(1/12) When I look to hire folks into the energetics area (which actually has many parallels with pharma), I look to those that have a total synthesis and a stereochemical background. I thank @curiouswavefn for bringing up the topic.

#chemtwitter #realtimechem @RealTimeChem https://twitter.com/curiouswavefn/status/1346522261205913600

(2/12) It’s true that most natural products that grad students/postdocs make will not find application due to low yields, expensive preparation, too many steps, etc. I have heard this criticism lobbed at total synthesis for 20 years, as well as declaring that the field is dead.

(3/12) There are some that believe that total synthesis must be ended as a practice. This outlook is nonsense. Frankly, comments like this get made because there’s a fight for dwindling research dollars. Total synthesis is remains highly valuable. That’s not going to change.

(4/12) Synthesizing complex molecules is freaking difficult. It requires incredible patience, skill, determination, perseverance, a never quit attitude, the ability to think and plan long-term, a sharp focus, a constant need to study literature, and to work independently.

(5/12) Those that have made it through total synthesis have experienced satisfying highs and crushing lows. They’ve not settled for mundane routines, but constantly look for ways to take their chemistry and learning to the next level. They are chemistry tough.

(6/12) A good total synthesis chemist has a knowledge of stereochemistry, which can rear its ugly head at any time. They understand regiochemistry and heterocycles, and have acquired a deep knowledge of just about any reagent and reaction (named and unnamed) that is out there.

(7/12) The synthesis of complex molecules remains an excellent way to train students for careers in pharma, academia, government research, and yes, non-traditional chemistry jobs. I know a total synthesis chemist who now work in the financial sector. They know how to manage time.

(8/12) My first job after school was not in synthesis, but instead in pyrotechnic and explosive formulation. The field was foreign to me. There was a lot I didn’t know, and much is simply learned on the job. But I was trained in a very hard field that arms you with how to think.

(9/12) So I knew that while there’d be a learning curve, I was confident in my abilities to do well. I came from a total synthesis background. I thought that if I could do well in total synthesis, then I could do well in anything. That line of thinking turned out to be true.

(10/12) When I got back into synthesis in 2014, I saw a stark difference between those that had natural products backgrounds, and those that didn’t. Those that did total synthesis had an easier time designing molecules, planning ahead, and formulating project plans and ideas.

(11/12) It is these reasons why I like those with a background in total synthesis. These folks, in general, have an advantage over other organic chemists that aren’t trained in this area. They are more efficient, better planners, and generate results with excellent data analysis.

(12/12) Some of these folks stay in the lab and continue to excel. Others leave and go into management, where they tend to do well, because they’ve learned how to budget their time, meet deadlines, and handle pressure situations. Pressure situations happens a lot in real life.