Letters - Community pharmacists reject Pharmacy Bill

"WORRYING gaps in Pharmacy Bill" (My View, May 20) refers. Community pharmacists would like to state categorically that we reject the proposed New Pharmacy Bill in its current form as it would not bring any benefit to the public.
» Any bill without ensuring dispensing separation is unprofessional and not acceptable.
The most important element to bring the anticipated national healthcare transformation that is, the dispensing separation in the private sector (community pharmacy practice) is omitted, in contrast to the public/government sector.
There is no justification to still delay the implementation, unlike in the government sector where doctors are prescribing and pharmacists are dispensing.
Likewise a majority of registered doctors in private hospitals and health institutions are working under the system of dispensing separation.
Why is the government continuing to deprive pharmacists in the private sector to contribute professionally towards the healthcare of the rakyat like those in the public sector? Why the double standards?
Our medical counterparts are always telling the people that others, including pharmacists, should not be doing the doctors' job but why are they doing the work of pharmacists?
Section 10 of a World Health Organisation report, Promoting rational use of medicines: core components, states: "Prescribers who earn money from the sale of medicines (eg dispensing doctors), prescribe more medicines, and more expensive medicines, than prescribers who do not; therefore the health system should be organised so that prescribers do not dispense or sell medicines."
This is why most countries have opted for dispensing separation as this removes conflict of interest, such as a doctor prescribing medications that earns him a hefty profit.
Community pharmacists will be reduced to mere over-the-counter professionals, dealing with health supplements, minor medications and medical sundries without dispensing separation, if they are continued to be deprived of the right to dispense the Group B medicines without the separation of prescribing and dispensing functions.
Rejecting the inhumane penalty under the bill.
The proposal of "more deterrent penalties" on dealing of medicines by all medical professions, increasing the penalty or fine by 10-fold or more and imprisonment of one year on some infringements are absurd.
It is ironic, that the ministry, while not willing to recognise the professional roles of pharmacists, is proposing such a draconian penalty for the profession.
Some pharmacies are being raided and the pharmacists dragged to court at the whims of little "Napoleons" who even with the existing penalties, threaten to force community pharmacists to comply with additional self-made rules that are not stipulated in the Acts.
Examples of these self-made rules are additional recording of the sales of certain medicines (applicable only to Type A licence holders, meaning pharmacies but clinics are exempted). What will happen if the fine was increased 10-fold?
The proposed Malaysian Pharmacy Council should be headed by a pharmacist, not a doctor.
With reference to the proposed establishment of the council, it is only appropriate and logical that the chairman of the council should be a pharmacist. There will be a conflict of interest in having a doctor to head the council.
In addition, the top public service pharmacist should not be reporting directly to the top public service doctor as is the practice now.
Gan Ber Zin
Former Chief Pharmacist
Hospital Tuanku Ja'afar Seremban