7 most popular 6-figure healthcare jobs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Kevin.Mero

Kevin.Mero

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2014
Messages
207
Reaction score
76
It's not enough to make low 6 fig nowadays. It's not what it used to be; just like $1M is not much nowadays. 100k is definitely middle income.

Inflation adjusted $100k salary from 1980, you now need $320k to maintain the same purchasing power. 100k sig fig was used to mean something, not anymore... About 1 in 5 household makes 100k in the US. Aiming 300k is the new 100k salary.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
The six figures does not take into account what Uncle Sam and Sallie Mae will take from your paychecks. After that your take home pay will be in the mid five figures.
 
Momus said:
It's not enough to make low 6 fig nowadays. It's not what it used to be; just like $1M is not much nowadays. 100k is definitely middle income.

Inflation adjusted $100k salary from 1980, you now need $320k to maintain the same purchasing power. 100k sig fig was used to mean something, not anymore... About 1 in 5 household makes 100k in the US. Aiming 300k is the new 100k salary.
Click to expand...

Yes, but my understanding (no citations) is that in 1980 Pharmacists were making closer to $50K.

I agree that money doesn’t go as far as it used to. Looking at real estate history prices on Redfin in any major city is heartbreaking. Our parents were able to buy houses that are now >$500K for closer to $50K.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
njac said:
Yes, but my understanding (no citations) is that in 1980 Pharmacists were making closer to $50K.

I agree that money doesn’t go as far as it used to. Looking at real estate history prices on Redfin in any major city is heartbreaking. Our parents were able to buy houses that are now >$500K for closer to $50K.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
Click to expand...

50k is still 160k/yr inflation adjusted. So in essence, getting 50k back then had the same purchasing power of getting 160k now.

The only reason we get bumped to 100k+ during the shortage, they make Pharm. D degree requirement/standards, it took longer for everyone to get the degree, adding on anywhere from 1-4 extra "professional" yrs (for what it used to be bachelor degree only) thus creating artificial shortage of pharmacists. Housing boom/retailers over building pharmacies. This two main force is now gone...

No reason they keep jacking up salaries because demand (over supply) is already met. If anything, we will get a pay cut with 3% inflation/yr.
 
Momus said:
It's not enough to make low 6 fig nowadays. It's not what it used to be; just like $1M is not much nowadays. 100k is definitely middle income.

Inflation adjusted $100k salary from 1980, you now need $320k to maintain the same purchasing power. 100k sig fig was used to mean something, not anymore... About 1 in 5 household makes 100k in the US. Aiming 300k is the new 100k salary.
Click to expand...

Huh? We are top 10 to 15% in salary

Oh and even with inflation I'm making way more then in 2000.
 
Last edited:
Greatpharma said:
I don't think they are wrong. The thing is a 6-figure job does not necessarily mean the most happy job. It depends on the person's values, personality, passion, and goals; and also how early they start in the profession.
Click to expand...
Agreed! The article also doesn't say what the job outlook is either and whether it's good or bad!!
 
Momus said:
So? It's still not the same, it doesn't carry "Wow, you make bank!" since everyone and their mom makes that now. It's just good to meh even... 1 in 10 ppl you see on the road makes 100k, 1 in 6 household makes that. That's all I'm saying. Aim for 320k for the new sig fig threshold, to be 1%er.

$100,000 income: No big deal anymore
Click to expand...

1/10 thus you make more then 90%.

So what you are saying is I was even worse off when I started due to inflation?
 
wagrxm2000 said:
1/10 thus you make more then 90%.

So what you are saying is I was even worse off when I started due to inflation?
Click to expand...
We were making 50k 1980, the same as in now 160k. So no, back then (1980) we weren't rich, and we aren't rich now. It's just meh...
 
Members don't see this ad :)
mustang sally said:
I don't know...we can dismiss the six figure income as unimpressive until the cows come home, but I'm not willingly giving mine up.
Click to expand...
I am not willing to give mine up either since I have no other avenue to generate active income other than to trade my time for $65+/hr. But, I am not under the illusion we are baller rich.
 
Momus said:
We were making 50k 1980, the same as in now 160k. So no, back then (1980) we weren't rich, and we aren't rich now. It's just meh...
Click to expand...

I made $70k in 2000 which with inflation is way lower then today.

It's not about being a baller, it's about complaining you aren't doing well.

Everyone should be able to live extremely comfortable at our salaries.
 
Last edited:
Momus said:
So? It's still not the same, it doesn't carry "Wow, you make bank!" since everyone and their mom makes that now. It's just good to meh even... 1 in 10 ppl you see on the road makes 100k, 1 in 6 household makes that. That's all I'm saying. Aim for 320k for the new sig fig threshold, to be 1%er.

$100,000 income: No big deal anymore
Click to expand...

I think the question is for those of us run-of-the-mill pharmacists who graduate post 2010, just how many solid years of $120K can we expect to pull in? My guess is 15 years? If we average that out over a typical career span, that would land us in the low end even.
 
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1985/01/rpt1full.pdf

No, pharmacists made $50k in today's purchasing power parity, not $50k in those days.

Specialist physicians are the ones who really got the shaft over the years. I would take a guess that they have come down 30% from their highs for CPT.

Also, work circumstances have noticeably IMPROVED over when I started in 2004 in terms of getting help and automation. I would rather work in the current circumstances today than face the start of my career again. This profession has got quite a ways to go before it gets that bad again.
 
Momus said:
So? It's still not the same, it doesn't carry "Wow, you make bank!" since everyone and their mom makes that now. It's just good to meh even... 1 in 10 ppl you see on the road makes 100k, 1 in 6 household makes that. That's all I'm saying. Aim for 320k for the new sig fig threshold, to be 1%er.

$100,000 income: No big deal anymore
Click to expand...

No big deal... hmmm I have a GI doc friend who makes about 250k... who makes 320k that easily in the medical field?
 
Momus said:
We were making 50k 1980, the same as in now 160k. So no, back then (1980) we weren't rich, and we aren't rich now. It's just meh...
Click to expand...
lord999 said:
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1985/01/rpt1full.pdf

No, pharmacists made $50k in today's purchasing power parity, not $50k in those days.

Specialist physicians are the ones who really got the shaft over the years. I would take a guess that they have come down 30% from their highs for CPT.

Also, work circumstances have noticeably IMPROVED over when I started in 2004 in terms of getting help and automation. I would rather work in the current circumstances today than face the start of my career again. This profession has got quite a ways to go before it gets that bad again.
Click to expand...

If I'm reading that PDF correctly we made $27k in 1983 which would have been under $50k when I started plus we'd only be at my original starting rate today if our pay only went up with dollar inflation.

I guess we are doing pretty good huh?
 
wagrxm2000 said:
If I'm reading that PDF correctly we made $27k in 1983 which would have been under $50k when I started plus we'd only be at my original starting rate today if our pay only went up with dollar inflation.

I guess we are doing pretty good huh?
Click to expand...
According to that document, we were earning more than physicians in 1983.....
 
We also need to take into account that tuition has skyrocketed since the 80's and 90's which takes away a huge chunk of our take home pay. In a high tax state such as California someone earning $120k paying $25k/year in student loans would be taking home the rough equivalent of someone earning $75k/year gross with little or no student debt. That is also not taking into account the 4 years of lost earnings while you are in school.
 
VictorOfHungerGames said:
No big deal... hmmm I have a GI doc friend who makes about 250k... who makes 320k that easily in the medical field?
Click to expand...
Not us... But E-ROAD specialties and any specialties that do tons of procedures do. We never have the cushy 1980 six figure income.
 
stoichiometrist said:
We also need to take into account that tuition has skyrocketed since the 80's and 90's which takes away a huge chunk of our take home pay. In a high tax state such as California someone earning $120k paying $25k/year in student loans would be taking home the rough equivalent of someone earning $75k/year gross with little or no student debt. That is also not taking into account the 4 years of lost earnings while you are in school.
Click to expand...

Don't live in California?

I know, I know, nothing compares to California.

Anyways, everyone knows you shouldn't be going to pharmacy school now. Those of us though who have been working, should be doing absolutely fine.
 
Momus said:
It's not enough to make low 6 fig nowadays. It's not what it used to be; just like $1M is not much nowadays. 100k is definitely middle income.

Inflation adjusted $100k salary from 1980, you now need $320k to maintain the same purchasing power. 100k sig fig was used to mean something, not anymore... About 1 in 5 household makes 100k in the US. Aiming 300k is the new 100k salary.
Click to expand...
The average generalist physician didn't even make 100k in 1980, only specialists did, and not by much (they made 125k). Using numbers from 40 years ago sort of obfuscates things. Pharmacists certainly made a hell of a lot less back then
 
Momus said:
Not us... But E-ROAD specialties and any specialties that do tons of procedures do. We never have the cushy 1980 six figure income.
Click to expand...
lol @ thinking ROAD is still a thing. "Easily" is the key word in your quoted post. Nobody makes it easily. The surgeons/subspecialists who do make it are working >60/wk and cranking through patients.
 
Mad Jack said:
The average generalist physician didn't even make 100k in 1980, only specialists did, and not by much (they made 125k). Using numbers from 40 years ago sort of obfuscates things. Pharmacists certainly made a hell of a lot less back then
Click to expand...
So, specialist make tons of money before and still make tons of money now. We didn't before, we don't now. Nothing changes. I'm still saying the same thing 100k is alot back then, not now. 100k now is just meh salary. It used to mean A LOT.

I need to add again we got lucky during the decade of pharmacist shortage and housing boom, otherwise our wages won't even keep up with inflation at all. The next 30 yrs will suck.
 
Momus said:
So, specialist make tons of money before and still make tons of money now. We didn't before, we don't now. Nothing changes. I'm still saying the same thing 100k is alot back then, not now. 100k now is just meh salary. It used to mean A LOT.

I need to add again we got lucky during the decade of pharmacist shortage and housing boom, otherwise our wages won't even keep up with inflation at all. The next 30 yrs will suck.
Click to expand...

I take it you are completely going to ignore your incorrect statements?
 
wagrxm2000 said:
I take it you are completely going to ignore your incorrect statements?
Click to expand...
What's the incorrect statement? That our wages are keeping up with inflation due to rph shortage + housing boom, otherwise we would have gotten screwed like everyone else?

We already know wages aren't keeping up with inflation. We just got lucky. Let's not pretend we get where we are today due to anything else other than the huge pharmacist shortage in 2000-2008. We already know your company start doing pay freeze because of saturation. Lucky we are... no more.
 
Momus said:
What's the incorrect statement? That our wages are keeping up with inflation due to rph shortage + housing boom, otherwise we would have gotten screwed like everyone else?

We already know wages aren't keeping up with inflation. We just got lucky. Let's not pretend we get where we are today due to anything else other than the huge pharmacist shortage in 2000-2008. We already know your company start doing pay freeze because of saturation. Lucky we are... no more.
Click to expand...

No that up until this past year salaries have far surpassed inflation but going forward won't keep up that is the opposite you were saying.

Oh and the fact that this job pays better then about 90% but people still bitc...complain about how much they make.

Everyone knows going forward it's going to slow down but today and the past, no one should be complaining.
 
You can still make a decent living for now as a pharmacist provided that you've paid off your student loans and are working full time.

While not the worst, there are professions out there that make a far better investment. Software engineers, for example, graduate 4 years earlier with far less debt, start with a six figure salary (or close), and enjoy far less stress. Some of them even complain that they are getting bored at their cushy jobs or that recruiters keep hounding them to accept job offers - problems which most pharmacists would kill for.
 
Student loans and progressive taxation with income limits on interest deductions are eroding the salaries of higher earning healthcare professionals. 120k looks nice on paper, but attached to 6 figures of student loan debt, minimal tax relief with the student loans, and the fact that you'll be taxed making 120k but net keeping maybe 100-90k after student loans really puts the number into perspective. I have physician friends who will complete residencies with nearly 400-500k in debt (90k per year med school costs + interest growth during residency). They're all banking on PSLF with the goal of working in non-profit hospitals. If they actually had to pay down their debts their salaries wouldn't be as appealing either.

That being said though, I don't regret my decision to go into pharmacy, but I lucked out. I have a unicorn job and make a little more than the average pharmacist.
 
PharmDminus said:
According to that document, we were earning more than physicians in 1983.....
Click to expand...
Yes, actually. So, back in the 80s, there were a percentage of what we now call primary care providers that refused to deal with insurance whatsoever. They just charged a flat rate for visits and were paid comparably less but probably did a third of the work that average primary care today does. Less office support needs and lower time away from care.

Also, there were more pharmacists in ownership, which skews the results.

Mad Jack said:
The average generalist physician didn't even make 100k in 1980, only specialists did, and not by much (they made 125k). Using numbers from 40 years ago sort of obfuscates things. Pharmacists certainly made a hell of a lot less back then
Click to expand...

Thats true. However, primary care was in the dumpster and specialists made quite a bit more. There are a couple of papers in JME lamenting the decline in physician pay relative to productivity. In order to keep salaries where they are today, physicians have to work a lot harder and put up with increasing administrative BS in order to keep that up, a race that we will all eventually lose.
 
stoichiometrist said:
You can still make a decent living for now as a pharmacist provided that you've paid off your student loans and are working full time.

While not the worst, there are professions out there that make a far better investment. Software engineers, for example, graduate 4 years earlier with far less debt, start with a six figure salary (or close), and enjoy far less stress. Some of them even complain that they are getting bored at their cushy jobs or that recruiters keep hounding them to accept job offers - problems which most pharmacists would kill for.
Click to expand...

Wait until they get disenfranchised in their 40s or a bust, and you'll really see them complain. Software is a boom bust job like petroleum engineering. I shared class with many of them and people like @dgroulx had that kind of background.
 
stoichiometrist said:
You can still make a decent living for now as a pharmacist provided that you've paid off your student loans and are working full time.

While not the worst, there are professions out there that make a far better investment. Software engineers, for example, graduate 4 years earlier with far less debt, start with a six figure salary (or close), and enjoy far less stress. Some of them even complain that they are getting bored at their cushy jobs or that recruiters keep hounding them to accept job offers - problems which most pharmacists would kill for.
Click to expand...

For all this talk about easy money and lavish perks after a few months of coding bootcamp, I have to ask... do you know anyone personally who has gone this route and succeeded? Have you yourself ever attempted it? If not, then this evidence is on the same level as that one doctor in high school who told me that pharmacy was a good career because (I kid you not, this really happened) in his words, "there are a lot of cute Asian girls in those programs".
 
lord999 said:
Also, work circumstances have noticeably IMPROVED over when I started in 2004 in terms of getting help and automation. I would rather work in the current circumstances today than face the start of my career again. This profession has got quite a ways to go before it gets that bad again.
Click to expand...

I actually haven't heard of the work circumstances back then, only that things have gotten worse... please elaborate?
 
hye345 said:
For all this talk about easy money and lavish perks after a few months of coding bootcamp, I have to ask... do you know anyone personally who has gone this route and succeeded? Have you yourself ever attempted it? If not, then this evidence is on the same level as that one doctor in high school who told me that pharmacy was a good career because (I kid you not, this really happened) in his words, "there are a lot of cute Asian girls in those programs".
Click to expand...
Hack reactor published their employment rate at 95% for the graduates. YouTube have many people talk about their software engineer career without a computer science degree.
 
hye345 said:
For all this talk about easy money and lavish perks after a few months of coding bootcamp, I have to ask... do you know anyone personally who has gone this route and succeeded? Have you yourself ever attempted it? If not, then this evidence is on the same level as that one doctor in high school who told me that pharmacy was a good career because (I kid you not, this really happened) in his words, "there are a lot of cute Asian girls in those programs".
Click to expand...
Aside from the perks of the cute Asian girls, I can tell you that when I started an early .com pharmacy business developing formulary mgmt tools, we hired a guy that didn't look like he had his first shave yet. He was self-taught, knew something like 10 different machine languages and before long was running our complete dev team. We started him at around $40K in the early 2000's and he has done nothing but go up from there. He next job will be CIO but he's pulling down 170K+ now and he's just turned 30 yrs old. He has a very bright future ahead of him. No debt as he never went to college. Is married, has two kids, two Audi's, two homes and several investment properties.
 
hye345 said:
I actually haven't heard of the work circumstances back then, only that things have gotten worse... please elaborate?
Click to expand...

I trained on the original Intercom Plus, no scanners, no script checks, no e-pharmacy. Looked like SIMS (the inventory system) or a boosted PDX. My 400 script store had no dispensing machinery, everything was tray counted. No photograph with meds, so you had to send the bottle down with every prescription. I also did not have the benefit of trained techs (Walgreens routinely stuck a cashier as my "tech" when they even bothered), and when I did, I routinely lost them to higher paying gigs. Robberies were more common and store security/loss prevention was only at the region level and not the district. The original store I worked for priced in 10% shrink and a robbery a year into their profit/loss statements.

I still balance a phone a specific way and move my arms in particular patterns due to working for Walgreens. In my most stressful periods in my current job, I will answer phones with "Thank you for calling Walgreens, I'm ____ the Pharmacist" (my surname is alliterative with Pharmacist).

And while we can play the "who had the worst store conditions" and I'd certainly lose (the worst store in my area was arguably 3rd and Hell or Dogsh*t and Mormon where the cops were routinely called in for fakes, the PIC hung herself from the light fixture two months after being robbed and then some, and the place was robbed four times in 18 months), much of the technology has made it less error-prone for the volume than in the earlier eras. You don't get enough people, but you actually are more likely to get trained people rather than just whoever Walgreens stuck back there.
 
Last edited:
lord999 said:
And while we can play the "who had the worst store conditions" and I'd certainly lose (the worst store in my area was arguably 3rd and Hell or Dogsh*t and Mormon where the cops were routinely called in for fakes, the PIC hung herself from the light fixture two months after being robbed and then some, and the place was robbed four times in 18 months), much of the technology has made it less error-prone for the volume than in the earlier eras. You don't get enough people, but you actually are more likely to get trained people rather than just whoever Walgreens stuck back there.
Click to expand...
Holy crap.
 
lord999 said:
much of the technology has made it less error-prone for the volume than in the earlier eras.
Click to expand...

This is such a big change from my earliest pharmacy days. It was so easy to make mistakes back then, undoubtedly more mistakes were made, and many of these mistakes went undocumented because the technology to catch them wasn't there (now the pt has a description of their pill, the charge nurse scans the bar code on the, etc.)

I feel like it's a much safer atmosphere for patients these days. And yet another reason why the 2000's were such glorious years, the crazy pharmacist shortage meant pharmacists could take their pick of jobs in order to get the best one, and all kinds of new and great pharmacy technology was was being implemented make the job easier and less error-prone.
 
stoichiometrist said:
We also need to take into account that tuition has skyrocketed since the 80's and 90's which takes away a huge chunk of our take home pay. In a high tax state such as California someone earning $120k paying $25k/year in student loans would be taking home the rough equivalent of someone earning $75k/year gross with little or no student debt. That is also not taking into account the 4 years of lost earnings while you are in school.
Click to expand...

At most pharmacy schools, tuition increased about 30 to 35% in the past 5 years. Being $200K plus in student loans is now the norm for most pharmacy school new grads.

Curious, what was the average pharmacy school student loans/debt in the 70s, 80s, and 90s? Probably a lot less than today's averages since earning a bachelor's degree was sufficient to practice pharmacy during the pre-2000 era.
 
Last edited:
Transformer said:
Curious, what was the average pharmacy school student loans/debt in the 70s, 80s, and 90s? Probably a lot less than today's averages since earning a bachelor's degree was sufficient to practice pharmacy during the pre-2000 era.
Click to expand...

I can go into a spiel about this, but before 1989 (the advent of the Stafford loan), very little as there were no government loans available ordinarily (VA SRA and Perkins Public Service being the exceptions and Perkins being the main way you got trained nurses for decades). 1990s, Stafford loans were hard limited, so a pharmacist could not possibly loan more than 75% of their first year adjusted income due to the formula used in the Bush and Clinton administrations.
 
5.6% projected growth?! lol and how many more new schools are we opening each year? good lord. I'm applying to med school. screw this.
 
lord999 said:
I trained on the original Intercom Plus, no scanners, no script checks, no e-pharmacy. Looked like SIMS (the inventory system) or a boosted PDX. My 400 script store had no dispensing machinery, everything was tray counted. No photograph with meds, so you had to send the bottle down with every prescription. I also did not have the benefit of trained techs (Walgreens routinely stuck a cashier as my "tech" when they even bothered), and when I did, I routinely lost them to higher paying gigs. Robberies were more common and store security/loss prevention was only at the region level and not the district. The original store I worked for priced in 10% shrink and a robbery a year into their profit/loss statements.

I still balance a phone a specific way and move my arms in particular patterns due to working for Walgreens. In my most stressful periods in my current job, I will answer phones with "Thank you for calling Walgreens, I'm ____ the Pharmacist" (my surname is alliterative with Pharmacist).

And while we can play the "who had the worst store conditions" and I'd certainly lose (the worst store in my area was arguably 3rd and Hell or Dogsh*t and Mormon where the cops were routinely called in for fakes, the PIC hung herself from the light fixture two months after being robbed and then some, and the place was robbed four times in 18 months), much of the technology has made it less error-prone for the volume than in the earlier eras. You don't get enough people, but you actually are more likely to get trained people rather than just whoever Walgreens stuck back there.
Click to expand...
Damn...from a light fixture?
 
Momus said:
I am not willing to give mine up either since I have no other avenue to generate active income other than to trade my time for $65+/hr. But, I am not under the illusion we are baller rich.
Click to expand...

This is correct. Also, nothing is for certain and you're only as good as your last day on the job.

As a pharmacist you'll (probably) never starve but you actually don't have much financial freedom either. Pharmacists only make "bank" compared to an Uber driver. Compared to other white collar professions... nyet.
 
VA77 said:
Damn...from a light fixture?
Click to expand...

Yep, the 4th generation stores (#5000-6500ish) had low enough ceilings and strong enough supports to do it. There were three or four (the difference is whether you consider brain death a completion or an attempt) who had committed suicide between the time I was an intern and when I stopped paying attention 7 years later to local conditions.

At least she did a good enough job that she did not imitate the last person executed in that state by hang by drop as an incorrectly measured drop causes decapitation from the kinetic force.

Eva Dugan - Wikipedia
 
stoichiometrist said:
You can still make a decent living for now as a pharmacist provided that you've paid off your student loans and are working full time.

While not the worst, there are professions out there that make a far better investment. Software engineers, for example, graduate 4 years earlier with far less debt, start with a six figure salary (or close), and enjoy far less stress. Some of them even complain that they are getting bored at their cushy jobs or that recruiters keep hounding them to accept job offers - problems which most pharmacists would kill for.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree. Programs like App Academy have an average starting salary of 105,000 USD and are LESS THAN 3 months long. Pharmacy is basally committing to a life of poverty now that FTE full time jobs are starting to become scarce. OF the newgrads that got jobs in 2018 less than half got full time gigs. Most are floating or parttime.

This.
Is.
Only.
The.
Begging.

I estimate peak saturation to happen in 2023.
 
Modest_anteater said:
I 100% agree. Programs like App Academy have an average starting salary of 105,000 USD and are LESS THAN 3 months long. Pharmacy is basally committing to a life of poverty now that FTE full time jobs are starting to become scarce. OF the newgrads that got jobs in 2018 less than half got full time gigs. Most are floating or parttime.

This.
Is.
Only.
The.
Begging.

I estimate peak saturation to happen in 2023.
Click to expand...

Clicked on that link... can't help but notice that the $105,000/year figure has a tiny little asterisk, and when you scroll all the way down, it specifically states that that salary is ONLY for San Francisco and New York City. Most pharmacists in those cities have a similar starting salary.
 
hye345 said:
Clicked on that link... can't help but notice that the $105,000/year figure has a tiny little asterisk, and when you scroll all the way down, it specifically states that that salary is ONLY for San Francisco and New York City. Most pharmacists in those cities have a similar starting salary.
Click to expand...
Starting salaries of new tech grads in SF is around $200k total comp (base is 120k + bonus + sign on bonus + stock option/refresher). I recently PMed a middle manager of FAANG companies. He made 900k-$1M/yr with his wife as middle managers in SF lol... He isn't even a US citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Informatics Pharmacist
Replies
1
Views
2K
gwarm01
G
C
Emergency Room Pharmacist
Replies
12
Views
2K
KidPharmD
KidPharmD
R
Physician, Pharmacist or Grocery Store at fault?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Pronounce Doxazosin
P
P
Cigna Remote Pharmacist 2024 (WFH)
Replies
6
Views
3K
PharmGlam1
P
Caverject
Local Georgia Pharmacist wants to buy Greenland and rename it….
Replies
0
Views
988
Caverject
Caverject
Top