Who is a pharmacist?
I came across some definitions which are really interesting....
check it out...
I came across some definitions which are really interesting....
check it out...
May 26, 2011
April 27, 2011
Hair Loss: A review on present treatments available
Hair loss is caused by many factors and before looking for its solution, you should first of all find the particular cause for your hair loss. When people start losing their hair, their self esteem may be severely affected and hence they may suffer psychologically. The major type of baldness in men is the male pattern baldness that is hereditary in most cases. This simply means that if one of your parents is bald, then you can also expect to have it at some point in your life.
The main cause of the male pattern baldness is the production of the DHT hormones. DHT hinders the growth of new hairs from the hair follicles. On average, about one hundred hairs are lost everyday but since the hair follicles continually produce new hair, these loss isn't noticeable at all. However, if the hair follicle is prevented from continually forming new hair, then the hair lost becomes more than the replenished hair. At this point therefore, one will start experiencing slight baldness before it develops into full baldness in due time.
A majority of the pharmaceutical drugs, whether prescription or non-prescription, actually block the conversion of the male hormone testosterone to DHT(di-hydro testosterone). When there is no DHT produced, the hair follicles grow new hairs quickly to replace any hairs that might be lost in the normal process. Therefore, baldness is alleviated and one may even fully regain their normal hair.
Of course all pharmaceutical drugs may come with their side effects and it is imperative that you seek a doctor's opinion before using any of the drugs. If you are allergic to any of the ingredients that are used to make the prescription drugs, then you are bound to be affected. There are many drugs that can be bought over the counter and they include Rogaine (Minoxidil) and Propecia (Finasteride).
The other non-prescription drugs for hair loss that can be used are mainly herbal products but it is not 100% whether they actually lead to the regrowth of hair. Such herbal products include rosemary, honey, coconut oil, margosa, amla oil, lettuce juice, lime juice, etc. It is important that the individual ingredients that are used to make these products be mixed well so that they do not lead further hair loss.
Measures from your side:
Before spending all your money on hair loss drugs, it may be important to observe a few precautions first.1) Avoiding Stress: You should at all times make sure that you avoid stress. Stress constricts the blood vessels that lead to the hair follicles and therefore less blood is available to the hair follicles. As you may already know, blood helps carry important nutrients and mineral salts to the hair follicles and therefore aid the growth of new hair. When there are fewer nutrients available to aid in the growth of new hair, this results in balding.
2) Intake of nutrients and mineral salts that help nourish the hair. Nutrients such as proteins help to develop new cells that build the body. Other important nutrients are vitamin B6, vitamin A, zinc, copper, folic acid, iron, etc. Food sources that can provide these minerals include animal proteins that are low in fat, whole grains, green and yellow fruits, dark green vegetables, etc.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/
March 12, 2011
Levamisole: Was the “Wrong” Model the Right Model?
Many helminths (parasitic worms) of clinical and commercial importance are nematodes (roundworms). They parasitize humans and other mammals, so it is hardly surprising that candidate anthelmintic drugs are usually tested in small laboratory mammals.
Scientists at the Janssen company in Belgium, however, “screened” compounds for their potential anthelmintic activity against worms in chickens (Raeymaekers et al. 1966). They found a chemical compound (thiazothienol) that was active against the worms, but when they put it into worm-infected rats and mice, it was inactive.
Because roundworms of mammals were the primary target, the investigators might have been expected to ignore this lead. Instead, they performed experiments that showed that the feces of the treated chickens contained a substance that was active against worms in rats and mice.
Interestingly, it was not the original substance but was instead its metabolic product! That excreted substance (thiazothielite) was chemically modified to improve its efficacy and was developed as the veterinary drug tetramisole. The levo-isomer of tetramisole, named levamisole, was later found to have an improved safety margin, and was developed into an enormously successful anthelmintic agent for use in livestock and, to a lesser extent, in humans.
Here we have the “happy accident” so characteristic of serendipity. The compound that led to the discovery of levamisole was not synthesized by the scientists; it was synthesized by the chickens! That result was totally unexpected.
It was the scientists, however, who had the insight to recognize, from the “failed” rodent tests, that the secret to the previously observed anthelmintic efficacy lay not in what went into the chickens but in what came out! From this insight, an important drug was developed.
Obviously, the lesson to be drawn from this episode is not that we should deliberately select the wrong animal model. If there is a lesson to be learned, surely it is two-fold: we should be ever alert to the unexpected, and there is no such thing as a “failed” experiment.
Scientists at the Janssen company in Belgium, however, “screened” compounds for their potential anthelmintic activity against worms in chickens (Raeymaekers et al. 1966). They found a chemical compound (thiazothienol) that was active against the worms, but when they put it into worm-infected rats and mice, it was inactive.
Because roundworms of mammals were the primary target, the investigators might have been expected to ignore this lead. Instead, they performed experiments that showed that the feces of the treated chickens contained a substance that was active against worms in rats and mice.
Interestingly, it was not the original substance but was instead its metabolic product! That excreted substance (thiazothielite) was chemically modified to improve its efficacy and was developed as the veterinary drug tetramisole. The levo-isomer of tetramisole, named levamisole, was later found to have an improved safety margin, and was developed into an enormously successful anthelmintic agent for use in livestock and, to a lesser extent, in humans.
Here we have the “happy accident” so characteristic of serendipity. The compound that led to the discovery of levamisole was not synthesized by the scientists; it was synthesized by the chickens! That result was totally unexpected.
It was the scientists, however, who had the insight to recognize, from the “failed” rodent tests, that the secret to the previously observed anthelmintic efficacy lay not in what went into the chickens but in what came out! From this insight, an important drug was developed.
Obviously, the lesson to be drawn from this episode is not that we should deliberately select the wrong animal model. If there is a lesson to be learned, surely it is two-fold: we should be ever alert to the unexpected, and there is no such thing as a “failed” experiment.
March 9, 2011
Discovery of Lyrica (pregabalin)
It’s a rare example of a compound that came right out of academia to become a drug, but the rest of its story is both unusual and (in an odd way) typical.
The drug is a very close analog of the neurotransmitter GABA. Silverman’s lab made a series of compounds in the 1980s to try to inhibit the aminotransferase enzyme (GABA-AT) that breaks GABA down in the brain, as a means of increasing its levels to prevent epileptic seizures.
They gradually realized, though, that their compounds were also hitting another enzyme, glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD), which actually synthesizes GABA.
Shutting down the neurotransmitter’s breakdown was a good idea, but shutting down its production at the same time clearly wasn’t going to work out.
So in 1988 a visiting Polish post-doc (Ryszard Andruszkiewicz) made a series of 3-alkyl GABA and glutamate analogs as another crack at a selective compound. None of them were particularly good inhibitors of GABA- AT. But (most weirdly) they actually turned out to activate GAD, which would also work just fine to raise GABA levels.
Based on this discovery, Parke-Davis acquired the license for these molecules. One enantiomer of the 3-isobutyl GABA analog turned out to be a star performer in the company’s rodent assay for seizure prevention. Further testing resulted in the IND filing in 1995 and clinical trials continued until 2003. The FDA approved the drug in 2004.
And there you’d think the story ends – basic science from the university is translated into a big-selling drug, with the unusual feature of an actual compound from the academic labs going all the way.
As Silverman makes clear, there’s a lot more to the story. As it turned out, the drug’s efficacy had nothing to do with its GABA-AT substrate behavior. But further investigation showed that it’s not even correlated with its activation of the other enzyme, GAD. None of the reasons behind the compound’s sale to Parke-Davis held up, except the biggest one: it worked well in the company’s animal models.
The biologists at P-D eventually figured out what was going on, up to a point. The compound also binds to a particular site on voltage-gated calcium channels. That turns out to block the release of glutamate, whose actions would be opposed to those of GABA.
So they ended up in the same place (potentiation of GABA effects) but through a mechanism that no one suspected until after the compound had been recommended for human trials!
There were more lucky surprises:Lyrica has excellent blood levels and penetration into the brain, while none of the other analogs came close. As it happened, and as the Parke-Davis folks figured out, the compound was taken up by active transport into the brain (via the System L transporter), which also helps account for its activity.
And Silverman goes on to show that while the compound was originally designed as a GABA analog, it doesn’t even perform that function. It has no binding to any GABA receptor, and doesn’t affect GABA levels in any way.
The drug is a very close analog of the neurotransmitter GABA. Silverman’s lab made a series of compounds in the 1980s to try to inhibit the aminotransferase enzyme (GABA-AT) that breaks GABA down in the brain, as a means of increasing its levels to prevent epileptic seizures.
They gradually realized, though, that their compounds were also hitting another enzyme, glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD), which actually synthesizes GABA.
Shutting down the neurotransmitter’s breakdown was a good idea, but shutting down its production at the same time clearly wasn’t going to work out.
So in 1988 a visiting Polish post-doc (Ryszard Andruszkiewicz) made a series of 3-alkyl GABA and glutamate analogs as another crack at a selective compound. None of them were particularly good inhibitors of GABA- AT. But (most weirdly) they actually turned out to activate GAD, which would also work just fine to raise GABA levels.
Based on this discovery, Parke-Davis acquired the license for these molecules. One enantiomer of the 3-isobutyl GABA analog turned out to be a star performer in the company’s rodent assay for seizure prevention. Further testing resulted in the IND filing in 1995 and clinical trials continued until 2003. The FDA approved the drug in 2004.
And there you’d think the story ends – basic science from the university is translated into a big-selling drug, with the unusual feature of an actual compound from the academic labs going all the way.
But friends the twist comes here!!!
As Silverman makes clear, there’s a lot more to the story. As it turned out, the drug’s efficacy had nothing to do with its GABA-AT substrate behavior. But further investigation showed that it’s not even correlated with its activation of the other enzyme, GAD. None of the reasons behind the compound’s sale to Parke-Davis held up, except the biggest one: it worked well in the company’s animal models.
The biologists at P-D eventually figured out what was going on, up to a point. The compound also binds to a particular site on voltage-gated calcium channels. That turns out to block the release of glutamate, whose actions would be opposed to those of GABA.
So they ended up in the same place (potentiation of GABA effects) but through a mechanism that no one suspected until after the compound had been recommended for human trials!
There were more lucky surprises:Lyrica has excellent blood levels and penetration into the brain, while none of the other analogs came close. As it happened, and as the Parke-Davis folks figured out, the compound was taken up by active transport into the brain (via the System L transporter), which also helps account for its activity.
And Silverman goes on to show that while the compound was originally designed as a GABA analog, it doesn’t even perform that function. It has no binding to any GABA receptor, and doesn’t affect GABA levels in any way.
So on one level, this is indeed an academic compound that went to industry and became a drug. But looked at from another perspective, it was an extremely lucky shot indeed, for several unrelated reasons, and the underlying biology was only worked out once the compound went into industrial development.
And from any angle, it’s an object lesson in how little we know, and how many surprises are waiting for us!!
March 6, 2011
Genzyme acquired by Sanofi Aventis: A blockbuster Deal
French drugmaker Sanofi-Aventis SA clinched its long-sought deal for Genzyme Corp with a sweetened $20.1 billion cash offer, plus payments tied to the success of the U.S. biotech group's drugs.
The deal's announcement, marks the second-biggest acquisition in biotech history after Roche's $46.8 billion purchase of Genentech in 2009.(as per Reuters)
Sanofi will pay $74 a share in cash and offer a tradable contingent value right, or CVR, whose value will depend on Genzyme's experimental multiple sclerosis drug Lemtrada and production of two other medicines.
Sanofi will pay $74 a share in cash and offer a tradable contingent value right, or CVR, whose value will depend on Genzyme's experimental multiple sclerosis drug Lemtrada and production of two other medicines.
According to Bloomberg, the CVR payouts are these:
- $1 if the MS hopeful Lemtrada wins FDA approval;
- $2 if Lemtrada sales surpass $400 million by certain deadlines
- $3 if sales top $1.8 billion;
- $4 for $2.3 billion-plus;
- $3 for more than $2.8 billion.
February 20, 2011
The various evaluation tests for suppositories
The various evaluation tests for suppositories are
* Test of appearance
* Test of physical strength
* Test of dissolution rate
* Test of melting range
* Test of softening time
* Test of uniformity of drug content
* Test of drug uptake
Test of appearance
All the suppositories should be uniform in size and shape. They
should have elegant appearance. Individual suppositories should be
examined for cracks and pits due to entrapment of air in the molten
mass.
Test of physical strength
In this test, tensile strength of suppositories is measured to assess their ability to withstand the rigors of normal handling.
The apparatus used is called as breaking test apparatus. It
consists of a double-wall chamber. Through the walls of the chamber,
water is pumped. The inner chamber consist of a disc which holds the
suppositories. To this disc, a rod is attached. The other end of the
rod consists of another disc on which weights are placed.
PROCEDURE
On the first disc the test suppository is placed. On the second
disc a 600 g weight is placed. At 1 minute interval, 200 g weights are
added till the suppository crumbles. All the weights used are added
which gives the tensile strength. Likewise, few more suppositories are
tested and the average tensile strength is calculated. Tensile strength
indicates the maximum force which the suppository can withstand during
production, packing and handling. Large tensile strength indicates less
tendency to fracture.
Test of dissolution rate
It is the amount of dosage form that gets dissolved in body fluid
in unit time. It is a measure of the rate of drug release from the
suppository.
Two types of apparatus are available for testing the dissolution rate. They are:
(a) Suppository dialysis cell - Lipophilic suppositories are tested using suppository dialysis cell, which is also called as modified flow-through cell.
(b) Stationary basket - Rotating paddle apparatus
( USP dissolution test apparatus ). Hydrophilic suppositories are
tested using stationary basket - rotating paddle apparatus.
Test of melting range
Both macromelting range and micromelting range are determined.
(a) Macromelting range
It is a measure of the thermal stability of the suppository.
It is the time taken by the entire suppository to melt in a
constant temperature water bath. The test is conducted using the tablet
disintegration apparatus. The suppository is immersed in a constant
water bath. Finally the melting range is recorded.
(b) Micromelting range
The melting range of the fatty base is measured in capillary tubes.
Test of softening time
Softening time is the time for which the suppository melts
completely at a definite temperature. This test measures the softening
time of suppositories which indicates the hardness of the base.
METHOD
The apparatus consists of a cellophane tube tied at the two ends
of a condenser. The two ends of the cellophane tube are open. Water is
circulated through the condenser at a definite rate. As a result, after
some time the upper half of the tube opens wide and the lower half
collapses. A suppository is dropped into the water in the condenser.
The time period in which the suppository melts completely is noted as
the softening time.
Test of uniformity of drug content
This test is to assess the uniformity of the mixed suppository
mass. Different suppositories are assayed for the drug. All the
suppositories should contain the same labelled quantity of the drug.
Test of drug uptake
Both in-vitro and in-vivo tests should be conducted to assess the amount of drug absorbed into the systemic circulation.
(a) In-Vitro test
The test conditions should be similar to those inside the human
body. The dissolution apparatus is used which consists of simulated
gastric and simulated intestinal fluids. Definite number of
suppositories are placed in the apparatus. Aliquot portions of the
dissolution medium are withdrawn at definite intervals of time and drug
uptake is measured using a U.V. spectrophotometer.
(b) In-Vivo test
This test is carried in animals or human volunteers. The
suppository is placed in the intended body cavity. At regular intervals
of time, blood samples are collected and the amount of drug present is
determined.
Reference:
L. Lachman, H.A, Lieberman and J.L. Kanig, Theory & Practice
of industrial pharmacy, Lea & Febieger, Philadelphia Latest Edn
* Test of appearance
* Test of physical strength
* Test of dissolution rate
* Test of melting range
* Test of softening time
* Test of uniformity of drug content
* Test of drug uptake
Test of appearance
All the suppositories should be uniform in size and shape. They
should have elegant appearance. Individual suppositories should be
examined for cracks and pits due to entrapment of air in the molten
mass.
Test of physical strength
In this test, tensile strength of suppositories is measured to assess their ability to withstand the rigors of normal handling.
The apparatus used is called as breaking test apparatus. It
consists of a double-wall chamber. Through the walls of the chamber,
water is pumped. The inner chamber consist of a disc which holds the
suppositories. To this disc, a rod is attached. The other end of the
rod consists of another disc on which weights are placed.
PROCEDURE
On the first disc the test suppository is placed. On the second
disc a 600 g weight is placed. At 1 minute interval, 200 g weights are
added till the suppository crumbles. All the weights used are added
which gives the tensile strength. Likewise, few more suppositories are
tested and the average tensile strength is calculated. Tensile strength
indicates the maximum force which the suppository can withstand during
production, packing and handling. Large tensile strength indicates less
tendency to fracture.
Test of dissolution rate
It is the amount of dosage form that gets dissolved in body fluid
in unit time. It is a measure of the rate of drug release from the
suppository.
Two types of apparatus are available for testing the dissolution rate. They are:
(a) Suppository dialysis cell - Lipophilic suppositories are tested using suppository dialysis cell, which is also called as modified flow-through cell.
(b) Stationary basket - Rotating paddle apparatus
( USP dissolution test apparatus ). Hydrophilic suppositories are
tested using stationary basket - rotating paddle apparatus.
Test of melting range
Both macromelting range and micromelting range are determined.
(a) Macromelting range
It is a measure of the thermal stability of the suppository.
It is the time taken by the entire suppository to melt in a
constant temperature water bath. The test is conducted using the tablet
disintegration apparatus. The suppository is immersed in a constant
water bath. Finally the melting range is recorded.
(b) Micromelting range
The melting range of the fatty base is measured in capillary tubes.
Test of softening time
Softening time is the time for which the suppository melts
completely at a definite temperature. This test measures the softening
time of suppositories which indicates the hardness of the base.
METHOD
The apparatus consists of a cellophane tube tied at the two ends
of a condenser. The two ends of the cellophane tube are open. Water is
circulated through the condenser at a definite rate. As a result, after
some time the upper half of the tube opens wide and the lower half
collapses. A suppository is dropped into the water in the condenser.
The time period in which the suppository melts completely is noted as
the softening time.
Test of uniformity of drug content
This test is to assess the uniformity of the mixed suppository
mass. Different suppositories are assayed for the drug. All the
suppositories should contain the same labelled quantity of the drug.
Test of drug uptake
Both in-vitro and in-vivo tests should be conducted to assess the amount of drug absorbed into the systemic circulation.
(a) In-Vitro test
The test conditions should be similar to those inside the human
body. The dissolution apparatus is used which consists of simulated
gastric and simulated intestinal fluids. Definite number of
suppositories are placed in the apparatus. Aliquot portions of the
dissolution medium are withdrawn at definite intervals of time and drug
uptake is measured using a U.V. spectrophotometer.
(b) In-Vivo test
This test is carried in animals or human volunteers. The
suppository is placed in the intended body cavity. At regular intervals
of time, blood samples are collected and the amount of drug present is
determined.
Reference:
L. Lachman, H.A, Lieberman and J.L. Kanig, Theory & Practice
of industrial pharmacy, Lea & Febieger, Philadelphia Latest Edn
February 16, 2011
The FDA system ranks drugs as:
· Category A - drugs that have been tested for safety during pregnancy and have been found to be safe. This includes drugs such as folic acid, vitamin B6, and thyroid medicine in moderation, or in prescribed doses.
· Category B - drugs that have been used a lot during pregnancy and do not appear to cause major birth defects or other problems. This includes drugs such as some antibiotics, acetaminophen(Tylenol), aspartame (artificial sweetener), famotidine (Pepcid), prednisone (cortisone), insulin(for diabetes), and ibuprofin (Advil, Motrin) before the third trimester. Pregnant women should not take ibuprofen during the last three months of pregnancy.
· Category C - drugs that are more likely to cause problems for the mother or fetus. Also includes drugs for which safety studies have not been finished. The majority of these drugs do not have safety studies in progress. These drugs often come with a warning that they should be used only if the benefits of taking them outweigh the risks. This is something a woman would need to carefully discuss with her doctor. These drugs include prochlorperzaine (Compazine), Sudafed, fluconazole(Diflucan), and ciprofloxacin (Cipro). Some antidepressants are also included in this group.
· Category D - drugs that have clear health risks for the fetus and include alcohol, lithium (used to treat manic depression), phenytoin (Dilantin), and most chemotherapy drugs to treat cancer. In some cases, chemotherapy drugs are given during pregnancy.
· Category X - drugs that have been shown to cause birth defects and should never be taken during pregnancy. This includes drugs to treat skin conditions like cystic acne (Accutane) and psoriasis(Tegison or Soriatane); a sedative (thalidomide); and a drug to prevent miscarriage used up until 1971 in the U.S. and 1983 in Europe (diethylstilbestrol or DES).
November 12, 2010
GPAT 2011: Important Dates
Friends, finally the date of the war has been announced...so, start sharpening your weapons for GPAT 2011.
Details:
SYLLABUS FOR GPAT-2011:
click the link : http://gpat.in/index.php?gpat=syllabus11
For more Details :
log on to www.gpat.in
All the Best Guys!!
:)
Details:
- Registration for GPAT – 2011 examination will be ONLINE.
- The GPAT – 2011 examination will be at selected centers throughout India.
- The GPAT – 2011 examination will have multiple choice question ( MCQs ) as GPAT – 2010.
- The syllabus of GPAT – 2011 examination has been revised.
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE:
| Online Application website opens | Monday, 17th January 2011 |
| Online Application website closes | Monday, 21st February 2011 |
| Last date of receipt of photo, signature, Bank challan as a proof of payment for examination fees along with the printout of application | Monday, 28th February 2011 |
| Date of Examination | Sunday, 8th May 2011 |
SYLLABUS FOR GPAT-2011:
click the link : http://gpat.in/index.php?gpat=syllabus11
For more Details :
log on to www.gpat.in
All the Best Guys!!
:)
November 11, 2010
Pharma's Top 10 Blockbuster Drugs
Pharma's Top 10 Blockbuster Drugs
1) Lipitor(Atorvastatin)
- Maker: Pfizer
- Sales Rank: 1
- Technology: Chiral chemistry
- 2009 Sales: $12.5 billion
- Indications: Hypercholesterolemia and mixed dyslipidemia (Fredrickson types IIa and IIb) to reduce total cholesterol.
- Maker: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Aventis.
- Sales Rank: 2
- Technology: Small molecule.
- 2009 Sales: $9.5 billion.
- Indications: Heart attack and stroke prevention.
- Maker: GlaxoSmithKline
- Sales Rank: 3
- Technology: Small Molecule
- 2009 Sales: $7.7 billion
- Indications: Asthma and COPD.
- Maker: Amgen
- Sales Rank: 4
- Technology: Recombinant product
- 2009 Sales: $6.2 billion
- Indications: Rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic plaque psoriasis.
- Maker: Novartis
- Sales Rank: 5
- Technology: Small Molecule
- 2009 Sales: $6.0 billion
- Indications: Hypertension and congestive heart failure.
- Maker: Johnson & Johnson
- Sales Rank: 6
- Technology: Monoclonal antibody
- 2009 Sales: $5.9 billion
- Indications: Plaque psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn's disease in adults, pediatric Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, and ankylosing spondylitis.
- Maker: Roche/Genentech
- Sales Rank: 7
- Technology: Monoclonal antibody
- 2009 Sales: $5.7 billion
- Indications: Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Metastatic Breast Cancer, Glioblastoma, Metastatic Kidney Cancer.
- Maker: Roche/Genentech
- Sales Rank: 8
- Technology: Monoclonal antibody
- 2009 Sales: $5.6 billion
- Indications: Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Chronic Lymhocytic leukemia, Rheumatoid arthritis.
- Maker: Abbott Pharmaceuticals
- Sales Rank: 9
- Technology: Monoclonal antibody
- 2009 Sales: $5.5 billion
- Indications: Rheumatoid arthritis, Polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis, Psoriatic arthritis, Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in adults, Crohn's disease, Plaque psoriasis.
- Maker: AstraZeneca
- Sales Rank: 10
- Technology: Small molecule
- 2009 Sales: $5.1 billion
- Indications: Major depressive disorder, Acute depressive episodes in bipolar disorder, Acute manic or mixed episodes in bipolar disorder alone or with lithium or divalproex; Long-term treatment of bipolar disorder with lithium or divalproex, and Schizophrenia.
FiercePharma, EvaluatePharma and PriceWaterhouse Coopers.(jointly)
October 1, 2010
National Level Online PowerPoint Presentations Competition
Hey guys...here's A National Level Online PowerPoint Presentations Competition for Indian Pharmacy Students and Professionals.
Go ahead and show your talent...A very nice platform to exhibit your skills..
Dates:
Abstract and Powerpoint: October 12th, 2010
Online Contest : October 20th to Nov 7 th.
Results : on Nov 14th.
Theme:
Visualizing Pharmaceutical Concepts Using Multimedia
This contest is to test pharmacy students understanding of "Concepts" they learned and their ability to explain their ideas using multimedia tools such as graphics , animations and narration (optional) as supportive media.
Suggested Areas of Competition are :
* Oral Sustained /Controlled release Systems
* Mucosal Systems
* Transdermal and topical Systems
* Ophthalmic Systems
* Targeted Drug Delivery Systems
* Protein and Peptide Delivery Systems
* Particulate System
* Pulmonary Drug Delivery System
* Colloidal Drug Delivery System
Eligibility :
The presenting author should be either 2nd, 3rd or 4th year Bachelor of Pharmacy student , M.Pharmacy student , Pharm D student or Ph D student.
Posts
