Evidence of meeting #79 for Health in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was product.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:25 p.m.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
I have a short period of time. I'm sorry, and we're just.... Your testimony was—
9:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
I'm going to interrupt you for one second. Your time won't stop.
Dr. Sharma, you are entitled to as much time to answer the question as it takes him to ask the question, and I will make sure that you get that, but you won't get any more.
Go ahead.
9:25 p.m.
Conservative
Todd Doherty Conservative Cariboo—Prince George, BC
I just want to be clear and give you a chance to clarify or withdraw that statement, because in fact it is misrepresentation of this.
Listen, I don't want anybody to pass away from taking natural health products. I had a natural health store back in the nineties as well. That dates me. I too was on the end of saying, “Well, this is the next thing that's going to get you muscles and what have you.” Did I know? No, I didn't.
I guess your point today is that because of a product being unregulated, we saw the death of an 18-month-old toddler. That was how your comments came across. I'm just asking you to withdraw that, because in fact it was the parents, in their wishes, who didn't believe in hospitals at the time. They thought they could deal with the sickness. I guess they didn't understand the depth and the seriousness of the illness, and they tried with home remedies to make their child.... They loved their child, by all accounts. I believe they were charged with undue care ultimately....
I think your comments were misleading. You may not have intended it. That child didn't die because they used a natural health product. He died because they didn't get the appropriate treatment in a timely fashion. Is that correct?
9:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Now, Dr. Sharma, you won't be interrupted. You have two and a half minutes to answer the question, and that is the last question from Mr. Doherty.
9:25 p.m.
Chief Medical Advisor, Department of Health
Respectfully, Chair, I'm a pediatrician. That's how I was trained. I was trained to look after children. I don't think there's anything more tragic than the loss of a child, and I don't think any parent should have to live through that. I'm sure that these parents very much loved their child.
That was not the intent. The intent of the discussion we're having is that if you have natural health products that make claims against serious diseases and people believe those claims, they may be using those treatments instead of using treatments that could potentially help their own condition or that of their loved ones. That was really the context.
The other example was a physician who said that one of their patients was taken off their medications and put on a natural health product for seizures, and that this had tragic consequences. It was just in that context.
I don't want to cast aspersions on any parents. It's just that when products are being misrepresented there can be consequences, and it's not just the toxicity of the product itself.
9:30 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I think we asked that there be an answer to the question, not an expansion of it or a redirection around other things. The question was very clear. It was related to the fact that you cannot regulate what parents do to their children. Regulating natural health products would not have meant this child lived longer if his parents had chosen to do something different. That answer does not answer that question at all.
9:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
I'm sorry, Dr. Ellis. That isn't a point of order.
If you could finish your answer, Dr. Sharma, we'll get on with the last round. Go ahead and finish.
9:30 p.m.
Chief Medical Advisor, Department of Health
Thank you, Chair. I'm done.
9:30 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Mr. Chair, can I ask a question that might clarify it for everybody?
9:30 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
I think it would help Dr. Sharma and all of us with this. In that case, did the product that was given make a claim that it would treat the particular ailment the child had?
9:30 p.m.
Chief Medical Advisor, Department of Health
We don't have the details, but the understanding was that the parents believed it could treat the condition the child had.
9:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
The last round of questions goes to Mr. Fergus for five minutes or less.
September 27th, 2023 / 9:30 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
With great trepidation, I'm going to continue the conversation along that vein. I think Mr. Davies asked a very good question, and I think your answer was very illuminating. The reason I say “with great trepidation” is the proviso that no one wants to impute or cast aspersions upon any parent. I know Mr. Doherty would agree with this, as well. As you mentioned, the death of a child is a tragedy beyond measure.
I think the point you made in your final answer in responding to Mr. Davies is that what often happens is that if you believe a claim about a product but that claim is unverified or unsubstantiated, it can have tragic consequences. It's not like a belt and suspenders in that you take a natural health product and a product that has undergone scientific rigour and study to make a validated claim. People usually pick one or the other.
I can see the attraction and why people would want to take natural health products. People are very concerned about what goes into their bodies, and so on and so forth. That's a very current view in Canada, and it has existed for a very long period of time. I'm not going to call into question what people's intentions are.
However, it seems to me that the minimum we would want to do to ensure that Canadians are safe, especially when it seems to having the same type of adverse.... As you said in answer to my last question, if the number of people who have adverse reactions to prescription drugs is the same as for natural health products, then you would want to make sure the claims made about those natural health products, or the ingredients of those natural health products, are clearly defined, so that people can understand what they're taking and make sure they know what's going into their bodies. Is that a fair comment to make?
9:30 p.m.
Chief Medical Advisor, Department of Health
Yes, it absolutely is. When the claims that are being made—what someone is saying that product is doing—are accurate, truthful and supported by evidence, then they're appropriate for that product. When you look at that label and you can read it and understand it; when you know what's in the product, what the adverse events and allergens are, and how to contact the company; and when you have assurances that what's in that bottle or that tube is of high quality and not contaminated or adulterated in any way, shape or form, all of that then allows you, the consumer, to have the confidence that you are going into a safe marketplace and can have confidence in those products. That's really the goal.
That's not just our goal at Health Canada; that's every company's goal, as well. We're all working towards the same thing, to make sure that information is accurate and people can make informed decisions about their own health.
9:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
Colleagues, I'm going to pose a question to you. Then I'm going to dismiss the witnesses to give you a minute to think about the question. Then I'm going to ask you to answer the question. Then we're going to call for adjournment.
Our calendar calls for us to commence a review of the draft report on medical devices at our next meeting, but we have not yet finished the draft report on children's health. My question for you is this: Do you want to do medical devices or children's health at our next meeting? Park that for now. I'll come back to you to see if you have an answer for me right away.
To our witnesses, thank you so much for the patient and professional manner in which you handled all of the questions, as per usual. Thanks for the work you do on behalf of Canadians and for being here at this late hour in this climate.
Members, what's your wish for the next meeting?
Yes, Dr. Ellis.
9:35 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Mr. Chair, I'd like to move a motion, actually, since you brought up some committee business:
That the committee conduct its upcoming study on women's health concurrently with its study on the opioid crisis, owing to the escalating opioid epidemic, which is having a devastating impact on the health of Canadians.
9:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
All right, considering the hour, can we consider that to be a notice of motion to be dealt with after the appropriate 48 hours' notice?
9:35 p.m.
Conservative
Stephen Ellis Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Well, Chair, I think it is actually in order. You yourself brought committee business into this. I think it's germane that we bring this up now in a public meeting and that we highlight how important the opioid crisis is. We should bring it up sooner than later and actually have this particular study run concurrently with the women's health study.
9:35 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Chair, I have a point of order. Dr. Ellis moved his motion and finished speaking, and then you took the floor. I had my hand up to take the floor next, and then Dr. Ellis just jumped in. I don't think he was recognized after that.
9:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Sean Casey
I'm sorry. I don't know that I saw your hand, Mr. Davies. Do you have an intervention now?