Nalin Thakker

Professor of Molecular Pathology and Genetics and Consultant Histopathologist, St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester

I carry out research on diseases of the head and neck, and I am the DI for the research licence. Because of my work I fully appreciate the immense value of using human tissue in research.

HTA regulation has certainly helped drive up standards. In the past, individual laboratories here had varied practices, but now we have institution-wide policies and procedures, a clearly defined structure for accountability, and training for all staff. This is not cost-free, and you have to balance benefit against risks, but overall I feel it has been worth it. The research sector is relatively low risk, so I think it is appropriate that the HTA works in a risk-based way and has a light touch.

I also advise the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) on matters relating to the HTA; and as part of this role, I sit on a joint NRES- HTA group where we discuss issues that are of common interest and concern. I think this is extremely important in providing a consistent message and a complementary approach that facilitates research.

Researchers still have some misconceptions about the Human Tissue Act. I come across researchers who say they cannot conduct research because of the Act. They are surprised to learn that not only is this not true, but the legislation has in fact clarified issues that have previously hindered research. The Act actually facilitates research.
Researchers and their institutions should see themselves as partners to the HTA to help improve practice. The wide consultation exercises that the HTA has undertaken on various issues, such as the new research code of practice, are very important in developing this relationship.

It is important for the public to know that this area is regulated. Standards of ethics change with time, and what was acceptable in the past is not acceptable now.