Sorry to not do the research on this one myself.
My question:
Does mainstream medical science consider osteopathy to be a legitimate field. And are they considered equal, though alternative, to MDs?
From the mailbag:
What’s the difference between an osteopath and an MD?
There’s a little more to it than is in the mailbag reply. For example, MDs do a LOT of research. Albert Sabin (oral polio vaccine), Jonas Salk (first polio vaccine), Christian Barnard (first heart transplant), Prusiner (guy who discovered prions, the cause of mad cow disease), and the guy who discovered that bacteria cause duodenal ulcers were/are all MDs. I can’t think of any medical science breakthroughs attributed to DOs. Also, DOs don’t seem to specialize as much as MDs do.
That is utterly ridiculous. DOs aren’t generally in research because they are positioned in General Practice. I don’t see much groundbreaking research coming from General Practice M.D.s either.
D.O.s are also found in areas that tend to have fewer practitioners, period. They do internships and residencies side by side with MDs, and insurance companies do not differentiate between the two for claim reimbursement. (Not all insurance companies cover OMT [osteopathic manipulation therapy], however) They also specialize. I’ve met D.O.s who specialized in OB/GYN, surgery, radiology, and internal medicine, among others.
See The American Osteopathic Association website for more information.
Robin
Gosh, you guys tapping my phone? I was just telling my brother about this today.
The cynic’s view of the difference: DO’s are MD’s that didn’t get accepted to an allopathic (MD granting) med school but still wanted to be a doctor.
The true differences: Osteopaths take a more holistic approach to health care. MD’s tend to be more reductionist. Each approach has it’s merits. I know great DO’s and sucky ones. I known great MD’s and sucky ones. IMHO the great:sucky ratio is about the same in both fields.
My father, a PharmD (basically a pharmacist with a doctorate…it’s more of a clinical degree), worked in a osteopathic hospital for years. He also worked in the Detroit Medical Center (both Harper and Children’s) for years.
I’ve noticed that since the osteopathic hospital (his last place of employment before his current position at Glaxo) he’s more willing to look into therapies not involving drugs (as much as a pharmacist will).
They also were very supportive of his research and were respectful of him and his career. He always fought with MDs at the DMC about types of drugs, dosages and the like…said they were slaves to whatever the drug reps were pushing that week.
At the DO hosp, they were more willing to work with him, developing individualized treatment on a case by case basis.
YMMV
“That is utterly ridiculous. DOs aren’t generally in research because they are positioned in General Practice. I don’t see much groundbreaking research coming from General Practice M.D.s either.”
Chas.E, just what is “utterly ridiculous”? Did someone say that general practice M.D.s do a lot of groundbreaking research? The fact is that M.D.s (as a group) have done a lot of groundbreaking research. I don’t think the same can be said of D.O.s. This is in part becuase D.O.s “are positioned in General Practice” (as you put it) or “don’t seem to specialize as much as MDs do” (as I put it). It is also probably due in part to the simple fact that there are fewer D.O.s than M.D.s. I don’t consider pointing out this difference betweent the activites of M.D.s and D.O.s to be a criticism of D.O.s, even if you do.
Please read twice, post once, and don’t be such an a__e.
If you want a data point, the Texas Medical Association considers M.D.s and D.O.s to be equals. As a matter of fact, if you aren’t one or the other, then you aren’t getting into the TMA.
Long ago, I checked into osteopathic and allopathic med schools. It seemed that the osteopathic courseload was lighter, but included a lot of time in clinics.
Osteopathy in Europe isn’t the regulated profession that it is in America. I have the impression that American D.O.s make an effort to disassociate itself from European, specifically British osteopathy. To elaborate (from here),
Also, Here’s a discussion about D.O.s from August.
“If you want a data point, the Texas Medical Association considers M.D.s and D.O.s to be equals. As a matter of fact, if you aren’t one or the other, then you aren’t getting into the TMA.”
The government of California considered M.D.s and D.O.s so equal that in about 1960 they essentially turned all the D.O.s in California into M.D.s and the osteopathic schools into allopathic schools. IIRC, there was talk a few years ago about reintroducing D.O.s to California but I don’t know if they went through with it.
There is a major difference between D.O.s and M.D.s at the undergraduate level.
I have taught many pre-med classes at a major University, and I can say that in my experience, EVERY pre-med student wanted to be an M.D., not a D.O.
But often their grades and MCAT scores weren’t that great. So everyone that didn’t get into M.D. programs had two options: going to M.D. school in a lovely island setting in the Caribbean or a D.O. school in the states.
If they had money, or really shitty grades/scores, they worked on their tan while getting an offshore M.D. But the second tier students that lacked the money for Caribbean U. or had mediocre enough grades to get in applied to the D.O. programs so that they could become doctors.
As I said before, not one of the many pre-meds I have dealt with wanted to be a D.O. at the start. They just had to do it when they couldn’t become an M.D. Therefore, D.O.s are like state school students, while M.D.s are like the Ivy League. State schools have good students and bad, as do the Ivy’s, but the difference is mostly their starting qualifications.
In Philadelphia, the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine has an exemplary reputation, and therefore D.O.'s are pretty highly respected in Philly. The flip side is that D.O.'s who went to other (far less rigorous) schools often move into the area to take advantage of the acceptance in the area, and far too many of them are, well, quacks.
In NYC and D.C., the other two places I’ve lived for extended periods, D.O.'s occupy a much lower place in the medical pantheon.
Sua
Thanks to everybody who answered.
I should have known better, however, than asking a question only a couple of hours before leaving for a three-day trip. I was talking to a friend on AIM who mentioned that her sister was just about to enter into a DO residency.
It suddenly occurred to me that I wasn’t really sure how legitimate the field was (and I wasn’t going to potentially insult her by asking).
Thanks for the info everybody.