Bioterrorism Prevention Means Changing our Minds
Discussions with my medical school colleagues who are experts in infectious
disease lend special urgency to the concerns expressed in the media
about bioterrorism via smallpox or anthrax. Some steps have already
been taken in various localities to address initial concerns. In
the New York City area police have been issued gas masks and charcoal
body suits. When it comes to bioterrorism however, the old adage, "an
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" holds true. For
prevention to work however, we must think and act locally and globally.
Some potentially helpful local measures include:
-
The recognition of the biological attack in the early stages so containment
can be attempted.
This includes both hardware and people. Suspect bioorganism detectors
in public places can be of some help. But, early recognition
must start with training hospital personnel, clinics and
pharmacists in the recognition of early symptoms of potential
biological warfare attacks. Training in such symptom pattern
recognition must immediately become part of the curriculum
in the medical schools, nursing schools and pharmacy schools.
Risk management credits for continuing health professional
education can be expanded to include recognition and responses
to bioterrorism symptom patterns.
-
The devising of a contingency plan to deal with the various types
of biological agents, either through stockpiling of drugs or
establishing emergency procedures to produce antidotes in a short
period of time (There is a precedent in the mobilization of pharmaceutical
firms to produce penicillin for WWII).
-
Utilization of a centralize agency to track potential outbreaks via
databases.
-
Including responses to bioterrorism as part of public and private
school curricula for health education.
-
Training of public and private school nurses and EMT's for first
line and secondary responses to a bioterrorist attack.
-
Parent and workplace education courses on initial responses to bioterrorism.
-
Use the existing Veteran's Administration health care system and
mobilize medical schools as focal points for bioterrorist emergency
response preparedness.
When all is said and done however the variety of proposed measures such
as gas masks that can help in damage control for chemical weapons
attack are relatively useless versus biological weapons. Availability
of vaccines, while helpful, is not likely to be an impregnable Maginot
line for preventing casualties in the millions. Unfortunately, for
bioterrorism, the old military adage of "the best defense is
a good offense" holds true. This means destroying state sponsored
manufacture of such bioterrorism weapons of mass destruction at their
source. Today, at the very least this means destroying the Sadam
Hussein's capability for biological weapons manufacture as well as
the Israeli's destroyed his capability for nuclear weapons manufacture
in the 1980's. More likely, since under state sponsorship, biological
weapons manufacture is far easier to widely disperse than nuclear
weapons manufacture, it means completing the unfinished work of the
1991 Gulf War: the liberation of the Iraqi people from their oppressive
regime.
To proceed effectively however, we need to change our minds. In the face
of terror and the understandable need to maintain continuity post-catastrophe,
changing our minds is particularly challenging. To change our minds
we need to be aware of and avoid the variety of decision-making heuristics
and psychological defenses which are pitfalls to effective bioterrorism
prevention. I was struck by the prevalence of these pitfalls even
among the flower of our own intelligentsia. Among some of my most
world-renowned colleagues there still is understandable denial. This
denial is one well-meaning response in the face of terror, the desire
to continue with our lives as if there is nothing to worry about.
One misguided attempt at being helpful to those who feel terrified is
summed up by statements such as "We need to go on just the way
we did before September 11th except a little kinder to each other".
While these are different times, I remember my parents, members of
the Jewish resistance in Poland during the Shoah of World War II,
recounting their frustration when they tried to warn and organize
other Jews in the Lodz ghetto. "Let's be kind to each other
and just go on with our lives" was a tragically common dismissive
response.
There is now, as there was than, an all too prevalent a sense that talking
about "it" will lead to panic or paralysis. Other mechanisms
contributing to paralysis include a misguided holier than thou perfectionism
such as that embodied in a recent petition for academics originating
in the University of Toronto urging the U.S. President not to take
any action that might involve the loss of any innocent lives. Of
course, this impossible to achieve when the mass murderers use human
shields reminiscent of the way the Nazi's would execute innocent
hostages for any acts of self-defense by the Jewish resistance. Other
mechanisms include blaming the victim in a variety of ways ranging
from reductionistic causal heuristics to misleading moral equivalencies.
These are heard as statements ranging from "their murders are
caused by the West's US, Israel's actions" to "we are as
bad as they are for embargoing the Iraqi's use of chlorine (a poison
gas ingredient) to purify their water". Other counterproductive
responses to terror and mass murder heard in the academic world include "que
sera sera" fatalism. "The mass murderers represent an emerging
world order, the decline of the West has to come sooner or later",
or as in 1991, "if we overthrow Hussein, someone worse will
come along" or "nothing can be done until we address root
causes such as the economic inequalities which exist between us and
them."
One also needs to also avoid extreme conservatism in probability assessment
based on anchoring on our pre-September 11th model of the world and
failing to adjust our probability estimates as to the likelihood
of another attempt at mass murder. Such a failure represents a common
human rigidity as to updating probabilities based on new information.
This is a pitfall all the more tempting as a way to maintain continuity
post catastrophe. A common refrain is that "there is as little
or even less likelihood today of another mass murder as there was
on September 10th. Unfortunately, while we are now better able to
defend ourselves against such threats as use hijacked airplanes or
explosives, the sheer magnitude of the murder committed is likely
to encourage other megalomaniacs to attempt to copycat using different,
less readily defended against, means. In that respect, bioterrorism
all to readily fits the bill as the next terrorist weapon of choice.
It is true that we should not be too hasty to act. But the old chess
and military dictum of "getting there the fastest with the mostest" still
matters. While many have focused on "haste makes waste" as
a dictum, we need not succumb to either panic and paranoia or perfectionism
and paralysis in considering when to act. Deliberate yes, but speed
is key. We cannot safely give Sadam Hussein and his associates much
more time by being deliberate beyond prudence. The longer we wait
to act to topple his regime the more we unwittingly increase the
risk of biological weapons of mass destruction being effectively
used in the foreseeable future. The West cannot continue to put its
blinkers on by focusing exclusively on bin Ladin and his particular
cult-like network, nor to continue to wait distracted. Until we act
to stop the threat at its source of manufacture, Sadam Hussein's
regime will continue to manufacture these bioterrorism weapons. We
cannot wait forever to overthrow those governments who right now
manufacture the next weapons of choice for those cult murderers who
misuse Islam to rationalize tyrannical domination and rule via mass
murder.