You have said absolutely correct...

Beautifully said

Very well said, Mary! And, amen to that!

nice work

nice :)

How? Corporate America has all the power now by owning all the politicians of all political parties with their massive amounts of money with which they easily buy out all competitors as well as the political prostitutes. And it's not just in the field of health care; it's everything today.

George Lee you got it brother. This is extremely wishful thinking but I do hope it comes true...one day

The biggest problem lies within our own academic system of pharmacy. Pharmacy has to stop opening up more schools and to increase standards to get in. And Pharmacy residency needs to introduce a standardized test and clinical skills other than Naplex to get the best pharmacists. If pharmacy does not raise its standards, No one will take pharmacy seriously. Instead of fighting for provider status start focusing on reducing the number of schools

@@lovefunkrockmusic They do that with physicians at medical schools. What we have ended up with is not enough doctors to service the population, especially the boomer generation on the cusp of growing old now. By the time they increase the numbers graduating, the need will have been unmet for most boomers just like the need for teachers and schools were when they were growing up (untrained teachers, classrooms in gyms, worn out textbooks that had to be shared, double and triple sessions in public schools). That is not the answer; the answer is to utilize pharmacists fully for patient benefit and to take some burden off the physician who has no time for patients because there aren't enough physicians to care for all the people.

Clinical pharmacists DO interact with physicians and nurses everyday during patient rounds.

@@dahum__ There is just one problem with that: not every pharmacist gets the chance to experience the future Diana Jeon mentions. The ones that do (after pharmacy school) are usually residency trained or are professors themselves. Will residents choose to include the traditional PharmD in something they are trained to do? Pharmacists can be of great help and assistance, but the healthcare professionals must take the doctor off the bench first. Otherwise, the market will be flooded with students with no true outlet (just like now). Pharmacist Provider Status is not enough, we need more than that.

agreed

In fact, it's all about people, and the ability to see 'the other'. Implying that it's not only the disease that determines what care is needed, but what's important for every individual. This will stimulate effectiveness as well as efficiency. So: no good care without dialogue!

Jess R, I strongly agree with you on how online doctors will not be efficient nor decrease the wait time. More people will want to just click on a button to see the doctor instead of actually going in because that means they have to get ready and drive to the office. Online doctors will see the patient only over video chat, it will decrease the knowledge of the prognosis because they can not run any tests or see you physically to get a good idea of what you have. Instead they will go based on what the patient is telling them and may say they have the wrong sickness concluding prescribing the wrong medicine. This can lead to many problems with patients getting more sick or having effects they shouldn’t based on the medicine they are taking. Even though Dr. Shah made some good points when talking about how online doctors will be more efficient, it still has some things too it that will be missing when seeing a patient in person. When talking about beneficence, it means that things done are for the benefit or good for others. When you apply beneficence to the concept of online doctors it is trying to be good to everyone but when thinking about the risks that can arise it ends up being bad. I also agree when Jess says that doctors should spend more time educating patients on the medicines they are prescribing for them. So many times, like Dr. Shah said about his patient named Sarah, people have so many drugs they are supposed to take but they do not know what they are or which one if for which so sometimes they just do not take them at all. Pharmacists are also accountable when it comes the the education of the medicine they give the patients. Its their duty as well to tell them what each drug is, what it is used for and what they side effects the patient way experience.

Hi, am working on a system like this and wouldnt mind your opinion on this. Feel free to send me an email - benjaminomeke@gmail.com

what exactly is the pharmacist supposed to do ''off the bench''???? pharmacists are already playing their part making the drugs and ensuring availability a huge role if you ask me a huge instrument part! . the case here was not that there was no knowledge of the drug surely the doctor knew the adverse effects of the drugs but the problem here is one thats ever growing and seems to be ignored , patients have become just files on a doctors desk humanity in health care is on a serious decline . DOCTORS DONT CARE anymore. its the truth . patient care and bed side etiquette have become terrible . humanity is the missing link here . doctor has knowledge of the human body and its functions find sout whats wrong the pharmacist makes the drugs to induce changes to make one feel better thats a huge role , true there is no medicine without pharmacy ..buut there isnt any care..a doctor wont even tell you to drink lots of water with a certain drug to reduce gastric irritation he or she just writes the prescription and sends you off ..at the pharmacy they just hand you the drugs.you get home take the drug with half a cup of water and bam!diarrhoea fire out of your rectum ofcourse you wont take the drug!! ....lets bring care back into the system and we will see shorter waiting times in waiting rooms, more information being conveyed between the patient doctor and the pharmacist , patients understanding why and what they are taking , less medication non adherence , more satisfied patients , better healthCARE even better preventive care due to understanding of disease etiology due to more information between doctor and patient and a healthier generation ..we need more love !! technology is good yes but human interaction is necessary ..a physical exam is a fundamental part of diagnosis and cannot be disregarded .this doctor popping up on screen stuff is not feasible and frankly quite dangerous ..if you want it in patient care terms :) we all want a doctor who smiles at us puts a hand on our shoulder tells us it will be alright we need that we are humans we dont need science to prove that humans need humans its how we are made .technology helps in diagnosis and decreases human error yes we love it :) but human support and care is itself a potent drug hugely underestimated cheap with no side effects and no maximum therapeutic index . lets bring back care ..yes health care has a long way to go so much is ''wrong'' so many errors but hey lets fix the ones that dont bleed anyones pocket and benefit everyone .WE LOVE PHARMACISTS :)

i agree with you completely

hey could you share a bit about this system please

no one makes money when everyone is healthy happy and focused on their health

@Arnulfo Laniba same as teachers i guess..and pretty much any job if you think about it.

Pardon my cynicism, but I feel we are not patients but the raw material to input to make money for corporations and insurance companies and, especially, pharmacy benefit managers. We are victims of the corrupted system.

@@virginiamoss7045 yea you could also describe it this way 🙂

I don't think you fully understood the issue that Dr. Shah was talking about. There are certain chronic diseases and conditions that certainly require constant medicational therapy in order to prevent severe, life threatening consequences, that might turn out to be irreversible and that might cause disabled state for the rest of one's life, which is just followed by the fact that there are further consequences attached to it, like missing out on work, putting more financial pressure on a country's leading, etc. I could list all the consequences that is not only connected to the patient personal life but the society as well. But the most important thing- which as a pharmacyst I can say with full certainty- is that if the patient is not able or not open to cooperate with the prescribed therapy(just like Dr Shah said, in medicational terminology it's called : lacking of adherence) all those money spent on these life-maintaining drugs goes to waste, the patient can't benefit, and on top of that if once those life threatining, potentionally health damaging events occur (like stroke when let's say someone incorrectly takes/doesn't take the antihiperlipidemic drugs, or hipoglicemia when someone overdoses insulin let's say accidentally when they overpressure themselves with phisical exercise and that results in increase in insulin sensitivity) the number of required hospital care increase and of course that lead us to the huge financial cost that we all share that Dr. Shaw presented.And it's not always the patient's fault, for someone who hasn't got a health care education we can't even require it from them to know it.The most crucial thing is that patient are hardly aware of the fact that there are specialists ( like pharmacysts!) who they can turn to with their medicational issues.That's why it's so crucial to emphesize that we're here to help, we're educated to help, and we'll do everything in our will to upgrade our knowledge according to the newest evidence based medicine, to shift the issues and find solutions to one's personal therapeutical inconvenience, imperfections, and offer the best version of solution to optimize one's health and overall wellbeing in their day to day life as well as long term wellness. Thank you so much if you took your time to read this. -a fifth year pharmacy student from Hungary

@@whiteswan94 🙌🙌👏

In terms of the UK one solution to the shortage of GPs was to increase the number of GPs however pharmacists seem to be more ideal as they are worth 1/3 of the GPs time. Pharmacists also spend half as much time in education than a GP.

Tammy Chowdhury the problem is pharmacists cannot diagnose. That’s why some think that role should be filled by NPs and PAs

@@lovefunkrockmusic In US, pharmacists can diagnose if they contract with the doctors to establish a protocol.

Umm the pharmacists u wait at are community dispensing pharmacists. When he says bring them to the patient he's referring to counselling and clinical pharmacists.

You don't know which Sarah!

I think you may only be imaging a pharmacist in a dispensing role in a community pharmacy. Pharmacy is a much broader profession which I believe this video refers to. Thousands of pharmacists work in institutional settings. Many of them pursue residencies and specialize in areas like pediatrics, infectious diseases, cardiology, organ transplant, emergency medicine, etc. Many round on treatment teams daily where physicians seek their opinion on treatment options. Remember that where there are drugs there is a pharmacist. This includes hospitals and clinics. So if you are ever in the unfortunate situation of being hospitalized, remember that a pharmacist definitely prepared and assured its accuracy but potentially even recommended it's use in your treatment plan.

I totally disagree with you there. There are many different pharmacies in which you can go to in your area (unless you live in a very remote area) most likely they are more pharmacies near you then doctor's offices. As well if you go the same pharmacist for a little while they will know you, your medical history and your needs. The pharmacist may not seem important to you but (I work at a pharmacy) and many people are on many many drugs and the pharmacist is someone who knows them and their medications very well. In many of these cases these drugs are prescribed to them by different doctors so the pharmacist may even have a better relationship with them then their doctor.

Although your response to this video is short and a little bit rude, I suppose I can understand your viewpoint. You appear to take the stance that taking action is the best way to get things done. I do not disagree. I fully support your viewpoint that action being taken as soon as possible is indeed very important in moving towards solving a problem. However, I believe you’ve overlooked one important aspect. You are unable to take action until you have a plan of attack. A plan of attack for complex problems such as these cannot begin until you discuss the issue at hand. Something that I learned during this video that I was unaware of is that pharmacists are indeed doctors. He refers to them as “doctors on the bench.” The issue that Dr. Shah discussed in this video that you may have missed is that doctors are in need of some help. A doctor can only do so much. Dr. Shah is discussing solutions because he wants to put your “fighters” into action, which would be your currently underutilized pharmacists. Dr. Shah fully admits that he is able to help his patients when they come in to him with their problems, but there are certain things that he is unable to do because he does not possess all of the knowledge in the world. Dr. Shah is a specialist, and he is very educated in his specific line of study, which would be kidneys. When it comes to the specifics of your medications, Dr. Shah would like to see our pharmacists become another tool to be utilized by patients in their fight for good health. There is no secret that medications have all sorts of risks. Medications have side effects that are sometimes worse than the problem they are trying to fix in the first place, and when combined with other medications, they can cause even further complications. I am a nursing student, and in my ethics class we have been discussing a term in which I believe applies to this situation perfectly. This term that I am referring to is nonmaleficence. The definition of the term nonmaleficence is “to inflict the least harm possible when trying to reach a beneficial outcome.” The combined team of your doctor and your pharmacist will help to achieve this goal. Your doctor can prescribe your medications for your problem, and you can go in and talk to your pharmacist and they will break it down even further for you. Your pharmacist should be able to tell you what kinds of things you can expect when taking certain medications. They will be able to tell you what you will feel, the things that may happen when you combine the medications that you have been prescribed, and possibly offer an alternative to how you can take them in order to minimize the negatives. I hope you will see this point of view and understand that action is on the way, but before we can reach that part of the solution, we need to first agree on a plan of action.

I wonder if you understand what you saying cause you not making sense. You saying pharmacist are not trained? What was the purpose of them going to varsity, doing internship or residence if that is not for training pharmacist?

Pharmacists can get sued.

Why would it be dangerous? Pharmacists cannot diagnose but they can recommend treatments based on the Most up to date guidelines

Pharmacists have training in physiology and use same treatment protocols and guidelines as doctors, just not as focus on diagnosing in the curriculum but more on pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Once patient gets diagnosed by doctor, pharmacist can easily select proper drugs, dose, and monitor for patient optimal outcomes for increased benefits and minimize costs.