| · Statins
· Enhanced services
· Shipman inquiry
· Dispensing errors
· Language skills
· Pharmacy education
· Tablet identification
· TCM
· The Charter
Letters to the Editor
|
Pharmacy education
Do you want medicines developed by a bunch of arbitrary scientists?
From Ms E. Harrop, MRPharmS
Being “someone who works in a research and development laboratory”,
I would like to respond to Ms
Wakeling’s letter (PJ, 31 July, p148)
about training of pharmacists. The question keeps arising — what
is a pharmacist? There are some who like to believe that only those pharmacists
who dispense prescriptions or wander around hospitals in white coats
are worthy of using the title. Perhaps this is their lack of understanding
of the different opportunities available or the wide range of ways in
which their colleagues contribute outside the stereotypical roles.
The current pharmacy course is an eclectic mix of a variety of different
sciences and disciplines, which covers the whole sphere of drug delivery
and development, and gives a pharmacist a unique position among graduates,
to be able to converse confidently with a wide range of scientists and
health care professionals including pharmacologists, toxicologists, chemists,
nurses, microbiologists, senior consultants — the list goes on.
Although I do not legally need to be a pharmacist to do my job I have
found it brings a range of experience that, far from being a hindrance,
is actually a great asset.
I think it is short-sighted to suggest that pharmacists are not required
to be involved in the development process. Would you really want your
medicines of tomorrow developed by a bunch of arbitrary scientists or
would you prefer these advances to be made with the help of pharmacists,
who have trained in the whole pharmaceutical process but bring with them
their experiences of patient care and end user knowledge? I know which
I would rather have.
Elaine Harrop
Cropston,
Leicester
|