BIOHAZARD I !I¸ I:I¸ • •!:I I• BI

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

BIOHAZARD I !I¸ I:I¸ • •!:I I• BI BIOHAZARD _i_!i¸_i:i¸ • •!:i_i• BI T_e Chillini St_ of the _argest Covert Biological Wea in,_theWorldmToId from the Inside in Who Ran It KEN ALIBEK WITH STEPHEN HANDELMAN RANDOM HOUSE NEW YORK Copyright © 1999 by Ken Alibek All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. Published in the United States by Random House, Inc., New York, and simultaneously in Canada by Random House of Canada Limited, Toronto. Random House and colophon are registered trademarks of Random House, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Alibek, Ken. Biohazard: the chilling true story of the largest covert biological weapons program in the world, told from the inside by the man who ran it/Ken Alibek with Stephen Handelman. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-375-50231-9 (alk. paper) 1. Biological weapons--Soviet Union. I. Handelman, Stephen. II.Title. UG447.8.A45 1998 358".3882"0947--dc21 98-56454 Random House website address: www.atrandom.com Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 24689753 Book design by Caroline Cunningham [We are] determined for the sake of all mankind, to exclude completely the possibility of bacteriological agents and toxins being used as weapons; [We are] convinced that such use would be repugnant to the conscience of mankind and that no effort should be spared to minimize this risk .... --Preamble to the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, 1972 i. CONTENTS Prologue ix Map: Soviet Biological Warfare Installations xii MILITARY MEDICINE 1 Army Headquarters 3 2 Rebirth Island 15 3 Military Medicine 29 4 The Enzyme Project 39 BInHAZARD 5 Lab Work 51 6 Building 107 62 7 Accident at Sverdlovsk 70 8 Progress 87 9 Smallpox 107 10 Vector 123 SECRETS AND LIES 11 The Institute of Ultra-Pure Biopreparations 137 12 Bonfire 153 13 The First Main Directorate 168 VIII CONTENTS 14 Insidethe Kremlin 180 15 Visitors 193 16 Three Days 207 FrlRTRESS AMERICA 17 Fort Detrick 225 18 Communist Prospekt 241 19 Debriefing 257 20 Buyers and Sellers 270 21 Biodefense 280 Appendix 1: Chart of Soviet Biological Warfare System 293 Appendix 2: Soviet Biological Warfare System 295 Acknowledgments 305 Index 307 PROLOGUE n a bleak island in the Aral Sea, one hundred monkeys are tethered to posts set in parallel rows stretching out toward the horizon. A muffled thud breaks the stillness. Far in the dis- tance, a small metal sphere lifts into the sky then hurtles down- ward, rotating, until it shatters in a second explosion. Some seventy-five feet above the ground, a cloud the color of dark mustard begins to unfurl, gently dissolving as it glides down toward the monkeys. They pull at their chains and begin to cry. Some bury their heads between their legs. A few cover their mouths or noses, but it is too late: they have already begun to die. At the other end of the island, a handful of men in biological protective suits observe the scene through binoculars, taking notes. In a few hours, they will retrieve the still-breathing monkeys and return them to cages where the animals will be under continuous examination for the next several days until, one by one, they die of anthrax or tularemia, Q fever, brucellosis, glanders, or plague. X PROLOGUE These are the tests I supervised throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. They formed the foundation of the Soviet Union's spectac- ular breakthroughs in biological warfare. Between 1988 and 1992, I was first deputy chief of Bio- preparat, the Soviet state pharmaceutical agency whose primary function was to develop and produce weapons made from the most dangerous viruses, toxins, and bacteria known to man. Bio- preparat was the hub of a clandestine empire of research, testing, and manufacturing facilities spread out over more than forty sites in Russia and Kazakhstan. Nearly every important government in- stitution played a role in the Soviet biological weapons program: the Ministry of Defense, the Ministries of Agriculture and Health, the Soviet Academy of Sciences, the Communist Party Central Committee, and, of course, the KGB. The System, as Biopreparat was often called, was more successful than the Kremlin had ever dared to hope. Over a twenty-year period that began, ironically, with Moscow's endorsement of the Biological Weapons Convention in 1972, the Soviet Union built the largest and most advanced bio- logical warfare establishment in the world. We were among the 140 signatories of the convention, pledging "not to develop, pro- duce, stockpile or otherwise acquire or retain" biological agents for offensive military purposes. At the same time, through our covert program, we stockpiled hundreds of tons of anthrax and dozens of tons of plague and smallpox near Moscow and other Russian cities for use against the United States and its Western al- lies. What went on in Biopreparat's labs was one of the most closely guarded secrets of the Cold War. Before I became an expert in biological warfare I was trained as a physician. The government I served perceived no contradiction be- tween the oath every doctor takes to preserve life and our prepa- rations for mass murder. For a long time, neither did I. Less than a decade ago, I was a much-decorated army colonel, marked out for further promotion in one of the Soviet Union's most elite military programs. |f I had stayed in Russia, I would have been a major general by now, and you would never have PROLOGUE XI heard my name. But in 1992, after seventeen years inside Bio- preparat, I resigned from my position and fled with my family to the United States. In numerous debriefing sessions, I provided U.S. officials with their first comprehensive picture of our activities. Most of what I told them has never been revealed in public. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the danger once posed by our weapons work has sharply diminished. Biopreparat claims that it no longer conducts offensive research, and Russia's stock- pile of germs and viruses has been destroyed. But the threat of a bi- ological attack has increased as the knowledge developed in our labs--of lethal formulations that took our scientists years to dis- cover--has spread to rogue regimes and terrorist groups. Bioweapons are no longer contained within the bipolar world of the Cold War. They are cheap, easy to make, and easy to use. In the coming years, they will become very much a part of our lives. Since leaving Moscow I have encountered an alarming level of ig- norance about biological weapons. Some of the best scientists I've met in the West say it isn't possible to alter viruses genetically to make reliable weapons, or to store enough of a given pathogen for strategic purposes, or to deliver it in a way that assures maximum killing power. My knowledge and experience tell me that they are wrong. I have written this book to explain why. There are some who maintain that discussing the subject will cause needless alarm. But existing defenses against these weapons are dangerously inadequate, and when biological terror strikes, as I'm convinced it will, public ignorance will only heighten the dis- aster. The first step we must take to protect ourselves is to under- stand what biological weapons are and how they work. The alternative is to remain as helpless as the monkeys in the Aral Sea. SOVIET BIOLOGICAL WARFARE INSTALLATIONS | reserve mobilization facility _ biological weapon [] storage (to be activated in time of war) research biological weapon production [] testing grounds ® other facility 0 ....ii ARMY HEADQUARTERS Moscow, 1988 aratemyin hetheadquwinterartersof o19n 8Ki8, roIvwasStreecalt ledin Moto sacomeetw. inTgheatnotSoviete of urgency in the message was hard to ignore. "We've set aside a spe- cial room for you, Colonel," said the clipped voice on the phone. A black Volga was waiting at the curb, its motor running. The two armed bodyguards who accompanied me on top-secret busi- ness were slouched alongside, their fur hats pulled low against the cold. One held the door open as I climbed into the backseat, and followed me inside. The second slid in beside my driver, Slava. I told Slava to drive quickly. It was usually a thirty-minute drive across town from my office to Red Army headquarters, but a fresh snowfall that morning had turned the streets into an Arctic snarl of spinning tires and raging drivers. Once or twice the flashing blue light on our official vehicle aroused the attention of a traffic policeman, who thrust his gloved hand in the air to clear the way. Close to an hour had passed by the time we finally pulled up in front of the austere granite building that housed the Ministry of 4 MILITARY MEDICINE Defense. I entered through a side entrance and stamped the snow from my boots. A junior officer took me to a small adjoining room, where I was issued a pass, and then on to a guard booth, where a young soldier examined my pass and picture, stared hard, and waved me on. The first officer led me up a flight of stairs to a heavy armored door with a coded lock. He punched in a series of numbers and we walked into the sprawling suite of offices occupied by the Fifteenth Directorate of the Soviet army, the military wing of our biological weapons program. I unzipped my parka and tried to relax. Although I was a colonel, I never wore my uniform. Like all mili- tary personnel at Biopreparat, I was provided with a cover identity as an ordinary scientist.
Recommended publications
  • Cuban Missile Crisis JCC: USSR
    asdf PMUNC 2015 Cuban Missile Crisis JCC: USSR Chair: Jacob Sackett-Sanders JCC PMUNC 2015 Contents Chair Letter…………………………………………………………………...3 Introduction……………….………………………………………………….4 Topics of Concern………………………...………………….………………6 The Space Race…...……………………………....………………….....6 The Third World...…………………………………………......………7 The Eastern Bloc………………………………………………………9 The Chinese Communists…………………………………………….10 De-Stalinization and Domestic Reform………………………………11 Committee Members….……………………………………………………..13 2 JCC PMUNC 2015 Chair’s Letter Dear Delegates, It is my great pleasure to give you an early welcome to PMUNC 2015. My name is Jacob, and I’ll be your chair, helping to guide you as you take on the role of the Soviet political elites circa 1961. Originally from Wilmington, Delaware, at Princeton I study Slavic Languages and Literature. The Eastern Bloc, as well as Yugoslavia, have long been interests of mine. Our history classes and national consciousness often paints them as communist enemies, but in their own ways, they too helped to shape the modern world that we know today. While ultimately failed states, they had successes throughout their history, contributing their own shares to world science and culture, and that’s something I’ve always tried to appreciate. Things are rarely as black and white as the paper and ink of our textbooks. During the conference, you will take on the role of members of the fictional Soviet Advisory Committee on Centralization and Global Communism, a new semi-secret body intended to advise the Politburo and other major state organs. You will be given unmatched power but also faced with a variety of unique challenges, such as unrest in the satellite states, an economy over-reliant on heavy industry, and a geopolitical sphere of influence being challenged by both the USA and an emerging Communist China.
    [Show full text]
  • Patentability of Human-Animal Chimeras Ryan Hagglund
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal Volume 25 | Issue 1 Article 4 2008 Patentability of Human-Animal Chimeras Ryan Hagglund Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ryan Hagglund, Patentability of Human-Animal Chimeras, 25 Santa Clara High Tech. L.J. 51 (2012). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol25/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PATENTABILITY OF HUMAN-ANIMAL CHIMERAS Ryan Hagglundt Abstract The chimera was a mythological creature with a lion 's head, goat's body, and serpent's tail. Because of recent advances in biotechnology, such permutations on species are no longer the stuff of myth and legend The term "chimera " has come to describe a class of genetically engineered creatures composed of some cells from one species, which thus contain genetic material derived entirely from that species, and some cells from another species, containing only genetic material from that species. Scientists have created a goat- sheep chimera or "geep" which exhibits physical characteristicsof both animals. Likewise, scientists have also used the tools of modern molecular biology to create human-animal chimeras containing both human and animal cells. While none of the human-animal chimeras hitherto created have exhibited significant human characteristics,the synthesis of human-animal chimeras raises significant ethical concerns.
    [Show full text]
  • 112. Na Na Na 112. Only You Remix 112. Come See Me Remix 12
    112. Na Na Na 112. Only You Remix 112. Come See Me Remix 12 Gauge Dunkie Butt 12 Gauge Dunkie Butt 2 Live Crew Sports Weekend 2nd II None If You Want It 2nd II None Classic 220 2Pac Changes 2Pac All Eyez On Me 2Pac All Eyez On Me 2Pac I Get Around / Keep Ya Head Up 50 Cent Candy Shop 702. Where My Girls At 7L & Esoteric The Soul Purpose A Taste Of Honey A Taste Of Honey A Tribe Called Quest Unreleased & Unleashed Above The Law Untouchable Abyssinians Best Of The Abyssinians Abyssinians Satta Adele 21. Adele 21. Admiral Bailey Punanny ADOR Let It All Hang Out African Brothers Hold Tight (colorido) Afrika Bambaataa Renegades Of Funk Afrika Bambaataa Planet Rock The Album Afrika Bambaataa Planet Rock The Album Agallah You Already Know Aggrolites Rugged Road (vinil colorido) Aggrolites Rugged Road (vinil colorido) Akon Konvicted Akrobatik The EP Akrobatik Absolute Value Al B. Sure Rescue Me Al Green Greatest Hits Al Johnson Back For More Alexander O´Neal Criticize Alicia Keys Fallin Remix Alicia Keys As I Am (vinil colorido) Alicia Keys A Woman´s Worth Alicia Myers You Get The Best From Me Aloe Blacc Good Things Aloe Blacc I Need A Dollar Alpha Blondy Cocody Rock Althea & Donna Uptown Top Ranking (vinil colorido) Alton Ellis Mad Mad Amy Winehouse Back To Black Amy Winehouse Back To Black Amy Winehouse Lioness : The Hidden Treasures Amy Winehouse Lioness : The Hidden Treasures Anita Baker Rapture Arthur Verocai Arthur Verocai Arthur Verocai Arthur Verocai Augustus Pablo King Tubby Meets Rockers Uptown Augustus Pablo In Fine Style Augustus Pablo This Is Augustus Pablo Augustus Pablo Dubbing With The Don Augustus Pablo Skanking Easy AZ Sugar Hill B.G.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear Delegates, Congratulations on Being Selected to the Kremlin, One of VMUN's Most Advanced Committees. My Name Is Harrison
    Dear Delegates, Congratulations on being selected to the Kremlin, one of VMUN’s most advanced committees. My name is Harrison Ritchie, and I will be your director for this year’s conference. I have been involved in MUN since Grade 10, and have thoroughly enjoyed every conference that I have attended. This year’s Kremlin will be a historical crisis committee. In February, you will all be transported to the October of 1988, where you will be taking on the roles of prominent members of either the Soviet Politburo or Cabinet of Ministers. As powerful Soviet officials, you will be debating the fall of the Soviet Union, or, rather, how to keep the Union together in such a tumultuous time. In the Soviet Union’s twilight years, a ideological divide began to emerge within the upper levels of government. Two distinct blocs formed out of this divide: the hardliners, who wished to see a return to totalitarian Stalinist rule, and the reformers, who wished to progress to a more democratic Union. At VMUN, delegates will hold the power to change the course of history. By exacting your influence upon your peers, you will gain valuable allies and make dangerous enemies. There is no doubt that keeping the Union together will be no easy task, and there are many issues to address over the coming three days, but I hope that you will be thoroughly engrossed in the twilight years of one of the world’s greatest superpower and find VMUN an overall fulfilling experience. Good luck in your research, and as always, if you have any questions, feel free to contact me before the conference.
    [Show full text]
  • 230 Soviet Defense Policy
    #230 SOVIET DEFENSE POLICY: A CONFERENCE REPORT Copyright March 1989 by the Wilson Center The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies is a division of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Through its program of fellowships, meetings, and publications, the Institute encourages a wide range of scholarship on Russia and the Soviet Union. The Kennan Institute is supported by contributions from foundations, corporations, individuals, and the United States Government. Kennan Institute Occasional Papers Kennan Institute Occasional Papers are available to all those interested in Russian and Soviet Studies. Occasional Papers are submitted by Kennan Institute scholars and visiting speakers, particularly those who wish to receive timely feedback on their work. Copies of Occasional Papers and a list of papers currently available can be obtained, free of charge, by contacting: Occasional Papers Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW, Suite 704 Washington, D.C. 20024-2518 (202) 287-3000 The Kennan Institute is a nonpartisan institution committed to the exploration of a broad range of scholarship. It does not necessarily endorse the ideas presented in its Occasional Papers. SOVIET DEFENSE POLICY: A CONFERENCE REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS On September 21-23, 1987, the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies and the International Security Studies program of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars cosponsored a conference on the Dynamics of Soviet Defense Policy. The following report summarizes the proceedings of that conference. This report examines the evolution and context of Soviet defense policy, surveys Soviet military doctrine--including views on theater war in Europe and world war, and on the use of military power in the Third World--and concludes with a discussion of the USSR's nuclear and conventional arms control policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Conde, Jonathan (2018) an Examination of Lithuania's Partisan War Versus the Soviet Union and Attempts to Resist Sovietisation
    Conde, Jonathan (2018) An Examination of Lithuania’s Partisan War Versus the Soviet Union and Attempts to Resist Sovietisation. Masters thesis, York St John University. Downloaded from: http://ray.yorksj.ac.uk/id/eprint/3522/ Research at York St John (RaY) is an institutional repository. It supports the principles of open access by making the research outputs of the University available in digital form. Copyright of the items stored in RaY reside with the authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full text items free of charge, and may download a copy for private study or non-commercial research. For further reuse terms, see licence terms governing individual outputs. Institutional Repository Policy Statement RaY Research at the University of York St John For more information please contact RaY at [email protected] An Examination of Lithuania’s Partisan War Versus the Soviet Union and Attempts to Resist Sovietisation. Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Research MA History at York St John University School of Humanities, Religion & Philosophy by Jonathan William Conde Student Number: 090002177 April 2018 I confirm that the work submitted is my own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the works of others. This copy has been submitted on the understanding that it is copyright material. Any reuse must comply with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and any licence under which this copy is released. @2018 York St John University and Jonathan William Conde The right of Jonathan William Conde to be identified as the Author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 Acknowledgments My gratitude for assisting with this project must go to my wife, her parents, wider family, and friends in Lithuania, and all the people of interest who I interviewed between the autumn of 2014 and winter 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Conversions of Former Biological Weapons Facilities in Kazakhstan
    SWEDISH DEFENCE RESEARCH AGENCY FOI-R--0082--SE NBC Defence May 2001 SE-901 82 Umeå ISSN 1650-1942 User report Conversion of former biological weapons facilities in Kazakhstan A visit to Stepnogorsk July 2000 Roger Roffey, Kristina S. Westerdahl 2 Issuing organization Report number, ISRN Report type FOI – Swedish Defence Research Agency FOI-R--0082--SE User report NBC Defence Research area code SE-901 82 Umeå 3. Weapons of Mass Destruction Month year Project no. May 2001 A472 Customers code 2. NBC-Defence Research Sub area code 34 Biological and Chemical Defence Research Author/s (editor/s) Project manager Roger Roffey Lars Rejnus Kristina S. Westerdahl Approved by Scientifically and technically responsible Report title Conversion of former biological weapons facilities in Kazakhstan, A visit to Stepnogorsk July 2000 Abstract (not more than 200 words) Report from the conference “Biotechnological development in Kazakhstan: Non-proliferation, conversion and investment” held in Stepnogorsk, Kazakhstan July 24-26 2000. The conference was sponsored by US DOD and organised by the Biotechnology Centre at Stepnogorsk in co-operation with the NIS Representative office in Astana, Kazakhstan of the Centre for Non-proliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies. The conference concentrated on the dismantlement and conversion of former BW producers. The intent was to present to a larger public the results of the US DOD CTR (Cooperative Threat Reduction) program at the Biotechnology Centre of Stepnogorsk and attract some potential partners to encourage conversion projects. The conference gave a good overview of the conversion projects in progress in Kazakhstan and scientific results were presented of research being funded by the US.
    [Show full text]
  • Title of Thesis: ABSTRACT CLASSIFYING BIAS
    ABSTRACT Title of Thesis: CLASSIFYING BIAS IN LARGE MULTILINGUAL CORPORA VIA CROWDSOURCING AND TOPIC MODELING Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang Thesis Directed By: Dr. David Zajic, Ph.D. Our project extends previous algorithmic approaches to finding bias in large text corpora. We used multilingual topic modeling to examine language-specific bias in the English, Spanish, and Russian versions of Wikipedia. In particular, we placed Spanish articles discussing the Cold War on a Russian-English viewpoint spectrum based on similarity in topic distribution. We then crowdsourced human annotations of Spanish Wikipedia articles for comparison to the topic model. Our hypothesis was that human annotators and topic modeling algorithms would provide correlated results for bias. However, that was not the case. Our annotators indicated that humans were more perceptive of sentiment in article text than topic distribution, which suggests that our classifier provides a different perspective on a text’s bias. CLASSIFYING BIAS IN LARGE MULTILINGUAL CORPORA VIA CROWDSOURCING AND TOPIC MODELING by Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Gemstone Honors Program, University of Maryland, 2018 Advisory Committee: Dr. David Zajic, Chair Dr. Brian Butler Dr. Marine Carpuat Dr. Melanie Kill Dr. Philip Resnik Mr. Ed Summers © Copyright by Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang 2018 Acknowledgements We would like to express our sincerest gratitude to our mentor, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Pathogens As Weapons Gregory Koblentz the International Security Implications of Biological Warfare
    Pathogens as Weapons Pathogens as Weapons Gregory Koblentz The International Security Implications of Biological Warfare Biological weapons have become one of the key security issues of the twenty-ªrst century.1 Three factors that ªrst emerged in the 1990s have contributed to this phenomenon. First, revelations regarding the size, scope, and sophistication of the Soviet and Iraqi biological warfare programs focused renewed attention on the prolifera- tion of these weapons.2 Second, the catastrophic terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, and the anthrax letters sent to media outlets and Senate ofªces in the United States during the following month, demonstrated the desire of terror- ists to cause massive casualties and heightened concern over their ability to employ biological weapons.3 Third, signiªcant advances in the life sciences have increased concerns about how the biotechnology revolution could be ex- ploited to develop new or improved biological weapons.4 These trends suggest that there is a greater need than ever to answer several fundamental questions about biological warfare: What is the nature of the threat? What are the poten- tial strategic consequences of the proliferation of biological weapons? How ef- Gregory Koblentz is a doctoral candidate in Political Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I would like to thank Robert Art, Thomas Christensen, Linda Fu, Jeanne Guillemin, Kendall Hoyt, Milton Leitenberg, John Ellis van Courtland Moon, Julian Perry Robinson, Harvey Sapolsky, Mar- garet Sloane, Jonathan Tucker, and Stephen Van Evera for their support and discussion of previous drafts. I am also grateful for comments from the participants in seminars at the Massachusetts In- stitute of Technology’s Security Studies Program, Harvard University’s John M.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Management of Biological Casualties Handbook
    USAMRIID’s MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF BIOLOGICAL CASUALTIES HANDBOOK Sixth Edition April 2005 U.S. ARMY MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES FORT DETRICK FREDERICK, MARYLAND Emergency Response Numbers National Response Center: 1-800-424-8802 or (for chem/bio hazards & terrorist events) 1-202-267-2675 National Domestic Preparedness Office: 1-202-324-9025 (for civilian use) Domestic Preparedness Chem/Bio Helpline: 1-410-436-4484 or (Edgewood Ops Center – for military use) DSN 584-4484 USAMRIID’s Emergency Response Line: 1-888-872-7443 CDC'S Emergency Response Line: 1-770-488-7100 Handbook Download Site An Adobe Acrobat Reader (pdf file) version of this handbook can be downloaded from the internet at the following url: http://www.usamriid.army.mil USAMRIID’s MEDICAL MANAGEMENT OF BIOLOGICAL CASUALTIES HANDBOOK Sixth Edition April 2005 Lead Editor Lt Col Jon B. Woods, MC, USAF Contributing Editors CAPT Robert G. Darling, MC, USN LTC Zygmunt F. Dembek, MS, USAR Lt Col Bridget K. Carr, MSC, USAF COL Ted J. Cieslak, MC, USA LCDR James V. Lawler, MC, USN MAJ Anthony C. Littrell, MC, USA LTC Mark G. Kortepeter, MC, USA LTC Nelson W. Rebert, MS, USA LTC Scott A. Stanek, MC, USA COL James W. Martin, MC, USA Comments and suggestions are appreciated and should be addressed to: Operational Medicine Department Attn: MCMR-UIM-O U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) Fort Detrick, Maryland 21702-5011 PREFACE TO THE SIXTH EDITION The Medical Management of Biological Casualties Handbook, which has become affectionately known as the "Blue Book," has been enormously successful - far beyond our expectations.
    [Show full text]
  • From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research
    Dartmouth College Dartmouth Digital Commons Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty Faculty Work Spring 2002 From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research Stephen G. Brooks Dartmouth College, [email protected] William C. Wohlforth Dartmouth College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa Part of the International Relations Commons Dartmouth Digital Commons Citation Brooks, Stephen G. and Wohlforth, William C., "From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research" (2002). Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty. 2641. https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa/2641 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Work at Dartmouth Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty by an authorized administrator of Dartmouth Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. New versus Old Thinking in Qualitative Research From Old Thinking Stephen G. Brooks and William C. to New Thinking in Wohlforth Qualitative Research Robert English has provided a strongly written critique of our article “Power, Globalization, and the End of the Cold War.”1 Unfortunately, his reply may have the unintended consequence of reinforcing a pernicious but popular view among political sci- entists that qualitative research—especially on single cases—cannot generate progress. Here we have a case of seminal importance that has attracted the sus- tained attention of dozens of international relations scholars for more than a decade, and yet it appears that scholars are still involved in what looks like an interminable historians’ debate over causes.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Phylogenetic Analysis
    Assignment #2 Physics 498: Statistical Physics of Biological Complexity and Information Molecular Phylogenetic Analysis Date of Submission: 31th October, 2001 Rahul Roy Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign email: [email protected] Evolve by Borrowing ? Rahul Roy Center for Biophysics and Computational Biology University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign Introduction Molecular evolution over a period of four billion years has resulted in the development of present myriad of species from a hot soup of molecules. It has resulted in the evolution of complex multicellular organisms (Eukaryotes) along with single-celled organisms like prokaryotes at the same time. The question that has baffled scientists for long is: how did this incredible transition from a soup to this complex state take place? The discussion, that still continues, as how life started from the primordial soup is not the emphasis of the present debate, though Stanley Miller showed in, as back as 1950s, that organic chemicals can be synthesized from completely inorganic inputs. It has been proposed based on structural and functional complexity and fossil evidence that prokaryotes must have predated the eukaryotes by at least 1.0-2.0 billion years [Knoll, 1992]. This has led to the notion that eukaryotic cells have evolved from more simple prokaryotic organisms with which they share numerous common (or related) molecules [Margulis, 1970; Zillig, 1991]. Indeed, studies have shown that a number of eukaryotic organelles (namely mitochondria and chloroplasts) bear a close evolutionary relationship to specific groups of prokaryotes (namely α-proteobacteria and cyanobacteria, respectively) [Gray, 1992] So, how did the complex multicellular eukaryotes evolve from prokaryotes? To understand the origin of the eukaryotic cells a number of theories have been proposed.
    [Show full text]