Haemophiliacs in Newcastle "should have been told" that there was a "clear and special risk" they could contract HIV from contaminated blood products as early as 1984, a former senior health adviser has said.
Speaking at the ongoing Infected Blood Inquiry this week, Sir Michael Rawlins gave evidence accepting that health bosses and doctors were "a bit paternalistic" at that time, and were reticent to tell patients about problems or potential problems with their treatments. Sir Michael was Professor of Clinical Pharmacology at Newcastle University for 33 years to 2006 and also held a series of roles at the Committee for the Safety of Medicines (CSM).
The CSM was a precursor organisation to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority (MHRA). Sir Michael was a member of the CSM from 1980 and became chair in 1998. During the 1980s he also had a role advising what was then the Newcastle District Health Authority. He was also chair of the MHRA from 2015.
Read more: Infected blood scandal victims should be compensated at least £100,000, report suggests
Thousands of haemophiliacs were infected with viruses including HIV and hepatitis C via contaminated blood products. In many cases the blood factor products once hailed as "life-saving" were created using blood collected from prisoners in the USA. The ongoing Infected Blood Inquiry led by Sir Brian Langstaff is investigating the circumstances which led the infections which have killed at least 2,400 people - along with how this has been managed since.
Patients at the Newcastle Haemophilia Centre, led by Dr Peter Jones for decades, were among those to be infected. Speaking at the Inquiry, Sir Michael was asked by Jenni Richards QC about his time advising the local health authority.
"Referring to a meeting in December 1984 where Sir Michael and others, including Dr Jones, discussed how there was a known risk to the haemophiliac community of AIDS, she said: "Would it be your professional view that haemophiliacs themselves in the Newcastle region should have been told that they were at clear and special risk of contracting AIDS?"
Sir Michael responded: "Nowadays they should have been. In those days, we were a bit paternalistic about telling patients about problems, so it wasn't quite so common. But I think, you know, in the modern context, yes."
He also spoke of how he had been uncomfortable with connections between doctors and pharmaceutical companies - and the Inquiry was told of comments he made in the media in the 1980s when he said he would "like to see hospitality totally divorced from promotion". He added in the article: "If they were introducing their drugs to people in Newcastle they wouldn't get such a good turnout, whereas going to Spain could whet appetites." When you talk to doctors they always say 'I go along and have their drink and I am not influenced by it', but subconsciously they must be."
At the Inquiry, he said this was "certainly" his view both in the 1980s and today. The Inquiry also heard how Dr Jones had attended a hearing of the CSM regarding the licensing of a product created by Speywood Laboratories on behalf of the firm - but Sir Michael said he "had no idea" and could not recall if he had had particular concerns about this. "I don't think it's completely unreasonable. I think it just has to be done with care," he said.
Sir Michael also told the Inquiry that the CSM had not been given enough information about where donated blood in blood products was sourced from. He said; "We now know, in retrospect, that they were unsatisfactory [levels of information]."
The Inquiry continues and has spent this week hearing from senior advisers, civil servants and lawyers about how the scandal was managed by the UK Government. Later this year further senior politicians are set to give evidence, including former Prime Minister Sir John Major.
This comes as victims of the scandal including Jesmond's Carol Grayson who lost her husband and brother-in-law to AIDS they developed after contracting HIV from products they were given to treat their haemophilia continue to demand the Government offers full compensation.
An independent report commissioned by the Government this week recommended "interim payments" should be paid to those affected immediately - but this has yet to happen. Cabinet Office minister Michael Ellis has instead spoken of how analysis of what the Government will do next "cannot be completed hurriedly".
READ NEXT:
