This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Agriculture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Microbiology Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microbiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microbiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrobiologyWikipedia:WikiProject MicrobiologyTemplate:WikiProject MicrobiologyMicrobiology Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine: Dermatology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Dermatology task force. Occupational Safety and Health Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Veterinary medicine High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veterinary medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Veterinary medicine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veterinary medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicineTemplate:WikiProject Veterinary medicineVeterinary medicine High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Policy Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Anthrax. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Archives

1

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[spontaneous generation#Spontaneous generation|spontaneous generation]] Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Paige1.0.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ciprofloxacin is a fluoroquinolone, but doxycycline, erythromycin, vancomycin and penicillin are NOT. 192.12.184.7 (talk) 22:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that was the intent of the sentence. I made a minor change to make it clearer.MartinezMD (talk) 00:22, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Compare paragraphs 3 and 5: "Carnivores living in the same environment may become infected by consuming infected animals." "Anthrax typically does not cause disease in carnivores and scavengers, even when these animals consume anthrax-infected carcasses." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.184.43.100 (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The page is biased toward recent news (poor history). In particular, it lacks US production facilities and test sites and decontamination status. 99.2.229.105 (talk) 19:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does it seem necessary to include a reference that the bacilius anthracis is found specifically on antarctica? As far as anthrax is concerned, as a whole, I feel like it is an insignificant detail. So, I propose that maybe the sentence structure just be changed to only include that it is found on all seven continents, which, at least in my opinion, seems like relevant information. It may seem nitpicky, but through time little useless additions of information like this can really bog down an article. Aglo123 (talk) 19:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the german Wikipedia entry Aloys Pollender ist listed as the one who discovered Anthrax in 1849. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloys_Pollender The Englisch article of him is very small, but in the German article of him it is proven by a source that he discovered Anthrax. Here is the first page of his study about Anthrax: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aloys_Pollender_Publizierung.jpg Maybe you guys could think about editing this article. 91.38.31.112 (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These two parts of the introduction seem contradictory to me. Some clarification would be appreciated -

"Anthrax commonly infects wild and domesticated herbivorous mammals that ingest or inhale the spores while grazing. Ingestion is thought to be the most common route by which herbivores contract anthrax. Carnivores living in the same environment may become infected by consuming infected animals. Diseased animals can spread anthrax to humans, either by direct contact (e.g., inoculation of infected blood to broken skin) or by consumption of a diseased animal's flesh."

Then later... "Anthrax typically does not cause disease in carnivores and scavengers, even when these animals consume anthrax-infected carcasses" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethylfox (talk • contribs) 16:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No contradiction. Carnivores may become infected but typically don't. It's the herbivores (cattle) that will get the disease and only sometimes that carnivores get it from eating them.MartinezMD (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Until the 20th century, anthrax infections killed hundreds of thousands of animals and people worldwide each year.[4] French scientist Louis Pasteur developed the first effective vaccine for anthrax in 1881.[5][6][7] As a result of over a century of animal vaccination programs, sterilization of raw animal waste materials, and anthrax eradication programs in United States, Canada, Russia, Eastern Europe, Oceania, and parts of Africa and Asia, anthrax infection is now relatively rare in domestic animals (with only a few dozen cases reported each year).[citation needed] "

'a few dozen cases reported each year' is likely a very country(?USA) centric statement. It should be removed or qualified. I am not sure which countries operate anthrax eradication programs. Many vaccinate and maintain vaccination programs following outbreaks, but to attempt to eradicate spores in the ground does not make sense. Unreported anthrax outbreaks are common in some parts of the world. Geoff Chubb (talk) 02:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done I tried to Google some info about this but couldn't find any. I've removed that from the article now. Stickee (talk) 01:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all! It seems like people have added information about specific outbreaks of anthrax in a hodge-podge fashion throughout the article. There is one in the lead, some in symptoms, some in causes, etc. This doesn't really seem like a sustainable plan. I'm going to make a List of anthrax outbreaks like they did for Legionnaires' and start to shift the specific outbreak info over there. I think that'll help us to organize this article a bit more easily. If anyone has any other ideas, I'm all ears (or eyes, I suppose)! Thanks! Ajpolino (talk) 04:53, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:49, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of the word "other" in the above sentence from the lede seems to unnecessarily emphasise the fact that humans are animals at the expense of clarity. While humans are of course animals in a scientific sense, in common usage the word "animal" doesn't generally include them. One solution would be simply saying "humans and animals", but perhaps a more accurate solution to improve readability would be to split it into separate estimates for humans and animals.

Just to note; the given citation for this sentence consistently uses the term "animal" in the common, human-excluding sense. With examples such as "periodic emergence of disease in humans and animals" and "incidents of anthrax in animals and/or humans". 122.59.140.127 (talk) 02:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the word "other" from this sentence, since there has been no comment or objection in over three months. 203.97.181.188 (talk) 02:28, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yup humans are animals. So restored. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That may be so. But it's unusual English to specify that fact where it isn't necessary for clarity. As was pointed out, even in the cited paper the more natural form (i.e. "humans and animals") is used. 203.97.181.188 (talk) 02:16, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is the way we do it per WP:MEDMOS Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:18, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article uses "spore" throughout, but a hatnote on the spore article specifically excludes bacterial spores, redirecting to endospore. Is it better to replace "spore" with "endospore" throughout this article, or to just change the first wikilink to endospore?--Theodore Kloba (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anthrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120824060412/http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/anthrax/downloads/ed-vpd2006-anthrax.ppt to http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/anthrax/downloads/ed-vpd2006-anthrax.ppt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120406205603/http://dogsinthenews.com/issues/0110/articles/011030a.htm to http://dogsinthenews.com/issues/0110/articles/011030a.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been going through the GA criteria in this article and fixing things to get it up to the standard. I'm going to nominate it for good article status if no one minds (not sure why anyone would). Any thoughts? I'll nominate it tomorrow if this doesn't get any replies. Icebob99 (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anthrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070405150014/http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/anthrax/faq/signs.asp to http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/anthrax/faq/signs.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130511004056/http://www.sardc.net/editorial/sanf/2001/iss21/specialreport.html to http://www.sardc.net/editorial/sanf/2001/iss21/specialreport.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anthrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020040629/http://www.documents.hps.scot.nhs.uk/giz/anthrax-outbreak/anthrax-outbreak-report-2011-12.pdf to http://www.documents.hps.scot.nhs.uk/giz/anthrax-outbreak/anthrax-outbreak-report-2011-12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anthrax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161226204204/https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/anthrax/decon.html to https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/anthrax/decon.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CDC calls them spores.https://www.cdc.gov/anthrax/basics/index.html

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While reading the Anthrax article, I noticed that the Treatment section contained the "how-to content" warning template. I'm not sure if it counts as how-to content, as it merely states the most common ways to treat it. I haven't removed it yet. MrConorAE (talk) 21:06, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the most popular pages in Wikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicine's scope. Very few editors watch WT:VET's pages, which means that questions may not be answered in a timely manner. If you are an active editor and interested in animals or veterinary medicine, please put WT:VET on your watchlist. Thank you, WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The episode of the British TV show "Foyle's War" that was called "Bad Blood" is about the accidental release of a single anthrax infected sheep at a British bioweapons facility. IMdB has the entire story here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0582081/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:e422:3c01:24d2:cf5f:f994:e486 (talk) 09:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet the CDC says "Anthrax is most common in agricultural regions of Central and South America, sub-Saharan Africa, central and southwestern Asia, southern and eastern Europe, and the Caribbean. Anthrax is rare in the United States, but sporadic outbreaks do occur in wild and domestic grazing animals such as cattle or deer."[1] Doug Weller talk 09:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See this search.[2] There's one in Texas also. Doug Weller talk 09:26, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2023 and 11 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brownpaylon7, MatthewBroadway (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TraceRussell, Brebre2719, GardOU, Jtownsend10.

— Assignment last updated by Mbl5581 (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20191222230854/https://techlinkcenter.org/technologies/anthrax-strain/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 08:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]