Pushing marijuana rule, Board of Pharmacy Director offered attorney a job

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

Kevin.Mero

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
207
Reaction score
76
Oklahoma State Board of Pharmacy Director Chelsea Church, offered former Oklahoma State Department of Health attorney Julie Ezell, a job with the "guarantee" of a pay raise if Ezell included a pharmacist requirement in the OSDH's medical marijuana rules. Ezell did not do as Church asked.


https://nondoc.com/2018/07/19/board-of-pharmacy-director-offered-julie-ezell-job/

Members don't see this ad.
 
Slimy if true. However, if marijuana is going to be medical in any nature it absolutely should include a pharmacist. We are the drug experts and also are legally required to know (and are tested on) controlled substance laws. I'd argue dispensing marijuana based on a prescription order or referral from a prescriber by anyone not a licensed pharmacist is indeed practicing pharmacy without a license which is both illegal and a danger to public health.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Sleazy, but at least the bop director is trying to do something that will materially help out pharmacists - more than we can say for a lot of our supposed leaders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Sleazy, but at least the bop director is trying to do something that will materially help out pharmacists - more than we can say for a lot of our supposed leaders.

I don't think boards look out for us, their jobs in essence are to license and "govern" the practice of pharmacy with the focus being protecting the public (which is a good and necessary thing). I doubt the motive was to help pharmacists, it would likely be to expand board authority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I second that Digsbe. They only wanted to expand board authority. The cannabiz is unilaterally against having any healthcare professional behind the counter due to the cost.
 
I'm curious how medical marijuana will be handled in the future. There is definitely more support for medical use of the plant nationwide, and it feels like the stigma is slowly lifting.

I'm especially curious to see how the current state-backed medical marijuana programs mesh with FDA approved products moving forward. CBD oil has been available for years in medical states, but now has an FDA approved product. Is there any conflict here? Would a patient be granted additional legal protection by having a prescription for the FDA approved product? Will bone-headed employers still try to fire you if this shows up in a drug screening?

The federal government has had its head in the sand on this issue for decades. Sooner or later we are going to have to reconcile these systems.
 
I don't think boards look out for us, their jobs in essence are to license and "govern" the practice of pharmacy with the focus being protecting the public (which is a good and necessary thing). I doubt the motive was to help pharmacists, it would likely be to expand board authority.

Why would Oklahoma care about getting pharmacists inside of the weed office? None of us learned about cannabis in school outside of the stoners who got lessons every night for 4 years during undergrad.
 
Why would Oklahoma care about getting pharmacists inside of the weed office? None of us learned about cannabis in school outside of the stoners who got lessons every night for 4 years during undergrad.

Wouldn’t this be an arguement against ANY new medication?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Why would Oklahoma care about getting pharmacists inside of the weed office? None of us learned about cannabis in school outside of the stoners who got lessons every night for 4 years during undergrad.
I did.

I taught a class to 7th graders once a week during my P3 year.
 
I did.

I taught a class to 7th graders once a week during my P3 year.

I was also educated on marijuana and on illicit drugs in pharmacy school as well. Any patient may come into your hospital high on something and you need to know the toxicities, withdrawal, and drug interactions it may present you with. The education was mostly focused on the harmful effects of illicit drugs, but in my school we did discuss medical marijuana from a clinical perspective.
 
I was also educated on marijuana and on illicit drugs in pharmacy school as well. Any patient may come into your hospital high on something and you need to know the toxicities, withdrawal, and drug interactions it may present you with. The education was mostly focused on the harmful effects of illicit drugs, but in my school we did discuss medical marijuana from a clinical perspective.

I also feel comfortable counseling on Marinol too
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Wouldn’t this be an arguement against ANY new medication?

Not with mandatory CE. I once took a 3 hour CE on EKGs so I guess I'm ready to read them. Watch out cardiologists! I'm coming for your job!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Not with mandatory CE. I once took a 3 hour CE on EKGs so I guess I'm ready to read them. Watch out cardiologists! I'm coming for your job!

Is this sarcasm?

Edit: I know it is, I'm saying you're comparing reading EKGs and preforming DURs with marijuana as one of the medications
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Is this sarcasm?

Edit: I know it is, I'm saying you're comparing reading EKGs and preforming DURs with marijuana as one of the medications

I was going to ask the same question but the absurdity of comparing EKGs with DURs convinced me not to. Kudos to you for trying.

Or perhaps he really is joking and I am just not giving him enough credit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
giphy.gif
 
I feel comfortable counseling on dronabinol but the one time I walked into a marijuana shop in CA I was blown away at all these different "blend" or whatever of weed in bowls with exotic names. I couldn't tell you the difference or the mg equivalents of each one because I was never trained on it. I don't know, maybe schools in states where marijuana is legal have classes for that.
 
Sleazy, but at least the bop director is trying to do something that will materially help out pharmacists - more than we can say for a lot of our supposed leaders.
Agreed her intentions might have been in the right place but she broke the law none-the-less
 
Is this sarcasm?

Edit: I know it is, I'm saying you're comparing reading EKGs and preforming DURs with marijuana as one of the medications

The hard part to me is classifying a plant with many strains and many different concentrations of a variety of different active chemical compounds all the same every time. Would our DUR systems know the difference in interactions between a sativa and an indica? What about OG Kush vs. that upcoming Girl Scout Cookies?

I’m all for trying to assess patients given their complete picture and everything they consume. I’m just saying taking a step back in the science required to get a drug approved and labeled to have more confidence in the expected outcome is a little depressing.

We aren’t advocating trees, or more specifically willow trees, or more specifically willow tree bark to be classified as a medication. It’s a standardized dose of aspirin.

I have nothing against those wanting to explore and consume natural products but it becomes a slippery slope when desiring to classify a plant that is purposely grown in a ton of different strains for different effects. Would you be liable to know that emergent new strain Purple Haze that was just developed is so “loud” that if taken with drug xyz can kill you?
 
The hard part to me is classifying a plant with many strains and many different concentrations of a variety of different active chemical compounds all the same every time. Would our DUR systems know the difference in interactions between a sativa and an indica? What about OG Kush vs. that upcoming Girl Scout Cookies?

I’m all for trying to assess patients given their complete picture and everything they consume. I’m just saying taking a step back in the science required to get a drug approved and labeled to have more confidence in the expected outcome is a little depressing.

We aren’t advocating trees, or more specifically willow trees, or more specifically willow tree bark to be classified as a medication. It’s a standardized dose of aspirin.

I have nothing against those wanting to explore and consume natural products but it becomes a slippery slope when desiring to classify a plant that is purposely grown in a ton of different strains for different effects. Would you be liable to know that emergent new strain Purple Haze that was just developed is so “loud” that if taken with drug xyz can kill you?

Is differentiating between strains similar to differentiating between (for example) valsartan and olmesartan? My educated guess is that for the purposes of a DUR, I’d treat them the same...but I’m not an expert (...yet )
 
Is differentiating between strains similar to differentiating between (for example) valsartan and olmesartan? My educated guess is that for the purposes of a DUR, I’d treat them the same...but I’m not an expert (...yet )

I would say no. It’s believed that marijuana has several active compounds in varying degree of depth (strength) and breadth (number of compounds) by different strain, in which there still isn’t a standardized dose per strain due to it being a plant and not something manufactured to produce a measured quantity of something. It’s literally trying to equate a piece of tree bark to 81mg of aspirin. Additionally, the traditional utilization doesn’t have a set amount that is administered for each dose. It’s not a blister or actuation or whatever measured inhalation you want to use.

I’m not saying marijuana doesn’t possess compounds or a combination of compounds that may have a medical benefit, rather there are standards in place to evaluate the effects of measured administered doses of specific compounds. An abstract amount of a substance containing non-normalized amounts and varying extent of different drug compounds is a dramatic shift from our current approach on medication IMO. Others may strongly disagree.
 
Top