Search

CP111 did an article about this research article.

Southern Spaces did an article about the topic and listed this article as a resource.

Even Quizlet has a page citing and for this article.

Currently the only supported language is English. Older patients or people that are not as familiar with current technology my find this system difficult to use. There is no public data on the effectiveness of this platform. The video chats could lack the wholeness of in person visits and the online tests could be inaccurate.

Some works that referenced or discussed the article include: “Test for Athlete Citizenship: Regulating Doping and Sex in Sports”, “Reimaging (Bio)Medicalization, Pharmaceuticals and Genetics: Old Critiques and New Engagements”, “Depression in Japan: Psychiatric Cures for a Society in Distress”, “Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences”, and “Posthumanism”. According to Google Scholar there are eighty-five other articles that reference “Biological Citizenship: The Science and Politics of Chernobyl-Exposed Populations”.

The author uses a wide variety of news and journal sources to make their point. Everything from the New York Times to East Asian Science. It also cites many volumes on disaster preparedness. For example, “The Chernobyl Accident: a Case Study in International Law Regulation State Responsibility for Transboundary”. The sources tell me that the article was developed around the news at the time and works that dealt with handling of disasters from the past. For me, this furthers the case that the author is making: that the way we have been doing things in the past is not working.

1) “Repeatedly, I have been surprised by the impact that even lightly sketched case histories can have on readers.”

2) “But even the manifesto conceded that less formal expertise would remain important in the areas of practice that had not been subject to high-level testing. THAT confession covers much of the territory.”