The Norfolk Germ Warfare Experiments - Petition to the Prime Minister

During the Cold War, military scientists from the Chemical Defence Experimental Establishment (CDEE), and the Microbiological Research Establishment (MRE), Porton Down used large parts of the UK as a giant outdoor laboratory.

Their numerous public area experiments involved the release of massive aerosols of Biological Warfare (BW) ‘simulants’ in public areas. A BW ‘simulant’ is a supposedly harmless substance, which mimics the physical properties of a real disease causing BW agent.

During Porton’s public area BW programme, the general public were exposed to two main types of BW simulants: a cadmium compound - Zinc Cadmium sulphide (ZnCds); and live bacteria - E.coli MRE162, Bacillus subtilis var niger spores.

During 1963-1964, scientists from CDEE Porton Down decided to investigate whether the heat generated by built-up areas at night would make a city more vulnerable to covert BW attacks. After searching for a area on which they could experiment, they selected the city of Norwich, Norfolk.

During 1963-1964, Porton scientists secretly sprayed the cadmium compound (ZnCds) over vast areas of Norfolk, with the city of Norwich as the centre of the target.




As the substance used in these experiments (ZnCds) was designed (particle size 1-5 microns) to bypass the body’s natural defences, it therefore was inhaled and digested by an enormous amount of the population of Norfolk, especially those living in the target city - Norwich.

Which is surprising, as even back in 1963, Porton scientists were aware that cadmium compounds are very hazardous substances. They were even warned in 1955 to store ZnCds powder as a potentially toxic material.

During 2005, it became apparent that residents of Norwich were experiencing a higher than normal level of incidence of oesophageal cancer. Residents, and Health officials, are questioning the link between the Cold War spraying of Norwich with massive amounts of potentially carcinogenic material, and the rise of oesophageal cancer in the area.

To this end, one Norwich resident, who is a recent survivor of oesophageal cancer, has petitioned the Prime Minister for a full Public Inquiry, which would investigate the 1963-64 spraying of Norfolk/Norwich, and the possible link with the higher incidence of a particular type of cancer in the area.

The Petition may be found at:

petitions.pm.gov.uk...


zero lift

[edit on 18-3-2007 by zero lift]

Wow it’s surprising what these mad scientists get up to isn’t it. I thought this kind of stuff only happened in the United States; learn something new everyday hay!!

It was wrong from the start especially as they knew the stuff was hazardous. What I hate most is this business of telling nobody what was about to happen, and though the Cold War was designed to protect democracy a national referendum anytime would show this has crossed the line.

What I would like to see is those individuals actually responsible sued; not just our U.K government of 2007.

Wow it just goes to show what our Governments are capable of, and they say leaders in the middle east are monsters.

Signed it.

[edit on 19-3-2007 by Nightworker]

In the context of the time - in the middle of the Cold War - it was probably thought that the end justified the means.

40 years ago.

What would a Public Inquiry achieve except the direct redistribution of my (tax) money ino the pockets of an army of lawyers.

I would be interested on the statistics which show just how much greater the incidence of this cancer type is in the area compared to the national picture. Cancers and other diseases often have regional variations and it is well known that some cancers are associated with certain socio-economic groups, for example.

Go to UK National Statistics and have a gander.

Regards

Originally posted by paraphi
In the context of the time - in the middle of the Cold War - it was probably thought that the end justified the means.

40 years ago.

What would a Public Inquiry achieve except the direct redistribution of my (tax) money ino the pockets of an army of lawyers.

Well, for one thing, a Public Inquiry would enable the UK public to discover the true extent of both CDEE and MRE Porton Down's long running public area Biological Warfare programme, as those giving evidence to a Public Inquiry have to do so on oath.

It might also persuade HMG that there are repercussions for intentionally using vast swathes of the UK as a giant laboratory. My original post doesn't do justice to the scale of these experiments. For example, South Dorset was subject to Biological Warfare attacks (albeit with supposedly harmless live bacteria) on no less than 86 occasions between 1963-1975.

Each attack produced a massive aerosol cloud that contaminated over 1,000 square miles. A single ship would sail a straight line track across Lyme Bay on the south coast of the UK, spraying two types of live bacteria. This bacterial cloud was carried onshore by the wind, and sampled by teams of Porton scinetists up to 50 miles from the ship.

This graphic gives an idea of the field trials procedure.










The red cloud represents the 'massive crosswind line release' (Porton's description) of bacteria. This huge aerosol cloud contained two types of live bacteria: E. coli MRE 162 and Bacillus subtilis var niger spores.

These supposedly 'harmless' bacteria (known as simulants) were used instead of live BW agents. It was later revealed that both types of simulants were capable of causing disease in certain individuals.

These experiments proved to the MOD that a single sortie by a ship/submarine/aircraft could contaminate an area of at least 10,000 square miles.

It was estimated that should an attack take place on a highly populated area, such as the UK, then the number of casualties from a single attack would be between 17-28 million people.



Its possible, paraphi, that the exposure of the true scale of Porton's past experiments at a Public Inquiry might just persuade HMG to outlaw the conduct of similar public area BW experiments in the future - something Government Ministers have in recent years refused to do.

In 1999, I made inquiries of the Defence Evaluation Research Agency (DERA) asking whether they would conduct similar public area experiments in the future.




The response from DERA, who were then responsible for what is now Dstl Porton Down, stated:

“In the event of a military question arising which could only be answered by conducting open air trials in areas which may involve the general public, Ministers have made it quite clear that they cannot rule out the need to conduct larger scale trials in the future…”

Larger?


zero lift

I am unconvinced. This was 30-40 years ago in the middle of the Cold War. In the context of the time when the threat was real that the Cold War would go hot, these experiments probably had their place in calculating the effect of Soviet chemical / biological warfare.

The regional variations may explain the raised incidents of oesophageal cancer (just like othe cancers and diseaes). The oesophageal cancer was central to your original post.

The key to this is the use of harmless bacteria, so what's the prolem?

Best wait for researchers of the future to open the files, rather than drag up the past for no useful purpose except the enrichment of the legal fraternity.

As for the Government not doing this again in the future... I doubt they would bother as this type of thing is more easily modelled on computer.

Regards

Originally posted by paraphi
I am unconvinced. This was 30-40 years ago in the middle of the Cold War. In the context of the time when the threat was real that the Cold War would go hot, these experiments probably had their place in calculating the effect of Soviet chemical / biological warfare.

In what way?

A little research easily reveals that, by 1959, CDEE Porton Down had already proved to their satisfaction that the Large Area Coverage concept of Biological Warfare attack was valid. There was little or no scientific need for the later 1963-64 Norwich series of BW field trials; especially field trials such as these which would expose the public to toxic material specifically designed to bypass the body's defences.

The key to this is the use of harmless bacteria, so what's the prolem?

[The Norfolk experiments (which is the subject of the call for a Public Inquiry) used a cadmium compound, not live bacteria.]

I beg to differ; I feel that the key to the Lyme Bay trials (1963-75) is, were the bacteria used in the experiments actually harmless?

Although most people probably didn't suffer adverse health effects to inhaling and digesting the E. coli MRE162 released in the Lyme Bay trials, some people with an underlying disease might have suffered chest or blood infections: pneumonias or septicaemia. If you were either very young or very old this may have had very serious consequences.

And as for the harmlessness of the other major bacteria released in the Lyme Bay Trials; well, when these experiments first came to light the Chief Executive of DERA went on record as admitting that Bacillus subtilis (aka Bacillus globigii or BG) can cause disease in immuno-suppressed people. More recently, the UK Health Protection Agency has listed Bacillus subtilis as a cause of food poisoning.

Even Dstl Porton Down's own Risk Assessments warn that exposure to aerosolised BG may lead to anaphylactic shock in some people.

In short, although Porton's definition of a BW simulant as: "a harmless chemical compound which mimics the physical characteristics of a BW agent aerosol particle", in reality the live bacteria used by Porton Down scientists during the Lyme Bay Trials were far from 'harmless'.

Best wait for researchers of the future to open the files, rather than drag up the past for no useful purpose except the enrichment of the legal fraternity.

Why wait? Porton have already declassified all the files that they are going to voluntarily release. They have admitted as much.

Whereas the advantage of a Public Inquiry is that it can order the release of all relevant material, including the files of which the MOD have in the past made reference as 'politically embarrassing'.

I apologise for bringing it up, but you do seem to be more concerned about your money ending up in the pockets of the lawyers, rather than being concerned about discovering what really happened during Porton's public area BW experiment programme.

As for the Government not doing this again in the future... I doubt they would bother as this type of thing is more easily modelled on computer.

And your evidence for this rather dismissive answer? Dstl Porton Down field trial reports perhaps? MOD policy documents? Or just an 'educated guess'?

You did read the DERA letter in my earlier post didn't you? Just in case you misunderstood, HMG refuse to rule out conducting larger scale public area experiments in the future.

Last year, Dstl Porton Down confirmed to me that this policy remains the same.



zero lift

There are all sorts of scary stories of what went on back then and some of it absolutely should not have happened (and in cases compensating those who suffered the consequences will be absolutely justified).

But 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing just the same, eh?

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey


But 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing just the same, eh?

Oh absolutely, sminkeypinkey.

But all the same you didn't need hindsight to realise that exposing the public to enormous aerosols of cadmium compounds is a bad idea! Porton's use of protective equipment demonstrates that fact.

And you certainly don't need hindsight to realise that spraying over 120 gallons of bacterial suspension (which was contaminated with an unknown bacteria) over a populated area, on a number of occasions, was not good scientific practice.

In short, it was evident at the time that Porton's public area BW experiments contained serious flaws; but as these experiments weren't subject to independent oversight these flaws were overlooked.

As I mentioned before, the MOD Chief Scientist (Dr Cawood) was more concerned that if these experiments became public knowledge it might cause 'political embarrassment'. Concern that the experiments might harm the public never seems to have crossed his mind, or the minds of those politicians who were aware of Porton's public area field trials.

The Chief Scientist's attitude, and that of the Secretary of State for War, is best summed up by the following extract of a 1963 Government Committee meeting:

"….The Chairman stated that the Secretary of State for War was concerned over the use of living organisms, and asked the Chief Scientist about approval for their use. Dr Cawood replied that he had undertaken to keep the Minister informed, and explained that the Minister was concerned solely about public reaction to tests."



zero lift

Originally posted by zero lift
In short, although Porton's definition of a BW simulant as: "a harmless chemical compound which mimics the physical characteristics of a BW agent aerosol particle", in reality the live bacteria used by Porton Down scientists during the Lyme Bay Trials were far from 'harmless'.

To some extent this is my point. One bunch of "subject matter experts" will have the opinion "gosh, totally harmless" and another bunch will be "yikes, death and destruction". Nothing conclusive. Nothing proved. Nothing relevant. Just give the lawysers the cash and save forcing loads of old men the trouble of explaining what they did to a public that cannot understand the environment of paranoia, panic and secrecy they had to operate in.

I don't want to sound overly negative here, but the people who were making the decisions at the time did so in the context of the time. They have probably all passed away by now or are long retired.

The original point which was raised concerning an increase in oesophageal cancer in a region of the UK will just pit one bunch of "subject matter experts" against another. This cancer type has regional variation in the UK and over the entire planet. Proving that a case - or a cohort of cases - was related to a Government inspired test just could not be proven - even if it was true, so why try? Leave the papers to be raked over by future researchers when all the cupboards are opened.

Regards

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by zero lift
In short, although Porton's definition of a BW simulant as: "a harmless chemical compound which mimics the physical characteristics of a BW agent aerosol particle", in reality the live bacteria used by Porton Down scientists during the Lyme Bay Trials were far from 'harmless'.

To some extent this is my point. One bunch of "subject matter experts" will have the opinion "gosh, totally harmless" and another bunch will be "yikes, death and destruction". Nothing conclusive. Nothing proved. Nothing relevant. Just give the lawysers the cash and save forcing loads of old men the trouble of explaining what they did to a public that cannot understand the environment of paranoia, panic and secrecy they had to operate in.

Normally I'd agree paraphi, but, and this is a major reason why I feel a Public Inquiry is needed, in the examples that I've given all the information which shows that Porton were, at the time, very aware of their shortcomings when of disseminating BW simulants in public areas.

They were aware that perhaps it wasn't such a good idea to produce the simulant E.coli in their prototype Experimental Pathogen Plant No 2. This produced mutated E.coli which was then sprayed on the public. This particular mutation was capable of causing increased virulence in the E coli.

They were also aware that their quality assurance procedure was totally flawed. For example, Porton tested each batch of bacterial simulants for contamination. But even though they results from these tests sometimes indicated that the bacterial suspension was contaminated with an unknown bacteria, Porton still went ahead and sprayed it over a populated area.

The other bacterial simulant, Bacillus subtilis, was imported from the US BW facility - Fort Detrick. Unbelievably, was not tested for toxicity prior to being mixed with the E. coli. [Later imported Fort Detrick material was found to be contaminated with other organisms]

And perhaps the worst procedural lapse took place during the final stage of preparation. The bacterial suspension (a mixture of E. coli MRE 162 and Bacillus subtilis) was loaded into aluminium barrels, ready to be taken to Portland for the exeriments. For reasons as yet unknown, but would be discovered at a Public Inquiry, Porton saw it fit to top up the suspension with tap water from their own water supply.

Nothing wrong with that you may think. But when you learn that this water supply had, at the time, been found to be seriously contaminated, you would be right to be more than a tad concerned.

Unbelievably, right at the end of Porton's entire simulant production procedure, they introduced a source of contamination into a bacterial suspension, which was destined to be sprayed over populated areas. Moreover, a bacterial suspension which was designed to evade the body's defences.

I don't want to sound overly negative here, but the people who were making the decisions at the time did so in the context of the time. They have probably all passed away by now or are long retired.

Fair point paraphi.

I've no doubt that they thought that they were, but that doesn't excuse the fact that their scientific procedure was, at times, appalling. And their safety procedures virtually non-existant. For example, during the late 1960s, the new Director of MRE Porton Down was horrified to learn that his scientists were still handling pathogens, such as Yersinia pestis, with mouth pipettes!

It is very important to remember that Porton scientists operate in conditions of extreme secrecy. While this is to an extent understandable, it does and has encouraged an atmosphere of what could be described as' macho arrogance'. This was noticed by many people who attended one of the three 'Porton Roadshows' which visited the South Dorset area when news of the Lyme Bay Trials first broke.

So in short, if there was to be a Public Inquiry, there wouldn't be very much of the inconclusive discussion that so concerns you. Porton condemn themselves in their own documents.

I would add that most of those who conducted the Lyme Bay Trials are very much alive, as are most of those who conducted the Norwich experiments. Memorably, one of them, a Mr Titt, when questioned about the ZnCds public area experiments, remarked "Cadmium is poisonous, everone knows that".

When examining the activities of Porton Down one must not only keep in mind the context of the Cold War, but also the vested interest of each Porton Establishment. Declassified documents reveal that until 1957,and the 'discovery' of the Large Area Coverage concept in a joint CDEE and MRE paper, both Porton Establishments were facing massive budgetary cuts.

The conduct of both: the ZnCds experiments, which led to vastly increased budgets for both Establishments in the early 1960s; and the Lyme Bay Trials, proved extremely useful for their coffers. And in MRE's case, these field trials probably prolonged its retention in military hands for at least another 15-20 years!

The original point which was raised concerning an increase in oesophageal cancer in a region of the UK will just pit one bunch of "subject matter experts" against another. This cancer type has regional variation in the UK and over the entire planet. Proving that a case - or a cohort of cases - was related to a Government inspired test just could not be proven - even if it was true, so why try? Leave the papers to be raked over by future researchers when all the cupboards are opened.

You might be perfectly correct paraphi, but what if you're not? Norwich surgeon Wyn Parry is very concerned that he has a 'cluster' of oesophageal cancers in his area, and yes, he is aware of regional variation. Wouldn't it be better to 'clear the air' now?

I have quite a bit of experience of researching Government papers, and I must warn you that only a very small proportion of Porton documents ever reach the shelves of the National Archive. This dearth of material is not caused by reasons of National Security. Porton are very eager to distance themselves from their past excesses, and have been in recent years ridding their Archives (both Central, and Historic) of any potentially embarrassing material; whether it be documentation, or photograhic material.

To wait any longer would be folly.

zero lift

Considering I was born in Norfolk 30 yrsish ago and knew about this, I will be def. be signing this e-petition. for those of you not lived or born in Norfolk, remember, " IT COULD BE YOU!!"

[edit on 23-4-2007 by MistahBear]