Subscribe to Search results

Professor Aileen Keel stated in her oral evidence that "In 1984, there was only just the beginnings of the emergence of the possibility that that virus [ie AIDS] could be transmitted by blood products."

Published on:

Professor Aileen Keel's oral evidence in relation to non-A non-B Hepatitis was that "If we had known in 1984 what we now know about the impact of non-A, non-B hepatitis, then maybe the choice would have been to choose cryoprecipitate, but we didn't know that then."

Published on:

Professor Aileen Keel suggested in her oral evidence that the "untenability" of the no compensation position arose from the fact that there was an increasing degree of lobbying from organisations such as the Haemophilia Society.

Published on:

Professor Aileen Keel, when asked if the commercial concentrates given to the children at Yorkhill were the best available treatment in light of medical knowledge at the time, answered: "I suppose with hindsight the answer is no."

Published on:

Professor Aileen Keel told the Inquiry that she knew from her own clinical practice in Glasgow, doing clinics with Professor Lowe, that the practice there was to to inform patients of the result of a test if they were found to be HCV positive.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Professor Aileen Keel said that during an investigation into how people with haemophilia were infected with Hepatitis C, what was said by Professor Gordon Lowe in respect of a policy to inform patients that they were being tested and the results, was accepted at face value.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Professor Keel stated that the Advisory Committee on the Virological Safety of Blood ("ACVSB") had considered this issue over a number of years, on each occasion agreeing that ALT testing should not be introduced because of the poor specificity of the test.

Published on:

Professor Keel raised the issue of compensation following the draft report circulated by Christina Dora. During oral evidence Professor Keel said it was important to raise this as it was a material issue that had been discussed,.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Professor Keel insisted the remit of the Scottish Executive investigation had been agreed with the Haemophilia Society.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Professor Keel confirmed that the position in the Scottish Executive, both before and in the aftermath of the publication of the Scottish Executive report, remained one of fundamental opposition to financial support or compensation for those infected with Hepatitis C.

Published on:

A draft memo from Ian Sneddon to the Minister of State stated that the main argument against compensation for those infected with Hepatitis C through blood transfusion/blood products was that the treatment offered was the best available in the light of medical knowledge at the time.

Published on:

The Department of Health and Social Security in London was aware by this date of the strong possibility that "some sort of virus" (the AIDS virus) was transmitted by blood products.

Published on:

The Department of Health sought the views of the Scottish Office on the issue of compensation payments for those infected with Hepatitis C.

Published on:

Ian Snedden of the Scottish Office advised the Department of Health that whilst the 'no compensation' position was becoming increasingly untenable the proposed compensation scheme for those infected with Hepatitis C would give rise to a number of complex legal and medical questions.

Published on:

The Department of Health prepared proposals for a scheme to compensate those infected with Hepatitis C through blood or blood products but "without any presumption that such a scheme would be desirable or inevitable." Scottish Ministers were asked to agree to respond in terms of a draft letter which identified the difficulties in the proposed scheme and recommended "that pressure to establish a no-fault compensation scheme should continue to be resisted."

Published on:

A Department of Health memo raised concerns as to where the funding would come from to meet the proposed scheme compensating those infected with Hepatitis C.

Published on:

A Scottish Office memo raised concerns about the cost of a scheme to compensate those infected with Hepatitis C if one was to be introduced.

Published on:

The Scottish Office concluded that claims for compensation for those infected with Hepatitis C "should be resisted, at least until the outcome of the Court cases is known and a more precise estimate can be made of the likely numbers and costs involved."

Published on:

The Minister of State at the Scottish Office, James Douglas-Hamilton, commented that it "is likely that the view of the layman, and of the electorate as a whole, would probably be that those infected should receive compensation. Those infected had become so through no fault of their own, while being treated by the NHS, and those infected with HIV have already been compensated."

Published on:

The CMO of Scotland, Dr Robert Kendall, referred to a statement by the Secretary of State for Health, Stephen Dorrell, which "very strongly" suggested that the Department of Health would resist offering compensation and informed the Minister that in those circumstances it would be extremely difficult for Scotland to attempt to adopt a different policy.

Published on: