You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 278 No. 5, August 6, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Commentaries
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bioterrorism
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Why Should We Be Concerned About Biological Warfare?

Richard Danzig, JD, DPhil; Pamela B. Berkowsky, MALD

JAMA. 1997;278(5):431-432.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

There is a widespread tendency to think about defense against biological warfare as unnecessary, as someone else's responsibility, or as simply too difficult. Unfortunately, however, the dangers posed by biological weapons did not disappear when the United States began to unilaterally dismantle its own of-fensive program in 1969. The dangers did not vanish with the signing of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1972, and they did not dissipate with the end of the Cold War or the threat of nuclear retaliation against Iraq during the Persian Gulf conflict. Only by planning and investing in the right training and defensive measures can we diminish the likelihood that biological weapons will be used and reduce the risks, disruption, and casualties in the event that such weapons are used.1 Fortunately, significant improvements can be made in our defensive posture at relatively modest levels of investment, and both the Department of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Footnotes

This commentary was written when both authors worked for the Office of the Undersecretary of the Navy, US Department of the Navy, Washington, DC. Mr Danzig, a Washington, DC, lawyer, was undersecretary of the US Navy from November 1993 through May 1997. Ms Berkowsky is now a special assistant in the Office of the US Secretary of Defense.

Reprints: Pamela B. Berkowsky, MALD, 1000 Navy Pentagon, Room 4E732, Washington, DC 20350-1000 (e-mail: berkowsky.pamela@osd.pentagon.mil).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1997 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.