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

* FBI interview statement: If someone came in off hours it was to work on the animal experiments – this could take approximately two hours and was usually a one-person job.

Posted by DXer on January 1, 2012



7 Responses to “* FBI interview statement: If someone came in off hours it was to work on the animal experiments – this could take approximately two hours and was usually a one-person job.”

  1. DXer said

    Krist Friend, Dr. Ivins’ assistant, testified:


    Q. Ms. Friend, we were kind of on the track of — I had asked your personal opinion as to whether you thought Dr. Ivins was the anthrax perpetrator, and you answered that — I’m just kind of summarizing to lay the predicate here — and you gave us some reasons why.

    A. I thought of another reason. Go ahead. I mean, the times that the FBI and the report states that he was in the lab, after hours and on the weekends or whatever really doesn’t give enough time to have made that kind of preparation. I think that a lot of the times that they — they count the time that it takes you to actually get into the lab and shower out, and when you look at those times really closely, there is only a small window of time that he was actually in the laboratory. So I have heartache over that when I look at that. It would require a lot more time within the lab to do something of that nature, from the knowledge that I do know. So that’s my other reason for that [thinking Dr. Ivins was innocent]. (p. 110)

  2. DXer said

    The emails that were available to the FBI contained references to the rabbit in the formaldehyde study to be held and immunized at Covance and then shipped for USAMRIID for challenge. It was negligence for AUSA Lieber and Agent Lawrence Alexander to not know about the documentary evidence relating to the rabbit formaldehyde experiment. If they knew about them, then it constituted wrongful withholding of evidence not to disclose them.

    From: To: Subject: Date:
    Ivins, Bruce E Dr USAMRIID
    rPA meeting – 6 AUG 01 Tuesday, August 07, 2001 2:59:52 PM
    (b) (6)
    (6) Here is what I have for the rPA meeting yesterday:
    1) Every other week there will be rPA product development team meetings.
    2) discussed the progress on his mouse potency assay studies. The rPA/Alhydrogel vaccines he has been formulating immediately prior to injection do not contain formaldehyde. The A/j mice in his first study were immunized intramuscularly with a single dose of vaccine containing 1, 3.162, 10, 31.62 or 100 micrograms of PA. Four weeks after immunization, the mice were challenged subcutaneously with 10 LD50 of Sterne spores. There was little difference among the doses with respect to antibody titers or protection, although the titers appeared to rise weekly. No information was available on the rabbit dose titrations. The next experiment will look at doses of 3.162, 1, .3, 0.1, and 0.03 micrograms of PA in the vaccines.

    3) Bruce talked about the status of stability studies (rPA vaccine with and without formaldehyde) in the rabbit. The rabbits will be held and immunized at Covance, then shipped to USAMRIID for challenge. The survival data should be in by the end of October. If there is enough available, some the vaccines will be given to [] physically characterize. He will try to present the data at the next meeting. will identify other items, such as sucrose, which would be acceptable as stabilizers in a new rPA vaccine. It was emphasized that we need to look at both physical stability and potency stability in a new rPA vaccine. The use of formaldehyde as a stabilizer in vaccines is discouraged by the FDA.

  3. DXer said

    FBI interview statement: If someone came in off hours it was to work on the animal experiments – this could take approximately two hours and was usually a one-person job.

    Dr. Majidi, bemoaning that the science did not prove Dr. Ivins was the murderer, based his Ivins Theory on the false claim he had no business being in the lab alone.

    This was contradicted by the documents in the FBI’s possession. Although the name is redacted, I understand the statement to have been given by Dr. Mara Linscott.

  4. DXer said

    Dr. Majidi wrote:

    “”I have personally worked in “hot laboratories” (during my career at Los Alamos) with very similar procedures for those who worked in a glovebox with radiological material. The procedure for working in this environemnt is onerous enough to highly discourage anyone from casually coming into the laboratory. We were not allowed to work alone in any hazardous laboratory, at LANL”

    It is absolutely breathtaking that Vahid is relying on experience at Los Alamos rather than the experience and practice explained by the scientists at USAMRIID, including Patricia Worsham, who led off the FBI’s presentation before the NAS panel.

    Dr. Majidi: On what basis do you claim that checking on animals in the hot suite was a 2-person job in 2001, rather than a one-person job, when all the evidence available says it was a one-person job.

    You screwed up Amerithrax, dude.

  5. DXer said

    Dr. Majidi’s canard about Dr. Ivins’ hours is contradicted both by the documents and the witness statement.

  6. DXer said

    Of course, if you pretend that this experiment with the 52 rabbits did not happen — as AUSA Lieber and Kohl have done — then you instead have visit to the lab that is unexplained.

  7. DXer said

    Note that Dr. Ivins typically took slightly less time than the estimate of what it would take.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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: