139
8.7.1 Identification Methods for Biological Warfare
Health Hazards
An instrumental activity in risk assessment as part of the risk analysis process, is the
identification of health hazard agents. As such, the response to bioterrorism events
requires fast analytical methods for identification, that can quickly and specifically
detect the biological warfare agents used, allowing effective treatment of the
exposed individuals and the implementation of appropriate decontamination measures. As the biological warfare agents are effective in very low quantities, identification methods must exhibit both a high degree of sensitivity and a high degree of
selectivity to discriminate them from other interfering biological and non-biological
material present in complex samples [32].
Direct identification methods, such as mass spectrometry methods, are instrumental in biological warfare agent analysis because they can address various and
complex samples (e.g., air, water, culture medium, bodily fluids, and food), are
quick and sensitive. For example, MALDI-TOF MS (Matrix-assisted Laser
Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry) was shown to reliably
identify B. anthracis spores with a limit of detection of 2.5 × 10
6
spores within a
30 min long detection protocol) [32].
The application of direct detection may be hampered, particularly due to the
biological agents being available at low concentrations in the samples. Because
adverse health effects (i.e., diseases or infections) are linked to changes in physiological traits possibly involving new regulations and connections between molecular entities (e.g., genes, proteins or metabolites), it is plausible that such molecular
networks emerging after exposure to agents could offer an indirect signature for the
presence of specific hazard agents. In this context, indirect identification methods
(e.g., proteomics, metabolomics, breathomics and microbiomics) are promising
technologies that could complement the classical direct identification methods. For
example, proteomics can be applied for assessing host interaction and discovery of
therapeutic targets and markers or for identifying protein signatures of biological
health hazards [32].
8.8 Concluding Remarks
The annual report on global preparedness for health emergencies published by the
Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB, 2019) draws an actual and critical
alarm signal on the current status of public health. Whereas the past and current
efforts, as of 2019, are “grossly insufficient”, the emerging and newly emerging
disease are increasingly tough to manage (e.g. Ebola outbreak, flu, Zika, antimicrobial resistance) and a pandemic threat is real [33]. As such, the GPMB urges political action to prepare for and mitigate the effects of global health emergencies: (i)
governments must commit to preparedness by fostering the implementation of the
8 Risks and Consequences of Hazard Agents to Human Health
8.7.1 Identification Methods for Biological Warfare
Health Hazards
An instrumental activity in risk assessment as part of the risk analysis process, is the
identification of health hazard agents. As such, the response to bioterrorism events
requires fast analytical methods for identification, that can quickly and specifically
detect the biological warfare agents used, allowing effective treatment of the
exposed individuals and the implementation of appropriate decontamination measures. As the biological warfare agents are effective in very low quantities, identification methods must exhibit both a high degree of sensitivity and a high degree of
selectivity to discriminate them from other interfering biological and non-biological
material present in complex samples [32].
Direct identification methods, such as mass spectrometry methods, are instrumental in biological warfare agent analysis because they can address various and
complex samples (e.g., air, water, culture medium, bodily fluids, and food), are
quick and sensitive. For example, MALDI-TOF MS (Matrix-assisted Laser
Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry) was shown to reliably
identify B. anthracis spores with a limit of detection of 2.5 × 10
6
spores within a
30 min long detection protocol) [32].
The application of direct detection may be hampered, particularly due to the
biological agents being available at low concentrations in the samples. Because
adverse health effects (i.e., diseases or infections) are linked to changes in physiological traits possibly involving new regulations and connections between molecular entities (e.g., genes, proteins or metabolites), it is plausible that such molecular
networks emerging after exposure to agents could offer an indirect signature for the
presence of specific hazard agents. In this context, indirect identification methods
(e.g., proteomics, metabolomics, breathomics and microbiomics) are promising
technologies that could complement the classical direct identification methods. For
example, proteomics can be applied for assessing host interaction and discovery of
therapeutic targets and markers or for identifying protein signatures of biological
health hazards [32].
8.8 Concluding Remarks
The annual report on global preparedness for health emergencies published by the
Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB, 2019) draws an actual and critical
alarm signal on the current status of public health. Whereas the past and current
efforts, as of 2019, are “grossly insufficient”, the emerging and newly emerging
disease are increasingly tough to manage (e.g. Ebola outbreak, flu, Zika, antimicrobial resistance) and a pandemic threat is real [33]. As such, the GPMB urges political action to prepare for and mitigate the effects of global health emergencies: (i)
governments must commit to preparedness by fostering the implementation of the
8 Risks and Consequences of Hazard Agents to Human Health