CDC cracks down on labs after Anthrax, and Bird Flu scares

Apparently, there have been some big mistakes with handling of some dangerous substances.

In addition to the anthrax and H5N1 incidents, CDC officials said laboratory lapses had occurred on three other occasions in the past decade. That included another accidental release of live anthrax at the Bioterrorism Rapid Response and Advanced Technology, or BRRAT lab, in 2006, and that same year, the release of live botulinum toxins from another CDC lab. In 2009, another lab showed that a strain of Brucella bacteria was released.

This kind of trouble isn't just limited to one lab either. Should we be worried ATS?

www.nbcnews.com...

I also read on ATS about small pox found in and old shutdown lab recently. And a little off topic someone contracted the ancient strain of the plague in Colorado could be related somehow. I have lymes disease prob got that from the cdc too.

a reply to: lostbook

Would the "crackdown" be acceptable if 100's or 1000's of people died due to their incompetence?

I'm sorry, but people need to go to prison for this kind of negligence OR the government needs to do the right thing and quit appropriating money for ways to kill their enemy by biological means!

Especially, since lately it seems the "enemy" is their own citizens.........

a reply to: seeker1963

Agreed. This type of incident can't be allowed to happen. Although, I get the strange feeling that this happens more than we know.

My husband works for a company that produces animal vaccines, so they have level 2 containment and plenty of nasty stuff on-site. The only reason their labs aren't higher is because the stuff they work with isn't, for the most part, likely to infect humans or it's stuff that has common treatments available for it. However, it still poses a risk, so they have to treat it with kid gloves both for their own sake and because of established protocol developed by, among other watchdogs, the CDC - the CDC calls it the Select Agents Program. They have to convince them (CDC) that the things the CDC has decided are dangerous are being properly handled and contained as per CDC-established rags.

I sent him the article on the CDC failures, and I will quote him:

"Yes, if my company did something like this it would be a sh*******rm. And you can quote me on that. CDC and DOT have zero tolerance for stuff like this with the private sector."

When they decide to send samples to other facilities, ironing out the particulars can take months to resolve to determine what level of shipping classification it needs regardless of how dangerous or not it is.

So I guess the question is, who watches the watchdogs? Because it certainly seems that they aren't taking their own rules to heart.