pece_annotation_1478040797
tamar.rogoszinski- I looked for more information regarding the disaster.
- Cancer projections as a result of this disaster
- Current healthcare in these areas as a result of this disaster.
1. Arguably, the new Ukrainian accounting of the Cherobyl unknown was part and parcel of the government's strategies for "knowledge-based" governance and social mobilization. In 1991 and in its first set of laws, the new parliament denounced the Soviet management of Chemobyl as "an act of genocide."
2. On the one hand, the Ukrainian government rejected Western neoliberal prescriptions to downsize its social welfare domain; on the other hand, it presented itself as informed by the principles of a moder risk society. On the one hand, these Chernobyl laws allowed for unprecedented civic organizing; on the other hand, they became distinct venues of corruption through which informal practices of providing or selling access to state privileges and protections (blat) expanded.
3. Government-operated radiation research clinics and non- governmental organizations mediate an informal economy of illness and claims to a "biological citizenship"-a demand for, but limited access to, a form of social welfare based on medical, scientific, and legal criteria that recognize injury and compensate for it.
Through her field work, the author is able to create a concise argument by using interviews and anecdotes by those affected by the disaster in Chernobyl. She also highlights aspects of the disaster itself, highlight pre, peri, and post events that had an impact on the area and populations exposed. She also provides some data regarding an increase in clinical registration of illnesses that have occurred under the title "symptoms and other indequately known states", that show a sharp increase after the event.
The citations in this article include not only the author's own work, but also many citations by other experts in the field and data. This tells us that the author did extensive research for this article and looked to others for opinions and information, instead of just using her own ethnographic research.
1. Arguably, the new Ukrainian accounting of the Cherobyl unknown was part and parcel of the government's strategies for "knowledge-based" governance and social mobilization. In 1991 and in its first set of laws, the new parliament denounced the Soviet management of Chemobyl as "an act of genocide."
2. On the one hand, the Ukrainian government rejected Western neoliberal prescriptions to downsize its social welfare domain; on the other hand, it presented itself as informed by the principles of a moder risk society. On the one hand, these Chernobyl laws allowed for unprecedented civic organizing; on the other hand, they became distinct venues of corruption through which informal practices of providing or selling access to state privileges and protections (blat) expanded.
3. Government-operated radiation research clinics and non- governmental organizations mediate an informal economy of illness and claims to a "biological citizenship"-a demand for, but limited access to, a form of social welfare based on medical, scientific, and legal criteria that recognize injury and compensate for it.
This article talks about the Chernobyl disaster and the sociopolitical factors that affect patient access to care. The author highlights the ways in which the government are able to intervene and effect the outcome of post disaster care and reaction. The author also uses her field research in the US, Russia, and Ukraine to not only compare the technology and radiology knowledge. She worked with resettled families and radiation-exposed workers in order to provide more information regarding their experience and how they were effected.
According to Google Scholar, this article has been cited 85 times. This is a pretty large amount of citations, which are primarily articles regarding societal effects of distress and disasters.
1. Arguably, the new Ukrainian accounting of the Cherobyl unknown was part and parcel of the government's strategies for "knowledge-based" governance and social mobilization. In 1991 and in its first set of laws, the new parliament denounced the Soviet management of Chemobyl as "an act of genocide."
2. On the one hand, the Ukrainian government rejected Western neoliberal prescriptions to downsize its social welfare domain; on the other hand, it presented itself as informed by the principles of a moder risk society. On the one hand, these Chernobyl laws allowed for unprecedented civic organizing; on the other hand, they became distinct venues of corruption through which informal practices of providing or selling access to state privileges and protections (blat) expanded.
3. Government-operated radiation research clinics and non- governmental organizations mediate an informal economy of illness and claims to a "biological citizenship"-a demand for, but limited access to, a form of social welfare based on medical, scientific, and legal criteria that recognize injury and compensate for it.
The author of this article is Adriana Petryna. She is an Edmund J. and Louise W. Kahn Term Professor in Anthropology at UPenn. She teaches primarily anthropology courses because her main interest lies in anthropological theory and methods, the social studies of science and technology, globalization and health, and medical anthropology. Her research focuses on the effects of cultural and political forces on science and medicine. She has written several books and articles.
This article focuses more on public health concerns, rather than EMS response. She analyzes sociopolitical factors that affected the response post-Chernobyl and the impacts that had on people's lives and the healthcare they received as a result.