TR072 Pharmacy

BlutendeRabe · 10-04-2014 7:19pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Reading that 1 year on, nope...

How did the lab exam go?

partyatmygaff · 10-04-2014 7:51pm

BlutendeRabe wrote: »

How did the lab exam go?

Grand I think. Felt a lot more straightforward than 1st and 2nd year anyway...

Does she email people the results?

BlutendeRabe · 10-04-2014 11:36pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Grand I think. Felt a lot more straightforward than 1st and 2nd year anyway...

Does she email people the results?

Last year she emailed, but only notified you whether you passed or failed in the attachment. We had to each go up to her office and go over the results.

No problems last year AFAIR; especially with the paper exam. In fairness to her she knows how to run a lab (in contrast to that mountebank in first year).

partyatmygaff · 11-04-2014 12:33am

BlutendeRabe wrote: »

Last year she emailed, but only notified you whether you passed or failed in the attachment. We had to each go up to her office and go over the results.

No problems last year AFAIR; especially with the paper exam. In fairness to her she knows how to run a lab (in contrast to that mountebank in first year).

You think?

I dunno personally. Don't remember there being any problems in PH1004. Thought both that and second year ceutics were organised pretty well (especially 2nd year).

BlutendeRabe · 11-04-2014 12:13pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

You think?

I dunno personally. Don't remember there being any problems in PH1004. Thought both that and second year ceutics were organised pretty well (especially 2nd year).

When I did 1st year, the 1004 lab exam had a failure rate greater than 50% and usually every year one or two poor bas/ards had to go off books solely because of that exam.

I blame it on that muppet plus I remember the postgrads who were supposed to help us being the most lackadaisical bunch of ****wits ever. There were two gits I remember (one ginger the other Indian), and I hope to god they're in some frozen hell, a mile underground in Antarctica ideally.

Anyway back to 3004. Make sure you cover anything to do with clean rooms. D'Arcys background is in that.

11-04-2014 12:48pm

BlutendeRabe wrote: »

When I did 1st year, the 1004 lab exam had a failure rate greater than 50% and usually every year one or two poor bas/ards had to go off books solely because of that exam.

I blame it on that muppet plus I remember the postgrads who were supposed to help us being the most lackadaisical bunch of ****wits ever. There were two gits I remember (one ginger the other Indian), and I hope to god they're in some frozen hell, a mile underground in Antarctica ideally.

Anyway back to 3004. Make sure you cover anything to do with clean rooms. D'Arcys background is in that.

Well after just finishing it I can say it's hopefully changed a lot! We haven't got our results yet but in general I think our year did well in Ceutics (I loved the labs personally). The exam was so straightforward; no overdoses, no double salts, no triturations. It was just 2 oral and a set of suppositories.
Postgrads still aren't much help to be honest. They all gave conflicting advice to us (x has to be on the label or you'll fail while another person was criticised for putting x on their label; silly stuff really).

partyatmygaff · 11-04-2014 1:15pm

BlutendeRabe wrote: »

When I did 1st year, the 1004 lab exam had a failure rate greater than 50% and usually every year one or two poor bas/ards had to go off books solely because of that exam.

I blame it on that muppet plus I remember the postgrads who were supposed to help us being the most lackadaisical bunch of ****wits ever. There were two gits I remember (one ginger the other Indian), and I hope to god they're in some frozen hell, a mile underground in Antarctica ideally.

Anyway back to 3004. Make sure you cover anything to do with clean rooms. D'Arcys background is in that.

The postgrads are never much use in any of the labs tbh. At times, I get the feeling they have less of a clue of what's going on than we do. Especially in ceutics.

Deleted User wrote: »

Well after just finishing it I can say it's hopefully changed a lot! We haven't got our results yet but in general I think our year did well in Ceutics (I loved the labs personally). The exam was so straightforward; no overdoses, no double salts, no triturations. It was just 2 oral and a set of suppositories.
Postgrads still aren't much help to be honest. They all gave conflicting advice to us (x has to be on the label or you'll fail while another person was criticised for putting x on their label; silly stuff really).

From what i've heard, the labs haven't changed in the slightest! I think your year did better than usual, haven't heard any of the usual major disaster stories (like pouring out your prep or accidentally dropping your suppositories) so fail rate might actually drop below 50% this year. Maybe :P

11-04-2014 1:25pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

From what i've heard, the labs haven't changed in the slightest! I think your year did better than usual, haven't heard any of the usual major disaster stories (like pouring out your prep or accidentally dropping your suppositories) so fail rate might actually drop below 50% this year. Maybe :P

I wouldn't say that just yet! After our mock, AMH brought in some of the 'less than good labels' with one stating "Each 5ml spoonful contains 288mg of salbutamol sulfate" when there should have only been 72 mg in the whole bottle! :eek:

My suppositories snapped in half 3 times in the lab but they were fine in the exam! :cool:

partyatmygaff · 11-04-2014 1:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I wouldn't say that just yet! After our mock, AMH brought in some of the 'less than good labels' with one stating "Each 5ml spoonful contains 288mg of salbutamol sulfate" when there should have only been 72 mg in the whole bottle! :eek:

My suppositories snapped in half 3 times in the lab but they were fine in the exam! :cool:

I've seen worse

To give you an idea of how it usually goes, back in our year
12 people got less than 10% (4-5 with 0%)
33 people got less than 50%

Beat that and you're doing well!

11-04-2014 1:52pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I've seen worse

To give you an idea of how it usually goes, back in our year
12 people got less than 10% (4-5 with 0%)
33 people got less than 50%

Beat that and you're doing well!

I have heard from a few sources that the 3rd years weren't too good at 04 :P

FaoiSin · 11-04-2014 10:44pm

I don't recall but I think my year had a low enough fail rate in 04 :P 2nd year ceutics exam is lovely.

partyatmygaff · 11-04-2014 10:58pm

Oh 2nd year ceutics is great all around. Easily the best of 1st-3rd year.

The theory can be a bit dry at times though. They need to have a good close look and assess the course on an almost microscopic level. I think it needs to be mixed up a bit to filter out some of the less relevant material (or to put it better, distill the course down to the most relevant points) before it evaporates off everyone's interest in industry.

and now... back to pharmacology

The Pharmacist on the Moon · 12-04-2014 1:05am

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Oh 2nd year ceutics is great all around. Easily the best of 1st-3rd year.

The theory can be a bit dry at times though. They need to have a good close look and assess the course on an almost microscopic level. I think it needs to be mixed up a bit to filter out some of the less relevant material (or to put it better, distill the course down to the most relevant points) before it evaporates off everyone's interest in industry.

and now... back to pharmacology

lol at this

The Pharmacist on the Moon · 12-04-2014 1:09am

partyatmygaff wrote: »

I've seen worse

To give you an idea of how it usually goes, back in our year
12 people got less than 10% (4-5 with 0%)
33 people got less than 50%

Beat that and you're doing well!

I doubt that the 1st year results will be similar to the above considering someone else is in charge of the exam this year. Plus it sounds like it was a fairly straightforward exam

12-04-2014 12:39pm

There comes a time in every young Pharmer's life to decide what question they're not gonna study for on the 1003 paper...

partyatmygaff · 12-04-2014 1:11pm

Unless you've a fair idea of what's coming up in Cormac's question or think it's very easy, it's probably the least useful in the grand scheme of things.

Pretty much everything else on the paper you're going to see again and again over the next few years in some way or another.

Don't skip Sasse, her questions are always fairly quick and handy if you know what you're doing. You'll be doing spectroscopy, especially UV for the next 3 years as well so you'll only be putting off the inevitable if you leave it out.

12-04-2014 1:26pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Unless you've a fair idea of what's coming up in Cormac's question or think it's very easy, it's probably the least useful in the grand scheme of things.

Pretty much everything else on the paper you're going to see again and again over the next few years in some way or another.

Don't skip Sasse, her questions are always fairly quick and handy if you know what you're doing. You'll be doing spectroscopy, especially UV for the next 3 years as well so you'll only be putting off the inevitable if you leave it out.

My original thought was to skip Sasse but then she gave her tutorial and it made her questions look a lot more approachable. Then I did two past exam questions and sent them to her and got 16/20 so I'm doing her question now. I am really hoping for something that's calculation-heavy as I can do all that easy but I'm not as confident on the theory.

Cormac's question looked quite easy and repetitive until he gave his lectures and I didn't understand a thing :pac:

FaoiSin · 12-04-2014 2:01pm

Deleted User wrote: »

My original thought was to skip Sasse but then she gave her tutorial and it made her questions look a lot more approachable. Then I did two past exam questions and sent them to her and got 16/20 so I'm doing her question now. I am really hoping for something that's calculation-heavy as I can do all that easy but I'm not as confident on the theory.

Cormac's question looked quite easy and repetitive until he gave his lectures and I didn't understand a thing :pac:

The key to Cormac's is to pick up on the hints he gives in lectures and also diagrams. He loves diagrams.

partyatmygaff · 12-04-2014 2:02pm

His lectures had way too much content. He is fairly repetitive and he's not averse to giving the occasional hint. If he did, may be worth a shot. If not, you could probably use the time to learn something else.

The theory's not that bad in first year spectroscopy. If you think that's bad... wait until PH2003 :eek:

12-04-2014 2:10pm

JeaicMaG wrote: »

The key to Cormac's is to pick up on the hints he gives in lectures and also diagrams. He loves diagrams.

See this year he was a bit weird. He told us that Aufbau and definitions of ligands, chelate etc. would come up [and they'd be worth 4/20 together]. Then he said that 10 marks would go for discussing the role of a metal in biological systems and named the 4 metals that he covers in the course and pretty much left it at that. Gilmer had to give Cormac's 5th lecture for some reason too so no hints there.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

His lectures had way too much content. He is fairly repetitive and he's not averse to giving the occasional hint. If he did, may be worth a shot. If not, you could probably use the time to learn something else.

The theory's not that bad in first year spectroscopy. If you think that's bad... wait until PH2003 :eek:

This! Most of the time he just said "This slide has a lot of information and is very important. Read it yourselves." And then he went on. Pointless.

Well the theory is pretty alright it's just I didn't pay too much attention (Damn Refreshers week).

partyatmygaff · 12-04-2014 2:33pm

They're not bad hints in fairness...

You didn't notice any sections of the slides that are inexplicably in red font, by any chance? He told us they were the main points of his lectures. Should do you for the 5th lecture that Gilmer gave.

FaoiSin · 12-04-2014 3:23pm

The role of the metal in biology is an easy 10 marks though in fairness :P He specified the metal for our year but sometimes leaves it up to yourself. Just prepare a paragraph on each really.

I really need to get back into studying myself :P

Edit: He specified in the exam,not beforehand. Just to clarify :P

partyatmygaff · 12-04-2014 4:53pm

PH3010
82 densely-packed A4 pages of notes from one lecturer
423 content-heavy slides with notes from another lecturer

PH3011
1111 slides from one lecturer
~200 slides from another lecturer

Fun times await.

BlutendeRabe · 12-04-2014 7:24pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

PH3010
82 densely-packed A4 pages of notes from one lecturer
423 content-heavy slides with notes from another lecturer

PH3011
1111 slides from one lecturer
~200 slides from another lecturer

Fun times await.

With 10 don't leave anything out with Santos. She's always guaranteed an essay question and its usually just either COPD or asthma. She gives 70% for the drugs and usually 30% for the lifestyle modifications (she was annoyed with last years essays because of that).
Medina is harder to predict. The slides are good, so you shouldn't need to do any extra reading. Funnily enough he's never asked IBD/UC, which is his main research area.

quadrifoglio verde · 14-04-2014 6:39pm

aaaah, the lovely month of April. All this study and people asking you for money for hoodies and essays and what not. I wish they still did exemptions for getting over 65%, I mean I basically passed this year already Good thing it's only 7 exams instead of the usual 10.

As an aside, does anyone know if epileptic animals get LTI books? Ryder really didn't make that clear in her notes. Also, is the target BP for diabetics 170/20? So many different values all over the internet and in the notes.

God I ****ing love Pharmacy. Sure it'll be worth it in the end, heard there was a pharmacy in North County Dublin, offering an internship for a qualified pharmacist under job bridge for 9 months. Cheeky feckers

BlutendeRabe · 14-04-2014 9:57pm

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

aaaah, the lovely month of April. All this study and people asking you for money for hoodies and essays and what not. I wish they still did exemptions for getting over 65%, I mean I basically passed this year already Good thing it's only 7 exams instead of the usual 10.

As an aside, does anyone know if epileptic animals get LTI books? Ryder really didn't make that clear in her notes. Also, is the target BP for diabetics 170/20? So many different values all over the internet and in the notes.

God I ****ing love Pharmacy. Sure it'll be worth it in the end, heard there was a pharmacy in North County Dublin, offering an internship for a qualified pharmacist under job bridge for 9 months. Cheeky feckers [B/]

1. Its <130/80. If in doubt see what either NICE or the Mayo Clinic say and go with that.

2. The longer Ive been here (I've been here an awfully long time), the more I regret making that last minute switch between Pharmacy and Maths on my CAO form. Also I hope to god the PSI gets those ****ers.

partyatmygaff · 21-04-2014 1:33pm

The irony is just too great.

partyatmygaff · 28-04-2014 11:44am

Not a bad start....

Officially down to the single digits in terms of numbers of exams left.

Bit annoyed Tami didn't even get an MCQ but they included random questions on metronidazole and methotrexate.

28-04-2014 4:23pm

JF Biochemistry is now negative marking; ah f*ck.

FaoiSin · 28-04-2014 5:43pm

Deleted User wrote: »

JF Biochemistry is now negative marking; ah f*ck.

Still should be grand! Ours was quarter negative today :P

TR072 Pharmacy

Comments