Prescribing power for pharmacists

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

TopChef

New Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
I have heard that pharmacists in other states can prescribe. Although I have heard about this for a couple years I always thought that it was limited to stuff like Robitussin AC or Lomotil.

But after talking to a couple pharmacists in other states it seems like there is more to it than this. I have heard that in Florida and New Mexico prescribing power has been greatly expanded. Apparently pharmacists can arrange to be supervised by a MD and prescribe off of a limited formulary.

Just wondering if anyone can confirm this. Also does anyone know what drugs pharmacists would be limited to? Is there a state law limiting the formulary to a set amount of drugs or can a doctor sign off on his own set of drugs to prescribe?
 
I have heard that pharmacists in other states can prescribe. Although I have heard about this for a couple years I always thought that it was limited to stuff like Robitussin AC or Lomotil.

But after talking to a couple pharmacists in other states it seems like there is more to it than this. I have heard that in Florida and New Mexico prescribing power has been greatly expanded. Apparently pharmacists can arrange to be supervised by a MD and prescribe off of a limited formulary.

Just wondering if anyone can confirm this. Also does anyone know what drugs pharmacists would be limited to? Is there a state law limiting the formulary to a set amount of drugs or can a doctor sign off on his own set of drugs to prescribe?

not trying to rain on your parade, just informing you ... i think there are sites for this.. that you can find, on the internet.
 
A good number of the C-Vs are technically BTC type drug. The bottle of Cheratussin we have actually has an OTC label on it. It is up to the pharmacist on whether to dispense it, and most don't.
 
I've tried looking on the internet and the info was too general. I'm not talking about BTC type drugs nor the VA. What I am talking about is when you can prescribe say psyche drugs under a doctors supervision. Or hormones.
 
I am going to be attending UNM this fall, and during the interview process i remember the dean mentioning something about New Mexico being one of maybe 3 states that allows pharmacists to prescribe. I am unsure what the details are however. I have been trying to find a helpful site, but most everything i read is legal jargon and hard to decipher. If i find a helpful site i will post it on here later.
 
Here is some info i found on the topic...

PHARMACIST CLINICIAN
The State of New Mexico has one of the most progressive pharmacy practice acts in the United States. Currently, all pharmacists actively licensed in New Mexico have the ability to administer immunizations (both children and adult) and to provide emergency contraception without the order of a physician. In order to provide these services, the pharmacist must provide the Board of Pharmacy (BOP) with documentation of completion of a BOP approved certificate-training program and have a protocol approved by the BOP.
In addition to the above, New Mexico enacted the “Pharmacist Prescriptive Authority Act”. This act grants pharmacists that have met the requirements of a “pharmacist clinician” prescriptive authority according to a BOP approved protocol or guideline. Prescriptive authority means the authority to prescribe, administer, monitor or modify drug therapy. Monitoring drug therapy involves the following: obtaining patient medical and medication histories, ordering and interpreting pertinent laboratory studies, and measuring routine vital signs and, if necessary, performing appropriate physical examination procedures.
In order to become certified as a pharmacist clinician, pharmacists must meet one of the following requirements:
1. If the applicant is an actively licensed pharmacist, achievement of national certification as a physician assistant; or
2. Satisfactory completion of an academic curriculum which includes a minimum of sixty (60) hours of physical assessment training followed by nine (9) months of supervised clinical experience involving assessment skills (all Pharm.D. graduates); or
3. Satisfactory completion of a 60- hour physical assessment course approved by the Board and a 150-hour, 300 patient contact preceptorship supervised by a physician and approved by the Board, and achievement of a passing score as defined by the Board on an appropriate exam approved by the Board; or
4. If the applicant is certified by the Indian Health Service's Pharmacist Practitioner Program, documentation of 600 patient contacts within the past two years as a pharmacist practitioner, accompanied by a supporting affidavit from the supervising physician.
Therefore, all Doctor of Pharmacy graduates from the University of New Mexico College of Pharmacy are eligible to become pharmacist clinicians based on criteria #2 above. In addition to the above requirements, a certified pharmacist clinician seeking to exercise prescriptive authority must submit an application to the BOP.

The guidelines or protocol must include the following:
1. Name of the practitioner authorized to prescribe drugs and name of the pharmacist clinician;
2. Statement of the types of prescriptive authority decisions the pharmacist clinician is authorized to make, including, but not limited to:
a. types of diseases, drugs or drug categories involved and the type of prescriptive authority authorized in each case;
b. procedures, decision criteria or plan the pharmacist clinician is to follow when exercising prescriptive authority;
3. Activities to be followed by the pharmacist clinician while exercising prescriptive authority, including documentation of feedback to the authorizing practitioner concerning specific decisions made; documentation may be made on the prescriptive record, patient profile, patient medical chart or in a separate log book;
4. Description of appropriate mechanisms for reporting to the supervising practitioner; and
5. Description of the scope of practice of the pharmacist clinician.
A pharmacist clinician may prescribe controlled substances, provided that a New Mexico Controlled Substances registration and a Drug Enforcement Agency registration have been obtained and controlled substances prescribed are within the parameters of written guidelines or protocols.
Currently there are approximately 100 pharmacist-clinicians that are certified with the BOP. These clinicians are practicing in a multitude of healthcare environments, such
as long term care (nursing homes), institutional (hospital), physician offices, and community pharmacies. There is currently no additional fee to apply for pharmacist clinician certification. However, pharmacist clinicians must renew their license annually and are required to obtain an additional 10 hours of annual continuing education (either American Council of Pharmaceutical Education approved or Category I of the American Medical Association approved live continuing education) in addition to the 15 hour annual requirement for active pharmacist licensure. The New Mexico Pharmaceutical Association’s website has more detailed information regarding the pharmacist clinician regulations and also has several examples of pharmacist clinician protocols posted http://www.nm- pharmacy.com/pharmacist_prescribing.htm.
 
I can and do prescribe certain drugs for certain disease states under collaborative practice agreements I have with a few doctors in my clinic. It's part of the MTM program I started here. I do not diagnose - all patients must have a diagonsis already, I want to make that clear. Usually I am adding step therapy, changing doses or changing drugs (therapeutic subsititution). Occassionally I start someone on a statin who has only been using LSMs or I'll start insulin on someone who is failing metformin + secretagogue.
 
I hear in Alaska, pharmacists have full prescribing rights.
 

No, seriously. I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who has a friend who graduated from Hawaii College of Pharmacy. Got a job up in Fairbanks making 250K per year, and he's got full prescribing rights. It's a sweet deal, if you ask me.
 
I can and do prescribe certain drugs for certain disease states under collaborative practice agreements I have with a few doctors in my clinic. It's part of the MTM program I started here. I do not diagnose - all patients must have a diagonsis already, I want to make that clear. Usually I am adding step therapy, changing doses or changing drugs (therapeutic subsititution). Occassionally I start someone on a statin who has only been using LSMs or I'll start insulin on someone who is failing metformin + secretagogue.

I believe this is how the IHS pharmacists practice as well. Doctors diagnose and pharmacists prescribe.
 
No, seriously. I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who has a friend who graduated from Hawaii College of Pharmacy. Got a job up in Fairbanks making 250K per year, and he's got full prescribing rights. It's a sweet deal, if you ask me.

Strange I can't find a school like that 🙄
 
Strange I can't find a school like that 🙄


And what does he do when he's not working? Hunt, frozen fishing?


Back to the topic, I would like to see more states (namely Florida) allow pharmacists more prescribing authority.
 
i really do not understand this obsession some people on here have with "prescribing power". this process should be up to the diagnostician who has spent time with the patient and fully (hopefully) understands their condition and history (i understand this is not always the case with physicians). i do think pharmacists should be able to adjust the prescriptions prescribed by physicians, which does occur in many situations (pharmacists prescribing under physician supervision). i guess i'm just trying to say if you want the power to prescribe, which also comes with much more liability/accountability, you should have gone to med school and became a physician.
 
i really do not understand this obsession some people on here have with "prescribing power". this process should be up to the diagnostician who has spent time with the patient and fully (hopefully) understands their condition and history (i understand this is not always the case with physicians). i do think pharmacists should be able to adjust the prescriptions prescribed by physicians, which does occur in many situations (pharmacists prescribing under physician supervision). i guess i'm just trying to say if you want the power to prescribe, which also comes with much more liability/accountability, you should have gone to med school and became a physician.

I talked about this a couple months ago and all the pharm students attacked me like shark on chum. I personally don't think I'd feel comfortable prescribing abx for pneumonia I have not heard nor seen on film. I agree with adjusting though, especially for those that are adjusted according to lab values.
 
I talked about this a couple months ago and all the pharm students attacked me like shark on chum. I personally don't think I'd feel comfortable prescribing abx for pneumonia I have not heard nor seen on film. I agree with adjusting though, especially for those that are adjusted according to lab values.

word, i think i was kinda on your side in that thread...

it's kind of weird that we have so many people coming into this profession (pharmacy) with goals (or even expectations) that pharmacists deserve more responsibilities, including the privilege to prescribe, with such vehemence.
 
I talked about this a couple months ago and all the pharm students attacked me like shark on chum. I personally don't think I'd feel comfortable prescribing abx for pneumonia I have not heard nor seen on film. I agree with adjusting though, especially for those that are adjusted according to lab values.

What findings would you expect on film/auscultation that might cause you to adjust your therapy?
 
word, i think i was kinda on your side in that thread...

it's kind of weird that we have so many people coming into this profession (pharmacy) with goals (or even expectations) that pharmacists deserve more responsibilities, including the privilege to prescribe, with such vehemence.

I would argue that the the many pharmacists feel they deserve more responsibilities that are commensurate with the training they receive. This may include prescription privileges in certain cases.
 
I would argue that the the many pharmacists feel they deserve more responsibilities that are commensurate with the training they receive. This may include prescription privileges in certain cases.

touche.

this is something that should be researched and understood (though shadowing) PRIOR to applying to pharmacy school though. it seems like a lot of pre-pharmers (and even pharm students) have distorted views on the role(s) that pharmacists play in health care.
 
Here is some info i found on the topic...
PHARMACIST CLINICIAN

This is good news. But what about insurance companies, Medicaid and Medicare?? Do pharmacists get paid for this added responsibility?

Even if pharmacists can prescribe with collaborative agreement, some of other important questions are "can they get paid for the service, especially Medicaid and Medicare?" and "what are the hospital/physician's attitudes about hiring pharmacists in their practice?"

I know that pharmacists' knowledge base regarding general pharmacotherapy is very usful but would it be more profitable for physicians/hospitals to hire nurse practitioners to do medication management in their office, considering that they are also legally allowed to do physical assessment and diagnose and can bill insurance/medicare for these services as well as charging for the office visit?

Can pharmacist bill Medicaid and Medicare for medication management based on collaborative agreement (not MTM-related)?

But I think it is still a good thing. If not hired by physicians or hospitals, they can still have stand-alone clinic that may provide service at a lower cost than physician's office provided that patients only need medication managment and pharmacist can find a physician who is willing to sign the collaborative agreement. In other words, they will function like NP with private practice with collaborative agreement but they can't assess and diagnose. Am I correct?
 
Can pharmacist bill Medicaid and Medicare for medication management based on collaborative agreement (not MTM-related)?
No, pharmacists can only bill as providers for MTM.
 
No, pharmacists can only bill as providers for MTM.
Thanks for the answer.
Then, what about coumadin clinic? Who pay pharmacists for their service. From patients?
 
Thanks for the answer.
Then, what about coumadin clinic? Who pay pharmacists for their service. From patients?

Coumadin clinics are typically run with some form of physician supervision (I think the VA is an exception to this). The pharmacist will be the insurance under the attending physician's name, similar to the way an NP or PA would. The clinic will receive the payment, and then the pharmacist gets paid by the clinic (or hospital, office, etc.), either as a percentage of the money billed or as a salaried/hourly employee.

There are exceptions to this, but I believe the vast majority follow this or a very similar business plan.
 
I would argue that the the many pharmacists feel they deserve more responsibilities that are commensurate with the training they receive. This may include prescription privileges in certain cases.

Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.
 
Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.

Sadly , as a pharmacist, i have to agree with this guy's harsh reply. Pharmacists should not be prescribing and if u are into the prescribing shiet, then go back to school and get ur MD or PA/NP degree. I hate it when people keep saying the term "expanding our scope of practice"...just an excuse to butt into other's job...
 
Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.

You have a limited perspective of what pharmacists do.

I really doubt it is about the money...
 
Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Well then you are going to be a poor doctor. Last time I check pharmacists had a much more education relating to pharmacokinetics and dynamics of all of the different drugs, and you... didnt. So when you look at areas like pediatrics and infectious disease, where there is SO much wrong prescribing going on, you start to realize that maybe you need someone with DOCTORATE in pharmacy to handle such matters.

I dont think pharmacists should have full independent prescribing powers, but the ability to collaborate with physicians on certain patients is certainly an advantage. If anything it helps free up your time so you can focus on other things. And no one will be calling you up on your weekend off for your permission to change a dosage because a pharmacist will be able to do it all by themselves. Doesnt that sound good?
 
Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.

Pharmacists want script privileges because they are seeking some semblance of prestige. Let's be honest. I think its kinda lame..because knowing the people that are spearheading it...that's pretty much the driving force behind it. Narcissism.

But there isn't really a model available that would pay pharmacists any more money than they currently make via dosing based upon a diagnosis, anyway. That type of setup would, if anything, bring more visits to physicians. In studies where pharmacists are given the reigns, the results are typically positive.

For instance, in a study where pharmacists in a collaborative practice agreement were instructed to adjust HTN meds:

Those who took part in the online program transmitted blood pressure readings via a home computer to their physicians. Pharmacy specialists reviewed the numbers and adjusted the medications of the patients accordingly, the study authors explained.

After six months, 58 percent of those in the program had lowered their blood pressure to healthy levels, compared to just 38 percent of those in the other group, Dr. David Magid of Kaiser Permanente Colorado and colleagues found.

There are several other studies (i.e. The Asheville Project) that have shown similar results.

So if, objectively, using pharmacists to select drug therapy after a proper diagnosis has yielded great outcomes, why do you give a ****? You still diagnose. You still decide when they have to come back for a follow up. You still decide how long the pharmacist is dosing. It doesn't really affect you at all.

Why do you care? Because (and I'm just basing this off of years of experience, I could hypothetically be wrong) you are probably a pompous narcissistic douchebag that doesn't give a flying **** about patients if it affects the quality of the internal cult of personality you've built for yourself.

I mean, come on. Your screen name is Socrates for Christ's sake. What type of pretentious ass delusion of grandeur is that? You think you are worthy of being associated with Socrates? Of course, being that you had to tack on a number after that leads me to believe that at least one other dude thinks the same thing...which doesn't surprise me given the type of person that gets into healthcare...but I digress.

Now, personally, I have no interest in such things. I have more interesting things to do than whine about being able to write things down on a piece of paper that can be exchanged for goods and services. But if you think your utter bull**** is going to fly, you're wrong. We ain't cave dwellers enchanted by your shadow puppets, oh master Socrates. If including pharmacists provides better outcomes, it should be embraced. In situations where studies have shown that it doesn't (i.e. cholesterol, mostly because pharmacists can't force lifestyle changes), it should not be embraced. You know. Practicing evidence based medicine? That whole schtick? Call me crazy, but I think that should be the way we approach this.

Oh, and the worker bees at CVS and Walmart aren't the ones trying to push this type of thing. I'd imagine they would be against it as it would only give them more crap to do. Your disdain should be reserved for the equally pompous and narcissistic pharmacists that are in academia. Just in case you get into a future internet argument and want to sound less confused to another lowly pill jockey...
 
Last edited:
Coumadin clinics are typically run with some form of physician supervision (I think the VA is an exception to this). The pharmacist will be the insurance under the attending physician's name, similar to the way an NP or PA would. I believe the vast majority follow this or a very similar business plan.

Will the reimbursement rate lower than NP/PA because pharmacist can only do dose adjustment? Well..I guess people just go in for dose adjustment and labs anyway. There is no need for diagnosis/assessment anyway.

But how about in case of cardiology clinic where pharmacists adjusts/change BP meds? NP/PA can assess and diagnose at the same time while pharmacists can only adjust/switch meds.
 
Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

um, I don't believe any of the pharmacists that DO have prescribing power are compensated for this added responsibility. Money is definitely not the motive here...

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Even if it benefits patient outcomes? You sure went into medicine for the right reasons.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

This is the only part of your post that makes any sense. The problem with this is that many students that end up applying to pharmacy school are not doing it by choice, they just don't have anything else to do, ie: they were not qualified enough for medical/dental school.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.

These are not even the pharmacists that are claiming they deserve prescribing power.

Why do you care? Because (and I'm just basing this off of years of experience, I could hypothetically be wrong) you are probably a pompous narcissistic douchebag that doesn't give a flying **** about patients if it affects the quality of the internal cult of personality you've built for yourself.

Well said.
 
Thats a total red herring. Pharmacists want script privileges because of market economics -- there's too many pharm schools out there and jobs are starting to tighten up. Thats the ONLY reason pharmacists want script power, it has nothing to do with "helping" patients or any of that nonsense. This is about the $$$$, as always.

Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

Dont sit there and tell me that you "deserve" script privileges. You dont deserve jack. You knew the score when you signed up for pharm school, so you dont get the luxury now to change the rules and all of a sudden say "you know what I'm actually a doctor because I went to school for 4 years after college and I should be able to script out any drug that a physician uses." If you didnt understand that pharmacy school does not give you privileges of being a prescriber, then you should have gone to medical school instead.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.
Wow, arrogant much? You obviously don't understand jack about the scope and purpose of CPAs not to mention the function of pharmacists (hint: we aren't your pill filling minions who should just shut up and count). I know a hell of a lot more about pharmacotherapy than many of the docs I work with. How do I know this? Because they consult me.

My MTM patients are extremely grateful for the time and care I provide for them. I know this because they tell their doctors and the clinic board members and their nurses. I see patients that have had diabetes for 20 years and never understood the disease. Why? Because their doctor never explained it to them in a way they could understand in their 15 minute visits. And because the patient understands the disease, they can manage it better. I have absolutely no desire to be a doctor or to diagnose; for me, in my practice, my "prescribing privileges" are solely for the convenience of the physicians I work with and for the patients. I am not making any extra money, in fact I don't bill for my services at this point - I am funded by public and private grant money. It is my plan to bill eventually, but it's not much of a money-making venture, the margins are very low. It's not about the money as you falsely assert. My job as I see it, is to help the patient become more informed and coordinate care from different providers who don't always know what each other is prescribing. I help little old ladies who are inundated with information trying to manage 14 prescriptions. My job is to help patients understand how to take their meds and how they work and why they are important - because when their doctors ask if they have questions, they are often scared to admit they don't understand. Particularly if they have a God-complex doctor such as yourself.

I consider myself lucky I work in a progressive environment where the doctors are open to collaboration when they see how it benefits them and their patients. Pity you are so ill-informed.
 
...This is the only part of your post that makes any sense. The problem with this is that many students that end up applying to pharmacy school are not doing it by choice, they just don't have anything else to do, ie: they were not qualified enough for medical/dental school...

I had no idea this was the case.
 
Rest assured I wont be "supervising" or "collaborating" with any pharmacists, and I encourage my fellow physician brethren to do the same.

You'll be in the minority on that one. Look at any academic hospital (and many community hospitals) - you'll see pharmacists everywhere. Rounding, sitting on medical committees, giving Grand Rounds; basically, everything. How do you think they got there? Smarter people than you decided that having a pharmacist is beneficial to both them and the patients they're treating.

Go back to your CVS and Walmarts.

And you go back to your stacks of paperwork and incompetent office help.
 
word, i think i was kinda on your side in that thread...

it's kind of weird that we have so many people coming into this profession (pharmacy) with goals (or even expectations) that pharmacists deserve more responsibilities, including the privilege to prescribe, with such vehemence.


Here's at least one factor in this phenomenon, based on my observations over the years:


When I was in college the first time through, ~15 years ago, if you were in the sciences and you were a gunner, your target was med school. The only thing students wanted was med school - not PA, nursing or pharmacy. Frankly, I don't even remember anyone discussing those fields as alternate career options, even ...



Coming back to school to finish out prereqs a couple of years back, I noticed that an interesting phenomenon was starting to develop. Same gunners, different story. Med school is certainly on everyone's radar, but it is far from the only thing. More than a few top students were doing a cost/benefit/lifestyle analysis, and sometimes finding that med school was not the route they wanted to take, due to both expense and time. Not always, but several orders of magnitude more often than my first time through school 15 years ago!! This is particularly true of my fellow female classmates (especially if they are in a relationship with the boy they planned to marry, or had talked about wanting a family).


This group, instead of spending all that time in med school, decided to pursue other avenues including: pharmacy (specializing), nursing (specializing), dentistry (specializing), and PA (specializing).


Granted it is a small sample size of maybe 100 classmates total both times through school. But it seems that gunners are learning about more varied options nowadays than in years past. And this type of fire-in-the-belly student with a competitive streak and a high GPA is the type of student who is going to want to push the envelope professionally. I can't help but wonder how many of these students ruled out med school for various reasons -- but still secretly wanted it -- and are channeling their energies now into their alternate career choice.


(Analogy!! MA, a historically liberal state, is bordered by NH, a historically conservative state. But due to taxes, a lot of liberal MA residents have moved to conservative NH over the past couple of decades. As a result, in the past few election cycles, NH is looking like a much more liberal state than in years past. MA residents didn't move to NH for the politics and culture -- they moved for their personal quality of life and finances, and they are changing NH to suit their desires. Much like I think a new breed of pre-health students are looking to change their target professions in the image they want).
 
I had no idea this was the case.

I didn't say every pharmacy student is a med school reject but this is the case fairly often. I am definitely aware that there are also MANY students that pursue pharmacy to specialize.
 
I didn't say every pharmacy student is a med school reject but this is the case fairly often. I am definitely aware that there are also MANY students that pursue pharmacy to specialize.

I don't personally know a single person that went into pharmacy in lieu of medical school acceptance.
 
Last edited:
I don't personally know a single person that went into pharmacy in lieu of medical school acceptance.

neither do i... but i know a decent amount of students that simply applied to pharmacy school because their GPA was not high enough for med school even though they had little to no interest in being a pharmacist. i've also seen many of these types of students (lazy/disillusioned) at all of my interviews so excuse me for being slightly jaded... i mean no offense towards those who have earned their pharmD and have made an impact (as i hope to do the same) but from the students I HAVE SEEN many are only in it for the $$, which is quite frustrating to me. i hope you all can see where i'm coming from.
 
Last edited:
neither do i... but i know a decent amount of students that simply applied to pharmacy school because their GPA was not high enough for med school even though they had little to no interest in being a pharmacist. i've also seen many of these types of students (lazy/disillusioned) at all of my interviews so excuse me for being slightly jaded... i mean no offense towards those who have earned their pharmD and have made an impact (as i hope to do the same) but from the students I HAVE SEEN many are only in it for the $$, which is quite frustrating to me. i hope you all can see where i'm coming from.

Is the average GPA for pharm lower than Med again? God, I hate these new schools. When I was accepted back in 2003, my class had a higher average GPA for acceptance than the Med school across the hallway. The entire concept of just saying "I can't get into med, so I'll do pharm" was ridiculous back in my day.
 
Is the average GPA for pharm lower than Med again? God, I hate these new schools. When I was accepted back in 2003, my class had a higher average GPA for acceptance than the Med school across the hallway. The entire concept of just saying "I can't get into med, so I'll do pharm" was ridiculous back in my day.

i know the average matriculating GPA for MD students is >3.7. not sure about DO or pharm though. as i've stated many times before, these new schools attract the type of student who majored in bio, had a sub-par GPA, no pharmacy experience, no extracurriculars, did little to no research on the career, and thought pharmacy looked appealing due to the good salary. these are the students who are taking jobs from more qualified students that worked hard in undergrad to get accepted to an established school and the more i think about it the more it pisses me off. word?

edit: i shouldn't say "these new schools" because not ALL new schools operate in this fashion (ie: money grubbing) but a good percentage do. you can tell by the outrageously high tuition and low quality faculty. i think all of these doom and gloom threads may be good for one reason: deterring these types of students from taking out ridiculous loans for a career they may struggle finding a job in and a career they never really cared about advancing in the first place. anyone who reads these forums will surely come across one of the many doom threads and hopefully it will prevent students who do not have a strong commitment to pharmacy from applying.
 
Last edited:
Medical school wasnt even on my radar
Me neither. In fact I have a dual degrees in social science and arts, so even pharmacy wasn't on my radar as an undergrad.

Good thing I didn't want to be a doctor because I have a vasovagal response to wounds. Not blood so much, but any kind of deep wound. I fainted on two of my rotations. Totally embarrassing and totally uncontrollable. 😳
 
Last edited:
Medical school wasnt even on my radar 🙄
I did consider medicine for a while, but because I had the opportunity to observe my older brother go through medical school, residency, and then working as a physician, I realized early enough that while I probably would have liked medical school more than pharmacy school (which was the most boring by far out of all of my educational experience), I would have hated working as a physician. Still, I think had I not discovered that pharmacy was really about, I probably would have gone to medical school after all and tried to find a non-patient care position... I am glad I didn't, though. 🙂
 
Top