I am at a crossroads, please help! PhD or PharmD?

[MPH 2010]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I am currently a MPH student. I am halfway through the degree. My undergrad degrees are BS-Microbiology and BS-Biology. I was wanting to attend medical school but an illness nearly took my life when I was studying for the MCAT. So that's when I decided to go back to school for my MPH (I needed something with low stress...stress is thought to be a trigger). I thought I could boost my GPA and then apply to medical school. My undergrad GPA was not competitive at all. But now, I am interested in becoming a pharmacist because it brings full circle my undergrad degrees and my MPH. If I don't get my PharmD, I am thinking of getting my PhD in Health Science Research...Suggests/comments welcome.

 

[PharmDstudent]

I hate to break it to you, but pharmacy is stressful. 80% of pharmacy school graduates go into retail where the customers/patients/clients have no problem yelling, screaming, crying, lying, hassling, pressuring, etc. the pharmacist. Pharmacists have to be gatekeepers, insurance agents, and general store associates all at the same time...

If I had to guess, "clinical pharmacy" is stressful, too, in a direct healthcare kind of way.

Perhaps you can look into research. A Doctorate of Pharmacology or something similar could be your 'golden ticket'.

(This is my own personal opinion, which some may disagree with.)

 

[ffpickle]

Hey dude,

You and I share some interests. I've been considering PhD (got into some really good schools somehow) vs. a PharmD.

I have been involved with a considerable amount of research since "Day 1," including the upsides such as getting to travel overseas to present research, and the enormous autonomy that is afforded by a PhD.

But I have also been exposed to the downsides, namely i) no matter how much you love your research topic, it will inevitably become dreadfully boring, ii) research is unbelievably competitive (when you are a student, faculty, etc.), iii) grant-writing, iv) negative or null results, v) long hours, vi) low compensation for amount of work put in. It will *not* be your golden ticket, whatever that means.

Only do a PhD if you have a sick & twisted, insatiable love for research and some burning research questions you *must* investigate on your own.

I must say that I categorically disagree with the post above mine which intimates that a PhD is not stressful. Let me tell you straight up, that a PhD will bring you the type of stress, that of which you have never seen. A PharmD, while arguably stressful, during school, and as PharmDstudent said, when working, does not compare to the stress associated with being a PhD-level researcher.

With all this being said, if you are good (and lucky) enough with your research,then after slaving away at a post-doc, you *may* outcompete the 100+ other qualified applicants for a faculty position, and even land the job. Then, you get to look forward to 60-80 hour weeks full of service obligations, teaching, setting up your research, grant-writing, paper-writing, basically slaving away. I think of a PhD like being a student for the rest of your life, there is always some deadline to meet.

Still, after all of this, being a PhD-level researcher can be a very rewarding career in the distant future, like 20-25 years from now. You might be a full professor or in a management/director position at a cancer center, health dept, pharmaceutical company, etc. In all of these cases, your pay will easily exceed that of 95% of pharmacists, you will have considerable independence (in terms of your hours, what type of research you want to do, etc.), and have some influence over the direction of your organization (academic institution, pharm company, etc.). You will also come across great opportunities like collaborating with other brilliant people in your field, mentoring new students, etc. and traveling to conferences. But again, none of this comes easily, and if that is what you think a PhD will bring you (and this is influencing your consideration of a PhD_, then I would recommend against it.

You could always still try for med school since it seems like that is what you really want.

 

[Aznfarmerboi]

I am currently a MPH student. I am halfway through the degree. My undergrad degrees are BS-Microbiology and BS-Biology. I was wanting to attend medical school but an illness nearly took my life when I was studying for the MCAT. So that's when I decided to go back to school for my MPH (I needed something with low stress...stress is thought to be a trigger). I thought I could boost my GPA and then apply to medical school. My undergrad GPA was not competitive at all. But now, I am interested in becoming a pharmacist because it brings full circle my undergrad degrees and my MPH. I also am thinking of going to get my PhD in Health Science Research too...Suggests/comments welcome.

You already have too many years in education. Go for your PhD.

 

[PharmDstudent]

The OP is worried about illness flares due to stress. I used the phrase "golden ticket" to mean that the amount of stress would be much more manageable in research, because you don't have to deal with the physical, mental, and emotional abuse brought on my customers/patients and other health care providers.

Sure, the deadlines or whatever you think is stressful will still exist, but you will have more control over yourself than you would practicing pharmacy in a public setting like a drug store or hospital.

 

[bigpharmD]

For one thing it is not THAT stressful. I think the route you are looking at taking is a very good one that can lead to a successful non-stressful career. Check this guy out

http://www.cceb.upenn.edu/faculty/?id=12

 

[ffpickle]

Hehehe, I could show you literally hundreds of links of successful epidemiologists 😉 Please note that Pharmcoepid is actually a *very* small field. I can count on two hands the number of Pharmacoepid PhD programs out there (in N. America).

The grass is always greener on the other side.

I have an MPH too my friend.

I got into good PhD Epid programs that are willing to pay for me and making me feel more wanted than any Pharm School.

A PhD *is* more education, not less. 4-5 yrs for the PhD, and possibly a post-doc as well. Then many many years of slaving away. You should visit the physician scientist board on SDN and read the horror stories.

A PhD is not something you just walk into...you will be miserable if doing do....so don't listen to people who say "just do a PhD"....LOL

There is a reason 50% of the science-PhDs in the U.S. are foreign-born. Americans just don't want to go into something that is long hours, boring, and not compensated well, compared to people with equivalent educational training.

You could also do a PharmD/PhD as well.

By the way, it sounds like MPH 2010 is interested in health outcomes reearch, not an Epid PhD, per se.

 

[bigpharmD]

I put that link because it is a PharmD. Just because you focus on epi does not mean that is all your research or job has to deal with it. You can easily do "health outcomes research." What do think an epi study on incidence of hospital MRSA and outcomes is? An MPH alone is very difficult to get good use out of, especially for what this poster wants to do. You have to either get a good medical background (md,pharmd, pa etc) or get a phd. The physician scientist boards are MD/phd'ers who are mainly combining their md degree with bench research. This is totally different than getting a phd in healthoutcomes research. This area is not nearly as filled up with foreign grads as is bench research, and quite frankly it is rewarding because you are doing research that directly affects system changes and patient care. Are you a pharmd or md? Have you ever conducted outcomes research (not just the assistant)?

 

[ffpickle]

Okay first, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make?

Everything else is secondary:
I am doing outcomes research right now (or should be...clearly I'm not, as I'm on SDN)...not that it is any of your business. The physician scientist boards have many posts from people only with PhDs. An MPH is not difficult to get good use out of....well it depends where you go and what you have done with it actually, i.e. publications, etc. "What do think an epi study on incidence of hospital MRSA and outcomes is?" Not too sure really, but since you seem interested in this topic, provide me your e-mail and I can send you a paper and grant propsal I've written about this.

 

[Priapism321]

I must say that I categorically disagree with the post above mine which intimates that a PhD is not stressful. Let me tell you straight up, that a PhD will bring you the type of stress, that of which you have never seen. A PharmD, while arguably stressful, during school, and as PharmDstudent said, when working, does not compare to the stress associated with being a PhD-level researcher.

For the record, you hold neither of the degrees that you are giving us advice about, right? Thanks.

 

[Priapism321]

I am currently a MPH student. I am halfway through the degree. My undergrad degrees are BS-Microbiology and BS-Biology. I was wanting to attend medical school but an illness nearly took my life when I was studying for the MCAT. So that's when I decided to go back to school for my MPH (I needed something with low stress...stress is thought to be a trigger). I thought I could boost my GPA and then apply to medical school. My undergrad GPA was not competitive at all. But now, I am interested in becoming a pharmacist because it brings full circle my undergrad degrees and my MPH. I also am thinking of going to get my PhD in Health Science Research too...Suggests/comments welcome.

Get a Pharm.D., do a Fellowship under this guy(http://www.stjude.org/stjude/v/inde...nnel=7cc71436e3218010VgnVCM1000000e2015acRCRD)
and you can then enjoy the clinical, research, and potentially the administrative/executive sides of science. His body of work puts most PhD level (and any level really, pubmed him) scientists to shame.

 

[ffpickle]

For the record, you hold neither of the degrees that you are giving us advice about, right? Thanks.

For the record, I am not giving you advice. I am giving it MPH 2010. In fact, I don't recall addressing you. So shut the **** up.

And I have an academic background congruent with MPH 2010 so I am giving advice that is germane to him.

Different people have different perspectives.

Thanks.

 

[bigpharmD]

Okay first, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make?

Everything else is secondary:
I am doing outcomes research right now (or should be...clearly I'm not, as I'm on SDN)...not that it is any of your business. The physician scientist boards have many posts from people only with PhDs. An MPH is not difficult to get good use out of....well it depends where you go and what you have done with it actually, i.e. publications, etc. "What do think an epi study on incidence of hospital MRSA and outcomes is?" Not too sure really, but since you seem interested in this topic, provide me your e-mail and I can send you a paper and grant propsal I've written about this.

Really? What drug would you use to treat it...if it had an MIC of 2 and was cultured from the lungs in a 70 kg patient? You can write my papers all day if you want...I am hiring.

 

[Sevarious]

Given that I hold both a PharmD and a PhD I feel that I can chime in here with my experiences and views. To get right to the point, before you choose a path you need to think very hard about what you want to do after you graduate.

The PhD
Consider skipping PhD work unless you find the minutia of research so mentally stimulating that it gets you out of bed in the morning. The PhD degree program is good in that it teaches you how to think like a scientist, but unfortunately it's a moving target where the graduation requirements change with every committee meeting.

The traditional PhD post-graduation track is abysmal. Basically pick a post-doc and slave away in a nearly, but not entirely, futile attempt to become a faculty member while making a salary that is a joke for your education level.

The PharmD.
The program is great and you will learn a lot. It's a way more focused and well thought through curriculum than a PhD program. The bad parts only come after you graduate.

You have two main options in the world of staff pharmacy. Count by fives in a retail setting for 12 hours a day while being screamed at by patients and put on hold by insurance companies. Or spend 12 hours a day typing tylenol orders in a hospital setting. To be honest with you, if you have the kind of personality that is interested in a PhD I think traditional staff pharmacy work will bore you to death.

There is a lot of talk about clinical pharmacy but despite the job title most of these positions have a high degree of order entry associated with them.

Conclusion
Think very hard about what you want to do career wise and then try to plan your future education around that. You have an MPH and that may count for something depending on what you want to do. Also keep in mind that experience trumps education in the corporate world so don't go getting 4-6 more years of schooling to do the same job you could have done without it.

 

[MPH 2010]

Given that I hold both a PharmD and a PhD I feel that I can chime in here with my experiences and views. To get right to the point, before you choose a path you need to think very hard about what you want to do after you graduate.

The PhD
Consider skipping PhD work unless you find the minutia of research so mentally stimulating that it gets you out of bed in the morning. The PhD degree program is good in that it teaches you how to think like a scientist, but unfortunately it's a moving target where the graduation requirements change with every committee meeting.

The traditional PhD post-graduation track is abysmal. Basically pick a post-doc and slave away in a nearly, but not entirely, futile attempt to become a faculty member while making a salary that is a joke for your education level.

The PharmD.
The program is great and you will learn a lot. It's a way more focused and well thought through curriculum than a PhD program. The bad parts only come after you graduate.

You have two main options in the world of staff pharmacy. Count by fives in a retail setting for 12 hours a day while being screamed at by patients and put on hold by insurance companies. Or spend 12 hours a day typing tylenol orders in a hospital setting. To be honest with you, if you have the kind of personality that is interested in a PhD I think traditional staff pharmacy work will bore you to death.

There is a lot of talk about clinical pharmacy but despite the job title most of these positions have a high degree of order entry associated with them.

Conclusion
Think very hard about what you want to do career wise and then try to plan your future education around that. You have an MPH and that may count for something depending on what you want to do. Also keep in mind that experience trumps education in the corporate world so don't go getting 4-6 more years of schooling to do the same job you could have done without it.

Thanks! I am getting the big picture now. I have been looking into fellowships/internships to see where I should be. I just have interests in so many things, I sometimes lose focus.

 

[Requiem]

For the record, I am not giving you advice. I am giving it MPH 2010. In fact, I don't recall addressing you. So shut the **** up.

And I have an academic background congruent with MPH 2010 so I am giving advice that is germane to him.

Different people have different perspectives.

Thanks.

Do you not realize that you stating doing PhD level research is "definitively" more stressful than being a pharmacist is akin to priaprism telling dentists that med school is absolutely more stressful than practicing as a dentist?

Do you not see why he said that's ******ed?

 

[bigpharmD]

Given that I hold both a PharmD and a PhD I feel that I can chime in here with my experiences and views. To get right to the point, before you choose a path you need to think very hard about what you want to do after you graduate.

The PhD
Consider skipping PhD work unless you find the minutia of research so mentally stimulating that it gets you out of bed in the morning. The PhD degree program is good in that it teaches you how to think like a scientist, but unfortunately it's a moving target where the graduation requirements change with every committee meeting.

The traditional PhD post-graduation track is abysmal. Basically pick a post-doc and slave away in a nearly, but not entirely, futile attempt to become a faculty member while making a salary that is a joke for your education level.

The PharmD.
The program is great and you will learn a lot. It's a way more focused and well thought through curriculum than a PhD program. The bad parts only come after you graduate.

You have two main options in the world of staff pharmacy. Count by fives in a retail setting for 12 hours a day while being screamed at by patients and put on hold by insurance companies. Or spend 12 hours a day typing tylenol orders in a hospital setting. To be honest with you, if you have the kind of personality that is interested in a PhD I think traditional staff pharmacy work will bore you to death.

There is a lot of talk about clinical pharmacy but despite the job title most of these positions have a high degree of order entry associated with them.

I disagree with this statement. Depends on the hospital and where in the country you practice. My wife worked retail for 1 year, switched to hospital and loves it. I have interviews all over the country and I will not enter one order...

 

[Sevarious]

Since we are on the subject of stress let me compare the two for everyone.

PhD research environment
You generally have a few tasks to accomplish and they take a a long time - from a few hours to a few weeks.

The bad! You are under constant pressure to produce data. You are also constantly reminded that you are not good enough unless you're the department superstar. You will be taking your work home with you. In fact, you are expected to work at home on evenings, on weekends and on your vacation.

The good! The data analysis and experimental design work is mentally engaging. Although, actually doing the experiments and troubleshooting them can be dull. You get a sense of accomplishment as you complete different aspects of your research, produce papers and get grants. And you can take breaks and collect your thoughts when you need to.

PharmD staff pharmacy environment
You have a lot of tasks to do and none of them take very long to complete.

The bad! There is constant pressure that everything should have been accomplished five minutes ago and that you are never moving fast enough. The pace is fast and you do not have the luxury of taking a break whenever you get tired, hungry or cranky.

The good! When you clock out you leave your work at work. You may take your crankiness home with you but all those prescriptions stay at work. You can enjoy your time off without having to think a bit about your job.

Conclusion
The traditional PhD and PharmD career tracks offer very different work environments and very different kinds of stress. You should be aware of each of them and pick the one that best compliments your personality.

 

[Sevarious]

I disagree with this statement. Depends on the hospital and where in the country you practice. My wife worked retail for 1 year, switched to hospital and loves it. I have interviews all over the country and I will not enter one order...

Order entry was what I observed over all my rotations and what several of my friends who are in hospital pharmacy currently do. As students were were rounding with the MDs, but where were all the pharmacists? Entering orders..

But you are quite right in that it depends on the hospital.

My best advice is caveat emptor. Don't assume that just because it has the word "clinical" in the title that you aren't going to be working as a glorified data entry clerk. Do your homework and make sure you know what you are getting into.

 

[FarscapeGirl]

Okay, so this might be a good thread for me to post on. I'm about to finish my PhD in molecular and cellular biology, hopefully by this summer. Pretty much month 1 of grad school I realized research wasn't for me. I gave it some more time, making sure it wasn't the lab. For awhile, I thought of going into science writing (but the only writing I do regularly is e-mails to friends, stuff for work/school, and posts on SDN). It was only when I discovered pharmacy that I realized that that was the career for me and worth the extra school.

I should point out that my husband loves research and wants to stay in it. He delays starting a movie with me on a Friday night so he can check his PCR results. Me, I'm glad to try and leave it all at work, when possible. My experiments over the five years haven't worked much, which means I spent over an entire year studying prostaglandin and cytokine release from my cells, all of which was negative data. Because of all the stress, I'm constantly sick or just don't feel well. You may only work 8 hours a day, but if you don't like what you do, you will feel miserable. This may not be the case if your experiments work out okay, but you can get stuck with a difficult project. And at some point, you just have to rescue it and publish what you have.

There are pluses to research, like Sevarious said. You are on your own schedule, which can be nice if you're an evening person. If you want to leave in the middle of the day and get a hair cut but then work until 7 at night, in most labs you can (as long as you can move your experiments around). But most experiments take some weekend work. And if you don't have to do it, you'll need to in order to get a paper done or for a presentation. Research is also great if you like change, as most likely you won't be doing the same experiments for the rest of your life. There's always something new to learn eventually, even if you'll be working on one project for several years. Also, I do like the people I work with, and my boss is great (if you do go to grad school, finding a boss/adviser you like and know you can work with is essential above all else).

 

[bigpharmD]

I want to point out that you guys are talking about completely different research that I would find extremely boring as well. For example, I am currently working on a project looking at thymoglobulin dosing in heart transplant patients and incidence of infection and affect on renal function. This project will affect our dosing of the drug and how we give it. It immediately impacts patients care. I just want to point this out. Health outcomes research, a lot of epi research, etc has immediate impact on patient care and to me is more enjoyable (as long as someone helps collect most of the data).

 

[FarscapeGirl]

I want to point out that you guys are talking about completely different research that I would find extremely boring as well. For example, I am currently working on a project looking at thymoglobulin dosing in heart transplant patients and incidence of infection and affect on renal function. This project will affect our dosing of the drug and how we give it. It immediately impacts patients care. I just want to point this out. Health outcomes research, a lot of epi research, etc has immediate impact on patient care and to me is more enjoyable (as long as someone helps collect most of the data).

That's a good point. I think I would find clinical research more enjoyable than studying the function of some protein in a certain cell type that may or may not turn out to be related to any disease. For me, molecular biology research is too specific. I don't like narrowing my area of interest so much. I see why it's important, but it's not for me.

However, I've heard from several people that if you do do clinical research, you should start out with more basic science. I guess to learn the methods and how to be a scientist better, but I don't really know why people suggest this.

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

Can't practice pharmacy without pharmd.

 

[ffpickle]

Do you not realize that you stating doing PhD level research is "definitively" more stressful than being a pharmacist is akin to priaprism telling dentists that med school is absolutely more stressful than practicing as a dentist?

Do you not see why he said that's ******ed?

Completely false equivalence.

Don't you see that MPH 2010 has an the same undergrad & grad degrees as me, and is considering two separate doctoral degrees (research, clinical), both of which I have strongly considered, researched, applied to, and interviewed for. So I do think my perspective is relevant. This is completely dissimilar from the (random?) scenario you have mentioned above.

Andthe stress issue is simply based on my own anecdotal experiences, talking to & watching countless people in the research field, and yes, including hearsay, although everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion on the issue. There may not be a consensus opinion. Certainly, both options require major commitments, sacrifices, etc.

 

[ffpickle]

Really? What drug would you use to treat it...if it had an MIC of 2 and was cultured from the lungs in a 70 kg patient? You can write my papers all day if you want...I am hiring.

1) No I can't, 2) Never said I could, 3) Why are you giving me a pop quiz that has nothing to do with MPH 2010's question? 4) Did you even read what I wrote? I mentioned a paper & grant-proposal (case-control in hospitals) regarding MRSA incidence in hospitals, *not* treatment of MRSA. 4) Never said I was looking to write your papers so why do you want to hire me? Do you like me *that* much? I'd be lying if I said I was flattered.

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

so he can check his PCR results.

Actually I do find PCR very exciting. It is the new wave of how Micro and Infectious Disease are and will be practiced. Rapid ID of bugs... how can it be not exciting. You could swab your PB and check for Salmonella in 2 hours!!!!

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

1) No I can't, 2) Never said I could, 3) Why are you giving me a pop quiz that has nothing to do with MPH 2010's question? 4) Did you even read what I wrote? I mentioned a paper & grant-proposal (case-control in hospitals) regarding MRSA incidence in hospitals, *not* treatment of MRSA. 4) Never said I was looking to write your papers so why do you want to hire me? Do you like me *that* much? I'd be lying if I said I was flattered.

If you pay me, I can dose it for you..

 

[ffpickle]

Actually I do find PCR very exciting. It is the new wave of how Micro and Infectious Disease are and will be practiced. Rapid ID of bugs... how can it be not exciting. You could swab your PB and check for Salmonella in 2 hours!!!!

Yeah exciting until you realized how much time you've wasted when you don't have enough product for sequencing or you realize your product is contaminated 🙁

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

Yeah exciting until you realized how much time you've wasted when you don't have enough product for sequencing or you realize your product is contaminated 🙁

Not with our PCR... find you a better brand.

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

Yeah exciting until you realized how much time you've wasted when you don't have enough product for sequencing or you realize your product is contaminated 🙁

And the same thing can happen with the traditional method where culture, growth, ID, and Sensitivity results take 2 to 3 days only to find out your culture is contaminated while the patient is still taking up a valuable bed getting pumped with broadspectrum antibiotic while not knowing what we're treating.

 

[bigpharmD]

1) No I can't, 2) Never said I could, 3) Why are you giving me a pop quiz that has nothing to do with MPH 2010's question? 4) Did you even read what I wrote? I mentioned a paper & grant-proposal (case-control in hospitals) regarding MRSA incidence in hospitals, *not* treatment of MRSA. 4) Never said I was looking to write your papers so why do you want to hire me? Do you like me *that* much? I'd be lying if I said I was flattered.

the point is to do meaningful health outcomes research and be the lead you have to have a clinical background...very rarely will an mph alone give you this.

 

[bigpharmD]

And the same thing can happen with the traditional method where culture, growth, ID, and Sensitivity results take 2 to 3 days only to find out your culture is contaminated while the patient is still taking up a valuable bed getting pumped with broadspectrum antibiotic while not knowing what we're treating.

hey zyvox what you think about zosyn for h. flu...thats what the icu pa put one of my patients on today...sorry should have posted in the off topic thread

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

hey zyvox what you think about zosyn for h. flu...thats what the icu pa put one of my patients on today...sorry should have posted in the off topic thread

I think it's stupid but what other risk factors are associated with this patient? How well does Pip Tazo penetrate meninges?

I would feel more comfortable with ceftriaxone 2 grams q12h.. after all... now cefriaxone 2 grams only cost $3.60 per vial.

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

hey zyvox what you think about zosyn for h. flu...thats what the icu pa put one of my patients on today...sorry should have posted in the off topic thread

geez... y'all have ICU PAs?

 

[Priapism321]

geez... y'all have ICU PAs?

PA's did the brain biopsies at my previous institution...of course, only UNDER the CLOSE SUPERVISION of a Physician. Haha, what a joke.

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

PA's do the brain biopsies at my previous institution...of course, UNDER a Physician. Haha, what a joke.

I don't mean to knock PAs. It's just that many institutions I work with rarely have family practice phyisicians with ICU privilege.

 

[bigpharmD]

I think it's stupid but what other risk factors are associated with this patient? How well does Pip Tazo penetrate meninges?

I would feel more comfortable with ceftriaxone 2 grams q12h.. after all... now cefriaxone 2 grams only cost $3.60 per vial.

sputum culture in a liver transplant....midlevels rule in the southeast

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

sputum culture in a liver transplant....midlevels rule in the southeast

eh... he's high risk. Yet, you have the culture. What did the C/S say? WBC? S/S of Pneumonia? Nosocomial? I need the HPI and need to read the chart.

 

[bigpharmD]

eh... he's high risk. Yet, you have the culture. What did the C/S say? WBC? S/S of Pneumonia? Nosocomial? I need the HPI and need to read the chart.

gram stain read
hevy growth normal flora
light growth h flu
few wbcs


and no secretions

 

[ItsOverZyvox]

gram stain read
hevy growth normal flora
light growth h flu
few wbcs


and no secretions

Signs and symptoms of pneumonia? And if so, hospital acquired? Then Zosyn could be justified. But if no meningitis suspected and non nosocomial..then Ceftriaxone 1 gram Q24h would have sufficed. Of course, I would like to know why PA felt pip/tazo was necessary?

 

[LiveLoveFartRepeat]

I am currently a MPH student. I am halfway through the degree. My undergrad degrees are BS-Microbiology and BS-Biology. I was wanting to attend medical school but an illness nearly took my life when I was studying for the MCAT. So that's when I decided to go back to school for my MPH (I needed something with low stress...stress is thought to be a trigger). I thought I could boost my GPA and then apply to medical school. My undergrad GPA was not competitive at all. But now, I am interested in becoming a pharmacist because it brings full circle my undergrad degrees and my MPH. If I don't get my PharmD, I am thinking of getting my PhD in Health Science Research...Suggests/comments welcome.

pharmD vs phD-------------------------------------------------

I begged my husband to go for pharmD, my school pretty much offered him a spot. He said being a pharmacist was just not his calling. He loves research and would not trade that for nothing.
A phD can be really stressful, I am pretty much a single mom cz he leaves home at 6 am and don't come back most days until after 8pm..he is just a rat lab. then when he is home I have to listen to all the drama that happened to his cells..yay me

I am still trying to trick him into doing MD/phD..just for the love of me

 

[xiphoid2010]

To OP:

One thing to keep in mind is that not all Ph.D going into academia. Working at Pfizer gave me the impression that most Ph.Ds work in the industry. I was a BS level researcher, buy my supervisors were all Ph.Ds. I can only chime in on what a Ph.D's job in a big pharmaceutical company's like -- and it's very good. Lower level of stress than retail pharmacy by a mile, and pay that's at least equal to Pharm.D.

A med chem Ph.D's work is basically: you are given a drug target (say MEK), and you are given a few "hits" (active molecules) from mass screening. Your mission is to manipulate the molecule in ways to make it better and into a drug. You scourer the literature, you come up with the changes, and you tell your peon BS med chemist to do the actual lab work (ok you do some too, but only like 1/3 of your day). You send it to the biologists, and they run their tests and give you results, which you then use them as a part of the developing SAR to determine your next modification. You attend once a week group powwow with bio/tox/pk/pd, drink coffee, eat donuts, call each other doctors and listen to each other talk about the week's results, and you go back to tell your B.S to do something different... There is no grants to write, you just ask for what you need, and you usually get it. Let's me say, it's pretty cushy work. Only a few dead lines, which are really decision points to determine whether to continue or switch to another project.

The pay is very good, when I left Pfizer in 2006, my Ph.D boss was getting paid $140K total ($120 salary, $20K bonus) and some stock options. And he wasn't a director, assistant director, or even a project leader.

The down side to Ph.D is: to work for a big pharma, you better be one kick ass Ph.D from a good school and famous adviser. At Pfizer Ph.Ds more or less bunch themselves into the harvard group, the MIT group, cal Tech, ect, and still a little rivalry going on. 🙄 The few guys from less well known schools are a little left out and passed over.

I guess the point is: if you are going into Ph.D, and if you can get into a good school under a big shot adviser, you can make a pretty damn comfortable Ph.D living in a big pharma. But if you are mediocre, then I don't know what Ph.D jobs in smaller companies are like.

 

[rxlynn]

To OP:


I guess the point is: if you are going into Ph.D, and if you can get into a good school under a big shot adviser, you can make a pretty damn comfortable Ph.D living in a big pharma. But if you are mediocre, then I don't know what Ph.D jobs in smaller companies are like.

They are disappearing! I agree - if you can get a job, then the pharmaceutical industry is a great place to be, but it's also very unstable and can be very geographically limiting.

My suggestion for the OP would be the following: investigate more fully the niche opportunities availalbe with a PharmD. Yes, it is true that most of us will either do retail or hospital, but there really are other opportunities out there, especially if you know going into school that you want something different and can therefore slant your coursework, rotations, summer internships, volunteer work, class presentations, etc. towards your goal.

 

[ffpickle]

Check out this thread. You may want to read some of the posts by JimblyUK. http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=509448

 

[museabuse]

Does anyone else think it's funny that a pharmd is considered a post graduate degree when for a lot of students the haven't graduated with any degree and the pharmd is their first degree?

Does anyone else think it is funny that it take longer to get a phd in philosohy or PE than a pharmd?

 

[bigpharmD]

Does anyone else think it's funny that a pharmd is considered a post graduate degree when for a lot of students the haven't graduated with any degree and the pharmd is their first degree?

Does anyone else think it is funny that it take longer to get a phd in philosohy or PE than a pharmd?

No not really because they are professional degrees, and not a terminal degree. Some MD schools will accept you as long as you have all the pre reqs and an MCAT. So no I dont think it is that funny

 

[Priapism321]

Does anyone else think it's funny that a pharmd is considered a post graduate degree when for a lot of students the haven't graduated with any degree and the pharmd is their first degree?

Does anyone else think it is funny that it take longer to get a phd in philosohy or PE than a pharmd?

I didn't think it was considered a post-graduate degree, so no, not that funny. PhD programs take long because there are no real deadlines. If everything goes smoothly, those hippies should be able to finish in 4 years.

 

[xiphoid2010]

Ph.D can be short or can be long. The shortest org/med chem Ph.D I heard was only 2.5 years, the longest was 7. For Chem ph.D you are either doing methodology or total synthesis. There is only 1 year of "classes" and the rest is pretty much all lab research. For total synthesis, your advisor usually give you a new natural product to synthesize.

Luck plays a big part. If you are very lucky and every single step of the synthesis works out, you could have the molecule made in a year, and then you can write your thesis and be done, tata! But you are unlucky or your advisor is an ass, this could happen...http://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/29/magazine/lethal-chemistry-at-harvard.html?sec=health. EJ Corey is actually one of Pfizer's main consultants, and I met this nobel loreate a few times. If you graduated under him, you are guarenteed a job at Pfizer.

 

[museabuse]

I didn't think it was considered a post-graduate degree, so no, not that funny. PhD programs take long because there are no real deadlines. If everything goes smoothly, those hippies should be able to finish in 4 years.

I meant starting from scratch(no college at all). You can can get a pharmD in 5 years. I dont think you can get a Phd in less than 6 years. And I think 7 to 8 years is normal.

 

[noname1]

I am currently a MPH student. I am halfway through the degree. My undergrad degrees are BS-Microbiology and BS-Biology. I was wanting to attend medical school but an illness nearly took my life when I was studying for the MCAT. So that's when I decided to go back to school for my MPH (I needed something with low stress...stress is thought to be a trigger). I thought I could boost my GPA and then apply to medical school. My undergrad GPA was not competitive at all. But now, I am interested in becoming a pharmacist because it brings full circle my undergrad degrees and my MPH. If I don't get my PharmD, I am thinking of getting my PhD in Health Science Research...Suggests/comments welcome.

I agree with the other poster. Pharmacy in most practice environments is very stressful especially retail. However, getting a PhD is not exactly easy. The big difference is once you have a PhD you have a much better life than as a pharmacist. So if it were me I'd nix the pharmacy route and get the doctorate