Subscribe to Search results

According to Dr Dempsey, in regards non-A non-B Hepatitis, around 1980 there was a "general feeling" amongst clinicians that it was not a major concern, but there were patients who did have evidence of chronic liver disease.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey recalled that non-A non-B Hepatitis was not thought sufficiently serious to merit withdrawal of "the only really effective treatment for severe/moderate haemophilia" in reference to factor concentrate.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey understood there was still a risk of non-A non-B Hepatitis from commercial concentrates, but there was also a risk from NHS concentrates. He acknowledged that the risk with cryoprecipitate was "very much reduced risk."

Published on:

Dr Dempsey described batch dedication as "extremely difficult" and as something that ultimately did not work.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey had gathered from reading UKHCDO minutes that things had improved considerably in relation to the safety of commercial concentrates.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey recalled that the pharmaceutical firms, mostly Armour, were "keen to emphasise the fact that they'd tightened up on the type of donor they looked to for their plasma source" and reassured him that he was "disposed to look favourably on commercial concentrates at that point in time."

Published on:

Children at the RBHSC with moderate haemophilia were treated with these commercial concentrates; children with mild haemophilia were treated with DDAVP and tranexamic acid.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey's patients who would have been treated with commercial concentrates and SNBTS concentrates - were infected with Hepatitis C.

Published on:

Dr Dempsey was not aware, that BPL was producing a product at this time (8Y) which did not transmit hepatitis; had he known about it, he would have phoned BPL and requested a supply.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Jeremy Quin, Paymaster General, confirmed it was the Government's expectation that the compensation recommendations would go beyond the cohorts of individuals to whom the interim payments had been directed.

Published on:

Jeremy Quin, Paymaster General, formed the view that the Government needed to increase resources on the issue of what the final compensation scheme might look like.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Jeremy Quin, Paymaster General, explained the Government anticipated it would see the Inquiry's recommendations on compensation by mid 2023 and would be in a position to respond quickly to recommendations.

Published on:

In oral evidence, Jeremy Quin, Paymaster General, was unable to explain why work to analyse the cost and scale of the implementation of compensation had not been commissioned earlier than 2023.

Published on:

Jeremy Quin confirmed in his evidence to the Inquiry that his thinking was that, as and when decisions were made on particular issues or recommendations, he would be able to make announcements on a rolling basis rather than a single announcement at the end of all the work.

Published on:

Shona Dunn, the Second Permanent Secretary in the DHSC, agreed with Jeremy Quin that the building blocks necessary for decisions regarding implementing a compensation scheme existed.

Published on:

Jeremy Quin suggested the Inquiry's final report would enable the Government to see the recommendations in the Inquiry's Second Interim Report in their full context.

Published on:

Simon Taylor conveyed to the Inquiry that the Society principally relied upon the advice given to it by its Medical Advisory Panel, which did not meet in person and advice was relayed verbally.

Published on:

David Watters had concerns that the Medical Advisory Panel was not getting the most unbiased information. He had concerns that appointments to the Medical Advisory Panel in the 1980s were nepotistic and the source of information was not unbiased. These concerns led to a review of the panel in the 1990s.

Published on:

The information provided by the Haemophilia Society was not relied upon heavily by its members, however by the mid 1980s, the Society aimed to be an authoritative voice on AIDS and haemophilia to both members of the Society and the wider public.

Published on:

Simon Taylor noted that there was a rationale for publishing the fact that they had received legal advice, stating that it was unlikely they would be successful in a legal case against the Government. Firstly, to release the legal advice into the public domain, and secondly to garner support with Parliament for their cause as legal action would likely fail.

Published on: