to the (really nice) people diffusing my bombs

[GoldenDelicious]

dont worry about it! save your k!

...but thankyou, im touched

 

[Gambino]

dont worry about it! save your k!

...but thankyou, im touched

\

what was that shit about you denying peeps pharmy perscriptions? I never read that shite...quite ironically, I might add, the peeps stateside that do that? they are fanatical right-wing zealots, buddy-buddy with bush.
just so you know

 

[GoldenDelicious]

\

what was that shit about you denying peeps pharmy perscriptions? I never read that shite...quite ironically, I might add, the peeps stateside that do that? they are fanatical right-wing zealots, buddy-buddy with bush.
just so you know

the bottom line of it is that, just like any person in any job anywhere in the world, i have the right to exercise free will and to reap the consequences of that decision. just becaseu im the only guy in town with a certain item doesnt mean i have to sell it to you. i can refuse, and you can go someplace else.

in this case the item is a drug, and people have the misconception that pharmacies are public services (rather than independent commercial enterprises) and somehow think that we are obligated to cater to their every whim, becaseu they have the RIGHT not to drive across town to the next drug store to get their drug. ha!

 

[Gambino]

the bottom line of it is that, just like any person in any job anywhere in the world, i have the right to exercise free will and to reap the consequences of that decision. just becaseu im the only guy in town with a certain item doesnt mean i have to sell it to you. i can refuse, and you can go someplace else.

in this case the item is a drug, and people have the misconception that pharmacies are public services (rather than independent commercial enterprises) and somehow think that we are obligated to cater to their every whim, becaseu they have the RIGHT not to drive across town to the next drug store to get their drug. ha!

true, a business can deny anyone they want to...seems bad for business though.
what drug was it?

 

[CENTURION44]

whats that....ur blacked out

 

[Redshoteye]

the bottom line of it is that, just like any person in any job anywhere in the world, i have the right to exercise free will and to reap the consequences of that decision. just becaseu im the only guy in town with a certain item doesnt mean i have to sell it to you. i can refuse, and you can go someplace else.

in this case the item is a drug, and people have the misconception that pharmacies are public services (rather than independent commercial enterprises) and somehow think that we are obligated to cater to their every whim, becaseu they have the RIGHT not to drive across town to the next drug store to get their drug. ha!

What the fuck is a becaseu.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

true, a business can deny anyone they want to...seems bad for business though.
what drug was it?

morning after pill is the one that caused all the fuss. people started freaking out that pharmacists would somehow deny them their blood pressure medications

apparently pharmacists should just give out drugs to whoever wants teh cash, since who the hell do they think they are? the police? but when it comes to keeping amphatamine precursors out of the hands of drug users, all of a sudden its up to the pharmacist to ask 20 questions to the people wanting a bit of psuedoephedrine, since after all, its a pharmacists job to make sure the right people get the right drug!

all thats going to happen is that pharmacists are going to lie to you, and say that its not in stock, which in turn upsets the patient/pharmacist relationship, which then messes up healthcare in general....which, when you consider that pharmacists diagnose at least as many problems (unpaid though) as doctors, is a pretty bad thing.

 

[Gambino]

morning after pill is the one that caused all the fuss. people started freaking out that pharmacists would somehow deny them their blood pressure medications

apparently pharmacists should just give out drugs to whoever wants teh cash, since who the hell do they think they are? the police? but when it comes to keeping amphatamine precursors out of the hands of drug users, all of a sudden its up to the pharmacist to ask 20 questions to the people wanting a bit of psuedoephedrine, since after all, its a pharmacists job to make sure the right people get the right drug!

all thats going to happen is that pharmacists are going to lie to you, and say that its not in stock, which in turn upsets the patient/pharmacist relationship, which then messes up healthcare in general....which, when you consider that pharmacists diagnose at least as many problems (unpaid though) as doctors, is a pretty bad thing.

I can't say I disagree with you on a argumentive scale...if I was a pharmacist, though, I would have no issue with giving RU (morning after right?) to whoever was perscribed it.
The point i was trying to make is that similiar episodes are happening in the states, pharmicists denying RU and birth control...the pharmy guys denying are right wingers, religious peeps, people you have again and again dennounced as idiots, sheep, etc...but you appear to share some beliefs, kinda ironic you must admit

 

[ziggyziggy]

I can't say I disagree with you on a argumentive scale...if I was a pharmacist, though, I would have no issue with giving RU (morning after right?) to whoever was perscribed it.
The point i was trying to make is that similiar episodes are happening in the states, pharmicists denying RU and birth control...the pharmy guys denying are right wingers, religious peeps, people you have again and again dennounced as idiots, sheep, etc...but you appear to share some beliefs, kinda ironic you must admit

 

[chefbone]

Someone should have given tucs mom an RU the day after his conception!!!!!

 

[Whiskey]

I'm sorry, I can't read what you're saying

Whiskey

 

[Lestat]

lotsa pwnage going on now

 

[slat1]

There is so much blacked out on this thread it is like reading a classified document that has been released!

 

[Gambino]

I can't say I disagree with you on a argumentive scale...if I was a pharmacist, though, I would have no issue with giving RU (morning after right?) to whoever was perscribed it.
The point i was trying to make is that similiar episodes are happening in the states, pharmicists denying RU and birth control...the pharmy guys denying are right wingers, religious peeps, people you have again and again dennounced as idiots, sheep, etc...but you appear to share some beliefs, kinda ironic you must admit

666

 

[GoldenDelicious]

I can't say I disagree with you on a argumentive scale...if I was a pharmacist, though, I would have no issue with giving RU (morning after right?) to whoever was perscribed it.
The point i was trying to make is that similiar episodes are happening in the states, pharmicists denying RU and birth control...the pharmy guys denying are right wingers, religious peeps, people you have again and again dennounced as idiots, sheep, etc...but you appear to share some beliefs, kinda ironic you must admit

well i wouldnt say that its ironic, pharmacy is a profession filled with all sorts of people, and i am not one who doesnt realise that we all share the human condition. they can do what they like, so long as they dont hurt other people. in fact, i respect the people denying people medications because they step up and say "im not giving this to you because it goes against my beliefs, so please take your money to the competitor next door, or write a letter complaining to my employer which will hinder my job prospects in the future". i like straight up people. they say what they mean and take it on the chin.

in regard to the aspects of those people that i criticise as per the war on terror, well its the opposite - those people in that case seek to justify blatant atrocities with largely irrelevent arguments, and refuse to apologize for past mistakes (ie rather than saying shit, we screwed up, lets fix it, they say "on with the mission!". its fucked) . if they were to come out and declare it as conquest, i would respect them a lot more. sure id say they were thieving pricks, but id respect them as thieving pricks.

and on a side note - im ok with people taking morning after pills. you want to take it and it might be a sin? well its your bloody sin, not mine, leave me out of it. im just not a fan of people thinking that a pharmacy that *I* set up in my future is some sort of government service, where i *have* to give people freebees or operate it in a way that i find intrusive to my rights, which hypocritically, people think is needed to protect theirs.

 

[terrapin]

if thats how you feel you shouldn't be a pharmacist. you are coming between a person and their doctor and sometimes going somewhere else is not an option. and make no mistake about it, it is religous people that do this type of thing. its based on a belief system that all people do not share. i respect religious people, but they should keep their religous beliefs to themselves. We now have the great state of Kansas teaching intelligent design in a science class. we will soon be back to the pre-enlightenment era. if you don't believe in giving a person what a doctor prescribes them- don't be a pharmacist. period, end of argument.

 

[jackangel]

gambino, see clearly. gd isn't necessarily agreeing with pharmacists who deny medications on various grounds, but he is defending their right to take such stands. i agree and i also respect them for that.

 

[GoldenDelicious]

if thats how you feel you shouldn't be a pharmacist. you are coming between a person and their doctor and sometimes going somewhere else is not an option. and make no mistake about it, it is religous people that do this type of thing. its based on a belief system that all people do not share. i respect religious people, but they should keep their religous beliefs to themselves. We now have the great state of Kansas teaching intelligent design in a science class. we will soon be back to the pre-enlightenment era. if you don't believe in giving a person what a doctor prescribes them- don't be a pharmacist. period, end of argument.

terrapin, it seems that youre a tad ignorant about the medical profession. you see, the old doctor-patient model has sort of gone out the window in modern medicine, because we know so much about the human body that it is impossible for one person to learn enough to practice in isolation. the obvious solution to this is, of course, specialisation, which is exactly what has happened.

you have primary health practitioners, who are general practitioners (doctors), optometrists, community pharmacists, and social workers. these guys are the gate keepers to the medical system, and once they work out that you ahve a problem that they cant deal with, they pass you on the the relevent specialist, who in the case of doctors might be a surgeon, or a dermatologist or whatever. in teh case of physiothercapist, they might pass you on the a sports or rehab specialist. in teh case of a pharmacist, you might be bounced on to a clinical pharmacist or a consulting pharmacist rather than a community guy, or whatever, and hopefully, you will be seen to by someone with the field of expertise that includes your specific problem.

now, you might think that general practitioners are veritable gods, but at the end of the day they are jack-o trades - competent in many aspects of medicine, but master of none.

pharmacists, on the other hand, have far less diagnosing expertise than doctors (since we dont have the tools to do so - stethescopes etc), but we are masters of the drug game. really. i can glaze the eyes of even a 30 year veteran of general practice when i get into specifics about drugs.

so do me a favour and try to get your head around the idea that the opinion of pharmacists/physiotherapists etc etc is as important as something your GP might have to say, and dont beliettle my profession again, because really, it makes you look the fool. if a pharmacist tells you something, they do so beacsue they know damn well what theyre talking about.

and if you think taht going to another pharmacy isnt an option - move to a place where theres more than one. YOUR choice of where to live does not supercede a pharmacists right to act as they see fit, ethically.

 

[seizer]

Now this is what I call educational beef, children.

 

[Spanky11]

terrapin, it seems that youre a tad ignorant about the medical profession. you see, the old doctor-patient model has sort of gone out the window in modern medicine, because we know so much about the human body that it is impossible for one person to learn enough to practice in isolation. the obvious solution to this is, of course, specialisation, which is exactly what has happened.

you have primary health practitioners, who are general practitioners (doctors), optometrists, community pharmacists, and social workers. these guys are the gate keepers to the medical system, and once they work out that you ahve a problem that they cant deal with, they pass you on the the relevent specialist, who in the case of doctors might be a surgeon, or a dermatologist or whatever. in teh case of physiothercapist, they might pass you on the a sports or rehab specialist. in teh case of a pharmacist, you might be bounced on to a clinical pharmacist or a consulting pharmacist rather than a community guy, or whatever, and hopefully, you will be seen to by someone with the field of expertise that includes your specific problem.

now, you might think that general practitioners are veritable gods, but at the end of the day they are jack-o trades - competent in many aspects of medicine, but master of none.

pharmacists, on the other hand, have far less diagnosing expertise than doctors (since we dont have the tools to do so - stethescopes etc), but we are masters of the drug game. really. i can glaze the eyes of even a 30 year veteran of general practice when i get into specifics about drugs.

so do me a favour and try to get your head around the idea that the opinion of pharmacists/physiotherapists etc etc is as important as something your GP might have to say, and dont beliettle my profession again, because really, it makes you look the fool. if a pharmacist tells you something, they do so beacsue they know damn well what theyre talking about.

and if you think taht going to another pharmacy isnt an option - move to a place where theres more than one. YOUR choice of where to live does not supercede a pharmacists right to act as they see fit, ethically.

what a great post.

now send me some test j/k

 

[Spartacus]

dont worry about it! save your k!

...but thankyou, im touched

I used to "debate" with you
now I think you're just a big fat whiney ass motherfucker
I can post sources and/or links to support my position
you're weak

 

[Spartacus]

for the record
back in the "election" era I answered his doubts
backed with solid and documented argument

in a nutshell Saddam's stane neccistated a US military presence in saudi

 

[~Lexy~]

Interesting points. Cheers.

 

[terrapin]

Interesting. If you noticed, in my reply I did not personally attack you. Yet, in your response you use words like fool, ignorant, etc.

First, I am acutely aware of the medical profession- so you should have a better idea who you are talking to. Second, I didn't state that pharmacists lack intelligence or that they don't provide solid information. My statement clearly stated that it is not the job of the pharmacist to deny someone a prescription. It is not your job, period. Also, this is not a discussion about denying someone a script for tetracycline, so don't pretend it is. Finally, you cannot compare the education and training of a physician to a pharmacist, at least not hear in the states.