There are, however, restrictions on this. Pharmacists won’t be able to prescribe just ANY medication. No drugs that require bloodwork will be prescribed.

From what I understand (and I can get his word for word on this) that for example, if you have a baby with an ear infection – you won’t have to see your doctor, a pharmacist will be able to give antibiotics for simple things such as ear infections (result of common colds) to the general public.

He has recieved tons of reading material from the provincial society of pharmacists on this.

Is he comfortable with this?

Nope.

I think it’s a personal thing. He has a friend who is a pharmacist out in Alberta who is looking forward to having prescribing privileges.

Maybe it’s a personality thing? But based on the high volume of customers at the pharmacy he currently works at, and the staffing issues – it would be extremely difficult to take the time out to be doing this sort of thing with patients. They are too overworked. Unfortunately, this scene is common in most pharmacies. They do take the time to counsel a patient on a prescription that is new though … but if you had walk-in’s coming in with common ailments off the street, every pharmacy in town would be bogged right down.

Sounds great in theory (do I have faith that my husband and his coworkers could prescribe stuff … yes, I do.) but in reality I’m not sure it would work so good.

I’m lucky enough to be covered by insurance at this time, but am old enough to be concerned about the cost of drugs when I am eligible for Medicare! More generic and affordable drugs is my chief interest. It would be nice not to pay for an office visit to the Dr to get a prescription, tho’.

The US seems so far behind. Then someone jumps up and says, “Hey, I have an idea.”

Unfortunately the US is so capitalist-based that it is hard to tell what “idea” benefits who.

In regards to pharmacists, I trust them a heck of a lot more then my doctors. I have spent time with my pharmacist reviewing scripts I consistently fill, other options to save money, interactions with new medications and even recommendations of doctors to see!

Too bad I lost all of that when I lost my insurance.

So once again, here we are. Those who are uninsured, what are we to do? We can still consult with our pharmacists but the cost, oh the cost.

So I beg the question again, who would this really benefit?

In the UK, a number of drugs are designated “prescription only”. Only a registered doctor (and where appropriate and within limits other health care professional e.g. dentist, nurse) can prescribe these drugs. All antibiotics and all insulins fall in to this category.

Some medicines, such as basic painkillers, indigestion remedies, nicotine replacement, cold relief etc are listed on a general sales list or designated GSL. This means anyone can sell them. Some medicines are on this list in restricted quantities, especially painkillers.

A huge number of medicines make up the middle ground. The are designated ‘P’ and can be supplied only under the direction of a registered pharmacist. It includes a diverse range of things such as triptans for migraine, treatments for thrush, antibiotic eye drops and emergency contraception.

As the daughter of two pharmacists, I can tell you that this is a huge part of their role. Pretty much anyone can be trained to follow the directions on a doctor’s prescription. In the UK, technicians do most of the actual counting out, labelling and supply or prescribed medicines. Pharmacists check on and train the technicians and also look out for errors on the part of prescribers, since pharmacists are many times more knowledgeable about medicines than most doctors. In the hospital environment they review every patient who is admitted to ensure they are on appropriate medications – this is why they train for four years! In the community, they also consult with patients about symptoms and suggest appropriate remedies – including no remedy, or seeing a doctor or other professional. They are a major, easy-access, first point of call on the high street. So for those who wonder if pharmacists want this responsibly, my response is I’m surprised they haven’t demanded it sooner!

In the UK this method of drug supply also helps somewhat to maintain the NHS. If every item that is currently bought as a ‘P’ required a visit to a doctor and a prescription, the NHS would have failed long ago. On the flip-side, many drugs bought over the counter are also cheaper for patients who must pay prescription charges – which are rather like an insurance co-pay, but fixed at a single price charged per-item, every item (except birth control!). For those who are exempt from this charge (people with diabetes included) a medicine being designated ‘P’ doesn’t mean you can’t get it on prescription or even reduce the liklihood of that happening. I recognise, however, that this change in the US may have more far reaching consequences for insurance coverage.

I guess I feel pharmacists are highly trained where drugs and minor symptoms are concerned and personally I would trust them to know more about what medication I should take than many doctors, even if I first needed to get a diagnosis from a doctor!

On the other hand, we shouldn’t expect our pharmacists to be doctors and listen to all of our medical conditions, make a diagnosis and “prescribe” (even if a prescription is not necessary) medicines.

And while having more generic options makes it cheaper for everyone, changing medicines from prescription only to non-prescription means that many people would lose coverage, since, in my experience, my insurance will only pay for medications that require a prescription. It sounds like a boon for health insurance companies and a big loss for those already insured.