Bioweapons Sensors Hit the Streets

A new generation of bioweapons sensors has been deployed in New York City as part of the federal BioWatch program. The sensors have the ability to autonomously sample the surrounding air, identify up to 100 different biological threats, and instantaneously share their finding with officials. Real-time sampleing is one of many technical improvements these new sensors offer when compared with those deployed in 2003 in more than 30 major U.S. cities, but their introduction raises questions about how we are preparing for potential acts of bioterror.

Some experts have suggested that resources might be better utilized by improving existing detection methods within traditional health care settings, such as hospitals. This would involve developing better diagnostic tools and data sharing systems so that information from hospitals could be centrally gathered and analyzed. The Washington Post reports that $2 million of BioWatch’s $77 million operating budget has been allocated to a National Academy of Sciences study to determine if investing in new sensor technology—such as that deployed in New York—is the best way to combat the bioterror threat.

Another concern is that the push to deploy new sensors has overshadowed the role of the public in the response to an airborne attack. An article in the journal Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science last year highlighted the role of community planning and involvement in responding to health disasters that tax the official emergency infrastructure. Its authors conclude that community engagement before an attack is essential to lay the groundwork for appropriate communication and action when responding to an emergency. This type of coordination amidst a disaster appears unlikely given the findings of a report in June from the Center for a New American Security. That report suggests that officials would be unable to meet the public’s demand for immediate instructions, rapid diagnosis, and the dissemination of medications and vaccines in the event of an attack.

The challenge today is to determine the best balance between investing in new technology, augmenting existing infrastructure, and educating the public about the threat of bioterrorism and how to respond to it. Complicating the matter is the necessity to ensure that any outreach is done in such a way as to constructively inform the public without creating excessive alarm.

Image: Autonomous Pathogen Detection System (APDS) monitor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Tags: security

Comments on this article

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.