Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

Andrew Paxton

Andrew Paxton

Lancaster

Male

Recent activity

Comments (8)

  • Comment on: MP group wants pharmacist prescribers and minor ailment scheme in England

    Andrew Paxton's comment 24 JUN 2017 15:05

    Me again! I'm now 60. I tried a few years ago to enrol in one of the local Pharmacist Prescriber courses, but I was told that I am too old. I could still do it, though. Is this ageist?

  • Comment on: MP group wants pharmacist prescribers and minor ailment scheme in England

    Andrew Paxton's comment 19 MAY 2017 19:04

    Yes, but all the while CCGs are cutting Minor Ailment Services 'to save money'! When oh when, are the Government going to realise that Minor Ailment Services don't cost money, they save money?
    Andrew Paxton

  • Comment on: Reclassifying erectile dysfunction drug sildenafil as a P medicine not such a huge leap

    Andrew Paxton's comment 19 MAY 2017 18:56

    If we had to follow the same questionnaire as is used by such as Asda (I don't work for the Boots Company), it should be safe. There are checks and reservations involved, and I for one have not had any problems reported back to me.

    Andrew Paxton

  • Comment on: GPhC consultation on religious beliefs generates record number of responses

    Andrew Paxton's comment 12 MAY 2017 21:11

    I agree absolutely with Ruth Shaw. The reason I didn't study medicine was that I knew that I wouldn't be cajoled or forced into doing what I considered, and still do consider, to be immoral, unethical and what should be illegal activities. My conscience would not allow me to kill babies or elderly or ill adults, and no ill-considered decision of the GPhC, in opposition to what the majority of its correspondents have expressed, will make me do otherwise. Equally I have absolutely NO objection to helping addicts to maintain a decent life, or help people who are unhappy in their original sex, or anything else like that. Why should I bend with the pressure of the anti-moral vocal minority?
    Andrew Paxton

  • Comment on: GPhC standards for pharmacy professionals come into force on 12 May 2017

    Andrew Paxton's comment 9 MAY 2017 18:47

    1. Pharmacy was originally recognized as a profession when we were given the responsibility to police the sale and use of Arsenic, in order to reduce the rash of husband-poisoning by abused wives. Does this now mean we should sell arsenic to such women?
    2. Any pharmacist knows that some OTC addicts will trawl through pharmacies to find one that does not care whether a patient is addicted or not, and will sell them any codeine-containing medication - no questions asked. Should we all join in, as that is what the customer wants?

View all comments

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.