Nope. Closing thread. Bannana, we need you now more than ever!Abilene said:
if they had the same knowledge, what would be the point of having pharmacy school and medical school? If they were the same, pharmacists and physicians would be interchangable....Abilene said:
agreed. this comparison is absolute ridiculous....Caverject said:Pharmacists do not even come close to the knowledge of pathophysiology a doctor has. Doctors don't come close either to the knowledge of pharmaceutical therapeutics, thus you can not compare the two.
wow that is a ridiculous question ESPECIALLY from an interviewer what did you say in it?? i think i would have been floored that they even asked about that!Abilene said:some of you thought it was a ridiculous question....I just thought it was kind of strange to be asked that during pharmacy school interview...that was one of the questions that I found in one of the pharmacy interview feedbacks from the southern nevada school (3/10/2004 3:26:56 PM)....just wanted to see what those of you who already know more about the field of pharmacy have to say... thankx for responding...chill...
i don't know how i would have reacted in an interview type setting but in retrospect the temptation would be to say.... "i guess that all depends on what you are teaching them here" and then not expect an acceptance.Caverject said:maybe it was to judge reaction?
...but when I graduate, I WILL be a doctor....Does a pharmacist have the same knowledge as a doctor
Well, pharmacists do seem to have lot's of knowledge but they just don't seem able to get the arrogance part down. You guys just don't seem anyway close to being obnoxious enough to be doctors.Abilene said:
Good one!phoenixsupra said:Well, pharmacists do seem to have lot's of knowledge but they just don't seem able to get the arrogance part down. You guys just don't seem anyway close to being obnoxious enough to be doctors.
bananaface said:Not all physicians are focused on treatment of disease. Hanging out with the pathology folks here has made me realize that we stereotype physicians as FPs in the same way that other people stereotype us as being retail pharmacists.
SlaveRPH said:The knowledge of the physician is more focused on diagnosis and treatment. I do feel physicians have a very good knowledge of pharmaceuticals. In some cases I feel they know more than a pharmacists. For example, a cardiologist has an excellent knowledge of cardiovascular drugs, their side effects and interactions. Physicians have an advantage over pharmacists in that they see the patients and the affects of the drugs. The problem for pharmacists has always been the disconnect from the patient. I feel we should stop portraying physicians as drug knowledge challenged. The ones I have known are very good and in some cases more knowledgeable than the pharmacists. I believe that pharmacists cannot be completely effective in their profession until they are connected with the patient and their disease state, labs and drug therapy.
ZpackSux said:Cardiologists will most likely know more about cardiovascular drugs than the most pharmacists. Infectious disease physician will know more about antibiotics then the most pharmacists.. so on.
But a pharmacist will know more about antibiotics than a typical cardiologist and a pharmacist will know more about cardiovascular drugs than the ID physician.
Pharmacists will have a broader general knowledge about most drugs and are more familiar with more drugs than the most specialized docs. Anesthesiologists are experts with anesthetics, neuromuscular blockers and analgesics.. but when it comes to anti-diabetics or antibiotics..they'll be scrambling...
But there is no doubt physicians are the experts in diagnostic science. Surgeons know how to do the surgeries.. some pharmacists are experts in pharmacotherapy.
But no one can parallel the phramacoeconomics knowledge of a well trained pharmacist.
SlaveRPH said:And how many jobs are there and who pays for this service. If you want to talk economics you'll have to cut and past things and take credit for them. You know like you did on the other boards you post. I'm glad you're here. We can have a lively debate. No matter how you cut the cake your spin of pharmacy represents a very small minority of positions. The truth is most positions have very little to do with the clinical area the colleges are pushing today. The main use of pharmacoeconomics that I have seen is in HMO's and PBM's. HMO's like to push the use of out dated generics amitryptiline over celexa or at PBM's where they want pharmacists to push the patient to the higher rebated drug. There have even been lawsuits on the latter one. I'm glad you know economics. You'll understand that until there is a solid proven cash flow and entities that will pay for the service clinical pharmacy will continue to go nowhere. 35 years ago they were pushing it in colleges of pharmacy. The big deal was to get the colleges of pharmacy to be located and/or have class work in large medical centers. The acceptance has just never exploded like they planned.