Advertisement

The Global Threats from Naturally Occurring Infectious Diseases

  • Alessandro Mancon
  • Davide Mileto
  • Maria Rita Gismondo
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series A: Chemistry and Biology book series (NAPSA)

Abstract

Biological risk relates to a broad spectrum of possible scenarios, that can be classified in three categories: natural occurring, unintended and deliberate. The prevention and management of such events require dedicated measures at national and international level, in terms of biosafety and biosecurity: an optimized intervention can minimize the probability of occurrence, but also adverse short-term (i.e.: number of casualties, population reaction…) and long-term (i.e.: chronic illnesses, ecological changes, trades drop…) consequences. Natural scenarios include common, emerging/re-emerging and chronic infectious diseases: they are caused by biological agents, which can be normally present in the communities, as acute or chronic pathologies, or suddenly appear, causing new or uncommon syndromes. In particular, a lot of environmental and human factors can influence emerging and re-emerging diseases: for example, urbanization and people mobility facilitate microorganisms spread, while climate changes are likely to induce a relocation of pathogens vectors. Unintended events are usually due to research and diagnostic activities: laboratories are the places where biological agents are handled and a lack in Biosafety measures or negligence can result in accidental release; the so called Laboratory Acquired Infections represent the main consequence, since they cause pathologies in the laboratory workers, but could be also transmitted in the population. Deliberate use of biological agents is strictly related to terroristic activities: microorganisms are very suitable for this purpose, since they are hidden and can easily spread. The present chapter summarizes the main characteristics of biological agents related events, taking in account their origin and the principal consequences on the community.

References

  1. 1.
    Meeting of the states parties to the convention on the prohibition of the development, production and stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and toxin weapons and on their destruction. Report of the meeting of states parties. Geneva; December 1–5, 2008. BWC/MSP/2008/5. http://www.opbw.org/new_process/msp2008/BWC_MSP_2008_5_E.pdf. Accessed 27 Oct, 2016
  2. 2.
    Dickmann P, Bhatiasevi A, Chaib F, Baggio O, Banluta C, Hollenweger L, Maarouf A (2016) Biological Risks to Public Health: Lessons from an International Conference to Inform the Development of National Risk Communication Strategies Report of an international conference on risk communication strategies before, during, and after public health emergencies, Rabat, Morocco, October 22–23, 2015. Health Security 14(6.) Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.  https://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2016.0050
  3. 3.
    Cavallini S, Bisogni F, Mastroianni M (2014) Economic impact profiling of CBRN events: focusing on biological incidents. Arch Immunol Ther Exp 62:437–444.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-014-0306-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galassi FM et al (2017) Poliomyelitis in ancient Egypt? Neurol Sci 38(2):375CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martin PMV, Mertin-Granel E (2006) 2,500-year evolution of the term epidemic. Emerg Infect Dis 12(6):976–980CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barton FH et al (2014) Introduction to the immune system. In: Kasper D et al (eds) Harrison’s principles of internal medicine, cap. 360, 19 edn (electronic version). McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    World Health Organization – WHO (2015) Accelerating progress on HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, hepatitis and neglected tropical diseases (HTM). WHO, Geneva. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204419/1/9789241510134_eng.pdf?ua=1 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Institutes of Health (US), Biological Sciences Curriculum Study; Understanding Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases; NIH Curriculum Supplement Series [Internet], Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Health (US) (2007) Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20370/
  9. 9.
    Dawood FS, Jain S, Finelli L, Shaw MW, Lindstrom S, Garten RJ, Gubareva LV, Xu X, Bridges CB, Uyeki TM (2009) Emergence of a novel swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus in humans. N Engl J Med 361.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0903810
  10. 10.
    European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control; ECDC Daily Update – Pandemic (H1N1) 2009–18 January 2010 (PDF)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ksiazek TG et al (2003) A novel coronavirus associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome. NEJM 348:1953–1966CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    De Groot RJ et al (2013) Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV): announcement of the coronavirus study group. J Virol 87(14):7790–7792CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    World Health Organization – WHO (2017) Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) – Fact sheet (updated May 2017); World Health Organization, Media centre, Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/mers-cov/en/. Last access 31 May, 2017
  14. 14.
    Centers for Disease Control and prevention – CDC; Ebola (Ebola Virus Disease) – Outbreaks Chronology; Centers for Disease Control and prevention, Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/history/chronology.html, Last access 31 May, 2017
  15. 15.
    Centers for Disease Control and prevention – CDC; Marburg hemorrhagic fever (Marburg HF) – Outbreaks Chronology 1967–2014; Centers for Disease Control and prevention, Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/marburg/outbreaks/chronology.html, Last access 31 May, 2017
  16. 16.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – OECD (2012) OECD Environmental Outlook to 2050. OECD publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264122246-en
  17. 17.
    O’Neill J (2014) Review on antimicrobial resistance antimicrobial resistance: tackling a crisis for the health and wealth of nations. London: Review on Antimicrobial Resistance. Available from: https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/AMR%20Review%20Paper%20-%20Tackling%20a%20crisis%20for%20the%20health%20and%20wealth%20of%20nations_1.pdf
  18. 18.
    World Health Organization (2004) Laboratory biosafety manual, 3rd edn, Avbailable from: http://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/biosafety/WHO_CDS_CSR_LYO_2004_11/en/
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Sewell DL (1995 Jul) Laboratory-associated infections and biosafety. Clin Microbiol Rev 8(3):389–405PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Review Panel on New SARS Case and Biosafety. Biosafety and SARS Incident in Singapore September 2003. Available from: http://www.biosafety.be/CU/PDF/Report_SARS_Singapore.pdf
  22. 22.
    Diego Viali dos Santos et al; Identification of foot and mouth disease risk areas using a multi-criteria analysis approach. PLOS ONE |  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178464 May 26, 2017
  23. 23.
    OVERVIEW REPORT Bio-risk management in laboratories handling live FMD virus. EUROPEAN COMMISSION HEALTH AND CONSUMERS DIRECTORATE-GENERAL. Ref. Ares (2015)854105 – 27/02/2015. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/food/fvo/overview_reports/act_getPDF.cfm?PDF_ID=335
  24. 24.
    Wheelis M (2002) Biological Warfare at the 1346 Siege of Caffa. Emerg Infect Dis 8(9):971–975CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sheldon H (2002) Harris; factories of death: Japanese biological warfare, 1932–45 and the American cover-up, 2nd edn. London, RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Manchee RJ et al (1981) Bacillua anthracis on Gruinard Island. Nature 294:254–255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    The United Nations General Assembly; Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare; Geneva, 17 June 1925Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    The United Nations Office at Geneva; The biological weapons convention. Available from: https://www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/(httpPages)/04FBBDD6315AC720C1257180004B1B2F?OpenDocument. Last Access 18 Aug 2017
  29. 29.
    Török TJ et al (1997) A large community outbreak of salmonellosis caused by intentional contamination of restaurant salad bars. JAMA 278(5):389–395CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Smithson AE (2000) Chapter 3: Rethinking the Lessons of Tokyo. In: Smithson AE, Levy L-A (eds), Ataxia: the chemical and biological terrorism threat and the US response. Washinghton, Henry L. Stimson Center, pp 77–79Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Moon S et al (2015) Will Ebola change the game? Ten essential reforms before the next pandemic. The report of the Harvard-LSHTM Independent Panel on the Global Response to Ebola; The Lancet 385(10009):2204–2221Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    World Health Organization; Emergencies – In equatorial Congo, WHO and its partner respond to an Ebola outbreak; http://www.who.int/emergencies/ebola-DRC-2017/articles/working-with-partners/en/

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandro Mancon
    • 1
  • Davide Mileto
    • 1
  • Maria Rita Gismondo
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory of Clinical Microbiology, Virology and BioemergenciesASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, “L. Sacco” – University HospitalMilanItaly
  2. 2.University of MilanMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations