Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to investigate any possible link between COVID-19 vaccinations and increasing numbers of premature deaths from heart and circulatory conditions since 2020.
Answered by Lord Markham - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
There is no evidence linking excess deaths to the COVID-19 vaccine. Analysis from the Office for National Statistics, published on 25 August 2023, shows that people who died between 1 April 2021 and 31 May 2023 and who had a COVID-19 vaccine, had a lower mortality rate than those who had not been vaccinated.
Each COVID-19 vaccine is only authorised once it has met robust standards of effectiveness, safety and quality set by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). No medicine or vaccine is completely risk-free, but the MHRA continually monitors the safety of the vaccines through a comprehensive vaccine surveillance strategy. This monitoring strategy is proactive and based on a wide range of information sources, with a dedicated team of scientists continually reviewing information to look for safety issues or any unexpected, rare events. Any information indicating a possible new safety concern is thoroughly evaluated, including through a review by the independent expert working group for COVID-19. Updated advice for healthcare professionals and patients is issued where appropriate.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of reports that COVID-19 vaccines may cause serious side effects, including death; and what steps they taking to collate all evidence on side effects from COVID-19 vaccinations in order that sufferers may be advised how best to respond to symptoms.
Answered by Lord Markham - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
All COVID-19 vaccines deployed in the United Kingdom have been authorised for use following a rigorous review by the independent regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
The MHRA continuously monitors a wide range of data regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, including reports of adverse reactions from the UK and internationally. The MHRA’s position remains that the benefits of these vaccines far outweigh any currently known side effects in the majority of patients.
In the very rare event where an individual may have suffered a severe adverse reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine, care is likely to be best managed by local National Health Service specialist services, augmented as appropriate by national specialist advice.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Kamall on 28 June (HL985), whether Hartismere hospital in Suffolk is under consideration as a community diagnostic centre.
Answered by Lord Kamall
There are currently no existing community diagnostic centres (CDCs) in Suffolk and potential locations remain under review. NHS England’s discussions with local integrated care systems, diagnostic networks and primary care services have considered Hartismere Hospital as a potential site for a CDC. However, these locations will be determined alongside wider system plans for providing more accessible diagnostics to the local population, including potential sites in Ipswich and Newmarket.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Kamall on 28 June (HL985), which community diagnostic centres have already been identified in Suffolk and which are under consideration.
Answered by Lord Kamall
There are currently no existing community diagnostic centres (CDCs) in Suffolk and potential locations remain under review. NHS England’s discussions with local integrated care systems, diagnostic networks and primary care services have considered Hartismere Hospital as a potential site for a CDC. However, these locations will be determined alongside wider system plans for providing more accessible diagnostics to the local population, including potential sites in Ipswich and Newmarket.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the current diagnostic capacity in the NHS; and, further to any such assessment, what immediate consideration they have given to designating the Hartismere Hospital in Suffolk as a diagnostic hub to serve the surrounding rural area.
Answered by Lord Kamall
The Spending Review 2020 provided £325 million, with a further £2.3 billion in the 2021 Spending Review, for diagnostic services, including the launch of up to 160 community diagnostic centres (CDCs) by March 2025. There are currently 90 CDCs in operation, including supporting sites, which have delivered one million tests and scans since July 2021. CDCs are projected to deliver 17 million tests in the next three years, with an annual capacity for approximately nine million tests by 2025. The National Health Service collects data on 15 diagnostic tests, which shows that 1,850,900 diagnostic tests were delivered in April 2022. This is an increase of 3,400 from April 2021.
The East of England region, including Suffolk, is currently working with integrated care systems, diagnostic networks and primary care services to determine the location and configuration of services for future CDCs, based on the needs of the local population.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to make the PPE that is no longer needed by the NHS available to carers.
Answered by Lord Kamall
In England, carers are eligible to receive personal protective equipment (PPE) through the online PPE Portal. Carers can register on the Portal to order free PPE until the end of March 2023 or until the relevant guidance is withdrawn or significantly modified. In addition, some local authorities and Local Resilience Forums also distribute PPE to carers in their local areas.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what links there are (1) legally, (2) administratively, and (3) financially, between the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and pharmaceutical companies.
Answered by Lord Kamall
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is an independent regulator working on a nominal fee for licence applications and regulating the industry. The MHRA is funded predominantly by income from fees for both statutory and non-statutory sales of products and services, which includes working with pharmaceutical companies.
As civil servants, all staff are committed to the core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality. Additionally, staff are not permitted to have any personal financial connections to pharmaceutical companies or medical device manufacturers.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, given the speed with which vaccines against COVID-19 were approved, what are the causes of the delay to the approval of the use of Ivermectin; and what assessment they have made of (1) the approval of Ivermectin by other countries, and (2) the health benefits that would result from approving Ivermectin for use in the UK.
Answered by Lord Kamall
Ivermectin was entered into the PRINCIPLE clinical trial in the United Kingdom in June 2021. The trial aims to generate robust evidence to determine its effectiveness as a treatment against COVID-19.
To date, there is no conclusive evidence for the efficacy of ivermectin in treating and preventing COVID-19, as there have been no supportive randomised control trials in the United Kingdom. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency and the World Health Organization have concluded that the evidence in support of ivermectin as a COVID-19 treatment is insufficient to warrant a marketing authorisation. The FDA has issued warnings against the use of ivermectin whilst it remains in trials, as it can have dangerous interactions with other medicines. Currently, there is no firm deadline set for the publication of trial results. However, the Therapeutics Taskforce continues to monitor any emerging evidence for ivermectin’s use as a treatment for COVID-19.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how the ability to transmit COVID-19 differs between someone who has been vaccinated and someone who has been infected with COVID-19.
Answered by Lord Kamall
An assessment on the ability to transmit COVID-19 between those who have been vaccinated and those who have been infected with COVID-19 has not been made. Several studies such as SIREN, Vivaldi and the Office for National Statistics Community Infection Survey have provided evidence that vaccines are effective at preventing infection and therefore transmission.
Results from the SIREN study indicate that vaccination was 85% effective in healthcare workers after two doses, compared to an 84% lower risk of subsequent infection in healthcare workers with natural immunity. The COVID-19 Infection Survey concluded that vaccine-acquired protection remains at least as good as natural immunity. In both people with and without prior natural infection, vaccination provides the highest level of protection.
Asked by: Lord Framlingham (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the difference in protection against COVID-19 provided by (1) vaccination, and (2) antibodies, following a COVID-19 infection.
Answered by Lord Kamall
Multiple studies on the immune protection provided by both COVID-19 vaccination and natural immunity following infection are underway. This includes the SARS-CoV-2 Immunity and Reinfection EvaluatioN (SIREN), the Office of National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey, Vivaldi, and the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission studies. Findings from these studies show that both infection-acquired and vaccine-acquired immunity give high levels of protection from new symptomatic and asymptomatic infections for several months.
Results from the SIREN study indicate that vaccination was 85% effective in healthcare workers after two doses, compared to an 84% lower risk of subsequent infection in healthcare workers with natural immunity. The COVID-19 Infection Survey concluded that although vaccines are less effective against the Delta variant compared to Alpha, vaccine-acquired protection remains at least as good as natural immunity. In both people with and without prior natural infection, vaccination provides the highest level of protection.