General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOsteopaths (Doctors of Osteopathy) constitute nearly a third of new med school grads.
M.D.'s aren't the only "real" doctors.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/03/education/edlife/the-osteopathic-branch-of-medicine-is-booming.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&version=HpSumSmallMediaHigh&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Harlem is a fitting location for Touros new medical school. Many osteopathic schools have an added mission: to dispatch doctors to poorer neighborhoods and towns most in need of medical care.
SNIP
Inside, Touro seems indistinguishable from a conventional medical school what doctors of osteopathic medicine, or D.O.s, call allopathic, a term that some M.D.s arent much fond of. A walk through the corridors finds students practicing skills on mannequins hard-wired with faulty hearts. They dissect cadavers. They bend over lab tables, working with professors on their research. And, unlike their allopathic counterparts, they spend roughly five hours a week being instructed in the century-old techniques of osteopathic medicine, manipulating the spine, muscles and bones in diagnosis and treatment.
SNIP
In February, the accrediting agencies agreed to a single system for residencies and fellowships. Beginning next year and fully in place by 2020, D.O. residency standards will be aligned with those of the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education, the nonprofit that accredits M.D. programs. The council will now accredit D.O. residencies, though osteopathic representatives will sit on review committees and its board. The announcement cited the need to provide accountability and a uniform path of preparation, and to help mitigate the primary care physician shortage. About 60 percent of D.O. graduates go on to primary care fields like internal medicine, pediatrics and family medicine, compared with about 30 percent of M.D.s.
SNIP
Dr. Goldberg believes osteopaths have a strong case to make. Too many doctors, he said, rely on expensive medical tests like CT scans and M.R.I.s and fail to probe or even touch the patients body. Osteopathic schools, on the other hand, stress physical diagnosis techniques like palpation or percussion gently tapping the abdominal area, say, to determine if the size and shape of the liver suggest inflammation. An osteopath might more quickly notice that if a pregnant womans posture is askew her fetus is imposing a burden on her skeleton.
The D.O. philosophy makes much of patient interaction. I hate the term holistic, but we look at the patient as a whole from their biological, psychological, social, occupational and family background, said Dr. Goldberg, a physiatrist (rehabilitation specialist) by training. We teach respect for technology and laboratory testing to aid in making a diagnosis, but count on the history and physical examination to confirm it. In that way, were old-fashioned.
REP
(21,691 posts)Bone doctors can be fine primary care doctors, but most don't have access to the training and research medical doctors do. For underserved communities, a DO can be a welcome addition.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)programs that many MD's do -- so I don't know what you mean when you say "most don't have access to the training and research medical doctors do." If they have the same residencies, they have the same training.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)They were the only private practice doctors who accepted Medicaid. There was even an osteopathic hospital in the community because DOs were treated badly by the MDs at the other hospitals.
All of that has changed. MDs are far more tolerant of osteopaths and more DO have privileges at hospitals. Osteopathic schools train specifically to conform to MD programs and internships cross the lines.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)DOs aren't just "bone doctors". They are in all types of practices: ER, general practitioner, OB/GYN, pediatrician, etc.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)littlemissmartypants
(22,655 posts)My rheumatologist is a Ph. D., M. D. Personal relationships that are my choice. I am glad to see the influx opening up opportunities in employment and in direct care to those under served.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)Can't wait for the first homeopath Surgeon General.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)But they are more likely to pursue specialties in primary care -- where we need doctors the most. This isn't a race to the bottom. It's a shift away from doctors who pursue high-paying specialties because they're more interested in making a ton of money than in patient care.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)When the claims of osteopathy survive rigorous testing and qualify for peer review, then we will live in another world.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Last edited Tue Jul 29, 2014, 10:52 PM - Edit history (1)
They go through years of medical school and complete residencies.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Stop teaching the osteopathy nonsense
tabasco
(22,974 posts)What are you talking about?
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)they should call themselves Doctors of "something that isn't an old discredited school of pseudo scientific whackodoodlery"
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)They have the same education as any MD with the addition of a class on manipulation. All the DOs I know work for major hospitals. There's a few DOs in the health care practice that my general practitioner, a MD, works in. He's even recommended an OB/GYN to me that's a DO.
Mopar151
(9,983 posts)Night and day difference... I've had treatment from both. The osteopath's spinal manipulations are combined with manual stretching, and are much less WWF-like.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)just like M.D.'s.
But your connecting them to homeopaths revealed your ignorance on the subject.
KT2000
(20,577 posts)identical to MDs. It is a foot in the door for those who were not able to get into regular MD colleges. The number of MD graduates is tightly restricted by design - to assure good incomes. That though has failed to live up to the population increase over time.
I think you will see most large clinics have D.O.s on staff.
They receive advanced training for specialties at MD colleges.
Traditional osteopathy practices are not that common.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)None of them chose that type because they couldn't get into a MD school, but because they preferred to be a DO. Being a DO isn't like taking the easy way to be a doctor, the schooling is the same except for the class on manipulation.
Edited to add: the people I know all work at top hospitals, and are all highly paid.
KT2000
(20,577 posts)it is difficult to get into medical school - limits exist. People who go to osteopathy schools are equally intelligent and the education is the same as MD colleges, like you say with the addition of manipulation.
My guess is that the osteopaths working at top hospitals and are highly paid do not focus their practices on manipulation.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Implies that a DO is somehow a lesser or easier choice. It is not. The DOs I know prefer to look more at preventative and a holistic view of care.
KT2000
(20,577 posts)as well - prevention and utilizing holistic approach.
Many well qualified, intelligent, able and otherwise sterling people are not accepted into medical schools. Many more apply than are accepted - fact. The admissions involve many factors including connections and all that implies.
Some who are not accepted then choose an osteopathy school - but of course not all.
Enough said.
DO programs have lower GPA's and MCAT's than medical schools. That's changing, but its easier, especially for a non-traditional student, to get into a DO school.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 30, 2014, 10:20 PM - Edit history (2)
There were only 6400 slots for 144,000 applications last year for osteopathy schools.
The comparable numbers for medical school were almost 20,000 openings and less than 50,000 applications.
http://www.medschoolpulse.com/2013/10/21/med-school-admissions-statistics-part-i-how-many-people-get-into-medical-school/
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)one who wanted to be an MD. Their first choice was to be a DO. All the doctor owned hospitals here have been bought by big corporate entities and MDs and Dos share hospital privileges as equals.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)last fall, according to the article.
The numbers of graduates from both MD and Osteopathy programs is artificially low. Many more fully qualified candidates are turned down than accepted.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Stop embarrassing yourself.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)is as stupid as that of homeopathy. They are free to discard that silly school of thought and take a better name that doesn't make people question whether they are a skilled doctor or a moron.
They can drop that name at anytime.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Please stop embarrassing yourself.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)who are you again?
get the red out
(13,462 posts)That is completely different.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)I know exactly what I am thinking about.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)one of the best diagnosticians around. I've being seeing him since I was 14. My kids never saw a pediatrician they saw him.
I love him.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)They're not all PCPs.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)I meant I like him so much I didn't see a need for a pediatrician. I wasn't very clear.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)Sorry I just didn't want anyone reading think they're all just PCPs.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)I took my son to our pediatrician's office when he was having severe chest pain after a basketball game. My doctor couldn't see him, but the DO could. We were lucky because the DO fixed him after talking to him for a few minutes and doing manipulations for a few seconds. It turns out my growing son had popped something out of alignment in his back and the pain was referring to his chest.
It's lucky we happened upon the DO that day, or we probably would have ended up in the hospital, looking for heart problems.
Lisa0825
(14,487 posts)She didn't seem to practice any differently to me, other than the fact that she was really big on preventive care. I developed an autoimmune condition which many people find takes a long time to get a proper diagnosis for. She did not make the diagnosis herself, but I do credit her with referring me to the correct specialist after considering my very ambiguous symptoms and ordering the correct preliminary tests.
She was consistently voted one of the top primary care docs in my county. I can't see her anymore because she left her practice to begin a practice focused on home visits for geriatric patients.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)didn't want a contagious person in his office -- referred me back to my family practice doctor. That doctor's office said I had to wait for three days for an appointment -- even though I was sure I had pneumonia. (I've had it multiple times.) So I called the ob/gyn back and said NOW WHAT???
Can you imagine, being pregnant and that sick, and no doctor will see you? So they gave me the name of a doctor, an osteopath, who had recently set up her own practice. And she was great, and I got in to see her right away, and yes, I did have pneumonia. I could have ended up in the hospital -- or worse -- if I'd had to wait three more days without treatment. (By contrast, the osteopath said if I ever got those symptoms again, she wanted me to call the office on the FIRST DAY I got sick.) So I dumped the family practice doctor and switched to the osteopath.
I'd still be with that doctor except she moved her practice to another town, and I wanted someone closer. But she was great.
jen63
(813 posts)The only problem that I have is a lot of them get away from manipulation in private practice and an extra appointment to see a chiro sucks. They always spend MUCH more time with you.
My grandpa was a DO and I can remember my mom picking my brother and I up from school and taking us to his office to "have our backs cracked". Heaven!! There would be baskets and bags of veggies and homemade canned goods he would take as payment. (Even though he had an enormous garden and my grandma canned.) He didn't turn anyone away for not being able to pay.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Happy to be here, y'all are helping me keep my sanity in this sea of red I live in.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Are they covered by most insurance? Are they by any chance less expensive? Can one choose them as your PCP for insurance?
This sounds like the kind of doctor I would be interested in. Most doctors I have visited are so full of ego they won't listen and are so over-scheduled they don't have to. I have had more wrong diagnoses from doctors than correct ones. So I would love to find a doctor that is willing to get to the heart of the problem, not run a jillion tests in order to land on a lucky break. I swear, most doctors don't need to know anything, just run as many tests as it takes to find something.
Ilsa
(61,695 posts)My last PCP was a DO.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)I had one as my PCP till she moved out of the area. I only accidentally ended up with her -- another doctor was too busy to see me and I was very sick -- but she was great, and I stuck with her.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)I will definitely check it out. I currently don't have a PCP because I haven't gone to the doctor in years, mostly due to insurance issues and because I am generally very healthy. But it's always good to know.
exboyfil
(17,862 posts)school and our very well respected state medical school. She decided to go to the D.O. school and is now in residency as a primary care physician.
D.O.s are just as good as M.D.s. My current PCP is a D.O., and he is the best doctor that I have ever had. He is younger than me, and I plan to keep him until I am deep into retirement.
When my daughter was considering medical school it was a no brainer to include both the state school and the above mentioned D.O. as the top two schools to apply to. The state school is a little less expensive, but it is more difficult to get into.
Laffy Kat
(16,377 posts)They are interchangeable. I've seen both at Kaiser an can't really tell a difference in philosophies or care. Of course at Kaiser HMOs it's all about protocol, cookie-cutter medicine. Of note, be wary of D.C.'s; they refer to themselves as "doctors" but they are doctors of chiropractic medicine---BIG DIFFERENCE.
Archae
(46,327 posts)It began just after the Civil War.
osteopathy
Osteopathy is a medical practice based on the theory that diseases are due chiefly to loss of structural integrity which can be restored to harmony or equilibrium by manipulation. The manipulation allegedly allows the body to heal itself. Osteopaths use manipulation for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease.
http://www.skepdic.com/osteopathy.html
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)They do all the exact same course work as a a MD with an additional manipulative class added. That's the only difference. I know many DOs that practice in top hospitals. There are DO in the practice that my general practitioner, a MD, works in.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)They will always be looked at sideways if they continue with that name.
Doctor Oz is a very skilled and competent cardiac surgeon but his belief in Reike and other moronic bullshit makes him a quack at the end of the day.
The same goes for Chopra.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)You ignorance is showing.
Stick to being wrong about GMOs.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)If you don't agree with them, anything you say is just "anecdotal evidence" to them. Their way or no way.
Archae
(46,327 posts)"Standing on my head cured my foot fungus!"
The basic theory behind osteopathy sounds like chiropractic.
Oh sure, we can find lots of testimonials.
But actual science?
That's where both osteopathy and chiropractic fails.
The use in the OP article of the discredited term "allopath" speaks volumes.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)However, some people reading this subthread might not, so I'll explain. It's pretty simple, really. Basically, septics (such as yourself) do not care about our opinions or personal experiences with forms of medicine with which they do not agree.
Now, I know you're the primary "Woo Warrior" on DU, but as this is just another message board online, don't you ever think that your words might be put to better use by doing things like, oh, I don't know, writing campaigns to the FDA to reign in all these heinous activities of the "woo" purveyors? Because it's not like you're going to change any minds here.
In fact, from threads I've seen on chiropractic in some of your safe havens, you can't even convince some members that think similarly (as in skeptical, and/or, atheistic.) I mean, if you can't even convince the choir, why are you bothering to attempt to convince me, or anyone else here?
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)in conventional medical schools, and are involved in peer reviewed research.
For example:
http://www.nyit.edu/medicine/research/
Research activities at the NYIT College of Osteopathic Medicine encompass a wide variety of areas ranging from basic biology to clinical medicine to patient outcomes and from health policy to global health to medical education. The medical school has targeted several areas of research, including:
Osteopathic manipulative medicine/neuromusculoskeletal biology and disease
Cardiovascular biology and pathophysiology
Renal physiology and disease
The focus on neuromusculoskeletal health and disease is closely tied to our mission as an osteopathic medical school. Our goal in this area is to validate the clinical efficacy of osteopathic manipulative medicine and to investigate the physiological mechanisms mediating the clinical effects of OMM. We have a strong program focusing on research into Parkinsons disease and other neurodegenerative diseases with studies ranging from basic pathogenesis and genetics to patient-centered outcomes.
Research carried out by medical school faculty members has been supported by funding from multiple external sources including the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Michael J. Fox Foundation, the American Heart Association, and the American Diabetes Association.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)If that was simply a typo, then no harm. One might as readily type "credulous fools," for example, when they mean to type "believers in crank alternative medicine." It's an equally honest mistake.
As you're well aware, anecdotal evidence can be a fine reason to investigate a claimed phenomenon, but in the absence of other evidence anecdote is never sufficient to assert that the claimed phenomenon is proven.
A hundred passionate testimonials about osteopathy do not mean that the practice is real as described; it simply means that a hundred people are passionate about it. If I could find 100 people who praised Vioxx, would you declare it a rousing success?
It's probable that you'd require more stringent verification; you'd be a fool not to do so. That's also true of osteopathy; whatever the real benefits of the practice, they are independent of the heartfelt tales told by believers, and a rational observer should demand better evidence.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 30, 2014, 03:19 PM - Edit history (1)
Otherwise, I meant every syllable and character. As long as y'all continue to attempt to insult some of us with the use of the word "woo" then I will continue with the far more insulting (and perfect) insult of "septic." Don't dish it out if you can't take some in return.
As for this assertion of yours:
The biggest problem with it is that of all of DU's septics, I have never seen a single one of you go that route. It's always dismissal of anecdotal evidence. Why even bring up this other possibility if you have no intention of ever using it?
Yes, I know that's only the first half of your sentence. You do know that the use of the word "but" basically negates everything said before it, right? You're teasing. Which is typical.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)but rather to the embrace of phenomena in the absence of evidence, or to such phenomena itself. If you would care to point me to someone using the term "woo" to refer to a person, then I will happily take that person to task for it, because I find it rather distasteful.
Referring to skeptics as "septics" is a direct insult. It's not a matter of "dishing it out" or not being able "to take it." It's a response to criticism of pseudoscience with a personal attack, which is a juvenile reaction that certainly invites no respect in return.
We've seen countless anecdotes about the claims of chiropractic's ability to cure illness, and we've seen studies performed to test these. To date, those lofty claims have not been supported.
We've seen many anecdotes about Reiki and similar "energy therapies." These have been tested and debunked.
The early 20th century saw numerous scientific investigations of paranormal claims based on testimony and anecdotal evidence. More recently, we've seen scientific investigation of crop circles, UFOs, orbs, ESP, psychic ghost-talkers and the like. All without successful result.
In other words, anecdotes have certainly inspired further investigation. To assert otherwise is either a deliberate lie or a statement of profound ignorance. Your objection seems less motivated by reality than by frustration at the failure of these alleged phenomena to withstand serious inquiry.
And frankly, it's not up to the skeptics at DU to test every wacky claim made by every believer. Instead, the advocate of the unverified treatment/technique/phenomenon needs to demonstrate that it either works as described or that it's sufficiently distinct from previously debunked claims to merit further investigation. You would require actual science to do all the heavy lifting so that pseudoscience can sit by rattling its beads and hoping for a "hit."
kentauros
(29,414 posts)Then you haven't been paying attention to how it's used on DU, and elsewhere online. That or you choose to interpret it the way you have stated. The problem with you doing that is you are going against the common use of the word against anyone that supports alternative forms of medicine and/or broader forms of scientific thought.
Use of "woo" is as much a direct insult to those of us that are brave enough to admit that we use such things y'all label as "woo." It's kind of like how anti-theists love to mock someone's belief, and yet dismiss anyone getting upset by that, as if a belief is separate from the believer. So, if some of us use things y'all call "woo" then don't be surprised when you get angry blowback because you're criticizing said use with the term "woo."
We've seen countless anecdotes about the claims of chiropractic's ability to cure illness, and we've seen studies performed to test these. To date, those lofty claims have not been supported.
We've seen many anecdotes about Reiki and similar "energy therapies." These have been tested and debunked.
The early 20th century saw numerous scientific investigations of paranormal claims based on testimony and anecdotal evidence. More recently, we've seen scientific investigation of crop circles, UFOs, orbs, ESP, psychic ghost-talkers and the like. All without successful result.
Then name them. And skepdic isn't much of a source, so try harder than that. Also, there is one observation I've had with DU (and elsewhere online.) That is, when anyone is attempting to prove their assertion by way of studies performed by researchers, often just one study is enough. Whereas the critics will insist on at least 100 studies to be satisfied, and sometimes, not even then. So, if you're going to state that all of this stuff has been debunked, back it up with at least one-hundred studies on each topic. Otherwise, I'll be dismissing their findings out of hand (as happens on both sides of these issues, exactly as I stated in my original reply with regard to how DU's septics commonly and generally react to anecdotal evidence.)
And yet, y'all do seem overly compelled to mock every "wacky" claim by a believer. Seems to me that you could channel that same energy into testing the claims instead of launching thread after thread after thread with the sole intention of mocking and insulting "believers." If your intent is to "protect" us from such claims, you're going about it all wrong.
Although my educated guess here is that what I said above either went over your head, or I didn't explain myself thoroughly enough. Hopefully this reply has done so.
Cha
(297,196 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)The DO is accepted as a medical doctor by the AMA and all the other medical associations, and people with DO degrees go on to attend residencies in all the usual MD programs.
You apparently didn't read the article in the OP at all.
Sgent
(5,857 posts)of the US are quacks.
DO's trained in the US are physicians in every sense of the word.
Osteopathy itself is somewhat quackish, but its a very small portion of a DO program (about the length of 1 elective), the rest of it is standard medical school. Very few practicing DO's use any OMM.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Too many MD's today are over-relying on lab tests and not learning the skills they need to physically examine their patients. That is not a dying art for osteopaths.
When my son was in high school basketball, the school called me to say he was having chest pain. I took him to his pediatrician's office, but the only person who could see him right away happened to be an osteopath. He talked to my son for a few minutes. Felt his chest, felt his back. My son was almost shaking, he was in such bad pain. Then the doctor had him turn his head, while he was holding his back and doing something to it. My son had been almost shaking in pain -- in about two seconds he was fine.
It turned out that something had popped out of alignment in his back, and the osteopath fixed it. He also taught my son some exercises to keep it from happening again, while his back was still growing (and susceptible to this).
If I had taken him to an emergency room and he'd seen an MD, who knows what kinds of tests he would have had to have. But I am certain his pain wouldn't have been gone in 2 seconds.
All DO's touch their patients. And when the patient has a problem that would benefit from OMM, they use it.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Not commenting on DO's in the larger sense here, but your story is simply testimony and, in itself, doesn't validate the practice of osteopathy any more than a less positive story, in itself, would invalidate the practice.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Orrex
(63,208 posts)Reiki is "compatible" with medical practice, insofar as it doesn't generally make things worse. Calling osteopathy "compatible" is a pretty tepid endorsement.
Late in the her pregnancy with our first child, my wife went to the ER due to intense abdominal pain. An MD identified the cause as a dislocated rib and popped it back into place, whereupon the pain vanished.
To hear the advocates of osteopathy tell it, MDs never actually deign to touch their patients, in the same way that advocates of "alternative" "medicine" claim that MDs don't care about nutrition and would rather prescribe pills. Both claims are simply false.
Also, it doesn't change the fact that your story is anecdotal testimony.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)as the prerequisite for a residency, and the large majority of DO graduates go on to do a residency in medical school.
Among M.D.s, the physical exam is becoming a lost art.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/13/health/are-doctors-losing-touch-with-hands-on-medicine.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias:s,{%221=%22:=%22RI =%22}=&pagewanted=2
''Physical diagnosis can be an enormously powerful and inexpensive way of sorting out those who need expensive tests from those who don't,'' said Dr. Robert H. Fletcher, a professor of ambulatory care and preventive medicine at Harvard Medical School. ''And yet the skills are tending to be de-emphasized, to atrophy in young physicians because they jump right away to expensive technology. So when it comes down to being on their own and having to decide something without the technology, they've lost a lot of their ability.''
SNIIP
In parts of the world where technology is less accessible, skillful physical examinations remain important. ''In Europe they pay more attention to physical findings,'' said Dr. Jacqueline Achkar, who received her medical training in Germany and Britain, and now teaches physical diagnosis to students at New York University Medical School. ''Here students talk less to the patient and spend more time in front of the computer. That is what they're focused on. I say, did you feel the liver, and they tell me what the blood tests showed. I say, 'Was the patient yellow?' and they say, 'I don't know, I have to go back and check.' ''
Dr. LaCombe, the director of cardiology at Maine General, had a similar observation. ''Most physicians would admit that few physicians under 50 know how to do a physical exam,'' he said. Teaching the subject is now generally considered one of the thankless chores of medical education in this country, he added, usually an unpaid labor relegated to junior medical school faculty members who themselves are uncertain of the techniques.
''It's like 'Fahrenheit 451,' '' Dr. LaCombe said, referring to Ray Bradbury's science fiction novel about a totalitarian society where books are burned, but a small cadre of rebels keeps their contents alive by memorizing them. ''There has got to be a place where we can keep this thing alive until it gets into vogue again.''
_______________________________
The place where these skills are being kept alive is in Osteopathy school.
JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)My GP is an MD who is also a D.O. She did an extra year. It's not quackery.
That's the only doctor (been seeing her since mid 2006) who has never just thrown antibiotics at me and poo poo'd issues as something short of the old fashioned 'hysteria'.
They actually listen to their female patients.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Last edited Wed Jul 30, 2014, 12:52 PM - Edit history (2)
You'll forgive me if I don't accept it as current or definitive, especially since Dr. LaCombe doesn't tell us how he came to his "few physicians under 50" conclusion. Whom did he poll? How did he research his claim?
For that matter, is it strictly necessary that the physician herself conduct the physical exam in all cases? An RN or a CNP is fully capable of handling that part of the process, after all. Must the physician draw blood and run all of the lab tests herself, too?
I haven't had too many visits to the doctor during my adult life, but I don't recall any who didn't know how to conduct a physical exam. It seems unlikely that I'd have found the last three relics in the great state of Pennsylvania who've survived from the mythical golden age of hands-on medicine.
In short, I find the claim unconvincing, and it doesn't refute the fact that your son's happy anecdote is still an anecdote.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)That DO's, unlike MD's, still rely on physical examinations.
"Dr. Goldberg believes osteopaths have a strong case to make. Too many doctors, he said, rely on expensive medical tests like CT scans and M.R.I.s and fail to probe or even touch the patients body. Osteopathic schools, on the other hand, stress physical diagnosis techniques like palpation or percussion gently tapping the abdominal area, say, to determine if the size and shape of the liver suggest inflammation. An osteopath might more quickly notice that if a pregnant womans posture is askew her fetus is imposing a burden on her skeleton."
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Years ago I sprained my ankle, and my MD gave me a thorough physical exam before saying "you should still get an x-ray." I simply can't believe that my experience is unique or that MDs routinely usher people into the MRI chamber prior to performing an actual checkup.
No one should claim that DOs aren't doctors, because they are. Equally, however, no one should claim that the muscular/skeletal manipulations involved in osteopathy are capable of greater healing than they are, either.
If DOs have better patient interaction, then that's super, but it's a shifting of the goalposts, much the way the goalposts are shifted when we discuss acupuncture or chiropractic. Each of these is claimed to manipulate magical body energy, but when this claim is debunked, proponents then claim that chiropractic still makes people feel better and acupuncture is shown to release endorphins. That's lovely, but it's not the original or primary claim.
Ditto for osteopathy. The practice claims to be able to treat a range of illnesses with musculo-skeletal "adjustments," when in fact no such treatments have been demonstrated to be effective (with the exception of back and neck pain and their associated symptoms). So when those "adjustments" are called out as bunk, the goalposts are shifted instead to "my DO is great with face-to-face communication." Lovely, but not the original or primary claim. Nor is that claim unique to osteopathic medicine, but it's put forth as if MDs and their associates are incapable of human interaction.
So DOs are doctors. Great! I see no reason to question this. But the acceptance of DOs by the AMA is not an endorsement of every crazy claim made by the quack fringe of osteopathic elan vital.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)So it's okay but only when you use it?
Orrex
(63,208 posts)My anecdotes are no more valid than yours, except to the extent that mine are supported by evidence where yours are not. But if you reject my anecdotal evidence, then on what basis do you assert your own as valid?
And I notice that you didn't actually address the body of the post, opting instead for a dubious attempt at soundbyte zinger. Not sure that I see much point in continuing on this topic.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Quackeopaths throw that meaningless term around and try to make it seems as if only their doctor can see the whole patient.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)I am sorry that you have an inadequate background in Science, but that is reason to jump on others.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)Yeah that is a real handicap compared to your endless hours on Natural News and Mercola.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)of the most basic facts about Doctors of Osteopathy. If you aren't lying about being a nurse, it will be a shock to your system someday when you find yourself having to follow the orders of a D.O. (And with a third of doctors being DO's, that will happen soon.)
I don't know what Mercola is. You seem fascinated with it, however. Maybe you should broaden your education.
hunter
(38,311 posts)...and probably more likely to kill a patient than an osteopath was.
Once upon a time surgery and dentistry were done by barbers, the same people who cut hair and shaved necks. After all, they had the sharp knives.
Times change. Today you wouldn't ask your barber or hair stylist to pull a tooth, excise a suspicious growth from your skin, or amputate a rotten toe.
Osteopaths get the same training today as M.D.s.
In my own experience I've found Osteopaths to be much more tolerant and less judgmental of quirky, sometimes non-compliant patients like myself who sometimes experiment with alternative (but not "woo" sorts of medicine.
polichick
(37,152 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)I would like to direct you to this part:
I was in a D.O. Program for a while before I learned the hard way medicine was not for me. Here in America you get the exact same training as a medical doctor. In fact, the medical training DOs get dwarfs the Manipulation by about 4:1. You spend 5 days a week (all day MWF, and the mornings on TTh) learning "traditional medicine" in its entirety and IIRC you spend 2 afternoons a week studying manipulation. That is it.
The osteopathic manipulation is indeed on the level of Chiropractic woo (nice for a massage but thats about it), but many (maybe even most) DO abandon it once they are done with med-school. Thus, whether or not a DO is a quack depends on whether they advocate manipulation as anything beyond a massage. The ones who think is more than that are quacks.
There are many DOs who are very competent in the US and just as good as any doctor...its just that are able to give a nice massages as well.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)(Well, former friend...we had a falling-out in 2004 over the election. Whole other story, though).
We were in touch regularly during his rigorous DO education and training and, based on what he shared with me, I agree with you.
Based on what I just found online, he's currently an anesthesiologist in Texas and has affiliations with three major hospitals in the Dallas area.
littlemissmartypants
(22,655 posts)Thanks.
Holly_Hobby
(3,033 posts)there are no other PCP's taking new patients here, and my former Internist retired.
The OD's diagnosis' are never right the first or second time, usually takes 3 visits before the correct diagnosis. I would switch in a minute.
On the other hand, my mother saw an OD when her sciatica was ruining her life. Cured after 2 adjustments.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)He didn't want germs in his office, so he said to go back to my family practice doctor. That doctor couldn't give me an appointment for three days, even though I told the nurse what I was sure I had (and had had several times before) and that I couldn't wait that long. (It's especially important to breathe when you're pregnant!) So I called the OB back and asked him what to do. He gave me the name of a DO who had just opened her own practice, and whom he could recommend. She got me in that day, and was able to diagnose me without an x-ray. I hate to think of what could have happened if I hadn't seen a doctor for another three days. After that, she told me to call the office the same day I ever got symptoms of pneumonia again. A year later, I got a fever and cough late on a Friday afternoon, so I called her first thing Monday morning. When she saw me, she wanted to know why I waited so long.
She was a wonderful doctor but she moved out of the area eventually. I'd still be with her if she hadn't.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)I could recognize the feelings myself since I'd had it several times earlier. She could even tell me where in my lungs she heard it, and on my repeat visits over the next few weeks, she could hear it going away.
(It doesn't feel the same as asthma, which I also have. And I can have asthma and pneumonia at once, which complicates things.)
taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)She is first and foremost a western medicine allopathic doctor. She doesn't even do osteopathic manipulation in the office. She is much more holisitic about treating the source of disease than most doctors, though.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)in the way that homeopathy is.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)it might be a different philosophy to the MD model, but it cant be easily thrown away as quackery
kentauros
(29,414 posts)even though I've only been to one, and that was over twenty years ago. I'm going to look in my insurance network tonight to see if I can get one as a PCP
Thanks for the thread, pnwmom!
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)More and more doctors with questionable degrees
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)No, clearly not. They are working with schools of Osteopathy on joint accreditation.
MattBaggins
(7,904 posts)They have nothing of value to offer.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Osteopathy so they just spew a bunch of bullshit without a clue of what they are talking about. They really do sound clownish to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of modern medicine. But what can you do? Keep informing, I suppose.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)BuddhaGirl
(3,605 posts)CherokeeDem
(3,709 posts)where we participated in clinical rotations for 3rd and 4th year DO students. I spoke before the classes during their selection period when they chose where they wanted to do their rotations. They are doctors, who in addition to conventional medicine also are taught alternative medicine.
I've been to a DO as a patient and couldn't tell any difference in the quality of my care.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Much more in agreement with my view of medicine. Oh well.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)the importance of treating the whole person.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)That is about it
They get the same training and are able to take either the normal medical boards (USMLE) or the osteopathic boards(Complex) or both.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)I knew nothing about osteopaths when my high school son developed sharp chest pain after a basketball game. I took him to the pediatrician, and the only available doctor was an osteopath. My son was stoic but in so much pain that he was trembling. He asked my son a few questions and then told him to turn his head. He grabbed my son around the shoulder and did something to his back and instantly my son relaxed. All that pain was gone.
The doctor told me that my son was growing so fast that his muscles and tendons weren't quite strong enough for his bones, and so his spine had slipped out of alignment. The chest pain was actually referred spinal pain. He taught my son exercises to do to help keep it from happening again.
I've had back massages by physical therapists. 'This was no massage. I was so glad I'd accidentally taken my son to the perfect doctor for him, instead of to the ER where who knows what tests they would have been giving him for his "chest" pain.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)So I think its safe to say I do know a fair bit more than the average person about their training.
DOs get the exact same medical training and can elect to take the exact same boards. So if you think I am saying they are inferior to normal MDs you are mistaken. However, if you are claiming they are better based on that episode, then I disagree.
OM is as unproven as Chiropractic manipulation. If it were, it would have been combined with evidence based medicine years ago. You are pretty much getting someone who can give you a nice massage and all the benefits therein combined with real medical knowledge. Its like having a Doctor who used to be a PT or something of that nature at best. If they claim it can do much more than that, it is non-sense.
Many DOs never even use OM after they get their medical license. Their med schools even tell you that you don't have to use it if you don't trust it.
As for your son, how do you know how a normal MD would have treated him if you never took him to one. That like saying Thanks goodness X was elected, there is no telling how Y would have messed things up. That is not logical at all. Also, PTs have a lot more techniques than just back rubs. I have seen them employ some of the exact same techniques as the intro manipulation I was taught. How do you know that a MD or PT would not have done the same exact thing and taught him the exact same exercises if you never went to one?
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)When have you ever heard of a medical doctor -- not an osteopath or a chiropractor -- doing a spinal adjustment? Even though medical school doesn't train them to do them?
I know what a regular MD would have done. He would have started out by ordering an X-ray.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)Cause you know...PTs do spinal manipulation too, the type that has been proven effective by science based medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_therapist#Effectiveness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinal_manipulation
The type that doesn't make unsupported claims to do things it has never done.
Not to mention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_medicine
But I will give DOs this, they are at least trained enough in real medicine (or at least they should be) to avoid seriously hurting anyone.
How do you know that a regular MD would have done an X-ray...since you never even saw a regular doctor? And what do you have against X-rays? DOs also use X-rays you know!
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)was caused by referred spinal pain? Most likely, he would have done a heart work-up, since the chest pain started during a basketball game.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)By examining the boy.
First thing Doctors and DOs do is create a SOAP note...which means asking questions and doing an exam. Do you really think MDs have never heard of referred pain before?
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)That isn't taught in medical school.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)And if that particular doctor is not a rehab doctor then they can send you to a PT.
We been over this already and can finish later on today:
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)in that practice, I'm sure none of them -- including our regular doctor, who is a dear friend now -- would have been immediately able to do what the DO did.
Being able to send a patient to a PT is not the same as being able to do a procedure yourself. And that would be unlikely to happen without some sort of test, like an x-ray. Or, with chest pain, maybe an electrocardiogram.
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)And AGAIN, you don't know what a MD would or would not have done as you did not take him to one. Further, why on earth would a MD send a YOUNG, physically active basketball playing teenage to get an electrocardiogram before preforming an exam and eliminating more likely and mundane diagnosis?
Does your family have a history of heart disease hitting at Young ages? Does he have a conditions like Marfan's syndrome? If so, then the DO is the one being negligent, if not why would they instantly think heart problems when it could have been a pulled muscle, heart burn, acid reflux, etc...
AGAIN, you don't know cause you didn't take the kid to a MD...
And did they not have any sports doctors (ie physicians of physical medicine and rehabilitation...the very type trained to do what you said MDs are not trained to do) at the game?
Orrex
(63,208 posts)Haven't you been reading?
LostOne4Ever
(9,288 posts)MD are morons who never heard of referred pain and don't know about PTs either. Chest pain, especially in a teenage, has to be heart problems even if there is no family history of it. A doctor would never think of other things like referred pain or acid reflux or the numerous other things it could be...
Obviously they were all playing minesweeper instead of taking notes in class.
Orrex
(63,208 posts)And they never under any circumstances touch the patient or ask her how she's feeling.
no_hypocrisy
(46,089 posts)I want to cry in relief. She cares about me and getting me better. She listens to me, asks me questions, and doesn't hustle me out of the office. I wouldn't trade her for anything.