U.S. Response:  Threat Level to Orange

The White House yesterday raised the national terrorism threat level from “yellow” to “orange’ shortly after U.S. President George W. Bush concluded his nationally televised speech on Iraq, CNN.com reported.

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said terrorists might attempt to attack the United States after a U.S. invasion of Iraq.  The al-Qaeda terrorist organization might say it is attacking on behalf of Muslims and the Iraqi people, instead of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, CNN.com reported.

Operation Liberty Shield

Ridge also announced Operation Liberty Shield, which is intended to make the nation more secure and calls on U.S. officials to detain asylum applicants from countries where al-Qaeda and its sympathizers operate.  The Homeland Security Department described the effort as a “reasonable and prudent temporary action” that would allow officials to keep a close watch on the detainees while their asylum applications are investigated.

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration also increased security at U.S. airports, conducting random vehicle inspections, increasing canine patrols and the law enforcement presence and asking for public vigilance (Jeanne Meserve, CNN.com, March 17).

“Tonight I have spoken to the nation’s governors and asked them to deploy the National Guard or additional police forces to improve security at critical locations throughout their states,” said a statement from Ridge.

Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich (R) said Ridge had indicated the threat was not specific, but was based on intelligence and the expected conflict with Iraq.

“This is orange plus,” Ehrlich said.

Operation Atlas

New York City authorities, meanwhile, increased security through Operation Atlas, according to a law enforcement source.

The effort — which could cost more than $5 million every week — cancels most training, equips police patrols with radiation sensors, increases towing, and puts more uniformed officers, National Guard soldiers and canine units in public places (Jamie McShane, CNN.com, March 17).

Back to top

Iraq I:  Bush Gives Hussein 48 Hours to Leave Iraq or Face War

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and his two sons, Uday and Qusay, have 48 hours to step down from power and leave Iraq or face the threat of U.S. military action, U.S. President George W. Bush said last night (see GSN, March 18).

“All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end.  Saddam Hussein and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours,” Bush said in a televised address to the nation.  “Their refusal to do so will result in military conflict, commenced at a time of our choosing,” he said.

In his remarks, Bush indicated that previous U.N. resolutions gave the United States the legal authority to use force to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction.  The United States, the United Kingdom and Spain yesterday withdrew a proposed resolution on Iraq from U.N. Security Council consideration.

“The United States and our allies are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction,” Bush said.  “This is not a question of authority.  It is a question of will,” he said.

Bush also issued veiled criticism of France and Russia, two permanent Security Council members who had publicly indicated their intention to veto any resolution that could authorize military action.  British U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock yesterday cited France’s veto threat as one reason the resolution was withdrawn.

“These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it,” Bush said of the permanent Security Council members opposed to a new resolution, declining to name them.

Bush laid the blame for the failure to disarm Hussein on the Security Council itself.  “The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities.  So we will rise to ours,” he said.

Noting that many people in Iraqi were able to hear his remarks through a translated broadcast, Bush promised the United States would provide humanitarian aid and help rebuild the post-Hussein Iraq.

“If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you,” Bush said in his remarks aimed at the Iraqi population.  “As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine you need.  We will tear down the apparatus of terror, and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free,” he said.

Bush also warned Iraqi military and civilian personnel to not obey orders calling for the sabotage of oil facilities or the use of weapons of mass destruction, promising war crimes prosecutions for those who chose to do so.

“War crimes will be prosecuted.  War criminals will be punished,” Bush said.  “And it will be no defense to say ‘I was just following orders,’” he said (White House release, March 18).

Reaction on Capitol Hill

Members of Congress were mixed in their reactions to Bush’s speech, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) said that while he doubted Hussein would voluntarily leave Iraq, he praised Bush for “giving him this one last, clear option.”

Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.) said he was sure Bush would make a second address to the nation, “the going to war speech,” if Hussein did not step down.

The Bush administration is expected to send a request to Congress as early as Friday for as much as $90 billion to fund a war with Iraq, congressional and White House aides said. 

Representative John Lewis (D-Ga.) said that while he still opposed war, he would support U.S. troops.

“I am against the rush to war,” Lewis said in a statement.  “I believe that our president has an obligation to give diplomacy more time.  However, I will stand behind our troops regardless of what happens.  Our brave men and women positioned in the Persian Gulf deserve our unconditional support,” he added.

Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) offered harsh criticism for Bush, saying he failed “miserably” at diplomacy, resulting in war.

“I’m saddened, saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we’re now forced to war,” Daschle said in a speech to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, “saddened that we have to give up one life because this president couldn’t create the kind of diplomatic effort that was so critical for our country” (Shepard/Lindell, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, March 18).

Iraqi Response

Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri yesterday rejected any idea that Hussein would go into exile and instead called for Bush to resign.

“He should go away from the presidency and let the Americans lead an ordinary life with other nations, not a life of aggression, a policy of aggression against other nations,” Sabri said prior to Bush’s speech.  “This policy has brought about disasters to the U.S.  So for the U.S. to live properly with the world and for the world nations to live in peace, this crazy man should go,” Sabri added (CNN.com, March 18),

Many analysts, and even some White House officials, have said it is highly unlikely that Hussein will choose to step down.

Instead, the Iraqi leader will probably attempt to hide in one of his many bunkers or in the home of an Iraqi family, officials and analysts said.  Hussein was reported to have used these two strategies during the 1991 Gulf War, according to the Boston Globe.  Even if the Iraqi security services turn against Hussein, he still might attempt to hide in one of the many bunkers unknown even to those closest to him, analysts said (Geneive Abdo, Boston Globe, March 18).

Blows to Blair

In the United Kingdom, three British ministers resigned yesterday over the apparent decision to go to war with Iraq without U.N. approval, according to the London Telegraph.

The first was former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, leader of the House of Commons.  In a statement last night, Cook said the United Kingdom was heading to war without international support and questioned the claims that Hussein still possessed weapons of mass destruction.

In his resignation letter, Cook praised British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s “heroic” attempt to obtain a new resolution within the Security Council, saying it was not the British government’s fault that such an effort failed.

For his part, Blair said Cook had been a “good friend and colleague” and that he regretted that Cook would not be part of the government “that leads the country through this difficult and dangerous crisis” (George Jones, London Telegraph, March 18).

In addition to Cook, two other ministers have also resigned — Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, junior health minister; and John Denham, Home Office minister, according to the Telegraph.

“I’m under no illusion about the nature of the regime led by Saddam Hussein.  I recognize the tremendous efforts made by the prime minister and other ministers to try and secure a second resolution,” Lord Hunt said after his resignation.  “But I do not feel we are justified in taking pre-emptive action without broad international support, or the clear support of the British people.  I’m also concerned about the long-term consequences for international stability of such pre-emptive action,” he said (London Telegraph, March 18).

The British Parliament is expected to vote today on a resolution that would authorize the use of “all means necessary” to disarm Iraq.  As many as 160 of the 411 Labor Party members of Parliament, however, could choose to instead vote for an amendment that says there is no justification for war, according to the Globe and Mail.

“A large number of colleagues, many of whom loyally supported the government last time, are now deeply unhappy about what they see as Britain going to war without sufficient cause on the coattails of the United States, and without proper United Nations authorization,” said Chris Smith, a Labor member of Parliament and a war opponent (Alan Freeman, Globe and Mail, March 18).

French Reaction

France said today that the international community does not support the U.S. 48-hour deadline for Hussein to step down.

“This unilateral decision is contrary to the wishes of the Security Council and of the international community, who wish to pursue the disarmament of Iraq in accordance with (U.N.) resolution 1441,” said a statement released by the office of French President Jacques Chirac.  “Whatever the objective pursued, France recalls that only the Security Council has the authority to justify the use of force,” the statement said (Al-Bawaba, March 18).

Back to top

Iraq II:  U.N. Weapons Inspectors Begin to Withdraw

U.N weapons inspectors began leaving Iraq today over concerns that U.S.-led military action was imminent (see related GSN story, today).

About 80 of the 134 inspectors and support staff deployed in Iraq landed in Larnaca, Cyprus, which has been a base for the inspectors since November.  More inspectors were expected to arrive on a later flight, according to Reuters.

“It is unfortunate, but we have to leave.  It was a high-level decision,” said Hiro Ueki, spokesman for the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC).  “There is a sense of sadness that the job we came to complete was not completed.  It is a decision beyond our control,” Ueki added (Samia Nakhoul, Reuters, March 18).

A spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency, which oversaw nuclear inspections in Iraq, said the agency expects its inspectors to someday return.

“We expect that any new government (in Iraq) would also be a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said.  “We expect to be back, but when and under what circumstances, what terms, is not certain,” he said (Agence France-Presse, March 18).

Blix Presents “Key Disarmament Tasks” Report

As inspectors made their preparations yesterday to leave Iraq, UNMOVIC chief Hans Blix distributed to the Security Council his long-awaited report on Iraq’s “key remaining disarmament tasks.”

The report, mandated by Resolution 1284, lists the tasks under 12 headings, most of them dealing with fate of chemical and biological weapons agents Iraq was known to have before inspectors first left at the end of 1998.  Iraq maintains that these agents have been destroyed but UNMOVIC is demanding proof of this.

Blix’s proposed program of work would require Iraq to “present any remaining quantities” of anthrax, botulinum toxin, mustard gas, VX, sarin, binary agents or “credible evidence” that these agents have destroyed or spoiled.  Iraq would also be required to “present any remaining chemical and/or biological munitions, including aerial bombs, rockets or missile warheads, artillery shells, cluster munitions and fragmentation rounds.”

The report seeks that Iraq account for its research into producing Scuds and other long-range missiles, its import of missile fuel and to “explain with credible evidence which missile systems, and their specifications, it intended to be tested” at a major test site.  UNMOVIC also wants Iraq to explain the purposes of various programs for the production of unmanned drones.

The report is a distillation of a lengthy document Blix presented to the council on March 7.

Echoing an earlier statement to the council, Blix wrote that the time needed to complete this program of work “is months rather than weeks or years” assuming “a proactive Iraqi cooperation.”

German U.N. Ambassador Gunter Pleuger, one of the council’s key advocates of continuing inspections, said this morning, “it makes sense” to hear from Blix tomorrow because “the inspection system will remain and it might be useful in the future.”  The report “is going to be discussed in the council as it should be,” Pleuger said, adding that the Blix report is mandated by Resolution 1284 and the resolution “has not been repealed and cannot be repealed by things that are happening outside of the United Nations.”

“It is wrong to say diplomacy and the United Nations have failed because the United Nations and diplomacy have created the instruments to achieve the common goal of the peaceful disarmament of Iraq,” Pleuger added, referring to the inspections regime.

Germany and France had suggested the council meet tomorrow at the ministerial level to receive the new report.  At least six foreign ministers, including France and Germany, but not the United States, are planning to attend (Jim Wurst, Global Security Newswire, March 18).

Kurds Flee to Avoid Chemical Weapons Attacks

Fearing retaliatory Iraqi chemical weapons attacks, Kurds in the northern section of the country have begun fleeing urban areas to seek shelter in mountain villages, according to the Boston Globe.

“We know what Saddam is capable of.  He is the most dangerous man in the world,” said Najat Shafiq Sadiq.

Rizgar Ali, governor of the Kurdish region, said he was frustrated that the United States had not provided the same kinds of protective equipment to the Kurds as it had to other allies in the Persian Gulf region.

“We should be angry with the Americans and the U.N. for this, for not providing gas masks or any other protection,” Ali said.  “We have been victims of this before, so why have they left us undefended?” he added (Charles Sennott, Boston Globe, March 18).

Inspections

U.N. inspectors visited three last suspect Iraqi sites yesterday, according to a U.N. press release.  Inspectors supervised the destruction of prohibited al-Samoud 2 missiles at al-Taji (see related GSN story, today).  They also visited the Tikrit Dairy Factory and al-Sina Center (U.N. release II, March 17).

For further information, see:

UNMOVIC

IAEA Iraq Action Team

U.N. Resolution 1441

Back to top

Israeli Response:  Israeli Residents Directed to Seal Rooms

The Israeli Home Front Command today urged Israeli residents to seal rooms to prepare for a possible chemical or biological attack from Iraq, Ha’aretz reported today (see GSN, March 4).

The probability of an Iraqi attack on Israel, however, is very low, according to Israeli intelligence reports.

The announcements came after much debate yesterday among senior officials.

“If this is how things are run before the campaign begins, I shudder to think what will happen in a real case if, heaven forbid, a missile does fall on us,” said a military source (Amos Harel, Ha’aretz, March 18).

Information for sealing rooms and guarding against attacks is available on the command’s Web site (Jerusalem Post, March 18).

Sealed Room Deaths

Meanwhile, a mother and two of her children suffocated when they slept in a sealed room adjacent to a coal-fueled heater, Israeli police reported yesterday.

Fearing Iraqi missile attacks, the family had begun routinely sleeping in a sealed room, a police spokesman said.

The family’s father and two other children survived (Associated Press/San Francisco Chronicle, March 17).

Back to top

Iraq III:  Summary of Inspections

Experts from the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have conducted hundreds of inspections in Iraq since resuming the post-Gulf War inspection regime Nov. 27, 2002.  Inspectors began withdrawing from the country today over concerns of an imminent U.S.-led attack.  The following chart summarizes some of the inspectors’ recently reported activities.

 

Date	Site	Activity
March 17	Al-Taji	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles and related equipment (see GSN, March 18).
	Tikrit Dairy Factory	See GSN, March 18.
	Al-Sina Center
March 16	Al-Taji	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles and related equipment (U.N. release, March 16).
	Al-Aziziyah Airfield and Firing Range	UNMOVIC biological inspectors supervised the excavation of R-400 bombs (U.N. release, March 16).
	Al-Rashidiyah military stores	U.N. release, March 16.
	Technical Institute of Kerbala
	Kerbala Health Centre Respiratory and Chest Diseases Consultation Clinic
	Al-Habbaniyah and al-Fallujah Missile Facility
March 15	Taji Technical Battalion	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles and related equipment (U.N. release, March 15).
	Al-Qaid Warhead Filling Plant of the al-Qa Qaa State Company	UNMOVIC missile inspectors placed tags on five al-Fatah warheads (U.N. release, March 15).
	Daura Oil Refinery	UNMOVIC chemical experts worked to identify the changes made to the site over the last four years (U.N. release, March 15).
	Al-Rhashidyah Military Store	U.N. release, March 15.
	Site in the area of Jabal Hamryn, north of Baghdad
	Large underground facility
	Daura SEHEE
	Tho al-Fekar Plant
	Area northwest of Baghdad	IAEA inspectors conducted a radiation survey (U.N. release, March 15).
March 14	Taji Technical Battalion	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles and related warheads (U.N. release, March 14).
	Al-Muthanna	Inspectors destroyed chemical waste left over at the site (U.N. release, March 14).
	Site west of the northern city of Mosul	Inspectors inspected a destroyed ballistic missile launcher (U.N. release, March 14).
	Northeast Baghdad	IAEA inspectors conducted a radiation survey (U.N. release, March 14).
March 13	Fasten Frozen Foods Co. Ltd.	U.N. release, March 13.
	State Company for Canned Foods
	Al-Taji	UNMOVIC missile inspectors supervised the destruction of al-Samoud 2 missiles (see GSN, March 13).
March 7-12	See GSN, March 13

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Duma Postpones Treaty Vote, Citing Iraq War

Citing the expected U.S. military action against Iraq, Russian lawmakers today decided to delay consideration of the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty and did not set another date to take the nuclear weapons disarmament agreement up (see GSN, March 7).

“After yesterday’s statement by the president of the United States, and in conditions of massive pressure by the U.S. administration on the world community, a decision to postpone the ratification was taken,” said Sergei Shishkaryov, deputy chairman of the International Affairs Committee in the Russian Duma.

“We consider ratification very important, but now this step is not justified,” he added.  Shishkaryov said the Duma Council, which sets the agenda for the legislative body, would look at the issue again next month.

The U.S. Senate unanimously approved the treaty March 6 (Associated Press/London Guardian, March 18).

Back to top

North Korea:  Cheney Plans Asia Trip

U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney plans to travel to Asia next month to address the North Korean nuclear crisis, he said Sunday on NBCs’ Meet the Press.

“The situation in North Korea is very serious.  We recognize that,” Cheney said.  “We think the key is a multilateral approach.  Everybody always wants us to be multilateral and we think it’s appropriate here,” he added.

Cheney said that North Korea’s neighbors have more at stake in the current standoff than the United States does.

“They’re far more directly affected than we are — Japan, South Korea and especially China,” he added (NBC News, Meet the Press, March 16).

Meanwhile, North Korea said yesterday that the nuclear standoff will determine its sovereignty.

The nuclear crisis “will decide whether the D.P.R.K.’s sovereignty will be trampled down by the U.S. or protected,” said North Korea’s official Rodong Sinmun newspaper (Associated Press/Straits Times, March 18).

Food Aid Resumes

The European Union sent $10 million of wheat to North Korea in the largest food shipment to the starving country in several months, BBC.com reported yesterday.

“With this shipment it will mean we can resume distributions to most, if not all, of all of those we cut off,” said World Food Program spokesman Gerald Bourke (BBC News, March 17).

Back to top

CTBT:  Ivory Coast Ratifies Treaty

The Ivory Coast deposited its instrument of ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty with the United Nations March 11 (see GSN, Sept. 30).  To date, 98 nations have ratified the treaty, including 31 of the 44 nations whose ratifications are necessary for the treaty to enter into force (CTBT Organization Web site, Sept. 30).

Back to top

Anthrax I:  Preattack Antibiotic Distribution System Needed, Experts Say

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — Distributing anthrax antibiotics, such as Cipro, prior to or shortly after an attack could dramatically reduce casualties, according to a study to be published this week in the online version of the Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences (see GSN, March 14).

Yale University, Stanford University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology researchers have determined that distribution of antibiotics before a large-scale anthrax attack could cut anticipated casualties by half by reducing delays in administering such treatments, the study says.  It also says some other biological terrorism countermeasures being developed, such as advanced sensors, could be less effective without a rapid-response plan in place.

The researchers developed a mathematical model to simulate the effects of an anthrax release in a major city.  In the study’s base scenario, 1.5 million people out of a population of 11.5 million are infected with anthrax through a release of billions of spores.  If the entire infected population received antibiotics after 48 hours — the time needed to become aware that an attack had occurred — more than 123,000 casualties would be expected, the study says.

The number of anticipated casualties could be reduced by almost half, however, if anthrax antibiotics were distributed before an attack to reduce waits at medical facilities to receive such supplies, the study says.  “The hospital queue is the system bottleneck,” it says.

There are several risks in the preattack distribution of antibiotics, such as the still-unknown costs of such a plan and the side effects of the drug, the study says.  There are also concerns among scientists that if people take such antibiotics needlessly, it could increase the number of drug-resistant bacteria. 

If a preattack distribution plan is determined to be too risky, then it is “imperative” that nonmedical personnel and volunteers be used to distribute antibiotics in the event of an attack to reduce delays, the study says.  Antibiotic distribution delays could also be reduced by increasing the amount of available medical personnel by expanding inhalational anthrax training and through the development of mobile medical teams, it says.

The anticipated casualty rate could also be further reduced by promoting adherence to antibiotic regimens, the study says.  This was a concern during the autumn 2001 anthrax attacks, when many people who were potentially exposed to anthrax spores either declined preventive antibiotics or discontinued their use too early.

“It’s one thing to simply worry about what anthrax can do to us, but quite another to determine how we can best respond to an anthrax attack.  The United States must act quickly to put a rapid response plan in place,” Edward Kaplan of Yale University’s School of Management, one of the researchers involved in the study, said in a statement.

“To not prepare for the possibility of such an attack puts many more lives at risk,” he said.

The study was not as supportive of development of biological weapons detection systems.  Such detectors, if used without a preattack antibiotic distribution system in place, would provide a “false sense of security,” the study says, because even if the delay in antibiotic distribution were reduced from 48 hours to six hours, 70,000 casualties would still be suffered. 

The Bush administration has placed a high emphasis on the development of biological detectors.  In January, the U.S. Defense Department launched a program to develop new high-speed sensors capable of detecting an aerosolized release of biological agents in less than 60 seconds (see GSN, Jan. 8).  The New York Times also reported in January the administration’s plans to modify the Environmental Protection Agency’s national network of air quality monitors to detect biological agents (see GSN, Jan. 22).

In addition to calling for development of a rapid-response plan, the study also urged officials to begin a “serious consideration” of mass anthrax vaccination if the threat of a large-scale anthrax attack became significant enough.  This approach should be considered because of the potentially huge numbers of casualties that could be suffered in such an attack, the possibility of panic and flight, the potential economic consequences and the “general societal dysfunction in the aftermath of an attack,” the study says.

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax   

Back to top

Smallpox:  Revised Guidelines Open Door to Local Mass Vaccinations

By David McGlinchey
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — U.S. health officials last month revised their smallpox attack response plan, creating the option of widespread smallpox vaccinations after an attack.  Previously, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had pushed solely for a “ring vaccination” strategy which seeks to prevent an epidemic by first vaccinating those who have been in contact with known victims.

Some experts have cautioned that the ring vaccination would not work in the event of a terrorist attack.

Following the revisions, health officials will still act first to identify and isolate an outbreak with targeted vaccinations, but will also consider large-scale vaccinations as a more viable option.  The change was made possible by the growing availability of smallpox vaccine, said Raymond Strikas, director of smallpox preparedness and response activity at the CDC’s national immunization program.

The former guidelines for state and local health officials were “written in large part over a year ago, in late 2001.  At that point we were talking about a small amount of vaccine available,” Strikas said.  Those guidelines were removed from the CDC Web site in late January and replaced Feb. 27.

The Vaccination Guidelines for State and Local Health Agencies says “vaccination of close contacts to smallpox cases played the most important role in stopping transmission of disease.  Public health authorities may supplement this strategy with broader vaccination campaigns to increase the level of community immunity to smallpox.”

This language represents an opening to allow for local mass vaccinations, according to William Bicknell, a Boston University professor and an authority on immunization planning.

“They are clearly moving toward much more comfort with going to local and national mass vaccination early after an attack.  It is not explicit, but it is a distinct shift in tone and balance,” Bicknell said.

In November, White House biological terrorism chief D.A. Henderson said health officials should offer to immunize the local population if an attack spreads smallpox.

“There’s nothing else that one can really do at that point, other than make the vaccine available,” he said.

Guidelines Provide More Detail

Strikas said the new guidelines address concerns of local and state health officials who have requested more specific direction.  The revised guidelines provide “a clear statement about what to do in the first period of time [after an attack] … dividing responsibilities, some more detail on the when,” he said.

Officials involved in the program — which has been plagued by low turnout and volunteer fears of adverse reactions to the vaccine — have often pointed to the CDC’s education efforts as examples of success.

Two weeks ago, CDC Director Julie Gerberding said the CDC’s programs had reached “hundreds of thousands” of medical workers through several media, including the Web site guidelines.

Bicknell corresponded with CDC officials in the weeks leading up to the change, and he said the revision is a step in the right direction.  He faulted the new guidelines, however, for several omissions that he said were glaring.

Specifically, he criticized the advertisement of a post-exposure “window,” which federal health officials say allows patients to protect themselves with vaccinations even several days after coming in contact with the virus.

Bicknell said the window does not give an accurate picture of a post-exposure scenario because people most likely would not know when they were exposed.

When a person realizes that they have been exposed to the smallpox virus, they could mistakenly believe they have several days from that point to become immunized, Bicknell said.  By the time they are vaccinated, “this rather imaginary window is long since shut, and you have suggested to planners that somehow people can be found in that time,” he added.

Bicknell also doubted the medical benefit of vaccinations several days after exposure.

“Vaccination after exposure may decrease the severity of the disease.  There is, I think, no credible evidence that allows anyone to state that it will prevent disease.  That is an extraordinary conclusion to make based on the data,” he said.

Strikas conceded that a time lag between the attack and the onset of vaccinations would allow some transmission of the disease.  Current plans, however, are designed to stop the infections soon after the initial cases, called the first generation, are discovered.

“We will recognize the first generation as it is happening.  Modify the second generation and prevent the third,” he said.

The CDC cannot stop the smallpox virus immediately after an attack.  “We know that won’t happen, some cases will slip through, some of those second generations,” Strikas said.

Pushing the idea of widespread vaccinations, Bicknell criticized what he called an “excessive reliance” on ring vaccination and the tracing of an infected patient’s personal contacts.

“Although contact tracing is a beloved concept in public health, it doesn’t work” after a biological terrorist attack, Bicknell said.

“A narrow medical approach would say, ‘let’s go individual-by-individual.’  A public health approach, a keeping-the-nation-functioning approach, would say, ‘let’s stop this thing in its tracks,’” he added.

Back to top

Anthrax II:  U.S. Biotechnology Firm Develops New Treatment

The U.S. biotechnology company Human Genome Sciences, Inc. announced today the development of a new drug capable of both preventing and treating anthrax infection (see GSN, March 14).

The new drug, ABthrax, is a genetically engineered human antibody drug that treats inhalational anthrax by countering protective antigen — one of the three toxins produced by the anthrax bacterium.  When a person is infected with anthrax, the protective antigen binds to a cell and acts as a syringe to inject the cell with the other two toxins produced by the bacterium.  ABthrax prevents the protective antigen from binding with a cell, and in turn, preventing the other toxins from entering and killing the cell, according to a company press release.

When administered pre-exposure, ABthrax was found to significantly increase the survivability rate of rabbits and primates exposed to inhalational anthrax, the company release said.  As opposed to the current anthrax vaccine, which requires a series of injections administered over an 18-month period to provide protection against infection, a single dose of ABthrax may be able to do the same once the appropriate level of the antibody is reached in the blood, the release said.

Human Genome Sciences now plans to file an Investigational New Drug application with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to begin human clinical testing of the drug’s safety and tolerability, according to the company release.  Under the FDA’s “animal efficacy rule,” animal data can be used to demonstrate a drug’s effectiveness when it cannot be ethically or feasibly tested on humans.

“We believe that ABthrax demonstrates significant potential as a new prophylactic and therapeutic option in fighting anthrax infection,” William Haseltine, chairman and chief executive officer of Human Genome Sciences, said in a statement.  “We hope, by applying our expertise in protein and antibody discovery and development, that Human Genome Sciences will be able to make an important contribution to our nation’s biodefense initiative,” he added (Human Genome Sciences release, March 18).

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions About Anthrax

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax

Back to top

Iraq:  Baghdad Has Destroyed 72 al-Samoud 2 Missiles

Iraq yesterday destroyed two prohibited al-Samoud 2 missiles and related equipment, bringing the total to 72 missiles since March 1, according to a U.N. press release (see GSN, March 17; U.N. release, March 17).  On Sunday, Iraq destroyed two of the missiles, along with related equipment (U.N. release, March 16).

Back to top