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

Too similar to “MPharm” and “MRPharmS”

From Mr M. R. Hewitson, MRPharmS


I read the coverage on PJ Online of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians UK’s decision to allow the use of the post-nominals “MAPharmT” by its members (“APTUK members vote to use post-nominals”, 5 October 2012).

Although I have no objection to registered technicians using post-nominals, I believe as a pharmacist that the post-nominals they have chosen are potentially confusing to the public. The designation is similar to both “MPharm” and “MRPharmS”, and could mislead members of the public into thinking they are talking to a pharmacist.

A simple amendment to make the designation “MAPharmTech” would not be at all misleading and would have my full support.


Michael Hewitson

Beaminster,

Dorset

 

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal URI: 11109462

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.