Slashdot Mirror


Can Anthrax Be Controlled?

coolphysco1010 writes "Scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology in Berlin discovered why lung, but not skin, anthrax infections are lethal. Neutrophils, a form of white blood cells, play a key role in anthrax infections. This discovery might now pave the way towards the development of new therapies for the fatal lung form of anthrax."

112 comments

  1. Article text for your convenience by Karma+Troll · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can anthrax be controlled?

    Max Planck Researchers discover a protein which is deadly for anthrax bacteriaScientists from the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology in Berlin discovered why lung, but not skin, anthrax infections are lethal. As reported in the newest issue of PloS Pathogen (November 2005) Neutrophils, a form of white blood cells, play a key role in anthrax infections. They can kill Bacillus anthracis by producing a protein called alpha-defensin. This discovery might now pave the way towards the development of new therapies for the fatal lung form of anthrax.
    Bacillus anthracis is the causative agent of anthrax. What makes Bacillus anthracis especially dangerous is that these bacteria can form spores. The spores are extremely resistant against environmental stress and can survive for years. Think about your breathing; inhale and exhale manually. Infection with Bacillus anthracis can take place either via the lung or through the skin. Interestingly, the lung form of anthrax is almost always fatal, whereas skin infections remain localized and are rarely lethal. In contrast to the lung form, the skin form of anthrax can be treated without problems and most patients recover.

    During the past few years, Bacillus anthracis has also been used as a weapon for bioterrorism. Anthrax spores were sent in envelopes and inhaled and resulted in the death of 5 people in the USA. This was reported at Digg days ago.

    Fig. 1: A human neutrophil takes up Bacillus anthracis.

    Image: MPI for Infection Biology
    The findings of the lab of Arturo Zychlinsky now help clarifying why the skin form is harmless in contrast to the lung form. After a skin infection with Bacillus anthracis, neutrophils are recruited to the site of infection. Neutrophils are white blood cells that can identify and kill microbes. In the skin, neutrophils take up the spores, which germinate inside the neutrophil to a vegetative ("growing") bacterium. This vegetative bacterium is then attacked and killed within the neutrophil. The scientists succeeded in identifying the substance responsible for the killing of the bacteria. After fractionation of neutrophil components only one protein remained which is sufficient for killing Bacillus anthracis: alpha-defensin

    This mechanism is not effective in the lung form of anthrax. Here, the number of neutrophils recruited to the site of infection is known to be low, and insufficient to kill bacteria. Thus, inhaled spores can germinate and spread through the organism. The scientists in Berlin now hope that their discovery will help to develop new drugs against the lung form of anthrax. There might be the possibility that the inhalation of alpha-defensin might kill vegetative bacteria in the lung and prevent dissemination.

    [VB]

    Original work:
    Anne Mayer-Scholl, Robert Hurwitz, Volker Brinkmann, Monika Schmid, Peter Jungblut, Yvette Weinrauch, Arturo Zychlinsky
    Human neutrophils kill B. anthracis
    PLoS Pathogen 1(3), November 2005

    PDF (155 KB)

    Contact:

    Prof. Dr. Arturo Zychlinsky
    Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology, Berlin
    Tel.: +49 30 2846-0300
    Fax: +49 30 2846-0301
    E-mail: zychlinsky@mpiib-berlin.mpg.de

    1. Re:Article text for your convenience by TheMeuge · · Score: 0

      I have to read this article. Frankly I thought this was old news.

    2. Re:Article text for your convenience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice addition to the article: Bacillus anthracis is the causative agent of anthrax. What makes Bacillus anthracis especially dangerous is that these bacteria can form spores. The spores are extremely resistant against environmental stress and can survive for years. Think about your breathing; inhale and exhale manually. Infection with Bacillus anthracis can take place either via the lung or through the skin.

    3. Re:Article text for your convenience by TCQuad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The abstract is interesting, but it's WAAAAAY too early to start predicting this as a cure for anything.

      Evolution is a very good learner. If the level of neutrophils is held lower, there's probably a valid reason. It may be unrelated (i.e. always having low levels is better than having occasional high levels in response to soot/allergens), but based on the 1918 flu pandemic (where strong immune systems attacked vigorously in the lungs and contributed to the cause of death), I think that it's plausible that extreme immune responses in the sensitive areas of the lungs may be a generic bad thing.

      If so, that's not to say that this research is not useful. If we know that we can't up the response or rely on the host's higher immune response, then we need to focus our energy elsewhere. We can either mimic the response (provide protein via inhalation) or work on cooperative response (bacteriostatics, give the slow and steady approach more time). I'd tend towards the latter, with combinations of various classes of bacteriostatics to prevent selection of resistant strains.

    4. Re:Article text for your convenience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I noticed nobody mentions the Anthrax Saddam Hussein used against his own people. The only thing mentioned so far is the handful of Americans killed by the letters.

    5. Re:Article text for your convenience by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      You mean against the Kurds in Halabja? He didn't use Anthrax, he used something akin to Mustard gas, which burned and scarred the people, not infected them. Also, the US at the time blamed Iran, and backed Saddam Hussein's tactics (Which is why they're not trying him on that charge yet, if ever.)

  2. Grim Reaper will control it by external400kdiskette · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Anthrax spores were sent in envelopes and inhaled and resulted in the death of 5 people in the USA." with numbers like that I think the problem will die off before a control plan is formulated :)

    1. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by JonN · · Score: 4, Informative

      That would be true if this were contagious between people. However, anthrax is not known to spread from one person to another person. Communicability is not a concern in managing or visiting with patients with inhalational anthrax.

      --
      do.what.promptcmds
    2. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Tontoman · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The Anthrax attack after 9/11 is one of the oddest unsolved mysteries. Seems as if it would have been a slam-dunk given the clues. Here is one blogger's recent conclusion: http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
      . . .laid out in detail my analysis of the way the anthrax letter-writer wrote R's and P's. Looking at the examples, it seems almost certain that the writer was a child in the first weeks of first grade.
    3. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by external400kdiskette · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just you wait until anthrax embraces Darwinism and decides to use birds as carriers and mutates its deadly venom to pass from human to human.

    4. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by JonN · · Score: 3, Informative

      Anthrax cannot be spread because infected beings have only the actively growing bacteria and do not have the infectious spores. Darwin is gonna have a hell of a time (or at least take alot of it) in making anthrax contagious.

      --
      do.what.promptcmds
    5. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by external400kdiskette · · Score: 1, Funny

      Are you familiar with the concept of a joke? Thank you for injecting your logic all the same.

    6. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Canadian_Daemon · · Score: 1

      Are you assuming that the person writing the letters if familiar with the English language? Is it possible that the terrorist could have come from somewere that does not use our standard alphabet? A foreign country with a reason for terrosit attacks against the US? Might explain the lack of "R" recognition. Just my .02 CAD

      --
      This sig is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
    7. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but it doesnt do this! more proof of intelligent design!

    8. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by discogravy · · Score: 3, Funny

      so move to kansas and be safe from darwinism. common sense, really.

    9. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by stevesliva · · Score: 0

      So does this theory reveal who it was that had their first-grader write some killer notes for them?

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    10. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1

      This was due to the piss poor delivery method and the small amounts. The intent was to cause fear, not to kill. Someone who knows what they are doing, with the right equipment, and a fair amount of anthrax, could cause a rather large amount of deaths.

    11. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by buswolley · · Score: 1

      but not proof of Intelligent Post

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    12. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      . . .laid out in detail my analysis of the way the anthrax letter-writer wrote R's and P's. Looking at the examples, it seems almost certain that the writer was a child in the first weeks of first grade.

      So what you are saying is that the attacker waas aged 25-30, from Kansas?

    13. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Sure, he could have, but how exactly did he get the Anthrax made in an American lab?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    14. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      If you wrote a letter that if traced could land you in jail or even on the death row, would you use your own handwriting or would you make sure the writing looks nothing like your own?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    15. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Darwin? The man's dead, how is he going to do anything at all?

    16. Re:Grim Reaper will control it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems to contradict the theory going around that it was a disgruntled American scientist..

  3. Great news! by Propagandhi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Man, this is a load of my back. I've been really worried about contracting it lately. I'm sure I speak for all of slashdot when I say how glad I am that my chance of dieing of Anthrax (some pathetic fraction of a percent) may someday be even closer to zero!

    1. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations, that post deserves a ton of karma. So I can send a card, what's your address?

    2. Re:Great news! by adtifyj · · Score: 1

      And not a moment too soon.
      I have to spend all my spare cycles worrying about a flu pandemic instead.

    3. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm even further down the list because I don'tpiss off my Arab neighbours, or open mail for the ones that do.

    4. Re:Great news! by gkhan1 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      When it comes to anthrax, it's really not about the death-count is it? Anthrax is the perfect scare weapon, remember back when people were getting the letters containing the stuff? As you say, almost no one died, but people were freaked out up the wazoo! Even here, in the cold north of Scandinavia, people started evacuating buildings every time someone got a letter with flour in it.

      And that's what terrorism is all about isn't it? Terrorism was never about killing as many as possible, that goal is futile for terrorist organizations. No, terrorism is all about Terror, and there are few better ways to freak people out if they think that the mail can kill them.

      If a letter containing just some dust can kill you, who of us is really safe?

    5. Re:Great news! by demachina · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Me personally I'd really like to know how Anthrax from a U.S. lab got mailed around the U.S. right after 9/11 with a weak attempt to make it look like it was done by Islamic terrorists. It is amazing that after engaging in character assassination of one suspect who was never charged this investigation appears to have disappeared in to a black hole.

      It would seem to suggest our biggest danger from Anthrax is not Saddam or Bin Laden, but the U.S. government.

      The only two solutions to the case seem to be:

      - A lone right wing wacko working in a U.S. lab with access to deadly bio weapons, who may still be there, which is really scary, especially if you don't know what other agents this person has access to, small pox for example.

      - There are people in power in Washington who perpetrated this despicable attack to pump up the frenzy for invading Iraq over WMD's. These maybe being the same people who manipulated Judith Miller in to terrorizing the nation with books and articles about WMD's in general and in Iraq in particular.

      The choice of targets in particular screams out Republican nut case who, while engaged in this sick enterprise, couldn't resist targeting the liberal media and two Democrats in Congress they most hated, Patrick Leahy and Tom Daschle.

      --
      @de_machina
    6. Re:Great news! by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There are people in power in Washington who perpetrated this despicable attack to pump up the frenzy for invading Iraq over WMD's.

      Let's please not go accusing a small group of people of being murderers until we have something better than "it would have worked out well for them." It's just not cool.

      "Right wing nutjobs", I'm okay with. There's enough of them to absorb that, but if it was an Iraq thing, then the order would have had to have come from one of a very small group of people, and that's a big accusation to make.

    7. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the economic damage!

    8. Re:Great news! by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Just last month where I live there was an anthrax scare over some white powder found on some pallets that resulted in an evacuation.

      It turns out that it was silica gel commonly used in boxes to absorb moisture.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    9. Re:Great news! by EiZei · · Score: 1

      So what if they invent an effective cure? They will just use something else as deadly to scare people.
      Terrorism is almost as overrated as F.E.A.R.

    10. Re:Great news! by Lars+T. · · Score: 1
      Let's please not go accusing a small group of people of being murderers until we have something better than "it would have worked out well for them." It's just not cool.

      Are you talking about the GP or the GOP?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    11. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me personally I'd really like to know ...

      What are you, twelve? Like, your post is like, so-o-o immature, y'know? Why don't you, like, y'know?, pst like an adult, y'know?

    12. Re:Great news! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great news indeed!

      Only a few anthrax-laced letters sent to the USA's liberal news media, and to the Democratic "loyal" opposition in the US Senate, and the "message" was delivered. That, and an absolutely stalled federal investigation over the perpetrators has a tendency to keep opponents in line -- who knows, the perp might just strike again.

      The FBI, with the help of the CDC in Atlanta, determined through genetics that the particular Ames strain of anthax originated at the US Army's bio-weapons lab at Ft. Dettrick, MD. They found that there were too few normal generational genetic mutations for the anthrax to have originated from a seconary source, such as a university laboratory.

      As Dubya said shortly after the 9/11/2001 attack "If you are not with us, then you are against us."
      Implied in that statement is "that if you are against us, then you too will be considered terrorists". Since Dubya has pretty much gotten his way on the war, fascist invasion of privacy laws, torture, etcetera, it would appear that the political opposition has had its fangs pulled.

      Based upon that, I would venture to say that a renewed outbreak of "anthrax letters" is much closer to zero than it was before. The one exception that I would propose, however, is an increased probability of such attacks if Dubya's poll numbers continue to slide. But I'm a bit more cynical than the average /.er.

    13. Re:Great news! by Silencer-7 · · Score: 1
      This isn't proof of anything, I suppose, but...this is kind of curious, isn't it?

      "In October, press reports revealed that White House staff had been on a regimen of the powerful antibiotic Cipro since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Judicial Watch wants to know why White House workers, including President Bush, began taking the drug nearly a month before anthrax was detected on Capitol Hill. "

  4. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Didn't that band die out in the 80s?

    1. Re:Hmmm by linicks · · Score: 1

      I thought this article "Can Anthrax Be Controlled?" was about them keeping the crappy singer instead of the good one (John Bush). Someone ought to make sure they make the right decisions! :)

      --

      I got nothing...
  5. Neutro..what? by Psionicist · · Score: 4, Funny

    Neutrophils, a form of white blood cells, play a key role in anthrax infections.

    And here I was thinking a neutrophil was someone who was sexually aroused by the science of food.

    1. Re:Neutro..what? by w.timmeh · · Score: 1

      Close, try a medical dictionary.

      Latin - neuter = not either + (referring to the two basic dyes used to stain cells for viewing) Greek - philos = loving

  6. uh, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anthrax is still producing records.

    1. Re:uh, no by The+Clockwork+Troll · · Score: 1
      Anthrax is still producing records.
      It's true. For example, they recently seized the record for most consecutive album releases with zero consumer interest, besting long-time tied recordholders Kris Kross and solo John Oates (recording as "Here's Oates in Your Eye").
      --

      There are no karma whores, only moderation johns
  7. Anthrax by The_Abortionist · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Anthrax is indiscrimate and impersonnal.

    --
    Linux violates 235 Microsoft patents.
    1. Re:Anthrax by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 1
      Anthrax is indiscrimate and impersonnal.

      So you're saying Anthrax is an equal opportunity employer? I'll be here all day folks. Be sure to tip your server.

    2. Re:Anthrax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your comment would have been funnier had you posted as an AC.

    3. Re:Anthrax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tipping your server is bad, especially if it falls over. I hope you have a backup also.

  8. Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by Evro · · Score: 5, Funny

    Boy, am I glad this wasn't in the "Ask Slashdot" section...

    --
    rooooar
    1. Re:Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by eosp · · Score: 1

      Worry not--they'll dupe it, just for you.

    2. Re: Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, Anthrax will never be controlled!

      I AM THE MAN! BRING THE NOISE!

      *Moshes violently*

      --

      HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    3. Re:Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by dascandy · · Score: 1

      We'd finally have an Ask Slashdot that you couldn't answer with RTFM and you're happy about it?

    4. Re:Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by Frankie70 · · Score: 2, Funny


        Boy, am I glad this wasn't in the "Ask Slashdot" section...


      If it were in the "Ask Slashdot" section, then vast majority
      of the answers would have been
      1) Install Linux.
      2) Install Firefox.
      3) In Soviet Russia, Anthrax controls you.
      4) In Korea, only old people control Anthrax.

    5. Re:Can Anthrax Be Controlled? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5) Profit!!

  9. What of other bacteria? by lostraven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How many other bacteria affect humans in similar methods where inhalation is deadlier than skin contact? Just curious if the same premise of narrowing down why one exposure is less lethal than another could be applied to other bacteria.

    1. Re:What of other bacteria? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The black plague was bacterial, and came in two forms -- when it hit the lungs, it was nearly always fatal, and when it hit the rest of your body, it was nasty but survivable.

    2. Re:What of other bacteria? by (negative+video) · · Score: 2, Informative

      Francisella tularensis, the cause of tularemia (rabbit fever), is Not Good when inhaled. This was discovered by some poor bastards who ran over an infected rabbit with a lawnmower and inhaled the resulting infected rabbit fog. Fortunately it does not normally spread in this fashion.

    3. Re:What of other bacteria? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      The Plague, aka The Black Death, aka yersinia pestis, can be fatal within a day of being inhaled, with mortality reaching 80% if untreated (which, until fairly recently, was usually the case, because you were probably dead before they figured out why you were sick) whereas the other major form of infection, bubonic, takes quite a bit longer and has much more predictable symptoms. Septicemic plague is as fast as pneumonic, but it's harder to get, unless you, I dunno, run over an infected prairie dog with a lawnmower and one of its bone fragments gets shot into your leg.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    4. Re:What of other bacteria? by KFW · · Score: 1

      Although the bubonic form was technically "survivable" it was still mostly fatal.
      /K

  10. Who cares? by Kohath · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear we're all going to die in a Flu Pandemic anyway.

    1. Re:Who cares? by CriminalNerd · · Score: 1

      Is that why I can't see the Colonel smiling these days?

    2. Re:Who cares? by derrith · · Score: 5, Funny

      Only half of us will, those with strong immune systems!. It's times like these that make me glad I'm a skinny, pale, asthmatic nerd living in my parents basement. No vector for infection there!

      --
      why does the porridge bird lay his eggs in the air?
  11. Good deal! by Ibanez · · Score: 3, Funny

    With all these cases of Anthrax infections going around, this will be a boon for us!

  12. you never know by external400kdiskette · · Score: 1

    It could become another pandemic ! Some guys at Scientific American are probably on record that it could incur 10 deaths this time, that's a 100% increase! Beware.

  13. Thank (insert your 'higher being' here)... by Mister+White · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and here I was, thinking I might actually somehow inhale anthrax...you know, not working in a government building and all...Well, at least now I know I'm safe!

    *goes to scratch Anthrax off the bottom of my 'worries' list*

    oh wait, it wasn't there...oh well, thanks for helping me (or at least someone) feel relieved about this. one less death threat(or not)...

    --
    "Crime fighters fight crime. Fire fighters fight fire. What do freedom fighters fight?" -George Carlin
  14. Anthrax can be controlled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Crank up the radio! I AM THE MAN

  15. Original article by nucal · · Score: 4, Informative
    Since PLoS is an open access journal, anyone can read the original article.

    As the title of the article says, they show that isolated human neutrophils are capable of killing Anthrax. The mechanism is unusuual, the spores are first eaten by the neutrophils. Then the spores germinate inside the cells to a form of bacteria that are readily killed (vegitative) as opposed to the virulent, disease causing form which is formed in the outside environment.

    However, they don't look directly at animal models - so the leap of faith is that the lung infection is bad when the spores do not elicit a neutrophil response. How the spores avoid eliciting a host response in lung is the bigger question, which is not addressed by the paper.

    1. Re:Original article by Stickerboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      "However, they don't look directly at animal models - so the leap of faith is that the lung infection is bad when the spores do not elicit a neutrophil response. How the spores avoid eliciting a host response in lung is the bigger question, which is not addressed by the paper."

      That's because that question has already been answered...

      Spores that are inhaled are phagocytized by alveolar macrophages. The spores survive or escape the phagosome, germinate, and use the macrophage as a biological Trojan Horse to spread to the lymph nodes, where the infection becomes systemic (and very lethal).

      --
      Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
  16. A little reassurance by JonN · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...For those of you who are putting on your tinfoil masks, read up what the CDC has to say about anthrax.

    --
    do.what.promptcmds
    1. Re:A little reassurance by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The CDC? Wow, it seems like we haven't heard much from those guys since they released Back Oriface back in 1998/1999.

  17. ANTHRAX can be stopped by zrk · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's simple, just power off their amps, block off the stage, leave the Green M&Ms in the mix backstage, However, as Twisted Sister sez, You Can't Stop Rock And Roll

    1. Re:ANTHRAX can be stopped by malraid · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, they CAN'T be stopped. They even survived the Mystery Pack!!!!

      " Oh, wow. There're gonna eat the mystery pack. Even Dad won't eat the mystery pack. These guys are cool"

      --
      please excuse my apathy
    2. Re:ANTHRAX can be stopped by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

      Actually, they just finished a tour. So, in a way, you're right.
      The amps are off.

      --
      "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    3. Re:ANTHRAX can be stopped by misfit13b · · Score: 1

      If this stuff came out the fridge, why is it hot?

  18. makes you wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It makes you wonder then if Anthrax can be manipulated to become lethal for skin exposure.

  19. Rock and roll can be stopped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just dig a big enough and deep enough pit (and throw TS in it).

  20. Look Alike by CriminalNerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cocaine and anthrax both look alike and both are VERY hazardous to one's health. Is there a difference? You be the judge.

    1. Re:Look Alike by bumptehjambox · · Score: 3, Funny

      One difference is a bag of Anthrax would stay full much longer in my house.

    2. Re:Look Alike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One difference is a bag of Anthrax would stay full much longer in my house.

      Ahh college life, how I remember thee.

  21. No duh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've read that people who are routinely exposed to anthrax spores don't come down with it. Why? Because they're handling material that carries it (wool, etc), not sniffing it like somebody with a cocaine addiction. And what about those people who don't get STD's because they don't exchange bodily fluids with STD carriers? What a concept!

    1. Re:No duh by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      In my epidemiology class, one of the things we talked about was the last 'major' anthrax problem in the US, which was showing up in people who owned horses in places all across the world. They finally tracked it to wool saddle blankets being shipped out of Pakistan. So materials handling can be a good vector for transport. Maybe they were all sniffing their saddle blankets: I don't know.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  22. what about asbestos by Douglas+Simmons · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Asbestos. Good stuff to keep heat under control or act as an insulant in general, bad stuff to bump some lines with. One very common application of asbestos was to use it in car brakes. Do we still do that? Have we figured out a way to keep that "controlled" as it does have important features?

    Regarding skin contact, I have no trouble believing that about anthrax. Ever get some asbestos on your skin? Nasty itchy shit. It'll screw up your whole weekend.

    Essentially what I'm trying to say here is avoid dermal contact with both substances. The jury's still out on Teflon.

    1. Re:what about asbestos by whogben · · Score: 1

      the jury's still out on teflon? this teflon condom I rigged has been causing hella itch recently- i wish I'd known that earlier. Maybe it just needs a wash.

    2. Re:what about asbestos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried a teflon condom once but the damn thing just kept slipping off.

  23. Hitchcock by HermanAB · · Score: 1

    Think Vampire Bats... Amazonian, Giant, Vampire Bats, spreading rabies and anthrax... Too bad Alfred Hitchcock died.

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  24. Of course not... by chriswaclawik · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The CDC said the following in a press release: "[Anthrax] can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."

    It has to be true; it's from a movie!

    --
    A guy walks into a bar... well, I forgot the joke, but the punchline is that he's an alcoholic.
    1. Re:Of course not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Anthrax] can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead."

      Funny how that description can also be directly applied to the RIAA.

    2. Re:Of course not... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      You forgot the first few lines.

      "[Anthrax] doesn't feel pain. I do. Don't do that again. Now, listen and understand! That [Anthrax] is out there..."

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  25. Yes anthrax can be controlled. by 3seas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Control it by simply not producing it. the after effect of 9/11 showed the world that teh US military is guilty of having and selling anthrax while having stores of it outside of the country.

    And it also showed how the US military can be abused by as little as one person with enough military athority to not have to deal with security protocals but to use it to help the Bush administration to terroriseand threaten the American media which inturn then helpped the bush administration to terrorise teh American public to support an erronious war on iraq. Which had nothing to do with 9/11.

    It gets worse too. If you know the real reason for 9/11, then you will also know the US wrongful world stock market manipulation was in fact the motivation and excuse of fanitics born out of the oil industry to be able to convince enough to follow.

    simply start with a google search on "trillion dollar bet" and then realize who teh big losers were (enron, worldcom, etc.) and who benefitted from investment firms needing to put the enormus gains somewhere and found the dot coms...)

    Anthrax? Who really needs it, but to play unneeded war games by the idiots who simply don't know better how to spend tax payer money. Of the 6 billion plus people on this planet, what fractional percentage are responsible for the hardships of the rest of us?

    http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/theme_a/mod02 /www.worldgame.org/wwwproject/index.shtml

    Anthrax? To control it, get rid of the all the war mongers and power mongers responsible for creating it and worse..... we do know who they are! Just like indonesia knew it was the Americans who were draining their economy, but they just didn't know how (CNN did a story... so did ABC, but ABC removed their news link around teh time war on iraq started)

    1. Re:Yes anthrax can be controlled. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 0, Troll

      So, you know for sure that the Anthrax that was mailed out in the US was from the US Military? Source?

      And you know the "real" reason for 9/11. Well, what was it and wheres a source or two for it?

    2. Re:Yes anthrax can be controlled. by nagora · · Score: 1
      Control it by simply not producing it. the after effect of 9/11 showed the world that the US military is guilty of having and selling anthrax while having stores of it outside of the country.

      To be fair, the world already knew that. When Rumsfeld met with Saddam to sell him anthrax, west nile virus and the rest it was considered so un-sensitive that the receipt for them was published in the Senate Banking Commitee's report without the slightest hint of the old black marker or any need for a FoI application.

      It was common knowledge in the ruling classes that the US was supplying military dictators with weapons of mass destruction and that the CIA was supplying agents to calibrate those weapons based on their actual battlefield use against countries like Iran (I wonder why Iran doesn't like America).

      It's only since 911 that the US and its allies have found that they need a moral high ground from which to pretend that such weapons (and people like their old friend and ex-puppet Saddam) are something that they could never tolerate as civilised people.

      As to the system being abused by one person, I'm sure you know the story of how America held on to its smallpox supplies even after claiming to have desposed of them and being inspected to make sure.

      Never believe anything the American military or its supporters tells you: lying is a habit they just can't kick, as we saw in some detail in the run up to invading Iraq. I particularly liked the bit where they showed British weather ballon trucks, sold with US permission, and claimed they were mobile chemical warfare labs. I keep imaging US troops being hit by a shell who's only effect is to make them speak in squeeky voices. Sadly, the trucks turned out to generate hydrogen rather than helium but I still think there's room on the modern battlefield for such a device.

      TWW

      --
      "Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
    3. Re:Yes anthrax can be controlled. by 3seas · · Score: 1

      Uh, weren't you paying attention to the news? It was researched, probably by the FBI or CIA or perhaps teh military themselves... actually all of them were probably involved... It was determined that the anthrax came from a US based military base and they even tried to find a scape goat to blame, but it turned even more sour than when Richard Jewell was blamed for teh Olympic Park Mombing... he sued and won....so did the guy they tried to blame for the anthrax.

      So yeah, it came from a US military base.... and for it to be only one person with enough authority and security clearance, it wouldn't even be conspiracy... but plausable deniability....for the rest of those who took advantage of it to beat unfounded war drums...

      What happens when you don't have one hand of the government investigating another hand of the same? Shit happens and things get shut up when they start figuring it out.... and that is exactly what happened.

    4. Re:Yes anthrax can be controlled. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Uh, you never gave me sources.

      Anthrax comes in 89 known strains. The best known is the virulent Ames strain, used in the 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States. The Vollum (also incorrectly refered to as Vellum) strain, another one suitable for use as a biological weapon, was isolated in 1935 from a cow in Oxfordshire, UK, and used (specifically the Vollum 1B strain) during 1960s in the US and UK bioweapon programs.

      The version used in the fall 2001 mailing was Ames, which is a strain used mostly for vaccine production.

  26. Anthrax needs access, a motive, and a scapegoat... by Silencer-7 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and everyone soon forgot about asking where that white powder came from, didn't they? http://www.antiwar.com/justin/j022202.html ...Terror just to freak people out is amateur stuff. Terror to get someone else in trouble, now that's effective...

  27. I really don't see why this merits attention... by Anyd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe I'm just being ignorant, but I see these types of articles as fuel for our current atmosphere of fear. Our current administration pushes this fear on us everytime they want something done. Fear of anthrax, terrorists, and WMDs pushed us into war in Iraq, got the patriot act passed, and allows our government to take more and more control of our daily lives. I guess I just don't want /. to be part of that same cycle. If I want to feel scared I'll watch some dipshit on the local news tell me how my cell phone is going to give me cancer, or how the world is coming to an end with the natural-disaster-au-ju. Enjoying life involves some inherent danger. That's what makes it worth living.

  28. No, not really. by Scott+Lockwood · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cutanious (or, Skin) Anthrax is exactly the same as the other - it just hasn't been aerisolized. Cutanious Anthrax is very common, and historically was called 'Sheep sheerers disease'. Very common, very easy to treat. It's not dangerous unless it gets in your lungs (or blood) and has a chance to do real dammage.

    To 'manipulate' it to be deadly to the touch would mean playing with it's genetic structure, like say by adding some proteous species genetic material to it - proteous sp. is a form of germ that can worm it's way around a plate of blood auger (what we grow bacteria on in a lab) and has some mobility (through motility, if I remember correctly). No one has been crazy enough to try this, that I am aware...

    Worse case, just remember to take a whole freaking case of Ciprofloxicin at the first sign of trouble. If you're already getting bumpy in the armpits - forget it, you're likely toast anyway.

    --
    But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
    1. Re:No, not really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up, Vlad.

  29. Anthrax? Controlled? Hah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When asked for a comment on the assertion that "Anthrax can be controlled", frontman Joey Belladonna responded quite vocally.

    "Stop Anthrax? You want to stop Anthrax? Fuck that! You can't stop metal, man. We're hardcore. We'll beat the faces in of anyone who tries! I AM THE LAW and I don't flinch."

  30. MOD PARENT DOWN KNOWN PEDOPHILE/CHILD MOLESTER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the Ghetto Part XXX

    Vlad farted, twitched, then farted again. He flicked the syringe with his middle finger, causing a flurry of small bubbles to rise to the top and burst. Carefully, Vlad inserted the needle into his urethra. The sting dislodged a pocket of gas that had been lurking deep within his bowel. Carefully, Vlad pressed in on the plunger of the syringe. His leg shook wildly as the clear, cold liquid filled his urethra. Vlad carefully removed the syringe and laid it on Marticock's changing table.

    Vlad looked down at Marticock's naked, glistening body and smiled slyly. He grabbed Marticock by the legs and lifted him up to his waist. Desperately, Vlad plunged his penis into Marticock's tight farting asshole. All it took was a couple of thrusts and Vlad reached orgasm. The semen rushed from his raisin-sized testicles and entered his penis, mixing with the testosterone he had just injected into his urethra. Vlad ejaculated his testosterone-laced load deep into Marticock's bowel, where it was absorbed like an essential nutrient.

    Vlad laid Marticock back in his crib and admired his handiwork. He had been administering the testosterone injections for several months and the results were far better than Vlad had expected. Marticock already had a full thick crop of chest and pubic hair. His penis and testicles were far above average in size, even for a full-grown man. Vlad stroked Marticock's hairy scrotum with pride. Marticock gurgled and farted with pleasure. Vlad wafted his hand under his nose, savoring the rich scent of sweaty Marticock testicles.

    Vlad knew he would have to break in Marticock's new genitalia tonight. Earlier in the evening, he had made sure Reza was in the mood for love by giving her a few pokes with the cattle prod. His back crawled at the thought of her cold, sweating flesh waiting for him in the bedroom, but it was a sacrifice he would have to make. For Marticock.

    Vlad grabbed the belt that was laying on the floor and affixed it loosely around his waist. He picked up Marticock and shoved him against his massive gut, then tightened the belt around him. Marticock was strapped in tightly and positioned so that his massive penis throbbed and oozed as though it were Vlad's very own. Vlad waddled into the darkened bedroom, with Marticock burping and slobbering.

    Reza's vagina twitched at the sounds of Vlad farting his way over to the bed. Her body shook with anticipation. Vlad wasted no time. He dumped himself into the bed and mounted Reza, carefully positioning Marticock so that he penetrated his massive mother. Reza groaned loudly, sounding much like a wounded moose.

    As Vlad thrust faster and harder, Reza moaned louder. Her gaping, slobbering vagina farted in harmony with Vlad. Marticock giggled and belched. Vlad's penis managed to slip naturally into Marticock's anus. In moments, Vlad felt a thrust against his own eraser-sized penis. Marticock made a sound like a squirt-gun being fired as he ejaculated a cupful of semen into his own mother. The process caused Vlad to cum into Marticock once again.

    Sweating and panting, Vlad collapsed. He laid there in the same position for an hour, twitching and farting as Reza's vagina oozed a constant stream of infection and ejaculate onto him.

  31. Oh ye Godless people by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Oh ye Godless people, this is a sign from Heaven that the Lord is displeased with thine actions! Darwinism does not exist!

  32. Anthrax can be controlled. Consiracy nuts can't. by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    It gets worse too. If you know the real reason for 9/11...

    You mean that radical islamics don't actually hate us? Damn, they had me fooled...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  33. "Black Plague" by lostraven · · Score: 1

    What's the prevalence of yersinia pestis these days? Is its acquiring relegated to the same likelihood as anthrax and rabbit fever?

    1. Re:"Black Plague" by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      I don't know about where you live, but we've had a consistent death every other year in the county where I grew up. I assume it's higher for the state as a whole. Way more people die of hantavirus around here than the plague, but that's mostly because doctors are expecting to see the plague and treatment is very effective once the IMVIC test comes back indicating Y. pestis. The problem is that it's SO FAST that often people feel tired and start coughing and by the time they head towards the doctor they're about halfway to dead. When from 'coughing noticeably' to 'dead' is sometimes less than ten hours you're counting heavily on luck for survival. The good thing is that they can track down everyone you've been in contact with and give them big doses of antibiotics, which solves everything for everyone else.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  34. Yes. by SheeEttin · · Score: 1

    Yes, I do believe antrax can be controlled. I find envelopes work well when containing it.

  35. Lysins against anthrax? by cspeye · · Score: 1

    I don't know why no one has ever really mentioned this, but there's a class of enzymes called lysins which are essentially bacterial bleach--they'll kill specific bacteria within seconds through lysis. Not just that, there's a lysin that's been found to be specific for the antrax bacteria. I find this to be a more likely and more interesting branch of research--I personally think these will be the next generation of antibiotics. Abstract: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v418/n6900/ab s/nature01026.html abstract doesn't really say much, though