http://www.thebostonchannel.com/cnn-news/21421216/detail.html
Either possible scenarios -- accidental or intentional -- is rather scary
Either possible scenarios -- accidental or intentional -- is rather scary
Harvard University tightening security after 6 poisoned
- Thread starter Carol
- Start date
Bruno@MT
Senior Master
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2009
- Messages
- 3,399
- Reaction score
- 74
The sad thing is that many people still live with the illusion that (terrorist) attacks have to cost a lot of money, or use big, expensive infrastructure, or be difficult to accomplish.
There is such a wide range of low tech, low cost attacks on so many things that it is a miracle it hasn't happened yet.
There is such a wide range of low tech, low cost attacks on so many things that it is a miracle it hasn't happened yet.
And not every terrorist attack has to kill 4000 people to be effective. no that I'm saying it was a terrorist attack - particularly with it being at a research building. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it was a jealous girlfriend or something.
wow. yes, scary.
Basic self-defense, folks - if you aren't the one who breaks the seal, pours the drink or it leaves your hands at any time (think chain of custody), then you shouldn't consume it - especially at the college level.
I'm surprised it hasn't happened before as well. Perhaps it has and has been successfully buried.
I'm surprised it hasn't happened before as well. Perhaps it has and has been successfully buried.
That's unreasonable advice here. You can't have everyone have their own separate coffee pot, or fridge full of soda, that is kept guarded at all times. The students may not have had offices in the buildings. You're basically coming out against restaurants and vending machines here. It's much too broad, and it would be very difficult for anyone to follow this advice consistently.
Of course it is. I was multitasking and should have finished my thought, but I was watching a man describe how he killed a hamster with his mind. :barf:
I meant to acknowledge that such a "chain of custody" process would be unreasonable in many cases and of course I don't think we'll be shutting down restaurants anytime soon. This case is a "single-serve coffee machine" which I assume means the kind you pop a couple of quarters into and it plops down a cup and nearly misses the cup entirely with a spray of coffee, a spew of cream and grain of sugar. Is this what they mean? Or is it a smaller counter-top version which must be filled by whomever is servicing the area? If that's the case, you don't have to have a key to open the machine, likely.
In any case ... sorry, I carry my own whenever I can or buy sealed single chilled servings from a store.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #8
I'm going to guess its a Keurig brewer -- the company is heaquartered in Mass. and their brewers are hugely popular here. www.keurig.com
The coffee/tea/hot chocolate are sealed in a small cup (K cup). The user selects their beverage of choice and puts it in the machine. In the loading process a nozzle pierces the top of the cup (usually foil) and sends a set amount of hot water in to the cup. Another nozzle pierces the bottom of the cup and drains the liquid in to the user's cup.
The brewer that I have at my home has a small reservoir that is filled with water. The larger brewers that we have in the office have Swagelok tubing that can either go to the sink (to continuously refill the reservoir) or to a water source such as a 5 gallon spring water bottle (which we use here in the office because of an arsenic issue with our tap water).
So, to contaminate the coffee, one would have to somehow inject the toxin itself in to the K cup, or get it in to the water somehow. Considering this is Harvard Medical Schools pathology lab, and the toxin used was a preservative, I'd say that chances are good that the person that did this had access to lab chemicals.
The coffee/tea/hot chocolate are sealed in a small cup (K cup). The user selects their beverage of choice and puts it in the machine. In the loading process a nozzle pierces the top of the cup (usually foil) and sends a set amount of hot water in to the cup. Another nozzle pierces the bottom of the cup and drains the liquid in to the user's cup.
The brewer that I have at my home has a small reservoir that is filled with water. The larger brewers that we have in the office have Swagelok tubing that can either go to the sink (to continuously refill the reservoir) or to a water source such as a 5 gallon spring water bottle (which we use here in the office because of an arsenic issue with our tap water).
So, to contaminate the coffee, one would have to somehow inject the toxin itself in to the K cup, or get it in to the water somehow. Considering this is Harvard Medical Schools pathology lab, and the toxin used was a preservative, I'd say that chances are good that the person that did this had access to lab chemicals.
I've never seen those before, Carol. Thank you. That becomes quite easy to see how the coffee can be contaminated.
