Pharmaceutical scientist with a Pharmd?

[grs23]

Hey guys.
If I want to pursue a career as a pharmaceutical scientist, can I do so with a Pharmd? Or should I follow the PhD route?

I know that do not want to go into retail as a pharmacist, and from what I’ve read, hospital pharmacy jobs are very hard to land right now.
More so, I want to study how pharmaceuticals impact the human body/disease and focus on how to improve a drug.
Can I do this with a Pharmd??

I just graduated undergrad last May, and I was on the pre-dental track. During my gap year, I worked as a dental assistant and saw that the dental route may not be for me. I want to study disease and really focus on how drugs interact with the human body and disease, and obviously dentistry doesn’t have this in most cases. Pharmacy seems to be the route follow, though I’m not entirely a fan of retail pharmacy. I know I seem a little over the place, this field is knew to me, so please let me know what you guys think.

thank you!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Seriously Serious]

PhD or dual PhD/PharmD

 

[grs23]

PhD or dual PhD/PharmD

So a pharmd alone wouldn’t be helpful?

 

[lord999]

So a pharmd alone wouldn’t be helpful?

Not anymore. There have been no (as in zero) new investigator R01 sole-PI's who were only PharmD trained in the past decade (the ones who seemingly had one had significant postdoctoral experience in fellowships or were intramural). And due to the change in training, you do not have the actual basic sciences knowledge to even get started without significant detouring. At the bare minimum for the scientist track, you need an MS, but it's extremely limited in terms of career pathways as opposed to the PhD. If you actually want to do ADME pharmacology or biotech, that's definitely PhD territory and furthermore, the PhD for that field only qualifies you for a narrow spectrum. There are no grand pharmacology PhD's anymore because the knowledge depth has gotten so particular.

If you don't have significant research experience though, do yourself a big favor and actually spend a year as research staff before you make a decision. It'll save you more time in the end.

 

[PharmtoCS]

Go for a PhD. The vast majority of PharmDs end up in retail. Pharmaceutical scientists jobs for PharmD are far and few between if not nonexistent.

 

[TranslationalRPh]

If you truly want to be a pharmacuetical scientist, get the PhD. I didn't realize that I wanted to be a pharmacuetical scientist until pharmacy school, which is why I did a PharmD/PhD combo sequentially. With the increased specialization and competition, you do yourself a disservice by not going the graduate school route. It's not that there are no other paths to be a pharmacuetical scientist in the industry, but they are less certain and usually take a lot more time. You may also determine whether you are trying to become more traditional pharmacuetical scientist or a clinical pharmacuetical scientist where a PharmD can be more of an asset.

 

[PharmCompliance.com]

The vast majority are going to be PhD or PharmD/PhD. I mainly know about UNC, where I got my PharmD, but it has a dual-degree program, and I would imagine many other schools do too. A lot of the people there also graduated with a PharmD elsewhere and then entered the PhD program.

One advantage of UNC is that they are near Research Triangle Park and have access to all the big industry that comes along with it, including GSK. That means time spent in those companies, where you can to know people that will help you get a job after graduation.

I did have one professor (not at UNC anymore), though, who did it with just a PharmD. He is definitely the exception rather than the rule, though: Dr. Howard McLeod Leads Personalized Medicine

 

[TranslationalRPh]

The vast majority are going to be PhD or PharmD/PhD. I mainly know about UNC, where I got my PharmD, but it has a dual-degree program, and I would imagine many other schools do too. A lot of the people there also graduated with a PharmD elsewhere and then entered the PhD program.

One advantage of UNC is that they are near Research Triangle Park and have access to all the big industry that comes along with it, including GSK. That means time spent in those companies, where you can to know people that will help you get a job after graduation.

I did have one professor (not at UNC anymore), though, who did it with just a PharmD. He is definitely the exception rather than the rule, though: Dr. Howard McLeod Leads Personalized Medicine

Howard graduated in a time where PharmD with fellowship was adequate. So did HIS PI, Dr. Bill Evans (PharmD) at St Judes, who deliberately did not got a PhD, partly to prove a point. Same is also true for the current dean, Angela Kashuba. However, they trained and graduated DECADES ago, so I respectfully don't think that this is a good example for how to do this now. Knowing Howard for many years, he was a huge proponent of getting a PhD for this purpose.

 

[Splenda88]

MD/DO

 

[lord999]

Howard graduated in a time where PharmD with fellowship was adequate. So did HIS PI, Dr. Bill Evans (PharmD) at St Judes, who deliberately did not got a PhD, partly to prove a point. Same is also true for the current dean, Angela Kashuba. However, they trained and graduated DECADES ago, so I respectfully don't think that this is a good example for how to do this now. Knowing Howard for many years, he was a huge proponent of getting a PhD for this purpose.

Sacked Moffitt Officials Didn't Report Chinese Financial Ties

Not clear what was done in exchange for payments

www.medpagetoday.com

That's no exception for me. McLeod was NIH Postdoctoral trained, but he never tenured nor was considered anything but a research professor (meaning at will). Bill Evans is an ABD with extremely high ties to the NCI farm (he was actually there when I was a fellow on a Midcareer and was quite excellent). Both of them are pre-2000 as well, where the PharmD also could have been a research degree (this is definitely not the case now without the basic sciences training).

Oh, and McLeod's looking for other employment now (and good luck with that as he is on the Exclusionary List). Thousand Talents eliminations are getting pretty nasty in academia right now due to the NSF and NIH cracking down on the matter. A couple of my colleagues (that everyone knew was corrupt) is in the final process of the Academic Senate removing them at HHS's behest. I'll be really curious how Harvard, Penn, and Duke will do their housecleaning considering they are in deep.