asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 21 April (WA 234–35), what the effect was on any decision by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's research licence committee of comments by those opposed to cloning human embryos; and [HL3282]
Further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 31 March (WA 132–33) and 21 April (WA 234–35), why the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) did not take account of views in favour of human reproductive cloning, when the register of members' interests in each of the HFEA's last four annual reports referred to royalties being received from academic publishers by a research licence committee member, one of whose publications seemingly approves of human reproductive cloning (on page 320 of Regulating Reproduction: Law, Technology and Autonomy). [HL3283]
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) research licence committee's decisions are made in accordance with the criteria laid down in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. Comments received are among the material considered.
The HFEA has assured me that no member of the authority is in favour of human reproductive cloning, nor does the citation referred to approve of human reproductive cloning.
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 21 April (WA 235), what role Dr David Thorne played in preparing the information leaflet on egg sharing for research that was made available on the website of the North East England Stem Cell Institute; and in what capacity has Dr Thorne been employed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority; and [HL3284]
Further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 22 January (WA 28–29) and 21 April (WA 235), how the information leaflet on egg sharing for research provided by the North East England Stem Cell Institute was approved by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA); what is the risk of hospitalisation recorded in the minutes of the HFEA research licence committee meeting September 2006 with regard to the number of eggs suggested in the NESCI information leaflet in order to ensure that the chance of pregnancy is not significantly reduced; and how this risk compares with the overall incidence of hospitalisation for the corresponding number of eggs described in the journal Human Fertility (volume 10, issue 3, pages 183–87). [HL3285]
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has informed me that Dr David Thorne was employed as a licensing manager between January 1994 and August 2000. The HFEA holds no information on Dr Thorne's activities since that date.
The HFEA has advised me that the information leaflet on egg sharing for research was provided by the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life. The leaflet was approved by the HFEA's research licence committee via correspondence with HFEA staff, concluding on 11 July 2006.
The overall incidence of hospitalisation where 20 or more egg follicles develop, described in the journal Human Fertility, volume 10, issue 3, pages 183-187, is 14.5 per cent. For women who develop fewer than 20 follicles the risk is described in the article as less than 0.1 per cent. The HFEA has informed me that the written representations considered by the research licence committee set out this information on risk, which has subsequently been published.
I have also been informed that there is an error in the minutes of the HFEA research licence committee held on 14 September 2006, which incorrectly recorded the risk of hospitalisation, following superovulation due to ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, as 1 in 2,000 for “women who grow 20 or more follicles”. The correct phrase should be “less than 20”.
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 21 April (WA 232–33) and (WA 235), what treatment offered to a patient would be considered the most suitable available to satisfy the needs of the recipient with regard to egg sharing for research; and to what extent the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has ensured that those providing such treatment services are not engaged in the relevant research. [HL3286]
Decisions on what treatment should be offered to a patient in these circumstances are matters of clinical judgment, to be decided on a case by case basis. The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority's Code of Practice stipulates that where donated material is used for research, the licensed centre shall ensure that clinical and research roles are separated, so that individuals involved in advising patients regarding clinical decisions about their treatment are not involved in the research project to which patients are considering donating eggs.