Doc Martin

Regular readers will know I often comment about the popular ITV show Doc Martin, where Martin Clunes grimaces his way through the role of haemophobic GP Dr Martin Ellingham in the fictional Cornish village of Portwenn. The miserable medic invariably treats his patients with scant respect, but he is always spot on medically, identifying rare diseases and generally doing a good job in portraying the infallibility of the medical profession. My real beef is with the portrayal of the village pharmacist, Sally Tishell. She always wears a neck brace on account of her torticollis and is portrayed as being utterly inept. Her pharmacy is a travesty, with a thinly stocked counter, no sign of a dispensary, consulting room or any modern professional services. In all the episodes I have watched, Mrs Tishell never does anything worthwhile pharmaceutically, though she does make frequent reference to her professional standing. When there is a pharmaceutical storyline, like the possibility of an interaction between St John’s wort and SSRIs it’s the doc who gets it. From a PR point of view, Mrs Tishell is a disaster and can only serve to undermine the efforts of the profession to be taken seriously in modern health systems. Mrs Tishell does, however, have a saving grace. She is, apparently, a very good organist. How about the scriptwriters of Doc Martin translating her skills on the keyboard into the pharmacy setting?

PJ Watch

I read that the publisher of the PJ reckons that, under his watch, the PJ has evolved from a “B2B (business-to-business) trade magazine into a professional journal” (PJ, September 26, p275). I’ve read some rubbish in my time but that takes the biscuit. The PJ used to be the main link between the Society and its members. It took the business of the Society, and other institutions within pharmacy, seriously. It used to be a journal for the profession and as such was a professional journal. Although it carried some news of the business of pharmacy, it was never a trade magazine and to refer to it as such is a travesty. To my mind, what we have been witnessing under this purblind publisher is a move from the PJ being a professional journal to it becoming a general scientific magazine. The affairs of the profession, and those of the Society, are given scant attention. The fact that the publisher and his main sidekick hail from the commercial scientific publication Nature must have a lot to do with this. I read that peer review is to play a big part in PJ publishing in the future. It’s a pity that the publisher’s September 26 claim was not subjected to that process.

The favourite

It might have been a throwaway remark (and he might say it at all awards ceremonies), but I did hear Dr Keith Ridge (the chief pharmaceutical officer at NHS England) say, when he presented the Independent Pharmacy Awards on October 2, that these awards were the best. Why would he say this? Is it because the presentations take place at a small and intimate lunchtime event where everybody gets a chance to speak to everybody? Is it because the winners are not treated like pawns and are given the chance to say a few words after they have received their awards? Is it because those present pay attention while the awards are being presented? Is it because the winners are outstanding and a credit to the profession? Is it because the event is well supported by senior members of the profession? I reckon it is for all these reasons and probably a few more besides.

Thanks again

With summer at an end, it’s time to offer my thanks again to those stalwarts of the profession – the secretary’s of the pharmacy golfing societies. With National Pharmacy Association branches being but a distant memory and the Society’s branches being a recent loss, golfing societies offer the only means for many independents to rub shoulders with colleagues in the profession. This is something that a good many take full advantage of. So three cheers for the organisers!