Abstract
ON November 28, at a meeting of the General Medical Council, Sir Clifford Allbutt raised the question, how the grant for research provided by the National Insurance Act could be used to the best advantage. He looked forward, not to a crusade against tuberculosis alone, but to a crusade against many other endemic diseases, a “general movement all along the line against all these plagues.” He pointed out, very truly, that research, diagnosis, and treatment go hand in hand; that the business of pathological and clinical laboratories, in great cities, is to be in touch with men in practice, and to educate them in the methods of science, and in the results of science. He was opposed to the founding of one large institute in London: he was afraid that it would “harden into a bureau”; he desired to see more use made of the many institutions already founded in diverse parts of the country, in our great cities, and in our university cities. Medical research and medical education are inseparable; the doctor must not regard bacteriological institutes as places where he can put a specimen in the slot and get a diagnosis; he must take an intelligent part in the work of the institute. This view was approved by the General Medical Council.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Medical Research and Public Health. . Nature 90, 394 (1912). https://doi.org/10.1038/090394a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/090394a0