From Ms H. Neill
SIR,—I was intrigued to read of the Science Committee's agreement to ask the Education Committee to consider the inclusion of new topics as part of the recommended pharmacy undergraduate syllabus (PJ, November 20, p815). Of particular interest were the areas of genomics and gene technology. As a third-year pharmacy student, there is a feeling of trepidation yet also excitement over what the future holds for our profession.
As the risk of sounding clichéd, particularly as the millennium approaches, this next century should greatly expand the boundaries of medical and pharmaceutical science.
The current stockpile of medicines has evolved from the days when man first realised the power of opium alkaloids. These drugs, while undoubtedly valuable, do not hold the key to treating, or even curing some of today's most elusive diseases. Complacency is the biggest threat to pharmacy's evolution.
The 21st century will provide both innovative and powerful treatments. By harnessing the human body's own physiological mechanisms, eg, the use of lymphokines as possible cancer treatments, we can potentiate the body's own healing response.
Generic engineering is an indispensable technology which is already readily utilised, but is not yet exhausted. It is, therefore, imperative that the pharmacists of the future are educated on these fundamental subjects. What is the point of millions of pounds being invested in developing and producing new therapeutic techniques if pharmacists, the experts on dosage forms, cannot effectively advise other medical professionals on their use?
Pharmacy as we know it is due to undergo a significant transformation in the coming decades. We must, therefore, possess the knowledge to implement tomorrow's therapies, and targeting undergraduates is a good place to start.
Helen Neill
Third-year Pharmacy Student, Liverpool John Moores University