Bioscope ‘08

by  Dr. Barbara Price

An Inconvenient Truth -
A Convenient Circumstantial Story?

          In some ways the results of the FBI investigation of the anthrax-laced letter sent through the mail in 2001 in the US presents even more dilemmas for governments. If he was the only one responsible, how do we protect ourselves from a "rogue scientist"? Previously, it was claimed that weaponizing an airborne form of anthrax presented "a substantial challenge to the terrorist attempting to use the agent as a weapon" [Emerging Infectious Diseases, 1999] requiring sophisticated knowledge of aerosols and aerosolizing equipment, special labs, a team of scientists and lots of funding. Although Ivins was supposed to have benefited from the resulting anthrax research spending spree, in fact, many others really did benefit. By our conservative estimate, the US put approximately $2 billion into anthrax research plus buys for vaccines and detection from 2002 to now. Much of this is money that could have been better spent on infectious disease research, such as malaria, TB and measles, the top killers after HIV/AIDS, plus concerted preparations for flu and other pandemic possible emerging diseases.

         Does the psychotic researcher image cast such a pall on working with biological weapons defense that it will be harder to find, clear and employ stable, experienced scientists? Would a well-trained microbiologist want to go through the hoops for a government job when she could get a better paying job in private industry? If there was concern before about the proliferation of biodefense laboratories and the threat that accidents or sabotage could pose, those concerns are now more credible. How can universities ever guarantee mental stability, security and safety for their new BSL-3 facilities to the satisfaction of watchdog groups?

          Some of the circumstantial evidence for Ivins as the person who put the anthrax in the letters seems far-fetched and does not seem to be the "full story". If Ivins was solely responsible, why and how did he travel to NJ to mail the letters starting a week after September 11? FBI focus on Americans seems to dismiss any weapon from another country, even if the original source was an American collection. Can we be sure there was no involvement from another country or group? What about the September 11 hijacker Ahmed Alhaznawi, who complained of a leg lesion, which authorities believed was caused by anthrax? How does this fit with the Egyptian seaman who died in Brazil in 2003 of what authorities believed was inhalational anthrax exposure after opening a suitcase he was taking to Canada for "friends"?

          These inconvenient truths are not new. Also in the ASA Newsletter issue 2002-1 (February 2002) is a quote from "On the Street". "2. BW expertise. A reality that can not be overlooked is that some of the world's finest expertise in biological and toxin research, development and production has been bought, and continues to be bought, on the market."

For the Professional in Government and Industry with an interest in Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense, Disarmament and Verification; Emergency and Disaster Medical Planning; Industrial Health and Safety; and Environmental Protection