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?

Teach 3.11 was developed to serve students and general public. It allows the public to have more access to different books, teaching material, and research regarding disasters. The website was built in response to the Fukushima disaster of 2011, in order to provide "an educational space for understanding the history, memory, and context of social disasters" (Teach 3.11). The editorial team has members from different countries, reflecting the international collaboration that natural and nuclear disasters require. With it's availability in six different languages, public contribution and comments enabled on articles gives a global platform for discussion and sharing. They are currently accepting papers for their "Terms of Disaster" collection.

Increased funding from the U.N., distribution of cholera vaccines, focus on poorer populations to educate and give access to medications/water, and clean up of the Arbonite River.

The report has several small sections dedicated to possible ways the MSF could have responded better to the 2014 ebola outbreak; such as the medical challenges they faced, MSF challenges within the organization, and a "Looking to the future" about the importance of learning lessons from this epidemic.

The author is Didier Fassin, a French sociologist and anthropologist who was trained as a physician in internal medicine. He developed the field of critical moral anthropology and currently does research on punishment, asylum, and inequality. This research looks at the social and political forces that affect public health trends, so is not directly involved in emergency response.

All levels of government and Indian tribal government in the United States.

The policy was created in in 1999 after concerns brought up by the Team Leader of the Chemical Weapons Improved Response Team (CWIRT), U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command over whether first responders to WMD (weapons of mass destruction) incidents were liable for pollution and other environmental consequences of their decontamination/ life-saving efforts.

The article's main points cover the major challenges impeding research studies on violence that affects health service delivery in "complex security environments". The problem isn't lack of data regarding violence affecting health service delivery, but the lack of "health specific" and "gender-disaggregated" data, or data that's not completely tied to humanitarian aid.

The authors suggest several ways to increase research: increased collaboration between academia, NGO's, and health service organizations, inserting a research component in aid operations, and increasing funding to academic and aid organizations.

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.

This article used data from Baltimore about AIDS care, and the authors' research in Rwanda, discussing results from the Partners in Health structural interventions and comparing them to produce their claims.