Weapons of Mass Destruction
Table of Contents
Bioterrorism background and Literature Review.. 4
Problem regarding WMD regarding United States. 5
Emergency response plan, Resources, Hospitals and locations. 6
Consequences of bioterrorism attacks. 9
Future implications of bioterrorism.. 10
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Abstract
Bioterrorism is part of weapons of mass destruction, and it has high capability of causing harm to animals, environment and to the human beings. United States has been concerned on developing current technology in addressing the threat of bioterrorism. Category A of the bio-agents identifies with Tularemia, Anthrax, Small pox, Botulinum toxin, Bubonic plague and Viral hemorrhagic fevers. Category B identify with Brucellosis, Epsilon toxin, Glanders, food safety threats, Psittacosis, Meliodosis, Ricin, Q fever, Abrin, staphylococcal, Viral encephalitis, Tyhus and water supply threats. Category C of the bio-agents identify with Nipah virus, HIV/AIDS, Hantavirus, H1N1 and SARS. University of Pittsburgh initiated research on bioterrorism in 1999, with Center for Biomedical Informatics engaging bioterrorism detection system that was automated by the name Real Time Outbreak Disease Surveillance (RODs). Ricin letter attacks in April 2013 among top officials in the government of Obama are examples of the bioterrorism. Practices and principles of biosurveillance addresses both man made epidemics commonly referred to as the bioterrorism and also on the natural epidemics. There is a need of strengthening the national strategy dealing with bioterrorism, the second recommendation focus at sensitizing the public on ways of dealing with bioterrorism so that the nation is not caught at crossroads like it happened in the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks in New York.
Introduction
Weapon of mass destruction (WMD or WoMD) refers to biological, nuclear, chemical and radiological weapons (Alexander & Klein, 2006). It has been noted that WMD has the potential of harming and killing many human beings within a jurisdiction. WMD has the capability of causing massive damage to natural structures like mountains, manmade structures like buildings and to the biosphere (Furlow, 2003). Application and scope of WMD has been disputed basing on technicality and on political influence. The term WMD has evolved with time, as the world face globalization and socialization. According to the United States, WMD refers to CBR (Chemical, Biological and Radiological) or NBC (Nuclear, Biological or Chemical weapons) (Mauroni, 2010). There is no customary or treaty international law expressing standardized definition of WMD. This paper reflects on Bioterrorism as part of WMP.
Main Body
Bioterrorism background and Literature Review
Bioterrorism refers to dissemination or release of biological agents, and it happens intentionally as part of mass destruction. Agents of bioterrorism identifies with viruses, bacteria or toxins which are released in human modified forms or in the naturally occurring forms. According to CDC (United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), bioterrorism is a deliberate release of harmful agents in ways that they cause illness to plants, people and to animals (Furlow, 2003). The agents in the original setup are in the nature; bioterrorism rogue researchers alter and mutate the agents in ways that have capability of causing diseases to human beings, resistance to medicines and display high capability of multiplying in the target environment.
Surveys have indicated that biological agents can be spread through food, air and water. Terrorists use biological agents in causing human suffering in the target area. Bioterrorism cause widespread panic and fear among the public, which extends to beyond the possible damage that the biological agents can cause (Furlow, 2003). Leaders in the military have been sensitive in developing mechanisms of countering bioterrorism. Bioterrorism affects the whole population, without discriminating subset of the population. Bioterrorism has been successful in spreading mass disruption and panic (Gerstein, 2009). An example of a weapon that can cause mass destruction to the economy but not to humans is the FMD (Foot and Mouth Disease).
United States Department of Agriculture or United States Department of Health and Human Services has indicated that bioterrorism have the potential of inflicting mass threat to safety and health of the human beings (Furlow, 2003). Category A of the bio-agents identifies with Tularemia, Anthrax, Small pox, Botulinum toxin, Bubonic plague and Viral hemorrhagic fevers. Category B identify with Brucellosis, Epsilon toxin, Glanders, food safety threats, Psittacosis, Meliodosis, Ricin, Q fever, Abrin, staphylococcal, Viral encephalitis, Tyhus and water supply threats. Category C of the bio-agents identify with Nipah virus, HIV/AIDS, Hantavirus, H1N1 and SARS.
Problem regarding WMD in United States
Detecting WMD is not easy and authorities in the United States have been concerned on addressing the issue by developing diverse mechanisms of detecting bioterrorism (Mauroni, 2010). Strategies used in biological defense are developed in ways that they even protect the soldiers at the battlefields, although little control mechanisms has been directed at the ordinary individuals in the streets. Tracking of diseases outbreaks is expensive and time involving, hence has hampered preparedness efforts at the desired levels and standards. There are a number of natural origins in disease outbreaks and could easily be mistaken for bioterrorism. An example is the food poising due to Salmonella or E. Coli (Furlow, 2003).
Obtaining of biological agents are easily available, United States is threatened by bioterrorism, a model that has prompted laboratories in the United States to develop advanced detection systems of the biological agents, which act in identifying the risk factors, sending early warnings, identifying populations that are facing the risk and in facilitating mitigation factors in curbing the problem (Tucker, 2007). Major cities are at risk of bioterrorism, Pittsburgh city in Pennsylvania State in the United States has developed an emergence response plan.
Emergency Response Plan, Resources, Hospitals and Locations
University of Pittsburgh is located in Pittsburgh city and has responded to the threats of bioterrorism. The University is engaging research and design and forensic technologies in developing the best emergency response plan in the State and in the United States at large. Advancement in the forensic technologies is believed to contribute significantly to identification of the geographical origins of the bioterrorism, biological agents and the intention of the bioterrorism. University of Pittsburgh is concerned on developing decontamination technologies in possible attacks of bioterrorism and restoring the systems to normal operations without causing harm to the environment (Guillemin, 2006).
Scientist in University of Pittsburgh have argued that rapid response and early detection of the bioterrorism is critical and is facilitated by the active collaboration of the law enforcement authorities, public health authorities and the general public; there are arguments that national vaccine stockpiles and detection assets are not accessible to the State and local officials.
University of Pittsburgh initiated research on bioterrorism in 1999, with Center for Biomedical Informatics engaging bioterrorism detection system that was automated by the name Real Time Outbreak Disease Surveillance (RODs). RODs use information from various sources, which are directed at the signal detection of any threats in the environment; the gadget is believed to be effective in detecting cases of bioterrorism at the earliest time possible. Information is gathered from data sources within the clinics, laboratories and sales over the counter of drugs. The project collects live data and analysis it in making viable conclusions.
University of Pittsburgh has collaborated with the hospitals within the State and in the nation in managing possibilities of bioterrorism; which is critical in biosurveillance. RODs is connected to the National Retail Data monitors that gathers relevant information from all over the United States. George W. Bush was impressed by RODs in mitigating bioterrorism basing on the advanced systems of biosurveillance systems. RODs is compared to DEW which acts as the early warning signs for Cold War ballistic missile.
University of Pittsburgh has collaborated with University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), Veterans Administration Pittsburgh Health System, West Penn Allegheny Health System, Allegheny Cancer Center and Pittsburgh’s Ohio’s Valley General Hospital among others. Practices and principles of biosurveillance addresses both man made epidemics commonly referred to as the bioterrorism and also on the natural epidemics (Reich, 2008). RODs make use of the computer systems at the hospitals, electronic health record systems (EMRs), clinical laboratories data, record keeping systems at the medical examiners desks, call centers from 911 on related calls, veterinary medical records, feedlot data, ranching data, drinking water systems data, food processors data, physiologic data, school and attendance monitors data among others.
Advancement of technology has led to development of fiber optic tubes and electronic gadgets that detect abnormal antibodies and living nerve cells which are common with bacterial toxins and specific pathogens like ricin, anthrax and botulinum among others. Ultraviolent avalanche photodiodes technology is used in detecting bioterrorism agents in the air such as anthrax. Department of Defense in the United States has taken up the issue of bioterrorism seriously to an extent that it is surveying the whole world through diverse programs including Response System and Global Emerging infections Surveillance (Reich, 2008).
Impacts of bioterrorism on the emergency response system
In an event of bioterrorism, there are agencies ready to advance on the threats or incidences; the government agencies identify with emergency medical units, law enforcement agencies and hazardous materials and decontamination units among other agencies (Mercer, 2011). Military in the United States has developed special units in curbing the threats and incidences related to the bioterrorism. Among the special forces are the CBRNE and Marine Corp’s Chemical Biological Incident Response Force among others (Alexander & Klein, 2006). The specialized agencies are trained in identifying, detecting, decontaminating victims and in neutralizing threats which are caused by the bioterrorism agents; CDC and World Health Organization (WHO) are also part of the response teams.
Training and education
Terrorism in the world is not a new phenomenon, it has been in existence for decades and centuries, but in the twenty first century, there has been increased rates of terrorism to an extent that educational facilities and security agents have developed criminology as a course in advancing the skills of the security authorities in the United States and beyond (Coleman & Willis, 2003). In the recent past, terrorism has been characterized with high levels of destruction, carnage and instilling fear among the public. Terrorism is part of the larger psychological warfare (Coleman & Willis, 2003), and the general public in the United States has been sensitized in addressing threats and advances of bioterrorism.
Preparedness
United States to some extent is prepared in dealing with bioterrorism; an example is the Ricin letters that were sent to the president Obama in April 2013, where Shannon Richardson was interdicted in sending the ricin infested letters. Ricin is a highly toxic form of protein that was detected at off-site mail facility at the United States capitol in Washington D.C. The ricin infested letters were addressed to Roger Wicker who was the Republican senator at Mississippi and also at the Barrack Obama who is the president of the United States. Both of the letters originated from Memphis, Tennessee. A third letter was directed at Sadie Holland who was a judge at the Lee county in Mississippi. FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigations) tested the three letters as infested with ricin (Mercer, 2011). It can be argued that United States is highly prepared in dealing with bioterrorism in and across the borders of the nation.
Problems with response
The problems with bioterrorism in the United States is based on the uncoordinated response of the security agents and other authorities involved. An example of the uncoordinated events in the United States is on September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks (Coleman & Willis, 2003). Security agencies were unawares on how the terrorists managed to plan and execute the hijackings of the airplanes without the slightest knowledge of intelligence agencies. In the same concept, uncoordinated efforts by different authorities could leak bioterrorism in the United States unnoticed.
Consequences of bioterrorism attacks
Bioterrorism attacks cause massive panic among the target population, terrorism attacks will contribute to lost financial markets, economy and in the global economic outlook (Coleman & Willis, 2003). Major effects identify with a push to recession, fixed income markets, growing risk associated with risk aversion, mixed reactions to investors, negative influence on policies, diverse policies on insurance liability, variations in defense spending and reconstruction.
Future implications of bioterrorism
The world is facing global changes, an indication that risks associated with bioterrorism are on the rise. It is the high time that United States develops diverse mechanism of addressing this challenge (Tucker, 2007). President Obama of the United States has been concerned on bioterrorism to an extent that he formed ‘National Strategy to Counter Biological Threats’, with the mandates detecting and combating diseases in the United States and across the borders. There are high possibilities that the future will be characterized with diverse bioterrorism agents (Ryan & Glarum, 2008).
Recommendations and suggestions in improving preparedness in the US
There is a need of strengthening the national strategy dealing with bioterrorism, in the sense that new methods of bioterrorism are evolving. If the government is reluctant on the issue, there are high chances that an attack will occur while the nation is unaware like it happened in September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks by the Al Qaeda; the second recommendation focus at sensitizing the public on ways of dealing with bioterrorism (Coleman & Willis, 2003).
Conclusion
Bioterrorism is facing changes with globalization and socialization, an indication that authorities in the United States dealing with the threats must update its systems with the global changes. Global war on terrorism has generated diverse debates on the issue. Terrorism is a global war and affects all nations; fighting terrorism needs different nations in handling the problem (Coleman & Willis, 2003). Terrorism groups like Al-Qaeda and the like are ever planning on how to attack target nations, United States being the greatest culprit.
References
Alexander, D. & Klein, S. (2006). The challenge of preparation for a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear terrorist attack . Journal of Postgraduate Medicine , 07-67.
Coleman, E. & Willis, D. (2003). The dirty bomb: management of victims Of radiological weapons . MedSurg Nursing , 397.
Furlow, B. (2003). Biological, chemical and radiological terrorism. Radiologic Technology , 91-102.
Gerstein, D. M. (2009). Bioterror in the 21st Century: Emerging Threats in a New Global Environment . Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press.
Guillemin, J. (2006). Biological Weapons: From the Invention of State-Sponsored Programs to Contemporary Bioterrorism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Mauroni, A. J. (2010). A counter-WMD strategy for the future . Parameters , 58.
Mercer, J. C. (2011). Federal response to a domestic nuclear attack. Air Force Journal of Logistics , 52.
Reich, W. (2008). Origins of Terrorism: Psychologies, Ideologies, Theologies, States of Mind. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
Ryan, J. & Glarum, J. (2008). Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Containing and Preventing Biological Threats . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Tucker, J. (2007). War of Nerves: Chemical Warfare from World War I to Al-Qaeda. New York: Anchor.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|