Perspectives of public health officials, goverment workers (excluding the president), and international aid organizations such as doctors with out borders and the united nations (both of which are depicted), are not included in the film. More scholarly perspectives are also not included.
The correlations between mental health disorders and EMS is discussed since those in emergency response are more open to suffer form mental disorders in the midst of disasters. Aside form that the focus was more on how to better study vulnerable populations who have experienced trauma, such as EMS.
Thus policy is department specific, and while the article does not expressly state it, it was likely drafted and put into place by the Bethel Township Fire Department.
This arguement is supported by looking at 4 specific case histories and examining the factors contributing to the investigations in each.
1. The 1814 Burning of the Capitol Building - Investigation of the disaster conducted by one engineer, B.H. Lathobe, who was given vast resources with very few obsticles, except for financial constraits and an impatient congress, to complete his investigation and reconstruct the building.
2. 1850 Hauge St. Explosion - After a major boiler explosion in Manhattan's Lower East Side, a pannel of "jurrors" and "experts" were called together to complete investigations, bring forth the history of the fauty boiler, and place the blame for the accident in an effort to "memorialize the dead and bring them justice." Because of the way this investigation was conducted, the blame could not be accurately placed so everyone involved was blamed for the failure.
3. 1903 Iroquois Theater Fire - John Ripley Freeman, a fireproof engineering expert and factory inspector, was brought in to complete a report and provided one of the first "modern" scientific disaster investigations. He utilized a new network of investigators, engineers, insurance companies, testing labs, and inter-industry coordination that characterizes modern disaster investigation.
This is a 180 page document that has hundreds of components in terms of what information, as well as measures and advice that the report includes and recommends. The report contains information on the radioactive release amounts and deposition in the urban, environmental, agricultural and aquatic areas surrounding the plant. Recommendations for future monitoring and research are also provided. Countermeasures are also widely discussed and ways in which people can combat and help reverse effects of the radiation and evacuations. The effects the disaster had on plants and animals is also analyzed and supported by facts and figures. The amount of human exposure and recommendations are also discussed. Future trends are analyzed as well as very detailed reports of the weather during the time of the incident, how that effected things, how specific types of animals were effected, the differences between external and internal doses. A break down of the impact on air, shelter, surface water, groundwater etc. is also provided. Needless to say, pretty much any single detail that could possibly be known about the condition during the event and after the event were researched and documented in this report.
This study was written by Kota Katanoda et al and recently published in 2016. The article is published by JJCO (Japanese journal of Clinical Oncology.) This journal publishes many works involving cancer studies and epidemiological studies analyzing the distribution of cancers. This journal focuses on oncology and the medical aspects of causes and effects based off radiation exposure, surgeries mainly focused on effects seen on Asian countries and citizens. The journal focuses on all types of cancers and publishes meta-analyses, as well as systematic reviews of risks that patients face post or pre surgery in terms of cancer, as well as possible reactions to disasters or radiation exposure. This journal has numerous publications as well as has ties to the Oxford Journals, it is regarded as a dependable and noteworthy journal for clinical oncology by peers. It is edited by Tadao Kakizoe and was established in 1971.
The program is funded in most part by Brown University, and research funding is suplimented by various grants applied for by individual researchers.
The argument is supported through the use of other work by professionals in this field and on this topic, which corroborate the author's own findings and provide material support for his arguments. Secondly, case studies along with statistics and data are provided along with stories of patients and their experiences in Ankara. Along with interviews and statistics, an in depth background is also provided by the author in which he analyzes the meaning of narrative and explains its connection with culture.