Search

They have a lovely list on their website

Financially: Securing funding during unstable economic climate. Maintaining and improving their programs that rely on international funding. Having reserves to respond to new emergencies.

Human Resources: Finding experienced and committed staff, and qualified medical staff.

Operations: Security in areas of conflict. Balancing speaking out with accessing populations. Accessing appropriate medical treatments.

The main argument is supported primarily with a detailed description of the events surrounding the Fukushima Daiichi plant disaster on March 11th, 2011 as an example of the need for a specilized group to respond to nuclear emergencies. Schmid also supports the effectiveness of such a group by tracing the recent shift in opinion away from an accident prevention mindset to the idea that nuclear disasters are a risk in the nuclear industry and therefore plans for the effective response to future nuclear disasters must be made in order to mitigate the damage caused. Several other works addressing similar problems in risk management, such as Risk Society by Ulrich Beck, as also cited to support the main argument.

The article uses statistics of the health care system and diagnosis methods to show that, while the program was created with good intentions to help those suffering from radiation poisoning, it has become necessary for those seeking assistance to find influential individuals or groups to try and receive enough funding to support themselves and their families.

I think it can both bring the public to better understand first response and disaster response better as well as serve as a great film for other first responders to better understand what happened and how that day was handled.

The main argument is that susceptibility to certain diseases is not only determined by biology but also social conditions, leading to a disproportionate disease rate among the poor, and minority groups without access to medical services. The author shows that addressing these social conditions leads to a decrease in disease when combining treatment and prevention plans.

The article provides statistics and excerpts of interviews to support its analysis of the narrative of illness. There are also several quotes from other works that analyze story and narrative to support the claims of the importance of emotion as a method of sharing the plot.

Emergency response is not directly addressed in the article, but addressing the welfare of endangered citizens helps to ensure good public health. The policies formulated addressing illness in the undocumented workers speaks to the overall care given to citizens.

The authors, Andrew Lakoff and Stephen Collier both study anthropology. They have written several papers together focusing on the social and cultural types of knowledge concerning health and medicine. Lakoff works at the University of Southern California and Collier is the Director of Anthropology for the New School.

The main argument of the article is that the attempt to depoliticize sexual violence has a negative effect on the ability for the victims of sexual violence to receive humanitarian aid and prevents the recognition of all manifestations of this type of violence.