>Would not anyone receiving an anthrax
>vaccine be easily traceable form
>physicians records? It would surely narrow the
>list of suspects at present, until we
>immunize a few million soldiers, that is.
>Of course the common anthrax vaccine used
>for cattle is known to work just fine in humans,
>and it is fairly easy to obtain and would be
>more difficult to trace.
I don't believe that people would be traceable. When someone wants to
buy some heroin or a gun (for illegal use) they are unlikely to go
their doctor or the local gun shop (and apply for a licence). Anything
can be bought for a price.
>Easy to work with, true, but subsequent
>large scale cultivation and dispersal of
>the organism would be impractical without
>prior immunization.
Precisely my point, that terrorists don't have enough control yet to
use this weapon.
>On the contrary, I think you are
>dismissing the terrorism possibility much too
>quickly. Fortunately all microbiologists
>have high levels of morality and sanity-
>indeed, that Unabomber fellow was a
>mathematician (and those guys are nearly ALL nuts).
I am not saying that it will never happen, I am just saying in my
opinion it will be some time before terrorists will have enough
control over these weapons to use them efficiently. You can disagree
with me, but that is what I believe.
Incidently, I used to think I was paranoid before I saw this
newsgroup, but I am feeling much better now! (Oh and more sane).
