This article discusses how organizations can respond to and mitigate the effects of public health disasters. They discuss different responses to past crises and how past crises are different than those that have been presenting themselves in the modern era.
On "researchgate.net" there are 28 separate citations of this article. They consist of a range of articles mostly dealing with the subject of biosecurity. I could not find any references that weren't on researchgate.
There was not a bibliography in this report.
The authors are Stephen Collier, PhD and Andrew Lakoff, PhD. Dr, Collier is an associate professor of international affairs at UC Berkeley. He is an anthropologist by training, and focuses his research on a variety of political schools of thought and their applications. Dr, Lakoff is an associate professor of sociology and focuses his research globalization, biomedical innovation and the history of human sciences.
I followed up on the FMD in the 1990s in Europe and how they followed up on the side of industrial meat production. I also followed up and did more research on what the term "biosecurity" actually means. Finally, I visited the website for the Center for Strategic and International Studies to figure out what they were all about.
The rise and emergence of infectious diseases has led to a number of puclic health "scares" over the years. The creation of national and international frameworks, as well as focus groups, has brought the struggle of infectious diseases like AIDS to light. Looking at diseases with the combined inputs of governmental and philanthropic organizations has had a positive influence on the fight against them. In the realm of bioterrorism, many factors are at play. First is the terrorist act itself and the social issues that lead to a terrorist being created. Then there is themethod, which is the numerous diseases that can be weaponized. These diseases are researched at the government level as potential additions to the arsenal of weapons a country has. However, they are also used at the individual level. With highly educated individuals and any number of social ideologies, the risk for bioterrorism increases. By looking at bioterrorism through the lens of both a social expert and scientist, the roots of bioterrorism can be examined.
The causes for these examinations are events that have had a largescale effect on multiple levels of expertise. These "focusing events" have a lot of factors and players, and thus require a lot of different views to analyze, as the article argues.
The artice cites WHO preparadness plans and Doctors without Borders as sources of policy on emergency response, in the context of global health. With the rise in infectious disease, there is a risk for "global threat" that is not directly targeted at a group, but rather engineered through social and economic factors. This means that emrgency preparadness is key. However, the article metions the use of Emergency repsonse as a bit of a cop-out. It is much easier to plan for the worst than prevent it from happening. The author states "... measures focused on mitigating potential emergencies are easier to implement rhan longer-term structural interventions."
The authors are Stephen J. Collier and Andrew Lakoff. They both have PhDs in anthropology and are professors are educational institutions. Collier is a professor of International Affairs at The New School and Lakoff is a professor of sociology at USC. They are professionally situated to discuss emergency response as they have done research in biosecurity and biothreats.
One major point outlined in the article is the way that disease outbreaks have been viewed and prepared for has changed over the past few centuries. It started out in the view of public health where social factors like sanitation and clean water were valued but then shifted towards preparedness after outbreaks of various influenza viruses seemed to not fit the paradigm of public health.