• SDN Site Updates

    Hey everyone! The site will be down for approximately 2 hours on Thursday, August 5th for site updates.

vigs1234

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Jan 12, 2007
17
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?
 

Doc Henry

blowin' in the wind
10+ Year Member
Feb 4, 2007
933
4
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
Everyone has been telling me that you get pretty much the same education except you also get manipulation training at OM. From what I understand DOs can do MD residencies and practice in all the same ways MDs do. YOu should check out the DO forum FAQs
 
About the Ads

vigs1234

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Jan 12, 2007
17
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
Sorry I am just used too posting here since I am a non-trad I prolly should have done it DO v MD Threads
 

DragonWell

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Nov 20, 2004
1,682
12
47
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
The phrasing of your questions has the potential to tap into some pretty provocative subjects. You might want to consider reading the FAQs, reading some web info about DOs, doing a search and then asking any specific questions you still have.
 

spicedmanna

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 22, 2006
5,820
16
Somewhere over the rainbow
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?

Check out the DO forum and the FAQ there. DO vs. MD has been done to death. Do a search; you'll see what I mean.
 

NonTradMed

Perpetual Student
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Jan 6, 2004
2,303
12
Somewhere in the middle of nowhere.
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
This recent thread has some students discussing the reasons why people would prefer the MD over the DO given both choices:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=365649

It has nothing to do with the actual education and more to do with the extra hurdles of licensing in a MD dominated medical world as well as the difficulties of getting competitive residency.
 

QofQuimica

Seriously, dude, I think you're overreacting....
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Oct 12, 2004
18,900
4,275
Florida/Fellowship
Status (Visible)
  1. Fellow [Any Field]
  2. Attending Physician
I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?
I don't think that most people think allopathic education is better. But allopathic schools tend to be cheaper, more prestigious, and better known. Since we're very concerned with these things as a society, there's your answer. My personal feeling is that if you're planning to go into practice, there's no real difference between getting an MD versus a DO. My dad is a DO in family practice, and he does the same job as MDs in family practice. I'm going to be an MD because I want to do research. That's about it as far as I'm concerned.
 

Lshapley

Old Man Med Student
10+ Year Member
Jul 2, 2006
1,102
1
46
Portland
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I have heard that as non-trads (especially we older non-trads), that we are much more likely to be accepted into a DO school. The more I think about it, the less I think it matters which way you go. I think the only exception would be if you are trying to become a researcher or are looking for prestige leadership positions at major university hospitals. Those are the only situations that I can think of where it might hold you back.

FYI, there are a couple of osteopathic state schools, UMDNJ-SOM is the first one I can think of.
 

Scottish Chap

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Aug 3, 2003
1,645
83
I have heard that as non-trads (especially we older non-trads), that we are much more likely to be accepted into a DO school. The more I think about it, the less I think it matters which way you go. I think the only exception would be if you are trying to become a researcher or are looking for prestige leadership positions at major university hospitals. Those are the only situations that I can think of where it might hold you back.

FYI, there are a couple of osteopathic state schools, UMDNJ-SOM is the first one I can think of.
I think your feeling is generally true. Osteopathic medical schools are filled with older students and career changers and, for what it's worth, I think they pride themselves in retraining students that perhaps more traditional medical schools won't take a gamble on. While older students are perhaps a little more motivated and they are generally taking on more of an element of risk (leaving established careers, subjecting themselves/their family to financial burdens), they also tend to have a LOT more going on in their life (spouse, children, mortgage, house, part-time job etc.). Medical schools know that these factors can jeopardize academic success and so it's understandable that they may not be willing to take a gamble on such a student - especially if their application credentials are borderline. There are, of course, always exceptions to this generalization.

Now, that said, I've had colleagues who are M.D.'s and D.O.'s and they really are indistinguishable clinically. If anything, the D.O.'s tended to be a little more down to earth and less whiny - no matter how hard things got. One D.O. friend told me that if you are a graduate from an ANY U.S. allopathic medical school, you "hit the ground running" whereas you will always face more hurdles as an osteopth if you want to do an allopathic residency or if you want to be a physician-scientist (like QofQuimica) because osteopathic training is just not consistent with those goals. There's no getting away from that.

In the end, it doesn't matter. My wife's anesthesiologist for her surgery at Johns Hopkins was a D.O. and she was super nice, alleviating my wife's anxiety. The public will care more about your bedside manner than where you went to medical school and, as long as you work hard, you'll be successful in any program.
 

Law2Doc

5K+ Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Dec 20, 2004
30,876
10,044
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?

The multiple uses of the word "better" in your post is likely to start a flame war, even if your underlying question is sincere. I pretty much agree with the preceding comments, but would note that while DOs more or less have basically the same training and practice as MDs these days, and currently practice in the same hospitals, it wasn't always so, which is why there is perhaps some lingering stigma amongst older docs. The differences in admission numerical stats, and the emphasis on primary care of DO schools, is the likely source of comments you might come across from the younger set in pre-allo. Thus there is some stigma out there you may have to deal with if you go that route. Additionally, osteopaths are more common in some regions of the country, and in some specialties, than others at this time, meaning that allo schools may open more doors, particularly in terms of the more competitive residencies and parts of the country with no DO schools (The preceding comment I believe comes from a TPR's guide to med schools). There is ample information on both these degrees on SDN. But as with much of medicine, the best thing you can do is find a way to actually talk to people working as MDs and DOs.
 

awk

AWK
10+ Year Member
Dec 10, 2006
146
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
The two fields are growing very similar but the perceptions are still around. Perhaps this is because M.D. is older and been so respected for so long.
 

sunnyjohn

Got Mustard?
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Feb 24, 2005
2,697
10
In a world all my own.
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Health (Field Undecided)
The field is the same. Medicine.

DO= MD.... Except in the mind of some residency Program Directors and some folks here on SDN.

> 250 on the USMLE and a decent personality? You can practically write your own ticket.
 
About the Ads

soonereng

Double Trouble
10+ Year Member
Oct 13, 2006
1,286
2
where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
The two fields are growing very similar but the perceptions are still around. Perhaps this is because M.D. is older and been so respected for so long.

MD is older? Never heard that one before. I always thought osteopathic was older and just went along with allopathic when its methods became more accepted.
 

Scottish Chap

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Aug 3, 2003
1,645
83
MD is older? Never heard that one before. I always thought osteopathic was older and just went along with allopathic when its methods became more accepted.
The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine was the first allopathic medical school in the U.S., founded by John Morgan in 1765 - a wee bit earlier than the first D.O. program. He trained at the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. Harvard Medical School was founded in 1782 - a wee bit later.

From Wikipedia:
Osteopathy was founded by Andrew Taylor Still M.D. (1828 - 1917) in reaction to what he perceived as inadequate medical treatment of his day. Specifically, he believed that other conventionally trained physicians over-prescribed to patients harsh and often toxic medications. He invented the name "osteopathy" by blending two Greek roots osteon- for bone and -pathos for suffering in order to communiciate his theory that disease and physiologic dysfunction were etiologically grounded in a disordered musculoskeletal system. Thus, by diagnosing and treating the musculoskeletal system, he believed that physicians could treat a variety of diseases and spare patients the negative side-effects of drugs. He intended his new system of medicine to be a reformation of the existing 19th century medical practices he knew and imagined that someday "rational medical therapy" would consist of manipulation of the musculoskeletal system, surgery, and very sparingly used drugs (for example, antiseptics, ointments, or laxatives).

Osteopathic medical practice began in 1874 in the US
. From its very inception, early practitioners embraced the movement's philosophy and theories to varying degrees. Some held steadfastly to its core tenets while others were more apt to 'blend' features of osteopathic medicine with other conventional or competing schools of medicine. Early in the twentieth century, the American osteopathic profession adopted the use of medicine and surgery. Outside of the USA, osteopathic physicians tended to stay closer to their traditional approach. As biomedical science developed, osteopathic medicine gradually incorporated all its proven theories and practices. Qualified D.O.'s have been admitted to full active membership of the American Medical Association since 1969. Today, except for a stronger primary care emphasis in most osteopathic medical schools and additional education in musculoskeletal diagnosis and treatment, the training and scope of osteopathic medicine in the United States is identical to that of allopathic medical practice as practiced by MDs.
 

Onstarr

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Feb 5, 2007
178
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
It has nothing to do with the actual education and more to do with the extra hurdles of licensing in a MD dominated medical world as well as the difficulties of getting competitive residency.


basically.
 

Lshapley

Old Man Med Student
10+ Year Member
Jul 2, 2006
1,102
1
46
Portland
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
It has nothing to do with the actual education and more to do with the extra hurdles of licensing in a MD dominated medical world as well as the difficulties of getting competitive residency.

Hah! Like it isn't bad enough being a non-trad! I am also more likely to be accepted into a program that will likely bring along with it extra baggage! I guess I am just a glutton for punishment. :laugh:
 

ForbiddenComma

Tanned for Bowling
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Oct 16, 2004
929
23
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
Most D.O. schools are more primary-care oriented than M.D. schools, although there's no hard and fast rule about this. That's the only real difference.



Oh, and the students of the local D.O. school here like to kick puppies and they smell vaguely of poo.
 

dctrgreen

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
Jul 29, 2006
107
0
43
tennessee
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
i can't believe these discussions are still going on...this has been discussed to death and there is so much information on this topic without a whole new set of posts.

MD/DO discussions=dead horse. come on people...stop beating it. move on.
 

Faze2

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,196
2
Jessica Biel's Closet
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?


It's an age old question that has been discussed to death on this forum. Just do your best and whatever school you go to, DO or MD, and you will be a doctor, plain and simple. Any kind of doctor you want. It's all a personal preference, and no matter what, some people will agree with this, some will not. Believe me, just let it go.:laugh:
 
About the Ads

mitawa

Member
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Feb 25, 2005
186
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
Read up on both philosophies of medicine and realize that as a DO you also have to study OMT. Research the individual schools. Apply to both if you are still uncertain or wish to broaden your options, hopefully you'll get the opportunity to interview for both, and then make a properly informed decision based on your personal preferences. Each person is a unique individual! In the end we all end up practicing medicine its just what interests you or where you feel comfortable that determines the means to the end.:)
 

relentless11

Going broke and loving it
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Mar 31, 2001
1,584
9
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
Although I never had anything against DO, what really reinforced the notion that it was equal to MD was the fact that we have tons of DO's at UC Davis Medical Center...which is part of UC Davis School of Medicine, an allopathic med school. Just like everyone said, do well in whatever you do, and you will go quite far.

I forget if this was a rumor, or an actual fact, but it appears that at one point, DO's could apply to change their degree name to MD. This was later abolished for one reason or another. UC Irvine Collge of Medicine apparently was a DO school before it became a UC. Given these pieces of info, its clear DO and MD are quite similar and for me...identical in how they practice medicine (minus the whole OMT thing).
 

Law2Doc

5K+ Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Dec 20, 2004
30,876
10,044
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I forget if this was a rumor, or an actual fact, but it appears that at one point, DO's could apply to change their degree name to MD. This was later abolished for one reason or another.

I read that on SDN too, and I'm pretty sure that was just in Cali, quite some time ago (no longer the case).
 

Scottish Chap

Full Member
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Aug 3, 2003
1,645
83
I read that on SDN too, and I'm pretty sure that was just in Cali, quite some time ago (no longer the case).
"In the 1960s in California, the American Medical Association (AMA), sensing increased competition from osteopathic medicine, spent nearly $ 8 million to end the practice of osteopathy in the state. With considerable financial support from the AMA, the state passed a state wide referendum (Proposition 22) ending the practice of osteopathic medicine in California. California D.O.s were granted the M.D. degree in exchange for paying $65 and attending a short seminar. The College of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons became the University of California, Irvine, College of Medicine. However, the decision proved quite controversial. In 1974, after protest and lobbying by a group of influential and prominent D.O.s, the California Supreme Court ruled that licensing of D.O.s in that state must be resumed.

College of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons in Los Angeles, c.1920s. From California College of Medicine Records, AS-027 The osteopathic college was eventually absorbed into the University of California system following a state-wide ballot referendum and become the UC Irvine Medical Center. College of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons in Los Angeles, c.1920s. From California College of Medicine Records, AS-027 The osteopathic college was eventually absorbed into the University of California system following a state-wide ballot referendum and become the UC Irvine Medical Center.

This decision by the California Medical Association in the 1960s to grant D.O. physicians an M.D. license was one of two turning points for D.O.s in their struggle for parity; the other being the U.S. Army's decision to allow D.O.s to enter the military as physicians. The California Medical Association may have been attempting to eliminate the osteopathic competition by a process of amalgamation by converting thousands of their physicians to M.D.s. While most Californian D.O.s did take the opportunity to become M.D.s, in other parts of the country it provided the osteopathic community with the stamp of equivalency they desired."
 

Orthodoc40

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Oct 21, 2005
3,039
24
Between Michigan & Massachusetts
Status (Visible)
  1. Medical Student
This recent thread has some students discussing the reasons why people would prefer the MD over the DO given both choices:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=365649

It has nothing to do with the actual education and more to do with the extra hurdles of licensing in a MD dominated medical world as well as the difficulties of getting competitive residency.

Yes, I think ultimately this is the difference. Where licensing & residency placement are concerned:
US MD has no real battle to face.
DO's face some uphill battle, but only IF they are trying to get into certain areas of medicine or areas of the US.
FMG's face a greater uphill battle, again that's IF they are trying to get into certain areas of medicine or parts of the US.

In that regard, US MD represents the path of least resistance for what comes next. That's where people tend to mistakenly substitute terms like 'good', 'bad', 'better', 'worse' - etc.

For the record - research is becoming an increasingly strong component at some DO schools. You'll have to hunt down which ones are strongest if that's your interest.
 

hyperbaric

Cool under pressure.
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Mar 18, 2005
1,014
2
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
Oh, and the students of the local D.O. school here like to kick puppies and they smell vaguely of poo.

Occasionally we have a student from the neighboring MD school for dinner. They go well with some fava beans and a nice chianti.
 

automan

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Oct 30, 2006
75
0
Status (Visible)
  1. Pre-Medical
The reason people think DO < MD is because it is much easier to get into DO school. Think about it. Why is Harvard regarded as better than Howad? Because Harvard is seletive and Howard will take almost anyone.

You need a much better GPA/MCAT to get into a MD school compared to a DO school and that makes people think it is a weaker program.

In the end, the training is pretty much the same, but taking the "easier" road and going to DO school instead of MD school is going to hurt you if you want to practice in an area of medicine that is mostly staffed my MDs. It is possible to do anything, but if you look at the numbers, it is much easier to match as a MD in the tougher to get specialties. If you want to do Family practice, then DO is perfectly fine. If you want to do Ortho, you would be much better off going MD.
 

Taus

.
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Feb 1, 2005
4,092
766
Philly
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
The reason people think DO < MD is because it is much easier to get into DO school. Think about it. Why is Harvard regarded as better than Howad? Because Harvard is seletive and Howard will take almost anyone.

You need a much better GPA/MCAT to get into a MD school compared to a DO school and that makes people think it is a weaker program.

In the end, the training is pretty much the same, but taking the "easier" road and going to DO school instead of MD school is going to hurt you if you want to practice in an area of medicine that is mostly staffed my MDs. It is possible to do anything, but if you look at the numbers, it is much easier to match as a MD in the tougher to get specialties. If you want to do Family practice, then DO is perfectly fine. If you want to do Ortho, you would be much better off going MD.
I think most people are totally ignoring and forgetting about the option of residencies that are open to DO's only. Here is the list of residencies that are run by my school:http://www.pcom.edu/Graduate_Medical_Education/Residency_Programs/Residency_Programs.html and here are all of the DO programs in the country:
http://opportunities.osteopathic.org/

So when you're thinking about how DO's have somewhat of a harder time in the competative allo specialties....remember the above
 
About the Ads

Skialta

Full Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Sep 5, 2003
259
0
Northwest
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
There really is no difference between MD and DO except for OMT. I have worked with both and if you didn't know which degree they held you could not tell them apart.

That being said I believe you should be informed about the choice you make. If you look at the match statistics DOs match at quite low rates into certain specialties (esp surgical) in the allopathic match. It is true that you can find DOs who match into any specialty, but for the competative residencies it is the exceptional candidate. I know it would be nice to think if I work hard in medical school I can do whatever I want, but the reality is it is difficult to come out on top when you are competing with not only 100-150 extremely bright people in your class, but also the 15-20 thousand medical students across the country. There are numerous threads from DO applicants with great stats and board scores who did not match because of percieved bias against them.

The whole thing about the DO philosophy and looking at the whole patient is bull, that is the same philosphy any reasonable physician uses when treating a patient. I was a former PT so the OMT part of DO would have been a great adjunct, but I did my homework and had a good idea of what my professional goals were and realized going DO would have made things more difficult for me. If in your heart of hearts you know primary care is for you then by all means DO is great, but if you are planning on a career as a plastic surgeon or radiation oncologist I would do my homework.

I am sure at some point in the future there will be no division between MD and DO, but it has not been acheived yet.

skialta
 

Taus

.
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Feb 1, 2005
4,092
766
Philly
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
There really is no difference between MD and DO except for OMT. I have worked with both and if you didn't know which degree they held you could not tell them apart.

That being said I believe you should be informed about the choice you make. If you look at the match statistics DOs match at quite low rates into certain specialties (esp surgical) in the allopathic match. It is true that you can find DOs who match into any specialty, but for the competative residencies it is the exceptional candidate. I know it would be nice to think if I work hard in medical school I can do whatever I want, but the reality is it is difficult to come out on top when you are competing with not only 100-150 extremely bright people in your class, but also the 15-20 thousand medical students across the country. There are numerous threads from DO applicants with great stats and board scores who did not match because of percieved bias against them.

The whole thing about the DO philosophy and looking at the whole patient is bull, that is the same philosphy any reasonable physician uses when treating a patient. I was a former PT so the OMT part of DO would have been a great adjunct, but I did my homework and had a good idea of what my professional goals were and realized going DO would have made things more difficult for me. If in your heart of hearts you know primary care is for you then by all means DO is great, but if you are planning on a career as a plastic surgeon or radiation oncologist I would do my homework.

I am sure at some point in the future there will be no division between MD and DO, but it has not been acheived yet.

skialta
while I definitely agree w/ you about most of your post....please read my post that came right before yours
 

Law2Doc

5K+ Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Dec 20, 2004
30,876
10,044
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
while I definitely agree w/ you about most of your post....please read my post that came right before yours

You are correct that such slots exist but apparently the # of DO slots in certain specialties is significantly lacking or else so many DOs wouldn't be going allo.
 

Beau Geste

yah mo b there
10+ Year Member
Jun 10, 2005
22,166
159
Between Heaven and Hell, benching like crazy
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
You are correct that such slots exist but apparently the # of DO slots in certain specialties is significantly lacking or else so many DOs wouldn't be going allo.

There might be other considerations for choosing an allo program since they're more prevalent. Location, for one.
 

Taus

.
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Feb 1, 2005
4,092
766
Philly
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
You are correct that such slots exist but apparently the # of DO slots in certain specialties is significantly lacking or else so many DOs wouldn't be going allo.
That may be a part of it...but its also the big issue of location, location, location.....and in case I forgot...location. Most of the DO specialty slots are clustered in a handful of states. You've been around here long enough to know its not a cut and dry issue. Location, research focus, availablity, ease of entrance (ie AGCME IM, FP, etc) etc etc all figure in to it. It may be more of a fair statement ot say that the ease/ability of a DO to place into something like Ortho is about on par w/ an MD (ie both brutally hard) b/c MD's have a tough time w/ MD spots and there is much competition among DO's for their own spots (not even figuring in the few DO's who match MD spots).
 

DrMom

Official Mom of SDN
Moderator Emeritus
15+ Year Member
Apr 24, 2002
43,318
26
wherever I go, there I am
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
You are correct that such slots exist but apparently the # of DO slots in certain specialties is significantly lacking or else so many DOs wouldn't be going allo.

While it is true that there are too many DO FM residency positions (as evidenced by the # that are left open after the match & scramble), there are other things at play here.

1) As already mentioned, when med students and residents have been polled, location is the #1 factor in choosing residency programs of interest. This is true on both the DO and MD sides. That is a big reason why you'll find a lot of DOs in MD primary care residencies like FM & IM.

2) There are DO residencies in nearly every specialty (I know, for example, that we don't have any in pathology anymore). True there aren't many spots in some very competitive specialties, but there aren't many DOs taking up MD positions in those specialties either.
 
8

8744

I was just reading all about osteopathic and I think I like their philosophy better. However, with reading everybody's posts most people seem to think the allopathic is better and is a better education. Am I not hearing everything about D.O. school? Or are allohpathic just better?

Allopathic is better because you won't have to spend the rest of your life explaining that you are a real doctor.

Also, there is no real dfference between the two philosophies as they are applied in practice. "Holistic," which is used to describe the DO philosophy, is another one of those creepy words which, when used in medicine, means that one is short on medical knowledge but tries to compensate by being a nicer person.
 

DropkickMurphy

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Sep 13, 2005
9,731
25
A bar room in Mombasa drinking gin
Status (Visible)
  1. Other Health Professions Student
Allopathic is better because you won't have to spend the rest of your life explaining that you are a real doctor.

Also, there is no real dfference between the two philosophies as they are applied in practice. "Holistic," which is used to describe the DO philosophy, is another one of those creepy words which, when used in medicine, means that one is short on medical knowledge but tries to compensate by being a nicer person.
:thumbup:
 

Jack Daniel

In Memory of Riley Jane
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Oct 12, 2005
991
1
Status (Visible)
Allopathic is better because you won't have to spend the rest of your life explaining that you are a real doctor.

I agree that this is a potential frustration. One should not pursue a DO medical education without understanding that you will be in the minority.

Also, there is no real dfference between the two philosophies as they are applied in practice. "Holistic," which is used to describe the DO philosophy, is another one of those creepy words which, when used in medicine, means that one is short on medical knowledge but tries to compensate by being a nicer person.

I think the key words here are "in practice". In school there actually may be a difference.

It's my understanding that MD schools do not hold to any philosophy, preferring that everything be subject to evidence-based medicine. However, DO schools, while certainly teaching evidence-based medicine, also stress 4 principles which form the osteopathic philosophy. This is taught in all 26 schools. While MD programs probably teach the same principles, especially ones that focus on primary care as a mission, I don't think all the MD schools emphasize them or have them integrated into the curriculum.
 
8

8744

I agree that this is a potential frustration. One should not pursue a DO medical education without understanding that you will be in the minority.



I think the key words here are "in practice". In school there actually may be a difference.

It's my understanding that MD schools do not hold to any philosophy, preferring that everything be subject to evidence-based medicine. However, DO schools, while certainly teaching evidence-based medicine, also stress 4 principles which form the osteopathic philosophy. This is taught in all 26 schools. While MD programs probably teach the same principles, especially ones that focus on primary care as a mission, I don't think all the MD schools emphasize them or have them integrated into the curriculum.


I don't know what those principles are but I hope they're not magical principles. The only magic in medicine is your ability to talk to patients and convince them to do what you think is best for their health.
 
8

8744

I agree that this is a potential frustration. One should not pursue a DO medical education without understanding that you will be in the minority.



I think the key words here are "in practice". In school there actually may be a difference.

It's my understanding that MD schools do not hold to any philosophy, preferring that everything be subject to evidence-based medicine. However, DO schools, while certainly teaching evidence-based medicine, also stress 4 principles which form the osteopathic philosophy. This is taught in all 26 schools. While MD programs probably teach the same principles, especially ones that focus on primary care as a mission, I don't think all the MD schools emphasize them or have them integrated into the curriculum.

I have no idea what you mean by this. I guess our philosophy of finally taking medicine out of the dark-ages by subjecting every aspect of it to scientific review might not be much of a philosophy, earning us no points from the ignoratti, but I'm thinking we're going to stick to it.
 

group_theory

EX-TER-MIN-ATE!'
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Oct 2, 2002
4,753
1,914
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
I don't know what those principles are but I hope they're not magical principles. The only magic in medicine is your ability to talk to patients and convince them to do what you think is best for their health.


Nothing magical. In fact, nothing exclusive to osteopathic medicine. Only difference is that the founder of osteopathy, Dr. Andrew Taylor Still, realized and encoded these "principles" into the practice of osteopathy (later osteopathic medicine) during the late 19th century. Hopefully a good doctor (MD or DO) will take these principles into account always

  • The body is a unit. (the body is a whole)
  • The body has self healing and self regulating mechanisms.
  • Structure and function are interrelated.
  • Rational osteopathic treatment applies these first three tenets to the care of individual patients.


Dr. Still went on to write about what he means by these 4 principles.
http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=ost_tenet

Tenets of Osteopathic Medicine

Excerpted from A Historical Perspective on the Philosophy of Osteopathic Medicine, by Robert E. Suter, D.O., based on the writing of A.T. Still.

First, do no harm. A thoughtful diagnosis should be made before exposing the patient to any potentially harmful procedure.

Look beyond the disease for the cause. Treatment should center on the cause, with effect addressed only when it benefits the patient in some tangible way.

The practice of medicine should be based on sound medical principles. Only therapies proven clinically beneficial in improving patient outcome should be recommended.

The body is subject to mechanical laws. The science of physics applies to humans. Even a slight alteration in the body's precision can result in disorders that overcome natural defenses.

The body has the potential to make all substances necessary to insure its health. No medical approach can exceed the efficacy of the body's natural defense systems if those defenses are functioning properly. Therefore, teaching the patient to care for his own health and to prevent disease is part of a physician's responsibility.

The nervous system controls, influences, and/or integrates all bodily functions.

Osteopathy embraces all known areas of practice.



Remember, Dr. Still came across these principles in the late 19th century, when physiology was in its infancy, when molecular biology/immunology was still immature, and there were little standardization amongst how MDs (there were many, allopathic, homeopathic, ecclectic, etc) practiced. The practice of medicine in those times were more likely to harm than to heal.
 
8

8744

Nothing magical. In fact, nothing exclusive to osteopathic medicine. Only difference is that the founder of osteopathy, Dr. Andrew Taylor Still, realized and encoded this "principles" into the practice of osteopathy (later osteopathic medicine) during the late 19th centuries.

  • The body is a unit. (the body is a whole)
  • The body has self healing and self regulating mechanisms.
  • Structure and function are interrelated.
  • Rational osteopathic treatment applies these first three tenets to the care of individual patients.


Dr. Still went on to write about what he means by these 4 principles.
http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=ost_tenet

]Tenets of Osteopathic Medicine

Excerpted from A Historical Perspective on the Philosophy of Osteopathic Medicine, by Robert E. Suter, D.O., based on the writing of A.T. Still.

First, do no harm. A thoughtful diagnosis should be made before exposing the patient to any potentially harmful procedure.

Look beyond the disease for the cause. Treatment should center on the cause, with effect addressed only when it benefits the patient in some tangible way.

The practice of medicine should be based on sound medical principles. Only therapies proven clinically beneficial in improving patient outcome should be recommended.

The body is subject to mechanical laws. The science of physics applies to humans. Even a slight alteration in the body’s precision can result in disorders that overcome natural defenses.

The body has the potential to make all substances necessary to insure its health. No medical approach can exceed the efficacy of the body’s natural defense systems if those defenses are functioning properly. Therefore, teaching the patient to care for his own health and to prevent disease is part of a physician’s responsibility.

The nervous system controls, influences, and/or integrates all bodily functions.

Osteopathy embraces all known areas of practice.

Not true at all. I hope they still don't teach this at DO schools, I mean, unless they don't believe in antibiotics, chemotherapy, and mechanical ventilation.
 

Beau Geste

yah mo b there
10+ Year Member
Jun 10, 2005
22,166
159
Between Heaven and Hell, benching like crazy
Status (Visible)
  1. Resident [Any Field]
Not true at all. I hope they still don't teach this at DO schools, I mean, unless they don't believe in antibiotics, chemotherapy, and mechanical ventilation.

I agree. If that were the case, we wouldn't need to eat or drink. Plus, what would be the point of taking in essential amino acids then?
 

group_theory

EX-TER-MIN-ATE!'
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
15+ Year Member
Oct 2, 2002
4,753
1,914
Status (Visible)
  1. Attending Physician
That was written at the turn of the century (19th/20th) ... way before antibiotics, chemotherapy, or mechanical ventilation/bipap/CPAP/SNIPPS

Hence why they were condensed down to the 4 main principles ... body is a unit, body can self-heal and self-regulate, structure and function are inter-related, and use these principles in helping the patient heal


To take what was written in the late 19th century and condemn osteopathic medicine today is a little dishonest. Remember, it is "A Historical Perspective of the Philosophy of Osteopathic Medicine".

Philosophy change with time. When osteopathy was founded, allopathic medicine still believe in the "four humors" as founded by Galen. I sure hope it still isn't taught in MD schools today outside of "historical context" (edit: to be fair, medicine was slowly evolving and people were beginning to adapt to scientific processes to determine medicine, with more practitioners dropping the four humor theory. Germ theory is still in its infancy and still struggling to find acceptance. Joseph Lister experiments with antiseptic use was only 10-20 years old when ostoepathy was founded)



And yes, EBM is still taught. Pt will still get beta-blocker, ASA, nitro, and cathed with an MI. Pt with diabetes will still be put on an ACEI. Whether or not to treat an ear infection in an infant greater than 6 months of age is still being debated. Believe it or not, standard of care is no different between an osteopathic emergency physician and an "allopathic" emergency physician.

OMM is still being researched. Cranial is the ugly step-child that no one wants to talk about. But the vast majority of education in undergraduate medical and postgraduate medical ... are standard stuff that is no different from MD/DO.
 
About the Ads
This thread is more than 14 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.