To use all functions of this page, please activate cookies in your browser.
With an accout for my.bionity.com you can always see everything at a glance – and you can configure your own website and individual newsletter.
- My watch list
- My saved searches
- My saved topics
- My newsletter
Additional recommended knowledge
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 1:
A bioterrorism attack is the deliberate release of viruses, bacteria, or other germs (agents) used to cause illness or death in people, animals, or plants. These agents are typically found in nature, but it is possible that they could be changed to increase their ability to cause disease, make them resistant to current medicines, or to increase their ability to be spread into the environment. Biological agents can be spread through the air, through water, or in food. Terrorists may use biological agents because they can be extremely difficult to detect and do not cause illness for several hours to several days. Some bioterrorism agents, like the smallpox virus, can be spread from person to person and some, like anthrax, can not.
Biological terrorism dates as far back as ancient Roman civilization, where dead and rotting animals were thrown into wells to poison water supplies. (Bock,2001) This early version of biological terrorism was used to destroy enemy forces covertly. It continued on into the 14th century where the bubonic plague was used to infiltrate enemy cities by both instilling the fear of infection in residences, in hopes that they would evacuate, and also to destroy defending forces that would not yield to the attack. The use of disease as a weapon in this stage of history exhibited a lack of control aggressors had over their own biological weapon. Primitive medical technology provided limited means of protection for the aggressor and a battles surrounding geographical regions. After the battle was won, the inability to contain enemies who escaped death lead to wide spread epidemics affecting not only the enemy forces, but also surrounding regions inhabitants. Due to the use of these biological weapons, and the apparent lack of medical advancement necessary to defend surrounding regions from them, wide spread epidemics such as the bubonic plague quickly moved across all of Western Europe, destroying a large portion of its population. The victims of biological terrorism in fact became weapons themselves. This was noted in the Middle Ages, but medical advancements had not progressed far enough to prevent the consequences of a weapons use. (Eitzen and Takafuji, 1997)
In the 15th century, smallpox was used on contaminated clothing to defeat South American and Native American forces. (Bock, 2001) Again, the use of biological weapons for which limited protection and containment was available, lead to casualties on both sides of battles. Bioterrorism continued to be an effective method of weakening an adversary but it was also difficult to contain. In the Revolutionary War, colonists were vaccinated from the small-pox virus and then used the virus to intentionally infect enemies. This demonstrates a major advancement in the evolution of bioterrorism. Once the ability to defend from biological warfare became possible through medical advancement, the weapons became far more valuable.
As time continued, and use of biological warfare became more and more sophisticated. Countries were developing weapons that delivered much higher effectiveness and less chance of infecting the wrong party. One significant enhancement in biological weapon development was the first use of Anthrax. Anthrax effectiveness was initially limited to victims of large dosages. This became a weapon of choice because it is easily transferred, has a high mortality rate, and can be easily obtained. Also, variants of the Anthrax bacterium can be found all around the world making it the biological weapon of choice in the early 19th century. Another property of Anthrax that helped fuel its use as a biological weapon is its poor ability to spread far beyond the targeted population.
By the time World War I began, attempts to use anthrax were directed at animal populations. This was ineffective. Instead, the use of poisonous mustard gas became the biological weapon of choice. The sheer horror of its affects lead to a treaty called the Geneva Protocol of 1925. The treaty was created to prevent the use of asphyxiating gas as a method of biological warfare. (Brooks, 2001) While this was a significant advancement toward the prevention of biological weapon use, the treaty said nothing about weapon development. Secretly, biological weapon development programs existed in many nations. While no documented instances of biological weapon use exist it is believed that this was primarily due to the programs immaturity and not the unwillingness to use them.
American biological weapon development began in 1942. President Franklin D. Roosevelt placed George W. Merck in charge of the effort to create a development program. You may recognize the name Merck, Mr. Merck is also the founder of Merck Pharmaceuticals. These programs continued until 1969, when by executive order President Richard Nixon shut down all programs related to American offensive use of biological weapons. (http://fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/cbw/bw.html)
Accusations of the use of biological weapons against North Korea were spread during Viet Nam, however it is believed that those accusations were propaganda developed by the North Korean regime to villainize American Armed Forces. As the 70’s passed, global efforts to prevent the development of biological weapons and their use were widespread. In 1972 the prohibition of development, production and stockpiling biological weapons was developed.
In the 1980’s Iraq made substantial efforts to develop and stockpile large amounts of biological weapons. By the end of the 80’s Iraq had several sights dedicated to the research and development of biological warfare. They began to test their findings in the late 80’s. These actions lead to the first Gulf war in which Iraq’s biological weapons were dismantled and destroyed.
Since that time, efforts to use biological warfare has been more apparent in small radical organizations attempting to create fear in the eyes of large groups. Some efforts have been partially effective in creating fear, due to the lack of visibility associated with modern biological weapon use by small organizations. In 1995 a small terrorist group launched a terrorist attack aboard a Tokyo subway. The attack killed twelve and affected more than 5000. The response of Japanese emergency services successfully prevented an outcome with much higher mortality rates.
In the United States a more recent biological terrorism attack occurred in 2001 when letters laced with infectious anthrax were delivered to news media offices and the U.S Congress. (Johnston,2005) The letters killed 5. While many believed this attack to be in relation to Iraq’s development of biological weapons, tests on the anthrax strand used in the attack pointed to a domestic source.
Types of biological agents
The CDC has defined and categorized bioterrorism agents according to priority 2 as follows:
Category A agents
These are biological agents with both a high potential for adverse public health impact and that also have a serious potential for large-scale dissemination. The Category A agents are anthrax, smallpox, plague, botulism, tularemia, and viral hemorrhagic fevers.
Category B agents
Category B agents are moderately easy to disseminate and have low mortality rates.
Category C agents
Category C agents are pathogens that might be engineered for mass dissemination because they are easy to produce and have potential for high morbidity or mortality (examples: nipah virus, hantavirus and multi-drug resistant Tuberculosis (MTB).
Modern bioterrorist incidents
1915-16 livestock sabotage by Germany
Dr Anton Dilger, a German-American physician, worked for Germany in the U.S. (Chevy Chase and Baltimore) in 1915 and 1916 with cultures of anthrax and glanders with the intention of biological sabotage on behalf of the German government. Other German agents are known to have undertaken similar sabotage efforts during WWI in Norway, Spain, Romania and Argentina.
1984 Rajneeshee Salmonella attack
In 1984, followers of the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh attempted to control a local election by incapacitating the local population by infecting salad bars in eleven restaurants, doorknobs, produce in grocery stores and other public domains with Salmonella typhimurium in the city of The Dalles, Oregon. The attack caused about 751 people to get sick (no fatalities). This incident was the first known bioterrorist attack in the United States in the 20th century.
2001 anthrax attack
In September and October of 2001, several cases of anthrax broke out in the United States in the 2001 anthrax attacks, caused deliberately. This was a well-publicized act of bioterrorism. It motivated efforts to define biodefense and biosecurity, where more limited definitions of biosafety had focused on unintentional or accidental impacts of agricultural and medical technologies.
2003 ricin incidents
Planning for and reacting to a bioterrorist attack
Planning may involve the development of biological identification systems.
Until recently in the United States of America, most biological defense strategies have been geared to protecting soldiers on the battlefield rather than ordinary people in cities. Financial cutbacks have limited the tracking of disease outbreaks. Some outbreaks, such as food poisoning due to E. coli or Salmonella, could be of either natural or deliberate origin.
Preparedness and Response to a Biological Attack
Biological agents are relatively easy to obtain by terrorists and are becoming more threatening in the U.S.. Government agencies and laboratories are working on advanced detection systems to provide early warning, identify contaminated areas and populations at risk, and to facilitate prompt treatment. Methods for predicting the use of biological agents in urban areas as well as assessing the area for the hazards associated with a biological attack are being established in major cities. In addition, forensic technologies are working on identifying biological agents, their geographical origins and/or their initial source of infection. Other efforts include decontamination technologies to restore facilities without causing additional environmental concerns (2).
In 1999, the University of Pittsburgh's Center for Biomedical Informatics deployed the first automated bioterrorism detection system, called RODS (Real-Time Outbreak Disease Surveillance). RODS is designed to draw collect data from many data sources and use them to perform signal detection, that is, to detect the a possible bioterrorism event at the earliest possible moment. RODS, another systems like it, collect data from sources including clinic data, laboratory data, and data from over-the-counter drug sales. In 2000, Michael Wagner, the codirector of the RODS laboratory, and Ron Aryel, a subcontractor, conceived of the idea of obtaining live data feeds from "non-traditional" (non-health-care) data sources. The RODS laboratory's first efforts eventually led to the establishment of the National Retail Data Monitor, a system which collects data from 20,000 retail locations nation-wide.
On February 5, 2002, [George W. Bush|President Bush] visited the RODS laboratory and used it as a model for a $300 million spending proposal to equip all 50 states with biosurveillance systems. In a speech delivered at the nearby Masonic temple, Bush compared the RODS system to a modern "DEW" line (referring to the Cold War ballistic missile early warning system).
The principles and practices of biosurveillance, a new interdisciplinary science, were defined and described in HANDBOOK OF BIOSURVEILLANCE, edited by Michael Wagner, Andrew Moore and Ron Aryel, and published in 2006 by Elsevier's Academic Press division. Biosurveillance is the science of real-time disease outbreak detection. Its principles apply to both natural and man-made epidemics (bioterrorism).
Data which potentially could assist in early detection of a bioterrorism event include many categories of information. Health-related data such as that from hospital computer systems, clinical laboratories, electronic health record systems, medical examiner record-keeping systems, 911 call center computers, and veterinary medical record systems could be of help; researchers are also considering the utility of data generated by ranching and feedlot operations, food processors, drinking water systems, school attendance recording, and physiologic monitors, among others. Intuitively, one would expect systems which collect more than one type of data to be more useful than systems which collect only one type of information (such as single-purpose laboratory or 911 call-center based systems), and be less prone to false alarms, and this appears to be the case.
In Europe, disease surveillance is beginning to be organized on the continent-wide scale needed to track a biological emergency. The system not only monitors infected persons, but attempts to discern the origin of the outbreak.
Researchers are experimenting with devices to detect the existence of a threat:
Limitations of bioterrorism
Bioterrorism is inherently limited as a warfare tactic because of the uncontrollable nature of the agent involved. A biological weapon is useful to a terrorist group mainly as a method of creating mass panic and disruption to a society. However, technologists such as Bill Joy have warned of the potential power which genetic engineering might place in the hands of future bio-terrorists; a bacterial agent might be engineered for genetic or geographical selectivity. Such a scenario formed the plot of the science fiction novel The White Plague and the action novel Area 7.
Other forms of bioterrorism
The use of agents that do not cause harm to humans but disrupt the economy have been discussed. A highly relevant pathogen in this context is the foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) virus, which is capable of causing widespread economic damage and public concern (as witnessed in the 2001 and 2007 FMD outbreaks in the UK), whilst having almost no capacity to infect humans.
The genomic revolution requires scientists to follow a recognised Code of Conduct. The 'dual-use' technology dilemma implicates issues further; good scientific inventions can be reapplied along a sinister vector.
|This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Bioterrorism". A list of authors is available in Wikipedia.|