Actually, nowadays an osteopath, in most states, must meet the requirements of any other MD medical training.  In addition, they recieve some training in the classical osteopathic treatment.

What I don't like about osteopaths is that they often don't do osteopathic manipulation, which I believe has some significant basis in patient care.

In some parts of the country, DOs work just like MDs.  DOs have their own specialty training (e.g. in surgery, anesthesiology).  I myself have seen osteopaths for treatment.

Chiropractors have their own value.  HOWEVER, there are too many different philosophies of chiropractic.  Traditional chiropractic manipulation has an important place in the care of patients, but some of the hokey nutrition, crystals, etc. stuff that some of them do doenot make sense to me, scientifically.  A minor change in your urinary or stool mineral levels does not have a significant meaning in terms of diagnosing or treating a disease.  Minerals in the body, more than 200, interact with more than 2000 different proteins and levels change from microsecond to microsecond.  The combinations are just too many, millions, to determine if they have a significant effect.

Once again, my own opinion.  I see osteopaths and I see chiropractors and I see MDs.  A "good" doctor is a good doctor. (Just try to find a good doctor!)

DancingDoc