I don’t know who you are corresponding with - but I have emails I’m also not allowed to quote from. But I can tell you that everyone in the N American aerosol BW community does not credit Beecher’s paper - they believe Beecher’s paper “slipped through the process” and the blame is on the reviewers. They don not believe it is possible to make a preparation based on only raw spores that could ever behave the way the Daschle powder was shown to behave by scientific study in the Hart Building (JAMA study).
Of course, Beecher did not respond to the rebuttal letter to provide his data, and that is basically the end of the matter.
The problem we have is that when you ask questions, you tend to ask them in such a way that the only possible answer is the answer you want. So, the answers cannot be trusted.
The anthrax in the letters was not "raw spores." The spores were treated with a surfactant before drying. Did you ask if it was possible to treat spores with an ORGANIC surfactant that would create a powder like that in the letters? If not, why not?