As I reflect on the 2017 APhA Annual Meeting & Exposition in San Francisco, I can vividly recall experiencing a variety of emotions before, during, and after attending. During the months leading up to the meeting, my thoughts had become speculative in nature as I had attempted to imagine the ambience within the Moscone Convention Center: the sights, the sounds, the experiences. As a first-year student pharmacist attending my first APhA Annual Meeting & Exposition: Would I be able to network with others? Would I be able to share my ideas to others? Would I be able to learn from others?

The term e-professionalism, or electronic professionalism, means to act and behave in a professional manner on electronic or digital platforms.¹ These digital platforms include the use of social media and social networking sites. Social networking and social media sites, such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Instagram, etc., are almost a necessity in the modern student’s life. These sites provide a platform in which the student may not only transmit information, but receive information, as well.

Imagine you are a pharmacist working on an interdisciplinary team that is treating a patient for severe opioid dependence. The idea arises to treat the addiction by slowly replacing the active drug with an inert substance, such as lactose, without the consent of the patient. As the pharmacist, it is your responsibility to compound these capsules where the amount of active drug is slowly tapered until the capsules are entirely lactose. Is it ethically permissible for the pharmacist to knowingly deceive the patient to treat the underlying addiction? What duties to the patient come into conflict during this situation? 


Ethical dilemmas often arise when a person is seemingly required to perform two or more incompatible actions. These situations are not uncommon in health care and often professional students receive minimal training on how to navigate these complex issues. Taking a closer look at this particular case, it seems clear that on the one hand, most practitioners agree that deceiving patients and hindering their ability to make informed decisions violates the trust that is fundamental to any patient–practitioner relationship. But on the other hand, treating the patient’s addiction would potentially save their life, even if the treatment relies on 
deception.