Biochemistry and Biomedical science?
- Thread starter flibbage0
- Start date
Shelf-stacking and burger-flipping.
Biomedical Science if the course involves the year out in a work placement will get you registered with the HPC, once finished u can apply for a biomedical scientist job in a hospital. Plus any other random lab jobs that come about if u dont wanna work in a hospital or if u dont want to do a placement. Oil industry etc, anywhere same with biochemistry degree although they dont tend to offer work placements so u cant get registered as a biomedical scientist and it doesnt tend to cover all the modules covered to get registered anyway.
I'm working in a medical laboratory at the moment, but my experience is only within the NHS and only in one trust at that, so I can't give you any more generalised inside information.
The biomedical scientists are the qualified, Band 5 posts. They're responsible (in theory) for the daily maintenance, calibration, quality control and general operation of the laboratory, mainly overseeing the lab techs processing samples through the analysers, but also doing specialist tests often specific to that lab, cross-matching for transfusions, validating deranged results and reporting directly when necessary.
I say in theory because in our lab, our team does most of that. We're only Band 3, but we do pretty much everything that the qualifieds do apart from validating results and cross-matching/issuing transfusion units, but that's mainly because we work for the NHS and are by default critically understaffed. On the plus side, you can't find state-registered BMSs for toffee, so even with your very poor grades you'll have a good shot at getting a post - just don't go setting your heart on Guy's & St Thomas', Addenbrooke's or Great Ormond Street.
That state registration, by the way, is what marks you as a qualified BMS, not your degree. From what I understand, if it's not included in your biomedical sciences course it's roughly a year's study to get your registration.
As to the differences you requested, biomedical science is a much wider topic than biochemistry. Biochemistry is a specific, though almost certainly the largest, area of biomedical science. As it suggests, it's a focus on the chemical interactions in biological organisms, in this case people, and covers things like liver and kidney function, diagnostic approach to CNS pathology, sex hormones, probability of congestive heart failure etc. etc. etc. - the list is extremely long. Biomedical science will give you a less in-depth understanding of the specific biochemical interactions, but will also cover many other areas - microbiology, haematology, haemophilia, transfusion, immunology, cytology, histopathology and so on. These are all included under the pathology directorate in most trusts, so taking a biomedical science degree would make you much more flexible in what positions you can take, especially since many pathology directorates are blending different disciplines into shapeless "blood sciences" departments with a fluid staff base, ostensibly to *insert management drivel* but really to cut costs.
One other thing - education and progression are available within the NHS, but you're sometimes required to fight tooth and nail for it. If you take the biomedical science course, you'll have a much better chance at getting your foot in the door at most hospitals, and it shouldn't be too difficult to specialise from there, which you'll need to do if you want to move up the ranks (not that there are many ranks). It also gives you the opportunity to explore many different disciplines, and you'd be better off getting a general overview before choosing your latter path rather than throwing your lot behind one subject only to realise you're much more interested in another field.
The biomedical scientists are the qualified, Band 5 posts. They're responsible (in theory) for the daily maintenance, calibration, quality control and general operation of the laboratory, mainly overseeing the lab techs processing samples through the analysers, but also doing specialist tests often specific to that lab, cross-matching for transfusions, validating deranged results and reporting directly when necessary.
I say in theory because in our lab, our team does most of that. We're only Band 3, but we do pretty much everything that the qualifieds do apart from validating results and cross-matching/issuing transfusion units, but that's mainly because we work for the NHS and are by default critically understaffed. On the plus side, you can't find state-registered BMSs for toffee, so even with your very poor grades you'll have a good shot at getting a post - just don't go setting your heart on Guy's & St Thomas', Addenbrooke's or Great Ormond Street.
That state registration, by the way, is what marks you as a qualified BMS, not your degree. From what I understand, if it's not included in your biomedical sciences course it's roughly a year's study to get your registration.
As to the differences you requested, biomedical science is a much wider topic than biochemistry. Biochemistry is a specific, though almost certainly the largest, area of biomedical science. As it suggests, it's a focus on the chemical interactions in biological organisms, in this case people, and covers things like liver and kidney function, diagnostic approach to CNS pathology, sex hormones, probability of congestive heart failure etc. etc. etc. - the list is extremely long. Biomedical science will give you a less in-depth understanding of the specific biochemical interactions, but will also cover many other areas - microbiology, haematology, haemophilia, transfusion, immunology, cytology, histopathology and so on. These are all included under the pathology directorate in most trusts, so taking a biomedical science degree would make you much more flexible in what positions you can take, especially since many pathology directorates are blending different disciplines into shapeless "blood sciences" departments with a fluid staff base, ostensibly to *insert management drivel* but really to cut costs.
One other thing - education and progression are available within the NHS, but you're sometimes required to fight tooth and nail for it. If you take the biomedical science course, you'll have a much better chance at getting your foot in the door at most hospitals, and it shouldn't be too difficult to specialise from there, which you'll need to do if you want to move up the ranks (not that there are many ranks). It also gives you the opportunity to explore many different disciplines, and you'd be better off getting a general overview before choosing your latter path rather than throwing your lot behind one subject only to realise you're much more interested in another field.
Last edited:
Biochemistry is for failed chemists and biomedical science is for failed medics.
DDDE isn't even close to the grades to get into a decent course for either of them.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,242
- Location
- Birmingham
If your grades stay the way they are could you even get into those courses? It used to be AAB to get into my course at Birmingham Uni.
I graduated Medical Biochemistry and I wish I hadn't bothered now. Decent entry level jobs in the industry are very scarce at the moment.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
If you do well in e.g. biomedical sciences then you could perhaps apply to medicine. Don't forget after two years your A-Levels mean diddly squat; say you were to do well on the 3 year degree (i.e. averaging a 1st) then without a doubt your faculty should support an application to the 4 year / fast track medicine degree.
Why? There's some justification for the second part, though one of the best parts of my job is being able to help people without actually meeting any of the whining little ******** and to my knowledge none of my colleagues have ever thought about getting on to a medical course, but the bold part just doesn't make any sense.
To be perfectly honest; I just really hated first year biochemistry
Chemistry is far better
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
To be fair biochem, biomed sciences, anatomy, physiology etc., often used to be heavily subscribed by those whose applications for dentistry or medicine weren't successful. Even on the latter two the mature students are by and large those with the aforementioned degrees under their belt.
To be perfectly honest; I just really hated first year biochemistry
Chemistry is far better
Looking at the course info now, biochemistry seems much more like the chemistry I did at school. The chemistry degree a friend of mine was on while I was at uni was much more like physics - which irked me somewhat, because I was doing physics and it was much more like maths than anything else.
Yes there's a fair bit of physics and maths in some areas of chemistry, there's also a lot of... chemistry too.
What irked me about biochemistry is that it isn't like chemistry in that you need to be able to understand complex principles to do well. To do well in biochemistry you need to sit down and learn a load of arbitrary facts, cycles, names and loads of other stuff that shows nothing of how clever you are; just how much time you are willing to spend doing parrot impressions.
Probably to get through the course, yes. You won't get far with that in practical application, not in a medical lab.
Biochemistry is very simple in the hospital lab, the machines do it all and then the biochemist looks at all the harder stuff anyway! I always found it amusing that the toughest subject of the biomedical sciences(for most people not everyone) is the easiest area to work in once qualified
Er, how long did you study biochemistry for and where were you studying it? Biochemistry should be a mixture of both disciplines, we had to learn a lot of the complex chemistry as well as the complex areas of biology.
A year, University of Bristol. I'm a chemistry student there and took 1st year biochem as an open unit, big mistake.