The Health Minister’s response to a call for cardiac screening for people under 35 years has been described as “surprisingly negative” by New Forest East MP, Dr Julian Lewis, following a debate in the House of Commons.

Dr Lewis, who had spoken in support of the Cardiac Risk in the Young (Screening) Bill he was co-sponsoring, had referred to the case of Sarah Woodhead, from Hythe, who was just 28 when she became the victim of sudden death syndrome (SDS).  The Bill calls for anyone showing symptoms of certain cardiac diseases, or who has a family history of them to be referred to a specialist; and also proposes that relatives of anyone under 35 who has died of the disease should be offered screening.

Dr Lewis recalled that the Government had in 2001 pledged substantial funds to the charity Cardiac Risk in the Young, which it had received and put to good use in its pilot programmes for screening.

Although the work that had been done and the awareness that had been raised were admirable, the Bill would be an essential further step, “because we have to ensure that where tragedy strikes, it is not then unnecessarily multiplied.  A key provision of the Bill is to make certain that the families of those who have been afflicted by sudden death syndrome are automatically screened.  There is no excuse for not doing that when lightning has already struck.”  Significant numbers of people had an opportunity to survive the condition provided it was identified in time, said the MP.

Health Minister, Melanie Johnson, replied that the UK National Screening Committee, which advised the Government, assessed proposed new screening programmes, to ensure they did more good than harm at a reasonable cost.  It’s child health subgroup has advised that there is currently insufficient evidence to introduce a national screening programme for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, the most common cause of SDS, either for the whole population or for specific subgroups….its advice in this case is that there should not be a national screening programme until further evidence is available.

“I emphasise that the child health subgroup examined carefully the concerns about the possibly negative aspects of screening and its consequences for the future employment and insurance of the young people involved.  In also considered the psychological consequences of telling young adults and their families that they have a condition that might kill them suddenly without warning.  While the meaning of a positive screen is so inconclusive, we must think carefully about whether it is fair to impost this burden on the young.  The issue is not clear-cut by any means.”

Dr Lewis, who is vice chairman of the Parliamentary Group on Cardiac Risk in the Young, said later: “Despite the support from MPs from all parties for this Bill to ensure that families most at risk are screened, the Health Minister’s response was surprisingly negative.  It seems that this campaign will have to continue and be intensified.”