Back in March, the Telegraph, a popular UK tabloid, revealed the UK's former health secretary, Matt Hancock's WhatsApp messages. Hancock, it was revealed, was part of 100,000 messages concerning covid-19 policy. The "Lockdown Files", as they were dubbed by the Telegraph, in essence, showed a window into how the UK government were liaising with one another during the covid outbreak. It was all rather churlish and smacked of incompetence. The revelations, however, soon died a death, despite the general public waiting to see if there was anything vaccine related amongst the 100,000 messages.
With this in mind, I took it upon myself to send the following to the British drug regulator, the MHRA. I deemed it as a Freedom of Information request (FOIA)
It was sent on March 9 and a receipt of acknowledgement was Sent back to me by the MHRA.
Click to enlarge
The MHRA claim that a Freedom of Information request can take up to 20 business days for a reply.
By late April, I had not received the information I requested so I sent them a reminder email to which they responded on April 28 with:
By late April, I had not received the information I requested so I sent them a reminder email to which they responded on April 28 with:
Click to enlarge
INQUIRY
It's now June 5 and despite a further 5 emails to the MHRA, I have still not received the information I requested back in March 9. Moreover, the MHRA have failed to reply to any of the 5 follow-up emails.
It was announced in 2021 that a covid inquiry would be taking place amid pressure from bereaved loved ones who were questioning the UK government response to the outbreak, Public hearings are scheduled to begin June 13 and last until 2026 and will be chaired by retired judge Heather Hallett.
WHATSAPP
Hallett has asked to see messages exchanged between former Prime Minister, Boris Johnson and more than three dozen scientists and officials over two years from early 2020. She also wants to see Johnson’s notebooks and diaries from the same period.
She is, in essence, requesting exactly what I have.
Last week, the government’s Cabinet Office filed court papers seeking to challenge Hallett’s order for the documents. Johnson, however, has somewhat distanced himself from the government’s stance by saying he is happy to hand over his messages. On Friday, he said he has sent the WhatsApp messages directly to Hallett’s inquiry.
I have to ask if my FOIA to the MHRA is connected to recent events. Did they know electronic messages would be requested by a future inquiry and have they been holding off sending me those electronic records so they can deny me access, citing a investigation and/or other legal matters as an excuse for denial?
One thing is certain, I've been sending FOIA's to the MHRA for nigh on 16 years, in the main these have been antidepressant related. I've seen MHRA CEO's come and go over the 16 years. My first contact with the MHRA was back in 2006. Back then, the then CEO, Kent Woods, personally emailed me. I even had a meeting with him to discuss my concerns regarding people struggling with SSRI withdrawal. Since his departure, around 2013, the MHRA, who were awful then, have spiralled into a state of decline.
Woods left the incestuous agency's revolving door and was followed by Ian Hudson. His appointment was a kick in the teeth for me. Hudson, for those who don't know, was the former Head of Safety at GlaxoSmithKline, the very same drug company who had threatened to sue me as they wasn't happy with my research on this blog. Hudson's tenure at the MHRA was uneventful and in 2019 the reigns were handed over to June Raine who is, today, the current Chief Executive of the MHRA.
Raine's 'leadership' has, at least, shown some clarity, she has highlighted the position of the MHRA but it's not a position that helps the public. Last year, Raine was part of a lecture given at Oxford University. She told the audience, of ‘how the Covid pandemic has catalysed the transformation of a regulator, from a watchdog to enabler’.
No mention in her lecture of the MHRA protecting the public from risk of unsafe medicines or vaccines.
To think (during Woods tenure) the MHRA and I were working together to better the Yellow Card Reporting System (I later declined to work with them after Woods wouldn't acknowledge the teratogenic side effects of paroxetine)
The MHRA are going about their duties and admitting, publicly, that they are a lapdog to the pharmaceutical industry (something I've known all along). They have now got to the point where they are refusing the public access to information that they have no right to refuse. (I see their refusal to answer my FOIA as a refusal to release.)
So, what now? Well, I could always seek an ombudsman to unravel the mystery of why my FOIA request is being ignored by the MHRA. It's a first for me as previous FOIA requests have always been answered.
Maybe I've hit on something they can't wriggle out of so they use the 'ignore him' tactic in the hope that I'll go away.
They, of all people, should know by now that isn't going to happen!
Bob Fiddaman
She is, in essence, requesting exactly what I have.
Last week, the government’s Cabinet Office filed court papers seeking to challenge Hallett’s order for the documents. Johnson, however, has somewhat distanced himself from the government’s stance by saying he is happy to hand over his messages. On Friday, he said he has sent the WhatsApp messages directly to Hallett’s inquiry.
I have to ask if my FOIA to the MHRA is connected to recent events. Did they know electronic messages would be requested by a future inquiry and have they been holding off sending me those electronic records so they can deny me access, citing a investigation and/or other legal matters as an excuse for denial?
One thing is certain, I've been sending FOIA's to the MHRA for nigh on 16 years, in the main these have been antidepressant related. I've seen MHRA CEO's come and go over the 16 years. My first contact with the MHRA was back in 2006. Back then, the then CEO, Kent Woods, personally emailed me. I even had a meeting with him to discuss my concerns regarding people struggling with SSRI withdrawal. Since his departure, around 2013, the MHRA, who were awful then, have spiralled into a state of decline.
Woods left the incestuous agency's revolving door and was followed by Ian Hudson. His appointment was a kick in the teeth for me. Hudson, for those who don't know, was the former Head of Safety at GlaxoSmithKline, the very same drug company who had threatened to sue me as they wasn't happy with my research on this blog. Hudson's tenure at the MHRA was uneventful and in 2019 the reigns were handed over to June Raine who is, today, the current Chief Executive of the MHRA.
Raine's 'leadership' has, at least, shown some clarity, she has highlighted the position of the MHRA but it's not a position that helps the public. Last year, Raine was part of a lecture given at Oxford University. She told the audience, of ‘how the Covid pandemic has catalysed the transformation of a regulator, from a watchdog to enabler’.
No mention in her lecture of the MHRA protecting the public from risk of unsafe medicines or vaccines.
To think (during Woods tenure) the MHRA and I were working together to better the Yellow Card Reporting System (I later declined to work with them after Woods wouldn't acknowledge the teratogenic side effects of paroxetine)
The MHRA are going about their duties and admitting, publicly, that they are a lapdog to the pharmaceutical industry (something I've known all along). They have now got to the point where they are refusing the public access to information that they have no right to refuse. (I see their refusal to answer my FOIA as a refusal to release.)
So, what now? Well, I could always seek an ombudsman to unravel the mystery of why my FOIA request is being ignored by the MHRA. It's a first for me as previous FOIA requests have always been answered.
Maybe I've hit on something they can't wriggle out of so they use the 'ignore him' tactic in the hope that I'll go away.
They, of all people, should know by now that isn't going to happen!
Bob Fiddaman
No comments: