§ Miss Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone)I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make it compulsory to display health warnings where spectacles are sold without prescription.Under the Health and Medicines Act 1988 it is legal for spectacles to be sold over the counter without a prescription. The practice is restricted to spectacles which have simple magnifying lenses to help people with reading difficulties. Nevertheless, it is likely to become extremely dangerous as it militates against the early discovery of eye disease.It is common ground that a significant amount of eye disease such as glaucoma is discovered, entirely incidentally, during regular eye check-ups. Very often the patient has such a check-up because of deteriorating vision and ordinary reading difficulties, the eye test is carried out and quite apart from the vision defect the incipient disease is discovered. Under the new system, people between 40 and 50 who might normally expect their reading sight to deteriorate will, in effect, be able to prescribe their own spectacles without any eye check-up or any prescription by trying out various lenses until they reach the ones with which they are most comfortable.
I do not wish to prevent anyone from being able to buy cheap spectacles without the hassle of a test and a prescription, but people should be aware that by forfeiting the chance of an eye test and properly prescribed spectacles they run the risk of incipient disease remaining undiscovered. More seriously, some people have vision defects directly attributable to eye disease, but if they find spectacles which make reading more comfortable they may assume that those spectacles are right for them and the more serious causes of their vision defects will not be discovered. No two eyes are alike. When a person is prescribed spectacles by a practising optician, the specification for each lens is likely to differ, if only by an infinitesimal amount. Individuals prescribing their own spectacles are not likely to obtain that precise variation and thus are likely to be wearing spectacles which do not exactly suit their requirements.
Medical opinion seems to have gone into reverse and now says that no damage is done to adults' sight by wearing the wrong spectacles. If that is so, when the Government were deregulating the provision of frames, why were they so particular to keep the dispensing of lenses separate? I and other hon. Members raised those points during the proceedings on the Health and Medicines Bill and the then Minister promised that the Government would consider the possibility of displaying health warnings where spectacles are sold, warning people of the dangers of forgoing the eye test.
There is no reason to suppose that that would be remotely deleterious to those selling spectacles without prescription. The warning would not be against the spectacles themselves—it would simply stress that regular eye tests can prevent eye disease. No reputable dealer could have any possible objection to displaying such a warning on the counter where people are self-prescribing. Such people may be self-prescribing for the second or even the third time, which would suggest that for six years they have missed the opportunity to have regular eye 199 check-ups. Individuals would have a choice. They could buy the spectacles and forget the eye check-up, they could take notice of the warning and perhaps buy the spectacles but have the eye check-up anyway, or they could have the eye check-up and then obtain properly prescribed spectacles.
It is a well-established principle that where there is likely to be danger to an individual from any course of action, whether it be smoking or anything else, a warning is issued. We would greatly improve preventive eye medicine if, in conjunction with the deregulation of the provision of reading spectacles, warnings were issued about the relevance of the eye check for disease rather than simply the correction of vision defects.
I believe that the Bill is essential and is in no way in opposition to the spirit of the Health and Medicines Act 1988.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Bill ordered to be brought in by Miss Ann Widdecombe, Dame Jill Knight, Mr. David Blunkett, Mr. David Amess, Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours, Mr. Robert G. Hughes, Mr. David Alton, and Mr. David Shaw.