Another scientist who worked with Ivins said it would be technically possible to produce powder Anthrax at the lab but it would be hard to do undetected "As well as we knew each other, and the way the labs were run, someone would discover what was going on," he added , "especially since dry spores were not something that we prepared or worked with." (14 ).
W. Russell Byrne Ivins supervisor 1998 - 2000 said "I'm waiting for it to be shown that the quantity and the quality of the powders in the anthrax letters could have been produced in those suites" and continued "I don't know how to make the stuff," (15 ).
Independent scientists, friends and colleagues of Ivins noted over one hundred people had access the Anthrax in question(16 ).
The government admits 16 government, commercial and university labs have the strain of Anthrax with the same genetic mutations as the anthrax used in the attacks, including Ivins lab (17 ).
The FBI claimed that link the Anthrax in used in the "anthrax letters" by DNA to Ivins. Meryl Nass, a Maine doctor who studied the anthrax vaccine and a professional acquaintance of Ivins, Points out "What you can do with all those forensic techniques is trace the anthrax to a lab, but you can't trace it to a person,"(18 ).
Why did the letters have a harmless bacterial contaminant and the others didn't. the government doesn't explain the source of the contaminate (19 ).
Dr. Thomas V. Inglesby, deputy director of the Center for Bio security of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said the search warrants said that the anthrax was link genetically to the anthrax in question but barely mentioned how the anthrax powder was prepared(20 ).
Jonathan B. Tucker, a biological warfare expert on the staff of a federal commission for the prevention of terrorism with unconventional weapons, said the FBI documents had "a number of gaps and inferences." (21 ).
Anthrax expert and colleague of Ivins noted that the FBI scientific evidence seemed thin and lacked the rigorous testing used by scientist (22 ).