Main

The Medical Research Council (MRC) is a grant-awarding organization of international repute. Supported by UK taxpayers, the MRC is the UK's largest public provider of biomedical-research funds and, armed with this capital, the organization seeks to promote research into all areas of medical science “with the aims of improving the health and quality of life of the UK public and contributing to the wealth of the nation”.

There is no doubt that MRC-funded research has benefited many, not only in the UK. Since its establishment in 1913, the organization has been directly responsible for many of the most significant discoveries and achievements in medicine. For readers of this journal, notable milestones include the work of Ernst Chain and Howard Florey who, building on the 1929 discovery by Alexander Fleming of penicillin's antibacterial properties, showed that it was possible to purify penicillin in pharmaceutical quantities and cure a wide range of infectious bacterial diseases. All three were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1945. In 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick solved the molecular structure of DNA while working at the MRC Unit for Research on the Molecular Structure of Biological Systems, which later became the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology at Cambridge. Watson, Crick and their collaborator, Maurice Wilkins, received the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discovery.

Both of these discoveries, and many other achievements made possible through the support of the MRC over their 93-year history, have proved invaluable in furthering our understanding of bacteria, bacterial infectious diseases and antimicrobial strategies. Putting the reputation of the organization to one side, a pertinent question of more immediate relevance is to consider whether the MRC is in a position to provide a similar degree of stimulus to the field of bacteriology in the years to come? A rudimentary analysis of recent funding trends by the MRC in this area suggests that this will not be the case.

...of these awards, none were devoted to furthering our understanding of bacteria responsible for either food-borne diseases or hospital-acquired infections.

A review of the lists of recently awarded MRC grants from the last grant awarding session (http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/funding/funding-recent_awards.htm) revealed that 293 grants were awarded to UK biomedical scientists. Of these, just 10 could be classified as awards funding research on pathogenic bacteria. The lucky few included projects on Group A streptococcal fimbriae, structural and functional studies on the Shigella type III secretion system, and the roles of sialic acid in the commensal and disease states of Haemophilus influenzae. The 10 grants amount to approximately 3% of the listed funded grants or £3 million pounds in funding, a sum of money that equates to less than 1% of the total MRC research grant budget for 2004/2005. Surprisingly, of these awards, none were devoted to furthering our understanding of bacteria responsible for either food-borne diseases or hospital-acquired infections, two of the more devastating medical burdens afflicting the UK health system.

On reflection, perhaps this paucity of success for grants funding bacteriology-focused projects is not entirely unexpected. Among the 50 or so MRC research centres and units, there is no facility that focuses on research into improving our understanding of the biology of bacterial pathogens, a first step in the successful development of any therapeutic strategy. Recently, the funding body announced a spending priority on post-genome research, a worthy ambition. However, deciphering the genome sequence of medically important bacterial pathogens — a crucial research milestone in achieving an understanding of the molecular basis of the infectious process and an obvious prerequisite to post-genomic studies — is left to other funding bodies to support.

The remit of the MRC is huge — their portfolio encompasses the whole spectrum of biomedical science, from basic research to bedside clinical practice. In addition to supporting research across these disparate areas, a focus on clinical research must be at the heart of the MRC's mission to build a knowledge base that will ultimately improve clinical practice and maintain public health. With this essential focus on clinical research and with so many important causes competing for limited funds, striking the correct balance is a complex and constantly evolving undertaking. In general, the MRC does an admirable job in achieving an equitable balance. Where there is an argument for a reassessment of priorities is a clearer recognition of the importance of bacteriology and, more specifically, an increased commitment to providing support that furthers our understanding of the biology of bacterial pathogens, especially those that place the greatest pressure on the UK health system.