Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pentagon Shifts Anthrax Vaccine to Civilian Uses
New York Times ^ | 6/28/02 | JAMES DAO with JUDITH MILLER

Posted on 06/28/2002 11:40:22 PM PDT by kattracks


WASHINGTON, June 28 — The Bush administration announced a new anthrax vaccination policy today, including plans to continue vaccinating some military personnel and to stockpile for civilian use a large part of all the anthrax vaccine being produced for the Pentagon.

Under the new policy, which reverses an earlier plan to vaccinate all military personnel, the Pentagon intends in the next two weeks to begin vaccinating those who are expected to spend at least 15 days a year in regions where the threat of anthrax attack is considered high. That would include Iraq and other Persian Gulf countries, the Korean peninsula and possibly Afghanistan, officials said.

But at least a third of the vaccine to be produced will be stored by the Department of Health and Human Services in secret warehouses scattered around the country for use after a domestic anthrax attack, administration officials said. In the event of such an attack, most of those doses would probably be given to police officers, firefighters, rescue squads and others required to respond, as well as to people who lived or worked in areas exposed to the anthrax bacteria, administration officials said.

The new policy reflects in part a mounting concern within the Bush administration and among intelligence officials about reports that Iraq has well over 2,650 gallons of liquid anthrax, and could be making more in more than half a dozen laboratories.

The Iraqi anthrax could be used in biological weapon attacks in the region, posing a threat to military personnel, intelligence officials said. But some administration officials said they could not rule out such attacks in the United States.

The officials said that this conclusion was based on recent assessments by United States intelligence officials, who are constantly monitoring Iraq's ability to produce chemical, biological and nuclear materials, and by United Nations weapons inspectors, who have also been re-examining their estimates of Iraqi stockpiles of unconventional weapons based on information dating from as early as 1991, foreign and American officials said.

The Pentagon's review of its vaccination policy has dragged on for months, and concern about whether the administration was perceived to be moving fast enough to protect soldiers was a factor in the announcement of a new policy today. The Pentagon said it would immediately begin vaccinating some soldiers at greatest risk and would significantly expand stockpiles of the vaccine for civilian use.

The new vaccination policy reflects a reversal of one instituted in 1997 by Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen. That plan required that all 2.4 million active and reserve military personnel be inoculated by 2003. The Pentagon declined to say how many people it expects to vaccinate in the coming year.

"This is a shift from our earlier policy, which was to vaccinate everyone," Dr. William Winkenwerder Jr., the assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, told reporters today. "This is a policy that's focused on those in higher-threat areas."

The Pentagon acknowledged in interviews this week that only 69,000 soldiers had received the full six-shot anthrax vaccine series.

During the Persian Gulf war, intelligence officials argued that Saddam Hussein would not use his stockpile of anthrax and other chemicals unless he and his regime were clearly threatened. The administration's recent statements about the need for "regime change" in Iraq, its inclusion of Baghdad in the "axis of evil," and President Bush's articulation of a pre-emption doctrine that would justify American military action against any hostile nation that makes unconventional weapons, however, have increased the threat that Mr. Hussein might use his large arsenal, some officials say.

United States military planners and United Nations weapons inspectors have been re-examining their estimates about the amount of anthrax that Iraq may have stockpiled, and the amount that Mr. Hussein has been able to make since he expelled inspectors three years ago.

A recent analysis by the United Nations inspectors says there is compelling evidence that Iraq has large stocks of liquid anthrax that could be used at any time.

The new policy clearly reflects the thinking that civilians in this country are as susceptible to anthrax attacks as soldiers in combat zones, as was demonstrated by the death of five people last year from anthrax spores sent through the mail.

But it also underscores the problem the government has had in producing enough vaccine for the entire military. In December 1999, the Food and Drug Administration ordered the lone manufacturer of anthrax vaccine in the United States, the BioPort Corporation of Lansing, Mich., to halt production after inspectors found dozens of violations in safety, consistency, record-keeping and sterility at its Michigan plant. The agency authorized BioPort to resume production again in January.

"I think the shift was driven by a couple of factors," Dr. Winkenwerder said. "The first is that we are dealing in a constrained supply situation."

Some administration officials have also raised questions about whether BioPort could produce enough vaccine in the coming year to support a major military operation, such as an invasion of Iraq. Some senior military planners have argued that ousting Saddam Hussein would require 200,000 troops.

BioPort officials asserted today that they could produce enough doses to vaccinate the entire military, and they expressed dismay at Pentagon suggestions that the new policy was being driven by supply constraints.

"We can make millions on an annual basis," said Robert Kramer, the company president. "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."

Mr. Kramer said, and administration officials confirmed, that despite the Pentagon announcement today there was not yet a specific agreement on how much vaccine Bioport would sell the government and at what price. Under a contract reached three years ago, the Pentagon pays $10.64 a dose, and both Pentagon and company officials said the price could rise significantly, perhaps doubling.

Pentagon officials have declined to say how much vaccine BioPort is capable of producing, but administration officials said the government wanted to buy about three million doses in the next three years. Administration officials said the military would receive about a third of the vaccine, the civilian stockpile about a third and the last third would go to other government agencies, like the State Department, that have employees who could be in danger.

Other officials say the new policy reflects a desire to provide sufficient vaccine for civilians. "At this point in time we do not have a large enough stockpile to pre-vaccinate, so the stockpile will be reserved for post exposure," said Jerome M. Hauer, acting assistant secretary for emergency preparedness at the Department of Health and Human Services. "The stockpile for civilians will be used for post-exposure vaccination and as the stockpile grows we will re-evaluate our policy as to whether certain first responders should be pre-vaccinated."

Full inoculation against anthrax requires a regimen of six shots administered over 18 months, followed by annual booster shots. Pentagon officials say a person must receive at least three shots to gain at least partial protection.

The Pentagon estimates that about 525,000 soldiers have received at least one anthrax vaccination over the last four years, but the vast majority have not received all six shots.

In addition to questions about BioPort's production, the Pentagon's mandatory anthrax vaccination program has been slowed by opposition from a small but vocal group of soldiers who contend the vaccine has potentially dangerous side effects.

Since the program began in 1998, more than 450 people in the military have been disciplined for refusing to be vaccinated. Those opponents won support from some Republicans on Capitol Hill, where the House Government Reform Committee held hearings airing their complaints.

Today, Representative Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican who championed the critics of the mandatory vaccination program, applauded the new policy, calling it a vindication of people who were forced out of the military for refusing to participate.

"The scaled-back approach announced today reflects a clear-eyed view of the threat and a responsible application of the limited medical countermeasures available," Mr. Shays said in a statement.

The analysis of Iraq's liquid anthrax stockpile, a summary of which has circulated in recent weeks among senior United Nations officials and selected Western governments, including the United States, says there must now be a "presumption" that Baghdad concealed at least 10,000 liters, or 2,650 gallons, of anthrax after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, officials said.

The seven-page report, an analysis of evidence that was gathered for a 1991 C.I.A. report on Iraqi biological weapons, the officials said, builds a circumstantial case that the anthrax remains potent and available.



TOPICS: Anthrax Scare; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 06/28/2002 11:40:22 PM PDT by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kattracks; Mitchell; Nogbad; keri; Dark Wing; aristeides; Alamo-Girl
The new policy reflects in part a mounting concern within the Bush administration and among intelligence officials about reports that Iraq has well over 2,650 gallons of liquid anthrax, and could be making more in more than half a dozen laboratories.

The Iraqi anthrax could be used in biological weapon attacks in the region, posing a threat to military personnel, intelligence officials said. But some administration officials said they could not rule out such attacks in the United States.

Here we go... step by step, bit by bit, we are being deconditioned. I wonder if the FBI's indulgence of Barbara Rosenberg this week is part of the process of clearing the decks. I suspect they're having their cake and eating it, too -- keeping the phony "domestic" investigation angle in the spotlight, but setting the stage for the end of the stall, too.

We should have ample stocks of anthrax on hand in about 12 months -- the government just put in an order for 25 million doses of a new "morning after" vaccine. As to the means to deliver it to the population in a timely manner in the event of a coordinated, 9-11 style assault, I do not know what is a realistic time frame -- I do know the government has recruited the drug companies to educate every primary health care provider in the country on how to respond to an anthrax attack, so progress is being made. The earliest time frame for an Iraq invasion now being mooted is next Spring. My guess is, realistically, we are looking at more like 18 months to two years to have all the pieces in place -- the blink of an eye, when you consider the profound remaking of the Middle East that will follow Saddam's removal.

2 posted on 06/29/2002 2:41:32 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks; cicero's_son; BlackVeil; EternalHope; muawiyah; okie01; Shermy

During the Persian Gulf war, intelligence officials argued that Saddam Hussein would not use his stockpile of anthrax and other chemicals unless he and his regime were clearly threatened.

Which is tantamount to saying that Saddam is still in power today because he presented a credible, anthrax-based WMD deterrent in 1991. Which, indeed, he did.

Saddam has been a full member of the Doomsday Club for over ten years now, but it's not polite to mention it:

It is protection for Saddam to have biological and chemical weapons, because, in the final analysis, if pressed, if he is surrounded in Baghdad, he will threaten to use them. He's capable of that. This is a sort of Samson complex--if you push me too hard, I'll bring the house down, on myself and on everyone else. Washington realizes that this is a possibility. For obvious reasons, it's not talked about openly. No one in Washington wants to tell the American people that Saddam is still capable of blackmailing us. They're acting as if he is capable of blackmailing them, but they are not going to admit it openly.
Is it any surprise that Saddam should have turned to anthrax for protection again, when he upped the ante on 9-11? The only new angle is the idea of using forward-positioned sleeper agents in the United States -- to bring doomsday closer to home for the Great Satan. The provocation was much bigger, so the back-end threat had to be correspondingly greater this time.

Since sleeper agents would likely be commiting suicide in fulfilling their roles as human missiles, some groundwork had to be layed first -- the establishment of the al-Qaeda connection and the coordinate re-infusion of Islamicism into the previously secular Iraqi state ideology. And then there's Saddam's cultivation of the "martyrdom" human bomb strategy among the Palistinians. It took ten years for the pieces to come together, but you gotta admit, the engineering is sound. The suicide attacks not only effected a devastating revenge on the United States -- they also communicated America's complete vulnerabilty to a hand-delivered biological attack. To follow up, all it took was a few discrete letters with samples of aerosolizable anthrax to communicate that reality to the National Command Authority:

YOU CAN NOT STOP US

WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.

Is it all clear now?

3 posted on 06/29/2002 3:13:04 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
I wonder if the FBI's indulgence of Barbara Rosenberg this week is part of the process of clearing the decks. I suspect they're having their cake and eating it, too -- keeping the phony "domestic" investigation angle in the spotlight, but setting the stage for the end of the stall, too.

The only way to put an end to the domestic theory is to carry out an investigation, which will presumably lead nowhere. Anything less would be regarded as a cover-up by those who subscribe to the theory.

4 posted on 06/29/2002 9:47:33 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
The only way to put an end to the domestic theory is to carry out an investigation, which will presumably lead nowhere. Anything less would be regarded as a cover-up by those who subscribe to the theory.

Correct, but if Hatfill is game, they might as well kill two birds with one stone. The publicity stunt search also keeps the ball in the air a bit longer, which is the name of the game until we are prepared to take on Saddam.

5 posted on 06/29/2002 10:11:21 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
From the article: During the Persian Gulf war, intelligence officials argued that Saddam Hussein would not use his stockpile of anthrax and other chemicals unless he and his regime were clearly threatened.

You wrote: Which is tantamount to saying that Saddam is still in power today because he presented a credible, anthrax-based WMD deterrent in 1991. Which, indeed, he did.

Yes. But there may have been a major change in the situation.

Assuming that Iraq was responsible for (or involved in) the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax mailings, Saddam Hussein's position has changed considerably.

The 1991 position seems to have been that he would use anthrax if we threatened to remove him from power. Leaving him in power was tolerable to the U.S., as long as he stopped bullying other countries, so we decided not to take the risk of moving on to Baghdad.

His position after 9/11 is quite different. As you mentioned, two of the anthrax letters said: "YOU CAN NOT STOP US. WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX." The new position is that he can kill thousands of people on U.S. soil at will, and he will use anthrax if we try to stop him from doing so.

This is not tolerable to the U.S., especially when you take into account the fact that Iraq's WMD arsenal will be getting deadlier over time. If we do nothing about it, he will ratchet things up, slowly but surely. We are willing to take the risk of anthrax retaliation in the short term in order to prevent a nuclear attack in a decade.

The above is not necessarily even contingent on Iraq being responsible for, or heavily involved in, the 9/11 attacks and the anthrax mailings. There's a good argument that 9/11 leaves both the U.S. and Iraq in the stated positions, even if Iraq turns out not to have been the guilty party. That's one of the powers of terrorism: it forces the rest of the world irresistibly in certain directions (look at the start of World War I).

6 posted on 06/29/2002 10:14:09 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Correct, but if Hatfill is game, they might as well kill two birds with one stone.

Absolutely. Hatfill does want to clear his name. Also, after losing his security clearance, he might be willing to play in a charade in order to prove his cooperativeness, getting back on the government's good side and regaining his security clearance.

7 posted on 06/29/2002 10:18:08 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
Terrorism is just another tool for Saddam Hussein in his ongoing war with the United States -- a means to an end. Al-Qaeda is less than it seems. Saddam outsources his "human missiles" requirement to al-Qaeda but, on their own, they couldn't manage anything more sophisticated than driving a truck into a synagogue.

Bush built up al-Qaeda in his first speech after 9-11 because it's the part of the problem he could immediately address but, independently, we have no evidence that al-Qaeda is more than a loose-knit bunch of stumblebums like Reid and Padilla. Whoever supplied that anthrax -- the most sophisticated, aerosizable anthrax ever seen -- is the real author of 9-11, and it ain't Osama bin Laden. It's time to put things in their true perspective. Our adversary in this thing is a seasoned pro, not a bunch of amateurs.

8 posted on 06/29/2002 10:30:28 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
Hatfill is supposedly out of the country right now. Like the feds would really let that happen if they had the slightest suspicion he is really the anthrax killer. Maybe he's taking a vacation -- not a bad idea, under the circumstances.
9 posted on 06/29/2002 10:32:36 AM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Some administration officials have also raised questions about whether BioPort could produce enough vaccine in the coming year to support a major military operation, such as an invasion of Iraq.

BioPort is a huge scandal.

BioPort was set up as a corporation with a single mission: make anthrax vaccine. Not surprisingly, it has had nothing but trouble actually making an acceptable product. It finally got permission to get started only when the need for more vaccine became acute.

That an unproven, start-up, single source supplier was selected is one of the unspoken scandals of the Clinton Administration. Its selection by the Clinton Administration had political payoff written all over it. The direct involvement of former Senator George Mitchell is also very interesting.

Due to obvious national security issues, we will not be told if this company is still having trouble performing.

10 posted on 06/29/2002 11:18:46 AM PDT by EternalHope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
"The direct involvement of former Senator George Mitchell is also very interesting."

The same might be said for Adm. William J. Crowe, former Chairman JCS, who owns 13% of BioPort.

11 posted on 06/29/2002 7:22:14 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Thanks for the heads up!
12 posted on 06/29/2002 9:12:40 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson