Search

"What does the lack in prominence of environmental coverage in German TV tell us about the general state of environmental journalism in Germany? It is almost impossible to draw con- clusions based on hard facts and numbers.There is no national organization of professionals in the media dealing with this topic like the Society of Environmental Journalists in the USA, for instance.That means there are also no statistics about how many editors, reporters, or producers would count themselves as environmental journalists; nobody is keeping track. Communications scholars, when asked about the number of environmental journalists in Germany, reply with: “That’s something I would also like to know; tell me if you find out.”There is no formal educa- tion, and only a few training opportunities are offered for established writers and editors who want to specialize in the field. In recent years, some well-qualified and experienced reporters on newspapers with influential voices have departed (or been made to depart) the publishing houses or even journalism per se, leaving a noticeable gap." (Schrader 2020)

"Summarizing, environmental journalism in Germany appears to be in a transition phase. Many traditional media and press outlets are struggling to keep their business model or find a new one. And reporting on air quality, biodiversity, or the climate beyond their often-superficial implications for national politics is not high on the list of priorities. Much of the work might be shifting to online publishing in new contexts and organizations, but those are still forming and far from settled."

The main findings of the article are that the relationship between natural disasters and communicable diseases is not as much due to dead bodies or high trauma as it is to population displacement and a lack of preparredness of the local governing body for the disaster and the crowding of survivors that follows a disaster as this

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

"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 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

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   

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.

The object of the study is the evidence in an increase of various types of epidemics (cholera, malaria, menigitis, tetnus, etc) due to displacement of a populatoin from a natural diasaster. Examples of natural disasters discussed include- hurricanes, cyclones, earthquakes and flooding. Despite popular belief (and scientific evidence) deaths due to natural diasters do not spread diasese; unless cause of widespread infection is due to contaminated water sources, malnutrition, residing in a third world country,access to healthcare and adequate bathroom facilities. These points are supported through statistics from the past twenty or more years.

The study is published under emerging infectious diseases from the CDC. The CDC publishes important information about the possibility of widespread infection (such as Zika) and offers ways to avoid outbreak and prevent further infection. The publication is very credible necause the CDC is cited by the government and on various news sources as a way of staying 'safe' from diasese.

The methodology of the study involves looking at past epidemics in the world countries and connect the dots. How did these epedemics happen? Due to a natural disaster? Okay why? Looking at factors that cause each epidemic and trying to discover a parallel. While this is not a new way of studying an issue it is an inventive way because it can be a new way to treat global epidemics: through disaster preparation.