As winter rolls in, we are once again reminded by drug company representatives of the dangers of suffering from the flu for the elderly and workers who simply cannot afford to take days off.
In the three short winters that I have worked in community pharmacy, there is one issue that remains constant.

At this point, I, and many others I'm sure, explain that the flu vaccine is a prescription only medicine, and I then outline the situations in which I can provide a prescription only product without a prescription, of which supply of the influenza vaccine would not fit.

The patient then rightly argues that they would have to see the doctor in order to get a prescription, pay the medical gap, bring the prescription back to the pharmacy to be filled, then return to the doctor and once again pay the gap.
This would mean payment for two doctors visits when one would be sufficient.

What is more, the customer gets rather upset because "it was never a problem with my last flu vaccine".

Truly if ever there was a need to down schedule an item, the flu vaccine would be it.
While not going as far as to suggest that pharmacist should employ someone to give these vaccinations (but I'm not drawing too long a bow there), perhaps it is time the lawmakers looked at allowing pharmacists to provide subsidised products (such as flu vaccine) without prescription.

Add to this debate the recent data suggesting that the current method of flu vaccine distribution through medical centres is wasteful, and a scathing editorial in a leading doctors publication suggesting that any move made by the Pharmacy Guild to regulate vaccinations was ludicrous.

Is it an even better idea to clear it from the pharmacy agenda altogether and relegate the duty to nurses, or that vaccinations be made available through state funded public hospitals.

Either way, I will not be providing any schedule four medications without a prescription.