Infected with fear: talk of biological and chemical terrorist attacks has some Americans fearing the worst is yet to come. How safe are you?

THE DISPLAY STAND WAS BARE, AND ITS BASE WAS littered with empty boxes. "No, we're out of gas masks," the clerk in a New York City army-navy surplus store told three customers in quick succession. She pulled out a clipboard. "But we've got a waiting list."

The store's security guard, watching the scene, shook his head. "People are just irrational right now," he said.

Since the September 11 terrorist attacks and the mysterious spread of anthrax through the postal system, fears of biological and chemical attack have taken hold of many Americans. The most nervous hound doctors or search the Internet for supplies of Cipro, a powerful anthrax-killing antibiotic. A new book on bioterrorism, Germs, is on the best-seller lists. And the arrival of the day's mail has become a source of worry.

The number of anthrax deaths had reached only four by early November, but several more people were infected with the highly lethal inhaled form of the disease. Early government efforts to find the source were unsuccessful, and public health officials had to rethink their understanding of anthrax and how it spreads. Faced with even a limited attack, officials finally acknowledged that the threat was more serious than they had believed.

The effects of the scare have rippled far beyond those killed, causing temporary closures of the House of Representatives, the Supreme Court building, and several postal facilities, disrupting mail deliveries. As a precaution, thousands of people have been taking antibiotics to ward off possible infection.

Yet despite the widespread fears, experts on chemical and biological weapons maintain that it is extremely difficult for terrorists to pull off attacks on a grand scale.

"The public and far too many policy makers do not understand the substantial technical hurdles associated with making and dispersing chemical and biological weapons so that massive casualties result," says Amy Smithson, an expert on biological and chemical weapons at the Henry L. Stimson Center, a private group in Washington, D.C. "That's why people usually believe the worst of what they hear."

U.S. intelligence agencies believe terrorist groups, including Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network, have experimented with chemical weapons. Such weapons include:

* Blister agents--gases or liquids that burn and blister tissue. One example is mustard gas, widely used in World War I.

* Blood agents--cyanide and other poisons in vapor form that prevent the body from using oxygen, causing suffocation.

* Nerve agents--distributed in gas or liquid form, which cut off the nervous system, causing the body to shut down. They include the nerve gases sarin and VX.

There is no question that such weapons are deadly. But how deadly they are depends on whether victims inhale them, swallow them, or get toxic amounts on their skin for a sufficient length of time. In practice, things haven't always worked out the way terrorists intended.

IN MARCH 1995, MEMBERS OF A JAPANESE CULT, Aum Shinrikyo, demonstrated that it's tough to kill with chemical weapons, even in the crowded subways of Tokyo. The cult, intent on killing hundreds if not thousands of commuters with satin gas, had millions of dollars, years to plan, trained scientists, and completely unprepared victims. But of the thousands of people present, only 12 died.

An outdoor chemical attack would prove even less effective, says Red Thomas, a retired U.S. military weapons expert who trained troops for biological and chemical warfare. A chemical weapon "won't work when it's freezing, it doesn't last when it's hot, and wind spreads it too thin, too fast," he says. "A chemical weapons attack that kills a lot of people is incredibly hard to do with military-grade agents and equipment, so you can imagine how hard it will be for terrorists who don't have that kind of technical ability or resources.

The technical hurdles are even higher when it comes to developing bioweapons, says Smithson, of the Stimson Center. "Biological agents have extreme sensitivity to sunlight, humidity, pollutants in the atmosphere, temperature, and even exposure to oxygen," she says, "all of which can kill microbes."

Several germs have gotten a lot of attention recently as analysts assess the bioterror threat. They include:

* Anthrax--a bacterium found in animals, it can generate deadly toxins if inhaled or swallowed; skin exposure is less likely to be fatal. It is not contagious.

* Smallpox--a highly contagious virus, it kills one third of those infected. It causes pustules on the skin and death occurs if the virus attacks the heart, liver, or other internal organs.

* Plague--650 years ago, this bacterium, spread by fleas feeding on infected rodents, killed millions in Europe, Asia, and Africa. Death occurs from pneumonia. Japan dropped plague-carrying bombs on China during World War II, killing thousands.

* Salmonella--a bacterium that is a common cause of food poisoning. A cult in Oregon used it to poison hundreds of people in 1984, but no one died.

WHILE STATE-OF-THE-ART ANTIBIOTICS AND VACCINES get most of the attention, Thomas says basic personal hygiene and sanitation can defeat most biological agents. "Wash your hands before you eat," he says. "Cover your mouth when you cough. Don't be spreading your bodily fluids all over the place. Historically, these aren't just ways of being polite, they help you avoid disease."

That said, one bioterrorism scenario has caused some officials to worry. In June, current and former U.S. leaders gathered to role-play a biological assault involving a smallpox attack by terrorists. The hypothetical outbreaks were in Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. Within two weeks, according to the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies, which organized the scenario, there were 16,000 cases in 25 states, resulting in 1,000 deaths. Within five weeks, the simulation projected as many as 300,000 victims, with one third of them expected to die.

Officially, smallpox was eradicated by 1980, thanks to a worldwide vaccination effort. But samples of the virus, needed to make the vaccine, were kept in U.S. and Russian laboratories, in case similar diseases came along later. Intelligence agencies suspect other countries may also have smallpox hidden away--batches that could find their way into terrorist hands.

U.S. preparedness for chemical and biological attacks had made some gains in recent years. The aftermath of September 11 has now shifted government efforts into overdrive (see "Are We Prepared for Bioterrorism?" page 14). The Bush administration has ordered 300 million doses of smallpox vaccine, for example, to create a national stockpile in the event of an outbreak. Americans were routinely vaccinated against smallpox until 1972, but even those people would require revaccination. "I think the American people will feel much more comfortable knowing they have their name on a vaccine shot in our inventory," says Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

IN ADDITION TO SUCH federal programs, most public health authorities feel the best defense would be an infusion of training and resources at the local level. While U.S. troops are trained in biological and chemical warfare, some say firefighters, police, paramedics, and medical professionals need the expertise to quickly detect a chemical or biological outbreak and contain it, terrorist attack or not. "Even if terrorists never strike again in this country, such investments would be well worthwhile," Smithson told a Congressional subcommittee, "because they would improve the ability of hometown rescuers to respond to everyday emergencies."

BUT EVEN AS OFFICIALS SCRAMBLE TO CLOSE HOLES in chemical and biological defenses, those who know the subject best are not losing sleep or buying gas masks. They regard doomsday scenarios as highly improbable.

Take concerns that terrorists could poison reservoirs of drinking water. Generally speaking, a community's water supply is so large that, even if tankerloads of chemicals were used to corrupt it, experts say the poisons would be diluted to nonthreatening levels. Besides, standard water treatments like chlorine are intended to kill most any microbe that might be introduced.

Nor would the nightmare scenario of crop dusters spraying chemical or biological weapons on crowds or cities prove effective. Such a plot would require rare equipment and skills, experts say, and even then, wind, rain, and other environmental conditions would conspire to carry the threat away.

Thomas, who worked and trained with such weapons, advises Americans to forget about gas masks and preventative doses of antibiotics, and instead look for perspective and common sense. "You're more likely to be hurt by a drunk driver on any given day," he says, "than be hurt by one of these attacks."

lesson plan 2 * NATIONAL * pages 11-13

Infected With Fear

FOCUS: Chemical and Biological Warfare Are Less Likely Than Most People Believe

TEACHING OBJECTIVES

To help students understand the actual threat posed by chemical and biological agents, specifically why experts say that such substances are so difficult to use as weapons of mass destruction.

Discussion Questions:

* During World War II, the U.S., Germany, and Japan refrained from using chemical or biological weapons against each other--though Japan dropped plague on China. Why do you think there was a general reluctance to use these terrible weapons?

* If you were discussing chemical and biological terrorism with a friend, which key points would you make?

CLASSROOM STRATEGIES

Before Reading: Ask students what they have heard about chemical and biological weapons. Do they regard such terrorism as a serious threat?

Critical Thinking/Discussion: After students read the article, discuss how it helps readers tell the difference between reasonable and unreasonable concerns. Distinguish between the real power of anthrax to kill and the likelihood that thousands will die from an anthrax attack.

Direct attention to the comparison between the odds of dying from a reaction to antibiotics with the odds of dying from being hit by lightning and other accidents.

Next, discuss one of the major goals of terrorism: fear of the unknown. Note the observation of Amy Smithson, on page 11, that people believe the worst of what they hear because they do not understand the substantial difficulty involved in producing and dispersing chemical and biological weapons. Does ignorance about terrorists' abilities allow the imagination to run wild and propagate unreasonable fear? Ask students to suppose that fear of bioterrorism causes Americans to become demoralized. How might this demoralization affect people's ability to perform at school or work?

Next, note Red Thomas's view that Americans are more likely to be killed by drunk drivers than by terrorist attack. Is there a comparable fear of drunken drivers? Revisit: After students read the article, discuss their "Before Reading" comments. Have their views on chemical and biological terrorism changed?

WHAT ARE THE ODDS?

Four Americans had died after inhaling anthrax, as of early November. In a national population of 280 million, experts say the odds of dying from anthrax are miniscule--much lower, for instance, than the chances of being killed by lightning. Here are the odds that an American will die in a given year from the following:

ACTUAL DEATHS IN 1998 *   ODDS OF DYING IN 1 YEAR

Motor-vehicle accident
43,501                    1 in 6,212

All homicides
17,893                    1 in 15,104

Falling on stairs
1,389                     1 in 194,563

Hit by falling object
723                       1 in 373,787

Lightning
63                        1 in 4,289,651

Hornets, wasps, bees
46                        1 in 5,874,957

Reaction to antibiotics
39                        1 in 6,929,436

* Latest available data.

Source: National Safety Council