Search

The development of Twine was funded primarily through donations from individual investors interested in the data sharing aspects of the software and humanitarian aid organizations who benefit from the accessible data.

The report quite clearly details the need to change our approaches to healthcare and epidemic emergencies. Currently, we seem to address these events in a singular method, and are unwilling to alter this approach. This is partially due to the narrow scope of patient care; for the most part, administering care to patients follows a standard guideline that does not seek to reach beyond that singular case. It is beyond the scope of a practitioner to attempt to mitigate socioeconomic discrepancies within their clinics alone. However, as Farmer and his colleagues argue, broadening this standard is necessary to combat illness. Biosocial factors, not just medicinal factors, need to be tackled in order to fully combat disease.

True to the article's sentiments, many of the works cited in the bibliography are entries from news agencies, such as The Lancet, UPenn Press (the university paper) & The Guardian. There is even a citation for a blog entry. There are several releases from organizations, such as MSF and WHO, but it is unclear whether these are reports, official press statements, or opinion articles produced by workers. Additionally, there are several entries for articles from PubMed, indicating that there may be some information in the form of actual research articles.

The article has been referenced in several other published works that look at hurricane Katrina and the long term effects, including Aging Disaster: Mortality, Vulnerability, and Long-Term Recovery Among Katrina Survivors, on which Vincanne Adams and Taslim van Hattum both worked.

The article seems to be primarily composed of thoughts from the author supported by evidence from historical, well-known occurrences. Moreover, both authors seem to have personal research in the fields identified here, making many of their arguments based on field experiences. There are cited reports and publications, but there does not appear to be an associated "Works Cited" page provided. 

The article supports the claim with statistics of mental illness and experience related data taken from interviews with both patients and doctors. The style of the article also highlights the authors’ claims in a way that is understandable for readers without experience in that subject by including definitions and working from micro to macro scales as the article progresses.

This article particularly focuses on analysis in the aftermath of emergencies. Specifically, in the investigative processes of structural disasters. It highlights the awkward melding of various agencies in the face of public demand for answers. More than anything, it presents this instability in the investigative processes surrounding many emergencies; understanding the logistics of a building's collapse or how a fire rapidly spread only furthers comprehension of the disaster as a whole. Moreover, findings from this analysis could provide strategies for avoiding future emergencies of a similar nature. The article opens investigations for scrutiny, asking why such an integral part of the post-disaster process often gets swept aside.

The author, Adriana Petryna, works as a professor of anthropology for the University of Pennsylvania. She has done extensive research on the cultural and political aspects of nuclear science and medicine.