Sharjeel Ashraf is a political analyst and a freelance journalist.
Immigration is the topic of the day, with politicians of all stripes at least feigning an interest in the topic.
We’ve had commentary on the effects that immigration has on housing, infrastructure, crime and social issues – however there has been very little discussion on the health or epidemiological dangers that immigration brings. This is quite surprising as regardless of what your political views are on the scale of immigration, preventing the spread of communicable diseases should be a serious, non-controversial goal that both sides of the political aisle share.
One prime example of the health dangers of immigration, is the surge in HIV cases that we have seen throughout the United Kingdom.
In 2024, there was a 51 per cent increase in HIV diagnoses – with over half of cases being from people previously diagnosed overseas; this effectively means that we are importing people with known HIV infections. From a financial perspective, this is highly problematic as the annual expenditure for the treatment of a HIV patient is £10,000 – whilst the annual health surcharge for immigrants is merely £1,035.
From a moral perspective, a government has a duty of care towards its citizens and the importing of people with life changing, non-curable diseases is a failure of that duty. In the event that a HIV patient stops taking Antiretroviral Therapy for 2-4 weeks, they become infectious again. It is unfortunate that the UK does not require HIV testing for visa applicants – unlike Cyprus, Singapore, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
Another prime example is Tuberculosis – with it having increased by 13 per cent in 2024 and 80 per cent of all cases being from those born outside the United Kingdom.
With Tuberculosis, the highest incidence rate is found in India which is then followed by Indonesia, China, the Philippines, Pakistan, Nigeria, and Bangladesh. The highest rates of immigration into the United Kingdom come from India which is then followed by Nigeria, Pakistan, and China.
This effectively means that the UK is importing immigrants from the most riskiest populations on the planet. With Tuberculosis, there is also the issue of latent TB – this is where the person carries the bacteria, but it is dormant, causes no symptoms and is invisible on an X-ray – however it can “wake up” years later when an individual is immunocompromised or stressed. The risk of this occurring is not assessed by the Home Office at all; immigrants are not required to take the Tuberculosis Skin Test (TST) or an IGRA blood test. This is quite surprising as the TST is cheap and widely available.
Another prominent example is Hepatitis B, in fact, data from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) shows that 95 per cent of new chronic Hepatitis B infections are in migrants who have acquired the infection from overseas. It is worth noting the countries where Hepatitis B is most common: China, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Ethiopia. Again, there is a clear link between the countries that contribute the most immigrants to the UK and the countries where a high-risk disease is most prevalent.
It is worth noting that the Home Office does not require a test for Hepatitis B, this is despite there being a very accurate blood test widely available – such a blood test allows for a doctor to determine whether a patient is currently infected, was infected in the past and was treated, has immunity via vaccination or has never been exposed.
The absence of testing by the Home Office seems foolish, especially as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, and Bahrain all require testing; these are nations that actually import immigrants from the same places as the UK.
The Home Office must, at the earliest, introduce mandatory health testing. The current surge in certain diseases is largely the result of the lax monitoring that the UK engages in regarding the health of immigrants.
