Kendall Defends US Pharma Deal, Rejects 229,000 Death Estimate

Q: Is the UK trading NHS funding and patient lives for tariff-free exports to the US?

Yes — the deal does trade a higher NHS medicines bill for tariff-free UK pharmaceutical exports to the US, but whether it is trading away patient lives is disputed and not proven. The core facts are clear. Under the 2025 UK-US pharmaceutical arrangement, the US removed tariffs on UK pharmaceutical and medtech exports for at least three years. In return, the UK committed to raise NHS spending on new medicines from 0.3% to at least 0.6% of GDP by 2036, lift medicine spending from about 10% to 12% of the NHS budget, and loosen pricing rules through higher NICE thresholds and limits on rebates. Critics argue the trade-off is severe. A BMJ analysis by researchers from York and Liverpool estimates the policy would divert about £44.7 billion from other NHS services by 2036 if no equivalent extra funding is provided. On that basis, it projects around 229,000 excess deaths, rising to 291,000 including social care effects. Their argument is about opportunity cost: more money for branded drugs means less for staff, waiting lists, and routine care. The government rejects that analysis as flawed and says the costs are covered by record NHS funding, with its own near-term estimate at about £1 billion through 2028-29. Ministers also say the deal gives patients faster access to innovative medicines and supports the UK life sciences sector. So the export-for-spending trade is real. The claim that it will cost large numbers of lives rests on a contested projection, not an established outcome.

1 articles · Updated · Bloomberg · Jul 10

Liz Kendall said the UK-US pharma deal should not be scrapped, arguing higher prices for new medicines will still benefit NHS patients.
A study published last week estimated about 229,000 excess deaths over a decade as NHS funds are diverted to pay more for new drugs; Kendall called that analysis flawed.
Speaking during a visit to Bicycle Therapeutics on Thursday, Kendall said the estimate also ignores positive patient developments already emerging from the deal.
The dispute centers on whether the agreement’s higher medicine costs will widen pressure on NHS budgets or improve access to innovative treatments.