Search

Emergency response is literally the main focus of the entire article. While it seems to be only a short chapter in a much larger collection of similar essays, the report fully analyzes past and present responses to nuclear emergencies. Moreover, Dr. Schmid builds a case for how future emergencies should be handled by an international team built on expertise. This includes expertise of nuclear energy, disaster response, and nuclear policy/regulation. While she refrains from commenting fully on whether the response mounted for Fukushima can be classified as "good" or "bad", her assertions indicates a need to shift focus from preventing emergencies to how nations respond to nuclear emergencies.

As an ambulatory agency, BSVAC obviously utilizes the typical EMS technologies, such as oxygen, BVM, ambulance, pulse oximetry, ect. However, it should be noted at the time of publication (2014), an article by the New York Times describing BSVAC's economic struggles, only 1 of the 6 functional rigs could be used due to lack of funding. At the time of the article, this rig had broken down-- and only through the volunteer maintenance by an EMT student's father had it been returned to commission. This leads me to believe that well BSVAC has all the available technologies, these may be dated or somewhat worn in nature.

The majority of the information obtained for this report comes from the work of the four authors. As members of Partners in Health or clinicians, these individuals have seen first hand the effects of social violence in patient care. Moreover, they have witnessed the effectiveness of addressing these ills to better patient outcomes. Some information was also gathered from past studies, including a report by Moore et al. detailing Baltimore's racial discrepancies in care and patient outcomes.

Teach 3.11 was developed to serve students and general public. It allows the public to have more access to different books, teaching material, and research regarding disasters. The website was built in response to the Fukushima disaster of 2011, in order to provide "an educational space for understanding the history, memory, and context of social disasters" (Teach 3.11). The editorial team has members from different countries, reflecting the international collaboration that natural and nuclear disasters require. With it's availability in six different languages, public contribution and comments enabled on articles gives a global platform for discussion and sharing. They are currently accepting papers for their "Terms of Disaster" collection.

1) The article begins by articulating the four domains that "biosecurity" supposedly encompasses. Yet, even just by looking at these four domains with a basic knowledge of current events, one can understand these are all far from having any sense of stability. Just recently, more reports emerged of use of chlorine gas and other agents against citizens in Syria. Reluctance to vaccination has led to a re-emergence of measles and pertussis across the US. 

2) Increase awareness and attention does not always result in cooperative and cohesive actions. While there may be movement to address certain issues, this does not always encompass details of how to attack certain public concerns. One of the main examples cited in the article was a small pox scenario termed "Dark Winter". Here, officials struggled to gauge the possibility of a small pox bioterrorism attack with the cost and effect of the small pox vaccine-- which can result in death. The conflicting results of the scenario between healthcare personnel "on the ground", government officials, and the CDC's difficulty in gauging a credible threat level led to a dismissal of the program.

3) Many of the approaches by global agencies touted as medical agencies primarily center on emergency response protocols. This modality prepares them for quick, short responses to emergency problems, while neglecting long-term intervention. The article argues this approach is preferred because of the galvanizing, global responses emergencies have-- they garner attention and resources quickly, while long-term problems do not. Additionally, short-term presence is far easier to prepare for than implementing long-term solutions to medical scenarios. 

Increased funding from the U.N., distribution of cholera vaccines, focus on poorer populations to educate and give access to medications/water, and clean up of the Arbonite River.

Several sources are utilized in compiling Dr. Knowles' argument. Much of the historical information comes from first-hand accounts provided at the time and compiled for posterity. A good portion of information also emerges from news articles produced in the wake of the event. This includes interviews and press releases. Historical court documentation and correspondences between parties are used for depiction of events and subsequent investigations. Several aanalysis pieces by historians also appear to be used. When discussing the parallels between scenarios, Dr. Knowles relies on his own logic to fully connect the events.

The report has several small sections dedicated to possible ways the MSF could have responded better to the 2014 ebola outbreak; such as the medical challenges they faced, MSF challenges within the organization, and a "Looking to the future" about the importance of learning lessons from this epidemic.