HeLa at 70: on honouring the legacy of Henrietta Lacks

The 4th of october 2021 signified 70 years since the untimely death of Henrietta Lacks, a daughter, wife and mother. On the same day, the University of Bristol unveiled a statue of Henrietta that sits in the heart of its campus in Royal Fort Gardens, by local artist Helen Wilson-Roe. The unveiling came amidst a year of celebratory events for the legacy of a woman whose contribution to science is, in many ways, unrivalled. To many cell biologists, Henrietta Lacks is a household name; however, to the general public her name remains largely unknown. So, who is Henrietta Lacks? And why are the Lacks family and their family-led HELA100 initiative working in collaboration with the University of Bristol to honour her legacy?

REDESIGNING AN UNDERGRADUATE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE UNIT: REFLECTIONS ON ALIGNING DEPARTMENTAL PEDAGOGIC OBJECTIVES WITH THE NEW TEACHING PROGRAMME AND ASSESSMENT

In this paper, we look into how the new structure of the final-year undergraduate language assessment introduced by the School of Modern Languages (SML) at the University of Bristol (UoB) has affected the teaching on the final-year programme in the Department of Russian. This paper tests whether the intended learning outcomes, the content of the course, teaching on the individual modules, the learning resources and the new assessment can be considered as ‘constructively aligned’, i.e., whether the Russian language teaching team working on the new course design succeeded in ensuring that “the learning objectives, the learning processes and the assessment mode and criteria relate systematically to each other”. We will also explore whether the new blended synchronous and asynchronous teaching fits into the redesigned curriculum and whether the teaching programme continues to address the development of students’ discipline-related and transferable employability skills linked to the three areas of the Bristol Skills Network: knowledge and intellectual abilities; engagement and influence; personal effectiveness and wellbeing. The key element of this research is the analysis of the anonymous student feedback questionnaire (SFQ) which includes qualitative questions related to all three written modules taught on the redesigned final year Russian language unit: the students were given an opportunity to analyse the quality and effectiveness of their learning on this unit.

Amyand David Buckingham. 28 January 1930—4 February 2021

David Buckingham was a chemical physicist and theoretical chemist who made fundamental contributions to the understanding of optical, electric and magnetic properties of molecules. Born in Australia, he was an undergraduate at the University of Sydney and the first PhD research student of John Pople (FRS 1961) at Cambridge, and there he made significant advances in the theory of intermolecular forces and nonlinear optics. He then moved to Oxford, where he and his group performed the first direct measurement of a molecular electric quadrupole moment. He was elected to the first chair of theoretical chemistry at the University of Bristol, where he wrote a particularly influential article on molecular moments, higher-order polarizabilities and intermolecular forces. His next appointment was at the University of Cambridge as the first holder of the 1968 Chair of Chemistry, and he was head of a distinguished department of theoretical chemistry for 28 years. With colleagues he pioneered experiment and theory on vibrational optical activity and developed a powerful model to predict the structures of weakly-bound molecules. A man of broad interests and achievements, he played first class cricket in the 1950s.

Assessing the causal role of epigenetic clocks in the development of multiple cancers: a Mendelian randomization study

ABSTRACTBackgroundEpigenetic clocks have been associated with cancer risk in several observational studies. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether they play a causal role in cancer risk or if they act as a non-causal biomarker.MethodsWe conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to examine the genetically predicted effects of epigenetic age acceleration as measured by HannumAge (9 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)), Horvath Intrinsic Age (24 SNPs), PhenoAge (11 SNPs) and GrimAge (4 SNPs) on multiple cancers (i.e., breast, prostate, colorectal, ovarian and lung cancer). We obtained genome-wide association data for biological ageing from a meta-analysis (N=34,710), and for cancer from the UK Biobank (N cases=2,671–13,879; N controls=173,493–372,016), FinnGen (N cases=719–8,401; N controls=74,685–174,006) and several international cancer genetic consortia (N cases=11,348–122,977; N controls=15,861–105,974). Main analyses were performed using multiplicative random effects inverse variance weighted (IVW) MR. Individual study estimates were pooled using fixed effect meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses included MR-Egger, weighted median, weighted mode and Causal Analysis using Summary Effect Estimates (CAUSE) methods, which are robust to some of the assumptions of the IVW approach.ResultsMeta-analysed IVW MR findings suggested that higher GrimAge acceleration increased the risk of colorectal cancer (OR=1.12 per year increase in GrimAge acceleration, 95%CI 1.04–1.20, p=0.002). The direction of the genetically predicted effects was consistent across main and sensitivity MR analyses. Among subtypes, the genetically predicted effect of GrimAge acceleration was greater for colon cancer (IVW OR=1.15, 95%CI 1.09–1.21, p=0.006), than rectal cancer (IVW OR=1.05, 95%CI 0.97–1.13, p=0.24). We also found evidence that higher GrimAge acceleration decreased the risk of prostate cancer (pooled IVW OR=0.93 per year increase in GrimAge acceleration, 95%CI 0.87–0.99, p=0.02). This was supported by MR sensitivity analyses, but did not replicate in MR analyses using data on parental history of prostate cancer in UK Biobank (IVW OR=1.00, 95%CI 0.96–1.04, p=1.00). Results were less consistent for associations between other epigenetic clocks and cancers.ConclusionsGrimAge acceleration may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Additionally, there is more limited evidence that it may be protective against prostate cancer. Findings for other clocks and cancers were inconsistent. Further work is required to investigate the potential mechanisms underlying the results.FundingFMB was supported by a Wellcome Trust PhD studentship in Molecular, Genetic and Lifecourse Epidemiology (218495/Z/19/Z). KKT was supported by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme) and by the Hellenic Republic’s Operational Programme “Competitiveness, Entrepreneurship & Innovation” (OΠΣ 5047228). PH was supported by Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019).RMM was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. GDS and CLR were supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/5) and by a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Programme). REM was supported by an Alzheimer’s Society project grant (AS-PG-19b-010) and NIH grant (U01 AG-18-018, PI: Steve Horvath). RCR is a de Pass Vice Chancellor’s Research Fellow at the University of Bristol.

2.N. Round table: COVID-19, ethics, and the many publics in public health policy and practice

The term public health is well known. However, there are many meanings and competing ideas about what public health practice, public health policies and public health services are, should be or could be. There are different understandings of public health's main concepts (e.g., health protection and health promotion), diverse underlying basic normative assumptions (e.g., regarding paternalism or justice), and competing views on how public health policies should be developed (e.g., through top down or deliberative/participatory approaches). Different theories and ideologies frame the debate. They refer to the value of privacy and spheres of personal decision-making, the image of human beings as social or political animals, and the role of the liberal-democratic state. Those theories also reflect different historical developments and institutionalized experiences underlying differences in “political cultures” and related understandings of “public”, and consequently, of “public health”. However, we as a “public health community” do not often reflect on the different understandings of “public” in “public health”. E.g., what is the meaning of “public” and what is “public” about public health services? The need to make and evaluate COVID-19 public health policies and practices underlines the necessity for an ongoing reflection to identify good answers. Against this background, the workshop addresses the following questions: What different kinds of understanding of key concepts of “public health” - including the concept of “public” itself - underlie different kinds of interventions, measures and policies to tackle the ongoing public health emergency / the Covid 19 pandemic? What are the ethical lessons from the pandemic and implications for public health policies and activities? The roundtable workshop will start with a key contribution by John Coggon (Chair in Law and Director of Centre for law and Society, University of Bristol), reflecting some core messages of his seminal book “What Makes Health Public?” and recent research on the issue in the light of COVID-19-policies. Together with three further panelists key messages and reflections will be discussed from the different disciplines of political science, ethics, social science and policy / practitioner perspectives, drawing out implications for policy, research and practice. This will be followed by reflections and discussion with the workshop participants and their reflections and insights on these critical questions. Speakers/Panelists John Coggon University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Kai Michelsen Fulda University of Applied Sciences, Fulda, Germany Peter Schröder-Bäck University of Applied Sciences for Police and Public Administration in North Rhine-Westphalia, Aachen, Germany Sadie Regmi Public Health Registrar, University College London, London, UK Key messages In theory, different conceptions of the normativity of the key term “public” lay different foundations for the role of the state and the scope of the policies initialised to advance PH aims. In practice, PH policies are strongly driven by political and economic interests of “the ruling classes”, but modified by civil society and institutionalised historical experiences.

University patenting and licensing practices in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic - implications for global equitable access to COVID-19 health technologies

Universities play a vital role in developing health technologies to address the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigated the measures the top 35 UK universities receiving most Medical Research Council funding have taken to ensure global equitable access to health technologies in technology transfer. In October 2020 we sent Freedom Of Information requests and analysed universities' websites, to (i.) assess institutional strategies on the patenting and licensing of COVID-19-related health technologies, (ii.) identify all COVID-19-related health technologies licensed or patented, and (iii.) record whether universities engaged with the Open-COVID pledge, COVID-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP), or Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) COVID-19 licensing guidelines. Except for the Universities of Oxford and Edinburgh, UK universities have not updated their institutional strategies during the pandemic. Nine universities licensed 22 COVID-19 health technologies. Imperial College London disclosed 10 patents relevant to COVID-19. No UK universities participate in the Open-COVID Pledge or C-TAP, but discussions are ongoing. The University of Bristol signed up to the AUTM guidelines. Despite several COVID-19 health technologies being developed by UK universities, our findings suggest minimal engagement with measures that may promote equitable access. We suggest that universities review their technology transfer policies and implement global equitable access strategies for COVID-19 health technologies.

Knowledge exchange and the creative industries: A reflective commentary on current practice

This reflective commentary summarizes the key learnings that arose from the 2019/20 Knowledge Exchange and the Creative Industries seminar series. These seminars at the University of Bristol, UK, looked at engagement with research within the creative industries. Each seminar showcased an academic and artistic partnership from across South West England and Wales which resulted in an artistic output that could be classified as ‘immersive’, including, but not limited to, audio storytelling applications, augmented reality games, virtual reality projects, films and theatre productions. Each seminar involved collaborators sharing their experiences and thoughts on best practice, possible styles and potential pitfalls in knowledge exchange projects. My commentary provides an overview of the partnerships, which represent a snapshot of current knowledge exchange practices in the region. I summarize the common trends that emerged throughout the seminars, including methods of initiating a collaboration, the scalability of partnerships between industry and academia, the challenges surrounding process when working on multi-partner collaborations, and questions of ethics and intellectual property. I also reflect upon the processes and learnings that arose from hosting the series, to guide others who are thinking about strategies to encourage collaboration. Overall, the commentary offers a blueprint of considerations for those in both academia and the creative industries who are considering embarking upon knowledge exchange projects. By drawing attention to the lessons learned from a series of successful partnerships, the discussion paves the way for future projects of engaged research within the creative industries.

Low uptake of COVID-19 lateral flow testing among university students: a mixed methods evaluation

Background: University populations offer a unique opportunity to quantify COVID-19 lateral flow testing (LFT) uptake. Methods: Mixed methods evaluation of LFT among University of Bristol students comprising an analysis of testing uptake using logistic regression analyses; a survey; and qualitative interviews to explore experiences of testing and subsequent behaviour. Results: 12,391 LFTs were conducted on 8025/36,054 (22.3%) students. Only one in 10 students had the recommended two tests. There were striking demographic disparities in uptake with those from ethnic minority groups having lower uptake (e.g. 3% of Chinese students were tested vs. 30.7% of White students), and variations by level and year of study (ranging from 5.3% to 33.7%), place of residence (29.0% to 35.6%) and faculty (15.2% to 32.8%). Barriers to engagement with testing included a lack of awareness, knowledge and understanding, and concerns about the accuracy and safety. Students understood limitations of LFTs but requested further information about test accuracy. Tests were used to inform behavioural decisions, often in combination with other information, such as the potential for exposure to the virus and perceptions of vulnerability. Conclusions: The low uptake of testing brings into question the role of mass LFT in university settings.

How Classical, Super and Quantum Computers Work

In this presentation I will explain how Classical computers, Super computers and Quantum computers work and compare them to one another. Bibliography [1] “Computer Basics: What Is a Computer?” GCFGlobal.org, edu.gcfglobal.org/en/computerbasics/what-is-a-computer/1/. [2] “Computers for /The Basics.” Computers for Beginners/The Basics - Wikibooks, Open Books for an Open World, en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Computers_for_Beginners/The_Basics[3] Fisher, Chris, and Eric Abenojar. “IBM: What Is Quantum Computing?” IBM Quantum, 2 Apr. 2009, www.ibm.com/quantum-computing/learn/what-is-quantum-computing/. [4] Gunter, Elsa L. "Computer." World Book Student, World Book, 2020, worldbookonline.com/student-new/#/article/home/ar127860/Cpu[5] Chubb, Jennifer C. "Quantum computing." World Book Student, World Book, 2020, worldbookonline.com/student-new/#/article/home/ar757070/quantum%20computers[6] Australian Research Council Gate based Quantum Computers. University of Bristol (Quantum in the Cloud Documentation}Center for Quantum Computing and Communication Technology University of New South Wales (http://www.cqc2t.org/)[7] University of Science and Technology (China) China hits milestone in developing quantum computer[8] Author’s in-person interviews with three IBM researchers at IBM Watson Quantum computers research center, Yorktwon Heights, NY, USA