Received: from onelist.com (www.onelist.com [209.207.164.201])
by scow.netquarters.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA20502
for <mnass@netquarters.net>; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 02:50:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 12292 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jul 1999 06:50:50 -0000
Received: (qmail 24415 invoked from network); 23 Jul 1999 06:00:52 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO scow.netquarters.net) (208.153.22.17) by pop.onelist.com with SMTP; 23 Jul 1999 06:00:52 -0000
Received: from 207.51.113.55 (brun-m003-55.netquarters.net [207.51.113.55]) by scow.netquarters.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA19935; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 01:59:51 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <379805D7.58F9@anthraxvaccine.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 02:05:38 -0400
From: Meryl Nass <mnass@anthraxvaccine.org>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
To: Anthrax-no@onelist.com
Mailing-List: list Anthrax-no@onelist.com; contact Anthrax-no-owner@onelist.com
Delivered-To: mailing list Anthrax-no@onelist.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:Anthrax-no-unsubscribe@ONElist.com>
Reply-to: Anthrax-no@onelist.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Anthrax-no] Hearing Update Plus More on Preventing Bioterrorism
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-UIDL: 4e8e15f28acf69460ce58f4e4649aba3
Status: U
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 5802
From: Meryl Nass <mnass@anthraxvaccine.org>
Here's a brief update on the Shays' Subcommittee hearing of July 21,
1999, which as SSgt Robert Soska already said, was a truly "feel good"
experience. The 5 servicemembers who gave testimony about their
illnesses, or the things they had come to know about the vaccine
program, were eloquent, honest, and clear examples of "America's
finest." I think everyone felt privileged to hear them.
Their stories were a distinct contrast to those of the DOD
spokespersons, led by General Claypool. Does service in the military's
highest medical ranks require one to jettison both integrity and shame?
No matter how ridiculous it sometimes sounded, only versions of the
party line were spoken.
GAO pointed out that only an estimated 1% of adverse drug reactions get
reported. Col. Gerber said that DOD was well aware that the VAERS
reports did not provide an adverse event rate, and DOD had not used the
VAERS data in this way. (Yet I distinctly recall him quoting the VAERS
rate as the adverse event rate at the Town Meeting in DC in March.)
Congressman Shays was similarly unimpressed, holding up a DOD bar chart
which cited the VAERS rate of reported reactions as the total adverse
event rate.
Even better, the testimony and questions focused on the reasons why
adverse effects are underreported, why servicemembers don't come
forward: harrassment, ridicule, lack of meaningful medical
interventions, fear of being boarded out or nondeployable, fear of how
illness may affect one's civilian job, unwillingness of medical
personnel to report, etc.
ABC filmed the entire hearing, and provided a "feed" to all other
networks who may have wanted footage. Reporters I recognized were from
Gannett, Army Times, Baltimore Sun. Hartford Courant was also
represented, and others I did not know. No one knew how much footage
C-Span would use, if any.
The two House bills to halt mandatory vaccinations (especially Ben
Gilman's HR 2548) are a ray of sunshine, which hopefully will focus some
light on a program which has nothing besides PR to recommend it.
Meantime, the DOD is fighting back with a series of briefings to
Congress, Veterans' Service Organizations and others. Their focus is
"The THREAT"--the likelihood of anthrax biowarfare in the current world
climate.
I don't disagree that anthrax is a threat (after all, I'm the first
person to have dissected an anthrax epidemic and shown it to be due to
biowarfare). But how will an ineffective and unsafe vaccine improve the
situation? By convincing servicemembers they are protected when they
are not? So they may be sent in harms' way, complete their mission, and
then start dying a few days later?
And if the vaccine were effective, would anthrax then be used by an
enemy, when we have threatened them with nuclear retaliation? If the
enemy wanted to attack us that badly with BW, I suspect they'd try
something more efficacious, for which our troops had not received
vaccinations, before risking nuclear annihilation.
The answer to "The THREAT" is limited, but the best we can do is the
following:
1. Better detectors (and we're getting there)
2. Post exposure therapies, to include multivalent antisera directed
against multiple anthrax virulence factors, and inhibiting germination
3. Masks that are effective at screening particles the size of viruses
and bacteria (the current series are not adequate to the task, according
to Gen. Stanley Wiener)
4. Publicly restating our doctrine of nuclear retaliation
5. Strengthening the inspections and sanctions provisions of the
Biological Weapons Convention (something we have backpedaled on
supporting)
6. Ending the public hype about anthrax and biowarfare, which first and
foremost puts the idea of bioterrorism into potential perpetrators'
heads
7. Practicing a brand of diplomacy that leaves our enemies with other
options than bioterrorism. That means, not backing them all the way
into a corner with a gun to their head. They will use BW only when
there is nothing left to lose. Let's not go there.
8. Honestly educating troops as to the real risks faced and the
strengths and weaknesses of our defenses. This is the only true force
protection measure. Troops and commanders must be aware of which
defense measures are porous and which are not, so they can make
intelligent decisions in the field and hopefully return home to fight
another day.
Will the War Games experts at DOD please step forward and confirm or
deny that the suggestions above are important in ameliorating and
mitigating the Biowarfare threat? Please point us in the direction of
what makes sense, as we grasp for means of protection from anthrax and
other bioweapons.
"When the people lead, the leaders will follow" has been attributed to
General and President Dwight Eisenhower. I commend all those at the
hearing and elsewhere for doing their part to lead us into clarity on
the AVIP.
Meryl Nass, MD
--
** Please note new email address **
mnass@anthraxvaccine.org
====================
Meryl Nass, M.D.
124 Wardtown Road
Freeport, Maine 04032
phone (207) 865-0875
fax (207) 865-6975
--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------
You can WIN $100 to Amazon.com by starting a new list at ONElist.
http://www.onelist.com
Weekly drawing is held each Friday. See homepage for details!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Anthrax information web site: http://www.dallasnw.quik.com/cyberella/
Contact list owner: Gretchen Whitney at: cyberella@dallasnw.quik.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, or to change your subscription to
digest, go to the ONElist web site at http://www.onelist.com and select
the User Center link from the menu bar on the left.