|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Lord Donoughue: Since the beginning of July the Government has received approximately 6,500 items of correspondence concerning its proposed control on dietary supplements containing Vitamin B6. Much of this has been in the form of standard letters. No record has been kept of those supporting or opposing the proposed controls. However, almost all of the letters received have either opposed, questioned the basis of, or expressed reservations about the proposed controls.
Lord Donoughue: The Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (COT) has reviewed the data on the toxicity of Vitamin B6 on two separate occasions. The Government have every confidence in the rigour with which the COT reviewed the data and in the robustness of the recommendation it made. We see no reason to undertake a further review.
Since the statement from the COT regarding Vitamin B6 was published, the Chairman of the COT and his colleagues have heard arguments put forward which question their decision but have not been persuaded that this issue needs to be looked at for a third time.
Lord Donoughue: The reply to Lord Kitchener's written Question of 30 July 1997 [Official Report, col. WA 54] and the letter sent on 21 August by the Minister of State at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to MPs in England were prepared for different purposes and contained different information. However, both noted that the adverse reactions reported under the UK Yellow Card Adverse Drug Research (ADR) reporting scheme were associated with products containing Vitamin B6 and, in some cases, other constituents. As the reply to Lord Kitchener correctly notes, the inclusion of a reaction on the ADR database does not necessarily mean that Vitamin B6 caused the reaction.
The Minister of State, Department of Health (Baroness Jay of Paddington): The 1998-99 hospital and community health services revenue allocations for weighted populations are given, by health authority, in the following table.
|Barking and Havering||190,213|
|Bexley and Greenwich||222,784|
|Brent and Harrow||239,173|
|Bury and Rochdale||183,925|
|Calderdale and Kirklees||272,948|
|Cambridge and Huntingdon||170,382|
|Camden and Islington||251,800|
|Cornwall and Isles of Scilly||227,525|
|Ealing, Hammersmith and Hounslow||359,671|
|East and North Hertfordshire||205,436|
|East London and the City||366,867|
|East Sussex, Brighton and Hove||372,547|
|Enfield and Haringey||248,639|
|Gateshead and South Tyneside||187,624|
|Isle of Wight||67,949|
|Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster||212,220|
|Kingston and Richmond||156,580|
|Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham||442,521|
|Merton, Sutton and Wandsworth||322,343|
|Newcastle and North Tyneside||248,792|
|North and East Devon||221,388|
|North and Mid Hampshire||215,612|
|North West Anglia||180,010|
|North West Lancashire||234,450|
|Portsmouth and South East Hampshire||240,760|
|Redbridge and Waltham Forest||231,328|
|Salford and Trafford||224,171|
|South and West Devon||280,719|
|Southampton and South West Hampshire||235,558|
|St. Helens and Knowsley||162,218|
|Wigan and Bolton||273,219|
|Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|