Lounsbury: In Amusing Business Assertions

« Eurotunnel | Oh perhaps fashionable now. Iraq. Civil War. »

April 26, 2005

In Amusing Business Assertions

I've thought about commenting on this for a bit, but it is a bit dry. Nevertheless, in the local market there is an ongoing controversy over a new bill revising pharma sector regs. Frankly, it is a damned good law, gets rid of a lot of archaic rubbish regulation. Not enough, but in the Arab region we have to move slowly, slowly.

This of course has provoked massive protest on the part of pharmacists. Such bizarre regulations as any pharmaceutical company (producer, distributor) has to have 50 percent of its capital held by pharmacists (what the logic of this is utterly escapes me, but it's a great rent for pharmacists) and equally the limitation on the size of the pharmacy are about to go out the door. This provoked a general strike by pharmacists a few weeks ago - bloody lazy gits don't even stay open after 19:00 or 20:00 so I don't know how they can "strike" - but now the latest and most amusing maneuver(s) are the dual claim that the pharmacists union should be authorized to license all new pharmacy opening (great give a clubby bunch of self-interested slime more power over their little inefficient and inconvenient cartel) and ban clinics from having internal pharmacies.

This last produced an assertion that still amuses me. The assertion that a clinic (hospital in fact) having an on premises pharmacy is "disloyal competition prejudicial to the profession."

April 26, 2005

In Amusing Business Assertions

Trackback Pings

Comments

Comment Subscription