It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(Reuters) - A presidential ethics panel has opened the door to testing an anthrax vaccine on children as young as infants, bringing an angry response from critics who say the children would be guinea pigs in a study that would never help them and might harm them.
The report, however, released on Tuesday by the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, said researchers would have to overcome numerous hurdles before launching an anthrax-vaccine trial in children. It now goes to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, who will decide whether to take the steps the commission recommended.
Originally posted by brandiwine14
That is just pure insanity. What are they going to bribe the parents with in order to get the okay on using their kids as guinea pig I wonder?
When my son was five or six months old at a regular checkup the doctor asked us if he could be part of an experimental trial for fifty dollars a shot and two-hundred up front, I said hell no. It was for some type of new antibiotic I think. I've often wondered about the kids whose parents said okay because they needed the cash.
These are children, it's scary enough to practice on adults but practicing on our babies with something like this just seems wrong in so many ways. I really hope that parents will consider their children before themselves and say no.
Yesterday it was announced that the government would be purchasing 3.42 million doses of anthrax vaccine to add to the civilian anthrax vaccine stockpile. This is on top of the military stockpile, and comes out of DHHS funds. The purchase adds up to $101 million to the total contract for DHHS' anthrax stockpile, now worth about $500 million. Stockpile cost could climb to over $2 billion if the government purchases the 75 million doses it said it needed.
While it is certainly true that there are many different types of actors who can easily gain access to rudimentary biological agents, there are far fewer actors who can actually isolate virulent strains of the agents, weaponize them and then effectively employ these agents in a manner that will realistically pose a significant threat of causing mass casualties. While organisms such as anthrax are present in the environment and are not difficult to obtain, more highly virulent strains of these tend to be far more difficult to locate, isolate and replicate. Such efforts require highly skilled individuals and sophisticated laboratory equipment.
Even incredibly deadly biological substances such as ricin and botulinum toxin are difficult to use in mass attacks. This difficulty arises when one attempts to take a rudimentary biological substance and then convert it into a weaponized form -- a form that is potent enough to be deadly and yet readily dispersed. Even if this weaponization hurdle can be overcome, once developed, the weaponized agent must then be integrated with a weapons system that can effectively take large quantities of the agent and evenly distribute it in lethal doses to the intended targets.
Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Ya know, in January a thread was posted about this and all of the deniers jumped down the throat of the OP!!!!
Here is the Link ATS
NOW! As we always see people demanding apologies for those whom have predicted or said something was so an thus denied, I am going to patiently wait for those in this past thread who said it was BS to prove their manhood and admit that they were mistaken!!!
Just take a look at the ATS members who screamed that the OP was wrong!