<p>What is the difference between Pharmaceutical Sciences, Pharmacology, and Pharmacy? These are all degrees offered at different places, but I dont know the difference.
Thanks.</p>
<p>Pharmaceutical Sciences - not sure
Pharmacology - I believe the study of medicine design/chemistry
Pharmacy - PharmD 6 year program to practice pharmacy</p>
<p>What degrees are you referring to? Doctorates, PhDs, MS, or BS?</p>
<p>All of the above (I think), except BS. This is where I got it from.
<a href="http://education.yahoo.com/college/essentials/grad_search/%5B/url%5D">http://education.yahoo.com/college/essentials/grad_search/</a></p>
<p>Pharmaceutical Sciences
<a href="http://raptor.pub.buffalo.edu/Projects/Pharmacy/Product/psci.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://raptor.pub.buffalo.edu/Projects/Pharmacy/Product/psci.shtml</a>
<a href="http://www.pharmacy.ohio-state.edu/services/academics/bsps_main.cfm%5B/url%5D">http://www.pharmacy.ohio-state.edu/services/academics/bsps_main.cfm</a></p>
<p>Pharmacology
<a href="http://www2.musc.edu/PHARM/whatis.html%5B/url%5D">http://www2.musc.edu/PHARM/whatis.html</a>
<a href="http://pharmacology.uthscsa.edu/whatis.html%5B/url%5D">http://pharmacology.uthscsa.edu/whatis.html</a></p>
<p>Pharmacy
<a href="http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/%7Epills/pharmacy.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~pills/pharmacy.html</a>
<a href="http://www.temple.edu/cahp/brochure_Pharmacy.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.temple.edu/cahp/brochure_Pharmacy.htm</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
Pharmacy - PharmD 6 year program to practice pharmacy
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Strictly speaking, the PharmD is a 4-year postgrad degree. </p>
<p>Some schools (but by no means all) run a special combined undergrad+pharmD program which you can complete in a total of 6 years. However, most PharmD programs are graduate-only programs that admit you for a 4-year program once you are out of undergrad. In theory, you can get into such programs with just 2 years of undergrad work. However, at the higher ranked PharmD programs, most successful applicants have completed their bachelor's degrees. For example, UCSF Pharm reports that over 95% of all admittees have completed their bachelor's.</p>
<p>Sakky is correct. It is actually a 4 year post-graduate degree. </p>
<p>But, I, personally, don't see the value proposition in getting a PharmD if it takes more than 6 years. You might as well get an MD if you are going to spend 8 years to obtain a PharmD. Of course, this assumes that you are qualified to be admitted to med school.</p>
<p>It also presumes that you can handle the lifestyle of a doctor. Getting an MD is not enough. You also have to complete a medical residency, and these can be some of the most grueling years of your life, arguably as stressful as investment banking. Even after you complete your residency, the life of a doctor is still pretty stressful the quality of life is low. You make a lot of money, but you also work a lot. </p>
<p>Pharmacy, on the other hand, tends to be offer a far better quality of life. For example, you don't work as many hours, there is lots of part-time work available, so it's very 'family-friendly'. Lots of pharmacists work a standard 9-5, 40 hour a week shift, and so have plenty of time to spend raising their kids or enjoying life. </p>
<p>I've said it before, I'll say it again. If 'money' or 'value proposition' is what you are really going for, don't be a pharmacist. And don't be a doctor either. Just get your MBA and get yourself a finance job like investment banking or private equity or something like that. A recent issue of Businessweek stated that some private equity firms are offering newly minted MBA's 300k offers to start. You should become a doctor or a pharmacist because you really care about the job, not just for the money. If you just want money, there are more direct ways for you to get it.</p>
<p>I have to admit, many people including me are in pharmacy after the money. Life you said, there's lots of part-time work available and many people here believe that its easily $70,000+ with just a PharmD.</p>
<p>However, I think its risky to take just a econ/finance route to the MBA and work for an IBank or Private equity firm. You're placing all your eggs in one basket. Often, individuals that go into Ibanking only do it for three years at most. I see a lot of burn-outs in that field. If you had a PharmD and an MBA, you have a lot more options.</p>
<p>Yeah, but where do these burnt-out Ibankers go? It's not like they're just unemployed and on welfare. Believe me, they are not. Most of them just take a nice cushy management job in the Corporate Finance or Accounting division of some company. Sure, these jobs don't pay as well as Ibanking does, but it's still pretty darn good. A lot of them trade up to PE, VC, hedge funds, or the like which can pay even higher than Ibanking does for a lot less work (although, granted, it is hard to break in). And a lot of them slide into nice general management jobs. </p>
<p>The point is, I wouldn't worry too much about these bankers. Even those who bail out after a few years are still doing quite nicely for themselves. </p>
<p>For example, I know one woman who was a former Ibanker who left banking and who was then hired as a VP of Finance of a small company (of about 50 people). She made something like 175k just on salary alone, and the bonus pushed it to easily above 200k, probably 250k. Not only that, but she rarely worked more than 40 hours a week. Furthermore, in a 2-year period, she took extensive maternity leave to have 2 babies. </p>
<p>Now, to be fair, this company was located in Silicon Valley, which partially explains the high pay. But it doesn't really explain the low working hours. When you think of Silicon Valley, you think of people working grueling hours putting their nose to the grindstone. Yet the truth is, she wasn't working very hard at all. And quite frankly, neither was anybody else in the finance department. Basically, nobody in that department was ever in the office before 730AM or after 515PM. Other than those times, that part of the office was like a ghost town.</p>