Most of the data was collected through the stories that the people told the researchers. This was the best way for them to collect data, since most conditions are best told through stories. They were then able to pull numbers out or ask specific questions catered to the story.
This article is not about a disaster. Just allow more medical stories to circulate.
The author compares existing and previous nuclear regulation/safety/etc committees, analyzing differences between them and various shortcomings. This information is used to develop the author's idea of a more effective and safe oganization to enforce regulations and train an emergency response team.
The author also looked at how previous emergencies were handled and what new regulations stemmed from each, as well as how those have worked since their implementation, and what more can be done.
The film has a lot of emotional appeal by introducing each patient and their family situation. The doctors show their frustrations and humanity too - they want to help everyone and they can't give everyone everything. All of the narritive is made through following patients and doctors through their interactions. Scientific information is given through listening to the doctors, and a lot of family information is seen through direct infomation from the families and patients, as well as their interactions with each other.
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.
The authors cite their own previous work and how rates of diseases and deaths changed. They also researched other programs and studies, similar to their own but in different areas or working on other issues. They also familiarized themselves with how things work within a physicians office - how diseases are presented, how promininent social issues may be, and other factors that the physician might see.
There are many citations, but the reference pages are not included, so it is not known what exactly the citations are, perhaps research papers or studies.
Many examples of responses to outbreaks are studied, and how regualtions stemmed from each outbreak, whether in animals, food industry, or vaccinations.
The school parent was interesting - explaining that the public image of resiliance was paid for by the lungs of the children being sent back into the uncleaned schools.
The person in charge of sending out the EPA press releases (and heavily editing them) had previously fought against the EPA for large companies.
The doctors eventually noticed the issues and tried to get more of the first responders evaluated and treated.
The first responders that risked their lives saving others now can't get fair treatment or benefits to help recover. They want to work but can't.
They needed to testify that they were on the scene in front of a judge to get benefits.
"'Sometimes [the detainees] tell [the guards], 'we not locking in becuase its too hot,' Jackson says. Such refusal has often meant calling in the Emergency Services Unit, the jail version of a riot squad. REferred to as 'the turtles' by some detainees, the ESU is known to use extreme force when bringing people back to their cells"
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.