Analyze

The main argument is supported primarily through policy changes that show a changing approach to public health safety in the government and private organizations, with specific examples such as changes to the US government funding for biodefense research in the early twenty-first century. The paper also includes examples of changing scientific knowledge during the later twentieth century, referencing studies and reports that highlight the changing opinions of the scientific community. Finally, the authors divide the paper into several sections each outlining a specific type of problem and the practices devised as a solution, this format clarifies the main argument and aids the reader in understanding the authors views.

1)            In domains of biosecurity: bio-terrorism (smallpox, anthrax, etc.), emerging infectious diseases (AIDS, tuberculosis [TB], malaria, etc.), life science (intention production of various deadly organisms for research or otherwise), and food safety (animal borne pathogens and diseases like mad cow, E. coli, etc.)

2)            Global health and emergency response: The DOTS (Directly-Observed Treatment, Short-Course) program failed in several areas to be a service-ready anywhere in the globe for drug resistant TB in places like Georgia. The strict regulations in treatment did not account for the variance in doctor training and practices in this area of the world. Its rigidness led to the breakdown of the protocol adherence.

3)            Health security and modernization risks: As the world modernizes, we generate new risks that need to be addressed. For example, in the 20th century, the technological and system advancements in agriculture and food processing have aided in consistent and increased food supply, but also introduced new problems such as sanitation practices and diseases that led to the creation of the Food and Drug Administration and the expansion of the Department of Agriculture.

Three ways the article is supported through using statements from the WHO about the problems of public health security, research studies on global epidemics such as “dark winter”, TB DOTS, and others. The article also uses direct quotes from credible sources such as national security officials: Richard Clark and the NSABB to name a few.

The arguments of this article are supported by the following discussions:

1. The authors discuss changes in response and preparation policies for both public health and private organizations, domestically and internationally.
2. The authors discuss the importance of innovation in scientific research and development and how they have affected the way response and preparation to health crises are conducted
3. The authors provide specific aspects of international health emergencies and cite ways in which countries or organizations have dealt with them in the past and in what ways they succeeded and failed. 

There are many citations, but the reference pages are not included, so it is not known what exactly the citations are, perhaps research papers or studies.

Many examples of responses to outbreaks are studied, and how regualtions stemmed from each outbreak, whether in animals, food industry, or vaccinations.

The arguments are supported by citing many studies and past experiences of organizations such as WHO and CDC. Based off the examination of current protocols of biosecurity interventions, it has been deduced that the process is still in formation and not completely settled. There are not "stable" or "clearly defined" understandings or strategies of possible interventions cited by WHO and CDC. This proving the point that there are clear actions that need to be made in terms of protocol development today.The AIDS crisis in the 80s was also used a supporting point for the argument in terms of response to emerging infectious diseases. The main focus of this was the alarm that was caused by science reports, journalists and novelists during that time. The effects this response had can be used today in the possible reformation of threat response now. The policy changes that have been seen in terms of public health and threat safety  were adequately researched and discussed in this paper. Showing the need for a changing system that adapts with time and needs globally.

The article cites other reports, experts in various fields, and notes historical events (previous epidemics, disease outbreaks, bioterrorism) to support its arguments for biosecurity. 

The article cites various studies and uses the experiences of organizations in order to help plan for the future. The authors use the WHO and the CDC as these examples of experience. They draw upon the AIDS crisis as an example of global outreach and of a public health crisis. Innovation in science is discussed and ongoing research experiments. DOTS (Directly-Observed Treatment, Short Term) program is discussed as well and its shortcomings in dealing with TB.

The authors used reports and statistics from international health organizations such as WHO. They also gathered information from think tanks like RAND. Additionally, to support the claims made in this article the authors looked at how biological outbreaks and threats were dealt with in the past, specifically World War II and the wars with Iran. 

The WHO, a well respected organization, pushed for a similar framework of 'public health security'.

Legislation in the United States that supported a global model of health care in order to address pandemics and other hazards.

Growing issues with pathogenicity and mutability in diseases that makes it harder to deal with retroactively instead of proactively.