[colorado tanker]

You ask a very good question, for which I sure don't have the answer. My instincts are that the spread of this stuff has a lot to do with how the mail is physically handled, how much is it squeezed or blown or sucked by automated sorting machinery, how is it opened, what kind of ventilation is in the building, how much if any was the mail exposed to weather?? I just don't know if there are multiple sources of this stuff or if handling, distance, weather and ventilation account for the dispirite impact. As in so many cases, I wish we had "journalists" with a little native curiosity and instinct for the five dubbyas who would ask some of these questions, but we don't; most of them are TV airheads, woodsteins or disguised editorial writers.

[jwalsh07]

I think it may argue that they simply don't hav every much anthrax in country. The letters were mailed by the same guy but one contained high test and one low test. I think they screwed some of it up. Got some of it wet which clumped it and limited aerosolization and chos to send the good stuff to DC for maximum effect.

2AD?

[blam]

"My instincts are that the spread of this stuff has a lot to do with how the mail is physically handled, how much is it squeezed or blown or sucked by automated sorting machinery, how is it opened, what kind of ventilation is in the building, how much if any was the mail exposed to weather?? I just don't know if there are multiple sources of this stuff or if handling, distance, weather and ventilation account for the dispirite impact."

Maybe they never considered disparate contamination, this spreading in the mail facilities may have just been a windfall, they were targeting, think about that angle, huh?