Login >Join Now Print  Email to a Friend  Newsletters

 

Connecticut Health Freedom
Coalition

 

HomeHomeAbout UsContact UsRallies & EventsRallies & EventsRally DetailsTerms of UsePrivacyNewslettersNewslettersNews & ViewsAHHF on CTHFCAAHF 05307SearchSite TreeContributeContributeHealthcare ForumContribute ContentsThe Issues1 ] Who Should Choose For You?2 ] Why Do Consumers Choose Natural Therapies?3 ] Who Provides These Therapies?4 ] Are You Free To Choose?5 ] Does It Pay To Be Different?6 ] Consumers Should Have The Freedom To...7 ] Practitioners Should Have The Right To...8 ] New Laws Are Essential To...9 ] What Can I Do?LibraryLibrarySearch LibraryResourcesHealthcare Freedom WebsitesIntegrative Medical AssociationsLegal & Advocacy ResourcesBook ListMembers & ArticlesMembersJoin Now
1 ] Who Should Choose For You?
2 ] Why Do Consumers Choose Natural Therapies?
3 ] Who Provides These Therapies?
4 ] Are You Free To Choose?
5 ] Does It Pay To Be Different?
6 ] Consumers Should Have The Freedom To...
7 ] Practitioners Should Have The Right To...
8 ] New Laws Are Essential To...
9 ] What Can I Do?
LibraryLibrarySearch Library

Content Detail

069 -- General News & Information

Flexner Report of 1910 

The Flexner Report is a book-length study of medical education in the United States and Canada, written by the professional educator Abraham Flexner and published in 1910 under the aegis of the Carnegie Foundation. Many aspects of the present-day American medical profession stem from the Flexner Report and its aftermath.

The Report (also called Carnegie Foundation Bulletin Number Four) called on American medical schools to enact higher admission and graduation standards, and to adhere strictly to the protocols of mainstream science in their teaching and research. Many American medical schools fell short of the standard advocated in the Report, and subsequent to its publication, nearly half of such schools merged or were closed outright. The Report also concluded that there were too many medical schools in the USA, and that too many doctors were being trained.

complete article Wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report

Contents

When Flexner researched his report, allopathic medicine faced vigorous competition from several quarters, including osteopathic medicine, naturopathic medicine, eclectic medicine, physiomedicalism, herbal medicine and homeopathic medicine. Flexner clearly doubted the scientific validity of all forms of medicine other than the allopathic, deeming any approach to medicine that did not employ drugs to help cure the patient as tantamount to quackery and charlatanism. Medical schools that offered courses in bioelectric medicine, eclectic medicine, naturopathy, homeopathy, or "eastern medicine," for example, were told either to drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and underwriting support. A few schools resisted for a time, but eventually all complied with the Report or shut their doors.

When Flexner researched his Report, the USA contained a number of medical schools training osteopathic, naturopathic, chiropractic and homeopathic practitioners. Because doctors of osteopathy (D.O.s) often had practices whose scope was similar to that of M.D.s, Flexner insisted that the training of DOs be held to the same standard as that of MDs. Osteopathic medical schools had fought hard over the years for their independence from allopathic medicine, and resented being included in Flexner's report, which concluded that the standards of osteopathic schools were in fact substantially lower. As a result of the Report, the American Medical Association (AMA) expected all osteopathic medical schools to close. Instead, through a series of internal revolutions, the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) brought a number of its schools into compliance with Flexner's recommendations.

Before the Flexner report, osteopathic and allopathic training had little in common. As a result of the Flexner report, American osteopathic medical schools today teach an evidence-based, medicalised, scientific knowledge base. The curricula of osteopathic and allopathic medical schools differ only minimally, the chief difference being the additional instruction in osteopathic schools of manipulative medicine. This dramatic convergence of osteopathic and allopathic training demonstrates the sweeping effect the Flexner report had, not only in the closure of inadequate schools, but also in the standardization of the curricula of surviving schools.

 

Library | Search Library

Go backTOPGo forward


Contribute to the Connecticut Heath Freedom Coalition
 


Terms of Use  -  Privacy Statement 

Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.
The articles posted on this website are the opinions of the authors who submitted them, not necessarily those of
Connecticut Health Freedom Coalition, Inc. Information is provided from a variety of sources that are solely responsible for content.

The information contained on this site is general in nature and is intended for use as an informational aid.
This information is not intended as medical advice or diagnosis for individual health problems
or for making an evaluation as to the risks and benefits of using a particular product.
You should consult your doctor about diagnosis and treatment of any health problems.
Information and statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration
("FDA"), nor has the FDA approved the products to diagnose, cure or prevent disease.
 Connecticut Health Freedom Coalition, Inc. shall not be held responsible for content herein.
Copyright 2006, 2007 Connecticut Health Freedom Coalition, Inc.. All rights reserved.