The Urgent Need for Public Health Preparedness Funding and Support

2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-365
Author(s):  
Linda C. Degutis ◽  
Kimberley Shoaf ◽  
Tomás J. Aragón ◽  
Christopher Atchison ◽  
David Dyjack ◽  
...  
2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 150-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louisa E. Chapman ◽  
Ernest E. Sullivent ◽  
Lisa A. Grohskopf ◽  
Elise M. Beltrami ◽  
Joseph F. Perz ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTPeople wounded during bombings or other events resulting in mass casualties or in conjunction with the resulting emergency response may be exposed to blood, body fluids, or tissue from other injured people and thus be at risk for bloodborne infections such as hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus, or tetanus. This report adapts existing general recommendations on the use of immunization and postexposure prophylaxis for tetanus and for occupational and nonoccupational exposures to bloodborne pathogens to the specific situation of a mass casualty event. Decisions regarding the implementation of prophylaxis are complex, and drawing parallels from existing guidelines is difficult. For any prophylactic intervention to be implemented effectively, guidance must be simple, straightforward, and logistically undemanding. Critical review during development of this guidance was provided by representatives of the National Association of County and City Health Officials, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and representatives of the acute injury care, trauma, and emergency response medical communities participating in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Terrorism Injuries: Information, Dissemination and Exchange project. The recommendations contained in this report represent the consensus of US federal public health officials and reflect the experience and input of public health officials at all levels of government and the acute injury response community. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2008;2:150–165)


2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 728-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georges C. Benjamin

ABSTRACTThe last 14 years has taught us that that we are facing a new reality; a reality in which public health emergencies are a common occurrence. Today, we live in a world with dangerous people without state sponsorship who are an enormous threat to our safety; one where emerging and reemerging infectious diseases are waiting to break out; a world where the benefits of globalization in trade, transportation, and social media brings threats to our communities faster and with a greater risk than ever before. Even climate change has entered into the preparedness equation, bringing with it the forces of nature in the form of extreme weather and its complications. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:728–729)


Author(s):  
Monica Marquez ◽  
Prachee Patel ◽  
Marisa Raphael ◽  
Beth Maldin Morgenthau

2021 ◽  
pp. e1-e3
Author(s):  
Michael R. Fraser ◽  
Raphael M. Barishansky ◽  
James S. Blumenstock

2003 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-505 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark S. Dworkin ◽  
Xinfang Ma ◽  
Roman G. Golash

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
MA Stoto ◽  
E Savoia ◽  
C Nelson ◽  
R Piltch-Loeb ◽  
S Guicciardi ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 567-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronak B. Patel ◽  
Hannah B. Wild

AbstractHumanitarian aid in settings of conflict has always been fraught with challenges. In the absence of political engagement, however, manipulation by state authorities, however, have the potential to pervert aid intervention to inflict harm. South Sudan exemplifies how states may abuse the humanitarian response to retreat from public responsibility, divert funds to further violence and conflict and dictate the distribution of aid. Recent trends toward nationalist policies in the West that favor disengagement and limited military strikes have the very effect of allowing this abuse to transform humanitarian aid into a tool for harm. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:567–568)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document