Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 273 No 7324 p683
6 November 2004

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 100K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· New contract
· Medicines management
· Registration examination
· Levothyroxine
· Hiccups
· Prescription pricing
· IT
· Personal control
· Control of entry
· Supermarket pharmacies
· Retention fees
· The Society
· The Journal


Letters to the Editor

Supermarket pharmacies

Pharmacies and tobacconists should not co-exist

From Mr A. M. Brown, MRPharmS

Last week’s Journal (23 October, p591) contained a summary of the Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health’s recent report on the dangers of passive smoking, which recommends a ban on smoking in all workplaces and enclosed public places. The pharmacist’s role in promoting smoking cessation was specifically mentioned in the report.

Shortly after qualifying, when I worked as a locum, the pharmacy premises sometimes housed an off-licence, where cigarettes and alcohol were freely sold within a few feet of the dispensary area. I remember feeling uncomfortable with this and tended to decline work in those sort of shops. Nonetheless, the juxtaposition of medicines and tobacco was accepted by patients and customers alike. Indeed, patients commonly purchased their cigarettes while waiting for their Ventolin inhaler to be dispensed. Such a scenario would seem preposterous nowadays, of course. Thank goodness our Society subsequently decided to prohibit registration of premises offering for sale “any product which may be injurious to public health, or may bring the profession into disrepute”. We have long since moved away from those dark days. Or have we?

Are there not a great many outlets where a pharmacy and tobacconist co-exist under the same roof. I am thinking of the superstores, most of which seem to have a pharmacy within their premises. Surely these situations must be contrary to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s code of ethics. How has this been allowed to happen?

On the same page of last week’s Journal (p591), under the report “Boots plans to sell alcoholic drinks at Christmas”, the answer to this ethical dilemma was revealed. Our head of professional ethics explained that “supermarkets that operate pharmacies only register sections of their stores as pharmacies”, the implication being that the other sections could sell whatever they wanted, presumably including cigarettes. “The situation Boots will be getting into will be no different to the supermarkets,” she went on, reassuringly.

Come off it Society! How on earth can we be taken seriously as a health care and health-promoting profession if we allow the big boys such as Tesco, Asda and others flagrantly to play the system? Either they are worthy of having a pharmacy or they are not. If they persist in selling cigarettes, and this is “allowed” because they can “deregister” part of their premises, then the rules must be changed. Or is it that the big boys effectively “make” the rules, as in so many other walks of life?

Adrian Brown
Southport, Merseyside

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Control of entry)
Next Topic (Retention fees)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal