Osteopatic doctors?

My goodness, dys. My son is an osteopath. Most of them, like any doctors, are excellent. They know all the stuff that an MD knows and more. By all means, go and see a DO. They practice homeopathic medicine. In other words, they don't just treat the symptoms, but the whole person. Hey, buddy. Ask me any thing you'd like to know....

And another thing. They (at least my son was)are fantastic diagnosticians.

Depends on the jurisdiction. I know that in Michigan, a good osteopath is at least the equal of a good g.p. In other jurisdictions with different regulatory requirements, not so equal. In Canada they can't be licensed to practice as physicians. Here, they are considered to be health professionals instead of health practitioners.

Definitely worth checking out - as a good osteopath, in a tight jurisdiction, can be a very good option.

In Germany (and most of Europe), most (if not all) osteopaths aren't medical doctors but nonmedical practitioner or physiotherapist - Mrs Walter is going to the latter (and paying the therapy by herself, because it isn't paid by the health insurance).

ehBeth. When we were camping, a woman from Canada saw the DO caduceus on the rear window of our RV, and came to talk to us about it. She left with a different perspective of the DO in America. I realize that in parts of the world, DO's are equated with chiropractors, and that is a giant mistake. Although many still do the manipulative thing, most do not, because it takes a lot of time. The AMA does NOT like any competition in this country, and it took a while for them to begrudgingly accept the Osteopathic doctor. It came about when the DO's got together and opened a clinic in California. The MD's wanted to have privileges, sooooo, they saw the green, and you can guess the rest.

The main thing is to evaluate your doctor, whichever, and decide for yourself. There are, as I told dys, good and bad in both cases.

The quality of the practice varies so much by jurisdiction, even within the U.S., Letty.

In Ontario, they do not even have the status of a chiropractor. There are no regulations on osteopaths here, as they are not accepted as medical practitioners. There is no college for self-regulation. They are not as well qualified as massage therapists in this jurisdiction, who must have at least 3 years of post-secondary education and be licensed in the jurisdiction they practice.

I always recommend to people that they look to the College which is in charge of registration and regulation in the particular jurisdiction. As we've both noted, quality varies greatly.

It's quite a maze to wander through, when you're trying to assess health professionals and health practitioners.

ok gosh and thanks for the clarification I am now more confused than ever

My first choice is always an osteopath. In my experience they have a much better bedside manner than MDs and do a very thorough job. In the U.S. they are equal to MDs in professional recognition.

sounds like it absolutely depends on where you are. since you're in the US, seeing a DO will be almost exactly the same as seeing an MD. they are licensed by 2 different boards to do EXACT same procedures etc. the difference is in the training philosophy. i'd hesitate to label it "homeopathic" simply because there are "homeopathic" docs without real medical licenses. osteopaths are taught the same anatomy, pharmacology, etc as allopaths (MDs) but they also learn something called "osteopathic manipulative medicine" which involves things they do with their hands to help the patients body heal itself (pretty cool stuff). you will find that most don't practice that as much, especially with time contraints in their practices, so the bottom line is if you hadn't seen the letters after the name you wouldn't know if you were seeing an MD or a DO. don't hesitate in the least to select one as your GP.

well, I am making my first appointment tomorrow morning, I will give it a go.

My regular doctor is a DO, dys. He's also been on the State Medical Review Board with other DOs and MDs for many years. He's highly qualified. When he recommends specialists, he refers me to MDs and DOs interchangeably. All hospitals here accept both equally.

I have found my DO to be more interested in the cause of my problems than in simple treatment for the problems. For instance, my hubby once had trouble with his knees...a lot of pain. If he had gone to an MD, I feel sure their first course would have been to take xrays. But the DO asked him a bunch of questions first and found out that he had recently bought a new pair of boots. Even though they were the same brand he'd always bought, the doctor could tell it was affecting his walk just by watching him walk down the hallway. He told hubby to either stop wearing the boots, or wear them exclusively for the next 10 days, and his knees would adjust to them. And so they did.

In other words, I've found his approach to be more well-rounded than most MDs I've dealt with whose first option seems always to be drugs and/or surgery. Of course, when those are warranted, he prescribes/recommends the best.

Good luck tomorrow morning. I hope you find someone who spends some time talking to you. That is crucial.

having said that, there are DOs with awful bedside manner and MDs that are fantastic at listening and considering the whole person

A little late, but dys...My personal physician for 20 years...a DO. I trust him. He cares about me. He gives me free samples when I can't afford the medicine. I was leery at first but DO's and nurse practitioners are a godsend for the economically challenged.

well I am now convinced that MDs and DOs are pretty much alike, when I called this morning to confirm my appointment the only question I got was "how do you intend to pay for this?"

There you go! Assimilation happens quickly in our society.

You should have retorted with, "How do you intend to pay for your malpractice insurance?"

hope it went well, and that you and the D.O. will have long and happy lives together !

Hmmmm.... so, how does a DO compare with a chiro?

A chiropractor is not authorized to prescribe medications, whereas an osteopath is. An osteopath has a level of education that is comparable with an MD, whereas a chiropractor doesn't. A chiropractor is basically involved in spinal manipulation, whereas an osteopath may become involved in the same specialties as an MD


http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos071.htm

http://www.osteopathonline.com/osteopat2.htm

LOL!!