Vulnerability of populations and the urban health care systems to nuclear weapon attack--examples from four American cities.

BACKGROUND: The threat posed by the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) within the United States has grown significantly in recent years, focusing attention on the medical and public health disaster capabilities of the nation in a large scale crisis. While the hundreds of thousands or millions of casualties resulting from a nuclear weapon would, in and of itself, overwhelm our current medical response capabilities, the response dilemma is further exacerbated in that these resources themselves would be significantly at risk. There are many limitations on the resources needed for mass casualty management, such as access to sufficient hospital beds including specialized beds for burn victims, respiration and supportive therapy, pharmaceutical intervention, and mass decontamination. RESULTS: The effects of 20 kiloton and 550 kiloton nuclear detonations on high priority target cities are presented for New York City, Chicago, Washington D.C. and Atlanta. Thermal, blast and radiation effects are described, and affected populations are calculated using 2000 block level census data. Weapons of 100 Kts and up are primarily incendiary or radiation weapons, able to cause burns and start fires at distances greater than they can significantly damage buildings, and to poison populations through radiation injuries well downwind in the case of surface detonations. With weapons below 100 Kts, blast effects tend to be stronger than primary thermal effects from surface bursts. From the point of view of medical casualty treatment and administrative response, there is an ominous pattern where these fatalities and casualties geographically fall in relation to the location of hospital and administrative facilities. It is demonstrated that a staggering number of the main hospitals, trauma centers, and other medical assets are likely to be in the fatality plume, rendering them essentially inoperable in a crisis. CONCLUSION: Among the consequences of this outcome would be the probable loss of command-and-control, mass casualties that will have to be treated in an unorganized response by hospitals on the periphery, as well as other expected chaotic outcomes from inadequate administration in a crisis. Vigorous, creative, and accelerated training and coordination among the federal agencies tasked for WMD response, military resources, academic institutions, and local responders will be critical for large-scale WMD events involving mass casualties.

Weapons of mass destruction: Overview of the CBRNEs (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives).

The events of September 11, 2001, made citizens of the world acutely aware of disasters consequent to present-day terrorism. This is a war being waged for reasons obscure to many of its potential victims. The term "NBCs" was coined in reference to terrorist weapons of mass destruction, i.e., nuclear, biological and chemical. The currently accepted acronym is "CBRNE" which includes Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive weapons. Non-nuclear explosives are the most common terrorist weapon now in use. Nuclear and radiological weapons are beyond the scope of this publication, which focuses on the "CBEs", i.e. chemical, biological and explosive weapons. Although neurologists will not be the first responders to CBEs, they must know about the neurological effects in order to provide diagnosis and treatment to survivors. Neurological complications of chemical, biological and explosive weapons which have or may be used by terrorists are reviewed by international experts in this publication. Management and treatment profiles are outlined.

The challenge of preparation for a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear terrorist attack.

Terrorism is not a new phenomenon, but, in the contemporary scene, it has established itself in a manner which commands the most serious attention of the authorities. Until relatively recently, the major threat has been through the medium of conventional weaponry and explosives. Their obvious convenience of use and accessibility guarantees that such methods will continue to represent a serious threat. However, over the last few years, terrorists have displayed an enthusiasm for higher levels of carnage, destruction and publicity. This trend leads inexorably to the conclusion that chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) methods will be pursued by terrorist organisations, particularly those which are well organised, are based on immutable ideological principles, and have significant financial backing. Whilst it is important that the authorities and the general public do not risk over-reacting to such a threat (otherwise, they will do the work of the terrorists for them), it would be equally ill-advised to seek comfort in denial. The reality of a CBRN event has to be accepted and, as a consequence, the authorities need to consider (and take seriously) how individuals and the community are likely to react thereto and to identify (and rehearse in a realistic climate) what steps would need to be taken to ameliorate the effects of such an event.

Archeo-cell biology: carbon dating is not just for pots and dinosaurs.

Defining the life span of specific human cell populations is limited by our inability to mark the exact time when cells are born in a way that can be detected over many years. In this issue of Cell, Spalding et al. (2005) describe a clever strategy for retrospectively birth dating human cells in vivo, based on their incorporation of 14C during a peak in atmospheric levels of this isotope resulting from above-ground nuclear arms testing in the 1950s.

The bane of "inhumane" weapons and overkill: an overview of increasingly lethal arms and the inadequacy of regulatory controls.

Weapons of both defense and offense have grown steadily in their effectiveness--especially since the industrial revolution. The mass destruction of humanity, by parts or in whole, became reality with the advent of toxic agents founded on chemistry and biology or nuclear weapons derived from physics. The military's new non-combat roles, combined with a quest for non-lethal weapons, may change the picture in regard to conventional defense establishments but are unlikely to deter bellicose tyrants or the new terrorists from using the unlimited potential of today's and tomorrow's arsenals. The author addresses the issues that are raised by this developing situation with the intent of seeking those ethics that will enable us to survive in a future and uncertain world.