Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I was first referred to the issue of adhesive arachnoiditis by a visit from constituent Pamela Romano of Ingleburn. Having undertaken a myelogram in 1972, she was later to endure severe low back pain, leg pain, numbness and chronic pain in the legs and feet, a burning sensation, and bladder and bowel dysfunction, leading to a failed back operation at a later stage. I note the recent recommendations by the roundtable: the need for more information and advocacy that the Australian College of General Practitioners and Medicare Locals provide practitioners with information, that the Australian government through the Australian Research Council supports research projects et cetera. However, I think the fundamental issue is the conduct of GlaxoSmithKline.

It is not as though this is a recent phenomenon. In 1948, Sweden banned the use of this product and a significant number of other countries followed. It is not as though it is raised for the first time in this parliament by the member for Swan. Back in 2002, the then member for Throsby, Jenni George, raised this same issue in this parliament. We have seen GlaxoSmithKline utilise a barrage of lawyers, who are paid expensive remuneration, to fight against these victims. It was very timely on the weekend when I noticed an article in the Saturday newspaper on the Baryulgil community of northern New South Wales who endured the same sort of attitude from James Hardie, a company thinking that the Indigenous workers would die off and basically that the matter would go into history and no-one would be properly compensated.

In regard to the resolution by the then member for Throsby, which has been crucially followed by the member for Swan since then, I note the point was made that:

In October 1994, the then federal minister responsible for therapeutic goods in this country advised the New South Wales minister as follows:

Myodil was a contrast medium used mainly for myelography ... It had a number of adverse reactions; arachnoiditis being one of the more serious.

As it was in use before the Commonwealth began to evaluate drugs of this class, it was never evaluated by the Therapeutic Goods Administration for efficacy and safety.

That is quite amazing. What we do know, however, is that the company which imported and distributed Pantopaque/Myodil was advised by the therapeutic goods branch in June 1978 that it was involved in `unauthorised distribution' which `has not been restricted to the “approved end users” but, apparently, has been supplied to all parts of the Commonwealth'.

There were questions about the use of this product for decades but the company blithely went ahead. As far back as 2008, Dr Dennis Cordato commented:

I am of the opinion that there is a causal link between this and a substance known as myodil … the inflammation of the arachnoiditis membrane covering the spinal cord and brain.

In 2005—quite a few years ago—Mark Colvin on PM quoted Marcus Stoodley, a neurosurgeon at the Prince of Wales Hospital who said:

It is now medically accepted that Myodil is associated with the subsequent development of arachnoiditis.

I have detailed the complaints that my constituent has endured. Clearly there is a large number of sufferers in this country. Clearly GlaxoSmithKline should, very late in the day, take notice of this recent series of recommendations to utilise some of their money to 'raise awareness, support research, coordinate support groups, make representations to government to establish and maintain an Australian case register'.

Clearly over time there have been significant indicators that this drug has caused massive problems. Countries would not have banned it if there were not an issue here. Quite frankly, they have had the clear attitude of hoping that they can battle it out, that the number is not that large, that interest is sporadic, although maybe by a few members of parliament more longer term, and that the media occasionally, every four or fix years, might raise it. For people like my constituent, clearly their entire existence has been very severely restricted. This woman has great difficulty in moving around, she is emotionally very distraught over the issue and has undertaken an operation which failed, has found a great degree of disinterest and a great degree of aggravated opposition from GlaxoSmithKline. I very much join with the mover of the motion and the seconder in supporting this motion.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context