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

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.

Sourced from:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/triamazon#comment-7139