981 resultados para Francis, John, 1811-1882.
Resumo:
In 1975 two Cambridge scientists published a short article in Nature which announced the discovery of monoclonal antibodies. The article concluded ‘Such cultures could be valuable for medical and industrial use’. The interest which developed by the end of the decade in the industrial and financial possibilities of the new prospects opening up in biotechnology was to throw the apparent ‘failure’ to follow‐up the potentialities of this discovery into a public prominence rarely achieved by scientific discoveries. By the time Mrs Thatcher came to power it had become a scandal, another example of Britain's apparent inability to exploit effectively the brilliance of its scientific base. It was to explore both the process of scientific discovery and the conditions in Cambridge which nurtured it, and the issues which this particular discovery raised in the area of technology transfer (and the changes of policy that ensued), that the Wellcome Trust's History of Twentieth Century Medicine Group and the Institute of Contemporary British History organised this special witness seminar. It was held at the Wellcome Trust in London on 24 September 1993. The seminar was chaired by Sir Christopher Booth and introduced by Dr Robert Bud of the Science Museum. Those participating included the two authors of the Nature article, Dr César Milstein and Dr Georges Köhler, who received a Nobel Prize for their research, Dr Basil Bard (National Research Development Corporation [NRDC] 1950–74), Sir James Gowans (Secretary of the Medical Research Council [MRC] 1977–87), Sir John Gray (Secretary of the MRC 1968–77), John Newell (BBC World Service science correspondent 1969–79), Dr David Owen (MRC), and Dr David Secher (Laboratory of Molecular Biology [LMB], Cambridge). There were also contributions from Dr Ita Askonas (former head of immunology at the National Institute for Medical Research), Dr John Galloway (former member of MRC headquarters staff), Dr David Tyrrell (former Director, MRC Common Cold Unit), Professor Miles Weatherall (head of Therapeutic Research Division, Wellcome Research Laboratories 1967–75), Dr Guil Winchester (post‐doctoral fellow, Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine), and Dr Peter Williams (former Director of the Wellcome Trust). The organisers would like to thank the Wellcome Trust for hosting and sponsoring the seminar. We would like to dedicate this publication to the memory of Georges Köhler, who sadly died in April 1995 before this could appear.
Resumo:
Opposition is rarely a good preparation for government. The only post‐war government to enter office confident, well‐acquainted with the Civil Service and with a fund of administrative experience to draw on was the Attlee administration formed in 1945. The longer a party spends in opposition the more these assets disappear. Labour, by the end of the long period of Conservative rule in 1951–64, was largely unfamiliar with the burdens of office. This formed the background to the formulation of the Douglas‐Home rules, whereby informal contact is permitted between the Civil Service and the Opposition in advance of a general election. Since 1964 this arrangement has gradually become more extensive (especially after Neil Kinnock complained that the period for contact was too brief during the run‐up to the 1992 election) and more formalised. In late 1993 John Major agreed that contacts could be made from early 1996 in advance of the next election, rather than only during the last six months of a parliament, as had by then become the convention.’ The object of this short paper is, however, to explain how these rules originated.
Resumo:
The witness seminar was held in December 1991 at the Institute of Historical Research in London. It examined some of the key issues surrounding the editing of political diaries, including what to edit, the motivation of the diarist and the value of diaries to historians. Peter Catterall of the ICBH was in the chair. The three principal speakers were Ruth Winstone, editor of Tony Benn's diaries, David Brooks, editor of the diary of Sir Edward Hamilton, and John Barnes, co‐editor with David Nicholson, of the diary of Leo Amery. Other contributors included Jad Adams (biographer of Tony Benn), Kathleen Burk (co‐author of a study of the 1976 IMF crisis), Philip Williamson (editor of the diary of William Bridgeman), M.R.D. Foot (an editor of the Gladstone diaries), and Stuart Ball (editor of the diary of Sir Cuthbert Headlam).
Resumo:
Trabalho de Projecto submetido à Escola Superior de Teatro e Cinema para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Teatro - especialização em Encenação.
Resumo:
TESE DE DOUTORAMENTO EM HISTÓRIA
Resumo:
Nationwide surveys on radiation dose to the population from medical radiology are recommended in order to follow the trends in population exposure and ensure radiation protection. The last survey in Switzerland was conducted in 1998, and the annual effective dose from medical radiology was estimated to be 1 mSv y(-1) per capita. The purpose of this work was to follow the trends in diagnostic radiology between 1998 and 2008 in Switzerland and determine the contribution of different modalities and types of examinations to the collective effective dose from medical x-rays. For this reason, an online database (www.raddose.ch) was developed. All healthcare providers who hold a license to run an x-ray unit in the country were invited to participate in the survey. More than 225 examinations, covering eight radiological modalities, were included in the survey. The average effective dose for each examination was reassessed. Data from about 3,500 users were collected (42% response rate). The survey showed that the annual effective dose was 1.2 mSv/capita in 2008. The most frequent examinations are conventional and dental radiographies (88%). The contribution of computed tomography was only 6% in terms of examination frequency but 68% in terms of effective dose. The comparison with other countries showed that the effective dose per capita in Switzerland was in the same range as in other countries with similar healthcare systems, although the annual number of examinations performed in Switzerland was higher.
Resumo:
Périodicité : Mensuel