High street chemists should sell fruit and vegetables.

2»

Comments

  • Fish_and_ChipsFish_and_Chips Posts: 1,333
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    They sell vitamin supplements anyway, maybe not the same as eating fresh fruit but still related in some sort of way.
  • CharnhamCharnham Posts: 61,334
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    cultureman wrote: »
    So selling fruit and veg would subsidise their normal operation. Aldi for instance sell 6 fruit and veg on special offer at any one time. Chemists could do similar.

    so they make (the cheaper thing) fruit and veg more expensive to subsidise the items that wold naturally be more expensive? dont ever open a business mate.

    To say nothing of all the other places selling it also.
  • EbonyHamsterEbonyHamster Posts: 8,175
    Forum Member
    malpasc wrote: »
    Most pointless idea ever.

    There are plenty of places selling fresh fruit and vegetables already - supermarkets, corner shops, convenience stores, markets, greengrocers, fruit and veg box deliveries to name but a few. If people aren't already "opting in" to eating healthily with the abundance of places already selling fresh fruit and veg I hardly see how selling them at a chemists is going to encourage people to do it.

    I'd rather the people working in pharmacies and chemists stuck to doing what they do now rather than diluting their roles further by turning them into part time greengrocers.

    This!

    I wish people would just race facts, if others do not want to eat healthy it's their choice! There are plenty of stores that sell healthy food
  • culturemancultureman Posts: 11,701
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    malpasc wrote: »
    Most pointless idea ever.

    There are plenty of places selling fresh fruit and vegetables already - supermarkets, corner shops, convenience stores, markets, greengrocers, fruit and veg box deliveries to name but a few. If people aren't already "opting in" to eating healthily with the abundance of places already selling fresh fruit and veg I hardly see how selling them at a chemists is going to encourage people to do it.

    I'd rather the people working in pharmacies and chemists stuck to doing what they do now rather than diluting their roles further by turning them into part time greengrocers.

    It's only a pointless idea if you don't believe or understand that the consumption of fruit and veg is related to good health.

    Food is a medicine or poison just as much as drugs and allied stuff they dispense.
  • coughthecatcoughthecat Posts: 6,876
    Forum Member
    cultureman wrote: »
    It's only a pointless idea if you don't believe or understand that the consumption of fruit and veg is related to good health.

    Food is a medicine or poison just as much as drugs and allied stuff they dispense.

    Yeah ... and that's the basis of your idea? :confused:

    Maybe they should also sell sports equipment because that's related to health?

    Do you want them to be forced to sell fruit & veg, or do they have the option to say "No. It's a stupid idea. We're not going to give up valuable floor-space to sell apples and turnips"?

    What about the long shelf-life, high margin products they'd have to get rid of to make space? Do the chemists get some hefty subsidy on the fruit & veg, thereby undercutting greengrocers and threatening their businesses ... or does everyone (including the supermarkets etc.) get hefty subsidies on fruit & veg, in which case, what's the incentive for chemists?

    Do you really think that people aren't aware that fruit & veg is good for you? Do you really think that Mr. and Mrs. Average-Joe wander round the supermarket, utterly confused by the fruit & veg, but would suddenly think "Hey ... they must be good for you!" just because they saw them in Boots the Chemist when they popped in to get some pile ointment and diarrhoea tablets?

    Personally, I think if you conducted a survey and asked the question "Is eating fruit & veg good for you?" hardly anyone would say "No" or "I don't know". Okay, you might get one or two who'd claim that the government is adding mind-control agents to fruit & veg which is why they're encouraging people to eat the stuff, but that could be easily solved by having chemists sell tin-foil hats. It would certainly make more sense than having them sell strawberries and parsnips.
  • netcurtainsnetcurtains Posts: 23,494
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It takes them a good half hour to put a box of pills in a paper bag, god knows how long it'd take them to weigh a bunch of bananas.
  • tealadytealady Posts: 26,266
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    cultureman wrote: »
    So selling fruit and veg would subsidise their normal operation. Aldi for instance sell 6 fruit and veg on special offer at any one time. Chemists could do similar.
    And you know that Aldi make a profit on their line because.....? Or have you not heard of 'loss leaders' ?
    In fact it is more likely the reverse, that the margins on medicines would subsidise the losses on fruit and veg.
    Where do you think that greengrocers get their supplies from? And how they are much lower in the pecking order than supermarkets. Where do you think chemists would fit in the hierarchy?
  • jrajra Posts: 48,325
    Forum Member
    I've been to my local chemist to ask what is the best form of treatment for 'insert name of ailment here' and they give specialised advice. I'd be extremely surprised if a supermarket employee would be able to do the same.

    As other people have mentioned, the current system works pretty well, so if it works don't try and fix it. Some heroin addicts are prescribed Methadone. They go into the chemist and drink it inside there and then. You don't really want your local supermarket to be giving that out over the counter, even if they were allowed to.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,770
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It'd promote health more by putting t hem miles apart then lazy bastards would get some exercise between the two - even if it just meant walking from the car to the shop twice as often ;)
  • jrajra Posts: 48,325
    Forum Member
    ericos wrote: »
    It'd promote health more by putting t hem miles apart then lazy bastards would get some exercise between the two - even if it just meant walking from the car to the shop twice as often ;)

    If you put these places miles apart, people will either not go there or use a car if public transport is not available. I don't think you've really thought this through. And I don't own a car anyway, so I either walk or get public transport.
Sign In or Register to comment.