Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:29, 16 November 2005

Osteopathy is a medical body that includes physicians practicing in all fields of medicine.

All this means to me is that it has gained official recognition. It doesn't tell me what it is or how it's different from "standard" Western medicine (or similar to it). Also, how does it relate to chiropractic?

This article doesn't say anything, and as such, is properly a candidate for deletion. But I'd rather it get finished. Please, someone answer my questions above. --Uncle Ed 21:45 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

Osteopathy originally strictly used manipulative techniques for correcting somatic abnormalities thought to cause disease and inhibit recovery. However, over the past century, osteopathy has come to embrace the full spectrum of medicine.

If that's not "saying something," then I don't know what it is. Would you prefer it to say, "now it utilizes a combination of manipulative techniques, drugs, and surgery?" The article also says where the movement came from, who founded it, and where its schools are. Now there are opinions as to whether the osteopathic approach is superior to the traditional M.D. approach or not, and I'm certainly of the belief that it is, but that's not NPOV, so it doesn't belong in there.

An osteopath can do absolutely everything that an M.D. can, and very nearly everything that a chiropractor can (my understanding, as I was told by my late father, who was an osteopath, is that osteopathy inspired chiropractic). And I don't think "gained" recognition is a good use of words; my grandfather was practicing osteopathy before World War II and nobody ever questioned whether he was a doctor. He just delivered babies and prescribed medicine like anyone else. The difference between going to him or the M.D. across town was that if your back hurt, Dr. Ralph would probably put you on his table and pop your back rather than telling you to take aspirin. Dave Farquhar 22:17 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks, Dave, I think it's getting better -- especially with your latest additions. I look forward to working with you further. :-) --Uncle Ed 22:49 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

There was a big fight in California in the late 1950s over whether osteopaths would be fully licensed as doctors. California passed some law that pretty much screwed over the osteopaths, requiring them to go back to medical school, as in M.D. school, to take stuff they'd already taken. At least, that's how I remember it. I was pretty young at the time. But the point is that there was struggle and conflict over D.O.s getting fully licensed in every state. jaknouse 01:51 Mar 26, 2003 (UTC)

Do M.D.s call themselves allopaths? As far as I can tell, "allopathic" is a term used by homeopaths and alternate practitioners to describe standard modern medicine, not a term it uses for itself. As such, saying that an MD "is properly called" an allopath is misleading at best: it's not a term used commonly or by the doctors themselves. Vicki Rosenzweig

I grew up in an Osteopathic family. We always called them allopaths. After all, Osteopaths are "medical doctors" just as much as M.D.s. jaknouse 03:31 Mar 26, 2003 (UTC)

Jaknouse is mostly correct about the instance in California. Only it wasnt a law passed by Californa to limit osteopathic practice rights rather it was a move by the AMA to absorb osteopathic medicine. They offered osteopaths the option to switch their degree from DO to MD for a mear 60$ membership fee. They did not have to go back to school.

I'm a current 1st year student at TUCOM. We've spent a great deal of time learning the history, theory, etc. of osteopathy, and will continue to do so. I made a few minor changes (e.g. - updating the # of osteopathic schools to 23 to reflect current numbers) and would be glad to contribute in the future. I believe that MDs tend not to call themselves allopaths only because they tend to follow the assumption that anyone who is "Doctor" is an allopathic doctor. However, the wording is perfectly correct. An MD is as much an allopath as a DO is an osteopath. Both terms are quite specific. --SargonZ 08:20, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

MDs tend not to call themselves allopaths because "allopath" is a perjorative term invented by Samuel Hahnemann, homeopathist, who used it to characature the practices of physicians. The term is not properly applied to todays practitions: standard medicine has never paid allegiance to an allopathic principle. - Nunh-huh 08:27, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, I stand corrected. It amazes me how much politics influences medicine. In my idealistic brain, it seems the two should be unrelated. --SargonZ 16:43, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It would be nice wouldn't it? In New Jersey it's now illegal to give certain people flu shots.....<g> - Nunh-huh 00:55, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

One of my colleagues forwarded me an article that I thought might be useful, either as a source or as a link; it seems to present a relatively clear, mostly unslanted view of osteopathy. It is aimed at pre-med students, but I think the information in it could be useful to all. I'll leave it up to y'all to decide what to do with it. Kaplan page on Osteopathy - SargonZ 20:39, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

osteopathic profession outside the USA

I have edited this page a little to widen the perspective, osteopathy has developed differently outside the USA. I am an osteopath that trained in the UK and have worked in the Uk & NZ.

When I havd time I shall add a section on the osteopathic paradigm and the philosophies that profession applies in clinical reasoning and treatment regimes.

AntaineNZ

Visceral Osteopathy

I've edited some modifications on this section since the author made some self-advertisement for his website and the information given was false and misleading. The author has been under investigation by the General Osteopathic Council for illegal use of the title "Osteopath" in the UK and illegal practice in this country. Alain Guierre DO(UK)

Criticism?

Isn't there usually a section for criticism? The word "critics" appears only once in the entire article, and this is a highly controversial practice!

This seems incredibly slanted to me at present, comes off as more of an advertisement than a critical analysis of both sides of the issue. If you can't see it in the text I think the inclusion of the pejorative Osteopath term "allopath" proves it's not exactly getting input from both sides.