Written question asked by Lord Morris of Manchester (Labour), in the House of Lords. It was answered by Lord Drayson (Labour) on Wednesday, 8 November 2006.

Gulf War Illnesses

Question: Further to the Written Statement by the Lord Drayson on 19 October (WS 87-8) on Gulf War illness, whether they will take steps to ensure that future studies into illnesses of veterans of the 1990-91 Gulf War take into account to the fullest extent possible factors or combinations of factors to which service personnel were subject.

Answer: The monitoring period of the marmoset study was 18 months. This represents some 11 per cent of the animals’ expected lifespan and was considered an appropriate period in relation to the timescale for the emergence of ill-health among veterans of the 1990-91 Gulf conflict. As my noble friend Lord Bach indicated in a Written Answer on18 November 2003 (Official Report, col. WA 280), the range of vaccines used represented the ““worst case”” scenario. Environmental and other conditions to which some individuals may have been exposed during the 1990-91 Gulf conflict were not part of the vaccines interactions research programme. The possible adverse health effects of other potential exposures are either already well understood or have been the subject of other research programmes. The wider evidence currently available makes clear that the ill health reported among Gulf veterans also affects individuals who have not experienced such other exposures.

Secondary information

Type: Written question
Reference: 8057; 686 c184-5WA
Session: 2005-06
Related items: Bach, Lord
Tuesday, 18 November 2003
Written questions
House of Lords; Gulf War Illnesses
Thursday, 19 October 2006
Written statements
House of Lords
Subjects: Chemical and biological warfare Animal experiments Iraq-Kuwait conflict Research Vaccination Side effects Gulf War syndrome Dstl Veterans
Link: View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk