Biosecurity itself is more than a buzzword; it is the vital work of strategy, efforts, and planning to protect human, animal, and environmental health against biological threats. The primary goal of biosecurity is to protect against the risk posed by disease and organisms; the primary tools of biosecurity are exclusion, eradication, and control, supported by expert system management, practical protocols, and the rapid and efficient securing and sharing of vital information. Biosecurity is therefore the sum of risk management practices in defense against biological threats. (NASDA 2001, p. 1) The events of September 11 and subsequent anthrax assaults have made US policymakers and the public more aware of our vulnerability to organisms released with the intent to cause significant harm. Such acts are generally labeled “bioterrorism,” which has been defined as “the threat or use of biological agents [to cause harm] by individuals or groups motivated by political, religious, ecological, or other ideological objectives” (Carus 2001, p. 3). Bioterrorism differs from other forms of terrorism in three important ways: (1) In addition to intimidation of governments and societies, mass destruction of life (humans, animals, or plants) is a major goal; (2) the onset of an attack may not be readily apparent until the biological agent has spread significantly (among populations or species), depending on the length of incubation periods and detection of visible symptoms; and (3) it may be impossible to establish whether release of the organisms was intentional, in large part because sources and vectors of biological agents, such as wind-borne diseases or food contaminants, can be extremely hard to trace (Chyba 1998, Casagrande 2000, Carus 2001). This last point (i.e., difficulty in establishing intentionality) could prove to be particularly true of bioterrorist acts launched in natural systems, with the ultimate intent that biological agents will spread to livestock, crops, or humans.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meyerson et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: