Posted this on Reddit

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

I'm strictly speaking about retail, as that's where 70% of the jobs are. Schools and the profession in general have this constant unspoken rule drilled down in us to always uplift our profession and swallow and never speak of the negative portions. And we comply. Why? Because we know a retail pharmacist shouldn't be paid the way that are. So that's why were obsessed with that doctorate and calling people we fill for "our patients" to make our job seem harder than it is. It's been a long time coming to admit but pharmacists are over educated for a retail setting job. There is no denying it a 4 year professional degree is overkill, 90% of what was taught in school is not applied ever. A pharmacist is a technician who can say okay on the drug and counsel patients. So a pharmacy tech who needs absolutely no training vs a pharmacist who needs 8 years doesn't really make sense for the work done as basically the only difference is verifying. I think Rph length of 4-5 years was perfect for retail. Then if you want to do hospital, 2-3 year residency total 8 years; not 2-3 years + a pharmD at 10 years.

And I understand the premise that when you only have 1 pharmacist on duty that holds the 1 power to control the flow and rate of the pharmacy is usually entirely on them at 500+ scripts a day, which leads to being overworked and stressed so the pay seems well deserved. As trending, it only makes sense to drop salary down to $30/hr and have 2-3 staffed pharmacists on all shifts, verifying, MTMs, and calling doctors, raise technician pay to fill, take calls and work drive-thru, and hire pharmacy cashiers that are trained in working with insurance. The pharmacy would be a lot less stressful and it would run way more efficiently. This would probably drive business too, as honestly, I hate going to the pharmacy because everyone looks miserable and I get why but most people don't. At the end of the day, retail is retail, to drive sales you need to ramp up the customer service. There's too much work to be done and the imbalance of power and pay is truly questionable. Choosing to pay more or having the privilege to get an extremely expensive degree and having a doctorate does not equate to entitled higher pay.

This business model makes way more sense. Anyone who says that 1 pharmacist paid at $60-70/hr doing literally everything every shift makes more sense than 2 pharmacists paid $30-35/hr should never go into business. Pharmacy like everyone has been saying should be about the "patient" and putting them first, not this sweatshop. So if you could take a pay cut and work more diligently, less rushed, have time to interact with them, I'm sure it'll be better for everyone in terms of patient health, not your student loans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lol, I got attacked immediately. I wrote a post about how I took a LoA and how NP is looking like a better career just flatly looking at 30% job prospects and they went wild. They kept saying how NPs know absolutely nothing, are very stupid and how I 'flunked' out because I wasn't smart enough. But again, these are the same people who have been looking for other career alternatives, telling people to leave immediately, all looking into going to med school. So, I was very confused. I was just saying how it might be a good alternative for those who already have a strong science undergrad as the pay is about the same and how its 2 years so you could start practicing around the same time. Also, who are the real losers when you have 200k debt, with Walmart slashes, Fred's Pharmacy closures, lowering pay already at $50, and have no job? I wouldn't say an NP. I don't understand how these people can afford to be so egotistical with our current state of the market. I truly. Don't understand. They are making the same amount as an NP and most people agree that a pharmD is a joke/overkill. I truly don't understand where this superiority is coming from other than insecurity. I understand it might hurt to say, but I really feel like this could be a true reality in the next decade or so. But no one made a single argument against me on my logic other than, "By that logic, MDs should get $40/hr" "PBMs are the real enemy, imagine thinking that pharmacists should be the one's to suffer". Do these apparent elite pharmDs not understand the laws of supply and demand? Do they not realize that they are rooting for communism at this point?

I just wanted to have a discussion but the highest voted comments were "I can work as a truck driver for $30" and "You're just mad that you flunked out".

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted480308]

1. Did you flunk out?

2. Do you really think an NP is the best trained person to see a patient?

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

1. Did you flunk out?

2. Do you really think an NP is the best trained person to see a patient?

1. Certainly did not. Still doesn't change my stance on the issue or the logic of my argument. If my biases were that apparent, their points should reflect and refute them, but they didn't.

2. Doesn't matter what I think. Nothings going to stop mid-level providers from providing if there's a market for it, which there is. Looking solely on the numbers, so far, it seems like a better deal than pharmacy.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

I'm strictly speaking about retail, as that's where 70% of the jobs are. Schools and the profession in general have this constant unspoken rule drilled down in us to always uplift our profession and swallow and never speak of the negative portions. And we comply. Why? Because we know a retail pharmacist shouldn't be paid the way that are. So that's why were obsessed with that doctorate and calling people we fill for "our patients" to make our job seem harder than it is. It's been a long time coming to admit but pharmacists are over educated for a retail setting job. There is no denying it a 4 year professional degree is overkill, 90% of what was taught in school is not applied ever. A pharmacist is a technician who can say okay on the drug and counsel patients. So a pharmacy tech who needs absolutely no training vs a pharmacist who needs 8 years doesn't really make sense for the work done as basically the only difference is verifying. I think Rph length of 4-5 years was perfect for retail. Then if you want to do hospital, 2-3 year residency total 8 years; not 2-3 years + a pharmD at 10 years.

And I understand the premise that when you only have 1 pharmacist on duty that holds the 1 power to control the flow and rate of the pharmacy is usually entirely on them at 500+ scripts a day, which leads to being overworked and stressed so the pay seems well deserved. As trending, it only makes sense to drop salary down to $30/hr and have 2-3 staffed pharmacists on all shifts, verifying, MTMs, and calling doctors, raise technician pay to fill, take calls and work drive-thru, and hire pharmacy cashiers that are trained in working with insurance. The pharmacy would be a lot less stressful and it would run way more efficiently. This would probably drive business too, as honestly, I hate going to the pharmacy because everyone looks miserable and I get why but most people don't. At the end of the day, retail is retail, to drive sales you need to ramp up the customer service. There's too much work to be done and the imbalance of power and pay is truly questionable. Choosing to pay more or having the privilege to get an extremely expensive degree and having a doctorate does not equate to entitled higher pay.

This business model makes way more sense. Anyone who says that 1 pharmacist paid at $60-70/hr doing literally everything every shift makes more sense than 2 pharmacists paid $30-35/hr should never go into business. Pharmacy like everyone has been saying should be about the "patient" and putting them first, not this sweatshop. So if you could take a pay cut and work more diligently, less rushed, have time to interact with them, I'm sure it'll be better for everyone in terms of patient health, not your student loans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lol, I got attacked immediately. I wrote a post about how I took a LoA and how NP is looking like a better career just flatly looking at 30% job prospects and they went wild. They kept saying how NPs know absolutely nothing, are very stupid and how I 'flunked' out because I wasn't smart enough. But again, these are the same people who have been looking for other career alternatives, telling people to leave immediately, all looking into going to med school. So, I was very confused. I was just saying how it might be a good alternative for those who already have a strong science undergrad as the pay is about the same and how its 2 years so you could start practicing around the same time. Also, who are the real losers when you have 200k debt, with Walmart slashes, Fred's Pharmacy closures, lowering pay already at $50, and have no job? I wouldn't say an NP. I don't understand how these people can afford to be so egotistical with our current state of the market. I truly. Don't understand. They are making the same amount as an NP and most people agree that a pharmD is a joke/overkill. I truly don't understand where this superiority is coming from other than insecurity. I understand it might hurt to say, but I really feel like this could be a true reality in the next decade or so. But no one made a single argument against me on my logic other than, "By that logic, MDs should get $40/hr" "PBMs are the real enemy, imagine thinking that pharmacists should be the one's to suffer". Do these apparent elite pharmDs not understand the laws of supply and demand? Do they not realize that they are rooting for communism at this point?

I just wanted to have a discussion but the highest voted comments were "I can work as a truck driver for $30" and "You're just mad that you flunked out".

Look, Reddit is filled with a bunch of empty-headed people who epitomize everything that’s wrong with the profession: entitlement, over-estimation of one’s value relative to the broader healthcare industry and quite frankly this is the result of pharmacy schools graduating tons of pharmacists who have no business being pharmacists to begin with. These are the same “I scored 15 on the PCAT, what are my chances?” people who downvote every “negative” post about the profession because they are clinging to knowing that they aren’t worthy of being a pharmacist and want to feel better about themselves (the very definition of being in denial).

Quite frankly, for the whole lot of them, if they are a student or long-time practicing pharmacist then they likely have no awareness about the current state of the job market so I wouldn’t blame them. But these are the same people who will be crying wolf in the future and nobody will come help them. Our profession needs to shave off dead weight, anyways.

 

[deleted480308]

1. Certainly did not. Still doesn't change my stance on the issue or the logic of my argument. If my biases were that apparent, their points should reflect and refute them, but they didn't.

2. Doesn't matter what I think. Nothings going to stop mid-level providers from providing if there's a market for it, which there is. Looking solely on the numbers, so far, it seems like a better deal than pharmacy.

If you didn’t flunk, it doesn’t matter what people think

I’m not asking the NP question because of numbers, I’m asking about the morality question of wanting to do the best thing for patients. What makes you the best trained to care for patients?

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

If you didn’t flunk, it doesn’t matter what people think

I’m not asking the NP question because of numbers, I’m asking about the morality question of wanting to do the best thing for patients. What makes you the best trained to care for patients?

I think mid-level providers are of value and have a place in health care. I would say pharmacists with this heavy clinical curriculum could execute this role as well. For example diagnosing the flu, allergies, diabetes, and working at urgent care facilities. But pharmacists have too much of a heavy place in retail making advocating for this role harder and nurses actually have organizations trying to expand their roles. I believe NPs have beat pharmacist to the punch in this provider status regard. I would trust a mid-level provider's patient practices if they are similar to what I've endured during school. But again, my main goal is to have a job to fufill the bottom of my hierarchy of needs. Everything else is secondary. At a pharmacy student drop outs stakes, everything is too uncertain to be thinking about the deep morality of the profession. Everything will have its ups and down, I would argue retail pharmacy is not that ethical either. A pharmacist should be trying to pump out scripts as fast as she can, but she has too.

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

you don't how retail works if you think they would keep 2 pharmacists for $30 versus 1 at $60. They don't even like to give extra techs that make $15 per hour. they will cut the 1st chance they can

I wrote that with the optimism that they would perhaps they cared about efficiency and less stressful work conditions, surely since 1 isn't meeting standard having 2 at the price of 1 would maybe be up to their standards. I'm sure there's a supply and demand chart that could be worked up to maximize profits. But either way, pharmacists are getting paid less and there's no turning back.

 

[CetiAlphaFive]

I'm strictly speaking about retail, as that's where 70% of the jobs are. Schools and the profession in general have this constant unspoken rule drilled down in us to always uplift our profession and swallow and never speak of the negative portions. And we comply. Why? Because we know a retail pharmacist shouldn't be paid the way that are. So that's why were obsessed with that doctorate and calling people we fill for "our patients" to make our job seem harder than it is. It's been a long time coming to admit but pharmacists are over educated for a retail setting job. There is no denying it a 4 year professional degree is overkill, 90% of what was taught in school is not applied ever. A pharmacist is a technician who can say okay on the drug and counsel patients. So a pharmacy tech who needs absolutely no training vs a pharmacist who needs 8 years doesn't really make sense for the work done as basically the only difference is verifying. I think Rph length of 4-5 years was perfect for retail. Then if you want to do hospital, 2-3 year residency total 8 years; not 2-3 years + a pharmD at 10 years.

And I understand the premise that when you only have 1 pharmacist on duty that holds the 1 power to control the flow and rate of the pharmacy is usually entirely on them at 500+ scripts a day, which leads to being overworked and stressed so the pay seems well deserved. As trending, it only makes sense to drop salary down to $30/hr and have 2-3 staffed pharmacists on all shifts, verifying, MTMs, and calling doctors, raise technician pay to fill, take calls and work drive-thru, and hire pharmacy cashiers that are trained in working with insurance. The pharmacy would be a lot less stressful and it would run way more efficiently. This would probably drive business too, as honestly, I hate going to the pharmacy because everyone looks miserable and I get why but most people don't. At the end of the day, retail is retail, to drive sales you need to ramp up the customer service. There's too much work to be done and the imbalance of power and pay is truly questionable. Choosing to pay more or having the privilege to get an extremely expensive degree and having a doctorate does not equate to entitled higher pay.

This business model makes way more sense. Anyone who says that 1 pharmacist paid at $60-70/hr doing literally everything every shift makes more sense than 2 pharmacists paid $30-35/hr should never go into business. Pharmacy like everyone has been saying should be about the "patient" and putting them first, not this sweatshop. So if you could take a pay cut and work more diligently, less rushed, have time to interact with them, I'm sure it'll be better for everyone in terms of patient health, not your student loans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lol, I got attacked immediately. I wrote a post about how I took a LoA and how NP is looking like a better career just flatly looking at 30% job prospects and they went wild. They kept saying how NPs know absolutely nothing, are very stupid and how I 'flunked' out because I wasn't smart enough. But again, these are the same people who have been looking for other career alternatives, telling people to leave immediately, all looking into going to med school. So, I was very confused. I was just saying how it might be a good alternative for those who already have a strong science undergrad as the pay is about the same and how its 2 years so you could start practicing around the same time. Also, who are the real losers when you have 200k debt, with Walmart slashes, Fred's Pharmacy closures, lowering pay already at $50, and have no job? I wouldn't say an NP. I don't understand how these people can afford to be so egotistical with our current state of the market. I truly. Don't understand. They are making the same amount as an NP and most people agree that a pharmD is a joke/overkill. I truly don't understand where this superiority is coming from other than insecurity. I understand it might hurt to say, but I really feel like this could be a true reality in the next decade or so. But no one made a single argument against me on my logic other than, "By that logic, MDs should get $40/hr" "PBMs are the real enemy, imagine thinking that pharmacists should be the one's to suffer". Do these apparent elite pharmDs not understand the laws of supply and demand? Do they not realize that they are rooting for communism at this point?

I just wanted to have a discussion but the highest voted comments were "I can work as a truck driver for $30" and "You're just mad that you flunked out".

Nah, it's just that you and most other retail pharmacists are bad at their.jobs

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

Nah, it's just that you and most other retail pharmacists are bad at their.jobs

I mean were down to $50/hr. Those senior pharmacists at WM who were probably the best got the boot trying to hire those inexperienced new grads. So I don't think being good or bad is a solid argument. It's obviously all about the money.

 

[deleted480308]

I think mid-level providers are of value and have a place in health care. I would say pharmacists with this heavy clinical curriculum could execute this role as well. For example diagnosing the flu, allergies, diabetes, and working at urgent care facilities. But pharmacists have too much of a heavy place in retail making advocating for this role harder and nurses actually have organizations trying to expand their roles. I believe NPs have beat pharmacist to the punch in this provider status regard. I would trust a mid-level provider's patient practices if they are similar to what I've endured during school. But again, my main goal is to have a job to fufill the bottom of my hierarchy of needs. Everything else is secondary. At a pharmacy student drop outs stakes, everything is too uncertain to be thinking of the next best thing be thinking about the deep morality of the profession. Pharmacy is not that ethical either. A pharmacist should be trying to pump out scripts as fast as she can, but she has too.

You don’t really know how little you know about patient care right now. I would advise some more reflection beyond “get money”

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

You don’t really know how little you know about patient care right now. I would advise some more reflection beyond “get money”

Get money is 99% of the reason why people are in this profession. So you're telling me you wouldn't jump ships if you dropped down to $30 over the next decade if you had the chance? You'd stick around after your fired and reapply for 3x less your salary which someone is paying a new grad to do? Retail work is not seen as valuable as it once was. We went down from $70 to $50. I've seen job listings for $45. Can you explain to me how I know very little about patient care? What is patient care in a retail setting? I think with 1 didactic year left, I'm quite aware of what goes on. The store manager yells at you for taking care of a customer for more than 5 minutes as you have to go with the "flow" of the store. There's no such thing as actual patient care in retail pharmacy. The monitor tells you if there's an interaction or the dosing is wrong, then you call the doctor and change it. That's called doing your job that's not even that difficult.

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

you don't how retail works if you think they would keep 2 pharmacists for $30 versus 1 at $60. They don't even like to give extra techs that make $15 per hour. they will cut the 1st chance they can

I wrote that with the optimism that they would perhaps they cared about efficiency and less stressful work conditions, surely since 1 isn't meeting standard having 2 at the price of 1 would maybe be up to their standards. I'm sure there's a supply and demand chart that could be worked up to maximize profits. But either way, pharmacists are getting paid less and there's no turning back.

The easy fix is 1 pharmacist at $30. That’s what it’s going to become, anyways.

 

[deleted480308]

Get money is 99% of the reason why people are in this profession. So you're telling me you wouldn't jump ships if you dropped down to $30 over the next decade if you had the chance? You'd stick around after your fired and reapply for 3x less your salary which someone is paying a new grad to do? Retail work is not seen as valuable as it once was. We went down from $70 to $50. I've seen job listings for $45. Can you explain to me how I know very little about patient care? What is patient care in a retail setting? I think with 1 didactic year left, I'm quite aware of what goes on. The store manager yells at you for taking care of a customer for more than 5 minutes as you have to go with the "flow" of the store. There's no such thing as actual patient care in retail pharmacy. The monitor tells you if there's an interaction or the dosing is wrong, then you call the doctor and change it. That's called doing your job that's not even that difficult.

I’m a doctor discussing your impressions about what it takes to appropriately evaluate, diagnose and treat a patient. You don’t know how little you know about that topic

I share your opinion about the economic future in retail pharmacy

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

I’m a doctor discussing your impressions about what it takes to appropriately evaluate, diagnose and treat a patient. You don’t know how little you know about that topic

I share your opinion about the economic future in retail pharmacy

I've been treated by many PAs for nora virus. I've been treated by NPs for my foot fungus and UTIs. I had to memorize charts up and down to indicate which insulin is the most cost effective and effective in treatment. I've had many pharmD/MDs and MD students tell me they do not go anywhere near that sort of dept in pharmacology. I don't think there's a need to see a doctor for general "sicknesses". It's not rocket science, you follow a flow chart. I just need a prescription for an anti-fungal an antiviral, and antibiotics. Getting an appointment with doctors can be difficult/expensive and sometimes need to planned weeks ahead of time. So mid level providers are way more accessible and therefore serve a purpose, especially to those without good insurance. I don't believe a doctor would have been more or less effective in the treatment that I got. I understand that you have some sort of bias towards NPs I feel, but they have a place. But again, there's no need to jerk each others egos/titles off. I want a job that's not in pharmacy with my science undergrad and if there's a market for mid-level providers there's a reason: it works.

 

[wagrxm2000]

Pharmacists that work in hospitals don't use that much more knowledge obtained.

Just want to get that out there.

 

[PikminOC]

I've been treated by many PAs for nora virus. I've been treated by NPs for my foot fungus and UTIs. I had to memorize charts up and down to indicate which insulin is the most cost effective and effective in treatment. I've had many pharmD/MDs and MD students tell me they do not go anywhere near that sort of dept in pharmacology. I don't think there's a need to see a doctor for general "sicknesses". It's not rocket science, you follow a flow chart. I just need a prescription for an anti-fungal an antiviral, and antibiotics. Getting an appointment with doctors can be difficult/expensive and sometimes need to planned weeks ahead of time. So mid level providers are way more accessible and therefore serve a purpose, especially to those without good insurance. I don't believe a doctor would have been more or less effective in the treatment that I got. I understand that you have some sort of bias towards NPs I feel, but they have a place. But again, there's no need to jerk each others egos/titles off. I want a job that's not in pharmacy with my science undergrad and if there's a market for mid-level providers there's a reason: it works.

It's not about ego. It's about appropriate differentials. I have many patients that seem easy, but are not.

 

[deleted480308]

I've been treated by many PAs for nora virus. I've been treated by NPs for my foot fungus and UTIs. I had to memorize charts up and down to indicate which insulin is the most cost effective and effective in treatment. I've had many pharmD/MDs and MD students tell me they do not go anywhere near that sort of dept in pharmacology. I don't think there's a need to see a doctor for general "sicknesses". It's not rocket science, you follow a flow chart. I just need a prescription for an anti-fungal an antiviral, and antibiotics. Getting an appointment with doctors can be difficult/expensive and sometimes need to planned weeks ahead of time. So mid level providers are way more accessible and therefore serve a purpose, especially to those without good insurance. I don't believe a doctor would have been more or less effective in the treatment that I got. I understand that you have some sort of bias towards NPs I feel, but they have a place. But again, there's no need to jerk each others egos/titles off. I want a job that's not in pharmacy with my science undergrad and if there's a market for mid-level providers there's a reason: it works.

Your post makes my point for me.

We’re not going to agree here. Good luck

 

[JustFillIt]

I'm strictly speaking about retail, as that's where 70% of the jobs are. Schools and the profession in general have this constant unspoken rule drilled down in us to always uplift our profession and swallow and never speak of the negative portions. And we comply. Why? Because we know a retail pharmacist shouldn't be paid the way that are. So that's why were obsessed with that doctorate and calling people we fill for "our patients" to make our job seem harder than it is. It's been a long time coming to admit but pharmacists are over educated for a retail setting job. There is no denying it a 4 year professional degree is overkill, 90% of what was taught in school is not applied ever. A pharmacist is a technician who can say okay on the drug and counsel patients. So a pharmacy tech who needs absolutely no training vs a pharmacist who needs 8 years doesn't really make sense for the work done as basically the only difference is verifying. I think Rph length of 4-5 years was perfect for retail. Then if you want to do hospital, 2-3 year residency total 8 years; not 2-3 years + a pharmD at 10 years.

And I understand the premise that when you only have 1 pharmacist on duty that holds the 1 power to control the flow and rate of the pharmacy is usually entirely on them at 500+ scripts a day, which leads to being overworked and stressed so the pay seems well deserved. As trending, it only makes sense to drop salary down to $30/hr and have 2-3 staffed pharmacists on all shifts, verifying, MTMs, and calling doctors, raise technician pay to fill, take calls and work drive-thru, and hire pharmacy cashiers that are trained in working with insurance. The pharmacy would be a lot less stressful and it would run way more efficiently. This would probably drive business too, as honestly, I hate going to the pharmacy because everyone looks miserable and I get why but most people don't. At the end of the day, retail is retail, to drive sales you need to ramp up the customer service. There's too much work to be done and the imbalance of power and pay is truly questionable. Choosing to pay more or having the privilege to get an extremely expensive degree and having a doctorate does not equate to entitled higher pay.

This business model makes way more sense. Anyone who says that 1 pharmacist paid at $60-70/hr doing literally everything every shift makes more sense than 2 pharmacists paid $30-35/hr should never go into business. Pharmacy like everyone has been saying should be about the "patient" and putting them first, not this sweatshop. So if you could take a pay cut and work more diligently, less rushed, have time to interact with them, I'm sure it'll be better for everyone in terms of patient health, not your student loans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lol, I got attacked immediately. I wrote a post about how I took a LoA and how NP is looking like a better career just flatly looking at 30% job prospects and they went wild. They kept saying how NPs know absolutely nothing, are very stupid and how I 'flunked' out because I wasn't smart enough. But again, these are the same people who have been looking for other career alternatives, telling people to leave immediately, all looking into going to med school. So, I was very confused. I was just saying how it might be a good alternative for those who already have a strong science undergrad as the pay is about the same and how its 2 years so you could start practicing around the same time. Also, who are the real losers when you have 200k debt, with Walmart slashes, Fred's Pharmacy closures, lowering pay already at $50, and have no job? I wouldn't say an NP. I don't understand how these people can afford to be so egotistical with our current state of the market. I truly. Don't understand. They are making the same amount as an NP and most people agree that a pharmD is a joke/overkill. I truly don't understand where this superiority is coming from other than insecurity. I understand it might hurt to say, but I really feel like this could be a true reality in the next decade or so. But no one made a single argument against me on my logic other than, "By that logic, MDs should get $40/hr" "PBMs are the real enemy, imagine thinking that pharmacists should be the one's to suffer". Do these apparent elite pharmDs not understand the laws of supply and demand? Do they not realize that they are rooting for communism at this point?

I just wanted to have a discussion but the highest voted comments were "I can work as a truck driver for $30" and "You're just mad that you flunked out".

Smells like a disgruntled technician to me.... look just keep your mouth shut and do what your told please... thank you..

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

It's not about ego. It's about appropriate differentials. I have many patients that seem easy, but are not.

Yeah. But if I tell you if it hurts when I pee and I'm sexually active, you'll assume its a UTI. Then send me home. It's not that serious. I've been to doctors for a UTI. It was a complete waste of money, time and resources, when I could have just gone to the clinic and saw an NP. The doctor saw me for 2 seconds and left.

I get if my symptoms get worse, or when things start to feel not right, then I would contact a doctor. Has never happened though. I was cured after an NP, PA, and after an MD. I would think these instances are more likely that it was actually that simple than those of thinking something was simple but wasn't. Your services are simply too expensive and doesn't justify for things like this.

Aren't I on the pharmacy thread? I'm confused.

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

Smells like a disgruntled technician to me.... look just keep your mouth shut and do what your told please... thank you..

Aren't you that climate change denier?

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

Your post makes my point for me.

We’re not going to agree here. Good luck

Again, we can all get horny over how great we all are, if there's a market there's a reason. 1 or 2 doctors on here don't get to decide the effectiveness of them. This already shows how big your ego is. Society will do that for them. If they suck, are useless, they'll get trickled out. I'm happier with a world with PAs, NPs, MDs, RNs, pharmacists and whatever. But your egos are more important than my access to care right? Rile up your gang and practice for 100k and then we can talk how you guys should be the only ones allowed to practice.

 

[deleted480308]

Again, we can all get horny over how great we all are, if there's a market there's a reason. 1 or 2 doctors on here don't get to decide the effectiveness of them. This already shows how big your ego is. Society will do that for them. If they suck, are useless, they'll get trickled out. I'm happier with a world with PAs, NPs, MDs, RNs, pharmacists and whatever. But your egos are more important than my access to care right? Rile up your gang and practice for 100k and then we can talk how you guys should be the only ones allowed to practice.

Someone providing “care” doesn’t mean they are adequately trained to be providing good care

It’s an important distinction

 

[radio frequency]

I've been treated by many PAs for nora virus. I've been treated by NPs for my foot fungus and UTIs. I had to memorize charts up and down to indicate which insulin is the most cost effective and effective in treatment. I've had many pharmD/MDs and MD students tell me they do not go anywhere near that sort of dept in pharmacology. I don't think there's a need to see a doctor for general "sicknesses". It's not rocket science, you follow a flow chart. I just need a prescription for an anti-fungal an antiviral, and antibiotics. Getting an appointment with doctors can be difficult/expensive and sometimes need to planned weeks ahead of time. So mid level providers are way more accessible and therefore serve a purpose, especially to those without good insurance. I don't believe a doctor would have been more or less effective in the treatment that I got. I understand that you have some sort of bias towards NPs I feel, but they have a place. But again, there's no need to jerk each others egos/titles off. I want a job that's not in pharmacy with my science undergrad and if there's a market for mid-level providers there's a reason: it works.

Clearly as pharmacists we are not taught much about diagnosis, which this post attests to. Some pharmacists would be good providers, but there would be a lot of training we’d need in diagnosing and assessment. That semester of patient assessment definitely wouldn’t cut it if pharmacists were diagnosing patients all day!

Also, while I truly appreciate NPs and PAs for what they offer, it’s important to know when an MD is a better choice. If it’s complex or involves antibiotics, I prefer the involvement of an MD for myself and my patients. The degree is longer and covers more clinical information that I feel many NPs and PAs miss in their practice, plus the additional residency time doesn’t hurt either.

 

[owlegrad]

I don’t have a strong opinion on NPs but saying they have a place because they exist is a fallacy. Homeopathy also exists but there is no place for them in EBM.

Just wanted to point that out.

 

[JustFillIt]

Again, we can all get horny over how great we all are, if there's a market there's a reason. 1 or 2 doctors on here don't get to decide the effectiveness of them. This already shows how big your ego is. Society will do that for them. If they suck, are useless, they'll get trickled out. I'm happier with a world with PAs, NPs, MDs, RNs, pharmacists and whatever. But your egos are more important than my access to care right? Rile up your gang and practice for 100k and then we can talk how you guys should be the only ones allowed to practice.

Please don’t tell me what I can and can’t get horney over... this is 2019

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

Someone providing “care” doesn’t mean they are adequately trained to be providing good care

It’s an important distinction

Yes of course 'quality' care is better. But when I have the need to pee every 10 seconds and need this fixed right away, I will go to urgent care and pay 5x less than a doctors appointment. I've been adequately taken care of each time and I'm certain others have too. It's a privilege to see a doctor in the US. So until this is not a thing anymore, they are giving me the most quality care I can afford. I could have waited a week to a see a doctor for my UTI and then had my kidneys infected. Access saves people. Saved me. I'm sure have saved many others.

 

[pharmDcanwishIwasnt]

Clearly as pharmacists we are not taught much about diagnosis, which this post attests to. Some pharmacists would be good providers, but there would be a lot of training we’d need in diagnosing and assessment. That semester of patient assessment definitely wouldn’t cut it if pharmacists were diagnosing patients all day!

Also, while I truly appreciate NPs and PAs for what they offer, it’s important to know when an MD is a better choice. If it’s complex or involves antibiotics, I prefer the involvement of an MD for myself and my patients. The degree is longer and covers more clinical information that I feel many NPs and PAs miss in their practice, plus the additional residency time doesn’t hurt either.

Idk what pharmacy school you went to but mine is the whole scope from diagnosis, pharmacology, and therapeutics. I'm sure our scope is not as heavy on diagnosis but if you need to prescribe a dose for Stage 4 CKD, you need to know what it is, hence diagnosis. I don't know how much pharmacists actually use this knowledge in hospital but we are trained for it. Yeah, NP, PA aren't perfect or ideal. Neither is MD and healthcare in general. There is a lot more in value in these services than the title. This is why healthcare is a mess. We all forget the common goal and put way too much emphasis on the title. Why do we have these super qualified pharmDs "Dr." unemployed/laid-off but PA/NPs still practice? If title was that important in terms of usefulness to society, this would be a fallacy.

Lol if you denied and refused to fill my antibiotics for my UTI because it was prescribed by a PA because you think you're better than them, I would be beyond pissed. Give me my meds. Just do your job and fill my script, your opinion doesn't really matter unless its very clearly wrong and the computer will tell you that. I'm not your "patient". This pharmD has gotten to peoples heads. Never once have I heard an Rph refer to people they fill for their "patients" or are their "Dr.". Shut up and fill, know your place. Your ego is hilarious. I appreciate the work all healthcare workers, I think retail pharmacists and the computer that does A LOT of the work for them are none the less much needed (not at $70/hr thou) but this is too much. It's called retail. I don't think someone who works at Nike who checked me out calls me their patient.

 

[owlegrad]

Well that was fun.

It always amazes me when people don’t know how much they don’t know.

 

[Lubeckd]

I thought that was mcpickle. The stalking is high with the keg drinking

 

[radio frequency]

Idk what pharmacy school you went to but mine is the whole scope from diagnosis, pharmacology, and therapeutics. I'm sure our scope is not as heavy on diagnosis but if you need to prescribe a dose for Stage 4 CKD, you need to know what it is, hence diagnosis. I don't know how much pharmacists actually use this knowledge in hospital but we are trained for it. Yeah, NP, PA aren't perfect or ideal. Neither is MD and healthcare in general. There is a lot more in value in these services than the title. This is why healthcare is a mess. We all forget the common goal and put way too much emphasis on the title. Why do we have these super qualified pharmDs "Dr." unemployed/laid-off but PA/NPs still practice? If title was that important in terms of usefulness to society, this would be a fallacy.

Lol if you denied and refused to fill my antibiotics for my UTI because it was prescribed by a PA because you think you're better than them, I would be beyond pissed. Give me my meds. Just do your job and fill my script, your opinion doesn't really matter unless its very clearly wrong and the computer will tell you that. I'm not your "patient". This pharmD has gotten to peoples heads. Never once have I heard an Rph refer to people they fill for their "patients" or are their "Dr.". Shut up and fill, know your place. Your ego is hilarious. I appreciate the work all healthcare workers, I think retail pharmacists and the computer that does A LOT of the work for them are none the less much needed (not at $70/hr thou) but this is too much. It's called retail. I don't think someone who works at Nike who checked me out calls me their patient.

Reading comprehension is a useful skill.

 

[CetiAlphaFive]

I mean were down to $50/hr. Those senior pharmacists at WM who were probably the best got the boot trying to hire those inexperienced new grads. So I don't think being good or bad is a solid argument. It's obviously all about the money.

No, I mean it is entirely possible to use your education in retail.
Too many get stuck in the hamster wheel and just go through the motions.

You also have to have the guts to stand up to prescribers

 

[PikminOC]

Yes of course 'quality' care is better. But when I have the need to pee every 10 seconds and need this fixed right away, I will go to urgent care and pay 5x less than a doctors appointment. I've been adequately taken care of each time and I'm certain others have too. It's a privilege to see a doctor in the US. So until this is not a thing anymore, they are giving me the most quality care I can afford. I could have waited a week to a see a doctor for my UTI and then had my kidneys infected. Access saves people. Saved me. I'm sure have saved many others.

Mid-levels don't charge less than physicians. It may be the urgent Care setting.
When you go to your physician, if they have a mid-level, it's no cheaper

 

[PikminOC]

Idk what pharmacy school you went to but mine is the whole scope from diagnosis, pharmacology, and therapeutics. I'm sure our scope is not as heavy on diagnosis but if you need to prescribe a dose for Stage 4 CKD, you need to know what it is, hence diagnosis. I don't know how much pharmacists actually use this knowledge in hospital but we are trained for it. Yeah, NP, PA aren't perfect or ideal. Neither is MD and healthcare in general. There is a lot more in value in these services than the title. This is why healthcare is a mess. We all forget the common goal and put way too much emphasis on the title. Why do we have these super qualified pharmDs "Dr." unemployed/laid-off but PA/NPs still practice? If title was that important in terms of usefulness to society, this would be a fallacy.

Lol if you denied and refused to fill my antibiotics for my UTI because it was prescribed by a PA because you think you're better than them, I would be beyond pissed. Give me my meds. Just do your job and fill my script, your opinion doesn't really matter unless its very clearly wrong and the computer will tell you that. I'm not your "patient". This pharmD has gotten to peoples heads. Never once have I heard an Rph refer to people they fill for their "patients" or are their "Dr.". Shut up and fill, know your place. Your ego is hilarious. I appreciate the work all healthcare workers, I think retail pharmacists and the computer that does A LOT of the work for them are none the less much needed (not at $70/hr thou) but this is too much. It's called retail. I don't think someone who works at Nike who checked me out calls me their patient.

membership revoked?

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

Mid-levels don't charge less than physicians. It may be the urgent Care setting.
When you go to your physician, if they have a mid-level, it's no cheaper

Actually mid-levels can only get reimbursed up to 70-75% of what an MD gets reimbursed for the same service. This is an example: https://mediproviders.anthem.com/Do...burseChangeMidLevelPractitioners_Oct_2018.pdf

 

[Mcpickle]

Mid-levels don't charge less than physicians. It may be the urgent Care setting.
When you go to your physician, if they have a mid-level, it's no cheaper

Why can’t you just admit that part of what you do can be done by midlevel providers and it makes a difference. I don’t think they’d be employable if health outcomes were reduced.

You have to be seriously joking if you’re saying it costs the same amount to employ a midlevel and a physician. I don’t think I need to explain the implications of how access is determined by that.

Along those lines, then I’m sure you know the reasons behind the discrepancies in health within POC and low economic status individuals..

For the UTI example, would you seriously say to a patient they did the right thing for waiting a week to see a doctor instead of an more accessible provider?

 

[PikminOC]

Why can’t you just admit that part of what you do can be done by midlevel providers and it makes a difference. I don’t think they’d be employable if health outcomes were reduced.

You have to be seriously joking if you’re saying it costs the same amount to employ a midlevel and a physician. I don’t think I need to explain the implications of how access is determined by that.

Along those lines, then I’m sure you know the reasons behind the discrepancies in health within POC and low economic status individuals..

For the UTI example, would you seriously say to a patient they did the right thing for waiting a week to see a doctor instead of an more accessible provider?

I have seen numerous missteps by mid-level I've had to clean up. There are cases that are much more complex than meets the eye.
Insurances are reimbursing them the same so it's not bringing the overall cost of healthcare down. Just more profit for employer

 

[PikminOC]

Actually mid-levels can only get reimbursed up to 70-75% of what an MD gets reimbursed for the same service. This is an example: https://mediproviders.anthem.com/Do...burseChangeMidLevelPractitioners_Oct_2018.pdf

Not in Oregon and other states. Do you pay 75 percent less in cash for a mid-level

 

[JustFillIt]

Your about to get Mcpickled, Tiki. It’s a never ending argument that is like chasing your tail.

 

[Lubeckd]

Your about to get Mcpickled, Tiki. It’s a never ending argument that is like chasing your tail.

Don't waste your timeee

 

[Pharmacy is a Scam]

Not in Oregon and other states. Do you pay 75 percent less in cash for a mid-level

What “other states” have this policy? Oregon is the outlier and not the norm. That is like saying “pharmacist salaries aren’t dropping, look at California, the pharmacists there make $80/hr.”

 

[Mcpickle]

Not in Oregon and other states. Do you pay 75 percent less in cash for a mid-level

I have seen numerous missteps by mid-level I've had to clean up. There are cases that are much more complex than meets the eye.
Insurances are reimbursing them the same so it's not bringing the overall cost of healthcare down. Just more profit for employer

Stating 1 state where it’s not the case doesn’t say anything at all. Access has much more involved than what’s billed to the insurance which is what you’re arguing. Are you seriously saying there are no barriers to health that mid levels could never adequately solve? Most doctors choose to operate on a network private insurance and not take Medicare..? I don’t think I need to go further on the implications of that. You’re out of touch.

If the argument still remains that mid levels provide more negative health outcomes than positive, I believe that’s an extremely privileged opinion and I disagree.

If a doctor is this much smarter, I think they can understand the basic economics and sociology in healthcare.

 

[JustFillIt]

If the argument still remains that mid levels provide more negative health outcomes than positive, I believe that’s an extremely privileged opinion and I disagree.

Quick point of privilege! Hello - my name is Justfillit, chosen pronouns are he/him...

An argument like that shouldn’t be based on privilege or opinion... it should be based on data.

Now I’m curious - is there data that shows poor outcomes with mid levels compared to physicians?

 

[PikminOC]

Quick point of privilege! Hello - my name is Justfillit, chosen pronouns are he/him...

An argument like that shouldn’t be based on privilege or opinion... it should be based on data.

Now I’m curious - is there data that shows poor outcomes with mid levels compared to physicians?

Physicians are collaborators on their cases. So when there's an issue. It goes to the deepest pocket first.

Why not have high school kids with an online course prescribe? Where's the line.

 

[PikminOC]

Stating 1 state where it’s not the case doesn’t say anything at all. Access has much more involved than what’s billed to the insurance which is what you’re arguing. Are you seriously saying there are no barriers to health that mid levels could never adequately solve? Most doctors choose to operate on a network private insurance and not take Medicare..? I don’t think I need to go further on the implications of that. You’re out of touch.

If the argument still remains that mid levels provide more negative health outcomes than positive, I believe that’s an extremely privileged opinion and I disagree.

If a doctor is this much smarter, I think they can understand the basic economics and sociology in healthcare.

Mid-levels are not filling those roles more than physicians. They work in more urban areas and choose their insurances as well.

The fees are based on negotiations. Many large hospital systems can negotiate hard, and get the same reimbursement for mid-levels. They just skim more off the top.

 

[JustFillIt]

Physicians are collaborators on their cases. So when there's an issue. It goes to the deepest pocket first.

Why not have high school kids with an online course prescribe? Where's the line.

Ok but I’m curious. Are there any studies out there that hash out the outcomes between pa/np vs. physicians?

 

[deleted480308]

Ok but I’m curious. Are there any studies out there that hash out the outcomes between pa/np vs. physicians?

Not any good ones because the few that operate without supervision haven’t been doing it for long and there is a selection bias

 

[emergentmd]

Not this Midlevel vs physician again. I know many MLs can do probably 75% of the primary care/ER/specialty clinic stuff competently. Its the 25% that they will screw up on and that is why you need an MD supervision. Docs probably make 3-4x more than a midlevel so the question remains is screwing up 25% of the time worth paying 50-75% less?

Medicine like everything else is economics. If MLs can get things right 99% of the time, docs would be out of jobs b/c 3-4x cost is not worth the 1%. But 3-4x cost is definitely worth not screwing up 25% of the time.

The BIG problem for pharmacist is that they do not affect outcome on a daily basis. Truthfully, in retail, how many times in a month do you catch something that really affects outcome without the help of the computer. If the computer catches it, then all you are is a middle man.

Pharmacy will eventually die as a profession. Just like Taxi drivers.

Once Amazon can figure out how to give the public 2 day free prime/same day shipping with just a handful of pharmacists verifying at a central location, then all of the Walgreens/CVS will close down. This is why Amazon is killing all of the malls/retail stores.

Pharmacists also be careful in the hospital. I can't think of many times they have helped me in the ER that I can't look up from Dr. Google.

The only reason I call the pharmacist for advice is if I am too lazy or busy to do my own google search. What is more damning is almost every time I ask them a question, they put me on hold and do their own internet search. If this is their value to hospitals, they better watch our b/c they will be replaced with something cheaper.

 

[Mcpickle]

Mid-levels are not filling those roles more than physicians. They work in more urban areas and choose their insurances as well.

The fees are based on negotiations. Many large hospital systems can negotiate hard, and get the same reimbursement for mid-levels. They just skim more off the top.

Stop. It’ll never in any circumstance be cheaper and more accessible to see a physician vs a mid level. Just stop. You’re saying the same thing over and over again.

Example, TB tests are regularly needed for placement for jobs, schooling, ect. Which is not reimbursed from institutions. As an uninsured college student, I’m going to go to the CVS clinic down the street to get it down by an NP, which very much got the job done. CVS isn’t going to employ a physician. Why? Because of the cost??? A “good” physician will never want to work there or have to. So it’s a joke to say physicians are filling these roles. Are you at CVS? One of the most accessible retailers in the US?

But we can further into how access isn’t just determined by the money like you’re arguing. I will positively assume there are more CVS clinics, urgent care that
1. Are open to the general public
2. Are open more hours a day

than free clinics where doctors volunteer their time on the weekend with students which is what the uninsured or poorly insured have to utilize. You don’t know how many times I’ve searched “free clinic near me” on google and just settled for a CVS clinic. I’m obviously not a minority in this.

What you’re essentially arguing is that no care is better than some care for the poor because you’ve had to “clean up” a mid levels mistake. But please do go on about how you’re the victim and they are ruining healthcare.

 

[Mcpickle]

Ok but I’m curious. Are there any studies out there that hash out the outcomes between pa/np vs. physicians?

I had you two muted for good reason. You and Lube are obsessed with me because I called you both out on the lies and “bragging” you do on this forum. These constant useless comments talking about how you do keg stands like a champ. No one cares. Just like in high school/college. Even more so that a 35 year old does it. I just have to click on any trending thread to see a post from saying how if Pharmacy was a party you’d be the DJ on the dance floor workin’ it because that’s how good you are, or how much money you make.

Keep doing it, that’s fine if that’s where you get your self worth. Obviously the mods don’t care. But when you try to start a debate with me, insulting my intelligence and then inevitably have nothing else to say and resort to sarcasm then stalk me like this mentioning me in every comment, it just further adds to the sadness. Move on man.

 

[JustFillIt]

I had you two muted for good reason. You and Lube are obsessed with me because I called you both out on the lies and “bragging” you do on this forum. These constant useless comments talking about how you do keg stands like a champ. No one cares. Just like in high school/college. Even more so that a 35 year old does it. I just have to click on a thread to see that you guys post on every thread just saying how if Pharmacy was a party you’d be the DJ on the dance floor workin’ it because that’s how good you are.

Keep doing it, that’s fine if that’s where you get your self worth. Obviously the mods don’t care. But when you try to start a debate with me, insulting my intelligence and then inevitably have nothing else to say and resort to sarcasm then stalk me like this, it just further adds to the sadness. Move on man.

My nickname used to be “Beer Pong Boomer”