Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I don't agree with your assertion that PCOM is like that. However, I am only a first year so I will step back and allow a upper classmen speak for PCOM.
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
When OMM becomes dangerous
Started by FutureNavyDOc
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
I don't agree with your assertion that PCOM is like that. However, I am only a first year so I will step back and allow a upper classmen speak for PCOM.
Thanks Soundman and JRF!
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Agreed.
The original post is spun worse than a Fox News broadcast.
Your aversion to OMM is well documented here on SDN, but to make the connection that you tried to make is comical.
It will be your responsibility to help educate patients about a variety of therapies. I hope you never meet a patient in your career that agrees with your flawed logic...you will become intimately familiar with the legal system.
I TEACH OMM at PCOM so I know for certain that you are incorrect here.
Looks like the guy who sits next to you in lecture got tired of you complaining and decided to throw you a bone to shut you up!
So of course you are not at all biased.
Looks like the guy who sits next to you in lecture got tired of you complaining and decided to throw you a bone to shut you up!
Actually we've been done with lectures for 4 months and I didn't sit by him. Excellent attempt though and I highly doubt he threw me a bone to shut me up since we've discussed the subject in person before assuming this is the person I believe it to be.
So we should make all posts as un-biased and as honest as CBS news then? Ask Dan Rather about the current president's military record.
Anyone who claims Fox news is biased and that NBC, CBS, or ABC news are not is clearly unable to see the log in their own eye while attempting to remove the splinter from their neighbor's eye.I will educate my patients about a variety of proven therapies. I will not suggest or recommend a therapy which has no evidence behind it only because a lecturer once said it was true. I fear for the patient of the doc who blindly believes all that he/she is told in lecture without ever asking for proof or doing their own research.
Please explain how my logic will result in familiarity with the legal system. The only connection I can come up with is getting called in to testify against the doc who missed the MI, however my cardiologist attending would be called in long before I, not to mention I do not believe medical students can be called in to testify in Malpractice cases where they did not directly witness the malpractice in the state of Iowa.
Like-minded patients? I could only hope to have patients who were willing to try proven methods to treat their ailment rather than dropping $100 a week in the vitamin section at Walgreens on products that are "Not intended to treat, prevent, diagnose or cure any medical conditions."
Maybe instead of eating 4 multi-vitamins a day I could get my post-MI pts to exercise, lose weight, and eat healthy. What a horrible concept.
Yes.
I fear that if cranial is admited to be wrong, that as other OMM treatments aren't "fully proven by primary research," which means drug companies dont have an iterest in them, OMM will eventually disipate. I know certain aspects of OMM are beneficial, I benefit from them.
My question is this, how can dubious OMM procedures be erradicated while keeping the benefit of other OMM procedures from being shunned as well?
My question is this, how can dubious OMM procedures be erradicated while keeping the benefit of other OMM procedures from being shunned as well?
Prove that the other procedures do work.
I think this is an accurate assessment: as I've said in several posts, the integrity of OMT is maintained at all costs, at the expense of actual clinical usefullness to the patient. Certainly not all of OMT is dubious, but there is a fear among AOA leaders that critical self evaluation over practices such as cranial (regardless how absolutely ridiculous cranial is) will lead to larger doubt of the profession as a whole. Not a chance the current AOA leadership is willing to take.
And I love the title of this thread...it reminds me of those late-night shows that no one really wants to watch but everyone ends up watching anyway, like "When mountain lions strike" or "When rabid chipmunks attack."
Not a matter of bias at all. You are incorrectly portraying the OMM Department at PCOM and I am simply telling you that whatever information you got was completely wrong. I dont think its appropriate for a second year student from another school to be bad mouthing a school that he has likely never stepped foot in, let alone begin to critique how a certain class is taught. I dont know where you get your information but it is certainly not from your own experiences. Bash OMM all you want, but when you come out and make comments about another school that are false then I will come back and point out where you are mistaken. So I dont consider it bias...I consider it assuring the public that you are misinformed.
Regarding my Fox News comment. I didnt feel it necessary to list every major network...I thought that the SDN community would be able to understand the joke as-is. For those of you who were unable to do so, I would like to make it clear that if you so choose you can substitute any major network in place of "Fox". 😉
1. I'm not a 2nd year, I'm a 3rd year.
2. The claim that I made about PCOM was from a conversation with several PCOM students at Navy OIS training last summer. All 4 of them agreed.
3. Please don't lecture me about being biased and then claim you have no bias when you teach in the OMM dept. I have no problem with your bias since it is obviously important to work in that department, but don't call the pot black when the kettle has the same complexion.
4. If I am misinformed on the topic, then several PCOM students are misinformed as well despite having stepped foot on PCOM's campus a time or two.
5. You never addressed why the connection I made was "comical" nor how my logic will result in my becoming acquainted with the legal system.
FutureNavyDOc,
Like JPHazelton, I have worked as a Pre-Doctoral Fellow in the OMM department. So this may be viewed as biased, but I just wanted to throw in my two cents.
One thing I have kept through the tenure of medical school and especially during my Fellowship is skepticism towards OMM and its reported mechanisms. Skepticism doesn't have to be a negative thing, but it should keep you continuously learning about all facets of medicine. There are many things we have been told about medicine that will be changed or completely disproven within the next ten to twenty years. OMM is something that has been around for a long time, but we have been using it as practicing physicians moreso than as practicing scientists. Because OMM is very much based on anecdotal evidence rather than being objectively proven, the AOA has established the Osteopathic Research Center. There are currently numerous studies being conducted by the ORC proving the efficacy of OMT in many different disciplines in medicine.
I ask you to have patience, as it is going to take years before there is a large database of studies done on OMT. Meanwhile, rather than bash OMM and its ineffectiveness, I challenge you to try it on your patients. See if it helps them more than the current standard of care. If they have a visceral disease, then see if there is the correlating facilitated spinal segments that you learned during your 2nd year. Even further, treat these areas of facilitation and see if your patient sees an improvement. See if addressing areas of lymphatic obstruction can assist your patient hospitalized with CHF. Just prove whether it works or not to yourself. Irvin Korr, PhD, one of the most renowned researchers in the history of the Osteopathic profession, originally aimed to discredit OMT. It wasn't until he actually started researching it that he realized that the stuff actually works. So I ask you to be a skeptic, and ask questions that challenge what you have learned, but I also ask you to seek the answers.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I realize that this was a while ago but I thought you might appreciate a direct quote from Dr. Wooley from last week's lecture on "Osteopathic Consideration of the Cardiovascular System."
Directly from the mp3, Wooley states at the very beginning of lecture:
"OMT decreases morbilidity and mortality which would make sense when we speak about sympathetics, parasympathetics, and lymphatics. PLEASE UNDERSTAND IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH A HEART ATTACK, OMT WILL NOT SAVE THEIR LIVES. IT WILL BE ABLE TO ASSIST WITH CERTAIN THINGS TO HELP. IT IS NOT THE BE-ALL END-ALL. YOU MUST GO THROUGH THE BASIC STEPS OF TREATMENT AND OMT IS TO BE USED AS AN ADJUCT."
The very fact that a professor has to emphasize something that almost any allied health professional (plus quite a few intelligent lay people) could tell you to a class of second year medical students indicates that a problem exists.
Furthermore, where is the data proving that OMT decreases morbidity and mortality in the post-MI setting? Another unsubstantianted claim, it would seem.
Ever hear of logical fallacies? You just exemplified one.
Yeah, I kind of think you're stretching things here, OldMil. I'm sure you're fully aware of how often professors state some of the most obvious thing that any non-medical student could logically infer on a regular basis. She's just trying to drive it home and make certain that she's not misinterpreted.
He doesn't have to answer that question. He is an OMM fellow. Therefore, he has full license to make false claims and avoid all use of logic. It's part of his job description.
Exactly!
Just wait for Woolley's claims when you get to Cranial, it's scary!
The1doc,
Also good point.
In reply to danclear's post from last week (sorry for the slow reply, I had to drive to a wedding 9 hours away this weekend), I am not opposed to people using OMM if that's their prerogative. I've tried it and had some success in alleviating back and neck pain temporarily. However, on the whole until it is proven to work and do everything that it is claimed to do, I am opposed to the unsubstantiated claims about it's abilities being on boards.
Much like doctors don't use prescription meds unless they have proven efficacy, I don't use and don't plan on using OMM until it is proven.
Any guesses as to what most docs would do if you suggested they prescribe a medication to their patients that had only anecdotal support?
"Please, Dr. Fluffenstuf, prescribe this anti-hypertensive for your patients. We have no clinical trials proving it works, but my aunt said it worked great for her!"
Assuming that this is a sarcastic remark (and my apologies if it isn't), then I sincerely hope you're more informed (and more able to discern between fantasy and reality) about OMM in the statements you are making, than you are about world events.
You're about a year late into this conversation.
Wow, I see there must really be a lot of people posting on this site then, as it was in the upper half of the first page. Allow me to help out then:
<bump>
I'm more so referring to the particular quote you commented on, which was much earlier in the conversation.
Ah, didn't realize there was a statute of limitations on quotes here. My bad.
Legally, no. But you're much like Steve Buscemi's character in The Big Lebowski..........most people find it a little annoying to rehash something that's been covered once before.
Hmmm... and since everyone who visits this site and read this thread all started at exactly the same time, except me, obviously, and since people aren't capable of NOT clicking a topic that has a new post on it, this puts a pretty major annoyance factor out there for all those people. I apologize profusely for such an oversight on my part.
You're by far the most dense individual I've met on SDN. It's not the fact that you came into the conversation late.....that happens all the time. It's the fact that you commented on something that was a complete off shoot of an actual post that ultimately has nothing to do with this thread.
So yes, it is annoying when someone enters a conversation late and literally has nothing to add to the actual topic.
Since you don't seem to have the basic intelligence quotient necessary to understand sarcasm, let me put it to you more directly:
I don't really care that you don't like my posting about a quote that someone put up several months ago - whether it was off-topic or not. Go cry somewhere else. It's a forum, time has to jump weeks and months. Here's a link more your speed than a forum like this: http://disney.go.com/home/today/index.html , maybe you should go hang out there instead. I hear whining is ok there, btw.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Haha...trust me, I get the sarcasm. Fact of the matter is you're still more than a slight annoyance and you never really quite figured that out until I spelled it out for you. I won't even respond to the IQ remark. You're clearly far and above so many of us. Life up on a pedastel must be nice. It's just too bad that yours has such a faulty foundation. It's interesting that you provide me with a link to a disney forum and explain to me that it's "more my speed"......interesting considering that this entire conversation has fallen around your inability to get up to speed. I'm willing to bet that people within the disney forum at least think in a logical and reasonable manner. You continue to resort to sarcasm and disingenuousness, because it's really all you have.
Looking back, I've severely wasted my time, so I'll go ahead an officially stop posting any responses to you, because it's clearly futile. I'm sure you'll respond with some sort of short quip that provides you with the kind of self-satisifcation you crave, so enjoy that while it lasts.
Thank you for nothing.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Don't take wooden nickels.
There you go. Two short quips for the price of one, and you're welcome.
Fair enough, it is true that there is still a lot to be proven about the efficacy of OMM, especially in the adjunct treatment of visceral disease. Of course, I have not heard of any reports of OMM causing an increase in morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. I have not heard any reports of OMM tx as an adjunct to the standard of care lengthening hospital stays for patients. Can we at least agree that OMM will not cause any serious harm to our patients? Of course, we have heard the reports of basilar artery dissection with cervical HVLA, but I have heard this entirely due to chiropractic manipulative techniques. I realize that there are a ton of DO students and osteopathic physicians that will never use OMT in their practice. Wouldn't it be nice though to have another form of treatment in your armamentarium? What if standard of care is not enough to provide a whole treatment to your patients? After all, evidence-based medicine is now becoming the norm in practice, but it is also leading to drugs being pulled off of the market. The standard of care today is not going to be the same standard of care in ten or twenty years, things will change. Some medications that are deemed safe and you will prescribe to patients today will be found to have long-term effects on a patient's health and will no longer be used in the future. On the other hand, OMM has been around for a long time now, and the same techniques that assist in the care of a patient today will have the same efficacy in the future...it will just be proven by EBM by then.
So, when there is a lack of evidence to support cranial, you're still suggesting we give glorified scalp massages in hopes that the EBM subset will somehow crossover to the "OK, we'll go off of anecdote and speculation" way of thinking. The reverse logic you are using, by your own admission, is that doing something counter to the standard of care is fine, so long as it's always been done that way. Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but then why do we not use bloodletting? Poultices of magic herbs? Because there is no evidence to support their use. Does OMM work for musculoskeletal problems? Yes. Anything else? Questionable at best.....extremely unlikely, but I won't rule it out. Cranial? Well....read on.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence...it doesn't matter if you're trying to prove that there is really a creature called Bigfoot or trying to prove that you can feel pulsations through the skull and that somehow that pulsation can be modified and used to treat whatever ails the patient. Sadly, there's more evidence to support the existence of sasquatch than there is to prove that cranial is anything more than the lunatic rantings of a bunch of people who refuse to admit they have checked the basic scientific tenets of medicine at the door...Pardon me but that's not far the beliefs of those I would expect to hear say "The line for the grape Kool-aid forms to the left, ask for Jim."
Since you used these examples to point out the efficacy of modern science over what you are classifying certain aspects of OMM as (namely "superstition" - can we agree that's basically what you are saying?) then I am am assuming your examples of "bloodletting" and "magic herb poultices" are beyond reproach... at least from any standpoint of western scientific reasoning, right?
If that is so, then you should perhaps come up with better examples of what doesn't work. Or are you saying that Hirudotherapy (leeches and bloodletting), which has been in use for at least a few decades to assist with (among other things) various aspects of surgery, is actually a left-over from flat-earth society times, and has no place in medicine?
As for the "magic herb poultice," I could name several such homemade remedies which have been copied and marketed by pharmaceutical companies... guess why? Because they work, maybe? Here's a quick one... willow bark, high in salacylic acid. Now, in the absence of aspercreme (or one of its many competitors) or even needing for some other reason to have an anti-inflammatory or antipyretic applied topically (ok, your kid is intensely sick with a high fever and can't keep anything down orally), and in the middle of the wilderness without your handy-dandy drug kit (even though this example is silly, since there is really no such thing as "wilderness" in the USA any more anyway), would you take the willow-salacylic-acid "magic herb" poultice or start out for the nearest Walgreens? Ok, again, bad example because the nearest Walgreens is always only a 10 min walk away, no matter where you find yourself... but you get my point I hope. If you don't well, obviously all the major pharm. companies do, since they spend hundreds of millions yearly in pharmacognosy research in rain forests and elsewhere around the globe. So, maybe don't get too far up on that "western science and reductionism will be our savior" high horse. It's a pretty long fall.
I agree with your point that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" but unless you could prove that cranial is causing harm, I don't see how that negates the point of the post you were replying to (and the point of many posts on this thread). If it's not doing harm and a D.O. wants to use it on their patients, thereby perhaps even doing their own personal research into it as well, why would that possibly be a problem? Especially in the case of patients who actively are seeking out this type of therapy because they KNOW it works for them.
You do have a hilarious avatar, btw.
Siinew,
Are you a med student yet? I am just curious b/c it seems that the people who really defend cranial & other OMM practices w/ no basis in EBM, are those who haven't even begun to be instructed in the theory behind some of these ridiculous practices.
If you are a med student, then I applaud you for being able to stay naive & open to some of these goofy practices.
Are you a med student yet? I am just curious b/c it seems that the people who really defend cranial & other OMM practices w/ no basis in EBM, are those who haven't even begun to be instructed in the theory behind some of these ridiculous practices.
If you are a med student, then I applaud you for being able to stay naive & open to some of these goofy practices.
Good enough for me....musculoskeletal problems are extremely common complaints of patients.....as for the rest that you feel is bs...forget it and concentrate on the msk stuff
1. I am a third-year PCOM student with excellent attendance and no, I was never told to "try OMM as a first resort".
2. I know how to identify the red-flags of an MI and perform an appropriate work-up.
3. I have never used OMM in lieu of performing said work-up.
4. There is no relationship between treating patients with OMM appropriately and missing an MI.
5. Lot's of my patients have felt really great after an appropriate OMM treatment.
6. OMM is not the culprit here. Perhaps you should consider removing it from the title of this thread and reconsider your bias. End of story.
2. I know how to identify the red-flags of an MI and perform an appropriate work-up.
3. I have never used OMM in lieu of performing said work-up.
4. There is no relationship between treating patients with OMM appropriately and missing an MI.
5. Lot's of my patients have felt really great after an appropriate OMM treatment.
6. OMM is not the culprit here. Perhaps you should consider removing it from the title of this thread and reconsider your bias. End of story.
That is the most idiotic rationale I have heard in some time. Think of one work - "QUACK" - and then read your last paragraph again.
Peter Popoff has thousands of followers who "KNOW" his "Miracle Spring Water" works for them. The $28.30 that he charges for his miracle water is a fraction of what most QUACKS who practice cranial charge their patients. His water isn't doing people any harm either.
Here's a novel idea -
Since Peter Popoff's miracle water isn't doing any harm, it's relatively inexpensive, and there is loads of anecdotal evidence for it, why don't we include it in the OMM curriculum? Then we could include it on the boards, make it part of our literature, and provide it as a supplement to cranial therapy.
Amen.
When asked about OMM during interviews, be sure to let the adcoms know your opinion. I'm sure they will get a kick out of the Jim Jones comparison!
Although you're right about willow bark containing salacylic acid, the source for the salacylic acid in aspirin was actually a plant called meadowseet (Spirea ulmaria) - hence the name: A for acetyl, spir from Spirea, in from ? ->Aspirin
I agree with much of your post by the way. I guess this is the designated OMM bashing thread for this month. 👎
But you are forced to learn it if you want to get a good grade in OMM as well as on boards since a large chunk of my OMM boards questions were of the BS un-proven Cranial type.
1. Good to hear, apparently the students I talked to didn't catch that part, which if even 1 student has that message it's dangerous.
2. Again, great! I would hope every physician, PA, NP, and RN would know the same thing!
3. Again, great but there are obviously those who have.
4. Not when you include the word appropriately in the sentence.
5. No one ever questioned the feel good part of receiving a treatment.
6. OMM is not the culprit, the over-emphasis of it to the point that some (Notice I didn't say all or even most) DO school grads leave with the mindset of thinking MSK problems before any other. If even 1 DO graduates with that mindset, we have created a dangerous situation.
Bodymechanic;
I understand your enthusiasm and belief in OMM, I was of a similar mindset 3 months into my first year as well. When I got to 2nd year and started being told all the BS claims, especially in the Cranial dept, my mindset changed drastically.
Get back to me once you've been through the Cranial hokus-pokus and let me know if you still feel the same way.
the1doc,
I have some great snake oil that has never harmed anyone and my cousin's neice's uncle's best friend's car mechanic said it cured his cirrhosis! Maybe we can get my product added to next year's OMM curriculum.
Heck, while we're at it, lets add every supplement at GNC to the DO curriculum. Every product they have there has no hard evidence, but the anecdotal evidence is phenomenal!*
* Look on the side of the bottles, they all say something along the lines of "This product not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease or illness."
Maybe we should mandate that any patient given cranial receives a similar slip of paper saying something like: "This technique not intended to treat or cure any problems you might have, but some strongly people believe it might."
No, I'm not and I acknowledge I am saying things without any experience. However, I was just jumping in on a general "philosophical" basis of the argument - which becomes, "what makes a good doctor?" I have had OMM used on myself, however, with great success (for two separate musculoskeletal issues), and have a huge decision looming ahead of me as to whether to pick DO or MD, as I've been accepted into both types of schools at this point. There are a lot of other things involved of course (mostly geographical location), but I've decided that if I do go the MD route, I will probably come back and learn OMM later. I will likely go into PM & R, although of course that could change.
Ok, now let's take your insistence on going to the ridiculous extreme to the other side. You become the type of doctor who is convinced your patient knows absolutely nothing about what's going on with their body. Regardless of what they tell you, you don't listen. In fact, you really don't even care. I mean, what's the point of taking a history? They might be lying and it's just subjective information anyway. The fact that they have migraines, let's say (just to pick an ailment) and OMM (cranial) makes it go away means absolutely nothing to you. You wave aside their statements and find some great muscle relaxants or whatever the agreed-upon approach by the AMA-Pharm incestuous collaboration (complete with lot's of data of course, which we know could never be skewed... such as Merck, et. al.) happens to be. Find that name-value pair, just like a computer, because we're all just machines with parts... sickness-cure. Doesn't work, go down to the next item on the bonified spreadsheet - just don't actually listen to your patient... that would be going out on a limb and <gasp> thinking for yourself.
Who's really the quack here in my equally extreme example as your holy water one?
But it's true, all my osteopathic experience is only as a patient (I do have, in my past, about 4k clinical hours experience as a specific type of Army medic that has to make critical decisions without any attending to back him up, though - but most of that is emergency medicine).
I do know that with your attitude, you'd only be my doc for one visit. The fast-food approach may work for the chunk of the American population who have absolutely no personal connection to their own bodies, but I don't come anywhere near that demographic. If a physician doesn't value the fact that I know my own physical pain, what alleviates it, etc., then that physician is the worst kind of quack there is, in my book.
Please don't mistake my empirical observations of the benefits of OMM with a "belief" in anything. In my previous life I was a masssage therapist and have taken many CEUs in cranial, as well as visceral manipulation, and have found both modalities to be useful in certain circumstances. Personally, I think the proposed mechanisms of action for cranial make about as much sense as cold fusion, but I have observed and experienced some effects from cranial that were very interesting and appeared to be very therapeutic. Do the effects come from manipulating the PRM or merely from a parasympathetic response to touch? I have no idea. Can I prove they weren't placebo? No, and I'm OK with that. Personally, I think the placebo effect is way underappreciated in medicine.
I think your original post, although obviously intended to provoke a response, had a valid point. Now this thread is just some run of the mill OMM bashing. Too bad that some students end up so turned off on one particular aspect of OMM that they dismiss it entirely. Nobody says you have to embrace cranial, just regurgitate some info for a test and forget it if you so desire, then go use what works for you.
"Are you a med student yet?"
That's the most honest and accurate thing you have ever posted on here.
Would you also like to comment on Nuclear physics, Cambodian fashion design, Mayan ruin significance or any other topic of which you know nothing about?
When you first started posting on these threads it appeared to me you had little to no knowledge about the topic and now I see why.
Your analogy is worthless, weak and not even comparable to the1doc's. Nice effort though.
If you'd rather have a doc who uses techniques he/she "thinks should work" over a doc who looks at the evidence supporting different options and picks the best one, at 45 you're gonna end up moving to Tijuana for holistic mexican drugman cures for your prostate cancer.
Regarding your osteopathic experience, by your logic, I can post all about Neurology since I've been to a Neurologist a handful of times I obviously know all about Neurology. 🙄
That's the most honest and accurate thing you have ever posted on here.
Would you also like to comment on Nuclear physics, Cambodian fashion design, Mayan ruin significance or any other topic of which you know nothing about?
When you first started posting on these threads it appeared to me you had little to no knowledge about the topic and now I see why.
Your analogy is worthless, weak and not even comparable to the1doc's. Nice effort though.
If you'd rather have a doc who uses techniques he/she "thinks should work" over a doc who looks at the evidence supporting different options and picks the best one, at 45 you're gonna end up moving to Tijuana for holistic mexican drugman cures for your prostate cancer.
Regarding your osteopathic experience, by your logic, I can post all about Neurology since I've been to a Neurologist a handful of times I obviously know all about Neurology. 🙄
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
So we should just hold all of our patients for about 15 minutes at a time and let the parasympathetic response to touch heal them?
I can't wait until my Surgery rotation when a patient develops a post-op ileus, I'll just hop in the hospital bed with my patient and spoon them until it's fixed.
It is too bad that cranial drives so many students from OMM, which is exactly why it shouldn't be taught or included on boards. If 1 part of our schooling brings about so much ridicule from DO's and MD's alike as well as students, wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate it and increase the overall validity of OMM? Not that any aspect of OMM has been proven outside of anecdotal evidence.
I regurgitated all the Cranial BS for a test, faked it for a practical, and regurgitated it again for boards. Unfortunately I have to regurgitate it for 2 more sets of boards when I never should have had to sit through it in the first place.
Nice answers NavyDoc. I notice you made sure to stay away from my actual points, since you have nothing to say on the matters.
I've noted in other threads where I've conversed with you, that I am not a med student at this time, but you evidently missed that while you were sounding out any multi-syllabic words.
Nonetheless, if you haven't started your 4th (let alone 3rd) year yet, which I don't think you have, based on the medical immaturity of many of your statements, then I probably have a hell of a lot more clinical experience than you.
Wait until you do your first rape kit on a hysterical teenage girl and then I challenge you to come back and read what you wrote regarding the whole issue (which you contributed nothing of substance to) around the Catholic hospital scenario. You ought to be ashamed, but I think you probably just said it for shock value, because I've nailed you on your ridiculous assertions on this board more than once now. The whole fact that there would have to BE a law telling doctors in a Catholic hospital to just do their job is actually pretty sickening to me, in fact.
I've noted in other threads where I've conversed with you, that I am not a med student at this time, but you evidently missed that while you were sounding out any multi-syllabic words.
Nonetheless, if you haven't started your 4th (let alone 3rd) year yet, which I don't think you have, based on the medical immaturity of many of your statements, then I probably have a hell of a lot more clinical experience than you.
Wait until you do your first rape kit on a hysterical teenage girl and then I challenge you to come back and read what you wrote regarding the whole issue (which you contributed nothing of substance to) around the Catholic hospital scenario. You ought to be ashamed, but I think you probably just said it for shock value, because I've nailed you on your ridiculous assertions on this board more than once now. The whole fact that there would have to BE a law telling doctors in a Catholic hospital to just do their job is actually pretty sickening to me, in fact.
Just when I thought your posts couldn't get any more ridiculous.....you post something like this.
You aren't making any sense. You are just rambling.
I suspect that you are right - I will only see patients like you for one visit - your next visit will be to a psychiatrist.
Sorry, LOL, you're right. I crossed posts... was talking to NavyDoc regarding his comments on the other thread that's been going on. That probably does look like psychotic rambling coming up here like that. Only part of that post was where it belonged, the rest over in -->
( http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=328884&page=2 )
My bad, please disregard.
Let me first attempt to make sense of your SN.
The first 2 letters "si" are Spanish for "if."
Then comes the letter I, obviously referring to yourself, the only person who matters to you and the only person with valid opinions.
Then comes "new" where I am guessing you forgot the "k."
So really your name is "If I Knew".
Yes, if only you knew that the rest of the world's opinions matter.
If only you knew anything about OMM aside from a few limited experiences as a patient you could provide valid input on this thread.
If only you knew how to disagree with someone without attempting to turn it into an all out onslaught on them as a person.
No, I hit your points right on, however since my opinions differ from yours, you chose not to recognize them as relevant.
I, like many others who I have talked to in person, often skip the rest of your posts after you make the first ridiculous claim, which is usually within the first sentence.
You asked about my Verbal MCAT score and I told you I got a 12. I'd love to know your verbal score while you're busy insulting my verbal comprehension skills so I know whether or not to be hurt.
I'm 2 months into my 3rd year, thanks for asking, which is way farther than you are into med school and I had my fair share of clinical experience before starting.
This gives me 2 months more experience with rotations than you have with OMM, so by your logic and actions, I am more than qualified to post as an expert on all apects of rotations.
How much of your clinical experience was in OMM, the subject this thread is about? Or are you just trying to flaunt your Army clinical experience as basis for your expertise on everything?
As I have previously said several times, I respect you for your service and I thank you for it, however the way you attempt to use it as proof for your ability to know more than anyone else on any subject is dis-heartening.
FYI, the rape debate was on another thread, but you can't seem to stay on topic regardles of what thread you are on.
I mentioned over there that I have volunteered at a Rape counseling center while in College. I have been in the room and assisted in doing a rape kit on a 15 year old girl who was raped by her own dad and uncle. Don't even attempt to lecture me on what it is like. I've been there and I've spent hours after battling between tears and anger wondering why she had to go through it.
If you think the primary thing a rape victim needs is a doc throwing a pill at her as he passed through on lightning rounds that will fix all her problems, you're more ignorant and inconsiderate than I thought.
Offering a pill to abort any pregnancy which may or may not have occured is not the part of the job description of a doctor. The job of a doctor with a rape victim is to treat any injuries that have occured, both physical and emotional, perform a thorough rape exam, and attempt to console the patient.
I find it ironic that in one post you claim that OMM, of which you know next to nothing about, is the cure for everything, then in the next post you want every patient to be given a pill.
Maybe once you've learned cranial, you can do CV4 on all your rape patients. In 3 years, once you've gotten in to med school, started med school (if you choose a DO school), and taken med school classes plus OMM and the Cranial portion, you will know what I am talking about. Until then, keep on blabbing about that which you know nothing of, it seems to make you happy.
The first 2 letters "si" are Spanish for "if."
Then comes the letter I, obviously referring to yourself, the only person who matters to you and the only person with valid opinions.
Then comes "new" where I am guessing you forgot the "k."
So really your name is "If I Knew".
Yes, if only you knew that the rest of the world's opinions matter.
If only you knew anything about OMM aside from a few limited experiences as a patient you could provide valid input on this thread.
If only you knew how to disagree with someone without attempting to turn it into an all out onslaught on them as a person.
No, I hit your points right on, however since my opinions differ from yours, you chose not to recognize them as relevant.
I, like many others who I have talked to in person, often skip the rest of your posts after you make the first ridiculous claim, which is usually within the first sentence.
You asked about my Verbal MCAT score and I told you I got a 12. I'd love to know your verbal score while you're busy insulting my verbal comprehension skills so I know whether or not to be hurt.
I'm 2 months into my 3rd year, thanks for asking, which is way farther than you are into med school and I had my fair share of clinical experience before starting.
This gives me 2 months more experience with rotations than you have with OMM, so by your logic and actions, I am more than qualified to post as an expert on all apects of rotations.
How much of your clinical experience was in OMM, the subject this thread is about? Or are you just trying to flaunt your Army clinical experience as basis for your expertise on everything?
As I have previously said several times, I respect you for your service and I thank you for it, however the way you attempt to use it as proof for your ability to know more than anyone else on any subject is dis-heartening.
FYI, the rape debate was on another thread, but you can't seem to stay on topic regardles of what thread you are on.
I mentioned over there that I have volunteered at a Rape counseling center while in College. I have been in the room and assisted in doing a rape kit on a 15 year old girl who was raped by her own dad and uncle. Don't even attempt to lecture me on what it is like. I've been there and I've spent hours after battling between tears and anger wondering why she had to go through it.
If you think the primary thing a rape victim needs is a doc throwing a pill at her as he passed through on lightning rounds that will fix all her problems, you're more ignorant and inconsiderate than I thought.
Offering a pill to abort any pregnancy which may or may not have occured is not the part of the job description of a doctor. The job of a doctor with a rape victim is to treat any injuries that have occured, both physical and emotional, perform a thorough rape exam, and attempt to console the patient.
I find it ironic that in one post you claim that OMM, of which you know next to nothing about, is the cure for everything, then in the next post you want every patient to be given a pill.
Maybe once you've learned cranial, you can do CV4 on all your rape patients. In 3 years, once you've gotten in to med school, started med school (if you choose a DO school), and taken med school classes plus OMM and the Cranial portion, you will know what I am talking about. Until then, keep on blabbing about that which you know nothing of, it seems to make you happy.
