Chemistry Jobs?

I don't understand why this gif saved as a jpg. Please don't roast me on this stupid picture of Trudeau. It's the only thing I had on this computer.

do yourself a favor, don't major in chemistry.

>>9002263
but it seems pretty based. I don't care if I have to specialize in biochemistry, synthetic chemistry, or material science while also picking up some meme-worthy shit like machine learning on the side. I want to do advanced psychiatric research or build the next meme material goddamnit!

>>9002286
If you really like it then go for it, it's the rational choice

>>9002286
Start off in synthetic organic chemistry, take your gained intuitive understanding of how organics work and function, move over to biology and do something useful. Chemistry research is tool development, only biology research is truly useful. This is coming from a chem PhD

File: cheme.jpg (41KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 480x360px

>>9002070
Among all types of Pre-Med (Undergrad Bio/Chemical) Majors,

Chemical Engineering is the more prestigious, valuable & well paid (however more difficult & challenging)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJeWKvQD90Y

>>9002286

>>9002696
ChemE more difficult than ochem.

What are you smoking

File: petrochemical-engineering.jpg (51KB, 370x225px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 370x225px

>>9002703
>ChemE vs Ochem
Why not both?

PetroChemE > ChemE & Ochem


PetroChemE is the most well paid STEM field ever.

File: ChemE.png (452KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 960x720px

>>9002696
ChemE rocks

Can I become a Petroleum Engineer with an EE degree? I don't want to do Chem E cause I keep hearing that job outlook and shit is worse than EE.

If I can't land a career as a Petro Engineer I wouldn't want to be stuck not finding a job as a Chem Engineer.

File: Proteaosome_1fnt_top.png (352KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

352KB, 500x600px

>>9002696
>>9002703
>>9002711
>>9002719
>>9002724
Biochem master-race reporting in.

>>9002070 >>9002760 >>9002719

Physics is the Hardest Pre-Med degree.

Physics -> Medical School

You can also get into Medical School with EE if you take the required (general, organic & bio-) chemistry courses.
Which may also satisfy a Minor (or Major) in Biomedical Engineering.

>>9002286
have you actually talked to anyone who majored in chemistry? it's a shitty field, jobs are hard to find and salaries are low even after your graduate degree. don't take my word for it, just read every single reddit thread on r/chemistry about relating to careers. also people in this thread recommending chem E don't know what they're talking about. chem E deals with production, processing in factories and power plants. study pharmacy.

>>9002719
read: Caltech

>>9002968
I have. Which is why I made this thread, because I realized that "le STEM for a career" might be a fucking meme outside of engineering and computer science. I do want to avoid the meme specialization spike organic, but other than that, I'm not sure with what to do at this point except maybe just stick with biomedical engineering.

I just don't understand how biotech could boom without good chemists. If there's a need for good chemical biologists, synthetic chemists, or material scientists in the private sector, I'll do it even if it means picking up analytical, computational, or other techniques. Machine learning seems like a great way to become useful too.

>>9002968
I think I could transfer to CalTech if I wanted to. Do they take retards from Harvard?

chemistry is redpilled but only if you avoid meme specializations

>>9003214
such as?

>>9002760
Biochem is the sports science of chemistry. You study both and become proficient and neither.

>>9003257
At*

>>9003256
Some guy here said physchem is useless. Analytical sounds useful but boring.

>>9003645
A lot of people in organic don't seem to be having a good time either.

Honestly, I just want to know what are some flexible, well-paying STEM jobs that have SOMETHING to do with chemistry, even if you need to have some niche skills to make it valuable. Academia, biotech, medicine, pharmaceuticals, etc., it doesn't matter for me IMO.

>>9002070
you should know now that science careers in biotech and pharma are dead end jobs unless you have a PhD

>>9003257
>this is what high-schoolers believe
Keep getting meme'd while I do my folding calculations, faggot.

Is anything not a meme?

I got my BA in chemistry from a top 10 program a couple of weeks ago. Out of ~22 of us, only like 2 aren't going straight on to some form of grad school (mostly for MDs / PhDs but with a couple exceptions).

It's possible to go straight into industry, but from my experiences the jobs you'll get with a BA / BS are mostly technician based and not research based.

>>9002938
The hardest pre-med degree is the subject that you're worst in. It's also very dependent on your school's departments.

>>9004083
So I should be preparing for grad school is what you're saying? I currently have a 3.8 in-major GPA and a 3.5 total GPA at an Ivy League school, freshman year. Grades picked up second semester after getting my shit together and kicking my procrastination habit. Should I be worried about my GPA dropping any further?

>>9002070
Chemistry is pretty limited by itself.
Chemical engineering is where's at.

>>9004077
Yes, arts and or History majors.
They are not a meme, just plain shit.

>>9004105
It depends on your long term objectives. I thought about grad school as a freshman, then I joined a lab for a year and realized I didn't want to spend another decade doing research.

Research experience is generally speaking the most important thing for grad school, so I'd reach out to any research labs you find interesting asap. Hopefully this will also give you a feel of whether or not grad school is actually right for you. Obviously try to keep your GPA as high as possible too though, since having a high GPA is literally never a bad thing.

Also as a general word of caution, my chem GPA slipped from like 3.7 to <3.5 my junior year after taking quantum chemistry / p-chem / advanced lab. I don't know your school's program and it's very possible that you're smarter than I am, but just because you're doing great in chemistry now doesn't mean you'll be able to sustain that for 4 years, especially after all the pre-meds drop out leaving behind a harsher curve.

Which master program would lead to better job opportunities: biochem or bio and nanomaterials? (I'm in europe, if it makes any difference).

>>9004149
Fair enough. Thank you for the warning about p-chem et. al. A lot of people seem to share the same feelings, maybe I'll try to read up in advance. I'm also considering avoiding majoring in chemistry completely (or solely) and picking the most chem-related major that can get me a rewarding job in biotech or something.

>>9002070
O-Chem PhD with industry experience here...

Here's the thing. If you're smart AND very lucky, getting into the industry with a BS is just fine. You basically have a 5 year head start on PhD's to get into management-type roles. But again, you have to be smart and very lucky. Once you hit management you have no glass ceiling. However, if you don't get into management in the first 10 years after your BS, you'll be stuck in a dead end job forever.

Getting a PhD is the safer route, you're guaranteed a decent paying job in a field you love (otherwise you don't go into STEM, you go into business!). The problem is that those intrepid BS chemists that did make management roles could eventually or already outrank you, and then you have plebs for bosses. The Vice President of my company is a pleb, as is the site director, quality control director, and quality assurance director. Thankfully the CEO has a PhD, along with the director of R&D.

The problem with a PhD is you'll always feel like you're 5 years behind the curve (or longer if you don't finish in 5 years). The people at the top are usually business people and don't give a fuck that you could call yourself a doctor, they only care about revenue and getting as-cheap-as-possible labor.

Personally I like Organic Chemistry, especially process development. Right now I'm working on redevelopment of a chemical process to revalidate in a continuous flow process. Going from batch-to-batch processing to continuous. I also lead a number of DoE (design of experiment) studies that address edges of failure and process improvements. It's all very rewarding and I'm glad I stuck with O-Chem.

If you want my opinion on viable industrial PhD's, I'd suggest: Inorganic (focus ONLY on polymers), Organic (focus on either natural product synthesis or transition metal catalyzed reactions), or Physical (focus ONLY on materials science, like some NASA type shit or something).

>>9004226
How far will a MSc get you?

>>9004233
MSc is -2 years experience (yes, minus).

If you don't go the PhD route, consider getting an MBA while on the job. Make sure it's very visible that you're going back to get an MBA, it will help you fill management roles if they open up.

>>9004226
Thank you for the valuable information on the state of industry. Tbh it sounds like you do the roles of a chemical engineer. Was it easy switching into that role given your undergraduate in chemistry and graduate education in organic chemistry? Or did you have to learn it on your own?

Which specializations lead to jobs with the most flexibility without sacrificing income? What is income like in general? What should I be doing to maximize my competitiveness in the marketplace, should choose to want to go into the graduate school route?

>>9004226
Also, I forgot: what about biochemistry/synthetic chemistry/chemical biology (or whatever I should be calling it... the combination of all 3?)... is there much of an industrial market for that specialization?

>>9004242
Okay here goes... ChemE is a meme degree. They don't understand organic chemistry enough to make real process improvements. My current project is projected to take the cost-per-kilogram of a specific API from $63 to $3 which saves the company millions, and only because I'm an expert in transition metal catalyzed reactions. The ChemE's here do our bitch work like writing batch records, filling out deviation reports (i.e. when someone/something fucks up a cGMP process an investigation is opened), managing the reactor flow, and being the 'face' of manufacturing in general.

What sucks is that as the 'face' of manufacturing, when things go really well in the plant they're the ones who get the credit. When things go terrible, everyone's like "what the fuck is wrong with this chemistry!?". So the problem with my job is visibility, which I try to fix myself by saving fucking millions of dollars. Anyways... back to your questions.

The best route for a science-focused career is this: BS Chemistry from whatever university wherever (seriously it doesn't matter), PhD from an Ivy league school in NATURAL PRODUCT SYNTHESIS. The reason is simple, natural product synthesis was the ONLY field of synthesis back in the day, all those PhD's from back in the day that discovered blockbuster drugs are the presidents/CEO's/directors of R&D today - so they like to keep to their inner circle of natural products. Sucks because I was transition metals, and I'm smarter then most of the natural product guys.

>>9004244
Maybe good if you're extremely talented, but more likely the guys who focus on one of those fields will always be a step ahead of you.

Industry favors expertise and collaboration more then it favors a one-stop-shop. For example an expert in synthesis, an expert in biochemistry, and an expert in biology working together is overall more powerful then three experts in synthesis, biochemistry, and biology. The hybrid nature of that specialization dilutes your overall knowledge.

Having that specialization as a professor is completely fine though, you would just hire grad students and post-docs that fill the roles as experts in a respective field.

>>9002263
This. look on indeed. there are NO jobs besides lab bitch doing cgmp work.

>>9002938
if you actually managed to get a EE degree you wont be needing to get into med school to make money rofl.

There are NO jobs for chemistry majors. Its simply not rigorous enough

the things you learn in your lab courses are not really needed for employers..... complete meme. either work in a sigma-aldrich lab or go into masters -> phd -> teaching stuck in cycle.

>>9002703
Is organic chemistry being hard the biggest meme ever?

>>9004270
>Okay here goes... ChemE is a meme degree. They don't understand organic chemistry enough to make real process improvements. My current project is projected to take the cost-per-kilogram of a specific API from $63 to $3 which saves the company millions, and only because I'm an expert in transition metal catalyzed reactions. The ChemE's here do our bitch work like writing batch records, filling out deviation reports (i.e. when someone/something fucks up a cGMP process an investigation is opened), managing the reactor flow, and being the 'face' of manufacturing in general.
>What sucks is that as the 'face' of manufacturing, when things go really well in the plant they're the ones who get the credit. When things go terrible, everyone's like "what the fuck is wrong with this chemistry!?". So the problem with my job is visibility, which I try to fix myself by saving fucking millions of dollars. Anyways... back to your questions.
>The best route for a science-focused career is this: BS Chemistry from whatever university wherever (seriously it doesn't matter), PhD from an Ivy league school in NATURAL PRODUCT SYNTHESIS. The reason is simple, natural product synthesis was the ONLY field of synthesis back in the day, all those PhD's from back in the day that discovered blockbuster drugs are the presidents/CEO's/directors of R&D today - so they like to keep to their inner circle of natural products. Sucks because I was transition metals, and I'm smarter then most of the natural product guys.

You're fucking amazing, thank you for all of this food for thought. I guess I have a lot more research to do, but I now feel like I'm heading somewhere where I can finally make the most of my time.

Final question: what is the income like? I have to find a way to balance flexibility, passion, and income because family life is a priority for me.

>>9004286
Sorry, I also have another final question. What do you think about the market for chemistry PhDs in general? A lot of people seem to report that competition is high, openings are low, and pay is mediocre. Is it only a problem for PhDs with specializations that aren't valuable on the job market? Is it systemic and only the best connected and pedigreed get jobs? I'm not sure how I should proceed in a way that keeps my prospects stable.

>>9003082
Nobody has taken the Ivies seriously for at least the last decade, so probably not.

>>9004318
I would say upper-middle class out of your PhD, I would probably project my career to put me in the top 5% of earners in the next 15 years. Maybe never in the 1%, but that realm is mostly for the business world and I like science.

There is a problem though... Work-life balance is extremely hard to negotiate. In grad school the hours suck, like 12 hours per day 7 days a week at Ivy league schools. If you don't work that hard, you wont keep up. A lot of PhD's take that same lifestyle with them to the industry, and it ruins it for everyone else. I strive to work 40-45 hours a week, but it's hard when Xiong Mong will work 60-80 hours just because he doesn't care about his family (or maybe doesn't even have one).

>>9004321
The market is iffy. If you have a good PI, they'll find you a job. They have friends or alumni who can get you in. That's why it's extremely important, and I forgot to mention it earlier, that you NEVER pick a new professor as a PI. They have no connections. A new professor at Princeton is 100x worse then an old (famous/semifamous) professor at a no-name school.

Also should mention that many new PhD's will do post-doc work. This is okay, it's considered like kind-of-sort-of experience on an industrial level, but overall while you post-doc you should be working 12 hours a day and looking for jobs 6 hours a day. And never post-doc more then 1 year, ever.

Recent chemistry/mathematics graduate here. I was accepted into chemistry grad school for organometallic/inorganic at a top 10 program. Since accepting the offer, I've read countless anecdotes/articles about how getting a chemistry PhD sucks and doesn't really lead to great opportunities. If I'm being honest with myself, I don't really even like chemistry that much. However, I'm thinking that if I don't do it, I'll never amount to anything important in the world. Does anybody know of reputable/reasonable career paths for someone like me? (Hardmode: Don't want to work in business/management)

Also, OP, I would advise majoring in chemistry unless you're truly fascinated by it as it's not very general. If you do major in chemistry, try to pair it with computer science or a BS in math.

The MS program I'm looking at offers a specialization in bioinformatics. How are career prospects there/should I go for it?

>>9004339
why would you advise for majoring in chemistry if replicating your success means going to an ivy league...

>>9004508
Apparently there is a huge demand for bioinformaticians, I'd say it's a pretty good idea.

File: .eJwNyMENgzAMAMBdMkCMjaGBX4dA6jcKaYgENYrdV9Xd4Z73c9-2u9ltZqfOAGvVJG31atJiyb6IlD3Hs6pPckA0i2k78scUepxGGhin0I38YGKCnojwro4ZkYYQAjxJF3uJL_Xt.gif (349KB, 302x320px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 302x320px

>>9004073

>tfw DNA folded over 1000 thousands cuts through brainlets like a hot knife to butter.

>>9002286

Chemistry major here.

Don't do it. Pay is low, finding a job is hard.

Plus you get normies asking if you work in a pharmacy 24/7. Not worth it.

>>9004679
Because I'm already at an Ivy caliber school and I asked for advice given my resources?

>>9002070
Do mat sci and go on to grad school

>>9002696
ChemE has a ded job market because pretty much all their fields are doing bad right now.

>>9002724
No, if you want to do petro you have to do Chem

>>9004795
Did you go to grad school?

>>9004073
It's such an obvious point even a high schooler can get it. Studying chemistry is like studying meta biology and if you transition over to biology afterwards you can learn everything fucking easily. Can't be said for the other way around. Biology is applied chemistry learn to be ok with it friend.

>>9004073
Hahahaha sitting in your mom's basement with 'folding@home' running doesn't count you god damn normie

>>9004679
He asked for the best possible route. I didn't go to an Ivy league school and as I posted I'm still relatively successful, especially for having a job I enjoy.

I went to a tier 1 school though, and my PI has 300+ publications, NIH grant money until he retires, and was/is a member of the scientific advisory board for where I got my job. Obviously Ivy league famous dudes have even more pull, and can get you into an even more comfortable position.

Also as I said, people get the wrong impression that a BS in Chemistry is worthless. It can get you a good job, and you can very quickly increase your worth if you're lucky and the right positions open up (assuming you have the chops to be a manager). I started working in industry with a BS, and was on track to move up quickly, but after 2 years the grad. school pull finally won out and I went back. I don't regret it at all, it's a very good decision to make (plus you get paid to be a grad student, so you can pay off loan debt if you're fiscally responsible). So I came out of grad school with no loan debt, a PhD, and a comfortable job. Not to bad.

>>9004837
Where are good chemistry jobs located throughout the USA, like the ones you've described? I seriously hope I don't have to live in California, Boston, or any other extremely liberal, extremely crowded, and extremely expensive urban areas.

>>9004832
I wouldn't mind an alternative to a BS in Chemistry that's oriented towards biotech, as long as I can still find some sort of useful chemistry in it. I always thought that biology was applied chemistry in practice, but it seems like the demand for pure chemists is low, and I don't really know of any other compromises or niches that could make me valuable.

>>9002070
I wonder if it would be possible for someone Double Major in ECE & ChemE (Electrical & Computer Engineering + Chemical Engineering)

But seems that doing that is very suicidal.

>>9004845
Wrt your second point, I understand what you're saying, but it's not necessarily the case.

Pharmaceutical companies looking to hire medicinal chemists will, more often than not, hire natural product/ total synthesis chemists - about as pure as it gets in ochem. There are plenty of 'medicinal chemists' available but at an early career stage their chemistry is just not up to scratch. They hire exceptional natural products chemists and anything else they need to learn can be learned on the job.

>>9004858
Will it help to have some sort of additional knowledge in biochemistry when pursuing the natural product specialization? What about having other niches such as machine learning and computational chemistry? Also, are you familiar with molecular engineering?

How's the job market for computational chemists? I hope the coding/computer math/whatever skills I am learning will let me jump ship and work in a bank or something if chemistry doesn't work out.

>>9004919
Honestly natural product synthesis is so difficult that you'd only have the time to be able to learn additional subjects at a rudimentary level.

Everything is a meme if you have the wrong attitude. I know people who are unemployment with Stem PhDs and I know liberal arts majors making millions in finance, it's about your inner game and not about your credentials.

>he did a chemistry degree and didn't plan on going to grad school
>his grad school research project doesn't involve some engineering skills / application

>>9004955
>I know liberal arts majors making millions in finance
Why? Because Favoritism / Nepotism

Liberal arts majors with "Rich Daddy, Mommy or Uncle" working at a Company owned by "Daddy or Uncle".

File: 1381021888690.png (125KB, 765x638px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 765x638px

>>9004832
>he literally thinks the meme in pic related is true
/sci/ anno 2017, folks.

>>9002070

Analytical chemistry jobs are the most prevalent and accessible for chem grads.

If you do well at university, you'll be able to get into an analytical role at a big pharma company. From there, most doors will be open for you.

>>9004938
This is what I hate. Natural product synthesis is NOT hard, it's tedious. It was hard back in the day and it's perpetuated that it's hard by people that just assume it's still hard. What Phil Barron does is great, but that fucker and his little minions work 24/7 to just force chemistry out the door. It's just rats in a lab, no invention is occurring. The work they do is wonderful, don't get me wrong, but just looking at it you know that they just open a book to "stereoselective carbonyl reductions" and just go through the list until something sticks - and they do that for every step in their 30 step synthesis. Stuff like this has no parallel in industry.

Now what Buchwald, Hartwig, Sharpless, Grubbs, etc... do (not sure if any of these dudes have retired yet, but whatever) is invention - and they're not natural product guys. Industry is changing slowly as well, in 15-30 years only transition metal grads will find work in big pharma as the natural product generation is going to retire in that time.

>>9006043
>Industry is changing slowly as well, in 15-30 years only transition metal grads will find work in big pharma as the natural product generation is going to retire in that time.
Why would that be if they're retiring? Wouldn't that open more positions in natural product synthesis, not less?

>>9004169
>Thank you for the warning about p-chem et. al.

took pchem/qm earlier this year, i thought i was gonna fuck it up but i aced it and it got me a sweet summer job

my point is, if you like something go for it, pchem is tricky but just study

>>9004339
>I strive to work 40-45 hours a week, but it's hard when Xiong Mong will work 60-80 hours
then stop being a lazy fucking fatass

>>9006760
I'd rather slave for my children than slave for Schlomo. Nobody is working an effective 60-80 hours per week, these H1B dunces simply don't have lives and are playing office politics.

Is it realistic to be a chemist and be able to find employment in the Midwest or the South? I'd really like to find a comfy job in Nashville, Minneapolis, or somewhere else /comfy/. If it is literally impossible to find a job outside California, New York, or any other urbanized expensive hellhole, then I might as well go to med school.

>>9005483
There aren't enough "Company owned by Daddy or Uncle" existant for this to be as true for the reason liberal arts majors can make millions in finance. The way they get those jobs is much simpler and fucking stupid. The people who do the hiring and firing at IBs (where you can make millions) recruit almost purely off of the prestige of the school, then whether or not they like the person.

File: 06d519b2d17427933b1a8257f53d6c608cdc7b6430072a458c36da83a7820f26.jpg (23KB, 592x438px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 592x438px

>be me
>chem. engineering Ba
>1st semester
>uni offers a 32 year old lecture note for organic chemistry studies
>it's written with a type writer
>black and white illustrations
>there are complete sentences missing because of the bad scanning


Chemfags please recommend me a book on organic chemistry.

File: images.jpg (79KB, 771x1080px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 771x1080px

>>9006785

Why are people using the term biochemistry as though it means biological chemistry? It's not the same thing.

>>9006795
This.
You beat me to it.

>>9006803
What's the difference then?

>>9006630
Natural product synthesis doesn't exist in industry, they just prefer that academic path for PhD's because all the top dogs were natural product chemists in grad school.

>>9006776
PhD guy here, I work in the midwest. You can get a job anywhere, there's just like 10x more jobs on the coasts.

>>9006803
>>9006848
What's the difference between biochemistry, biological chemistry, and chemical biology?

>>9006870
Also, why the fuck aren't they more integrated? Why should there be three different specializations over roughly the same subject area?

>>9006871
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_biology

google is your friend, friend

>>9006899
I did Google it. I just don't get the need for a distinction. You'd think the same foundational knowledge would be consistent across these disciplines.

>>9002070
if you knock him out, he wins

>>9006917
They're nearly identical, especially at undergrad level

>>9007775
Well then why am I getting berated?

>>9002263
What about a minor?

>>9002070
Honestly if you want to work in biotech I see several options:
Organic synthesis
Experimental biology
Engineering
CS/computational biology

If you choose one of the first two you better like the lab work.

What about research? How do you get into it?

>>9007906
What about computational chemistry and molecular engineering? If I go the safe route of analytical chemistry, is it feasible to switch between specializations later on?

>>9006870
Biochem and biological chemistry are synonyms for describing and investigating different chemical processes in organisms.

Chemical biology is probing these processes using bespoke organic molecules and is also described as chemical genetics. It's heavily ochem based.

>>9008906
do you love chemistry or do you wanna make money doing chemistry

>>9008907
Both. I don't mind doing any chemistry because figuring out how the world works through chemistry is a lot of fun. It's like the perfect mix of theory and application of theory, since it seems easy to bring yourself from the properties at the microscopic level to explain properties at macroscopic level. Unfortunately, I also want to raise a family and be middle-class, so if there's no real hope of getting a decent-paying job with good hours in a flexible location, then I want to know in advance that I'm wasting my time and should do something else.

>>9008046
Wouldn't biochemistry be heavily ochem based as well? Is the difference that biochemistry does more stamp-collecting WRT the various chemical processes in the body, while chemical biologists are more focused on perfecting their theoretical/applied knowledge of chemistry so they can learn to alter biological systems?

>>>9008046
>Wouldn't biochemistry be heavily ochem based as well? Is the difference that biochemistry does more stamp-collecting WRT the various chemical processes in the body, while chemical biologists are more focused on perfecting their theoretical/applied knowledge of chemistry so they can learn to alter biological systems?

It's ochem based in the sense that you're getting to know all these reactions in the body but the wet lab work you do on a day to day basis is not ochem, it's molecular biology. With chemical biology your day to day is organic synthesis

>>9008965
>It's ochem based in the sense that you're getting to know all these reactions in the body but the wet lab work you do on a day to day basis is not ochem, it's molecular biology. With chemical biology your day to day is organic synthesis

What if I want to do both? Are biochemists reliant on chemical biologists for new methodology and materials in their wet lab work?

>What if I want to do both? Are biochemists reliant on chemical biologists for new methodology and materials in their wet lab work?
>>9008967

I'm not a biochemist so I'm talking out of my comfort zone but my perception is they use regular biological techniques such as gene manipulation through knockdowns, flow cytometry and etc, but that's much more dependant on lab and institution and the pathways/disease/disorder you're investigating.

it seems to me that you're a tad fixated on biochemistry/chemical biology/molecular engineering

labels don't mean much as you keep studying

my advice is to go ahead with a chemistry major and then specialize yourself in what you think you enjoy

I thought my thing was biochemistry, but now I find myself enjoying physical chemistry a lot

>>9008981
I agree. I started in synthetic organic and moved through medchem and now I'm starting a postdoc in biology. I almost think it's better this way. The options are there for sure for people who want to translate across subjects

>>9008981
>>9008986

It seems like I am. It's the tightest shit out there. Imagine understanding the neurobiological processes of the brain, including how it connects to the observable psychological processes like memory and learning. Then imagine designing and synthesizing a drug to induce changes during the retrieval of memories by extending the encoding period, altering memory and learning, but only when we want it to thanks to some chemical or physical trigger built into the molecular structure. We're already able to somewhat manipulate this process in rats to the extent that we may soon be able to treat people with PTSD (which is, after all, a learning problem where one cannot un-learn traumatic associations because of how ingrained they've become). I feel like molecular engineering is the way of the future.

I think the safest bet is to just get through the basics of a chemistry degree and get my feet wet in all sorts of labwork and specializations. See where that takes me.

What do you guys think about inorganic chemistry?

Current inorganic chem / materials science PhD student here to share a couple thoughts, as I think about this career oriented stuff in chemistry a lot.

The best fields from what I can tell are organometallics (you learn lots of difficult chemistry both theoretical and practical practices) , materials, analytical, and some organic/biochem labs.

First off, you need to understand the biggest meme in chem is organic chemistry. Everyone wants to do fucking organic chem. Total synthesis is a dying art and from what I can tell the job market is flooded with people with an organic PhD. Not to mention you can easily get all the skills you would learn in an organic lab from an inorganic/organometallics lab.

Organometallics / inorganic for this reason is all the better. You will become well versed in air sensitive chemistry, pyrophorric materials, wacky metal chemistry shit that rarely plays a role in organic, and a broader range of applications than "I want to make a drug". Your organic knowledge has to be top notch as well. Don't be fooled, you can't just not know organic because that isn't your field.

Materials is awesome because the field is such a gray area with engineering. Materials chemists, scientists, and engineers work closely together. I'm somewhere between a materials chemist and materials scientist (I work in both an inorganic lab and engineering lab) and I am becoming well versed in a shitload of data analysis techniques, instrumentation, and knowledge that would normally be confined to one lab or another. On top of that, I get to make functional materials and test the viability of the thing I made. It's fucking sick.

Analytical has jobs for days, but is incredibly boring. Full of boring people. Full of uninteresting work to be honest. Some people go for it I guess. Good for them.

Physical / computational is useless in industry outside of a few companies. I think Boeing hires a lot of pchemists probably for thermodynamics, but otherwise useless

>>9009539

So where does that put someone doing organometallics that doesn't have top notch organic knowledge? Useless?

>>9009539
>Materials is awesome because the field is such a gray area with engineering. Materials chemists, scientists, and engineers work closely together. I'm somewhere between a materials chemist and materials scientist (I work in both an inorganic lab and engineering lab) and I am becoming well versed in a shitload of data analysis techniques, instrumentation, and knowledge that would normally be confined to one lab or another. On top of that, I get to make functional materials and test the viability of the thing I made. It's fucking sick.
You're right, that sounds fucking awesome. How did you get to where you are today?

>>9009539
Well of course you think this, you're still a grad student and have no useful experience in the industry.

Fact of the matter is that in chemistry, pharma is king. Because of that, organic is king. The market is only saturated if you're on an H1B visa (~75% of organic grad students in my experience), otherwise you're golden. H1B's will never find a job until they have a greencard, which is what they usually figure out while they post-doc.

Inorganic has some opportunities with polymers, but organic chemist are better equipped for the job since inorganic grad. school experience is generally in some bullshit niche field. It's also boring. (I know many people who went into polymers, both organic and inorganic)

Organometallic is fine, it's just depends on what you focused on. If you're metal-focused you're screwed, if you focus on the organic portion (application/discovery) you're good to go. Buchwald is a good example, his chemistry and the chemistry his grad students focus on has wide application and is based around new reactions and reaction efficiency - thus his students find great jobs (and get to name ligands after themselves).

Anyways in my opinion the best chemistry job in the industry right now is organic process development. You have job security as you don't have to worry about your therapeutic area being canned (medicinal), you have high visibility (reduce cost), decent pay, and because you're modeling reaction for scale-up you get to play with all sorts of fun equipment. Your mileage may vary though.

>>9005509
It is though.
It's also true that mathematicians make terrible biologists, and even worse chemists.

>>9005509
No it's not true. For example, the schrödinger equation is not analytically solvable for large systems, so you need to make assumptions and approximations, and these come from classical chemistry.
Similarly, you use empirical knowledge for MD force-fields for proteins. Using the same force-fields for RNAs for example lead to completely shitty results.

>>9009931
Fuck, that was meant for >>9009915

>>9009899
>organic process development

I would argue that a lot of more interesting process development uses transition metals to catalyze enantioselective reactions. But I don't know. You're right I am just a grad student.

What do you think about materials outside of academia (non polymer)? Like I said that's my field. I have a lot of experience of different instrumentation, engineering knowledge, and synthetic chemistry involving metals.

Maybe Burger King.

>>9009944
You're right! It's just that pharma prefers natural product chemists because of historical reasons that I posted above. Being able to shorten a synthesis by even 1 step using transition metal catalyst can save millions.

Non-polymer materials is difficult, because chemistry in industry is pharma > oil > polymers and then really everything drops off. You have to evaluate the jobs vs. grads numbers, and yes organic has the most grads, but also the most jobs by far. If there are 10,000 materials chemists in the US, look to see what jobs they can occupy in the industry vs. academic. Look at where grad students in your field have gone post graduation. That gives you an idea.

You should worry that BS engineers will occupy all of your job opportunities though, your PhD in reality is going to count for nothing even if they say "PhD = 4 years experience".

>tfw chemistry is the only thing I'm good at
>job outlook is bleak as fuck
So a few questions for anons here
>what's it's like being analytical chemist
I don't mind lab work at all. In fact I kinda hoping to spend maybe a year of my life doing mindless lab works, simply because I have to deal with a bit less responsibilities
>do BS chemist get to work in analytical chemistry lab right away?
>how about the job prospect in quality control/water treatment plants?
I lives near a big ass city and I was thinking they need people like that to keep the water clean
>I also want to get a PhD in nuclear chemistry, is that even a realistic goal?

>>9010084
i dont know if it counts for anything, but my field is electrochemistry and more generally batteries which I make novel active materials for. I have looked for jobs and there seems to be a few options out there along with a more general application of the skills im picking up. There are a few people who do the same work as me that I collaborate with and they seem to be getting interviews. thoughts?

>>9004795
Do you work in a pharmacy?

File: ARM-Chip.jpg (85KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1500x1000px

>>9009899 >>9002070

But how about Material Science/Eng, Nanotechnology & Physical Chemistry?

They make things like Semiconductors for Electronic Industry, Solar Panels, Superconductors.

Also things like Composite Materials for Aerospace (Rockets, Stealth, Drones, new Aircraft)

Graphene & OLEY (Although I think Organic Chemists may be more suited for the Job rather than Material Scientists depending n Circumstances)

So much different things.

Is Electronic Material Underrated if compared to Organic?

Can Someone earn more with Electronic Materials than Pharma?

ARM Chip Manufacture seems pretty comfy. Or It isn't?

>>9002070
People with degrees in law/business/management etc. drove the industry into the fucking ground. They took over big companies then invested huge amounts of money into memes.

They took over the companies despite knowing fuck all about pharmaceutics/biotechnology and directed the companies towards shit like Six Sigma, kinases and "me-too"ceuticals.

Product pipelines dried up, patents expired, cashflow slowed down and the people who suffered were the R&D scientists. Management continued to get paid big money, marketers and lawyers kept getting work but R&D funding was decreased.

The industry will always exist, but until there is a big shakeup and some actual scientists take over the decision making processes there won't be much growth.

>>9010826
I second this chap's questions because I, too, am looking at analytical/instrumental chemistry.

>>9009840
I was a chemistry major, i went to grad school, and decided to do a project that had an active collaboration between two labs on campus. both professors agreed it would be beneficial for me to learn the ins and outs of both labs and here I am.

>>9009711
you cant do organometallics without organic knowledge. synthetic chemistry just doesnt work without organic.

>>9009899
i dont know if i buy this...

im also a grad student and there are many organic chemists here that complain about the job market up and down. I see other labs (like materials or analytical) doing fine, but organic people seem to have trouble. it doesnt help that almost all of the internet resources we have without actually working in industry say "organic is a shit show right now". I know the market changes wildly and often, but I see analytical and even inorganic getting more opportunities (internships, jobs, etc.) than organic does. the number of organic labs dwarfs the number of inorganic. i think theres like 1 or 2 here compared to 20 organic labs.

>>9011029
>grad school
Exactly.

Finding a job is always hard, but where you're in a field with thousands of more opportunities you have a much better chance. Inorganic is okay too, don't get me wrong, it's just that what you work on in industry is going to be pleb level compared to grad school. It's the other way around for organic chemists, so it's more fulfilling for me as a scientist personally.

And analytical does have a ton of jobs, in big pharma. You know what they do all day long? Wait for HPLC runs to finish and do the bidding of the organic PhD's. I'd rather shoot myself in the head then be an analytical chemist.

How easy is it to change specializations, like going from an analytical chemist to an organometallic chemist? Also, what is the "master race" chemistry specialization if we're going to take the piss out of each other?

Become a fucking engineer first.

Youll spend thousands of dollars working with autists to get your grad studies.

Itll be a masters or phd before you can get an entry level job without engineering qualifications.

Remember, non-professional degrees only qualify you for more education.

If your plan is contingent on special snowflake status, get a real job as an engineer and youll see potential employers give you respect before you even hand in a resume

>>9011299
Why would I become an engineer first? Do you mean chemical engineer? One person said that he became an ubermensch's chemical engineer thanks to his in-depth specialization in organic chemistry because he actually understood enough of the science to make alterations that saved significant amounts of money.

>>9011135
>I'd rather shoot myself in the head than be an analytical chemist

I have been known to say this word for word on the regular whenever someone asks me about interesting labs to join.

>>9011283
Organic will say they are master race
Inorganic will say they are master race
Pchem will say they are master race

Computational and analytical will look at their shoes and shuffle their feet back in the corner quietly

imma bash your skull in you racist

>>9011283
Depends on where you're at in your academic career. Once you're in the industry, no chance.

If you still doing your undergrad and just focused on analytical for capstones, it's easy to switch to organic (organometallic is just a subset of organic). If you're in grad school, it's more complicated. Your research would be trashed, so if you're 2 years in or more settle for a masters and apply to a new grad school (if your GPA is high, aim for a top 10 PI).

File: image.gif (16KB, 218x149px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 218x149px

How are we doing today, my fellow chemists?

>>9013073

Depressed as usual

>>9013948
chemshits BTFO

>>9004795
Do you work in a pharmacy 24/7?

>>9004795
Do you work in a pharmacy 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Or do you work normal hours in a pharmacy that's open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week?

>>9008973
It really depends on what field of biochemistry you're working in.
A protein chemist will spend more time doing unfolding and binding experiments, NMR etc. than doing molecular biology.

>>9002070
Major in materials science and condensed matter physics. Invent room temperature superconductors.

>>9016765
It really is just that easy my dude :^)

File: 612px-C60-Fulleren-kristallin.jpg (84KB, 612x599px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 612x599px

>>9016765

Fullerene?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fullerene

Graphene?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphene

Carbon nanotubes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotube

Buckminsterfullerene? [math]C_{60}[/math]?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckminsterfullerene

Pretty good thread, wish I had found it earlier. Tons of stuff to chew on.

I'm in my fourth year in a biochemistry PhD program. Before grad school, took a few years off. Job hopped in industry my first year or two out, then went back to academia to work as a tech. Finished a chemistry and molecular biology major around seven years ago.

I can speak to life sciences industry: big pharma and biotech. With only a BA/BS, a huge hurdle is getting your first job. You may be able to land QA/QC jobs and maybe get in smaller biotechs or CROS, but you won't be getting an RA position in big pharma or a famed biotech (say, Genentech) without a good two - four years of post-undergrad research experience. Competition for these jobs is tough. My advice has been to get a few years of lab experience in academia under your belt. You will have more autonomy and will be holding bigger roles, juggling or helping out more projects. When you have the BA/BS + 2 - 4 yrs experience, you have opened a number of doors that were not available just out of undergrad. Of my cohort of techs (various labs in the department, etc.), we scattered off to PhD programs, MD programs, MD/PhDs, RA positions in industry, consulting, business development, etc.

When it comes to the job market for PhDs, I'll get back to you in several years (hoping I finish soon).

>>9017619
What was the pay like? The work conditions? Why did you decide to go to grad school?

Continued from >>9017619

>>9004244
>Also, I forgot: what about biochemistry/synthetic chemistry/chemical biology (or whatever I should be calling it... the combination of all 3?)... is there much of an industrial market for that specialization?

Biochemistry, as we all know, is a broad discipline. With regards to industry R&D, there is plenty of research which falls under that umbrella. Genentech, which has built and maintained a reputation for basic research, has an Early Discovery Biochemistry department.

Like biochemistry, we all know with synthetic chemistry is.

Chemical biology is a smaller sub-discipline, most frequently within chemistry departments. It is defined, more or less, as studying and probing biological systems using tools from organic chemistry. You can think of it this way: characterizing a protein-protein interaction by, say, alanine-scanning is biochemistry; inhibiting the interaction is chemical biology.

>>9006870
>What's the difference between biochemistry, biological chemistry, and chemical biology?

Biological chemistry and biochemistry are, essentially, the same. The only reasons, in my experience, why a department would prefer to refer to itself as "biological chemistry" would be out of tradition, or if the chair doesn't like shortening "biological" to "bio-".

Biochemistry is a broad discipline, studying the chemical processes of biological organisms. Chemical biology is a smaller sub-discipline, studying or probing biological pathways or systems using tools from organic chemistry. So, for example, studying the structure and function and molecular basis of a protein-protein interaction is biochemistry. And, inhibiting that interaction with a small molecule is chemical biology.

>>9008967
>What if I want to do both? Are biochemists reliant on chemical biologists for new methodology and materials in their wet lab work?

This will vary based on what sort of R&D is done, and how the firm or institution structures itself.

>>9017636
I'll speak my sister she took Biochem and graduated with distinction. Her first job out of school she did QA for a specialty paint company. Then QA for a food company. Now she does QA for a liquor company. The people who work in the manufacturing side(high school diplomas) they all make more than her and work less hours she is salaried. Granted her work is not taxing on the body. So uhh bachelors degree doesn't pay well and she is a woman with top grades. Go into medicine if you can or get some practical experience and get your MBA.

>>9017649
I'll speak for my sister**

>>9017636
>What was the pay like? The work conditions? Why did you decide to go to grad school?

In smaller biotech firms or CROs, most of the RA jobs were temp, around $15 - 20/hr, with an opportunity to go full-time if things worked out and their budgets allowed. There were no benefits (no health insurance or dental insurance, etc.) QC/QA jobs paid about the same, but your odds of getting full-time work were better because the companies were a bit larger and more established. That said, QA/QC jobs didn't have much room for advancement. This was back around 2010 to 2012, for what it's worth.

One thing I forgot to mention in my earlier post is that you'll hit ceiling in industry R&D without a PhD. Unless you are, say, the n-th person in a start-up and you are a rock star and everyone loves you, you're not going to be running a research group or be a director in industry without a PhD. I've known a few associate or assistant scientists or scientist-Is (all similar, more or less, as a first-level scientist) without a PhD, with maybe a tech or two underneath them. Not much more or much else, though.

Work conditions were fine for smaller biotechs and CROs. Pretty much 9-to-5 (or, 8-to-6) hours. Might work alongside a BA/BS or two, under a PhD. Otherwise, pretty run-of-the-mill workplace stuff for the most part. You're not at a multi-billion dollar firm like Genentech with massive perks and company-sponsored parties and what not, but you're not at a start-up sleeping in the office and fixing the printer with duct tape on a shoestring budget. Same goes for personalities. Some good people, some not so good people. Nothing you wouldn't see elsewhere, IMO.

Decided to go to grad school because I had a genuine interest in doing basic research in academia (driving a project, publishing findings, etc.), and because it would open doors that would allow me to pursue my career goals in R&D.