Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Life Sciences The PHARMACY Thread, everything you need to know/ask

views
     
youngkies
post May 3 2010, 04:12 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(zstan @ Apr 29 2010, 10:53 AM)
ooo..japan...did you get scholarship to go there?so what's the difference between japan and malaysia in the pharmacy line?
*
The three major players in pharmaceutical industries/advancement, The States, European countries and Japan.


Added on May 3, 2010, 4:15 am
QUOTE(jerk @ Apr 13 2010, 10:26 AM)



Added on April 13, 2010, 10:44 am
i do dislike imu for the fact that they started to offer chiropractic degree. it is like an endorsement for some unproven complementary and alternative treatment where as current evidence strongly suggest that chiro is effective for treatment of back pain and maybe neck related and definitely not a cure all treatment. not to mention the risk associated with manipulation of spine and neck region compared to conventional treatment
*
taking painkillers for the rest of the life to overcome the pain whilst couldn't afford the fee for correctional/surgical intervention is neither a cure to the disease.

This post has been edited by youngkies: May 3 2010, 04:15 AM
youngkies
post Jun 1 2010, 08:35 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(vesna_5 @ May 28 2010, 01:52 PM)
when one becomes a pharmacist after a while he/she can specialise in one field right?for example,cardiology..

so,the pharamacist must undergo housemanship is it?

i need a detailed explanation on this...

thankx..
*
if you are hospital pharmacist, you can undergo further specialisation say as cardiology pharmacist.

QUOTE(entryman @ May 29 2010, 01:12 PM)
Hey dear pharmacists,

I always had a burning question in my mind that needs answers.

What do you think of synthetic supplements? Yes those multivitamins that you can get almost anywhere.

I know this may go against what you have been learning, but some pharmacists seem to know that they're actually useless for us humans in the long run, and maybe even cause more health problems in the long run, but they don't wish to speak of it for obvious reasons.

What are your views? Compare it with natural supplements, i.e. NOS.
*
eat healthily and there's no need for extra supplement then. billions people doesn't takes any supplementary multivits and live healthily, meanwhile probably millions do take, but doesnt significantly show they are more healthy either. though some supplementary vitamins does have clinical values especially in the frail or compromised (e.g. vit. B in elderly and liver compromised patient)

QUOTE(zstan @ Jun 1 2010, 10:06 AM)
hmm.gif

actually i dunno what to believe now.

'organic'

'natural'

'original'

all can have different meanings.

so original vit c means? 20 biji of oranges a?XD
*
vitamin C is one that have very unique pharmacokinetic. contradictory to most people believing that the more you take, the more you get, as for vit. C, the more you take, the less the body will absorb (i.e. anything above 500mg)


youngkies
post Jun 3 2010, 05:04 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(hurm00 @ Jun 1 2010, 11:15 PM)
no need to eat extra pills la
everyday u eat more than enough
u eat nasi lemak for breakfast
rice again for lunch
rice again for dinner
chocolate. milk veges.
haih a lot !
no need supplement
your body already fulled with mineral vitamins it needed.
drinks a lot of mineral water everyday
*
rice, rice and rice, that is more of carbohydrate, than any other vits. and fat and sugar too from lemak and choc.


QUOTE(entryman @ Jun 2 2010, 02:46 AM)
Hmm sorry for the confusion. what I meant by original is natural, not synthetic. As for organic, well, it just means that the source of the product is grown organically, which under certification standards means no chemicals etc.
Food nowadays are tainted with pesticides, growth hormones, chemicals etc (which are hard to avoid), and the growing methods as well as preparation methods lead to significantly low amounts of remaining nutrients as compared to say 100 years ago. So compare what you eat now with what some dude ate 100 years ago, then yes you need supplements to catch up with that dude.
Wrong. I'm not a nutritionist so the explanation I give here may be somewhat crude, but here goes: Firstly, from your list above, it already clearly shows that the food you are referring to don't cover many of the vitamins that the body require. Secondly, refer my post above.
*
there are things called organic or free range if you are worried of pesticides, hormones etc.

and I wonder why people of 100 years ago have lower average life span, compare to today if what you said, people of 100 years ago are healthier from what they have eaten.

a range of balanced diet, from carbs, proteins, to all sort of nuts, foods with mineral do have a good range of multivits. preparation methods so as growing doesnt degrade minerals (particularly if you dont overcook the food), its what you eat that makes what you are. and multivits can be a guilt-free pass for unhealthy eating individual.

I dont go against multivits, as I do dispenses ranges of them everyday, but it aint compulsory nor actually essential.
youngkies
post Jun 3 2010, 09:16 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(entryman @ Jun 3 2010, 01:04 PM)
You can't eliminate the advancement in medical care and technology, which leads to longer life span. But you cannot also eliminate the increase in cancer rate when making that statement. It will be a long standing debate. Therefore what I posted only focuses on discussing the need for synthetic vitamins, and the potential harm.

Comparison and study has been done (sorry I can't provide the source) that nutrient levels in food are significantly lower than those in earlier years, before you and I were born. Some causes are: farming methods, the use of pesticides and chemicals, soil degradation, and processing methods. Cooking (as in heating) also degrades vitamins further.

Ah, finally someone who dispenses them. I wish to obtain your personal view and comments on some of the ingredients in multivitamins, and I presume what you are dispensing are synthetic multivits. As I've read on a naturopath website, ingredients used in the making of these vitamins are generally industrial chemicals, and I may be a layman and completely oblivious to pharmaceutical ingredients, but I do recognize ingredients such as cyanide, coal tar, acetone, and petroleum derivatives.
*
Cancer is actually one of the consequences of longer life span. The longer one lives, the more chances of mutation/growth of cancerous cells, though nowadays environmental may suggest its contribution to cancer particularly in young age.

Organic vitamins? Eat fresh food or even some processed/frozen food containing the vitamins then. Multivits, gain it from eating various food. Everything is made in industry, with industrial chemicals, e.g. plastic, metals etc. Therefore, source of natural stuff, take it from the natural made, e.g. foods. After all, so called natural, organic multivitamins, require organic chemical (common one, acetone) to extract the vitamins/compounds from its natural source anyway, and then packed it with so called chemical (e.g. lactose) into tablet or its desired formulation.
youngkies
post Jun 4 2010, 08:55 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(entryman @ Jun 3 2010, 09:53 PM)
Yep I understand where you're coming from. Even natural products will require processing with chemicals. Unless they're 100% certified organic products (I believe). But my actual intention was to bring to attention the fact that the MAIN INGREDIENTS of synthetic multivitamins can be cyanide and coal tar, while the processing ingredient used can be formaldehyde. So when taking multivitamins found on the racks, what the general consumer fails to realise is that he is actually eating a concoction of coal tar, cyanide, ammonia petroleum extracts, etc., don't you agree?

I quote Dr. Thiel:
*
that is why, why bother taking supplements while you can have them from eating range of healthy food.

though, most of drugs which are made via harsh chemical reactions (e.g. combining all sorts of chemical, extracting, dissolving, re-extracting with different reagents, purifying, formulating etc etc), keep the man away from all sorts of disease.
youngkies
post Jun 4 2010, 08:07 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


Well, anything about drugs, it is for benefit against risk of harm.

The argument here is about is it necessary for the customer? Is it going to beneficial or a waste of money? Or is there any other option.

Scene 1: Conflict of interest? If you are pharmacist, you have your right to professional judgement. I have seen plenty of dodgy pharmacist owners trying to squeeze every single penny out of everything. But my best interest is to the patient/customer I care, and it is my license on the line, not the owner. Don't risk you professional decision for someone else profit.

Scene 2: you are right, pharmacist is not to judge customer intelligence. but they come in and ask about it, means they want a piece of your advise/knowledge, as a healthcare professional advise.

youngkies
post Jun 6 2010, 08:32 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


I eat healthy enough to cover range of vitamins I need. laugh.gif
youngkies
post Jun 7 2010, 03:01 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(zstan @ Jun 6 2010, 10:54 PM)
what do u eat everyday then? brows.gif  brows.gif
*
definitely not nasi lemak/kon lo me for breakfast, rice for lunch, pao for tea, then rice again for night, plus roti canai for supper, and plenty of milo/teh peng in between.

you dont get that luxuriously fat & high-carbs food when living abroad.

This post has been edited by youngkies: Jun 7 2010, 03:02 AM
youngkies
post Jun 9 2010, 10:18 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(OMG! @ Jun 9 2010, 10:03 AM)
first, thanks for the link posted, zstan.
well, from what i have checked with the link that u have posted:

[cool.gif[/b]

it seems like all bachelor degree holder can apply to the master of healths  science( Pharmacy) programme offered in UKM. Is that true?
Or what does it mean by Bachelor's Degree acceptable by university/equiv? Do i need to have a BPharm to be eligible for the entry requirements??
*
I would think it has to be Bachelor degree in Pharmacy, to enrol in master course for pharmacy.
youngkies
post Jun 26 2010, 06:59 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


education industry? it's called academia.
youngkies
post Jul 30 2010, 08:37 AM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(zstan @ Jul 27 2010, 09:09 PM)
of course its recognised
yes. like the other posters said, u need 1st class/2nd uppers to qualify.  smile.gif 

hmm..but u dun submit a thesis, do you? hmm.gif
*
they do actually, I did.

MPharm is at equivalent level of any other Master degree in UK, just that it is not recognised as master in country like Malaysia unfortunately.

@loveless

MPhil is master in philosophy.

This post has been edited by youngkies: Jul 30 2010, 08:38 AM
youngkies
post Aug 12 2010, 04:21 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(Fantasia @ Aug 12 2010, 12:15 PM)
A*BB. i wanted to go nottingham sad.gif
*
Just apply for it.

You'll get it, trust me on that.
youngkies
post Aug 12 2010, 08:02 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


QUOTE(Angelpoli @ Aug 12 2010, 05:07 PM)
cuz i heard if want biotech...go USA study and work there better...but heck..im taking A level...lol....btw...is nursing a good course to take in UK??is it demanding and have a good pay??
*
it is a good course, and demand for the job is high, pay is OK-OK but it can be a really hardwork.

This post has been edited by youngkies: Aug 12 2010, 08:03 PM
youngkies
post Aug 29 2011, 06:58 PM

Monday <--> Friday
Group Icon
VIP
9,511 posts

Joined: Apr 2005


It depends where you work in and what you do too. Being in a pharmacist doesn't mean you will be stuck with checking tablets and capsules.

A clinical pharmacist in hospital pharmacy for example rarely having to check / identify medicines but managing patient care/medicines. But of course to get to that grade of pharmacist, everyone has to start with from the bottom, i.e. checking medicines dispensed against prescription, and being colour blind shouldn't be an major issue if you are practising in UK, as medicine dispensed mostly in its original container/box which clearly indicates the drug and its strength.

5 Pages « < 3 4 5Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0199sec    0.50    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 8th December 2025 - 07:23 AM