Rishi Sunak

kaz7 said:
This announcement today about pharmacies is a con , most of it plus lots of every other services have been done by pharmacies for years , it looks good in an election year but it wont do what sunak has stated in his tweet and end the eight am rush for appts , blatant fucking lie
Click to expand...
I actually had an insect bite that I went to the pharmacist with, they gave me some cream that didn't work. Went to the doctors and they spotted straight away it was infected and needed anti-.biotics I'm sure pharmacists can give good advice but they can't spot what a doctor can.
 
blueparrot said:
I actually had an insect bite that I went to the pharmacist with, they gave me some cream that didn't work. Went to the doctors and they spotted straight away it was infected and needed anti-.biotics I'm sure pharmacists can give good advice but they can't spot what a doctor can.
Click to expand...

There is a new girl in the branch of Boots I go to. Lovely lass - before Xmas she worked at B&M. I am happy to take her advice on garden furniture no so much on inner ear infections
 
bluethrunthru said:
There is a new girl in the branch of Boots I go to. Lovely lass - before Xmas she worked at B&M. I am happy to take her advice on garden furniture no so much on inner ear infections
Click to expand...

Good job you will be speaking to a highly trained professional pharmacist then and not your pal from B&M.
 
bluethrunthru said:
There is a new girl in the branch of Boots I go to. Lovely lass - before Xmas she worked at B&M. I am happy to take her advice on garden furniture no so much on inner ear infections
Click to expand...
Once again you’re either showing your complete ignorance of the planned initiative or simply talking bollocks for the sake of it.

I must admit it’s hard to judge which is the case.
 
blueparrot said:
Many serious illness have symptoms in common with a mild illness, a bad back can be cancer. Is a pharmacist as qualified in spotting the difference as early as a doctor can, no they aren't that's why they are pharmacists not doctors.
Click to expand...

Medicine is a process of elimination - your GP (or practice physio who you’d most likely see for something like back pain) will likely prescribe pain relief anyway as a first port of call. Only if that didn’t help would they look at other potential causes. I’m sure the pharmacist would sign post people to their GPs if the symptoms persisted.
 
BobKowalski said:
It’s sticking plasters over gaping wounds. It will do nothing with regard to the availability of GP appointments or GP’s for that matter.

Rather than tackling the problem it’s about redistributing the problem to other parts of the Health service and waiting for the usual suspects to applaud the move and talk about people having to be more responsible for their health.

Next we will be issued with home surgery kits and an instruction film on YouTube.
Click to expand...
You’ve directly contradicted yourself here, all in the space of two sentences.

If you don’t think that it will reduce the pressures on GP appointments, and you think that people will continue to go to their GPs, then why should the initiative simply redistribute the problem to other areas of the health service? And if people do use other areas of the health service, then why wouldn’t that reduce the pressures on GP appointments?

Nobody is suggesting that the initiative is going to single-handedly solve the problem of GP appointments, rather that for a specific list of ailments, people can choose to go to their pharmacy and still receive a prescribed drug if they wish rather than having to go to their GP.
 
Is there any none biased information relating to the pharmacy? Mine is always busy as they have post office services at the same till and one person manning it all. Wondering what incentive the pharmacists receive for the extra work? After the experience my mrs just had in A&E with a kidney infection at 34 weeks pregnant having to wait 9 hours with a load of pissheads, mentally ill and timewasters anything has to be better than what we currently have!
 
blueinsa said:
Good job you will be speaking to a highly trained professional pharmacist then and not your pal from B&M.
Click to expand...
Pharmacist are not medically trained , they train in medicines and can give you basic advice and products , most people know what to ask for for basic conditions

I see one thing is uncomplicated uti's in women , a uti can quickly turn into a kidney infection if not treated properly first time , they cant examine you to see if it has spread to the kidneys which is very serious , there will be loads of misdiagnosis from your pharmacist imo
 
Brewster's millions said:
No pharmacists aren’t doctors and that’s why the new initiative only relates to a specific number of relatively minor ailments, such as earache or an infected insect bite.

Believe it or not pharmacists won’t be treating people with a bad back or a heart condition.
Click to expand...

List of ailments as you state.

• Sinusitis
• Sore throat
• Earache
• Infected insect bites
• Impetigo
• Shingles
• Uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women under 65
 
metalblue said:
Medicine is a process of elimination - your GP (or practice physio who you’d most likely see for something like back pain) will likely prescribe pain relief anyway as a first port of call. Only if that didn’t help would they look at other potential causes. I’m sure the pharmacist would sign post people to their GPs if the symptoms persisted.
Click to expand...
Boils down to this for me, if people want to use a pharmacist as first port of call, fine it isn't new it's always happened, if we want allow a pharmicist to prescibe a few more medicines again fine.
However if it's being used as an alternative to policies on retaining, recruiting, training more GPs , and solving those problems, then it won't work and is another misguided policy / gimmick from a government that won't take the decisions that will fix a failing health service.
 
blueinsa said:
List of ailments as you state.

• Sinusitis
• Sore throat
• Earache
• Infected insect bites
• Impetigo
• Shingles
• Uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women under 65
Click to expand...
So no open heart surgery or kidney transplants then?

That will come as a bit of a shock for a few on here.
 
Brewster's millions said:
So no open heart surgery or kidney transplants then?

That will come as a bit of a shock for a few on here.
Click to expand...
Shingles needs to be looked at , it is mostly over the ribs , in a private room with no chaperone i am not letting someone with no medical training examine me . Also i have already posted about the uti problem , they cant examine you to see if it is uncomplicated or is spreading to the kidneys , most of the rest they have been doing for years along with all the basic conditions , it is being lauded as more than it is
 
kaz7 said:
Shingles needs to be looked at , it is mostly over the ribs , in a private room with no chaperone i am not letting someone with no medical training examine me . Also i have already posted about the uti problem , they cant examine you to see if it is uncomplicated or is spreading to the kidneys , most of the rest they have been doing for years along with all the basic conditions , it is being lauded as more than it is
Click to expand...
The policy is about introducing a degree of choice for people with minor ailments with the intention of reducing some of the pressures on GP appointments. Allowing pharmacists to make prescriptions for things like earache, so on, I can’t see the problem with it. And it’s entirely about choice, not restricting who can see a GP.

I don’t think anybody is suggesting that the initiative is going to remove all the pressures at a stroke as in reality nothing could. It may help at the margin, and therefore it’s worth doing.
 
Brewster's millions said:
The policy is about introducing a degree of choice for people with minor ailments with the intention of reducing some of the pressures on GP appointments. Allowing pharmacists to make prescriptions for things like earache, so on, I can’t see the problem with it. And it’s entirely about choice, not restricting who can see a GP.

I don’t think anybody is suggesting that the initiative is going to remove all the pressures at a stroke as in reality nothing could. It may help at the margin, and therefore it’s worth doing.
Click to expand...
The policy is barely new as some pharmacists have been perscribing limited antibiotics for ages , they are few and far between so chances are you will never meet one . As my post there are things on the list that they cant do , not saying dont expand the pharmacy role but sunak saying it is new and will end the 08.00 struggle for gp appts is a bare faced lie
 
blueparrot said:
Boils down to this for me, if people want to use a pharmacist as first port of call, fine it isn't new it's always happened, if we want allow a pharmicist to prescibe a few more medicines again fine.
However if it's being used as an alternative to policies on retaining, recruiting, training more GPs , and solving those problems, then it won't work and is another misguided policy / gimmick from a government that won't take the decisions that will fix a failing health service.
Click to expand...

I think that’s fair. Ideally you’d have your GP receptionist be able to make you an appointment with the pharmacist as well as the GP, practice nurse, or practice physio they currently do and it all go on your medical notes etc. Unfortunately I think that’s some way away as GPs typically use one of three systems - only one of which I think is used by hospitals (but far from all hospitals). Pharmacies probably don’t use any of the same systems as the GP.

You’d think it common sense to get everyone using one system (although post office sub masters may disagree with that principle). The problem is both GPs and Pharmacies are private businesses so it’s harder for government to legislate and get them all using the same system.

It’s a national service that is deeply disjointed and largely run as fiefdoms so change is about as likely as Elvis being found alive and well on the moon.
 
There are far far worse things the snide rat faced **** and his cronies have been up to recently to be getting het up about than this tbh.
In a perfect world this would just be about having a bit of common sense but common sense doesn’t seem overly, err, common these days.
 
kaz7 said:
Shingles needs to be looked at , it is mostly over the ribs , in a private room with no chaperone i am not letting someone with no medical training examine me . Also i have already posted about the uti problem , they cant examine you to see if it is uncomplicated or is spreading to the kidneys , most of the rest they have been doing for years along with all the basic conditions , it is being lauded as more than it is
Click to expand...

TBF I doubt too many people would think of going to pharmacist so even if it is a rehash (not sure it is or isn’t) if it makes people more aware of it as an option then it’s a worthwhile “announcement”.

I’ll just pull you up when you say they have no medical training, that is a little unfair. Part of their qualification includes clinical examination skills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top