Subscribe to Search results

It was reported that a baby in San Francisco had developed symptoms of AIDS after receiving transfusions. One of those transfusions had been given by a donor who was subsequently diagnosed with AIDS.

Published on:

Dr Craske set out various theories as to the aetiology of AIDS, including "possibly the transfusion of commercial blood concentrates". He noted that there was a considerable delay between occurrence of initial symptoms and diagnosis, and that mortality was high.

Published on:

Dr Craske submitted his report on AIDS to the UK Haemophilia Centre Directors' Hepatitis Working Party

Published on:

Drs Craske, Rizza and Bloom sent a circular letter to the Director of the Oxford Haemophilia Centre providing papers to enable a system for the reporting of possible AIDS cases to be set up "as quickly as possible."

Published on:

Dr Charles Rizza wrote in a study report that "By the end of 1982 it was clear that [recipients of blood products were] at risk of developing AIDS."

Published on:

MMWR described that since June 1981, 43 females had developed AIDS typical infections. It stated "epidemiological observations increasingly suggest that AIDS is caused by an infectious agent....such an agent could be transmitted sexually or through other intimate contact".

Published on:

Alpha Pharmaceutical issued a press release which stated, "The evidence suggests, although it does not absolutely prove, that a virus or other disease agent was transmitted to [haemophilia patients with AIDS] in the Factor VIII concentrate, derived from pooled human plasma".

Published on:

Dr Craske told 21 haemophilia centre directors at a meeting with Immuno regarding AIDS that the disease was "intractable", up to December 1982 in the US 45% of those suffering from it had died, ten people with haemophilia in the US had been affected of whom five had died, the youngest aged seven and there appeared to be an incubation period of between six months and two years.

Published on:

The nature of the risk of AIDs was discussed by haemophilia centre directors at a meeting in January 1983.

Published on:

An article appeared in The Lancet entitled "Acquired Immunodeficiency-like Syndrome in Two Haemophiliacs" which stated that the cause of AIDs was likely a blood borne virus and that transmission of an infectious agent in blood products seemed likely.

Published on:

The CDC reported that blood products or blood appeared responsible for AIDS among haemophilia patients requiring clotting factor replacement. It also noted that the first signs of AIDS might take two to three years to emerge after exposure to a possible transmissible agent. There was a fatality rate of more than 60 percent for those first diagnosed over one year previously.

Published on:

An article in MMWR states that it seems likely that the pool of persons capable of transmitting an AIDS agent may be considerably larger than the presently known number of AIDS cases. Also that there may be a latency period of between several months to two years between infection and recognisable clinical illness and that transmissibility may precede illness.

Published on:

CDC representatives met with leaders from the blood industry (including the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association), haemophilia groups, gay community organisations and representatives from the NIH [National Institute of Health] and FDA in Washington. The disease was renamed AIDS and it was agreed that it was caused by an infectious agent.

Published on:

In a memo Ed Cutter wrote that Cutter might consider being open about the risk of AIDs for those who consumed its products.

Published on:

The FDA issued a directive to all US manufacturers of plasma derivatives aimed at decreasing the risk of transmitting AIDS, stating that plasma collected from donors in certain high risk groups "should not be fractionated into derivatives already known to have a risk of transmitting infection diseases".

Published on:

Dr Smith wrote to Dr Fowler, stating that it would be advisable to consider the problem of AIDS and blood products at the next meeting of the CSM(B) and asking Dr Fowler to produce a brief paper for the meeting.

Published on:

During oral evidence to the Infected Blood Inquiry, Dr Diana Walford stated that it was "a fairly unusual format" to have conclusions already made within an agenda for a committee meeting. This was in reference to an agenda for the Committee on Safety of Medicines Sub-Committee on Biological Products on 13 July 1983.

Published on:

During oral evidence to the Infected Blood Inquiry Dr Walford was questioned in relation to concentrates and the UKHDO's stance on the risk they carried. In response to the level of risk she stated that "the risk as they [UKHCDO] were defining it was what they perceived as the risk at the present time".

Published on:

Dr Fowler seemed to think it questionable that factor concentrates posed any additional risk to people with haemophilia. He asked in it whether haemophilic AIDS might be a function of the concentrate itself, but then said: "one cannot ignore other views and hope the problem will go away."

Published on:

Cutter - in a letter - to Dr Fowler, stated that the facts about AIDS were "very limited" and it therefore "can only be an assumption that AIDS can be transmitted by certain blood products." They added that "Also it is unclear whether the syndrome contracted by hemophiliacs really is the same as the AIDS syndrome contracted by other high risk groups."

Published on: