Jack Hayward obituary

In 1976 my colleague Jack Hayward, who has died aged 82, was the second nursing professor to be appointed in the UK (after Jean McFarlane, Lady McFarlane of Llandaff, appointed at Manchester in 1974) and the first man to earn this distinction.

Born into a family of railway workers on the Isle of Wight, son of Ethyl and Horrace Hayward, Jack trained in general and psychiatric nursing at Whitecroft hospital on the island. He became a nurse tutor and studied part-time for a psychology degree. He was then appointed one of the six members of the important Study of Nursing Care project in 1969 and gained his PhD at the London School of Economics in 1972.

The main aim of the project was to develop methods to measure the effectiveness of nursing care in general hospitals. Jack’s contribution was his landmark study Information: A Prescription Against Pain. He showed that giving relevant information to patients before their operation significantly reduced their post-operative pain and anxiety. The experimental design that Jack used was unique in UK nursing at the time. This and other methods he pioneered helped future generations of nurses to transform care for patients and raised the profession’s standing. My own programme of research investigating the effects of psychosocial interventions in acute medical and surgical wards developed from Jack’s initial research.

After two years as principal nursing officer for research in the Department of Health, in 1976 Jack was appointed to the foundation chair in nursing studies at Chelsea College, University of London, which in 1985 merged with King’s College London. It was after the transition to King’s that the Department of Health and Social Security funded the pioneering National Nursing Research Unit; unsurprisingly, a few years later, Jack became its director.

The high calibre of graduate nurses who emerged from the King’s degree programme has had a “cascading” influence on many aspects of the nursing, midwifery and health visiting professions over the years since the department was established. Indeed, many of these graduates went on to become distinguished professors of nursing.

Despite his impressive academic credentials, Jack never lost his view that the best research was that which made an impact on practice and translated to demonstrable patient improvements. Quality was Jack’s mantra. He liked to quote John Ruskin’s view that quality arises from intelligent effort rather than by accident. In recognition of his services to nursing, Jack was appointed CBE in 1986.

Despite his illustrious professional career, it was Jack’s love of the sea and nature that was most evident throughout his life, a passion he passed on to his children and grandchildren, all of whom remember a patient, caring and intelligent man who, given the opportunity, loved to share his knowledge, strength of character and wry humour.

Jack is survived by his second wife, Jane (nee Ramage), whom he married in 1995, his children Chris, Steve and Ali, from his first marriage, to Margarete, which ended in divorce, and six grandchildren.

Jack Hayward obituary

There is no harm in a young little one obtaining a evening away from its mother | Jack O"Sullivan

‘When a group of family court judges was not too long ago asked whether or not a little one could safely spend a night away from mum, there were various opinions.’ Photograph: Brian Vikander/Alamy

I have no more great memory than cuddling my daughter and son to sleep. Bath time, stories, then snuggling down. When they woke in the evening it was tiring but magical to calm their distress. I miss that these infants-turned-teens now place themselves to bed and rest by means of until morning. But the unspoken bonds forged overnight years in the past carry us by way of the turbulence of their adolescence.

So I am shocked to hear parenting guru Penelope Leach claim that following mother and father split, no child underneath 4 can devote even a single evening away from their mom with out the threat of lasting damage to the kid. Her latest book, Household Breakdown, cites “undisputed evidence” that overnight separation from mum can adversely have an effect on a child’s brain improvement.

These trenchant certainties threaten to have an tremendous effect on dad and mom and judges who are frequently baffled about what is best soon after couples split. For instance, when a group of household court judges was just lately asked whether a kid could safely commit a evening away from mum there were diverse opinions. 1 ventured that probably any overnight remain “would be a undesirable point” another said “it depends” while a third laughed out loud: “My grandchildren frequently stay overnight with me and have accomplished considering that they were babies!”

Leach’s influence is even more worrying because science exhibits her “undisputed proof” to be incorrect. She relies on a single study from Australia (McIntosh et al, 2010). Responding to this examine, the American Psychological Association (APA) has published a paper, Social Science and Parenting Plans for Youthful Young children: A Consensus Report, endorsed by 110 of the world’s foremost child mental overall health professionals from 15 nations, repudiating its conclusions. The lead writer of the Australian examine has subsequently dropped the conclusions that Leach relies on, stating: “Cautions against overnight care for the duration of the very first 3 many years are not supported.” Sadly for so many young children and their dad and mom, Leach does not incorporate this addendum in her guide.

We can’t afford for such critical concerns about child welfare to turn into an ideological battleground. Parents – and the judiciary – want clear advice grounded in sound evidence. Which is why the APA overview is so valuable, since it offers an overview of 45 many years of settled and accepted investigation.

“We discovered no help for the idea that kids under 4 (some say under 6) need to devote almost all their time residing with only one particular mother or father, when their other parent is also loving and attentive,” the lead writer Professor Richard Warshak explained. “Warnings towards infants and toddlers investing overnight time with each and every parent are inconsistent with what we know about the growth of robust, positive parent-little one relationships. Babies and toddlers require parents who reply regularly, affectionately and sensitively to their needs. They do not need to have, and most do not have, one particular parent’s complete-time, round-the-clock presence.”

The proof continues to mount. A latest review reported prolonged-term positive aspects to teenagers and young adults who, as pre-schoolers, stayed overnight with their fathers after their mother and father separated. These youngsters really feel a lot more essential to their dads than youngsters who were deprived of overnights. They report greater relationships with their fathers at no cost to the top quality of their relationships with their mothers. And these youngsters showed no indications of any extended-phrase tension-relevant overall health difficulties.

To me, as a dad, this helps make sense. I know that my young children required me near by them at night when they were small, and I loved to share that time. My pals who are dads come to feel the identical way, and have intimate and crucial relationships with their young children in that hidden, private existence that is modern day fatherhood. We are stunned by inaccuracies peddled as respectable wisdom by such influential figures as Leach. I am sure numerous mothers are appalled as effectively. Mums, also, can stand up for the fatherhood on which their youngsters depend, and present how these spurious claims fail to reflect the lived knowledge of families.

There is no harm in a young little one obtaining a evening away from its mother | Jack O"Sullivan

"We know the place Jack the Ripper lived" - authorities

Canadian criminologist Dr Kim Rossmo and Steve Le Comber of Queen Mary, University of London, used a mathematical model to find the spot.

Speaking at the Cheltenham Science Festival Dr Rossmo explained: “All the victims lived quite shut to Flower and Dean Street.

“The last victim was noticed less than a block away choosing up a client, and that was almost certainly her last customer, probably the Ripper.

“So it is risk-free to say it was none of the Royal family as folks have speculated. It is unlikely they would have frequented an region like that, and we think the Ripper is an individual who lived on that street.”

Two victims Catherine Eddowes and Elizabeth Stride had been killed on the same evening, September thirty 1888.

Eddowes apron was found in nearby Goulston Street alongside a message, believed to be written by the Ripper which go through: “The Juews are not the males that will not be blamed for nothing at all.”

Dr Rossmo claims that if a line is drawn in between the area of the victim’s bodies and he apron it suggests the Ripper was heading towards Flower and Dean Street.

“It seems to be like he was on his way residence,” said Dr Le Comber.

The approach functions due to the fact most criminals operate in predictable spots, usually not also far from their property, family members or their workplace. But they also set up a ‘buffer zone’ about their homes in which they will not commit crimes. The model predicts in which they dwell

It previously been utilised to track down the serial rapist Clive Barwell and is becoming employed by anti-terrorist police.

Dr Le Comber also believes the formula can be used to locate the origin of disease outbreaks such as malaria, so that epidemics can be stopped ahead of they even began.

He believes that the origin of an infectious ailment could be located with the addresses of just five folks who have been infected.

It follows on from the function of John Snow, who in 1844 mapped all circumstances of cholera in central London and identified the source was a water pump in Broad Street, Soho. When he closed the pump, individuals stopped dying.

“Snow’s genius was to map it,” explained Dr Le Comber, “Nobody has taken that approach with conditions because then.

“In Malaria paper right after paper will inform you crucial it is to find exactly where the contaminated mosquitoes are breeding, but no one will tell you how to find those areas.

“And the problem with mosquitoes is they will breed anywhere. In puddles, in water in abandoned car tyres. So this is precisely the dilemma we are trying to fix.

“We can use this technique in quite a great deal of biological information and hopefully use it in the long term to benefit public overall health.”

Dr Le Comber utilized the model to demonstrate that he could have spotted the origin of a devastating malaria outbreak in Cairo.

"We know the place Jack the Ripper lived" - authorities

Why Biotech Whiz Child Jack Andraka Is Not On The Forbes thirty Underneath thirty List

Jack Andraka (Photo credit score: XPRIZE Foundation)

When I place out a call for promising younger scientists to be portion of Forbes’ yearly 30 Underneath 30 undertaking, no identify came up a lot more than that of Jack Andraka, the 16-yr-old who developed a prototype cancer diagnostic check and won the prime $ 75,000 prize at Intel’s yearly substantial school science fair.

And no wonder. For two years, Andraka has been all over the place.  The Intel win resulted in a barrage of media appearances on 60 Minutes, which mentioned the check “might save many lives,” ABC Globe Information Tonight, and Forbes. He was honored as a “Champion of Change” at the White House and was Michelle Obama’s guest for the duration of the 2013 State of the Union Handle. He has offered several TEDx talks, the most prominent of which has produced much more than one million views. These presentations have constantly portrayed Andraka’s achievements as Earth-shaking. A Forbes post, for instance, described the test as a “breakthrough.”  Smithsonian named him “The Teen Prodigy Of Pancreatic Cancer.”

But I determined not to incorporate Andraka on the listing, overriding the recommendation of an skilled judging panel, since the perform was not however published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. It is by published operate that scientists are judged.  I nonetheless think this was the right determination. In fact, when Andraka volunteered to share a draft of a paper that he does plan to submit to a scientific journal, my concerns deepened.

George Church of Harvard University, one of the skilled judges for the 30 Below 30 venture and a single of the fathers of up coming-generation DNA sequencing, reviewed the paper and thought that numerous of the key claims that had been made of Andraka’s sensor – for instance, that it was 168 instances more rapidly, 26,667 instances much less high-priced, and 400 times a lot more sensitive than existing technologies – may not hold up, or at least call for a lot more work to be verified. I sent the paper to five much more prime scientists, who reviewed it, for the most portion, anonymously. Most noticed holes and mentioned the benefits did not match the glowing accounts reported, effectively everywhere.

The consensus: Andraka’s sensor is a probably a publishable piece of science that could at some point appear in a journal, and was a impressive achievement for a substantial school student. But it falls far short of altering science and is only a little phase toward developing a workable cancer diagnostic.

“While promising the undertaking truly was really preliminary and is by no implies as sophisticated as some stories say it is,” Andraka writes me through email.  “I realize that in retrospect that it was just a higher college science fair project and it was a proof of idea experiment and at first I imagined that it could get on the market place in one-two many years however I’ve discovered so much in excess of the program of this journey and recognized that it will in actuality consider a good deal longer than this.” A great deal longer.

Underestimating Existing Technological innovation

Here is what Andraka did, in accordance to his draft paper: he created a gadget by dipping filter paper into a resolution of carbon nanotubes coated with antibodies for a particular protein that can be elevated in individuals with pancreatic cancer. He proved that the gadget can detect the presence of that protein, mesothelin, in cell culture options. He also showed that the sensor could inform the big difference between the blood of mice that had human pancreatic tumors grafted onto them and individuals that did not.

So far, so very good. But what about all individuals claims that this new method is more rapidly, far better, and less expensive than the present technologies, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)? This 60-year-old technology utilizes antibodies linked to shade-modifying enzymes. If the substance you’re looking for is existing, the shade exhibits up when you include a third chemical.

Andraka’s “168 occasions more quickly, 26,667 occasions less costly, and 400 instances a lot more sensitive” figures are primarily based on a comparison with ELISA. But Church saw difficulties with the way that Andraka characterizes the ELISA test.

Test velocity: Andraka says he in contrast the pace of his test to the sum of time he spent attempting to get results from an ELISA kit he ordered on-line: 14 hrs.  But generally a contemporary ELISA check takes 1 hour.

Test value: Andraka is comparing the industrial price for a test – such as the manufacturer’s profit and overhead – to his very own materials expense. That’s not a fair comparison. He says the only mesothelin test that he identified expense $ 912 per kit. But other ELISA tests are for sale on the web for $ 400 per 60 tests or $ 600 for 96 exams – in other words, about $ six.50 per test run. That even now compares favorably to Andraka’s $ three per ten exams, but remember that there would also be a commercial markup if a company determined to sell his tests.

Sensitivity:  Church felt that the regular deviations on Andraka’s sensitivity measurements had been also massive to say that his check is considerably a lot more delicate than ELISA. Others explained that it’s not clear how much increased sensitivity a new check would want.

Is it the right protein? Another question: Is Andraka even testing for a protein that will effectively identify pancreatic cancer? Doctors use a blood protein named CA19-9 to track no matter whether a pancreatic tumor is expanding, or whether it will come back. But they really don’t use CA19-9 for screening, simply because it would miss too several cancers and, far more importantly, recognize pancreatic cancer in patients who really don’t have it. That could lead to needless CAT scans, or even to pointless surgeries to eliminate tumors that really don’t exist.

Andraka asserts that mesothelin would be a much better protein to test for. But a single of my anonymous reviewers pointed to a paper published in HPB, the journal of the Global Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association. It compared mesothelin to CA19-9 as a marker for pancreatic cancer, and located mesothelin was much less useful. The paper expressed hope that plenty of proteins, employed collectively, would allow the development of a prostate cancer screening test. It is not specific that Andraka’s test, no matter how delicate it is, could grow to be broadly used just by detecting mesothelin. (His mentor at Johns Hopkins has advised that other proteins would want to be extra in news articles.) These are all inquiries Andraka would have had to solution in the peer-overview approach, probably top him to modify his claims.

The Issues For Diagnostic Tests

In standard, cancer medical professionals are turning into skeptical about screening exams. There has been controversy about making use of PSA screening to detect prostate cancer, and mammography to detect breast cancer in youthful female. The reason is that the harms of screening – the further CAT scans and incumbent radiation, the further biopsies, even the removal of tumors that would never ever show deadly – can in aggregate be worse than the cancer becoming taken care of.

This is a bigger problem in pancreatic cancer, because pancreatic tumors are difficult to detect and the pancreas is nestled deep in the abdomen, beneath other, fragile organs.

Susan Desmond-Hellmann, the chancellor at University of California, San Francisco, reviewed the paper and wrote:

The more substantial issue right now is the growing comprehending of the limitations of ‘early detection’.   For a pancreatic cancer screening check to have clinical utility a single would want to believe that the cancers detected would be early stage and resectable and it would be rare to operate on somebody and not find a cancer (pancreatic surgical treatment is really difficult, not as simple as breast or prostate surgical procedure).

So the manuscript is compelling, but the road to an authorized screening test is likely to be lengthy, tough and pricey.

Andraka’s draft paper does not consist of tests of the sensor in human blood samples. There have been no exams of it in human beings. Andraka’s check can tell a mouse with a human tumor developing on it from one particular without having. But can it inform the blood of a person with an inflamed pancreas or gallstones from yet another person with cancer? After all that perform is carried out, there will nonetheless be a require for prospective clinical trials, the ultimate check in which individuals are randomized to get the check – or not.  At the finish of the day, does acquiring the check make you healthier? There’s a extended path in between developing a instrument to detect a protein in the blood — which is what Andraka commenced to do — and generating a diagnostic test. We’re undertaking him no favors by pretending otherwise.

Actuality Check: Medicine Is Super-Challenging

The two Forbes 30 Under 30 judges who voted that we should highlight Andraka were Mikael Dolsten, the head of R&ampD at Pfizer, and Daniel Kraft, the executive director at FutureMed. Each advised me that they believed his example was encouraging other young individuals. I hope so, but I really do not think it is correct to honor Andraka for that cause. Individuals who get concerned in health care analysis need to know how tough it is — that not only are there 1000′s of failures, but that the successes look to flip into failures too. And that’s why I want to see published perform for scientists on the 30 Under thirty.

More than that, I think it may possibly have been greater for Andraka, and for his check, if he had gone via the standard method of publishing and presenting his function to other, hypercritical but friendly scientists prior to he became a media star. A scientific paper should have come ahead of the TED Talks, and before the adulation. He says he’s looking for a big diagnostics organization to license and build the test I’m sure the businesses he’s speaking to would come to feel much much more relaxed if they had been hunting at published investigation. Instead, it appears to me that a single author following yet another has just taken the claims he created whilst making an attempt to win a large college science honest and inflated them to fill a international stage. In Andraka’s personal phrases, it has been a “media circus.” Andraka advised me: “It was my extremely first time in the laboratory and I was just so enthusiastic to be able to do serious scientific study and talk about my investigation in the media.”

By taking a teenager’s excitement and utilizing it to turn him into a folk hero, TED and a lot of, a lot of media organizations which includes my very own have provided false hope to cancer patients and provided the general population a distorted see of how healthcare science performs. Individuals may possibly like to think that cancer researchers have missed something obvious, and that we just want a substantial school student to come in and develop a breakthrough. We need to have that super-intelligent, ambitious substantial college student operating on cancer, but this is a ailment that is actually written into our DNA. (60 Minutes and Smithsonian, at least, did better, cautioning that it would be numerous years and get numerous clinical trials before the check could be used.)

In 1 of the 1st stories about Andraka, Forbes Managing Editor Bruce Upbin asked: “Wait, Did This 15-Yr-Previous From Maryland Just Modify Cancer Treatment method?”  Nineteen months later, I really feel protected answering: No, he did not. And I feel it is unfair to him, and to the operate he did do, that we anticipated him to. Simply because what he did — making a cool biosensor while still in higher school — was quite neat on its personal.

Why Biotech Whiz Child Jack Andraka Is Not On The Forbes thirty Underneath thirty List