The program is regarded postively by the public. If education and training was no longer needed, it would no longer be provided. The systems are also updated as needed- this knowledge provides a positive lookout on continuing education for others who wish to be emergency nuclear response trained
At the end of the film, the need of more medical centers are suggested as in some of the countries there is no medical center to serve a whole country. Due to the lack of medical center, medical operation cannot be hold long in the area with the overwhelming populations. By sending short-term temporary medical service from foreign countries would not solve the problem at once, as the populations would get some kind of disease overtime. By building more medical centers, medical supplies would maintain in a constant rate so the emergency responders do not have to make decisions based on the supplies left.
The central argument/narrative of the film is explaining what the Fukishima nuclear meltdown was and what was done to contain the explosions and the subsquent radiation that was leaking into the atmosphere. How to restore power to the plant in order to contain the fuel rods and prevent meltdown. Indirectly the argument was to persuade the public to be more informed about nuclear power and the affects it could have on the world- to learn how to prevent nuclear disasters; make emergency nuclear response teams.
The study was not funded it was on a volunteer basis, where particpiants would be paid for their time and information gathered would be used for the study.
User data are translated into patient’s profiles, session history and tracked progress.
This study addresses vulnerable popoulations because it centers around third world countries that are affected by natural disasters. It also supports the need for preparation for natural disasters. It addresses these populations by stressing the need to see the connection of those who cannot have access to clean water, food, etc in certain situations.
"MSF argued in their essays on the Congo that one reason for not taking rape seriously was that women who had experienced sexual assualt were not ideal subjects of aid; since they could not be easily identified with images of innocence."
"It seems that MSF workers assumed that sexual violence would bring aparticular soft of share, greater than that accompanying other forms of violence or brutaility; and therefore should be kept in a quiet, confidential, in the private relm"
"The question is how exactly a humanitarian response shares what constitutes sexual vioelnce and who 'gets sick' with it, particulary when humanitarism plays an increasingly important role in governing crisis zones."
A point that I looked up to further my knowledge of the article was the stoning of the Ebola workers, if it was reported anywhere else (a hot topic) or if there was any new information available; only one other news source reported on this topic and that source does not appear to be reliable. I also looked up the possibility of Ebola workers actually transporting Ebola to others. I found that the protocals in place to prevent this is extensive and infection (the possibility of) is extremely low. I finally looked up Guiena village leaders to understand why they do not trust western medicine, to understand if it is generally like that; if they do not like outsiders invading their village or if it is a general fear of infection. In truth it is the latter.
This film best addresses audiences who do not understand the healthcare crisis in the US. It provides a first hand view on the crisis and exemplifies how it needs to be fixed.
The policy addresses matters of public health because it ensures people who were affected by 9.11 get the help and support they need. It provides money and healthcare to those who were hurt physically or mentally by the attack on the world trade center. The act itself identifies possible issues ( a braod spectrum) that could be a driect fault of the attack, it also offers a board if the issue is not listed- to be treated.