The psychological impacts of bioterrorism.

SINCE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, federal, state, and local government agencies’ emergency response planning has focused on possible terrorist attacks using chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive (CBRNE) weapons. Shortly after the destruction of the World Trade Center and the attack on the Pentagon, letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to media outlets and government officials. Twenty-two people became ill and five died. Although these acts of bioterrorism were limited, millions of people were made anxious and the routine act of opening the mail became dangerous. The U.S. Postal Service was disrupted, a Senate office building was shut down, and widespread psychological, behavioral, and social impacts were felt in affected communities. Before September 11, 2001, government agencies and public health leaders in states from representative regions of the country had not incorporated mental health as a component of their overall response plan to bioterrorism.1 Anticipating the psychological and behavioral consequences of a bioterrorist attack is now an urgent task facing our government’s leaders and our nation’s healthcare system. Understanding and planning for the public’s psychological response to terrorism has far-reaching implications for the practical management of a bioterrorist event. Bioterrorism raises special issues such as administering vaccination programs, distributing prophylactic medication, evacuation, isolation, and quarantine, all of which demand skilled psychosocial management. Developing a risk communication and public education program that addresses these concerns is essential to sustain the public trust and ensure people will follow directions that help control the spread of disease. CBRNE terrorist acts may be motivated by any number of objectives: wielding power to achieve a political goal, exacting revenge, punishing nonbelievers, or enacting an apocalyptic vision. The victims who are killed, injured, or even directly affected are rarely the primary target.2 It is the fear and terror instilled in the public’s psyche, the loss of one’s sense of personal and community safety, and the disruption of critical social infrastructure that can cripple a nation’s economy and leadership. In the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack, individuals and communities may respond in adaptive, effective ways based on information and directions from trusted leaders or they may make fear-based decisions, resulting in unhelpful behaviors or even panic. Understanding the psychological responses to a CBRNE attack enables leaders and medical experts to talk to the public, promoting resilient healthy behaviors and sustaining the social fabric of the community. Recognizing the influence that psychological distress has on physical symptoms, illness, and injury allows medical personnel to more effectively triage and treat patients. Managing psychological distress that will be ubiquitous, as distinct from psychiatric illness, is appropriate and restorative and decreases the likelihood of future mental health problems.

[1]  E. Susser,et al.  Combating the terror of terrorism. , 2002, Scientific American.

[2]  R. Yehuda,et al.  Post-traumatic stress disorder. Editorial , 2002 .

[3]  M. J. Hall,et al.  The Psychological Burden of Bioterrorism , 2004 .

[4]  Dickson S Diamond,et al.  Medical management of terrorism-related behavioral syndromes , 2004 .

[5]  C. Fullerton,et al.  The threat of biological weapons. Prophylaxis and mitigation of psychological and social consequences. , 1997, JAMA.

[6]  Laurie Garrett,et al.  Betrayal of Trust: The Collapse of Global Public Health , 2000 .

[7]  M. Guttmacher The Mind of the Murderer , 1959 .

[8]  Lisa Thalji,et al.  Psychological reactions to terrorist attacks: findings from the National Study of Americans' Reactions to September 11. , 2002, JAMA.

[9]  L. Gostin,et al.  Large-scale quarantine following biological terrorism in the United States: scientific examination, logistic and legal limits, and possible consequences. , 2001, JAMA.

[10]  The Power of the Pink Ribbon: Raising Awareness of the Mental Health Implications of Terrorism , 2004, Psychiatry.

[11]  Robert J Ursano,et al.  Psychological Impact of the Animal-Human Bond in Disaster Preparedness and Response , 2004, Journal of psychiatric practice.

[12]  J. Shemer,et al.  Medical aspects of the Iraqi missile attacks on Israel. , 1991, Israel journal of medical sciences.

[13]  Betty Pfefferbaum,et al.  Research on the mental health effects of terrorism. , 2002, JAMA.

[14]  Dori B. Reissman,et al.  New Roles for Mental and Behavioral Health Experts to Enhance Emergency Preparedness and Response Readiness , 2004, Psychiatry.

[15]  M. Elliott,et al.  A National Longitudinal Study of the Psychological Consequences of the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks: Reactions, Impairment, and Help-Seeking , 2004, Psychiatry.

[16]  T. Glass,et al.  Bioterrorism and the people: how to vaccinate a city against panic. , 2002, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[17]  Virginia Gil-Rivas,et al.  Nationwide longitudinal study of psychological responses to September 11. , 2002, JAMA.

[18]  M. Elliott,et al.  A national survey of stress reactions after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  S. Galea,et al.  Psychological sequelae of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York City. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  Bill Durodié,et al.  Facing the possibility of bioterrorism , 2004, Current Opinion in Biotechnology.

[21]  S Hinohara,et al.  Sarin poisoning on Tokyo subway. , 1997, Southern medical journal.

[22]  Elizabeth M. Smith,et al.  Psychiatric disorders among survivors of the Oklahoma City bombing. , 1999, JAMA.

[23]  C. Fullerton,et al.  Preparing for bioterrorism at the state level: report of an informal survey. , 2002, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry.

[24]  J. Barbera,et al.  The reality of the modern bioterrorism response , 2002, The Lancet.