Safety of the experimental vaccine regime Gulf War 91

gavin roberts made this Freedom of Information request to Ministry of Defence Automatic anti-spam measures are in place for this older request. Please let us know if a further response is expected or if you are having trouble responding.

The request is waiting for clarification. If you are gavin roberts, please sign in to send a follow up message.

Dear Ministry of Defence,

Which Senior Civil Servant was given the responsiblity for the safety of the experimental vaccine regime subjected to British Troops in preparation for the Gulf War 1991. Please remember Senior Civil Servants do not have the privilege to stay unnamed in foi's. Thankyou in advance

Regards,

Gavin Roberts

SG SecFin-Sec Gp Mailbox (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Roberts,
Please see the attached.

Regards,

Headquarters Defence Medical Services

show quoted sections

Dear SG SecFin-Sec Gp Mailbox (MULTIUSER),

Clarification

Thankyou for your response. However we do not feel you need to insult veterans intelligence and especially the publics intelligence on this matter a single day further than the MOD have been doing it for (30yrs+). MOD's own data shows us that JUST 2 of the vaccines given to troops were being experimented with up until 1990. The final experiment/trial (Results 21 DEC 90) was carried out by Dr Metters as he had serious concerns (DOH) just 2 weeks prior to the vaccines (These 2 plus many more) going into our troops bodies (4 JAN 91). The result of this tests/trials/experiments was Serious Loss of Condition to the animals (They mostly died). Troops were not informed of this information or any info to be possible to form "Legal' informed consent. MOD have been unable to provide information that was claimed must have been lost in the information 'cascading down the chain of command'. Medics received 'Zero ' information to be enable any service member to give legal informed consent. None was sent to them. Of course this was simply a further lie of the many past MOD lies on the record in this matter. I digress.
So Porton Down (PD) had been testing these vaccines and various combinations between the years of 1983 and 1990 with the conclusions being the need/desire to test dosage levels on humans,. Approximately 6 months later an opportunity arises for PD to carry out these desires. PD advise given to MOD allows PD to carry out the said desires if authorised. MOD authorise them to carry out their desires and you would like not only veterans, but the public to believe that MOD/PD did not carry out any monitoring of the effects of dosage levels on troops? Are you sure? As not only is this is very embarrassing in the public eye, this matter is now making mainstream national news (also international from next week) simply Google . We forward information to several journalists wishing to put details through their media. . We know previous administrations to be corrupt in this matter with their 'Cover Ups', as we have all the data., We did not expect current administration to be prepared to become complicit to the cover up too? Especially with all the information of corruption available to you. Are you sure you want to go down this road?. I am just clarifying your stance/position here. Legal proceedings have not been issued. This allows everyone to speak freely. A previous foi confirmed the person/s responsible for each foi are recorded. This allows us to subpoena each and every individual in the future that involves themselves in this 'Cover Up'. Hence the requirement for us to be crystal clear with our clarifications. It may help if you were in the knowledge that we now have more than one official government whistle blowers on board too within the last few months (on the gov payroll), since making the National News. Previously on past MOD corrupt side. Life is full of choices. Some make the wrong choices some make honourable choices. Imagine defending others corruption against those prepared to pay the ultimate sacrifice defending King & Country. PD/MOD put an immediate stop to the experimental vaccine regime during the 2nd round of boosters. At a later date in was claimed due to not reaching the required efficacy. A further MOD lie. You do not stop an immunisation programme due to lack of efficacy, you definately continue to build efficacy. It was stopped due to safety . For PD/MOD to stop it means It was being monitored. Hence the dosage level/s were being monitored (As in a research environment ). The data also shows blood was collected from troops and kept at PD. PD were also collecting the brains from dead veterans in the following years without the knowledge or consent of families until a much later date.
I think I've clarified the question & it was an experiment. Just because it is trialled on humans & not animals, does not change this fact. If you require further clarification, please do not hesitate to ask, but do not in any circumstances attempt to insult veterans/public intelligence again. You are not dealing with neanderthals here. When we ask a question it would be foolish to assume we do not already have the answer/s. A few have already hung themselves out to dry. This is not our intention. We do not wish to add more people to our list. We simply request that government departments work openly, transparently, with respect & integrity in line with how they publicly claim to work. We have a corrupt side and an uncorrupted side here. Join the corrupt side or join the uncorrupted.side. A simple choice. Those that a prepared to attempt to defend the corrupt, should be prepared to be held to account too and pay the consequences.

Kind Regards,

gavin roberts
On behalf of sick veterans/families of our fallen
J4V
💜

Dear SG SecFin-Sec Gp Mailbox (MULTIUSER),

I note that you did not include a calculation or explanation of the costs involved in providing the information. It would be useful if you could do so, to allow me to understand how best to reframe my request and not exceed the cost limit.
As I am sure you are aware, the FOI Act states that it is "the duty of a public authority to provide advice and assistance, so far as it would be reasonable to expect the authority to do so", and the ICO consider it best practice to provide "arguments or evidence" when applying this exemption.

Yours sincerely,

gavin roberts

SG SecFin-Sec Gp Mailbox (MULTIUSER), Ministry of Defence

Dear Mr Roberts,

Please can you confirm you are referring to the FOI request with reference number FOI2022/12042?

Regards,

Secretariat
Headquarters Defence Medical Services
Defence Medical Services Whittington
Lichfield

show quoted sections