The quote doesn't apply to many of the people on the list, and others only tangentially...
I guess my beef with this list has always been that the people who add names to it have no clue about what the people on the list actually did. Wiley is the best example - he wasn't a microbiologist per se, but an X-ray crystallographer. Because he published a few (less than half a dozen...) papers on the crystal structure of proteins from nasty viruses (Ebola, HIV), he's suddenly a leading virologist. Back when he first disappeared I actually downloaded some of his papers - I highly doubt his lab ever worked with live viruses whatsoever - I seem to recall them getting from another lab a cDNA clone of the gene whose protein they were trying to study.
Benito Que is another example, per my searching he only published less than a dozen papers in the last 10 years or so, none on infectious diseases so far as I can see.
Nguyen Van Set, per my recollection, was a lower level research technician, who just happened to work in the same institute (not the same lab, mind you) which made the mousepox discovery.
I'm not sure I'd consider Steven Mostow "an expert in the threat of bioterrorism", although he was an infectious disease specialist. Articles like
this one tend to confuse this issue.
I'm still trying to figure out what sort of leading research on DNA sequencing (which is performed by every molecular biology lab extant these days...) made Robert Schwartz famous...
The Huang - Holzmayer murder suicide appears to be some kind of workplace dispute...
David Wynn-Williams studied cyanobacteria - the direct link to bioterrorism/infectious disease is not immediately obvious to me...
Many on the list weren't "experts" in their fields, by any charitable definition. (Wiley definitely was, however...).
Of all the people on the list, Pasechnik is the most interesting, IMHO...
-SM