Analyze

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. 

The article explores the effects of society, politics, and science on the diagnosis/treatment of medical conditions in the wake of Chernobyl's nuclear disaster. The article looks into the complex development of a system of compensation and benefits for victims of the disaster, and how people became dependent on the system for their basic needs. 

The author used primarily field work in order to create her arguments. This is shown through interviews and case studies involving people effected. She also uses data analysis and statistics to help affirm her argument. Other experts are cited and used as part of her argument. 

Adriana Petryna is a professor of anthropology at UC Berkeley. Her primary research area is on medical anthropology, social studies in science/technology, and eastern europe. 

1. "The sufferers and their administrators were also supported by the nonsuffering citizens, who paid a 12 percent tax on their salaries to support compensations"
2. "Today, approximately 8.9 percent of Ukraine is considered contaminated."
3. "When I returned in 2000 to Kyiv to conduct further research, I discovered that cur- rent democratic politicians, many of whom drafted the original compensation laws as sovereignty-minded nationalists, now saw the Cherobyl compensation system as a dire mistake that has "accidentally" reproduced a socialist-like population."
4. "Specific cases illustrate how these economic and state processes, combined with the technical dynamics already described, have laid the groundwork for such "counter- politics."29 Citizens have come to depend on obtainable technologies and legal proce- dures to gain political recognition and admission to some form of welfare inclusion."

1. I looked for more information regarding the disaster.
2. Cancer projections as a result of this disaster
3. Current healthcare in these areas as a result of this disaster.

The author addresses emergency response in the context of the workers who responded to and continue to work at the site of the chernobyl nuclear disaster. These workers were monetarily compensated in high ammounts, but left physically injured and disabled by the exposure to radioactivity at the site.

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. 

The author seems to rely strongly on personal experience and belief to make broad statements about the situation following chernobyl. Most of the article is about the author and their experience with the issue, rather than the objective data and observations of others. This makes the arguments seem rather close-minded and almost biased.