- Joined
- Feb 28, 2006
- Messages
- 354
- Reaction score
- 4
Does this mean I can't argue with Dr_Feelgood anymore? I like his cowbell avatar.
That's what makes this forum and Country great is that you can argue with whomever you want.
Does this mean I can't argue with Dr_Feelgood anymore? I like his cowbell avatar.
You know where I stand on this one. Any doctor that:
1) Is a member of medical staff at a hospital
2) Has full hospital privileges
3) Can write prescriptions
is a physician but that's just my humble opinion. I just took out a home loan from "Physician Loans" so I guess that settles it!
Search the archives. This argument is well documented!!!
Sorry to feed the flames on this one, but according to this list of prerequisites, do dentists and optometrist refer to themselves as dental physicians or optometric physicians as well? traditionally, physician refers to MDs/DOs only. At some schools (Columbia dental is an example) takes all their basic sciences with MDs. However, as far i know, it is uncommon to call a dentist a dental physician. There was a huge argument over the term optometric physician as well. This is because, although the title doesn't really matter to much, the term "doctor" is being used by many different healthcare professions and can come off as confusing to the public who their medical providers actually are. However, the word physician, has traditionally been exclusive to MDs/DOs. One of my closest friends in applying to pod school and i suggested this career to my brother as well. So needless to say, i have a lot of respect for podiatrist. However, i think podiatric physician does come off as slightly misleading. Also, the argument that podiatry is a medical profession still doesn't justify it. Dentistry and optometry are medical professions, it is still not medical school. Just my 2cent.
PS: Dear Dr Feelgood, thank you for your advice on the marathon. My feet are feeling great.
podiatrists go through 4 years of schooling - including rotations in podiatric and general medicine and then are obliged to complete a minimum of 2-3 years of residency training. During our residency training, our PGY-1 year is comprised of rotations in medical specialties like internal medicine, neurology, etc. We are expected to work up these patients, and present to attendings just like any other medical residents - these attributes are not available to dental or optometry professionals with all due respect of course.
I personally dont have a problem with being referred to as a "podiatrist" as opposed to podiatric physician - Though, I'd rather see "Dr. John Doe, podiatrist" or "Dr. Jane Smith, internist" on white coats to tell u the truth. From my short experience in externships so far, I've seen "podiatric surgeon" as the popular and common ground - its not misleading and its not confusing. The reason there is a push for "podiatric surgeon" or "podiatric physician" is to emphasize a higher level of advanced training. >30 years ago DPMs were able to graduate with virtually no surgical training and were essentially practicing chiropody. However, today we are in an era where the profession has moved to become a recognizable medical surgical specialty and that is why you'll see the push for those titles.
FYI - Case western reserve university refers to its dental school as "school of dental medicine". And it is a very respectable school without a doubt.
It's misleading to say that orthopods are not foot experts if they do not complete a foot and ankle fellowship. The vast majority of foot and ankle problems are handled by primary care docs who refer out to general orthopods PRN. Where I am doing my residency, for whatever reason, we have no Pods in the hospital. I am at a tertiary medical facility with 800 beds and over a thousand physicians. But no Pods. And this is in a state where there is a Pod school. Ortho handles all the foot stuff here, all through their residency. I would venture to say that in the 80+ hours a week they work x 5 years, that they get as much foot and ankle exposure as the average 2-3 year Pod residency. I've seen the Pod residents, and some don't work that hard. There is a program in Harris County (Houston, Texas), and their residents used to work with my partner who was a Pod in our family practice. The requirements for these residents were minimal because they were essentially performing a 1 on 1 preceptorship with each surgeon they worked with. It was nowhere near as rigorous as ortho. I would argue that a general trained ortho is equally qualified to treat feet as a Podiatrist. It's not like Ortho guys get to skip the lower extremity on their boards. I've been well educated by my ortho colleagues on foot issues.
The beef people have with Pods calling themselves physicians is that the term physician is a well established societal norm that most laypersons associate with meaning a doctor who has training in all aspects of the body first and foremost. Podiatry eventually needs to become a residency in the MD/DO world and this will be null and void. I honestly don't even mind them calling themselves surgeons, but physician is a misleading term.
Sorry to feed the flames on this one, but according to this list of prerequisites, do dentists and optometrist refer to themselves as dental physicians or optometric physicians as well? traditionally, physician refers to MDs/DOs only. At some schools (Columbia dental is an example) takes all their basic sciences with MDs. However, as far i know, it is uncommon to call a dentist a dental physician. There was a huge argument over the term optometric physician as well. This is because, although the title doesn't really matter to much, the term "doctor" is being used by many different healthcare professions and can come off as confusing to the public who their medical providers actually are. However, the word physician, has traditionally been exclusive to MDs/DOs. One of my closest friends in applying to pod school and i suggested this career to my brother as well. So needless to say, i have a lot of respect for podiatrist. However, i think podiatric physician does come off as slightly misleading. Also, the argument that podiatry is a medical profession still doesn't justify it. Dentistry and optometry are medical professions, it is still not medical school. Just my 2cent.
PS: Dear Dr Feelgood, thank you for your advice on the marathon. My feet are feeling great.
It's misleading to say that orthopods are not foot experts if they do not complete a foot and ankle fellowship. The vast majority of foot and ankle problems are handled by primary care docs who refer out to general orthopods PRN. Where I am doing my residency, for whatever reason, we have no Pods in the hospital. I am at a tertiary medical facility with 800 beds and over a thousand physicians. But no Pods. And this is in a state where there is a Pod school. Ortho handles all the foot stuff here, all through their residency. I would venture to say that in the 80+ hours a week they work x 5 years, that they get as much foot and ankle exposure as the average 2-3 year Pod residency. I've seen the Pod residents, and some don't work that hard. There is a program in Harris County (Houston, Texas), and their residents used to work with my partner who was a Pod in our family practice. The requirements for these residents were minimal because they were essentially performing a 1 on 1 preceptorship with each surgeon they worked with. It was nowhere near as rigorous as ortho. I would argue that a general trained ortho is equally qualified to treat feet as a Podiatrist. It's not like Ortho guys get to skip the lower extremity on their boards. I've been well educated by my ortho colleagues on foot issues.
The beef people have with Pods calling themselves physicians is that the term physician is a well established societal norm that most laypersons associate with meaning a doctor who has training in all aspects of the body first and foremost. Podiatry eventually needs to become a residency in the MD/DO world and this will be null and void. I honestly don't even mind them calling themselves surgeons, but physician is a misleading term.
I would venture to say that in the 80+ hours a week they work x 5 years, that they get as much foot and ankle exposure as the average 2-3 year Pod residency.
It's misleading to say that orthopods are not foot experts if they do not complete a foot and ankle fellowship. The vast majority of foot and ankle problems are handled by primary care docs who refer out to general orthopods PRN.
Sorry to feed the flames on this one, but according to this list of prerequisites, do dentists and optometrist refer to themselves as dental physicians or optometric physicians as well? traditionally, physician refers to MDs/DOs only. At some schools (Columbia dental is an example) takes all their basic sciences with MDs. However, as far i know, it is uncommon to call a dentist a dental physician. There was a huge argument over the term optometric physician as well. This is because, although the title doesn't really matter to much, the term "doctor" is being used by many different healthcare professions and can come off as confusing to the public who their medical providers actually are. However, the word physician, has traditionally been exclusive to MDs/DOs. One of my closest friends in applying to pod school and i suggested this career to my brother as well. So needless to say, i have a lot of respect for podiatrist. However, i think podiatric physician does come off as slightly misleading. Also, the argument that podiatry is a medical profession still doesn't justify it. Dentistry and optometry are medical professions, it is still not medical school. Just my 2cent.
PS: Dear Dr Feelgood, thank you for your advice on the marathon. My feet are feeling great.
Podiatry eventually needs to become a residency in the MD/DO world and this will be null and void.
I posted a few more articles from orthopaedic journals and that it would be interesting to see what orthopaedic leadership had on their website. There were many interesting posts most about how they are trying to block any expansion of podiatric scope. One of my favorite claims was:
http://www2.aaos.org/aaos/archives/bulletin/jun99/scope.htm
In South Carolina, for example, House Bill 3240 sought to give podiatrists the right to amputate toes.
Jan Kellar, director of health policy and affairs for the South Carolina Medical Association, says "We had two orthopaedic surgeons testify at three different times against the bill. They testified, in essence, that you can teach anybody to cut off the toes, but podiatrists are not trained to treat the disease itself-diabetes. A lot of diabetics eventually have to have their toes amputated, but cutting off a limb should always be a last resort. If podiatrists were allowed to do it, the surgeons argued, it would happen more often. And where does it stop, will they want to remove the foot next? Fortunately, we were able to defeat the bill, but we know they'll be back next year."
So I just wanted to see how much exposure orthopods had in their residency to other medical specialties. Here are a few examples:
http://www.bumc.bu.edu/Dept/Content.aspx?DepartmentID=62&PageID=6784
http://www.mcg.edu/resident/ortho/rotations.html
So the only exposure that they have to endocrinology or internal medicine come in their 3rd and 4th year internships. So lets compare that to podiatric residencies (just to make it fair, I tried to pick programs in the same states).
http://www.casprcrip.org/html/casprcrip/pdf/Dir_Pgs/Massachusetts.pdf
http://www.casprcrip.org/html/casprcrip/pdf/Dir_Pgs/Northlake.pdf
Rotations in internal medicine, family medicine, endocrinology/diabetes, and ER. Who is exposed to the treatment of diabetes and who is not??? It would be nice to hear from outside of the pod world on this subject. Maybe it is just me but as we discuss the title of physician and scope. How can things like this be ignored? I just think that comments like the one above are based on ignorance not fact.
I posted a few more articles from orthopaedic journals and that it would be interesting to see what orthopaedic leadership had on their website. There were many interesting posts most about how they are trying to block any expansion of podiatric scope. One of my favorite claims was:
http://www2.aaos.org/aaos/archives/bulletin/jun99/scope.htm
In South Carolina, for example, House Bill 3240 sought to give podiatrists the right to amputate toes.
Jan Kellar, director of health policy and affairs for the South Carolina Medical Association, says "We had two orthopaedic surgeons testify at three different times against the bill. They testified, in essence, that you can teach anybody to cut off the toes, but podiatrists are not trained to treat the disease itself-diabetes. A lot of diabetics eventually have to have their toes amputated, but cutting off a limb should always be a last resort. If podiatrists were allowed to do it, the surgeons argued, it would happen more often. And where does it stop, will they want to remove the foot next? Fortunately, we were able to defeat the bill, but we know they'll be back next year."
So I just wanted to see how much exposure orthopods had in their residency to other medical specialties. Here are a few examples:
http://www.bumc.bu.edu/Dept/Content.aspx?DepartmentID=62&PageID=6784
http://www.mcg.edu/resident/ortho/rotations.html
So the only exposure that they have to endocrinology or internal medicine come in their 3rd and 4th year internships. So lets compare that to podiatric residencies (just to make it fair, I tried to pick programs in the same states).
http://www.casprcrip.org/html/casprcrip/pdf/Dir_Pgs/Massachusetts.pdf
http://www.casprcrip.org/html/casprcrip/pdf/Dir_Pgs/Northlake.pdf
Rotations in internal medicine, family medicine, endocrinology/diabetes, and ER. Who is exposed to the treatment of diabetes and who is not??? It would be nice to hear from outside of the pod world on this subject. Maybe it is just me but as we discuss the title of physician and scope. How can things like this be ignored? I just think that comments like the one above are based on ignorance not fact.
Personally, I think toe amputations are probably fine. I think it's fine as long as you stick to the foot. But I also think they have a good argument that an MD/DO provides a better background in systemic diseaes (such as diabetes) - that's what you went to podiatry school for, to keep the scope narrow early at the expense of a more general medical education. You can't claim that your focused curriculum and training make you the preeminent experts in the foot, and then turn around and say, "yeah, but we're just as good as you at the other stuff too". But really what everyone's worried about is the slippery slope. Orthopedists don't want pods creeping their way up the leg bit by bit under the rehashed argument, "well, we're operating right next to it anyway, what's the difference, why not just include this little bit more...." and they don't want this coming back to bite them in the ass and set some sort of precedent that would include a broader scope.
I do agree that we choose a specific scope early, but I cannot say that we sacrifice an education in general medicine. How much did you really learn in your 3rd and 4th year compared to residency? Residency is where you learn how to practice medicine. So for any orthopod to claim that they know more about diabetes than a pod is ridiculous; they don't even rotate in any area of medicine, only surgery. It would be like an endocrinologist saying they know more about foot orthopedics than a podiatrist. No one, NO ONE is an expert at everything. That is why we have specialty physicians. You do not see OB-GYNs don't work on vascular issues and a cardiologist doesn't take out an appendix. But they have unlimited scope, why don't they do everything; because training determines scope. If a cardiologist removed an inflammed appendix, they are wide open for a malpractice lawsuit.
Since you bring up scope, what would is your ideal the podiatric scope? My opinion is Georgia's scope. Nothing osseous above the tibial tuberosity (i.e. no knee) and soft tissue to the iliac crest. I will explain my opinion:
1) We must bring in another surgeon to take skin grafts from the hip or buttocks. We are trying to find a way to save money in health care, well how about having to surgeons in the OR??? So pods have to harvest from the calf which is no where near as good as the hip.
2) Pods should be able to perform a BKA. If we are going to see the diabetic population, we should see it through to the end. Heck think about it, must pods will fight harder to keep the leg than any other specialty. When it is gone we lose the patient.
3) Pilion fractures and ankle fractures can be higher in the leg than most states allow. If you are going to have the ankle than you should be able to treat all ankle trauma.
Be very careful how you word things.
You get mad when others are ignorant of our profession so don't make ignorant comments about their's.
All MDs do an intern year. Even orthos - the first year is still considered an intern year, gen surgery's 1st year is an intern year...
they do Imed rotations and all just like we do.
Sam I maybe wrong but everything that I look at for orthopaedic residencies say that the PGY-1 (i.e. the intern year) is done in general surgery. The only medical rotation I can find is in the ER. I maybe wrong (so I edited my statement above) but I cannot find anything saying that they do any work in an Imed rotation.
Listen, this is getting ridiculous. If you're now to the point where you can't even acknowledge that an MD/DO degree gets a better general medical education, then I'm talking to a delusional person. Half the time you're trying to convince me your education is the exact same as an MD/DO, and half the time you're trying to tell me you're the foot & ankle experts because of how much time you spend on it. There are only so many hours in a day.
This is actually a good debate. Let's keep it professional.
See we went from having a good debate on the issue to you personally insulting me again. Are you that insecure? I'm just surprised your name is Sam.
So you are telling me that a cardiologist is not an expert of the cardiovascular system? And a urologist is not an expert of the urinary system? But the are MD/DO specialties. How can they do this? It is impossible, their is not enough hours in the day for them to know general medicine and then specialize. I am telling you that as I have posted above PGY-1, pod residents see more specialties than those two residency programs. Orthopaedic interns are surgical interns; they do not see much in general medicine (every program I've found only has an ER rotation as a medicine rotation). My point being, they have an unlimited scope, but have some areas where they aren't experts. Why b/c there are only 24hrs in the day, and no one can be an expert of everything (as I posted above).
So, I ask for you opinion on 1 thing and you just choose to insult me. Are you here to debate or to be a jerk?
I that you have noted exactly where the heart of the anti-pod mentality arises from....Orthopedists don't want pods creeping their way up the leg bit by bit under the rehashed argument, "well, we're operating right next to it anyway, what's the difference, why not just include this little bit more...." and they don't want this coming back to bite them in the ass and set some sort of precedent that would include a broader scope.
I agree w/ the 3 qualifiers you listed. I don't think he's fighting you on the narrowed scope of practice per se, he is and he isn't. I think his point is that during Pod residency, our PGY1 is an intern year (just like every residency out there) and during that PGY1, a pod resident will go on more medicine rotations than an ortho PGY1, according to the sites listed above, it seems that ortho residents focus mainly on surgery during PGY1 and less on medicine (read IM and FP) than pod residencies where we do IM and FP rotations along with surgical rotations.
I personally think that pod school prepares you to be the preeminent F/A specialists from the get go. DMU doesn't really expose it's first years to much if any real foot and ankle stuff other than our intro to pod med course which is really just sort of showing us pictures of foot and ankle procedures as well as in anatomy when we get to the lower limb. Other schools start from day 1 with podiatry related curriculum, that being said, yeah we are highly focused on the foot and ankle in the preclinical years, but we are also highly focused on general medicine too.
I that you have noted exactly where the heart of the anti-pod mentality arises from.
I, like many DPM students and graduates, would like to see the national DPM scope which Dr_Feelgood mentions, Georgia's. Podiatry will never attempt to move above the tibial tuberosity (surgically). The knee is the largest joint in the human body, it is a surgical gold mine, and orthopaedic surgeons do a fantastic job treating it. Podiatrists are foot and ankle experts, not "lower leg-ologists," and I don't think any DPM should or will ever lobby for surgeries on the knee joint. I would vote against any such motion. As soon as a podiatrist infected a knee joint or had a less than stellar surgical success rate, there would be all kinds of hell to pay. It is important that all DPMs understand the anatomy of the knee (and the entire body) for biomechanical purposes, physiological, and pathological purposes, but knee problems/surgeries are always referred out and will always continue to be. (I will note that my opinions on DPMs and the knee are largely derived from my lower extremity anatomy prof, a DPM, who advised us to (paraphrased), "know it well, but you are a guest. Your real estate lies to the south. Treat the knee as a respected friend's property which you occasionally visit"... I wholeheartedly agree)
I think the far more slippery slope is hand and fingernail care by DPMs. The surgical procedures are not an issue; ortho, plastic, general, trauma and vascular MD/DO surgeons do a fine job on hand procedures, so podiatry has no business in that arena - no matter how similar the anatomy may be. However, many skin and nail pathologies present very similarly in hands. Should podiatrists be allowed to biopsy a suspicious brownish blue plaque on the hand of a beach bum or a pigmented streak in a caucasian's nail? Should DPM scope include treatment of an ingrown finger nail or a yeast-infected webspace on the hand? There is a lot of risk in referring these patients off for follow-up with derm, especially if they do not have insurance or the pathology is agressive and has poential to get very bad very fast. Yes, any smart DPM would document well when he sends away a suspected hand melanoma to follow up with derm, but what is really best for the patient? States differ on these issues, but a uniform national DPM scope would fix that also.
I that you have noted exactly where the heart of the anti-pod mentality arises from.
I, like many DPM students and graduates, would like to see the national DPM scope which Dr_Feelgood mentions, Georgia's. Podiatry will never attempt to move above the tibial tuberosity (surgically). The knee is the largest joint in the human body, it is a surgical gold mine, and orthopaedic surgeons do a fantastic job treating it. Podiatrists are foot and ankle experts, not "lower leg-ologists," and I don't think any DPM should or will ever lobby for surgeries on the knee joint. I would vote against any such motion. As soon as a podiatrist infected a knee joint or had a less than stellar surgical success rate, there would be all kinds of hell to pay. It is important that all DPMs understand the anatomy of the knee (and the entire body) for biomechanical purposes, physiological, and pathological purposes, but knee problems/surgeries are always referred out and will always continue to be. (I will note that my opinions on DPMs and the knee are largely derived from my lower extremity anatomy prof, a DPM, who advised us to (paraphrased), "know it well, but you are a guest. Your real estate lies to the south. Treat the knee as a respected friend's property which you occasionally visit"... I wholeheartedly agree)
I think the far more slippery slope is hand and fingernail care by DPMs. The surgical procedures are not an issue; ortho, plastic, general, trauma and vascular MD/DO surgeons do a fine job on hand procedures, so podiatry has no business in that arena - no matter how similar the anatomy may be. However, many skin and nail pathologies present very similarly in hands. Should podiatrists be allowed to biopsy a suspicious brownish blue plaque on the hand of a beach bum or a pigmented streak in a caucasian's nail? Should DPM scope include treatment of an ingrown finger nail or a yeast-infected webspace on the hand? There is a lot of risk in referring these patients off for follow-up with derm, especially if they do not have insurance or the pathology is agressive and has poential to get very bad very fast. Yes, any smart DPM would document well when he sends away a suspected hand melanoma to follow up with derm, but what is really best for the patient? States differ on these issues, but a uniform national DPM scope would fix that also.
I hate to say it lol... but this is correct and his logic is sound. We can't have our cake and eat it too.Well, my point is that you can't have a classroom education MORE focused on F&A, clinical rotations MORE focused on F&A, residency MORE focused on F&A without sacrificing a more general swath of medicine. The only way to get 100% of the general medical education + a focus on F&A would be if you're claiming podiatry school is more rigorous than medical school, and that your rotations are more expansive than MD/DO rotations. I don't think that this is the claim you're trying to make....
"Delusional" is not name-calling. "Jerk" is. I'll ignore it though, because I'm not oversensitive (note: "oversensitive" is not name-calling either).
Maybe let's start from the beginning.
1) Does your pre-clinical podiatry school education better prepare you to be a foot expert than an MD/DO? If so, explain.
(I think it does)
2) Do your clinical rotations better prepare you to be a foot expert than an MD/DO? If so, explain.
(I think it does)
3) Does your (shorter and more focused) residency better prepare you to be a foot expert than (let's exclude F&A ortho) in an MD/DO path?
(I think it does)
4) Explain to me how you can have 1-3 without sacrificing a more general medicine (systemic disease management, etc.) training.
I agree with you that each specialist is an expert within their own scope of practice, mostly to the exclusion of other areas of medicine. I also argue, however, that the generalization can easily be made that podiatry school and podiatry residency prepare a person to have been trained with a more narrow scope of medicine practice than an MD/DO. Why are you fighting this one?
I hate to say it lol... but this is correct and his logic is sound. We can't have our cake and eat it too.
As a DPM student about to begin 3rd year and clinics, I feel that I will be significantly weaker than MD/DO counterparts in neuro, internal med, and anat/phys of the special senses. I will probably be slightly weaker in general path, pharm, and micro yet better in those subjects as they relate to podiatry. I think pod students are better in general radiology and far better in lower extremity radiology than their MD/DO counterparts.
Yes, there are differences. Those will always vary between schools and between degrees. There is no getting around it. I think DPM programs generally put in extra lower extremity anat, pod med, and radiology at the main expenses of neuro and internal med. While graduating DPMs are generally adequate in internal med and have experience in general physical diagnosis, the systemic training volume (classroom and clinical) is not always on par with MD/DO because we specialize earlier. Some exceptional DPM students may have IM/neuro/etc knowledge that is on par or above MD students, but I think those are rare cases and not your "average."
Being a jerk is a verb not an adjuctive.
.
That is a very good possibility.See and I never felt this way. Probably b/c I saw some the level at which the DOs know medicine.
Not to spit hairs but actually, jerk is a noun, a person place or thing. Verbs are actions. You don't say "he jerks it" or "he is jerking it" because that sounds really bad. The way you decribe though can make it like an adverb instead of a noun becuase it describes the verb, how he is acting or as you said "being". For the record my grammer sucks and I only know this correction from learning two different languages which taught me more about english grammer than elementary school did.
That is a very good possibility.
I can only speak for my Barry program, but already in two years, I have had the following:
Intro to Podiatric Medicine (2cr)
Applied Lower Extremity Anat w/ Lab (4cr)
Conceptual Lower Extremity Anat (3cr)
General Radiology (3cr)
Podiatric Medicine I (2cr)
Podiatric Medicine II (2cr)
Podiatric Medicine Lab (1cr)
Radiology Lab (1cr)
With many more pod med, pod sx, podopeds, pod sports med, etc classes and labs as well as many pod med clinical rotations and pod clerkships upcoming during my two remaining years, I feel that, while we get plenty, it's hard or impossible for a DPM student to get the internal med and general physical diagnostic volume that a MD/DO does during school. However, nobody can question how much more education and experience we have with lower extremity anat, path, etc upon graduation when compared with MD/DO grads.
_________________
I definetly agree that this is an excellent thread. I am learning a lot, and I feel it is great to discuss education and training differences to further understanding and mutual respect. That said, my First Aid for USMLE isn't gonna read itself ... I'm out for now.
Sam I maybe wrong but everything that I look at for orthopaedic residencies say that the PGY-1 (i.e. the intern year) is done in general surgery. The only medical rotation I can find is in the ER. I maybe wrong (so I edited my statement above) but I cannot find anything saying that they do any work in an Imed rotation.
So even if podiatry was given an unrestricted scope of practice it would not be unrestricted. It would be esentially the same as it is now just less confusing to the patients. we would not be treating arm burns or head lacerations or common colds or brain tumors or HTN or even DM. I may know how to treat a diabetic wound and know that the BS has to be controlled for the wound to heal but I do not want to treat the DM. If I wanted to do that I would have gone to MD or DO or nutrition school.
Those ortho residents at Shands Jacksonville were truly impressive. And the funny thing is that they were some of the nicest people that I've ever met. It is nice to see there is still some humility left in medicine.
I totally agree with you. Theoretics are theoretics but when it comes down to it, every doc has a limited scope of practice.
That is difference of programs. At DMU, you have 1 pod class your first year, Intro to Pod. Your second year you don't get any pod classes until the second semester. Your first 1 1/2 is sent on general medicine only (Basic science year 1 and systems the first half of year 2).
At Scholl, we only have 1 pod class our first year, Intro to Pod. Also, the second year has its fair share of Basic science classes.
With in the first year we get nailed with special senses in our extensive Neuro with the PT, and PA students. Actually, a Scholl professor teaches a lot of the special senses for both MD and DPM neuro classes so we learn the same thing with the same standards of acheivement.
Not sure where you were going with this, but it doesn't really prove or disprove anything...
I'm still waiting to hear what you would like written into law as a pods scope. Do you think that they should be included with MD/DOs it that the law says that they practice what they are taught; no written restrictions. Or what limits would you like to see? Lets pretend you are being called to the state legislature to discuss a new law.
can I play? can I play? I love playing make believe
Okay Sam. You are a NY metro woman. Lets here your testimony in front of the NY Congress in Albany. Mrs. Krabmas, what do you think the state of NY should have as the scope for podiatric medicine? Also, generally when people address the legislature they wear more than their bathrobes; are you looking for cheap votes? (You said you wanted make believe. )
I'm still waiting to hear what you would like written into law as a pods scope. Do you think that they should be included with MD/DOs it that the law says that they practice what they are taught; no written restrictions. Or what limits would you like to see? Lets pretend you are being called to the state legislature to discuss a new law.
Well, I'm no expert on podiatry practice laws, but including treatment and most if not all operations restricted to the foot and ankle seems reasonable