Jennifer Jackson

Current Threat of Food Borne Terrorist Attack

“All hell breaks loose… as the tainted ice cream moves swiftly from distribution

centers to retailers to American homes. The first illness comes on the third day. Fives

day after the contamination, the deadly product is finally identified, but by then it is too

late. More than 71,000 people have consumed the tainted ice cream, 15,000 are ill, and

7,500 more are in the hospitals. ‘The ice cream folks said this was plausible’ Sholl

remarks casually, as he ponders what action to take in response to the outbreak. The final

tally: 67,122 dead and a $314.3 million blow to the economy.” This simulation actually

comes from a game software program created by Jeff Sholl. The game scenario is an

accurately depicted botulism outbreak, which is a major concern for the milk industry.1

Deliberate food (or plant/livestock used for food) contamination with a biological

(or other) agent for the purpose of killing, injuring, creating fear, panic, and/or chaos, and

economic loss is considered terrorism. Bioterrorism consists of using any biological

agent to contaminate most any target including agriculture, water, animals, or food.2

The advantages for terrorists in using biological agents are many. Biological

agents are relatively inexpensive and somewhat easy to acquire. The equipment used to

produce biological agents is also inexpensive and readily available, while these agents are

also relatively easy to produce. Biological agents are very effective in the correct

1 Boyle, m. (Nov. 2005). A Recipe for Disaster. Fortune, vol 152 Iss 10 pg.2. Retrieved on Feb 21, 2009 from: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune_archive/2005/11/14/8360705/index.htm

2 Rasco, B. and G. Bledsoe (2005). Bioterrorism and Food Safety. Chpt 1, pg 2. CRC press Boca Raton Florida USA

1

conditions in that they have the potential to cause mass casualties and will likely leave a

very high psychological impact on the public.3-4-5 Genetic modification could intensify

these advantages as well as add to them such as creating resistant agents.6

Botulinum toxin is one of the most lethally toxic substances in existence.7-8 It is

generally produced as bacteria in soil and requires an oxygen-free atmosphere in order to

grow.9 Little skill is needed to produce the pathogen.10-11

The U.S. (and global) food production and processing system is a huge,

interconnected mass production conglomerate and thus an open, centralized, fast moving,

and widespread target for food borne bioterrorism.12-13-14-15 With this “large-scale storage,

production, distribution, and consumption” food bioterrorism is one of the greatest

national (perhaps global) threats that currently exists.16 Storage and production in the U.S.

is done as a “continuous flow” in which the product flows through the system at each

stage, or it is done as a “batch”, in which the product is produced in batches at each stage.

Also, liquid foods are usually agitated to mix the product and thus have greater potential

3 Rasco et al (2005). chp 2, pg 504 Paul, F. (2004). Biological Warfare and Bioterrorism. Epidemiological Approach. Impacts on Public health Services. Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Terrorism: Biological Terrorism and Traumatism. Publisher: Publishing House of the Union of Scientists in Bulgaria, Sofia, pg 375 Dishovsky, C. (2004). The Problems of Chemical and Biological Terrorism, Medical Aspects of Chemical and Biological Terrorism: Biological Terrorism: Biological Terrorism and Traumatism. Publisher: Publishing House of the Union of Scientists in Bulgaria, Sofia, pg 126 Dishovsky (2004). Pg 127 Sobel, J; A. Khan; and D. Swerdlow (2002). Threat of a Biological Terrorist Attack on the U.S. Food Supply: The CDC Perspective. Lancet Vol 359, Iss 9309, pg 2 8 Boyle (2005). Pg 29 Rasco et al (2005). Chp 2 pg 5510 Blonder, G. (2007). Bracing for Bioterror. Business Week Online. Paragraph 10. Retrieved on Feb 21, 2009 from: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2007/+c20070521_139355.htm 11 Spake, A. (2001). Food Fright. U.S. News & World Report Vol 131, Iss 26, pg 112 Sobel et al (2002). Pg 113 Boyle (2005). Pg 114 Spake (2001). Pg 115 Weise, E. (2003). A One-Agency Solution to Protect the Food Supply: Streamline the Process, USA Today April 3, 2003, section: “Life” pg 10d 16 Wein, L. and Y. Liu (2005). Analyzing a Bioterror Attack on the Food Supply: The Case of Botulinum Toxin in milk. The National Academy of Sciences of the USA, Vol 102, Iss 28, pg 9984

2

for larger amounts of contamination than solid foods, which would most likely only have

patches of contamination along the processing line.17 Large and small-scale food

contamination is nothing new however. History has shown that this type of open food

supply is thus very vulnerable to accidental or intentional contamination. There is an

estimated 76 million illnesses nationwide due to food contamination each year.18-19 In

1984 for example, Aum Shinrikyo, a (terrorist) religious cult, sprayed Salmonella on

several restaurant salad bars and succeeded in making over 700 people ill. During the

1930s, while the Japanese occupied China, prisoners were fed Botulinum in their food in

order to kill them. In 1996, a laboratory worker intentionally used a pathogen in food to

infect colleagues. In 1970, a college student attending an agricultural program

contaminated his roommate’s food with worm ova found naturally in pigs! More

recently, in 2006, there was an outbreak of E. Coli on spinach, and an outbreak of

salmonella in tomatoes, and then another E. Coli outbreak found in produce later that

same year at Taco Bell and Taco Johns.20-21-22-23 Of course there must also be a mention

of the current outbreak of Salmonella in peanut butter and contaminated pistachio nuts

added to the list.

An ongoing, current concern is the threat of a botulinum toxin contamination in

the milk supply. With the wide-open food supply chain, from “cow to consumers”, there

are many stages of the milk processing system in which contamination can occur. Wein

17 Liu, y and L. Wein (2008). Mathematically Assessing the Consequences of food terrorism Scenarios. Journal of Food Science Vol 73, Iss 7, pg m34618 Weise, E. (2003) pg 219 Spake (2001) pg 120 DeWaal, C. (2007). Food Safety and Security: What Tragedy Teaches us about our 100-year-old Food Laws. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. Vol 40, Iss 4, pg 92821 Sobel et al (2002) Pg 1-222 Dishovsky (2004) Pg 1123 Rasco et al (2005) pg 55

3

and Liu (2005) offer a scenario that simulates what could happen during an attack on the

milk supply. A truck picks up milk from each farm once a day and transports it to the

processing facility. Then the milk is piped into one of several raw milk silos at the

processing plant. This milk gets piped into the facility where it is processed (several silos

pump milk at once so it is all mixed together). Then it is bottled and travels “down

stream” to retail establishments and then to consumers. The botulism could thus be

released at a number of different points during processing: in holding tanks at the farms,

in the truck, in the silo, or in the facility (it is unlikely to get released after it reaches the

retail establishments).24

In this type of scenario, a large number of people could be affected due to the fact

that milk is widely consumed. Thus rapid identification of the pathogen and vehicle is

essential. Lui and Wein (2008) state that…

“Because the U.S. government is likely to have very little reliable detailed data about terrorist intentions and capabilities that would inform a threat analysis and because a determined and resourceful terrorist group would be capable of defeating any security mechanisms that might be put into place at a food processing facility, a probabilistic risk analysis of food terrorist attack is almost entirely dictated by a consequences analysis”

rather than threat (likelihood of attack) or vulnerability (likelihood attack is successful)

analysis.25

Thus surveillance and detection are main components of preparedness for a food-

borne bioterrorism. Recognition of illness outbreaks is necessary in detecting

contamination. Once there is a confirmed illness outbreak then tracking begins in order

24 Wein et al (2005) pg 9984 25 Lui et al (2008) pg m349

4

to find and recall the tainted food. This tracking would also monitor the spread of an

outbreak.26-27-28

One method of surveillance is through the nationwide network PulseNet. Its

members include many public health laboratories that produce “DNA or genetic

fingerprinting” of pathogens/disease agents.29 PulseNet uses “pulsed-field gel

electrophoresis” as the method to create the genetic fingerprints. These prints are then

electronically transmitted to the laboratories in the PulseNet network as well as reginal

and national databases.30 FoodNet is another system and is used for tracking food borne

diseases based on population. Also Epi-X is a secure communications network used

between public health officials during emergency situations.31

There are many agencies that work to secure the food supply as well: The Center

for Disease Control (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), United States

Department of Agriculture (USDA), Safe Food International (SFI), Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Marine Fisheries Services (NOAA) are just a

few. However, there are many times uncoordinated efforts by these agencies individually

and thus less effective safety procedures put in place. This is one of the many

problematic situations in the system.32-33-34 Controlling an outbreak depends on a variety

of factors including how fast the epidemiologists relay the information to the “decision

26 Sobel et al (2002) pg 527 DeWaal (2007) pg 92728 Paul (2004) pg 4729 Spake (2001) pg 330 Sobel et al (2002) pg 531 Sobel et al (2002) pg 932 DeWall (2002) pg 93233 Sobel et al (2002) pg 434 Spake (2001) pg 2

5

makers” and how effective the decision makers are with their decision making as well as

handling the task of informing the public.35

In February of 2007, a Senator (D-IL) helped to enact the Safe Food Act (SFA).

This act called for the consolidation of several of the main agencies listed above into a

new category called the Food Safety Administration (FSA). FSA also created “risk-

based” inspections of food using a rating system based on scientific evidence and public

health issues, which helps in providing safety checks throughout the entire farm-to-fork

flow.36 Several new products are also in the works to help minimize, discovery, and

recovery of bioterrorism food attacks. The first is a bacteria zapper that kills bacteria on

surfaces (such as stainless steel) without leaving the mess that chemical

cleaners/sanitizers do. Second is the botulinum detector created by Eric Johnson (maker

of wrinkle removing botox) that detects minute amounts of the agent, which could be put

to work in a processing (milk?) plant. Finally, the up-and-coming hopeful in the making

is a field pathogen detector. First responders could use such a device to help detect

disease agents at the scene.37

Response preparedness is the most essential element of recovery from a food

borne attack. There is a need for stockpiles of antitoxins, vaccines, and other medicines.

In the event of a botulism attack specifically, there is a great need to have quick access to

enough ventilators to care for each and every victim. Currently, there is nowhere near

enough readily available equipment or personal to run the equipment during a “worse

case scenario”. The public health system would simply be overwhelmed during such a

catastrophe. As always, information sharing and communication in general is a key

35 Liu et al (2008) pg m34836 DeWaal (2007) pg 93337 Boyle (2005) pg 2

6

component in recovering from (any) a food borne attack. CDC, public health

professionals, agencies, and health care and first responders much have an effective

network set up in advance to effectively deal with an outbreak.38

There is a need to have pre-designated recovery spots throughout communities

that could be quickly transformed into makeshift hospitals with supplies in storage on the

premises or at least very close by. It is also essential to have community drills of worse

case scenario bioterrorism attacks in order to find weakness in any existing plans and

protocols. Public health officials need to keep in direct contact with local dispatch

personnel as well as first responders as a priority communication strategy thus ensuring

that everyone involved, from the highest government officials to the very first on the

scene such as police officers and EMS, are all “on the same page”.39

38 Paul (2004) pg 4939 Paul (2004) pg 49

7

References

Blonder, G. (2007). "Bracing for Bioterror." Business Week Online Retrieved on Feb.

21, 2009 from:

http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2007/tc20070521_139355.

htm>.

Boyle, M. (2005). "A Recipe for Disaster." Fortune Magazine pg 59-60. Retrieved on

Feb 21, 2009 From:

<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/11/14/8360705/

index.htm>.

DeWaal, C. (2007). "Food Safety and Security: What Tragedy Teaches Us about Our

100-Year-Old Food Laws." Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law Vol 40, Iss

4, pg 921-935.

Dishovsky, C. (2004). The Problems of Chemical and Biological Terrorism, Medical

aspects of chemical and biological terrorism: biological terrorism and

traumatism. Sofia, Bulgaria: Publishing House of the Union of Scientists in

Bulgaria.

Liu, y., and L. Wein (2008). "Mathematically Assessing the Consequences of Food

Terrorism Scenarios." Journal of Food Science Vol 73, Iss 7 pg m346-m353.

Paul, F. (2004). Biological Warfare and Bioterrorism, Epidemiological Approach,

Imapacts on Public Health Services, Medical Aspects of chemical and biological

8

terrorism: biological terrorism and traumatism. Sofia, Bulgaria: Publishing

House of the Union of Scientists in Bulgaria.

Sobel, J. (2002). "Threat of a Biological Terrorist Attack on the U.S. Food Supply: The

CDC Perspective." Lancet Vol 359, Iss 9309, pg 874-881.

Spake, A. (2001). "Food Fright." U.S. News & World Report Vol 131, Iss 26, pg 48-50.

Wein, L. and Y. Liu (2005). "Analyzing a Bioterror Attack on the Food Supply: The

Case of Botulinum Toxin in Milk." Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences Vol 102, Iss 28, pg 9984-9989. Retrieved on Feb. 20, 2009 From:

<http://www.pnas.org/content/102/28/9984.full.pdf+html>.

Weise, E. (2003). "A One-Agency Solution to Protect the Food Supply: Streamline the

Process." USA Today April 2, 2003. Retrieved on April 1, 2009 From:

<http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2003-04-02-foodsafety-usat_x.htm>.

9