Letby babies could have survived with better medical care, claims expert
In a new ITV documentary about Letby's case, Prof Neena Modi, of Imperial College, said she had examined medical notes and concluded that critically ill babies had not been monitored or treated appropriately.
Letby, 35, from Hereford, is serving 15 whole-life orders for killing seven babies and attempting to murder seven others at the Countess of Chester Hospital between 2015 and 2016.
But Prof Modi, a former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said the babies should never have been admitted to the ill-equipped and understaffed neonatal unit.
'On reading through the detailed medical notes, what was harrowing was seeing a story unfold where possibly things could have been recognised earlier and interventions could have been put in place, and perhaps for some of the babies, the outcomes might not have been what they were,' she said.
'This was deeply distressing. This was a neonatal unit that was being required to look after babies who should not have been cared for there.
'The babies that we're referring to were all extremely vulnerable. Some of them were demonstrably and recognisably on a knife edge.
'Others could have been recognised to have been on a knife edge, but they were not monitored appropriately, and they were not treated appropriately.
'Problems went unrecognised until the point at which a baby deteriorated very abruptly. So the babies might not have died had their difficulties been addressed earlier.'
Prof Modi is part of a panel of world-leading experts who have challenged the verdicts and who have compiled a report that has been presented to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which looks into potential miscarriages of justice.
The CCRC is expected to report back before Christmas.
The documentary also heard that test results which the prosecution relied on to prove that several of the babies had been poisoned with insulin were not fit for purpose.
Prof Matthew Johll, a forensic chemist from Illinois Valley Community College, said that an immunoassay test should not have been used to convict Letby without follow up forensic testing to rule out a false positive.
'You would not strip a gold medal from an international athlete on an immunoassay,' he said.
'It's not good enough for drug testing for pilots or anyone who has mandatory drug testing. So how can it be good enough to put someone in prison?'
Lucy Letby: Beyond Reasonable Doubt? is currently available on ITVX.
The show's producers said: 'After two trials, nurse Lucy Letby was found guilty of killing seven newborn babies and attempting to kill seven others in one of the most shocking murder cases in British history.
'Described as a cold-blooded, calculating killer, Letby was said to have used her trusted role to cause catastrophic harm to the most vulnerable newborn babies.
'So why are a growing number of expert voices now questioning the evidence used to convict her? This programme explores the views of a team of international scientists who say the prosecution case simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny.'
Letby could also face further charges. In July, Cheshire Constabulary passed a new file to the Crown Prosecution Service relating to new baby deaths and non-fatal collapses at the Countess of Chester Hospital and Liverpool Women's Hospital between 2012 and 2016.
The CPS confirmed that it had received the file and said it would 'carefully consider the evidence to determine whether any criminal charges should be brought'.
Cheshire Constabulary is also investigating three former managers from the Countess of Chester over allegations of gross negligence manslaughter and corporate manslaughter.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
The Oral-B iO2 electric toothbrush offers premium iO performance at a fraction of the price
The Oral-B iO2 is the newest and cheapest electric toothbrush in the brand's flagship iO range. That lineup culminates in the outrageously expensive Oral-B iO10 – which costs either £400 or £800, depending on whether any offers are available. With the iO2, the proposition is simple: take the superior, near-silent magnetic cleaning technology that makes the iO range so good, but bring the price down by stripping away most of the sillier bells and whistles of the more expensive electric toothbrushes in the series. This is an iO-series brush pared back to the bare essentials, focusing on the thing that actually matters: getting your teeth properly clean. After months of testing, I'm convinced the iO2 is not only the best-value brush in the iO lineup, but one of the most sensible electric toothbrushes you can spend your money on. Nobody needs an AI brushing coach or 101 polishing modes. This does all the simple things well. How I tested Without wanting to seem too obvious, I used this like a toothbrush. I squeezed a pea-sized amount of toothpaste on the bristly end of the Oral-B iO2 and cleaned my teeth, morning and night. I tested the Oral-B iO2 for six weeks, swapping out my usual Philips Sonicare 9900 – though I do still pick up the Suri electric toothbrush whenever I travel. Throughout my testing, I paid attention to these key criteria: Cleaning performance: I used the iO2 twice a day, paying close attention to the smoothness of the tooth surface and along the gumline. I used all three brushing modes to see if there were any noticeable differences in the results. Battery life and charging: I used the iO2 normally, brushing twice daily to measure how long a single charge lasts. Once it was fully depleted, I timed how long it took to get back to 100 per cent, to test Oral-B's claims. Design and comfort: I considered the ergonomics and build quality of the brush, how comfortable and secure the handle felt to hold and move around, especially when wet. Why you can trust IndyBest reviews As a tech journalist who has tested more electric toothbrushes than I care to admit, I've become an expert in dental hygiene. I've spent four years swapping between brushes, evaluating everything from the most basic models to the smartest, app-connected gadgets from Oral-B and Philips. My focus is on separating the genuinely useful innovations from the marketing gimmicks, with a view to identifying the features that actually contribute to a better, healthier clean.
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Warning issued to patients who stop using weight-loss jabs
Health chiefs have raised concerns about patients regaining weight after stopping popular weight-loss drugs such as Wegovy and Mounjaro, calling for robust support to prevent them from piling on the pounds again. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice), the UK's health watchdog, highlighted research indicating that many individuals regain weight if not adequately supported after ceasing treatment. Nice stressed that those coming off the drugs should be offered "structured advice and follow-up support" to mitigate weight gain. This guidance specifically applies to individuals receiving these treatments through the NHS. However, an estimated 1.5 million people in the UK are currently using weight-loss injections, with the vast majority paying privately. These individuals will not be eligible for NHS support once their treatment concludes. Over the next three years, approximately 240,000 people deemed to have the "greatest need" are anticipated to receive Mounjaro, also known as tirzepatide, via the NHS. The new 'quality standard' from Nice says that NHS patients should be monitored for at least a year after they complete treatment, and extra support should be offered if needed. It emphasises building 'long-term behavioural habits, use self-monitoring tools, and draw on wider support – from online communities to family-led interventions and local activities'. This standard, a type of guidance for the health services in England and Wales, sets out expectations for health providers including how they should support patients. 'Successful weight management doesn't end when medication stops or when someone completes a behavioural programme,' said Professor Jonathan Benger, deputy chief executive and chief medical officer at Nice. 'We know that the transition period after treatment is crucial, and people need structured support to maintain the positive changes they've made. 'This new standard makes sure services provide that vital continuity of care, and it supports the NHS 10 Year Plan to shift from a 'sickness service' to a genuine health service focused on prevention.' Dr Rebecca Payne, chair of Nice's Quality Standards Advisory Committee, added: 'Weight management is a long-term journey, not a short-term fix. 'The evidence is clear that advice and support for maintaining weight after stopping medicines or completing behavioural interventions can help prevent weight regain and enable people to experience lasting benefits. 'We've seen excellent examples of services that already provide comprehensive discharge planning and ongoing support. 'This quality standard will help ensure all healthcare providers adopt these best practices, giving every person the best chance of maintaining their weight management success over the long term. 'This standard ensures healthcare services are equipped to provide that essential ongoing support.' Commenting, Henry Gregg, chief executive of the National Pharmacy Association, said: ' Pharmacies take their responsibilities seriously to provide full wrap around support to patients trying to achieve a healthy weight. 'We know that although medication can be effective in speeding up weight loss in some people, it is not a silver bullet and patients need to make long term lifestyle changes to make their weight loss sustainable. 'The current NHS roll out of weight loss treatment is very small, with only a handful of patients receiving it and it will continue to be the case that the vast majority of eligible patients will be seen by their pharmacy.' Professor Kamila Hawthorne, chairwoman of the Royal College of GPs, said: 'There is no one-size-fits-all approach to tackling obesity – what works for one patient will likely not work for another and, as with any medication, weight-loss drugs do not come without risk. 'It's also the case that patients will likely need support to sustain their weight loss once they stop taking the medication. As such, this is important and sensible guidance from Nice. 'As a college, we've been clear that whilst weight loss medications have significant potential benefits for patients who are struggling to lose weight, they mustn't be seen as a 'silver bullet' and ensuring access to sufficient 'wraparound' services – particularly for when patients come off their medication – will be key to optimal health outcomes.'
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Avoiding these foods could help people lose twice as much weight, study finds
Cooking from scratch and avoiding ultra-processed foods like pre-packaged sandwiches and protein bars could help people lose twice as much weight, a study has found. Ultra-processed food (UPF) is typically high in saturated fat, salt and sugar, contains ingredients you would not find in your kitchen cupboard like emulsifiers and preservatives, and is ready-to-eat or heat. The study published in the journal Nature compared a UPF diet to a minimally processed one, and found avoiding UPFs helped curb food cravings, increased weight loss and improved fat loss. The trial, led by experts at University College London (UCL) and University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH), involved 55 people who were overweight but otherwise healthy. Half of the participants were given an eight-week diet plan comprising minimally processed foods such as overnight oats, cottage pie and chicken salad cooked from scratch. The other half were given a diet of ready-to-eat protein bars, shop-bought sandwiches and microwave lasagne. Both diets were matched nutritionally and contained the recommended levels of fat, saturated fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt and fibre. After completing one diet for eight weeks, the groups switched. Dr Samuel Dicken, of the UCL centre for obesity research and UCL department of behavioural science and health, said: 'Previous research has linked ultra-processed foods with poor health outcomes. 'But not all ultra-processed foods are inherently unhealthy based on their nutritional profile.' Researchers aimed to find out whether eating more processed foods impacts weight, blood pressure, body composition and food cravings. Results showed those on the minimally processed diet lost twice as much weight (2.06 per cent) compared to the UPF diet (1.05 per cent loss). Those on the UPF diet also did not lose as much fat, researchers said. Dr Dicken explained that although a 2 per cent reduction may not seem like much weight loss, it is a significant amount for eight weeks. 'If we scaled these results up over the course of a year, we'd expect to see a 13 per cent weight reduction in men and a 9 per cent reduction in women on the minimally processed diet, but only a 4 per cent weight reduction in men and 5 per cent in women after the ultra-processed diet,' Dr Dicken said. However, researchers measured other markers like blood pressure, heart rate, liver function, glucose levels and cholesterol but found no significant negative impacts of the UPF diet. Gunter Kuhnle, professor of food science and nutrition at Reading University, who was not involved in the study, told The Independent: 'I think it confirms it is not processing that is important but rather food composition.' He suggests consumers should focus more on composition, such as carbohydrates and fats, rather than on processing. However, those on the UPF diet ate more calories than those on the minimally processed diet. The NHS recommends the average woman should consume around 2,000 calories a day, while the average man should consume 2,500. Participants were given more food than they needed, but those on a minimally processed diet spontaneously had 230 calories less than is recommended and those on the UPF diet had 120 calories less. A questionnaire also revealed those on the minimally processed diet had fewer cravings than people on the diet of ready meals and packaged snacks. Rob Hobson, registered nutritionist and author of Unprocess Your Family Life, who was also not involved in the study, told The Independent: 'The findings support the idea that cutting back on UPFs may help with appetite control and weight regulation and not because UPFs are inherently toxic, but because of how they affect eating behaviour. 'Many are designed to be hyper-palatable, easy to eat quickly, and less satisfying. They don't give us the same satiety signals as minimally processed foods.' Professor Rachel Batterham, senior author of the study, said: 'The best advice to people would be to stick as closely to nutritional guidelines as they can by moderating overall energy intake, limiting intake of salt, sugar and saturated fat, and prioritising high-fibre foods such as fruits, vegetables, pulses and nuts. 'Choosing less processed options such as whole foods and cooking from scratch, rather than ultra-processed, packaged foods or ready meals, is likely to offer additional benefits in terms of body weight, body composition and overall health.'
