Many other research papers, articles, books, and sources of research were referencd in the article. The author read and studied a lot of research in various areas and covering all of the topics discussed in this paper, then strengthened ideas and concepts with enough support from hard research to write this article.
The film is best for anyone over the age of 10. Everyone has the potential to find themselves in an ER at any point, so seeing this film is very good for giving perspective and probably makes the lives of the staff easier if the people coming in know a little more. It's hard when they can't do much to make the wait shorter but they are still being sworn at, so if everyone watched this film and had their eyes opened a bit more, then maybe they would find more patience and understanding for those around them in an ER. Nobody wants to be there and a little kindness to go around would only help. It can't make the wait any longer.
Paul E Farmer, Bruce Nizeye, Sara Stulac, Salmaan Keshavjee are listed as the authors of this paper. They work with the health workers in suffering countries, like Haiti. Farmer is a co-founder of Partners in Health, as well as a physician and anthropologist. Stulac is an MD, MPH, specializing in pediatrics, and is also associated with PIH. Keshavjee is an MD, PhD, professor at Harvard of Global Health and Social Medicine. They are all professionals in the field of medicine, and through the PIH, they are well acquainted with responding to global health issues.
Lakoff has a PhD in social anthropology and is an associate professor of sociology at the Univeristy of Southern California. Collier in an associate professor of international affairs at the New School in New York. Both authors have extensive backgrounds in studying people, but not disease, so their stance in this paper is not looking at the biological or emergency response aspects, but more how people plan and react to such.
First responders share their experiences, how they responded, how they realized there weren't going to be many survivors. Many of them suffered from health issues afterwards. The air was very toxic and led to cancers. It makes you wonder how other safety information is given to first responders. They weren't even doing a rescue mission at the point that asbestos was being hidden in reports, so their lives should not have been risked like that for simply cleaning up rubble. Was it worth it for them to shovel the debris and pull out parts of bodies at that point, while putting their well being and lives at risk? If they had waited a few months for the dust to settle and be cleaned up, would that have saved many of the first responders? Offices in the area and houses nearby weren't inspected until even later. Schools opened as a sign of American strength led to asthma, bronchitis, etc. Are those lives worth the public image?
The health of the inmates is in serious jeopardy and there was in instance in which an ambulance was unable to get to the island, which resulted in a death. There are also a lot of suicide attempts so that should be a warning to someone.
This policy affects the insurance coverage for some populations, so that may impact how willing people are to be transported. The policy mostly deals with IMDs though, and those aren't as frequent for emergency responders, unless the individual was trying to harm themselves.
Membership is an ongoing thing, and other countries are notified when a country joins. They may sign treaties for safe nuclear use, but this is not required for initial joining. Since there is no "completion" of the program, there is no certificate.
This article appears to be cited in a variety of different publications, from papers on managing diabetes to aging.
Most of the data came from the MSF book of essays as well as other humanitarian aid studies and data.