§ Norman BakerTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what work has been carried our to establish the background levels of fluoxetine in the aquatic environment; [167861]
(2) what information she has procured to establish the levels of residues from anti-depressant drugs in the (a) livers, (b) brains and (c) muscle of fish. [167860]
§ Mr. Bradshaw[holding answer 23 April 2004]: During 2002–03 the Environment Agency carried out a desk based ranking exercise on the 500 pharmaceuticals most commonly used in England and Wales in order to prioritise those of environmental significance. This exercise included fluoxetine, more commonly known under the trade name Prozac. A short, targeted monitoring programme was then set up for 12 pharmaceuticals. Fliioxetine was not included because no analytical method suitable for use on environmental samples existed and development of one would be difficult. The top ranked antidepressant was lofepramine and this was included in the monitoring survey. A method NA as not in existence and had to be developed. Lofeprar line was not detected in any of the five sewage works effluents or receiving watercourses monitored. However, it does not necessarily follow that the same would be true for fluoxetine.
No monitoring of fish has been undertaken.
The Environment Agency have developed a Position Statement on pharmaceuticals—which can be found on the Agency's website www.environment-agency.gov.uk 1015W (search—pharmaceuticals). This elaborates further on the work done and includes a recommendation to the pharmaceutical industry to do more on the development of analytical methods for environmental monitoring. I am pleased that the Environment Agency is in discussion with the industry on the development of a work programme to cover the recommendations to industry listed in the Position Statement.