Search

Emergency response is discussed a lot in this paper with respect to a global level of care. They analyze the current protocols in place that would create a global response and investigate their effectiveness. The need for a more concrete protocol is discussed as most countries exhibit nationalism and self interest that would inhibit them from helping others. 

The authors researched previoud research papers, articles, or speeches to gather data that was used to create a discussion.

1. "“In the globalized world of the 21st century,” it argued, simply stopping disease at national borders is not adequate. Nor is it sufficient to respond to diseases after they have become established in a population. Rather, it is necessary to prepare for unknown outbreaks in advance"
2. “World health is indivisible, [and] we cannot satisfy our most parochial needs without attending to the health conditions of all the globe.”
3. "This tension relates to a difference in aims but also in forms of intervention: emergency response is acute, short-term, focused on alleviating what is conceived as a temporally circumscribed event; whereas “social” interventions—such as those associated with development policy—focus on transforming political-economic structures over the long term. Thus, in global health initiatives we find a contrast between possible modalities of intervention that parallels the one already described in U.S.–based biosecurity efforts: between acute emergency measures on the one hand and long-term approaches to health and welfare on the other."
4. "Although there is a great sense of urgency to address contemporary biosecurity problems— and while impressive resources have been mobilized to do so — there is no consensus about how to conceptualize these threats, nor about what the most appropriate measures are to deal with them."

I looked up bioterrorism agents and cases in which they were used. I looked on the CDCs website where they discuss preparation and planning to review their protocol for bioterrorism. On the same website, I also looked at the information for first responders to bioterrorism. 

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 bibliography includes vast amounts of other papers, many of which governmental. The paper shows that a lot of background research was done, which is shown in the bibliography as well. The vastness of their references adds crediblity and authority to this paper. 

This article discusses public health and biosecurity. The authors discuss the need for preparedness and risks that start outbreaks. The article is broken into four domains: emerging infection disease, bioterrorism, cutting-edge life-sciences, and food safety in order to highlight their arguments. Through public health initiatives, it is important to identify security risks and prevent them from negatively impacting the world. 

According to ResearchGate, this article has been cited 28 times. 

The authors of this article are Andrew Lakoff and Stephen Collier. Both are anthropologists. Andrew works at USC and Stephen is the Director of Philosophy at The New School. They have both written many articles, several of which were written together.