A hospital drug shortage which could lead to the cancellation of surgeries appears to be much worse than Alberta health officials let on earlier this week.
On Tuesday, a senior health official said while work is underway on a contingency plan, Alberta Health Services had adequate supplies of the drugs for now.
But CBC News has obtained a leaked Alberta Health Services memo which paints a different picture. The memo, which was sent to doctors on Feb. 23, states that hospitals are already experiencing "significant outages" of these drugs.
A second memo sent on Thursday discussed how seven "significant" injectable drugs are now at "critical" levels.
On Friday, Health Minister Fred Horne said he wasn't aware of any critical shortages that could threaten patient safety or the quality of care.
"There may be some impact on elective surgeries and we certainly hope that's not going to be the case," he said. "But some people may be inconvenienced because of that."
Horne says as far as he knows the shortage affects about 40 drugs used in hospitals. But CBC has been told that the number is more than 100.
The shortage is a result of a decision by Quebec-based manufacturer Sandoz to stop making some painkillers, antibiotics and anesthetics while it improves standards at its plant in Boucherville.
The plant is undergoing the upgrade to address concerns raised by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Alberta physicians believe the looming shortage could result in cancelled surgeries.
"Some of these things are very powerful injectable painkillers, for example," said Edmonton anaesthesiologist Dr. Douglas DuVal.
"And so you wouldn't want to have a surgical procedure — leaving aside what happens in the operating room —if you're going to have a couple days' worth of surgical pain afterwards."
The problem affects hospitals across Canada and DuVal says every province is scrambling to find back-up supplies.
The slow-down is expected to last from a year to 18 months.

Just thankful I'm not scheduled for anything.
****
Finally, some of our politicians don't know what committees they are on. Some are even paid for committee meetings even though there haven't been any. Committee members have received around $870,000 for the past three years even though they haven't done anything.

(excerpt from Rick Bell's column in the Edmonton Sun)

In 2008, provincial politicians voted to change committee pay from a per-meeting rate of a modest $135 for short meetings, $224 for longer ones.
Instead, they made it a flat monthly pay rate of $1,000, regardless of how often the committee met. The chair and vice-chair of the committee earned a higher rate.
Then the biggest MLA committee -- the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, Standing Orders and Printing -- promptly stopped meeting. The group hasn't held a meeting since 2008.
That despite an annual committee payroll of $261,000 for the entire committee, including $15,000 a year for the vice-chair, Independent Vermilion-Lloydminster MLA Lloyd Snelgrove, and $18,000 a year for chair PC Lacombe- Ponoka MLA Raymond Prins.
And the cushy committee has representation from every party.
Genia Leskiw, PC MLA for Cold Lake-Bonnyville had no comment on the purpose of the committee or if it should be axed. It all runs together, she said.
"I sit on so many committees and it seems like I'm working from seven in the morning to 10 or 11 at night," said Leskiw.
"One committee runs into another committee, and a person just sort of loses track of what they're doing ... I can't even remember all the committees I'm on."
Little Bow MLA Barry McFarland, PC, said people in his riding are satisfied with his work and pay.
"They look at the public disclosures, they see that I made $123,000. You can call it whatever you want, committee work or MLA pay, and they think I've earned it," he said.
Prins was brief, referring reporters to a judicial review of MLA salaries that's underway.
NDP MLA Rachel Notley said she has tried to give the committee -- which she sits on -- work to do in the form of "points of privilege."
Those are carefully researched items raised in the chamber, one on the inappropriate use of legislative authority, and one about the conduct of a former health-care minister about what he knew with respect to a plan to privatize health care, she said.
"Had the Speaker or the majority of the legislature chosen to accept my points of privilege, then that committee would have met and done the work it's designed to do," she said.
The fact that her points died on the floor reflects "a function of the government not wanting itself to be held accountable," Notley said.
Other committees meet a little more often.
The Standing Committee on Member Services is a workhorse in comparison, having met twice in 2011, four times in 2010, twice in 2009, twice in 2008 and three times in 2007.

The Trough just keeps getting longer and no party should be safe from having their hands slapped.
We'll Talk again soon. Dave