Biochemist vs Geneticist?

Interesting question. A pure genticist looks at inheritance patterns of genes and thus genotypes and phenotypes. The results lead to deductions about the nature of genes, linkage and mutation. The molecular geneticist (a branch of biochemistry) looks at the reasons at the fine molecular level exactly what a gene is and what mutation is and why they lead to different phenotypes. I would say that molecular genetics is a sub-branch of biochemistry. I would not say that biochemistry is a sub-branch of pure genetics.

branch, sub-branch, those words are there just to confuse you. they are similar and share many methods of scientific investigation. they often use the same techniques to study related matters.

a biochemist looks at chemicals. for example, a friend of mine researches how proteins fold in order to form a virus capsid. not exactly interested in how viruses cause disease, or how they replicate within a cell. he is a chemist. DNA has little to do with his work. other biochemists may deal with nucleic acids, such as DNA. biochemists are interested in chemical interactions, many of which happen to exist in lifeforms (biology). strict biochemists often discovery great things for biologists go follow up on. many of them work alongside and with biologists to solve problems in science.

a geneticist studies inheritance. in modern science, geneticists are virtually always molecular geneticists, that is to say they study the genome found within a cell, and studies how it produces changes in the cell or organism to lead to a 'phenotype'. it involves the intricate understanding of what molecules do in a cell. a geneticist is interested in biology, but requires chemistry knowledge to deal with his work - that is certain.

i am a molecular biologist. i have quite a strong understanding of genetics, molecular and cell biology, and chemistry. these are indispensable areas of knowledge for me if i want to be successful in my work. good luck!