Fact:"In the Military Climate/Culture Survey and associated focus groups, many officers and NCOs -- well informed through the Internet and by other means -- expressed disappointment in their senior service leaders...such a perceptions gap -- complicated by the need for senior military leaders to support administration policy while also speaking for their service or command -- can erode the trust that is essential to the chain of command. "

Fact:"Though one could raise fundamental questions about the likelihood of anthrax use, and there are a dozen other biological agents that adversaries will now likely pursue with greater rigor given universal anthrax vaccination, the two sides are locked in a more fundamental debate... this is the Pentagon versus its own service members. It is a depressing window into the breakdown of discipline and basic confidence in the political and military leadership. That has nothing to do with the Web."

Fact: "FDA conducted an inspection of MBPI in November 1996. During that inspection, FDA investigators documented numerous significant deviations from the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, FDA&rsquos regulations and the standards in MBPI&rsquos license. Based upon the documented deviations, FDA issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke Letter (NOIR) to MBPI in March 1997. The NOIR letter did not mandate the closure of the facility or lead to seizure of finished product. The letter, however, did state that if MBPI&rsquos corrective actions proved to be inadequate, they would run the risk of having their license revoked."

Fact:

DR. ROBERT MYERS: "... we received on March 11th, 1997 a letter of notice of intent to revoke in which the agency notified us that they would initiate proceedings to revoke our license unless we did certain things."

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: "Did that notice apply to any parts of the facilities involved in the anthrax vaccine manufacturing process?"

DR. ROBERT MYERS: "Yes. It was gone. It was everybody."

Reporter: Have you taken the shot?

Bacon: I haven't. I've thought often about it. I certainly have no hesitation to take the shot.

Reporter: Why are you hesitating then? (Laughter)

Bacon: You know, I probably should review my entire shot record and go in and get new DPT shots and everything else that are probably up to date for my children but not up to date for me.

Reporter: You go to the Persian Gulf regularly.

Bacon: I do. I do. That's why I thought that I should take these shots. Maybe some day I'll come here and tell you that I've taken the shot.

Fact: Mr. Bacon's comments speak for themselves. If a servicemember gave the same response to their commander they would (and have been) court-martialed and jailed.

DoD Spin: " I've had three shots. My hair is growing more robust than ever. (Laughter) I sleep better. I eat better, run farther. It's been nothing but a great experience. (Laughter)"

Fact: Dr. Renate Engler, the chief of immunology at Walter Reed Army Medical Center addressed a conference on the anthrax vaccine policy at Ft Detrick Maryland on 25-27 May 1999. During her address she described "Chronic Illness Perceived as Linked to Anthrax Vaccine: Dover AFB". She went on to observe:

• "Potentially more than 25 individuals from same location, having received anthrax vaccinations around the same time & from same lot, growing "belief" that anthrax has caused potentially long term, indefinite, untreatable disease!"
• "Fear of military medical establishment: affected service members fail to report"

These patients described by Dr. Engler in her briefing reported having chronic systemic reactions to the anthrax vaccine during the Fall of 1998 -- well before Mr. Bacon's comments discrediting the idea of serious adverse reactions to the vaccine.

DoD Spin: " This vaccine is as safe, and at times recorded to be safer than some of the vaccines that we give to children in America. We are actually seeing fewer side effects than might have been expected... So, this vaccine has been shown to be not only effective, but in fact safe, and on par with other vaccines that we give. We are continuing to monitor those side effects, though."

Fact: "The obligation assumed by MBPI [manufacturer] under this contract involves unusually hazardous risks associated with the potential for adverse reactions in some recipients and the possibility that the desired immunological effect will not be obtained by all recipients. Although AVA has been extensively tested under the auspices of the Food and Drug Administration, the size of the proposed vaccination program may reveal unforewarned idiosyncratic adverse reactions. Moreover, there is no way to be certain that the pathogen used in tests measuring vaccine efficacy will be sufficiently similar to the pathogen that U.S. forces might encounter to confer immunity. These concerns, coupled with the uncertain and evolving state of product liability law with regard to vaccines, lead me to the conclusion that the performance of this contract will subject MBPI to certain unusually hazardous risks."

DoD Spin: "... Notably, the AVEC [DoD's anthrax vaccine "expert" committee] judged the injection site inflammation event as the only case likely caused by the vaccine."

Fact: "I think it speaks to the undercurrent of distrust of the government and the military," said Lt. Gen. Ronald R. Blanck, the surgeon general of the Army, the service that oversees the vaccination program. "Agent Orange. Nuclear tests in the '50s. People say, `How can you say this is safe?' Clearly, we have a credibility problem."

Fact: "Although anthrax vaccine had been considered approved prior to the Persian Gulf War, it was rarely used. Therefore, its safety, particularly when given to thousands of soldiers in conjunction with other vaccines, is not well established. Anthrax vaccine should continue to be considered as a potential cause for undiagnosed illnesses in Persian Gulf military personnel because many of the support troops received anthrax vaccine, and because the DoD believes that the incidence of undiagnosed illnesses in support troops may be higher than that in combat troops."

Fact: "The long- term safety of the vaccine has not yet been studied."

Fact: "The AVIP should be suspended because it lacks an essential element in a medical program: trust&hellip Trust must be earned. It can be earned only with a degree of candor and openness that has not been the hallmark of the AVIP to date. While claiming a new awareness of the need for effective risk communication, the Pentagon still reverts to absolutist declarations, heavy handed propaganda, and ad hominem attacks whenever the risks of the anthrax vaccine are communicated too effectively or persistently. In a culture based on a chain of command and the power to compel, attempts at persuasion and education often devolve into intimidation. Labeling opponents "paranoics" and ridiculing the intelligence or courage of those with legitimate questions are not the methods of modern risk communication."

. Fact: "... The mandatory requirement to take Anthrax shots is another major morale beater. Many warriors simply don't trust this inoculation designed to prevent mass casualties during a germ attack. Literally thousands are choosing to walk rather than risk the suspected side effects."

Fact: "The nature and magnitude of the military threat of biological warfare (BW) has not changed since 1990, both in terms of the number of countries suspected of developing BW capability, the types of BW agents they possess, and their ability to weaponize and deliver those BW agents."

Fact: " U.S. policy-makers and several outside analysts have predicted catastrophic consequences if a terrorist group or an individual-alone or with state sponsorship-ever mounts a major chemical or biological attack... But these scenarios have not drawn on a careful assessment of terrorist motivations and patterns of behavior... Contrary to the conventional wisdom about the catastrophic nature of chemical and biological terrorism, actual attacks were few in number, small in scale, and generally produced fewer casualties than conventional bombs."

Fact: "Nothing supports these propositions. They are exaggerated and alarmist. They are probably even dangerous and counterproductive, since they virtually solicit and induce precisely what they portray as fearing... The portrayal of this subject by senior government officials is grossly exaggerated, and the government's policy is accordingly based either on faulty assessments or no assessment at all."

Fact: "In 1996, the FBI counted 37 WMD cases in the United States; in 1997, 74; in 1998, 181, and in the first 10 months [1999], "more than 225." In roughly three-quarters of those cases, the perpetrator threatened to release a biological agent, usually anthrax--probably because anthrax is widely recognized and feared. None of the threats was determined to be "credible," according to the FBI."

Fact: "... since 1900 there have only been seventy-one known terrorist acts worldwide involving the use of chemical or biological agents. Of the 123 fatalities these attacks caused, only one was American. As for biological attacks worldwide, seventy have occurred in the last century causing nine deaths but only eighteen of these seventy attacks were made by terrorists. These are not large numbers."

Fact: "... here's a question that often gets lost as Congress prepares to spend $10 billion on counter-terrorism this year: Do you know how many people have died in chemical or biological terrorist attacks in America in the last 100 years? The answer is one.

Fact: "As a health care effort, the AVIP compromises the practice of medicine to achieve military objectives... Preposterously low adverse report rates generated by DOD point to a program far more concerned with public relations than effective force protection or the practice of medicine... The AVIP raises an ominous question: Who protects the force from ill-conceived force protection?"

Fact: "...the biological defense program seems to be lacking the superstructure for lines of accountability and monitoring and lacking a central office that would monitor the safety programs. So we have to presume -- we have to presume -- that these programs are being carried out in a safe fashion. And, without paraphrasing a poet, do we dare presume in this particular case? I thinks that's really what we have to look at today. Perhaps we are presuming too much if we make the presumption that this is being carried out consistent with adequate standards and safeguards."

            -- Senator William S. Cohen, "Department of Defense Safety Programs for Chemical and Biological Warfare Research", hearings before the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, Committee on Government
Affairs, US Senate, 27-28 July 1988 (Congressional Record - not online)

Fact: "Mr. Secretary, you had set four specific conditions that had to be met before the vaccination program could start... According to the hearing testimony before the Subcommittee, none of these conditions was satisfactorily addressed before the vaccine program was implemented."

Fact: " The Defense Department was looking for some [sic] to review the program in general and make suggestions, and I accepted out of patriotism. I was very clear that I had no expertise in Anthrax and they were very clear they were looking for a general oversight of the vaccination program."

Fact: "The Subcommittee has received an unconfirmed report that you were provided detailed information about a substantial number of pending resignations and transfer requests attributable to the anthrax vaccine program during your visit to Stewart Air Force Base... in September [1999]... Please provide a detailed description... "

Fact: "During a meeting with Wing officials... [they] gave me a list detailing pending resignations and retirements. I attach a copy of that list, which indicated that 21 personnel were due to retire or resign as of January 1, 2000. Of these, 17 had listed anthrax as their reason for doing so."

Fact: Slides given to Mr. Cragin at Stewart Air National Guard Base (attached to his letter to Congress) indicate that the 105^th Airlift Wing projected that it would retain only 57% of their pilots by 1 Jan 2000 if the anthrax vaccination occurred. The anthrax vaccine shots were cancelled a few days after Mr. Cragin's visit and have not been rescheduled.

-- Charles Cragin, acting as Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, letter to Congress, 16 May 2000 (not online)

Fact:"This policy statement [against mandatory anthrax immunizations] is based upon the controversy in the medical literature about the efficacy of the vaccine; the lack of valid monitoring of its potential adverse effects; and the stance taken by the United Kingdom and other allies that the receipt of the vaccine remain voluntary among their troops."          

-- Mohammed N. Akhter, MD, MPH, Executive Director, American
Public Health Association, letter to Congressman Jack Metcalf (R-WA), 23 May 2000

Fact: "There is a paucity of published peer-reviewed literature on the safety of the anthrax vaccine... The committee concludes that in the peer-reviewed literature there is inadequate/ insufficient evidence to determine whether an association does or does not exist between anthrax vaccination and long-term adverse health outcomes. This finding means that the evidence reviewed by the committee is of insufficient quality, consistency, or statistical power to permit a conclusion regarding the presence or absence of an association between the vaccine and a health outcome in humans."
"An Assessment of the Safety of the Anthrax Vaccine", Institute of Medicine report to DoD, 30 Mar 2000

Fact: "The current vaccine against anthrax is unsatisfactory for several reasons. The vaccine is composed of an undefined crude culture of supernatant adsorbed to aluminum hydroxide. There has been no quantification of the protective antigen content of the vaccine or of any of the other constituents, so the degree of purity is unknown. Standardization is determined by an animal potency test. The undefined nature of the vaccine and the presence of constituents that may be undesirable may account for the level of reactogenicity [adverse reactions] observed. The vaccine is also less than optimal in that six doses are required over 18 months, followed by annual boosters. There is also evidence in experimental animals that the vaccine may be less effective against some strains of anthrax. Clearly a vaccine that is completely defined, that is less reactogenic, and that requires on or two doses to produce long-lasting immunity would be highly desirable."

 Fact: If servicemembers and Congress knew the true magnitude of the number of refusals, court-martials, administrative discharges, resignations, and retirements then military commanders would be unable to enforce the anthrax vaccination policy.

Fact: " At best, the vaccine provides some measure of protection to most who receive it. Just how much protection is acquired, by whom, for how long, and against what level of challenge are questions DoD answers with an excess of faith but a paucity of science. Many servicemembers of the armed forces do not share that faith."

DoD Spin: "People are petrified that their penis is going to fall off, yet it is the safest vaccine ever given to American citizens... "

Fact: "Today," says retired Admiral Stanley Arthur, who commanded U.S. naval forces during the Gulf War, "the armed forces are no longer representative of the people they serve. More and more, enlisted [men and women] as well as officers are beginning to feel that they are special, better than the society they serve. This is not healthy in an armed force serving a democracy."

Fact: " But in spite of furious efforts by the Pentagon to tamp down what it considers insidious misinformation about the vaccine, the resistance continues. Efforts have included senior officers taking the vaccine in public and an unusual memorandum to all Marines from the Marine Corps commandant, Gen. Charles C. Krulak."

Fact: "The FDA inspections of the facility where the licensed vaccine was manufactured uncovered numerous problems. The facility received warning letters from FDA, including one in March 1997 stating its intent to revoke the facility's license. The facility closed its plant in 1998 and is now being renovated."

Fact: "While these deviations were documented in the most recent inspection, we note that significant deviations have been documented during previous FDA inspections of May 4 through May 7, 1993; May 31 through June 3, 1994; and April 24 through May 5, 1995. The seriousness of these deficiencies was emphasized to you in a letter dated December 22,1993, and a Warning Letter dated August 31, 1995. Based on the nature and number of the deficiencies identified during the recent inspection, it is the agency's judgment that management of the Michigan Biologic Products Institute has not fulfilled its responsibilities to exercise control in all matters relating to compliance with federal regulations and the applicable standards of your establishment and product licenses, or to assure that personnel are adequately trained and supervised"

Reporter: "I am wondering why you tore it down before the new one was certified?"

Mr. Oliver: "I don't know. That was a different decision. But I'll give you a reason why I might have made that if I were in his place... "

Reporter: "I guess that brings me back to Jim's question, which is, Why tear it down? You said it was a tried-and-true facility that was working. Why tear it down before you have another tried-and-true facility? When you look back on the decision, do you think that was a smart -- "

Mr. Oliver: "I was driving west at the time -- " (laughter).

Reporter: "Do you think it was a smart decision?"

Mr. Oliver: "I was driving west, I was looking at the sunset -- I don't know."

Reporter: "You have --"

Reporter: "Can you answer that, please?"...

Reporter: "Just explain -- is this what you meant, then, that to build another facility alongside of it, then to close down the facility afterwards, you can't ever reuse it, you'd have to do some big, like, Superfund cleanup to get rid of all the anthrax, or what -- is that the idea?"

Mr. Oliver: "You have to burn -- yes."

Reporter: "You burn it down."

Mr. Oliver: "You have to burn it."

Fact: Mr. Oliver's repeated evasive answers are intended to obscure the consequences of DoD's decision to destroy and burn the old anthrax vaccine production line: it precludes the old line from being used as evidence in a criminal prosecution of government and Bioport/MBPI officials into negligent manufacturing practices that have caused long-term systemic adverse reactions in servicemembers.

Reporter: But if they're [Bioport] the only producer in the country, what's the stick for getting this solved? Why does it -- what avoids it (sic) from just drifting on and being a problem forever?

Mr. Oliver: Because I think the [Bioport] people are inherently good people. The people are inherently good people. People understand the problem. We're going to put a lot of assets in this. This is no different than all the depots that exist across this great country and lots of other things for which the government runs, because it feels like it must. It's absolutely no different. And the reason that works is because you have good people.

Fact: " Bioport Corp. was created solely to take over the assets of MBPI by Admiral Crowe, his partners in a company called Intervac L.L.C. and a group of former managers of the Michigan-based institute... Crowe owns 22.5 percent of Intervac shares, though he hasn&rsquot "invested a penny" in the venture... Fuad El-Hibri appears to be the real day-to-day director of Intervac and is listed by Dun & Bradstreet as the "chief executive" of Bioport... . Experts in defense policy suggested that the Pentagon would be highly unlikely to approve the sale to a foreign national of a company that is the sole manufacturer of a vaccine considered vital to national security."

Fact: "Whatever their flaws or merits, vaccines continue to draw the interest of small companies eager to gain a foothold in an expanding area of the federal budget. On July 7 [1998], the state of Michigan approved the sale of the nation's only licensed maker of anthrax vaccine to a company led by Admiral William Crowe, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who was an important supporter of Clinton's in the 1992 presidential campaign.

Fact:Like Admiral Crowe, "Mister" Oliver is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and a former career naval officer. He retired as a Rear Admiral.

Reporter: I don't get it. If you don't track the numbers, explain to me how you know it's just 200 or 300 and is Congressman Jones inaccurate in what he...

Rear Admiral Quigley: Again our estimate, and it's just that, is 200 or 300. These are some of the actual judicial proceedings throughout the military. So that is much easier. But administrative actions which are by far more numerous in number, we're not going to keep track of those.

Reporter: Do you have any idea how many people have faced administrative action for refusing their anthrax shot?

Rear Admiral Quigley: Perhaps on an individual service level, but it's not something that we're going to make a conscious decision to track the numbers here, again for that very reason. The influence that that might provide to limit a local commander's discretion as to how he or she feels best to handle it.

Reporter: So is it correct that the number 200-300 is based on a review of judicial proceedings, and you actually have no precise idea how may people have refused the shot?

Rear Admiral Quigley: It is not only judicial proceedings because there have been some very high profile, non-judicial proceedings here and there throughout the military as well. So no, it is just that. It is an estimate. It's a rough estimate. We have no intention of going with more precision than that.

Fact: DoD leadership does not want to know the truth about the retention impact of the anthrax vaccine, so they don't ask the question. In November 1999, Rep George Nethercutt (R-WA) formally asked DoD how many servicemembers had been disciplined for refusing the anthrax vaccine. Three months later DoD has not answered.

Fact: "Richard H. Kohn, a former chief historian of the Air Force who now teaches at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, argues that the officer corps has changed since the Cold War in the way it acts and feels. "I sense an ethos that is different," he told me in an interview. "They talk about themselves as 'we,' separate from society. They see themselves as different, morally and culturally.

Fact: All of those court-martialed, jailed, and discharged from the military for refusing the anthrax vaccine are loyal Americans who volunteered to serve their country and swore an oath to defend it against all enemies -- foreign and domestic.

Fact: "The reason members of the 103rd Fighter Wing of the Connecticut Air National Guard based at Bradley Field outside of Hartford were being given these shots is that they're scheduled to deploy to the Gulf later this year. And therefore, because we are giving these shots first to people going to Southwest Asia, and, secondly, to people in or going to Korea, and then after that, people who are likely to deploy to these or other hot spots, they're in line to get these shots. So I think eight or nine people have resigned rather than take the shots."

Fact: "...we have become aware that in response to a question from the field regarding this matter, you indicated it was understood that you were referring to individuals "with a commitment" as opposed to those who had no commitment. We find nothing in the hearing transcript that so limits your description of the documented "refusal."

Reporter: "You expressed some disappointment with the congressional report... Is Congress simply stirring the pot here without a lot of facts behind it?

GEN. WEST: "I'll stop short of saying that. I'm sure that their motives are well-intended, as ours are. But what I do believe is that there are a lot of people out there that are opposing our anthrax vaccine program for a lot of different reasons. I think some of them are against vaccines in general. I think some of them don't think we need as big a military as we've got or as much military spending or as much research as we're doing.

And I think that they came together and they became very active, and there are a lot of people out there opposing this now for a lot of different reasons, and I think that they've flooded the Internet and the web system with information that doesn't have to stand the test of legality and validity and science and medical responsibility that what we say and do and write does. And I think that that's caused a lot of people to be misled about this program."

Fact: "These isolating attitudes, while perhaps most extreme in the Marines, are also found in varying degrees elsewhere in the military. "There is a deep-seated suspicion in the U.S. military of society," Andrew Bacevich, a retired Army colonel who is the executive director of the Foreign Policy Institute at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies, told me in an interview. It is "part of the Vietnam hangover -- 'You guys betrayed us once, and you could do it again.'" This suspicion, he added, "isn't going away, it's being transmitted" to a new generation of officers."

Fact: Many of the Congressmen on the House Government Reform Committee who were the primary catalysts behind the six hearings that formed the basis of Rep Christopher Shays' report are Republicans who have strong records of supporting defense spending. When he announced his report, Rep Shays said of those who testified against the vaccine, "These people were not troublemakers or conspiracy theorists. They were not malingerers looking to duck tough duty. They are among the most level-headed, dedicated and patriotic Americans it has ever been my privilege to meet. They deserve a better vaccine, and a better vaccination program."

Fact: On 14 Jan 2000, MGen West met for three hours with one current and one retired USAF Reserve officer, each with over twenty years of military experience. These officers informed him of serious concerns with the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, doctrinal shortcomings of its use, and ethical lapses in the implementation of the DoD anthrax vaccine policy. He was told explicitly that opposition to the anthrax vaccine policy is from American servicemembers who volunteered to serve their country -- and still desire to do so -- not from an internet fringe element.

Fact: In Dec 1999, MGen West met for an hour with an USAF Reserve lieutenant colonel who is afflicted with chronic joint pain, inflammation, and arthritis following the anthrax vaccinations. He informed MGen West that the DoD anthrax vaccination policy had caused 50 percent of the pilots in his C-5 squadron to leave and that this was happening throughout the reserve components.