Detecting Biowarfare Attacks

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

At first, it feels like the flu but the effect is ultimately far worse. And you don't find out until it's too late. The inability of doctors to diagnose a patient's exposure quickly is one of the most troubling aspects of attacks by toxic biological agents like anthrax. At the biannual Army Science Conference, researchers discussed new ways to identify such deadly disease agents more rapidly, while there's still time to treat them successfully, and to warn of imminent attacks.

By the time a pathogen is identified using existing blood-sampling techniques that may take as long as 72 hours to perform, it is could be too late to save the patient. So doctors at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research are trying to push back the diagnostic clock from days to minutes by measuring changes in a patient's gene patterns that occur soon after exposure to deadly pathogens.

Doctors compare a patient's gene pattern against a library of key gene patterns derived from a diverse group of 75 individuals. In 24 hours, they can detect whether there are significant discrepancies between the patient and the library, which are reliable indicators of exposure to a pathogen. Medical researchers are working on a method to identify these genetic changes within 30 minutes, well before symptoms become apparent, according to Walter Reed researcher Marti Jett.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The new technique does not identify a specific pathogen but instead gives doctors a prompt to begin the identification process earlier than they might otherwise, thereby dramatically reducing the time it takes to pinpoint the pathogen. The ultimate goal is to put this genetic testing method on a chip, so that it can be used by non-medical personnel in the field. One challenge is that each toxin produces its own unique genetic signature in a host, so gene patterns will vary accordingly. And while a chip can be packed with data regarding known pathogens, this technique may not be effective against previously unknown pathogens or against known pathogens that have been somehow modified in a laboratory.

Better yet, of course, would be a warning that a biowarfare attack is imminent. For soldiers in the field, that warning may come from radar. Researchers at the U.S. Army Research Institute, the University of Virginia and the University of Southern California have discovered that radar frequencies in the terahertz range can detect an oncoming cloud of pathogens. To date, the maximum warning time is 85 seconds. While that doesn't sound like much time, it may be just enough of time to don protective gear or seek shelter indoors. --Frank Vizard


Back to Future Combat: Part 1

"Attacking Anthrax," March 2002; by John A.T. Young and R. John Collier, sidebars by Rocco Casagrande and Ricki L. Rusting, is available for purchase at the Scientific American Archive. "Technology against Terror," October 2002; by Rocco Casagrande, is available for purchase at the Scientific American Archive.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe