Archive | SA Pharmacy Council

Revoking the license of any health professional?

Continue Reading 0

Posted 13 February 2015

South Africa is not immune to health professionals who “substantiate” or support scam products in spite of no evidence that the product is no more than just that, a scam.

This article, Revoke the license of any doctor who opposes vaccination, published in the Washington Post, written by Arthur L. Caplan, the director of the Division of Medical Ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center’s Department of Population Health, makes a strong argument that “Doctors who purvey views based on anecdote, myth, hearsay, rumor, ideology, fraud or some combination of all of these, particularly during an epidemic, should have their medical licenses revoked“.

Although his opinion is directed primarily at health professionals and related to vaccination, we suggest that the same should apply to any health professional whose ‘professional opinion’ is used to substantiate a product that in fact is not supported by good … Read the rest

Continue Reading 0

Pharmacist’s Code of Conduct

Continue Reading 2

Posted 19 February 2013

I have been reminded that the South African Pharmacy Council (SAPC) states the following in their Code of Conduct:

A pharmacist must not give an impression to a potential purchaser that any product or food supplement associated with the maintenance of or enhancement of health is efficacious, when there is no evidence of efficacy, as confirmed by the registration with the Medicines Control Council.

This is interesting for many scams are in fact being promoted or sold by health professionals, including pharmacists.

Read the rest
Continue Reading 2

Multiple organ failure – death of consumer protection?

Continue Reading 0

“This hard-hitting commentary by Harris Steinman and Roy Jobson appears in the August 2010 South African Medical Journal (SAMJ).”

“Multiple organ failure has clearly resulted in an inability to efficiently clear or reject deleterious medicines and substances, resulting in financial and health trauma to consumers, with possible consequences including unnecessary deaths.”

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0

South African Pharmacy Council “dismisses complaint against” [absolves] substantiators

Continue Reading 0

Posted 01 June 2010

In brief:

Complaint: Beverley Summers PhD erroneously substantiated Homemark products Peel Away the Pounds and Slim Coffee to the detriment of consumers.

Result: Complaint dismissed as the SAPC (a science-based statutory council) did not want to override any decision of the ASA (an industry-based, non-scientific, non-statutory “authority”). The SAPC erroneously refers to the Final Appeal Committee of the ASA as an “independent judicial tribunal” — possibly on the basis that Judge Mervyn King convenes the Final Appeal Committee.

Unintended consequences: the SAPC decision creates a precedent which allows pharmacists to substantiate claims made for unregistered and unregulated products where there is insufficient evidence for the claims to be made. The SAPC decision therefore places consumers at risk of harm, financially and possibly even healthwise.

Read the rest
Continue Reading 0