General Discussions > Skepticism / Science Talk
Osteopathic Medicine
sakuma:
There were a couple other threads on this topic but I really wanted to start a discussion concentrated on whether or not there should be "Osteopathic Medicine." I should preface that this only refers to the American definition of DO.
This isn't designed to be the place to discuss whether DOs are quacks or if they are comparable to MDs. It has been discussed many times in this forum, on science-based medicine, on wikipedia, and on many other sources.
Osteopathic Medicine is like Alternative/Complimentary/Integrative Medicine in the sense that the modifier to the word "Medicine" suggests that it is another form of medicine, but medicine is a broad category that refers to all scientific healing and anything that is non-scientific can't be medicine. If their are components of osteopathy that are not used by allopathic medicine but they are scientific they should be adopted. If there are components osteopathy that don't work they should be rejected from the discipline. If both of those points are true, then the professions are the same and there should only be one discipline of medicine and only one type of medical doctor.
Thoughts? Disagreements?
Xptical:
--- Quote from: sakuma on Apr 25, 2012, 11:55:04 PM ---If both of those points are true, then the professions are the same and there should only be one discipline of medicine and only one type of medical doctor.
Thoughts? Disagreements?
--- End quote ---
I agree with this statement *so* much. If you want to practice medicine, then go to medical school. A "real" medical school. I really don't understand how homeopaths get away with what it is they do. Arrest the bastards and throw their asses in jail for practicing without a license.
Same for chiropractic, Chinese medicine, faith healing, and all those other things. Hell, if a preacher tells members to pray for someone's health, throw his ass in the slammer.
drizz:
You say you don't want to talk about whether osteopaths are quacks but that argument is key to the rest of your post. If they are quacks, they should be treated as such. If not, their practices should be integrated into the body of knowledge that we call medicine and there should never be such a thing as an osteopathic doctor.
As it stands, they are quacks, performing unscientific treatments. Any scientifically legitimate treatments they administer are by accident and not through any devotion to logic and evidence.
Chew:
Very recent news: Amputee patient sues osteopath who provided holistic treatment
drizz:
--- Quote from: Chew on Apr 26, 2012, 08:56:26 AM ---Very recent news: Amputee patient sues osteopath who provided holistic treatment
--- End quote ---
So I guess "go home and take a nap" is not one of the osteopathic practices that should be integrated into real medicine?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version