Anthrax:  Postal Service to Spend $35 Million on Decontamination

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Postal Service plans to spend $35 million to decontaminate two postal facilities that were tainted with anthrax and have remained shuttered since last fall’s attacks, a Postal Service spokeswoman said yesterday (see GSN, June 28).

The funds will cover the costs of decontaminating the Brentwood Road postal facility in Washington and the Trenton, N.J., Postal Processing and Distribution Center, said spokeswoman Monica Hand.  Ashland Inc. and Sabre Oxidation Technologies have been awarded the contracts to clean the two facilities, Hand said, adding that the Postal Service will buy the chemicals and equipment needed for the projects.

There has been no specific date set yet for the cleanup projects to begin, Hand said, but fumigation of the two facilities with chlorine dioxide gas is expected to begin this summer.  The Trenton facility is scheduled to be decontaminated once work at Brentwood is completed, Hand said.

The Postal Service will “just keep doing it till you no longer get growth of spores on samples,” Hand said.

Irradiation Sickness?

Meanwhile, a report scheduled to be released today says that irradiation, used to sterilize pieces of mail sent to members of Congress since the anthrax attacks, might be responsible for several health complaints reported by congressional staff members, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Feb. 20).

The report, prepared by the congressional Office of Compliance, says that testing conducted on the air from irradiated mailbags and congressional mailrooms found trace amounts of chemical irritants, according to the Times.

“While we do not believe these chemical irritants are life-threatening, we believe further study is essential to determine the effects of extended exposure to irradiated mail, particularly in restricted work areas,” the Times quoted the report as saying.

According to the Times, the office recommends that congressional staff members be monitored, that more studies be performed and that preventive measures, such as airing mail before it is handled, be conducted.

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  U.S. Should Expect Another Attack, Expert Says

U.S. bioterrorism expert Michael Osterholm warned environmental health experts Sunday that another biological weapons attack will probably occur in the United States (see GSN, June 20).

Another biological weapons attack could perhaps come in the form of anthrax spores placed in the ventilation system of a building, which would infect a large number of people before it could be detected, said Osterholm, a special adviser to Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, speaking at a meeting in Minneapolis (see GSN, May 14).  Or, terrorists could attempt an attack by poisoning a tanker truck of unpasteurized milk with botulinum bacteria before the milk is processed and distributed, Osterholm said.

“You wouldn’t have enough body bags in Minnesota to handle that event if it occurred here,” he said.  “That kind of situation does exist.”

The U.S. environmental health system needs to be changed to reduce the more than 4,000 separate departments competing for funds, Osterholm said.  The system also needs to recruit 15,000 new professionals to provide new and better ideas, he said.

“We need some rabble-rousers,” Osterholm said.  “We need some people willing to shake the system ... We get too comfortable telling ourselves what a good job we’re doing” (Craig Gustafson, Associated Press, July 1).

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions on Anthrax

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Anthrax

Journal of the American Medical Association Background on Botulinum Toxin

CDC Basic Botulism Information

Back to top

Anthrax:  White House Stockpiles Vaccine for Civilians

The White House announced a new policy on anthrax vaccinations Friday, preserving a third of the U.S. supply for civilians and continuing to vaccinate military personnel considered to be at high risk (see GSN, May 31).

Under the new policy, the U.S. Defense Department in two weeks is expected to begin vaccinating personnel who will spend at least 15 days per year in high-risk regions, according to the New York Times.  Those regions include the Middle East, the Korean peninsula and possibly Afghanistan, officials said.

One-third of the U.S. anthrax vaccine supply will be set aside for civilian use in the event of an anthrax attack, the Times reported.  Doses will be stored in secret locations as part of the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile administered by the Health and Human Services Department, Bush administration officials said (see GSN, Jan. 29).  In the event of a domestic anthrax attack, first responders such as police and firefighters, as well as those near the areas exposed to the disease, would be vaccinated, Bush administration officials said.

“This is a shift from our earlier policy, which was to vaccinate everyone,” said William Winkenwerder, assistant defense secretary for health affairs.  “This is a policy that’s focused on those in higher-threat areas.”

The change in policy, which previously had been to vaccinate all military personnel, could have been caused by concerns over a potential shortage, the Times reported.  There have been concerns that BioPort, the sole U.S. producer of the vaccine, would not be able to produce enough vaccine needed in the event of a major military operation, some Bush administration officials said (see GSN, May 17).

BioPort officials, however, said they would be able to produce as much vaccine as needed, adding they are disappointed that the Pentagon appeared to link the change in policy to supply concerns (see GSN, April 12).

“We can make millions on an annual basis,” BioPort President Robert Kramer said.  “We were disappointed to hear at the press conference that the vaccination schedule is supply driven, that policy was being driven by supply.  We’re ready, willing and able to partner with anyone to produce enough doses under our license.”

Some White House officials said the change in anthrax vaccination policy is meant to preserve more of the stockpile for civilians.

“At this point in time we do not have a large enough stockpile to prevaccinate, so the stockpile will be reserved for post exposure,” said Jerome Hauer, Health and Human Services acting secretary for emergency preparedness.  “The stockpile for civilians will be used for postexposure vaccination and as the stockpile grows we will re-evaluate our policy as to whether certain first responders should be prevaccinated” (Dao/Miller, New York Times, June 29).

1990 Study

A 1990 study examining the effectiveness of various anthrax treatment regimens helped provide support for the change in vaccination policy, the Times reported Saturday.

The study, which was conducted on 70 rhesus monkeys, indicated those that received anthrax vaccine and antibiotics together had a higher survival rate against the disease than those monkeys that were only administered either the vaccine or antibiotics, according to the Times (see GSN, March 7).

The study first exposed three groups of monkeys to anthrax and then gave one group both treatments, another group only the vaccine and another group only antibiotics, said Arthur Friedlander, a senior researcher at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick, Md.  After the first exposure to anthrax, some of the monkeys in each group died, Friedlander said.  When the monkeys were exposed again to anthrax three months later, only those in the group that had been both vaccinated and given antibiotics suffered no additional casualties, he said.

U.S. officials provided few details about how the anthrax vaccine would be used with antibiotics in the event of an outbreak.

“Stockpiling the vaccine is the most prudent course for protecting our citizens’ health and well-being,” Deputy Health and Human Services Secretary Claude Allen said.

Experts also agreed with the Bush administration’s decision to use the vaccine along with antibiotics based, in part, on the study, according to the Times.

“There’s no way in the world you could do a clinical trial of this in humans,” said Philip Brachman, an anthrax expert at Emory University (see GSN, June 4).  “We use the best scientific judgments we have” (Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times, June 29).

For further information, see:

CDC Frequently Asked Questions on Anthrax

Journal of the American Medical Association Background 

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP