Originally Posted by PharmDEpi
Yes konkan, I have, and if I were to list them here you would recognize some of them as being taught to you and in the literature that I presume you read.
But that is not the point. And I am not trying to bash you. I just can't figure out why a student such as yourself would have such a negative view of pharmacy before they have even experienced it. I have read some of your past posts, and they are completely negative and cynical about your profession. You haven't even graduated yet! What do you have to look forward to, if that is your attitude?
My posts in this thread were trying to relate to your original question. I still don't understand what you are asking -- what you expect, if you want to be a pharmacist in a hospital who does nothing but enters orders or if you think there should be some in-between, but not quite a "clinical pharmacist". BTW, I put the term in quotes, because I think all pharmacists should be "clinical pharmacists". To me it's a meaningless term. It's what you do that is important, not what you're called.
Again, I am not trying to bash you. So my apologies if you feel 'picked on' by me. I just feel sad from reading your posts, when someone like you who is obviously intelligent enough to get through pharmacy school is so completely depressed about the profession before even getting through the program.
"...I think all pharmacists should be "clinical pharmacists". To me it''s a meaningless term. Its what you do that is important, not what you're called."
I think you could be a classmate of mine...or someone who has graduated from a school similar to mine!
This whole discussion of "clinical" is antiquated & meaningless!!! We are all clinical because we are pharmacists - no matter our practice setting!!!
Why do schools not teach this????