I think the fact that I am already a Paramedic will help with the distance issue, seeing as I already have a great grasps on A&P, Pharm, and Cardiology. So any classes tha further my education in this should come fairly easy wouldn't you think? Even if it is online.......
This will depend a lot on how well these were taught within your paramedic program. Most programs claim to teach anatomy & physiology "at a university level", but fall a little short (*Something that should raise suspicion here is that they combine two separate subjects into one course --- usually these are taught separately). I don't know anything about where you trained, but I haven't seen a program yet where they make a serious claim to have gone beyond an introductory physiology course.
It will help compared to someone who just has high school biology. In the best of worlds, it might be equivalent to an introductory physiology course. But this depends greatly. It's also a matter of what sort of anatomy and / or physiology you're looking at. Even for introductory courses you usually have a number of options, e.g. "Physiology for Nurses", "Physiology for physical therapists", physiology courses aimed a general science students, or at honour's majors. These will also vary greatly in their depth and scope.
My personal experience was that most of the material we covered that related to cardiac physiology in an introductory course was included in medic school. There were other areas where I was less well prepared, like reproductive physiology, or endocrine physiology.
I don't think pharmacology is taught well in paramedic school. I think most of us have an idea of what pharmacology is, and then it gets challenged when we encounter university education in this area. Many of us seem to think that pharmacology is about memorising trade and generic names, specific dosing regimens, and a few contraindications, and maybe being able to say something like "dopamine is a positive dromotrope as it increases AV conduction velocity". Or maybe "lidocaine is a Vaughan-Williams class IB antiarrhytmic because it decreases the slope of phase 0 depolarisation without lengthening or shortening the action potential duration".
But, we generally have little or no idea why. Most of us can list a number of effects of epinephrine at the beta-1 receptor, and we can say this has something to do with calcium. Very few of us can talk intelligently about what happens after the receptor's occupied and activated, e.g G protein signalling cascades, cAMP, PKA, and various kinase events. In the same thread, most of us can say "drug x is a vasoconstrictor acting at the alpha-1 adrenergic receptor". But can't follow the Gq/Ga13 signalling pathways to describe why and how. Our education is a little incomplete, even in areas we claim to know well.
Then factor in that pharmacology isn't just about the 30 - 100 drugs you might see on a typical ambulance or fixed / rotary wing platform. Many of us may have briefly surveyed some of the prescription medications, and might have a cursory idea of what an ACE inhibitor is. We may even be able to talk a little about the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone axis. But when someone starts introducing cancer chemotherapeutics, we tend to get lost, because medic school doesn't give a good understanding of DNA replication and mitosis. We don't learn about proofreading and error-correcting mechanisms.
So, I think medic school prepares you for pharmacology, but only in the narrow area that we work in. It doesn't really cover the wider field. This often becomes apparent when someone takes a nursing pharmacology course (these aren't generally any better on the cell biology level, just broader in scope and less specialised), or an introductory pharamacology course from a university pharmacology department. They're not going to be as focused on autonomic, cardiac, vascular and neuromuscular pharmacology.
When you look at the higher (more specialised) courses, some of them are a lot more relevant. I found I learned a lot of stuff that I felt should have bee covered in paramedic school. But there's always a balance there. Two years is a very short time to make someone a semi-autonomous provider. It isn't really sufficient, as many of us have argued before, and our training should be more detailed.
I think being a paramedic will be really helpful, but I wouldn't expect it will automatically give you the background to go into specialised pharmacology or physiology courses. You might be able to manage anyway, but you'll probably find you're lacking some areas. You'll probably really enjoy CV physiology / pharmacology. Half of university / anything is having the motivation to want to learn.
The other reality is you're unlikely to get most of these courses on-line. For example, most universities will give a course specifically in "Neuromuscular pharmacology". So, 3-4 hours a week for a semester of talking about the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, and all the many different early and modern neuromuscular agents, many of which we don't use in the field (Did you know nicotine is a depolarising neuromuscular blocker like succinylcholine?). But this requires having a number of research groups working in this area at the university. And it needs enough students to have an interest for the course to be worth running. So these sorts of courses don't typically end up getting offered on-line, because it's not financially viable.
Sorry for the long post. I hope I didn't come across as an elitist *******, because that's not what I'm trying to do here.