The Blair government's willingness to allow its citizens and environment to carry the can continues apace -- see item 1 on genetic testing.
Mind you when it comes to lack of regulatory rigour the freebooting governments of north america are something to behold - see item 2 for the latest on Canada's deregulatory farce. Perhaps that's why Blair imported a Canadian regulator to head the Food Standards Agency in Scotland. As Blair's chief GM spokesperson says: "We want the UK to remain a leader in this field".
---
1. Genetic testing, New Scientist
The UK is uniquely permissive in its use of genetic test results for assessing insurance cover, leaving a "strong potential for improper use"
http://www.newscientist.com/dailynews/news.jsp?id=ns9999402
The UK is uniquely permissive in its use of genetic test results for assessing insurance cover, says a report, leaving a "strong potential for improper use". The British insurance industry's use of tests has also been harshly criticised by politicians.
Companies are expected to abide by a voluntary code, which allows them to hike premiums or refuse cover on the basis of certain genetic tests.
Several countries, including Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Austria, ban the use of genetic tests by insurers. In many other countries, there is legislation to ensure that no one is refused cover on the basis of their test results.
"The UK stands alone in its position towards insurers," says Anna Dixon of the London School of Economics, one of the report's authors.
Unapproved tests
British politicians criticised the industry's approach to self-regulation. The voluntary code, drawn up by the Association of British Insurers, allows companies to use the results of tests which have not been approved by the government's Genetics and Insurance Committee (GAIC).
"This is shooting first and asking questions later," Labour MP Alan Williams told representatives of three insurance companies at a meeting of the House of Commons science and technology committee.
But the industry is rejecting growing calls for legislation to ban the use of gene test results in assessing cover.
The numbers of test results used by insurers is very small, says Martin Clarke, general manager of Co-operative Insurance. "The general public are getting the impression that genetic testing is more widespread than is the case," he says.
Under the ABI code, companies cannot ask potential customers to take genetic tests. Neither can they raise premiums if an existing customer takes a test which proves to be positive.
But they are allowed to ask to see the results of tests for Huntingdon's Chorea, early onset Alzheimer's and tests for two genes that increase the risk of ovarian and breast cancer.
Only the tests for Huntingdon's Chorea have been approved as sufficiently accurate to be used in assessing cover by the GAIC. Some companies ask only for the results of this test. But Norwich Union, one of the UK's largest insurance companies, does use the results of tests for familial Alzheimer's and the two cancer genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2.
Insurance companies say they will refund any customer who has been asked to pay higher premiums on the basis of a genetic test which is then rejected by the GAIC.
---
2. Food, drug act 'needs overhaul'
'External forces' gut safety system, document reveals
Mark Kennedy
The Ottawa Citizen
Feb. 6, 2001
The federal law that governs Canada's drug and food regulatory system is outdated and has a "narrow focus" on safety that ignores other factors such as the "need" to bolster the economy and promote competitiveness, says a Health Canada document.
Critics say the document, obtained by a public health interest group through the Access to Information Act, lends credence to their longstanding allegations that the Chretien government has bowed to private industry pressure and is quietly gutting the country's drug and food safety system.