CASE CLOSED … what really happened in the 2001 anthrax attacks?

* After a subcutaneous challenge, the animals would be checked for survival/death 3X daily

Posted by DXer on March 31, 2011




4 Responses to “* After a subcutaneous challenge, the animals would be checked for survival/death 3X daily”

  1. DXer said

    In this 1999 mice study, the mice were checked 3X’s daily.

    • So for the 1999 mice study, we want to graph hours by the team in BSL3 at night/weekends v date. The y-axis is hours in BSL3 by any team member. So if Joe is in the BSL3 for 2 hours on a night on Sep 1 1999 we put a point at 2 over that date. If Ralph is there for 2 hours on Sep 2 1999 we put a 2 over Sep 2 1999. We then get a graph, bar or line as you want.

      We now do the same thing for Sep and Oct 2001. We graph the time spent by anyone in the team managing the challenge in BSL3 at night or weekend. Now we compare the 2001 to the 1999. If the graphs are the same, then it rejects the hypothesis that Ivins had unusual hours in Sep and Oct 2001.

      • DXer said

        On July 16, 2001 it was likely the formaldehyde study protocol that Dr. Ivins forwarded to someone planning the isoform rabbit study. How many daily checks were done in the isoform study? 2Xs? 3Xs? I have submitted a FOIA request to Ms. Rogers re whatever protocol was attached to the July 16, 2001 as he seems to indicate that it was approved and it likely was the formaldehyde protocol. If there were only two checks, was the second check in the “afternoon” as contemplated in the June 21 draft or was it at night? And what is the contemporaneous evidence of the time of the work from October 2001. It seems to point once again to the importance of the lab notebooks not being produced by DOJ under FOIA — for which they took the only copy from USAMRIID.

  2. Old Atlantic said

    Who at the FBI, if anyone, has put together that Ivins’ nights in the BSL3 were all night checks of animals at the same time and someone else was checking during the day and thus growth of spores by Ivins was ruled out on those dates?

    Did the first FBI team do that?

    Is this the reason the FBI won’t say when the anthrax was grown by Ivins? Won’t “speculate” on growth scenarios? They know that the spike in hours by Ivins in the BSL3 after hours were on days he could not have grown anthrax spores?

    Their own charts prove Ivins could not have grown spores in other months, assuming August is the same deal, because he was not in the BSL3.

    Did the people who checked animals on those days already tell the FBI they did? Do they feel they have already come forward? Is the FBI sending a message, don’t come public with this and the heavy handed investigation tactics will not return?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: