I am not taking a position on this, I am just asking. When you say qualifications what are they? Like they didn’t take a single math class or they didn’t take multiple biology courses?
Generally a better GPA or more prestigious college diploma. Perhaps more research experience depending on the MD school. Most of all it’s just the fact that MD schools have been around longer and developed more of a reputation so they can pick and choose their candidates, and it’s historically been the case that when some students get rejected from MD school they will turn around and apply for DO school.
As most med schools it’s the same program, maybe a few different classes. From a courtroom perspective, there is no difference and their opinions carry equal weight; residency and specialized training after med school is what counts.
Although, medical doctors are also known to be severely lacking in skepticism and understanding of the scientific method (much like engineers), so depending on the doctor you talked to, they might actually believe it.
Source: anecdotal, but I’ve spent my entire adult life in higher ed chemistry departments taking classes with and then teaching premeds, and it’s a real thing. Med school does nothing to alleviate this, being focused as it is on basically troubleshooting a single particularly complicated and poorly designed machine.
Edit: here are a few studies that corroborate my experience, although they’re far from comprehensive ( Source 1 and Source 2)
Lol, ok. Then why do the editors at numerous medical journals and other science writers agree with me? Like this one, that concludes that medical doctors are far too quick to abandon scientific skepticism in favor of new treatments. Or this one, which argues that doctors ascribe too much importance to one-off studies. Or this one, which flat out states that doctors do not think like scientists.
Outlandish and contrived, my ass. Just because you like to believe doctors can think like scientists doesn’t make it so. If you disagree, feel free to provide sources.
Your ass, indeed. You said they severely lack an understanding of the scientific method and lack skepticism. Those are wild and ridiculous claims, and the commentaries you link do not even prove them.
Just because you think every doctor is incapable of using/understanding the scientific method does not make it so.
There are doctors who do medical research, as well as engineers, that is a fact. Not to mention the scientific method othen applies in daily practice, inherently.
There’s a difference between saying that not all MD are physician scientists and need to better apply their fundamental principles, verses claiming that doctors don’t understand the scientific method.
Just because you think every doctor is incapable of using/understanding the scientific method does not make it so.
I didn’t say every doctor. I said that doctors in general and medical education as a whole are lacking in understanding of and curriculum supporting skepticism and the scientific method.
Those are wild and ridiculous claims, and the commentaries you link do not even prove them.
Correct. They do not provide conclusive proof. But when educators and editors of scholarly journals both agree with the premise that medicine is not science and physicians do not apply proper scientific rigor in the course of their work, it’s fairly suggestive, don’t you think? Especially in the absence of any sources with claims to the contrary. After all, I’ve yet to see you provide a single source…
But while you look, you could consider these commentaries that look into the lack of fundamental science education in modern and historical medical education (Source 1, Source 2, and Source 3)
I just want to emphasize that the two studies you’ve linked to are not for US graduate DOs/MDs. One is for practicing physicians in Israel and the other in India. I would be interested to know what this looks like in the US because a large part of medical education is built around research, at least early in training. Everyone has varying aptitude and interest in research (like anything else), but you’d be hard pressed to find a US trained MD/DO who has become licensed in the last 20 years and has never done any research. It might surprise you to know that most of medicine is, in fact, evidence based which requires us to learn how to interpret said evidence. Both for when we need to make decisions about applying research to our own practice, as well as for answering patient questions about things they might’ve come across on Google, MD.
So, since my sources are fairly small focused studies, I assume you have sources that are more comprehensive, right? Because I found these after less than 30s of searching, and a couple more minutes yielded a multitude of articles and op-eds from medical and scientific journals that all agree that MDs are not scientists. Like this one. Or this one. Or this one, which talks about how physicians do not apply proper levels of scientific thinking to new treatments in
So, I think it’s safe to say that applying evidence-based research is not the same as understand the scientific method or having a healthy level of skepticism.
I think you are thinking of a chiropractor. DO’s are legitimately the same as an MD in practice. My experience working in an office with two MDs and two DOs was the DOs tend to be more personable, and the MDs feel more book smart. But they both see the same patients and do the same job in the same office.
And keep in mind my experience was just with 4 total people, so it could be just that office.
To be fair an osteopathic doctor is barely even a doctor to begin with… more like a glorified masseuse.
I was told by multiple MD holders that DOs and MDs were basically the same at this point. Were they being polite?
There are plenty of outstanding DOs and many poor MDs. But it is a fact that you need better qualifications to get into MD school.
I am not taking a position on this, I am just asking. When you say qualifications what are they? Like they didn’t take a single math class or they didn’t take multiple biology courses?
Generally a better GPA or more prestigious college diploma. Perhaps more research experience depending on the MD school. Most of all it’s just the fact that MD schools have been around longer and developed more of a reputation so they can pick and choose their candidates, and it’s historically been the case that when some students get rejected from MD school they will turn around and apply for DO school.
This is correct
As most med schools it’s the same program, maybe a few different classes. From a courtroom perspective, there is no difference and their opinions carry equal weight; residency and specialized training after med school is what counts.
Maybe.
Although, medical doctors are also known to be severely lacking in skepticism and understanding of the scientific method (much like engineers), so depending on the doctor you talked to, they might actually believe it.
Source: anecdotal, but I’ve spent my entire adult life in higher ed chemistry departments taking classes with and then teaching premeds, and it’s a real thing. Med school does nothing to alleviate this, being focused as it is on basically troubleshooting a single particularly complicated and poorly designed machine.
Edit: here are a few studies that corroborate my experience, although they’re far from comprehensive ( Source 1 and Source 2)
This comment is severely out of line and admittedly anecdotal.
That is a broad and ignorant statement that is as outlandish as it is contrived.
Hm yes outlandish and contrived, I concur.
Found the MD. /s
Lol, ok. Then why do the editors at numerous medical journals and other science writers agree with me? Like this one, that concludes that medical doctors are far too quick to abandon scientific skepticism in favor of new treatments. Or this one, which argues that doctors ascribe too much importance to one-off studies. Or this one, which flat out states that doctors do not think like scientists.
Outlandish and contrived, my ass. Just because you like to believe doctors can think like scientists doesn’t make it so. If you disagree, feel free to provide sources.
Your ass, indeed. You said they severely lack an understanding of the scientific method and lack skepticism. Those are wild and ridiculous claims, and the commentaries you link do not even prove them.
Just because you think every doctor is incapable of using/understanding the scientific method does not make it so.
There are doctors who do medical research, as well as engineers, that is a fact. Not to mention the scientific method othen applies in daily practice, inherently.
There’s a difference between saying that not all MD are physician scientists and need to better apply their fundamental principles, verses claiming that doctors don’t understand the scientific method.
I didn’t say every doctor. I said that doctors in general and medical education as a whole are lacking in understanding of and curriculum supporting skepticism and the scientific method.
Correct. They do not provide conclusive proof. But when educators and editors of scholarly journals both agree with the premise that medicine is not science and physicians do not apply proper scientific rigor in the course of their work, it’s fairly suggestive, don’t you think? Especially in the absence of any sources with claims to the contrary. After all, I’ve yet to see you provide a single source…
But while you look, you could consider these commentaries that look into the lack of fundamental science education in modern and historical medical education (Source 1, Source 2, and Source 3)
I just want to emphasize that the two studies you’ve linked to are not for US graduate DOs/MDs. One is for practicing physicians in Israel and the other in India. I would be interested to know what this looks like in the US because a large part of medical education is built around research, at least early in training. Everyone has varying aptitude and interest in research (like anything else), but you’d be hard pressed to find a US trained MD/DO who has become licensed in the last 20 years and has never done any research. It might surprise you to know that most of medicine is, in fact, evidence based which requires us to learn how to interpret said evidence. Both for when we need to make decisions about applying research to our own practice, as well as for answering patient questions about things they might’ve come across on Google, MD.
So, since my sources are fairly small focused studies, I assume you have sources that are more comprehensive, right? Because I found these after less than 30s of searching, and a couple more minutes yielded a multitude of articles and op-eds from medical and scientific journals that all agree that MDs are not scientists. Like this one. Or this one. Or this one, which talks about how physicians do not apply proper levels of scientific thinking to new treatments in
So, I think it’s safe to say that applying evidence-based research is not the same as understand the scientific method or having a healthy level of skepticism.
This is not true.
deleted by creator
I think you are thinking of a chiropractor. DO’s are legitimately the same as an MD in practice. My experience working in an office with two MDs and two DOs was the DOs tend to be more personable, and the MDs feel more book smart. But they both see the same patients and do the same job in the same office.
And keep in mind my experience was just with 4 total people, so it could be just that office.