CONFLICT
OF INTEREST COULD BE NEXT
Criticism
of the Woolworths push into pharmacy was accompanied by the claim
that a non pharmacist owner would instruct the pharmacist manager
what the preference was in recommending products for sale. Quite
clearly the converse can apply.
A pharmacist
owner is motivated by financial bonding to recommend products
that are making the most money for the pharmacist owner. These
may not be the best available for the consumers need.
Ironically
the recommendation that was in the National Competition Policy
draft report on pharmacy regulation that advocated a 49% ownership
to another party (external equity) also recommended an amendment
to the Crimes Act to make it an offence for a non-pharmacist interest
to influence what a pharmacist may professionally judge. Here
must be the epitome of safeguards.
The interest
to sell a product should be professional interest on the part
of the pharmacist for the welfare of the consumer.
This can be
taken too far however as instanced in a recent case where a consumer
was told by a pharmacist that it could not sell a product because
of a potential interaction.
The consumer was incensed as they had bought the product before
and was pleased to accept the advice when offered.
The final decision must be with the consumer once the risks have
been explained.
When it comes
to Natural Products homeopathy, naturopathy and herbal
medicines it is becoming more evident that pharmacists must become
properly trained to make judgments on these products.
Go to http://www.quackwatch.org/01quackeryRelatedTopics/pharm.html
for more on this subject.
FRIENDLY
SOCIETY LEADERS MUST BE WONDERING
The Friendly
Society movement in Australia must be wondering what more it can
do to be able to satisfy the population.
The NCP review of pharmacy ownership stated:
"As an
indicator of what might be possible, the ongoing presence of friendly
society pharmacies in most States, however circumscribed, seems
to act as a spur to independent pharmacies to enhance their own
performances and to maintain such quality.
If pharmacy proprietorship opened up further, it is possible that
change could bring overall benefits to the community, and to the
industry itself, in terms of diversity, vibrancy, and entrepreneurial
thinking."
Reference:
Page 35 Final Report of the Review: National Competition Policy
Review of Pharmacy
Now the friendlies
find they have been stymied in NSW by the Bill following the NCP
review limiting them to six new openings, while in Victoria nothing
has changed, except more restrictions on how they operate as a
Friendly Society.
VICTORIAN
PARLIAMENT GETS HALF THE STORY
The soap opera
of who can own a pharmacy continues in Victoria. This really would
be a classic for the "Yes Minister" series.
Minister Pike
told the Victorian Parliament on 13 May:
Part
One:
The
final report of the national review, titled National Competition
Policy Review of Pharmacy, dated February 2000, recommended limited
deregulation of the ownership arrangements for pharmacy businesses.
The review recommended removing any cap on the number of pharmacies
a pharmacist may own, allowing friendly societies to continue
to own and operate pharmacies unrestricted and allowing pharmacists
to adopt a corporate structure to carry on their pharmacy businesses.
Pharma-goss
comment:
Okay well we knew all that in February 2000 so have had plenty
of time to get used to it. As for a pharmacist being able to own
as many as they like - well it is almost that now with the fiddles
they work to get around the restriction of three pharmacies. How
many pharmacists do you know that have an ownership stake in more
than three pharmacies?
Part
Two:
The
Council of Australian Governments (COAG) also established a senior
officials working group (SOWG) that examined the national review
recommendations and,
broadly, supported their implementation.
Pharma-goss
comment:
So now we have two high level examinations of pharmacy ownership
supporting an unlimited number of pharmacies any one pharmacist
may own and unrestricted friendly societies. Seems pretty clear
to meet NCP requirements.
Part
Three:
The
Victorian Department of Human Services released a discussion paper
in August 2002, inviting interested parties to comment on the
national review and COAG senior officials working group recommendations
and their implications for Victoria. The discussion paper also
canvassed a wide range of other reforms proposed to bring
pharmacy legislation up to date.
Pharma-goss
comment: Wow we can hardly wait for details of the wide range
of other reforms to bring pharmacy up to date!
Part
Four:
In line
with the federal governments determination, the bill lifts
the cap on the number of pharmacies a pharmacist can own
Pharma-goss:
Wait for it that is correct lift the cap
but-
from
three to five (and). It does not introduce any new restrictions
on the number of pharmacies a friendly society can own.
Pharma-goss
comment:
Eh? In line with the Federal Governments determination
oh!
You mean:
Part
Five:
Yet
at the same time the Prime Minister announced he would act to
prevent community pharmacy being undermined and specifically said
that he would prevent chain stores like Woolworths owning or operating
pharmacies within their stores.
Pharma-goss
comment: But
wait a minute who said anything about letting anyone other
than a pharmacist owning a pharmacy.
Woolworths!!
Never mentioned in any Bill anywhere or in either of the high
level reviews.
Is someone imagining or presenting a hypothetical case to the
Liberal CP coalition.
Maybe someone knows the PM and has influenced his judgment.
This takes history back to the 1930s when it is alleged a bag
of 50 Gold Sovereigns was put on a post in Newtown late at night
to be collected by a staffer from the Ministers office.
Hope he got it!
Oh wait a
minute it was in NSW in 2004 where the Pharmacy Guild conned
the people into thinking that this was the case so that 500,000
of them signed a petition asking that this (Woolworths owning
pharmacies) should not happen.
It was claimed as a record number of signatures.
It probably was a record and not difficult to see why.
The whole thing was a hoax and should be investigated by
well somebody that is not influenced by a lot of money
after all talk back radio kings (and queens) dont come cheap!
So for all
of you that are wondering where the National Competition Council
of Graeme Samuels is standing on this well we might have
to wait until after an election to find out.
Confusing
isnt it?
My
quote of the month:
The greatest
pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do.
Walter
Bagehot
Vale
George Michael Eckert
1931 to 2004
It
was with much sadness we learnt of the passing of George Eckert
in Sydney on 17th May at the age of 73 years.
George was the shining light for many of us who studied pharmacy
at Sydney University 50 years ago and his teaching style and methods
have stayed with us in all our endeavors.
He had a fantastic memory and a mind that had a filing system
as good as the computer. His vinyl record collection of 2,000
was filed in what to us seemed a very careless manner but it allowed
him to find what he wanted in seconds. The 200 students a week
that attended his Mat Med lectures were known to him by first
name after just two weeks.
He graduated as a Batchelor of Science and then did pharmacy and
after another seven years continued to study medicine graduating
as a Doctor of Medicine in 1974.
Following this came the dedicated time of George's life as he
was "trialed" at Sydney Hospital as a "clinical
pharmacist". His pioneering work in identifying and actioning
reviews of medication for patients with adverse pathology was
acclaimed world wide. This resulted in a second wave of pharmacists
passing through his tutorship as a second generation of pharmacists
was destined for the ward rounds.
Much admired and dearly loved George will be sadly missed but
his inspiration to so many of us will stay in our memories forever.
RIP
dear friend and mentor George Eckert.
From
Rollo Manning
Comments and
suggestion for topics to this column may be sent to rollom@bigpond.net.au
|