Biomedical Research

Voyageur

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Spent an hour last night while driving listening to this talk (Ideas - with Dr. David Naylor) which was part his talk at the Friesen Public Lecture and an interview with him intermixed.

It is aimed at doctors and researches, and yet there is something in here for anyone to think about. In this respect, coming from much of the data that has been reviewed in different posts, in articles, papers and in further research, there is counters to what he represents in the main - this is what I was thinking when listening because the basis of what he spent his former years doing was on different forms of clinical and advanced research; much of it obviously with drugs. Dr. Naylor only brings up a specific drugs or even the words pharmaceuticals a few times, yet it is inhered throughout. He does mention some poor trial that were void of proper methods. He discusses the abhorrent practice of 'while you are at it' doing appendectomy's or the same with tonsils, as was the practice.

On trials, he discusses the forms of trials (basic experimental, clinical, epidemiological research, cohort studies etc.) among the explosive nature of new database availability and precision biomedical research of the future, and what that means. So, he is getting at the nys and bolts of some of the problems with research, such as evaluative vs. observational cohort based (case control, cross-sectional, ecological, randomized, observational (subdivided), epidemiological studies et cetera.

From the get-go, Taylor left research to become professor and then Dean (UofT medicine) and was/is influential in the mechanisms of medicine and public health policy and was involved in a large degree with the SARS so called epidemic and what to do about it, and likely much more. He says he does not regret the shift away from research, and yet you can hear the longing for it in some of his replies; he offers advice for new researchers or people considering the field..

He does bring down some heavy words for some drug companies and the ways in which research is conducted (including fraud in papers) and makes mention towards the end on the issue of genetic altering (very much not in his liking) that is starting to take place more and more. On drugs, and as an overall, he is talking about the variability of each individual and their different reactions (in evidence) to the effects of drug treatments and how we cannot continue with blanket methods to treat patients. Basically, he seems to acknowledge that a whole new system needs to be developed (which will have commercial decenteors of course) with the barriers being cost.

He does not once bring up nutrition or anything alternative, and yet I wondered if he does not deeply know that these things are of vital importance; one had to consider who he was talking to in lecture and interview. He does bring up cardiovascular issues and things like HDL in studies; cholesterol and how the studies slant findings, at least as was understood.

Anyway, for researchers and doctors this might be a interesting talk to listen to if only to make comment on what I'm missing; think it is obvious in our day where things have gone wrong and Naylor seems likely to have a better grasp of this then he lets on; he seemed genuine and concerned and at the same time represents the system we know.



Talking with Doctor David Naylor: Winner of the 2018 Friesen Prize

Talking with Doctor David Naylor: Winner of the 2018 Friesen Prize | CBC Radio




dr-david-naylor-2018-friesen-prize-winner.jpg

Dr. David Naylor is the winner of the 2018 Friesen Prize. (Friends of CIHR/Patrick Doyle/Facebook)


Listen to the full episode53:59

Although he's not yet officially eligible to collect his pension, Dr. David Naylor is already President Emeritus of the University of Toronto — having occupied the office itself for eight turbulent years from 2005 - 2013. Before that, Naylor was Dean of Medicine at U of T, and Chair of the National Advisory Committee on SARS. Right now, he's interim head of the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. And he was recently awarded the 2018 Henry G. Friesen Prize for Health Science Research. David Naylor talks with Paul Kennedy about his life and work, and about his recent Friesen Prize Lecture at the University of Ottawa.

There remains no reason why Canada cannot leapfrog many nations in the domain of Health Science. We gave the world evidence-based medicine, and now we give the world evidence-based precision medicine. Think of it as another Canadian gift to human kind.

- Dr. David Naylor

Paul Kennedy on his history with the Friesen Prize Winners

Dr. Naylor is actually the thirteenth Friesen Prize Laureate to be featured on IDEAS. But the series started a bit of a hiccup.

We've been partnered with the Friends of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research since the first prize was presented in 2006. It went to Dr. Joseph Martin, who'd been Dean of the Harvard Medical School, and who'd played a key role in the identification of the gene responsible for Huntington's Disease.

I have very intense memories of that first Friesen Public Lecture. It was a sunny early-autumn afternoon, at the University of Montreal. I met the legendary Henry Friesen backstage just before the lecture started. It felt like I'd somehow been beamed up into some intellectual stratosphere, where giants of medical research magically walked and talked and acted just like normal people.

When Dr. Martin started to deliver his lecture, and his first PowerPoint slide filled the screen behind him, I suddenly realized that he hadn't been told we were hoping to broadcast some version of his lecture on the radio.

The slide depicted an X-ray cross section of a diseased human brain. It was followed by several dozen similar slides, each described in clinical detail, using language understood by neurological specialists. For me it was absolutely impossible. I knew what he was talking about, but I had no idea what he was saying.

When he finished, there was polite applause. I made my way to the podium to shake Dr. Martin's hand, and start the question period.

"How was that?", he whispered.

"I'm sure it was brilliant," I responded, "but there's no way we could ever broadcast it on the radio. Don't worry though. I think I can fix it." The problem was the PowerPoint, which "doesn't work on the radio".

After he'd answered questions from the audience — most of which used the same specialist language in which he'd delivered the lecture, we agreed to meet at a later date, to record an interview about his life and work.

1544222476843.png
Dr. David Naylor is the winner of the 2018 Henry G. Friesen International Prize in Health Research.

All of the subsequent Friesen Laureates have also been interviewed. Those conversations have revealed those 'giants of medical research' as real people with real aspirations and dreams and goals — all trying to solve medical problems to help all of humanity.

In many ways, David Naylor delivered a 'perfect' Friesen Lecture. People listening on the radio wouldn't need to see his slides, which were mostly portraits of the medical pioneers that were mentioned in his talk. He spoke directly and clearly, using language that even I could understand. And his clarion call for a new renaissance of Canadian Medical research sounded like something that Henry Friesen — who was, once again, sitting in the front row — could endorse.

Ideas

David Naylor talks about the value of winning prizes, and the importance of communication in science.

{Radio clips from presentation and interview}:

David Naylor talks about the value of winning prizes, and the importance of communication in science.


**This episode was produced by Paul Kennedy.
 
Back
Top Bottom