Results 1 to 14 of 14
Scripting by Pharmacists
  1. #1
    Miles is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    330

    Default Scripting by Pharmacists

    With the plethora of prescription drugs available for virtually every known medical condition, how can a physician be expected to keep up with what is new in the market? Wouldn't a new paradigm be appopriate here? I.e., let the physician diagnose, and the pharmacist prescribe.

    Or, better yet, in a truly "free society," why shouldn't these drugs be available to anyone w/o a prescription? Such was the free market model before the onset of the therapeutic state!

  2. #2
    jaserell is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Although the pharmicists do have it over the drs. in knowing more about the drugs, the docs do have a book called a PDR in which they could look up and get a full description on all the drugs before they prescripe. I am a pharmacy technician and have found this way has worked well since the begining of pharmacy. The Docs and the Pharmacists do discuss situations out over the phone if need be.

    Ellaine Janicki

  3. #3
    Miles is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    330

    Default

    But the doc-pharmacist dialog is merely an extra step in the process and to a degree contributes to the high cost of healthcare. As a Pharm Tech, you probably have access to an on-line PDR. Most docs do not have the time nor staff to spend wading through that tome. I simply don't understand the current paradigm... unless it reinforces the covetous sanctity of the physician.

  4. #4
    kellrx is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    75

    Default

    A "truly free society" sounds like someone who thinks illegal drugs should be legal. This is a free society. Doctors and pharmacists do what we do and we are the only ones who dispense medication for a reason. Unless you had any slight clue of your illness or disease, you wouldn't know what you were taking, if it was safe for you, and people would be dropping dead every where. Every thing has a due process for a reason, in the case of medicine, it is safety and efficacy. And being a free society, you have the right and privilage of going to a doctor and pharmacist and buying that medication.

  5. #5
    Miles is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    330

    Default

    In a truly "free society," the drugs dispensed by pharmacists would be legal w/o a prescription. The prescribing doctor and the pharmacist are nothing more than agents of the coercive State. Prior to the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1914, there was no need for a prescription. When it comes to prescribing drugs, the medical community in the USA has sold the American public a line of tripe about the efficacy and safety of their role in drug dispensing and usage.

    Thank you for insulting the American public, Kellrx. I do believe we have enough intelligence, given a new paradigm, to determine what medications are proper and efficacious for us. It certainly does not seem like the FDA is doing a very good job of it.

    You write, "This is a free society." If it is indeed free, why don't I have such choices available to me? Why do I have to defer to the therapeutic state?

  6. #6
    lordnine is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I would agree with you only because of Darwin-esc world we would be in if there was no regulation of prescription drugs. Basically our only benefit would be the morons who would go the pharmacy get as many narcotics, etc. as possible that would hopefully overdose and die. With out such regulation a good portion of people would just skip the doctor visits all together and go straight to the pharmacy to get whatever medication they think would work for them. Which would end in disaster for most of the population...but survival of the fittest would prevail in such a case. There are plenty rules and regulations put upon us that I am opposed to and may even agree with you on but I definitely support the regulation of prescription drugs.

    Kyle - Pharmacy Tech and Rockstar!

  7. #7
    Miles is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    330

    Default

    But Kyle, going to the doctor, requiring a scrip, etc.... none of this was necessary prior to enactment of the Harrison Narcotic Act. Have we become that much wackier as a nation? Given proper information, I would like to think that the American public could choose what therapies work for them. Don't sell us short.

    In the therapeutic state, virtually every human problem appears to be a disease and every remedy for it is viewed as a treatment. The result is that democracy, limited government, and the rule of law are replaced by "pharmacracy," unlimited government, and the rule of medical discretion. As in a theocracy, where people are obsessed with religion and perceive all manner of human problems as religious in nature and therefore susceptible to religious remedies, so in a pharmacracy, people are obsessed with medicine and perceive all manner of human problems as medical in nature and therefore amenable to medical remedies.

    Thus, taking drugs not prescribed, or at least recommended, by a physician appears to be a disease and a public health problem, requiring medical treatment and prevention as well a legal deterrence. A 6-year-old in Colorado has been suspended from school under the school system's zero-tolerance drug policy. The drug? Organic lemon drops.

    Americans are longing for a government that will protect them from responsibility -- not only for their own health and healthcare -- but also from the behaviors that make them ill, literally or figuratively.

    Pandering to this longing, politicians tell people they have a "right to health"; assure them that their personal, marital, economic, racial and political problems are "no-fault diseases"; promise them a "patients' bill of rights" and an America free of cancer, free of drugs, free even of aging, disability and death.

    An old American proverb warns: "Protect me from my friends, I will take care of my enemies." A foe that threatens to harm you is easy to resist. A friend eager to help you -- even though you could, if you tried hard enough, help yourself -- poses a more subtle danger. Therein lies pharmacracy's threat to individual liberty and personal responsibility.


  8. #8
    lordnine is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    53

    Default

    My problem even today is that I feel people may be a little quick to use medication. The biggest issue I have is in regards to parents giving their kids Adderall, Concerta, etc. for ADD or ADHD. I feel that most parents are using it as a crutch for lack of parenting skills and/or responsibility. Kids are pretty active by nature and if they have a parent that doesn't feel like dealing with that its time to go to the doctors and get some meds to calm this kid down. Now there are plenty of children and such who legitimately need these types of medication. Of course there are many other types of medications that I feel are being overused but I am just using those as an example. This is my opinion of course but I'm also sure I'm the the only one who feels that way.

    Kyle - Pharmacy Tech and Rockstar!

  9. #9
    kellrx is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    .
    Posts
    75

    Default

    Well, Miles, I am not insulting the public because, for example, ephedrine products, which were not FDA regulated, were available over the counter and people, who according to you, should have been fine taking them all by themselves, but then claimed the have developed heart problems or people died. Maybe you are smart enough to decide what you can take and not take but a huge-- and I mean huge--- percentage of the population does not know what is good or bad for them and wouldn't know how to find out, I'm a pharmacist, I see hundreds of people who have no idea. If you leave it up for Drs to diagnose and Rph's to script, you're really not cutting out any steps are you? And if you did leave it up to the Rph's or no rxs needed for anything, in society today that would never work. Thanks all of the money-hungry and sue-crazy people and lawyers in this free society who can freely sue whomever whenever they want, it is they who force us to regulate anything to begin with. Thanks to them you're truly free society, which yes we are, go to a communist country if you don't believe me, can never be because everyone wants to blame someone else for everything. And as awful as you think it sounds, too many people, when left to their own devices, will not listen to reason or research as someone like yourself might. That is why regulations and restrictions and laws came to be in the first place.

  10. #10
    JaTT is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    6

    Default

    lordnine if your a pharmacy technician? how much $ do u make per hour and which country do you live in?

  11. #11
    lordnine is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    53

    Default

    I live in the USA and definitely not as much as the pharmacists make haha

    Kyle - Pharmacy Tech and Rockstar!

  12. #12
    Odus is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    6

    Default

    kellrx should have paid closer attention in history 101. it is common knowledge, even among novice history buffs, that prohibition of "drugs" was the direct result of a sudden influx of immigrants into this country (america). granted the rhetoric was delivered to the masses by religious zealots (some who believed what they were saying and many who were paid to join the band) which made it easier to stomach. however, this does nothing to change the fact that when substantial numbers of chinese began settling on the west coast, opium smoking became "the scourge of mankind". when too many mexicans (according to the local wasp population) moved across the border, marijuana became "the scourge of mankind". do we see a pattern here? the harrison act, of 1914, was nothing more than a group of greedy rich white men actively seeking to control markets on an international level. i have nothing against capitalism, but this was not capitalism. the "pure food and drug act of 1906" addressed the main problem with drugs (specifically a problem caused by greedy rich white men who sold patent medicine). after patent medicine companies could no longer sell morphine and cocaine under benign names like "pain-away" and "headache soother", nothing more was needed. as long as the ingredients are plainly labeled in specific amounts, it is up to the individual to decide whether or not he/she takes the drug. any attempt that has ever been made, throughout recorded history, to restrict or prohibit mind-altering substances has had the same result. first, and foremost, it automatically (and instantly) creates a substantial population of criminals out of regular people, who would otherwise never commit a crime. second, and at least as bad but far more dangerous, it creates a huge criminal enterprise consisting of people who would be criminals anyway but would never see the enormous profits they do by providing illegal mind-altering substances. remember, kellrx, the mafia was nothing more than a few italian hoods extorting money from fellow immigrants...UNTIL PROHIBITION!!! of course, the money provided by the short prohibition of alcohol changed the mafia from a few hoods to an international criminal organization of many, many, thousands of REAL criminals that exists to this day.

    unfortunately it is too late to turn back now. profits generated by illicit drugs are bigger than the top one hundred fortune 500 companies profits, combined. various branches of the u.s. government have financed coups, strikes, contract killings, civil wars, and a plethora of pain and suffering, with the profits made by complicity in the drug trade. hell, some governmental agencies have gone so far as to import illicit drugs themselves to maximize profits; of course this was done "for the good of americans". after realizing the vast numbers of americans who would lose their jobs, on just the interdiction side of the illicit drug trade, there is no way this country could now do the right thing and stop making these evil people (ala pablo escobar) richer than god by ceasing prohibition. any thinking person can come to no other conclusion. after researching the subject, and finding that far fewer people had "drug problems" prior to addictive drugs becoming illegal, even the bible-totin' do-gooders would be forced to admit prohibition has not been a good thing for this country. indeed, it has hastened the downfall of america. safety and efficacy? i think not. obscene profit and total control? no doubt about it.


    odus, the evil republican

  13. #13
    Miles is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA.
    Posts
    330

    Default

    Well stated Odus! Your point about the Chinese and opium is insightful. And remember too... the Chinese were out-working and outperforming their American counterparts during that period... ergo, no more opium! The irony in all this is undeniable... the modern day prohibition against certain "illegal" drugs, yet the proliferation of the therapeutic state. Drugs... we loathe them yet love them.

  14. #14
    randyis714 is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    2

    Default Lol.... You JUST GOTTA LOVE THIS!!

    [QUOTE=Miles;82419]But the doc-pharmacist dialog is merely an extra step in the process and to a degree contributes to the high cost of healthcare. As a Pharm Tech, you probably have access to an on-line PDR. Most docs do not have the time nor staff to spend wading through that tome. I simply don't understand the current paradigm... unless it reinforces the covetous sanctity of the physician.. " Well said Miles!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22