Volume 19
THE CANADIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL LA REVUE VlTtRINAIRE CANADIENNE December-decembre 1978
No. 12
The D.L.T. Smith Lecture Series The inaugural lecture of the D. L. T. Smith Lecture Series was given by Peter D. Rossdale, Newmarket, England, February 23, 1978. The lecture series was introduced by Dean N. 0. Nielsen and appears below. Mr. Rossdale, an equine practitioner with an international reputation, was introduced by Prof. A. Fraser and was thanked by Prof 0. M. Radostits. Introduction to the D.L.T. Smith Lecture Program In 1974 when our founder Larry Smith stepped out of the Deanship of the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, we, his veterinary colleagues, his students and his friends wished to honor him in a way appropriate to our enormous respect and affection, we also wanted to assure the perpetuation of the high ideals he forged into the structure and spirit of this institution. To this end, the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship Program was established. Knowledge and ideas are the essence of a university. They are both its quest and its product. In Larry Smith's life they have been personified. "Knowledge is power". These extraordinarily wise words were penned to Larry by his father on a battlefield of World War I from which he never returned. Clearly they have been a guiding star in Larry Smith's life and enriched all those lives which have touched Larry's. The establishment of the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship was intended to bring the best in knowledge and ideas from all parts of the world to Western Canada. It was felt that no other single program supported by nonuniversity funds could have a
greater beneficial impact on the community served by the veterinary profession. A visiting lecturer program is particularly appropriate at the University of Saskatchewan. While we dearly love our environment and the benefits of splendid isolation, we recognize that we are out of the main stream of the travel of many of the world's leading veterinary and natural scientists. Therefore, the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship program is a positive means of assuring that the College and the profession in Western Canada are in contact with new knowledge and ideas. The goal of the D.L.T. Smith Lecture Fund is to reach the point where it can support several visiting lectureships each year. Not only will lecturers address students at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, they will also, where possible, meet with members of the veterinary profession or other groups in Western Canada. It is particularly gratifying that our first lecturer is so highly distinguished in the veterinary profession that during his visit he has been able to address the students of the College, the Western Canadian Association of Equine Practitioners, a large meeting of horsemen in Calgary and those present here tonight. This is an auspicious beginning.
Combining Research with Veterinary Practice P.D. ROSSDALE* It is often said that veterinary surgeons in practice have not the training or the time to carry out research. It is my intention, here, to contradict this view and to advance the alternative argument, namely, that the practitioner is an essential part of the total research effort undertaken by our profession and, further, that the barriers between academic and practice life should be lowered so as to integrate the various activities we often designate as "academic", and practice, research teaching and clinical disciplines. The theme that I have chosen for this, the first D.L.T. Smith lecture, is the need for integrating
the diverse parts of our profession and for promoting collaborative research. These are, in fact, the themes propounded by Dr. Smith, while I was in my clinical cradle, in a paper presented to the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association on June 1, 1965: "In planning the facilities of the Western Canadian Veterinary College, we have recognized the need for integration within each division - basic sciences, pre-clinical science and clinical division - and for collaboration and cooperation between the divisions and the three phases of veterinary activity; teaching, research and service (practice)."
*Beaufort Cottage Stables, High Street, Newmarket, Suffolk, England CB8 8JS.
Can. vet. J. 19: 327-330 (December 1978)
327
The challenge of our times is that we must provide an outlet for the creative faculties and, as Dr. Smith observed in the same address in 1965, "we are aware that students trained in high professional standards may have difficulty in applying these standards to practice". And it is this challenge which is recognized by every graduate who turns away from practice, disillusioned by his or her inability to find satisfaction in a situation where the means are not justified by the end - that is, where the expectations of training are dashed by the reality of practice. Somehow, we must change the system lest the process of education leads to an increasing number of square pegs looking for a home in a world of round holes. I believe that involving the practitioner in teaching and in clinical research is the way to change the system. Dr. Smith has stressed the need for continuing education but the common denominator to all our activities and endeavours is research and under the concept of research we should strenuously promote collaborative studies involving all sections of our profession. Research is the thread which binds the members of our profession in the common interest of progress towards higher standards of competence. A man can be no greater than his art and it, therefore, behooves us all to strive to improve our understanding of medicine and surgery. For convenience, our profession is often divided into categories. It is counter-productive to raise barriers to protect these categories, so that we reside in static c6teries of academics, research workers, teachers, clinicians and practitioners. We are all academics in that we subscribe by our training and our aspirations to scientific objectivity; we are all teachers in that we are anxious to impart our knowledge and wisdom to our colleagues and our successors; we are all practitioners of the veterinary art in one form or another. And each of us have a vested interest in research. The concept of research may be discussed in the context of life, of science, of the veterinary profession, or of practice. Research in practice is the major concern of this lecture, but let us dwell for the moment on wider issues. Research may be likened to a person's urge to follow through mysterious impulse towards change which is the hallmark of our species; change that we often glorify by the name of Progress. Research is an activity and interest which binds us to a common purpose. True, we may view this activity from different angles; and it may mean something rather different to one person than to another. Nevertheless, it is a unifying force, touching all of us in the veterinary profession. It is not until the 17th century that, largely through the teachings of Sir Francis Bacon, the scientific method of research became established. Bacon recognized the need for the spheres of religion and science to be separated; that knowledge rests on facts perceived; that facts, to be
328
useful,
must lead to some conclusion elaborated
through the man's rational faculty. The concept of research has been summarized by Hanington (1). "Research implies enquiry and a constant seeking
for answers". This concept covers all the various of research, but it is particularly apt when used in the context of clinical research; for it so nearly describes the activities of the clinician in his or her day-to-day routine. When a clinician investigates a case, prescribes treatment or carries out a necropsy, he is undertaking a protocol which is part of, albeit a fragment of, a research program, just as Sir Edward Jenner, observed that the fair skinned milkmaids who contracted cowpow were relatively immune to smallpox; or as Semmelweis, a 19th century Hungarian physician, deduced the pathogenesis and epidemiology of puerperal fever from the statistics of the two divisions of the Lying-in Hospital of Vienna. The clinician needs only to record and to observe to be as much a research worker as the scientist who never leaves the laboratory and studies the structure of DNA of the in vitro behaviour of antigens and antibodies; it is largely a matter of definition and more importantly of attitude. Nor need the clinician feel inferior or less objective in his approach and in the significance of his research, compared with his contemporaries in the laboratory. In fact, clinicians may sometimes record results which are ahead of their times, as illustrated by the remarkable achievement of the Dane, Erik Viborg who, in 1797, showed glanders and farcy to be one and the same disease. Hickman (2) wrote of Viborg, "he must have been a man with a most enquiring mind, an astute observer and a profound thinker. Indeed, in 1797, he really knew all there was to know about glanders, until the isolation of the causal organism". These observations preceded those of Joseph Lister and Louis Pasteur by many years. In his book "Clinical Research For All", Maxwell (4) listed the possible motives for carrying out research as, to benefit humanity, to satisfy or prove one is right, to prove that someone else is wrong, to advance one's career or to relieve the boredom and frustrations of work. However, there are other reasons which may not fall into any of these categories. Personal experience serves as an example. In 1965 the late Leo Mahaffey came to the U.K. from Australia and took up an appointment as pathologist at the Equine Research Station of the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket. His enthusiasm for the objective approach in practice made a powerful impression and his influence awakened a latent aspiration to become involved in clinical research. Together we became interested in the "barker" foal, he from a pathoclinical and I from a clinicopathological viewpoint (3). What contribution can the practitioner make to research? Case records containing actual data and observations form the basis of epidemiological surveys to solve questions of etiology, pathoareas
genesis and the response to particular lines of treatment. One of the problems is to organize methods of obtaining material from the wealth available in practice. Observation and clinical survey units can help as, for example, the various surveys carried out by the Veterinary Clinical Observation Unit of the British Veterinary Association and the British Equine Veterinary Association, Survey Section Organization. However, it is the introduction of a suitable protocol, with controls, standardized procedures and appropriate numbers relative to variables, that may present the biggest obstacle to the practitioner intending to perform research in practice. It is, even, a problem for those working in institutes; and the design of a program is not always of the required strength to satisfy the objective approach necessary for a reliable and worthwhile end point. The practitioner, when faced with the need for objectivity, may be overawed by the idea of becoming involved. Apart from a dislike, sometimes amounting almost to a fear, of the necessary disciplines which research entails, many practitioners believe that they cannot afford the time or financial commitments to programs for which there is no financial return. This view, although understandable, is mistaken; and its basis can be removed by organization. Grant-aiding bodies can help, for example, by providing financial support for the necessary capital expenditure for equipment and to recompense the practitioners for the time spent in pursuing objective ends. There is, of course, the natural reluctance of grant-aiding bodies to put money into commercial situations. However, it should not be outside the wit of man to arrange some equitable system whereby financial support is not abused in pursuit of personal profit. A further advance along the path towards greater practitioner participation in research would be provided by training of students and young undergraduates in the area ofestablishing research programs and in ways of conducting research. There should be more encouragement for those in practice. We should stop propagating the view that research is carried out in institutions while practitioners should confine themselves to clinical work. It might help if we focused our attention on collaborative rather than clinical research. If attitudes evolve towards an acceptance of research in practice so, I believe, ways and means can be found to make this participation practical. Collaborative research, means that clinicians in institutions (teachers and research workers) may enter the practice environment; and the practitioner goes to "institutes". The contact in either direction, is a highly stimulating and beneficial process to those on each side of the "academic" fence. Institute people rub shoulders with practical men and women, while the practitioner has the chance to sustain contact with those who preach and practice standards of excellence.
FIGURE 1. Suggested reorganization of veterinary situation around department of experimental medicine and clinical research providing central control through the director of the department. C/I = Institute clinicians P = Practitioners M = Material R = Research workers S = Students T = Teachers
The practitioner may also become incorporated in teams of experimental investigations in the furtherance of projects which cannot be pursued in the field. For example, during the recent outbreak of contagious equine metritis in the U.K., clinical research was supplemented by experimental investigations in which ponies were infected with the Gram negative coccobacillus and thus aspects of etiological, pathogenesis and therapy were studied on both sides of the "academic" fence (5, 6). The practitioner gained from contact with the necessary expertise of experimental workers and the specialists in the laboratory came into contact with the problems of owners and their representatives in the field. A further spin-off of this type of collaborative work was the fact that students could see at close hand the working of research protocols and the disease in the field. Also through the availability of experimental ponies, students gained access to material on which they could learn and practise techniques, such as uterine biopsy, rectal palpation and swabbing of the genital tract, for which there is often little or no opportunity open to them at the veterinary school in the U.K. The practitioner who undertakes research may be regarded as something of an oddity by the academic who is suspicious of his intent and capabilities and by fellow practitioners who are unable to identify with the dual role of professional activities. In short, the practitioner who devotes his energies to research may find himself in no man's land. The fault lies with the system and not with the practitioner or the "academic". 329
Returning to the theme of this lecture, namely that research is a common thread of our activities, may I refer to the position in the U.K. where six months of a student's curriculum is spent with practitioners. In a previous contribution (7) 1 contrasted the position of the veterinary with the medical profession. In the "human" hospital, clinical material filters readily from outside, and teachers, research workers, students and institute clinicians (consultants) can form a cohesive unit for teaching and clinical research. Academics and clinicians work in harmony, using experimental procedures on suitable models where required. On the veterinary side, for various reasons, clinical material does not readily filter to the hospital and the field clinician (practitioner) occupies, therefore, a key position in teaching and clinical research. There is no cohesive unit and the pursuit of investigations is often made difficult by the differences of practice and institutional attitudes. The concept of a Department of Experimental Medicine and Clinical Research (Fig. I) to break down barriers between the institute and field worker would help practitioners become involved in experimental investigations, thus furthering their clinical research and for institute workers to have access to field conditions as consultants or as active participants in practice. It would also enable clinicians and full time research workers to operate together thus providing a nucleus for postgraduate training and the furtherance of specialist facilities. In conclusion, I put the question "Are we what we become or do we become what we are?" A less esoteric variation of this question is "are we the servants or the masters of the systems we create?" I believe that in the veterinary profession we are, too often, bound by concepts which lead us into situations that frustrate our aims and aspirations. Thus, in practice we strive towards the high standards preached - (quite rightly) - by those who teach, but there are areas forbidden to the practitioner - these areas are teaching and research.
330
I suggest that we must seek to elevate the status of the practitioner, not only that his position is elevated in the eyes of the academic but, more importantly, in the minds of practitioners themselves. Too often we hear that a practitioner cannot be expected to teach or to research. This is the philosophy of despair. Likewise, the teacher suffers a division of interest, locked into a system of career structure based on diplomas and higher degrees which dictate an arbitrary choice between pure and clinical research and, often, between research and clinical activities with no research element whatsoever. Finally, may I leave you with the advice passed on by J. Cochrane Smith in a letter written shortly before his death at Passchendaele to his three year old son whose life and work have born ample witness to its wisdom as applied to our profession. "To thine own self be true, and it shall follow as the night the day - thou canst not then be false to any man": Hamlet I iii 79. REFERENCES
1. HANINGTON, EDDA. Migraine. Priory Press. 1974. 2. HICKMAN. J. Glanders: a contribution to epidemiology. Equine vet. J. 2: 153-158. 1970. 3. MAHAFFEY, L. w. and P. D. ROSSDALE. Convulsive and applied syndromes in newborn foals. Vet. Rec. 69: 1277. 1957. 4. MAXWELL, C. Clinical Research for All. Cambridge Medical Publications Ltd. 1973. 5. PLATT. H.. J. G. ATHERTON. D. J. SIMPSON. C. E. D. TAYLOR, R. D. ROSENTHAL, D. F. J. BROWN and T. G.
WREGHITT. Genital infection in mares. Vet. Rec. 101: 20. 1977. 6. RICKETTS. S. W.. P. D. ROSSDALE, N. J. WINGFIELDDIGBY. MONICA FALK. R. HOPES. M. D. N. HUNT and C. K. PEACE. Genital infection in mares. Vet. Rec.
101: 65. 1977. 7. ROSSDALE, P.D. Some reflections on clinical research. Equine vet. J. 7: 81-85. 1975.
THE CANADIAN VETERINARY JOURNAL LA REVUE VlTtRINAIRE CANADIENNE December-decembre 1978
No. 12
The D.L.T. Smith Lecture Series The inaugural lecture of the D. L. T. Smith Lecture Series was given by Peter D. Rossdale, Newmarket, England, February 23, 1978. The lecture series was introduced by Dean N. 0. Nielsen and appears below. Mr. Rossdale, an equine practitioner with an international reputation, was introduced by Prof. A. Fraser and was thanked by Prof 0. M. Radostits. Introduction to the D.L.T. Smith Lecture Program In 1974 when our founder Larry Smith stepped out of the Deanship of the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, we, his veterinary colleagues, his students and his friends wished to honor him in a way appropriate to our enormous respect and affection, we also wanted to assure the perpetuation of the high ideals he forged into the structure and spirit of this institution. To this end, the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship Program was established. Knowledge and ideas are the essence of a university. They are both its quest and its product. In Larry Smith's life they have been personified. "Knowledge is power". These extraordinarily wise words were penned to Larry by his father on a battlefield of World War I from which he never returned. Clearly they have been a guiding star in Larry Smith's life and enriched all those lives which have touched Larry's. The establishment of the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship was intended to bring the best in knowledge and ideas from all parts of the world to Western Canada. It was felt that no other single program supported by nonuniversity funds could have a
greater beneficial impact on the community served by the veterinary profession. A visiting lecturer program is particularly appropriate at the University of Saskatchewan. While we dearly love our environment and the benefits of splendid isolation, we recognize that we are out of the main stream of the travel of many of the world's leading veterinary and natural scientists. Therefore, the D.L.T. Smith Lectureship program is a positive means of assuring that the College and the profession in Western Canada are in contact with new knowledge and ideas. The goal of the D.L.T. Smith Lecture Fund is to reach the point where it can support several visiting lectureships each year. Not only will lecturers address students at the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, they will also, where possible, meet with members of the veterinary profession or other groups in Western Canada. It is particularly gratifying that our first lecturer is so highly distinguished in the veterinary profession that during his visit he has been able to address the students of the College, the Western Canadian Association of Equine Practitioners, a large meeting of horsemen in Calgary and those present here tonight. This is an auspicious beginning.
Combining Research with Veterinary Practice P.D. ROSSDALE* It is often said that veterinary surgeons in practice have not the training or the time to carry out research. It is my intention, here, to contradict this view and to advance the alternative argument, namely, that the practitioner is an essential part of the total research effort undertaken by our profession and, further, that the barriers between academic and practice life should be lowered so as to integrate the various activities we often designate as "academic", and practice, research teaching and clinical disciplines. The theme that I have chosen for this, the first D.L.T. Smith lecture, is the need for integrating
the diverse parts of our profession and for promoting collaborative research. These are, in fact, the themes propounded by Dr. Smith, while I was in my clinical cradle, in a paper presented to the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association on June 1, 1965: "In planning the facilities of the Western Canadian Veterinary College, we have recognized the need for integration within each division - basic sciences, pre-clinical science and clinical division - and for collaboration and cooperation between the divisions and the three phases of veterinary activity; teaching, research and service (practice)."
*Beaufort Cottage Stables, High Street, Newmarket, Suffolk, England CB8 8JS.
Can. vet. J. 19: 327-330 (December 1978)
327
The challenge of our times is that we must provide an outlet for the creative faculties and, as Dr. Smith observed in the same address in 1965, "we are aware that students trained in high professional standards may have difficulty in applying these standards to practice". And it is this challenge which is recognized by every graduate who turns away from practice, disillusioned by his or her inability to find satisfaction in a situation where the means are not justified by the end - that is, where the expectations of training are dashed by the reality of practice. Somehow, we must change the system lest the process of education leads to an increasing number of square pegs looking for a home in a world of round holes. I believe that involving the practitioner in teaching and in clinical research is the way to change the system. Dr. Smith has stressed the need for continuing education but the common denominator to all our activities and endeavours is research and under the concept of research we should strenuously promote collaborative studies involving all sections of our profession. Research is the thread which binds the members of our profession in the common interest of progress towards higher standards of competence. A man can be no greater than his art and it, therefore, behooves us all to strive to improve our understanding of medicine and surgery. For convenience, our profession is often divided into categories. It is counter-productive to raise barriers to protect these categories, so that we reside in static c6teries of academics, research workers, teachers, clinicians and practitioners. We are all academics in that we subscribe by our training and our aspirations to scientific objectivity; we are all teachers in that we are anxious to impart our knowledge and wisdom to our colleagues and our successors; we are all practitioners of the veterinary art in one form or another. And each of us have a vested interest in research. The concept of research may be discussed in the context of life, of science, of the veterinary profession, or of practice. Research in practice is the major concern of this lecture, but let us dwell for the moment on wider issues. Research may be likened to a person's urge to follow through mysterious impulse towards change which is the hallmark of our species; change that we often glorify by the name of Progress. Research is an activity and interest which binds us to a common purpose. True, we may view this activity from different angles; and it may mean something rather different to one person than to another. Nevertheless, it is a unifying force, touching all of us in the veterinary profession. It is not until the 17th century that, largely through the teachings of Sir Francis Bacon, the scientific method of research became established. Bacon recognized the need for the spheres of religion and science to be separated; that knowledge rests on facts perceived; that facts, to be
328
useful,
must lead to some conclusion elaborated
through the man's rational faculty. The concept of research has been summarized by Hanington (1). "Research implies enquiry and a constant seeking
for answers". This concept covers all the various of research, but it is particularly apt when used in the context of clinical research; for it so nearly describes the activities of the clinician in his or her day-to-day routine. When a clinician investigates a case, prescribes treatment or carries out a necropsy, he is undertaking a protocol which is part of, albeit a fragment of, a research program, just as Sir Edward Jenner, observed that the fair skinned milkmaids who contracted cowpow were relatively immune to smallpox; or as Semmelweis, a 19th century Hungarian physician, deduced the pathogenesis and epidemiology of puerperal fever from the statistics of the two divisions of the Lying-in Hospital of Vienna. The clinician needs only to record and to observe to be as much a research worker as the scientist who never leaves the laboratory and studies the structure of DNA of the in vitro behaviour of antigens and antibodies; it is largely a matter of definition and more importantly of attitude. Nor need the clinician feel inferior or less objective in his approach and in the significance of his research, compared with his contemporaries in the laboratory. In fact, clinicians may sometimes record results which are ahead of their times, as illustrated by the remarkable achievement of the Dane, Erik Viborg who, in 1797, showed glanders and farcy to be one and the same disease. Hickman (2) wrote of Viborg, "he must have been a man with a most enquiring mind, an astute observer and a profound thinker. Indeed, in 1797, he really knew all there was to know about glanders, until the isolation of the causal organism". These observations preceded those of Joseph Lister and Louis Pasteur by many years. In his book "Clinical Research For All", Maxwell (4) listed the possible motives for carrying out research as, to benefit humanity, to satisfy or prove one is right, to prove that someone else is wrong, to advance one's career or to relieve the boredom and frustrations of work. However, there are other reasons which may not fall into any of these categories. Personal experience serves as an example. In 1965 the late Leo Mahaffey came to the U.K. from Australia and took up an appointment as pathologist at the Equine Research Station of the Animal Health Trust in Newmarket. His enthusiasm for the objective approach in practice made a powerful impression and his influence awakened a latent aspiration to become involved in clinical research. Together we became interested in the "barker" foal, he from a pathoclinical and I from a clinicopathological viewpoint (3). What contribution can the practitioner make to research? Case records containing actual data and observations form the basis of epidemiological surveys to solve questions of etiology, pathoareas
genesis and the response to particular lines of treatment. One of the problems is to organize methods of obtaining material from the wealth available in practice. Observation and clinical survey units can help as, for example, the various surveys carried out by the Veterinary Clinical Observation Unit of the British Veterinary Association and the British Equine Veterinary Association, Survey Section Organization. However, it is the introduction of a suitable protocol, with controls, standardized procedures and appropriate numbers relative to variables, that may present the biggest obstacle to the practitioner intending to perform research in practice. It is, even, a problem for those working in institutes; and the design of a program is not always of the required strength to satisfy the objective approach necessary for a reliable and worthwhile end point. The practitioner, when faced with the need for objectivity, may be overawed by the idea of becoming involved. Apart from a dislike, sometimes amounting almost to a fear, of the necessary disciplines which research entails, many practitioners believe that they cannot afford the time or financial commitments to programs for which there is no financial return. This view, although understandable, is mistaken; and its basis can be removed by organization. Grant-aiding bodies can help, for example, by providing financial support for the necessary capital expenditure for equipment and to recompense the practitioners for the time spent in pursuing objective ends. There is, of course, the natural reluctance of grant-aiding bodies to put money into commercial situations. However, it should not be outside the wit of man to arrange some equitable system whereby financial support is not abused in pursuit of personal profit. A further advance along the path towards greater practitioner participation in research would be provided by training of students and young undergraduates in the area ofestablishing research programs and in ways of conducting research. There should be more encouragement for those in practice. We should stop propagating the view that research is carried out in institutions while practitioners should confine themselves to clinical work. It might help if we focused our attention on collaborative rather than clinical research. If attitudes evolve towards an acceptance of research in practice so, I believe, ways and means can be found to make this participation practical. Collaborative research, means that clinicians in institutions (teachers and research workers) may enter the practice environment; and the practitioner goes to "institutes". The contact in either direction, is a highly stimulating and beneficial process to those on each side of the "academic" fence. Institute people rub shoulders with practical men and women, while the practitioner has the chance to sustain contact with those who preach and practice standards of excellence.
FIGURE 1. Suggested reorganization of veterinary situation around department of experimental medicine and clinical research providing central control through the director of the department. C/I = Institute clinicians P = Practitioners M = Material R = Research workers S = Students T = Teachers
The practitioner may also become incorporated in teams of experimental investigations in the furtherance of projects which cannot be pursued in the field. For example, during the recent outbreak of contagious equine metritis in the U.K., clinical research was supplemented by experimental investigations in which ponies were infected with the Gram negative coccobacillus and thus aspects of etiological, pathogenesis and therapy were studied on both sides of the "academic" fence (5, 6). The practitioner gained from contact with the necessary expertise of experimental workers and the specialists in the laboratory came into contact with the problems of owners and their representatives in the field. A further spin-off of this type of collaborative work was the fact that students could see at close hand the working of research protocols and the disease in the field. Also through the availability of experimental ponies, students gained access to material on which they could learn and practise techniques, such as uterine biopsy, rectal palpation and swabbing of the genital tract, for which there is often little or no opportunity open to them at the veterinary school in the U.K. The practitioner who undertakes research may be regarded as something of an oddity by the academic who is suspicious of his intent and capabilities and by fellow practitioners who are unable to identify with the dual role of professional activities. In short, the practitioner who devotes his energies to research may find himself in no man's land. The fault lies with the system and not with the practitioner or the "academic". 329
Returning to the theme of this lecture, namely that research is a common thread of our activities, may I refer to the position in the U.K. where six months of a student's curriculum is spent with practitioners. In a previous contribution (7) 1 contrasted the position of the veterinary with the medical profession. In the "human" hospital, clinical material filters readily from outside, and teachers, research workers, students and institute clinicians (consultants) can form a cohesive unit for teaching and clinical research. Academics and clinicians work in harmony, using experimental procedures on suitable models where required. On the veterinary side, for various reasons, clinical material does not readily filter to the hospital and the field clinician (practitioner) occupies, therefore, a key position in teaching and clinical research. There is no cohesive unit and the pursuit of investigations is often made difficult by the differences of practice and institutional attitudes. The concept of a Department of Experimental Medicine and Clinical Research (Fig. I) to break down barriers between the institute and field worker would help practitioners become involved in experimental investigations, thus furthering their clinical research and for institute workers to have access to field conditions as consultants or as active participants in practice. It would also enable clinicians and full time research workers to operate together thus providing a nucleus for postgraduate training and the furtherance of specialist facilities. In conclusion, I put the question "Are we what we become or do we become what we are?" A less esoteric variation of this question is "are we the servants or the masters of the systems we create?" I believe that in the veterinary profession we are, too often, bound by concepts which lead us into situations that frustrate our aims and aspirations. Thus, in practice we strive towards the high standards preached - (quite rightly) - by those who teach, but there are areas forbidden to the practitioner - these areas are teaching and research.
330
I suggest that we must seek to elevate the status of the practitioner, not only that his position is elevated in the eyes of the academic but, more importantly, in the minds of practitioners themselves. Too often we hear that a practitioner cannot be expected to teach or to research. This is the philosophy of despair. Likewise, the teacher suffers a division of interest, locked into a system of career structure based on diplomas and higher degrees which dictate an arbitrary choice between pure and clinical research and, often, between research and clinical activities with no research element whatsoever. Finally, may I leave you with the advice passed on by J. Cochrane Smith in a letter written shortly before his death at Passchendaele to his three year old son whose life and work have born ample witness to its wisdom as applied to our profession. "To thine own self be true, and it shall follow as the night the day - thou canst not then be false to any man": Hamlet I iii 79. REFERENCES
1. HANINGTON, EDDA. Migraine. Priory Press. 1974. 2. HICKMAN. J. Glanders: a contribution to epidemiology. Equine vet. J. 2: 153-158. 1970. 3. MAHAFFEY, L. w. and P. D. ROSSDALE. Convulsive and applied syndromes in newborn foals. Vet. Rec. 69: 1277. 1957. 4. MAXWELL, C. Clinical Research for All. Cambridge Medical Publications Ltd. 1973. 5. PLATT. H.. J. G. ATHERTON. D. J. SIMPSON. C. E. D. TAYLOR, R. D. ROSENTHAL, D. F. J. BROWN and T. G.
WREGHITT. Genital infection in mares. Vet. Rec. 101: 20. 1977. 6. RICKETTS. S. W.. P. D. ROSSDALE, N. J. WINGFIELDDIGBY. MONICA FALK. R. HOPES. M. D. N. HUNT and C. K. PEACE. Genital infection in mares. Vet. Rec.
101: 65. 1977. 7. ROSSDALE, P.D. Some reflections on clinical research. Equine vet. J. 7: 81-85. 1975.
