Analyze

The documentary is missing because the documentary is as safe as the fence it mocks in its title.
In the beginning we are asked to bear witness to the construction and use of the most devastation weapon of indiscriminate death the world has ever seen, and all the harm the construction of such a tool, yet its construction and its use is justified near instantaneously by repeating the same old propaganda.
In continuation, we are asked to bear witness to the continuous production of similar weapons and the devastation caused by the mishandling of the waste that accumulated in their production, yet why such a production took place is not only left unquestioned, but simple hints of cold war propaganda is left in their places for safekeeping.
In the end, we are asked to bear witness to a sombre victory, same spectres of patriotism and nation-of-God watching over our shoulder, yet how the pitiful situation of being forced to celebrate even such a small victory is never explored.
To sum up, we are shown people, good people, who struggle against the symptoms of a disease, yet this disease itself never named, nor challenged. It could not have been challenged, as it would force a complete change in their discourse.

If we sincerely would like to critique how the bodies of these workers were made disposable; used, harmed, dislocated and discharged as deemed necessary; if we wish to explore this topic as the necropolitical issue it is, we cannot stop halfway through. This inability to stop chasing connections, relationalities wherever it fits our ideology, is not a call for “objectivism”, it’s a call to respect the term of Anthropocene with all its rhizomatic connections.

An investigation of nuclear waste, that does not factor the use of its product, the socio-political effects of said product, and the historical conditions that even led to the possibility of producing it in such ways and such quantities, are of no use for us.  It cannot penetrate the barrier of capitalist realism. If it could, at least a single mention of workers unions would have existed. Instead, it has confessionals by atomic weapons lawyers whose heart goes out to these workers.
An America that refuse to face up to the fact that it is what it is by the great necropolitical project it led for hundreds of years, I struggle to accumulate sympathy for, what I can easily accumulate is rage however, which this documentary is missing..
Wish the documentary would have at least attempted to say something radical, instead of praising these disposable bodies for being patriotic about it. There are lives who never had false fences built as idols for safety, the collective idols of old America, the patriotic nation under God were built upon their broken bodies, what would you ask of them?

This article has been referenced in a wide variety of emergency medicine journal articles, ranging from flood protocols, use of cell phones in disaster enviroments, earthquakes and medical complications, to the costs of disaster consequences. Many of the articles referencing this paper appear to go into greater depth for some of the epidemics and diseases that were touched on in the research article. These include hepatitis E, Leptospirosis, cholera, and tetanus.

This article shows how some communities that, in the opinion of the Disaster Accountability Project organization, are within an effective radius of a nuclear incident at Indian Point and have little or no emergency plan for this kind of event. This is primarily due to these communities not having the knowledge that they could be effected by an event of this nature if they are over 10 miles away from the plant. Also, many of the communities that said they had not undergone any studies in relation to the plant's effects on their own community or developed any emergency plans because they cannot without federal aid. These counties and towns are not well-enough informed and are lacking the funding from the government in order to provide for their own safety if a nuclear accident were to occur

Emergency response is addressed in a broad sense of the major risk factors associated with a natural disaster and epidemics. The main points they make are that preparedness, with a focus on availability of safe water and primary healthcare services, along with surveillance for the beginnings of an epidemic, are necessessay for a strong response to a disaster situation   

The National Regulatory Commission: Government agency responsible for public safety with regards to nuclear reactors and nuclear energy

Entergy: An integrated energy company that primarily deals with electric power production. Operators of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant

Disaster Accountability Project: Nonprofit organization that monitors disaster-response programs and acts as a watchdog for disaster response and preperation

The main methods that the authors appear to use are reported data from disasters that have happened around the globe, including numbers and types of infections, displacement and crowding data, and knowledge of the disaster incidents examined

The main point of the article is to report a conflict of opinions between the NRC and the Disaster Accountability Project on the safety of the communities surrounding the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. The NRC and the company running the plant, Entergy, state that those communities within a 10 mile radius are required to have emergency evacuation plans in place should a nuclear emergency occur; those outside this radius, however, are not at as large of risk. The nonprofit, however, cites the NRC's report on the Fukushima disaster, where it recommended the US citizens within 50 miles of the plant should evacuate the area, and suggests that communities within a 50 mile radius of Indian Point have specific nuclear emergency plans at hand and prepared for use. Entergy says that the radius "provides a robust safety margin", and the NRC replies to the Disaster Accountability Project's statement by saying that the incident at Fukushima is not comparable to any nuclear power cite in the US, due to the size and number of reactors in the Fukushima plant.

"The risk for commuicable disease transmission after disasters is associated primarily with the size and characteristics of the population displaced, specifically the proximity of safe water adn functioning latrines, the nutritional status of the displaced population, the level of immunuty to vaccine-preventable diseases..., and the access to healthcare services"

"...natural disasters (regardless of type) that do not result in population displacement are rarely associated with outbreaks"

"When death is directly due to the natural disaster, human remains do not pose a rise for outbreaks"

The author contacted both the NRC and the nonprofit Disaster Accountability Project for statements and information on the safety of the plant and if emergency plans were in place. The NRC gave statements and information on their discussions with the Disaster Accountability Project, and the nonprofit described their process of sending freedom-of-information requests to 20 jurisdictions in NY, NJ, and CT located up to 50 miles from Indian Point, in order to determine if they had emergency plans related to the power plant and what they might be

1: Crowding is shown to be common in displaced populations, and local overpopulation/crowding often facillitates the transmittion of disease

2: Natural disasters that do not cause a displacement of a population are rarely associated with disease outbreaks

3: There is little or no evidence that dead bodies, as some believe, pose a epidemic risk for a population of survivors after a disaster has struck