mikel

So what would they do if a UKC tested +ve for TB, refuse them entry? I doubt it, but they can refuse entry to non UKC's and should, they should extend the screening to HIV as well.

daisymoll

I'm pretty sure we were given the BCG vaccine in school and that was in the nineties. Is it the one where you are tested with six needles to see if you are immune and then given the vacine if you are not or is that something else?

Yorkieabroad

Found this on a yahoo search. www.immunisation.org.uk/vbcg.html.

debbie+dave

I find it ridiculous that the UK does not screen every immigrant for TB, especially in a country where healthcare is nationalised, and therefore infected immigrants who have not contributed to the system receive treatment which is long and costly, therefore an added drain on resources. Treatment for TB requires months of treatment with multiple antibiotics, and in cases where there is a risk of the patient not completing the treatment medical staff have to directly observe the patient taking the medication every day......you can guess how cummulatively expensive that is. We moved to the USA two years ago and have just had our medical screening to move to Australia, both of whom screen for TB. We had no objection to undergoing these tests, people who are moving to another country should understand that a country should protect its own citizens from disease. With regards to the BCG, it only gives limited protection, having had the innoculation is no guarantee that you are protected from TB. The bcg would give a false positive on a skin test, a simple chest Xray is simplest way to detect TB, a method which other countries seem to use without any problem.....I can't see why the UK would find it difficult to check immigrants, especially when the immigrants have to pick up the cost anyway.....the UK's immigration policies are part of what causes all the racial tensions. The system in the UK is crap and we know we never want to move back to the UK again. Thats my 2cents worth (or $5 worth)

MrsLondon

But they have said that if you are positive for TB or HIV, it will not stop you being admitted! So it would not save the NHS any money. I believe in other countries like the US, if you have TB you could not enter until you've undergone treatment. If HIV positive, you would not be allowed in.

scotch03

I think the change of policy is related to the fact that TB is very high in London and some of the other metropoliton areas. This is also the case in the US, in particular New York.

It may be reasonable to prevent entry for those with TB as it is contagious although sending them for treatment is far more humane than showing the red card.

Since HIV is not infectious it should have no bearing on entry to a country or not. Unless the UK or any other country wish to ban people with any kind of illness.