Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 Articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Members & Subscribers
    • Benefits for CMA Members
    • CPD Credits for Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription Prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Editorial

From nannyism to public disclosure: the BSE Inquiry report

CMAJ January 23, 2001 164 (2) 165;
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

If ever one needed proof of how difficult it is to formulate health policy in the absence of hard evidence, the thorny problem of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is it. And the more costly the implications of such evidence, the greater the likelihood it will be challenged. Every hard-won scrap of information we have about vCJD, its derivation from bovine spongiform encephalopathy and its mechanism of transmission has been disputed in one quarter or another. As if inured to that fact, the Lancet, publishing an early report on the experimental sheep-to-sheep transmission of BSE through transfused blood,1 simultaneously ran an editorial that criticized the authors and editors for publishing the report. The objection was twofold: first, the results were preliminary (only 1 of 19 transfused animals had become infected, and the study was not complete); second, the results would not change anything, unless one were willing “to shut down the whole UK blood-donor system.”2

With respect, we disagree. Too often, minority views and marginal reports that later turn out to be true have been suppressed by government agencies and their expert advisory committees. The contamination of the Canadian blood supply with HIV and hepatitis C comes immediately to mind.3 Even when a change in policy is unnecessary or impossible, there is still a need for disclosure and discussion.4

The recently released report of the “Inquiry into BSE and variant CJD in the United Kingdom” criticizes, among others, the UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for imposing an embargo on releasing the finding, in 1987, that some cattle in the UK were infected with BSE.5 Lord Phillips, chair of the inquiry, was also critical of the government, expert committees and officials such as Sir Donald Acheson, chief medical officer at the time, for not fully informing the public of possible risk.

Public officials, particularly those in ministries of agriculture, fisheries and food, are caught between the rock of potential economic loss and the hard duty of ensuring public safety. Protecting the public requires that the public be fully informed; protecting industry, that the public be kept in the dark until the evidence is substantial. Officials and expert committees for health ministries and other public agencies such as the Canadian Blood Services and Hema-Québec are also caught, but the rocks and hard places are, well, softer: there is no pressure to protect private industry. Yet, as the Krever inquiry in Canada and the BSE epidemic in the UK show, public officials tend to believe that a public fully informed of possible dangers will overreact. As the Phillips report comments, expert committees “followed an approach whose object was sedation.” We fully agree with the decision of the Lancet to publish the sheep case report and with the testimony to the BSE Inquiry of Sheila McKechnie, director of of the UK Consumers' Association, that “There is nothing more nanny-ish than withholding information from people on the ground that they may react irrationally to that information.”5 — CMAJ

References

  1. 1.↵
    Houston F, Foster JD, Chong A, Hunter N, Bostock CJ. Transmission of BSE by blood transfusion in sheep. Lancet 2000;356:999-1000.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    Brown P. BSE and transmission through blood. Lancet 2000;356:955-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Hoey J. The sensibility of safety: reflections on the Krever inquiry's final report. CMAJ 1998; 158 (1):59-60. Available: www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-158/issue-1/0059.htm
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Hoey J, Giulivi A, Todkill AM. New variant CreutzfeldtJakob disease and the blood supply: Is it time to face the music? CMAJ 1998;159(6): 669-70. Available: www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-159/issue-6/0669.htm
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    Lord Phillips, chair. The BSE inquiry. Vol 1: findings and conclusions. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 2000. Report no HC 887-1. Available: www.bseinquiry.gov.uk (accessed 2000 Dec 2).
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 164, Issue 2
23 Jan 2001
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
From nannyism to public disclosure: the BSE Inquiry report
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
From nannyism to public disclosure: the BSE Inquiry report
CMAJ Jan 2001, 164 (2) 165;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
From nannyism to public disclosure: the BSE Inquiry report
CMAJ Jan 2001, 164 (2) 165;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • First, the bad news...
  • Canada's Public Health Agency: Bound and gagged?
  • What's in a name? Reporting data from public institutions
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Le sujet de l’heure : l’accès aux soins de santé au Canada
  • Integration of midwifery care in Canada
  • CMAJ’s new guidance on the reporting of race and ethnicity in research articles
Show more Éditorial

Similar Articles

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
  • Accessibiity
  • CMA Civility Standards
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

Powered by HighWire