'War on Terror' Said to Cause U.S. Deaths as Bush Invokes 9/11

by Abid Aslam

WASHINGTON - The U.S. government's ''war on terror'' has cost many Americans their lives by diverting funds from basic services and health care, a prominent doctor and professor said in comments published to coincide with Sunday's fourth anniversary of the ''9/11'' terrorist attacks.

While 3,400 people died in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, some 5,200 fell on the same day to common diseases, said Erica Frank of the Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta, Georgia.

A similar number of Americans have died from these causes--including cancer, heart disease, stroke, flu, and Alzheimer's disease--each day since, according to Frank, who based her figures on official estimates.

''It is certainly justifiable for governments to appropriate substantial funds to prevent potential future threats to our security. But public funding for current threats should not be compromised,'' she said.

Frank's comments, in Saturday's edition of the British Medical Journal, appear as President George W. Bush, faced with public outcry in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, seeks to rekindle the warm glow of public approval in which his administration basked following the 2001 terror attacks.

''The most recent effects of these diversions of funding have been seen in the unfolding tragedy of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and the surrounding area,'' Frank said, citing numerous reports showing the federal government cut spending to reinforce the historic city's flood defenses.

Additionally, the response to Katrina was hampered because 7,000 members of the Louisiana and Mississippi National Guard were deployed in Iraq, Frank said.

Concern over ''disproportionate'' funding of bioterrorism prevention by the administration of President George W. Bush, at the expense of other public health infrastructure, is not new.

''As early as 2002, many people thought that the Bush plan for smallpox vaccination was a misguided reflection of public health funds for bioterrorism preparedness, and it was thwarted,'' Frank said.

Even so, such the bioterrorism preparedness continues to be ''magnified well beyond its proportional risk,'' she added.

In September 2002, for example, New York was awarded $1.3 million to reduce heart disease, the leading killer of people in the state, while $34 million was awarded for bioterrorism preparedness.

North Dakota got $300,000 to prevent heart disease and stroke, compared to $7 million designated for bioterrorism preparedness in the state.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) funds designated for investigating fraud in health care also seem to have been ''improperly'' shifted to other purposes including fighting terrorism, she said.

''These observations are not intended to diminish the tragedies of 11 September 2001 or ... other terrorist actions, nor to negate the importance of developing effective ways of making sure such tragedies are not repeated,'' Frank wrote.

''Nor do I intend to suggest that all the blame for catastrophic or everyday events should be attributed to any government, or that any quantity of redirected funds could completely erase these events.''

Nevertheless, ''predictable tragedies happen every day,'' she said, and responsibility to head them off should not be sacrificed at the altar of the ''war on terror.''

''We know strategies to reduce deaths from tobacco, alcohol, poor diet, unintentional injuries, and other predictable causes. And we know that millions of people will die unless we protect the population against these routine causes of death,'' Frank said.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in a statement cited by the BBC, said it ''certainly understands and agrees that public health infrastructure in the U.S. needs to continue to be expanded to counter natural or intentional public health events.''

''CDC provides funding to state health departments for what we term an 'all hazards' approach to public health preparedness,'' the agency added.

''This approach, for instance, includes the expansion of surveillance methods and lab capabilities used by public health to detect and confirm a naturally occurring event such as flu.''

In the run up to Sunday's 9/11 anniversary, Bush has sought to link hurricane recovery and the aftermath of the 2001 attacks.

''America is a strong and resilient nation'' and would ''overcome any challenge,'' he said Friday at the swearing-in for Karen Hughes, the State Department's new undersecretary in charge of polishing the U.S. image overseas.

Bush offered thanks to the 100-plus countries that had offered aid to the United States, likening it to ''a similar outpouring of support when another tragedy struck our nation,'' a reference to the 2001 attacks.

''Sri Lanka, one of the world' most impoverished nations that is struggling to overcome the effects of the tsunami, has sent a donation of $25,000,'' he said.

Bush's comments appeared designed to restore his administration's post-9/11 luster.

As commentator Al Neuharth put it in USA Today Friday, Bush ''has had three really big at-bats during his four-plus years in the White House. First, 9/11. Then, the Iraq War. Now, the Katrina Hurricane tragedy. His batting performance: One home run (9/11). Two strikeouts (Iraq and Katrina).''

Public reaction to Bush's handling of 9/11 and Katrina has been a study in contrast.

A CBS News poll conducted after the 2001 attacks found that 83 percent believed the president had ''strong qualities of leadership.'' That number had fallen to 48 percent in a CBS poll taken this week.

Similarly, the number of Americans saying they have a lot of confidence in Mr. Bush's ability to handle a crisis has been halved, from 66 percent in Sept. 2001 to 32 percent this week, according to the survey.

Even Bush's strong suit, handling terrorism, has been dented. Over the past week, the proportion of Americans with little or no confidence in the government's ability to protect them from terrorist attacks rose to 40 percent, up from 26 percent.