BioWatch

BioWatch is a United States Federal Government program to detect the release of pathogens into the air as part of a terrorist attack on major American cities. Reportedly operating in Philadelphia, New York City, Washington, DC, San Diego, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, St. Louis, Houston, Los Angeles and 21 other cities,> [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32152.html#_1_3 "The BioWatch Program: Detection of Bioterrorism"] Congressional Research Service Report No. RL 32152. November 19 2003, retrieved October 22 2007] the BioWatch program was created in 2001 in response to the increased threat of bioterrorism sparked by the 2001 anthrax attacks, and was announcing in President George W. Bush's State of the Union Address of 2003. The program, described as "the nation's first early warning network of sensors to detect biological attack" operates via a system of filters located within existing Environmental Protection Agency air filters which monitor the quality of the air. Results from these filters are analyzed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who then pass any significant results to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Origins

The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its FBI case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on September 18, 2001. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two Democratic U.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others. As a response, the US increased countermeasure research funding and funding into the public health sector. Before the BioWatch program, the quickest method of detecting the presence of an infectious material was through the diagnosis of infected patients, however the most effective treatment takes place prior to infection or in its early stages. While the Central Intelligence Agency maintains that the use of bioterrorism in the United States is unlikely, [Directorate of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, Terrorist CBRN: Materials and Effects, June, 2003.] the Biowatch program was created in 2001 in conjunction with the FBI, EPA, United States Department of Homeland Security and the US Laboratory Response Network for Bioterrorism, and was tested by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Association of Public Health Laboratories. According to the DHS, the BioWatch program helps to provide "early warning of a mass pathogen release." The original 31 city program cost $60 million to implement, with a proposed expansion in 2005 to cost $118 million. [ [http://www.ndu.edu/ctnsp/biosensing_05.htm "A Hot Idea"] National Defense University, retrieved October 22, 2007]

Instances of positive results

On October 9 2003 a BioWatch filter in Houston, Texas detected "low levels of the bacterium that causes tularemia". Three consecutive days of positive results were recorded. [Houston Department of Health and Human Services, [http://www.ci.houston.tx.us/departme/health/bacteria%20detection.htm "Officials Following Up on Bacteria Detection"] Press Release] Additional tests were taken, and the local area was watched for signs of infection among the population. While an investigation is still on going, Director of the Houston Department of Health and Human Services stated that "We are investigating to determine if the bacteria was always present or newly present and if it represents a health threat to the community."

Response and criticism

The BioWatch system has received a mix of responses since coming online, many that result in waste of resources and a lowering public confidence in the system. A Congressional report in 2003 recorded that there was concern that the BioWatch filters would fail to detect indoor or underground releases, and also that the existence of BioWatch filters in some cities would direct terrorists to attack other cities without such protection. The report also highlighted the risk of the filters themselves being detected and destroyed. The report also states that, as EPA filters are located based on different policies than those which would provide optimum locations for counter-bioterrorism sensors, the BioWatch filters may not be optimally located. Furthermore, the BioWatch system may miss releases that take place within the gaps in coverage. [Geoff Dutton, "Ohio Says Security Requires Secrecy On Tests For Air Toxins," The Columbus Dispatch, March 21 2003, p. 3] The House of Representatives also concluded that models used to predict the spread of an infectious agent after release and detection may be inaccurate. [U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on National Security, "Emerging Threats and International Relations, Following Toxic Clouds: Science and Assumptions in Plume Modeling", 108th Congress, June 2, 2003] [http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/biosecurity_briefing/archive/govt_response/content/2007-02-09-dhsoigrptmismanagementbiowatch.html "DHS OIG Report Finds Mismanagement of BioWatch Program"] Center for Biosecurity, retrieved October 22 2007]

The Congressional Report also raises concerns as to whether BioWatch can detect pathogens in large, polluted cities, as well as issues relating to the BioWatch filter reporting harmful pathogens which are actually within safe background levels, and thus would throw up more positive hits than actual investigation warrants. There are also concerns that the BioWatch filters kill whatever pathogen has set them off, thus removing the possibility of further tests being undertaken. ["BioWatch Program Aims For Nationwide Detection of Airborne Pathogens" CIDRAP News, February 26, 2003, revised March 10, 2003] Finally, concerns were raised in the Congressional Report regarding the sensitivity of the filters, and the fact that each filter would be exposed to different environmental conditions and thus a standardized detection rate would be near impossible to achieve. The complicated response that would be required should the BioWatch filter detect a pathogen would also be difficult to implement and put strain on local health authorities. Funding, policy and evaluation of effectiveness were all other areas of concern

Notes

External links

* [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32152.html#Back48 "The BioWatch Program: Detection of Bioterrorism"] Congressional Research Service Report No. RL 32152, November 19 2003.
* [http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/mgmtrpts/OIG_07-22_Jan07.pdf "DHS' Management of the BioWatch Program"] Department of Homeland Security, January 2007.