Memo from The Right to Die Society of Canada:
We are currently conducting research into diverse methods of suicide by
terminally ill individuals. We publish the results of this research in our
journal, "Last Rights" (current issue: 68 pages). We have just published a
preliminary report on the use of carbon monoxide as employed by Dr. Jack
Kevorkian in 18 out of 20 cases in which he has assisted suicide. For our
next issue (Sept) we are engaged in gathering information on the use of
"inert gases) (nitrogen, etc) which one Canadian biochemist advises us is
"easier to obtain, safer to us and a more pleasant means to succumb to than
carbon monoxide."
If you have any leads, technical advice, or comments to contribute to this
research, please let us know by Email:
(rig…@freenet.victoria.bc.ca);
or by
FAX: (604) 386-3800;
or by post:
P. O. Box 39018, Victoria BC V8V 4X8)
We appreciate any well-informed assistance we can obtain
on carbon monoxide or inert gases as applied to euthanasia.
John Hofsess, Executive Director.
The Right to Die Society of Canada
—
John Hofsess
P. O. Box 39018
Victoria BC V8V 4X8
FAX (604) 386-3800
In article <2tv59e$…@larry.rice.edu>,
Stuart Robert Hall <stuh…@flammulated.owlnet.rice.edu> wrote:
>I started taking desipramine last Tuesday, and by Wednesday morning I was
>having chills and sweating profusely. I thought it might be from the
>medication, but I thought it might disappear, so I took another dose on
>Wednesday. I had chills and fits of sweating off and on Wednesday, so I
>took a half dose on Thursday. By this point, my extremities were very cold
>to the touch, and somewhat cyanotic.
>These reactions don’t seem to fit well with the list of side effects for
>the class of TCAs. Has anyone heard of this reaction?
Both cold extremities and sweating are not unheard-of side effects of
TCAs, particularly desipramine, though your experience seems to be
on the severe side. My partner used to complain of cold hands and
feet when he was on desipramine (which I can verify–his hands and
feet were like icicles in bed), and he used to find himself sweating
much more profusely than he ordinarily would after exertion or a hot
environment. On the other hand, these were minor annoyances for him.
Both side effects disappeared once he eventually changed medications
for other reasons–desipramine just "pooped out" and stopped working
as an antidepressant after a few years.
I always imagined that the cold feet and hands were due to the drug’s
peripheral effects on catecholamine reuptake causing capillary
vasoconstriction.
–
Steve Dyer
d…@ursa-major.spdcc.com
d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>Pharmacy laws differ between states, but speaking generally, only a valid
>practitioner or an agent acting on hir behalf can phone in an oral Rx to
>a pharmacy.
I live in the same state as the original poster, and a few months ago
when I got a prescription for some chloramphenicol, I called all the
pharmacies in the area and none of them had it in stock, but several
agreed to order it. I went with Osco, who had the cheapest price on
the generic, and they ordered it for me and all I had to do was show up
a few days later with the Rx and they filled it.
–
Jim Marco — d…@uiuc.edu
This tagline is umop apisdn
In article <2u1r1j$…@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, Jim Marco <d…@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>>Pharmacy laws differ between states, but speaking generally, only a valid
>>practitioner or an agent acting on hir behalf can phone in an oral Rx to
>>a pharmacy.
>I live in the same state as the original poster, and a few months ago
>when I got a prescription for some chloramphenicol, I called all the
>pharmacies in the area and none of them had it in stock, but several
>agreed to order it. I went with Osco, who had the cheapest price on
>the generic, and they ordered it for me and all I had to do was show up
>a few days later with the Rx and they filled it.
Right; they filled it when you arrived with the prescription.
Presumably, you had to wait the 10 to 30 or so minutes for the
pharmacist to fill the prescription–it wasn’t waiting for you
when you arrived. Having to wait (because they didn’t fill it
in response to his phone call) was what the original poster
was complaining about if I understood him correctly.
Chloramphenicol is rarely enough used these days that it isn’t
unusual for it to be out of stock in most pharmacies. But
asking a pharmacy to order it beforehand isn’t the same as calling
in a prescription to be filled. This is a subtle point.
–
Steve Dyer
d…@ursa-major.spdcc.com
d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>Presumably, you had to wait the 10 to 30 or so minutes for the
>pharmacist to fill the prescription–it wasn’t waiting for you
>when you arrived.
Well, they ordered it and had it there, and all they had to do was
give it to me when I got there. I had to wait about 5 minutes, but
presumably only because there were other people being helped that were
there before me.
>Chloramphenicol is rarely enough used these days that it isn’t
>unusual for it to be out of stock in most pharmacies.
Considering that it can cause aplastic anemia, I don’t wonder why.
—
Jim Marco — d…@uiuc.edu
If this were an actual tagline, it would be funny.
In article <CrnsH6….@spdcc.com> d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>Right; they filled it when you arrived with the prescription.
>Presumably, you had to wait the 10 to 30 or so minutes for the
>pharmacist to fill the prescription–it wasn’t waiting for you
>when you arrived. Having to wait (because they didn’t fill it
>in response to his phone call) was what the original poster
>was complaining about if I understood him correctly.
I usually get the "it’s illegal" line (here in Illinois, home of the
original posters on this subject) when the pharmacist doesn’t want to be
bothered. I’ve asked numerous other pharmacists and most admit that it’s
not illegal here, but that many pharmacists feel that the customer can’t
or won’t read the prescription correctly.
I’ve had some pharmacists who would take it over the phone from me, and
have it ready, in the bottle, labeled and ready to be rung up when I arrived.
(Upon proper presentation of the written prescription, of course. :-)
I’ve also taken good care with such people to make a verbal note of any
anomalies on the scrip, such as the time I was prescribed qty 30, 5 GRAM
valium tabs. (I told the pharmacist "it says grams, it probably means
milligrams," and he noted it and agreed when he looked at the paper. The
doctor did indeed scribble "5g".)
–
Optimists say, "The glass is half full."
Cliff Sharp Pessimists say, "It’s half empty."
WA9PDM We realists say, "Before I decide,
cli…@indep1.chi.il.us tell me what’s in the glass."
Regarding whether a pharmacist is allowed to fill an oral prescription
transmitted by a patient.
In article <Cro1sE…@indep1.chi.il.us>, Claims
> I usually get the "it’s illegal" line (here in Illinois, home of the
>original posters on this subject) when the pharmacist doesn’t want to be
>bothered. I’ve asked numerous other pharmacists and most admit that it’s
>not illegal here.
Contrary to this claim. It is illegal for a pharmacist to fill a
prescription which has been transmitted orally by a patient.
This is prohibited by United States FEDERAL LAW. You can find it in the
Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, As Amended 1979, Section 503B.
In article <CrMyEx….@spdcc.com>
d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
> minutes while they `fill’ this prepackaged prescription drug.
How much of what Pharamacists do is simply repackaging medicine and how
much is actually involved in "mixing up compounds?" Or is their
expertise now more aligned toward patient eduacation/proper ways to
take medice/drug interactions/… and less toward the actuasll
"bottling" of the medicine?
Phil Sloan
psl…@bwco.com
Ronald Kavanagh (k8821…@u.washington.edu) wrote:
: Contrary to this claim. It is illegal for a pharmacist to fill a
: prescription which has been transmitted orally by a patient.
: This is prohibited by United States FEDERAL LAW. You can find it in the
: Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, As Amended 1979, Section 503B.
But that’s not what the person who started this thread asked. He asked
if it was really illegal for him to call in a prescription in advance and
present the written version upon arrive at the pharmacy to pick up the drug.
–
My name is Stan Horwitz and my E-mail address is s…@astro.ocis.temple.edu
My opinions are all mine. They do not reflect those of my employer.
In article <2u7k4u$…@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>,
Stan Horwitz <s…@astro.ocis.temple.edu> wrote:
>Ronald Kavanagh (k8821…@u.washington.edu) wrote:
>: Contrary to this claim. It is illegal for a pharmacist to fill a
>: prescription which has been transmitted orally by a patient.
>: This is prohibited by United States FEDERAL LAW. You can find it in the
>: Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, As Amended 1979, Section 503B.
>But that’s not what the person who started this thread asked. He asked
>if it was really illegal for him to call in a prescription in advance and
>present the written version upon arrive at the pharmacy to pick up the drug.
Kavanaugh is correct, and you and the person who started the thread are
missing the point. That guy wanted a pharmacist to fill a prescription
based on what he read over the phone so that when he came to pick
it up, he could just be delivered the drug, no waiting (and by the
way, he gave the pharmacist the hard-copy Rx at that point.)
The pharmacist would have to fill it based on what was read over
the phone by the patient. This is what is illegal. The prescription
is _already filled_ by the time the guy arrives at the pharmacy
with the hard copy.
–
Steve Dyer
d…@ursa-major.spdcc.com
In article <CrpDos….@bwco.com>, Phil Sloan <psl…@bwco.com> wrote:
>In article <CrMyEx….@spdcc.com>
>d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>> minutes while they `fill’ this prepackaged prescription drug.
I didn’t write this.
>How much of what Pharamacists do is simply repackaging medicine and how
>much is actually involved in "mixing up compounds?" Or is their
>expertise now more aligned toward patient eduacation/proper ways to
>take medice/drug interactions/… and less toward the actuasll
>"bottling" of the medicine?
This would be an appropriate question for a pharmacist to answer.
–
Steve Dyer
d…@ursa-major.spdcc.com
>>How much of what Pharamacists do is simply repackaging medicine and how
>>much is actually involved in "mixing up compounds?" Or is their
>>expertise now more aligned toward patient eduacation/proper ways to
>>take medice/drug interactions/… and less toward the actuasll
>>"bottling" of the medicine?
>This would be an appropriate question for a pharmacist to answer.
>Steve Dyer
>d…@ursa-major.spdcc.com
Well, as a pharmacist who does not practice in the retail setting anymore,
I will have to say that 99.9% of prescriptions these days are either
"repackaged" or "prepackaged" (like oral contraceptives, etc.)
Actually "mixing up compounds" (compounding in pharmacistese) is uncommon in
the usual chain drug store-like setting. Lots of the effort involved goes
into interpreting prescriptions and fixing problems.
As far as expertise in patient education, I’d like to hear what the
consumers have to say about that.
Paul
————————————————————–
Paul Sovcik, PharmD | Email- U18…@uicvm.uic.edu
University of Illinois at Chicago|
Department of Pharmacy Practice |
Chicago, Il |
In article <CrrsoC….@spdcc.com>
d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>Kavanaugh is correct, and you and the person who started the thread are
>missing the point. That guy wanted a pharmacist to fill a prescription
>based on what he read over the phone so that when he came to pick
>it up, he could just be delivered the drug, no waiting (and by the
>way, he gave the pharmacist the hard-copy Rx at that point.)
>The pharmacist would have to fill it based on what was read over
>the phone by the patient. This is what is illegal. The prescription
>is _already filled_ by the time the guy arrives at the pharmacy
>with the hard copy.
Wait just a minute. It’s true that this is in fact the crux of the matter. BUT
the determinant is how the Federal statutes define "filling a prescription."
Certainly, from the point of view of the consumer, the prescription has not
been filled until the medicine is in the consumer’s possession. Clearly, you
view "filling" as preparing the ready-to-go package, regardless of when it
actually leaves the pharmacy. It’s certainly not obvious who is correct. That
may be why different pharmacists deal with this kind of request differently.
It seems unlikely to me that the Feds would have, or wish to pursue, a case
against a pharmacist who prepared the medication based on a telephone call,
but had not yet dispensed it, and would not until a legitimate prescription
were presented … Don’t you think???
Joe
In article <16FDDD4F1S85.M02…@mwvm.mitre.org>,
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
Joe Gems <M02…@mwvm.mitre.org> wrote:
>In article <CrrsoC….@spdcc.com>
>d…@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>>Kavanaugh is correct, and you and the person who started the thread are
>>missing the point. That guy wanted a pharmacist to fill a prescription
>>based on what he read over the phone so that when he came to pick
>>it up, he could just be delivered the drug, no waiting (and by the
>>way, he gave the pharmacist the hard-copy Rx at that point.)
>>The pharmacist would have to fill it based on what was read over
>>the phone by the patient. This is what is illegal. The prescription
>>is _already filled_ by the time the guy arrives at the pharmacy
>>with the hard copy.
>Wait just a minute. It’s true that this is in fact the crux of the matter. BUT
>the determinant is how the Federal statutes define "filling a prescription."
>Certainly, from the point of view of the consumer, the prescription has not
>been filled until the medicine is in the consumer’s possession. Clearly, you
>view "filling" as preparing the ready-to-go package, regardless of when it
ually leaves the pharmacy. It’s certainly not obvious who is
correct.
The federal law only gives authorization to fill an oral prescription
from an authorized practitioner. A prescription which is filled based on
the oral transmission from other than an authorized practioner or his/her
agent is defined by the food drug and cosmetics act as misbranded, and can
result in the immediate seizure of the entire contents of the pharmacy.
The previous section of the law (502) gives a very complete description
of "filling’ a prescription, so that a pharmacist will not be defined as
a manufacturer or repackager and have to follow the regulations for those
types of establishments.
>may be why different pharmacists deal with this kind of request differently.
>It seems unlikely to me that the Feds would have, or wish to pursue, a case
>against a pharmacist who prepared the medication based on a telephone call,
>but had not yet dispensed it, and would not until a legitimate prescription
>were presented … Don’t you think???
There are also state inspectors who make unannounced visits and make sure
that you’re following both state and federal law. If you don’t follow the
federal law you can be charged by the state with unprofessional conduct and
working
outside the bounds of the profession (i.e. working without a license).
And if this is the case your malpractice insurance won’t cover your
legal expenses.
In terms of what community pharmacists really do when someone
insists that you fill their prescription based on what they say over
the phone, what pharmacists do is say OK and then ignore it until the
hardcopy
presciption actually comes into the pharmacy. Anybody who’s ever worked
in community pharmacy knows that in the vast majority of these cases
either the prescription never comes in (presumably the patient went
elsewhere), or there’s a problem with the prescription. Thus the ‘filled’
prescription may need to be returned to stock, or the label needs to be
reentered into the computer, resulting in waste due to duplication of
time and resources,
and causing an increase in direct and indirect cost.
Since there is
virtually no way to pass on these costs and remain competitive.
Your arguments about whether a community pharmacist may fill a
prescription in this situtation are really moot, because I don’t know any
community pharmacist who is going to actually do it (Even if they tell
the patient that they are, in order to placate them), because it is
likely to wind up costing them money.
People are confusing "Filling" and "Dispensing" a prescription. When the
label goes on the bottle and it is ready to go the prescription is
"filled". When it is handed to the patinet it is dispensed. Theirfore
"Filling" a prescription being phoned into a pharmacy by a customer which
is not a refill is in violation of Federal Law.
Terry
Ronald Kavanagh (k8821…@u.washington.edu) wrote:
: Since there is
: virtually no way to pass on these costs and remain competitive.
: Your arguments about whether a community pharmacist may fill a
: prescription in this situtation are really moot, because I don’t know any
: community pharmacist who is going to actually do it (Even if they tell
: the patient that they are, in order to placate them), because it is
: likely to wind up costing them money.
What’s the problem here? I moved into a new neighborhood a month ago. I just
went to a local drug store to fill a prescription. I expected that this drug
store would not have my medicine in stock since its not commonly prescribed.
As such, I called a day a head of time to let the phamacist know I was going
to order this prescription. I then picked up the phone again and called my
physician. He called the drug store to confirm the prescription. When I came
in the next day to pick up the drug, which costs me about $100, I saw the
pharmacist walk over to a shelf, pick up a bag, and she handed it to me as
soon as I paid for the medication. I waited all of 5 minutes and that was
mostly waiting for the person in front of me to be served. I am not saying
the pharmacist filled the prescription (which was new to him) on my word
alone, however, I still had no problem calling my doc up and asking him to
order the medication from me. As such, my suggestion is, don’t bother even
calling K-Mart on your own, just call your doctor and have him or her order
the drug for you. Any doctor that would not do this simple thing may not
be worth seeing any more. If its some sort of restricted drug that even your
doc can’t order over the phone, just think a head and drop off the written
prescription at the pharmacy the day before you intend to pick it up if you
can or just bring a magazine or a newspaper with you to read while you wait
for the pharmacist to fill your prescription. All in all, I can think of
much worse fates than to have to wait 15 minutes for a prescription to be
filled. Its not like you’re stuck there while the prescription is filled.
–
My name is Stan Horwitz and my E-mail address is s…@astro.ocis.temple.edu
My opinions are all mine. They do not reflect those of my employer.
>>> On 22 Jun 1994 23:54:13 GMT, cla…@iia.org (Terry R. Clark) said:
Terry> People are confusing "Filling" and "Dispensing" a prescription.
Terry> When the label goes on the bottle and it is ready to go the
Terry> prescription is "filled". When it is handed to the patinet it
Terry> is dispensed. Theirfore "Filling" a prescription being phoned
Terry> into a pharmacy by a customer which is not a refill is in
Terry> violation of Federal Law.
Well here in Texas I have had the following experience. I was taking
a drug (cyclosporine to be exact) that my pharmacy did not normally
carry. At least once I called the pharmacy the day before I wanted to
pick up some more. I would tell them I needed some more and how much
and then would order it. The next day I would go to my doctor to
(among other things) get the prescription and then take this to the
pharmacy. As I remember the prescription was "filled" when I got to
the pharmacy.
Now the phamacist knew that I was on this drug and had previously
filled a prescription of mine for this drug. Still it seems that the
prescription was "filled" on my word.
Sure seems like a stupid law.
Art
fla…@cli.com
Computational Logic, Inc.
Austin, Texas
You are all avoiding the obvious…….
Kmart benefits from having you hanging around the place waiting.
Can you say "impulse buying" …..?
–
A host is a host from coast to coast……………..wb8…@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that’s close………..(v)301 56 LINUX
Unless the host (that isn’t close)….kibo# 777…………pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead…………..vr………………..20915-1433
David Lesher (wb8…@netcom.com) wrote:
: You are all avoiding the obvious…….
: Kmart benefits from having you hanging around the place waiting.
: Can you say "impulse buying" …..?
Possibly, but you are missing the point. The law is to prevent a
prescription to be completely filled and waiting for the order to be
brought to the pharmacy. If for some reason something goes wrong
(Murphy’s law) and the prescription is dispensed with out it being
compared to the written prescription. You have a HUGE potentional for an
error to happen. Is a 15 min wait worth your life?
Terry
In article <wb8fozCrv52n….@netcom.com>, wb8…@netcom.com (David Lesher) says:
>You are all avoiding the obvious…….
>Kmart benefits from having you hanging around the place waiting.
>Can you say "impulse buying" …..?
They do, however, that isnt the reason the Rx wasnt filled. The pharmacist
behind the counter is not trying to get you to hang around the store so you’ll
hit the blue light special. What IS happening is that when people try to call
in their own prescriptions, they often screw it up. This causes duplicate
work for the pharmacist and staff and also adds an element of risk… the
incorrectly filled prescription may be dispensed to the patient inadvertently.
If the patient is well known to the pharmacist and the medication is chronic,
the pharmacist may make an exception. But it would be a nightmare behind the
counter if everyone tried to call in their interpretation of their prescription
continuously.
-Paul
Just a comment on this thread. My parents are both in the medical
profession — my father’s a physician and my mother’s a nurse. When I was
in college, I had to have a letter from each of them before I could figure
out what was going on at home. My father’s handwriting is awful — it
takes forever to decipher what’s he’s saying. Mom’s is better, but it can
be difficult in places. By putting their letters "together", I usually
figured out at least the gist of what was going on back home. No way
would I want to try to figure out what Dad has written on a prescription.
And no way would I want a pharmacist to take my word for what I thought
the prescription said. Even when I know what medication the prescription
is for I usually have no idea what the actual prescription says. As a
side bar, I just read an article about medical schools considering adding
a handwriting course because there have been serious errors made by
pharmacists who deciphered that scrawl incorrectly.
Just my $.02 worth.
Barbara-Jean
cf…@eiu.edu
On Wed, 22 Jun 94 15:08:29 EDT,
Joe Gems <M02…@mwvm.mitre.org> wrote:
>It seems unlikely to me that the Feds would have, or wish to pursue, a case
>against a pharmacist who prepared the medication based on a telephone call,
>but had not yet dispensed it, and would not until a legitimate prescription
>were presented … Don’t you think???
Sounds sensible to me, but how about the delightful individual who waxes
abusive should anything (eg a pharmacist checking the accuracy of a
prescription) slow his/her bulldozer progress through a day? (Have been
privileged to see these people in action, on occasion… Truly Impressive!)
-Miranda
–
M. Rose Mulvale November 7. Solitude. A puppy biscuit
rmulv…@fox.nstn.ns.ca did it, part of a puppy biscuit.
On 21 Jun 1994 20:55:58 GMT,
Stan Horwitz <s…@astro.ocis.temple.edu> wrote:
>Ronald Kavanagh (k8821…@u.washington.edu) wrote:
>: Contrary to this claim. It is illegal for a pharmacist to fill a
>: prescription which has been transmitted orally by a patient.
>: This is prohibited by United States FEDERAL LAW. You can find it in the
>: Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, As Amended 1979, Section 503B.
>But that’s not what the person who started this thread asked. He asked
>if it was really illegal for him to call in a prescription in advance and
^^^^^^^
>present the written version upon arrive at the pharmacy to pick up the drug.
Not at all! Nobody will arrest him for "Attempt to speed up the process,
prescription-wise"! *However* (whether it is or is not legal, State-side),
it would take a pretty gutsy pharmacist to fill a prescription based on
information read by a non-pharmacist from an order written by any member of
the world’s most notoriously illegible scribes…..
Did I say "gutsy" back there? How’s about "stupid"? If concern for the
welfare of the patient is not primary, maybe concern about the state of
the malpractise insurance is (or *should be*)!
-Miranda
–
M. Rose Mulvale November 7. Solitude. A puppy biscuit
rmulv…@fox.nstn.ns.ca did it, part of a puppy biscuit.
>It seems unlikely to me that the Feds would have, or wish to pursue, a case
>against a pharmacist who prepared the medication based on a telephone call,
>but had not yet dispensed it, and would not until a legitimate prescription
>were presented … Don’t you think???
As a pharmacist, I have to agree. I don’t think it’s illegal to prepare
the prescription in advance, pursuant to a patient’s telephone call, and
then dispense it only after receiving the written copy – but I personally
am not willing to. I have had many instances where patients have tried to
read their prescriptions to me over the phone. Most of the time they
cannot decipher the handwriting, and when they can, they cannot pronounce
the drug name and commonly used abbreviations.
Assuming I were willing to fill this verbal order from my patient, in a
busy pharmacy there is an excellent possibility that this
yet-to-be-confirmed prescription would be sold by a harried clerk, to my
patient’s detriment. There are too many chances to hurt the patient I am
trying to serve. It really is better to bring the written prescription in
and have it done right. Alternatively, have your physician call or fax it
to the pharmacy directly.
Vic Walker R.Ph.
The reason that people in Delaware can not call in
there own prescriptions is because only a doctor or
someone who works for them can call them in. I work
at a Pharmacy and we won’t take any prescriptions
over the phone by anyone who is not a doc or works
for them
In article <9406231656.AA07798@artist> fla…@cli.com (Arthur D. Flatau) writes:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>Xref: otago.ac.nz alt.drugs:24401 misc.consumers:14128 misc.legal:21118 sci.med.pharmacy:1621
>Path: otago.ac.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!waikato!comp.vuw.ac.nz!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!not-for-mail
>From: fla…@cli.com (Arthur D. Flatau)
>Newsgroups: alt.drugs,misc.consumers,misc.legal,sci.med.pharmacy
>Subject: Re: Pharmacy law in Illinois? Stupid Question
>Date: 23 Jun 1994 11:57:16 -0500
>Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
>Lines: 29
>Sender: nob…@cs.utexas.edu
>Message-ID: <9406231656.AA07798@artist>
>References: <2tvhf5$…@bradley.bradley.edu> <CrMyEx….@spdcc.com> <2uaiv5$…@ankh.iia.org>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: news.cs.utexas.edu
>>>> On 22 Jun 1994 23:54:13 GMT, cla…@iia.org (Terry R. Clark) said:
>Terry> People are confusing "Filling" and "Dispensing" a prescription.
>Terry> When the label goes on the bottle and it is ready to go the
>Terry> prescription is "filled". When it is handed to the patinet it
>Terry> is dispensed. Theirfore "Filling" a prescription being phoned
>Terry> into a pharmacy by a customer which is not a refill is in
>Terry> violation of Federal Law.
>Well here in Texas I have had the following experience. I was taking
>a drug (cyclosporine to be exact) that my pharmacy did not normally
>carry. At least once I called the pharmacy the day before I wanted to
>pick up some more. I would tell them I needed some more and how much
>and then would order it. The next day I would go to my doctor to
>(among other things) get the prescription and then take this to the
>pharmacy. As I remember the prescription was "filled" when I got to
>the pharmacy.
>Now the phamacist knew that I was on this drug and had previously
>filled a prescription of mine for this drug. Still it seems that the
>prescription was "filled" on my word.
>Sure seems like a stupid law.
>Art
>fla…@cli.com
>Computational Logic, Inc.
>Austin, Texas