Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lately?

Discuss your favourite picks, broker, and trading or investment style.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Bylo Selhi »

The Source (née Radio Shack) chain store used to be a major cellphone marketing channel for Robbers. When Bhell bought the chain from Circuit City they gave Robbers the boot and started selling their own cellphones. Now it seems that Robbers is trying a comback via SDM: Rogers starts Shoppers Drug Mart pilot project. Presumably this should drive additional traffic into SDM and result in an increase in high-ticket, high-margin revenues.

Revolting thought for the day: Think of a pharmacist, no longer as busy advising his clients about their pharmaceuticals as before, now trying to help them choose the best cellphone and contract for their needs :shock: :rofl:
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
Peculiar_Investor
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 13267
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 14:52
Location: Calgary
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Peculiar_Investor »

Bylo Selhi wrote:Revolting thought for the day: Think of a pharmacist, no longer as busy advising his clients about their pharmaceuticals as before, now trying to help them choose the best cellphone and contract for their needs :shock: :rofl:
Fits the current model somewhat, 3 refills and then you need to call the doctor's office and get them to resend an updated prescription (sometimes for a fee). :wink:
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki New editors wanted and welcomed, please help collaborate and improve the wiki.

Normal people… believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet. – Scott Adams
c emptor
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3064
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 13:24

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by c emptor »

There has been no loss in duties performed by pharmacists. They can still do the same things they did before. They are lobbying to enlarge their duties, that is all. They haven't lost anything
because there are laws that describe their permitted activities. Pharmacists must be knowledgeable about the action of drugs on the body. They must know a lot of chemistry. And they must be methodical ,accurate, and responsible. They mustn't make mistakes when filling a prescription. It is an important job and a clerical person is not allowed by law to do this job . They need to understand in depth what they are doing. They need to guard against drug interactions as well.

There has been no cutback in pharmacists activities. There is no reason why they would be selling cell phones. SDM is within its rights to sell Rogers cell phones in its stores.
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by kcowan »

Peculiar_Investor wrote:
Bylo Selhi wrote:Revolting thought for the day: Think of a pharmacist, no longer as busy advising his clients about their pharmaceuticals as before, now trying to help them choose the best cellphone and contract for their needs :shock: :rofl:
Fits the current model somewhat, 3 refills and then you need to call the doctor's office and get them to resend an updated prescription (sometimes for a fee). :wink:
Maybe they could combine some prescription painkiller along with the cell phone contract! :rofl:
For the fun of it...Keith
c emptor
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 3064
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 13:24

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by c emptor »

Pharmacists are trying to enlarge the scope of permitted activities. With the long wait times for doctors' appointments ,this would improve patient access to medical treatment. The pharmacists would be busier than ever. They wouldn't need to sell cell phones.
* Proposed laboratory tests that pharmacists may order to facilitate medication therapy management for their patients - Click here to go to this document.
* Proposed substances to be administered by injection for the purposes of education and demonstration - Click here to go to this document.
* Proposed substances to be administered by inhalation for the purposes of education and demonstration - Click here to go to this document.
Fits the current model somewhat, 3 refills and then you need to call the doctor's office and get them to resend an updated prescription (sometimes for a fee).
Even now they give advice about how to take pills and what it does. Pharmacists aren't just pill pushers as a certain poster has intimated in the past.
Hammerer
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 628
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 00:09

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Hammerer »

Peculiar_Investor wrote:Another cost cutting move, Shoppers pulls support from pharmacists’ group - The Globe and Mail
The Globe and Mail wrote:Mr. Schreiber is now turning his guns on the Ontario Pharmacists’ Association, one of the key groups that joined him in opposing the government reforms. About two weeks ago, Shoppers notified the association that the retailer would no longer cover the $500 annual membership fee for its 1,300 or so pharmacists who are members of the OPA. The Shoppers pharmacists are free to maintain their memberships, but they will have to pay the fees themselves.
Rumour has it that it's due to internal squabbles rather than the suggested economically minor cost-cutting. Annual dues aren't due for another couple months, so we'll see what the end result is.

Funny how he talks about there being too many organizations and lobbying groups, yet doesn't name off the ones that he does pick and choose, of which there aren't that many with much clout to actually concentrate on. I think it's another Schreiber blunder.
pitz
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2878
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 18:41
Location: Canada/Costa Rica

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by pitz »

Hammerer wrote:Rumour has it that it's due to internal squabbles rather than the suggested economically minor cost-cutting. Annual dues aren't due for another couple months, so we'll see what the end result is.
Funny how he talks about there being too many organizations and lobbying groups, yet doesn't name off the ones that he does pick and choose, of which there aren't that many with much clout to actually concentrate on. I think it's another Schreiber blunder.
Yeah alienating the employees who literally drive your business forward, who are voluntarily members of an organization, doesn't seem like a smart move.

How much will it cost Shoppers recruiting efforts when word gets out to pharmacy students that the company doesn't support belonging to a professional organization that has, among its mandates, pharmacist continuing education and professional development?
pitz
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2878
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 18:41
Location: Canada/Costa Rica

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by pitz »

Earnings dropped from 79cents in Q3 2009 to 73 cents in Q3 2010.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idCAN092 ... 110?rpc=44
User avatar
Wallace
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2422
Joined: 30 Nov 2005 19:05
Location: Waterloo Ont
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Wallace »

I've given up on SDM and no longer own it. I've come to the conclusion that the government is philosophically opposed to profit in the health care sector, and will do whatever is politically convenient to erase it.

One of the little-known results of the Ontario policy with respect to the pharmacists is the sudden shortage of cheap generic drugs that has resulted. There is no shortage of the biaxins, the lamisils and other three-figure a month medications that make large profits for the drug companies. But it has suddenly been very difficult to get tetracycline, garamycin eye drops, oxazepam, and about a dozen other cheap, effective, well-tried medications that are prescribed frequently by the medical profession. Every morning our office has 5-6 faxes from pharmacies telling us that these prescriptions are on back order or are no longer available and would we prescribe an alternative. The alternatives, of course, are usually more expensive. Thsi is a new phenomenon that I have never seen in 40 years, and has to have a connection to the Provincial political decisions made earlier in the year. I suspect that smaller pharmacies can no longer afford to hold the inventory that was subsidised before, but I'm a doctor Jim, not a pharmacist, so the ins and outs of this issue are not quite clear to me.

So I no longer hold SDM. Pity.
"Why do I have to go to school? If I watch YouTube I'll know everything."
- Grandson #2
pitz
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2878
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 18:41
Location: Canada/Costa Rica

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by pitz »

Wallace wrote:One of the little-known results of the Ontario policy with respect to the pharmacists is the sudden shortage of cheap generic drugs that has resulted. There is no shortage of the biaxins, the lamisils and other three-figure a month medications that make large profits for the drug companies. But it has suddenly been very difficult to get tetracycline, garamycin eye drops, oxazepam, and about a dozen other cheap, effective, well-tried medications that are prescribed frequently by the medical profession. Every morning our office has 5-6 faxes from pharmacies telling us that these prescriptions are on back order or are no longer available and would we prescribe an alternative. The alternatives, of course, are usually more expensive. Thsi is a new phenomenon that I have never seen in 40 years, and has to have a connection to the Provincial political decisions made earlier in the year. I suspect that smaller pharmacies can no longer afford to hold the inventory that was subsidised before, but I'm a doctor Jim, not a pharmacist, so the ins and outs of this issue are not quite clear to me.
So I no longer hold SDM. Pity.
Weird, but oxazepam? Seriously? There's a half dozen different suppliers of that in Canada, and probably 3 or 4 therapeutically equivalent products that could be prescribed without difficulty. Sure its not just a matter of a pharmacy doing that because its convenient for them?

Having said that, there are certain pharmacy chains that have standardized on using generic products from only one supplier (ie: Rexalls are almost exclusively supplied generic by Apotex), and individual suppliers have been running into production problems (ie: Apotex). The beauty of Shoppers is that they haven't tied themselves into one supplier; the shelves are stocked with products from all of the half-dozen different genetic suppliers (APO, Teva, Cobalt, etc.).

I think what you're seeing is more of the result of individual pharmacies running down their inventories to reduce carrying costs, and not of a systemic shortage of product in the supply chains though.
Hammerer
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 628
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 00:09

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Hammerer »

pitz wrote:
Wallace wrote:One of the little-known results of the Ontario policy with respect to the pharmacists is the sudden shortage of cheap generic drugs that has resulted. There is no shortage of the biaxins, the lamisils and other three-figure a month medications that make large profits for the drug companies. But it has suddenly been very difficult to get tetracycline, garamycin eye drops, oxazepam, and about a dozen other cheap, effective, well-tried medications that are prescribed frequently by the medical profession. Every morning our office has 5-6 faxes from pharmacies telling us that these prescriptions are on back order or are no longer available and would we prescribe an alternative. The alternatives, of course, are usually more expensive. Thsi is a new phenomenon that I have never seen in 40 years, and has to have a connection to the Provincial political decisions made earlier in the year. I suspect that smaller pharmacies can no longer afford to hold the inventory that was subsidised before, but I'm a doctor Jim, not a pharmacist, so the ins and outs of this issue are not quite clear to me.
So I no longer hold SDM. Pity.
Weird, but oxazepam? Seriously? There's a half dozen different suppliers of that in Canada, and probably 3 or 4 therapeutically equivalent products that could be prescribed without difficulty. Sure its not just a matter of a pharmacy doing that because its convenient for them?

Having said that, there are certain pharmacy chains that have standardized on using generic products from only one supplier (ie: Rexalls are almost exclusively supplied generic by Apotex), and individual suppliers have been running into production problems (ie: Apotex). The beauty of Shoppers is that they haven't tied themselves into one supplier; the shelves are stocked with products from all of the half-dozen different genetic suppliers (APO, Teva, Cobalt, etc.).

I think what you're seeing is more of the result of individual pharmacies running down their inventories to reduce carrying costs, and not of a systemic shortage of product in the supply chains though.
Most of the time, pharmacies will order in their non-preferred manufacturer's stock when they need to. The big wholesalers do carry most manufacturers' products, and it's not uncommon for pharmacies to have accounts with multiple wholesalers (read: They could buy non-preferred manufacturer's stock if they wanted to).

I think what's happening is that Apotex might have, for example, 80%+ of the market for a particular molecule, so if they go back-ordered, all of the other vendors quickly run out thereafter because they just can't handle the demand.
Most of the companies do batch production with multi-million dollar oral tablet/capsule machines. So, they might make one product on only a couple of days per year. If they have to destroy that stock, or run out pre-maturely, they may not have the easy ability to schedule more production time to re-make it or make more.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-in ... le1793577/
I do find Shoppers' strategy of increasing store-brand prescription drug exports a funny idea. Just how do you competitively sell, from a small-market country, a product that is, by definition, generic? Shouldn't there be some other manufacturer that can do it cheaper, perhaps the one that already makes it? Generics provide a good margin for the retail seller, not the manufacturer!

I'll give them a ton of credit for trying, maybe they're on to something that I'm not aware of.

"The chain is expanding its other non-pharmacy sales, including cosmetics, over-the-counter drugs, baby products and foods."
Other than by increasing store conversions, I'm not sure how they plan on going about this more than they already do.
Reading between the lines, I'm surprised to hear nothing lately about their Murale cosmetics focused pharmacies (admittedly, only 7 exist). Are they not doing so well?
User avatar
Wallace
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2422
Joined: 30 Nov 2005 19:05
Location: Waterloo Ont
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Wallace »

pitz wrote:Weird, but oxazepam? Seriously? There's a half dozen different suppliers of that in Canada, and probably 3 or 4 therapeutically equivalent products that could be prescribed without difficulty. Sure its not just a matter of a pharmacy doing that because its convenient for them?
For a while I had to prescribe ativan as an alternative, which much faster-acting and sometimes will 'zap" people out. The pharmacies tell me that oxazepam is now available but only in 10mg strength, so we have to write some clumsy-looking prescriptions to get the previous dosage.

Our local pharmacy (the one next door to my office) helpfully sent us a list of 14 medications that were unavailable for one reason or another. But it's not just one pharmacy. This has happened all over town.
"Why do I have to go to school? If I watch YouTube I'll know everything."
- Grandson #2
brucecohen
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 13310
Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:47

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by brucecohen »

Wallace wrote:Every morning our office has 5-6 faxes from pharmacies telling us that these prescriptions are on back order or are no longer available and would we prescribe an alternative. The alternatives, of course, are usually more expensive.
Does the pharmacy benefit from this forced upselling? If so, is it possible that the lower cost generics are fully available, but pharmacists are misleading physicians to protect revenue?
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Bylo Selhi »

A related issue: Generic drugs not the same: experts
No one questions that generics contain the same medicine as the brands. He suggested the problems lie with excipients -- the non-active ingredients -- used by generic manufacturers and how they affect the release and absorption of drugs.

Dr. Margolese, who has received brand-name industry funding, cited three cases, involving patients with schizophrenia and major-depressive disorder. All went abruptly from being stable to feeling depressed and having suicidal thoughts. Investigation revealed the three had shortly before been switched to a generic version of an anti-depressant or anti-convulstant. All became healthy again after the branded drug was restored, he reported in the journal International Clinical Psychopharmacology.
It seems to me that if this is a valid issue with generic anti-depressants or anti-convulsants (and as the article points out, that's yet to be proved conclusively) a physician still has the option of writing a scrip for the brand name drug along with the directive, "no substitutions." Presumably the number of people who suffer from such disorders is relatively small and the number who experience serious side-effects with generics even smaller, so the increased cost of treating those patients with brand names would have little effect on the overall cost of medical care.

OTOH this would be much bigger news if it is also an issue with generics that treat more comon conditions like hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia, etc. Is it (or could it be)? Or is this just another FUD campaign by Big Pharma?
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
pitz
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2878
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 18:41
Location: Canada/Costa Rica

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by pitz »

Wallace wrote:For a while I had to prescribe ativan as an alternative, which much faster-acting and sometimes will 'zap" people out. The pharmacies tell me that oxazepam is now available but only in 10mg strength, so we have to write some clumsy-looking prescriptions to get the previous dosage.
And I remember about a decade ago, when there was a huge lorazepam shortage, doctors were highly encourage to substitute oxazepam. Bromazepam is another alternative that isn't quite as rapidly-acting as lorazepam, btw, similar half life, same effects, etc., and it seems to be well-stocked for now.
Our local pharmacy (the one next door to my office) helpfully sent us a list of 14 medications that were unavailable for one reason or another. But it's not just one pharmacy. This has happened all over town.
Yeah its certainly happening. Probably the ironic thing is that if your patients travelled to Pakistan or even the USA, they could obtain the medication by the bucketful, but since its in Canada, they can't. Especially on the controlled substances which, of course, they couldn't import them, even if they wanted/needed to.
Hammerer
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 628
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 00:09

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Hammerer »

As an on-topic aside, I will say that Ontario's ban of rebates still confuses me. Purely economically speaking, the incentive to promote cheap generics is gone, instead replaced with an incentive to increase sales volume (ie: brand name drugs!). The government claimed that rebates inflate drug prices, but it's the government that sets the price in the first place, right? Now, independent pharmacies less able to weather the storm (ie: actual Ontario companies with Ontario shareholders) will likely sell-out or get forced out in favour of non-Ontario chains (Rexall, Wal-Mart, Zellers), or widely-held Canadian chains (Shoppers).

The nation-wide players should be able to play out the rebate game between provinces, but with lower generic prices in the first place, the size of rebates will have to give.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

I checked one major Ontario supplier today: Apotex oxazepam available in all strengths, provincial and private stock. I will say that it is time-consuming and paper-work heavy to transfer stock of a controlled drug/narcotic from one pharmacy to another in Ontario, but I'd think most (all?) pharmacies have an account with this wholesaler.

I'd question the pharmacy more in-depth about it.

The alternatives are still quite cheap or cheaper, so I doubt it's an example of forced up-selling, it wouldn't be worth the paper-work and aggravation.

------------------------------------------------------------------
On the topic of brand vs. generic (feel free to ignore, we're very off-topic at this point!)
When equivalence studies are done to get a generic drug approved (errr, declared "interchangeable"), they're not only tested to ensure that the amount of drug is the same, but they are actually tested in people. ie: Give a group a standard dose of each drug after a standard meal (or fasting) in a standard environment, and then pull a blood sample every X unit of time for Y units of time. Then the brand and generic trend line results are compared. There are more stringent requirements for drugs that have more specific dosing requirements. My understanding is that the generic must meet the same standard that the brand name drug would be held to. (Brand name manufacturers change manufacturing sites, suppliers, equipment, people, ownership, formulations, etc. too!)

The big issue is that a lot of brand name manufacturers have had trouble coming out with new blockbuster molecules in recent years, so they've come out with new formulations of their existing products, mainly extended release products and sometimes orally dissolvable tablets (which usually need their residue swallowed in order to absorb, so what's the point?).

Most of these new formulations are not proven to work any better than their previous product (and actually have less evidence for their safety/efficacy). These manufacturers have a huge vested interest in these new formulations of off-patent drugs. I'm sure the brand name manufacturers have done bioequivalence studies on their generic competitors, and I've yet to see any published, and I could only imagine why...

(Though I do recall a drug-rep once bringing in a graph comparing generic Ritalin SR to brand Concerta. Nice try buddy, but I hate to think of how many didn't catch that part of his presentation...)

I really can't understand the purpose of an extended release version of a drug that was once-daily in the first place when their were no questions or concerns about the once-daily version.

---------------------------------------

Consumer psychology is definitely the best explanation for most complaints about generics, most other generic industries have sub-par products to their brand comparators, so people extend that to drugs.

---------------------------------------------------

Personally, if there were an issue between a generic and a brand name drug, I'd say it has more to do with different crystal forms or granule size, but they're more complicated and hard to explain subjects, therefore I think the marketers just default to blaming the "filler".

-----------------------------------------------

(The nice thing about oxazepam, lorazepam and temazepam is that they aren't as affected by liver dysfunction + fewer drug interactions than the other benzos. Bromazepam may not be a great substitute, though don't take my word for it, do your own research :) )

-----------------------------------------------------

Finally, most often, to get a brand name drug covered where a generic exists, the prescriber must also fill out a legitimate Health Canada "Adverse Drug Reaction" form in order for it to be paid for. Some plans may not care and still make you pay the difference, or even the whole cost.
pitz
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2878
Joined: 27 Oct 2005 18:41
Location: Canada/Costa Rica

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by pitz »

Hammerer wrote:As an on-topic aside, I will say that Ontario's ban of rebates still confuses me. Purely economically speaking, the incentive to promote cheap generics is gone, instead replaced with an incentive to increase sales volume (ie: brand name drugs!). The government claimed that rebates inflate drug prices, but it's the government that sets the price in the first place, right? Now, independent pharmacies less able to weather the storm (ie: actual Ontario companies with Ontario shareholders) will likely sell-out or get forced out in favour of non-Ontario chains (Rexall, Wal-Mart, Zellers), or widely-held Canadian chains (Shoppers).
Just a brief story out of Ontario: apparently, the new rules in Ontario have resulted in amitryptiline (a tricyclic antidepressant used as a mild sedative and as an adjunct in pain management) generics dissappearing. So basically, only brand-name amitryptiline is available now, and its expensive. The Ontario rules have actually driven the generic manufacturers out of the market, and increased drug costs to the drug plan, something that is completely at odds with the stated goals of the program.
The alternatives are still quite cheap or cheaper, so I doubt it's an example of forced up-selling, it wouldn't be worth the paper-work and aggravation.
Yeah, oxazepam is a fairly marginal product to begin with. In the time I've spent in the pharmacy, I think I've only seen 1 or maybe 2 prescriptions for it, compared to hundreds, maybe thousands for lorazepam. Sure, a bottle of 100 doesn't really cost more than a couple bucks at the most, but if a local Dr. started going on a prescribing binge, certainly, the supply chain could be depleted fairly quickly.

The big issue is that a lot of brand name manufacturers have had trouble coming out with new blockbuster molecules in recent years, so they've come out with new formulations of their existing products, mainly extended release products and sometimes orally dissolvable tablets (which usually need their residue swallowed in order to absorb, so what's the point?).
Probably the most egregious examples of this are the formulations that only include the active stereoisomer or optical isomer of a particular medication, when the previous product contained a mixture of the active and inactive ingredient.

Getting slightly back on-topic, these products, at least in the province I live in, are a complete pain. The pharmacy doesn't receive extra compensation, but has to stock a very expensive bottle of, for instance, desvenlafaxine, because some psychiatrist was pitched it by a drug rep, and wanted to try it on a patient who was stable on venlafaxine to see if it worked. So the pharmacy ends up having to stock inventory that barely gets used, and ultimately, expires.
Consumer psychology is definitely the best explanation for most complaints about generics, most other generic industries have sub-par products to their brand comparators, so people extend that to drugs.
The Indian Affairs clients seem to insist on brand-name most often, strangely enough, around here. Brand-name Ativan, the only people it gets sold to are people with treaty health benefits. I don't know why; its just weird.

And I can certainly see why you're between a rock and a hard place trying to substitute oxazepam for something approved in Canada, especially in liver-compromised patients. That temazepam stuff, wow, even the lowest dose is awesome at knocking me out when I'm on those long flights; certainly much stronger than lorazepam, IMHO, and certainly better than drinking the flight away, lol :P.
User avatar
Wallace
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2422
Joined: 30 Nov 2005 19:05
Location: Waterloo Ont
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Wallace »

pitz wrote:Getting slightly back on-topic, these products, at least in the province I live in, are a complete pain. The pharmacy doesn't receive extra compensation, but has to stock a very expensive bottle of, for instance, desvenlafaxine, because some psychiatrist was pitched it by a drug rep, and wanted to try it on a patient who was stable on venlafaxine to see if it worked. So the pharmacy ends up having to stock inventory that barely gets used, and ultimately, expires.
There are approximately 3,000 products in the CPS (The book of Prescription medications).* Each product is appropriate under specific circumstances, and I really don't know how pharmacies decide which ones to stock, because all of them will be prescribed by some doctor at some time or another. There have always been cases where pharmacies have not had an unusual medication in stock, and they helpfully solve the issue by obtaining it from another pharmacy that does have it, but it's only recently that I've seen such an acute shortage of common, day to day products.


*They are now outnumbered approximately 5 to 1 by the "alternative" products on the shelves, making prescription medicines the new "alternative" medicines.
"Why do I have to go to school? If I watch YouTube I'll know everything."
- Grandson #2
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Bylo Selhi »

Wallace wrote:I really don't know how pharmacies decide which ones to stock, because all of them will be prescribed by some doctor at some time or another.
1. How do hospital pharmacies cope with this, especially when something is needed "stat"?

2. You'd think the larger chains (hello SDM!) would have regional warehouses that stock 99% of what their franchisees are ever going to need and be able to deliver it, either to the store or directly to the patient, within a short time. Moreover, you'd think the deep thinkers in their marketing departments would heavily tout this feature, in part to be better able to make available so many different items, in part to address some of the shortages and in part, to justify their higher dispensing fees compared to discounters like Costco, WalMart, Loblaws, etc.
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
marty123
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2950
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 13:36
Location: Ontario

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by marty123 »

Bylo Selhi wrote:2. You'd think the larger chains (hello SDM!) would have regional warehouses that stock 99% of what their franchisees are ever going to need and be able to deliver it, either to the store or directly to the patient, within a short time. Moreover, you'd think the deep thinkers in their marketing departments would heavily tout this feature, in part to be better able to make available so many different items, in part to address some of the shortages and in part, to justify their higher dispensing fees compared to discounters like Costco, WalMart, Loblaws, etc.
There's probably no need to tell customers until drug shortage headlines hit the mainstream media.
User avatar
Pickles
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4215
Joined: 27 Sep 2006 09:44
Location: Toronto

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Pickles »

marty123 wrote:
Bylo Selhi wrote:2. You'd think the larger chains (hello SDM!) would have regional warehouses that stock 99% of what their franchisees are ever going to need and be able to deliver it, either to the store or directly to the patient, within a short time.
There's probably no need to tell customers until drug shortage headlines hit the mainstream media.
You mean like this?
The trouble lies with supply shortages, such as difficulties for some manufacturers in getting the active ingredients to make the medicines, creating a domino effect in which demand for similar drugs is going up and leading to sellouts.

“It’s a real problem,” said Dennis Darby of the Ontario Pharmacists Association, adding it was not caused by the provincial government’s reforms forcing a 50 per cent cut in the price of generic drugs last spring.
Regards,
Pickles
Hammerer
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 628
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 00:09

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Hammerer »

Shoppers does have its own corporate-owned warehouses.

As for hospitals many of the regular-world rules/laws don't apply. Their pharmacies can do auto-substitution, so if one, say, PPI-based stomach ulcer medication goes back-ordered, they can just auto-switch people, they can compound dosage forms as they please, and, as far as I know, injectable drugs don't seem to be have the same availability problems. If things get really bad, I suppose they could get products through Special Access, a program only available to hospitals and physicians to get medications that are not available in Canada (Why pharmacies are not permitted, I'll never understand). They also don't have to worry about who will pay for stuff...

Basically, they do what they need to do to get the right therapy for the patient, it's just a lot easier when you don't deal with slow-as-molasses government bureaucracy, and all of the parties are under the same roof.

The problem is not that pharmacies are refusing to carry these relatively common medications, and the problem is not lag time in receiving orders from wholesalers. The wholesaler I'm familiar with takes next day orders, Saturday orders, and even same day orders: Order by noon, and you'll get your item by 3PM or 4PM. I've even had them Purolator stuff from distant warehouses when their local ones didn't have it. For some reason, they don't penalize a same-day or Saturday order.

Generally, pharmacies, even competitors, will freely transfer stock between each other when needed, or at least send people in the right direction, so the supply problems often are transparent to the physician/patient until the whole town is dry.

Once there was (and still is, I think) a pharmacy that would somehow have back-ordered drugs in stock unavailable anywhere else, and I could only imagine if these fell off trucks, were intended for export, stock that was supposed to be destroyed, etc. We never sent anyone there ;)

Another issue is that compounding pharmacies can't get paid by Ontario Drug Benefit (and usually not by private insurance either) to compound capsules for backordered medications or to make up those 25mg doses from the 100mg capsules. Usually the raw powders are still available from compounding wholesalers. I recall asking ODB if they would be willing to pay us just the list price to make up a back-ordered hard-to-substitute drug (which is still back-ordered according to the article), and they refused. We had enough active ingredient on the shelf expiring in 12 months to make up about 25 000 doses, and could probably make up 500 per hour.

I also believe it has little do with drug system changes for the reasons stated in the article: It started long-before they were enacted. The manufacturers are typically reluctant to share why.
User avatar
Bylo Selhi
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 29494
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
Location: Waterloo, ON
Contact:

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by Bylo Selhi »

I realize that this is the wrong thread, but we've already digressed beyond SDM, so here goes...

Over on Bogleheads a poster asks if he was dispensed the correct medication because the description on the bottle differs slightly from the actual tablet. What intrigues me is the label on the bottle:

Image

1. There's a "Discard after" date.
2. There's a description of what the contents are supposed to look like, including the colour and shape of the tablet as well as the markings on it.

Since I've never seen either in Ontario I presume it's not a requirement. Should it be? If not, why? Surely the cost of adding this information, essentially zero given how everything is bar-coded and computerized these days, would help avoid dispensing errors and help get expired medications out of peoples' medicine cabinets.

Case in point: I have some Tylenol 3 (with codeine) and Voltaren (anti-inflammatory) tablets that were prescribed some three years ago. I didn't need them at the time, however, you never know. How long will they remain effective? How would I know absent a discard after date?
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by kcowan »

Bylo Selhi wrote:...1. There's a "Discard after" date.
2. There's a description of what the contents are supposed to look like, including the colour and shape of the tablet as well as the markings on it.
...
Case in point: I have some Tylenol 3 (with codeine) and Voltaren (anti-inflammatory) tablets that were prescribed some three years ago. I didn't need them at the time, however, you never know. How long will they remain effective? How would I know absent a discard after date?
Yes. And then there is the fact that no one reads labels (except DW), and that expiry dates are a marketing gimmick rather than a realistic estimate? I have taken 10 year-old aspirins before expiry dates were introduced.

(Case In Point: I have been taking fish oil pills from 1997 expiry with the prescribed positive effects. When they are done I will buy some new ones. But then I do have a Scottish background.)
For the fun of it...Keith
User avatar
ThinkDividends
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 509
Joined: 02 Dec 2009 00:07
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Re: Shoppers Drug Mart (Symbol-SC) -- why so beaten down lat

Post by ThinkDividends »

Shoppers CEO Resigns
Jürgen Schreiber, Shoppers Drug Mart's President and Chief Executive Officer is resigning effective February 15, 2011. Schreiber is leaving Shoppers to pursue a private equity opportunity outside of North America. David Williams, Chair of the Board of Directors, will serve as President and Chief Executive Officer on an interim basis until a replacement is named.
Post Reply