Will there ever be too many medical schools in the US?

[NontradCA]

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[OCDEMS]

Wow this thread is toxic.

However, for anyone else browsing through this I'd like to emphasize what has come "from the horse's mouth" so to speak. DO students - our example being OCDEMS in post #172 - understand that the OMT practiced by many DO practitioners is:

1) Of dubious value to patients
2) Used to pad the bottom line of many practices by mixing it with standards of care that are actually efficacious ("adjunct")
3) Essentially a way of defrauding Medicare, or otherwise being compensated for treatment that is unnecessary.

Now obviously, many DO practitioners probably personally believe in the efficacy of OMT, but this begs the question of why we should accept it as a normal and ethical way of treating patients.

I get what you're saying, although I would never go as far as to say any DO is "defrauding" anyone. They aren't. Most of the research done on OMT shows it either has no value or limited value in very specific situations. DOs typically respond by saying that the nature of what they do, being subject to individual acumen and highly subjective issues like pain, are hard to study effectively. I get their point, but I also have my own skepticism, which I've tried to share here only in an attempt to find common ground. I was blunt in my assessment of some areas in an effort to be truthful of what I've observed

I think many patients find the treatments to be "valuable." The problem for the profession is that there will probably never be a good way to study the methods and, in some regards, other practitioners have a right to question its efficacy. Scientifically, something that can't be studied isn't scientific at all. It becomes theoretical. The osteopathic profession has to come to terms with that.

The overarching, original point of this thread wasn't about OMT. It was about the larger, macroeconomic factors that drive the success of osteopathic medicine and, with that, the reason why it will continue to thrive regardless of what anyone on here thinks.

 

[NontradCA]

Wow this thread is toxic.

However, for anyone else browsing through this I'd like to emphasize what has come "from the horse's mouth" so to speak. DO students - our example being OCDEMS in post #172 - understand that the OMT practiced by many DO practitioners is:

1) Of dubious value to patients
2) Used to pad the bottom line of many practices by mixing it with standards of care that are actually efficacious ("adjunct")
3) Essentially a way of defrauding Medicare, or otherwise being compensated for treatment that is unnecessary.

Now obviously, many DO practitioners probably personally believe in the efficacy of OMT, but this begs the question of why we should accept it as a normal and ethical way of treating patients.

The horse's mouth is a 1st(or second, I don't know for sure) year medical student? I'm pretty sure all the DO students on this entire network have little to no say on the acceptance of OMT as a practice, since we/they have never billed for it.

 

[PL198]

I get what you're saying, although I would never go as far as to say any DO is "defrauding" anyone. They aren't. Most of the research done on OMT shows it either has no value or limited value in very specific situations. DOs typically respond by saying that the nature of what they do, being subject to individual acumen and highly subjective issues like pain, are hard to study effectively. I get their point, but I also have my own skepticism, which I've tried to share here only in an attempt to find common ground. I was blunt in my assessment of some areas in an effort to be truthful of what I've observed

I think many patients find the treatments to be "valuable." The problem for the profession is that there will probably never be a good way to study the methods and, in some regards, other practitioners have a right to question its efficacy. Scientifically, something that can't be studied isn't scientific at all. It becomes theoretical. The osteopathic profession has to come to terms with that.

The overarching, original point of this thread wasn't about OMT. It was about the larger, macroeconomic factors that drive the success of osteopathic medicine and, with that, the reason why it will continue to thrive regardless of what anyone on here thinks.

I have no idea why you think osteopathic medicine is thriving. People are more critical now of this quack **** than ever. It's 2014, not 1954. In 1954 a doctor could rub a patient and say it's good for them and that was that. Now people actually question the **** you do and make sure you know what you're talking about.

 

[NontradCA]

I have no idea why you think osteopathic medicine is thriving. People are more critical now of this quack **** than ever. It's 2014, not 1954. In 1954 a doctor could rub a patient and say it's good for them and that was that. Now people actually question the **** you do and make sure you know what you're talking about.

Which is why Doctor Oz is the most trusted and influential physician in the nation. Oh wait....

 

[PL198]

Which is why Doctor Oz is the most trusted and influential physician in the nation. Oh wait....

By who? The average person? Sure, they're dumb as f*ck, I don't care about them. I'm talking about people with intelligence

 

[Baller MD]

Which is why Doctor Oz is the most trusted and influential physician in the nation. Oh wait....

Most influential? Maybe. Most trusted? LOL. Maybe in your opinion. Didn't you see he had to face politicians about his bull****?

 

[NontradCA]

By who? The average person? Sure, they're dumb as f*ck, I don't care about them. I'm talking about people with intelligence

And we're measuring intelligence by academic prowess or one's general understanding of their surroundings and what they're getting themselves into?

 

[Silent Cool]

http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/06/dos-fake-rolex-of-medical-profession.html

DO’s: The "fake Rolex" of the medical profession?

Sup, everyone. I just got back from the doctor.

I mean DOctor.

He palpated some stuff in my back, stretched me, and cracked my neck. He worked some mad cranial on me, too.

Now, I no longer suffer from erectile dysfunction, irritable bowels, headaches, or cancer--my Leukemia is gone.

The point being, as it pertains to this thread, is that without the massive proliferation of DO(ctor) schools, I would still suffer from an acute--heck, even an obtuse--lack of access to care. That means I would still have cancer. And I couldn't bang my wife--well, not without my Viagra. But that $hit's not holistic, so I don't mess with it.

#OsteopathyFTW

 

[DermViser]

Yep one of my business partners does the same. Her business cards, the sign on the door etc. all say "Dr" instead of "DO". This is not an oversight, it's done intentionally.

That being said she's had patients (few, but they do exist) refuse to see her because of the DO so her subterfuge is understandable.

I don't blame her at all. With all this transparency in medicine, narrow networks, etc. it's not surprising that patients are demanding to know every educational credential of physicians. Some hospital institutions put down the exact dates of med school, residency, fellowship, etc.

 

[DermViser]

Out of curiosity, if you or someone you cared about had a sick child and was at a children's hospital, which schools would you/they accept providers from? What if they just needed stitches? What if they were healthy newborns and the DO hospitalist was covering the newborn nursery. What if they went to a DO or Caribbean or other foreign school but had done a US residency? Which residencies would you accept? Assume for a moment that it is possible to ask for a specific doctor within a service, as is "sometimes" possible.

In 30 years plus since I graduated from med school I've only once ever seen or heard of that happening in pediatrics and the family got it all wrong.

If my child is gravely sick you can bet I will be looking up the credentials of my pediatrician/pediatric subspecialist - where they went to med school, where they went to residency/fellowship, how many years they have been in practice, etc.. You don't think these days that people lookup who you are before they've even set foot in your office? Everyone has a smartphone where they moment they leave your office they can fill out a survey on you in Healthgrades, Vitals.com, etc.

You can put it down all you like, but it's the reality. I realize however, that your views are quite well out of the mainstream on many healthcare issues, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[Winged Scapula]

I don't blame her at all. With all this transparency in medicine, narrow networks, etc. it's not surprising that patients are demanding to know every educational credential of physicians. Some hospital institutions put down the exact dates of med school, residency, fellowship, etc.

I suppose but given that it's on our website and easily Google-able, it seems like spitting in the wind.

 

[Roxas]

With any DO that I've ever encountered in a clinical setting their patients were far less concerned about their degree and more on their ability to help them feel better and be nice about it in the process. I hope to be able to achieve this status one day and let my skills as a physician speak for itself.

And I totally get the skepticism of OMM. Let's not forget however that isn't the only thing we're learning in school.

This was dismissed earlier as a strawman, but I feel pretty strongly that we as physicians need to band together against the ever encroaching midlevels. Yeah, too many schools are popping up, so lets do what we can (if anything) to stop it in the meantime, and in the end let the bottom of the barrel (be they DO, carrib, or whatever) students struggle to find residency positions. The days are rapidly approaching that those who barely make it into the lowest of low schools may want to reconsider starting given the risk of not finding a position down the road.

 

[NontradCA]

Sorry for the confusion about my intent.

I was responding to a post that said they knew of a Harvard undergrad trained DO who specifically didn't mention where he obtained his medical degree or residency; I was (attempting) to say that I too had seen firsthand that sort of thing when I didn't think it was necessary. I wasn't attempting to derogate the degree, the training or it's practitioners except to say that why is it, with 2 partners who are osteopaths, a personal physician who is one, and several close friends, that I can't get anyone to perform OMT on my sore neck? Y'all are apparently even doing it to newborns and my pleas are ignored!!!

Well since I am a beginner I can't do much except palpate structures, but depending on your needs that might work

 

[GoSpursGo]

My $0.02: I think we can all agree that doing OMM when one doesn't really believe in its efficacy and just as a method to pad a medicare bill is inappropriate. All of the DOs that I have encountered in my residency training and from my interactions as a medical student have been very well-qualified, cared about their patients, and did not do inappropriate procedures (TBH, I have never seen OMM done). There are certainly unethical MDs out there as well, and that should illustrate that while there are some DOs who are unethical it does not follow that all of them are.

That said, this is a friendly reminder that:
1) The original purpose of this thread was whether we will ever reach a point where there are so many med schools that there will be a shortage of jobs, not the merits of OMM or the DO degree.
2) Circumventing the language filter does not conform to the professional environment that we try to promote here on SDN.

We respectfully ask that you please return to the original topic of conversation, and take any side conversations to a different thread or PMs, as well as refrain from violating the language filter.

 

[PL198]

My $0.02: I think we can all agree that doing OMM when one doesn't really believe in its efficacy and just as a method to pad a medicare bill is inappropriate. All of the DOs that I have encountered in my residency training and from my interactions as a medical student have been very well-qualified, cared about their patients, and did not do inappropriate procedures (TBH, I have never seen OMM done). There are certainly unethical MDs out there as well, and that should illustrate that while there are some DOs who are unethical it does not follow that all of them are.

That said, this is a friendly reminder that:
1) The original purpose of this thread was whether we will ever reach a point where there are so many med schools that there will be a shortage of jobs, not the merits of OMM or the DO degree.
2) Circumventing the language filter does not conform to the professional environment that we try to promote here on SDN.

We respectfully ask that you please return to the original topic of conversation, and take any side conversations to a different thread or PMs, as well as refrain from violating the language filter.

It's not really off-topic, because the DO schools are the ones sprouting up like wildfire in relation to their market share. It's a completely different issue if MD schools began doing so. Too many DO schools =!= too many MD schools.

 

[ChrisGriffen]

Quick someone else say strawman

 

[sazerac]

... those who try to dodge the question and simply offer the metropolitan area in which they did their clinical rotations, or the state in which their DO school is located.

This happens on the MD side too. Guaranteed, if you ask an MD where they went to medical school and they say "Chicago...", then they went to RFUMS, which is (1) not associated with the University of Chicago medical school, and (2) the preclinical campus is not even in Chicago.

Out of professional courtesy I never press the issue (I almost went to RFUMS myself), but I always giggle inside when I hear this well-practiced dodge.

 

[VisionaryTics]

This happens on the MD side too. Guaranteed, if you ask an MD where they went to medical school and they say "Chicago...", then they went to RFUMS, which is (1) not associated with the University of Chicago medical school, and (2) the preclinical campus is not even in Chicago.

Out of professional courtesy I never press the issue (I almost went to RFUMS myself), but I always giggle inside when I hear this well-practiced dodge.

Interestingly, you hear the same thing with HMS students/residents. "When I was in Boston..." is never Boston University. Ever.

Example: "At the time, I was a fourth-year medical resident in Boston."

Also, Caribbean students do this with their clinical sites. "Where do you go to med school?" "New York."

 

[oldbearprofessor]

You don't think these days that people lookup who you are before they've even set foot in your office? Everyone has a smartphone where they moment they leave your office they can fill out a survey on you in Healthgrades, Vitals.com, etc.

You sound like the guy who sends me this email EVERY DAY which I'll excerpt.

"Your online reputation has become the primary way that patients, colleagues, referring practitioners and even your friends will come to learn about you, so it is imperative that you be aware and proactive about how you are being portrayed on the Internet."

My friends??? Say what?? What bugs me is that there isn't a single evaluation of me on any of those sites. Maybe that's why I'm friendless?

Don't believe me? Google "OBP" and any of those sites and see what you get!

Oh well, I'll keep waiting and hoping someone notes that my office staff was slow (I don't have an office, never have). The first time I ever recommend a doc, including a general pedi, to a family (I do this all the time, it's what neos do) and they tell me that they reviewed them on-line and didn't approve of their credentials, I might change my mind on this. Most families just want me to find them a doc who is nearby, takes their insurance, is able to see them and whom I tell them I recommend. Well actually, in my personal experience that's every family.

But, I acknowledge it could change over time. Meanwhile, I'll keep training DOs and folks from lower ranked MD schools whom I think will make great pediatricians and/or neonatologists.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Interestingly, you hear the same thing with HMS students/residents. "When I was in Boston..." is never Boston University. Ever.

Example: "At the time, I was a fourth-year medical resident in Boston."

Also, Caribbean students do this with their clinical sites. "Where do you go to med school?" "New York."

That's a long standing thing with Ivy grads, for undergrads as well. I think it's meant to seem humble or something.

 

[Winged Scapula]

This happens on the MD side too. Guaranteed, if you ask an MD where they went to medical school and they say "Chicago...", then they went to RFUMS, which is (1) not associated with the University of Chicago medical school, and (2) the preclinical campus is not even in Chicago.

Out of professional courtesy I never press the issue (I almost went to RFUMS myself), but I always giggle inside when I hear this well-practiced dodge.

There are other medical schools in Chicago not associated with the University of Chicago so I wouldn't assume someone who said they went to school in Chicago went there anymore than I would assume "LA" meant UCLA,

Furthermore, while the campus may not be in downtown Chicago, for those who aren't from there and don't know the geography, it's pretty common to simplify things and give the nearest large town.

I have no affiliation with RFUMS so no "dog in this fight" and I recognize there may be some subterfuge but these seem to be overreaching examples.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

There are other medical schools in Chicago not associated with the University of Chicago so I wouldn't assume someone who said they went to school in Chicago went there anymore than I would assume "LA" meant UCLA,

Furthermore, while the campus may not be in downtown Chicago, for those who aren't from there and don't know the geography, it's pretty common to simplify things and give the nearest large town.

I have no affiliation with RFUMS so no "dog in this fight" and I recognize there may be some subterfuge but these seem to be overreaching examples.

I've experienced the same think with RFUMS. Every other Chicago school student I've met just says "I go to Northwestern" or "I go to Loyola".

The carib studs definitely do this with NY

 

[DermViser]

There are other medical schools in Chicago not associated with the University of Chicago so I wouldn't assume someone who said they went to school in Chicago went there anymore than I would assume "LA" meant UCLA,

Furthermore, while the campus may not be in downtown Chicago, for those who aren't from there and don't know the geography, it's pretty common to simplify things and give the nearest large town.

I have no affiliation with RFUMS so no "dog in this fight" and I recognize there may be some subterfuge but these seem to be overreaching examples.

I've experienced the same think with RFUMS. Every other Chicago school student I've met just says "I go to Northwestern" or "I go to Loyola".

The carib studs definitely do this with NY

To be fair it is called Chicago Medical School - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Medical_School

 

[PL198]

Its completely different if a random asks you than a doctor. If my school name wasn't state related, I would say the geographical location to my grandma , but not to a doc.

 

[Winged Scapula]

I've experienced the same think with RFUMS. Every other Chicago school student I've met just says "I go to Northwestern" or "I go to Loyola".

The carib studs definitely do this with NY

Oh I know it happens, I just thought the reasons being given for that (trying to rook people into believing it was University of Chicago or that because it's not in the Chicago CBD it valid to say "Chicago") were not valid.

I think the difference may also be that a lot of people know where Northwestern or Loyola are so it may not be necessary to use the city as a qualifier.

In addition as noted above its name
is The Chicago Medicsl School.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Its completely different if a random asks you than a doctor. If my school name wasn't state related, I would say the geographical location to my grandma , but not to a doc.

No one's making that argument.

You're absolutely correct that people do you try to hide where they trained.

You're also correct in that your answer might be different depending on whether it was a physician who trained in the US versus a nonmedical person.

However my point was that the reasons given are not valid. I'm a medical person but I have no idea where certain schools are located in Chicago or the difference between Chicago and North Chicago. Therefore claiming that unless a medical school is in "Chicago" (apparently defined as downtown or the CBD ) it's wrong to say it's in Chicago is overstating that point.

 

[Winged Scapula]

To be fair it is called Chicago Medical School - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Medical_School

Exactly. To older physicians Rosalind Franklin is a relatively new name.

By way of full disclosure, one of my ex-boyfriends went there for medical school but referred to it as "the worst medical school in the country" without any other qualifiers, leaving me to try to guess where he was talking about.

He never tried to hide anything...well except the existence of not quite yet ex-wife. LOL

 

[DermViser]

Exactly. To older physicians Rosalind Franklin is a relatively new name.

By way of full disclosure, one of my ex-boyfriends went there for medical school but referred to it as "the worst medical school in the country" without any other qualifiers, leaving me to try to guess where he was talking about.

He never tried to hide anything...well except the existence of not quite yet ex-wife. LOL

He was cheating on you? Or was it a "separation" not quite official divorce situation? Part of the problem is that RFUMS doesn't have it's own hospitals - if it's one thing it's good at it's being put on probation again, and again...

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Therefore claiming that unless a medical school is in "Chicago" (apparently defined as downtown or the CBD ) it's wrong to say it's in Chicago is overstating that point.

Well to be fair, Chicagoans are really weird about that, outside of medicine. There are extensive arguments about what constitutes "being from" Chicago and wars between city folk and suburbians.

I only know this from my exposure to it via college friends.

 

[Winged Scapula]

He was cheating on you? Or was it a "separation" not quite official divorce situation?

They were separated and living apart when we first started dating but he neglected to tell me that for a bit longer than I thought was appropriate.

 

[DermViser]

They were separated and living apart when we first started dating but he neglected to tell me that for a bit longer than I thought was appropriate.

Although, it's separated (thinking as a guy here), you do have a right to know and make the appropriate decision. Women tend to be iffy about dating someone who is "separated".

 

[Winged Scapula]

Well to be fair, Chicagoans are really weird about that, outside of medicine. There are extensive arguments about what constitutes "being from" Chicago and wars between city folk and suburbians.

I only know this from my exposure to it via college friends.

Meh. I get that as it's pretty common in most desirable areas.

I just think that since most people aren't from there, the distinction is irrelevant. As far as I'm concerned Rosalind Franklin is in Chicago.

 

[Winged Scapula]

Although, it's separated (thinking as a guy here), you do have a right to know and make the appropriate decision. Women tend to be iffy about dating someone who is "separated".

That is true.

I've never knowingly dated someone who was married or separated before and he knew that I would be iffy about it but was afraid if I knew I wouldn't go out with him if I knew (and I suppose figured he would wait and see if this was something that might be longer term before admitting it to me).

 

[DermViser]

That is true.

I've never knowingly dated someone who was married or separated before and he knew that I would be iffy about it but was afraid if I knew I wouldn't go out with him if I knew (and I suppose figured he would wait and see if this was something that might be longer term before admitting it to me).

Would you have still dated him if he told you at the beginning?

 

[Psai]

That is true.

I've never knowingly dated someone who was married or separated before and he knew that I would be iffy about it but was afraid if I knew I wouldn't go out with him if I knew (and I suppose figured he would wait and see if this was something that might be longer term before admitting it to me).

Sounds like that red pill guy

 

[NeedToStudy]

It's interesting how this thread started asking if there were too many med schools in America and now it's a DO vs MD thread. Lord why do threads always go off topic?!?!

 

[maxxor]

People assume things about you t when you say you are from a top school.

It's interesting how this thread started asking if there were too many med schools in America and now it's a DO vs MD thread. Lord why do threads always go off topic?!?!

The question is about if there are too many med schools. DO schools are opening up like wildfire, even without affiliated hospitals. Of course the MD/DO comparison is going to become germane to the discussion.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Why are all these MDs so overly concerned with our presence? If they are as high and mighty and super smart as they say, it doesn't matter if we have 400 DO schools because all MDs will match first and we'll be the ones screwed over. We can't get license without residency and it has been a long time that residencies get filled up thanks to IMG/FMG. MDs here need to grow up and concern themselves with their problems and not what the DO cousins do.

 

[PL198]

Why are all these MDs so overly concerned with our presence? If they are as high and mighty and super smart as they say, it doesn't matter if we have 400 DO schools because all MDs will match first and we'll be the ones screwed over. We can't get license without residency and it has been a long time that residencies get filled up thanks to IMG/FMG. MDs here need to grow up and concern themselves with their problems and not what the DO cousins do.

ok? if your colleagues keep up the trend and keep setting up chop shop schools everywhere, it won't be long before there are more students than residencies. As a DO I promise you, that's the last thing you want. It's as you said, MDs will be preferred over all but the best DO candidates. More crap schools that pop up just to make profits, more it hurts average DO student. Not going to hurt me a lick.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

ok? if your colleagues keep up the trend and keep setting up chop shop schools everywhere, it won't be long before there are more students than residencies. As a DO I promise you, that's the last thing you want. It's as you said, MDs will be preferred over all but the best DO candidates. More crap schools that pop up just to make profits, more it hurts average DO student. Not going to hurt me a lick.

It is our problem. I don't see how it is yours or why other people here are going crazy attacking DO schools. In the end, we already have regulations to limit schools by requiring a certain number of matches to stay accredited. All these "crap" schools are still better than the unknown FMG or the average IMG and none have damaged the overall percentage of residency matches for us. Again, these are our problems. I don't see why so many MD here feel the need to bash and criticize over something that they already believe doesn't affect them. I certainly don't care if the Caribbean opens 20 new schools.

 

[PL198]

It is our problem. I don't see how it is yours or why other people here are going crazy attacking DO schools. In the end, we already have regulations to limit schools by requiring a certain number of matches to stay accredited. All these "crap" schools are still better than the unknown FMG or the average IMG and none have damaged the overall percentage of residency matches for us. Again, these are our problems. I don't see why so many MD here feel the need to bash and criticize over something that they already believe doesn't affect them. I certainly don't care if the Caribbean opens 20 new schools.

just because it doesn't hurt me job-wise doesn't mean I'm ok with it. it devalues the whole profession and not really about FMG/IMG because they don't routinely have multiple facets of their treatment arsenal deemed ineffective or useless. It's more the nature of DO medicine in general I have a problem with. I know a lot of good DO doctors, yet none of them practice medicine in the DO sense, they practice just like an MD would. I also know a few that you'd literally think were insane if you heard them talk about the stuff they believe about the body. Hugely anecdotal, just saying.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

just because it doesn't hurt me job-wise doesn't mean I'm ok with it. it devalues the whole profession and not really about FMG/IMG because they don't routinely have multiple facets of their treatment arsenal deemed ineffective or useless. It's more the nature of DO medicine in general I have a problem with. I know a lot of good DO doctors, yet none of them practice medicine in the DO sense, they practice just like an MD would. I also know a few that you'd literally think were insane if you heard them talk about the stuff they believe about the body. Hugely anecdotal, just saying.

But it's not your profession. We're Osteopathic Physicians. We literally have different letters and degree, so I don't see how that can reflect on the "whole" profession but rather just us. I don't understand what you mean by DO medicine in general because you say they practice like an MD would. Is it just OMM that you have trouble with? Could you elaborate? Also, what "multiple facets" are you referring to? Because the only thing different in the curriculum is OMM, and many techniques originally from and used in OMM are used by PTs and PM&R physicians.

 

[PL198]

Craniosacral therapy, chelation therapy, OMT, take your pick. There's tons. Like anyone that says that CSF has an independent rhythm that a physician can change by touching the patient in certain ways, I'm going to think they're nuts. There's literally nothing in the science world that validates that theory. I don't understand how these procedures even get created. Like there is no basis in biology for them, so does someone just get high and say " hey I feel like CSF probably has it's own innate rhythm that I can control." I seriously don't get it. How is it possible to just pull treatments out of your *ss with no scientific basis? beats me.

 

[NeedToStudy]

Jesus shut up already.

 

[PL198]

Jesus shut up already.

or my post could be addressed, as it's clearly germane.

 

[DrEnderW]

Craniosacral therapy, chelation therapy, OMT, take your pick. There's tons. Like anyone that says that CSF has an independent rhythm that a physician can change by touching the patient in certain ways, I'm going to think they're nuts. There's literally nothing in the science world that validates that theory. I don't understand how these procedures even get created. Like there is no basis in biology for them, so does someone just get high and say " hey I feel like CSF probably has it's own innate rhythm that I can control." I seriously don't get it. How is it possible to just pull treatments out of your *ss with no scientific basis? beats me.

100% agree. Everything you just elaborated on is pure BS. The studies backing cranial and CSF flow and all that would not make it in any major medical journal. Zero argument. Complete garbage

However, that stuff isn't even a component in many DO schools - it's maybe 2hrs out of 4 years in medical school absolute max. We've all spent more time on sdn in the last 48 hours than DOs spend "learning" cranial. I've heard deans of DO schools completely renounce those practices. Those are good doctors. It's something that need to be distanced from.

You can't equate quack DOs with the entire profession just like people don't equate MDs with taking acacia berries and saw palmetto as a tx for prostate cancer because some fringe doctors say so.

It's awesome medical students and physicians, MD and DO, are calling out things that don't past muster for an educated 6th grader (that's being generous). Keep doing it. I agree it's better for medicine as a whole. I just urge you to reconsider the amount of time DOs spend learning treatments that isn't basic PT or PM&R. It's incredibly small and met with skepticism and honestly laughter. If the techniques didn't sound like a psychotic wizard named them, that would probably go along way. It should be marketed this way. Your physician partners, the overwhelmingly vast majority, are not ignorant. Just like your classmates are not. This is why every DO student organization supported the residency merger.

 

[DermViser]

Which is why Doctor Oz is the most trusted and influential physician in the nation. Oh wait....

Not after being brought in front of Congress. Also, he's not the one doing a physical exam.

 

[DermViser]

But it's not your profession. We're Osteopathic Physicians. We literally have different letters and degree, so I don't see how that can reflect on the "whole" profession but rather just us. I don't understand what you mean by DO medicine in general because you say they practice like an MD would. Is it just OMM that you have trouble with? Could you elaborate? Also, what "multiple facets" are you referring to? Because the only thing different in the curriculum is OMM, and many techniques originally from and used in OMM are used by PTs and PM&R physicians.

With all due respect, it isn't. Not when you're under the Medical Board (I realize some states have an "osteopathic" medical board but let's look at most states here). Also I think it's interesting that in this scenario you guys want to separate yourselves, but not in other scenarios. You can't pick and choose when you want to be just like allopaths and when you're in your own special group. I think what ticks people off is that you pick one side or the other depending on whether it personally benefits you.

 

[DermViser]

Depends on the area. Lots of people prefer DOs where I'm at (decent size Midwestern city)

I've lived in rural areas as well and people don't care about your degree there at all. (Altho they might care about your race)

Bc that's what they're familiar with. And of course people in rural areas don't care. They already are an underserved population to begin with. They don't get to by choosy vs. getting no care at all.