Search

The Weldon Spring Interpretive Center was a discursive jamboree for those of us curious about how anthropocenics are narrated. This particular display at the center stood out to me becuase of its resemblance to other interpretive center or science museum displays representing the "life cycle" of an organism or of cycles of ecosystem conditions (e.g. forest succession). One of the first displays visitors see upon entering the center, the display's format and captions read to me as a clear attempt to control the discourse about nuclear contamination and remediation in the area. The image--or its creator--wants to do the work of suggesting that the clean up process has brought the place "back to how it was," cycling back to a good beginning. The text used in this display is exclusively neutral or positive. The arrows moving from each circle to the next purports to display how "this area has served many purposes over the years." It states "these exhibits are designed to educate you on the history, science, and efforts of many to bring the Weldon Spring site full circle." In this cycle, Weldon Spring is not a hazardouse waste site or contaminated site but rather "a site for remedial action." Thus we are to see the space as a "home to many people," then "a TNT and DNT plant," then "a uranium feed and matierals plant," then "a site for remedial action," "an extensive cleanup effort," "a successful solution," and, finally, "a place to enjoy and learn." In this emphasis on a "return" to good conditions, the displacement of residents, health issues plant workers and others' faced, and the uncertainties or messiness of what adequate clean up is are omitted. In this image, and in much of the interpretive center, the discourse around nuclear materials, its effects and cleanup, is neatened, simplified, into a narrative that de-emphasizes the actual health impacts of these processes and of the political wherewithall that was required to make that remediation happen.

The notion of cycling back to something is a particularly intriguing move

International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) was founded in 1980 by physicians from the United States and the former Soviet Union who shared a common commitment to the prevention of nuclear war between their two countries. In 1985, the organization recieved the nobel peace prize for their efforts.

IPPNW is comprised of national medical organizations, not individuals, with a common commitment to the abolition of nuclear weapons and the prevention of war. Each organization may range in size from a handful of dedicated physicians and medical students to tens of thousands of activists and their supporters.

I can't really find any concise information in regards to the IIPNW having direct publications or legislation passed. They seem as more of an organization that compiles information, and presents at global colloquiums in order to swy opinions for preventions of escalation. They also have many outreach programs for new physicians that help support the idea of nuclear prevention. 

The largest event that affects this organization was the Cold War, becuase it was the reason that it was formed in 1980. The organization cites the first principal of the medical profession — that doctors have an obligation to prevent what they cannot treat. The website states that experts come together to explain the medical and scientific facts about nuclear war to policy makers and to the public, and to advocate for the elimination of nuclear weapons from the world’s arsenals. 

IPPNW is funded by donations and are a non-profit organization. They also recieved money upon recieving the nobel peace prize.

The hardest thing that they have to deal with is trying to convince uneducated legistalors on topics that can affect millions of lives. The material that seems simple to them must be conveyed in a mundane matter.

"Two FDNY EMTs who had to intervene to stop four police officers beating a handcuffed patient on a stretcher have turned the cops in to authorities"

""Three cops began to punch the patient in the face, EMS (had) to get in the middle of it to intervene. Pt's. wounds and injuries cleaned in the (ambulance)," the report said."

The article was based on answers to questions to the FDNY and NYPD, as well as the report filed by the EMTs.

The article shows the fact that EMTs had to step in to prevent police officers from further abusing an inmate/patient. The purpose of EMS is to take care of people that are hurt accidentally or in crimes, not to pull police officers off of patients. This article is purely factual, but shows a very poor example of police "helping" EMTs.