The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 272 No 7289 p281
6 March 2004

This article
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF 100K, Acrobat Reader

· Thalidomide
· Retention fee
· Community pharmacy
· Which? report
· CPD
· Ramipril
· Canesten Combi
· Careers supplement
· The Journal

Letters to the Editor

Ramipril

We should give manufacturers the benefit of the doubt

From Mr M. M. Alam, MRPharmS

Like so many other pharmacists I, too, read the letters in the PJ (25 October 2003, p578, 1 November 2003, p612 and 20/27 December 2003, p841) about the transition of Tritace capsules to tablets. At first I was dubious as to the motives for the switch (I can be as cynical as the next man), however on further enquiry I was told by Aventis the reason for the switch was “to reduce production cost in this country by bringing England in line with other European countries where tablets are the norm”.

At this time, as with so many of my colleagues, my main concern was for my customers, many of them whom are elderly and easily distressed when medication changes. Fortunately my primary care trust adviser was efficient and had already contacted my neighbouring GP with regards to formulary changes. With my staff explaining to the customers about the switch coupled with staff at the surgery changing capsules to tablets on prescriptions, plus the patient leaflet provided by the company, the transition was smooth and we managed 100 per cent conversion: all in a day’s work for us pharmacists.

The recent introduction of generic tablets and capsules onto the market further reinforces the idea that I may have been too hasty to jump to conclusions and that we should give the companies the benefit of the doubt on occasion — maybe there was a genuine reason for the changes proposed.

M. Alam
Manchester

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (CPD)
Next Topic (Canesten Combi)