§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Fallon.]
10.31 pm§ Mr. David Tredinnick (Bosworth)With Mr. Speaker's permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker, my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre (Mr. Mans) will read my speech for me.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Harold Walker)I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for informing Mr. Speaker and I hope that he will soon recover—to his usual robust debating form.
§ Mr. Keith Mans (Wyre)Had my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. Tredinnick) had the benefit of a product of my constituency—the Fisherman's Friend—I might not now be rising in his place. I am not over-familiar with the contents of my hon. Friend's speech, but I trust that I shall read it as well as he undoubtedly would have made it.
At a time of ever-increasing concern about levels of pesticides and chemicals in the human blood, I rise tonight to argue the case for providing the Robens institute at the university of Surrey with a computer-controlled mass spectrograph. This machine would enable an accurate assessment of chemical levels, would be available to doctors from all over Britain, and would bring about a dramatic reduction in suffering.
Before I explain this need in greater detail, I must declare an interest—it is my hon. Friend's interest, not mine, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am a member of the parliamentary group for alternative and complementary medicine and I have myself suffered from and been treated for allergies. Chemicals cause allergies—so do certain foods in certain people, for that matter, as has been conclusively shown. One of my nephews has had problems with hyperactivity. After analysis of his diet and the banning of certain foods, the hyperactivity has all but disappeared. If the diet is ignored, the hyperactivity returns.
Chemical levels in the human body are now a major threat to health, and Professor Rea at the Robens institute has highlighted one area of greatest possible concern for which a mass spectrograph would provide vital and accurate analysis. That is the level of pesticides in mothers' milk. Professor Rea fears that many agricultural workers and country dwellers are exposed to high levels of pesticide which are a potential cause of ill health. Breast-fed children of these country dwellers may be at even greater risk than their parents because pesticides are concentrated in mothers' milk and at a time of life when infants are highly susceptible to poisons.
It has already been established that the pesticide DDT is concentrated in mothers' milk, and it was banned in America for that reason. The level of many commonly used pesticides in blood and in breast milk is unknown, but it is expected to be high. Professor Rea has said:
the long term side effects of these pesticides is alarming, and it is important that at-risk agricultural workers are routinely tested to diagnose pesticide poisoning at an early stage.901 A computer-controlled mass spectrograph at the Robens institute would enable Professor Rea and his team to analyse blood pesticide levels, and it could also be used by general practitioners all over Britain.Since 1978, the Robens institute, which is more properly called the Robens institute of industrial and environmental health and safety, has grown from two full-time and one part-time members of staff to 110 scientists and others working in a wide range of disciplines connected with human health and safety at work and the environment.
Last year, a chair in environmental medicine at the Robens institute was established by the environmental medicine foundation—a great achievement for a small group of dedicated people. As a result of the establishment of that chair, new, exciting and essential research has been initiated by Professor Rea and his colleague, Professor Bridges.
The Robens institute has a particular research interest in the effects of chemicals on human health. Part of that work involves the use of non-animal systems, such as the use of cell preparations, computer models, and so on, to understand the causes of toxicity. The other crucial aspect of that research is direct information from human investigations. Human investigations include studies of population groups, conducted by Professor Balarajan and Professor Grob, and investigations on individuals. In the case of individuals, there are two main research lines. The first is direct investigations into the effect of administering individual drugs and other chemicals to man—the work of Professor Hindmarch. The second line of research is studies of individuals who appear to be suffering ill health as a consequence of exposure to an individual chemical or multiple chemicals—Professor Rea's work.
To investigate those with illnesses that have been attributed to a chemical or chemicals, some assessment needs to be made of the chemicals and/or their metabolites present in the body. It is important also to establish, where possible, specific biological markers of the chemical exposure history.
Professor Rea and others have proposed the hypothesis that, for particular sensitive individuals, the total body burden of certain classes of chemicals is responsible for their condition. That hypothesis is interesting and potentially important in regard to treatment and ill health prevention, but it remains to be tested properly. To do that, sophisticated methods need to be developed to measure not just a single chemical but a range of chemicals to identify, first, the total body burden of chemicals and, secondly, specific classes of chemicals that are considered likely to be responsible.
Research to establish suitable analytical techniques is also needed. If they are to be widely applied they will need eventually to be cheap, robust, sensitive and specific. That requires a primary reference method which will unambiguously identify the major chemicals present in the blood or biopsied tissues of sensitive individuals, and indicate the form in which those chemicals exist in the body—for example, as parent compound or metabolites—which, if any, blood tissue components they are bound to, and whether the binding, if it occurs, is readily reversible.
902 The primary reference method will look for possible links between the nature and concentration of those chemicals and any biochemical abnormalities in sensitive individuals. A mass spectrometer is the only available technique that fulfils the necessary criterion for a primary reference standard. The instrument is required because in the first phase of the work its role is primarily as a research tool. It needs the following specifications—first versatility of interface. That means that samples may need to be separated before a measurement is made. That requires capability for connecting the mass spectrometer to a gas liquid chromotograph, as well as a high performance liquid chromatograph. Secondly, it needs an ability to identify and measure the levels for relatively high molecular weight components—for example, chemicals that are bonded to proteins, fats and/or carbohydrates. Thirdly, it requires mild conditions in the chamber of the instrument so that relatively unstable biological molecules are not degraded prior to measurement.
In her reply to the Adjournment debate of my hon. Friend the Member for Dorset, West (Sir J. Spicer) on allergies on 30 January, my hon. Friend's predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey, South-West (Mrs. Bottomley), explained:
facilities for the analysis of blood for very low concentrations of chemicals, including pesticides, are available in the United Kingdom at the UK Atomic Energy Authority establishment at Harwell at commercial rates."—[Official Report, 30 January 1990; Vol. 166, c. 288.]That was a helpful suggestion. Indeed, it is expected that this work will complement that of Harwell, and the others who offer an excellent service for environmental samples and who have special expertise in dioxins and dibenzo-furan measurements. The continuation—indeed, the extension—of services such as Harwell's is important. However—this is the key problem—clinicians cannot readily use such services unless they know precisely what they want to measure in order that a satisfactory response can be provided. Harwell offers service rather than research, and analysis of condition rather than measurement. In contrast, the mass spectrograph identifies precisely what chemicals are in the blood and in what quantities.I have argued for the mass spectrograph. I naturally hope that the Minister will tonight commit his Department to finding the funds for this essential project. If he cannot, I hope that he will at least use his influence with the Medical Research Council and the Science and Engineering Research Council. He does have a very real influence there—will he give that commitment tonight? Will he also inform other Departments and organisations, including the Department of the Environment, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and the Health and Safety Executive of the work of the Robens institute, and will he co-ordinate a fund-raising campaign with those other interested parties?
In conclusion, the mass spectrometer is essential to investigate the very important hypothesis that the total body burden of chemicals is an important factor in the ill health of certain sensitive individuals in the population. In addition, the instrument would have many other valuable uses in the area of human health and safety from chemicals. In the first instance, the primary role of the instrument will be to aid the development of simple technologies. Ultimately, the Robens institute will be able 903 to provide an effective, economic analytical strategy for investigating patients whose condition has been attributed to chemical exposure.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Stephen Dorrell)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth (Mr. Tredinnick) on winning the opportunity to raise this subject this evening and to extend to him the good wishes of the entire House on the recovery of his voice. I celebrated my arrival in the Department of Health as a new Minister by suffering from exactly the same condition as my hon. Friend. It meant that I had more time to read briefs and less ability to annoy the civil servants in my first week in the Department. I hope that my hon. Friend recovers quickly.
I extend to my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre (Mr. Mans) my commiseration on being asked to read out a technical brief with, I suspect, relatively little notice. I wish that I could read out a brief containing as many long words with the same skill. I thank both my hon. Friends for raising the matter this evening.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre said, the Robens institute is well respected and dedicated to research in occupational and environmental health. It was founded on the intitiative of Alf Robens with that background. It is not surprising that it was originally interested in occupational health research and since then has extended its activities to include environmental health research as a topic related to its original core interest. The issues that my hon. Friend raised on the Adjournment tonight reflect that development of interest.
The institute argues that in order fully to realise the opportunities which that development of interests provides, it needs a spectrometer within its armoury of facilities to conduct the research that it wishes to do. That case was advanced by Professor Bridges in the paper that my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth was kind enough to send to me earlier today. I am the first to concede that the paper raises several interesting subjects which could certainly be the subject of legitimate scientific research.
The first question prompted by the case advanced by my hon. Friends this evening is to whom the case that Professor Bridges made should be directed. In effect, he seeks an independent capital project to invest a substantial sum of money in a mass spectrometer for the Robens institute. There is no fund within the Department of Health which can legitimately be regarded as a fund for such investment. The Robens institute is part of the university of Surrey. Proposals for major capital projects such as this should properly be made to the authorities at the university of Surrey or, in the education world, through the institutions set up by the Department of Education and Science. I do not pretend to have sufficiently developed expertise in the various institutions of that Department to suggest precisely which course my hon. Friend the Member for Bosworth should pursue.
Within the Department of Health no fund has been established precisely to meet the need that Professor Bridges has advanced for a spectrometer for an academic research institution. We fund research but not capital investment required by a research institute in an academic setting.
904 My first point in response to my hon. Friends is that they have made their case to the wrong institution of Government. My second point is that my Department is not hostile to the idea that environmental medicine and theories, particularly those advanced by the Environmental Medicine Foundation, should be researched. We are not hostile to that idea. However, if research funds are to be made available to undertake scientific tests on the theories advanced by that foundation, it is incumbent upon it to construct a clearly specified, properly tested programme of academic scientific research to test its propositions. I am sure that my hon. Friends would be the first to accept that they have not advanced such an approach, but rather made the case for investment in a particular piece of advanced scientific kit.
The Medical Research Council is funded from my Department's budget and if its money is to be used to support research into environmental medicine it must be on the basis of a formally presented, clearly specified, properly tested proposal for research. Our doors are not closed to such a proposal—on the contrary, discussions have gone on for some time with those interested and much enthusiasm has been expressed for the ideas advanced. However, I am advised that no formally presented proposal of the kind that I have described has been put before the Medical Research Council.
Even though the Department is not opposed to the idea of research, I know that those at the Environmental Medicine Foundation believe that the Medical Research Council gives their ideas a frosty reception. Those who want their ideas to be tested properly should recognise, however, that there are other courses open to them. The national health service does not seek to determine centrally the clinical decisions of individual clinicians. Those who find that they cannot secure the acceptance of the Medical Research Council to test their ideas properly should consider making their case to the clinicians and suggesting that their ideas should be properly examined in medical institutions.
My hon. Friends have argued that the Department should invest in the mass spectrometer, but their case is misdirected as the Department does not have the resources to make such an investment. It is not for lay Ministers, people who are properly not expert in such matters, to make decisions about precisely the type of research that should be followed and tested in the scientific world of medicine.
It is incumbent upon those who want to advance the case for their research to do so through the academic research institutions, pre-eminently the MRC in this case, and to seek the interest of individual clinicians. They should seek to persuade those clinicians and institutions about the development of research that offers the opportunity for the treatment of patients and clinical conditions. No Minister should pretend to be able to make a decision on such an issue. The NHS does not seek to centralise clinical decision making and it makes a virtue out of leaving clinicians free to make such decisions in the interests of their patients.
My hon. Friend questioned whether those who wish to see their ideas tested have a realistic prospect of access to the mass spectrometer that they believe necessary to provide a proper testing of their concepts. My hon. Friend suggested that if I were not able to promise funds this evening—and I have made it clear that I am not—I should 905 sponsor or otherwise bless a fund-raising campaign to raise money to provide a spectrometer for this type of research. I would not want to take that stance, but I have a suggestion to make to my hon. Friend which I hope he will feel goes some way towards responding to the concern which he expresses and which I know exists in the field about whether it is realistic to see any prospect of access to a spectrometer for research of this type.
In the context of the general programme of research that is constituted in the document prepared by Professor Bridges, I am the first to recognise that a spectrometer would contribute to that kind of proposal. Referring back to some earlier remarks I made about the proper source of capital funds for that type of proposal, it is up to him to make a bid for investment in a spectrometer from the bodies that provide capital investment funds for academic research of that nature.
§ Mr. MansIf the Robens institute produces a proposal which meets the Department's criteria, would the Minister be prepared to use his influence with the Medical Research Council to consider that proposal with great care?
Mr. DarrellI am not sufficiently experienced in the ways of my Department, after five weeks in office, to know 906 the extent of my influence with the Medical Research Council. But I can make a slightly different offer, which I hope my hon. Friend will take in the spirit in which it is made.
The facility of mass spectrometers is not rare in the academic and medical world now, and I am told that several hundred of them have already been installed. I suggest to my hon. Friend that if the Robens institute prepares the kind of properly tested, clearly specified programme of research into this field about which I have talked—as part of a structured programme of research— and it finds that that programme is running into the sands because of its inability to secure access to a mass spectrometer, I will offer the services of my Department to try to find one of the installations that already exists in the country that may be made available to provide the opportunity to use the facility required by the Robens institute.
I hope that my hon. Friend will feel that that is a genuine expression of my Department's good will towards genuine research in the field which he is anxious to encourage.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at three minutes to Eleven o'clock.