ELIGIBILITY

ELIGIBILITY TO THE TRUST FUND.

Department of Health and Family Services

'HPH Newsletter' September 1997

PROBABLE NEW CASE OF IATROGENIC CJD

The National Pituitary Hormone Advisory Council (NPHAC) wishes to advise readers of HPH News that a former recipient of pituitary hormones has developed a neurological condition for which no definitive cause has been found. On the basis that the woman was concerned was treated under the AHPHP, CJD must be considered high on the list of probable causes.

The woman concerned is under the care of a neurologist. An independent panel of experts has considered clinical records and has stated that further evidence would be required before a definitive diagnosis could be made. Assistance to the family has already commenced.

A claim under the compensation settlement scheme , which was extended to all former recipients in May, 1997, has also been received. The Commonwealth is currently processing this claim.

From information provided to the Department, it is believed that the former recipient of pituitary hormone was treated with hPG sometime between 1968 and 1971. These documents also indicate that batch 003-2 was used in treatment.

As the below documents will demonstrate a definitive diagnosis is not possible at present.

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

Mr Dale Boucher
The Australian Government Solicitor
ltobert Garran Offices
National Circuit
BARTON ACT 2600

Dear Mr Boucher

CREUTZFELDT - JAKOB DISEASE... CLAIM BY MARGARET BANSEMER

I refer to the settlement negotiations currently taking place in relation to the claim by Margaret Banserner. Prior to the initial settlement offer to Mrs Banserner, Professor Masters assessed the possibility of Mrs Bansemer having CID as greater than 50%. Professor Masters has today informed me that he currently assesses that possibility as 30 to 40%. 1 concur with that assessment. A conclusive diagnosis of CID is not medically pollible pre-mortern. There is no doubt In my mind that there is a very real possibility that Mrs Banserner has contracted CJD. Having regard to all the circumstances of this case, including the reasonable possibility that Mrs Banserner has CID, 1 consider that it is appropriate to proceed to settle this claim on the basis of a diagnosis of CJD for the purposes of the settlement deed.

Yours sincerely

Professor ludith A. Whitworth Chief Medical Officer
10 October 1997

****************************************

July 16,1997

Mr Geoff MeDonald
Senior Government Solicitor
Australian Government Solicitor
GPO Box 2853AA
MELBOURNE VIC 3001

Dear Geoff

Re., Mrs Margaret Bansemer

I have been advised by Dr H Waddy (Consultant Neurologist, Royal Adelaide Hospital) that both she and Dr Don Burrow, (Senior Consultant Neurologist, RAH) have considered the clinical features of Mrs Banserner's illness and consider the differential diagnosis to be: