ShareThis Page
Initial anthrax test negative for Roddey |

Initial anthrax test negative for Roddey

| Saturday, October 27, 2001 12:00 a.m

Allegheny County Executive Jim Roddey, sick with flu-like symptoms after a visit to Washington, D.C., doesn’t have anthrax, an initial test has found.

The county executive was tested Wednesday at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center’s Montefiore Hospital in Oakland after he starting feeling ill, according to a statement his office issued Friday.

Roddey had gone home sick Friday and was not available for comment, said spokeswoman Margaret Philbin. Final test results are due in several days.

Roddey had visited Congressional leaders Oct. 16 and 17 in several Capitol Hill buildings later closed after anthrax was found in a letter delivered to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat. Two Washington postal workers have died.

County Manager Bob Webb said Roddey’s decision to get tested arose solely from his trip to Washington, D.C., and that no mail received by the county has raised any suspicions.

As a precaution, Roddey is taking Cipro, an antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections, including anthrax.

Health officials discourage anyone from seeking anthrax testing or treatment from a doctor or hospital emergency room unless they are sick or there is a positive anthrax sample from their environment.

Mayor Tom Murphy, who had been in Washington this week for a forum on security by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, said yesterday he had not been tested for exposure to the bacteria.

is a former freelancer.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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 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.