Data for human experiments post Gulf War 90/91

Response to this request is delayed. By law, Ministry of Defence should normally have responded promptly and by (details)

Dear Ministry of Defence,

We can see from the Data that Porton Down were experimenting with different strains of Anthrax and adjuvants (Some named and some not), from the mid 80's up until and including 1989 (Less than 12 months before troops would be sent to the Gulf Region).
It is stated in the data that to produce enough Anthrax ( U.S formula), the run of EXPERIMENTAL whooping cough would have to be postponed!

In 89 it was also stated/concluded that Porton Down had gone as far as they could go with pertusis/anthrax trials and it now requires further research with humans.

Voila 1990

From the data we can see a decision was made on the 16th August 1990 to go with option 2 - experimental combination of pertusis and Anthrax along with the many other vaccines. On the same declassified document we can see that it would be ' A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY to collect the HUMAN DATA of the combination/s.

MOD have claimed in the past that troops were NOT used for human research in the Gulf War and that no data was collected. Of course this cannot be true as the protection levels (antibodies against Anthrax) were taken as it is in other MOD data.

However if troops were not the HUMAN research, then who was? Or is MOD/Porton Down claiming that the experiment/trials in '89' that then required humans was never taken any further is purely coincidence post Gulf War?

This can easily be resolved. Is there Data for human trials for pertusis/anthrax post Gulf War 91? Basically did Porton Down carry on the research? If so on who/where? Current MOD must be asking themselves if not, why not?

Also is there existing Data that Cross Contamination was investigated in 1990 when EXPERIMENTAL pertusis lines/runs were postponed to then produce the anthrax on them?

Please break these questions down into 20 days each if you find that easier, however we would imagine the answers would all be part of the same data if any exists.

Regards,

gavin roberts

People-Sec-FOI Mailbox (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Roberts,

Please find attached response to your FOI request of 18/05/20, reference
FOI2020/05755.

 

Kind regards,

 

Defence People Secretariat

[1]cid:871293313@24082015-19F4

 

References

Visible links

Dear People-Sec-FOI Mailbox (MULTIUSER),

Aa requested a clarification of requests for data (Not unsubstantiated opinions thankyou)

It is very simple, the first part of foi was for your information, what we have read in data/links forwarded on by yourselves. However as requested, I will clarify 2 simple questions at the bottom . The data shows (FFT data)that up until the Gulf War Porton Down had been experimenting with different strains of Anthrax, different pertusis, experimental pertusis and other unlicenced adjuvants.

Porton down pushed their opinion through that option 2 from Declassified document 16th August 1990 would be a unique opportunity to collect human data!.

Of course without this poor decision millions would not have been made by the unscrupulous who appear at times of crisis. In fact it was a corrupt decision as they had zero evidence it would protect against inhalation Anthrax. Still to this day 30 years later, there is no drug/vaccine that can protect against it to anyones knowledge! We should have simply been issued with antibiotics like the French were.
Yes this would mean a few people would not have had a cash windfall , but our troops( now veterans) would not be suffering in epidemic levels of autoimmune illnesses. Just like the French,Saudis etc . I digress, back to the clarification

Simple questions. There is either data or not. We do not wish to hear opinions of MOD backed up with zero evidence.

Q1 -Is there data showing experimenting with unlicenced adjuvants, pertusis and different strains of Anthrax POST Gulf War? If not . The question is Why Not? It is what Porton down clearly wanted to do in the data. The ONLY reason not to carry on with it is if they monitored the effects of troops/veterans and decided it was not safe to carry on. What other reason could there be? It failed miserably, but it did not fail to make some organisations/people millions off the backs of our troops.

Q2 - Is there any data that Cross contamination was at least investigated within Porton Down? Especially as the data shows the Anthrax was to be produced on the same lines as the experimental pertusis they had been playing with. Not forgetting at the same time across the pond in the U.S their Anthrax batches were tainted with cross contamination a further reason to carry out checks as part of the absent 'Duty of Care'.

Q3- Is there any data that shows checks were carried out on the US supplies of vaccines and/ or vaccine ingredients/cultures/strains? (Q3 is an added question bought upon this foi - please take 20 days to reply if neccessary)

Regards,

gavin roberts
J4V

Dear People-Sec-FOI Mailbox (MULTIUSER),

As requested I am replying to help clarify. The information/data we are referring to is within the link provided by yourselves .
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/gulf-veteran...

We would like to add. It was not possible to compare the vaccines and their combinations subjected to troops in the Gulf War 99/91 15 years later in 2005/2006.

1, Due to the fact that the vaccines SPECIFICALLY developed for Operation Granby shelf life could only have been 3 years. MOD have confirmed that these same developed vaccinations (Using U.S vaccines, U.S formula's /supplies/cultures etc have never been repeated post Gulf War 91.

2, It clearly states that humans were not used in the vaccine interaction study? Relying on alleged data from Porton Down staff. Which even if were true can only be unreliable as it clearly states that none of them received 5 or more vaccines in 1 sitting. In fact it states the majority received only 1 vaccine on a given day. Also there is no evidence showing vaccines administered with less than 4 weeks between them. In contrast to troops receiving them within only a few weeks , if not on the same day. A clear waste of time and money only adding to ' THE COVER UP' in total disregard and in disrespect of veterans!

With the DOH( Government Dept ) own Green book Chapter 11 stating Do not administer 5 or more vaccines. It is 'CRYSTAL CLEAR' that it is NOT safe to do so! To suggest otherwise further insults this cohort of veterans!

The Italian Study ( published 2018) Also confirms 5 or more vaccines = high risk of autoimmune conditions.

A signal was sent out during the Gulf War to stop administering the Anthrax/Pertusis combo. Too late - the majority had received it. If it was safe there would have been no requirement to send this signal out!

The so called study in 2005/2006 was clearly a 'FRAUD'.

If MOD/Porton Down truly believed they were safe, they would have simply carried out a study within 2/3 years of 91 with EXACTLY the same vaccines that returned from theatre at the same intervals on HUMANS . Very simple. In fact not doing so is just another display of gross negligent 'Duty Of Care'.

I hope this spells things out a little more clearly for you. So that the wool can no longer be pulled over anyones eyes. We cannot believe anyone can see things any differently. Considering the limited data and this is without the data that has been tied up in Classifieds for up to 75 years??? where as the data from other conflicts before and since the Gulf 91 has been released . Does current MOD wish to carry on this insult against veterans? Or is there someone with some decency within current MOD? Do MOD really want all this out in front of a Judge?

MOD's lines have been 'OVERWHELMING evidence against gulf war 'syndrome' and the same for Vaccine Study.

We agree there is 'No Syndrome' The epidemic levels of sickness are vast majority autoimmune sickness. Veterans have carried out the 'ONLY' survey!

We've explained above the vaccine study was a fraudulent cover up.

What MOD actually have is ZERO evidence.

It cannot be clarified /spelled out in a simpler format.

Veterans should not be having to fight for justice, we should be relaxing in our retirement whilst coping with these conditions ! Please forward to MOD legals! Do they wish to find solution? Or do they wish to fight us in the legal arena?

Regards,

gavin roberts
J4V