If you do not want to pay that 30 bucks, you can always pay nothing and consult the stranger on the street. Or may be the cleaner about your diabetes? Or the taxi driver for your heart condition?

But if you want to consult someone with many years of hard study and money (RM1 million if overseas) in university about human disease/sickness, you will have to pay that 30 bucks. In other word, you should pay for his knowledge. There is no free lunch in this world.

how long is the problem....it have been 20 years man...Why the hell doctor wants to take all the duties?i think alot of them worry about their children as most the GREEDY doctor will definitely push their kids to be doctor and continue to earn...some even unethically...
i really hope that malaysia will act liek the UK NHS system which everybody plays their own role...In malaysia the doctor wants take the most profits..then become so rich..then the youngster will lure to become one not for the passion to medicine but for the money more....so dissapointed with the healthcare system.Or as usual we have to wait singapore do it first then we follow like a little puppy...

due to our country mostly doctor dispense therefore they ask cheaper price from the manufacterer...tharefore...they got it at much lower cost compare to pharmacist...but pharmacist still try to sell it cheap...now you know how hard to run a pharmacy business...and also the doctor tend to sell generics which have a high profit margin...not cheap = he earn less de...

while in other countries pharmacists are starting to apply for PRESCRIBING rights, in Malaysia they dun even have DISPENSING rights yet. a total joke..and as long as Datuk and MB's sons and daughters are being sent overseas for medicine program, i dont think it will change in the near future..

You just some of the very reason why separation of dispensing is desirable: safety.

The role of a pharmacist, if he is doing his job properly, is to spot medication mistake. Based on university training, the doctor are expert in diagnosis whereas the pharmacist are expert in medication. They are supposedly to complement each other for  the sake of SAFETY. Not unless you think doctor are not human and can make no mistake.

And since there are no free lunch in this world, extra safety procedure do cost money. That is one of the very reason why doctor are given sole privilege of diagnosis. Otherwise, the bomoh cost far less money.

---

Added on December 3, 2008, 10:12 pm

The intangible valued added is called patient SAFETY.

What you are paying for from the doctor is his knowledge. Same for the pharmacist. And since knowledge in both cases is intangible and transparent, of course you do not see anything physical value.

---

Added on December 3, 2008, 10:15 pm

That is why we remain a 3rd world country with 3rd world mentality.

The purpose you just described are:
1. The doctor has sole right to diagnosis and to see there are no changes in your diseased state. This is a safety issue.
2. The pharmacist make sure you go through Step 1 to make sure safety procedure are being followed.

You have to pay because in developed country, life are precious.

---

Added on December 3, 2008, 10:17 pm

AFAIK, no profession or tradesman work for free.

Wrong. Nowadays, doctors tend to consult the pharmacists first before making decision on drug selection, well, at least in Melaka GH and Muar Hospital.

First of all, i apologise for using the word "prescribing" wrongly. What i meant was "dispensing". Was multi-tasking when replying the post last night.

2. Re
3. Error caught by pharmacists? Evidence pls. My head of department for medicine once told me that pharmacists in private practice tend to change the prescription to newer medications without giving prior notice to the treating doctors. As i have mentioned before, certain diseases require conventional medications. For those pharmacists here, i am sure you guys tend to recommend newer medications belonging to the same group as the conventional ones. However in medical field, newer not necessarily means better.
In a hospital setting, doctors tend to consult pharmacists before prescribing, due to the fact that both doctors and pharmacists are on the same team. In hospital, medications are indeed dispensed by the pharmacists. Therefore, the issue of inconvenience for the patients does not arise.

i think you are talking about the system in m`sia, so ill go with that assumption. error not caught by pharmacist because there isnt a proper system in place and changing medication without consulting doctors and getting another prescription is not legal. older and newer drugs even within the same class dont mean similar side effects(se's) or less(but usually less)


However in private practice, for example you get prescription from a clinic, and then again have to rush to the nearest pharmacy to get the medication. Isn't it troublesome? Imagine if there's no pharmacy near by. Mind you, our system is totally different than that of UK. So we have the change to whole health care system before making it convenient for the patients if the dispensing right lies with the pharmacists.
 
In addition, as i have mentioned before, the biggest hindrance for such change is the lack of pharmacists in Malaysia. You can google and see. The number of pharmacists in Msia is much less than that of doctors. When we do not have enough pharmacists in our country, how can we give them the dispensing right?

its a chicken and egg thing. if there is no system and push for a standard, why would people want to study for such a long time(5 years mind you if you do it in malaysia) and then do a 3 year gov service to get your licence. and only to find yourself being a doctors dispensing robot and in a shop?(ok overgeneralised here  )

Following is taken from an article which you have provided:
Link

Even in the US, a country which awards dispensing right to the pharmacists, the problems of wrong prescriptions and medications are rampant. So what's the point of giving the pharmacists such right?

Now I know once these expensive drug reaches their end of their patent, other companies can also make cheap copy of it legally and of similar quality. Just like you can buy RM50 original DVD vs pasar malam RM5 and both are watchable.  And recently news I saw actually all says these cheaper clones are just as good, just that many doctor refuses to accept that fact.

mr lappy, what are you doing in UK currently?

yes, the pharmacist can actually give the patient the branded one of the same generic if the prescription is written in generic. but the pharmacy will be re-imbursed for the price of the generic rather than the branded one. so unless the branded one is same price of the generic or cheaper, the patient have to go back to the doctor and ask the prescription to be named to branded item instead or pharmacy suffers loss.

Wow, looks like i am being bombarded by hordes of pharmacists here. Well, i have nothing more to say atm as i haven't done enough research on this particular topic. However, i once came across an article regarding such issue in MMA magazine, and it stated all the disadvantages for pharmacists to have the dispensing right. Can't recall as it has been a long time.

Anyway, i have to stress on one point: without enough pharmacists in Msia, the situation is unlikely to change. You guys want the dispensing right, you have to pray that more people join pharmacy course. No offense but facts of life.

anyone that here as medical student..please change the situation next time...I think alot malaysian are poisoned by antibiotics...you come to klang any clinic and say you flu....they straight give you...
*

Actually I would be more interested in knowing how the system developed overseas. Long ago did the pharmacists there also face the same conflict with doctors? or the same problem with numbers and logistics? If so, how was the problem overcome?

lols i was just debating this in IMU the other day

hypermax are you a doctor?or a medical student?how old are you?

Perhaps. Then why did the authority concerned withdrew the decision to run the trial? You think we doctors and DAP can force the gov to do that?

You want proof, here:

Source
Now let's us look at number of doctors in Msia:

Source
The number of pharmacists is roughly 1/5th of that of doctors. When there are only 4292 pharmacists available in the whole of msia back in 2006, you think there's enough pharmacists in Klang Valley?  It doesn't take a genius to answer this question.

2. Educate public regarding role of pharmacists.

This is the part I do not understand.

Not enough doctor. But doctor still given sole right to diagnosis.
Not enough pharmacist. This is the reason why pharmacist should not have right to dispense.

Both not enough. So why use "not enough" as reason not to give right to pharmacist? Or is this called double standard?