The New Battlefield in our City Streets:
The Epidemiology of Biological Terrorism in the US
and some thoughts on the way ahead
David R. Franz
The last 60-70 years of the
twentieth century might be called the modern era of biological warfare's During this period, nation states developed
biological weapons to be used on a far-away European battlefield Even after ratification of the Biological Weapons
Convention of 1972, the most impressive BW program in the history of mankind
continued for 20 years, effectively cloaked in secrecy's Yet between 1970 and 1990, little thought was
given to the possibility of a biological warfare or biological terrorist attack
on US cities Funding for biological
defense in the US was minimal and most of the federal government was oblivious
about the threat
In fiscal year 2000, the US
government has committed more than $1.5 billion to military biodefense and
another $1 billion to domestic preparedness for biological attack What happened In 1991, the US decisively engaged the Iraqi force, demonstrating
vast conventional technical superiority while the world watched on CANN Shortly thereafter, with economic implosion
in the Former Soviet Union, our concern turned to the fate of tens of thousands
of Russian scientists and engineers who had developed an impressive program which
may never be surpassed in scale or offensive capability We feared that lesser nations might turn to
now jobless Russian bioweaponeers for help in building their great equalizer.
All this occurred with a backdrop of increasing evidence that the dual-use
nature of bioweapons programs might make treaties unverifiable.
Here at home, the equally dual-use biotechnological revolution screamed
forward while novels imprinted the horror of bioterrorism on our minds and
experts proclaimed that there are no technical solutions What can we do?
There is no silver bullet
Our best deterrent and response to the unknowns of bioterrorism must
be a broadly integrated defense founded on a deep and sustained biotechnical
base The solution does not lie in
procurement of things: safety equipment, clothing or gadgets for fire services
or police If preparation for chemical terrorism is HAZMAT equipment, treatment
in the streets and a cordoned-off crime scene; preparation for biological
terrorism is education, a robust public health system and broad interagency collaboration
The integrated system
must include intelligence and forensics, the means and the will to retaliate,
medical and physical countermeasures and a strong public health infrastructure,
all bound by vigorous interagency collaboration and effective educational programs
We face a very complex problem;
one of low-probability, but potentially high-impact
Calling for a Manhattan Project may actually be under-response.
What must we do?
1.
Technological base: We believe that we understand the relative limits of nuclear physics
and chemistry, but we do not understand the limits of biology---for good (medicine)
or evil (biowarfare).Ý The future biological
warfare or terrorism threat is relatively unknown; therefore, it will be difficult,
especially in the medical arena, to prepare specific countermeasures for all
threats We must be capable of responding
quickly and effectively to the unknown; therefore, our technical base
must be deep and broad There is not a military-industrial complex for biological defense
as there was for our nuclear weapons and energy programs We must strengthen our military tech-base for
threat evaluation, pathogenesis and specific medical countermeasures research
We must expand and leverage non-military government public health research,
especially in the areas of immunology, diagnostics and drug development
We must increase our support to academic research and partner with
industry for advanced development and production of orphan vaccines and antiviral
drugs All of these efforts will provide
more spin-off application to public health than we typically expect from defense
research Finally, we must demonstrate
that we are in this battle for the long term.
2.
Intelligence Intelligence for bioterrorism
is extremely difficult because of the dual-use nature and minimal signature
of the weapons programs Facilities,
equipment and human resources for the R&D and production of biological
agents are not unique Even weaponization
and dissemination---especially for the terrorist---can be done with equipment
from legitimate industry Precursors
are not unique and signatures are non-specific, rapidly diluted or destroyed
in the environment or nonexistent Maintaining
quality expertise in our intelligence analyst corps is proving difficult because
of competition from industry for our best young scientists and the mundane
aspects of the analyst's job On the
other hand, the new openness fostered by information technologies and the
spread of free enterprise biotech throughout the world offer new options for
information mining We must not only
use these technologies to better understand the threat worldwide, but to better
use human sources which are more plentiful in the era of increased mobility.
3.
Forensics capability: While diagnostic capabilities are paramount in responding
medically to an attack, attribution following bioterrorist attack will require
exquisite forensics capabilities We
must be capable of quickly dissecting an organism at the molecular level
More importantly, people who are familiar with the epidemiology and
laboratory characteristics of strains and isolates from around the world,
and who work with these agents daily, must do this work
Obtaining the complete genetic fingerprint of an agent used in a biological
attack will never be as good in the world court as matching rifling marks
on a bullet with the criminal's firearm, but without this information we won't
have a clue Even in preparation, what we learn about the
genomes of the biological agents of concern will have application in basic
science and public health.
4.
The will to retaliate: The way we respond to the first use of biological
agents against our citizens, even if it is not a mass-casualty event, will
likely set the general course for our future interplay with the biological terrorist
The Israeli model for defense
against airline hijacking---granted a less complex problem than we face here---has
proven effective: vigilant, integrated, uncompromising and swift
We must take the most extreme measures against known proliferators
and users of biology to harm our citizens; their clear understanding of our
resolve will serve as a deterrent.
5.
Medical countermeasures: Protecting civilians from bioterrorism is more difficult
than protecting a military force For
the force, we can use 1) active immunization for some agents, 2) passive immunoprophylaxis
and chemoprophylaxis for others, 3) battlefield detection systems, 4) physical
protection (masks), 5) identification and diagnostic tools and methods, 6)
decontamination procedures, 7) passive immunotherapy and 8) chemotherapy
For an attack on our citizens, our useful countermeasures begin with
identification and diagnostics and essentially end with chemotherapy.
Identification of the agent
used in an attack is of critical importance Without this, rational post-exposure prophylaxis will be
futile Diagnostic capabilities must be ready in the
field, throughout a network of hospital and government clinical laboratories
and in key national reference laboratories. Classical and molecular methods
must be known and validated. Triage may be critical to success in therapy
of the right subpopulation Humans
exposed, even to replicating agents, will not have measurable amounts of the
agent in their blood or serum for several days at the earliest, nor will they
have a measurable immune response Yet,
humans---or domestic animals---may be the only sentinels at the site of the
aerosol attack Therefore, methods
of preclinical diagnosis must be developed.
We must consider stockpiling
antibiotics effective against anthrax, pneumonic plague and tularemia Today, neither antiviral drugs for smallpox
nor vaccines for the two agents----smallpox and anthrax---for which they might
be needed post-attack, are available in sufficient quantities to allow stockpiling.
We must leverage industry and academic research for antiviral drugs,
which target selected threat agent active sites
We must develop adequate stocks of anthrax and smallpox vaccine
Most experts believe that ventilators are likely to be in short supply
after an attack on a city, with certain of the most lethal classical agents
We must also prepare for rapid acquisition of necessary equipment and
hospital bed space in an emergency Finally, we must consider and prepare for the
potential psychological impact of a biological attack on our primed society.
6.
Physical countermeasures: Fewer physical countermeasure options exist for the
civilian population than for the military force At present, technological hurdles (cost, logistical requirements,
narrow spectrum and high false-positive rates) prevent the widespread application
of sensor technologies for biological terrorism Without timely warning, protective masks seem
to have little utility However, some
experts advocate the development of a simple, inexpensive bio-only mask
to be carried in automobile, briefcase or purse To date, this concept falls below the threshold set by the balance
between perceived risk and benefit to the population Collective protection by modification of HVAC
systems in critical public buildings may have utility Decontamination of patients, buildings and
environmental areas must be considered It
is believed that decontamination following a biological event is less important
than following a chemical attack The
true aerosol that is required for effective dissemination of a non-volatile
biological agent might leave little residual, except around the area of detonation
That agent which is deposited is thought to be poorly reaerosolized
and subject to inactivation by environmental factors, especially ultra-violet
light.
7.
Public health infrastructure: Strengthening our public health infrastructure should
be at the forefront as we prepare for bioterrorism. Effective surveillance
programs, improving the laboratory capabilities at state and local levels,
teaching and practicing public health and epidemiology, enhanced communications
and health threat response systems are all dual-use functions. Not only do
they prepare us to better respond to a man-made outbreak but to a naturally
occurring one as well The current
initiative supported by the Public Health and Social Services Emergency Fund
for FY2000 is an important start As
with our biomedical tech base and intelligence programs for biodefense, we
must think long-term in supporting our public health infrastructure
It will be cost effective.
8.
Interagency collaboration: Preparing to respond to biological terrorism must
involve intelligence, law enforcement and other traditional first responders,
clinical and research medical communities, public health, political leadership
and the military It must involve
national, state, regional and local organizations, agencies and officials As the perceived threat has mounted and the
federal government has responded with funds, bioterrorism defense has become
a growth industry. Yet, no single office with the necessary authority has
clearly taken the lead, either within the Department of Defense or the federal
government Therefore, interagency
collaboration has become even more important
Vertical (local through national) and horizontal (across all disciplines)
communication and willingness to collaborate are imperative Excellent leadership facilitates necessary
collaboration.
9.
Educational programs: Education and training must be given the highest priority
The fundamentals of what is needed in a hospital or medical center
facing a spike in the patient load following an attack is application of the
standard principles of medicine with which the professional and support staffs
are already intimately familiar But our health-care providers have not seen
the diseases caused by many of the threat agents Education and training must include the general characteristics
of biological agents versus chemical agents; clinical presentation, diagnosis,
prophylaxis and therapy of the most important diseases; sample handling, decontamination
and barrier patient care Training,
planning and drills must prepare physicians and staff for mass-casualty patient
management, respiratory support for unusual numbers of patients, distribution
of medications or support of the local government in vaccination programs
Engineering staffs must be taught to establish improvised containment
in patient rooms or suites. Traditional first-responders and public and military
leaders must understand rather complex technical and biological issues in
order to effectively balance cost and benefit in preparation and response.
Application of the knowledge we already have though education may be the least
expensive and the most important thing we can do as we prepare.
10.
Complementary programs: In addition to the obvious
domestic preparedness initiatives needed, we must be prepared through the
military or law enforcement to destroy biological weapons whether deployed
or in storage We must have the means
to neutralize facilities wherever they are found
We must seek and support international law that would bring proliferators
to justice. We must seek to enhance
communication between scientists internationally, through cooperative threat
reduction programs with states that might threaten us; there are significant
risks inherent in these programs, but there are huge potential payoffs as
well.
11.
New Technologies: We must exploit to the fullest, the phenomenal advances in both biotechnologies
and the cyber- and communication technologies that have occurred in parallel
with the changing biological terrorist threat Genomics and proteomics are revolutionizing
diagnostics, vaccine development and drug discovery These have obvious and wide application for biodefense. Telemedicine, robotics, virtual reality and
simulation, nanotechnology and the Internet and wireless communications must
be used to replace or augment human capabilities and allow us to respond more
quickly when lives are threatened If
we keep the pressure on those who would use these breakthroughs for evil---taking
away their freedom through effective intelligence programs and law enforcement---we
will be more likely to stay steps ahead as we use the technologies for good,
and provide an additional deterrent to the threat.
Bioterrorism presents a daunting
problem to our free society, especially at the unique intersection of politics
and biotechnology that occurred during the last decade of the 20th
century We may have been lulled by
our prosperity and strategic isolation from major conflict into a sense of invulnerability.
However, we are
vulnerable today and there is no reason to believe that will change in the
near future We must carefully evaluate
the real threat, make the hard cost-benefit decisions and continue to build
a fully integrated defense against the distortion of biology by those who
would do us harm.