Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

I congratulate the hon. Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) on securing this debate, and on his thoughtful and well-informed comments. I am glad to have this opportunity to update the House on the latest developments. We can be thankful that the number of variant CJD cases in this country has so far been relatively low. Every case is serious, however, and devastating for the individuals and families involved. I want to express my deepest sympathy for all those whose lives have been affected by this traumatic and tragic illness. There remains much to learn about the disease. We do not know how many people are potentially infected, and we do not know the maximum incubation period, or how the disease progresses through the body. The House will recall that the consensus on the origins of this terrible disease, which is fatal, is that people unknowingly ate meat that was contaminated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy. The BSE controls that were introduced from 1989 minimised the risks of infection from cattle. Our focus now is on reducing the risk of person-to-person transmission, and on caring for those who are already infected. I can give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that the Government are currently spending more than £7.5 million on variant CJD surveillance and research every year. It is true, however, that with so many unknowns still surrounding the disease, we must remain both cautious and vigilant. We must follow the evidence, and we must also ensure that any new measures that we introduce are safe and proportionate. These principles underpin everything that we have done on variant CJD. The hon. Gentleman made a number of important comments about dentistry and about variant CJD. I appreciate that he speaks from a position of rather more personal and professional expertise than I do on this matter. There are no known cases of variant CJD being transmitted through dentistry, but, as the spongiform encephalopathy advisory committee has noted, studies using BSE in mice suggest that there is a potential risk of infection from oral tissue, as the hon. Gentleman suggested. The risk is difficult to quantify, but, given the seriousness of the disease, it is only right that we take precautions, especially when those precautions bring wider, additional benefits. As the health technical memorandum and the British Dental Association's recent advice sheet on infection control make clear, the risks posed by variant CJD and other infections demand the most rigorous measures to prevent cross-infection. That is why we have issued guidance that encourages the use of automated washer disinfectors, which remove the worst contamination from dental instruments and ensure greater consistency and containment in cleaning. Although the guidance is part of our precautionary approach to variant CJD, it serves a dual purpose by improving overall standards of dental decontamination. It is important to recognise that the guidance is the result of consultation with the dental profession, and that the British Dental Association was fully involved in its development. It is also important to note that that is just one of the actions that we have taken to manage risks in dentistry. In April 2007, the chief dental officer wrote to all dentists advising them that certain instruments that are difficult to clean should be made single-use. As I mentioned earlier, when it comes to managing risk in dentistry, we must always follow the evidence.