Literature DB >> 12959889

Responding to a bioterrorist attack: environmental investigation of anthrax in New Jersey.

David J Valiante1, Donald P Schill, Eddy A Bresnitz, Gregory A Burr, Kenneth R Mead.   

Abstract

A bioterrorism attack using the United States postal system to deliver a hazardous biological agent to specific targets created multiple environmental and occupational exposure risks along the path of the anthrax-containing letters. On October 18, 2001, a suspected case of cutaneous anthrax was confirmed in a postal worker from the Trenton Processing and Distribution Center where at least four suspect letters were postmarked. Over the next three weeks, a team of investigators collected samples at 57 workplaces in New Jersey as part of a comprehensive environmental investigation to assess anthrax contamination as a result of this bioterrorist attack. A total of 1369 samples were collected with positive sample results found in two mail processing and distribution centers, six municipal post offices, and one private company. This large-scale epidemiological and public health investigation conducted by state and federal agencies included environmental evaluations utilizing general industrial hygiene principles. Issues of sampling strategy, methods, agency cooperation and communication, and site assessment coordination are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12959889     DOI: 10.1080/10473220301445

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Occup Environ Hyg        ISSN: 1047-322X


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of a macrofoam swab protocol for the recovery of Bacillus anthracis spores from a steel surface.

Authors:  L R Hodges; L J Rose; A Peterson; J Noble-Wang; M J Arduino
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Public health investigation after the discovery of ricin in a South Carolina postal facility.

Authors:  Joshua G Schier; Manish M Patel; Martin G Belson; Amee Patel; Michael Schwartz; Nicole Fitzpatrick; Dan Drociuk; Scott Deitchman; Richard Meyer; Toby Litovitz; William A Watson; Carol H Rubin; Max Kiefer
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-04-05       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Effect of Surface Sampling and Recovery of Viruses and Non-Spore-Forming Bacteria on a Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Model for Fomites.

Authors:  Mark H Weir; Tomoyuki Shibata; Yoshifumi Masago; Dena L Cologgi; Joan B Rose
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 9.028

4.  False-negative rate and recovery efficiency performance of a validated sponge wipe sampling method.

Authors:  Paula A Krauter; Greg F Piepel; Raymond Boucher; Matt Tezak; Brett G Amidan; Wayne Einfeld
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 5.  Considerations for estimating microbial environmental data concentrations collected from a field setting.

Authors:  Erin E Silvestri; Cynthia Yund; Sarah Taft; Charlena Yoder Bowling; Daniel Chappie; Kevin Garrahan; Eletha Brady-Roberts; Harry Stone; Tonya L Nichols
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 5.563

6.  Epidemics of panic during a bioterrorist attack--a mathematical model.

Authors:  Vladan Radosavljevic; Desanka Radunovic; Goran Belojevic
Journal:  Med Hypotheses       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 1.538

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.