APPENDIX 1
Letter from the NHS Executive to the Clerk
of the Committee (PAC 2000-01/79)
Further to my letter of 21 February on behalf
of Mr Crisp and Mr Gorham, it has come to my attention that the
answer given at the second paragraph of Question 191 was incorrect.
An analysis of the figures had been given to the National Blood
Authority. Can I ask you therefore, to disregard the original
answer for Question 191 and replace it with the following:
Question 191: Can you explain the apparent inconsistency
between Figure 11 showing significant net in-flows of blood to
London and the South East from the other NBS regions in 1999,
and the finding in NAO's attitude survey that, compared with the
general population, recent donors are more likely to be Londoners
than people in other regions?
There is no necessary or direct relationship
between stock movements (Fig 11) and donor potential and collections,
and stock movements vary year on year. In 2000, for example, the
net flow into the London and South East Zone was only slightly
greater than into the Northern Zone. Historically in Midlands
and South West the donor potential and collection capability has
always exceeded local demand.
The recent survey shows Londoners are disproportionately
represented among recent donors. However, London is also a disproportionately
heavy consumer of blood because of the preponderance of large
acute hospitals.
Martin G Sturges
NHS Executive
28 February 2001
| 
