Search

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. 

1. "as Richard Danzig has argued in the case of bioterrorism, despite the striking increase in funding for biodefense in the U.S., there is still no 'common conceptual framework' that might bring various efforts together and make it possible to assess their adequacy."

2. “Who should lead the fight against disease? Who should pay for it? And what are the best strategies and tactics to adopt?”

3. In contrast to classic public health, preparedness does not draw on statistical records of past events. Rather, it employs imaginative techniques of enactment such as scenarios, exercises, and analytical models to simulate uncertain future threats.

4. emergency response is acute, short-term, focused on alleviating what is conceived as a temporally circumscribed event; whereas “social” interventions—such as those associated with development policy—focus on transforming political-economic structures over the long term

The college was created to continue New York State's position as a leader in homeland security, cybersecurity and emergency preparedness and as a response to the growing need for professionals in those fields. Advances in technology, and increased threats to terrorism and cybersecurity in the past few decades called for the formation of this college. Overall it was a strategic political and economic decision by Governor Andrew Cuomo as it would provide training in a field that's expected to grow by 650,000 employees (for cybersecurity) in the next decade*.

*http://www.albany.edu/news/57214.php

The argument is supported with case studies, anecdotal evidence from medical officers, research on the history of the article, and news reports regarding the law. 

The policy doesn't specifically address the elderly or children, who are very vulnerable populations during disasters/ emergencies (but it does address pets and animals in Title IV).

The central argument is that healthcare professionals are not trained well enough in mentally/ emotionally handling patient relationships when providing end-of-life care for terminal/ chronic illnesses.