Search

I'm interested in better understanding the ongoing geological processes that shape St. Louis and the Mississippi Valley region. So far, I've been looking into the history of seismicity in the region, focusing on the fascinating but little known history of the New Madrid earthquakes of 1811 and 1812 -- the most devastating earthquakes to have hit the US east of the Rockies. I've also been exploring how St. Louis and surrounding areas are dealing with the possibility of another earthquake occurring in the future. According to one article I read, one of the biggest uncertainties is what would happen to the heavily engineered Mississippi River in the case of another major tremblor. The shaking could break the levees, flooding wide areas along the river and creating cascading effects. The flow of the river might also reverse completely, as occurred during the New Madrid earthquakes.

On these possibilities and the lack of scientific consensus surrounding intraplate seismicity in this zone, see this article in The Atlantic.

On current efforts to create earthquake hazard maps in St. Louis, see this overview on the US Geological Survey site.

For a deeper dive into the history of the New Madrid earthquakes, see this book by historian of science Conevery Bolton Valencius. 

The main argument was that there are "biosocial phenomena" or "structural violence" that lead to the tendency for certain diseases or lack of treatment in populations, particularly those in poverty. Their three major findings were: they can make structural interventions to "decrease the extent to which social inequities become embodied as health inequities", proximal interventions can reduce premature morbidity and mortality, and structural interventions "can have an enormous impact on outcomes.

This article seems to focus more on the overarching theme of global medicine. This does include aspects of emergency response (such as discussing how various agencies respond to emergencies or how they formulate protocols) as biosecurity seeks to minimize or eradicate health emergencies. However, as the article contends, biosecurity is not a functional ideal at this time; it primarily contends that our current models of biosecurity are undermined by several factors, leaving them as simply emergency responses.

Stephen Collier is an Associate Professor of International Affairs at The New School in NYC. He has a Ph.D in Anthropology from U.C. Berkeley and has conducted research in Russia, Georgia, and the U.S. His expertise is in political systems (post-socialism and neoliberalism), infrastructure, social welfare, and contemporary security. His knowledge in infrastructure and politics gives him a more top-down perspective of emergency response; Collier can assist with creation of organizations and groups for large scale emergencies that would require international collaboration. 

Andrew Lakoff is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Southern California, and is an anthropologist of science and medicine. He research is in globalization processes, human science, and the implications of biomedical technology. He has a similar position in emergency response as Collier, where he sees global, political, and technological interactions that would effect how we prepare and respond to international emergencies. He's written essays and other books on emergency preparedness such as "The Risks of Preparedness: Mutant Bird Flu" and "Disaster & the Politics of Intervention".

This article seems to be primarily cited by other articles concerning historical disasters. It appears, for the most part, to be very under-cited by the research community. This may be due to its nature as a primarily historical analysis of a very under represented issue. Many competing articles seem to focus on more substantial issues with direct effects on communities or directly point out failures that led to significant reduction in response capability. As argued in the article, it can be very difficult to press issues without public encouragement for the topic. 

1) Jean-Pierre Chevenement:  a key player in passing this immigration legislation, the leader has since stepped away from the political scene after running for the presidency in 2002. As the sitting minister, Mr. Chevenement has been described as a key member of the left; I'd be intrigued to see what other pieces of legislation he has worked on

2) Didier Fassin: Dr. Fassin, a reigning expert in french state anthropology, appears to bring an element of medical background to his analysis. Obviously, he seems to be a well-respected member of the anthropological community-- where and what other projects he has on-going would be interesting 

3) French healthcare: this type of legislation obviously puts a tremendous amount of strain on the general healthcare; depending on the system utilized by the French state, this could have a detrimental effect on the quality and timing of care delivered. 

The author is Didier Fassin, a French sociologist and anthropologist who was trained as a physician in internal medicine. He developed the field of critical moral anthropology and currently does research on punishment, asylum, and inequality. This research looks at the social and political forces that affect public health trends, so is not directly involved in emergency response.

While emergency response is not addressed as an overarching theme, this report focuses on the nuances of mental health within emergency response. A key, but often forgotten aspect of emergency response, the report seeks to better focus the treatment and study of mental health after an emergency. The report discusses how to better study mental illness in populations who have experienced trauma, which will further enable effective treatments. It also discusses a few interventions currently shown to help mitigate PTSD, MDD, and other disorders after a disaster event.

The policy was created in 1988; it was created to support previous legislation, such as the Disaster Relief Act of 1970, which was amended in 1974 by President Nixon. 

While there are clips of various spokesmen and women for the marine corps, I would have liked to see an interview with them directly. Particularly, a female appears several times to directly meet with the survivors of Camp Lejeune and to speak at the senate hearing (she's not listed on any outside resources). She serves as the "Marine Corps Representative", and appears to be reserved at best. Her view on the former residents and the situation would be intriguing.