A BS in Pharmaceutical Science - non PharmD student

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

Parklife

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
644
Reaction score
7
I have decided not to pursue pharmacy. I will be pursuing dentistry after graduation. I'm debating what I should major in. I want to major in something i like.

I love pharmacology and the concept of learning drug interactions. My school offers an under grad degree in pharma sci.

I want to hear from pharmacists, does a BS in pharma sci give me competence in pharmacy? Obviously, I'm not expecting to be a pharmacist, but I hope to at least be semi-competent. Pharmacy use to be run by BS and MS before the pharmD, so maybe?

As far as actual application, investing and buying stock of pharma companies, partnerships, help in dental school with oral medicine and pharmacology, undergrad research, and general knowledge are my reasons for pursuing this degree over a biology degree or other science degree. I want to be able to follow the pharmaceutical industry and make investments...maybe even participate in research/fund an R&D lab after I've gotten my DDS.

I'll minor in bio though.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I have decided not to pursue pharmacy. I will be pursuing dentistry after graduation. I'm debating what I should major in. I want to major in something i like.

I love pharmacology and the concept of learning drug interactions. My school offers an under grad degree in pharma sci.

I want to hear from pharmacists, does a BS in pharma sci give me competence in pharmacy? Obviously, I'm not expecting to be a pharmacist, but I hope to at least be semi-competent. Pharmacy use to be run by BS and MS before the pharmD, so maybe?

As far as actual application, investing and buying stock of pharma companies, partnerships, help in dental school with oral medicine and pharmacology, undergrad research, and general knowledge are my reasons for pursuing this degree over a biology degree or other science degree. I want to be able to follow the pharmaceutical industry and make investments...maybe even participate in research/fund an R&D lab after I've gotten my DDS.

I'll minor in bio though.

By pharma science do you mean pharmaceutics? And honestly, I don't see the utility of getting an undergrad degree in pharmacology. I didn't even know programs like that existed. The last paragraph just confuses me. You think getting an industry related degree will help you make better investments? I don't think so.
 
By pharma science do you mean pharmaceutics? And honestly, I don't see the utility of getting an undergrad degree in pharmacology. I didn't even know programs like that existed. The last paragraph just confuses me. You think getting an industry related degree will help you make better investments? I don't think so.

The point is to have a working knowledge of pharmacy, so I can invest in the pharmaceutical industry in the future-should I want to(http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=761604)

No the degree is pharmaceutical science. I want to major in it, but I know biology will be more useful for dental school. I'm honestly interested in both, but I do want to do undergrad pharma research. Medicinal chemistry to be exact.

A lot of schools offer this degree. Ohio State, Purdue, Michigan, UGA, MCPHS, buffalo, etc.


Basically, let's say the PharmD is a 10/10. How far will the undergrad program get me in terms of knowledge?

Here is an outline of some programs:
http://pbs.rx.uga.edu/index.php/degrees_programs/undergraduate_program/
http://www.pharmacy.ohio-state.edu/futurestudents/?subsec=bspscurriculum
http://pharmacy.umich.edu/pharmacy/b.s._in_pharmaceutical_sciences

I'm hoping some of the older pharmacists that don't have the pharmD can help.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Its just that you are comparing apples to oranges. Pharm D is a professional doctorate with focus on clinical. They just gloss over the basic science. The degree you are referring to is a bench-work research degree which will give you nothing comparable to a PharmD.
To have a working knowledge of pharmaceutical industry is possible without a PharmD or the degree you are referring to. Even as a Pharm D, I sometimes have no idea what kind of research drug companies are doing. I have to read up on it.
 
Its just that you are comparing apples to oranges. Pharm D is a professional doctorate with focus on clinical. They just gloss over the basic science. The degree you are referring to is a bench-work research degree which will give you nothing comparable to a PharmD.
To have a working knowledge of pharmaceutical industry is possible without a PharmD or the degree you are referring to. Even as a Pharm D, I sometimes have no idea what kind of research drug companies are doing. I have to read up on it.

I know this is a really taboo thing to say, but I'm just wondering for my own sake.

Obviously, I'm not going to do anything major with this undergrad degree, but would you say that a pharmaceutical science degree is more "marketable" than a biology degree?

I'm minoring in biology. I'll still take the microbiology, biochemistry, genetics, anatomy and physiology that's sort of status quo for ideal classes to take before dental school. I just want to major in something I like. Since I like several degrees equally, I want some sort of tie breaker.

That's why I'm asking this question. In other words, should i major in pharma sci? :laugh: I just don't know
 
O.. if you are worrying about the marketability of the degree I can't help you much there since I was not all that familiar with the other degree you are referring to. I am sure someone else in this forum might be able to provide some insight regarding that. Good Luck!
 
Get a degree in business, finance or accounting. Most healthcare professionals lack sufficient knowledge in these areas.

Also, if for some reason you don't become a dentist, you'll have something to fall back on.
 
Get a degree in business, finance or accounting. Most healthcare professionals lack sufficient knowledge in these areas.

Also, if for some reason you don't become a dentist, you'll have something to fall back on.

Maybe I'll consider a minor in those areas, but I want to major in something I can't easily learn by myself. I also want to do pharma research while in undergrad. Like I said. Also, business major's course load is too weak. It won't prepare me for dental school. It'll leave me with a helluva lot of time to enjoy college though. :D

I rather become a nurse than become an accountant. :rolleyes:
 
As far as actual application, investing and buying stock of pharma companies, partnerships, help in dental school with oral medicine and pharmacology, undergrad research, and general knowledge are my reasons for pursuing this degree over a biology degree or other science degree. I want to be able to follow the pharmaceutical industry and make investments...maybe even participate in research/fund an R&D lab after I've gotten my DDS.
Let me try to save you some money now. Please DON'T

"Passive investors who buy the market will capture better results than most active investors who try to beat the market."

"As a group, mutual fund managers have no special talents and outperformance is more a matter of luck than skill. The academics have been saying this for years."

"Wall Street promotes the possibility of earning superior returns--not the probability."

"Attempting to earn above market returns by picking actively managed mutual funds is an inefficient use of time and money."

"Mutual funds; brokerage firms; money management companies; advisors; or what's written in most books, magazines, investment newsletters, and web sites make it seem as though everyone is winning. That's simply not true and can't be true."

"Investment greats such as Warren Buffett, Peter Lynch, and David Swensen are all outspoken advocates for passive investing. In addition, the U.S. government's Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) for federal employees has only passive investment options available for participants."

"Statistics show that investors lose over 1% per year by trying to shift their investment in front of the next market move."

"The truth must be repeated over and over again because lies about investing are constantly being told."

"Survivorship bias occurs in performance data when the entire return histories of non-surviving entities are deleted from the data-base."

"Academics began studying mutual funds in the 1960s to discover managers who had skill. Their efforts were unsuccessful back then and new efforts remain unsuccessful today."

"Active management was exposed as a loser's bet many decades ago by the academic community."

"Princeton professor Burton G. Malkiel published his own in-depth mutual fund analysis. His conclusions were similar to all the other academics who studied the data. Where was the skill?"

"The Vanguard 500 Index Fund beat over 85% of actively managed funds during the 25 year period (1984-2009) -- even before making adjustments for terminated funds, risk factors, sales loads, and taxes."

"The S&P benchmarks outperformed the active managers in most style and size groups over most periods."

"It doesn't take any skill to buy stocks that have recently outperformed the market."

"After adjusting for beta, firm size, style, and momentum factors, Carhart concluded that an equal weighted portfolio of the mutual funds underperformed by 1.8% per year."

"According to Allan Roth's model, the chance that a single actively managed fund will beat a comparable index fund over any single year is 42%. The success rate drops to 30% over 5 years, 23% over 10 years, and just 12% over 25 years."

"Assume you own 10 actively managed funds. According to Roth's data, the odds of beating an all index fund portfolio are 27% over one year, 9% over five years, 6% over 10 years, and an incredibly low 1% over 25 years."

"The winning active managers in one period are typically not the winning managers in the next."

"An overwhelming percentage of investors and advisors select mutual funds based almost exclusively on past performance. Their underlying assumption for relying on past results is that it has predictive value. Not so."

"Every economics student knows there's no such thing as a free lunch, especially on Wall Street. Any extra gain in one person's account means a loss in someone else's."

"The loser is the investor who believes sector rotation strategies and market timing decisions can beat the market."

"Trying to beat the market creates a huge distraction that takes your mind off the mission of building wealth."

"Wall Street and the actively managed mutual fund industry spend an inordinate amount of money flooding the airways, print media, and Internet with messages about how their active strategies will either save you from calamity or make you rich."

"Wall Street know that the more confused and off balance you are about investing, the more money they'll make."

"I joined the investment industry as a rookie stockbroker in 1988. -- If a client did inquire about index investing, our canned response was, "Index funds guarantee average performance. We know you can do better." That was a true statement. It is possible to do better; it's just not likely."

"Only successful investors are interviewed in the media, and only the winning mutual funds are advertised.--losers sit quietly in the background."

"The hope of beating the market sells active management, magazines, newsletters, web site subscriptions, books, and technical analysis trading programs."

"Investors who have several winning bets in a row often misinterpret luck as skill."

"There'll always be years when an actively managed portfolio outperforms a passive portfolio, but the active funds won't outperform by much and not for long."."
 
Thanks so much Momus, that was an obscure, but enlightening post.

So do you think I should just go for the biology degree? Actually, I could probably double major if I go the biology route..
 
Top