Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Medical Students - MD' started by Optimistic, Nov 10, 2001.
Can you guys write the resons why you chose allopathy over osteopathy?
Hi Optimistic! Nice to see a fellow Ohioan (although I am a transplant) here. Here's the nutshell version: I chose not to apply to DO schools because I don't think I need different letters to take a more open and holistic approach to medicine. I think along more "DO" lines if we're being stereotypical (non-traditional, nutrition, spirituality, etc), but I don't think that a mold is necessary. If I want to do manipulations (which I do not think, based on my current experience, that I will ever want to do) I can take CME courses for what I need. If anything a degree & license to practice medicine opens up your horizons so you can do much, much more with what you already have.
Because an MD school accepted me...and I didn't even get an INTERVIEW at the DO schools....
Those MD schools knew what they might lose out on, Cobragirl. The DO schools just didn't catch on!
I didn't have a DO rec letter at the time.
I applied to only alllopathic but had a DO general surgeon write one of my letters. So far I don't think its done any harm.
Frankly, I chose allopathic medical education because a DO doesn't exactly help the already highly competitive rat race for many residencies. But don't let this discourage you from DO; my cousin went to UNE Osteopathic School in Maine and he got into a cardiology residency at UCLA. Good luck!!
DO definitely starts you out at a disadvantage...
I somewhat disagree with that last statement (my personal opinion). Most of the time it is what you make of the opportunity. There are cases where you are at a disadvantage, but most goals are not unachievable just because someone has a DO degree.
I do not get the question! Sure we've all heard over and over that DO's are just as skilled and competent as MD's, and I even buy that, but MD's, though it doesn't make them better, were first, not better, but definitely first. Furthermore, the DO's arguing until they are blue in the face that they are just as good as MD's is simultaneoulsy an argument against them. They are trained the same for the most part as MD's -- they don't offer anything unique. They do manipulation and alternative medicine sure but for the most part they are doctors. They have learned a new or different aspect of treatment. What if when Pastuer made his case there was a seperate physician degree for people who practiced sterile technique? Any MD can do manipulation once they learn how. What if there was a separate degree when penicillin was discovered for physicians who believed in using it? The question "why didn't you apply to DO?" is a little haughty and absurd. That's like saying why did your family immigrate to the US instead of to Canada? Why do you drink Coke instead of RC Cola? Why do you go to McDonalds instead of Burger King? Why do you join the Navy instead of the Coast Gaurd? Why did you call the Police instead of Mall Security? Why did you get the a DVD player when I could have sold you my Beta? Why didn't people apply to DO????!!! Whether you like it or not - DO **DOES** *START* you at a disadvantage - you could still wind up the countries best neurosurgeon, but hospitals and insurance companies have a bias to MD's - most of the real world have never heard of DO, most medical schools by a large percent are MD's, and there isn't a real unique attribute that a DO possesses that separates him or her and makes them a special commodity apart from an MD. The more DO's whine and are defensive about this the more they reinforce the pro-MD argument.
I respectfully disagree with the last post. As a person who has just gone through the application process for D.O. schools, I must say that there definitely IS a difference between D.O.s and M.D.s. The difference is Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine (OMM). D.O.s are trained in this aspect of medicine and M.D.s are not. It is fairly cut and dry, to my knowledge, what separates a D.O. from an M.D. While I will agree that they are both physicians, D.O.s can offer something to a patient that an M.D. cannot and that is why I chose to go to an osteopathic school over an allopathic one. I don't mean to start anything but I just had to make my point of view known. Take care all...
Prove to me that D.O.'s start off at disadvantage.
Show me the numbers.
The more people I talk to, the more I realize that the bias against D.O.'s is greater in the premedical community than anywhere else.
There are osteopathic residencies for everything just as there are allopathic residencies. Osteopathic education tends to steer its students towards primary care, so naturally you will have fewer D.O. grads attending specialty residencies. That doesn't tell me that D.O.'s are at a disadvantage.
So, Jean...I'm asking you to prove that D.O.'s are at a disadvantage. I want to see some hard evidence...or at least something more substantial than your misguided opinion.
I'm guessing they were thinking on the lines of 'If I want to be a big-wig super respected big hospital in the news specialist, I'll be at a disadvantage.'
The corporate world is not biased toward DO's. Trust Me.
As a 4th year med student at an allopathic school whose best friend from childhood is a 4th yr at an osteopathic school, I think I have a bit of perspective on this question.
First of all, there is the issue of the letters-- DO as opposed to MD -- which will come after your name after you're slogged your way through med school. Rightly or wrongly, this IS an issue. In my experience, this is a non-issue as both the abilities and knowledge of the many DO's I've had a chance to work with are comparable to those of MD's. However, I think that I was a bit more open-minded to DO's from the start due to the fact that my friend was at an osteopathic school and I knew from the start that he wasn't chasing tail on a beach somewhere while I was slogging it out in the books. However, most people don't have this perspective, and I guarantee that you will meet those, including MD's, staff, and laypeople, who will assume that DO is inferior. It is not right, and it is not the truth, but if you aren't going to be willing to explain the equivalency, you'd better forget about even applying to DO schools. In the northeast, at least, it's "Why DO?" not "Why MD?".
In terms of DO school itself, I think that it's actually harder in the first two years, if anything. Aside from my friend's school's draconian attendance policies (all lectures are mandatory, with shirt & tie dress code), you wind up taking all of the same basic science classes with the Osteopathic manipulation curriculum shoehorned into the middle of it.
Your career options are limited to the extent that Osteopaths are presumed to be more focused on primary care. This is clearly not the case, as there are DO general surgeons, ER docs, and gastroenterologists. You simply have to work a bit harder to find DO-friendly residency programs if you aren't going to do a residency at an osteopathic hospital.
But the bottom line is that DO and MD are more or less eqivalent in today's world. I'm not convinced that DO's bring all that much more to the bedside in the practical sense, as most DO's never do OMM once they graduate from med school. And in terms of alternative approaches, I think that there is increasing exposure to that nowadays in most allopathic programs to the point that it is almost a non-issue. If you want to be an alternative medicine provider, nobody's stopping you. Some of the most popular non-traditional docs like Deepak Chopra and Andrew Weil are both MD's.
So the choice between MD and DO in the end comes down to your gut instinct. Do you think that you will feel more comfortable in a program which is more open-minded to begin with? Then apply for DO programs. They are somewhat less competitive than MD programs, which might factor into some people's decisions.
I respectfully disagree with the last post. As a person who has just gone through the application process for D.O. schools, I must say that there definitely IS a difference between D.O.s and M.D.s. The difference is Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine (OMM). D.O.s are trained in this aspect of medicine and M.D.s are not. It is fairly cut and dry, to my knowledge, what separates a D.O. from an M.D. While I will agree that they are both physicians, D.O.s can offer something to a patient that an M.D. cannot and that is why I chose to go to an osteopathic school over an allopathic one. I don't mean to start anything but I just had to make my point of view known.
OOoops... the last paragraph in my previous post was meant to be quoted, not pasted inline.
DOs are only equivalent to MDs in the US. In other countries, they are considered like funky chiropractors, and cannot be liscenced to practice medicine. This is an unfortunate but significant difference to mention.
I am a fourth year MD student. When I originally applied to medical school I interviewed at both the Allopathic and Osteopathic programs. Pound for pound they offered the same curriculum, aside from OMM, had students of similar caliber, and comparable facilities. I would say the biggest difference I noticed was the lack of a university hospital closely associated with the osteopathic schools as well as a lack of funding for research purposes. In the end the education seems to be equivalent in quality. The biggest things that swayed me towards Allopathic medicine were:
1. Whenever I told someone I was interviewing at an osteopathic school, they would get this blank look on their face. So, I'd have to go through the routine of explaining how a DO is like an MD, goes thru the same education, blah blah.
2. TWICE, I told my mother about osteopathy and she still thought I was talking about chiropractic (no, she's not stupid).
3. An attending DO psychiatrist told me he did an MD residency because "the osteopathic residencies are a joke." Not too comforting.
4. 90% of DOs practice primary care in rural settings. I'm a total city boy and I didn't want to limit my options.
So, I couldn't imagine going through four years of school plus residency, being a trained physician, and having people think I was anything less than a highly qualified medical doctor. Yes others may be ignorant of what a D.O. is but having to educate the Country is not exactly what gets me off!
?????? Greater Market share equals greater consumer confidence?????? Are you looking at patient's or PPO's/HMO's perspective? I am not disagreeing with your statement about better known. However, the truth is nobody (the patients)cares (at least in the midwest) Dr.=Dr. i.e. Market share is independent of consumer confidence. Again I will say that in the corporate world there is NO DIFFERENCE. Your DRG is my DRG. Your RVRBS is my RVRBS. Our Corp codes (SIC) differ by 1 pt, however MD's can take the DO code or vice versa. Either way envokes no advantage.
I don't have alot of time, but one thing does stand out.
There ARE foreign countries where D.O.'s can practice as Physicians, not the "Osteopath" that Europeans are accustomed to.
This information can be obtained from AACOM.
Hold up, I am not disputing the residency thing. I am disputing the Hospital/Insurance Co. thing. Good call on the Apple/Microsoft thing. While you have addressed market share. You have not addressed consumer confidence. That will be based on word of mouth, or whomever you refer the patient too (they trust us.) I WILL refer my patients to both MD's and DO's (whichever is best for the patient), and I think you will do the same. I also believe there is a geographical difference. In the midwest it is a non-issue. I do agree with your other points. I had the option of going MD or DO. At the time I thought there would be a difference (you know philosophy ect.). Truth is it doesn't matter, MD/DO Every Doc. wants to treat the whole patient. (Duh) My trip to being a premier doc in the big city will be different than that of an MD. However, I believe that hospitals don't care about letters, and I KNOW HMO's and PPO's don't. Also, If you choose DO, make sure that it is what you want. Don't do it for philosophy, that depends on the individual.
Many DO's apply to allopathic residencies and have lower match rates. You can attribute it to bias against DOs, hence a disadvantage, or that they are inferior. You can pick either one you want, but I'd prefer the former if I were you. OMM is a joke. Everyone is like - "it's an MD+." Gimme a break...Much of OMM is at the level of chiropractic medicine which is pretty much panned as being quackery. 95% of DO's never use it. I could invent another degree that incorporates medicine and juggling. It would be an MD+, but it isn't necessarily better. OMM is very shaddy. Please don't tell me you don't think that people can determine a CSF pulse in the skull. That's utter nonsense and it's never been proven. My point overall is that the extra OMM isn't necessarily a good thing. The MD+ is nonsense. Save the manipulation techniques for the chiropractors.
One of my parents died at the small hospital near my home. It was an emergency on a Friday night. There was no MD at the ED, only a DO was present. The cause of death was not determined until after autopsy, which was aneurysm.
I know that whether there was an MD present or a DO doesn't matter, despite this when I reveal that there was a DO and not an MD present some people react in horror. I try to explain that a DO is just as qualified as a MD, but a small percentage of people out there do think that a DO is like a chiropractor.
I think the situation would have been different if my father was at a higher level hospital.
I am very sorry to hear about your father.
I think I have a kink in my neck.
Anyone out there know if it could be causing my irritable bowel syndrome or herpes outbreak? If so, I'll need a little OMM up in here!
Whoooooo. good one. very humorous. Seriously, that was very funny. honest.
DarePimpMe- .. and I have this problem when I smile, I find that for some reason it triggers my cremasteric reflex. Oh.. it must be that somatic dysfunction of the left fourth rib that is causing this problem! (sorry, a little more sarcasm here.. and not much imagination on my part)
Perhaps it is different when you have seen or experienced OMM when it can really make a difference. Hey, if a doctor finds the cause for a symptom/dysfunction and successfully treats the cause, I am not going to complain.
If wish the mod's would just recycle the posts from the last few years about the DO/MD thing. Save us all time from having to type things again.
Just remember, billing codes are the same.. that must mean something...
Regarding the OMM-bit.. If MD schools are offering OPP training (i.e. Michigan) that might say something... and that there is CME for MDs in OMT... that might say something too. Also, that a bunch of MD surgeons (hmm.. classic MD mindset) that I know LOVE working with DOs on rotations (read: free manipulations post-surgery).. that might say something. Real-world issue: DOs can bill for OMT procedures.. THAT might say something....
Speaking of surgeons, a popular credo is: "proper structure begets proper function." Now, if that is true for surgery, why wouldn't it apply to manipulative therapy? Same theory (hands v. scalpel).
At the very least, I think the "social proof" justifies the validity of OMT as a treatment modality.
My Mom always said: "Don't knock it, 'til you try it." That might apply to this situation... then again, I think my Mom was refering to me eating my vegtables at dinner...
(apparently, that worked since I'm a vegetarian now)
1. Chiropractors also get paid for their non-sense, just cuz DO's do doesn't mean anything.
2. I've done many things such as snort coccaine, join the KKK, and jump off of a building...but yet it's accpetable to knock all that stuff...
Who cares. I'm a DO. I have to explain my degree every now and again. I suck at OMM but have been educated in the manor. I am at a disadvantage while applying for allopathic residency programs but I will be obtaining one. I will treat people in the future who will probably never know I am a DO. A minority of people may not come to see me because I am a DO and a minority people will come see me specifically because I one. Again who cares. The reality is once I am done it won't matter. I could use the egocentric arguement of why I am better or not. The truth is in the end, if you are good Dr. your good Dr. I am going to be good. Put whatever you would like behind my name but my actions speak for themselves.
Celebrate diversity, work hard and play harder and quit argueing over nonsense. God bless America.
please excuse my gramatical errors. It's a good thing I'm not an English teacher.
As a D.O. student I wish more practicing D.O.'s practiced OMM, especially in primary care settings. The fact that most don't simply confuses the "lines". However, realize that OMM is not practical in many circumstances, so don't assume that everyone visiting a D.O. should receive OMM of some kind.
Some aspects of D.O. philosopy are a little hard to swallow (i.e. craniosacral) and that is fine. AS a student, a lot of it is hard for me to swallow, and I don't necessarily think I will practice it on my own.
However, D.O.'s are unique in their training. If we were not unique, there would be no justification for our existence. I can assure you that the D.O. with 2 hard years of OMM training mixed in with their basic sciences is going to have a significant competency advantage over the M.D. who attends 2-3 OMM CME courses.
I don't plan on using every OMM treatment I am learning, but I have weeded the questionable stuff out, taken it with a grain of salt and determined that there are some really effective treatments that I am going to be able to perform with my hands.
And...this knowledge isn't something that makes me feel pretentious. I'll show any M.D. interested what I know, as I'm sure he/she would have a few things to show me.
It is my thought that it will be the uniqueness of OMM, and what we have learned regarding somatic dysfunction that will seperate DO primary care docs, and the PA's and NP's that can be found in many offices today.