Allopathic usage controversy

Allopathic usage controversy refers to the controversy surrounding the modern usage of term "allopathic." Recently, the term has been increasingly used by mainstream medical associations in the United States to refer to the M.D. profession, especially when making a distinction from the osteopathic medical profession. Opponents object to this usage, calling the term inadequate, inaccurate or pejorative.

Recent revival of usage
In the United States, the term "allopathic" has recently come into common usage by the medical profession, as a means to distinguish M.D. physicians from physicians, homeopaths, naturopaths and other practitioners of alternative medicine. According to the United States Department of Labor's Occupational Outlook Handbook, "There are two types of physicians: M.D.—Doctor of Medicine—and D.O.—Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine. M.D.s also are known as allopathic physicians." The National Resident Matching Program uses a similar definition, which labels as "allopathic" any "graduate of a Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accredited U.S. allopathic school of medicine." The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education is responsible for what are sometimes referred to as the 8,200 "allopathic" residency training programs in the United States. The American Osteopathic Association also uses this distinction. In some instances, other institutions are labeled as allopathic to distinguish them from parallel osteopathic organizations, such as in the "Osteopathic and Allopathic Healthcare Discrimination Act" of Illinois.

Some authors note the recent trend towards increased used of the term "allopathic":



The response from other authors is more pointed:



Others note that the term's original meaning, a type of therapy with "effects different from those of the disease itself" bears little resemblance to any theory of medical therapy practiced by physicians today.



Some authors note that physicians "bitterly resented the name" in the nineteen and early twentieth centuries,, often citing long history of usage by critics of "regular" medicine.
 
< Prev   Next >