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

* Dr. Ivins sent progress reports on August 30, 2001; in reconstructing a timeline, they are important to obtain and understand

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 15, 2011

******

Dr. Bruce Ivins

******

******

Advertisements

4 Responses to “* Dr. Ivins sent progress reports on August 30, 2001; in reconstructing a timeline, they are important to obtain and understand”

  1. External (attack) timeline: anthrax events.

    Internal (normal work) timeline: work done by Ivins’ team on anthrax trials, etc.

    All information that comes out on the timing or location of Ivins at a time fits to the Internal timeline not to the external attack timeline.

    Whenever we get a new document or better insight into old information it always shows that what we know of what Ivins was doing fits to the internal timeline.

    What Ivins was doing at night at a specific time and location never fits into a timeline of lab work to prepare attack anthrax. The lab steps to grow and process anthrax for attack letters are never discussed by the DOJ, FBI, etc. They just make vague claims like time was sufficient. But in fact, as we find out micro detail of Ivins’ time, location, activity it always fits into the internal Ft. Detrick timeline of Ivins’ paid work.

    • Also vice versa. As we think about the internal timeline of normal work that suggests new documents to get or new analysis of old information. The hypo that Ivins’ grew anthrax in the lab on those nights never leads to a new document request.

      • As this cycle goes on, we gain more confidence that Ivins’ activity at night was his normal work.

        • DXer said

          On Sept 28, ’01, Dr. Ivins had his monthly NGAV Meeting at which USAMRIID representatives addressed timelines, start, end, and cost for formulation studies, stability studies, passive immunity studies, surrogate marker and efficacy studies and CpG studies. If GAO were to obtain the powerpoints from the August and September 2001 meetings, they might provide a coherent overview of the numerous ongoing animal studies in which he was involved. I have requested the August minutes and will request the September 28, 2001 minutes and powerpoints after the FOIA person has had a chance to work on pending requests.

          From: Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
          To:
          Subject: NGAV meeting at Pentagon, 23 AUG 01
          Date: Friday, August 31, 2001 3:45:43 PM
          Here are some notes from the NGAV meeting at the Pentagon on 23 AUG:
          1) – For NGAV funding, FY01 funds are going to be freed up for work on VEE. This will allow
          some money to be made available for rPA funds.
          2) – BDRP (nee SAIC; nee MARP) has made some untenable demands with respect to the rPA
          made for human use. They want $200,000 per year (without specifying the number of years) for
          indemnification. They want the government to cover the cost of lawsuits. They also want international
          indemnification. They are refusing to release the rPA unless the Army agrees to the above demands.
          said that if the rPA is not given to the Army, then we may have to go to AVANT and use E.
          coli rPA. It was pointed out that since the E. coli rPA differs in some respects from the B. anthracis rPA,
          a number of studies will probably have to be repeated, including stability and efficacy studies. This will
          extend the timeline for rPA going into humans. said that this issue “is a RIID issue.” Several
          individuals disagreed with him on this statement. told o have this
          issue resolved by the next meeting.
          3) A new GANTT chart will be constructed, in color, to show what has been done and what needs to be
          done.
          4) said that NIH people are doing a lot of tech base studies on rPA, including the need
          for an adjuvant, passive immunity studies, surrogate marker studies, and stability/potency testing. Some
          of these studies are being conducted with CDC and include AVA studies.
          5) asked for a RIID tech base update at the next meeting on Friday, September
          28, 9-10:30 am, in office. This update should cover timelines, start, end, and cost
          for: 1) formulation studies; 2) stability studies; 3) passive immunity studies (here and at Battelle); 4)
          surrogate marker and efficacy studies; 5) CpG studies. ( – I don’t think that wants reams of
          information, just some bullets about what we’ve done and what is to be done, also, timelines and
          funding for the projects.)
          6) Action Items for next meeting :
          1) will have resolved the rPA issue.
          2) A new GANTT chart will have been made.
          3) will discuss studies of AVA in humans.
          4) will discuss tech base studies including Battelle and RIID studies.
          – Bruce

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: