what do these guys do anyway?? I mean it just seems like they read the paper, then they go and fill the bottle with pills... does this really require an advanced degree?

11/17/2005 7:43:27 PM

not a "street" phar. they just sell weed

11/17/2005 9:11:00 PM

I think they are responsible for making sure that none of your prescribed drugs have adverses effects when taken at the same time, etc.

I also think that most of the people who work as pharmacists couldn't cut it in research or just got tired of the rat race.

11/17/2005 9:13:57 PM

^a bunch of pharmacists work in research. Not the majority, but there are more than plenty. I would say about 20% of pharmacy school graduates either go to academia or industry.

11/17/2005 9:17:05 PM

Quote :

"people who work as pharmacists couldn't cut it in research "

Or med school

11/17/2005 9:18:24 PM

They make no sense at all, but like all Professions, they have made sure the system was created to protect their jobs and high pay. They systematically keep the supply of Pharmacists low and create regulations to ensure their demand.

There really is no reason that medicine couldn't come pre-packaged and dispensed by much lower skilled clerks. They could give you the printout from the computer system just as easily as the pharmacists. It's not like you actually talk to the pharmacist anyway.

This is the sort of shit that cause me not to know whether to laugh or cry every time I hear people talking about "rising medical costs." I don't really see medicine getting more expensive, I see it getting more profitable.

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 10:30 AM. Reason : ?]

11/18/2005 10:29:16 AM

^Bingo . All medical professions are like that. Why do you think UNC dental school only accepts like 45 people each year? Basic economic, supply and demand.

11/18/2005 4:41:45 PM

^^Ah, pharmacists do a lot more than that. Well, pharmacists at like a CVS or something don't do too much more than that, but hospital pharmacists do a hell of a lot of work. Mixing drugs, making sure someone dosen't give a patient two drugs that will have a bad interaction. And there is a reason why there aren't tons of doctors, etc., because it's hard work and you have to go to school for a really long time.

11/19/2005 1:23:01 PM

Quote :

"Ah, pharmacists do a lot more than that."

Right, be we aren't talking about hospital, research, and sales pharmacists.

Quote :

"And there is a reason why there aren't tons of doctors, etc., because it's hard work and you have to go to school for a really long time."

Right, but that's beside the point. You don't always need someone with that level of expertise. If I want Zyrtec for my allergies, I have to pay a doctor ~$150 for an appointment so I can get a prescription and then have the pills poured into a bottle by a clerk who makes $80k/yr. This is clearly overkill and it is created by people in the professions designing the system to profit them. I could just by the pills from Canada for $13, but that's illegal because it would short circuit their gravy train.

[Edited on November 19, 2005 at 3:30 PM. Reason : ?]

[Edited on November 19, 2005 at 3:32 PM. Reason : ?]

11/19/2005 3:27:17 PM

^dude, pharmacist have to pharmacy school for 4 years. I think $80K/year is reasonable.

11/19/2005 10:58:30 PM

has anybody implied differently?

11/19/2005 11:29:48 PM

Hey, I'm in pharmacy school. Pharmacists work in retail(Eckerds, Walgreens, etc.), hospital, consulting, industry, academia, and research. And lots of other fun shit. The reason you need a pharmacist is not for the guy with ONE presciption(ie, you!), but all those old people who are on 15 drugs and need their stuff monitored. Drug interactions, proper dosing, patient compliance, and medication counselling are all duties of a pharmacist. Techs can't do all that. Some of them think they can, but they don't have the education.

And pharmacists CAN cut it in research. But frankly, I didn't want to put up without the FDA Bullshit. I've also had some extra industrial training, but I'd rather do hospital. I like working on the sterile compounds.

11/19/2005 11:42:05 PM

Quote :

"Hey, I'm in pharmacy school. Pharmacists work in retail(Eckerds, Walgreens, etc.), hospital, consulting, industry, academia, and research. And lots of other fun shit. The reason you need a pharmacist is not for the guy with ONE presciption(ie, you!), but all those old people who are on 15 drugs and need their stuff monitored. Drug interactions, proper dosing, patient compliance, and medication counselling are all duties of a pharmacist. Techs can't do all that. Some of them think they can, but they don't have the education."

I totally reject this. Between the doctor, the computer, the insurance company, a pharmacy technician, and the patient, there is no way that this can't be accomplished without a Pharmacist. The current system is outdated and only serves to entrench Pharmacists and their income. I'm not saying that pharmacists have no place in the system, but the current system where every prescription (many for very benign drugs) has to originate from a doctor and be filled by a pharmacist is ridiculous.

The current system would make more sense if the pharmacist could actually prescribe some drugs. I see no reason why a pharmacist couldn't prescribe benign medication like allergy medicine.

11/19/2005 11:59:47 PM

Patman: I reject what you say, totally.

The Doctor: Doc's aren't trained for drugs like R.Phs are. They know SOME drugs, but not our breadth or depth.
The Computer: HAL can't fill your scripts, period. Even the "Drug Allert" software can't replace me. Or make decisions based on experience, education, and patient knowledge.
The Tech: No. Techs don't have enough training.
Insurance: Sucks. My. Nuts.
The Patient: Some patients are educated, or have enough common sense to help, but the majority of patients dont' know enough to be the kind of participant that you advocate.


And in NC some pharmacists CAN write Scripts. They're called Clinical Pharmacy Practitioners. Not a lot of them yet, but then they program only started a few years ago. Pharmacy is changing, but there is still a place for a pharmacist in the pharmacy. We can't be replaced yet.

11/20/2005 12:51:50 AM

^where do you go for pharmacy school? what year are you?

11/20/2005 1:04:59 AM

Seems like this thread is talking about a street pharmacist. Wtf is going on in here?

11/20/2005 1:05:28 AM

Quote :

"The Computer: HAL can't fill your scripts, period. Even the "Drug Allert" software can't replace me. Or make decisions based on experience, education, and patient knowledge."

It could if someone put the time and money into developing a proper solution. There is nothing that you do that can't be recreated by a team of top pharmacists and computer programmers. In fact, I'd bet the computer could do a more accurate job when you consider that it will eliminate disparities between pharmacists around the country. Just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean that it can't or won't be done.

11/21/2005 2:32:24 PM

^OK, why don't you go do it? you gonna make $texas if you can create something like that.

11/21/2005 2:52:53 PM

Because it would take an assload of money and time, neither of which I have enough of right now.

Because I don't know enough about patenting an idea, acquiring venture capital, etc.

Because, quite frankly, it would be hard as shit and while I see myself making ventures like that within my lifetime I'm not there yet. But, don't let my shortcomings trick you into thinking that it can't be done.

Corporations spend tons of money automating things to reduce the need for skilled labor. Examples of this are everywhere. The corporate world would jump at the opportunity to get rid of high paid pharmacists in every store. If the machine could cover 99% of all prescriptions then they could, in theory, have one pharmacist on duty to field questions from 100 stores. Videoconferencing, IP telephony, etc. only serve to make this concept more feasible.

[Edited on November 21, 2005 at 3:22 PM. Reason : s]

11/21/2005 3:21:04 PM

^yea, but there's law requiring the pharmacist to counsel patients. It's pretty hard to counsel patient when you can't talk to them face-to-face. I think there's also a law that requires the pharmacist to be present while the pharmacy is open for business.

11/21/2005 3:42:03 PM

^

Quote :

"They make no sense at all, but like all Professions, they have made sure the system was created to protect their jobs and high pay."

11/21/2005 5:25:17 PM

We need to pass a law that a computer engineer must be present at all times whenever computers are in use in a room.

11/22/2005 12:40:26 AM

^you can replace a computer. You can't replace a human life.

11/22/2005 1:03:14 AM

They're trying - http://www.paratasystems.com/

They're motto is "Time to get out in front"...in the picket lines.

[Edited on November 22, 2005 at 1:36 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on November 22, 2005 at 1:38 AM. Reason : ]

11/22/2005 1:33:24 AM

what do any people with any job do that can't be replaced by someone else or a computer (if time + money is endless)

11/22/2005 9:16:41 AM

It's not whether time + money are endless. It's whether time + money of a machine can be less expensive than time + money of a highly paid professional.

11/22/2005 9:27:12 AM

^you and Patman need to get together and create this machine. Then you both can go to D.C. and convince the politicians to pass the law stating that pharmacist is not needed at a pharmacy.

11/22/2005 9:43:14 AM

Laws are revised and repealed all the time, but you have yet to post any proof that such a law exists or that it doesn't have any loopholes written into it. Just like the last thread where you started making up statistics with absolutely nothing to back them up.

I'm assuming you have some vested interest in the industry since you seem to take this all so personally. You really don't give much credit to the notion that a person has some logic that can't be replicated. You see one roadblock as the reason that such a project could never be feasible. You have no vision. I'd say you'd be perfect for tasks such as opening bottles, counting pills, re-counting pills, putting pills in a bottle, capping a bottle, putting a sticker on the bottle. I wouldn't trust you with my health any more than I would trust a computer.

11/22/2005 10:01:55 AM

^lol, if you don't believe me, stop by CVS or eckerd, and ask the pharmacist there if the pharmacy is allowed to be open without the pharmacist.

11/22/2005 10:51:31 AM

Wow...

First, this thread is about street pharmacists aka drug dealers.

To be an actual PHARMACIST you have to go to school for a LONG time and do RESIDENCIES just like a doctor.

Second, you're assuming that at places like Eckerd, Walgreens, and CVS all the pharmacists do is count, cut, and label. That isn't the case. For starters they have to READ what the doctor has written (which is a task in itself) and then make sure that this is correct.

You would be surprised at how many mistakes doctors make ON A DIALY basis. Yet, the pharmacy team usually receives the brunt of the aggrivation from mistakes or wait time since they are the last people you deal with in the healthcare line.

The pharmacist also checks your medications w/your drug allergies or other drugs to make sure that what you're taking is safe. They are also there to provide healthcare information FREE OF CHARGE when your doctor is unavailabe.

These are just SOME of the things that pharmacists do.

To say that the healthcare system could function without them is simply illogical. While you're at it, why not just do away with doctors as well?

One more thing.... doctors are trained to know illness and the types of drugs to treat them. They don't however know about specific types of medication. That is the pharmacists job. Again, this pointless ramble about not needing pharmacists is obviously just an unresearched rant.

[Edited on November 22, 2005 at 1:01 PM. Reason : redo]

11/22/2005 12:59:13 PM

^agreed.

11/22/2005 1:11:48 PM

Quote :

"For starters they have to READ what the doctor has written (which is a task in itself) and then make sure that this is correct."

LOL. A lot of prescriptions are now printed out rather than hand written. There's no reason why they can't be transmitted directly from doctor to pharmacy (or some clearing house). I'm pretty sure such systems are already in place.

Quote :

"You would be surprised at how many mistakes doctors make ON A DIALY basis. Yet, the pharmacy team usually receives the brunt of the aggrivation from mistakes or wait time since they are the last people you deal with in the healthcare line."

This problem should first be addressed at the source. Why do doctors prescribe the wrong drugs? Are they incompetant? Do they think one thing and write another? This problem could be remedied with better information technology and more accountability. Secondly, there is no reason why a computer system couldn't look at what drugs a person is on, what they are prescribed, and why the medicine was prescribed and flag any concerns. This would go directly to the doctor immediately before the prescription is written.

The truth is that pharmacists interaction with patients is sporadic at best.

You can't defend the system by restating the system. The bottom line is this is an outdated system that could be improved both for better safety and lower costs.

[Edited on November 22, 2005 at 1:15 PM. Reason : ?]

11/22/2005 1:13:50 PM

Pharmacy like CVS, Eckerd only get $4 for every prescription they filled, even less for generic. That compensation minus overhead is what the pharmacist get, which probably is about $2.50/prescription. If you want to lower healthcare cost, maybe you should talk with your doctor.

11/22/2005 1:27:28 PM

Quote :

"Again, this pointless ramble about not needing pharmacists is obviously just an unresearched rant."

Since you missed this part:

Quote :

" If the machine could cover 99% of all prescriptions then they could, in theory, have one pharmacist on duty to field questions from 100 stores. Videoconferencing, IP telephony, etc. only serve to make this concept more feasible."

11/22/2005 1:41:32 PM

To be clear here, there is still a need for pharmacists in retail, just not nearly as much.

11/22/2005 2:03:02 PM

Quote :

"First, this thread is about street pharmacists aka drug dealers."

Yeah, that's why I started reading it, but shit took a way wrong turn somewhere.

12/2/2005 4:51:43 PM

If we didn't have really educated and expensive pharmacists you fucks would be bitching about how nobody cares about safety and the people at the CVS are incompetent. Ironically you people would shift the blame from the pharmacists to the drug companies and retailers for not hiring educated pharmacists, because the system doesn't cut it.

12/2/2005 5:03:49 PM