Search

The main argument that Sonja makes is that there does not exist any international organization with capabilities and expertise to respond to nuclear disasters. Further, with talk of forming such an organization/team since Fukushima, any international nuclear disaster strike team will need to have good relations with the communities and workers that they help as well as good communication at the international level to see the maximum effective response.

It has been cited in reports of the top polluted areas of the world. (http://www.worstpolluted.org/projects_reports/display/44)

According to Google Scholar the report was cited by 7 other papers.

In 2011 the IAEA developed the Action Plan on Nuclear Safety –a comprehensive safety plan for everything from planning a new site to response. After the Fukushima disaster, the IAEA gave a report the Fukushima Daiichi Accident, comprised of international collaboration of almost 200 experts from IAEA member states on what happened, how it happened, and what should be done moving forward. IAEA also worked with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN to use nuclear testing technologies to help Botswana quickly and effectively test for cattle disease.

I followed up on: the availability of medicine in 3rd world countries, the success of treating patients in less developed countries, and the complications of suspicion of western medicine in these areas.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has referenced this study in several places, namely on this powerpoint on natural disasters. (http://www.who.int/diseasecontrol_emergencies/publications/idhe_2009_london_natural_disasters.pdf).

Research Gate, a journal library, has an article entitled “Infectious diseases following natural disasters: Prevention and control measures” which also references this study. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51860057_Infectious_diseases_following_natural_disasters_Prevention_and_control_measures)

It was well received in large when it was signed into law by President Ronald Regan in 1986. The need, benefits, and issues brought about that. The only negative was the potential to cheap the system and steal from hospitals by those who are able to pay but don’t. This issue is not really a major issue because patients still get billed and there are still repercussions for not paying bills but if the need for urgent care is real it could save your life; however about 6% of hospital services are never paid for, thus not completely an unreal threat.