Infected Blood Inquiry

The Infected Blood Inquiry (IBI) examined the circumstances in which people treated by National Health Services in the United Kingdom (the NHS) were given infected blood and infected blood products (such as clotting factors for patients with bleeding disorders), in particular since 1970.

It examined why this happened, the impact on their families, how the authorities (including government) responded, the nature of any support provided following infection, questions of consent and whether there was a cover-up.

In specific regard to consent to transfusion, Volume 5 of the IBI report, What happened and why? – Blood Transfusion: Clinical Practice, found that

“…little or no advantage was taken of the opportunity to discuss the desirability of transfusions, their risks and benefits, and any alternatives (including no transfusion) with patients. Though plainly in emergency circumstances this may not be practicable, this should have happened in almost all other cases.”

and that:

“There was a widespread (and wrong) failure to warn patients of the risks of transfusion, and of alternatives, where they could reasonably have been warned, both so that they could give informed consent and so that they could be alert to, and take steps with regard to, the possible health consequences of the treatment.”

The number of people infected by blood transfusions was even greater than were infected by blood products. Between 80 and 100 were infected with HIV after a blood transfusion. Approximately 26,800 were infected with Hepatitis C after a blood transfusion, often linked with childbirth or surgery, but also from transfusions to treat thalassemia, sickle disease or leukaemia, or tissue transfer. It has not been possible to estimate the number of people infected with chronic Hepatitis B due to limited data.

Many patients died or suffered miserably, and many continue to suffer, not as a result of their underlying condition or illness, but as a result of this treatment itself.