Microbes, Mad Cows and Militaries: Exploring the Links Between Health and Security
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 'securitization' of health has generated considerable debate. In public health, the debate focuses mainly on health effects. Although securitization may refocus attention and resources toward certain health issues, it may focus undue attention on a few issues or on the military aspects of issues to the detriment of a broad range of health issues and their human rights aspects. In international relations, the concern is the effect on security analysis and policy. While some welcome a broadening of the security agenda to include items such as health, others are concerned that analytical rigour and operational effectiveness are lost. This article argues that, normative concerns notwithstanding, securitizing is occurring as a result of perceived changes, associated with globalization, that are creating changes in the nature or degree of threats. But, in international relations, security is largely a social construction, as the Copenhagen School claims. Contemporary social struggles are ongoing around competitions to define security. The article argues that human security is a concept that has considerable relevance for understanding the nature of change that is producing new or intensified threats. It also offers conceptual space for analyzing what security is provided and for whom in the changing world order.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it