U.S. Coast Guard corpsman Anna Christina Brothers (left) administered the anthrax vaccine to seaman Charity Knoll in February 2003 aboard the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Boutwell in the Persian Gulf (AFP photo/Leila Gorchev). Military Vaccines Trigger Special Treatment for 1,200 By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Approximately 1,200 U.S. military personnel who received vaccinations against biological agents during the past two years developed complex, in some cases debilitating, illnesses that were assessed or treated by a specialized network of clinics, according to figures released to Global Security Newswire by the U.S. Army and a review of some cases (see GSN, April 25)...Full Story

DOD Switches Policy on Voluntary Vaccinations By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — In announcing the resumption of anthrax vaccinations for military personnel this week, the U.S. Defense Department abandoned a fiercely defended policy against voluntary vaccinations (see GSN, April 1)...Full Story

Deadlock Continues over NPT Agenda By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Delegates to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference nearly overcame a diplomatic deadlock today, but still remain at odds over how to refer to the decisions of previous review conferences. The issue is critical to clearing the way for nations to agree on an agenda for the rest of the monthlong meeting (see GSN, May 5)...Full Story

	Friday, May 6, 2005

U.S. Renews Syrian Sanctions The United States has extended economic sanctions on Syria for one additional year, the White House announced yesterday (see GSN, May 12, 2004). Export restrictions were imposed “to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the actions of the Government of Syria in supporting terrorism, continuing its occupation of Lebanon, pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining United States and international efforts with respect to the stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq,” President George W. Bush said in a statement. The sanctions must be extended because Syria’s “actions and policies … continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat” to the United States, Bush said (White House release, May 5). Back to top       Bush Pressed for Iraq War Despite Doubtful Intelligence, Classified British Memo Indicates A classified British memo indicates that the Bush administration planned as early as summer 2002 to oust then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and wanted U.S. intelligence to support that decision, Knight Ridder reported today (see GSN, April 29). The memo recounts a July 23, 2002, meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and top security advisers. A visit to Washington by the head of the British MI-6 intelligence service was discussed in the meeting. “There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable,” the MI-6 chief said at the meeting, according to the memo. President George W. Bush “wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD.” “The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy,” the memo quotes him as saying. The memo is “an absolutely accurate description of what transpired,” during the meeting in Washington, a former senior U.S. official said. The Bush administration at the time claimed that no decision had been made on invading Iraq, Knight Ridder reported. The U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group found no weapons of mass destruction following the March 2003 invasion. The memo also cites British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw saying, “Bush had made up his mind to take military action.” “But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran,” Straw said, according to the memo (Strobel/Walcott, Knight Ridder/Seattle Times, May 6). Back to top       Bolton Vote Could Be Delayed Again A Senate committee vote on Undersecretary of State John Bolton’s nomination as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations could be delayed again as Democrats press their case for access to additional documents, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, May 5). Democrats on the Foreign Relations Committee want to see e-mail messages, memos, correspondence and draft testimony related to disputes between Bolton and intelligence analysts over the extent of Syria’s weapons programs. However, committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) has not supported their request to the State Department. Ranking committee Democrat Joseph Biden (D-Del.) made his case for access in a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the Times reported. “The documents in question go directly to an issue the committee has been pursuing, namely whether in speeches and testimony, Mr. Bolton sought to exaggerate the conclusions that could reasonably be drawn from available intelligence,” the letter states. Biden indicated that Democrats could delay the scheduled May 12 vote if the State Department fails “to produce the requested documents in a timely manner.” A spokesman said the department would “respond to all agreed-upon requests.” The Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees have asked the State Department and National Security Agency for details on Bolton’s requests for NSA transcripts of intercepted conversations involving U.S. officials, according to the Times. At issue is whether Bolton exceeded his authority as undersecretary in obtaining the documents. Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) and the office of National Intelligence Director John Negroponte are negotiating on the issue, a government official said (Douglas Jehl, New York Times, May 6). Foreign Relations Committee staffers plan to interview Larry Wilkerson, chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell, the Washington Post reported today. Wilkerson has criticized Bolton and could offer insight on Powell’s thoughts on the questions regarding his former subordinate’s conduct, a Democratic aide said (see GSN, April 22). Meanwhile, Bolton’s nomination received additional support from both sides of the Atlantic. “John Bolton is eminently qualified,” said former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. “He’s one of the smartest guys in Washington.” “It was the president’s choice and I support my president,” said Armitage, a close friend of Powell’s who clashed repeatedly with Bolton at the State Department (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, May 6). Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said in a May 4 letter to Bolton that she “cannot imagine anyone better fitted to undertake these tasks than you,” Agence France-Presse reported. “To combine, as you do, clarity of thought, courtesy of expression and an unshakable commitment to justice is rare in any walk of life. But it is particularly so in international affairs,” wrote Thatcher, a friend of the nominee. “A capacity for straight talking rather than peddling half-truths is a strength and not a disadvantage in diplomacy” (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 5). Back to top

Deadlock Continues over NPT Agenda By Jim Wurst Global Security Newswire UNITED NATIONS — Delegates to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference nearly overcame a diplomatic deadlock today, but still remain at odds over how to refer to the decisions of previous review conferences. The issue is critical to clearing the way for nations to agree on an agenda for the rest of the monthlong meeting (see GSN, May 5). The conference began Monday without an agenda because of a yearlong dispute over how its introductory paragraph — the “chapeau” — should refer to decisions from the 1995 and 2000 review conferences. The Bush administration opposes many of the initiatives contained in those decisions.  Conference President Sergio Duarte of Brazil announced this morning that an agreement had been reached on the agenda and on an accompanying presidential statement that he would read into the record. Delegates said all contentious language was removed from the chapeau, which now reads only, “Review of the operation of the treaty.”  The presidential statement was meant to address the concerns of states that wanted more explicit references to past conferences by including in the chapeau the words “in light of the decisions and resolution” of the previous review conferences.   “The resolution” is a reference to the resolution from the 1995 review conference endorsing negotiations for a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East. However, after a recess and further consultations, the meeting resumed today with the Egyptian delegate saying he would not accept the presidential statement without “slight amendments” he had offered earlier in the week. He wanted to replace the term “in light of” with the words “taking into account,” and the phrase “and the outcomes” to follow the words “the decisions and resolution.” He said the amendments were “the least we can accept,” since there are no specific references to the decisions of the past review conferences. Visibly frustrated, Duarte said he regretted that consensus still had not been reached and proposed continuing consultations today because “we must resolve this.   I appeal again to the spirit of understanding and compromise of all delegations to understand that we have to start substantive work. ... Public opinion awaits us to start dealing with the substantive questions at hand.” With the initial round of national speeches nearing an end, the conference should begin the next phase of its work next week.  This would involve dividing into three committees to review the implementation of the treaty over the last five years and to formulate recommendations for a final document for this conference. This is when all the disagreements over Iran’s nuclear program, the effectiveness of safeguards and the fulfillment of the disarmament commitments by the nuclear powers will have to be faced.  However, without an agenda, continuing the conference becomes problematic. The treaty was extended indefinitely in 1995, but with a number of decisions that committed the parties “to continue to move with determination towards the full realization and effective implementation of the provisions of the treaty.”  Those commitments included entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, “systematic and progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally, with the ultimate goals of eliminating those weapons,” and consideration of legally binding security assurance for non-nuclear states parties (see related GSN story, today).   The 2000 consensus decision included a longer and more specific list of disarmament initiatives, now called the 13 practical steps.  The United States has since rejected some of those measures and does not want explicit references to either the 1995 or 2000 decisions in this year’s documents. France and the United Kingdom Speaking in the plenary yesterday, France and the United Kingdom staked out positions closer to their non-nuclear European Union allies that to the United States.  Both said attention must be paid to disarmament and nonproliferation concerns. Both said they still supported the 1995 decisions, including the test ban treaty. While the United Kingdom referred to the 2000 decisions, France omitted any such references. On the question of strengthening the nonproliferation regime, France set out an agenda close to the U.S. proposals (see GSN, May 3). “The priority in 2005 is to meet the serious challenges constituted by the proliferation crises that are a threat to international peace and security,” said French Ambassador Francois Rivasseau.  “But this should not lead us to forget about our common obligations relating to nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.” He said France was committed to fulfilling its disarmament obligations and added, “I would nevertheless remind you that right at a time when the nuclear-weapon states were making strong commitments, several states parties were accelerating the development of their illegal nuclear programs.” British Ambassador John Freeman also made apparent references to Iran and North Korea without naming those countries. “We must work together to prevent future abuses of the treaty so as to ensure that nuclear energy can continue to be available to all those states — the vast majority of states represented in this room — who seek it for peaceful purposes only,” he said. “We need concerned action to resolve existing cases of states parties acting in violation of their nuclear nonproliferation and safeguards obligations.  We support the suspension of nuclear fuel cycle cooperation with such states,” he said. Rivasseau said France was aware that some states “fear that the strengthening of the nuclear nonproliferation regime will call into question the right to peaceful uses of nuclear power.  Quite the reverse, it is the unrestricted development of proliferation by some states that poses such a risk.”  He said the right to peaceful uses of nuclear technology as outlined in Article 4 of the treaty must be “preserved and fully exercised for countries that unambiguously comply with their international obligations.”  If states fail in their obligations, they should not “be entitled to enjoy the stipulations of Article 4.”  Rivasseau listed proposals for strengthening the nonproliferation regime similar to those of the United States.  He called for making the Additional Protocol to safeguards agreements on nuclear facilities to be made universal, for strengthened cooperation between the International Atomic Energy Agency and the U.N. Security Council to address proliferation concerns, and for greater controls by the supplier states over the transfer of sensitive technology. Rivasseau also called for a review of the withdrawal provisions of the treaty, including the idea of referring a withdrawal to the Security Council and requiring any state withdrawing from the treaty to dismantle and return items purchased while that country was under IAEA safeguards. Freeman said that any state withdrawing from the treaty “cannot subsequently benefit from nuclear technologies.” Neither said anything specific about the negotiations the two governments and Germany are conducting with Iran over Tehran’s nuclear program other than to say that they were concerned about the intent of the program. Back to top       U.S. Monitors Suspected Nuke Test Preparations U.S. satellite imagery of North Korea shows construction of a reviewing stand and other indications that Pyongyang is working quickly to prepare a nuclear weapons test, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, May 4). However, the activity could be a bluff by Pyongyang intended to pressure Washington to improve its incentives offer for North Korean denuclearization, Bush administration officials said. “The North Koreans have learned how to use irrationality as a bargaining tool,” said a senior U.S. official. “We can’t tell what they are doing.” One U.S. official confirmed that the images showed North Koreans building a reviewing stand. The official recalled that, after a surprise 1998 North Korean missile launch, analysts reviewed old satellite imagery and other data to see if they had missed anything. “What was interesting is they had built a reviewing stand for that launch, but that wasn’t noticed,” he said. “They had visitors from other countries in. We had seen movement, but we didn’t know what for. The idea was that they invited other people to watch this other thing.” Other officials familiar with the intelligence said they had not seen evidence that North Korea was receiving outside assistance with the activity. “What we’re seeing is everything you need to test,” said a senior intelligence official. “We’ve never seen this level of activity.” “This looks like the real thing. There is wide agreement in the [intelligence] community,” the official said. A hole being dug at the isolated site does not appear to be prepared in the manner of a mine. A mountain over the hole would contain the force of a weapon equal in power to the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in World War II, a senior intelligence official said. One U.S. intelligence expert, however, said that so far the images have not included electronic equipment often used to monitor a test (Sanger/Broad, New York Times, May 6). Japan also has seen indicators of a potential North Korean nuclear test, a Defense Agency official told the Associated Press today.  Tokyo was exchanging information with “concerned countries,” said a Foreign Ministry official (Mari Yamaguchi, Associated Press/TheStarOnline, May 6). Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura warned today that continued refusal by North Korea to resume negotiations could lead to its referral to the U.N. Security Council, Agence France-Presse reported. “If there is no progress in the six-way talks, we have to consider other options,” Machimura told reporters after meeting South Korean counterpart Ban Ki-moon. “For example, we can think about the United Nations Security Council,” Machimura told reporters. “We have to consider it as the next option” (Agence France-Presse/Khaleej Times, May 6). Meanwhile, U.S. President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao yesterday discussed their continued efforts to resume six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear program, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 5). Beijing yesterday rejected claims that it was not doing enough to persuade North Korea to resume talks, adding that other nations needed to do more, AFP reported. “China has done a very good job. But China alone is not enough,” said Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing. South Korean Foreign Minister Ban told that Li that South Korea was “increasingly concerned” about stalled negotiations. “We requested a more proactive role, constructive role by the Chinese government to resolve this situation peacefully,” Park Joon-woo, South Korea’s director general in charge of Asia and Pacific affairs, told AFP. “We believe China has the biggest influence. We believe that they can do more,” Park said. Li told Park, however, that China’s influence was limited. “He explained that outsiders believe that China has a bigger influence over North Korea but actually their influence over North Korea is limited,” Park said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 6). Back to top       Iran Expresses Commitment to Nuclear Talks Iran’s foreign minister yesterday said his nation remains committed to continuing negotiations on its nuclear program, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 4). “We will continue negotiations with the European side, provided it leads us somewhere tangible on the matter of time framework,” said Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi. In what appeared to be a shaded criticism of Tehran, France’s ambassador to the United Nations, Francois Rivasseau, said only countries “that unambiguously comply with their international obligations” under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty should have access to civilian nuclear technology, AP reported (Charles Hanley, Associated Press/Canada.com, May 5). Diplomats at the United Nations said no new talks between Iran and the European powers had been scheduled, Reuters reported yesterday (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters, May 5). Back to top       Non-Nuclear States Call for Security Assurances Non-nuclear states have renewed their calls at this month’s Nuclear Proliferation Treaty review conference for a treaty assuring they won’t face a nuclear strike from a nuclear power, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, May 5). Such assurances “would go a long way to reduce incentives for proliferation,” said Brazilian delegate and conference president Sergio Duarte. The United States, however, remains opposed to such a move, saying that Washington wants to retain the right to use nuclear weapons against any country that attacks it with chemical or biological weapons. “Both the Clinton and Bush administrations have taken the position that that would be a bad idea,” chief U.S. delegate Stephen Rademaker has said. Nuclear powers Russia and China, however, favor negotiations on such a treaty, AP reported (Charles Hanley, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, May 5). Back to top       Detained Former Russian Energy Official Opposes Extradition, Forcing Formal Proceedings Former Russian Atomic Energy Minister Yevgeny Adamov is opposing extradition to the United States on charges that he stole $9 million in U.S. money meant for Russian nuclear safety projects, Agence France-Presse reported yesterday (see GSN, May 5). Adamov is being held in Switzerland. The United States has 60 days to formally request extradition. Some Russian media charged that Washington is drawing attention to nuclear security problems in order to gain increased control Russian nuclear activities, according to AFP. “The United States have started a nuclear war” was Wednesday’s headline in the Izvestia daily. “The United States want to show that the Russian nuclear sector is run by dishonest people, to gain more control over Russian atomic installations,” wrote the Gazeta (Agence France-Presse, May 5). Washington wants to bring Adamov to the United States because he may have key information on Russian nuclear cooperation with Iran, Russia’s former top security official said yesterday. “The U.S. authorities will try to persuade him to cooperate with the investigation ... and admit to having helped Iran acquire nuclear technologies,” Nikolai Kovalyov, head of the FSB security service during Adamov’s tenure as energy minister, told state television. “I think that is why ... this whole mess has been created,” he said (Reuters, May 5). Back to top       Los Alamos Director to Leave; Laboratory Might Increase Production of “Pits” for Nuclear Weapons Peter Nanos will step down from his position as director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico on May 16, the Associated Press reported today (see GSN, March 21). Nanos is set to take a position with the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Robert Kuckuck, a former manager at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, will serve as interim director until the University of California’s management contract for Los Alamos ends on Sept. 30. The official announcement of Nanos’ departure is to be made today. A university press release was leaked yesterday to the Santa Fe New Mexican, AP reported. Nanos has worked at Los Alamos since August 2002. He became interim director in January 2003 and permanent director in July of that year. His tenure has been marked by high-profile troubles, including misuse of laboratory credit cards by employees and the disappearance of two classified disks that were eventually determined not to have existed, AP reported. Security and safety troubles caused Los Alamos to largely shut down operations last year. Some Los Alamos personnel have questioned Nanos’ management style, and an online blog allowed them to anonymously air their discontent. The laboratory, though, garnered awards for basic and applied research even as it dealt with its problems, AP reported. “While there have been many challenges, I believe there have been many more successes, not so much because of what I may have done, but because of the men and women who care so much about this great institution,” Nanos said in the press release (Associated Press, May 6). Meanwhile, the Energy Department may be looking to have Los Alamos expand its production of nuclear weapons components, the Albuquerque Journal reported yesterday. The laboratory might expand its production of “pits,” the plutonium triggers for nuclear weapons, while the Energy Department decides whether to move ahead with building the planned Modern Pit Facility, said John Ordaz, department assistant manager for environmental management. Los Alamos officials presently have pledged to produce 10 pits each year. The agency is preparing a new environmental impact analysis of the laboratory’s operations and programs. The analysis is expected to examine the potential for production of 40 pits per year, said Elizabeth Withers, Energy Department environmental compliance manager at Los Alamos (Adam Rankin, Albuquerque Journal, May 5). The Energy Department has also decided against fully reimbursing the University of California for losses incurred during the operations shutdown, the Associated Press reported. The cost has been estimated at $119 million by Los Alamos and up to $367 million by the Energy Department’s National Nuclear Security Administration. While the “vast majority” of the loss should be reimbursed, the agency will not pay $6.3 million in contractor claims or $8 million for Los Alamos employees’ salaries for the first two days of the shutdown, said Jerry Paul, NNSA principal deputy administrator (Erica Werner, Associated Press/San Francisco Chronicle, May 5). Back to top

Military Vaccines Trigger Special Treatment for 1,200 By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — Approximately 1,200 U.S. military personnel who received vaccinations against biological agents during the past two years developed complex, in some cases debilitating, illnesses that were assessed or treated by a specialized network of clinics, according to figures released to Global Security Newswire by the U.S. Army and a review of some cases (see GSN, April 25). The cases, corresponding with a massive Defense Department effort to vaccinate U.S. forces against anthrax and smallpox before and after the invasion of Iraq, included muscle and joint weakness and pain, chronic fatigue, intense migraines, cognitive problems, and severe diseases such as multiple sclerosis. Some of these have ended military careers. More common and less serious side effects from the vaccines are said to include temporary headaches, fatigue, fever, nausea and dizziness. In light of the large number people who received the vaccines, the number of serious cases treated by the Vaccine Health Care Centers, a network of four clinics at domestic U.S. military bases, is rare. Overall, the military says more than 1.3 million military and civilian personnel have received the anthrax vaccine, called Anthrax Vaccine Adsorbed, since 1998, when it resumed the vaccinations after a hiatus over quality control problems. The military has also vaccinated hundreds of thousands of personnel, many who also received the anthrax treatment, for smallpox beginning in December 2002. The Defense Department, on a Web site that provides information on the vaccine, maintains the anthrax vaccinations are “as safe as other vaccines” and necessary. None of the personnel treated in fiscal 2004 “has suffered loss of life, limb or eyesight,” according to a statement from Walter Reed Army Medical Center, which houses the main Vaccine Healthcare Center in Washington. Nevertheless, some cases have been quite severe, such as that of retired Air Force Reserve Lt. Col. Michael Gylock, who within nine days after receiving anthrax and smallpox vaccinations in March 2003 started showing symptoms and was eventually diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and some vision loss. “I’ve been retired because of it. I’m not fit for military duty,” he said. Gylock and other cases were referred to Global Security Newswire by an advocate of soldiers who believe they were harmed by the vaccine. Questions have surfaced in recent years about the safety of the anthrax vaccine, and when massive numbers of personnel are vaccinated, even a small percentage of rare disorders can add up. Walter Reed said that about 600 anthrax vaccine recipients in fiscal 2003 and 600 in fiscal 2004 received in-depth assessment or treatment by the centers’ staff. In addition, officials have said the Vaccine Healthcare Centers during the two years conducted more than 250,000 telephone, e-mail or face-to-face communications with personnel or physicians to discuss reactions, however minor or major, or to provide guidance on how to avoid or treat complications.  Sufficient funding for the four Vaccine Healthcare Centers, created by Congress in 2001 is in question this year. The centers were not included last year in the Pentagon’s fiscal 2005 budget and did not receive a specific congressional appropriation. A nonbinding resolution passed by the Senate urging full funding was stripped from a supplemental appropriations bill this week by leaders from both houses. Meanwhile, the Pentagon, citing a determination that there is potential for a heightened risk of an anthrax threat to U.S. forces, announced Tuesday it would resume providing mass anthrax vaccinations to service members mainly in South Korea and across the Middle East and South Asia (see related GSN story, today). “Without the centers [there are] over 1,000 military personnel who would not have gotten the care they deserve, the best possible care we can provide,” Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.), who had proposed specific funding for the centers, said in a Senate floor speech last month.  “If the department believes it is an emergency to resume that vaccine, how can we consider preserving the Vaccine Health Care Centers any less?” he said. Quantity of Serious Illnesses Uncertain While the data on Vaccine Healthcare Center treatments give some indication of the numbers and types of rare illnesses that may result from anthrax or smallpox vaccinations, there is no definitive data on how many and which illnesses were caused by the military inoculations. One reason is that the numbers of cases treated by the centers, and otherwise identified through its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, do not necessarily account for all serious illnesses caused by a vaccine because military reporting on side effects is passive. In other words, the onus is on the soldiers to seek help from the centers and many are said to be unaware the clinics exist, are unwilling to inform superiors they may have a career-jeopardizing disorder, or have had trouble convincing authorities of the illness. As little is understood about how vaccines cause serious illness, some doctors have appeared reluctant to conclude a vaccination may have caused a specific illness, experts have said. “Because serious problems are rare, it is difficult for the average base physician to develop the expertise needed to provide the best treatment,” Biden said in his speech. In addition, as multiple military vaccines are often given around the same time, researchers have difficulty determining which one might have been the cause of a particular illness, experts have said (see GSN, May 18, 2004). Furthermore, just because a person had experienced adverse events after those vaccinations, does not necessarily mean the events were caused by the vaccinations, Walter Reed said in a statement. “Cause-and-effect evaluations require consideration of at least six factors; timing is only one of those factors. Cause-and-effect evaluations are often difficult in individual cases,” it said. Little Understanding of Causality Air National Guard Technical Sgt. Rick Brown’s case is illustrative of the challenge to understanding causality. A Philadelphia firefighter and formerly an avid bodybuilder and hockey player, Brown said that soon after receiving anthrax and smallpox vaccinations in March 2003 he experienced intense pain in muscles and joints and decreased mobility. “My first indication was a mass on the side of my neck that was about the size of a grape and immediately my body started feeling really bad. I had open mucus membranes throughout my body, oozing out of my ears, my nose, my penis, my mouth,” he said. Brown said he was eventually diagnosed with degenerative arthritis, including joint and muscle aches, and may have had a heart attack. He was also twice ruled unfit for military work after 19 years of service. “For a while, my muscles turned to jelly, my joints were just all screwed up,” he said.  Brown said he learned of the Vaccine Healthcare Centers from an Internet search. Military physicians were initially unwilling to send him to a center and unwilling to consider that the anthrax vaccination might be causing his illnesses, he said. “They said, ‘We want to send you to a clinical physiatrist. We want to heavily medicate you,’” he said. In a case review delivered to Brown, the Vaccine Healthcare Center at Walter Reed said it had identified possible side effects from the anthrax vaccine. It noted, though, causality between the vaccination and such chronic illness has not been proven. The center and another organization are preparing to study that question. “At the present time, it is impossible to prove or disprove a causal link between the vaccine and chronic problems but efforts are under way … to collect information regarding these problems and continue to define the range of the problem,” the center said generically in its review of Brown’s case. Brown, who served for a year in Afghanistan until November 2002, “loves the military” and wishes he could resume service, said he might be forced out before he is eligible for retirement, which is in about six months. “Let’s put this stuff on the shelf, because a lot of people are getting sick,” he said. Gylock said an informal Air Force medical board had recommended discharging him without benefits because the illness was not caused by military action. An appeal to a formal board reversed the decision. That board cited a Vaccine Healthcare Center conclusion that his symptoms may have been caused by the anthrax vaccine, he said.  The center, also said, though there is a medical community controversy over whether vaccines can cause multiple sclerosis and that, that “causality cannot be established.” The Vaccine Healthcare Center’s “review of my records was probably the most beneficial thing that happened to me,” he said. Back to top       DOD Switches Policy on Voluntary Vaccinations By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — In announcing the resumption of anthrax vaccinations for military personnel this week, the U.S. Defense Department abandoned a fiercely defended policy against voluntary vaccinations (see GSN, April 1). The reversal of that policy, however, coincides with relaxed requirements for informing and obtaining the consent of potential recipients before administering such investigational drugs, which are in effect because senior Bush administration officials have declared a potential emergency. The new plan was announced Tuesday in a press release. The vaccinations were ordered to resume under a “emergency use authority,” which was based on a Pentagon determination last December that a “significant potential [exists] for a military emergency involving a heightened risk to United States military forces of attack with anthrax.” The Defense Department had halted mandatory anthrax vaccinations in October, after a U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled the drug was not yet fully licensed by the Food and Drug Administration as effective against inhaled anthrax and so could not be made mandatory.  The military previously opposed administering the vaccine voluntarily, arguing it could weaken U.S. forces were soldiers to opt out. “We fight as a team. All team members must be healthy. That’s why voluntary vaccination is not an option,” states a Defense Department Web site published to inform service people about the vaccine.  The drug has been licensed for skin-contracted anthrax since 1970, and used by textile workers, but not for inhalation anthrax, the type that would be expected in an attack on U.S. forces. Some soldiers in past years have been court-martialed for refusing to take the vaccine.  A Pentagon Web site says the vaccine causes serious adverse side effects in “about 1 in 100,000 vaccinations.” More than 1 million military personnel have been required to take the vaccine in recent years. Hundreds have been assessed and treated for severe reactions by a special network of centers (see related GSN story, today). Relaxed Information and Consent Requirements The “emergency use authorization” invoked by senior Bush administration officials enables the military to give voluntarily vaccinations without more stringent legal requirements for informing soldiers about the side effects of the vaccine or obtaining their written consent. Federal law normally would require that personnel be told that the vaccine is investigational and not approved for its intended purpose. Furthermore, all possible side effects must be disclosed and the person must sign a form consenting to the vaccination. Under a law signed last year allowing for emergency use authorizations, military authorities only are required to “establish such conditions … as the [defense] secretary finds necessary or appropriate” so that personnel are informed of “significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use.” An informational brochure the Defense Department said it will give service members before they are offered the shots lists only more common, minor side effects expected from the vaccine, such as itching, swelling and nausea.  A number of service members have reported symptoms such as chronic headaches and debilitating muscle and joint pains and weakness, and more serious illnesses, that have taken them out of service. The brochure also does not mention the vaccine is investigational for inhalation anthrax. “The emergency use authorization is much more generic with regard to the information that’s got to be provided to people [normally under U.S. law],” said Lou Michels, an attorney in Chicago representing six anonymous military and civilian personnel who sued government officials over the prior mandatory program. Pressure, No Punishment The brochure, released last month, says the vaccine has been used for more than 30 years and that death or serious illness has rarely been reported following treatment. It gives information on who to contact in the event of side effects and lists categories of people who should not receive the vaccine, including pregnant women. The brochure also includes text — demanded last month by Judge Sullivan — that indicates soldiers cannot be punished for refusing the vaccine and will still be deployable. Immediately following that text, though, it urges soldiers to take the vaccine. “The consequences of refusing anthrax vaccine include that you will be more vulnerable to lethal anthrax infection. Your loss could threaten the lives of others in your unit who depend on you, and could jeopardize the success of the mission,” it says. Such language in the brochure and verbal pressure, the Michels said, will likely be used to pressure soldiers into taking the vaccine. “I believe that at the end of the day, this program for a lot of these soldiers is not going to be purely voluntary. There is going to be a lot of pressure brought to bear on people to take the shot,” he said. The DOD press release Wednesday said commanders would inform personnel of “an option to refuse the vaccination without penalty.” ‘Potential for a Heightened Risk’ Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz in December requested the emergency authorization from the head of the Food and Drug Administration, citing a November intelligence report that he said indicated “a significant potential for a military emergency involving a heightened risk” of an anthrax attack on U.S. forces. The vaccination brochure is less circumspect in its description of a threat. “U.S. military forces are at high risk of attack with anthrax spores. A significant potential for a military emergency exists. … Your military and civilian leaders strongly recommend anthrax vaccination,” it says. The vaccinations “for the most part,” will be limited to personnel assigned to homeland biological terrorism defense missions and to the U.S. Central Command and Korea, according to a DOD statement released Tuesday. Adult family members and U.S. government contractors also may be asked to take the vaccine, according to a separate military notice. The Food and Drug Administration’s determination on whether to license the vaccine for prevention of inhalation anthrax is still pending. A public comment period on the proposed license ended in March and Food and Drug Administration officials are presumably reviewing those comments before making its determination. “The issue of mandatory vaccination will be reconsidered after the FDA completes its administrative review, which DOD expects to occur later in 2005,” the brochure says. Back to top       U.S. Inks $120 Million Anthrax Vaccine Deal, Says Delivery to Begin Within Weeks By Joe Fiorill Global Security Newswire WASHINGTON — The United States and its only licensed provider of anthrax vaccine agreed today on a contract for 5 million doses to be administered to civilians in case of a bioterror attack (see related GSN story, today; GSN, April 29). The Health and Human Services Department awarded the $122.7 million contract to drug maker BioPort after more than four months of negotiations. The deal is part of the Bioshield program to spur availability of WMD countermeasures. “We are committed to protecting the nation from the consequences of an anthrax attack,” the department’s public health emergency chief, Stewart Simonson, said in a press release. “The BioPort vaccine will add another important medical countermeasure for anthrax to the Strategic National Stockpile.” Spokesman Marc Wolfson added in a telephone interview that the department expects “within the next couple weeks” to begin receiving the vaccine, which BioPort is already manufacturing. Health and Human Services announced in November that it planned to buy the vaccine from BioPort. As the intervening months passed, complaints of slowness in reaching a contract agreement began to arise from such critics as Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Today’s contract is the second for an anthrax vaccine and the third overall awarded under Bioshield, which President George W. Bush signed into law July 21, 2004. In November 2004, Health and Human Services awarded a contract worth $877.5 million to VaxGen for 75 million doses of a new anthrax vaccine that has yet to be licensed. In March of this year, the department awarded a $5.7 million contract to Fleming & Co. for 1.7 million doses of pediatric liquid potassium iodide for use in warding off potential thyroid problems caused by radiation. Back to top       Acambis Seeks Funds for Smallpox Vaccine Readiness British drug maker Acambis is seeking $30 million from the United States to ensure its Massachusetts manufacturing facility is ready to produce smallpox vaccine during an emergency, the Boston Globe reported today (see GSN, Jan. 5). The company has already prepared 182.5 million vaccine doses for the U.S. stockpile, enough to cover the country. Now, however, there is not enough demand to keep the production line operating, the company said. Acambis argues that uncertainty on the vaccine’s lifespan and possible need in other countries requires the company to be able to quickly resume production. “Even if you have a stockpile of 200,000 bullets, if you go to war, you would need more bullets. This is the same idea,” said Gordon Cameron, Acambis chief executive. The Health and Human Services Department expects to make a decision this summer on the request, the Globe reported (Ross Kerber, Boston Globe, May 6). Back to top       Canada Equips Animal Labs for Bioterror Canada plans to distribute software allowing public and private animal health laboratories to link in order to more quickly detect and respond to a natural or terrorist-made outbreak in the country, Canadian Press reported today (see GSN, April 18). The $1.9 million project will also supply materials and training to laboratories on detection of exotic animal diseases (Canadian Press, May 6). Back to top

Russian Authorities Foil Poison Attack Plan Russian authorities have seized poisons believed to have been intended for use in terrorist attacks next week during a visit by more than 50 world leaders, the Los Angeles Times reported today (see GSN, April 15). The liquid cyanide and another poison recovered this week near the Chechen border was sufficient to kill 3,000 to 4,000 people, according to Maj. Gen. Ilya Shabalkin, spokesman for Russia’s regional counterterrorism headquarters in the North Caucasus. Authorities discovered the chemicals after receiving a tip that militants plotted “a series of terrorist acts in Chechnya and in other cities and towns of Russia, using highly poisonous substances,” said Shabalkin. “The use of these strong-acting poisons in small doses in highly populated areas, key installations and in reservoirs could have caused large numbers of victims,” the Federal Security Service announced (Kim Murphy, Los Angeles Times, May 6). Back to top       Chemical Weapons Disposal Begins at Newport Workers at the Newport Chemical Depot yesterday drained the first two of 1,600 containers of VX nerve agent stored at the Indiana facility, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, May 4). After being stored overnight in a holding tank, 360 gallons of nerve agent are set to be neutralized today by being mixed with water and sodium hydroxide and heated to 194 degrees in a chemical reactor. A laboratory will then test whether the process worked, AP reported. Results are expected by Monday (Associated Press, May 6). Meanwhile, a House-Senate conference committee has preserved $372 million in a federal spending bill to be used for development of chemical weapons disposal sites at Pueblo, Colo., and Blue Grass, Ky., the Pueblo Chieftain reported yesterday (see GSN, April 20). Votes on the bill are expected this week in the House and next week in the Senate. If approved, the legislation would ensure that funds designated for the facilities could not be shifted to other needs, according to the Chieftain. “The inclusion of these Pueblo depot provisions in the conference version of the supplemental appropriations bill will have the effect of forbidding, by law, any consideration of moving the weapons out of Pueblo for disposal, and ensure the (Defense Department) will begin contracting for the disposal on site,” Senator Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) said (Peter Roper, Pueblo Chieftain, May 5). Back to top       Nebraska Opens CW Terror Preparedness Lab A new laboratory in Nebraska will be able to test blood and urine to determine if people have been exposed to chemical agents, the Omaha World-Herald reported yesterday (see GSN, March 8). The facility at the Nebraska Public Health Laboratory was funded by more than $500,000 from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Similar laboratories are being developed in most other states and territories, the World-Herald reported (Julie Anderson,