Radiological Weapons:  Pentagon Pushing for Drug

The U.S. Defense Department has been urging approval of a drug that could help protect people from radiation, an issue that has gained increasing attention as concerns have risen that terrorists such as Osama bin Laden could possess radioactive weapons (see GSN, Dec. 4).

The drug, known as 5-androstenediol, is a steroid hormone that allegedly strengthens the immune system. Radiation can kill the immune system, rendering victims susceptible to serious infections.  Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals of California owns the rights to 5-androstenediol.

Researchers have only tested the drug on mice so far.  In one test it protected 70 percent of mice from potentially lethal radiation.  Because researchers cannot test the drug on humans for ethical reasons, Thomas Seed of the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute said he hoped the Food and Drug Administration would approve the drug using a new rule allowing tests on monkeys or other animals.

The institute was hoping that the drug would be useful for protecting soldiers in advance of possible radiation exposure, said Seed, adding the drug could also protect civilians, such as emergency personnel responding to nuclear power plant accidents.

Potential Problems

If effective, the drug would still not solve all health problems associated with nuclear accidents or attacks.  Some victims of high radiation die from immune problems, which the drug could help address, but people also die from other radiation effects, such as lung damage and cancer, doctors said.  The drug is injected, so authorities would require time after a radioactive incident to administer it.  Even if the drug is safe for animals in tests, it could still cause negative side effects in people.

Other Measures

Meanwhile, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been working to stockpile potassium iodide pills, which could prevent thyroid cancer in people exposed to radiation (see GSN, Nov. 29).

David Grdina of the University of Chicago has been trying to use a drug called amifostine to prevent cancer in radiation victims.  The drug, called Ethyol in its marketed form, has already been approved to protect the salivary glands during certain radiation therapy.

The National Cancer Institute, the Defense Department and the Energy Department have scheduled a workshop with various experts in mid-December to discuss radiation protection (Andrew Pollack, New York Times, Dec. 7).

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  U.S. Uncertain of “Dirty Bomb” Threat

In response to reports that bin Laden may be trying to build a “dirty bomb” (see GSN, Dec. 4), U.S. officials yesterday said they had no specific knowledge of Osama bin Laden’s capabilities.

“I do not know of certain knowledge precisely what kinds of capabilities [bin Laden] may have actually developed and weaponized and have available to him,” U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said during a press briefing yesterday (U.S. State Department transcript, Dec. 4).

Rumsfeld said it is well known that terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda, have tried to obtain weapons of mass destruction, and that several states known to support terrorism are developing weapons of mass destruction.

“The relationship between those countries and the terrorist networks, including al-Qaeda, is close and intimate,” Rumsfeld said during an interview with CBS anchor Dan Rather.  “So it ought not to be a surprise for anyone to realize that terrorists who are willing to kill thousands of Americans are perfectly willing to seek out, acquire and try to use weapons of mass destruction” (U.S. Defense Department transcript, Dec. 4).

U.S. Cities’ Response

In the wake of the recently issued terrorist threat warning (see GSN, Dec. 4) and of reports that bin Laden is working on radiological weapon, several U.S. mayors yesterday said they were working to prepare their cities for a potential attack.

In Denver, hospitals have set up backup phone systems, additional decontamination units and set aside extra beds for “catastrophic use,” said Denver Mayor Wellington Webb.  Los Angeles authorities have increased security in the city’s transportation infrastructure and at the water supply, Los Angles Mayor James Hahn said.

“No one could have predicted the two aircraft flying into the World Trade Center.  I mean, we prepare for the worst,” said Webb.  “But at the same time, we want to be prepared, but we cannot live our lives in terms of thinking that there’s a bomb behind every tree, and just live in a mushroom” (CNN, Dec. 4).

Following in Other Terrorists’ Footsteps

Al-Qaeda is not the only terrorist group to try to obtain materials for a nuclear or radiological weapon.  The Japanese doomsday cult Aum Shinrikyo, responsible for a deadly sarin attack in the Tokyo subway in 1995, also has tried to obtain nuclear and radioactive materials, the Christian Science Monitor reported.

During the 1990s, the cult purchased land in Australia with which it hoped to mine uranium for enrichment, according to the Monitor.  Aum also sought recruits from Russian nuclear design plants and student physicists from Moscow State University.  In 1993, members of the cult tried to set up a meeting with Russia’s then-Energy Minister Viktor Mikhailov for the stated purpose of buying a nuclear warhead, the Monitor reported.  The request for the meeting was denied (Peter Grier, Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 5).

How Bad Would It Be?

The effects of a “dirty bomb” would not come close to equaling the destruction caused by a nuclear bomb, according to experts.  “The nuclear device is a weapon of mass destruction,” said Los Alamos National Laboratory former Director Siegfried Hecker.  “Dirty bombs are weapons of mass disruption, in terms of frightening people, the cleanup and the potential economic consequences.”

The damage caused by a dirty bomb may be relatively light, experts said.  The contamination caused by the detonation of a bomb would likely spread across “only a small area of a few city blocks,” according to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 

The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War argued that a bomb using plutonium would likely have no immediate health effects, and while it could increase rates of cancer, the effects “would probably not be dramatic.”

The immediate reaction the use of a dirty bomb would cause would be to create the same level of fear as biological or chemical weapons attack, according to the Washington Post.  In that situation, a dirty bomb “would have an instant terrorist effect,” Hecker said (Guy Gugliotta, Washington Post, Dec. 5).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP