A New Model of Bioterrorism Risk - Annotated Bibliography Example

Annotated Bibliography March, An Annotated Bibliography Atlas, R.M. (2005). Biodefense research: an emerging conundrum.Current Opinion in Biotechnology.16, 239–242. DOI:10.1016/j.copbio.2005.04.009 The article was authored by one of the well-known, reputable Microbiologist, Ronald M. Atlas, PhD “who was conferred with the DSc (honoris causa) from the University of Guelph; a fellow in the American Academy of Microbiology, a recipient of the ASM Award for Applied and Environmental Microbiology and was claimed pioneer in the field of petroleum bioremediation” (Biographical Sketch, n.d.). The said article was purposely written to inform the scientific community of the brewing conundrum in biodefense research regarding “the issue on “dual-use dilemma” meaning legitimate scientific research can be misused for bioterroism and biowarfare “ (Atlas, p. 239). What must be done? It presses for a strategic plan to define the “boundaries or limits among scientists and laboratory workers of what are considered safe and ethical” (Atlas, 2005, p. 241). Finally, the author concludes that it would still be the “fiduciary responsibility of the scientific community to live up to protect the public against the looming threat of bioterrorism”(p.241). This complements “A New Model of Bioterrorism Risk Assessment”(2009) by V. Radosavljevic and G. Belojevic because it suggests to define the limits and boundaries for what is safe and ethical that will suffice the latter’s framework for bioterrorism risk assessment. Rambhia, K. J. & Gronvall, G. K. (2009). Science for Policymakers: Antibiotic Resistance. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Stratety, Practice and Science,7(4), 371-377. DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2009.1105 This article was purposely to explain to the scientific community “the importance of antibiotic to man’s health and to national security, the nature of bacteria and what steps should be done now so that antibiotics will be made available to save lives in the future” (Rambhia & Gronvall, 2009, p.371). One should be confident about this article because Rambhia and Gronvall are Senior Analyst and Senior Associate, respectively at the Center for BioSecurity of UPMC whose expertise cover “biotechnology, health care preparedness and pandemic influenza (for Rambhia) while Gronvall addresses the role and responsibility of scientists in biodefense: how they should diminish the threat of biological weapons and contribute to an effective technical response against biological weapon or natural epidemic” (p.371). This article becomes significant because it explains not only the nature of antibiotics but also reveals that “antibiotics are the only line of defense against the bacteria that cause plague, tularemia or if faced by a biological warfare. Thus, the authors suggest that the long term strategy is to develop new classes antibiotics that are effective against wide range of bacteria called the broad-spectrum antibiotics …” (p.375), a substantial input to complete its advocacy. Radosavljevic, V., & Belojevic, G. (2009). Commentary. A New Model of Bioterrorism Risk Assessment. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism. Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science 7 (4), 443-451.DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2009.0016. According to the authors Radosavljevic and Belojevic (2009), “in the postmodern or super terrorism, the aim is to maximize the number of casualties”(p. 445). Accordingly, “there are 3 types of biological attacks identified according to their scope, severity and consequences: strategic, operational and tactical” (p. 447). In this light, this article was purposely written to present a viable Bioterrorism risk assessment framework aimed at improving the preparedness of the national biodefense in the event of any future bioterrorist attacks. It also explains its proposed framework in terms of its components, how it will work and is primarily addressed to policy makers such as those in the U.S. Department of Home and Security and other higher echelons of national security whom the authors hope will promulgate policies to use their proposed framework in order to reduce the risk and impact of any future bioterrorist attack. This article shares the same advocacies with other articles in this annotated bibliography but differ only in their featured emphasis and methodologies. “Dr. Vladan Radosavljevic is with the Military Institute of Preventive Medicine while Dr. Goran Belojevic is from the Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade and Institute of Hygiene and Medical Ecology, Belgrade, Serbia”( p.443). Nicogossian, A., Metscher, K. N., Zimmerman, T.; Hanfling, D. and Wise, R. (2007) "Community Training in Bioterror Response," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management: 4: (3) Art. 10. DOI: 10.2202/1547-7355.1349. This article distinctively presents a new format, agenda, methodology and new point of focus which now involves the community. Comparatively, the other articles earlier cited were focused on the guidelines, mechanics and strategies of a mechanism or material of the biosecurity and biodefense. This time it involves the piloting of a community as the recipient-targets of the training intervention and preparation for an effective bioterrorist response. “Results of the survey reveal that the public remains unprepared to defend against and respond to bioterrorism” (Nicogossian, et. al. 2007). “This is striking considering the population surveyed in this community constitutes a well-educated group”(p.10). This article has also identified “the impediments to the citizens’ involvement in emergency response scenarios to include: the lack of health literacy, inferior, modes and methods of communication, and insufficient outreach to both the general populace and specialized sub-groups” (pp.10-11). After learning what the obstacles are, it is expected that the results of the study will further serve as inputs to improve the “current outreach system of information and training”(p.11). “These activities have been sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Urban Area Security Initiative grant #03-TU-03 under the direction of the Senior Policy Group of the NCR”(Abstract). Holmes, B. J. (2008). Communicating about emerging infectious disease: The importance of research. Health, Risk & Society. 10(4), 349–360 This article delves on the importance of research as support in communicating emerging infectious disease. The article was written by Bev Holmes, PhD , MA now a teacher at the School of Population and Public Health and Heads the Communications & Knowledge Exchange, Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research. It was cited that “Communication plays a vital role in an outbreak” (Holmes, Abstract). But study shows that there still remains inadequacy in the literature of the emerging infectious disease. Minimal attention is given to “how different groups react to the idea that there is more to communication than the intentional transfer of information.” (Holmes, Abstract) “Towards advocating for broadened scope for emerging infectious disease communications research, this article presents its review on the existing emerging infectious disease communications literature, and highlights some of the gaps, discusses risk communication theories, concepts and literature that could broaden emerging infectious disease communications research and open doors to new endeavors in a research agenda” (Holmes, 2008, p.351). This article is primarily addressed to the health experts, the community and government in charge of health care. What this article wants to achieve is to bring awareness that will deem “a change in attitude from emergency responsiveness to preventive preparedness” (p. 357). Works Cited Biographical Sketch (n.d.) [Web blog]. Retrieved on from http://www.biojobblog.com/uploads/file/ron%20atlas.pdf School of Population and Publication. (n.d.). Bev J Holmes, Adjunct Professor. Retrieved from http://www.spph.ubc.ca/?p2=/modules/hce/faculties/faculty.jsp&fId=288 Read More