Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Homeland Security -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jill who wrote (290)	11/2/2001 6:27:08 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 827

Anthrax in the the African wild Last weekend I saw a National Geographic special about a couple who had spent years studying wildlife and anthrax at Etosha National Park in Namibia. Here is a brief summary: The goal of the anthrax bacteria is to kill the victim and then consume all the edible nutrients. Anthrax can kill a three-ton bull elephant in one day. The primary victims are grazers such as antelope that crop close to the ground during the dry season and pick up the spores. The spores apparently infect lesions in the mouth and gut. Predators can also get anthrax but here it gets interesting. Lions and hyenas rarely die of anthrax, but cheetahs have a much higher death rate from it. The main difference here is that lions and hyenas are scavengers, but cheetahs are not. Apparently lions and hyenas are frequently exposed to small amounts of anthrax, and thus build up antibodies that protect them. They are not quite sure why only some of the grazers get anthrax. But obviously the disease has to be selective -- if all the animals got infected they would go extinct and there would be no more hosts for the anthrax.

To: Jill who wrote (290)	11/2/2001 6:57:21 PM
From: RocketMan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 827

The only thing I can think is that she was at the unfortunate lower end of the sensitivity scale. Here is portion of an anthrax article from someone at the university of Texas Pulmonary challenges have to be of high dose because of both the low proportion of particles that can be phagocytosed and the low probability of particles reaching the deep lung. However when in the deep lung the actual dose needed is relatively low at less than 10 spores Maybe she got 10 spores deep in the lung, as a secondary release from the other anthrax attacks in the city, and maybe her immune system was very sensitive to anthrax, some type of autoimmune reaction on top of the usual anthrax problems. I'm reminded of the study done on the russian release, in which at the extreme low end someone died also from a very low dosage, tens of spores. If this is the answer, what are the chances of finding other spores around her place of work, or home, if there are only, say, 100 spores total that killed her? Perhaps there are many others in her immediate community who got this dosage, but survived it with no symptoms.