Now that some things have settled in my personal life, I’ve decided to go back to medical school. I was wondering how some people felt about osteopathic physicians. Of the ones that I’ve met, there is literally no difference between a DO and an MD considering most of them do their residency in an MD program. Have other’s had the same experience?
Just to clarify with people outside of the US: the in United States there are two ways of becoming a medical physician: allopathic (MD) and osteopathic (DO). Most of the write the same boards, take the same classes and are licensed by the same governing boards. They are not like D.O.s in other countries (where D.O. stands for diploma of osteopathy).
Agree with your comment that both allopathic and osteopathic training are very similar, but only up to a point.
The individual that selects to be an osteopath receives more training in treating the body as a whole, regardless of a specialty as evidenced through subsequently obtained “board certification.”
The allopath, other than the General Practitioner, is basically a specialist.
Thus, for a vast majority of my life, I have always recommended to family and friends the use of an allopath for trauma, shock, and bacterial infection. For everything else, an osteopath has been recommended.
This is just my humble opinion, and not worth a penny.
An interesting opinion. Though it may be true that many osteopathic doctors choose to go into primary care (60%), the remainder of them will go into specialties. What you are saying does apply to osteopaths who choose to pursue an osteopathic residency. I’ve often found that these individuals tend to practice their manual manipulations unlike those who pursue an ACGME (MD) residency who tend to throw all the hands on stuff out the door.
Sadly there is no longer any difference between the way an osteopathic neurosurgeon or an allopathic neurosurgeon practice anymore. Most program directors won’t let any of that “whole body” stuff fly.
Thank you very much for you input, i really appreciate it!
[quote]furo wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but could you please explain the difference between a DO and an MD? I don’t really get it (I’m from the UK).
Thanks and good luck with which ever option you choose.[/quote]
Both are doctors with the ability to diagnose, prescribe and treat and are not seen as being any different in reimbursement from Insurance, Medicare or Medicaid.
The only difference is in their Med school training.
[quote]furo wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but could you please explain the difference between a DO and an MD? I don’t really get it (I’m from the UK).
Thanks and good luck with which ever option you choose.[/quote]
Both are doctors with the ability to diagnose, prescribe and treat and are not seen as being any different in reimbursement from Insurance, Medicare or Medicaid.
The only difference is in their Med school training. [/quote]
Thanks. How exactly does their med school training differ? Can both cover every speciality? Is one considered superior to the other, or is an MD consultant at the exact same level as a DO consultant?
[quote]furo wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but could you please explain the difference between a DO and an MD? I don’t really get it (I’m from the UK).
Thanks and good luck with which ever option you choose.[/quote]
Both are doctors with the ability to diagnose, prescribe and treat and are not seen as being any different in reimbursement from Insurance, Medicare or Medicaid.
The only difference is in their Med school training. [/quote]
Thanks. How exactly does their med school training differ? Can both cover every speciality? Is one considered superior to the other, or is an MD consultant at the exact same level as a DO consultant?
[/quote]
In the Emergency Room at one of our local hospitals, there are 4 MD’s and 4 DO’s on staff.
In medical school, I believe a DO gets more training in manipulation (chiropractic) of the spine and body.
While this is certainly anecdotal, my experience has been more like:
MD: if we can’t prove it and don’t have the studies to prove it, it doesn’t work
DO: if it works, it works, even if we don’t really know why
The MDs are more conservative, unwilling to stray outside of policy and procedure, whereas the DOs are more pragmatic and willing to consider a wider range of options.
MDs tend more to define things in terms of illness. Basically, if you have no known illnesses, you’re healthy. That’s how a clinically obese person can be “healthy”.
DOs have a much more broad concept of health that goes beyond “not being sick”.
Again, just my experience with the doctors I’ve personally dealt with and known. I don’t know how well it can be generalized.
[quote]furo wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but could you please explain the difference between a DO and an MD? I don’t really get it (I’m from the UK).
Thanks and good luck with which ever option you choose.[/quote]
Both are doctors with the ability to diagnose, prescribe and treat and are not seen as being any different in reimbursement from Insurance, Medicare or Medicaid.
The only difference is in their Med school training. [/quote]
Thanks. How exactly does their med school training differ? Can both cover every speciality? Is one considered superior to the other, or is an MD consultant at the exact same level as a DO consultant?
[/quote]
In the Emergency Room at one of our local hospitals, there are 4 MD’s and 4 DO’s on staff.
In medical school, I believe a DO gets more training in manipulation (chiropractic) of the spine and body.[/quote]
This. They take extra classes in manual manipulations. A hands on approach to treating certain conditions. Some have evidence behind them and some don’t. These classes tend to get beaten out of them by the time residency is over however some die hard fans will still integrate manual manipulations in their practice. I like it because it never really hurts to have an extra tool in the tool box, so long as you don’t go trying to treat cancer or something with a manipulation.
My wife is an athletic therapist and she was the one that convinced me to apply to osteopathic medical school because manipulations make up the majority of her practice.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
While this is certainly anecdotal, my experience has been more like:
MD: if we can’t prove it and don’t have the studies to prove it, it doesn’t work
OD: if it works, it works, even if we don’t really know why
The MDs are more conservative, unwilling to stray outside of policy and procedure, whereas the ODs are more pragmatic and willing to consider a wider range of options.
MDs tend more to define things in terms of illness. Basically, if you have no known illnesses, you’re healthy. That’s how a clinically obese person can be “healthy”.
ODs have a much more broad concept of health that goes beyond “not being sick”.
Again, just my experience with the doctors I’ve personally dealt with and known. I don’t know how well it can be generalized.[/quote]
Great response! What’s interesting is that this generation of doctors (whether MD or DO) are starting to get on board with the preventative medicine thing and start pursuing a broader form of “healthy”
[quote]furo wrote:
Sorry for the ignorance, but could you please explain the difference between a DO and an MD? I don’t really get it (I’m from the UK).
Thanks and good luck with which ever option you choose.[/quote]
Here’s a link for ya!:
interestingly enough, DOs are fully licenced in the UK as practicing physicians (provided the correct boards are taken)
[quote]furo wrote:
Ah right thanks for clarifying the differences.
So if a DO can do everything an MD can, but can also do physical manipulation, what are the advantages of being an MD?[/quote]
History of the programs. MD’s are always self viewed as being superior