Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans
The study sought to understand better how people come to believe they have been exposed to biological and chemical warfare. We conducted telephone interviews with 1,009 American veterans (65% response rate) deployed and not deployed to the Gulf War, a conflict during which there were credible threat...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Risk analysis 2006-04, Vol.26 (2), p.337-345 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 345 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 337 |
container_title | Risk analysis |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Brewer, Noel T. Lillie, Sarah E. Hallman, William K. |
description | The study sought to understand better how people come to believe they have been exposed to biological and chemical warfare. We conducted telephone interviews with 1,009 American veterans (65% response rate) deployed and not deployed to the Gulf War, a conflict during which there were credible threats that such warfare could be used. Only 6% of non‐Gulf War veterans reported exposure to biological or chemical warfare, but most of Gulf War veterans reported exposure (64%). The majority of these were unsure whether the exposure was chemical or biological in nature. The most commonly reported exposure indicators were receiving an alert from the military and having physical symptoms. Veterans who were certain of the type of exposure (biological or chemical) were more likely to recall having been told by the military and to recall physical symptoms. Future communications with soldiers and the general public about biological and chemical warfare may need to emphasize the uncertain nature of such risk information. Evaluations of exposure diagnostic technologies should take into account the problem of people initially believing, but not later discounting, false positive results. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00750.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67819143</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67819143</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5440-136cd8d84d754dc5fc8c5a996d0e06e63fa94ed70630fc0d2f306b6de3d83a9b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUFvEzEQhS1ERUPgLyCLA7cN47XX3kXikEQlbakKago5Ws56lmzYxKmdLcm_r7eJisSl-OKR5ntPmvcIoQwGLL6PywHLeJHIIhWDFEAOAFQGg90L0ntavCQ9SFWaCM7TU_I6hCUAA8jUK3LKZKa4TEWP4Gyxp9_RbRqkI2xqvEd6u8A9naFHerbbuICWbh0d1a5xv-rSNNR5Ol7g6nGeGV8Zj5_okE5bfx-FrqKTtqm6Df2JW_RmHd6Qk8o0Ad8e_z758eXsdnyeXH2bXIyHV0mZCQEJ47K0uc2FVZmwZVaVeZmZopAWECRKXplCoFUgOVQl2LTiIOfSIrc5N8Wc98mHg-_Gu7sWw1av6lBi05g1ujZoqXJWsJjIcyCXIgZUyGdBpphURYT75P0_4NK1fh2v1SkoqVIhigjlB6j0LgSPld74emX8XjPQXbN6qbsCdVeg7prVj83qXZS-O_q38xXav8JjlRH4fAD-1A3u_9tY31xMh3GK-uSgr8MWd09643_H2LjK9Ox6oq8vzy_V6OtU3_AHbOu_Sg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>207672449</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Brewer, Noel T. ; Lillie, Sarah E. ; Hallman, William K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Brewer, Noel T. ; Lillie, Sarah E. ; Hallman, William K.</creatorcontrib><description>The study sought to understand better how people come to believe they have been exposed to biological and chemical warfare. We conducted telephone interviews with 1,009 American veterans (65% response rate) deployed and not deployed to the Gulf War, a conflict during which there were credible threats that such warfare could be used. Only 6% of non‐Gulf War veterans reported exposure to biological or chemical warfare, but most of Gulf War veterans reported exposure (64%). The majority of these were unsure whether the exposure was chemical or biological in nature. The most commonly reported exposure indicators were receiving an alert from the military and having physical symptoms. Veterans who were certain of the type of exposure (biological or chemical) were more likely to recall having been told by the military and to recall physical symptoms. Future communications with soldiers and the general public about biological and chemical warfare may need to emphasize the uncertain nature of such risk information. Evaluations of exposure diagnostic technologies should take into account the problem of people initially believing, but not later discounting, false positive results.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0272-4332</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1539-6924</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00750.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16573624</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK: Blackwell Publishing, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis ; Belief & doubt ; Beliefs ; Biological & chemical weapons ; Biological warfare ; Biological Warfare - psychology ; Biological weapons ; chemical warfare ; Chemical Warfare - psychology ; Chemical weapons ; Communication ; Female ; Gulf War ; Humans ; Interviews ; Interviews as Topic ; Male ; Perception ; Persian Gulf War ; Risk ; risk perception ; Studies ; symptom reporting ; U.S.A ; United States ; Veterans ; Veterans - psychology ; Warfare ; Weapons of mass destruction</subject><ispartof>Risk analysis, 2006-04, Vol.26 (2), p.337-345</ispartof><rights>2006 The Society for Risk Analysis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5440-136cd8d84d754dc5fc8c5a996d0e06e63fa94ed70630fc0d2f306b6de3d83a9b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5440-136cd8d84d754dc5fc8c5a996d0e06e63fa94ed70630fc0d2f306b6de3d83a9b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1539-6924.2006.00750.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1539-6924.2006.00750.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16573624$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brewer, Noel T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lillie, Sarah E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hallman, William K.</creatorcontrib><title>Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans</title><title>Risk analysis</title><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><description>The study sought to understand better how people come to believe they have been exposed to biological and chemical warfare. We conducted telephone interviews with 1,009 American veterans (65% response rate) deployed and not deployed to the Gulf War, a conflict during which there were credible threats that such warfare could be used. Only 6% of non‐Gulf War veterans reported exposure to biological or chemical warfare, but most of Gulf War veterans reported exposure (64%). The majority of these were unsure whether the exposure was chemical or biological in nature. The most commonly reported exposure indicators were receiving an alert from the military and having physical symptoms. Veterans who were certain of the type of exposure (biological or chemical) were more likely to recall having been told by the military and to recall physical symptoms. Future communications with soldiers and the general public about biological and chemical warfare may need to emphasize the uncertain nature of such risk information. Evaluations of exposure diagnostic technologies should take into account the problem of people initially believing, but not later discounting, false positive results.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Belief & doubt</subject><subject>Beliefs</subject><subject>Biological & chemical weapons</subject><subject>Biological warfare</subject><subject>Biological Warfare - psychology</subject><subject>Biological weapons</subject><subject>chemical warfare</subject><subject>Chemical Warfare - psychology</subject><subject>Chemical weapons</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gulf War</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Persian Gulf War</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>risk perception</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>symptom reporting</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Veterans</subject><subject>Veterans - psychology</subject><subject>Warfare</subject><subject>Weapons of mass destruction</subject><issn>0272-4332</issn><issn>1539-6924</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUFvEzEQhS1ERUPgLyCLA7cN47XX3kXikEQlbakKago5Ws56lmzYxKmdLcm_r7eJisSl-OKR5ntPmvcIoQwGLL6PywHLeJHIIhWDFEAOAFQGg90L0ntavCQ9SFWaCM7TU_I6hCUAA8jUK3LKZKa4TEWP4Gyxp9_RbRqkI2xqvEd6u8A9naFHerbbuICWbh0d1a5xv-rSNNR5Ol7g6nGeGV8Zj5_okE5bfx-FrqKTtqm6Df2JW_RmHd6Qk8o0Ad8e_z758eXsdnyeXH2bXIyHV0mZCQEJ47K0uc2FVZmwZVaVeZmZopAWECRKXplCoFUgOVQl2LTiIOfSIrc5N8Wc98mHg-_Gu7sWw1av6lBi05g1ujZoqXJWsJjIcyCXIgZUyGdBpphURYT75P0_4NK1fh2v1SkoqVIhigjlB6j0LgSPld74emX8XjPQXbN6qbsCdVeg7prVj83qXZS-O_q38xXav8JjlRH4fAD-1A3u_9tY31xMh3GK-uSgr8MWd09643_H2LjK9Ox6oq8vzy_V6OtU3_AHbOu_Sg</recordid><startdate>200604</startdate><enddate>200604</enddate><creator>Brewer, Noel T.</creator><creator>Lillie, Sarah E.</creator><creator>Hallman, William K.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing, Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200604</creationdate><title>Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans</title><author>Brewer, Noel T. ; Lillie, Sarah E. ; Hallman, William K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5440-136cd8d84d754dc5fc8c5a996d0e06e63fa94ed70630fc0d2f306b6de3d83a9b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Belief & doubt</topic><topic>Beliefs</topic><topic>Biological & chemical weapons</topic><topic>Biological warfare</topic><topic>Biological Warfare - psychology</topic><topic>Biological weapons</topic><topic>chemical warfare</topic><topic>Chemical Warfare - psychology</topic><topic>Chemical weapons</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gulf War</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Persian Gulf War</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>risk perception</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>symptom reporting</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Veterans</topic><topic>Veterans - psychology</topic><topic>Warfare</topic><topic>Weapons of mass destruction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brewer, Noel T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lillie, Sarah E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hallman, William K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brewer, Noel T.</au><au>Lillie, Sarah E.</au><au>Hallman, William K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans</atitle><jtitle>Risk analysis</jtitle><addtitle>Risk Anal</addtitle><date>2006-04</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>337</spage><epage>345</epage><pages>337-345</pages><issn>0272-4332</issn><eissn>1539-6924</eissn><abstract>The study sought to understand better how people come to believe they have been exposed to biological and chemical warfare. We conducted telephone interviews with 1,009 American veterans (65% response rate) deployed and not deployed to the Gulf War, a conflict during which there were credible threats that such warfare could be used. Only 6% of non‐Gulf War veterans reported exposure to biological or chemical warfare, but most of Gulf War veterans reported exposure (64%). The majority of these were unsure whether the exposure was chemical or biological in nature. The most commonly reported exposure indicators were receiving an alert from the military and having physical symptoms. Veterans who were certain of the type of exposure (biological or chemical) were more likely to recall having been told by the military and to recall physical symptoms. Future communications with soldiers and the general public about biological and chemical warfare may need to emphasize the uncertain nature of such risk information. Evaluations of exposure diagnostic technologies should take into account the problem of people initially believing, but not later discounting, false positive results.</abstract><cop>350 Main Street , Malden , MA 02148 , USA , and 9600 Garsington Road , Oxford OX4 2DQ , UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing, Inc</pub><pmid>16573624</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00750.x</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0272-4332 |
ispartof | Risk analysis, 2006-04, Vol.26 (2), p.337-345 |
issn | 0272-4332 1539-6924 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67819143 |
source | MEDLINE; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Adult Analysis Belief & doubt Beliefs Biological & chemical weapons Biological warfare Biological Warfare - psychology Biological weapons chemical warfare Chemical Warfare - psychology Chemical weapons Communication Female Gulf War Humans Interviews Interviews as Topic Male Perception Persian Gulf War Risk risk perception Studies symptom reporting U.S.A United States Veterans Veterans - psychology Warfare Weapons of mass destruction |
title | Why People Believe They Were Exposed to Biological or Chemical Warfare: A Survey of Gulf War Veterans |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T16%3A41%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20People%20Believe%20They%20Were%20Exposed%20to%20Biological%20or%20Chemical%20Warfare:%20A%20Survey%20of%20Gulf%20War%20Veterans&rft.jtitle=Risk%20analysis&rft.au=Brewer,%20Noel%20T.&rft.date=2006-04&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=337&rft.epage=345&rft.pages=337-345&rft.issn=0272-4332&rft.eissn=1539-6924&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00750.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67819143%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=207672449&rft_id=info:pmid/16573624&rfr_iscdi=true |