Search

This policy applies to all people in America who meet the eligibility requirements and are in a state who has expanded to medicaid coverage. They must apply and meet certain criteria in terms of income, household demographic and marital status. 

This article discusses the Chernobyl disaster and the management and cooperation that followed this disaster. Technologies at play, as well as government involvement, scientific knowledge and sociopolitical factors effecting this situation post disaster are also mentioned. The author also extensively reviews Chernobyl through field research based off resettled families and radiation exposed workers. The dependence of health and illness based off economics and politics is also heavily discussed. International scientific cooperation is also discussed in terms of studies done on those exposed after the disaster. 

There is a lot of controversy behind the effects that Chernobyl had on the surrounding areas. There have been accusations of officials trying to cover it up, as well as completely denying that there were any repercussions that are current and apparent today. This report shows that there is no question about it, there is nuclear fallout as a result of the Chernobyl disaster. This will not only hold government officials and those in charge accountable, but also make the public aware of their risks and what they have been exposed to and what measures they should be taking to protect themselves and reverse and aid any effects or issues that may have occurred due to the disaster. This report exposes the real detriment that the disaster had on society and makes the public aware, allowing them to better fend for and protect themselves and also to make scientists more accountable as well as the government on ways to fix and counteract the issues that have risen due to the disaster.

There is a separate section of the study that cites where the funding for the study came from. The study was supported by Grants-in -aid for the Cancer Control Policy from the Ministry of Health, labour and Welfare, Japan. The study also notes that the funder didn't play a role in the conduct of the study .

This is a chapter excerpt from a book but looking at the references throughout the chapter, it is clear that an extensive amount of work and detailed research was performed for this book. 

The American Red Cross has been on the forefront of research and testing, especially when it comes to blood. It was one of the first organizations to implement the testing of infectious diseases and is a single major contributor to clinical trials to improve blood safety according to their site. They were also among the first to develop testing for not only infectious disease, but HIV, Hepatitis B and C, West Nile, and Chagas disease. Currently they are actually working on a study in which they are investigating the blood supply for a tick-borne parasite in donated blood. They often work with the CDC and are always innovating ways to monitor donor blood by way of antibody recognition as well as disease detection and transmission. 

This policy was explicitly made for vulnerable populations who couldn't afford or for whatever reason did not have health insurance. The vulnerable parties that did not have health insurance were at risk of being turned away at hospitals during crucial times of need and emergency situations. This act completely absolved the worries and fears of this vulnerable population without health insurance by making it a law that these ED patients were to receive care and stabilization. This act was made for this specific vulnerable population, to prevent discrimination.

There are two authors Andrew Lakoff and Stephen Collier. Andrew Lakoff works at USC and has roughly 40 publications. He is a professor of anthropology, sociology and communication at USC and has written many works with Stephen Collier. Collier has about 36 publications, and is a professor of international affairs at The New School. They are not directly involved in emergency response research but they do a lot of international studies related to medicine and disaster.

Professionals can use this data to better equip themselves with the knowledge of weaknesses of the masses, in terms of what they know or don't know and what they perceive about the Influenza epidemic. Professionals can better identify where most people receive their data from and where they are most likely to get their information from. This will allow professionals to better identify vulnerable groups and better prepare those areas and groups, sculpting educational programs and informational/educational forums and outlets to them, with the hopes of increasing public health efforts.