Metabolic rebuttal [Response to letter to the editor, September/October 2005]

Ms. [Carole Beveridge] also calls on us, as pharmacists and scientists, to make a greater effort to locate information to support the use of complementary and alternative medicines. We would argue, however, that the science of pharmacy has expanded well beyond the "fundamental" sciences that she mentions as key to our profession, and that pharmacist effort may be better expended in identifying strategies to enhance judicious use of known therapies. The movement towards evidence-based practice requires us to carefully evaluate the quality and applicability of published research to each specific patient, not to blindly recommend based on available science. Pharmacy practice research also proves illuminating as well, with literature indicating that pharmacists' actions with regard to promotion of complementary therapies are influenced by the presence or absence of such products on store shelves and whether specialized training in such therapies is obtained; it is unclear, however, whether variances in the promotion of complementary medicines reflect an enhanced ability of pharmacists to judiciously recommend such therapy, or is the result of indirect pressures to sell such products. The potential for perceived conflict of interest should thus be borne in mind.