Professional Rant

Research scientist commits suicide and is now being tried in popular media obviously this might hold no interest to you, and you're free to ignore it.

I was eagerly anticipating what the media was going to report about this ... I was perfectly willing to believe they had the wrong person. After all, other innocent people have gone to jail. Is this the epitome of "trial by the media" or what? After reading this, I find it even more ludicrous that the gov't claimed "there was no evidence that anyone else was involved." That is simply, patently false. What do they call the other two people who were splashed across the media, as being under serious suspicion? How about Steven Hathill, whom the gov't is paying $6 million for damages after John the Fuckhead Ashcroft blabbed his name as a suspect? Or the other fellow who wasn't an American citizen?

I dealt with people from USAMRIID. I've even visited it, and seen their gung-ho biological containment labs. [pretty cool, considering they're retrofitted into a 1950s building]. I dealt with anthrax at my job.

Okay, to put this all in perspective: at my last (unspecified) place of employment, where we had lots and lots of anthrax, I was the person responsible for all transfers of the material to any other agency. I got questioned by the FBI about this, in the aftermath of the anthrax letters. I had to cope with a consultant (of an unspecified agency) who showed up at work, and informed me that he had taken a couple of vials of viable anthrax bacteria with him, on a plane, from our labs to his employer in another state. This happened *after* the bioterrorism attacks. I don't think anything in my entire professional career has struck me so totally dumb. I spent the rest of the week straightening out this farce with the relevant federal authorities, who are supposed to be notified prior to a shipment, which is supposed to only happen with other licensed labs. Which he wasn't. All through this, and the total wrath of God never fell on him. I called and strongly suggested to the relevant federal authorities that they ought to do so. Nope. On a plane!! And he was so "I'm macho, look what I did" about it. The look on his face after I suggested he accompany me to the company president's office was no quite so macho. A rare point of walking up to the Big Man's door, and simply announcing to his secretary 'I needed to see him right now and I'll wait'.

So, you can bank on it: any total idiot could get away with stealing the stuff. It wouldn't require a highly educated scientist.

Just in case you are fond of reading conspiracy theory websites/blogs, feel free to go there, rather than my professional irritation. In the AP & Reuters' articles, the following statements were made. Unfortunately, my personal opinions weren't. :)

a) vaccinated for anthrax & yellow fever
He was required to get this simply because of his job requirements. I'm not guessing here; the gov't has the same requirements my employer did. I got vaccinated for it (anthrax), too, for the same reasons as Ivins.

vaccinations were "several weeks before the first anthrax-laced envelope"
Annual booster shots are required for this; and for someone who's never gotten vaccinated, it would take a lot longer for the immunization to fully take effect (18 months, actually). Not to mention, Ivins would have had to been growing the stuff for much longer than "early September". Ivins would also have been getting vaccinated for anthrax for years. As no one has accused him of stupidity, it's safe to conclude that he knew this. This is one point which is completely, 100% total fear-mongering. Anyone working with virulent B. anthracis who has the opportunity would get vaccinated against it.

If this vaccination is so suspicious, why aren't they looking for yellow fever organisms, as well?

b) "adequate explanation for his late laboratory work hours around the time of the attacks"
Can you seriously provide "adequate" information about what you were doing 7 years ago at work?

c) "sought to frame unnamed co-workers" -
does this mean he simply stated who else had access to the material, and could have been guilty?
FBI: Who else might have done this?
Answer: Jane Doe

... sounds quite a bit different than

FBI: "Good Morning"
Answer: "pssst, hey, you should go look at her, she's here late all the time and hates Bush".


d) "the genetic parent to the powder involved" - to me, this does not mean "same as" or "identical to"

e) "sole custodian of" doesn't sound like "only person who could had access to"

f) "taking 22 swabs of vacuum filters and radiators and seizing dozens of items" - no where do the words which tested positive for B. anthracis appear in this sentence.

g) Items seized: "among them were video cassettes, family photos, information about guns and a copy of The Plague by Albert Camus"
Yeah, cause sure as shit, owning a gun makes you a bioterrorist (like all those lunatics in Idaho, where anthrax is easily found in ordinary soil, while they're out shooting shit). And the Ivins family photos are certainly critical to establishing whether or not he was growing this crap in his basement.

h) The Plague?
Some 1940s novel set in Africa?
How about Preston's The Hot Zone, a non-fiction book, set in his own place of work?
How about Miller's The Coming Plauge, about epidemic possibilities across the globe today?
But most particuarly, I'm curious to know if he had a copy of Alibek's Biohazard, yet another non-fiction description about the development of Soviet anthrax warfare projects in the 1990s? Especially since I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that Ivins knew Alibek personally.
[ ... all 3 are, by the way, great books ... maybe I'd better get rid of all of the books on bioterrorism in the house. And, yes, I have several, but not Camus ...]

i) "affidavit filed by Charles B. Wickersham, a postal inspector, the scientist told an unnamed co-worker" - and just how does a postal inspector come into any knowledge about what some other dude at USAMRIID thinks about the deceased? If it is such credible information, why don't they have an affidavit from the co-worker?

j) "The FBI's investigation had dragged on for years, tarnishing the reputation of the agency in the process." Well, no shit, Sherlock.

k) "tracing back to Ivins' lab the type of envelopes used"
tracking back to his lab
= Government purchase order for the office supplies
= no one else at Ft. Detrick with access to the laboratories could possibly have had the same envelopes
= it was the cheapest thing the gov't could buy
= I could probably buy it at some dime store.


as an editorial note, having just cleaned up the grammar/spelling & applied my Professional Appropriateness Language Function (apologies to all, if you read this earlier and were put off). I don't mind using crass language for effect, but I do avoid it at work or in professional endeavors. This blog isn't my professional work, and the "turn off coarse language" option didn't get selected.