International Women’s Day
Lord Patel Excerpts(3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Patel (CB)
Noble Baronesses, right reverend Prelate and Lords, it is a privilege to take part in a debate that marks International Women’s Day on my youngest, formidable granddaughter’s birthday and to listen to so many powerful speeches from noble Baronesses, not just the maiden speeches, which were all brilliant, but all noble Baronesses’ speeches. I might have been expected to speak about the need to improve women’s health in England, but the noble Baroness, Lady Sugg, is a better advocate than I could ever be, so I will tear up that bit of my speech and move on.
In an International Women’s Day debate in another year, I spoke of HeLa cells, so called because they are cancer cells obtained without consent from a young, Black, uneducated woman named Henrietta Lacks, who suffered from an aggressive form of cervical cancer. These cells are the first human immortal cells, and today, 70 years after the death of Henrietta Lacks, they still survive as cultures in laboratories all over the world. Research using these cells has resulted in many treatments, including the development of the human papillomavirus vaccine for cervical cancer, the use of which will, I hope, one day end women getting cervical cancer. Pharmaceutical companies have benefited hugely from treatments developed using HeLa cells, yet Henrietta Lacks’ family remain poor.
Today, I will speak briefly to celebrate the achievements of brilliant women scientists in the United Kingdom who are the driving force in finding cures for cancers, including cancers that affect women. I would have loved to name them all but time does not allow me, so I will mention only a few.
Dr Nguyen created an atomic-level model of the enzyme telomerase to better understand cancer cell immortality and drug development. Professor Fitzgerald developed a method for early and less invasive diagnosis of oesophageal cancer. Professor Plummer was the pioneer of PARP inhibitors, a class of cancer drugs that are now standard treatment for BRCA-related cancers such as breast and ovarian cancers. Professor Dive developed liquid biopsies of biomarkers for early detection and monitoring that will lead to early diagnosis of many cancers. Professor Bryant worked on drug development to kill cancer cells. Professor Thistlethwaite developed CAR T-cell immunotherapy, a successful treatment for certain rare cancers. Professor Seligmann conducted research to make chemotherapy safer. Professor Beral carried out a study of 1 million women on cancer risks for women. Dr Jamal-Hanjani progressed the understanding of cancer cell survival in advanced cancers and of finding treatments. There are others, such as Dr Kitson, Professor Balkwill—regarded as one of the finest women scientists in the world—and Professor Psaila working on cancers that primarily affect women.
The UK has huge strength in life sciences research, not just in cancer research, and is strongly driven by brilliant women scientists. UK women scientists are ranked second only to those in the USA, with many featuring in the top 1% of highly cited academics. For only the second time in history, the 2026 Blavatnik awards were awarded to three young women scientists: Dr Nguyen, Dr Roessler, and Dr Pinilla.
More girls now taking up STEM subjects bodes well for the future of UK science. Some 57% of PhD students in CRUK institutes are women; at the same time, only 29% reach group leader positions. That needs to change
I have been privileged to be trusted by thousands of women to look after them during their pregnancies, for some at a very anxious time. If it were not for that, I would not be here.
Superintelligent AI
Lord Patel Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Patel (CB)
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, for this debate, and I wish we had more time for it. It helps sometimes if someone takes a slightly different view, so I ask noble Lords to forgive me if I deliberately do so, although I line up with what the noble Lord said about moratoriums.
In 1637 René Descartes said, “I think, therefore I am”. That is what we fear: that ASI will be able to think by itself, and therefore it will be. We fear that it will develop lethal weapons that we cannot control, let alone understand their development. I agree with that. So do all the tech company CEOs who discussed this at length at the Davos meeting and subsequently on different podcasts. So did Yuval Harari from Cambridge, a political reporter and philosopher who has identified the issues that will confront us if AGI leads to ASI.
AI is the next step to AGI, and, as the noble Lord, Lord Tarassenko, said, AGI is the next step to ASI. We are probably closer to level 2 of AGI, but the timelines are long. We are uncertain when we will get to ASI, particularly recursive ASI. If we get to that point, that will be when we have the greatest danger. After 4 billion years of evolution, we humans, the only species that can think, have got to the place that we are through lying and deviousness. We are now developing machines that can do exactly the same, and therefore we fear them. But it cannot be beyond the ingenuity of humans to try to control these developments.
I come from the position of saying that moratoriums will not work. But we can work in co-operation with other nations that have already started regulating, such as South Korea and Australia, as well as work with our AI Security Institute in the United Kingdom, to establish our own boundaries through regulations that will allow innovations to continue.
We must remember that there are benefits to developing this technology. One example that was given is the folding of proteins. Every protein in the body has been identified; we now need to learn very quickly how those proteins cause or prevent disease. We will not be able to do this unless we allow these technologies to develop more quickly than anybody else. The same applies for new energies and climate change management, so there are benefits to it. The conundrum is how to allow technology to develop these benefits while creating regulations that will not allow it to develop in areas that are dangerous to humanity.
The way forward on how we govern technology will be in how we identify its consciousness and how we work with it. Therefore, as we learn more, measured regulation and co-operation with other countries is probably the way forward.
UK Start-up Companies
Lord Patel Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)
It is the turn of the Cross Bench group, so can you make your mind up?
Children: Social Media
Lord Patel Excerpts(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
As I mentioned before, we think it is incredibly important to support parents to navigate the online world and support their children’s access. I mentioned the pilot awareness campaign, which is more targeted at eight to 14 year-olds, but I believe the resources that will be available with the Department for Education are more extended. We also support Ofcom’s updated media literacy duties under the Online Safety Act. As part of that, Ofcom is delivering a three-year media literacy strategy that prioritises support for children and families.
Lord Patel (CB)
My Lords, in the Lord Speaker’s lecture given by Dr Vivek Murthy, the former US Surgeon-General, he quoted the evidence of the mental health effect on children, particularly children using social media for over three hours per day. He said that it causes a higher degree of depression and anxiety. That is part of the evidence for why there should be better control for children using any kind of social media.
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
The noble Lord cites some important evidence which, along with other evidence about the links between social media use and different cohorts of young people, young adults and so on, is very important. The Government and Ofcom are looking at that carefully. As I said before, we continue to keep open all the issues here to protect children from unsafe content, while allowing them to participate actively in the digital world, which can provide many opportunities to young people and much education.
Medical Product Liability
Lord Patel Excerpts(1 year, 5 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Lab)
My Lords, we very much welcome the appointment of Dr Henrietta Hughes as the Patient Safety Commissioner. We have been looking at the details of her work and hope to come back in due course, particularly on the report that she produced in February. I understand that my noble friend Lady Merron has already met the Patient Safety Commissioner; she has been on a joint visit with her and plans to meet her again in the future.
Lord Patel (CB)
My Lords, there are over 600,000 medical devices used in the United Kingdom. Worldwide, there are probably over 2 million medical devices being used. People obviously want the devices as soon as they are available on the market without having been tested medically first. I am pleased to hear the Minister say that the Government intend to review the legislation, particularly as it applies to class 3 devices; they are mostly implant devices and cause most of the damage, including the mesh and other implanted devices. Can the Minister confirm that the Government will look in a stratified way as to where the legislation should apply and to what category of device?
Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Lab)
My Lords, we have already done considerable work on this, and I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Cumberlege, for her original work on this, as well as now to the Patient Safety Commissioner. We are looking in detail at these issues and will continue to do so. I should make it clear, however, that should we make any changes to the legislation, it will require—as I understand it—primary legislation. It will not in any case be retrospective, so all we can do is look at products going forward. Obviously, patient safety is our primary concern and is absolutely at the forefront of our mind in taking these issues forward.