According to a statement from the White House, the goal of the National Biosurveillance Integration System is ?to combine and analyze information collected from human, animal and plant health, food and environmental monitoring systems. Such an analysis, combined with evolving threat and intelligence information, will provide greater context for those making critical homeland defense decisions.? Clearly, the National Biosurveillance Integration System is much needed, as it has the potential for not only preparing the country for a potential flu pandemic but also may aid in the preparedness for a terrorist attack with a biological agent against humans or agriculture and also for other disease outbreaks.
Unfortunately, this system has not reached its initial operating capability, and there are questions regarding the feasibility of its proposed implementation. Specifically, some health officials believe that the Department of Homeland Security?s (DHS) plan for a six-month implementation from the time of contract award is unrealistic.
These same health officials also believe the biosurveillance system will require more funding than the $11 million currently allocated to version 2.0 of the National Biosurveillance Integration System. According to Dr. Rex Archer , the President of the National Association of County and City Health Officials, biosurveillance would need funding equivalent to the 1960s? space race to deliver what a working system within a year.
Other experts believe the system faces serious hurdles given its ambitious goal of integrating data from a variety of sources including but not limited to the CDC?s BioSense and BioWatch system. According to Kimothy Smith, DHS chief veterinarian, chief scientist, and acting deputy chief medical officer, it will be complicated to integrate large data sets from such diverse sources. Moreover, Nicholas Guzman, an associate professor at the George Washington University School of Medicine and a biosurveillance expert at the university?s Homeland Security Policy Institute, says, ?It will be difficult to integrate algorithms in a way that minimizes false positives and integrates disparate systems in a way that they validate data, and from that create actionable information.?
Given the biosurveillance system?s potential ability to provide utility across multiple scenarios, it is surprising that it has neither received greater funding nor that its potential hurdles have received greater scrutiny. It would be easy to conclude that the inattention given to this system is reflective of the Bush administration?s own admission that there is not much the federal government can do to ameliorate a flu pandemic. However, this biosurveillance system would serve as an early warning indicator for a bio-terror attack. It is, therefore, inexplicable why DHS would not heed the advice of some of its critics and provide more funding for and attention to this effort.