| Home |
 |
Student Resources |
|
Chapter 20: Technical Definitions |
|
Projects and Case Studies |
|
Anthrax Missteps Offer Guide to Fight Next Bioterror Battle
New York Times article by Lawrence K. Altman and Gina Kolata that follows the unfolding of a bioterror response team in Washington, D.C. Despite the extraordinary circumstances of January, 2002, this story is more about effective and responsible technical communication than biochemistry. Public health officials had to respond quickly to the anthrax outbreak and decide how much to tell the public at the same time. Very likely the officials quoted in this article knew that first Sunday of the press conference announcing a serious inhalation anthrax case in D.C. that cross-contamination was more than a likely factor. Yet that single fact, that other pieces of mail from the Postal Center were being delivered with anthrax powder on them, was not discussed until two WEEKS and several mysterious deaths later. What is the best ethical position to take when presented with this type of case? Does the possibility of panic negate the need for timely release of information?
NOTE: You may need to register as a free user at the New York Times site first. Then if you take the link above, it won't charge you to access the page. If you try to get there through the archives, it will charge you a fee, however.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response. FAQs on Anthrax and Smallpox, What to Do in an Emergency, and a biological, chemical, and radiological listing of agents and threats. Less accessible to the layperson than many media sites, the CDC is the site of record for public health professionals and public relations people, providing both policy and guidance. How does what you see here appear to be a clarification and response to the criticism in the New York Times article above?
ABCNews Sci/Tech
The Science and Technology section of ABCNEWS.com can be a comprehensive source of technical explanations of complex topics. The resource and information center provided on Anthrax by ABCNEWS.com was arguably superior to the CDC's web site. ABCNEWS.com also provided an interactive pop-up window analyzing the structure of the World Trade Center and how it collapsed. How are the high multimedia production values of sites like this changing technical communication? Unlike the New York Times site, ABCNEWS.com has neglected to archive this comprehensive source. Is this doing a disservice to people seeking technical information on the Web, or is it a simple business decision? Are people within their rights keeping and distributing copies of these pages if they are eventually going to disappear?
|