In the past, there has been plenty of criticism of S&T as not producing meaningful results that translated into useful tools being made available to field responders. The above feels like a PR campaign to change that impression.
I noted this lead statement in the linked piece, "With the very real possibility of a chemical attack in public spaces like stadiums, religious buildings, museums and theaters, or even contamination of the food or water supply, the U.S. needs to be prepared to take appropriate action to save lives." I would agree with the "possibility" statement, the "very real" part seems more appropriate for a time back in 2002-2005 when the 9/11 attacks created a boogeyman everywhere. Remember the perceived threats of the Taliban holed up in the caves of Tora Bora and hacking into our critical infrastructure? Not so much! China, yes. Russia, yes. Iran, yes. The Taliban today seem better suited for AK-47s.
