Has anyone heard of Naturopathic Medicine?

[mshheaddoc]

Whoa, I was making generalize statements. Many psychologists which I have known have not taken any classes of the like.

As well as pharmacology is fantastic but there are physiology and other factors to consider as well. Just my opinion.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PublicHealth]

Whoa, I was making generalize statements. Many psychologists which I have known have not taken any classes of the like.

Right. Because psychopharmacology training is postdoctoral and optional. Most psychologists will never pursue it, opting instead to conduct assessments and provide psychotherapy. To date, only two U.S. states allow psychologists to prescribe a limited formulary of psychotropic meds in collaboration with their patients' PCPs--New Mexico and Louisiana. To quote Pat DeLeon, PhD, JD, "With respect to safety, medical psychologists certified in Louisiana saw a total of 7,260 patients in 2005, after receiving the authority to prescribe. 3,863 (53%) were provided prescriptions and a total of 9,345 prescriptions were written including refills. There were no adverse events associated with this expanded practice."

Basic medicine and physiology courses, as well as physical examination and laboratory courses, are included in the training. Keep in mind that all prescribing is done in collaboration with PCPs, who must approve psychologists' decision each time they pick up their prescription pad. In a sense, this practice is analogous to PAs and NPs, except that medical psychologists are focused strictly on psychopharmacology.

OK, this a naturopathic medicine thread. Sorry.

 

[mshheaddoc]

Just one quick bit, with mental conditions the few PCP's I know (and had personal experience with) did not feel comfortable even consulting in a pharmacological stand point and really didn't know much about it. Hence why most refer to psychiatrists where it is there expertise. Most PCP's will know your basic depression/anixety treatments but past that it is way out of their league in reference to interactions. Sure they can look on their palm for interactions but its not the same as a full work up by a psychiatrist.

I'm not trying to be combative I just have my concerns, that is all. If an NP/PA was distributing mental meds, I also have a big issue with that as well.

 

[PublicHealth]

Just one quick bit, with mental conditions the few PCP's I know (and had personal experience with) did not feel comfortable even consulting in a pharmacological stand point and really didn't know much about it. Hence why most refer to psychiatrists where it is there expertise. Most PCP's will know your basic depression/anixety treatments but past that it is way out of their league in reference to interactions. Sure they can look on their palm for interactions but its not the same as a full work up by a psychiatrist.

I'm not trying to be combative I just have my concerns, that is all. If an NP/PA was distributing mental meds, I also have a big issue with that as well.

Agreed. There's always a gold standard. Unfortunately, that gold standard is not available everywhere. Moreover, the fact that you have a "big issue" with medical/prescribing psychology and NP/PAs does not change the fact that psychiatry is not meeting the mental health needs of this country. Psychiatry is not a popular specialty among medical graduates and is one of the lowest paying.

It's a supply and demand issue. Instead of issuing arguments about how psychologist prescribing is not safe, psychiatry would be better served in attracting American medical school graduates to fill the FMG-dominated ranks of their profession.

I'm an osteopathic medical student considering psychiatry. However, I find that the profession as a whole is not concerned about the public mental health needs of this country. Many of the psychiatrists and psychiatrists-in-training that I know are looking for the best ways to make money, whether it's working for pharma, opening a fee-for-service practice, etc. This is not, in my view, the most effective means for the "gold standard" profession to address the critical and desperate situation of behavioral healthcare in the U.S.

Now, the sake of naturopathy, please PM me if you want to continue this discussion, or visit the Clinical Psychology PhD forum.

Best,

PH

 

[Daemos]

Or start a new thread in the clinical psychology PhD program. Clinical Psychology (I have a great intrest in neuropsychology) is one other options I'm looking if I cannot ever get into Medicine

 

[mshheaddoc]

Agreed. There's always a gold standard. Unfortunately, that gold standard is not available everywhere. Moreover, the fact that you have a "big issue" with medical/prescribing psychology and NP/PAs does not change the fact that psychiatry is not meeting the mental health needs of this country. Psychiatry is not a popular specialty among medical graduates and is one of the lowest paying.

It's a supply and demand issue. Instead of issuing arguments about how psychologist prescribing is not safe, psychiatry would be better served in attracting American medical school graduates to fill the FMG-dominated ranks of their profession.

100% agree with your views. I was just voicing my concerns.


As for Naturopathic Medicine - I've been doing some more research on schools and found this link to a group of schools. While perusing the site I was surprised at the expense (per credit) and comparative curriculum and variety in each school.

link

 

[mshheaddoc]

bumping for people who might be interested to voice their opinions.

 

[FoughtFyr]

All of the above arguments were targeted toward the osteopathic profession several decades ago. Now, osteopathic physicians are indistinguishable from allopathic physicians. In fact, they have all the training of MDs, plus OMM. Naturopathic folks will likely retain their philosophic bent, but will assimilate themselves into mainstream medicine as well. And with their training in natural medicine, they may very well have MORE to offer their patients than traditional medicine

Once again you fail to grasp the basics of the history of the profession you are supposedly going into. Osteopathic schools were included in the Flexner report (google it).

"When Flexner researched his report, allopathic medicine faced vigorous competition from several quarters, including osteopathic medicine and homeopathic medicine. Flexner clearly doubted the scientific validity of all forms of medicine other than the allopathic, deeming any approach to medicine that did not employ drugs to help cure the patient as tantamount to quackery and charlatanism. Medical schools that offered courses in bioelectric medicine, eclectic medicine, homeopathy, or "eastern medicine," for example, were told either to drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and underwriting support. A few schools resisted for a time, but eventually all complied with the Report or shut their doors.

When Flexner researched his Report, the USA contained a number of medical schools training osteopathic and homeopathic practitioners. Because doctors of osteopathy (D.O.s) often had practices whose scope was similar to that of M.D.s, Flexner insisted that the training of DOs be held to the same standard as that of MDs. Osteopathic medical schools had fought hard over the years for their independence from allopathic medicine, and resented being included in Flexner's report, which concluded that the standards of osteopathic schools were in fact substantially lower. As a result of the Report, the American Medical Association (AMA) expected all osteopathic medical schools to close. Instead, through a series of internal revolutions, the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) brought a number of its schools into compliance with Flexner's recommendations.

Before the Flexner report, osteopathic and allopathic training had little in common. As a result of the Flexner report, American osteopathic medical schools today teach evidence-based, scientific medicine. The curricula of osteopathic and allopathic medical schools differ only minimally, the chief difference being the additional instruction in osteopathic schools of manipulative medicine. This dramatic convergence of osteopathic and allopathic training demonstrates the sweeping effect the Flexner report had, not only in the closure of inadequate schools, but also in the standardization of the curricula of surviving schools."​

That report and the changes it brought about in the standardization of medical education is "how" osteopathy "got into the mainstream". It was not some methodical plan nor direct action by the AOA. Simply put, they brought their schools into a standardized format that included a scientific base. Not only is it impossible for naturopaths (or chiropractors) to do this as there is no scientific basis (independent of very small areas of overlap with traditional medicine) for their practices, but also because the social and political climate today is not demanding a full overhaul of the system of medical education.

- H

 

[DrEastWest]

No, naturopathic includes stuff like homeopathic medicine. I don't call that legit, I call that downright unethical.

Osteopathic doctors are considered legit by the general medical community. Naturopaths are not. Many people like them, but many people have no comprehension of basic science.

Disclaimer: I am not a Naturopathic Doctor, nor do I have any personal interest in supporting the profession. I simply would like to clarify a few points to hopefully dispel some ignorance on this site.

1. NDs are licensed in 14 states and Washington DC.
2. Their scope of practice varies by state. In some, they have full prescription, minor surgery, and diagnosis ability. In others, they can merely order labs, diagnose, prescribe herbs and supplements, and offer lifestyle counseling and NMT (Naturopathic Manipulation Technique).
3. In those states, they are required to attend an accredited 4-year, 4100 hour (at least) graduate (ND) program, with a "built-in residency."
4. The first two years of these programs is startlingly similar to the first two years of MD/DO school. (ie, entirely western science lecture/lab-based taught by PhDs and NDs)
5. The final two years introduce clinical rotations and more "alternative" modalities such as herbal medicine, homeopathy, nutrition, and NMT.
6. At the end of two years, Naturopathic students take their first board exams (western science, quite similar to the USMLE). At the end of three years they take their "Clinic Entrance Exam," and at the end of four they take their comprehensive licensing exam.
7. A list of OPTIONAL post-grad accredited residencies can be found at the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians website.

Furthermore, there seems to a lot of similarities between the allopathic/osteopathic route and the naturopathic route (specifically that they all rely heavily on a foundation of western lab science curricula). ND training deviates upon the addition of alternative western modalities during later training (very similar to the way OMT is incorporated into the DO curricula in lieu of whatever allopathic classes MDs are taking instead). Contrary to popular belief, although many ND schools also have acupuncture programs, in order for NDs to study and preform acupuncture, they must enroll in an additional dual degree program that leads to an L.Ac. ("license in acupuncture").

The reason for discrimination against NDs seems very similar to the (declining) discrimination against DOs by MDs: the average MCAT scores of ND students are slightly lower, on average, than DO students. (Likewise, DO MCATS tend to be slightly lower than MD scores, on average.) This fact, combined with the Naturopathic inclusion of "alternative and complementary medicines" into their required course of training gives them an unfair, in my opinion, label as inferior physicians.

Now, there is one MAJOR difference: clinical training. NDs are only required to see a minimum of 350-400 patients (as primary attendings) during their clinical year and are not required to complete a post-grad residency for licensure. MDs and DOs see almost this many patients in a week during their training and are required to complete 3 years of 80 hour weeks before licensure becomes a reality. MAJOR difference. From what I understand, ND residencies are becoming more common, with time, and there may be a time when NDs occupy the same residencies as DOs and MDs.

The sad thing for me is that 36 states refuse to license naturopaths. Given the lapse in clinical education, perhaps "primary care" status is not appropriate. But, after 4 years of rigorous study, NDs ought to be able to practice what they've learned in order to give the people a choice. In states where NDs are primary care physicians, the malpractice rate is no higher than in states without NDs. Therefore, if they stay in business, they must be doing some good and ought to be given a chance, like Physical Therapists, Nutritionists, Massage Therapists, Nurses, and Chiropractors, to practice a safe alternative to what's currently offered as primary care.

Just thoughts...

 

[JaggerPlate]

Third thread you've bumped with this BS. NDs aren't physicians and they aren't discriminated against because of lower 'MCATS' scores. 36/50 isn't a big enough number for me. Quit spewing this BS.

Disclaimer: I am not a Naturopathic Doctor, nor do I have any personal interest in supporting the profession. I simply would like to clarify a few points to hopefully dispel some ignorance on this site.

1. NDs are licensed in 14 states and Washington DC.
2. Their scope of practice varies by state. In some, they have full prescription, minor surgery, and diagnosis ability. In others, they can merely order labs, diagnose, prescribe herbs and supplements, and offer lifestyle counseling and NMT (Naturopathic Manipulation Technique).
3. In those states, they are required to attend an accredited 4-year, 4100 hour (at least) graduate (ND) program, with a "built-in residency."
4. The first two years of these programs is startlingly similar to the first two years of MD/DO school. (ie, entirely western science lecture/lab-based taught by PhDs and NDs)
5. The final two years introduce clinical rotations and more "alternative" modalities such as herbal medicine, homeopathy, nutrition, and NMT.
6. At the end of two years, Naturopathic students take their first board exams (western science, quite similar to the USMLE). At the end of three years they take their "Clinic Entrance Exam," and at the end of four they take their comprehensive licensing exam.
7. A list of OPTIONAL post-grad accredited residencies can be found at the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians website.

Furthermore, there seems to a lot of similarities between the allopathic/osteopathic route and the naturopathic route (specifically that they all rely heavily on a foundation of western lab science curricula). ND training deviates upon the addition of alternative western modalities during later training (very similar to the way OMT is incorporated into the DO curricula in lieu of whatever allopathic classes MDs are taking instead). Contrary to popular belief, although many ND schools also have acupuncture programs, in order for NDs to study and preform acupuncture, they must enroll in an additional dual degree program that leads to an L.Ac. ("license in acupuncture").

The reason for discrimination against NDs seems very similar to the (declining) discrimination against DOs by MDs: the average MCAT scores of ND students are slightly lower, on average, than DO students. (Likewise, DO MCATS tend to be slightly lower than MD scores, on average.) This fact, combined with the Naturopathic inclusion of "alternative and complementary medicines" into their required course of training gives them an unfair, in my opinion, label as inferior physicians.

Now, there is one MAJOR difference: clinical training. NDs are only required to see a minimum of 350-400 patients (as primary attendings) during their clinical year and are not required to complete a post-grad residency for licensure. MDs and DOs see almost this many patients in a week during their training and are required to complete 3 years of 80 hour weeks before licensure becomes a reality. MAJOR difference. From what I understand, ND residencies are becoming more common, with time, and there may be a time when NDs occupy the same residencies as DOs and MDs.

The sad thing for me is that 36 states refuse to license naturopaths. Given the lapse in clinical education, perhaps "primary care" status is not appropriate. But, after 4 years of rigorous study, NDs ought to be able to practice what they've learned in order to give the people a choice. In states where NDs are primary care physicians, the malpractice rate is no higher than in states without NDs. Therefore, if they stay in business, they must be doing some good and ought to be given a chance, like Physical Therapists, Nutritionists, Massage Therapists, Nurses, and Chiropractors, to practice a safe alternative to what's currently offered as primary care.

Just thoughts...

 

[DrEastWest]

Third thread you've bumped with this BS. NDs aren't physicians and they aren't discriminated against because of lower 'MCATS' scores. 36/50 isn't a big enough number for me. Quit spewing this BS.

Them's the facts, maam!

 

[JaggerPlate]

Them's the facts, maam!

No problem. BS is a much more logical conclusion that NDs are physicians who are only discriminated against because of a slightly lower MCAT average, and that they are making waves toward full licensing and surgical residencies.

Just another example of a non-physician group trying to practice medicine without attending medical school. We've all seen it with NPs, DCs, CRNAs, etc, etc, etc. This time though it's particularly hilarious because you're likening it to the struggle between DOs and MDs (without taking into consideration the fact that DOs wildly changed their model, standardized the training, and can now take the USMLE and complete ACGME residencies), state that NDs are already physicians, and try to claim differences lie in MCAT averages without taking into consideration the fact that NDs apparently spend two years learning herbology and homeopathy. Must be the MCAT, huh?

Additionally, I'm confused as to why NDs want to act as 'primary care physicians' in the first place. Don't they spend years learning alternative techniques to practice outside the model? Why would they want to prescribe pharm drugs? Why would they want to perform surgery? Why would they want to be recognized with MDs and DOs? Money?

 

[DrEastWest]

No problem. BS is a much more logical conclusion that NDs are physicians who are only discriminated against because of a slightly lower MCAT average, and that they are making waves toward full licensing and surgical residencies.

Just another example of a non-physician group trying to practice medicine without attending medical school. We've all seen it with NPs, DCs, CRNAs, etc, etc, etc. This time though it's particularly hilarious because you're likening it to the struggle between DOs and MDs (without taking into consideration the fact that DOs wildly changed their model, standardized the training, and can now take the USMLE and complete ACGME residencies), state that NDs are already physicians, and try to claim differences lie in MCAT averages without taking into consideration the fact that NDs apparently spend two years learning herbology and homeopathy. Must be the MCAT, huh?

Additionally, I'm confused as to why NDs want to act as 'primary care physicians' in the first place. Don't they spend years learning alternative techniques to practice outside the model? Why would they want to prescribe pharm drugs? Why would they want to perform surgery? Why would they want to be recognized with MDs and DOs? Money?

Honestly, I don't understand why they would want to prescribe meds. It seems ludicrous given their enthusiasm for natural treatments. The one argument I have heard (that makes sense) is that they want to be able to take people OFF of drugs and can't do that without adequate training. However, I'm not so sure that's the real reason. As for surgery, I'm not sure the profession has their eye on surgical residencies so much as minor surgical techniques (stitches, mole removal, etc), done in office. There's nothing un-natural (or difficult, for that matter) about minor surgery.

I should also point out that my original post listed all of those other differences you mention. Lower MCATs and lots of other modalities being taught in school. NDs seem to be catering to patients who don't want drugs. If someone comes into your office and says they won't take drugs, what do you do? An MD would scoff and tell the person to get real. An ND would listen and work with "alternative" treatments. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter if an MD tells a patient they're crazy for not taking chemical medicine for migranes. If the patient wants alternatives, in a free country, those alternatives ought to be available and regulated appropriated (through licensure). I agree with you, ND should not be primary care, but they ought to be an option.

Finally, my understanding of ND training is that they study more basic sciences than PAs. I don't have the time to list all the curricula side-by-side for comparison here.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Honestly, I don't understand why they would want to prescribe meds. It seems ludicrous given their enthusiasm for natural treatments. The one argument I have heard (that makes sense) is that they want to be able to take people OFF of drugs and can't do that without adequate training. However, I'm not so sure that's the real reason. As for surgery, I'm not sure the profession has their eye on surgical residencies so much as minor surgical techniques (stitches, mole removal, etc), done in office. There's nothing un-natural (or difficult, for that matter) about minor surgery.

I should also point out that my original post listed all of those other differences you mention. Lower MCATs and lots of other modalities being taught in school. NDs seem to be catering to patients who don't want drugs. If someone comes into your office and says they won't take drugs, what do you do? An MD would scoff and tell the person to get real. An ND would listen and work with "alternative" treatments. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter if an MD tells a patient they're crazy for not taking chemical medicine for migranes. If the patient wants alternatives, in a free country, those alternatives ought to be available and regulated appropriated (through licensure). I agree with you, ND should not be primary care, but they ought to be an option.

Finally, my understanding of ND training is that they study more basic sciences than PAs. I don't have the time to list all the curricula side-by-side for comparison here.

Why would you assume an MD would scoff at them and shove big pharma down their throat? The ability to practice holistically isn't restricted to any sort of healthcare field. I've run across MDs who treat as naturally and drug free as possible and know DOs (supposedly the more holistic, 'whole patient' side of physicians) who scorn any sort of natural treatments and push for surgery and drugs.

Despite what ND admission pamphlets state, the ability to utilize natural modalities or treat patients holistically is not restricted to NDs. This is a pretty absurd notion. It comes down to the individual practitioner. However, the ability to complete a residency, attend medical school, and determine when to push the drugs, when to operate, and when to treat naturally is something that's restricted to MD/DOs. NDs claiming they want the ability to RX to 'understand' patients who want to get off the evil drugs, or get more surgical rights to 'naturally suture' people TO ME, seems like a push to simply act more like the MD who has the ability to utilize both options. However, without medical school, this is wildly inappropriate and bad for patients.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Finally, my understanding of ND training is that they study more basic sciences than PAs. I don't have the time to list all the curricula side-by-side for comparison here.

Compare any curriculum ... this is blatantly false. PAs essentially complete the first two years of medical school and then go on to shorter, but similar clinical education. Stating that NDs get more basic sciences or even basic science courses on the level of PA courses (i.e. just because a course at a ND school is called 'Biochemistry' doesn't mean it's equivalent to medical school biochemistry) just isn't correct. I'm 100% positive about this one.

 

[DrEastWest]

Why would you assume an MD would scoff at them and shove big pharma down their throat? The ability to practice holistically isn't restricted to any sort of healthcare field. I've run across MDs who treat as naturally and drug free as possible and know DOs (supposedly the more holistic, 'whole patient' side of physicians) who scorn any sort of natural treatments and push for surgery and drugs.

Despite what ND admission pamphlets state, the ability to utilize natural modalities or treat patients holistically is not restricted to NDs. This is a pretty absurd notion. It comes down to the individual practitioner. However, the ability to complete a residency, attend medical school, and determine when to push the drugs, when to operate, and when to treat naturally is something that's restricted to MD/DOs. NDs claiming they want the ability to RX to 'understand' patients who want to get off the evil drugs, or get more surgical rights to 'naturally suture' people TO ME, seems like a push to simply act more like the MD who has the ability to utilize both options. However, without medical school, this is wildly inappropriate and bad for patients.

Definitely true, a license doesn't define a practice. But I'd love to see an MD or DO program with 2 years of herbal medicine, 2-3 years of homeopathy, 1.5 years of nutrition... Why would anyone go to an ND if they're looking to manage complex disease pictures with lots of drugs? Clearly an MD/DO has more specialized training here (esp residency). But why would anyone go to an MD/DO for herbal treatments when an ND has spent so much more time with herbs in school? Of course there are NDs that never practice herbs and pretend to be MDs and there are MDs who are well-trained in acupuncture, etc. But, generally speaking, why go to an electrician when you have a problem with the plumbing? Anyone else care to weigh in, or should we shift to private email chat?

 

[DrEastWest]

Compare any curriculum ... this is blatantly false. PAs essentially complete the first two years of medical school and then go on to shorter, but similar clinical education. Stating that NDs get more basic sciences or even basic science courses on the level of PA courses (i.e. just because a course at a ND school is called 'Biochemistry' doesn't mean it's equivalent to medical school biochemistry) just isn't correct. I'm 100% positive about this one.

Well, if you can tell which Biochemistry classes teach biochemistry and which teach other things (?), psychically or otherwise, we'll just have to take your word for it. So is biochemistry taught in MD school "biochemistry" class? How about undergrad, are those "biochemistry" classes actually "biochemistry?" Or are those actually economics? The $10,000 question: what's actually taught in the ND "Biochemistry" classes? You, apparently, have been through the program, so what's in those mysterious classes? Home Ec? Phys Ed? You've got me intrigued!

 

[JaggerPlate]

Well, if you can tell which Biochemistry classes teach biochemistry and which teach other things (?), psychically or otherwise, we'll just have to take your word for it. So is biochemistry taught in MD school "biochemistry" class? How about undergrad, are those "biochemistry" classes actually "biochemistry?" Or are those actually economics? The $10,000 question: what's actually taught in the ND "Biochemistry" classes? You, apparently, have been through the program, so what's in those mysterious classes? Home Ec? Phys Ed? You've got me intrigued!

Do you honestly think that 'Biochemistry' is just one end all term that refers to any course in Biochemistry? Look at an undergrad Biochemistry major curriculum ... I think you'll find that they take 200+ credits in biochem and manage not to repeat the same course again and again

In undergraduate, I took molecular biochem - it focused on biochemistry on a very small, specific, and cellular based level. In medical school, I took medical biochem. Although it touched on some of the same aspects, it focused much more on the biochemical processes of disease and applications of biochemistry in the medical field (the way certain medications work, direction for future treatments based on biochemical principles etc).

Now, if I were to take a stab in the dark here ... my guess is that ND biochem would be a. very watered down compared to medical school biochemistry (do you think biochemistry taught at a community college is the same taught to Ph.D biochem candidates at Harvard) and it would focus on how the naturalistic treatments NDs use interact and react within our body. In my mind, this is a reasonable assumption.

So, I hope this clears up a few things ...

1. Biochemistry isn't a simple course that teaches a text book and you know it all
2. It's catered to different models and what you need to know
3. I don't see why biochem taught in an ND program would need to cover half the issues I learned in my medical biochem class because, as you stated, they relate to the complex management and understanding of drugs and diseases that NDs aren't looking to treat.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Definitely true, a license doesn't define a practice. But I'd love to see an MD or DO program with 2 years of herbal medicine, 2-3 years of homeopathy, 1.5 years of nutrition... Why would anyone go to an ND if they're looking to manage complex disease pictures with lots of drugs? Clearly an MD/DO has more specialized training here (esp residency). But why would anyone go to an MD/DO for herbal treatments when an ND has spent so much more time with herbs in school? Of course there are NDs that never practice herbs and pretend to be MDs and there are MDs who are well-trained in acupuncture, etc. But, generally speaking, why go to an electrician when you have a problem with the plumbing? Anyone else care to weigh in, or should we shift to private email chat?

So an MD without two years of herbology can't recommend that a patient take ginko, but an ND with 0 years of clinical rotations or residency training can diagnose complex diseases and intervene surgically??? Hmmm. Seems like it would be easier to google 'natural treatment for carpel tunnel syndrome' than it would be to learn the neurological compression issues and perform a surgical release.

Maybe that's just the evil, drug-pushing side of me thinking crazy things ...

 

[DrEastWest]

So an MD without two years of herbology can't recommend that a patient take ginko, but an ND with 0 years of clinical rotations or residency training can diagnose complex diseases and intervene surgically??? Hmmm. Seems like it would be easier to google 'natural treatment for carpel tunnel syndrome' than it would be to learn the neurological compression issues and perform a surgical release.

Maybe that's just the evil, drug-pushing side of me thinking crazy things ...

No, man, Christ. I agree with you: it's ridiculous to consider NDs as the cream of the crop for surgical rotations. If you read my posts, I don't even support NDs as primary care practitioners because of their lack of residency. I'm not taking in this ND stuff hook line and sinker, so don't be so defensive. Of course an MD can recommend Ginkgo. But an ND likely has some other suggestions and a more profound knowledge of herbal medicine than an MD (who definitely didn't have a single herb question on the USMLE). I wouldn't go to an ND for carpel tunnel surgery. But I might go to a DO or an acupuncturist before the surgeon to see if surgery might be averted! That's my choice. Not everyone would make that choice, and that's America. I'm simply pushing for diversity and education so that the public understand their options and the strengths of each practitioner. NDs are not MDs. Ideally they would simply work together when one feels they're not getting the results they're hoping for. Try not to project so much on what I've been writing. You can believe me or not, but I'll say it again that I'm not an ND, nor am I related to one.

 

[JaggerPlate]

No, man, Christ. I agree with you: it's ridiculous to consider NDs as the cream of the crop for surgical rotations. If you read my posts, I don't even support NDs as primary care practitioners because of their lack of residency. I'm not taking in this ND stuff hook line and sinker, so don't be so defensive. Of course an MD can recommend Ginkgo. But an ND likely has some other suggestions and a more profound knowledge of herbal medicine than an MD (who definitely didn't have a single herb question on the USMLE). I wouldn't go to an ND for carpel tunnel surgery. But I might go to a DO or an acupuncturist before the surgeon to see if surgery might be averted! That's my choice. Not everyone would make that choice, and that's America. I'm simply pushing for diversity and education so that the public understand their options and the strengths of each practitioner. NDs are not MDs. Ideally they would simply work together when one feels they're not getting the results they're hoping for. Try not to project so much on what I've been writing. You can believe me or not, but I'll say it again that I'm not an ND, nor am I related to one.

You're not an ND, but I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say you have some involvement here. You literally bumped a dozen 5 year old threads to post the same statement about NDs.

Additionally, I think you may be overestimating some of the uses of herbal medication and downplaying the MD/DOs ability to use critical thinking and their medical background to appropriately recommend natural treatments. Frankly, I don't think you need 2 years of training to offer this stuff.

Furthermore, I hope you mean see a DO who specializes in OMM, because otherwise, he/she will suggest surgery just like the MD. Like I said before, training model philosophies don't define practitioners. It's a personal thing, and a DO who trains in a more 'humanistic model' (whatever that means) can practice just as bluntly as any MD out there. It's a personal decision how to practice (though you could argue that DOs get more exposure to it).

Additionally, teams work together just fine ... it's just that ND care is 'complementary' in nature, so MDs/DOs would look at it as this - not a primary referral base, but something you could try if you wanted to err whatever.

 

[hefe]

First, why was this bumped randomly from 5 years ago?

ND's simply want rights to practice and such they're not properly trained for doing, certainly outside their scope of expertise. Many probably don't really care much about their 'philosophy' too much once their staring >100,000+ loans they're about $$$

They get a degree that they got duped into paying tens of thousands of loans by a private institution (sounds like those fancy podunk LA colleges), and want to make money and charge insurance for largely non-EBM philosophies. Do we need further waste of healthcare spending on homeopathy? The western physicians system have enough financial issues already, we don't need more psuedo-physicians billing for their CAM therapies. Let people who want that pay for a largely placebo skill-set on their own dime.

One great thing ND's might be good at is nutrition. But find an RD worth a darn, and you probably can get the same or likely better nutritional consultation for much less.

Where's the strong clinical hours? (Mandated residencies like MD/DO physicians?) Nope, not mandated. Also, there are many times fewer residency opportunities compared to sheer total graduates being produced. Thus, even if every new class wanted a residency they would be an disproportionate amount who would practice without one.

Their education structure sounds similar in structure to the shenanigans DC's have been doing for many years. Nothing like thousands of unsubsidized student loans spent on largely quack-practitioner degree. [I'll concede some DC's may try to remain evidence-based, but a majority certainly are not.]

Places like Bastyr sure know how to draw people in with pretty marketing and 'alternative' healing catchphrases.

Lastly, why the h*** was this randomly bumped from 5 years ago?

 

[deleted87716]

I simply would like to clarify a few points to hopefully dispel some ignorance.

Maybe you should start with your own.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=10892

 

[deleted87716]

Honestly, I don't understand why they would want to prescribe meds.

http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2009/06/what_the_latest_legislation_on.html

 

[JaggerPlate]

http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2009/06/what_the_latest_legislation_on.html

The ole 'we need rights to fill a crucial void in primary care' maneuver ... you think people are going to start catching on this one some some day.

 

[Lokhtar]

Don't get your hopes up about that.