http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121789293570011775.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Bruce Ivins Wasn't the Anthrax Culprit
By RICHARD SPERTZEL
August 5, 2008; Page A17
The Wall Street Journal.
Over the past week the media was gripped by the news that the FBI was about to charge Bruce Ivins, a
leading anthrax expert, as the man responsible for the anthrax letter attacks in September/October
2001.
But despite the seemingly powerful narrative that Ivins committed suicide because investigators were
closing in, this is still far from a shut case. The FBI needs to explain why it zeroed in on Ivins,
how he could have made the anthrax mailed to lawmakers and the media, and how he (or anyone else)
could have pulled off the attacks, acting alone.
I believe this is another mistake in the investigation.
Let's start with the anthrax in the letters to Sens. Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy. The spores could
not have been produced at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, where
Ivins worked, without many other people being aware of it. Furthermore, the equipment to make such a
product does not exist at the institute.
Information released by the FBI over the past seven years indicates a product of exceptional
quality. The product contained essentially pure spores. The particle size was 1.5 to 3 microns in
diameter. There are several methods used to produce anthrax that small. But most of them require
milling the spores to a size small enough that it can be inhaled into the lower reaches of the
lungs. In this case, however, the anthrax spores were not milled.
What's more, they were also tailored to make them potentially more dangerous. According to a FBI
news release from November 2001, the particles were coated by a "product not seen previously to be
used in this fashion before." Apparently, the spores were coated with a polyglass which tightly
bound hydrophilic silica to each particle. That's what was briefed (according to one of my former
weapons inspectors at the United Nations Special Commission) by the FBI to the German Foreign
Ministry at the time.
Another FBI leak indicated that each particle was given a weak electric charge, thereby causing the
particles to repel each other at the molecular level. This made it easier for the spores to float in
the air, and increased their retention in the lungs.
In short, the potential lethality of anthrax in this case far exceeds that of any powdered product
found in the now extinct U.S. Biological Warfare Program. In meetings held on the cleanup of the
anthrax spores in Washington, the product was described by an official at the Department of Homeland
Security as "according to the Russian recipes" -- apparently referring to the use of the weak
electric charge.
The latest line of speculation asserts that the anthrax's DNA, obtained from some of the victims,
initially led investigators to the laboratory where Ivins worked. But the FBI stated a few years ago
that a complete DNA analysis was not helpful in identifying what laboratory might have made the
product.
Furthermore, the anthrax in this case, the "Ames strain," is one of the most common strains in the
world. Early in the investigations, the FBI said it was similar to strains found in Haiti and Sri
Lanka. The strain at the institute was isolated originally from an animal in west Texas and can be
found from Texas to Montana following the old cattle trails. Samples of the strain were also
supplied to at least eight laboratories including three foreign laboratories. Four French government
laboratories reported on studies with the Ames strain, citing the Pasteur Institute in Paris as the
source of the strain they used. Organism DNA is not a very reliable way to make a case against a
scientist.
The FBI has not officially released information on why it focused on Ivins, and whether he was about
to be charged or arrested. And when the FBI does release this information, we should all remember
that the case needs to be firmly based on solid information that would conclusively prove that a
lone scientist could make such a sophisticated product.
From what we know so far, Bruce Ivins, although potentially a brilliant scientist, was not that man.
The multiple disciplines and technologies required to make the anthrax in this case do not exist at
Army's Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Inhalation studies are conducted at the
institute, but they are done using liquid preparations, not powdered products.
The FBI spent between 12 and 18 months trying "to reverse engineer" (make a replica of) the anthrax
in the letters sent to Messrs. Daschle and Leahy without success, according to FBI news releases. So
why should federal investigators or the news media or the American public believe that a lone
scientist would be able to do so?
Jan Rasmussen