Preparing for an era of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)--are we there yet? Why we should all be concerned. Part II.

Veterinary and human toxicology Pub Date : 2004-12-01
R B McFee, J B Leikin, Kathleen Kiernan
{"title":"Preparing for an era of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)--are we there yet? Why we should all be concerned. Part II.","authors":"R B McFee,&nbsp;J B Leikin,&nbsp;Kathleen Kiernan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>September 11, 2001 demonstrated dramatic voids in national preparedness, and catalyzed massive efforts to identify and remedy vulnerabilities. Since Part I of this series appeared in August 2002, significant improvements have been achieved especially in bioterrorism and chemical terrorism for first responders and emergency medicine, law enforcement, and public health (surveillance). Such efforts manifested benefits during the SARS outbreaks and monkeypox cases of 2003. Nevertheless, emerging infectious diseases will continue to pose a threat if we do not remain vigilant and continue to invest in training, surveillance, and treatments. As expected, many poison centers and toxicologists have taken leadership roles nationwide. In regions where such leadership existed, preparedness levels are strong and collaborations resulted in the development of valuable response plans and training, including the Advanced Hazardous Life Support (AHLS) and Basic Disaster Life Support (BDLS) courses. Early success notwithstanding, experts suggest that current national preparedness has improved slightly from \"1\" (9/11) to \"3\" out of \"10\". Increasingly it has become evident that the nuclear threat, including radiation terrorism, is significant, against which the US remains inadequately prepared. Arguably the nuclear threat-whether accidental or planned-remains our highest consequence vulnerability, and we must rapidly improve our readiness across disciplines. Special populations including the elderly and children remain marginalized in preparedness protocols. Local vulnerabilities including chemical manufacturing and transportation--not just a risk for terrorism but industrial accidents--continue unabated. Our early success is not an endpoint; much work remains and time is fleeting. This report examines vulnerabilities that must be addressed to enhance preparedness.</p>","PeriodicalId":23486,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary and human toxicology","volume":"46 6","pages":"347-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary and human toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

September 11, 2001 demonstrated dramatic voids in national preparedness, and catalyzed massive efforts to identify and remedy vulnerabilities. Since Part I of this series appeared in August 2002, significant improvements have been achieved especially in bioterrorism and chemical terrorism for first responders and emergency medicine, law enforcement, and public health (surveillance). Such efforts manifested benefits during the SARS outbreaks and monkeypox cases of 2003. Nevertheless, emerging infectious diseases will continue to pose a threat if we do not remain vigilant and continue to invest in training, surveillance, and treatments. As expected, many poison centers and toxicologists have taken leadership roles nationwide. In regions where such leadership existed, preparedness levels are strong and collaborations resulted in the development of valuable response plans and training, including the Advanced Hazardous Life Support (AHLS) and Basic Disaster Life Support (BDLS) courses. Early success notwithstanding, experts suggest that current national preparedness has improved slightly from "1" (9/11) to "3" out of "10". Increasingly it has become evident that the nuclear threat, including radiation terrorism, is significant, against which the US remains inadequately prepared. Arguably the nuclear threat-whether accidental or planned-remains our highest consequence vulnerability, and we must rapidly improve our readiness across disciplines. Special populations including the elderly and children remain marginalized in preparedness protocols. Local vulnerabilities including chemical manufacturing and transportation--not just a risk for terrorism but industrial accidents--continue unabated. Our early success is not an endpoint; much work remains and time is fleeting. This report examines vulnerabilities that must be addressed to enhance preparedness.

为大规模杀伤性武器(WMD)时代做准备——我们到了吗?为什么我们都应该担心。第二部分。
2001年9月11日表明了国家准备工作的巨大空白,并促使人们作出巨大努力,以查明和补救脆弱性。自本系列第一部分于2002年8月发表以来,已经取得了重大进展,特别是在生物恐怖主义和化学恐怖主义方面,第一反应者和紧急医疗、执法和公共卫生(监督)方面。这些努力在2003年SARS疫情和猴痘病例期间显示出效益。然而,如果我们不保持警惕并继续投资于培训、监测和治疗,新出现的传染病将继续构成威胁。不出所料,许多毒物中心和毒理学家在全国范围内发挥了领导作用。在具备这种领导能力的地区,备灾水平很高,通过合作制定了宝贵的应对计划和培训,包括高级危险生命支持(AHLS)和基本灾害生命支持(BDLS)课程。尽管早期取得了成功,但专家们认为,目前的国家准备程度已经从“1”(9/11)轻微提高到“3”(满分10分)。越来越明显的是,包括辐射恐怖主义在内的核威胁十分严重,而美国对此仍准备不足。可以说,核威胁——无论是意外的还是计划中的——仍然是我们的最高后果脆弱性,我们必须迅速提高各学科的准备程度。包括老人和儿童在内的特殊人群在防范协议中仍然处于边缘地位。包括化工制造和运输在内的地方脆弱性——不仅有恐怖主义的风险,还有工业事故的风险——依然有增无减。我们早期的成功不是终点;还有很多工作要做,时间转瞬即逝。本报告审查了为加强防范而必须解决的脆弱性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信