One last question?
Evidence of meeting #30 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was reactor.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #30 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was reactor.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. Regan. Your time is up.
We go now to Bloc Québécois and Madame Brunelle; and if there is time left, we'll go to Monsieur Malo.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We are meeting here today because there is a shortage and the situation is urgent. Government inaction this summer has resulted in the deterioration of patient health. Physicians and nuclear medicine specialists have characterized the situation as catastrophic. According to Dr. François Lamoureux, president of the Association des médecins spécialistes en médecine nucléaire du Québec, the government is overwhelmed.
Mr. Ivanco, you told us you were proud of the support that our government is providing to the nuclear industry. It seems to me that government support, whether it's from the current government or the previous government, has declined over the years. You're telling us that Canada is a world leader, but the Prime Minister tells us that he wants to abandon isotope production. How do you think we can maintain our position?
You say you're a nuclear specialist. A number of witnesses have told this committee about restarting the MAPLE reactors. Some say they are in favour of that option and others not. What is your opinion on the issue? Is it possible to restart them? Have the MAPLEs produced isotopes? Do you think this is a solution for the future?
August 21st, 2009 / 2:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Society of Professional Engineers and Associates
There were a number of questions there. One of them was whether it is feasible to restart the MAPLE reactors. I don't specifically work on MAPLE technology. All I can tell you is that I know credible technical experts on MAPLE technology within my company that I work for who have come out very strongly—and one recently vocally in the press, I think it was in The Globe and Mail—making the argument as to why they couldn't be restarted in a timeframe reasonable to deal with the isotope crisis. I know that those people who are saying these things are not saying them because they have to say them, but because they genuinely believe this way, so I have to defer to their judgment. I do not believe they are lying when they say these things. I believe they're telling the truth.
You asked another question, I think, about whether support for the industry was sufficient. Did I understand that correctly?
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
I talked about federal government support. You say you are proud of the federal government's support. It seems to me instead that the government lacks vision and is seeking to withdraw at least from isotope production.
2:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Society of Professional Engineers and Associates
The government of the day has been supportive certainly of my employer, in the sense that it has given them considerable funds over the last year and a half to complete the ACR-1000 design. We appreciate that.
As I try to mention, the issue of isotope production, when you look at it from an industry perspective, is just one thing. Most people don't appreciate that the NRU was built as a reactor not to make isotopes, but to carry out physics experiments, to test fuel, and to do those kinds of things. The nuclear medicine business was developed over a period of time.
The bigger issue, I think, for us in the industry is that we would like to see an NRU replacement down the road, not just for isotope production, but also because a viable industry needs to have a research reactor. I don't believe the support is there for that. I think that starting the isotope production reactors—if it's possible to start the MAPLEs—would solve that particular issue, but it wouldn't solve the bigger issue, which is to have a viable industry.
Personally, no one likes to say that so much money is not enough. I think there has been money there for certain projects, and it's appreciated; but an investment in a research reactor is a 40-year investment in the future. It's an investment in physics research; it's an investment in isotopes; it could be an investment in many things. It could cost a billion or a billion and a half dollars, but we gave the auto companies $10 billion that we may never see again. This would be a billion or billion and a half dollars that would keep on giving.
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Paule Brunelle Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Mr. Chairman, I'm handing over the rest of my speaking time to Mr. Malo.
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Luc Malo Bloc Verchères—Les Patriotes, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
A little earlier, I listened to Dr. McEwan speaking with my Liberal colleague. As Dr. McEwan no longer belongs to the Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine, he clearly cannot speak on behalf of that group of physicians. What most physicians in the field, who are practising in these somewhat peculiar conditions of isotope shortage, tell us is different. Their overall vision of the problem is much more realistic. Dr. McEwan seems to have a much more positive vision. I simply wonder how he can be so cheerful about this situation.
On August 12, the Minister of Health and the Minister of Natural Resources outlined 22 proposals that were going to be studied by the expert review panel on isotope production. I would like him to tell us what those proposals are. We haven't really heard about them.
In addition, in view of the highly precarious and urgent situation our specialists have to face, and of all the limitations caused by the isotope shortage facing patients, is it realistic not to table a report on those proposals until November?
2:50 p.m.
Conservative
2:50 p.m.
Special Advisor on Medical Isotopes to the Minister of Health, As an Individual
Mr. Chairman, if I can respond to that, I find it offensive that he would regard my comments as jovial. They are not jovial. I recognize the importance of this to my patients. I practise and I see patients every day. I am actually in the middle of a clinic. I have come out of that clinic to come to talk to this panel, so I find his comments unfortunate.
The degree to which there are regional differences across this country is very, very real. When we talk to the provinces and territories at our meetings, we have an indication from them both of the degree to which there are delays in tests and the degree to which there are cancellations of tests. The provinces and territories, from their health ministries, are reporting that there are manageable delays. These are clearly not entirely acceptable for our patients, but are manageable.
What is clear to me, as I talk to my colleagues on the ground, is that there are these big regional disparities across the country. The sites that appear to have the biggest difficulty coping are small urban sites dependant either upon small radiopharmacies or upon a generator being supplied to an individual hospital radiopharmacy. Clearly, that is a very great concern to me and the physicians dealing with those patients. What I now have committed to do with my colleagues is actually to understand what is causing those regional disparities.
So, Mr. Chair, I believe I do understand the seriousness of it. I am a practising physician on the ground and am actually in the middle of a clinic as we speak. I do understand the regional disparities and I am attempting to address them. I am not underestimating the impact on patients.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Mr. McEwan.
Merci, Madame Brunelle and Monsieur Malo.
We will go now to Mr. Cullen for up to seven minutes.
I understand, Mr. McEwan, that you have to leave very close to three o'clock. If you must do that, just leave when you feel you have to.
Mr. Jean, go ahead.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, I have a point of clarity.
Madam Brunelle asked a question of Mr. Ivanco in relation to the MAPLE reactor. Mr. Ivanco responded that he agreed with the experts in recent articles. I am wondering if he was specifically referring to the article by Jean-Pierre Labrie in the National Post on July 28, 2009.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
2:55 p.m.
Vice-President, Society of Professional Engineers and Associates
It's the only public explanation or articulation that I've seen.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
2:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Before I get started, I'm not sure if that was a point of order or something Mr. Jean could have asked in his questioning.
2:55 p.m.
Conservative
2:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you all for being with us here today, particularly Dr. McEwan, who is taking time out from a clinic.
Dr. Atcher, you spoke of the effects on patients. You mentioned three specific things. You said that this isotope shortage is having an effect on patients seeking cancer treatment and diagnosis of heart conditions. You talked about the accuracy of the tests being less than perfect. You talked about an increase in radiation causing health effects on the patients as well. You talked about the procedure itself being riskier.
Did I understand you correctly?
2:55 p.m.
Past President, International Society of Nuclear Medicine
That's correct.
2:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I'd like to turn to Mr. McEwan, because he talked about having to leave quite soon.
I want to take you from your comments in May of this year to your comments just recently. You talked about this being a catastrophe for patients, but from May until now the isotope shortage has increased. You talked about offering creative advice. You talked about the ability to triage the emergency and the crisis in isotope care much better.
I'm wondering what the basis is for your enthusiasm. Considering how long this crisis will continue with the shutdown at Chalk River, where do you find enthusiasm for cancer and heart patients in Canada in the future months?
2:55 p.m.
Special Advisor on Medical Isotopes to the Minister of Health, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree with you that the length of the shutdown and the length of the supply issue are of concern. We have improved the utilization of the available supply in a number of short-term ways, and we have been able to keep patient volumes up better than we had originally envisaged. Clearly this is not sustainable over the long term. It is going to create problems for hospital staff, as they're working different processes and different patents.
I believe there are some opportunities. The approval of the molybdenum from the Australian reactor may provide us with some medium-term relief in molybdenum supply. We have to remember that reactors also make iodine-131, which is essential in the treatment of patients with thyroid cancer, which is my own area of expertise.