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

Don’t forget about hospital and academic pharmacists

Ross Ferguson’s letter (The Pharmaceutical Journal, 2017;298:357) questioned how relevant The Pharmaceutical Journal is to members. In his reply to Ferguson, Sid Dajani agreed that the journal needed to be more member-oriented. What I find staggering is how the journal continues to shoot itself in the foot with regard to making members feel included. In the same edition, there is an article entitled ‘UK general election 2017: pharmacists react’ (The Pharmaceutical Journal, 2017;298:351).

In the byline, it says the journal has interviewed pharmacists across the nation. I read with interest the first two interviews, with a community pharmacist and a GP practice pharmacist on the first page, but when I turned over there were four more interviews, all with community pharmacists and all interviews focusing on ex-pharmacy minister David Mowat and his impact on community pharmacy.

Articles like these will make it difficult to persuade hospital pharmacists that the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) is something they should engage with. The general election result has an impact on us hospital pharmacists, as well as university pharmacists and scientists. The kicking into the long grass yet again on how to tackle social care funding and the continued pay cap on hospital pharmacists are just two issues someone from the hospital sector may have wished to comment on. I am sure my academic colleagues would also like to have their views heard, especially on how Brexit and the negotiations going forward post-election may fare.

Ray Lyon

Chichester, West Sussex

The Pharmaceutical Journal responds: Thank you for your feedback. Your point is valid and, in hindsight, we should have asked for views of pharmacists across more sectors. Therefore, we would like invite you and other readers from different sectors of pharmacy to contribute your views on the general election result via the correspondence pages of The Pharmaceutical Journal. More information is available at: http://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/for-authors-and-referees/article-types/#Correspondence_Published_in_The_Pharmaceutical_Journal

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal DOI: 10.1211/PJ.2017.20203120

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

Search an extensive range of the world’s most trusted resources

Powered by MedicinesComplete
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Newsletter Sign-up

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