Experts find Primodos was “not properly assessed” by Government review

Experts find Primodos was “not properly assessed” by Government review

According to experts at the University of Oxford, the risks of Primodos were not properly assessed by Government review. Primodos, the hormone pregnancy test pill available for use from 1956 until it was withdrawn from the market in 1978, has been linked to the malformation of newborn children.

The medical and healthcare products regulation agency (MHRA) oversaw an Expert Working Group review of the drug and claimed it did not find a causal link between the drug and malformations. Professor Carl Heneghan from the University of Oxford has contested the findings of the MHRA. According to Professor Heneghan, the meta-analysis showing the link was left out of the report.

Sky news reports Professor Heneghan as saying:

“Their results are completely consistent with our results. They show an effect size that is completely consistent with our results on heart defects. They’re virtually identical for all malformations. So we are basically saying, not only does our review show an association, their review always showed an association and it strengthens our effect because it’s similar and it’s strikingly similar to our results.”

“Somebody, somewhere has done a meta-analysis and not provided those results.”

The MHRA has responded by saying that “Meta-analysis was also not considered appropriate because the studies were not sufficiently robust…” and that “Based on the totality of the data, the review concluded the available scientific evidence did not support a causal association between the use of Primodos during early pregnancy and birth defects or miscarriage.”

SPG Law is acting on behalf of victims of Primodos and other Hormone Pregnancy Tests (HPTs) as well as parents who suffered a stillbirth or miscarriage while taking the drug. If you have suffered as a result of Primodos or other HPT please contact us at so we can investigate if you have a case.