Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Biological Weapons, an increasing threat. Alexandra Vera & Josefina Honig Miss Melissa Winkler 30th June, 2015 Index 1. Introduction _____________________________________________________ 3 2. Definition Biological Weapons ______________________________________ 4 3. Origins and History _______________________________________________ 4-5 4. General Process of Production _______________________________________ 6 5. Diffusion, detection and identification of biological weapons _______________ 7-8 6. Uses ____________________________________________________________ 9 7. Protection ________________________________________________________ 10 8. Case Study: Anthrax ________________________________________________ 10-11 9. Conclusion ________________________________________________________ 11-12 10. References _______________________________________________________ 13-14 2 Introduction The intentional use of microorganisms of biological nature to inflict damage is an ancient practice that prevails (Hooker, 2014). Throughout history, biological weapons have evolved from rudimental attacks involving bacteria’s from decomposing corpses and bacteria infested food sources, such as E.coli 1 , to high technology undercover bioweapons with greatly harming compounds. (Frischknet, 2003) The advances in the developing field of microbiology have led to an increased sophistication and manipulation of biological agents, to be weaponized into damaging bioweapons with high lethality 2 , toxicity 3 and virulence 4 (M.J.Ainscough). This development within biological warfare, according to scientists Demirev et al, will arise in that “both their proliferation and the likelihood for eventual use will increase significantly”. Additionally, they suggest that “Many of the current methods for the production and dispersal of CBW5 are based on well-established, inexpensive, and accessible technology from the 1950s over the next decades”, increasing the possibilities of a biological warfare attack of high destructive character to happen. The puzzling history of biological weapons has been surrounded by complex manipulation, difficulty for attack identification and the unethical use for personal purposes, which has generated an overall rejection and abstention of use. Anyhow, the threat of biological warfare is estimated to continue and possibly increase, raising uncertainty and concern for the future of our environment and race. 1 E.coli:. E coli is a bacterium that is commonly found in the gut of endotherms (warm blooded organisms). Certain strains can cause food poisoning in humans and can become lie-threatening. (Christian Nordqvist, 2014. Medical News Today) 2 Lethality: how capable something is of causing death 3 Toxicity: The degree to which a substance (a toxin or poison) can harm humans or animals. 4 Virulence: ability to cause disease. 5 CBW: Chemical Biological Weapons 3 Definition Biological Weapons Biological weapons are living or replicating infectious organisms such as bacteria, viruses, rickettsia, toxins, fungi or other biological agents of lethal or non-lethal character that may kill or disable humans, animals or plants when paired with a delivery system. These agents come from biological origin and reproduce within their host victims to intentionally inflict disease, grant microbial pathogenicity and evade the host’s immune response. They’re contemplated as weapons of mass destruction due to their high damaging potential, extending from an isolated attack to a single individual to a whole population (Federation of American Scientists, 2013). Variations within biological agents are found, determining distinct levels of danger. The type of biological weapon, the preparation and length of incubation, the durability of the agent in the environment, the route of infection, its ease of dispersal, its infectiousness, virulence and its lethality define the pathogens appropriateness as a weapon (Federation of American Scientists, 2013). Origins and History The first documented episode involving biological warfare dates back to antiquity, approximately around 1715 to 1075 BC, during a war in Western Anatolia where an infection was deliberately introduced with the purpose of debilitating the adversary. This incident is massively known as the Hittite plague, which due to further investigations revealed itself to be an epidemic of tularemia6, a form of biological weapon (Trevisanato, 2007) The use of biological weapons extended from antiquity to middle ages in three major forms. First, by the intentional contamination of aliment with venomous material. Secondly, by the use of biological agents (microbes and plants) and biological toxins in an 6 Tularemia: rare infectious disease caused by the bacterium Francisella tularensis that can attack the skin, eyes, lymph nodes, lungs and, less often, other internal organs. 4 armament system. Lastly, by the use of biologically injected humans or fabrics. Exemplars of these techniques were depicted through history repeatedly, displayed in Persian, Greek and Roman literature, which implied the use of animal detritus to contaminate sources of water. As well, during 400BC Scythian archers supposedly dipped their arrows in decomposing bodies and blood, benefitting from the microbes present within them to infect their enemies. The use of corpses as biological weapons extended to 1422 and 1710 in wars in Karolstein and Reval respectively, were they were catapulted towards the rival. In the 15th century, Pizarro was said to have distributed variola-contaminated clothing to South American natives. The same technique was used by British forces in the 18th century during the French and Indian war, were blankets infested with smallpox were delivered to the Native Americans. (Frischknet, 2003) Plunging into the 20th century, biological warfare suffered sophistication and development due to the advances in microbiology, permitting the manufacture and isolation of distinct pathogens. During World War I (1914–1918) Germany created an investigating committee, alternatively known as sabotage group, which developed anthrax, cholera, glanders and a destructive fungus for war and subversion motives. Later during World War II, Japan managed a secret biological warfare facility that developed and studied biological agents on several victims. Consequently, due to conferences and treaties, the use of these biological weapons were drawn to a halt but investigation continued, leading to accidental leakages of the manufactured biological warfare as was the case of New York and Sverdlovsk. (Eitzen et al) Currently, biological warfare investigation has continued but its use has been restricted by several agreements, being the most recognized of them the Biological Weapons Conference. Actually the most popular form of biological warfare is bioterrorism, using these agents for terrorist purposes. This has been the case of a Japanese sect (Aum Shinrikyo, 1994) or an unidentified group, which delivered anthrax in form of spray and embedded in a letter to an American congressman (2001), respectively, to harm a group of individuals. (Johnson T.J, AARC) 5 General Process of Production During the initial process of production, a specific biological agent must be chosen, collected and acquired essentially through isolation from its matrix, concentration and posterior purification. The criterion of election is based on the specific characteristics of each agent in relation to the matching desired results of an eventual attack. These may include the agents pathogenicity (quantity required to generate disease); its incubation period, as time between exposure and illness will generate delay; its virulence based on how debilitating the resulting disease is and how much harm is intended to create; lethality and transmissibility. These agents may be acquired through two major sources: either through our natural environment such as soil, water and infected animals or through microbiology laboratories, where bacteria may be obtained from pathogen banks or created, such as toxins, whose DNA coding for production is attached to a bacteria that acts as a vector 7 . Subsequent concentration and purification of the agent is obtained through a variation of methods such as Centrifugation8, Antibody absorption and Field flow fractionation9. (A. Demirev et al, 2005) Optimal conditions are later supplied in order to promote an increasing rate of growth and multiplication of the specific microorganism through cell wall disruption. Liquid agents are mostly affected by enzymatic, PH and electric discharge controlled variables, among others, whilst solids are influenced by the presence of a vacuum, laser action and electric discharge. Once sufficient quantities are provided, possible selection and modification procedures are used to alter certain traits and characteristics of the microorganism in order to adapt its function in a particular manner that could result in a more severe, fast-acting disease. For example, a microorganism that under normal circumstances does not affect potential targets could be modified to do so. This process usually occurs through 7 An organism, typically a biting insect or tick, that transmits a disease or parasite from one animal or plant to another 8 Use of centrifugal force as a separating technique 9 Separation technique where a field is applied to a solution pumped through a long and narrow cannel to disperse particles 6 Chromatography and technical manipulations of the agent’s genome. (Federation of American Scientists, 2007) The final stage involves delivery, in which agents are prepared to remain effective when removed from optimal conditions, as external factors such as temperature, ultraviolet radiation and drying can reduce the agent’s activity when dispersed. These procedures include Lyophilization,10 deep-freezing or the formulation into a specific stabilizing solid, liquid or gas. Once this process is achieved, pathogens are ready for dispersal. (Federation of American Scientists, 2007) Diffusion, detection and identification of biological weapons Eventhough several biological agents have the ability to induce disease, only a reserved amount are suitable to be weaponized into biological warfare. They must be easy to obtain, synthezise and operate, given by a reduced size which permits facilitated concealment, transport and diffusion. Diffusion According to Edward M. Eitzen, the size of the agent, stability and atmospheric conditions may alter the disseminating process. Biological weapons may be dispersed by: 1) Aerosol: for effectiveness they must be diffused in particles of a size less than 5 μm and requires a large inspiration of the bioweapon. This form is commonly used within bioterrorism and by military groups. 2) Food and water borne: demand an exaggerated amount of agent for effectiveness and must be introduced after water treatement. 3) Explosives: diminished effectiveness by the partial destruction of the agent after the explosion. 4) Injection/absorption by skin: permits effective individual attacks, but unrealistic to perform a massive assault. 10 Direct freeze drying 7 Detection and Identification Biological weapons are difficult to detect as they’re invisible, lack odor and taste and have a silent method of dispersion. Early detection of a biological attack diminishes lethality, but is hard to accomplish as biological organisms, wether pathogenic 11 or non pathogenic, contain the same biochemical compounds and require deep molecular analysis for differentiation. Additionally, immune responses initiate as non specific, performing general symptoms which delay the recognition of the biological weapon agent. (D.R Walt et al, 2000) The recognition of particular DNA, RNA, and proteins within the biological warfare agent permit the identification of the microorganism. Anyhow, only a small fraction of DNA sequences are known, disrupting rapid identification and posing a challenge for organisms with unknown DNA sequences. (D.R Walt et al, 2000) Currently, detection involves finding the biological agent within the environment or victim via medical diagnosis, as there are no reliable detection systems or sensors. Therefore, surveillance systems which provide epidemiologic evidence and data on the bioweapon permit proper identification and recognition. Anyway, according to Tracee Treadwell, the following criteria suggest a possible bioattack: Contraction of disease by a rare agent with unconventional symptoms and development. Non endemic, so the disease is inconsistent to the location. Transmission methods which are consistent to those of biological warfare (aerosol, food, water, injection, explosives). Stability and uncommon antibiotic resistance of strain, suggesting manipulation of the agent. Large number of casualties concentrated within one geographical area, suggesting a point source outbreak. 11 Pathogenic: Capable of causing disease. 8 Multi biological agents and disease coexistance within affected victims, suggesting an engineered mixture. Ilness inconsistent to a particular population or age group. Simultaneous appeal for medical treatment. Uses Offensive Biological weapons are used offensively to debilitate the opposing force, but pose a threat not only to the attacked but also to the attacker. They may be used to gain tactical advantage on the enemy, incapacitate a territory and kill or harm the desired target. Biological warfare is characterized by its complex control, so it may miscarry its purpose, harming and weakening the power that made use of the weapon initially. These may be: 1) Anti personnel: attack aimed at humans. The desired characteristics of the biological weapon include high infectivity and virulence, lack of inoculating agent, efficient delivery and transport system, high stability and knowledge on the management and storage of the agent. 2) Anti agriculture: the use of biological weapons to harm and inhibit cultivating land and raising crops. This type of bio attack is commonly driven by economic interest, intent of sabotage or to incite attention to a particular cause, being an effective offensive that doesn’t imply killing human population. These attacks are relatively easy to execute due to the vulnerability and exposition of agricultural resources, and due to the velocity at which they reproduce and disseminate the pathogen. 3) Anti livestock: use of biological warfare to kill or disable domestic animals, raised for home-use or for an economic concern. These attacks have a large productive impact on a nation, due to the frustrated commercialisation of animal products and the incapacity of consumption. 4) Entomological warfare: use of insects to harm the opponent. Insect may be used in the form of vector, direct agricultural attack or carrier and sufferer of a specific pathogen. Defensive 9 Biological weapons are handled in response to a bio attack, in order to restore biological security. These include biological agents, which aid in decontamination, neutralizing biological weapons and vaccines. (M.Leitenberg, 2003) Protection According to Eisenkfraft et al, a well-known method of biological warfare protection are protective respiratory devices. These account for differentiated respirators which aid in the purification and decontamination of air, preventing inhalation of bioweapons. Protective respiratory devices may be self-contained breathing apparatus, supplied air respirators, air purifying respirators, air filters and surgical masks. On the other hand, protective clothing may inhibit direct skin contact with biological weapons. These may be barrier attire, masks, latex gloves, clothing covers and eye shields. These are not only available to civilians which desire to prevent an attack, but are indispensable for health care professionals treating the bioweapon case and military forces. A wide spread form of bioattack protection are antibiotics, which obstruct bacteria action and detain their replication. These may be given orally or intravenously, but are more effective when the specific pathogen is identified. Finally, vaccinations promote the immune system functioning by exposing the body to a set of bacteria. The body reacts with the creation of antibodies12, and so creates a form of defense and immunization against widespread biological weapons. Case Study: Anthrax Anthrax is an infectious disease caused by an anaerobic, spore-forming bacterium known as Bacillus anthracis, found within our natural environment such as in soil. It primarily affects livestock and wildgame, which consequently leads to the infection of humans through the inhalation of spores, direct contact with skin of sick animals vía wounds and by the 12 Antibodies: large Y-shaped proteins which function to identify and help remove foreign antigens or targets such as viruses and bacteria 10 ingestion of contaminated meat. Symptoms, which develop within seven days of the exposure, will vary depending on how infected the person is; ranging from skin sores and black lesions, 13 when a cutaneous infection occurs; to vomit and fever, during a gastrointestinal anthrax; to shock and Meningitis14, present in a respiratory infection. These may be treated with specific antibiotics that cure the infection, however, inhaled anthrax is more difficult to treat and might be fatal. The ability of sporulation and resistance of these spores to harsh environmental conditions, including their survival for more that 40 years, time in which bacteria remain dormant before entering a living host, is what has caused Anthrax to become one of the most important biological warfare agents. The use of Anthrax as a potential biological weapon is prevalent in many parts of the world and has been adopted primarily for warfare and bioterrorist attacks, creating a leading cause of global concern. The first official documented attack occured during World War I, when Scandinavia released this infectious disease against the Imperial russian Army. Subsequently, Anthrax was also used by the british army during World War II in order to weaken german livestock. Nevertheless, one of the most recent cases was reported posterior to the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when letters contaminated with Anthrax were being sent to the U.S. Five americans were killed and 17 were infected, leading to one of the worst biological attacks in north american history. The ability of sporulation and resistance of these spores to harsh environmental conditions, including the survival for more that 40 years is what has caused Anthrax to become one of the most important biological warfare agents. (J Pharm, 2010) Conclusion Resemblant to most scientific and industrial advances within society, Biological Warfare is considered an effective technological device, whose implementation for the good or bad cany vary tremendously, imposing a vast amount of responsability onto scientists, politicians, military and others, who also take charge of this matter and whose moral and ethical values are continously challenged; as any nation with a reasonably developed 13 Black Lesion: suspicious flat lesion irregular in shape and pigmentation. Often known as Melanomas. Can be benignant or malignant. 14 Meningitis: A potentially life threatening inflammation of the brain 11 technical and medical industry, could produce massive amounts of biological weapons in order to casuse destruction upon an external population or opposing force as to gain further power. Although the use of biological weapons was initially condemned by international declarations and treaties during the 1907 Hague Convention, intentions failed to succed during both WW I and II when the use of disease and other biological agents was enabled in order to attack and defeat the enemy. However, the Biological and Toxin Weapon Convention (BTWC) entered in force during March 1975, with the ratification and support of more than 22 different countries and managed to legally ban the development, production and aquisition of biological agents and toxins of any type that did not have protective, medical or other peaceful purposes. Nevertheless, Biological Weapons still remain as an increasing global threat due to terrorist and other infiltrated ilegal attacks, which has lead to a significant amount of financial investment by many governments in order to meet public health responses and other additional concerns, such as investigations of mechanisms that counteract their impact. 12 References [1] Hooker E (2014). Biological Warfare (Electronic version), Emedicine health, 1-2. [2] Nordqvist C (2014). What is E.Coli? (Electronic version), Medical News Today, 1. [3] Frischknecht F. (2003). The History of Biological Warfare, EMBO Reports, Vol 4 [4] Ainscough M.J (2004). The Gathering Biological Warfare Storm, Westport, Praeger. [5] Demirev P.A, Feldman A.B, and Lin J.S (2005). Chemical and Biological Weapons: Current Concepts for Future Defenses, Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest. Volume 26, Number 4. [6] http://fas.org/programs/bio/bwintro.html (Federation of American Scientists, 26.5.2015) [7] Trevisanato, S.I (2007). "The 'Hittite Plague', an Epidemic of Tularemia and the First Record of Biological Warfare". Medical Hypotheses 69 (6): 1371–1374. [8]http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.360.3421&rep=rep1&type=pd f (Eitzen E.M & Takafuji E.T, Historical Overview of Biological Warfare, 15.6.2015) [9] https://c.aarc.org/resources/biological/history.asp (Johnson T.J, American Association for Respiratory Care, 29.5.2015) [10] http://fas.org/biosecurity/resource/bioweapons.htm#production (Federation of American Scientists, 15.06.2015) [11] http://dead-planet.net/chemical-terrorism/med_cbw/Ch20.pdf (Eitzen E.M, 26.5.2015) [12] Walt, D.R & Franz, D.R (2000). Biological Warfare Detection (Electronic version). Analytical chemistry, vol 23, pp 738 A–746 A. 13 [13] Treadwell, T. (March–April 2003). "Epidemiological Clues to Bioterrorism". Public Health Reports 118: 93–94. [14] Leitenberg M (2003). Distinguishing offensive from defensive biological weapons research, 29(3), 223-57 [15] Eisenkraft A, Cohen A, Krasner E, Hourvitz A (2002). Personal protection against biological warfare agents, PubMed, 105-10 [16] J Pharm (2010) Biological Warfare Agents (Electronic version) Journal of Pharmacies and BioAllied Sciences 2(3) 179-188 14