Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:13:12.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prophylactic Defenses against Toxin Weapons: A Double-Edged Shield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Jonathan B. Tucker
Jonathan B. Tucker*
Affiliation:
Washington, DC, USA
Get access

Extract

The term “dual-use” toxins refers to a number of naturally occurring poisons that are finding increasing application in medical therapeutics and biomedical research but also have the potential for misuse as weapons of war and terrorism. Dr. Harsanyi's thought-provoking critique of my recent article on dual-use toxins deserves a detailed response. First, I apologize for quoting him out of context. In my defense, however, his referenced article (Harsanyi, 1992) does not make a clear distinction between the potential diversion of dual-use toxins by the intended customers—physicians and research scientists—or by toxin manufacturers. It is a subset of the latter, of course, that pose the greatest risk with respect to the potential misuse of toxins for nefarious purposes.

Type
Continuing Dialogue: Dual-Use Toxins
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , August 1994 , pp. 266 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

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

Bakan, J.A. (1994). “Microencapsulation.” In Swarbrick, J. and Boylan, J.C.(eds.), Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical Technology Vol. 9. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Brown, C.B., Campbell, I., and Priest, F.G. (1987). Introduction to Biotechnology. Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Harsanyi, Z.P. (1992). “Biological Defense and Industry.” In Zilinskas, R.A.(ed.), The Microbiologist and Biological Defense Research: Ethics, Politics and International Security. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 666:219–29.Google Scholar
Kiper, M. and Streich, J. (1990). Biologische Waffen: Die geplanten Seuchen. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenburch Verlag.Google Scholar
Laskin, A.I. and Lechevalier, H.A., eds. (1987). CRC Handbook of Microbiology, 2nd edition. Vol. VIII: Toxins and Enzymes. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Mandell, G.L., Douglas, R.G., and Bennett, J.E. (1985). Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Shone, C.C. and Hambleton, P. (1989). “Toxigenic Clostridia.” In Minton, N.P. and Clarke, D.J.(eds.), Clostridia. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.B. (1993). “Lessons of Iraq's Biological Warfare Programme.” Arms Control 14:229–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (1991). “Responding to the Problems of Defensive Biological Warfare Programs: Beyond Confidence-Building and Verification.” In Geissler, E. and Haynes, R.H.(eds.), Prevention of a Biological and Toxin Arms Race and the Responsibility of Scientists. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar