Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearFart
Street, this was never directed at you personally, nor am I trying to incite a social media revolution. I merely wanted to spur on an interesting discussion. You gave a very thoughtful response, and I see you as part of the solution. I have nothing but respect for my individual pharmacist colleagues whom I often work with closely, and not infrequently seek opinions from.
I also fully concede MD's aren't perfect because every profession has its warts, but your comparison of the problem to physicians is a straw man argument, and very much apples to oranges. Since you raised them, I will address your points though:
~100% of outpatient pharmacies appear to be complicit in this problem. A handful of doctors who are clearly recognized as a fringe minority represents <1% of MDs. They are openly criticised by their peers, and are not endorsed by any real medical organization for their practices.
That said, differing opinions are allowed, and the CPSA cannot withdraw/suspend their license unless they demonstrate verifiable harm or gross incompetence. These fringe docs walk a fine line which the CPSA watches very closely, and don't be surprised to see prior or eventual disciplinary action. The CMA/AMA itself is very involved with clinical practice guidelines effectively refuting questionable activities, and works alongside AHS to prevent the billing of such services. It's not perfect, but there is by no means any turning a blind eye so the industry can profit.
|
Thanks for the response.
Pharmacists do not bill public money for homeopathic preparations either. Nor can either governing body participate in thought control. That's my point. How widespread the problem is vs severity can be argued all day, but my actual point is not a strawman. The college of pharmacists can no more regulate what can be on our shelves anymore than CPSA can prevent a doctor from practicing chelation. There are ardent homeopathic supporters in pharmacy too as there are in medicine. This needs to be tackled nationally with better limits on claims, not getting a college to forbid what can be sold. Pharmacists work in the confines of what can be done. Unfortunately, most practices are in settings that have non pharmacy interests. In fact, I'd be willing to bet a good portion of upper management in all these places (grocery stores, etc) have zero knowledge of the difference between homeopathy and medicine. The team making the planograms (order of stuff on a shelf) likely never discusses this in their cubicles or has any clue. There is lots of discussion railing against the sale of these products in our profession, but the solution was never going to be in regulatory bodies. If a pharmacist wants to have a job, he has to practice in this environment or he doesn't get employed at all. The discussion needs to be bigger because you'll never see every pharmacist risk their families livelihood on this. Health Canada needs to grow some balls and ignore the lobbies of big placebo. Additionally, social media pressure against pharmacies is fine, but it's a delicate balance to call pharmacists complicit when the overwhelming majority are not.
That was the line I felt you crossed. I'm sorry if it sounded angry, but I got the sense you were suggesting this was pharmacists problem they created and had to solve and I'd have to disagree there. We're part of the solution to be sure, but the problem is much, much bigger.