Good afternoon and thank you very much for having invited me to appear before the Standing Committee on Health.
I would like to begin by saying that as I am European, I do not want to comment on Canadian domestic policy but speak to you rather about the European situation through testimony or any questions you may wish to ask me.
First, the current technetium crisis is not a problem that is unique to Canada nor is it unique to Europe. This is a global problem but it is especially affects Canada, Holland, Belgium and France, if one excludes South Africa because of its low molybdenum production. It is mainly these four first countries I mentioned that are directly affected because they are the ones up until now who have been producing most of the molybdenum that is used in the manufacture of technetium generators.
The first point I would like to raise, and that has already been raised by colleagues, is the interest in technetium. There has been some debate on the importance of technetium exams as part of a medical strategy. I think that debate is no longer taking place. For reference purposes, I would like to suggest an excellent report that was published by the European community on June 30, 2009. This report provides an update on the importance and relevance of these types of exams.
There is also an audit that was produced by the Dutch government that is now available on the European Association website and that looks into the forecasted increase in the European zone of technetium exams. Of course it does not take into account the situation in emerging countries, as our colleague Professor Urbain said earlier. Today there is very clearly a problem of supply in technetium 99 M and this is truly a public health problem.
What is the current situation in Europe? It is the same as yours, because we depend on the Canadian reactor, and for the most part, on the Dutch reactor. The latter is still operating but it will have to stop operating in order to allow for significant maintenance work next spring. Therefore, there will truly be a supply crisis because both the Canadian reactor and the Dutch reactor will have been shut down.
It is estimated that approximately only 30 per cent of global needs will be met during a three- to four- week period. That is truly a problem. On the European side we are trying to find an industrial solution, but this is an European industrial solution whose purpose, contrary to the initial Canadian MAPLE project, is not to meet global needs—I think it is very important to make this clear. It is important to find transatlantic solutions that will secure technetium 99 M supply on both sides of the ocean.
In Europe you currently have a moderate crisis. It was more severe last year when there were periods during which the supply varied from 20 to 80 per cent depending on the country. Some members of the European community were able to use Russian supply or former Soviet countries' supplies, because at the time there was generator production. However, that is not currently authorized on the European market.
Very clearly, our situation is somewhat different from that of Canada because we have a greater number of suppliers for generators. Furthermore, one of our current advantages is that our industrial stakeholders are members of an association, the AIPS, that is a credible and active player in the crisis management, a player that can sit down with public authorities, representatives from reactors, and think-tanks like our own and attempt to find a plan.
That is what Professor Urbain was saying earlier, that there is a solution...