A decade of countering bioterrorism: Incremental progress, fundamental failings

Biosecurity and Bioterrorism

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 49-54

  Danzig, Richard ^a  

^a Department of the Center for A New American Security ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL WARFARE; CIVIL DEFENSE; DISASTER PLANNING; GOVERNMENT; MANAGEMENT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; UNITED STATES;

BIOTERRORISM; CIVIL DEFENSE; DISASTER PLANNING; GOVERNMENT; POLICY MAKING; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PUBLIC POLICY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84859196313     PISSN: 15387135     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2011.0104     Document Type: Article

References (2)

1. Franco C, Sell TK. Federal agency biodefense funding, FY2010-FY2011. Biosecur Bioterror 2010;8(2):129-149. An unascertainable, but no doubt substantial, portion of this has been expended on preexisting efforts now relabeled as relevant to bioterrorism. Still, this yields benefits by, for example, providing funding infusions to eroding public health systems.
2. See DARPA, Defense Sciences Office. Accelerated manufacture of pharmaceuticals (AMP). http://www.darpa.mil/Our-Work/DSO/Programs/Accelerated- Manufacture-of-Pharmaceuticals-%28AMP%29.aspx. Accessed January 21, 2012.