Published6 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingBy Jim ReedBBC PanoramaAll Sam Rushby can remember about his family are fleeting memories of hospital corridors and waiting rooms.In 1994, at just two years old, he lost his mum to Aids. His dad died with the condition a year later at Liverpool Royal Infirmary.His sister had also been infected with HIV, then a new and untreatable virus, and had died.”My family was literally torn apart and ripped away from me,” he tells BBC Panorama in his first-ever interview.”It just feels like they’ve been disposed of and that’s the end of it now.”Image source, Family photoSam’s father Gary was one of more than 1,200 people infected with HIV as part of the infected blood scandal, most after being given a drug made from US blood plasma in the late 1970s and 1980s.A long-running public inquiry into what has been called the worst treatment disaster in NHS history is preparing to report its findings.One of the key areas it is examining is whether the authorities were too slow to act at the time.Now, BBC Panorama has seen evidence that the British Embassy in Washington warned the UK government about the risk of Aids from contaminated blood in the early 1980s.An embassy official wrote a five-page memo to a senior figure at the Department of Health after meeting a member of the US Aids taskforce. The warning – one of several – came a decade before Sam was born. Infected Blood: Time for AnswersJim Reed meets the families of some of the children with bleeding disorders who were infected with HIV, to discuss their campaign for justice and what they hope for from the inquiry.Watch on BBC One at 20:00 BST on 13 May or on BBC iPlayer (UK Only) It wasn’t until he was in his teens that Sam, now 32, started to learn the truth.His father Gary was born with haemophilia, a genetic condition that damages the blood’s ability to clot. It almost always affects men, although women carry the haemophilia gene and can pass it on.In the late 1970s, Gary started on a new treatment meant to radically improve his life.Factor VIII was marketed as a wonder drug. Patients could simply take a bottle of the white powder from the fridge, mix it with distilled water and inject themselves.The bleeding would stop and, for the first time ever, haemophiliacs could live a more normal life.But those patients would later learn that entire batches of the new treatment had been contaminated with HIV and hepatitis C.About two-thirds of those infected with HIV in the 1980s developed Aids and died before modern antiretroviral drugs became available.Sam struggled to comprehend the truth about what happened to his family when he was finally told by his grandparents.”I didn’t believe it, I couldn’t believe it,” he says. “I just can’t get over, why did it have to happen?”In the early 1980s, the UK could not keep up with demand for Factor VIII, which was made by pooling – or mixing – the blood plasma of thousands of individual donors.Instead the treatment was shipped from the US.In the UK, blood donations have always been voluntary, but in the US, drug companies were allowed to pay cash for plasma.High risk groups, from prisoners to drug users, had a clear financial incentive to give blood and potentially lie about their medical history.Evidence uncovered by campaigners and seen by the ongoing public inquiry into the wider contaminated blood scandal shows that, as the risk from Aids started to become known, a series of clear warnings were sent to the UK government.In May 1983, Dr Spence Galbraith, the director of the UK’s Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, wrote to Dr Ian Field, the senior principal medical officer at the Department of Health, urging that all US blood products should be withdrawn from use until the risk of Aids was “clarified”.The letter from the British embassy in Washington – which Panorama has now seen – was also sent to Dr Field, just a month later on 28 June 1983.In it, an embassy official describes a meeting with a representative from the US Centers for Disease Control’s Aids taskforce.The transmission of HIV in blood was discussed, he writes. Haemophiliacs were “most at risk” from the “dubious habits” of some paid American blood donors, and the mixing of thousands of those donations to make Factor VIII.The Tainted Blood group, which represents hundreds of survivors and their families, says the letter shows a “staggering level of awareness and detail” about the dangers.But this – and other – warnings were not acted on. NHS patients continued to be given untreated Factor VIII imported from the US until at least 1985.Many of those involved in decisions in the 1980s are no longer alive, including Dr Ian Field.In 1983, knowledge of HIV and Aids was still emerging.At the time, a Department of Health official described the call to withdraw American Factor VIII as premature and said it did not take into account the risks to haemophiliacs of removing a major source of their treatment.Image source, Family photoSam says his dad didn’t know he had been infected with HIV for many years.Gary unwittingly passed the virus on to his wife Lesley. She later gave birth to a daughter, Abbey, who was born HIV+ and died at just four months old.Lesley did become pregnant again and in 1992 Sam arrived, this time testing negative for HIV.But just two years later, Lesley died of an Aids-related illness, followed just a year later by her husband.”The sad thing is, I have literally no memories of them, just a handful of pictures,” says Sam. “It’s that constant gutting feeling of sadness, of wondering what growing up would have been like.”Sam was brought up by his grandparents, who initially told him his mum and dad had died of cancer and a stroke.He only started to learn what really happened in his early teens, although the stigma surrounding Aids meant he kept the details secret as, he says, “teenagers could be mean”.”I’ve always suffered with anxiety and depression. If you lose your mum and dad at such a young age, it’s going to make you anxious,” he says.”But then, in later life, I found out why and that just compounded the agony.”What is the infected blood scandal and will victims get compensation?Hundreds infected with hepatitis C without knowing it, BBC findsChildren were used as ‘guinea pigs’ in clinical trialsSam is one of hundreds of children to have lost parents to the scandal. To date, none have received government compensation.In total, more than 30,000 NHS patients were infected with HIV and hepatitis C between 1970 and 1991 through contaminated blood products such as Factor VIII and IX – or blood transfusions after surgery, treatment or childbirth.In other countries – from France to Japan – investigations into the medical disaster were completed many years ago. In some cases, criminal charges were brought against doctors, politicians and other officials.In the UK, campaigners say the scandal has never had the same level of attention.A private inquiry in 2009, funded entirely by donations, lacked any real powers, while a separate Scottish investigation in 2015 was branded a “whitewash” by victims and their families.In 2017, following political pressure, then-Prime Minister Theresa May ordered a UK-wide public inquiry.Led by the former high court judge, Sir Brian Langstaff, it had the power to compel witnesses to give evidence under oath and order the release of documents.After a series of delays, his final report is now due on 20 May.Image source, Family photoResearch for the inquiry has found that 380 of the 1,250 patients with bleeding disorders infected with HIV were children at the time.Many families also had to deal with the stigma of what was then an untreatable disease.Sarah-Jane’s younger brother Colt was infected with HIV and died, aged 10, in 1992. She says the family, from Plymouth, had to move house three times to try to escape abuse from people in the local area.”We were shunned, we were talked about. Colt didn’t have any friends because nobody wanted to play with him,” she says.”Friends and neighbours became distant, afraid and accusing.”In September 1985, a primary school in Hampshire made national news headlines when the parents of a young haemophiliac told teachers he had tested HIV+.Other families pulled their children out of class, and didn’t allow them back until Aids specialists had been sent in to properly explain the risks.Image source, Family photoThe boy at the centre of the media storm was aged just nine and was anonymous at the time. But he can now be named as 48-year-old Peter Adlam.”I just remember, I didn’t want to get caught by the cameras outside the school gates,” he tells BBC Panorama in his first-ever interview. “I’d try to blend in with the other kids as much as I could. As a child you should think you’re indestructible and going to live forever and I was becoming very aware that I wouldn’t.”Peter went on to develop serious health problems linked to HIV including three episodes of pneumonia in 1996. At one point, his parents were told he may only have weeks to live.New HIV drugs arrived in time to save his life, although he has still had to deal with multiple health problems to this day.”Up until that point, I hadn’t thought I’d see the year 2000. So it was very bleak and there wasn’t a lot of hope,” he says.”I saw other people my age living their lives and I wasn’t able to. I haven’t had a career, I haven’t travelled. I can’t imagine what my life would be like if I hadn’t been infected.”In August 2022, the government agreed to make the first-ever interim compensation payments of £100,000 to about 4,000 survivors of the scandal or their bereaved partners.Ministers have indicated they are planning to extend that to the parents and children of those infected, including Sam Rushby, and to also set up a final compensation scheme.But no firm timetable has yet been put in place to make the payments, with the total cost likely to run to billions of pounds.The government told Panorama in a statement: “This was an appalling tragedy that never should have happened. We are clear that justice needs to be done, and swiftly. “This includes establishing a new body to deliver an Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, it will have all the funding needed to deliver compensation once they have identified the victims and assessed claims.”We will continue to listen carefully to the community as we address this dreadful scandal.”You can follow Jim on X.More on this storyWhat is the infected blood scandal and how many people died?Published1 MayChildren used as ‘guinea pigs’ in clinical trialsPublished18 AprilHundreds infected with hepatitis C without knowing it, BBC findsPublished3 days ago

Published40 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, PA MediaBy Jim ReedHealth reporterA final compensation scheme for infected blood victims could be running by the year’s end after the government made a key concession in the Lords.Ministers accepted a Labour amendment to the Victims and Prisoners bill, meaning the scheme must be set up within three months of the law passing.The deputy Lords leader said victims had waited “far too long for justice”.But Earl Howe warned the creation of the new body could be disrupted if Parliament were dissolved or adjourned.Westminster is due to rise at the end of July for the summer recess, and a general election is widely expected to take place this autumn.’Worst treatment disaster’More than 30,000 NHS patients were given contaminated blood products in the 1970s and 80s in what has been called the worst treatment disaster in the history of the health service.It is thought around 3,000 later died, after contracting HIV or hepatitis C from a treatment made from blood plasma or a blood transfusion.The government has said there is a moral case for compensating victims and, in November 2022, made the first interim payments of £100,000 each to around 4,000 surviving victims and bereaved partners. Campaigners say the speed compensation is paid out is crucial. It has been estimated that one person infected by the contaminated treatments dies every four days. What is the infected blood scandal and how many people died?The stories behind the infected blood scandalBBC iPlayer – BBC Wales Investigates – Blood MoneyIn April 2023, the chair of the ongoing public inquiry into the scandal, Sir Brian Langstaff, called for a full compensation scheme to be set up immediately. He also recommended interim payments should be extended to some of the children and parents of those who had died.In December 2023, opposition MPs and Conservative rebels forced through a key vote in the Commons designed to speed up the creation of a new body to administer and run the scheme, the first parliamentary defeat for Rishi Sunak as prime minister.More recently the government has been accused of trying to “wriggle out” of the new time limit by proposing its own amendments to the legislation in the Lords.Faced with the possibility of losing another vote, ministers agreed to a Labour-led demand for the final compensation system to be in place within three months of the Victims and Prisoners Bill becoming law.Speaking at the bill’s report stage, the Conservative peer Lord Howe said: “The government shares the determination of the House to ensure compensation reaches victims quickly.”He added: “We recognise that Parliament and the infected blood community need clarity on when these measures will be in place.”Nick Thomas-Symonds, Labour’s shadow minister without portfolio, said the decision marked “another important victory” for the victims of the scandal.”The government has now been forced, under cross-party pressure, to set out a clear timetable to deliver a final compensation scheme,” he said. “They must now progress – urgently – with getting the body ready to make payments.”The public inquiry into the infected blood scandal has been running since 2018 and is expected to publish its final report and recommendations on 20 May. More on this storyWhat is the infected blood scandal and how many people died?Published2 AprilChildren used as ‘guinea pigs’ in clinical trialsPublished18 April

Published5 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingBy Jim ReedHealth reporterFor many people who have a serious blow to the brain, physical recovery is just the first of their problems. Depression and other mental disorders are far more likely to develop following head trauma.The results of a small US study suggest taking a widely used antidepressant in the weeks after the injury could actually help prevent severe depression.And now a much larger trial is being held across England, looking into whether those findings can be replicated in a wider group of patients.’Lost hearing'”I was told I was airlifted to the Royal London [Hospital] and put in a coma for three weeks,” Shannon says. “They had to call my family down to say their goodbyes.” Shannon, 24, was hit on the side of her head by a digger while working on a building site in east London, in 2020. She needed operations to reconstruct parts of her face, using muscle from her legs. Pins and wires now hold her jaw together. But, as with so many people who have lived through a traumatic brain injury, the visible, physical damage to her body was just part of the problem.”It has had a real impact on my mental health and I have felt very low,” Shannon says. “I wasn’t going out, I wasn’t taking care of myself and I put on weight.”It has been a fight just to get out of bed and wash my face. It has been very difficult, almost unbearable at points.”In the immediate aftermath of such an accident, the focus has tended to be been on surgery, rehab and treating physical symptoms. But longer-term effects – such as depression and mood swings – can have a severe impact for many.Shannon says it took “maybe a year” after leaving hospital to get the right support and medication in place and start to “pull out of it”. Image source, Shannon BrazierResearch suggests about half the people admitted to hospital after a head injury report major depression in the year after the accident, a rate 10 times higher than the general population.The 18-month UK trial will examine the early use of common antidepressants following brain trauma. It will measure depression, quality of life and cognitive functioning among 500 patients, with results expected in 2027.”Up until now, most of the research has been on the treatment of depression once it’s set in, which we know can be difficult,” says lead researcher Khalida Ismail, professor of psychiatry and medicine at King’s College London.”This is the first large-scale study in the world that is actually trying to prevent it from happening in the first place.”The trial is being held across nine major trauma centres in England and is being funded by a £2.2m grant from the National Institute for Health and Care Research.Anxiety, mood, memory problemsA certain level of emotional trauma and stress might be expected after a catastrophic experience, with the knock-on effects on employment, education and relationships.But doctors believe a serious blow to the head can also disrupt the neural pathways in the brain that control memory, thinking skills and emotions.Sean Carty, 47, says he felt like he’d “landed on a new planet” after experiencing severe head trauma and depression.He was knocked off his motorbike on a dual carriageway in London five years ago, leaving him in hospital for three weeks, with a bleed to the frontal lobe of his brain. “After I was discharged, I was trying to get back to work, trying to do the things that I did before, but I was really struggling,” Sean says. He found his mind worked differently. His sense of smell and taste had changed and he struggled to keep up with friends’ conversations. Like many others, there was also an impact on his behaviour. He had a shorter temper and was argumentative with family members in a way he never had been before the crash.”You don’t realise how blunt you can be with a brain injury,” Sean says. “But it’s hard when your nervous system is not functioning properly. You feel like you’re an alien and everything is new to you.” Consultant neuropsychiatrist Dr Mike Dilley, from King’s College Hospital, says the patients who see him about their brain injury “are far more concerned about anxiety, mood and memory problems than about physical difficulties, which they might have adjusted to already”. Exactly how the antidepressants in the trial – selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) – work is unknown. Comprehensive research, from the University of Oxford, suggests they reduce serious depression in some people in the short term. But there is also evidence linking severe depression to brain inflammation after an accident. And one theory, although far from proven, is SSRIs might trigger an anti-inflammatory response and protect the patient from longer-term harm. Doctors say tackling the wider problem could benefit the NHS and the wider economy, with the cost of brain injury estimated at more than £15bn each year. “Depression is not just something in the mind,” Prof Ismail says. “It can have an effect on relationships, on jobs, on education and on rehabilitation. And all of these are consequences after a traumatic brain injury.”Follow Jim on X, formerly known as Twitter.More on this storyTwo million on antidepressants for five yearsPublished19 June 2023New tech centre to help brain and spinal injuriesPublished20 FebruaryRugby career length linked to brain injury – studyPublished24 October 2023Man with brain injury helping men open upPublished10 October 2023Window fall man describes life after brain injuryPublished6 October 2023

Published19 hours agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThousands of people in the UK were infected with HIV and hepatitis C after being given contaminated blood products during the 1970s and 1980s.A public inquiry into what has been called the biggest treatment disaster in NHS history will publish its findings in May, but victims are still campaigning for compensation.Who was affected by the infected blood scandal and how many patients were involved?Two main groups of NHS patients were caught up in the scandal.Firstly, haemophiliacs – and those with similar disorders – who have a rare genetic condition which means their blood does not clot properly. People with haemophilia A have a shortage of a clotting agent known as Factor VIII. People with haemophilia B don’t have enough Factor IX. In the 1970s, a new treatment was developed to replace the missing clotting agents, made from donated human blood plasma. But whole batches of the replacement Factor VIII and IX products were contaminated with deadly viruses.The infected blood inquiry estimates that 1,250 people with bleeding disorders in the UK developed both HIV and hepatitis C as a result, including 380 children. Around two-thirds later died of Aids-related illnesses. Some of those infected unintentionally gave HIV to their partners.Another 2,400 to 5,000 people developed hepatitis C on its own, which can cause cirrhosis and liver cancer. This video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.The second group of patients were given a contaminated blood transfusion after childbirth, surgery or other medical treatment between 1970 and 1991.Estimating the size of this group is difficult, but the inquiry thinks up to 100 may have been infected with HIV, and between 21,000 and 39,000 with hepatitis C.Tainted blood: The woman who lost two husbandsThe secret in my bloodITV to make drama about contaminated blood scandalWhy did the infected blood scandal happen?In the 1970s, the UK was struggling to meet the demand for blood-clotting treatments, so imported supplies from the US. But much of the blood was bought from high-risk donors such as prison inmates and drug-users. Factor VIII was made by pooling plasma from tens of thousands of donors.If just one was carrying a virus, the entire batch could be contaminated.UK blood donations were not routinely screened for hepatitis C until 1991, 18 months after the virus was first identified in a laboratory.Image source, Jackie BrittonWhat did the authorities know about infected blood?By the mid-1970s, there were repeated warnings that imported US Factor VIII carried a greater risk of viral infection. But attempts to make the UK more self-sufficient in blood products in the following years failed, so the NHS continued to use foreign supplies. Campaigners say haemophiliacs could have been offered an alternative treatment called Cryoprecipitate. This was less effective and harder to administer, but was made from the blood plasma of a single donor, lowering the infection risk. As late as November 1983, the government insisted there was no “conclusive proof” that HIV could be transmitted in blood, a line robustly defended by former health minister Ken Clarke when he appeared before the inquiry. By April 1985, all Factor VIII products were heat-treated to kill the HIV virus.This video can not be playedTo play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.When was the infected blood inquiry set up and when will it report? The UK-wide infected blood inquiry was announced in 2017 after years of campaigning by victims. It was led by former judge Sir Brian Langstaff, and took evidence between 2019 and 2023. The inquiry will publish its report on 20 May. It had been expected in autumn 2023, but Sir Brian said more time was needed to prepare “a report of this gravity”.Who gave evidence to the inquiry?One of the first to take the stand was Derek Martindale, who has haemophilia. He was diagnosed with HIV and given a year to live in 1985, aged 23. He survived but his brother – who was also infected with HIV – did not. The inquiry also heard harrowing testimony from former pupils at Treloar’s, a specialist boarding school in Hampshire, where dozens of young haemophiliacs were infected with HIV. Specialist haemophilia doctors working at the time also gave evidence. As well as Lord Clarke, the inquiry heard from former and current ministers in all four UK nations, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt.Five things we’ve learned from the inquiryWill victims of the infected blood scandal get compensation?Those infected have received annual financial support from the government, but a final compensation deal has not been agreed. In late 2022, following advice from the inquiry, the government made interim payments of £100,000 each to around 4,000 surviving victims and some bereaved partners. In April 2023, Sir Brian said interim compensation should also be offered to the children and parents of those infected. He also recommended a final compensation scheme be set up, with the total cost likely to run into billions.The government said it would be “inappropriate” to consider final compensation payments ahead of the inquiry’s full report. What happened in other countries which were affected by inflected blood?Many other countries were affected by the same scandal, although some – including Finland – were self-sufficient in Factor VIII, which minimised HIV infections.In the US, companies that supplied infected products have paid out millions of dollars in out-of-court settlements.Politicians and drug companies have been convicted of negligence in other countries, including France and Japan. In his evidence to the inquiry, former health secretary Andy Burnham suggested there may be grounds for charges of corporate manslaughter in the UK.Related Internet LinksInfected Blood inquiryThe BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Published28 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThe number of people in hospital with flu and norovirus has hit a new winter high in England. Latest NHS figures show 2,226 beds were taken up by flu patients each day last week, up 70% in a month.But the number in hospital with Covid dipped slightly, and surveillance from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) showed rates were “broadly stable”. The NHS said the data showed it was still “in the thick of a challenging winter”.”Last week was evidence of why the NHS needed to grow its core bed numbers,” said Prof Julian Redhead, NHS England’s clinical director for urgent and emergency care. The NHS said this month that it had met its target to increase the number of core hospital beds in England by 5,000 to 99,864. But the latest data shows 96% of adult beds were still full last week, above the 85% level seen as safe by the World Health Organization. NHS performance figures also showed that 34% of hospital patients in England arriving by ambulance in the week to 18 January had to wait more than 30 minutes to be handed over to A&E doctors.That was up from 32% in the previous week, and the joint highest rate so far this winter.It comes as a number of hospitals, including Shrewsbury, Winchester and Stoke have declared critical incidents recently because of “sustained pressure” on services, allowing them to request assistance from neighbouring NHS trusts.

A modern browser with JavaScript and a stable internet connection are required to view this interactive.

Flu and norovirus surgeThe latest figures show the winter flu season appears to have come later this year with the number needing hospital treatment continuing to rise.Common symptoms in adults include a sudden high temperature, aches, a dry cough and a sore throat. Some people also feel sick and report diarrhoea or stomach pain. The symptoms are similar in children, but they can also suffer from ear pain and appear less active.An average of 2,226 patients were in hospital each day last week with flu, including 84 in critical care beds, according to NHS England.The total is up 41% from 1,582 the previous week and up 70% from the start of the year.The NHS is urging those eligible for a free flu jab this winter, including all those over 65 years old, to continue to come forward. Another 688 hospital beds in England were filled last week by people with norovirus-like symptoms such as diarrhoea and sickness.The virus – known as the winter vomiting bug – spreads easily through contaminated surfaces or contact with an infected person. Covid hospitalisations dip slightlyThe number of people in hospital with Covid in England declined slightly, with an average of 3,701 beds occupied over the past week in large NHS trusts.Of that number, just over a quarter – or 1,013 – were being treated “primarily” for the virus, with the majority admitted to hospital for another health problem.A separate study from researchers at UKSHA suggested that the number of people testing positive for Covid in the community as a whole remained steady in the two weeks to 24 January. Analysis of lateral flow tests indicated that about 2% – or one in every 50 people – would have tested positive for the virus in England and Scotland, compared to 2.3% in its previous report.More on this storyFlu is the major player now, not Covid – virologistPublished4 JanuaryMore jabs to be booked online in NHS uptake drivePublished13 December 2023

Published23 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Jim ReedHealth reporterAlmost 10 million people in England can no longer access free NHS earwax removal services, the RNID has warned.The hearing loss charity said there was “no medical reason” for the withdrawal of NHS services across parts of England since 2019.And some people unable to afford private treatment were turning to “dangerous self-removal methods”.The government said GPs can still refer patients on to a specialist service if the problem is linked to hearing loss.Each year, about 2.3 million people in the UK need earwax treatment, according to the NHS.It is more common among older people, hearing-aid users and those with a learning disability. Wax build-up in the ear canal can cause painful symptoms including tinnitus, earache and hearing loss.It often requires removal before a hearing test and can interfere with certain hearing aids, causing a distracting whistling sound.Image source, Helen KendallHelen Kendall, 76, from Bath, Somerset, says she now has to pay £240 a year for private treatment, because the GPs in her area no longer offer a free service.”When the wax builds up, I find it very difficult,” she says. “I lost some of my confidence and became unable to follow conversations.”It led to increased isolation and I found I was withdrawing.”I’m a sociable person – I volunteer at a food bank, I’m part of an art group and cook for a lunch club and I love the cinema.”All of these rely on me being able to hear properly.”National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines say wax removal should be provided in GP surgeries or other local ear-care services. There are two main methods:microsuction – a small vacuum sucks out waxelectronic irrigation – a machine gently pumps pressurised water into the earThe RNID sent Freedom of Information requests to all 42 integrated health boards across England.Of the 40 that responded:. 18 funded a full service15 restricted eligibility or did not offer the service across all their GP surgeriesseven commissioned no treatment at all The charity’s director of health, Crystal Rolfe, said: “For the 10 million people who live in areas where there is no provision, the only option is to pay for it, which we know can cost up to £100 for just one procedure.”Previous research shows that 26% of people say they wouldn’t be able to afford that, partly because some people need to have earwax removed several times a year.”GettyNo NHS ear wax services7 areasBirmingham & Solihull, Cornwall & Scilly Isles, Dorset, Mid & South Essex, NW London, SW London, Suffolk & NE EssexSource: RNIDThe charity is concerned that a lack of provision in some areas means more patients may be trying to remove wax themselves. The strong advice is “never put anything in your ear smaller than your elbow”. Other objects – from cotton buds to paper clips and hairpins or even fingers – should never be used in the ear canal itself. “For most people, it’s a self-cleansing mechanism and the wax just comes out on its own,” Ms Rolfe says. “If it’s got stuck in your ear, then you should go and see a GP, who might sometimes suggest olive oil drops in the first instance.”Some commercial drops are available over the counter – but there is “little evidence” drops or sprays will resolve the issue in more than one out of every five people, the RNID says.Drops would not be recommended for those who have had a recent infection or operation – and the patient should speak to a pharmacist first.The government said local health boards are responsible for commissioning services in their area based on the needs of the population, and GPs can still refer patients to a specialist audiology service if the problem is linked to hearing loss.An NHS England spokeswoman said information about treating earwax safely at home was also available on the NHS website.The Scottish and Welsh governments remained “committed to ensure the availability of NHS earwax-removal services”, the RNID said.And it would “lobby for the same commitment” in Northern Ireland, once devolved government was restored.More on this storyPatients go private over ear wax removal wait timePublished17 March 2022Why ear wax syringing is no longer free – ministerPublished25 September 2020Related Internet LinksEarwax build-up – NHSThe BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Published24 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, PA MediaBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThe publication of a final report into the infected blood scandal has been delayed until May.The chairman of the public inquiry, Sir Brian Langstaff, said more time was needed to prepare “a report of this gravity”. Victims and their families were initially told they would learn the findings in autumn last year.That date was pushed back until March, and the inquiry has now confirmed the further delay to 20 May 2024.”I am sorry to tell you that the report will be published later than March. That is not what I had intended,” added Sir Brian. “When I reviewed the plans for publication, I nonetheless had to accept that a limited amount of further time is needed to publish a report of this gravity and do justice to what has happened.”It is thought about 30,000 people were infected with HIV and hepatitis C through contaminated blood products in the 1970s and 1980s.More than 3,000 have died in what has been described by MPs as the worst treatment disaster in NHS history.What is the contaminated blood inquiry?Blood scandal: 1 in 3 infected with HIV was a childHunt says compensation bill may be very largeIn April 2023, Sir Brian published his final recommendations for a full compensation scheme for those directly affected by the scandal and their relatives. The government has said it accepts the “moral case” for compensation, and interim payouts of £100,000 each have already been made to about 4,000 victims and some bereaved partners.But ministers have said they are not in a position to make a final decision on further payouts, which could total billions of pounds, until they have seen the inquiry’s findings in full. Campaigners say that one person affected by the scandal dies every four days, making the speed of compensation key.Rachel Halford, chief executive of the Hepatitis C Trust, said the latest delay would be “extremely disappointing” for a community that has “already been forced to wait half a century for justice”.”We now expect the government to immediately establish a full compensation scheme, and extend compensation to everyone affected,” she added. “The clock is ticking and the government has nowhere left to hide.”Political pressureIn December 2023, the government lost a key vote in the Commons that could force it to make final compensation payments more quickly.Opposition MPs and some Conservative rebels passed an amendment to a separate law – the Victims and Prisoners Bill – which is still making its way through the House of Lords.If the amendment becomes law, it would force ministers to set up a scheme to administer the payouts within three months of the bill receiving royal ascent. In a statement, Sir Brian said that he still wanted to see the a final compensation scheme set up “with urgency”. “No-one should be in any doubt about the serious nature of the failings over more than six decades that have led to catastrophic loss of life and compounded suffering,” he added.More on this storyInfected blood payments still not availablePublished18 December 2023PM faces ‘wrong side of history’ on blood scandalPublished5 December 2023Hunt says blood compensation bill may be very largePublished28 July 2023

Published1 hour agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, PA MediaBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThe Covid inquiry will not start hearing evidence about the development of vaccines and other drugs this summer, as originally planned. Witness hearings will be postponed until a later date, likely to be after the next general election.Baroness Hallett, who is chairing the inquiry, recognised the decision would be “disappointing for some”.But she said more time was needed to prepare for a separate investigation into the impact of Covid on the NHS.”I want to ensure our hearings in 2024 are as effective as possible and I recognise the increasing pressure on organisations to respond to requests and provide information to the inquiry,” she added.”I remain committed to not allowing the inquiry hearings to run beyond my original aim of summer 2026.”Different phasesThe Covid-19 public inquiry has been split into a number of sections – known as modules – each covering different topics.The first phase, which started taking evidence in June 2023, looked at planning for a pandemic. Its findings and recommendations are expected to be published this summer. A second phase, looking at the major political decisions taken after Covid emerged, started hearings in London in October 2023, and will now travel to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to take evidence. The module investigating vaccines and therapeutics was originally expected to start in the summer of 2024, but that has now been postponed. Instead, public hearings will restart in September 2024 looking at the impact of the pandemic on the NHS and healthcare, as originally planned.The investigation into vaccines was meant to look in detail at the rollout of jabs across the UK, including the setting up of the UK vaccines taskforce and the role of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation.It will also cover concerns around vaccine safety, including any suggested link between the jabs and heart issues, and whether reforms are needed to the scheme which is meant to pay out if an individual’s health is damaged after taking the jabs.No timing has been given for the postponed hearings, with further details promised “in the next few weeks”. It is thought the decision is likely to push that part of the inquiry until after the next general election, which has to take place before 28 January 2025.Cabinet secretary to face questionsThe inquiry is also still expected to question the current cabinet secretary, Simon Case, in a special hearing later this spring.Mr Case, who has recently returned as head of the civil service after two months of sick leave, was not able to give evidence last autumn when the second phase of the inquiry looked at the political decisions made during the pandemic.In WhatsApp exchanges with other Downing Street officials, and later read out at the inquiry, he was often critical of ministers. In one message he accused officials, including former health secretary Matt Hancock and then-education secretary Gavin Williamson, of being “weak”. In another, he described being “at the end of my tether” over decisions being made by Boris Johnson and said the former prime minister was “unable to lead”.More on this storyWhat is the UK Covid inquiry and how does it work?Published14 December 2023Officials urged tough Covid ads for ‘white van man’Published20 December 2023

Published18 minutes agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, Getty ImagesBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThe NHS in England could be facing one of its most difficult starts to the year since it was founded in 1948, one of its most senior executives has said.Medical director Sir Stephen Powis warned that a six-day strike planned by junior doctors from Wednesday will have a significant impact on routine care.Hospitals are also having to deal with rising rates of flu, Covid and other winter infections, he added.The doctors’ union, the BMA, said patient safety remains a top priority.If it goes ahead as planned, the latest strike will see the longest continuous stretch of industrial action in the history of the NHS.Junior doctors make up around half of all medical staff working in hospitals.British Medical Association members will walk out for 144 hours in a row from 07:00 GMT on 3 January until 07:00 on 9 January across all of England.”Six consecutive days of industrial action comes at one of our busiest periods,” said Sir Stephen. “The action will not only have an enormous impact on planned care, but comes on top of a host of seasonal pressures such as Covid, flu, and staff absences due to sickness – all of which is impacting on how patients flow through hospitals.”He said there is no doubt that the NHS would be starting 2024 “on the back foot” with the knock-on effects of the strike likely to be felt for weeks as services recover. Patients are being urged to continue to call 999 and use A&E in life threatening emergencies, with cover provided by more senior consultant doctors on strike days.But some services will have to close. Cheltenham hospital, for example, is directing anyone needing emergency treatment to Gloucestershire Royal, which is run by the same NHS trust. The strike is also likely to have a significant impact on routine care – from outpatient appointments to elective surgery such as hip replacements and some cancer operations. The most recent action by junior doctors, a shorter three-day walkout before Christmas, saw 88,000 NHS appointments cancelled across England.’Stand-off’ between government and junior doctorsAn organisation representing large NHS trusts said on Monday that any hopes the strikes could be called off appeared to be fading. Matthew Taylor, the chief executive of the NHS Confederation, told the BBC that industrial action would leave the health service “skating on very thin ice”. “Unfortunately it feels like there is a stand-off which is the government is refusing to enter negotiations unless the junior doctors call off the strike action, and the junior doctors are refusing to call off strike action unless the government commits to investing more money – and that is a pity,” he said.The BMA has been pushing for junior doctors to get a 35% pay rise, which it says would restore their earnings after inflation to 2008 levels, but the government says this is unaffordable.Dr Rob Laurenson and Dr Vivek Trivedi, co-chairs of the BMA’s junior doctors committee, said: “It’s incredibly disappointing that we’ve had to call this strike – no doctor ever wants to have to take industrial action.”We would still, at this late hour, encourage the government to put forward a credible offer so that we can stop this strike and get back to doing what we really want to do – care for patients.”The union said patient safety was its top priority at all times and it had plans in place with NHS trusts to constantly review staffing levels and bring striking doctors back to work in an emergency. A spokesman for the Department of Health and Social Care said: “We urge the BMA junior doctors committee to call off their strikes and come back to the negotiating table so we can find a fair and reasonable solution, and so we can all get back to focusing on patients and their care.”We know how distressing it is for patients who have had appointments and procedures cancelled, and we have provided £800m to ensure patients continue to receive the highest quality care this winter and ease pressure on hospitals impacted by industrial action.”More on this storyThousands of appointments hit by doctor walkoutPublished27 December 2023How double pay rise for senior doctors is backfiring on governmentPublished9 December 2023

Published13 hours agoShareclose panelShare pageCopy linkAbout sharingImage source, PA MediaBy Jim ReedHealth reporterThe government has said it is still not in a position to make a final decision on compensation for the victims of the infected blood scandal. Earlier this month, the government lost a key vote designed to speed up the creation of a new body to administer and make payments. Cabinet office minister John Glen said he recognised the anger of victims. But he told the Commons it would be wrong to pre-judge the final report of a public inquiry due next year.”For these reasons, the government is not yet in a position to share any final decisions on compensation,” he said. “However, members across this house have made clear that we must do right by the victims and the government recognises this, and I am personally committed to make sure that we do that.”What is the contaminated blood inquiry?Blood scandal: 1 in 3 infected with HIV was a childHunt says compensation bill may be very largeUp to 30,000 patients were infected with HIV and hepatitis C through contaminated blood products in the 1970s and 1980s. It is thought more than 3,000 people died in what has been described by MPs as the worst treatment disaster in NHS history.The government has said there is a moral case for compensating victims of the scandal, and has made the first interim payments of £100,000 each to 4,000 surviving victims and bereaved partners. On 4 October, MPs narrowly defeated the government in a vote to amend the Victims and Prisoners Bill. That legislation, which still needs to be approved by the House of Lords before becoming law, would mean a new independent body would have to be set up within three months to administer full compensation payments to a wider group of victims and their relatives. Campaigners say that one person affected by the scandal dies every four days, making the speed of compensation key. ‘Significant impact’Speaking in the Commons, Mr Glen said the government was still “working through the implications” of the amendment, adding that a final decision on compensation must consider both the victims of the scandal and the costs to the public sector.”There are a number of technical issues that must be considered that would have a significant impact on public finances,” he said.”This is my highest priority and I will continue to progress this work with all the urgency it deserves.”A new psychological support service would be set up for victims and their families in England, to go live from early summer 2024, he added. Earlier this year, Sir Brian Langstaff, who is chairing the long-running public inquiry into the scandal, called for a full compensation scheme to be set up immediately. Mr Glen repeated that it would be inappropriate for the government to respond until its full findings have been published, a process currently expected to be completed in March 2024. Responding, Labour MP Dame Diana Johnson, who put forward the amendment, said the government’s statement would cause “huge anguish” to victims, and “fuel suspicion” ministers were trying to delay the payments. “Justice delayed again will be justice denied for even more of those infected and affected in this scandal,” she added.The father of the house, Sir Peter Bottomley, one of 22 Conservative MPs who also voted for the amendment, said the government was still not doing enough for victims. “If it’s a question of money… and the cash flow of the government, say so now,” he added. More on this storyWhy the NHS gave thousands HIV-contaminated bloodPublished27 July 2021How 175 British children were infected with HIVPublished6 October 2022