Analyze

This health registry relies heavily on collaborations and other organizations. There is actually an entire section of the website dedicated to listing all the organizations that collaborate and work together in order to provide this information for the registry. The registry is a collaborative effort between the US Department of Health and Human Services and NYC. 

There are 3 advisory groups that work with WTC health Registry, they are the Community Advisory Board, the Labor Advisory Board and the Scientific Advisory Board. The following organizations are also listed as organizations that this registry depends on for research, number and data:

Government

• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
• Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Scientific 

• Albert Einstein College of Medicine
• Boston University – School of Public Health
• City University of New York – Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy
• City University of New York - Hunter College
• City University of New York - Queens College
• Columbia University - Mailman School of Public Health
• Columbia University – Medical Center
• Columbia University - New York Psychiatric Institute
• Cornell University
• Fire Department of New York City (FDNY) - Bureau of Health Services
• Fordham University
• HHC WTC Environmental Health Center at Bellevue Hospital Center
• Hospital for Special Surgery
• Johns Hopkins University - Bloomberg School of Public Health
• Mount Sinai Medical Center
• New School University
• New York City Police Department - Chief Surgeon's Office
• NYU Medical Center
• New York State Department of Health
• Rutgers University
• San Francisco State University
• State University of New York – Albany – School of Public Health
• State University of New York - Stonybrook
• State University of New York -Stonybrook University Medical Center
• University of California – San Francisco – School of Medicine
• University of Greenwich (United Kingdom)
• Weill Cornell Medicine

The author uses data from the chain of events and steps taken in response to the disaster in Fukushima along with recollection of the event. She analyzes and collects data about how previous situations similar to the one in Japan and involving nuclear fallout were handled and compared those reactions of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island to the reactions that followed Japan's disaster. She also analyzes responses that leaders had in those nations as well as the public and the new policies that arose from those different situations. She pooled data about the reactions of the public, leaders, law and policies and responses. She then uses that data to develop a plan for possible emergency responses as well as support her argument.

This registry allows for the tracking of the health effects of the 9/11 disaster. It is open to the public, where they can see the most common disorders and afflictions that those effected by 9/11 are dealing with today. The public can access this website and read up on the rates of lung infection, heart disease, PTSD, alcohol use, as well as the effect it has had on adolescent health. This registry was not only set up for the public use though, it is also used and produced by researchers. The researchers track the longterm health effects 9/11 has had on those exposed. The data also provides experts and researchers with the means to draw conclusions and analyses. Learning about the long term effects of 9/11 will raise awareness as well as allow for the understanding of how disasters of this caliber can effect those around it, in both long term and short term ways. 

This site runs like any run of the mill website. If there are any issues or questions about the website there is contact information provided to seek assistance with the site or ask questions regarding the information. 

By phone: 866-692-9827
By email: wtchr@health.nyc.gov
By fax: 347-396-2893
By mail: WTC Health Registry
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
42-09 28th Street, CN 6W
Queens, NY 11101-4132

These following quotes best exemplify the message of the article: 

" A nuclear emergency response group can no doubt benefit form improving the community resilience and emergency preparedness but this group will unavoidably carry an elite character." (p 196)

"The international community has come to acknowledge the magnitude of risk and responsibly involved in developing and safely operating nuclear facilities." (P. 199)

"To move forward with maximum efficient, an international nuclear response group needs to operationalize relevant experience form international disaster relief organizations." (p 201)

I would say that a situation where this site would be difficult to work with would be in an urgent, or time sensitive situation. Let's say during a situation where quick medical care is needed, this site would be difficult to work with and not a good source of information during that time. Yet in most situations and settings this would prove to be a good source of data. 

Reading this article caused me to do a further, in depth research on Fukushima and what actions led to what happened as well as what transpired during and after the disaster. I also looked into what the emergency response standards are today which led me to look at the IEAE website. I also looked at some of the author's other works that she wrote as well as explored and researched the WANO site. I read into their operating experiences and read about their pledge to "Prevent events by learning from others." I found out they have implemented "significant operating experience reports" as well as "significant event reports" and numerous other safe guards. 

The data is mainly visualized in report form. There is also a section of the site where data and statistics that have been confirmed are written out separated by disease/disorder type. So in the "what we know" tab PTSD, depression, tobacco use, asthma, lung function, respiratory issues, heart disease and adolescent health are separated into different sections with confirmed disease rates, correlations and numbers listed beneath each section. The same group that runs this registry in terms of research, called the 'WTC Medical Working Group' also provides links to other current studies on the matter, some of which they have partaken in. 

The article is supported through the use of numerous examples and educated points made by the author. First, the author supports her arguments by going through the events that transpired that day at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. She uses the details of the events in Japan to support her argument that a global emergency nuclear response team is necessary. Schmid also cites other areas in the world where this was an issue and protocols were not clear. Ultimately which caused the incidences at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, all of which would have benefited from a response team equipped and specially trained to deal with this type of situation. The author cites that incidences at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were the result of systems that were too complex, tightly coupled  and technical, ultimately not allowing broad policy changes when needed. The author also cites that this occurred in one of the world's most advanced areas in the world, both technologically and economically. She states that having scientists and the elite left to make decisions about responses to disasters alone further proves her point and supports her arguments. She also notes that current organizations have little international authority and often suffer when attempting to include or talk to the public in terms of these situation which doesn't allow for full integration with the public. She notes the importance of this integration, but also that world leaders are attempting to do so and see how beneficial this is. She compared the way previous situations similar to that in Japan was handled and she mapped out new regulations that arose based off each of those incidences in order to see what can further be implemented as a blanket response globally for all nations in a situation like this.

This website itself doesn't translate the data into information. Researchers collect the data, run analyses and tests, and then post them on the site for the public as well as other researchers. The website doesn't translate or post any data, registry staff does. Participants also do not enter the information into the website. Any information participants need to update or provide must be given directly to the registry staff.