Blog
In this part of my conversation with Prof. Dr. Manfred Wildner and Dr. Herbert Zöllner in Munich, we are discussing biothreat and pandemic preparedness in Germany.
Dr. Herbert Zöllner
Dr. Zöllner worked for the World Health Organization from 1971-2002, in a variety of roles. He was Regional Officer for Health Economics at WHO’s Regional Office for Europe in Copenhagen and later member of the executive management team in Strategic Planning and Coordination.
Austria’s approach to crisis management is worth studying. It was the first European country to safely open their economy again after the initial COVID-19 outbreak. Picture by Shutterstock
During my internship at New York University’s Department of Public Safety, I had an opportunity to learn about emergency management and preparedness. An interesting fact I came across while looking at how individual countries organize themselves in the field of crisis management, is that Austria, a comparably small country with a population of 8 million, has assisted other countries in every major crisis since 2003. I was curious how this impressive track record was made possible.
My enquiry to the Austrian government was kindly answered with an invitation from Dr. Roman Bayer, who I met in Vienna. Dr. Bayer works for the Federal Ministry of the Interior of the Government of the Republic of Austria.
Prof. Dr. Manfred Wildner, MD, MPH
The history of public health in Germany is inseparably intertwined with German historic events and public figures. I was able to learn about it from two experts in this field: Prof. Dr. Manfred Wildner and his colleague Dr. Herbert Zöllner, who are both based in Munich, Germany.
Hong Kong is well prepared for any kind of biothreat. Picture by Shutterstock
Since the Hong Kong health system is often an important gatekeeper with regard to pandemics, I was interested to find out how the government structures preparedness efforts for both unintentional and intentional biological incidents.
Before the coronavirus pandemic, I spoke to a senior officer who is working for the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). We discussed the Hong Kong Government’s approach to bioterror and public health preparedness.
Norway has a universal health system. Photo by Mia Tellmann
As with many other countries around the world, biodefense and public health planning, surveillance, and response are the responsibilities of numerous intertwined agencies within a country that all have different assignments and responsibilities, yet have to work together to successfully protect a nation from harm.
Last summer, I interviewed a Norwegian public health expert who chose to remain anonymous. She shared with me valuable information regarding the Norwegian Government’s approach to public health. As the Norwegian health system is universal and available to everyone, I was interested to find out how they organize pandemic preparedness and the agencies involved. Continue Reading
During my meeting with Prof. Dr. Manfred Wildner and his colleague Dr. Herbert Zöllner in Munich, Germany, we discussed the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the German, UK, and US public health systems. The systems are strikingly different.
Each German federal state is responsible for public health. Pictured here is Munich, the capital of Bavaria. Photo by Mia Tellmann
Over the summer, I met with Prof. Dr. Manfred Wildner and his colleague, Dr. Herbert Zöllner, in Munich, Germany to learn about the structure of public health institutions and emergency preparedness in Germany.
Germany is a federal republic consisting of 16 states. Each individual state is responsible for public health, as well as other matters including policing and education. I wanted to understand how Germany, and in particular the individual states, organize themselves to prepare for public health emergencies. Continue Reading
Bacteria Francisella tularensis, a potential biothreat agent. Picture by Shutterstock/ Kateryna Kon
Over the summer, I met with Dr. Tomoya Saito in Tokyo to learn about outbreak and bioterror preparedness in Japan.
This is Part II of my conversation in which we discuss the risks of dual-use technologies for biosecurity. Part I focused on the structure of the Japanese preparedness system and was posted in March. Continue Reading
Dr. Tomoya Saito
Last summer, I met with Dr. Tomoya Saito in Tokyo to learn about outbreak and bioterror preparedness in Japan.
Our conversation will be posted in two parts. Part I (below) is about the role that different Japanese institutions play to prevent and respond to biological threats. In Part II (to be posted soon) we will discuss how dual-use technologies change the risk of biothreats.
Dr. Saito is Chief Senior Researcher at the Department of Health Crisis Management of the National Institute of Public Health of Japan (NIPH). His current area of research is biosecurity, public health emergency preparedness and response, and simulation epidemiology. He is based in Saitama, Japan.
Virus cells and DNA strand. Picture by Shutterstock/ Kjpargeter
I recently spoke with Dr. Suneil Malik about genomics and outbreak preparedness.
This is the second part of our conversation, in which we were discussing the benefits and potential downsides of the so-called “omics”-revolution, which consists of new technologies such as transcriptomics and proteomics that are changing the field of medicine.