scholarly journals The Ethics of Biomedical Military Research: Therapy, Prevention, Enhancement, and Risk

2021 ◽  
pp. 235-252
Author(s):  
Alexandre Erler ◽  
Vincent C. Müller
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Laurent Tatu ◽  
Jean-Paul Feugeas

Botulinum toxin is nowadays approved as an effective medication for various neurological disorders. The extreme toxicity of this toxin-inducing botulism, a severe lethal muscle-paralyzing illness, has been well known since the seminal works of the end of the 19th century. Because of this toxicity, botulinum toxin was one of the first agents to be considered for use as a biological weapon. The Second World War was a crucial period for the first attempts to weaponize this toxin even if many unknown factors about botulinum toxin still existed at the outbreak of the war. Using documents from the British National Archives and other published sources, we discuss the main points of the attempts to weaponize this toxin in German and Allied armies. During WW2, Allied intelligence services regularly reported a major German threat related to the potential use of botulinum toxin as a biological weapon, especially during the preparation of <i>Operation Overlord</i>, the Allied invasion to liberate Europe. All these reports would ultimately prove to be inaccurate: botulinum toxin was not part of the German military arsenal even if some German scientists tried to use the results of the French pre-war military research. Misinformation spread by intelligence services stimulated military research at Porton Down facilities in England and at Camp Detrick in the USA. These studies led to a succession of failures and myths about the weaponization of botulinum toxin. Nevertheless, major progress (purification, toxoid) arose from the military research, providing useful data for the first steps of the therapeutic use of botulinum toxin in the post-war years.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Edwards ◽  
Guillaume L. Hoareau

Fluids are a vital tool in the armament of acute care clinicians in both civilian and military resuscitation. We now better understand complications from inappropriate resuscitation with currently available fluids; however, fluid resuscitation undeniably remains a life-saving intervention. Military research has driven the most significant advances in the field of fluid resuscitation and is currently leading the search for the fluids of the future. The veterinary community, much like our civilian human counterparts, should expect the fluid of the future to be the fruit of military research. The fluids of the future not only are expected to improve patient outcomes but also be field expedient. Those fluids should be compatible with military environments or natural disaster environments. For decades, military personnel and disaster responders have faced the peculiar demands of austere environments, prolonged field care, and delayed evacuation. Large scale natural disasters present field limitations often similar to those encountered in the battlefield. The fluids of the future should, therefore, have a long shelf-life, a small footprint, and be resistant to large temperature swings, for instance. Traumatic brain injury and hemorrhagic shock are the leading causes of preventable death for military casualties and a significant burden in civilian populations. The military and civilian health systems are focusing efforts on field-expedient fluids that will be specifically relevant for the management of those conditions. Fluids are expected to be compatible with blood products, increase oxygen-carrying capabilities, promote hemostasis, and be easy to administer in the prehospital setting, to match the broad spectrum of current acute care challenges, such as sepsis and severe systemic inflammation. This article will review historical military and civilian contributions to current resuscitation strategies, describe the expectations for the fluids of the future, and describe select ongoing research efforts with a review of current animal data.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. 7_18-7_24
Author(s):  
Keiichi TSUNEISHI

2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
John McManus ◽  
Annette McClinton ◽  
Robert Gerhardt ◽  
Michael Morris
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document