Anthrax:  New Tests Can Distinguish Between Ames Strain Stocks, Expert Says

A researcher in the FBI’s “Amerithrax” investigation into the recent anthrax attacks said yesterday that he can determine differences between various stocks of the Ames strain (see GSN, Feb. 11).

Paul Keim of Northern Arizona University said his new analytical method can distinguish between stocks of the Ames strain held by different laboratories and research facilities.  The information could help determine which facility kept the strain of anthrax most closely related to that used in the attacks.  This, in turn, could help narrow down the potential suspects, according to the New York Times (see GSN, Feb. 8).

Previously, Keim had developed a genetic fingerprint test for anthrax, but it could not determine the difference between various Ames strain stocks, according to the Times.

The new method examines two rings of DNA in the anthrax bacterium called plasmids, the Times reported.  Keim focused on one of these plasmids, known as a poly-A tract, and determined that stocks of the Ames strain differed in their gene sequences (see GSN, Dec. 18, 2001).

Using the new method, Keim said he is able to determine the differences between the Ames strain held by four laboratories and a natural strain of Ames anthrax taken from a goat in 1997 (Nicholas Wade, New York Times, Feb. 13).

False Alarm in Olympic City

A false positive test for anthrax alarmed officials at the Salt Lake City airport for more than two hours last night, according to the Associated Press.

A recently installed screening system first detected anthrax, according to the AP.  After a second test also indicated anthrax, officials put emergency response plans into motion, but they did not stop airport operations and issued no warnings, the AP reported.

Further laboratory testing came back negative four times, which led officials to believe the initial tests were wrong.

“We don’t believe this indicates the equipment is faulty at all,” said Scott Williams, deputy director of the Utah Health Department.  “These tests are extremely sensitive and we know that at the first level there is the possibility of a false result” (Associated Press/New York Times, Feb. 13).

Back to top

Anthrax:  Canadian Studies Would Not Have Changed Policy, CDC Says

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would probably not have changed its anthrax antibiotic recommendations even if it had known about Canadian studies that indicated how dangerous anthrax sent through the mail could be, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Feb. 8).

Last year, two Canadian laboratories conducted studies on letters filled with anthrax spores and found that they could spread farther and would pose a higher threat than previously believed, according to the Post.  Bioterrorism experts in several U.S. agencies circulated the results by mid-October, when the anthrax-tainted letter sent to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) was opened (see GSN, Dec. 12).

The CDC, however, did not learn the results of the Canadian studies until the U.S. anthrax attacks were ending in November, the Post reported.  The CDC headed the initial public health response to the attacks (see GSN, Feb. 8).

“It would have been good to have that information,” said Bradley Perkins, the lead CDC anthrax investigator.  “We were clearly dealing in a low-information environment.”

Health officials put Senate staff members on preventive anthrax antibiotics soon after the Daschle letter was opened, according to the Post.  Postal workers were given antibiotics six days later, after it was known that the two mail-sorting centers through which the letter had passed were contaminated.  By that point, however, several postal workers were infected with anthrax and two would later die, the Post reported.

“Had we known early on about the Canadian experiments, would that have pushed us to prophylax people earlier?  Maybe,” said Larry Siegel, senior deputy director for medical affairs for the Washington Health Department.  “Would it have mattered?  We don’t know.”

The Canadian research included two studies.  In one study, conducted at a military laboratory in Suffield, Alberta, researchers concluded that a person who opens a letter and stands over it for 10 minutes would inhale hundreds of lethal doses of spores, the Post reported.

“‘Passive’ dissemination of anthrax spores from an envelope presents a far more serious threat than had been previously assumed,” the military researchers said.

In the other study, a group of emergency responders in Ottawa investigated what happened when they carried a sealed, contaminated letter around an office.

“Contamination was present on the desk, papers, file folders and pen prior to opening the envelope (contamination was concentrated at the corners of the envelope where it was leaking out),” they said.

Perkins said he did not believe that the results of the Canadian studies would have changed the CDC’s antibiotics recommendations because the agency based its decisions on observations made after two people in Florida became sick with anthrax.

“I think the weight of the decision, … would [still] have been based on the field observations in Florida,” Perkins said.  “Whether having this information would have tipped the scales of decision making to a more conservative approach is in the realm of speculation at this point.”

The Alberta researchers presented their findings to U.S. military biological defense experts at four meetings from May to October 2001, the Post reported.  The Ottawa researchers presented their findings at a conference in Canberra in May.  Scientists from a delegation to the Canberra conference sponsored by the U.S. State Department’s counterterrorism office passed the Ottawa findings to the FBI, Secret Service and Capitol Police, according to the Post.

One of the Canadian researchers involved in the anthrax studies attempted to alert the CDC directly, but was not successful, the Post reported.  On Oct. 19, he e-mailed a copy of one of the studies to Richard Kellog, head of the CDC’s laboratory response network.

“In light of current of events, we thought you might like a copy,” said a note attached to the study.

Kellog said he did not know about the e-mail until two months later because of the chaotic situation after the Florida anthrax attack.

“In the middle of an emergency, do not do things in a perfunctory way,” Kellog said of the Canadian researcher’s e-mail.  “There was no red flag on this, and I was dealing in a red-flag world” (David Brown, Washington Post, Feb. 11).

No New Anthrax Vaccine

Meanwhile, Americans will still have to rely on the current anthrax vaccine since second-generation vaccines are still only in the research phase, said a leading vaccine researcher (see GSN, Feb. 6).

The only anthrax vaccine currently available for the public in the event of another attack is one approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration almost 30 years ago, Daniel Lucey, director of the Infectious Disease Service at the Washington Hospital Center said Saturday.

“This is the only vaccine that we will have if there is another anthrax attack,” Lucey said.

Researchers are also examining a protein taken from the blood of U.S. soldiers who have received the anthrax vaccine as another treatment option, Lucey said (see GSN, Jan. 8).  Current anthrax antibiotics only kill the bacteria itself, according to the Associated Press.  Researchers believe that immune globulin taken from the blood of those inoculated with the anthrax vaccine might also neutralize the toxin that the bacteria produces (Associated Press/New York Times, Feb. 9).

No Rest for Postal Workers

More than 85 Washington-area postal workers who have handled irradiated mail have complained of health problems, postal workers union leaders said (see GSN, Feb. 7).

“The employees are experiencing nosebleeds, runny noses, runny eyes, extreme headaches, nausea,” said Tammy Thompson, president of the Montgomery County, Md., local chapter of the postal workers union.  “Some are actually throwing up, and we have been going through this since December.”

Federal investigators have said the reported symptoms are minor and new measures have been put into place to reduce levels of harmful gasses produced by the irradiation process.

Medical experts, though, have recommended that postal workers at the mail-processing center in Gaithersburg, Md., continue to monitor their symptoms.

“These are unknowns, so I don’t think we can dismiss them as minimal.  They have to be explored.  They have to put the best science to use and get answers,” said Sally Davidow, spokeswoman for the American Postal Workers Union.  “If irradiation is causing [symptoms], or something else is causing it, they have to get to the bottom of it and fix it” (Spencer Hsu, Washington Post, Feb. 9).

About 200 postal workers at the Hamilton Township, N.J., mail-processing center protested Saturday to demand to know when they could return to work at the closed building.

The demonstrators said they wanted to know when the mail-processing center would be cleaned of anthrax and reopened and whether they could go back to work there.  More than 700 Hamilton workers were reassigned to other facilities after the building was found to be contaminated with anthrax.

Hamilton employees are concerned that they will be permanently reassigned to other facilities, said Steven Bahrle, branch president of Local 308 of the American Postal Workers Union.

“We understand that the Postal Service is not responsible for the initial anthrax attack,” Bahrle said.  “They’ve now turned an 8-hour day into a 12-hour day.  It’s impacting their family life.”

Officials are still working out decontamination contracts for mail-processing centers in Washington and New Jersey that are contaminated and they have set no time for reopenings, said U.S. Postal Service spokeswoman Diane Todd.  She added that it is unknown whether all Hamilton employees will return to work there.

“They are sympathetic to what’s going on and what the employees are going through,” Todd said.  “It’s an unfortunate thing that’s occurred, and we’re trying to deal with it as best we can” (New York Times, Feb. 10).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP