Search

This study examined the risk of acquiring Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) by healthcare workers in the setting of general hospitals and isolation units. By looking retrospectively at the Ebola Outbreak in Sierra Leone, the relative levels of risk to healthcare workers were computed and compared. The reasoning for these levels was also examined through interviews of surviving workers and the families/associates/colleagues of the deceased workers. The interviews reviewed common actions (and lack there of) for affected workers. This revealed certain themes that should be visited when reveising/creating hospital infection prevention and control policies.

1) DOTs: I chose to look into the TB-control program cited by Paul Farmer and several other global health experts. While this is a minute detail, it seems to be a program which encompasses everything wrong with our current model of biosecurity.

2) Doctors without Borders: Despite reading about this organization multiple times, I've yet to do in-depth research on its goals and capabilities. Recent information seems to indicate DWB (or MSF) struggles to be effective in a long-term way in many of its projects.

3) BSE and food safety: It's been quite a while since mad cow disease has reared its misfolded protein head, but it remains a speck on the public health radar. How agencies balance BSE outbreaks and public opinion can often indicate their level of success, both in terms of job fulfillment and ability to minimize public panic. 

This document was drafted and approved by the 111th US Congress

1) NIST: The National Institute of Standards and Technology, a federal agency primarily charged with promoting innovation and industrial competitiveness. In the wake of 9/11, FEMA chose this institution as the leading body in the investigation. This choice seems odd, as NIST is not a regulatory agency; what this agency exactly accomplishes would be interesting to know.

2) ASCE: Prior to reading this article, I had never heard of the ASCE. It serves as a representation of Civil Engineering for American engineers. I'd be intrigued to know their role in worldwide disasters. 

3) War of 1812: Nobody knows what happened during this war; literally the most misunderstood war in American history, yet it serves as a main point of contrast for this article.

The film provided general facts about MSF and the conditions in Lieria and the Congo, but no detailed medical statisitics. There wasn't any comparison of the issues in this mission versus those on other missions. The film could have included more on the factors that contribute to the diseases themselves, rather than the barriers to treating them. The film also needed more on the exact amounts of supplies that were given relative to what one would have in a clinic elsewhere. 

It's unclear who, at this time, primarily views and utilizes the information presented here. However, this web platform seems to be one piece of an ongoing project called "Land of Opportunity". This film discusses the ongoing urban issues and developments in America; as we move forward from disasters and begin rebuilding, the question becomes how we want to fortify our cities. The film itself specifically focuses on Hurricane Katrina, while the interactive web platform inclides information about Hurricane Sandy. The film has had several showings, has DVD's for purchase, and a viewing request can also be made.

In the aftermath of the hurricane, numerous issues arose for the evacuated citizens of New Orleans.First, the immediate affects of lack of access were apparent, such as lack of schooling, pharmacies, and employment. Then psychological affects appeared as people were told they couldn't return home, even if they were minimally damaged. The combined affects of the physical and mental conditions, combined with the lack of physicians and psychiatrists, led to a massive instability in the people. 

The government further exacerbated this instability by providing limited resources and shelter for victims. More exactly, the resources and shelter were unevenly distributed to the victims, favoring white mid- to upper-class citizens. The funds that otherwise should have gone to essential care facilities and housing, were unseen by the people. Promises of finanicial aid were never fulfilled, and no legislation (such as that in the wake of 9/11) was passed to support victims.

This leads to the creation of "disaster capitalsim" in which private companies benefit from the disaster and state-of-emergency, raising prices and suspending insurance policies. Poor government oversight of the private sector created deficiencies and health crises. 

The article concludes by suggesting the response to Katrina be examined to prevent the same mistakes from occuring in the future. However, there is a lack of optimism, as the system of response is ingrained into American Society. 

As mentioned earlier, the bibliography provides several of the authors' own works as references/supporting works for the report. These include reports and specific studies. Additionally, there are several governmental and agency reports, giving credit to this report as an overarching review of the process and not being too narrowly scoped. It should be noted the bibliography also includes several psychological and psychiatric works, detailing nuances of mental illness and their respective prevalence. 

The article explores the effects of society, politics, and science on the diagnosis/treatment of medical conditions in the wake of Chernobyl's nuclear disaster. The article looks into the complex development of a system of compensation and benefits for victims of the disaster, and how people became dependent on the system for their basic needs.