Jump to content

Bioterrorism Should we be worried ?


humble3d

Recommended Posts

Bioterrorism:  Should we be worried ?


GASMASKPEOPLE.jpg

 


Fact checked by Jasmin Collier    


"Biological weapons." The phrase alone could send chills down the spine.


But what are they?

 

How do they work? And are we really at risk? In this Spotlight, we survey

their history and potential future.

 

Biological warfare has been used for thousands of years.

 

Sometimes known as "germ warfare," biological weapons involve the use of

toxins or infectious agents that are biological in origin. This can include

bacteria, viruses, or fungi.

 

These agents are used to incapacitate or kill humans, animals, or plants as

part of a war effort.

 

In effect, biological warfare is using non-human life to disrupt — or end —

human life. Because living organisms can be unpredictable and incredibly

resilient, biological weapons are difficult to control, potentially

devastating on a global scale, and prohibited globally under numerous

treaties.

 

Of course, treaties and international laws are one thing — and humanity's

ability to find innovative ways of killing each other is another.

 


Biological warfare: The early days

 

The history of biological warfare is a long one, which makes sense; its

deployment can be a lo-fi affair, so there is no need for electrical

components, nuclear fusion, or rocket grade titanium, for instance.

 

An early example takes us back more than 2 and a half millennia: Assyrians

infected their enemy's wells with a rye ergot fungus, which contains

chemicals related to LSD.

 

 

Consuming the tainted water produced a confused

mental state, hallucinations, and, in some cases, death.

 

In the 1300s, Tartar (Mongol) warriors besieged the Crimean city of Kaffa.

During the siege, many Tartars died at the hands of plague, and their

lifeless, infected bodies were hurled over the city walls.

 

Some researchers believe that this tactic may have been responsible for the

spread of Black Death plague into Europe.

 

 

If so, this early use of biological warfare caused the eventual deaths of around 25 million

Europeans.

 

This is a prime example of biological warfare's potential scope,

unpredictability, and terrifying simplicity.

 

Moving forward to 1763, the British Army attmped to use smallpox as a weapon

against Native Americans at the Siege of Fort Pitt.

 

 

In an attempt to spread the disease to the locals, the Brits presented blankets from a smallpox

hospital as gifts.

 

Although we now know that this would be a relatively ineffective way to

transmit smallpox, the intent was there.

 

During World War II, many of the parties involved looked into biological

warfare with great interest.

 

 

The Allies built facilities capable of mass

producing anthrax spores, brucellosis, and botulism toxins. Thankfully, the

war ended before they were used.

 

 

It was the Japanese who made the most use of biological weapons during World

War II, as among other terrifyingly indiscriminate attacks, the Japanese

Army Air Force dropped ceramic bombs full of fleas carrying the bubonic

plague on Ningbo, China.

 

 

The following quote comes from a paper on the history of biological warfare.

 

    "[T]he Japanese army poisoned more than 1,000 water wells in Chinese

villages to study cholera and typhus outbreaks. [...] Some of the epidemics

they caused persisted for years and continued to kill more than 30,000

people in 1947, long after the Japanese had surrendered."


    Dr. Friedrich Frischknecht, professor of integrative parasitology,

Heidelberg University, Germany


Bioterrorism: Modern concerns


The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) define bioterrorism as

"the intentional release of viruses, bacteria, or other germs that can

sicken or kill people, livestock, or crops."


Bioterrorism incident


How likely is a bioterrorism attack today?

 

This can be achieved in a number of ways, such as: via aerosol sprays; in

explosive devices; via food or water; or absorbed or injected into skin.

 

Because some pathogens are less robust than others, the type of pathogen

used will define how it can be deployed.

 

Utilizing such weapons holds a certain appeal to terrorists; they have the

potential to cause great harm, of course, but they are also fairly cheap to

produce when compared with missiles or other more hi-tech equipment.

 

Also, they can be "detonated," and, due to the long time that it takes for

them to spread and take effect, there is plenty of time for the perpetrator

to escape undetected.

 

Biological weapons can be difficult to control or predict in a battlefield

situation, since there is a substantial risk that troops on both sides will

be affected. However, if a terrorist is interested in attacking a distant

target as a lone operant, bioterrorism carries much less risk to the person.
Anthrax

 

Experts believe that today, the most likely organism to be used in a

bioterrorism attack would be Bacillus anthracis, the bacteria that causes

anthrax.

 

It is widely found in nature, easily produced in the laboratory, and

survives for a long time in the environment.

 

 

Also, it is versatile and can be released in powders, sprays, water, or food.

 

Anthrax has been used before. In 2001, anthrax spores were sent through the

United States postal system. In all, 22 people contracted anthrax — five of

whom died. 

 

And, the guilty party was never caught.

 


Smallpox


Another potential agent of bioterrorism is smallpox, which, unlike anthrax,

can spread from person to person.


Smallpox is no longer a disease of concern in the natural world — because

concerted vaccination efforts stamped it out — and the last naturally spread

case occurred in 1977.


However, if someone were to gain access to the smallpox virus (it is still

kept in two laboratories — one in the U.S. and one in Russia), it could be

an effective weapon, spreading quickly and easily between people.

 

Plague


We have already mentioned the Tartars' use of the plague, Yersinia pestis,

hundreds of years ago, but some believe that it could be used in the modern

world, too. Y. pestis is passed to humans through the bite of a flea that

has fed on infected rodents.

 

Once a human is infected, the resulting disease can either develop into

bubonic plague, which is difficult to transmit among humans and fairly easy

to treat with antibiotics, or — if the infection spreads to the lungs — it

becomes pneumonic plague, which develops rapidly and does not respond well

to antibiotics.

 

A paper written on the plague and its potential for use in biological

terrorism says:

 

    "Given the presence and availability of plague around the world, the

capacity for mass production and aerosol dissemination, the high fatality

rate of pneumonic plague, and the potential for rapid secondary spread, the

potential use of plague as a biological weapon is of great concern."

 

    Dr. Stefan Riedel, Department of Pathology, Baylor University Medical

Center, Dallas, TX

 

Cholera

As a potentially severe and sometimes deadly gastrointestinal disease,

cholera has the potential to be used in bioterrorism.

 

 

It does not spread easily from person to person, so for it to be effective,

it would need to be liberally added to a major water source.

 

In the past, the bacteria responsible for cholera, Vibrio cholerae, has been

weaponized by the U.S., Japan, South Africa, and Iraq, among others.

 

Tularemia

 

Some consider tularemia, an infection caused by the Francisella tularensis

bacterium, as a potential bioweapon. It causes fever, ulcerations, swelling

of lymph glands, and, sometimes, pneumonia.

 

 

The bacterium can cause infection by entering through breaks in the skin or

by being breathed into the lungs.

 

It is particularly infectious, and only a

very small number of organisms (as few as 10) need to enter the body to set

off a serious bout of tularemia.

 

Studied by the Japanese during World War II and stockpiled by the U.S. in

the 1960s, F. tularensis is hardy, capable of withstanding low temperatures

in water, hay, decaying carcasses, and moist soil for many weeks.

 

According to the Johns Hopkins Center for Public Health Preparedness,

"Aerosol dissemination of F. tularensis in a populated area would be

expected to result in the abrupt onset of large numbers of cases of acute,

non-specific, febrile illness beginning 3 to 5 days later [...], with

pleuropneumonitis developing in a significant proportion of cases."

 

"Without antibiotic treatment, the clinical course could progress to

respiratory failure, shock, and death."

 

Those pathogens are an abbreviated selection, of course. Others considered

to have potential as biological weapons include brucellosis, Q fever,

monkeypox, arboviral encephalitides, viral hemorrhagic fevers, and

staphylococcal enterotoxin B.


A worrying future?


Although biological weapons are as old as the hills (if not older), modern

technology brings new worries. Some experts are concerned about recent

advances in gene editing technology.

 

Could gene editing become the bioterrorist's tool of choice?

 

When utilized for good, the latest tools can work wonders. However — as with

most cutting-edge technology — there is always the potential for misuse.

 

A gene editing technology called CRISPR has set off alarm bells in the

defense community; the technology allows researchers to edit genomes,

thereby easily modifying DNA sequences to alter gene function.

 

In the right hands, this tool has the potential to correct genetic defects

and treat disease. In the wrong hands, however, it has the potential for

evil.

 

CRISPR technology is becoming cheaper to run and therefore more accessible

to individuals bent on bioterrorism.

 

A report titled Worldwide Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence

Community, written by James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence,

was published in February 2016. In it, gene editing features in a list of

weapons of mass destruction and proliferation.

 

"Given the broad distribution, low cost, and accelerated pace of development

of this dual-use technology," he explains, "its deliberate or unintentional

misuse might lead to far-reaching economic and national security

implications."

 

"Advances in genome editing in 2015," he continues, "have compelled groups

of high-profile U.S. and European biologists to question unregulated editing

of the human germline (cells that are relevant for reproduction), which

might create inheritable genetic changes."

 

With future generations of CRISPR-like technology and an advanced knowledge

of genetics, there would be no theoretical end to the misery that could be

caused. There's potential to create drug-resistant strains of diseases, for

instance, or pesticide-protected bugs, capable of wiping out a country's

staple crop.

 

For now, however, other methods of bioterrorism are much easier and closer

to hand, so this is likely to be of little concern for the foreseeable

future.

 

In fact, to lighten the mood at the end of a somewhat heavy article, just

remember that anyone who lives in the U.S. today is much more likely to be

killed in an animal attack than a terrorist attack — biological or

otherwise.


 

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321030.php?
utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Medical_News_Today_TrendMD_1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...