APPENDIX 107
Memorandum from Professor Critchley and
Professor Calder, University of Edinburgh
We understand that the Science and Technology
Select Committee has been considering the future location of the
MRC funded National Institute for Medical Research at Millhill
and has been consulting on this issue. We write to contribute
to the debate by expressing our unambiguous view concerning the
best location for such a Medical Research Institute. We are in
no doubt about the added value of location adjacent to a busy
(preferably teaching) hospital which is dealing with the clinical
problems which are ultimately the target of the research agenda
of the scientists. Such a location benefits greatly from the opportunity
for exchange of ideas between basic scientists, clinical academics
and medical specialists. Those who work "at the bedside"
are then in the position to interact with colleagues working "at
the bench" in active regular interchange of ideas in relation
to the important questions that need to be addressed. Translatable
studies are more easily executed from the laboratory when the
patients are in close proximity. Geographical isolation inevitably
makes collaborations more difficult. Joint meetings between hospital
and laboratory staff become a reality thereby providing opportunities
for each to recognise the others' needs where there is a common
goal namely optimisation of patient care.
In Edinburgh, we have been privileged to have
enjoyed several such arrangements for several decades. Our own
participation lies within the Centre for Reproductive Biology
which is a tripartite collaboration consisting of the Medical
Research Council Unit of Human Reproductive Sciences together
with the University Division of Reproductive and Developmental
Sciences and the National Health Service Centre for Reproductive
Health located in the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. When the hospital
faced relocation two years ago to a greenfield site, the strategic
decision was taken that the three components of the Centre for
Reproductive Biology would remain in close association; indeed
with the opportunity for new building currently under construction
as the Research Institute for Medical Cell Biology, this integration
has been enhanced. The consequence of this is that clinicians
and basic scientists identify as being part of one organisation
with common goals. Joint seminars take place and all of the professionals
contribute to both undergraduate and postgraduate training. Clinical
research is a central part of the culture of the hospital as a
whole and there is a wholly positive attitude about the benefits
of a research agenda which is held by all staff (clinical and
non-clinical) as well as the many patients who themselves feel
part of that culture of common pursuit of the highest quality
of clinical care and who willingly participate in the relevant
research endeavors. We believe that the conduct of basic research
in a clinical vacuum detracts from its impact on the effective
development of enhanced treatment opportunities and consequently
runs the risk of failing to achieve the full potential of this
vital investment.
November 2004
|
