Triamazon

Grace Filby made this Freedom of Information request to Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

The request was refused by Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.

From: Grace Filby

5 October 2009

Dear Sir or Madam,

I understand that in February 2008 the MHRA were doing some
extensive tests on a natural supplement called Triamazon. Please
could you send me the results. I would like to know whether the
MHRA have any health concerns about Triamazon compared with the
benefits it has for cancer patients.

Yours faithfully,

Grace Filby (Ms)

Grace Filby BA(Hons) Cert Ed FRSA
Winston Churchill Fellow
Science & Engineering Ambassador
http://www.relax-well.co.uk
http://www.amazingphage.info

Link to this

From: MHRA Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

5 October 2009

Dear Enquirer,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Information Centre at the MHRA.

Please accept this automated response as acknowledgement that your
enquiry has been received and will be dealt with as quickly as
possible.

Your enquiry will be dealt with as follows; straightforward requests
should expect a reply within a few days, those requiring a more detailed
response or contribution from a specialist are likely to take longer.
We endeavour to provide a response to all enquiries as quickly as
possible, and within the Department of Health's target response time of
20 working days. For further information about the service and
timeframes provided by the CEP, please view the information published at
the 'Contact Us' section of our website at the following link:

[1]http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

If you have not heard from us after that time then please contact us on
020 7084 2000.

If you have any urgent enquiries during our closed periods, please
contact the Department of Health on 020 7210 3000.

Kind regards

Central Enquiry Point
Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

Please note this is an automated reply; please do not respond to this
message.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are
not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure,
copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited
and may be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what
you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely
monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use
of electronic communications.

For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click

http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndCondition...

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

Link to this

From: MHRA Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

7 October 2009

Our Ref: FOI 09/402

Dear Ms Filby,

RE: REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000

Thank you for your enquiry which we received on 5th October 2009.

I confirm that your request is being handled under the Freedom of
Information Act and you should receive a reply within 20 working days
from our date of receipt.

If you need to contact us again about this request, please quote the
reference number above.

Yours Sincerely

Central Enquiry Point
Information Centre
MHRA
Market Towers
London SW8 5NQ

Tel: +44 (0)207084 2000
FAX: +44 (0)207084 2353

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Grace Filby

2 November 2009

Dear MHRA Information Centre,

My FOI request FOI 09/402 about Triamazon should have received a
reply by today, 2nd November at the latest.

Please can you give this your prompt attention.

Yours sincerely,

Grace Filby

Link to this

From: MHRA Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

2 November 2009

Dear Enquirer,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Information Centre at the MHRA.

Please accept this automated response as acknowledgement that your
enquiry has been received and will be dealt with as quickly as
possible.

Your enquiry will be dealt with as follows; straightforward requests
should expect a reply within a few days, those requiring a more detailed
response or contribution from a specialist are likely to take longer.
We endeavour to provide a response to all enquiries as quickly as
possible, and within the Department of Health's target response time of
20 working days. For further information about the service and
timeframes provided by the CEP, please view the information published at
the 'Contact Us' section of our website at the following link:

[1]http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

If you have not heard from us after that time then please contact us on
020 7084 2000.

If you have any urgent enquiries during our closed periods, please
contact the Department of Health on 020 7210 3000.

Kind regards

Central Enquiry Point
Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

Please note this is an automated reply; please do not respond to this
message.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are
not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure,
copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited
and may be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what
you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely
monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use
of electronic communications.

For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click

http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndCondition...

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

Link to this

From: Grace Filby

4 November 2009

Dear MHRA Information Centre,

Although I reminded you on the day that your reply was due on 2
November, and I also phoned you, I am still waiting for the
information on Triamazon. By law, the MHRA should have answered
promptly. You have not given me a legal reason why you need extra
time so the MHRA are breaking the law to have not replied.

I look forward to receiving an answer from the Scientific Assessor
and an explanation from the Senior Policy Manager responsible for
FOIs.

Yours sincerely,

Grace Filby

Link to this

From: MHRA Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

4 November 2009

Dear Enquirer,

Thank you for your enquiry to the Information Centre at the MHRA.

Please accept this automated response as acknowledgement that your
enquiry has been received and will be dealt with as quickly as
possible.

Your enquiry will be dealt with as follows; straightforward requests
should expect a reply within a few days, those requiring a more detailed
response or contribution from a specialist are likely to take longer.
We endeavour to provide a response to all enquiries as quickly as
possible, and within the Department of Health's target response time of
20 working days. For further information about the service and
timeframes provided by the CEP, please view the information published at
the 'Contact Us' section of our website at the following link:

[1]http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

If you have not heard from us after that time then please contact us on
020 7084 2000.

If you have any urgent enquiries during our closed periods, please
contact the Department of Health on 020 7210 3000.

Kind regards

Central Enquiry Point
Information Centre
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

Please note this is an automated reply; please do not respond to this
message.

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are
not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure,
copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited
and may be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what
you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely
monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use
of electronic communications.

For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click

http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndCondition...

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Contactus/index.htm

Link to this

From: Lee-Frost, Danny
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency

4 November 2009

Dear Ms Filby.

REF: FOI 09/402 - Freedom of Information request - Triamazon

Thank you for your enquiry of 5th October 2009. I am writing to let you
know that we are unable to supply all the information you have requested.
Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) certain exemptions apply to
the information we can make available. The information you have requested
concerning Triamazon is subject to the exemption(s) contained in the FOIA,
namely Section 30: Investigations And Proceedings Conducted By Public
Authorities. We have concluded that disclosing this information would not
be appropriate because it would prejudice an ongoing criminal
investigation which is now before the courts

If you have a query about this letter, please contact me. If you are
unhappy with our decision, you may ask for it to be reviewed. That review
will be undertaken by a senior member of the Agency who has not previously
been involved in your request. If you wish to pursue that option please
write to the Communications Directorate, 10^th Floor, Medicines and
Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, at the above address quoting the
above reference. After that, if you remain dissatisfied, you may ask the
Information Commissioner at

The Information Commissioner's Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane,
Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF

to make a decision on whether or not we have interpreted the FOIA
correctly in withholding information from you.

Yours sincerely

Danny Lee-Frost
Head of Operations
Enforcement Group

Tel: +44 20 7084 2618
Fax: +44 20 7084 2769
Mobile: +44 7712 556 352
Email: [email address]
Web: [1]www.mhra.gov.uk

Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
Rm 18-108 Market Towers
1 Nine Elms Lane
London SW8 5NQ

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential. If you are
not the intended recipient, any reading, printing, storage, disclosure,
copying or any other action taken in respect of this email is prohibited
and may be unlawful.

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by using the reply function and then permanently delete what
you have received.Incoming and outgoing email messages are routinely
monitored for compliance with the Department of Healths policy on the use
of electronic communications.

For more information on the Department of Healths email policy, click

http://www.dh.gov.uk/DHTermsAndCondition...

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Link to this

From: Grace Filby

4 November 2009

Dear Danny Lee-Frost,

Unfortunately your reply provides no excuse for the unlawful
tardiness of the MHRA. The law plainly states that you should have
replied promptly within 20 working days.

You do not even offer a word of apology, which is surely justified
and a courtesy that is sadly lacking amongst government employees
and their agencies.

You actually state that you "are unable to supply all the
information". Why use the word "all" when you mean ANY of the
information?

If there is an ongoing criminal investigation about Triamazon that
is now before the courts, then don't you agree it is rather rich
that the MHRA itself has broken the law over a simple FOI question?
As you are no doubt aware, it is probably pointless for me to
pursue this through an internal review or the Information
Commissioner's Office.

So, in the ongoing absence of any official information (and even
your current refusal to disclose) about any risks or side effects
of Triamazon that the MHRA obviously were hoping to find, then we
can only assume that the individual testimonies of former cancer
patients, now cured, are true. Presumably it was taxpayers' money
that paid for the secret report to be written.

We can now see that the MHRA have decided to block information that
could actually benefit the health of British citizens, all for the
sake of an Act of Parliament dating back 70 years that was not
thought out clearly at the time and is in dire need of repeal and
reform. I feel sorry for your legal victim(s) - whoever they are.

May I add that I have yet to receive a reply from the Senior Policy
Manager (MB) that I telephoned this morning, or the Scientific
Assessor (LH) who was given the responsibility of answering my FOI
question in the first place.

As Head of Operations of Enforcement Group, I do hope you will do
your best to sort this out. It may be low on your list of
priorities. However, a natural cure for cancer is not, to the
British public.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Grace Filby

Grace Filby BA(Hons) Cert Ed FRSA
Vice-Chairman, Surrey and West Sussex Association of Churchill
Fellows
Science & Engineering Ambassador
http://www.relax-well.co.uk

Link to this

Grace Filby left an annotation ( 7 November 2009)

Quote-marks Following the MHRA's reply, the Head of Enforcement at MHRA telephoned the next day and offered an apology. He said this simple FOI question created a huge audit trail because they didn't know about Triamazon and ended up looking it up on Google. This explains the lateness of their reply to my FOI question.

He then informed me that the MHRA have found there is "no risk," with Triamazon, "as far as we can tell. It did not contain anything harmful. We have not analysed every single pot we have seized."

He said it is OK for people to sell it as a food supplement. It is OK for people to buy it on the internet from the USA - Florida. It is definitely OK for university hospitals to do clinical trials on Triamazon. The MHRA want to know more about the "novel ingredients" that it contains - alkaloids.

Link to this

Andy Lewis left an annotation (23 November 2009)

Quote-marks It would be worth annotating this request to give some possible background to it.

Triamazon is a name given to a herbal supplement by an Andrew Harris who marketed the herb as a cure for cancer. In January 2008, Trading Standards and the MHRA undertook dawn raids on a premises after concerns that individuals were unlawfully selling drugs. Some substances were found and taken away for tests.

http://www.thisischeshire.co.uk/news/200...

In September of 2008, Andrew Harris was convicted of advertising a cure for cancer on the internet. The pills were being sold at £250 for 100 pills.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manch...

Subsequently, Harris has been making claims that the MHRA have been withholding the tests. From this request, it would appear that the expectation is that these tests would confirm the efficacy and safety of triamazon. This is of course absurd. Any tests done would have been merely to confirm the identity of any substances seized in lieu of the upcoming court case.

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation ( 1 January 2010)

Quote-marks DEFENCE WITNESS STATEMENT

(C J Act 1967 s9: MCA 1980 ss5A(3)(a) and 5B: Criminal Procedures Rules 2005 R27.1)

Statement of :ANDREW HARRIS. Age:50 Years. Occupation :RETIRED.

This statement consisting of 4 page(s) signed by me, is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and i make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if i have wilfully stated anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

I Andrew Harris am a Soverign Subject, i am also the Original Sole Founder of http://www.triamazon.com.
I am a victim of crimes by various New Labour Government Agencies namely: Unlawful Detention, Kidnapping, Restriction of Free Trade, Criminal Damage, Theft, Racial Discrimination, Personal Injury, Character Assasination, committed against me while receiving services from the NHS, DWP, MHRA and a private company namely GlaxoSmithKline.
I am also a victim of the the Daily Mirror newspaper and treasonous government ministers known and not known to be drug company shareholders.
I and many of my fellow Sovereign Subjects are the Victims of the private company policies commonly known as (Acts & Statutes of Parliament) enforced upon me by Alistair Maclean Darling (born 28 November 1953) who is currently trading as a private for profit business commonly refered to and known as the New Labour Party.

In answer to the unjust charges brought against me, my defence relies upon article 61 of the Magna Carta 1215.
Lawful Rebellion.
Some one recently asked me the question; what is Lawful Rebellion?
Rebellion in itself has a number of different meanings and is in fact quite close to another word that seems to be on everyone’s lips; Revolution. Defined meaning of Rebellion; Refusal to accept some authority or code or convention. An act or show of defiance toward an authority or established government.
Defined meaning of Lawful; Being within the law; allowed by law: lawful methods of dissent. (The lawful refusal to conform to the authority that is unjust)

Under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 (the founding document of our Constitution) we have a right to enter into lawful rebellion if we feel we are being governed unjustly.
Contrary to common belief our Sovereign and her government are only there to govern us and not to rule us and this must be done within the constraint of our Common Law and the freedoms asserted to us by such Law, nothing can become law in this country if it falls outside of this simple constraint.
Article 61 shows quite clearly who really holds the power in this country, that being quite simply us the people; we have Sovereignty not any Parliament and nor can this be taken from us by any Parliament who claim to have taken the people’s Sovereignty. As defined above any act passed by a Parliament to remove the power the people possess, or to remove the power from the point of constraint we invested the power in, is invalid as it falls outside of the constraint laid down by Common/Constitutional Law.

This is a simple safeguard put in place to protect our freedoms under said law and to never allow such freedoms to be removed or diminished. So in reality any Act, Statute and subsequent law or legislation formed by these actions, that effects our freedoms asserted to us, is quite evidently unjust, invalid and most certainly illegal.
By invoking article 61 we are quite clearly stating that we feel we are being governed unjustly and after giving the head of state (Her Majesty) 40 day’s to correct this, if this is not corrected, then we can simply enter into lawful rebellion and we do this under the full protection of our Constitutional Law.

Lawful rebellion allows quite simply for the following recourse;Full refusal to pay any forms of Tax, Fines and any other forms of monies to support and/or benefit said unlawful governance of this country. Full refusal to abide by any Law, Legislation or Statutory Instrument invalidly put in place by said unlawful governance that is in breech of the Constitutional safeguard. To hinder in any way possible all actions of the treasonous government of this land, who have breeched the Constitutional safeguard; defined with no form of violence in anyway, just lawful hindrance under freedom asserted by Constitutional Law and Article 61. Above are listed the three main ways we can as a people rely upon article 61 and what this allows for.
The British people were given over 700 years ago a Law to use as there recourse when faced with either a Parliamentary dictatorship, or a Sovereign trying to rule by Divine Right, which amounts to the same thing. We have a right, and a birth right at that, to be governed properly under our birth right law and no other and certainly not by laws introduced on the pretence of being British Law, when in fact all laws passed since 1973 have been European laws in the guise of British law. We have a right to freedom within our true law and no Parliament can remove this for they were not present in its implementation nor did it need any Parliament, or any Parliament involvement, this was quite simply a deal struck between the people and a Sovereign, a deal which can never be broken.

The traitors that reside in the Parliament of this country only fear one thing and that quite simply is us the people and they know that they can never defend themselves, or defend their treasonous actions, lies and deceit against the power of the people, asserted by and given by, the founding document of our Constitution Magna Carta 1215. They realize, as many others do, that once the British public grasps the power of Magna Carta in both hands and start to use it in their defense; their game is quite simply up.
What does Magna Carta stand for?
In stands for freedom, that the people have Sovereignty that cannot be removed by anyone and it stands for the only real true rule of law; that no one, without exception, is above the law.

What does Article 61 of the Magna Carta 1215 (Lawful Rebellion) stand for? You have Sovereignty, realize it, and use it.
When i was first convicted under The Cancer Act 1939, i told the Magistrates that i wanted to be tried by jury at Crown Court, immediately after entering my plea of NOT GUILTY, i was denied my right to a fair trial when the case was heard on a later date by ONE district judge, all by himself he Declared me guilty as he represented the Department of Justice which by the way has a County Court Judgement registered against it and it is a private for proft business registered as tradeing just like everything else that passes itself off in a deceptive manner as a Public Authority.

The Bill of Rights was an Act of re-enforcement and re-statement of the Common Law of this land.
The Bill of Rights was enacted by Parliament in recognition of the conditions contained within the Declaration of Rights its preamble document.
Parliament itself has provided evidence of its own responsibility to uphold Common Law. FACT!
So for an example of their blatant disregard for the Common Law of this land; the clause that says… That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegall and void…Quite clearly states that all fines given without first being tried in a court of law are void and subsequently so are all forfeitures. So why are many people paying fixed penalty fines and allowing forfeitures of their property before conviction? The simple answer is you do not know your own laws and the MP’s passing these Statutes/Acts to make you submit to this are illegally using these Statutes and Acts to fool you.
This relates to any fixed penalty fine given to you and any attempt to remove your property before you have been convicted in a court of law, by a jury of your peers (equals in status). This pertains to another clause found in Magna Carta 1215, article… [39] No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights and possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. So any court of law that denies your right to a jury, is acting outside of its lawful duty to uphold the Common Law of this land and this should be maintained by all those swearing the Judicial Oath of Allegiance. Please note a jury is the most powerful element in any court of law for they have the power to null a case and even to go against the law if they feel the law is unjust, hence why juries are being denied in the courts; even more evidence of the power of the people!!
Let’s take for another example the MP’s Oath of Allegiance and their blatant disregard for the Oaths they swore and Parliaments conduct over the past 100 years. All Statutory and Parliamentary Acts of law must adhere to one simple rule…all Statutes/Acts of Parliament must only be for the strengthening and preserving of the Common Law of this land…Any Statute/Act of Parliament to the contrary is not valid as proven by…. That all and singular the Rights and Liberties asserted and claimed in the said Declaration are the true auntient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People of this Kingdome and soe shall be esteemed allowed adjudged deemed and taken to be and that all and every the particulars aforesaid shall be firmly and strictly holdenand observed as they are expressed in the said DeclarationAnd all Officers and Ministers whatsoever shall serve their Majestyes and their Successors according to the same in alltimes to come.
So all Ministers who have swore allegiance to Her Majesty are required by Common Law and by the evidence of their sworn oath, to maintain the format of Government in accordance with the terms of the Coronation Oath, an Oath taken by the Queen to regulate the Government in accordance to the laws and customs of the people entrenched in the Common Law of this land. Any minister who breaks this oath has removed his legitimacy to his position within Parliament by his own actions and the evidence of his none legitimacy is in the above.

As Major and Straw have both said on past occasions…Parliament is without the authority to require the Queen to break the terms of her coronation oath….this, quite simply, say’s it all.
I urge the Judge dealing with this case to personally issue an order and to over see the order carried out in its entire completion for the immediate commencement of Criminal Investigations with all crimes reported in this statement including the offence of Treason committed against this country and its people, as to NOT do so would bring into question the integrity and oath of office and the commiting of an offence under law by the readers of this document who hold a position of lawful authority.

Signature .....Andrew Harris................................. Date : 26th December 2009.

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation (31 January 2010)

Quote-marks THE MHRA LIES TO PUBLIC GETTING EXPOSED MORE AND MORE EACH DAY.

A MAN has been arrested in Partington on suspicion of selling unlicensed medicine and cultivating cannabis.
The 48-year-old was found at a residence on Hardwick Road today at around 11am with quantities of an unregistered (doesent need to be registered because its natural)drug called Triamazon, which the (alleged) offender was allegedly selling online as a cure for cancer (100% Correct !). Police also seized (took without consent) the man's computer hard drive and documents.
The (Medical Mafia) Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) teamed up with police in Sale and trading standards to target the (No Law Against Triamazon) unlawful selling of the drugs.
Speaking after the arrest Danny Lee-Frost, head of enforcement (Drug Company Shareholder) and intelligence at the MHRA, said: "People can be at considerable risk if they buy medication from illegal and unregistered websites. (But its OK for us to dump useless Swine Flu vaccine on to other countries)
"A medicine bought in this way has no guarentee of safety, (SEROXAT, VIOX, Etc Etc) quality and effectiveness.
"Today's visit demonstrates our commitment to (Big Pharma & GSK ) safeguarding public health and acts as a stark warning to those in the UK who are engaged in any way with supplying medicines (Against our will) illegally.
"We will use all appropriate measures available to stop you, including prosecution (persecution & victimisation) and confiscation (Theft) . The evidence today has shown that people go online hoping to buy a cure for cancer (Due to NHS & Toxic Chemo Failures) and it has actually been sold to them by a drug dealer (Experienced Seroxat Viox & Cancer victim turned Activist) in a council house (Private House) in Manchester.
"We need to hammer home the message that not all online souces selling drugs are (Illegal) safe and educate the public too. If you go online on any unregistered site you don't know what you're buying."
MHRA (Medical Maffia) are running extensive tests on Triamazon, which some websites claim is "100 per cent guaranteed to work" ( or you get your money back) and "puts chemotherapy to shame", and said there is currently no proof that the drug can cure cancer. (Liars ! See the Research links on the home page at www.triamazon.com )
Neighbourhood (Government Brainwashed Gullable Fascist Fool ) inspector for the Sale area, Brendan O'Brien, said: "There is no UK marketing authorisation for Triamazon. To sell this as a cure for cancer is to pray on people's vulnerabilities at a time when they will try anything to get better and that is despicable so we were happy to work with national enforcement organisations such as MHRA. So for us this has not been a bad result, it has been a good day." (oh yeah ? then why does Gordon Brown refuse the Triamazon Petition for the release of the test results to go public ? )
The raid in Sale was one of six nationally for the MHRA's internet day (Natural Cure for Cancer Cover-up) of action, which aimed to crack down on people selling unregistered drugs online.
A spokesperson for MHRA said: "The message (Threat to everyone) we want to put across is that you have to be very careful if you buy your medication online that it is licenced in the UK. If the medicine is unlicensed it means its safety and quality can't be guaranteed. (What ? Just like Seroxt & Viox ?) Claims that it does work and can treat and cure cancer should not be made if that's the case." (Which tests on Triamazon now proves beyound all doubt Triamazon kills cancer cells without harming normal cells which if the public were aware of this information would damage the share prices of the Chemotherapy Manufacturers and Medical Mafia Drug Cartel of Companies share holders )
The offender, (A Cancer Victim with 14 lots of CHOP R Chemo experience under his belt )whose house on Buxton Crescent in Sale was raided at about 7.30am, claimed Triamazon was herbal and was allegedly selling it for around £250 per course.
Mr Lee-Frost said: "He claims it's herbal but seeing as we don't know what's in it (if the MHRA dont know whats in it...then how can they claim it to be unsafe and illegal and also... has the raid warrent been obtained by deception to a magistrate ? we have to test it for everything. Nothing herbal could cure cancer."(What a Plonker ! See the links to the Research listed at Pubmed on the triamazon.com homepage, To say nothing herbal could cure cancer goes to show that the mhra really have got no idea what so ever, The test results on triamazon prove Triamazon to be a viable therapy for every cancer type, but the mhra will not show the test results to the public ! )
http://www.thisischeshire.co.uk/news/200...

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation (28 June 2010)

Quote-marks MHRA Medicines Healthcare Regulatory Agency
Summoned to Crown Court Minshull Street Manchester
on: 29th July 2010
for ABUSE OF PROCESS re: www.triamazon.com
MEDIA ENQUIRIES TO NAOMI BOWER
KEITH DYSON SOLICITORS
MANCHESTER TEL: 0161 8329933

Link to this

Gareth Jones left an annotation (29 September 2010)

Quote-marks http://www.mhra.gov.uk/NewsCentre/Pressr...

Yesterday (28 September 2010) a 51-year-old man received a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment suspended for 18 months for the illegal sale and supply of an unlicensed medicinal product called 'Triamazon'.

Andrew Harris of Partington, Manchester, pleaded guilty after hearing the prosecution evidence at Manchester Crown Court. He pleaded guilty to four offences: two counts of illegally importing an unlicensed medicine, one count of supplying Triamazon capsules and one count of possessing Triamazon with intent to place on the market.

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation (30 September 2010)

Quote-marks Dear Andy,

Ae those the very words that the judge said? It is not as quoted on the MHRA press release where they say he said:
In sentencing Harris the judge said: “you preyed on the vulnerable who are fearful that they may have a terminal illness”.

Is there a legal transcript that can prove what he really said? I think you could speak to your solicitor about it - sounds like defamation of character to me.

You are welcome to post the article as an annotation on my FOI page at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tr...

Grace

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation (30 September 2010)

Quote-marks A PARTINGTON MAN who sold Triamazon, an unlicensed ‘cure for cancer’, over the internet has been given a suspended sentence.

Andrew Harris, 50, from Hardwick Road, told Messenger that he is not a conman and had just wanted to tell people about the drug that he believes saved his life.

The father-of-five claims that he is in remission from non-Hodgkin Lymphoma after taking Triamazon and said it is a ‘miracle cure’ that he believes can help other cancer sufferers.

Mr Harris imported Triamazon, an Amazon jungle plant remedy, and sold it to cancer sufferers online for £250 per course of 100 pills.

But it is illegal to import and sell medical products without a licence and Mr Harris was charged with two counts of importing a medical product without a licence, one count of selling a medical product called triamazon and one count of possession of a medical product called triamazon intended for use on the market.

He dramatically changed his plea to guilty part way through his trial and on Tuesday at at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court was sentenced to 12 months in prison, suspended for 18 months, on each of the four charges to run concurrently .

Judge Adrian Smith told Mr Harris that it was not a deception case, but the seriousness of the offence was the fact that the drug had never been tested on human beings or tested for use on UK markets and had posible harmful side-effects including links to Parkinson’s Disease symptoms.

He said: “I accept that while you undoubtedly would have made some profit, your motive was to provide fellow cancer sufferers with an alternative treatment.

“An aggravating factor is that the people that would be keen to spend their money on something like this are either terminally, or fearful of being terminally ill, vulnerable people whose false hopes were raised by you.”

Mr Harris, who relies on benefits, was arrested in 2008 after a joint raid on his home by police and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

After sentencing, he told Messenger that he felt he had cleared his name.

Mr Harris said he blames the government, MHRA and drug companies for preventing cancer sufferers from accessing Triamazon.

He said: “Because legally Triamazon can only be sold as a food supplement, with no health claims attached, they are denying people the knowledge of what this drug can do.”Source from: http://www.messengernewspapers.co.uk/new...

Link to this

Andrew Harris left an annotation (30 September 2010)

Quote-marks RE: www.triamazon.com
THIS WEBSITE IS NOW UNDER NEW OWNERSHIP AND NEW MANAGEMENT.

It is our view that the information contained within this website is made honestly, reasonably and in good faith.

Article 10, Freedom of Expression of the Human Rights Act 1998, which is a qualified right, states everyone has the right of freedom of expression.

This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This guarantees the right to pass information to other people and to receive information that other people want to give to you. It also guarantees the right to hold and express opinions and ideas.

It is unlawful for a public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with a "Convention Right".

Here you will see videos and links that uncover suppressed independent scientific research to provide answers to those in need. Watch Read and Listen to the invaluable health knowledge you never knew existed...

SEE THE MHRA OFFICIAL PUBLIC STATEMENT
OBTAINED UNDER A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST
BY A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

MHRA have found there is no risk as far as we can tell. It did not contain anything harmful It is OK for people to buy it on the internet. It is definitely OK for university hospitals to do clinical trials.

See the full FOI statement made by the MHRA that was not disclosed to the jury at the trial. http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/tr...

TheFinchleyClinic.com contacted the new owners of this web site and asked us to point out that they now stock the food supplement product after being requested to do so by a number of their customers.

However, for legal reasons, The Finchley Clinic make no claims whatsoever as to the benefits and efficacy of the food supplement and that the personal views and scientific US Government Research links expressed on this web site due to legal reasons are not to be associated with them and are for personal educational research purposes only.

The UK Cancer Act 1939 is over 70 years old and because of its legal restrictions to those outside the medical world it therefore denies people from making an informed choice and denies people the right to freedom to choose what type of therapy to take as The Cancer Act 1939 stops the knowledge of life saving information being placed alongside a safe scientifically valid and proven non toxic natural food product whilst being sold.

How can any cancer patient make an informed choice when they are denied the knowledge of safe research proven evidence of what any natural non toxic food supplement product has to offer?
The Cancer Act 1939 urgently needs to be repealed.

Andrew Harris took 2 capsules twice daily prior to a meal for the first 7 days and then 2 capsules 4 times a day prior to a meal while giving a 7 day break each month until he achieved the desired results.

Vitalis News.com Radio Broadcast about the food supplement...
Go to this link below.
https://www.blogtalkradio.com/vnr/2009/1...

Link to this

Dom Robinson left an annotation (30 January 2013)

Quote-marks I am currently watching my father in Law (a Brazilian) quit Chemo 3 months ago because he was too weak, and increase his intake of Graviola (the parent plant from which the active ingredients of Triamazon are extracted).

The tumour has, in the last two months, stopped growing and he has outlived all expectations of his oncologists. He is fully active and at work as i write.

It may not be that it goes into full remission, but it clearly is having a direct effect since stopping Chemo and starting Graviola intake at a high level is the only thing that has 'changed'.

i have become increasingly interested in why this fruit is not more commonly distributed to cancer sufferers in England. I am a British citizen by birth, and a tax payer there (although i wonder why more and more). Even if the refined Tramazon is 'untested' as a 'medicine', Graviola is a FRUIT.

It doesn't need testing, and clearly should be provided automatically as a food supplement to cancer sufferers since it is clearly widely KNOWN in Latin America to reduce the effects of cancer as part of that cultures common knowledge.

So a fruit cannot be patented by GSK or other such pharmacoms. That is no reason to deprive people of thier knowledge of it, even though it would undermine the sales of chemo-poisons (which Chemotherapry drugs undeniably are).

Isn't it high time that we put health at the fore and Intellectual Property profiteering as a secondary factor when we dictate how people approach conditions that effect their lives.

I have seen it first hand. I believe. I eat fruit without needing medical health approval.

Good luck Mr Harris: Your cause is just.

Link to this

jacqui butterworth left an annotation (10 March 2013)

Quote-marks Dear Grace and Andrew
I salute you on trying to highlight what is happening in the cancer world and hope that there is a fair outcome to what is just a 'cover up' by governments.

Regards
jacqui Butterworth

Link to this

Things to do with this request

Anyone:
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency only:

Follow this request

There are 6 people following this request

Offensive? Unsuitable?

Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid for FOI purposes (read more).

If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators

Report this request

Act on what you've learnt

Similar requests

More similar requests

Event history details

Are you the owner of any commercial copyright on this page?