anthrax
oracknows | December 1, 2014
Every so often there's an article that starts making the rounds on social media, in particular Facebook and Twitter, that cries out for a treatment by yours truly. Actually, there are more such articles that are constantly circulating on social media that I could work full time blogging and still not cover them all. So I'm stuck picking and choosing ones that either (1) particularly pique my interest; (2) irritate me enough to goad me into action; or (3) reach a level of ubiquity that I can no longer ignore them. I don't think this one's hit #3 yet, but it certainly scores on #1 and #2.…
milhayser | December 19, 2011
On The Pump Handle, Liz Borkowski examines the ethical dilemma of testing the anthrax vaccine in children. If a widespread attack were to occur, we would want to know the safety and efficacy of the vaccine beforehand. But is an attack likely enough to warrant testing the vaccine on children? On ERV, Abbie Smith explains how vaccines are made: "Sometimes we use dead viruses. Sometimes we use crippled viruses. Sometimes we dont need to use whole viruses at all—little chunks of the virus are fine. Sometimes we just need chunks of the virus, but we keep them dressed up in hollow membranes."…
lborkowski | October 27, 2011The Obama administration has asked a federal advisory committee, the National Biodefense Science Board, to make recommendations about testing the anthrax vaccine in children. The vaccine has been tested in adults, administered to military personnel, and stockpiled so it can be administered quickly should an attack occur in the US. The Washington Post's Rob Stein reports that a federal simulation of an anthrax attack got federal officials thinking about how to handle children. If an actual attack occurs, would be easier to make the call to vaccinate children if we had already conducted…
mikethemadbiologist | July 19, 2011Keep in mind, this probably means there is a murderous terrorist running loose out there:
Now, however, Justice Department lawyers have acknowledged in court papers that the sealed area in Ivins' lab -- the so-called hot suite -- didn't contain the equipment needed to turn liquid anthrax into the refined powder that floated through congressional buildings and post offices in the fall of 2001.
The government said it continued to believe that Ivins was "more likely than not" the killer. But the filing in a Florida court didn't explain where or how Ivins could have made the powder, saying only…
tsmith | October 4, 2010This is great. The College of Physicians of Philadelphia has launched a site on The History of Vaccines. I've been poking around, and there's an incredible amount of stuff to check out. They have a nice FAQ, Top 20 questions about vaccination, as well as some great activities (herd immunity! learn about Koch's postulates! understand the relative risk of vaccination versus other events!) and a metric fuckton of articles and images. Looks to be a fantastic resource for students, and for anyone interested in understanding vaccination.
mpendergrast | June 21, 2010Mark Pendergrast writes: To kick off this book club discussion of Inside the Outbreaks, I thought I would explain briefly how I came to write the book and then suggest some possible topics for discussion.
The origin of the book goes back to an email I got in 2004 from my old high school and college friend, Andy Vernon, who wrote that I should consider writing the history of the EIS. I emailed back to say that I was honored, but what was the EIS? I had never heard of it. I knew Andy worked on tuberculosis at the CDC, but I didn't know that he had been a state-based EIS officer from 1978…
mikethemadbiologist | April 27, 2010I've had serious doubts all along about the anthrax investigation, but the latest turn raises even more questions about the government's case. According to former co-worker of Ivins' and former USAMRIID microbacteriologist Henry Heine, the science doesn't seem to support Ivins' guilt (italics mine):
Heine told the panel that the most common way of growing bacteria at USAMRIID is in flasks. Based on the number of envelopes mailed out (eight to 10), the concentration of spores in the powder (10 to the 12th power spores per gram) and the number of grams of anthrax per envelope (1 to 2 grams),…
revere | April 25, 2010It's been a couple of months since we posted on the anthrax story, the story that refuses to die despite the fact the FBI has done its best to close the case out. But here we are again, our 11th post on the subject, this time because a colleague of the conveniently deceased alleged anthrax terrorist, Dr. Bruce Ivins, has defended him publicly while testifying before a panel of the National Academies tasked with reviewing the case:
Henry “Hank” Heine, who left the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) in February 2010 after testing antibiotics there for 11…
revere | February 22, 2010This is our 10th post on the anthrax attacks. Will it be our last? Yes, if the FBI has anything to say about it. They are closing the case. A case they messed up pretty thoroughly from the outset but now want us to believe they've solved, even though the culprit they fingered, Dr. Bruce Ivins, a bioweapons researcher at Fort Detrick, allegedly committed suicide and wasn't available to interrogate. I say "allegedly" because there are other explanations for his demise, most plausibly in our view, an accident involving interaction of alcohol and acetaminophen which caused liver failure. But the…
edyong | August 12, 2009
When the bacteria that cause anthrax (Bacillus anthracis) aren't ravaging livestock or being used in acts of bioterrorism, they spend their lives as dormant spores. In these inert but hardy forms, the bacteria can weather tough environmental conditions while lying in wait for their next host. This is the standard explanation for what B.anthracis does between infections, and it's too simple by far. It turns out that the bacterium has a far more interesting secret life involving two unusual partners - viruses and earthworms.
A dying animal can release up to a billion bacterial cells in every…
revere | February 27, 2009When the FBI said that they had conclusive scientific evidence that biodefense scientists Bruce Ivins of the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) was the 2001 anthrax attacker, many people asked to see the evidence. Don't worry, we were told. It will be published for all to see in the peer reviewed scientific literature and then everyone will be convinced that the organisms used in the attacks came from a flask in the laboratory of Dr. Ivins. We're still waiting for the scientific papers, but some of the evidence is now being presented at scientific meetings.…
revere | February 14, 2009Among the many things going on (or not going on) the last couple of weeks is a total "stand down" of the country's main biodefense research laboratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Here's the inter memo, dated February 4:
I will institute a stand down of all biological select agents and toxin (BSAT) activities beginning on Friday, the 6th. This is necessary to conduct a complete inventory to identify all BSAT in USAMRIID [U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases]. The standard we have employed for 100% accountability has been the ability to find every sample listed in the…
revere | January 5, 2009Yesterday's New York Times carried a very long piece (more than 5000 words) by Scott Shanes on the anthrax attacker case. You may remember that shortly after Dr. Bruce Ivins, the Fort Detrick scientist who worked on anthrax, allegedly committed suicide (see posts here), the FBI announced he was the culprit and started to wrap up the case. Is the case truly "solved"?
With the F.B.I. preparing to close the case, The New York Times has taken the deepest look so far at the investigation, speaking to dozens of Dr. Ivins's colleagues and friends, reading hundreds of his e-mail messages,…
revere | September 8, 2008With all that's going on we sometimes forget about all that went on, even all that went on recently. Like "solving" the anthrax attacks case. Fortunately the New York Times reporters on the case are still on the case. And so is Congress:
A month after the F.B.I. declared that an Army scientist was the anthrax killer, leading members of Congress are demanding more information about the seven-year investigation, saying they do not think the bureau has proved its case.
In a letter sent Friday to Robert S. Mueller III, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Democratic leaders of…
mikethemadbiologist | August 21, 2008This is a good start:
The US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) plans to publish in peer-reviewed journals much of the scientific evidence it used to pin the 2001 anthrax attacks on microbiologist Bruce Ivins....
In lieu of expert witnesses and cross-examinations, the FBI plans to offer the evidence for peer review and will keep much of the data quiet until they are published. FBI laboratory director Chris Hassell anticipates a dozen or so papers related to the case, in addition to those that have already been published. However, Hassell says, some details of the investigation will remain…
revere | August 21, 2008Not many scientists were convinced the FBI had a solid science case against accused anthrax attacker Dr. Bruce Ivins. So the FBI held a telephone conference call between journalists and their scientific back-up to answer outstanding questions. Some questions were answered by promising the science would be submitted for peer review to the scientific literature but many others remain, some scientific but mostly about how the science fits in to what would have had to have been "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt" in what the FBI says would have been a death penalty case. An Editorial and…
revere | August 15, 2008A couple of days ago we discussed the murky questions surrounding the death of accused anthrax attacker Dr. Bruce Ivins. At the center of stipulating the cause and manner of death were the procedures for filling out the state of Maryland's death certificate by the medical examiner. Determining and recording the cause of death is important for many other things besides the circumstances surrounding the unexplained deaths of anthrax attackers. In the US you can't legally dispose of a body without a properly recorded death certificate and it's a document survivors use for all manner of other…
mikethemadbiologist | August 14, 2008Chris Mooney is worried that the latest turns in the anthrax case are reinforcing the notion of the 'mad scientist' (and what, exactly, is wrong with a Mad Scientist? Just asking):
The Bruce Ivins we're hearing about in the media sounds like a mad scientist straight out of Hollywood's most feverish fantasies. He had access to forbidden knowledge (anthrax spores and how to use them), and a sly, horrible plan to apply that knowledge to its worst possible end. For a public that has been repeatedly instructed not to trust the responsibility of scientists--because they don't value life and their…
mikethemadbiologist | August 11, 2008I realize science is hard and stuff, but there are serious problems with the evidence in the anthrax investigation. I'm not the only who thinks so: ScienceBloglings Tara and Revere think so too, along with most of the commentors. Thankfully, these problems are finally starting to enter the discussion. First, from Glenn Greenwald:
The NYT today has an excellent Op-Ed from a microbiologist (the former Chief of Fort Detrick's bacteriology division) pointing out the numerous deficiencies in the FBI's scientific assertions. Critically, that Op-Ed describes the properties of the high-grade…