Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Smallpox Revisited?

dc.contributor.authorSelgelid, Michael
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-07T22:24:44Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.date.updated2015-12-07T09:27:47Z
dc.description.abstractThis article reviews the history of smallpox and ethical issues that arise with its threat as a biological weapon. Smallpox killed more people than any infectious disease in history--and perhaps three times more people in the 20th Century than were killed by all the wars of that period. Following a WHO-sponsored global vaccination campaign, smallpox was officially declared eradicated in 1980. It has since been revealed that the Soviet Union, until its fall in the early 1990s, manufactured tens of tons of smallpox for military purposes. A worry is that some of this may have fallen into the hands of "rogue" nations or terrorists. Current U.S. debate questions whether smallpox vaccine should therefore be made available to the American public, which--like the rest of the world--now lacks immunity. Because the vaccine is considerably dangerous, public dialogue cannot resolve this matter if evidence material to the likelihood of attack is classified (i.e. secret). I conclude by recommending numerous future areas for ethics research related to the weaponization of smallpox.
dc.identifier.issn1526-5161
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/20973
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Group
dc.sourceAmerican Journal of Bioethics
dc.subjectKeywords: smallpox vaccine; article; biological warfare; ethics; experimental therapy; Health Care and Public Health; health care policy; human; human experiment; immunology; organization and management; preventive health service; public health; smallpox; United St
dc.titleSmallpox Revisited?
dc.typeJournal article
local.bibliographicCitation.issue1
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage11
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage5
local.contributor.affiliationSelgelid, Michael, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU
local.contributor.authoruidSelgelid, Michael, u4331118
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.identifier.absfor220205 - History and Philosophy of Medicine
local.identifier.absfor220106 - Medical Ethics
local.identifier.absfor160600 - POLITICAL SCIENCE
local.identifier.ariespublicationa240288xPUB15
local.identifier.citationvolume3
local.identifier.doi10.1162/152651603322781620
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-17144439907
local.type.statusPublished Version

Downloads

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
01_Selgelid_Smallpox_Revisited?_2003.pdf
Size:
203.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format