For academic or research jobs (or specialized clinical jobs), I agree, but I would think industry businesspeople would be more concerned with your job history and applicable employment experiences than academic work and other "fluff" (more or less fluff for a job where your goal is to help run a business). I mean if you're being hired to research things , you should list your experience researching (ie all your academic work like a cv). But if you're being hired to customer service etc you'd probably want to list your employment skills related to these areas of running a drug business. Like job experiences, and things you can bring to the table as far as practical matters. People who are practical dont want a long laundry list of all the academic things you've been part of..
Recently I was hired as an intern for a fortune top 25 company (non retail, non hospital). When I was applying, I debated adding a list of academic things i've been involved in to my resume, but decided to only list work experience and skills learned through some of my work related projects. Kept it to one succinct page. At the interview, the hiring manager asked if there was anything not on my resume I wanted to contribute. I mentioned that there were some academic things I left off and I wasnt sure if he cared or not, and he said he figured if I was a pharmacy student I was good at academics and that he was more concerned with what I could bring to a real workplace.
Just a little anecdote . Not sure if this would play out the same way with real pharmacist hiring as compared to interns, but it is an attitude I suspect is relatively common in the healthcare industry just as it is in most other industries.
I like resumes better. The are quicker and more to the point, easier to read, and more high impact. Also more fun to write, since if you limit to a page you get to put only your best stuff down.