Sign inSubmit
ArticleMetrics
Research Article · Free to read · Published 30 April 2005

Chemical and Biological Warfare: Should Rapid Detection Techniques Be Researched To Dissuade Usage? A Review

Mark R. Hurst1 & Ebtisam Wilkins1

American Journal of Applied Sciences, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp. 796–805 · doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2005.796.805

6,861 accesses5,648 downloads5 citations (Crossref)Metrics
Cite Check for updates

Abstract

Chemistry, microbiology and genetic engineering have opened new doorways for the human race to propel itself to a better future. However, there is a darker side to Bioengineering. One element of this is the manufacture and proliferation of biological and chemical weapons. It is clearly in the interest of humankind to prevent the future use of such weapons of mass destruction. Though many agents have been proposed as potential biological and chemical weapons, the feasibility of these weapons is a matter of conjecture. The unpredictable and indiscriminate devastation caused by natural epidemics and hazardous chemicals during wartime without medical treatment should warn humans of the dangers of employing them as weapons. This study argues rapid detection techniques may dissuade future use. Many agents are far less toxic to treatment. A quick response time to most attacks will decrease the chances of serious health issues. The agent will be less effective and discourage the attacker from using the weapon. Fortunately, the Chemical and Biological Weapons Convention (CWCIBWC) allows defensive work in the area of biological and chemical weapons. Consequently, the review will discuss history, delivery/dispersal systems and specific agents of the warfare. The study presents current developments in biosensors for toxic materials of defense interest. It concludes with future directions for biosensor development.

Licence and reuse

Free to read. This article carries the publisher’s copyright, as printed on it: © 2005 Science Publications. It is free to read; ask us before reusing it.

How to reuse this article

Responses (0)

Have a comment on this research? Sign in to respond. Responses are moderated and published with your name and affiliation; the authors are invited to reply. How we use your dataWrite a response

About this article

Cite this article

Hurst, M. R. & Wilkins, E. (2005). Chemical and Biological Warfare: Should Rapid Detection Techniques Be Researched To Dissuade Usage? A Review. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 2(4), 796–805. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2005.796.805

Licence
© Science Publications
Issue
Volume 2, Issue 4
Policies
Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
Version
Version of record
Chemical and Biological Warfare: Should Rapid Detection Techniques Be Researched To Dissuade Usage? A ReviewAmerican Journal of Applied Sciences · Volume 2, Issue 4 · pp. 796–805 · © Science PublicationsDownload