What is your interview answer for "Why D.O.?"

[RySerr21]

---

Members don't see this ad.

this last semester i took a class called disease and medicine in western society. basically just the history of medicine. we read three novels on top of a "sourcebook of medical history". Once we got into the 19th and 20th century, it seemed like every day we talked about the problems of healthcare, and every day it was the same theme. The problems were no longer that the docotrs didn't have the technology or the knowledge to save people, it was the dissappearance of a doctor/patient relationship, a lack of intimacy, doctors are too concerned with the disease...its like trying to figure out a puzzle for their own amusement, they show no care or concern for patients, lack of touching (patients are lucky to get a handshake now a days). Then one day it dawned on me "osteopathic medicine is fixing (or at least trying) EVERY bad thing about medicine that we have talked about" Lack of touching? Kind of hard if you practice OMM. Treating the disease and not the patient? Osteopathic medicine's "treating the whole person" philosophy does well to get rid of that. Dissapperance of doctor patient relatinoships....when looking through a curriculum at Des Moines, the first class i noticed was "Medical Ethics and the Doctor/Patient relationship" taught throughout the entire first year of med school.

We watched two movies in the class as well. We watched WIT and The Doctor, both films that will open your eyes. Watch them and you will see that the doctors in that film are everything that osteopathic medicine is NOT. Yes, they are fictional, but the script writers didn't just make them up for no reason.

We also read Lewis Thomas' book The Youngest Science and Lori Alvord's novel The Scalpel and the Silver Bear. The youngest science documents the changes of medicine from the beginning of the 20th century til now. The Scalpel and the Silver Bear is the story of the first navajo indian surgeon. Although she is an MD, she incorporates western medicine into the beliefs of her navajo tribe. you'd be surprsied how much the navajos and osteopathic philospohy have in common!

I can't honestly remember the day i thought to myself, "Hey, i want to be a doctor," but I won't ever forget the day i realized that osteopathic medicine was what I wanted to do. Chapter 6 of Lewis Thomas' book The Youngest Science. Read it. I think its titled "Leech Leech, etc." If that doesnt make you want to become a osteopathic physician, then nothing will. That seems kind of overtop, but I'm serious.

 

[RySerr21]

and yes, i realize that you can be an MD and be compassionate, show concern and care for your patients, treat the whole person, etc. but when givent he choice, why wouldn't you go to a program who's philosophy embodies those characteirstics that are going to make you a better doctor? august of this year, i wasnt sure if i wanted to be a DO or a MD, now the choice couldn't be any clearer. I dont even think i'm going to apply to an MD program.

 

[JaggerPlate]

But thats just life. The guy who wanted to go to Harvard but got into his state school has it exactly the same. The only difference is that in this case, the letters are different.

I agree, and I wish more people shared this mindset.

 

[Lokhtar]

The problems were no longer that the docotrs didn't have the technology or the knowledge to save people, it was the dissappearance of a doctor/patient relationship, a lack of intimacy, doctors are too concerned with the disease...its like trying to figure out a puzzle for their own amusement, they show no care or concern for patients,

Umm, the best way to show concern for the patients is to solve their damn disease. Teddy bears and sunshine don't cure diseases.

lack of touching (patients are lucky to get a handshake now a days). Then one day it dawned on me "osteopathic medicine is fixing (or at least trying) EVERY bad thing about medicine that we have talked about"

Errr, no. Considering that in a clinical setting, there is really no difference in most cases.

Lack of touching? Kind of hard if you practice OMM.

Touching for the sake of touching is pointless. I am not an expert on OMM, and in the cases where it has shown be useful, go for it. But if you're going into a physician's office based on whether they are touching you or not, I think you've got to re-evaluate yourself (or go to the red light district and get your fix there).

Treating the disease and not the patient? Osteopathic medicine's "treating the whole person" philosophy does well to get rid of that.

That's a really weird thing to say. You should be treating the disease as a doctor. I am probably heading towards an osteopathic school, and there is no way that I would go there if I thought I wouldn't be treating the patient's disease.

Dissapperance of doctor patient relatinoships....when looking through a curriculum at Des Moines, the first class i noticed was "Medical Ethics and the Doctor/Patient relationship" taught throughout the entire first year of med school.

Most medical schools have an ethics course, and every medical school in the country goes over the patient/doctor relationship in detail. You can't go through medical school without it, osteopathic or allopathic.

Although she is an MD, she incorporates western medicine into the beliefs of her navajo tribe. you'd be surprsied how much the navajos and osteopathic philospohy have in common!

Oh, God.......

Look, no offense but all modern medicine is evidence based. Navajo medicine involve singing "elaborate and lengthy songs that tell of the balance of original creation." I shadow an osteopathic oncologist. Tomorrow, when I see him, I am going to ask him what songs he has sung for the patient who has Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma and how it has helped his cancer. If osteopaths tried to pass this quackery off as medicine, they'd rightly have their licenses revoked.

 

[dctruth]

reading the chat on "should it be md or do school". one guy wants hands on, whole body, not focus on disease, all organs interact, etc. the other guy interested in being accepted by the brethren.

sounds like dc school for the whole lot of yas? Iv'e been doing it for 20 years now seeing 80 pv/day mwf, 40 pv/day tues thurs sat. and having the blast of my life!

dc school has the same curriculum up to pharm. and surgery, but is 500 hrs. more ( DC= nearly 5000 hrs. MD=4200 hrs), stronger in hours in most courses, especially; diagnosis, anatomy, physiology, orthopedics, x-ray, immunology, microbiology, neurology, etc. chiro school is essentially medical school but on steroids (there were several student body builders on the juice as a side note). we perform laboratory, x-ray, draw blood/urine analysis, etc., refer for all tests, etc.

what we do is not treat the symptoms so as to be not fooled and distracted in arriving at the "crux" (impeded nervous system/diet/exercise/hygiene/lifestyle/etc.) of the problem. clear them out, advise, the body does the rest. because the body is an amazing healing machine (a diabetic can be helped with diet and exercise alone) we want to see people before before they become infected (wellness or preventative care) and intervene while infected or in visceral stress (crisis care). when we work (balance nervous system, and all above, etc.) on patients who have reached or set in infection or system stress, we instruct the patient that we will use the temporary aid of an MD or DO (crisis care) for antibiotics or drugs to fight infection/visceral support, the patient continues to be adjusted, etc. so that they may reach maximum nervous/immune response.

this is what i do 6 days a week for the past 20 years. this system called "chiropractic" also called chiropractic while under a referral for additional support). it works wonders. the patient loves it because; it works so damn well, and they receive the best of "both" worlds.

this is why the DC makes an excellent primary care doctor and team member.


i do not blame the PT for being pissed off or worried about the DC. we do not learn any PT in school. a DC is not in the same niche as PT. our schools designed us for primary health care, the same land as MD/DO. the MD/DO wants to keep the DC in PT-neuro musc land, because they are upset and scared seeing millions stay with the DC for primary care. this is what i do. primary care. most of the patients come in with an ache. many put me as primary and MD/DO as secondary when they learn how the body is designed and works. there is no PT tools or neuro musc repair, retraining, etc. in my office. you will see numerous DC's behaving like PT's because they see neuro-musc as a means to scratch a living and fit in a niche.

though you did not ask me. this should have cleared this up for yas if there was a mis perception and a tutorial on the DC world after i replied suggesting DC school. by the way. DC school is the fastest growing health field in the nation. respect and understanding for its model of care is fast outpaced medicine.


good luck on your endeavors,

dcthruth

 

[ryryguy]

I think what's most important is to be honest with your interviewers...
I told them how...
I love the DO philosophy (i.e. considering the whole person when diagnosing)
I love OMT's usefulness as I have seen this first hand
I love their stance on preventing disease as well as treating it

and since I have learned even more about DOs, I've also learned how...
DOs produce far more primary care physicians than MDs, and if one chooses to specialize then they are a primary care doctor first in addition to their specialty, as opposed to progressing through medical school with the idea that you were going to specialize in something and only needed to pay attention to that one area of interest.

DOs can use OMT not only for treatment, but diagnosis.

DOs are able to practice in any state and approximately 50 countries (good for me because I want to do medical missions).

AND to top it all off, I shadowed two different DOs and both of them were AMAZING doctors (very detailed and thorough) and way better at interacting with their patients than any MD that I had followed. In a recent visit to an MD, I was seen 3 minutes and sent to a specialist. The visit was so fast that he forgot to write my prescription, which ended up taking a day to finally get. My last visit to a DO was cordial, prompt but also genuinely concerned.

As they say, the proof is in the pudding!

 

[RySerr21]

okay. lokhtar... if you are half the pompous a**hole that you appear to be, nothing i'm about to say is going to even come close to registering in your head. but i'm going to say it anyway.

1. "the best way to show concern for the patients is to solve their damn disease." you are an idiot. you can easily solve someones disease without showing concern. i bet you most doctors could solve a patients problem w/o even seeing the patient! as long as they have an accurate history and list of the current symptoms. send them off to get tests based on what they think fits the symptoms, and you will find your disease and begin treatment, curing the disease with out showing any concern. would they always be correct? no. would it be the most efficient way to save lives? no. but it would work some of the time.

2. " Errr, no. Considering that in a clinical setting, there is really no difference in most cases." i'm assuming you are referring to the treatment of the patient in a clinical setting. if i'm wrong, correct me...but in the case that my hunch is correct. Yes, i agree. there really is not much of a difference in the medical treatment a patient will receive if visiting a DO compared to an MD. The difference is beyond the exact medical science. Its the way the doctors interact with the patients, which has a huge impact on the well being of the patient. if the patient feels like the doctor actually cares about him/her as opposed to just being another MRI to order up, i imagine the effect will be different.

3. "Touching for the sake of touching is pointless" I'm not talking about touching the patient for the pleasure of the doctor. Read ch. 6 of the Lewis Thomas book. He talks about the effect of human contact. I tried to find an excerpt b/c i highly doubt you will go out of your way to read it. I found this article instead. Touching, done in a professional and appropriate manner, is never pointless. Maybe if you took your mind out of the red light district you would realize that. Read this article below.

http://www.alphaomegaalpha.org/PDFs/Pharos/Articles/2004Spring/Connelly.htm

4. "I am probably heading towards an osteopathic school, and there is no way that I would go there if I thought I wouldn't be treating the patient's disease" I'm not saying don't treat the disease. Clearly that is important, butThat is NOT the only thing you have to do. You ever heard of Dr. Richard Jadick? wikipedia him and then read the article that newsweek wrote about him. He's a perfect example of a DO who not only treated the disease (and did it well) but took into account the whole person. I think you should rethink your osteopathic profession, b/c you have it all wrong. The entire point of treating the "whole person" is to stear away from treating ONLY the disease. There is more to medicine than the "disease" You clearly don't see that. There are many other aspects beyond the disease that will effect the well being of the patient.

5. Fair enough. Every medical school in the country has to go over the doctor patient relationship "in detail" at some time. I guess in my opinion and in my expereince, DO programs emphasize the importance of this relationship..... as opposed to the importance of... a 3.9 GPA and a 40 on the MCAT.

6. WHOA. Forgive me. I was unaware that you shadow an oncologist. That means that you know everything about treating patients right? And what does and doesn't work? Riiiiiiiiight. I'll reiterate what i've said once before. You are an idiot. Who are you to say what is and is not helpful. have you ever had non-hodgkins lymphoma? No one is trying to pass off singing as medicine. But to discount something because it isn't "medicine" is ridiculous. The songs that the medicine men of the navajo tribe sing aren't just twinkle twinkle little star type songs. They have meaning. Not to you. Not to me. But to the navajo people, they do. If you had a navajo patient suffering from a disease, and she requested to have a medicine man sing to her, b/c in her mind, she thought it would help her....would you seriously look her in the eyes and tell her "no. your beliefs are stupid and they don't do anything. that isn't medicine. what i'm giving you is medicine." I sure hope not. Or maybe you just can't related to navajos b/c it is completely foreign to you. How bout this...Are you religious? Do you pray? I am not. In fact, i'm an athiest. My personal opinion is that praying to God does absolutely nothing becuase he does not exist. If i was sick, would I pray to god? no. When i have a dying pateint, and he/she is praying to God for better health, am I going to walk out and say "excuse me, what you are doing right now....its completely useless. Praying isn't medicine. What i am giving you is medicine." No way. Why? Because if the patient believes, if he/she has that extra bit of hope that God may be on his/her side, then great that may be just what he/she needed to pull through.

Tell you what, if i did believe in god, I would pray EVERY DAY that I never ever had a doctor like you to take care of me or my family.

 

[Krisss17]

We watched two movies in the class as well. We watched WIT and The Doctor, both films that will open your eyes. Watch them and you will see that the doctors in that film are everything that osteopathic medicine is NOT. Yes, they are fictional, but the script writers didn't just make them up for no reason.

Actually "The Doctor" is based on a true story. While the character William Hurt plays is fictional, Dr. Rosenbaum wrote it about his own experiences. I really enjoyed this movie and watched it a few times.

 

[endocardium]

dc school has the same curriculum up to pharm. and surgery, but is 500 hrs. more ( DC= nearly 5000 hrs. MD=4200 hrs), stronger in hours in most courses, especially; diagnosis, anatomy, physiology, orthopedics, x-ray, immunology, microbiology, neurology, etc. chiro school is essentially medical school but on steroids (there were several student body builders on the juice as a side note). we perform laboratory, x-ray, draw blood/urine analysis, etc., refer for all tests, etc.

I can't confirm or deny what you are suggesting. However, more hours in the classroom don't mean much. The vast majority of medicine is learned in residency, not in medical school. What you are doing isn't medicine. I think that is plain for anyone to see. You may study similar things (at least according to what you suggest), but at the end of the day, you aren't practicing medicine. You are practicing chiropractic, a fundamentally different approach. There's nothing wrong with chiropractic and it does have a role in healthcare, but please don't confuse it with medicine. End of story.

this is why the DC makes an excellent primary care doctor and team member.

Team member: okay, I can accept that. There are lots of ways to be part of a healthcare team. However, you, as a chiropractor, are not a physician. I hold no ill will towards chiropractors, but until you are trained to practice medicine, do a full medical residency, and practice to the same standard of care as a physician, you should not and cannot be a physician. Your role is be a chiropractor, not a primary care physician.

i do not blame the PT for being pissed off or worried about the DC. we do not learn any PT in school. a DC is not in the same niche as PT. our schools designed us for primary health care, the same land as MD/DO. the MD/DO wants to keep the DC in PT-neuro musc land, because they are upset and scared seeing millions stay with the DC for primary care. this is what i do. primary care. most of the patients come in with an ache. many put me as primary and MD/DO as secondary when they learn how the body is designed and works. there is no PT tools or neuro musc repair, retraining, etc. in my office. you will see numerous DC's behaving like PT's because they see neuro-musc as a means to scratch a living and fit in a niche.

I have no fear about it. It's very clear that chiropractic isn't medicine and chiropractors aren't physicians. You guys are good at marketing, though.

though you did not ask me. this should have cleared this up for yas if there was a mis perception and a tutorial on the DC world after i replied suggesting DC school. by the way. DC school is the fastest growing health field in the nation. respect and understanding for its model of care is fast outpaced medicine.

Chiropractic does have a role to play. Replace medicine: unlikely.

good luck on your endeavors,

dcthruth

Thank you. Same to you.

 

[TexasTriathlete]

Umm, the best way to show concern for the patients is to solve their damn disease. Teddy bears and sunshine don't cure diseases.

What if your disease is linked to vitamin D deficiency? Or teddy bear deficiency?

 

[chas]

What if your disease is linked to vitamin D deficiency? Or teddy bear deficiency?

Teddy Bear deficiency is pretty difficult to treat...

 

[Lokhtar]

Or teddy bear deficiency?

In that case, I will be sure to consult ryserr21. 😛 I bet you'd get a nice publication out of that.

okay. lokhtar... if you are half the pompous a**hole that you appear to be, nothing i'm about to say is going to even come close to registering in your head. but i'm going to say it anyway.

Actually, I'm probably much more pompous than I appear to be. I wear a cape in real life and make people call me "The Duke".

you are an idiot. you can easily solve someones disease without showing concern. i bet you most doctors could solve a patients problem w/o even seeing the patient! as long as they have an accurate history and list of the current symptoms. send them off to get tests based on what they think fits the symptoms, and you will find your disease and begin treatment, curing the disease with out showing any concern. would they always be correct? no. would it be the most efficient way to save lives? no.

Actually, by definition, it would be the most efficient way to save lives considering how much it would cut down on the time required, if it could be done.

The difference is beyond the exact medical science. Its the way the doctors interact with the patients, which has a huge impact on the well being of the patient. if the patient feels like the doctor actually cares about him/her as opposed to just being another MRI to order up, i imagine the effect will be different.

Awwww...my doctor pretends to care about my uninteresting life. Who cares? I want my doctor to fix me up. In any case, what you're implying is simply incorrect. I have not seen, nor heard, of any marked difference between an MD or a DO interacting with patients. I spent pretty much a whole year in a hospital as a patient, five years as an employee, and another one as a volunteer, and I could not see any relationship between the degree and their attitude towards the patients.

If you're a compassionate human being, you'll do well with patients. There is nothing inherent about the DO degree, compared to the MD, that makes someone more compassionate or more willing to listen. Physicians, all physicians, are under immense time pressure go see as many patients as possible, and no one is going to hang around to make small talk with you. Nor should they. They have other patients waiting.

I'm not talking about touching the patient for the pleasure of the doctor. Read ch. 6 of the Lewis Thomas book. He talks about the effect of human contact. I tried to find an excerpt b/c i highly doubt you will go out of your way to read it. I found this article instead. Touching, done in a professional and appropriate manner, is never pointless. Maybe if you took your mind out of the red light district you would realize that. Read this article below.

http://www.alphaomegaalpha.org/PDFs/...g/Connelly.htm

That's very nice, but you still haven't shown how DOs touch more than MDs. Most DOs don't use OMM, and those that do, often only use it in a very limited fashion.

I'm not saying don't treat the disease. Clearly that is important, butThat is NOT the only thing you have to do. You ever heard of Dr. Richard Jadick? wikipedia him and then read the article that newsweek wrote about him. He's a perfect example of a DO who not only treated the disease (and did it well) but took into account the whole person.

Um, he is an excellent physician who did very brave things during combat. How in the world is what he did unique to being a DO though? You think if he had an MD, he wouldn't be as good?

5. Fair enough. Every medical school in the country has to go over the doctor patient relationship "in detail" at some time. I guess in my opinion and in my expereince, DO programs emphasize the importance of this relationship..... as opposed to the importance of... a 3.9 GPA and a 40 on the MCAT.

Um, well thats a logical fallacy. MD programs do not emphasize your undergrad GPA and your MCAT after you get in. And even if for some weird reason they did, there is no reason that they can't emphasize both.

6. WHOA. Forgive me. I was unaware that you shadow an oncologist. That means that you know everything about treating patients right? And what does and doesn't work? Riiiiiiiiight. I'll reiterate what i've said once before. You are an idiot. Who are you to say what is and is not helpful.

Never implied nor mentioned I did. I simply said that in my experience, there is no difference between a MD and a DO in pretty much any setting. At least none that I could discern. This 'treating the whole person' is a marketing slogan - I haven't heard that explained.

have you ever had non-hodgkins lymphoma? No one is trying to pass off singing as medicine.

Yes, they actually are.

The songs that the medicine men of the navajo tribe sing aren't just twinkle twinkle little star type songs. They have meaning. Not to you. Not to me. But to the navajo people, they do. If you had a navajo patient suffering from a disease, and she requested to have a medicine man sing to her, b/c in her mind, she thought it would help her....would you seriously look her in the eyes and tell her "no. your beliefs are stupid and they don't do anything. that isn't medicine. what i'm giving you is medicine."

She can take homeopathic medicine, which I think is stupid, if she wants. She can have a medicine man sing for her, if she wants. She has that right. But I certainly wouldn't lead her to believe that singing is going to cure her tumor.

I sure hope not. Or maybe you just can't related to navajos b/c it is completely foreign to you.

No, I can completely understand where the Navajos are coming from. I have extensive personal experience with alternative 'medicine'. Most of is a load of crap not because I can't relate to it - but because it is a load of crap. Half my family goes to an ayurvedic doctor, and my dad takes homeopathic remedies (the dude with the NHL) in addition to his chemo. And I tell him that his beliefs are stupid all the time - that he should focus on real medicine. But I can live with it, as long as he takes real medicine too. I wouldn't say that to a real patient, unless they asked me what I thought.

Are we so politically correct now that we can't differentiate between evidence based medicine and crap? If these things help their emotional state, fine - they can do whatever they want on their own time. But I certainly wouldn't waste my time encouraging or supporting such crap.

How bout this...Are you religious? Do you pray? I am not. In fact, i'm an athiest. My personal opinion is that praying to God does absolutely nothing becuase he does not exist. If i was sick, would I pray to god? no. When i have a dying pateint, and he/she is praying to God for better health, am I going to walk out and say "excuse me, what you are doing right now....its completely useless. Praying isn't medicine. What i am giving you is medicine." No way. Why? Because if the patient believes, if he/she has that extra bit of hope that God may be on his/her side, then great that may be just what he/she needed to pull through.

No I am not religious. If a patient believes that he would be helped by praying, or having songs sung to him, go for it. But thats something he does by himself, to help his emotional state. It is unrelated to my job.

Tell you what, if i did believe in god, I would pray EVERY DAY that I never ever had a doctor like you to take care of me or my family.

I'm not a doctor. I hope to be one someday. But its your right to choose your own physician. I personally choose mine based on the guy who I think knows the most about my disease and gives me the best chance that way. You have other criteria, and that's fine - all the more power to you.

 

[JaggerPlate]

What if your disease is linked to vitamin D deficiency? Or teddy bear deficiency?

I lost my grandfather to a teddy bear deficiency.🙁

 

[gasapple]

Noob needs to respek the LOKHTAR!

 

[Bond8204]

I think a valuable lesson from all of this that comes out of the argument between LOKHTAR and ryserr21 is not to denigrate other careers when answering "Why DO?"

That is, I think you can answer the question for why DO without saying something like "because DO's compensate for the shortcomings of MDs" which is essentially what you're saying ryserr.

What I think is a better way of putting it is that DO's have something to offer their patients in addition to MD's, for being seemingly clinically equivalent.

I think your answer that DO's compensate a lot for the problems in healthcare is a good one, but acting like allopathic schools aren't working to solve these problems, or bringing MD schools up at all, isn't necessary. The ultimate danger in this would be if you were being interviewed by an MD.

An important component/challenge for this question is answering it withoug denigrating MDs.

 

[PBL DO]

What is your interview answer for "Why D.O.?"

For me, this question is easy. My father as well as a large portion of my extended family are D.O.s (aunts,uncles,etc.) and I look forward to continuing the strong family tradition (that is, my family as well as Osteopathic Medicine in general).

D.O.s emphasize prevention, which in my mind is of the utmost important today given the prevalence of chronic diseases and preventable deaths due to obesity, diabetes, smoking, etc. Educating your patient as part of the healthcare process is essential.

D.O.s share a close and personal relationship with their patients. Understanding the stress factors, family-life, job situation, etc. of a patient will help you provide the best quality of healthcare.

Osteopathic Medicine endorses primary care above all specialties of medicine. This includes family practice, internal medicine, pediatrics, and geriatrics (I think). Weather or not you truly intend on entering into primary care it is probably a good idea to express your interest in one of these fields and explain why it is important now more than ever that medical schools train these types of doctors.

Other than that I'm sure you have heard all the other bland cookie-cutter answers like the added extra a D.O. brings to medicine stressing the importance of mind, body, and soul. Interviewers will not be impressed unless they believe your answer comes from the heart.

Hope this helps.

 

[Hoebo54]

All you need to say is, " fame, females, and fortune"

 

[metalmd06]

Barack Obama said that he wants to change our system from a "disease care" system to a "health care" system by focusing on preventative care. I believe that sentiment gets to the root of what being a DO is all about. The holistic philosophy and the body's natural power to heal itself plays well into a sytem that focuses on health as opposed to illness.