Most of the claims are based on past examples in history of response to disease outbreaks and the development of new diseases. They looked at how regualtions were developed after each one, what research showed in each case, and how people reacted to the risk or security associated with each.
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.
Lakoff has a PhD in social anthropology and is an associate professor of sociology at the Univeristy of Southern California. Collier in an associate professor of international affairs at the New School in New York. Both authors have extensive backgrounds in studying people, but not disease, so their stance in this paper is not looking at the biological or emergency response aspects, but more how people plan and react to such.
" At just the moment when it seemed that infectious disease was about to be conquered, and that the critical health problems of the industrialized world now involved chronic disease and diseases of lifestyle, experts warned, we were witnessing a “return of the microbe.”"
" The aim of such techniques is not to manage known disease but to address vulnerabilities in health infrastructure by, for example, strengthening hospital surge capacity, stockpiling drugs, exercising response protocols, and vaccinating first responders. Approaches based on preparedness may not be guided by rigorous cost-benefit analysis. Rather, they are aimed at developing the capability to respond to various types of potentially catastrophic biological events."
"Security — the freedom from fear or risk — always suggests an absolute demand; security has, as Foucault wrote, no principle of limitation. There is no such thing as being “too secure.”51 Living with risk, by contrast, acknowledges a more complex calculus. It requires new forms of political and ethical reasoning that take into account questions that are often only implicit in discussions of biosecurity interventions."
I looked up how regualtions are formed and put into law after outbreaks of disease to prevent similar outbreaks from happening again. I also looked into how viruses become resistant to drugs and are able to mutate and continue to infect people, even after they have been "controlled". Additionally, I found a list of the safety measures that are recommended for emergency responders based on CDC guidelines.
There are four regions of microbial threats that the paper focuses on: emerging infectious disease; bioterrorism; life sciences; and food safety.
Huge increases on spending in the US on biodefense from millions to billions of dollars
Very general emergency response plans have weaknesses in that they are so quickly applied to any situation without considering what a specific region needs, has, or lacks.
Emergency response is briefly mentioned as something to consider in risk vs security in situations. The safety of emergency responders is important, but making every person take measures to prevent every disease may not be practical. The importance of vaccinating emergency responders was also mentioned.