The author utilizes data and a number analysis of symptoms experienced, as well as interviews with those effected and how it altered their lives in hundreds of ways. Along with primary source interviews and data analysis, expert analysis and opinion is also provided as well.
The article is supported through the use of numerous examples and educated points made by the author. First, the author supports her arguments by going through the events that transpired that day at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. She uses the details of the events in Japan to support her argument that a global emergency nuclear response team is necessary. Schmid also cites other areas in the world where this was an issue and protocols were not clear. Ultimately which caused the incidences at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, all of which would have benefited from a response team equipped and specially trained to deal with this type of situation. The author cites that incidences at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were the result of systems that were too complex, tightly coupled and technical, ultimately not allowing broad policy changes when needed. The author also cites that this occurred in one of the world's most advanced areas in the world, both technologically and economically. She states that having scientists and the elite left to make decisions about responses to disasters alone further proves her point and supports her arguments. She also notes that current organizations have little international authority and often suffer when attempting to include or talk to the public in terms of these situation which doesn't allow for full integration with the public. She notes the importance of this integration, but also that world leaders are attempting to do so and see how beneficial this is. She compared the way previous situations similar to that in Japan was handled and she mapped out new regulations that arose based off each of those incidences in order to see what can further be implemented as a blanket response globally for all nations in a situation like this.
This program is located within an institution, Columbia University's Medical Center and College of Physicians and Surgeons.
The authors support their argument many ways, one being how that the rates of HIV/AIDS are so positively linked and correlated with social arrangements that it is often referred to as social disease. HIV commonly effects those that are poor and disease rates are fueled by gender inequality, racism and poverty. The article discusses how structural violence has influenced HIV progression. The article cites that structural violence influences diagnosis rates, staging and treatment. The also article references a study done in Baltimore which reports racism and poverty forms of structural violence and the effects on excess mortality among African Americans without insurance- ultimately showing they were more likely to to be susceptible. The authors also used other historical data and research to support heir claims. Efforts through Partners in Health were made to prevent the spread and transmission of diseases in Haiti. The efforts made in Haiti and Rwanda were cited, both the positives and negatives. The article also discusses ways to incorporate more interventions to help eliminate any social influences of disease.
This article focuses on gender based violence and its ties with medical humanitarianism. The effects humanitarianism has on other violent acts versus ones effecting gender based acts such as rape and assault. A main point made in this article is the fact that special humanitarian attention to gender based violence in fact has a negative effect on the overall addressing of the issue in its entirety. The reason behind this being cited is the fact that it depoliticizes the issue when unprecedented attention is given to gender based violent acts. The article then notes that by paying attention to why this is failing, we can think of new ways of addressing this issues and violence, making it more equal.
A main concern is the fact that no disaster will ever be the same. A hurricane in one area will be very different in another area, despite the same source of destruction. This is because each areas has a different population, different needs and different services available in each area. The most challenging part is the ability to foresee what might be good resources or equipment or forms of medical care and best to supply at each different disaster since each one is unique.
There are numerous authors of this paper. Foghammar is from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in Sweden, as well as the Karolinska Institute in Sweden. Jnag, Kyzy, Sullivan and Irwin are also from Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Weiss is from the Fafo Research Institute in Norway and Fall is from King's College London in the UK. Foghammar is very active in foreign affairs as well as economics, global health and political science fields. Suyoun Jang researches at SIPRI in the Security and Development Program and her focus is on fragile states, security and development. Kyzy is also a researcher at SIPRI, working on the impact evaluation of the peace program in Kyrgyzstan. Weiss has a PhD in social anthropology and her research areas include conflict, gender, political anthropology, migration and social suffering and torture. Their publications all relate to their respective fields of study within the anthropology and social science world.
"The demand for “public health preparedness” escalated as public health insti- tutions faced mounting concerns about, first, a possible bioterrorist attack and then, beginning in 2005, a devastating influenza pandemic. "
"There is the problem of regulation and responsibility: given the global scale of biological threats and their multiple sources, it is often unclear who has regulatory jurisdiction or responsibility for managing a
given disease event. "
"The emergency management approach thus seeks to develop techniques for managing health emergencies that can work independently of political context and of socioeconomic conditions. "
This registry allows for the tracking of the health effects of the 9/11 disaster. It is open to the public, where they can see the most common disorders and afflictions that those effected by 9/11 are dealing with today. The public can access this website and read up on the rates of lung infection, heart disease, PTSD, alcohol use, as well as the effect it has had on adolescent health. This registry was not only set up for the public use though, it is also used and produced by researchers. The researchers track the longterm health effects 9/11 has had on those exposed. The data also provides experts and researchers with the means to draw conclusions and analyses. Learning about the long term effects of 9/11 will raise awareness as well as allow for the understanding of how disasters of this caliber can effect those around it, in both long term and short term ways.
I personally do not think that filing complaints will help reduce air pollution because officials are already aware of the problem. Doing so, will do nothing in aiding the problem. Unless people are able to make officials aware of unknown issues, filing complaints will not help