Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:48:59.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Minimizing Casualties in Biological and Chemical Threats (War and Terrorism): The Importance of Information to the Public in a Prevention Program

Part of: Prehospital and Disaster Medicine Counterterrorism Collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Shabtai Noy
Shabtai Noy*
Affiliation:
Senior Clinical and School Psychologist Jerusalem, Israel
*
12 Kubovy St., Jerusalem, 96757, Israel E-mail: Shabtai_Noy@huji.ac.il
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The most effective means of defending against biological or chemical warfare, whether in war or as a result of terror, is the use of primary prevention. The main goal of such a prevention program is to minimize the human loss by reducing the number of casualties (fatalities, physical wounds, and psychological injury). A secondary objective is to prevent the widespread sense of helplessness in the general population. These two aims complement each other. The more the public is active in defending itself, rather than viewing itself as helpless, the lesser the expected number of casualties of any kind. In order to achieve these two goals, educating the civilian population about risk factors and pointing out appropriate defensive strategies is critical. In the absence of an effective prevention program and active participation by the public, there is a high risk for massive numbers of physical and psychological casualties.

An essential ingredient of any preventive program, which ultimately may determine the success or failure of all other protective actions, is early, gradual dissemination of information and guidance to the public, so that citizens can become active participants in the program. The public needs to be given information concerning the nature of the threat and effective methods of coping with it, should an unconventional attack occur. Lack of such adaptive behavior (such as wearing protective gear) is likely to bring about vast numbers of physical and psychological casualties. These large numbers may burden the medical, political, and public safety systems beyond their ability to manage. Failure to provide reasonable prevention and effective interventions can lead to a destruction of the social and emotional fabric of individuals and the society. Furthermore, inadequate preparation, education, and communication can result in the development of damaging mistrust of the political and military leadership, disintegration of social and political structures, and perhaps, even risk the collapse of the democracy.

Keywords

coping with stresspanic preventionrisk communicationterrorismwar
Type
Special Reports
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 19 , Special Issue 1: Psychosocial Themes , March 2004 , pp. 29 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.DiGiovanni, C: Pertinent psychological issues in the immediate management of a weapons-of-mass-destruction event. Mil Med 2001;166(12):59–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Glass, TE, Schoch-Spana M: Bioterrorism and the people: How to vaccinate a city against panic. Confronting Biological Weapons 2002;Jan:34.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Noy, S: Early dissemination of information: An essential ingredient in the prevention of biological warfare. Harefuah, Journal of the Israel Medical Association 2002;141;92–95 (Hebrew, English abst.).Google Scholar
4.Noy, S: Psychological and Sociological Aspects. In: Yinon, A, Brenner, B, Katz, L, et al (eds), Biological Warfare: Medical Aspects and Approach. Israel Defence Force, Surgeon General HQ, NBC Branch, 2002.Google Scholar
5.Noy, S: Psychological Essentials in Coping With Biological Warfare: Early Dissemination of Information, An Essential Ingredient In Its Prevention. In: Yinon, A, Brenner, B, Katz, L, et al (eds), Biological Warfare: Medical Aspects and Approach. Israel Defence Force, Surgeon General HQ, NBC Branch, 2002.Google Scholar
6.Drabek, TE: Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings. New York: Springer Verlag, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Noy, S: Prevalence of psychological, somatic, and conduct, casualties in war. Mil Med 2001;166 (12, suppl. 2);31–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Noy, S: Gradations of stress as determinants of the clinical pictures immediately after traumatic events. Traumatology, The International Journal of Innovations in the Study of Traumatization Process and Methods for Reducing or Eliminating Related Human Suffering (Electronic Journal), 2001;7;3. Available at http://www.fsu.edu/∼trauma/. Accessed 10 August 2003.Google Scholar
9.Noy, S: Prevention Program Against Biological Warfare: The Public Must Be an Informed, Active Participant. In: Shemer, J, Shoenfeld, Y (eds), Terror and Medicine, Pabst Science Pub., 2003, pp 505–515.Google Scholar
10.Noy, S: The Clinical Pictures Expected at the Stage of Impact in a Situation of Biological Warfare. In: Shemer, J, Shoenfeld, Y (eds), Terror and Medicine, Pabst Science Pub., 2003, pp 516–524.Google Scholar
11.Covello, VT, Peters, RG, Wojtecki, JG, Hyde, RC: Risk communication, the West Nile virus epidemic, and bioterrorism: Responding to the communication challenges posed by the intentional or unintentional release of a pathogen in an urban setting. Journal of Urban Health, 2001;78:382–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.DiGiovanni, C: Domestic terrorism with chemical or biological agents: Psychiatric aspects. Amer J Psychiat 1999;156;1500–1505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Hall, MJ, Norwood, AE, Ursano, RJ et al. : Psychological and behavioral impacts of bioterrorism, PTSD Research Quarterly 2002;13(4):1–7.Google Scholar
14.Holloway, HC, Norwood, AE, Fullerton, CS et al. . The threat of biological weapons: Prophylaxis and mitigation of psychological and social consequences. JAMA 1997;278:425–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Myers, D: Weapons of mass destructions and terrorism: Mental health consequences and implications for planning and training. Paper presented at the Conference on Weapons of Mass Destructions, Bethesda, Maryland, May, 2001.Google Scholar
16.Ursano, RJ: Post-traumatic stress disorder. New Eng J Med 2002;346:130–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Collins, D, Carvalho, A: Chronic stress from the Goiania 137Cs radiation accident. Behav Med 1993;18;149–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Dolev, E: Bioterrorism and how to cope with it. Clinics in Dermatology 2002;31:343–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Schoch-Spana, M: Implications of Pandemic Influenza for Bioterrorism Response, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Special Section: Confronting Biological Weapons 2000;31:1409–1413.Google Scholar
20.Caplan, G: Principles of Preventive Psychiatry. New York: Basic Books, 1964.Google Scholar
21.Lazarus, RS, Folkman, S: Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer, 1984.Google Scholar
22.Noy, S: Can't Take it Anymore: Combat Stress Reactions. Tel Aviv, Publishing House of the Ministry of Defense, 1991 (Hebrew).Google Scholar
23.Noy, S: Traumatic Stress Situations. Tel Aviv, Shoken Pub., 2000 (Hebrew).Google Scholar
24.Glass, AJ: Neuropsychiatry in World War II, Vol II, Overseas Theaters. Mullins, WS, series editor, Washington DC: Office of the Surgeon General, Dept. of the Army, US Army, 1973.Google Scholar