Why do DO schools not give MD degrees?

[jesswise]

Please don't let this thread be nasty. This is meant to be an honest and fruitful discussion.

I understand that osteopathy schools have a philosophical perspective that is different from that of allopathy schools. But why are they not also "Doctors of Medicine?" There are no "Doctor's of Allopathy."

Is the osteo curriculum less comprehensive in some way? Does it prepare graduates for fewer residencies, or less well for them? In other words, what's the difference, besides philosophy? I personally feel that what little I know about the osteo philosophy makes sense to me (prevention, whole person health perspective). I admit there may be loads more I don't know about, but the stuff I know about seems to be pretty positive.

Anyway, without flaming or being nasty, does anyone have an opinion on this? I should say from the start, I have applied at two MD schools here in canada, where the DO degree is not offered to my knowledge.

Jess

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Adapt]

They changed the degree D.O. to be Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine so it's close. They learn manipulation which MDs don't so they shouldn't be given the M.D. degree since the education is slightly different in that sense.

 

[Teufelhunden]

Why don't law schools give Dentistry degrees?

 

[Teufelhunden]

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

If you truly want info on osteo medicine, click --> here

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Looks like a webpage I would make. Circa 1996.

 

[Echinoidea]

Yeah I agree. The AOA needs to do some serious image overhauling. That web page is a good metaphor for the state of public perception concerning osteopathic medicine.

 

[ddmo]

Thanks for posting that Alleria. Very interesting. Ill have to pass that on to some of my DO friends.

 

[bgreet]

Actually at one point in osteopathic history in California all DO's were "converted" to MD's. So they really werent "too late" but instead chose to remain seperate.

 

[Benjo]

hey--Professor Starr was my senior thesis advisor at Princeton. He's a smart guy

 

[group_theory]

The history of osteopathic medicine is really quite interesting - esp for those interested in the history of medicine.

Andrew Taylor Still (the founder of osteopathic medicine) created osteopathy as an offshoot from allopathic medicine (the term allopathic was invented by Hahnemann originally as a perjorative reference to MDs in those days).

Dr. Still (who was an MD) was a civil war surgeon and noticed the many ineffective treatments that MDs had to offer at the time (remember, we're talking about 1860s-1870s medicine here). Drugs were more harmful than helpful (such as mercury tx, etc). He watch the futility of "modern medicine" as his kids died from meningitis.

The school he created in Kirksville was originally granted in its charter by the state of Missouri to give out MD degrees (this was before the creation of the LCME or the Flexner report). However, he wanted something to distinguish his graduates from the others. Hence, in lieu of the MD degree, he decided to give his graduates the "Diplomate of Osteopathy" certificate.

As for licensing issues - also quite interesting (and funny).
Initially, some DOs were arrested for practicing medicine w/o a license. In a lot of cases, these DOs were quite popular in their local communities and most were found not guilty. In one of the states (I forget which one of the top of my head), the MDs tried to get the state legislature to outlaw osteopathy. Unfortunately, the governor of that state (along w/ several prominent state legislatures) decided to try osteopathy and found relief to their ailments. This resulted eventually in medical rights for DOs.


Anyway, I think that answered the OP's question on why seperate but equal degrees (well, at least the history part)

And a minor correction - there are Canadian schools that grant DO degrees (Canadian College of Osteopathy in Toronto, College d'Etudes Osteopathiques de Montreal, College d'Etudes Osteopathiques de Quebec, etc). However, they are not trained as physicians but as "osteopaths" and thus have no medical practice rights. They are similar to the DOs in Britian and Australia who practice pure manipulation.

 

[dudelove]

Would the DOs in Britan and Canada and such be more comparable to chiropractors here?

 

[skypilot]

Originally posted by Slickness
They changed the degree D.O. to be Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine so it's close

Yeah, I see the words "medicine" and "doctor" in there. It always seemed to me to be somewhat similar to the fact that Harvard grants an A.B. instead of a B.A.

There are minor differences between the degrees, mandatory classes in Osteopathic Manipulation being the main one. But since a D.O. can become a neurosurgeon in an allopathic hospital I don't think the differences are all that pronounced.

 

[Tbonez]

Originally posted by dudelove
Would the DOs in Britan and Canada and such be more comparable to chiropractors here?

I guess that's a fair comparison. Although, its quite unfortunate that the same letters (DO) are used. The ones in Britain and Canada are not osteopathic physicians. They are osteopaths (a rather derogatory term for a US DO). Their licensing is manipulative only, their education much less, and their scope of practice minimal.) Truly the are alternative health care providers. I would say they would be comparable to chiropractors, and on the level of allied healthcare (optometry, podiatry, chiropractic, osteopathy, etc.)
Osteopathic medicine was originally a sharp detour from the "quackerish" medicine that AT Still saw in his days. The allopathic community was shoving every kind of snake oil known to man down throats in a sad attempt to make a buck. Unfortunately, the osteopathic takeoff was seen as also "quackish" due to a sharp deviation from then-contemporary medicine, and thus shunned. As science has taken ahold of medicine and demanded peer review research, allopathic medicine and osteopathic medicine have given up almost all of their differences.