Search

The article describes the situation in post-Katrina New Orleans as one where trauma is constantly happening and more work is going into emergency response than recovery. Instead of construction workers, social workers and the like, the military was sent by the government for aid after Katrina. 

The main findings in this article is the phenomenon of "biological citizenship" that occurred in the Ukraine after the Chernobyl disaster, how "scientific cooperation and political management" developed, and how sociopolitical factors affect the course of health and disease in a country. 

The parts of the film that I found most persuasive and compelling were Atul Gawande's personal experience. As both a surgeon and son, he has the unique viewpoint of being the one to be the bearer of bad news and be the one to accept his father's mortality as his cancer progressed. Gawande gives rational and emotional parts of end-of-life care, and is able to learn new ways of handling mortality as a healthcare provider and a human. 

One argument presented is that public engagement leads to increased vigilance and emergency preparedness. Nuclear emergency response should not be governed by one elite body of scientists. Information should be crowd sourced from the public to increase awareness and transparency and lead to more ideas as well as public support. Another argument presented is that risk prevention has historically been the focus of governing bodies instead of risk acceptance and emergency response. A nuclear reactor being placed near the ocean is more fiscally responsible but natural disasters are unavoidable, regardless of the amount of risk prevention that has been taken. Instead, the focus should be on emergency response after natural disaster strikes. Safety is also sometimes substituted for profitability.

I have not found any opinions in the news about the program but several other educational institutions have released announcements about the program appearing to be advertisements.

The report addresses disaster and health in how it describes actors' emergency response to the initial disaster as adequate but states the aid supplied does not allow progress to occur. The victims of the disaster were given temporary shelter in tents, but many still live in tents at the time of this report being written. These conditions led to a cholera outbreak which the actors did not seem to care about or provide aid for.

The article notes the U.N.'s role in the cholera epidemic that killed thousands of Haitians and government and societal factors that lead to Haiti's lack of major improvement after the earthquake. Another public health issue that was mentioned was, "the only part of the Haitian government that receives direct funding from the U.S. government, the Health Ministry, has racked up impressive post-earthquake gains in childhood vaccination rates and access to lifesaving HIV treatment". 

“Mrs. Whitman and the agency put out press releases saying that the air near ground zero was relatively safe and that there were "no significant levels" of asbestos dust in the air. They gave a green light for residents to return to their homes near the trade center site”

“By these actions," Judge Batts wrote, Mrs. Whitman "increased, and may have in fact created, the danger" to people living and working near the trade center.”

The report addresses how strained public health infrastructures can get in the face of large scale epidemics like in the ebola outbreak. It analyzes the responses of local government, health care workers, and MSF in the ebola outbreak, discussing what could have been done to prevent the spread and severity of the disease.