The Bioethics of Bioterrorism
I. Ethical Question It is universally accepted that bioterrorism, or the use of viruses and bacteria to spread disease and cause panic (“Bioterrorism”), is wrong and inhumane. However there is still a question as to whether or not research into biodefense, or the mechanisms used to battle bioterrorism (“Biodefense”), should be allowed.
II. Background As previously stated, bioterrorism is the use of viral and bacterial diseases to infect populations and incite panic. These diseases can be found naturally, but can also be modified to be more contagious and resistant to medicine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) classify different agents of bioterrorism into three categories. Category A is for …show more content…
Reasons For and Against Biodefense Research There are many reasons why biodefense research is supported or opposed. One reason it is opposed is because of how expensive biodefense research is. Between 2001 and 2006, $36 billion has been spent by the federal government on biodefense research. In 2001, $414 million was requested for research; in 2005 $7.6 billion was requested (Roffey). These are huge hikes in spending allocated specifically for biodefense research, money that could easily be redistributed elsewhere.
Another reason biodefense research is opposed is because there are no specific guidelines as to how research should be conducted and because the BWC is unclear and unspecific. Often because of the varying rules and guidelines from lab to lab and country to country, many scientists are unaware of what specifically is entailed in the BWC. There are also no oversight committees in most countries, except for Canada and Australia (Roffey). This also means that the line is unclear as to what constitutes biodefense research versus biological warfare research. The risk in crossing the line arises in “threat assessment” research. This is when the threat of a biological attack is assessed and is where a biological weapon could accidentally be created. In a study conducted by the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, some participants said that, “…the issue is more complex and that some ostensibly protective research could lead to development and proliferation …show more content…
In the early days of research, 23 cases of cutaneous anthrax occurred between 1944 and 1945. Because of this, procedures were improved drastically, along with laboratory guidelines. Biosafety cabinets, or BSC’s, were introduced into laboratories and the instances of exposure went down to only two cases between 1948 and 1952. Much was the same for other pathogens. With the introduction of vaccines for diseases such as Q Fever and Franciscella tularensis, the instances of infection decreased even more (“Chapter 2”). With the continuing improvement of guidelines, rates of laboratory induced infections has decreased drastically, as evident in the following
I. Ethical Question It is universally accepted that bioterrorism, or the use of viruses and bacteria to spread disease and cause panic (“Bioterrorism”), is wrong and inhumane. However there is still a question as to whether or not research into biodefense, or the mechanisms used to battle bioterrorism (“Biodefense”), should be allowed.
II. Background As previously stated, bioterrorism is the use of viral and bacterial diseases to infect populations and incite panic. These diseases can be found naturally, but can also be modified to be more contagious and resistant to medicine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) classify different agents of bioterrorism into three categories. Category A is for …show more content…
Reasons For and Against Biodefense Research There are many reasons why biodefense research is supported or opposed. One reason it is opposed is because of how expensive biodefense research is. Between 2001 and 2006, $36 billion has been spent by the federal government on biodefense research. In 2001, $414 million was requested for research; in 2005 $7.6 billion was requested (Roffey). These are huge hikes in spending allocated specifically for biodefense research, money that could easily be redistributed elsewhere.
Another reason biodefense research is opposed is because there are no specific guidelines as to how research should be conducted and because the BWC is unclear and unspecific. Often because of the varying rules and guidelines from lab to lab and country to country, many scientists are unaware of what specifically is entailed in the BWC. There are also no oversight committees in most countries, except for Canada and Australia (Roffey). This also means that the line is unclear as to what constitutes biodefense research versus biological warfare research. The risk in crossing the line arises in “threat assessment” research. This is when the threat of a biological attack is assessed and is where a biological weapon could accidentally be created. In a study conducted by the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation, some participants said that, “…the issue is more complex and that some ostensibly protective research could lead to development and proliferation …show more content…
In the early days of research, 23 cases of cutaneous anthrax occurred between 1944 and 1945. Because of this, procedures were improved drastically, along with laboratory guidelines. Biosafety cabinets, or BSC’s, were introduced into laboratories and the instances of exposure went down to only two cases between 1948 and 1952. Much was the same for other pathogens. With the introduction of vaccines for diseases such as Q Fever and Franciscella tularensis, the instances of infection decreased even more (“Chapter 2”). With the continuing improvement of guidelines, rates of laboratory induced infections has decreased drastically, as evident in the following