Does big pharma care about organometallics? Would Paul Ehrlich find a job in today's drug discovery climate?
371080
Organometallics are very important in pharmaceuticals.\nThey can be used to make synthetic haemoglobin which is used to transport oxygen around in the blood stream.
130748
I have been in US pharma for over 11 years- some of it in sales. The best question I had used was- " Doctor, what do you think is the number 1 concern of your ??????? patients"- use that as a foot in the door to position your drug
686965
migs is correct.\n\nFor just a qualitative identification of functional groups, IR is the best for organic (and some inorganic) compounds. You load it in and, a few minutes later, you have a spectrum that tells you what groups you have. (assuming your compound is reasonably pure)
274321
Some chemists, especially organic chemists or biochemists.
949928
I think this is an interesting question.  Surprisingly, I think the answer is yes for some properties.  I don't have data in front of me (my books are at the office), but I'll bet that if you compare densities of homologous compounds in a group, you'd find that the density increases along with the density of the main constituent atoms.  I'll also bet that there are spectroscopic properties that are retained -- those relating to the inner shells.  In addition, there are tests used by mineralogists to detect the presence of common constituent metals in different minerals; a common example is the sodium "D" emission that causes a yellow flame in a fire when sodium is present regardless of the counterion.  In inorganic chemistry I seem to remember endless graphs of periodic properties that we used as a mnemonic device, but that was too many years ago to remember them.\n\nIf I wanted to look into it on the internet, I'd do a search on "periodic properties of the elements."  Also, geochemists are wonderful for collecting data and putting together tables of such things, and undergraduate inorganic textbooks may be helpful for finding some as well.
38958
Each have their strong points.\n\nOrganic - pharmaceutical research\n\nInorganic - superconductor research\n\nAnalytical - environmental\n\nPolymer - development of new plastics\n\nPhysical... OK, so I can't think of much for this one.  I couldn't even when I took it in college.  Most of us sat around asking "But what will we USE it for??"
396643
anything in the pharmaceutical industry would pay very well.. \nOther big chemical companies include Dow, 3M, DuPont, BASF.. who make pretty much everything from herbicides to hydrocarbons\n\nIf I were you I would go into the energy career since it is getting so much attention
1097619
The area of chemistry that does this is synthetic organic chemistry. It really only came into its own in the latter half of the 20th century, but is a mainstay of the modern pharmaceutical industry.\n\nIt turns out that some drugs can be easily extracted from natural sources (like penicillin), while others cannot. The potent anti-cancer drug Taxol is made in yew trees, but it would take many ancient yew trees to provide enough Taxol for a single dose. As a result, once a compound has been identified as medically useful, chemists will devise strategies to make the molecule using a series of carefully designed chemical reactions.\n\nIn other cases, by synthesizing the drug slight changes in its structure can be introduced. For example, slight changes in penicillin have given us ampicillin, amoxicillin, ticarcillin and the cephalosporins. While all of these work in a manner similar to penicillin, they have very different anti-microbial activity and can kill certain species of bacteria that are resistant to penicillin.\n\nWithout synthetic organic chemistry, much of modern medicine would not exist.
174049
I'd like to encourage you to learn chemisrty instead. The alchemists tried and tried to make lead into gold and similar things. Now we know that it cannot be done. They wasted their time. Don't waste yours. Learn and make something of yourself.
1022038
It is often alledged that all forms of animal testing could be replaced by other means. However other means are often left vague.\n\nThere are computer simulation techniques to try to select appropriate molecules but all they do is whittle dosn the list of probable compounds which might work. Some of them are int he public domain (look at http://www.grid.org/download/gold/download.htm) soem are complex private modelling tools.\n\nBut they are not comprhensive. I have friends who work for the Pharmaceutical Industry * medics, all without exception say there is no way they would trust a new compund that hadn't been tested before use. They are open about how it can be tested, but make the point that the human body is a complex mechanism, it cannot be simulated by computer, nor by cellular level trials. sometimes the side effecxts (and most compounds do have side effects) are seen in other parts of the body than expected, or can\nbe more severe than predicted.\n\nI don't think there is anyone who would condone testing of cosmetics and beauty products on animals (which are relativel easy to test on human volunteers, after all skin cells can be effectively tested, but pharamceutical compounds?\n\nThere may be a day when such compounds can be tested entirely in a computer, but I don't think its any where near there (yet). Simply we do not have enough information to create a realistic simulation model. Even so I'd still be very reluctant to be the first user of such a compound.
641083
if u have been speking of Pharma industry in india i should be saying "it rocks". if u see the acquisitions amde by pharma it suggests that indian pharma r fast expanding and exploring into european and the US markets. the r&d expenditure was raised by all the pharma companies...almost all the top companies have some potentila patents in hands while most patents of the US companis will be expired by 2008-2010. this becomes a major advantage fo indian phrama companies which are known for generic and bulk drugs.\n\n\nso its hey day for indian pharma sector
273309
wat r u ppl talking about....u ppl r absolutely wrong.....its alkynes n i am 100% sure about\n\nthey r more reactive becoz of there triple bonds...\n\n\n2 ppl in a row a row giving a wrong answer can confuse a person completely
708668
Que Paso Gringo,\n\nWith all due respect to the other participants answering this question, WHAT THE HELL IS SO GOOD AND EFFECTIVE ABOUT SCIENTIFICALY PROVEN CHEMO AND RADIATION?\n\nIm a natural health practitioner and people who state that EDTA CHELATION its not PROVEN or not SCIENTIFICALY APPROVED are obviously ignorant and have never had the insidious deisease nor have any of their friends or relatives, and God forbid they do, cause those SCIENTIFICALY PROVEN alopathic methods surely will cause an extreme amount of damage besides burning all cells, good and bad, in the system.\n\nI have used EDTA successfuly for Diabetics and Cancer patients along with a proper PH balance and stress control, all contributing factors to any disease.\n\nNone other than a true American Hero such as Dr. Linus Pauling have endorsed EDTA CHELATION for effective non invasive cancer treatments. Linus Pauling, PhD is the only person ever to have received 2 FULL, UNSHARED Nobel Prizes. He was one of the world's greatest biochemists and scientists. Before his death he wrote and researched extensively in the field of alternative and nutritional medicine.\n\nFor more than twenty years Dr. Pauling devoted most of his time to research and educate in the fields of nutrition and preventive medicine. He wrote and lectured extensively about simple, safe and inexpensive measures to improve the length and quality of life. In his recent books, How to Live Longer and Feel Better, he covered that subject at length. \n\nDr. Pauling stated that EDTA chelation therapy fits in well with his views on health care. SO IF THE ESTEEMED FELLOWS ANSWERING THIS QUESTION CAN CALL DR. PAULING A QUACK then it confirms their motives for writing such a ridiculous statement for all the world to see. \n\nAmigo, EDTA is not normally present in the human body and is therefore, by definition, not an Orthomolecular substance. Chelation, however, is far safer and much less expensive than surgical treatments for atherosclerosis. Physicians who adhere to the protocol for safe and effective administration of EDTA, as approved and promulgated by the American College of Advancement in Medicine, integrate the results of the proven research into their chelation program. \n\nThat protocol is published in its entirety fro any medical prefsional or potential patient to review. Improved nutrition and supplementation with vitamins and trace elements is an important part of the overall chelation program. \n\nEDTA chelation therapy makes good sense, It has a rational scientific basis, and the evidence for clinical benefit seems to be quite strong. Metallic ions play an important role in the formation of atherosclerotic plaque. EDTA removes those ions with relative safety and without surgery. Published research and extensive clinical experience show that EDTA helps to reduce and prevent atherosclerotic plaques, thus improving blood flow to the heart and other organs. The scientific evidence indicates that a course of EDTA chelation therapy might eliminate the need for bypass surgery. Chelation has an equally valid rationale for use as a preventive treatment. \n\nFurthermore, yet ANOTHER Nobel Prize winner, and yes this Doctor also won 2 Nobel Prizes, one in 1931 and the other in 1938, Dr. Otto Werberg of Germany, who discovered that cancer is formed when the cells and tissues are "anaerobic", with out sufficent oxygen. EDTA chelation accelerates de detox process removing the excess acid in the body, thereby raising the Alkaline level or oxigen level for all functions of the body and once this is achieved, no way that any tumor, harmful bacteria, germs, parasites or fungus can stay alive in the body, it all now gets naturaly excreted by the waste system.\n\nTherefore, the decision should be obvious, use an alternative treatment that is LEGAL and EFFECTIVE, that costs considerably less than traditional alopathic methods and DOES not cause any secondary damage to the body.\n\nAt your service
15266
I'm not sure about cars in our pockets, but nanotech is already happening, and yes it is changing our lives. In its simplest form, materials tailored at the nanolevel (a primitive nanotech) are already in stores. Nanomedicine, especially lab-on-a-chip technology is partially available and promises to revolutionize the way we do medicine. I don't know about some of the crazier promises (smart fog and such), but research at the nanoscale is changing our lives and will continue to do so.
325140
wow... i work in a chemical company as an operator and i don't even know the answer to those without having to consult someone from our QA dept.  as far as question number 2 i can't get specific but i can say that the fda does a damn good job of keeping cgmp qualified suppliers up to task as far as testing and good housekeeping. about number 4 china and india are becoming the premier place to import bulk generics, but you should know that their governments do not regulate like the US does and while standards are still the same here testing is not as stringent and coa's are accepted. sorry that's all i know!
1003661
hey there is a whole big article that i cannot post you can get thru tis link\nhttp://nobelprize.org/chemistry/articles/malmstrom/index.html
1127934
I would say the most expensive and common drug is PROCRIT.  Beyond that, just about any cancer drug that is still under patent is going to be sky high.  The drug companies have us by the n#ts!