The UK Government's Expert Working Group has found No 'causal association' between Primodos and birth defects

The transcript discusses the story of Daniel, whose birth defects were suspected to be caused by a pregnancy drug used in the 1960s and 70s. Families affected by similar issues have sought answers for over 40 years. A recent government report concluded there is no scientific evidence to support a causal link, despite warnings on the drug's packaging. Campaigners argue the report failed to address whether a possible association exists. Changes and omissions in the report have fueled suspicions, and the role of the regulator remains unexamined. The transcript highlights the ongoing struggle for answers and accountability.

What was suspected to be the cause of Daniel's malformations?

• A drug used during pregnancy

• A viral infection

• A genetic disorder

• An environmental factor

What did the government report conclude about the drug's link to malformations?

• There is strong evidence of a link

• The drug is completely safe

• The drug was never used in the 1960s and 70s

• There is no scientific evidence to support a causal link

What was removed from the final version of the report?

• The introduction section

• A graph showing studies favoring an association

• The date of the report

• The names of the researchers

What did the original draft of the report mention about the methodology?

• It was comprehensive and conclusive

• It had limitations and scarce evidence

• It was not relevant to the findings

• It was the best available at the time

What question remains unanswered regarding the regulator's role?

• Whether the regulator was aware of the drug's effects

• Whether the regulator did a good job protecting people

• Whether the drug was profitable

• Whether the drug was effective