2024年5月8日，新加坡衛生部高級政務部長普立傑醫生代表衛生部長回復碧山-大巴窯集選區議員安迪先生和盛港集選區議員蔡慶威先生關於康盛臍帶血轉移和儲存相關問題的質詢。
以下內容為新加坡眼根據國會英文資料翻譯整理：
臍帶血儲存事件中受影響客戶的支持和商業臍帶血庫責任審查（4）
議長先生：我可否提醒各位議員，你的補充質詢應簡明扼要？有請安迪先生。
安迪先生（碧山–大巴窯集選區議員）：議長先生，我有一個非常簡明扼要的補充問題。我想請高級政務部長澄清，其他臍帶血庫是否願意接受康盛人生集團的臍帶血單位，正如高級政務部長所分享的那樣，以及它們是否有能力接受這些單位？我想了解更多細節，因為高級政務部長提到有一些關於他們如何尋求幫助的指導方針？
普立傑先生：議長先生，我感謝安迪先生的提問。我懷疑議長關於發言的簡潔提示也針對我。很抱歉。
議長先生，新加坡臍帶血庫（SCBB）、Stemcord Private Limited和Cryoviva Singapore已表示有能力並願意接受從Cordlife轉移的臍帶血單位。然而，每個臍帶血庫都表示，在接受Cordlife的臍帶血單位之前，必須滿足特定條件。
因為不同機構存在一些差異，父母和客戶將不得不直接與接收臍帶血庫合作，以實現轉移。衛生部將在我們力所能及的範圍內，努力促進相關聯繫和流程。
不過，我想藉此機會指出幾點。三個臍帶血庫都有便利臍帶血單位轉移的程序，但它們只接受被證明仍然存活的臍帶血單位，而接受的臍帶血庫不太可能保證從Cordlife轉移的臍帶血單元仍然存活。因此，客戶和家長在選擇轉移時會面臨一些風險，而且需要一些時間。這不是一個輕率的決定。
議長先生：有請蔡慶威先生。
蔡慶威先生（盛港集選區議員）：謝謝議長。我只想向高級政務部長提出一個補充問題。我注意到，在Cordlife昨天的新聞稿中，他們提到，剩下的五個儲血罐被認為是所謂的「低風險」儲血罐。在高級政務部長提到的為期一年的測試中，是否涉及對Cordlife儲存的所有不同儲血罐和臍帶血單元進行全面測試，同時在操作過程中，向家長保證剩餘臍帶血裝置受到影響的風險確實很低，並通過對Cordllife的保證進行獨立的第三方審計，使人們對未來任何潛在的失誤有更大的信心？
普立傑先生：議長先生，我的答覆肯定簡短。整個審計過程的目的是使人們對審計結果有高度的信心，確保Cordlife自己能夠證明他們正在做正確的事情，並朝著正確的方向改進保護措施，並增強對整個行業的信心。這就是我做的簡短答覆。
他對新聞中提到的「五個儲血罐」的具體問題。我沒有關於這五個儲血罐在我們的總體評估和一年時間表中的確切信息。如果他願意，我可以單獨跟進。
以下是英文質詢內容：
SUPPORT FOR AFFECTED CUSTOMERS IN CORD BLOOD STORAGE INCIDENT AND REVIEW OF OBLIGATIONS OF COMMERCIAL CORD BLOOD banks（4）
Mr Speaker: Can I remind Members to keep your supplementary questions succinct? Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, I have a very succinct supplementary question. May I seek clarification with the Senior Minister of State whether other cord blood banks are willing to accept the cord blood units, as the Senior Minister of State shared earlier, and whether they have the capacity to accept them? May I ask for more details because the Senior Minister of State mentioned that there were some guidelines about how they can go about the process to seek help as well?
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Speaker, I thank Mr Saktiandi for the question. I suspect Speaker’s direction was also targeted to me. My apologies.
Sir, Singapore Cord Blood Bank (SCBB), Stemcord Private Limited and Cryoviva Singapore have indicated their ability and willingness to accept cord blood units transferred from Cordlife. However, each of the cord blood banks has indicated that specific conditions must be met prior to accepting the cord blood units from Cordlife.
So, there is some variance and the parents, the customers will have to work directly with the receiving cord blood banks to operationalise the transfer. MOH will try to facilitate the connections and processes, where it is within our power to do so.
However, I would want to take this opportunity to point out a couple of points. All of the three cord blood banks have processes in place to facilitate the transfer of the cord blood units, but they will only accept cord blood units that are demonstrated to be still viable and the receiving cord blood banks are unlikely able to guarantee the viability of cord blood units that are then transferred from Cordlife. So, there is some risk to the customer, the parents associated with making the choice for this transfer and it will also take some time. It is not a small decision to be taken lightly.
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. I note in the press release by Cordlife yesterday that they mentioned the remaining five tanks are deemed to be so-called 「low risk」 in terms of the viability of the cord blood units there. In the testing that the Senior Minister of State mentioned, this one-year period, does it involve comprehensive testing of all the various tanks and units that are stored within Cordlife, and at the same time, also in the operational processes, to give parents the assurance that there is indeed a low risk of the remaining cord blood units being affected and so that there is greater confidence as to any potential future lapses by having this independent third-party audit of Cordlife’s assurances?
Dr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, the short answer is yes. The entire process is designed to provide a high level of confidence in the findings, to make sure that Cordlife themselves can demonstrate that they are doing the right thing and moving in the right direction to improve protections, and for confidence in the industry as a whole to be shored up. So, the short answer is yes.
He had a specific question on the five tanks that were in the report. I do not have the information about exactly where those five tanks are in our overall assessment and the one-year timeline. If he would like to, I can follow up with him separately on this.
CF丨編輯
HQ丨編審
新加坡國會丨來源
新加坡國會丨圖源
