Two Docs in the Box
October 3, 2007 10:14 PM Subscribe
What is the difference between a DO and an MD? Is one particularly suited to treat certain types of illnesses/conditions better than the other?
More schooling than anything else these days.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MD+vs+DO&btnG=Google+Search
That was my preliminary search.
posted by 6:1 at 10:31 PM on October 3, 2007
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MD+vs+DO&btnG=Google+Search
That was my preliminary search.
posted by 6:1 at 10:31 PM on October 3, 2007
My understanding from my D.O. friend is that doctors of osteopathy are introduced to more non-traditional or holistic healing practices (such as chiropractic, mentioned above). Googling seems to back that up.
He doesn't buy into that stuff much, though. He just chose D.O. because it was an easier school to get into. I don't think it was particularly easier to graduate from.
posted by solotoro at 10:50 PM on October 3, 2007
He doesn't buy into that stuff much, though. He just chose D.O. because it was an easier school to get into. I don't think it was particularly easier to graduate from.
posted by solotoro at 10:50 PM on October 3, 2007
Recognition depends on where the DO practices. For example, in Canada, DOs can only practice in Saskatchewan.
posted by acoutu at 10:53 PM on October 3, 2007
posted by acoutu at 10:53 PM on October 3, 2007
Comparison of allopathic and osteopathic medicine - a starting point for exploring this issue.
posted by splendid animal at 10:58 PM on October 3, 2007
posted by splendid animal at 10:58 PM on October 3, 2007
Best answer: Allopathy is a derogatory term coined by opponents of regular old M.D. medicine; we don't use it ourselves.
A D.O. is an "osteopath." Schools of osteopathy started off by claiming that all disease originated from the bones. They've since completely discarded these outdated, disproven theories, as any osteopath will tell you. They're taught pretty much the same curriculum that M.D.s are taught; they also learn about high and low velocity manipulations of various body parts which are a sort of medical therapeutic massage. This is something that isn't part of the M.D. curriculum.
Most D.O. graduates in the U.S. go on to regular residencies working shoulder to shoulder with MDs and often being trained by them. It's rare, though not unheard of, to see a DO outside of internal medicine or family practice. There's a perception that D.O. students are folks who couldn't get into med school the first few times around but I don't know how true that is; the ones I've known have been smart, responsible, careful docs, maybe even a bit more dedicated than the average person who just sailed through all their admissions processes.
posted by ikkyu2 at 11:40 PM on October 3, 2007 [2 favorites]
A D.O. is an "osteopath." Schools of osteopathy started off by claiming that all disease originated from the bones. They've since completely discarded these outdated, disproven theories, as any osteopath will tell you. They're taught pretty much the same curriculum that M.D.s are taught; they also learn about high and low velocity manipulations of various body parts which are a sort of medical therapeutic massage. This is something that isn't part of the M.D. curriculum.
Most D.O. graduates in the U.S. go on to regular residencies working shoulder to shoulder with MDs and often being trained by them. It's rare, though not unheard of, to see a DO outside of internal medicine or family practice. There's a perception that D.O. students are folks who couldn't get into med school the first few times around but I don't know how true that is; the ones I've known have been smart, responsible, careful docs, maybe even a bit more dedicated than the average person who just sailed through all their admissions processes.
posted by ikkyu2 at 11:40 PM on October 3, 2007 [2 favorites]
The only difference is medical school training. As ikkyu2 said, most DO's do allopathic residencies. However, DO's are generally thought of as having a more holistic approach to healing and are known to do less of "treating the symptom" than allopaths may typically do. They are known to think about whole body and whole lifestyle types of solutions. That said, DO's are the red-headed stepchildren of medicine. Their training is looked down upon (particularly by allopaths). To be fair, it is though to be (much) easier to accepted to osteopathic medical schools.
I know the above has many generalizations, but having worked in an industry with physicians of all stripes, I've learned that it's what many people say and think.
posted by sneakin at 4:57 AM on October 4, 2007
I know the above has many generalizations, but having worked in an industry with physicians of all stripes, I've learned that it's what many people say and think.
posted by sneakin at 4:57 AM on October 4, 2007
My wife's OB-GYN was a D.O. He definitely was more willing than the average doc to look at alternative treatments. He was big on chiropractic adjustments for pregnant women, and used aromatherapy in the office to maintain a calm environment. That said, he was also a top notch doctor who handled both of our high risked pregnancies that ended in C-sections.
posted by COD at 5:54 AM on October 4, 2007
posted by COD at 5:54 AM on October 4, 2007
Here's some information from an osteopathic school that explains the differences, albeit from the DO viewpoint. Here is a Wikipedia link to A. T. Still, who is considered the father of osteopathic medicine
posted by haunted by Leonard Cohen at 6:01 AM on October 4, 2007
posted by haunted by Leonard Cohen at 6:01 AM on October 4, 2007
Best answer: Allopathy is a derogatory term coined by opponents of regular old M.D. medicine; we don't use it ourselves.
It's not quite that simple; The term allopathy was coined by Samuel Hahnemann, the inventor of homeopathic medicine, to differentiate medicine that treated disease by causing effects opposite to the symptoms versus homeopathic medicine that purports to treat disease by causing effects similar to the symptoms (and I won't get into the whole dilution thing here). This was in the 1840's, so it didn't seem as nonsensical then as it does today. Although it has been used a a disparaging term, many physicians don't see it that way; it is used in many places on the AMA's own website (for example this page which incidentally shows that the AMA and the AOA work together on policy matters). Also in the 1800's there were those who thought that disease was caused by imblances in the flow of energy through the nerves; this theory gave rise to both chiropractic and osteopathic medicine. Those two groups diverged because the osteopaths were willing to incorporate new ideas, such as the germ theory, into their education and chiropractors stuck with the same theories long after science had progressed beyond them.
In the modern day in the US, while there is some perception that osteopaths are not quited as well-trained as M.D.s, the reality is that most D.O.s go on to residency training in allopathic programs and undergo the same board certification and licensure procedures as M.D.s I am on the credentials committee for our hospital and there is no difference in the way we look at the two groups.
I have worked with a number of D.O.s both as residents and faculty in our anesthesia department and many of them have been excellent physicians. In general it is hard to tell the two types of physician apart, although some D.O.s will do manipulations for musculoskeletal pain.
posted by TedW at 7:40 AM on October 4, 2007 [3 favorites]
It's not quite that simple; The term allopathy was coined by Samuel Hahnemann, the inventor of homeopathic medicine, to differentiate medicine that treated disease by causing effects opposite to the symptoms versus homeopathic medicine that purports to treat disease by causing effects similar to the symptoms (and I won't get into the whole dilution thing here). This was in the 1840's, so it didn't seem as nonsensical then as it does today. Although it has been used a a disparaging term, many physicians don't see it that way; it is used in many places on the AMA's own website (for example this page which incidentally shows that the AMA and the AOA work together on policy matters). Also in the 1800's there were those who thought that disease was caused by imblances in the flow of energy through the nerves; this theory gave rise to both chiropractic and osteopathic medicine. Those two groups diverged because the osteopaths were willing to incorporate new ideas, such as the germ theory, into their education and chiropractors stuck with the same theories long after science had progressed beyond them.
In the modern day in the US, while there is some perception that osteopaths are not quited as well-trained as M.D.s, the reality is that most D.O.s go on to residency training in allopathic programs and undergo the same board certification and licensure procedures as M.D.s I am on the credentials committee for our hospital and there is no difference in the way we look at the two groups.
I have worked with a number of D.O.s both as residents and faculty in our anesthesia department and many of them have been excellent physicians. In general it is hard to tell the two types of physician apart, although some D.O.s will do manipulations for musculoskeletal pain.
posted by TedW at 7:40 AM on October 4, 2007 [3 favorites]
To answer the second part of your question, some might say that D.O.s are well-suited to be orthopedic surgeons because of there background (and I know good orthpods who are D.O.s), but in reality the quality of your training and work ethic in terms of keeping up with your specialty have a bigger impact than which letters are after your name on how good you are in your specialty .
posted by TedW at 8:24 AM on October 4, 2007
posted by TedW at 8:24 AM on October 4, 2007
In my experience DO's pay more attention to patients in a family practice setting. But good care is about personality - you should try doctors until you find one you like. Start with DO's though. You'll thank me later.
Allopathy may be a derogatory term, but its not like MD's and their tyrannical bureaucracy didn't earn it. Do no harm apparently doesn't apply to associations of doctors.
posted by ewkpates at 10:43 AM on October 4, 2007
Allopathy may be a derogatory term, but its not like MD's and their tyrannical bureaucracy didn't earn it. Do no harm apparently doesn't apply to associations of doctors.
posted by ewkpates at 10:43 AM on October 4, 2007
Response by poster: Thanks for the responses. The reason I asked was because I recently started seeing a neurologist for migraines. There are three neuros within my medical group's practice. Two are DOs, one is an MD. The DOs are disturbingly young - like scary young - and I'm not that old, myself ;).
I saw one of the DOs first, and had a pretty bad experience with her, both in terms of personality and in how she went about treating me from a clinical standpoint. I was curious as to whether it had to do with her training, age, (in)experience or personality.
Long story short, I ended up switching to the MD, and I am a MUCH happier camper now.
Again, thanks for the clarifications and responses.
posted by dancinglamb at 2:39 PM on October 4, 2007
I saw one of the DOs first, and had a pretty bad experience with her, both in terms of personality and in how she went about treating me from a clinical standpoint. I was curious as to whether it had to do with her training, age, (in)experience or personality.
Long story short, I ended up switching to the MD, and I am a MUCH happier camper now.
Again, thanks for the clarifications and responses.
posted by dancinglamb at 2:39 PM on October 4, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by katillathehun at 10:22 PM on October 3, 2007