Back in December, the FDA issued a proposal that would theoretically eliminate the little folded paper package inserts (PI) attached to prescription bottles by their manufacturer.

The proposal, verbosely titled "Electronic Distribution of Prescribing Information for Human Prescription Drugs, Including Biological Products," suggests that manufacturers eliminate these funkily-folded fact sheets and replace them with a URL to the online version.

I consider myself to be average (maybe above average) in my comfort level with utilizing online resources. I have Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn accounts. I have dozens of websites saved in my favorites folder that I visit frequently to update myself on the latest news relevant to my profession.

Therefore, it surprises me a bit that my gut reaction to the elimination of these inserts is strongly negative. I don't like the idea at all.

As a pharmacist, I currently use a variety of online resources on a daily basis to help answer questions for patients and other healthcare professionals. I'm reasonably adept at searching Micromedex or Clinical Pharmacology. I can navigate easily to any manufacturer's website and obtain their PDF version of the printed PI.

Additionally, now with the proliferation of smartphones, most of us access most of this information in the palms of our hands. I have the various apps downloaded onto my phone to assist in drug-dosing reminders, interactions, identification and counseling advice.

With all of these electronic resources for drug information, who needs the PI anymore, right?

Well, frankly, I do. I'm just not ready to give up my paper PI just yet, and I'll stand with the many who are opposing this FDA proposal.

While I’m extremely thankful for the various online resources that surround me, I must admit a sort of love-hate relationship with them all.

Internet access is often unreliable. Websites can be as annoying as they are helpful at times. Download speeds may vary. Internet access itself can be spotty (and even totally unavailable in some pharmacies). Cellphone service is far from evenly accessible in all areas.

It sounds like the majority of pharmacists are with me. I read a study published online in January by NERA Economic Consulting entitled "A Report on Pharmacists' Use of Printed Package Inserts." Their research found that most pharmacists still preferred the printed PI.

In their conclusion they state: "The majority of pharmacists surveyed do not feel that exclusive e-labeling provides more trustworthy or current information, and the majority of pharmacists see professional PI and e-labeling as equal. Even pharmacists who see e-labeling as a better means of providing information generally prefer to have both online information and the professional PI available as they are now."

Many pharmacists in the study also reported that they will occasionally give a copy of the PI to an inquiring patient, and that such activities are far more efficient if the PI is easily accessible right from the product bottle itself. I have certainly done that on many occasions myself.

I'll admit that the strangely folded and almost microscopically printed little package inserts are far from perfect. They are usually attached with that awkward little gummy material that you have to peel off and flick into the trash.

Then there is the ritual of unfolding these buggers so that you can actually find the section you want. With sufficient practice you can usually get to the point where, grasping one end of the PI, you can unfold the entire document with a single skillful swing of the arm (make sure your technician isn't standing too close).

I wouldn't object to the addition of a QR code on a prescription bottle with a direct link to the PI website URL. That would be fine. But to eliminate the written PI altogether seems risky and unnecessary.

Undoubtedly, there is no shortage of redundant and excessive printed material in the medical profession. But the PI, in my opinion, isn't one of them.