The Path Toward Improved Biosurveillance 25
Lasrick writes "Interesting opinion piece that explains successes and holes in the U.S. system of detecting and responding to pandemics: 'In April 2009, following an experimental protocol, staff members at a Navy lab in San Diego tested specimens from two patients using a new diagnostic device. Both tested positive for influenza, but, oddly, neither specimen matched the influenza A subtypes that are known to infect humans. This finding raised suspicions, and so the samples were sent to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Further tests would reveal that these two patients were the first reported cases of a novel H1N1 influenza virus that would cause a global pandemic in 2009. In many respects, the Navy lab's discovery of H1N1 is a success story for US efforts to boost its biosurveillance capabilities.'"
More Whitewashing (Score:2, Interesting)
I Like all these "US government surveillance is GOOD for you!" articles lately.
Means they really are running scared about all the illegal shit they do. I hope the paycheck for Lasrick ist worth it.
And "Biosurveillance" is a cool newspeak where all the first links on google go to such paragons of virtue as the dhs.gov, defense.gov and so on
Weird Article (Score:4, Interesting)
I basically don't get it. The Navy has developed a new test for Influenza that (apparently) doesn't need the typical surface markers that other tests do. Cool. But TFA just drops that and wanders around the US government's attempt at creating a more unified / functional bio-surveillance program but then complains we don't have the money or expertise to do it.
OK. Fine. Another first world Problem.
I'd like to know more about the test. I'm well aware of the Government's inability to organize anything more complex than an egg coloring contest.