DOCSLIB.ORG

Clinical Research in Britain, 1950-1980

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Clinical Research in Britain, 1950-1980 Wellcome Witnesses to Twentieth Century Medicine CLINICAL RESEARCH IN BRITAIN 1950–1980 A Witness Seminar held at the Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, London, on 9 June 1998 Witness Seminar Transcript edited by L A Reynolds and E M Tansey Introduction by David Gordon Volume 7 – September 2000 ©The Trustee of the Wellcome Trust, London, 2000 First published by the Wellcome Trust, 2000 The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no. 210183. ISBN 978 184129 016 4 All volumes are freely available online at www.history.qmul.ac.uk/research/modbiomed/wellcome_witnesses/ Please cite as: Reynolds L A, Tansey E M. (eds) (2000) Clinical Research in Britain, 1950–1980. Wellcome Witnesses to Twentieth Century Medicine, vol. 7. London: Wellcome Trust. Key Front cover photographs, L to R from the top: Sir Richard Bayliss (1917–2006) Sir John Gray Professor Sir Stanley Peart, Professor Richard Himsworth Dr Billie Williams, Dr Lise Wilkinson Dr Peter Williams, Dr Sheila Howarth (Lady McMichael, 1920–2000) Lord Walton of Detchant (chair), Sir Christopher Booth Professor Guy Scadding (1907–99), Dr David Gordon Sir Douglas Black (1913–2002), Sir John Gray Back cover photographs, L to R from the top: Professor Donald Munro, Dr Mary Cotes Dr Brandon Lush Professor Gert Brieger Dr Gordon Cook Dr Keith Kirkham Professor Arthur Buller Sir Raymond Hoffenberg (1923–2007) CONTENTS Introduction David Gordon i Witness Seminars: Meetings and publications iii Transcript 1 Index 67 INTRODUCTION The British, it is said, are not revolutionary by nature. However, in the last century, we created two organizations that have revolutionized the possibility and reality of clinical research, with worldwide influence. The first was the formation of the Medical Research Council (MRC). The Medical Research Council was the successor of the Medical Research Committee, appointed in 1913 to administer funds provided under the National Health Insurance Act of 1911 (see note 49). While there may be doubt whether or not these funds were intended primarily for research into tuberculosis or for medical research more generally, we cannot doubt the boldness of the step. A government set aside money for medical research, rather than devoting the funds available for a medical problem solely to prevention, diagnosis and treatment. The second revolutionary step was the creation of the National Health Service. The National Health Service Act of 1946 gave Ministers powers not only to conduct research, but also to support the research work of others. The notion of a population- wide, compre h e n s i ve healthcare system, free to the patient at the point of consultation, and able to support the clinical infrastructure of research, was truly revolutionary, and might have been impossible were it not for the appetite for social change created by the Second World War. The combination of government funding for medical res e a r ch, and a health service in which res e a r ch on patients could be carried out, was a recipe for success. In this Wit n e s s Seminar we learn – from those who wer e there at the time – of the success of this combined ven t u r e. The Seminar brought together a rem a r kable group of individuals. Some had undertaken clinical res e a r ch in the decades before the chosen starting point of 1950. We learn of the difficulties, whether created by institutions or by individuals, of clinical res e a r ch in pre-war days. The situation was quite different in the 1950s. We hear fr om many witnesses of the positive atmosphere, of the res e a r ch funds available for good ideas from the MRC and other sources, of the symbiosis between the Health Ser vice and un i v ersities and of the freedom under which people could work. In Sheila Howarth’s words (see page 10), research workers could be ‘rather a happy crew’. This freedom was hard won, and the outcome of the battle to win it was, at times, close. We are reminded that provision for teaching and research in the National Health Service Act was only secured following the intervention of members of the 1942 Club (see note 24). As well as the debate about whether the Medical Research Committee was only intended to support research in tuberculosis, the extent to which the Medical Re s e a rch Council would support re s e a rch in universities, or in postgraduate institutions, or in its own research laboratories, was not clear. Again, i evolution and happy chance led to a broadly-based portfolio of Research Council and charity-funded research that led to the progress of the 1950s and 1960s. This was also an era, as described by many who contributed to the Seminar, where those bodies that did not actively support research also did not constrain it. Howeve r , the past, even through our rose-tinted spectacles, was not perfect. We learn ho w some universities apparently resisted the opportunity of obtaining external funds for res e a r ch. The geographical disposition of hospitals in London was not ideal, either for their clinical service or (as a consequence) for res e a r ch. (This may explain the pre- eminence in clinical res e a r ch of some of the great provincial schools in this post-war era.) Most importa n t l y , Governments began to demand a different and more precise outcome fr om their expenditure in res e a r ch. Politicians failed to learn the lessons of success: the first quarte r - c e n t u r y of the National Health Ser vice had been rel a t i v ely free of top-down di r ection, and successful in the production of res e a r ch work of both fundamental and applied importance. Contributors to the Seminar described, from their own experience in the early 1970s, the process whereb y funds wer e to be transferred from Res e a rc h Councils to their ‘cu s t o m e r ’ departments (see note 149). It is inimical to the political mind to allow freedom in the use of public money, against the possibility of post hoc accountability: the urge is to control from the start. This Seminar showed the way in which the reforms following the 1971 Rothschild Rep o r t and the 1972 White Pap e r wer e introduced, made to work against all odds, and eventually disentangled. We would hope that such disastrous shifts towa r ds more ‘di re c t e d ’ res e a r ch will not happen again in the same way. Not all the failures in the era under rev i e w wer e caused by political errors. Exce l l e n t ideas, such as the development of the Medical Res e a r ch Council’s Clinical Res e a rc h Ce n t r e, did not have the success that they deserved. The Seminar touches on this at many points, but comes to no clear resolution as to why the Clinical Res e a r ch Centre ev entually failed to obtain the backing (both financial and political) that it needed, and was to close. This is a subject deserving of further study. One possibility is that the fa i l u r e lay in the hands of the Medical Res e a r ch Council, in not taking its ideas for a clinical res e a r ch hospital through to completion earlier in the history of the Council. The present Government, in the year 2000, repeatedly describes its programme for un i v ersities and for the Health Ser vice as one of ‘mo d e r n i z a t i o n ’. What could be more modern than a Health Ser vice, universities, Res e a r ch Councils, and others, all worki n g tow a r ds a common aim of supporting excellent and applicable clinical res e a r ch? Dur i n g the period cover ed by this Sem i n a r , there wer e many steps that wer e thought to be towa rd s fu r ther ‘mo d e r n i z a t i o n ’. Some succeeded, but many failed. We must learn from the rem a r kable group of individuals who gave so freely of their time for this Seminar and who, in these pages, give us their own experience of an extraordi n a r y era in clinical res e a r ch. David Gordon. Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Nursing, University of Manchester ii WITNESS SEMINARS: MEETINGS AND PUBLICATIONS* In 1990 the Wellcome Trust created the History of Twentieth Century Medicine Group to bring together clinicians, scientists, historians and others interested in contemporary medical history. Amongst a number of other initiatives, the format of Witness Seminars – used by the Institute of Contemporary British History to address issues of recent political history – was adopted, to promote interaction between these different groups, to emphasize the potentials of working jointly, and to encourage the creation and deposit of archival sources for present and future use. The Witness Seminar is a particularly specialized form of oral history where several people associated with a particular set of circumstances or events are invited to meet together to discuss, debate, and agree or disagree about their memories. To date, the History of Twentieth Century Medicine Group has held 24 such meetings, most of which have been published, as listed in the Table below.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Disorders of Thrombosis and Hemostasis in Pregnancy
    Disorders of Thrombosis and Hemostasis in Pregnancy Hannah Cohen • Patrick O'Brien Editors Disorders of Thrombosis and Hemostasis in Pregnancy A Guide to Management Second Edition Editors Hannah Cohen Patrick O'Brien Department of Haematology Institute for Women’s Health University College London Hospitals University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust NHS Foundation Trust London London UK UK ISBN 978-3-319-15119-9 ISBN 978-3-319-15120-5 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-15120-5 Library of Congress Control Number: 2015936083 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London © Springer-Verlag London 2015 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Make a Comment Or Complaint
    How to make a comment or complaint An easy-read guide for people with learning disabilities and their carers Making a comment We would like you to tell us what you think of our hospitals and the support you receive Please tell us if we can do better If you have had a good experience, we would like you to tell us about it This is how you can give us your comments: ●● Speak to someone from our patient advice and liaison service (PALS) ●● Use one of the hand-held computers on the ward or department you are visiting If you are not happy with the care or treatment you receive The Trust hopes to offer good support to all patients Sometimes things go wrong If you are not happy with the support you have received, you should tell us as soon as possible This booklet will tell you: ●● How to complain ●● The steps you will need to take ●● Who can give you support Step 1: how to make an informal complaint If you are not happy you should speak to the hospital staff caring for you Often things can be put right this way If you want to discuss the problem with someone else in the hospital, you can contact PALS, the patient advice and liaison service PALS can speak to the ward or department and try to put things right Using PALS, the patient advice and liaison service Every hospital has a patient advice and liaison team (PALS). They can help you with: ●● Any questions you have about your visit ●● Helping with to put right any problems during your visit ●● Speaking to the ward or department on your behalf We have patient advice and liaison services (PALS)
    [Show full text]
  • King's College Hospital Board of Directors
    King’s College Hospital Board of Directors PUBLIC AGENDA Time of meeting 14:00 Date of meeting Tuesday, 16 December 2014 Venue Dulwich Room, Hambledon Wing, Denmark Hill Members: Prof. Sir George Alberti (GA) Trust Chair Graham Meek (GM) Non-Executive Director, Vice Chair Marc Meryon (MM1) Non-Executive Director Christopher Stooke (CS) Non-Executive Director Sue Slipman (SS) Non-Executive Director Tim Smart (TS) Chief Executive Angela Huxham (AH) Director of Workforce Development Trudi Kemp (TD) - Non-voting Director Director of Strategy Dr. Michael Marrinan (MM) Medical Director Roland Sinker (RS) Chief Operating Officer Simon Taylor (ST) Chief Financial Officer Dr. Geraldine Walters (GW) Director of Nursing & Midwifery Jane Walters (JW) - Non-voting Director Director of Corporate Affairs In attendance: Tamara Cowan (TC) Board Secretary (Minutes) Prof. Sir Robert Lechler (RL) Executive Director, KHP Sally Lingard (SL) Associate Director of Communications Linda Smith KCH Charity Representative Apologies: Prof. Ghulam Mufti (GM1) Non-Executive Director Faith Boardman (FB) Non-Executive Director Circulation to: Board of Directors Circulation List Enclosure Lead Time 1. STANDING ITEMS G Alberti 14:00 1.1. Apologies 1.2. Declarations of Interest 1.3. Chair’s Action 1.4. Minutes of Previous Meeting – 25/11/2014 Enc 1.4 1.5. Matters Arising/Action Tracking Enc 1.5 2. FOR REPORT/DISCUSSION 2.1. Update from Board Committee Chairs 14:05 2.1.1. Audit Committee Verbal C Stooke 2.1.2. Board Integration Committee Verbal C Stooke 2.1.3. Finance & Performance Committee Verbal G Meek 2.1.4. Quality & Governance Committee Verbal G Alberti 2.1.5.
    [Show full text]
  • Reviews ~-Medical Journal Books Received
    JUNEJUNE24,L'+,1961 REVIEWS REVIEWS BRITISH 1813 ~-MEDICAL JOURNAL under the Presidency of Sir Charles Dodds. It was the Th2e Medical Register I96I. Parts 1 and 2. (Pp. 3,111 +xxiv.) first joint meeting between the British Society of London: The General Medical Council, 44 Hallam Street, W.i. Enclocrinology and the societies representing the Acta 1961. A Prelude to Medical History. By Felix Marti-lbifiez, Endocrinologica Congresses. M.D. (Pp. 253 +xix. $5.75.) New York: MD Publications, About two-thirds of the papers reported are included Inc. 1961. in four symposia. The first three, on " Neuroendo- The Mantagement ofPediatric Practice. By Hugh C. Thompson, crinology," " Thyroid Gland," and " Parathyroid M.D., and Joseph B. Seagle, M.S., M.D. (Pp. 172+xv; illUs- CGlands," make up Volume 9 (Part I). Volume 10 trated. 60s.) Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas. Oxford: (Part I1) includes the fourth symposium entitled "Are Blackwell Scientific Publications. 1961. the Endocrine Glands directly related to Cancer ? Par-ents of the Handicapped. Self. Organied Parents' adl Re!atives' Groutps for Treatmenzt of Ill anzd Hanydicappced and the remaining papers grouped under the headings Children. By Alfred H. Katz, D.S.W. (Pp. 155+ix. 48s.) " Steroid Biochemistry " and " Biological Actions and Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas. Oxford: Blackwell Interrelationships of Steroids and other Hormones." Scientific Publications. 1961. The symposia deal mainly with growing points and Thought Refo.rm and the Psychology, of Totalism. A Study oj give a representative picture of recent European "Brainwashing" in China. By Robert Lifton, M.D. (Pp. 510 achievements in these sectors of endocrinology.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Pharmacology in the UK, C. 1950–2000: Industry and Regulation
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY IN THE UK, c. 1950–2000: INDUSTRY AND REGULATION The transcript of a Witness Seminar held by the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL, London, on 25 September 2007 Edited by L A Reynolds and E M Tansey Volume 34 2008 ©The Trustee of the Wellcome Trust, London, 2008 First published by the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL, 2008 The Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL is funded by the Wellcome Trust, which is a registered charity, no. 210183. ISBN 978 085484 118 9 All volumes are freely available online at: www.history.qmul.ac.uk/research/modbiomed/wellcome_witnesses/ Please cite as: Reynolds L A, Tansey E M. (eds) (2008) Clinical Pharmacology in the UK c.1950-2000: Industry and regulation. Wellcome Witnesses to Twentieth Century Medicine, vol. 34. London: Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL. CONTENTS Illustrations and credits v Abbreviations vii Witness Seminars: Meetings and publications; Acknowledgements E M Tansey and L A Reynolds ix Introduction Professor Parveen Kumar xxiii Transcript Edited by L A Reynolds and E M Tansey 1 References 73 Biographical notes 89 Glossary 103 Index 109 ILLUSTRATIONS AND CREDITS Figure 1 AstraZeneca Clinical Trials Unit, South Manchester. Reproduced by permission of AstraZeneca. 6 Figure 2 A summary of the organization of clinical trials. Adapted from www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/info/glossary (visited 1 May 2008). 10 Figure 3 Clinical trial certificates (CTC) and clinical trial exemption (CTX), 1972–1985. Adapted from Speirs (1983) and Speirs (1984).
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Chair of Clinical Surgery
    History of the Chair of Clinical Surgery Eleven people have held the Chair of Clinical Surgery since its establishment in 1802. They are, in chronological order: • Professor James Russell • Professor James Syme • Lord Joseph Lister • Professor Thomas Annandale • Professor Francis Mitchell Caird • Sir Harold Stiles • Sir John Fraser • Sir James Learmonth • Sir John Bruce • Sir Patrick Forrest • Sir David Carter Introduction At the end of the 18th century surgeons had been advocating that the teaching of surgery in the University of Edinburgh was of sufficient importance to justify a chair in its own right. Resistance to this development was largely directed by Munro Secundus, who regarded this potentially as an infringement on his right to teach anatomy and surgery. James Russell petitioned the town council to establish a Chair of Clinical Surgery and, in 1802, he was appointed as the first Professor of Clinical Surgery. The chair was funded by a Crown endowment of £50 a year from George III in 1803. James Russell 1754-1836 James Russell followed his father of the same name into the surgical profession. His father had served as deacon of the Incorporation of Surgeons (Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh) in 1752.The younger James Russell was admitted into the Incorporation in 1774, the year before it became the Royal College of Surgeons of the City of Edinburgh. Prior to his appointment to the Regius Chair of Clinical Surgery, Russell was seen as a popular teacher attracting large classes in the extramural school. Though he was required by the regulations of the time to retire from practice at the Royal Infirmary at the age of 50, he continued to lecture and undertake tutorials in clinical surgery over the next 20 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Newsletter 8
    Fellowship Newsletter 8 Clinical Academic Medicine in Jeopardy Recruitment is in crisis and those already following a time for research, and proposes clinical academic career are under pressure as never solutions for the particular before. The attraction of a career in difficulties experienced in craft clinical academic medicine is specialties such as surgery, fading and while the public anaesthetics, obstetrics and have strong expectations for gynaecology, radiology, and high medical standards and cardiology. rapid developments in health- Professor Sir Peter Morris FRS, care more than 10% of PRCS, FMedSci, chairman of professorial and senior lecturer the Academy working group posts remain unfilled and the that produced the report said at shortage of clinical research its launch ‘The situation for workers and clinical teachers academic medicine is becoming desperate espe- raises serious worries. cially for craft specialties such as surgery. The Academy’s latest report Concerted action by all the stakeholders - the Clinical academic medicine in Academy, government, the universities, the medical jeopardy, confronts these issues, royal colleges and others - is needed now, not only to demands urgent action to improve recruitment and produce the next generation of doctors but also to retention and spells out the consequences of inaction. maintain the translation of basic biological research into It makes practical suggestions for how this can be clinical practice in the UK’. achieved by addressing contractual and remuneration The report may be downloaded from the Academy’s issues, and appraisal and revalidation practices, and web site or paper copies obtained free from Tony Leaney improving career progress. It stresses the importance at the Academy.
    [Show full text]
  • Acute Med V10 N1.Qxd 16/02/2011 16:10 Page 3
    Acute Medicine V10 N1_Acute Med V10 N1.qxd 16/02/2011 16:10 Page 3 Acute Medicine 2011; 10(1): 3-4 3 Guest Editorial The Rebirth of General, ‘Acute’ Medicine: will the baby survive? Professor Sir George Alberti uring the 1980s and 1990s general medicine specialty. Unfortunately this was not the conclusion was progressively displaced by medical of the first working party! However, a subsequent D specialties as the major focus of a consultant group did indeed agree that the development of physician’s career. Fewer and fewer people were acute medicine was important, leading to the appointed as ‘general physicians with a specialist creation of Acute Medicine as a subspeciality of interest’, which had been the norm prior to this. GIM. Concerns were expressed that consultants Specialists whose main focus was their ‘ology’ were appointed to such posts would suffer burn-out; continuing to be expected to take their share of acute inevitably those appointed in the first waves were medical “takes”. Training for most medical also accredited in another speciality. A 4 year training specialties still encompassed training in General programme, which provided accreditation in GIM Internal Medicine (GIM). However, this often was with recognition of the subspeciality training in truncated in favour of the main specialty and was Acute Medicine was developed. Later, the even resented, by some, as interfering with their recognition of Acute Internal Medicine (AIM) as a “proper” training. None of this was surprising: speciality in its own right ensured the development medical specialties were becoming more complex & of a specific AIM curriculum with its own set of many more treatments, interventions and diagnostic competencies allowing dual accreditation with GIM.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Effort Pays Off.. Smallpox at Target "Zero"
    DXIEIJMECIX: CENTER FOR DISEASE CONTROL ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30333 VOLUME 11, NO. 10 Zero Smallpox Issue This issue of DATELINE: CDC is devoted to the story of the eradi­ cation of smallpox and CDC's in­ volvement. Inside stories include: • Historical vignettes • Pictures of field work • The last case of U.S. smallpox • An early campaign to eliminate the disease • Technology of eradication • Future of the smallpox virus • Chronology of smallpox, and others ft#***#*####*#****#*#*********** Throughout this issue are scattered stories o f "unsung heroes" from many nations who worked with CDC staff in V A R IO LA MAJOR'S last case Rahima Banu, AFTER RECOVERY, Ali Maow Maalin, the fight against smallpox. We have a little girl in Bangladesh who survived. will have chance for normal life. asked the staffers who worked with them to write about them, and all Global Effort Pays Off.. represent true stories o f the eradica­ tion battle. Smallpox at Target "Zero" -ft****************************** The last documented, naturally occurring case of smallpox was diagnosed in Physicians Challenged Merka, Somalia, in 1977. On October 26, 1979, the world celebrated its second anniversary free from smallpox transmission. Smallpox in 1844 A li Maow Maalin, then 23, was a of confidence among a trained army of The WHO campaign against small­ cook in Somalia when he came down smallpox fighters from most of the pox wasn't the first time war had been with smallpox. When he recovered, nations of the world — confidence that declared on the disease. he became the last recorded case of they could be successful in combat In 1844 the progress of a vaccina­ variola minor, a less severe form of with an old enemy.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Testing
    GENETIC TESTING The transcript of a Witness Seminar held by the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL, London, on 13 July 2001 Edited by D A Christie and E M Tansey Volume 17 2003 CONTENTS Illustrations v Introduction Professor Peter Harper vii Acknowledgements ix Witness Seminars: Meetings and publications xi E M Tansey and D A Christie Transcript Edited by D A Christie and E M Tansey 1 References 73 Biographical notes 91 Glossary 105 Index 115 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 Triploid cells in a human embryo, 1961. 20 Figure 2 The use of FISH with DNA probes from the X and Y chromosomes to sex human embryos. 62 v vi INTRODUCTION Genetic testing is now such a widespread and important part of medicine that it is hard to realize that it has almost all emerged during the past 30 years, with most of the key workers responsible for the discoveries and development of the field still living and active. This alone makes it a suitable subject for a Witness Seminar but there are others that increase its value, notably the fact that a high proportion of the critical advances took place in the UK; not just the basic scientific research, but also the initial applications in clinical practice, particularly those involving inherited disorders. To see these topics discussed by the people who were actually involved in their creation makes fascinating reading; for myself it is tinged with regret at having been unable to attend and contribute to the seminar, but with some compensation from being able to look at the contributions more objectively than can a participant.
    [Show full text]
  • The Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London Galen Medal Winners
    The Worshipful Society of Apothecaries of London Galen Medal Winners 1926 Prof WE DIXON, BSc, MA, MD, DPH, FRS Pharmacology 1927 Sir Gowland HOPKINS, MA, LLD, DSc, FRCP, FRIC, FRS Discovery of vitamins 1928 Prof JJ ABEL, MD, ScD, LLD Isolation of Adrenaline 1930 Prof E FOURNEAU, Directeur de 1'Institute Pasteur Pharmacology of amino-alcohols 1932 Sir Henry DALE, OM, GBE, MA, MD, FRCP, FRS Neurophysiology 1934 Prof Sir Frederick BANTING, MC, Hon FRCS, DSc, LLD Discovery of Insulin 1946 Sir Alexander FLEMING, FRCP, FRCS, FRS Penicillin Lord FLOREY, MA, MD, FRCP, FRS 1947 F CURD, BSc, PhD D DAVEY, MSc, PhD Discovery of Paludrine F ROSE, BSc, PhD 1948 Sir Lionel WHITBY, CVO, MC, MD, FRCP Sulphonamides 1949 Prof J TREFOUEL, Directeur de 1'Institute Pasteur Sulphonamides 1951 Prof Sir Charles DODDS, Bt, MVO, MD, FRCP, FRS Biochemistry 1953 Sir Charles HARINGTON, MA, PhD, FRS Synthesised Thyroxin 1954 EL SMITH, DSc, FRIC Vitamin B12 1955 Lord BROCK, MS, FRCS Cardiac surgery 1957 Prof Sir Ernst CHAIN, MA, DPhil, FRS Production of Penicillin 1958 Sir Macfarlane BURNET, OM, MD, FRCP, FRS Vaccines for virus infections 1959 Prof Sir Bradford HILL, CBE, PhD, DSc, FRS Medical statistics 1960 Sir Tudor THOMAS, DSc, MD, MS, FRCS Corneo-plastic surgery 1961 Prof R PATERSON, CBE, MC, MD, FRCS, FFR Radiotherapy 1962 Prof W PENFIELD, OM, CMG, MD, DSc, FRS Neurosurgery & Neurophysiology 1963 Prof Sir Alexander HADDOW, MD, DSc, PhD, FRS Experimental pathology & cancer research 1964 FP DOYLE, MSc, FRIC Chemical & biological GN ROLINSON, BSc, PhD development
    [Show full text]
  • Dainton 1 NCUACS 112/11/02
    F.S. Dainton 1 NCUACS 112/11/02 Title: Catalogue of the papers and correspondence of Frederick Sydney Dainton, Baron Dainton of Hallam Moors FRS (1914-1997), chemist Compiled by: Timothy E. Powell, Peter Harper and Caroline Thibeaud F.S. Dainton 2 NCUACS 112/11/02 Description level: Fonds Date of material: ca 1885-2002 Extent of material: 162 boxes, ca 3,500 items Deposited in: University of Sheffield Library Reference code: GB 0200 MS 231 ã 2002 National Cataloguing Unit for the Archives of Contemporary Scientists, University of Bath. NCUACS catalogue no. 112/11/02 The work of the National Cataloguing Unit for the Archives of Contemporary Scientists in the production of this catalogue was made possible by a grant from the Goldsmiths’ Company’s Charities. F.S. Dainton 3 NCUACS 112/11/02 F.S. Dainton 4 NCUACS 112/11/02 NOT ALL THE MATERIAL IN THIS COLLECTION MAY YET BE AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION. ENQUIRIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE FIRST INSTANCE TO: THE CURATOR OF SPECIAL COLLECTIONS AND UNIVERSITY ARCHIVES THE MAIN LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD SHEFFIELD F.S. Dainton 5 NCUACS 112/11/02 LIST OF CONTENTS Items Page GENERAL INTRODUCTION 5 SECTION A BIOGRAPHICAL AND PERSONAL A.1-A.539 14 SECTION B RESEARCH B.1-B.131 72 SECTION C UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE C.1-C.122 84 SECTION D UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS D.1-D.97 91 SECTION E UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM E.1-E.78 99 SECTION F UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMITTEE F.1-F.136 108 SECTION G UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD G.1-G.147 126 SECTION H HOUSE OF LORDS H.1-H.374 143 SECTION J SOCIETIES AND ORGANISATIONS J.1-J.998 174 SECTION K PUBLICATIONS K.1-K.193 283 SECTION L LECTURES L.1-L.362 301 SECTION M VISITS AND CONFERENCES M.1-M.183 342 SECTION N CORRESPONDENCE N.1-N.91 363 F.S.
    [Show full text]