Replies

AFIP announced that silica was found and that it’s purpose was as a key component of the weapon’s aerosol properties.

On November 5, 2002 Alibek and Meselson published a letter in the Washington Post:

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/anthraxundermicroscope.html
Source: Washington Post, November 5, 2002.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Anthrax Under The Microscope

The Oct. 28 front-page article “FBI’s Theory on Anthrax Is Doubted” reported that silica enabled anthrax spores sent through the mail last fall to become airborne. The article quoted unnamed sources as saying that the spores had been formulated with a product called fumed silica, which, under an electron microscope, “would look like cotton balls strung together into strands that branch out in every direction.”

Both of us have examined electron micrographs of the material in the anthrax letter sent to Sen. Tom Daschle, but we saw no evidence of such balls or strands. In July 1980, the Journal of Bacteriology reported an “unexpectedly high concentration of silicon” to be naturally present in the outer spore coat of bacillus cereus, a close relative of bacillus anthracis. Is it possible that the unnamed sources misinterpreted silicon naturally concentrated in spore coats as something that was artificially added?

Until knowledgeable government investigators announce their results, statements attributed to anonymous sources or from persons who have not examined the actual evidence should be greeted with caution.

MATTHEW MESELSON

Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology

Harvard University

Cambridge, Mass.

KEN ALIBEK

Center for Biodefense

George Mason University

Manassas

Then, around 1 week later (coincidence?), AFIP published a Newsletter that provided Meselson and Alibek PRECISELY what they asked for. “Knowledgeable government investigators” did indeed announce their results. The information cannot come from a more solid source.
However, Meselson and Alibek chose to ignore the announcement that they specifically demanded. It almost reminds me of the old saying - “be careful what you ask for - you might just get it”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_anthrax_attack
The AFIP lab deputy director, Florabel Mullick, said “This [silica] was a key component. Silica prevents the anthrax from aggregating, making it easier to aerosolize. Significantly, we noted the absence of aluminum with the silica. This combination had previously been found in anthrax produced by Iraq.”

Meselson not only failed to acknowledge the announcement - he even misled a reporter for C&E News several years later - stating that AFIP released a spectrum showing only a silicon peak. AFIP only released ONE spectrum - that spectrum is the silica reference spectrum they used to prove that the additive in the Daschle anthrax really was silica. This is standard EDX protocol - you measure a standard versus an unknown. The ratio of the Si and O peaks have to be the same - also the ENERGY of the Si peak is slightly shifted in silica - compared to Si in the pure element Si.
Later on it was revealed that as well as silica, polymerized glass was also present - but polymerized glass can have a EDX spectrum very similar to silica, and another technique like FTIR or Raman scattering would nail it down.

Beecher’s paper stands discredited today.