HEALTH chiefs were today accused of wasting thousands of pounds of taxpayers' cash by refusing to fund a simple £1.50 test for a killer disease.
East Lancashire Health Authority has come under attack for not screening newborn babies for Cystic Fibrosis (CF).
The Cystic Fibrosis Trust claims the cost of frequent hospital visits and treatment for just one undiagnosed baby runs into thousands of pounds.
The trust is calling for the test, which costs £1.50, to be added to the standard Guthrie heel prick test given to every newborn baby in the UK.
But East Lancashire Health Authority, which refuses to purchase the test, has said a screening programme could "do more harm than good."
The CF trust says the test would save taxpayers' cash and prevent months of unnecessary suffering for affected children and their parents.
About a quarter of health authorities currently fund the test. CF specialist Dr Jim Littlewood, of St James Hospital, Leeds, who has produced a report on neonatal screening, said: "If patients remain in reasonably good health,as most do after early diagnosis and treatment, the cost is only about 10 per cent of that for a severely affected child.
"The cost to taxpayers of the late diagnosis of children with CF has already run into millions of pounds. It is a dreadful waste of health resources."
The annual cost of treatment for a child under five-years-old varies from £2,675 for a child in reasonably good health to a staggering £25,051 for one with severe lung damage.
Dr Mark Smith, East Lancashire Health Authority's consultant in public health medicine, said: "Screening programmes need to be very carefully evaluated by proper research before being introduced because they can do more harm than good.
"We cannot introduce new ones until we have had advice from research scientists and the Government."
CF affects 6,500 people in the UK and is caused by a single defective gene which causes a thick sticky mucus to clog the lungs and stomach, making it difficult to breathe and digest food.
Each week three people die from the disease in the UK.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article