I think that's enough of bickering and trolling. Forget about paragraphing and who is being more childish.

Back to the topic.

0) On the issue of money (oOOoo, sensitive issue), I'm sure the feeling is mutual here for both professions. Doctors don't want to let the pharmacists have sole dispensing rights because only then can they monopolise the sales of medication, and the pharmacist wants sole dispensing rights for the very same reason as well.

To other issues.

1) Doctors claim that it is troublesome for the patient to buy medications elsewhere.
(In KL or Klang Valley, there are substaintial numbers of pharmacies, usually within 1-2 shop rows away, the pharmacists are asking for a trial in KV not on nationwide basis.)

2) Doctors claim that there are usually no pharmacist to dispense medications, instead it is handle by some shopkeeper.
(Pharmacies have at least one in-house Pharmacist, and if medications are dispensed by shopkeepers when the Pharmacist is absent, they are liable to charges in court, and Pharmacy Enforcement sees to that. Also, most pharmacies employ Pharmacy Assistants to help in simple dispensing. I'm not so sure about the lady who calls my name to collect medications all the time in my local clinic. I wonder what qualification she posses?)

3) Doctors claim that it is more cost-effective for patients to see the doctor and get their medications from them.
(Yes, bundle and sell, might be cheaper. But sometimes, doctors purchase their stock from pharmacies as well, so It's hard to say until we try it out)

4) Doctors claim that there isn't sufficient pharmacists/pharmacies to do dispensing.
(True if on a nationwaide scale. Hence, which is why a pilot test is proposed to see if it will work in areas where they are enough pharmacist/pharmacies)

5) Doctors claim that this system is not suitable in our country.
(Suitable or not, the pilot test will tell. This system is very effective in other countries. Also, the NHS system in UK may also be modeled upon to allow more pharmacist back to the private sector to do dispensing)

6) Doctors claim that generics sold in pharmacies are not good.
(Generics do possess a certain amount of efficacy before it may be marketed in our country. Although I dare not vouch that it is as good as branded originals. However, consider this situation, patient has gastric. Doctor prescribes some hi-fi losec which costs the patient some RM100 for one-weeks worth. Patient then has to scrimp and save every penny, and hence did not eat well. Thus gastric worsens. Compared to a situation where patient used generic omeprazole at RM14 for one week's worth, and gets to eat normally. You do the math.)

7) Doctors claim that there are no 24hr pharmacies.
(This, the pharmacist must start. No excuses. Being in the healthcare industry, it must be patient orientated. Anyway, pharmacies who don't offer these services might lose their competetive edge sooner or later)

8)Doctors claim that pharmacist are dispensing prescription-only-medications to patients without a prescription.
(This is true, and needs to change. Pharmacist are regulated by Pharmacy Eforcement.And Pharmacists caught doing this, should be punished heavily.)

With seperate prescribing and dispensing, what the pharmacists offer are these:

A) A system where pharmacists may counter-check prescriptions by doctors for contra-indications, drug interactions, dosing/frequency errors, etcs.

B) A more in-depth counselling with regards to medications rather the regular, "this is for hypertension, take one table once daily (full stop)" recieved in most clinics.

C) A choice of generics or branded medication, while most clinics carry only one brand of the medication. Hence visiting a pharmacy might be more cost saving.

Pharmacists are only asking for a pilot test. Why are the doctors getting so worked up for? It might not even succeed. But during the time this issue was raised by our DG of Health, newspapers are swamped with articles against this. Surely, the doctors can see pharmacists' point as well right? Or do they see point number 0 as far more important? But there are doctors who are suportive of this directive, and pharmacists do understand their limitations due to the acute lack of pharmacists nationwide, but can't both profession work hand in hand to bring a better service to patients? Doctors, think of the Hippocratic Oath. Pharmacist, think of your Medication and Ethics Module. Think Hard. Then maybe we can ditch point number 0 and work on a healthcare system which is best for patients.

Edit: Some minor grammatical errors

This post has been edited by Kain_Sicilian: Feb 20 2009, 03:24 PM

Politics and buerocracy. Sigh~ In Malaysia this will be VERY difficult. And the Pharmacist Association (known as Malaysian Pharmacuetical Society) does exist, but is weak to say the least.

Yes, regulation and enforcement of laws is one big thing to top up. To hope to implement this system in the near future is almost impossible, but one can hope. However, with the huge outcry from doctors, it seems, they (but not all) are not the least bit willing to even give this system a shot for they would not even accept a pilot test running in only a small restricted area.