Replies

Oh, you mean the blown up incident of anthrax in an envelope?

Would you have considered it a "blown up incident" if the five who were killed were your relatives?

You apparently failed to read the link provided in comment# 8, "Vaccine Combined With Short-term Postexposure Antibiotics Protects Monkeys From Inhalational Anthrax ," and failed to appreciate the excerpt which came from it: "As noted by the authors, following the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, approximately 10,000 people were offered 60 days of antibiotic therapy to prevent inhalational anthrax. Adverse events associated with this regimen--including diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and dizziness--were commonly reported. More importantly, only about 44 percent of people completed the whole 60-day course. Thus, minimizing the duration of postexposure antibiotic treatment could be crucial to a successful defense against a large-scale anthrax attack."

Besides the other casualties from the anthrax attack, they're were about 5600 made ill from Cipro, aka ciprofloxacin, adverse drug reactions. I have no doubt that there were a number of cases of severe clostridium difficile enteritis or Pseudomembraneous colitis and others with severe fungal infections in their blood from prolonged antibiotic administration.

Truly a far cry from calling this a threat to our national security. In line with that I do believe that expenditures from Homeland Security in the name of national security have spiraled out of control. Much of the payouts in the name of Homeland Security have absolutely zilch to do with security. What exactly does rebuilding New Orleans have to do with Homeland Security?

What does that have to do with developing a useful anthrax vaccine?

A person needs to take six shots at various intervals in order to be protected. Does anyone really believe that government can administer such a program effectively? I certainly don't. And, who will get these doses of a restricted supply? Certainly not the normal Tom Dick and Harry.

I seriously doubt that you read the last link in comment# 8. In the alternative, you failed to comprehend its implications.

As usual, your comments are a rant about government spending for anything is a waste.

Don't know where to begin with this diatribe. First, the incident I was referring to was the envelope in the Senate. I have never heard of an incident of anthrax killing 5 people in the U.S. Even it it did, is that a reason to spend huge sums of money to stockpile a serum because "something sometime" might happen? You're right. I do believe that 80% of government spending is is wasted. "Vaccine Combined With Short-term Postexposure Antibiotics Protects Monkeys From Inhalational Anthrax ,"

Okay, now what about humans. I could care less about the monkeys.