House panel sets witness list for CDC anthrax hearing
WASHINGTON — A congressional committee said on Sunday that it will hear from half a dozen witnesses this week about dangerous lapses at federal health facilities, including one that led to the potential exposure of 84 people to live anthrax.
Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is among several government witnesses scheduled to testify at a Wednesday hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, which released its witness list online.
Accompanying Frieden will be Joseph Henderson, deputy director of the CDC's Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness.
The panel will hear from Jere Dick, associate deputy administrator or the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services at the Department of Agriculture, and Nancy Kingsbury, a managing director of the watchdog Government Accountability Office.
Two nongovernment experts — Behavioral-based Improvement Solutions LLC President Sean Kaufman and Rutgers University professor Richard Ebright — will appear, the panel said.
The CDC has blamed multiple failures by scientists and a lack of agency-wide safety policies for the potential exposure of lab workers to live anthrax at its Atlanta campus last month. Researchers in a high-security lab sent samples of what they thought were inactivated bacteria to colleagues in a lower-security lab, with fewer protections.
The House subcommittee, chaired by Republican Rep. Tim Murphy of Upper St. Clair, is trying to determine what led to that lapse as well as others, including the mishandling of dangerous avian flu at a CDC influenza lab and the discovery of smallpox vials in an unused room at the National Institutes of Health campus in Bethesda, Md.
No one has fallen ill.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.