Categories announced for the 4th annual Medical and Healthcare Awards

The West Midlands has many great examples of excellence and achievement in the medical and... more

UK Trade & Investment - Notice of Vacancy

Life Sciences/Healthcare Sector Specialist - The British Consulate-General in Cambridge, MA has an... more

Have you got a story to tell?

Professor Lord Robert Winston

At the Medical and Healthcare Industry Confer event hosted by MedilinkWM on 4 June, Professor Lord Robert Winston entertained the group with anecdotes about scientific developments in healthcare, both expected and accidental, and challenged industry to further engage with the general public to dispel their fears about innovation.

The following is a column Prof Winston submitted to the Birmingham Post after speaking at our event and talking with companies, and shows his passion for this market and ideas on how to move innovations forward.

Technology has been used for centuries to increase our understanding of the world around us. But understanding technology and the healthcare innovations it enables, presents us with challenges, both ethical and political.

How can we be sure that science is being used in the right way? Science is about uncertainty. Without knowing where scientific research may take us, how do we make informed decisions about it? It's been said that science is exceeding the pace with which humans can deal. In healthcare the perception is that it is, though the reality is undoubtedly different.

IVF and sex selection have been on the agenda for much longer that most people imagine. It was first investigated as far back as 1760. In fact, we change our views on ethics based on what we discover. That's why I believe it's essential that our universities teach ethics, as well as an understanding of potential conflicts of interest, so advances in healthcare technology can be more easily understood, accepted, and we can all benefit. With any innovation, the ethics debate needs to be had.

From GM crops to stem cell research or even MMR vaccines, the public's perception of the technology matters. For example, we accept that a mother has an ethical duty towards her child, not towards government. If there's doubt about the MMR vaccine, she feels justified in her decision to protect her child as long as there is 'herd immunity', where everyone else does agree to the vaccine in order to prevent an outbreak. With the voice highlighting the risks outweighing the voices of the scientists and the Government who were saying it was safe, there was a clear failure of dialogue, which I predict will have implications in the years to come. It was good fortune, not good planning, that in my opinion has prevented a measles epidemic over the last few years.

In this mathematically illiterate society, the concept of risk remains an issue. The attitude to risk affects the introduction of valuable new technologies, which adds to their cost. But 'reassuring' pronouncements of scientists often are counterproductive - exaggeration, certainty, arrogance and lack of subjectivity frequently have an adverse affect.

Reporting of stem cell biology is another good example. Public perception undoubtedly has a negative effect on certain developments, for example the difficulties associated with the science of genetic modification, which is potentially of huge benefit if it is used wisely.

There is a need for greater engagement with the public and it is the responsibility of Government, scientists, policy-makers and industry to do this. It must also include recognition of the ethical implications of what we do and the conflicts of interest arising from commercial exploitation of intellectual property.

Public trust is a vital ingredient. A recent survey showed that doctors, teachers and professors are among the most trusted of sources, while politicians, business leaders and journalists rate poorly. This is the challenge I set to healthcare and medical technology industry leaders at MedilinkWM's Industry Confer in Birmingham this week.

Industry can learn a lot by taking the lead from universities and bodies such as Science Wise, which has enjoyed great success in creating dialogue with the public and providing information. Improving the quality of information given will be a big step forward and by sponsoring public debates, companies and universities can increase their chances of success.

The region has a strong record for developments in medical technology, with many companies represented at the Confer. I posed an example where robotic technology had enabled a surgeon to conduct the removal of a brain tumour from a neighbouring room. An impressive use of medical technology undoubtedly, but I was concerned by the use of implements that were evidently too large for the job. With all that state of the art technology, one of the simple plastic tools was simply not designed for its current use. Many manufacturing companies in the West Midlands have the expertise, knowledge and state-of-the-art facilities to meet this demand, which demonstrates the need for everyone to engage with researchers, academics and clinicians, even if they offer the simplest of technologies.

Speaking to this group, I contested that the truth of the language is important. Genuine innovation; penicillin, ultrasound, MRI scans, are developed in universities. Industry brings these innovations to market, but it must also work in partnership with academics to make improvements to these products. The language used to describe the capabilities of these 'innovations' is vital to public engagement. Science can be misled by the enthusiasm of experts, and unsubstantiated claims can be reproduced in the media, swaying public opinion. This is exacerbated by the misrepresentation of science by politicians, enforced by the perception of science that even we scientists have pedalled, driven by the need for funding, implementation and acceptance.

We need academics in industry. The role of the university is to develop the minds of scientists so they can change the way we think about products. Industry then has to train these individuals. But as Science and Maths A levels are perceived as the hardest, students looking to gain the best grades to meet the criteria for universities choose 'easier' subjects. In schools, the quality of labs can be inadequate to allow practical research, which is essential to inspire young people to pursue the subject. This results in a lack of talent coming through to research and industry.

Both industrial research and basic academic research is needed in partnership, a concept that is increasingly valued in good universities. Both industry and academia benefit by collaborating in blue-sky work where possible. This is needed to develop true innovations, and is the most important component of university-based research. History shows that this is where key developments are most likely to start.

It's worth noting that better public knowledge of science alone does not increase public trust of technology, but if innovation is to be nurtured, public engagement is a vital process. Debating with companies from the West Midlands and across the UK at MedilinkWM's Industry Confer, is one way to put this process on industry's agenda.