Skip to main content

Self-selection of P medicines - not in the public interest!

96 Comments

A
Alun Phillips
1 year ago

I don't see any benefits to this idea and many drawbacks

A
Atiqur Rahman
2 years ago

Self selection of P medicines will create more problems than it will solve.

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

Unsafe for public

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

Unacceptable behaviour and judgement from the GPhC. They are supposed have patient safety as their main priority when regulating the pharmacy sector. Instead there main priority has become to please big companies such as Boots, Asda Pharmacy, Tesco Pharmacy, Well, Day Lewis and others.

M
Michelle Marshall
2 years ago

Keep patients safe

M
Mohammad waqaas
2 years ago

Codeine on self selection? Not a good idea

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

This is very dangerous for public safety and should never be passed

A
Amjad
2 years ago

Not available for self selection

F
Furqan Ali Ahmad
2 years ago

The new suggested regulations regarding P Med self-selection aren’t in public interest.

D
David Shallcross
2 years ago

If meds are safe for self selection then the manufacturers should be applying for GSL licenses.

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

Absolute madness to even consider putting p meds on general gsl display.

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

If P meds are being allowed to be picked by patients, this literally doesn't make any sense

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

Self selection for P med’s is not in patients interest. However, it is fine for corporate greed.

H
Hafsa Ebrahim
2 years ago

The whole idea undermines the role of the pharmacist and the medical practitioner and prioritises sales over patient safety. The ultimate outcome will be increased costs to the NHS due to increased hospitalisation from ADRs or Drug-drug interactions caused by allowing unsupervised self selection of P medications. Commercial interests and increased kickbacks or profit for retailers should never be the deciding factor. After all pharmacists fees keep the GPHc economically viable and pay their salaries and the opinion of the GPHc members should supersede any other outside input. Like the GMC and GDC it’s time the GPHc represented its members and consulted with it’s members first before taking decisions that impact it’s members role negatively and undermines the standing of the pharmacist in the public eye.

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

I do not agree with p-medicines to be in public display as GSL, it is a high risk to patient safety. So many people misuses these p medicines in community. I had a few patients who were on prescribed codeine and other meds, however, they would regularly try to buy more codeine and similar products over the counter. It came to my attention by my staffs and I kept an eye to confirm. Then I raised concerns with their GP and their GP got in touch with all the nearby pharmacies to not to sell anything similar to them. As they bought more p medicines from other local pharmacies. So, we all got in touch with each other and took action, to them safe.

F
Faez Khan
2 years ago

Public safety iand professionalism is being compromised for the sake of commercial profit

A
Anonymous
2 years ago

Very bad idea and potentially very dangerous.

O
Osamu Ode-Owegie
2 years ago

the GPhC, in the interests of the public should be helping pharmacists to instil some order in relation to medicines and to improve safety in this confusing and increasingly deteriorating situation. Instead, they are compounding the problem further by seeking to dismantle a well-established process that serves to keep patients safe.

S
Stephen KIng
2 years ago

The suggestion that the current regulation of 'P' medicines is reduced or removed entirely shows that the regulator is not fit to carry out its role. To say this is professionally negligent doesn't begin to cover it. But then it sounds like those who manage the GPhC are not professionally qualified to make such decisions and could be considered a 'rogue regulator'. Parliament should be involved (if they aren't already). If this dangerous change comes into effect, I contend that if any patient harm occurs as a consequence, the regulator is the one held criminally liable! It looks like it's time to challenge the competence of those responsible to be in the positions they are in. Disgusting+++!

T
Tahmida Chowdhury
2 years ago

no