Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Anthrax Mystery Deepens

Aired October 31, 2001 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: Two cases of anthrax infection stump the experts, and the mystery deepens.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These cases are unusual cases, and they are cases that were done purposefully and with criminal intent.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: Whom do you trust?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Take the advice from us and let us do the worrying.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: Can you do that? Also, are you sending your kids out tonight to trick or treat?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I haven't for years, irregardless of the anthrax, felt comfortable having my children trick or treat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't believe there is going to be a threat here in this neighborhood.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: How much should you tell your children in this new age of terror?

Hello, everyone, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out."

How much does anyone really know about anthrax infections and how they spread? Another person is dead from inhalation anthrax, and no one can figure out how she got it. A case of cutaneous anthrax infection is just as mysterious. And as we've heard again and again, the evolution of the outbreak seems to be a learning process for everyone. Our guests today are Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, an epidemiologist and founder of the American Council on Science and Health and Dr. Leonard Cole, a professor at Rutgers University and author of several books, including "The Eleventh Plague: The Politics of Biological and Chemical Warfare."

Welcome to both of you.

DR. ELIZABETH WHELAN, EPIDEMIOLOGIST: Thank you.

BATTISTA: All right, Dr. Whelan, let me start with you. How do you go about tracking down the mystery of these two people that contracted anthrax without any known connections?

WHELAN: Well, these two cases, especially the one of inhalation anthrax in New York are very puzzling and very disturbing. They are sort of what we call outlying cases. They fall outside the cluster pattern that we seem to understand. They don't work in the post office and they apparently have not been opening mail.

But to put it in some perspective, that's what epidemiologists do. We find out the answer. In terms of these cases, we will find out where the woman worked at the hospital, with whom she worked, what she did. We will look at her home, her clothes and her contacts, to see if we can find some kind of a pattern.

I might mention that I just recently heard in the last few minutes that there might be another case of cutaneous anthrax at that same hospital. Those test results will be in later tonight. And indeed, if something like that would happen, it would give it a whole different turn.

Beyond that, I think when you're hearing these stories day after day, you've got to keep that perspective. We've had four deaths from inhalation anthrax. Yet every single day there are over -- about 100 people who die in auto accidents. And over 1,300 people die from cigarette smoking every day. We have got to keep our perspective. We shouldn't act terrified, because that's what the terrorists want us to do.

BATTISTA: Leonard, let me ask you this, until we find out more facts about that second case at that hospital in New York. When there isn't a pattern, or there's nothing that appears to be in common with these two latest victims, what does that tell you?

LEONARD COLE, RUTGERS UNIVERSITY: Well, there is something in common. We haven't had any purposefully or deliberately applied anthrax for hostile purposes ever that we know of in the United States before these past few weeks. So the pattern means that we clearly are seeing somebody, some group, some group of scientists and maybe some foreign country behind this effort. I say maybe, because we don't have the evidence of what the source is.

Until we find out where this is coming from, not just simply patterning the epidemiological history, but the actual perpetrators of this, we don't know. We're at sea. The patterns can continue and, unfortunately, there's the likelihood, I would say, that we're going to see more anthrax cases, as long whoever has been doing this continues his unfortunate habits.

BATTISTA: Dr. Whelan, if we could look at some of the possibilities as to how this may have happened. I guess the first one that jumps out is the possibility that there was cross-contamination in the mail.

WHELAN: Right. That has been discussed and looked at. And most people that I consider knowledgeable consider that quite unlikely, that a piece of mail that this recently deceased woman had opened had come in contact, for example, with the Daschle letter or another letter bearing anthrax.

What concerns us, of course, is that this case could be a harbinger for finding that there is a new means of transmission of anthrax. That's what concerns us most of all, and that's why we really have to keep a look at it. We don't want to panic. We just want to start collecting data. And, as I said, we are medical detectives in the area of epidemiology, which of course, is the study of the cause of human disease.

BATTISTA: I don't want to panic people, but I just am curious. I want to ask Dr. Cole, what other sorts -- what other means of transportation could there be, or could we not imagine them all?

COLE: Look, we couldn't imagine September 10th that somebody had in mind to take four planes up rather simultaneously and crash them into buildings. That was beyond the scope of any of our imaginations in the intelligence world.

There are an infinite number of possibilities and we can scare ourselves to death if we go too far with this. And it is certainly true that, in terms of relative risks, you're far more in danger by getting into your car, than the possibility that you'll be struck with something by opening your mail.

Still, as long as the perpetrator is out there, as I said a moment ago, this is open-ended. We're at sea. We don't know where the shoreline is. We don't know exactly what the cause is coming from, nor do we know, in truth, how transmissible this material may be, by way of cross-contamination. It may not be, but it may be as well.

We've also read reports that the porosity of letters and mail, the paper, would allow the tiny microscopic-sized spores of anthrax to actually penetrate some of the envelopes. Whether this has been in fact demonstrated to be a cause of possible contamination and exposure to people is yet to be determined.

But the possibilities are out there and we have to be realistic and understand that.

BATTISTA: OK, let's talk then about what we do know. Dr. Whelan, for example, how long can anthrax spores exist in the air? How long do they live? WHELAN: Well, I think they're really quite stable. Perhaps what you might ask is how long can a human being harbor the spores and still be at risk of getting ill?

BATTISTA: But actually, I do want to know, if they do puff out of an envelope and they get into the air, are you saying they can last indefinitely, or years, or hundreds of years, in the air?

WHELAN: Well, it depends on the quality of -- how much of an aerosol spray they are. I think you really would have to see exactly what the characteristics of the anthrax you're speaking about. But I believe it can be fairly hearty. In terms of whether you're able to inhale it or not, it would depend on how much aerosol there is.

COLE: Maybe I can help a little bit. You know, anthrax is not a natural disease among humans, even though anthrax is all around, in many locations throughout the world. But it's in the soil. The spores ultimately settle down to a level of solid material.

If you are in a city, they'll settle onto the ground. If you're out in the country, where virtually all natural anthrax is found, you will find that it gets into the soil. So when the material is whirled about in the air, this is an artificial means of getting up there where people might be exposed, and inhale.

Keep in mind that through the 20th century there were only 18 recorded cases of inhalation anthrax in the United States. This is an extremely rare disease. So it is very likely that the spores, even though floating for a period of time, would ultimately settle down.

That's one of the reasons we say that if you have a suspicious letter, the best thing you do is gently place it on table. You don't wave it around, you don't look at it in a very wavy type of a manner, and you don't carry it around and show it to anybody. You just put it down quietly, and you get some help from authorities, whether 911 or public health authorities.

BATTISTA: OK, Dr. Whelan, then, now let's go back to the question that she wanted to answer about how long the spores can thrive in the human body, once they're ingested.

WHELAN: Well, we actually have very little experience, as would you understand. As was just stated, this is a highly unusual situation. But we do know from an accident that occurred in Russia, that the disease can actually break out, inhalation anthrax, up to 40, 41 days after the exposure. So we are looking at that time frame.

BATTISTA: You know what, let me do a quick e-mail here. Robert in Melbourne, Florida says: "They better make some moves, and make them fast, because now we're hearing of people becoming infected who have no affiliation with the postal service, the government or the media. Immediate action needs to be taken to halt any further anthrax progression and cross-contamination."

The problem is, nobody's quite sure of what that means, "immediate action." Dr. Cole, can you help us with that? COLE: I wish I could really help. We're at sea. We just do not know. The word "learning curve" was used earlier in preface to your program, and it's certainly true. The good news is that until the past few experiences these past weeks, we weren't as clear that you could use certain antibiotics and turn the course of the illness around after symptoms appear.

Now, although four people have died, other people have contracted inhalation anthrax, have shown symptoms, and still seem to be on the mend, having taken the right dosage and the right type of antibiotic. So that's good news, because we weren't even sure that was possible, previously.

We also know that with appropriate use of vaccines, and if we have an appropriate amount of vaccine in stock, that would be helpful -- which we do not now have -- that we can be more sure of protection against the population.

So it's not that we're facing a doomsday endless scenario. There are ways to combat this, And if we see a lot more cases coming around the country -- and that's a possibility -- we're going to have to ratchet up our ability to get the vaccines produced and out there, and available for the population.

BATTISTA: When you say that, though, are you advocating a mass vaccination then?

COLE: No. Absolutely not now. I'm saying that we ought to be gearing up, we ought to be getting cooperation of more than the single company that is now licensed to produce the vaccine. This ought to be a patriotic undertaking by all Americans, including our pharmaceutical companies, to join together with the government. The president of the United States ought to summon them into his office and say, "what can we do to help the American public?"

At the very least, we ought to be able to have in readiness the ability to produce millions of doses of the vaccine, in case of necessity. Not that we should go out and preemptively now vaccinate people, definitely not. But we must have a better preparatory position than to say, "maybe in a year or two or three years, we'll be getting the vaccine out to the market."

WHELAN: I would certainly agree with that. And I think we should, again, keep in mind that even in situations like the post offices, where there was exposure to anthrax, relatively few people in that environment actually became infected. So it's not something that necessarily will affect everyone.

In terms of responding, we are turning to technology. I think you've heard discussion about use of radiation on our mail. And there's a tremendous effort under way right now to explore that and get that going.

BATTISTA: I have to take a quick break here, and we'll continue in a moment. Nancy is on the phone from Maine. I'll take her call when we come back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BATTISTA: Welcome back. Let me take Nancy on the phone in Maine with a question. Nancy, go ahead.

CALLER: Yes, I just wondered why they haven't closed down the drop boxes. That seems to me like that would be a perfect place for a terrorist to mail a letter from. And I just don't understand why they haven't closed those down.

BATTISTA: Well, the effect of that on the mail service alone might be pretty severe, I'm guessing. I of course can't answer that question for you, and I don't think either one of our guests can answer that either.

Do you -- all I can ask you is whether you think that is necessary at this point. Dr. Whelan, Dr. Cole?

WHELAN: Well, I mean, we just don't want to have this fear paralyze us. We can't stop our daily routine. We just have to be vigilant and get on with our lives, as the president of the United States has recommended.

COLE: Unless you stop mail service entirely, it doesn't matter if the drop boxes are closed, because whether you go to the mailbox or whether you go to the post office, or some other means of delivering the mail, eventually it gets into the central office, where there is a sorting machine.

Now, we do have to be a little more careful about the processing of the mail, and to create as little turbulence inside the area as possible. And we do know as well that there are efforts to introduce some kind of ionizing radiation or electron radiation efforts to help kill spores. All of this is technology that's not fully in place, nor is it even fully developed or understood, how it would affect the letters.

We're learning. We're going to come out of this OK, but there's going to be some difficulty in the meantime.

BATTISTA: We just had a question there on the bottom of the screen from our chat room, and I think perhaps maybe we should talk about some fact and fiction, when it comes to trying to control the possibility of anthrax in your mail.

Somebody asked if Lysol kills anthrax. You know, or microwaving or ironing your mail -- all these things that have been circulating among people. If we could address that, I think we're doing a public service. Dr. Cole?

COLE: Now, I don't know the techniques personally, but what I have read and what I have understood from others...

BATTISTA: I'm sorry, Dr. Cole. Forgive me for interrupting, for just a moment.

(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)

BATTISTA: I want to ask our two guests about something she was just talking about a few moments ago, about complaining that they had stopped testing at those facilities. How do they make that decision to stop testing, and did she have a point there that Cipro is not like a vaccine, so therefore, are these people still at risk? Dr. Whelan?

WHELAN: Well, first of all, the idea of the testing is -- is a very confusing subject, because if you are testing with nasal swabs you are going to get -- you're going to pick up lot of false -- false negatives and -- because the spores could be in the lungs at that point.

Beyond that, though, for -- as we understand it, for inhalation anthrax you really are not going to get those antibodies in your blood until you begin to sick. So I mean, I think we're doing the right thing in urging people to take the Cipro. And the fact that -- that you might test negative taking Cipro and therefore, you would never know you are exposed is outweighed by the fact that you -- if were exposed that you would be protected by taking this drug.

BATTISTA: Doctor?

COLE: One comment I can -- yeah, sure. We are in a very difficult dilemma, and I certainly sympathize with the comments we just heard during the press conference. These people certainly have a right to know that they are working under relatively safe conditions.

At the same time, to simply close out the whole postal system would be a massive, massive injury to the country. Now, I don't know what the right answer is. I do know that the press conference offered some questions that have to be responded to by government officials .

I will say this, though. This is a technical correction to the -- what the -- what the woman just mentioned during the press conference that yes, Cipro the antibiotics is not the same as a vaccine.

But it has been demonstrated these past weeks that the appropriate antibiotic -- not just Cipro, but even doxycycline -- can turn the course of events. Somebody has been exposed, somebody who even has symptoms will heal, will get better with proper antibiotic intake. So it's not that that vaccine is the only way that will give you ultimate protection.

BATTISTA: And quickly, before we go. I interrupted you before that news conference. You were telling us quickly about these home remedies for trying to sanitize your mail.

COLE: Yeah. By the time you finish ironing a letter so that you would offer sufficient heat and steam to kill the spores, you would probably ruin the letter or whatever contents were in there.

There have been efforts to kill spores. Anthrax spores are very durable. They can be killed, say, in a pressure cooker -- 250 degrees for 15 minutes -- but then too you are going to ruin the mail. So it is not a wise idea to start becoming a scientist in your own home and trying to develop ways to eliminate the spores.

The best thing is to protect yourself. If you have doubts about a particular letter, by not even going to open it, or as distant as you can. And if it gives you some psychological comfort to wear gloves when you're dealing with suspicious letters, then by all means you should do that.

But this is not a rampant infection that's hitting everybody in every home that -- and every letter that comes in has to be suspect.

BATTISTA: Right. Good advice. All right. Doctors Whelan and Dr. Cole, thank you very much. We appreciate both of you being here today.

WHELAN: Thank you.

BATTISTA: We will take a break and be back right after this.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

BATTISTA: Still ahead, Halloween 2001. Trick of treat?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We may have a problem with somebody who thinks it's a practical joke to do something stupid, but we can deal with that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There are simply no jokes anymore.

BATTISTA: Will you send your kids out into the night, or will All Hallows Eve take on new meaning in the aftermath of September 11.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOMMY THOMPSON, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: Something, you know, can always happen when children are out tricks or treating and walking out in the streets and going door-to-door. All I am asking people to do is be very careful. Go with their children, watch what they receive, and check it out and be vigilant with -- with their activities. But do not be so afraid that you do not allow your children to enjoy Halloween.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BATTISTA: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT. In just a few hours, the streets will be filled with costumed children going door to door, asking for that treat. Will yours be among them? Or will Halloween be different for you this year?

An editorial in the "Arizona Republic" today reads: "They're not going to take Halloween away from us. Not this year. No way! One more thing: take pictures. Treasure those happy faces forever. The terrorists won't steal them from us, and neither should undue fear."

Joining us: Marilyn Kentz. She is one-half of the comedy team, "The Mommies." Marilyn, good to see you.

MARILYN KENTZ, THE MOMMIES: Good to see you.

BATTISTA: Also with us family psychologist Annie Kalayjian. She is a professor of psychology at Fordham University. Nice to see you.

ANNIE KALAYJIAN, PROFESSOR, FORDHAM UNIVERSITY: Thank you.

BATTISTA: And Laura Manske is with us, deputy editor of "Family Life" magazine. She has two children, ages 13 and 10. Laura, nice to see you.

LAURA MANSKE, DEPUTY EDITOR, "FAMILY LIFE": Nice to see you.

BATTISTA: OK. To trick or treat or not, that is the question tonight. Laura, let me start with you since you have that age children.

MANSKE: Absolutely. Halloween is a wonderful celebration, a ritual that kids look forward to all year long. And to deny Halloween to the kids is to say that our world has gotten so horrific that our lives have to change.

BATTISTA: And Marilyn, your daughter is 16 now, so she's a little old for the game anyway. But if she were younger, would you let her go out?

KENTZ: No. No, I wouldn't. I think that -- it's more for me than for her. I need to be near my kids. And even though we'd be walking out in the street I rather take her to a party, be with friends and people I know if something bad happened.

You know that 72-hour thing? That is really bothering me. And I don't know what's going to happen. It's now 24 hours. I don't know, I'd rather be close with friends and be inside. It's just me.

BATTISTA: OK. Dr. Kalayjian, is there some -- what is in the middle here?

KALAYJIAN: Well, you will see that there are individual differences. Parents need to do their own decision making, because it does depend on how parents feel, because that's going to transmit to the children. So if the parent feels insecure, so they should follow their intuition and their feelings and provide opportunities, Halloween parties for them to do with friends.

Again, this is a time for us also to emphasize community mobilization, trust in the neighborhood and for us collectively to be involved in raising the child, as the famous saying is that we need a whole village to raise a child. Yes, indeed. Now is the time for the community to mobilize and to put the efforts together and help the children have a healthy Halloween.

BATTISTA: That comment on the bottom of the screen there about "I am not going to trick or treating. I'm not giving out candy either." That person is looking for an excuse not to give out candy. They never give out candy.

KENTZ: No.

BATTISTA: The lights are out at that house.

KENTZ: You know what? I just think that there's crazy people. There's crazy people that will do things just because we are all nervous. It's not even the terrorists, it's those other people. I just don't want to take a chance.

BATTISTA: Do you -- do you have that little trust in your neighborhood, though, Marilyn? I mean, do you not feel like they have a general feeling there?

KENTZ: No, I have good neighborhood. No, I have a good neighborhood.

BATTISTA: So I mean, what are -- what are the chances the boogeyman is out there any worse this year than in years past?

KENTZ: I don't know if it is -- if it's logical. But I am not logical these days. This new reality sucks. And I don't even know where I stand in it all.

I mean, there are times that I'm really trying, trying to trust that the life is going to be fine and that the United States is going to be one step ahead of the terrorists the whole time. But other times I think I am going to open the mail and die and now I'm going to leave my daughter.

BATTISTA: Let me go to my audience on this one, quickly, and take a little survey here. Donna, do you have children?

DONNA: Yes. I have a 13 year old.

BATTISTA: Is he going out?

DONNA: Yes he is. He...

BATTISTA: Oh, sorry. Do you any problems with it at all?

DONNA: No, I don't. I mean, we've explained enough in the last month or so. Why explain why we are taking Halloween away?

BATTISTA: I want to get into that, about explaining this all to him. Let me -- here. Erin and Caitlin, you guys are, what, eighth grade?

ERIN: Seventh.

BATTISTA: Seventh, sorry. So you are not going out because mom says you're too old.

CAITLIN: I have been too old since last year.

BATTISTA: Oh, come on. Don't you hate that, though? I mean, part of you still really wants to go out, right?

CAITLIN: My sister takes me out toward the end of it.

BATTISTA: OK. Do you guys have any concerns about going out? You trust your neighborhood, trust your friends and neighbors?

CAITLIN: Yeah.

BATTISTA: And we had one -- I think a parent over here, didn't we?

CHRIS: Yes, Donna.

BATTISTA: Donna. How old are you children, Donna?

DONNA: I have one 9 and 13. And if I took the nine-year-old around then the 13-year-old would be the one answering the door, because dad is not home at night. He's working. And I just didn't feel that it was safe.

We talked about him just -- it wouldn't be safe for him to be the one answering the door. Because there are kids in the neighborhood who have said, "Oh, watch out. We are going to do this to cars and that to houses." And you know, just -- just may be troublemakers that -- that wouldn't have done anything last year, but this year they are thinking this is the year to do it.

BATTISTA: Let me ask the doctor about that. Do you think there -- we might see increased incidences of mischief and this kind of -- maybe worse, because of the general feeling that we are in this situation?

KALAYJIAN: We might. But it's again -- we are just hyping this too far and taking it too far. I think I need to emphasize more that there -- although there may be some copycat attempts and trying to fear their peers and so on -- but the important point I'd like to emphasize is having the parents to supervise and having that continuity and consistency.

If the parents are feeling insecure about it, let them go out as a family and let -- make this a family affair if it's important for the family. You need to emphasize -- as we were talking earlier with Laura -- on parent's feelings. If they are afraid, children will be afraid. If they are uncomfortable and feel helpless, then that is going to transmit to the children.

BATTISTA: Laura, at what age do you start talking to them about these realistic fears out there, though?

MANSKE: Well, I think -- I think right away. Certainly with what has happened since September 11th, you should be talking to them.

However, one mistake is that parents tell children too much. They ask a simple question, they want a simple answer and parents give them a whole treatise on it. So I think you should just answer what they're asking. Also while I am very much for the families celebrating Halloween together, that doesn't just mean pushing your kid out the door and expecting them to go to stranger's houses. Halloween more and more has become such a family bonding activity. So go to neighbors and friends and go out before dark. Take a flashlight with you. And let it be a family activity.

BATTISTA: Let me take Maggie on the phone in Wisconsin. Maggie, go ahead.

MAGGIE: Yes. I live in a 14-apartment -- a 14-building apartment community in Wisconsin. We had our trick or treating over the past weekend. We didn't have one kid come to the door. I got stuck with a big bowl of candy that would have gone within an hour. So we didn't have any children come around whatsoever.

So we're already -- we saw evidence of it over the weekend in our community.

BATTISTA: Wow. Maggie, where do you live in Wisconsin?

MAGGIE: I live in West Dallas.

BATTISTA: So it's a relatively small town?

MAGGIE: Well, not really. It is a suburb of Milwaukee. It's about -- I would say 200,000 people, maybe.

BATTISTA: And it -- has that really been kind of metro wide?

MAGGIE: Yes. They were even discussing it on our news shows and whatnot, that tricker or treater turnout was relatively very low this year.

BATTISTA: I have to take a quick break here. I have lots of candy. Come to my house. I'll give it to you. We will be back in just a minute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BATTISTA: Let me do a couple of e-mails. Charlie in Chicago says: "In Chicago, there is much fear generated with this new warning. I know that many, if not most, of my friends will be staying in on Halloween night. It makes me angry that I cannot go out and just enjoy myself and instead have to keep turning to TV to stay alert."

BATTISTA: Turn off the TV, Charlie, and go to bed.

KENTZ: I understand the point.

BATTISTA: I understand the point he is making, though. I mean, it should make them angry. And then Tim's question here. Tim from Oceanside, California says: "What are we teaching our children if we let the threat of a terrorist attack cause us to alter our behavior on a cherished children's holiday? How do we explain it to them? Do we cancel Thanksgiving? Christmas? Where do we draw the line?"

MANSKE: That's right.

KENTZ: You know, when I was young -- I am old enough to have been in the '50s when the threat of Khrushchev and the nuclear war coming, and I had to get under my desk and put my head down and -- and worry that a nuclear bomb was coming. And I had nightmares for years. And I know our kids are going to do that too.

BATTISTA: You know what? I went through those -- I went through those, Marilyn, but to be honest with you I never knew what they were for. I mean, they told you what -- I mean, the whole duck and cover thing and the air-raid drills. I never knew what those were for, so I slept blissfully.

KENTZ: Oh, lucky you.

BATTISTA: Maybe that's the point, though. I mean, when you are under 10 years of age, I don't think you need to know what these things are about. Am I right, Doctor?

KALAYJIAN: Yes. Yes. I like to emphasize that -- I think Laura also -- Laura and I were talking about it, that we need to be cautious about the type of information that you -- we provide to our children.

So if they ask a question, let's be brief and focus and go back to the certainty and security and nurturance that they are seeking. So you give them all the information and then you reinforce with a lot of love and touching and hugging and kissing and making sure to tell them that you are there for them.

That is what they want to hear. They don't want a whole entire dissertation about biological weapons or anthrax. And I think you wanted to say something about that too, Laura, right?

MANSKE: Well, absolutely. And in fact I have to applaud the parents -- so many parents at my children's school this year, who got their kids dressed up in costumes this year that are very positive. Everything from rescue workers, firefighters to Statute of Liberty, Abraham Lincoln, Uncle Samm, and it was a very joyous occasion. And it created an atmosphere of -- of routine for the kids. And I think that they all felt very secure in this holiday.

KALAYJIAN: And healing. It is very healing.

BATTISTA: Sherry...

KALAYJIAN: And it is very healing to do this to act up in terms of the -- representing symbolic representation of the recent terrorism and the threats we had and the heroes we had. So it is a very, very good opportunity to heal and process those feelings.

MANSKE: Well, another thing that the doctor and I were also talking about Halloween traditionally has become popular because it allays children's fears about monsters and about ghosts and the supernatural world. At any time it is so important now that this holiday take place and help kids work through those fears. And if parents are uneasy, then again, as I said, parents should accompany kids or have some of their children's friends over for apple bobbing and treasure hunt candy around the house so that the adults are comfortable but that the kids still get their holiday.

BATTISTA: Let me jump in with -- do we have time to take a call? No, we don't. OK. I'm sorry, Sherry out there in California. I'm sorry.

The poll question today was: will you will celebrating Halloween this year? And online you are saying that 30 percent of you, "No, I never do anyway." 10 percent no because of recent events. 60 percent, "Yes, I will." So that's encouraging.

KALAYJIAN: Yes, yes. That's very good.

BATTISTA: Marilyn Kentz, thank you very much for being with us. Laura Manske and Dr. Annie Kalayjian, thank you for being with us.

KALAYJIAN: Thank you. Happy Halloween.

MANSKE: Happy Halloween.

BATTISTA: Same to you. Happy Halloween. We need a little Christmas around here. All right. Join us again tomorrow for more TALKBACK LIVE. Thank you for joining us today. We'll see you then.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com