pharmacy practice where the profession is potentially divorced from drug distribution is a rather bleak vision, raising a future where a strong, distinct and unique skillset and practice focus is compromised or absent.In this edition of the Journal we see further discussion of the progress of electronic medication management systems, adding more weight to claims that this approach is a justified strategy to reduce medicationrelated harm. One aspect of the efficacy of this type of approach is based upon removing human fallibility from the processes of prescribing and medication management, but can this type of approach accommodate consideration of both the science and art required for these tasks? This edition also addresses, on the other hand, an approach that advocates a role for pharmacists in teaching less experienced doctors how to prescribe. This observer suggests that the two types of strategy should not be mutually preclusive -in fact, they can and should exist side by side. This way, should the unthinkable unfold and a prescriber or dispenser find themselves in a situation without access to electronic support, it is conceivable that the necessary tasks could still be completed safely, if not perhaps quite as effectively. Many would think that this is sensible, and counsel caution to maintain access to both types of approach.In the final analysis, it is worth considering the origins of the most enduring symbol associated with a prescription, the eye of Horus (Rx). This routine feature of prescriptions past was in part a historical and traditional deference in the form of a prayer to gods of healing. The symbol denotes the eye of Horus, who was said to have had a damaged eye removed, then healed by another god, but he then ultimately gave his healed eye to his dead father to bring him back to life.3 Of course, Rx is also an abbreviation for the Latin word 'recipe'. We might well consider a prescription a simple recipe that should be written carefully and followed accurately -or, we might imbue the prescription with a certain mysticism that addresses such a complicated and challenging process that it requires assistance to acquit capably and reliably. A rationalist would favour the former view, a pragmatist (and perhaps a romantic) would adopt the latter.