Pharmacy Practice is increasingly labelled as “illegal,” but this argument reflects a policy vacuum rather than a professional failure.

#TalkingIsLegal

     - Not Practicing..!

Pharmacy Practice is increasingly labelled as “illegal,” but this argument reflects a policy vacuum rather than a professional failure.

 The real issue is not the teaching of Pharmacy Practice or PharmaCare, but the absence of a comprehensive legal framework that clearly defines and integrates the pharmacist’s patient-care role within India’s healthcare system.

Healthcare today is medicine-intensive. Polypharmacy, chronic diseases, ageing populations, and medication-related harm are now routine. 

Regulating medicines as products alone is no longer sufficient. Modern healthcare requires PharmaCare-oriented professional practice, where pharmacists are trained and accountable for medication safety, therapy monitoring, patient counselling, continuity of care, and systems-based interventions that directly influence outcomes.

Insisting that the law must evolve before professional capacity is built reverses the natural order of health-system development. 

Across health professions, education has always anticipated emerging roles long before statutes formally recognised them.

Pharmacy Practice and PharmaCare education preparing pharmacists for structured patient-care responsibilities is therefore is legitimate and is necessary and forward-looking.

The confusion arises from India’s fragmented legal framework. The pharmacist’s role is scattered across the Pharmacy Act and the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, with no single statute clearly defining pharmacists as accountable patient-care professionals or formal providers of PharmaCare service within the healthcare team. 

This legal silence enables misinterpretation, under-utilisation of trained pharmacists, and the mistaken branding of structured professional education as “unauthorised practice.”

What India urgently needs is a comprehensive Pharmacy Practice Act that formally recognises and regulates PharmaCare, clearly defining scope, responsibility, accountability, and collaborative boundaries. 

Such legislation would align education with practice, strengthen patient safety, reduce medication-related harm, and integrate pharmacists meaningfully into healthcare delivery.

Suppressing Pharmacy Practice and PharmaCare education will not improve safety; it will only widen the gap between healthcare needs and system capacity. 

The real policy question is not why these competencies are being taught, but why regulation has not  yet been put in place to keep  pace with the realities of modern healthcare.?

#PharmacyPractice 

#PharmaCare #PharmacyPracticeAct

#PatientSafety #MedicationSafety

#HealthcarePolicy #HealthPolicyIndia

#PharmacyEducation #ClinicalPharmacy

#AIPDA

#APTI

#PharmacistsInHealthcare

#PCI #NMC #CDSCO #DTAB #MinistryOfHealth

Pov: Bhagwan PS

#Can Pharmacy Practice Be A Reality In India?

#CanPharmacyPracticeBeARealityInIndia?

Let’s be honest about Pharmacy Practice in India.

🤔 Pharmacy Practice Regulations (PPR) 2015–25 are repeatedly cited as proof that pharmacy practice is legally recognized in India. 

❌In reality, that claim does not stand up to scrutiny. PPR 2015–25 were framed by the Pharmacy Council of India under the Pharmacy Act, 1948 to hoodwink PharmD students and Graduates.

☑️But the Pharmacy Act primarily governs education and registration. 

❌It does not confer enforceable patient-care authority, nor does it empower PCI to regulate clinical practice on the ground. 

❌Calling PPR a “regulation” does not automatically make it enforceable.

☑️On the field, real power lies with State Drug Control Departments under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. 

☑️Licensing, inspections, prosecutions, and control over dispensing are all under FDA jurisdiction. 

❌PPR provisions are not embedded in State Drug Rules, and therefore remain legally optional.

❌FDAs are not bound to enforce what the law does not mandate.

☑️That is why pharmacy practice in India exists only in pockets. 

☑️A few hospitals run clinical pharmacy services because administrators allow it not the system.

☑️A few pharmacists counsel patients because they personally believe in it.

❌This is not system-driven practice;

 It is goodwill-driven survival.

☑️ The uncomfortable truth is this: 

• PPR 2015–25 is not legally tenable as an enforcement instrument. 

• It creates expectations without authority and 

(Like Alcohol, It creates desire but takes away performance..)

• It assigns responsibility without power. 

Worse,

• It gives the illusion of progress while shielding regulators from accountability for not securing supportive legislation.

👉 If pharmacy practice is truly the goal, then guidelines are not enough. 

👉 The profession needs statutory backing—A comprehensive

 "The Indian Pharmacy Practice Regulation Act".

👉 Fresh Rules have to be framed after the Act is put in place.

❌ Without that, PPR remains a document of intent, not law.

😢 Continuing to celebrate PPR while ignoring its legal weakness is intellectual dishonesty. (Bankruptcy) 

📢Pharmacy practice will not be built on aspirations, circulars, or seminars, Webinars of so called Resource Persons. 

👉It will be built only when law, administration, and accountability are aligned.

Till then, let’s stop pretending.🫢

#PCI, #PPR15-25,

#MinistryofHealthandFamilyWelfare 

#AIPDA 

#PharmD 

#APTI

POV: Bhagwan PS

Pharmacy Practice is increasingly labelled as “illegal,” but this argument reflects a policy vacuum rather than a professional failure.

#TalkingIsLegal

     - Not Practicing..!

Pharmacy Practice is increasingly labelled as “illegal,” but this argument reflects a policy vacuum rather than a professional failure.

 The real issue is not the teaching of Pharmacy Practice or PharmaCare, but the absence of a comprehensive legal framework that clearly defines and integrates the pharmacist’s patient-care role within India’s healthcare system.

Healthcare today is medicine-intensive. Polypharmacy, chronic diseases, ageing populations, and medication-related harm are now routine. 

Regulating medicines as products alone is no longer sufficient. Modern healthcare requires PharmaCare-oriented professional practice, where pharmacists are trained and accountable for medication safety, therapy monitoring, patient counselling, continuity of care, and systems-based interventions that directly influence outcomes.

Insisting that the law must evolve before professional capacity is built reverses the natural order of health-system development. 

Across health professions, education has always anticipated emerging roles long before statutes formally recognised them.

Pharmacy Practice and PharmaCare education preparing pharmacists for structured patient-care responsibilities is therefore is legitimate and is necessary and forward-looking.

The confusion arises from India’s fragmented legal framework. The pharmacist’s role is scattered across the Pharmacy Act and the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, with no single statute clearly defining pharmacists as accountable patient-care professionals or formal providers of PharmaCare service within the healthcare team. 

This legal silence enables misinterpretation, under-utilisation of trained pharmacists, and the mistaken branding of structured professional education as “unauthorised practice.”

What India urgently needs is a comprehensive Pharmacy Practice Act that formally recognises and regulates PharmaCare, clearly defining scope, responsibility, accountability, and collaborative boundaries. 

Such legislation would align education with practice, strengthen patient safety, reduce medication-related harm, and integrate pharmacists meaningfully into healthcare delivery.

Suppressing Pharmacy Practice and PharmaCare education will not improve safety; it will only widen the gap between healthcare needs and system capacity. 

The real policy question is not why these competencies are being taught, but why regulation has not  yet been put in place to keep  pace with the realities of modern healthcare.?

#PharmacyPractice 

#PharmaCare #PharmacyPracticeAct

#PatientSafety #MedicationSafety

#HealthcarePolicy #HealthPolicyIndia

#PharmacyEducation #ClinicalPharmacy

#AIPDA

#APTI

#PharmacistsInHealthcare

#PCI #NMC #CDSCO #DTAB #MinistryOfHealth

Pov: Bhagwan PS

10 CORE QUESTIONS TO PHARMACY LEADERS & REGULATORS (1948–2025)- Bhagwan PS

10 CORE QUESTIONS TO PHARMACY LEADERS & REGULATORS (1948–2025)

1. Why has the Pharmacy Act, 1948 failed to legally define, protect, and enforce Pharmacy Practice, leaving pharmacists without statutory professional authority even after 75+ years?

2. How and why did pharmacy regulation become academically dominated, excluding practicing pharmacists, healthcare administrators, and industry professionals, and what damage did this regulatory capture cause?

3. On what rationale were thousands of pharmacy colleges approved without ensuring employability, practice roles, or healthcare integration for graduates?

4. Why were chronic inspection malpractices (ghost faculty, fake infrastructure, borrowed facilities) tolerated or normalized, and who is accountable for this systemic fraud?

5. Why has no regulator or professional body been held personally or institutionally accountable for repeated failures in education quality, professional outcomes, and patient safety?

6. Why were clinical pharmacy, PharmD, and advanced programs introduced without corresponding legal authority to practice, thereby misleading students and families?

7. Why has pharmacist presence at dispensing points, hospitals, and public health programs not been strictly enforced, despite clear patient-safety implications?

8. Why have professional associations largely remained silent or complicit, prioritizing events and positions over legal reform and whistleblower protection?

9. How has the absence of a Pharmacy Practice law contributed to public-health failures, including medication errors, irrational drug use, and antibiotic resistance?

10. Do you accept the need for a complete structural reset—including a separate Pharmacy Practice & Education Regulation Act, reconstitution of the regulator, and criminal accountability for past educational fraud?

#PCI #MoHFW, #ÇDSCO, 

#IPA, #IHPA, #APTI, 

#Pharmacists 

#Exofficios

Pharmacy Intern and Resident

Pharmacy Intern is a student (PharmD candidate) gaining required experience under supervision, while a Pharmacy Resident is a post-graduate pharmacist (a licensed professional) pursuing advanced, specialized training after graduation, both roles involving patient care but at different educational and licensure stages, with residency being optional and enhancing specialized career paths. Interns work towards their degree, performing basic pharmacist duties with a license, whereas Residents, fully licensed, deepen expertise in areas like critical care, oncology, or administration through structured programs (PGY-1, PGY-2). 

Pharmacy Intern

• Status: A pharmacy student (PharmD candidate) completing required experiential rotations.
• Timing: During their degree program, often the final year.
• Role: Assists licensed pharmacists, performs patient counseling, assessments, and dispensing under direct supervision, often with an intern license.
• Goal: Fulfill graduation requirements and gain foundational practice skills. 

Pharmacy Resident

• Status: A fully licensed pharmacist who has graduated from pharmacy school.
• Timing: After graduation (Post-Graduate Year 1, or PGY-1) and potentially further (PGY-2 for specialization).
• Role: Advanced, independent (but supervised) patient care, research, education, and specialized rotations (e.g., critical care, infectious diseases).
• Goal: Develop expertise in a specific clinical area or management, gaining a competitive edge for specialized roles. 

Key Differences Summarized

• Education Level: Student vs. Graduate.
• Licensure: Intern license vs. Full pharmacist license.
• Purpose: Required training vs. Optional specialization.
• Scope: Foundational duties vs. Advanced clinical practice & research. 

Medical Intern and Resident

An intern is a medical school graduate in their first year of post-graduate training, often called a "first-year resident" in the U.S.. A resident is a doctor in their second year or any subsequent year of post-graduate training after the internship, specializing in a specific area. The primary difference is the level of training and experience; an intern is at the beginning, while a resident is further along, taking on more responsibility and working towards board certification in a specialty.  

Feature	Intern	Resident
Level of Training	First year of postgraduate medical training	Years 2+ of postgraduate training
Autonomy	Works under close supervision and guidance	Takes on more responsibility and supervises interns and medical students
Specialization	General training to be licensed to practice	Specializing in a particular medical field
Experience	New to clinical practice after medical school	Has completed the initial internship year
Role	Completes tasks under direction	Manages patient care, diagnoses, and treatment plans

No, there is no equivalent of "deemed boards" for schools in the way there are "deemed-to-be-universities" for higher education in India.

No, there is no equivalent of "deemed boards" for schools in the way there are "deemed-to-be-universities" for higher education in India. 

The concept of "deemed to be university" is a specific accreditation status granted to a higher educational institution (like a college) by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Ministry of Education, allowing it autonomy in setting its own syllabus, conducting examinations, and awarding degrees. 

School education is structured differently: 

• Governing Bodies: Schools are affiliated with a number of recognized boards. These are established by either the central government or state governments and have the authority to prescribe curricula and conduct examinations for classes 10 and 12.
• Central Boards: The primary national boards are the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations (CISCE), and the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS).
• State Boards: Each state has its own board of education (e.g., Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan) that governs the schools within that state.
• International Boards: Some schools also offer international curricula like the International Baccalaureate (IB) or Cambridge Assessment International Education (CAIE). 

All these boards operate under the oversight of government bodies and are part of a recognized system of school education. The status of "deemed" with the autonomy it implies for higher education institutions does not apply to school boards. 

USA :

That is correct; there is no direct equivalent of "deemed boards" for high schools in the United States in the way the "deemed-to-be-universities" concept functions in the Indian higher education system. 

Here's why:

• Decentralized System: The U.S. does not have a centralized national education system or a federal body that grants a special "deemed" status to school boards. Educational standards and recognition are primarily set at the state and local levels.
• Accreditation Model: Instead of a "deemed" status granted by a central government ministry (like in India for universities), U.S. high schools rely on a system of accreditation by independent, private, regional, or national agencies recognized by the Department of Education. This accreditation process assures a certain level of educational quality and ensures that diplomas are widely recognized by other institutions and employers.
• State-Level Recognition: State departments of education oversee public high schools and ensure they meet state-mandated requirements. A diploma from a state-recognized public high school is generally considered valid and standard.
• Private School Oversight: Private high schools also exist and typically seek accreditation from one of the recognized accrediting bodies to validate their educational programs. 

In essence, the U.S. system uses the general concept of accreditation to establish educational legitimacy across the board, rather than a specific "deemed" status for select, high-performing boards or institutions in K-12 education.