A podcast episode argues that ACT's proposal to allow pharmacists to prescribe certain treatments is not radical but common sense, aimed at improving access to care, reducing GP wait times, and supporting the survival of community pharmacies.
Stacked weekly counts; colour by lean. “n/a” covers government and iwi-Māori sources where lean isn't applicable.
How this topic has been named, week by week. A new alias winning out is usually a framing shift.
Verbatim segments from politicians speaking on podcasts and radio shows about this topic. Sourced via the voice-reference library — each speaker has been confirmed manually from their voice clip. Click play to stream the original audio from the publisher, pre-seeked to the moment the quote starts.
So lunchtime today I was catching up with one of our advertisers just across the road having a bit of a cup of tea there. Advertiser owns a health adjacent business and we were just having a bit of a chat and it got on to discussing about, you know, what we should do about community pharmacies like the one I go to and what they could do to continue to survive at a time when the big guys like the chemist warehouse are taking over. And as part of the conversation, I said to this guy, I just feel like the community pharmacies need a unique selling point. You can get everything that you want from everywhere else now, right? I feel like they need permission to do more prescribing themselves because that's going to make them relevant again because most of us would choose to go to them for a prescription if we could rather than go to our GPs who are chocker and we can't get in and rather than stand in line with 25 other people at the chemist warehouse we would just go to our local one in a line of two people. And just as I picked up my phone to leave this tea date, the alert came through. Seymour says pharmacists should treat more so you don't need to see a GP. How's that for serendipity? ACT's proposal would allow pharmacists to prescribe antibiotics for chest or ear infections, more pain relief or ointments for skin infections, provide skin lesion triage and monitoring, and manage long-term medication for appropriate patients and order blood tests for those patients. Talking about people who own things like... like statins or diabetes medications, which they're going to have to be on for the rest of their lives. And it's basically just to prevent them having to go to see the doctor every 12 months to get the same thing re-prescribed, which is going to inevitably happen. Act is bang on with this idea. This is not radical at all. Pharmacists in other countries are trusted to prescribe things like antibiotics for strep. I mean, most of us, you and I, can look at a chest infection and go, you know what I think that is? That's a chest infection. So if we can do it, I suspect pharmacists who have all of that medical training will be able to do it relatively accurately, don't you? You? My only question is why we have to wait for November for something like this, which is just abundant common sense, when ACT can surely do this now ahead of this winter.
Up to 12 framings spread across orientations. Each framing is a short phrase the topic extractor generated to characterise the piece's stance — not a quote from the source. Click through to read the original.
urgent, threatened, local resilience
Perspective with Heather du Plessis-Allan: ACT's proposal for pharmacists isn't radical, it's common sensesupporting local health networks in crisis
David Seymour: Associate Health Minister on the proposal to let pharmacists prescribe some funded medicationsSpotted something wrong on this page? Report a correction.
