10 shocking things I've learned as a pharmacist

drugtopics.com

The culture shock between pharmacy school and the real world is mind-boggling.

I assumed that pharmacy school would largely reflect the real world. How wrong I was! The culture shock between pharmacy school and the real world is mind-boggling.
figure image

Dennis Miller, RPhStudents graduate with egos that professors have built to stratospheric levels and with a belief that they are God’s gift to our healthcare system. Then, in the real world, they are immediately confronted with the realization that the only thing that matters is how fast they fill prescriptions.

What about you? Did you graduate from pharmacy school with noble ideas about promoting health? Did you find yourself becoming more skeptical, the more you experienced the real world?

Here’s my list of what shocked me the most. What would yours look like? (This is not a rhetorical question. Please write and tell me.)
Pills rather than prevention

1. I was shocked to see that our healthcare system prefers to throw pills at people with elevated blood pressure, elevated blood sugar (type 2 diabetes), elevated cholesterol, and other diseases of modern civilization rather than aggressively focus on a diet of whole, nonprocessed foods, lifestyle change, and weight loss.

The Merck Manual (16th edition, p. 984) says that most cases of hypertension and type 2 diabetes are preventable: “Thus weight reduction will lower the BP [blood pressure] of most hypertensives, often to normal levels, and will allow 75% of type 2 diabetics to discontinue medication.” Ninety percent of diabetics have diagnoses that fall under the heading of type 2.

Apologetics: The Mass and Back to the Future

 

I was recently visiting a friend. He was just finishing  the movie “Back to the Future.” I asked if I was disturbing him? He said “ No, I  already watched it yesterday. I was just re-watching it.” He turned the sound off as it continued to visually play in the background.  We had a conversation as the movie played. Just random stuff.

He is a pretty strong Protestant, and religious topics come up a lot between us, but this time, not so much. As we continued to talk, he noticed a part of the movie– now the TV was playing “Back to the Future, part II”, which followed right after the first one.

I remembered the first one pretty well, seeing it a few times in the cinema, in my youth. But the second movie, I think, I watched once on TV, and remembered hardly anything. He filled me in what had happened because it was nearing the end and approaching the climax. We both started to watch together with sound as Doc explains the TIMELINE.

Stephen Meyer on Intelligent Design and The Return of the God Hypothesis

Apologetics: Peter and the Keys

St. Peter and the Keys.

 

Here is part of a correspondence I had recently. People like to throw out a lot of accusations, if you are Catholic. Some may have a half truth, others are just wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think I answered your point on  "Petra" and "Petros," but regardless, it isn't so necessary to prove Peter to be head of the Apostles.

Let's look at the passage again.

Mathew 16:17-19
"…17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven.

18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.

19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."..."

To follow up on my point of lineage, ie. tracing your church back to Jesus through history, the verse "and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." By saying the Catholic Church fell away  until, whenever your church started, then you are saying "Hades" "Hell" or "death" have prevailed until the 20th century.

Apologetics: Did Jesus Say He will Build His Church on St. Peter?

St. Peter's in Rome

Here is part of a correspondence I had recently. The person was using the typical argument that Protestants like to use drawing a distinction in Greek between "Petros" and  "Petra,"

If you have never heard the Protestant claim, it's basically that when Jesus says "You are Peter [Petros] and upon this Rock [petra] I will build my Church" the Greek word Petros means "little pebble" while petra means "big rock". The Protestant is arguing that Jesus was not identifying Peter with "Rock," but rather contrasting Peter's littleness with the bigness of the Rock (i.e. Jesus). Therefore Jesus was not founding His Church on Peter.

In the Greek New Testament "Petros" is always used for Peter.(162 times). 

Where did the notion that Peter means "little pebble" even come from?

Some Protestant apparently dug up this distinction from a long outdated form of Greek that wasn't even in use at the time of the Apostles (i.e. not Biblical Greek). This detail alone makes the Protestant argument invalid.

There are two types of Greek: Attic Greek, and  Koine Greek.
In Attic Greek, there was a slight difference in meaning between "Petros" and "Petra," but in Koine Greek (the dialect used in the New Testament) they were synonyms. A place to look this up is D. A. Carson’s commentary on Matthew 16 in the Expositors Bible Commentary. He makes this point very well, and he is a highly-respected Evangelical Bible scholar.

Most Protestant scholars have rightly rejected this theory as well. But it always comes up with Evangelical friends.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I understand you correctly, are  you saying Peter is not the person Jesus will build His Church on?

Apologetics,: Should We Worship on Saturaday or Sunday?

Below is part of an email exchange I've had with a member of an Adventist group. Particularly a member of The World Wide Church of God . (Seventh Day Adventist fall with in this category too.)

Adventists, as most Protestants, tend to read the Bible without the context of history. They have very little, if any, knowledge of the ancient Church and early Christian history. They may know a lot about Jewish/Hebrew history but not Christian. There is over 2000 years of Christian history. But I am talking mainly about what is called the Apostolic Fathers-- the first 200 years of Christianity.  Detached from history, it is hard to have correct doctrine.

One thing I noticed about Adventist Protestants is they stress communal worship on Saturday--the Sabbath, and not Sunday as most Christians do. They think it is sinful to worship on Sunday and not Saturday as the Jews do.

How did the early Christians understand the theory of keeping communal  worshiping on Saturday?

Colossians 2:16

"Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."

In other words St. Paul is saying : ' Don't let anyone intimidate you into following the Jewish rituals about eating and drinking...nor their feast-days, nor their celebration of the SABBATH.

Are You a Fan of Jesus, or a Follower ?

 I have seen a lot of videos about the Bible but this is one of the best on how to pray with the Bible. It is very practical.