§ Mr. Hickmetasked the Secretary of State for Social Services, pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Glanford and Scunthorpe on 11 June, Official Report, columns 384–5, if he will indicate which organisations and individuals who gave evidence to the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council were in favour of accepting golfer's elbow as being occupationally induced.
§ Mr. NewtonI understand from the council that it treats the evidence it receives in confidence. Although in the case of epicondylitis of the humerus (which includes "golfer's elbow") a clear majority of those who expressed a view did not favour prescription, the council does not make its recommendations on the basis of how many witnesses are for or against. It attached much more importance to the weight of persuasive evidence which suggested that, while the condition could be caused or aggravated by occupation, the risk was not specific to particular occupations. The evidence suggested that unaccustomed activities were more likely to be the cause. It was also agreed that it was impossible to distinguish clinically between occupational and non-occupational cases of epicondylitis of the humerus.
The council's consideration of this question is set out more fully in its report on epicondylitis of the humerus and rotation cuff syndrome. I am arranging for copies of the report to be placed in the Library.