HL Deb 24 May 1990 vol 519 cc1019-21

11.13 a.m.

The Earl of Clanwilliam asked Her Majesty's Government:

Following Baroness Hooper's reply to the debate [Official Report, 9th May, col. 1433] whether they can estimate how many patients have died, been maimed or been born deformed as a result of treatment with products of the pharmaceutical industry through the medium of the National Health Service since 1948.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Hooper)

My Lords, it is difficult to make a reliable estimate on the information available, but stringent safeguards are built into the licensing provisions of the Medicines Act.

The Earl of Clanwilliam

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that somewhat inconclusive Answer. In the light of the punitive damages which have been awarded to those who have suffered such calamities in the past, is there any record of similar calamities occuring to those receiving treatment from herbal or other complementary and natural therapies?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, it was as a direct result of the thalidomide situation that the controls to which I have referred were built in in terms of licensing procedures. Sometimes it is argued that some herbal and homoeopathic medicines are inherently safe because they are natural. But that is not always the case. For example, as regards herbal medicines, which are currently the only natural medicinal products to be reviewed, from time to time it has been necessary for the licensing authority to withdraw or restrict the use of particular herbs in medicinal products. Again, although homoeopathic products are considered safe by virtue of their high dilution, some of the starting materials are toxic and the dilution itself is no protection against, for example, poor hygiene in manufacturing processes or microbial contamination.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, no doubt such things are happening as are indicated in the Question. However, is the noble Baroness also aware that the remarkable contribution of the British Pharmaceutical Society via the NHS has literally saved millions of lives and prevented a great deal of suffering? While when something goes wrong, quite rightly, there are reports in the press and Questions asked in both Houses of Parliament, we should not forget the remarkable contribution made by the British Pharmaceutical Society in saving lives and easing pain. It has made a valuable contribution to our National Health Service.

Baroness Hooper

Indeed, yes, my Lords. I fully agree with the noble Lord on this occasion that it should not be forgotten that modern pharmaceutical advances have produced incalculable benefits to sick people, who would die or suffer needlessly without effective treatment; for example, organ transplants made possible by anti-rejection drugs, anti-cancer drugs enabling the cure of certain childhood leukaemias, the successful treatment of peptic ulcers with less recourse to surgery, and anti-infective drugs, without which many infections were previously fatal. One could go on and on. We look to new and further developments in modern pharmaceutical science for more lifesaving treatments in the future.

Lord Nugent of Guildford

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that on this occasion I find myself in complete agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Molloy? Is she further aware that the Question of my noble friend Lord Clanwilliam, although in order procedurally, is in the worst possible taste implying that numbers of people have lost their lives as a result of treatment by the health service or pharmaceutical drugs? Is she also aware that the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, is absolutely right that the record of our health and pharmaceutical services in saving lives has a reputation which is second to none in the world and we should be proud of that?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend for underlining that point. I should also like to take the opportunity to re-emphasise the stringent safeguards built in to the licensing system and, indeed, the excellent system for voluntary notifications to the Committee on the Safety of Medicines.

Lord Auckland

My Lords, is the Minister aware that I have visited a number of pharmaceutical installations and, quite apart from its safety record, the pharmaceutical industry does a great deal for this country's exports?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, yes.

Lord Renton

My Lords, having voted against the Third Reading in another place of the National Health Service Act 1946, may I endorse the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, and my noble friend Lord Nugent?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, I am happy to say to my noble friend that I welcome him to the consensus which prevails.

Lord Peston

My Lords, I never like to introduce a note of controversy and of course I entirely accept what has been said about the pharmaceutical industry. However, perhaps the noble Baroness will address the point raised by the noble Earl, Lord Clanwilliam. Does she agree that it is the case that any drug, because of the great amount of good it does, is always potentially dangerous? Because it can do some good, it can also do some harm. The nonsensical drugs put forward under the name of homoeopathy and so on may well have little effect in terms of doing harm but the reason is that they also have little effect in doing good?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, that is why those forms of treatment are available in this country.

Lord Peston

My Lords, is the noble Baroness saying that they are available because their effect is negligible and therefore the Government do not feel that there is need to intervene?

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, they are available because we believe in freedom of choice.

The Earl of Clanwilliam

My Lords, it is suggested that my question is in bad taste. I would remind my noble friend that my supplementary Question asks whether there is any record of such calamities occurring for those receiving treatment from natural therapies. With respect, that question has not been answered.

Baroness Hooper

My Lords, in referring to the original Question tabled by my noble friend which relates back to the debate we had some little time ago in your Lordships' House, I confirm that we see this as a risk situation and that I did not point to any specific evidence.