Three ways the argument is supported is through interviews by those experiencing violence, accoutns from human rights (health) organizations, and statistics from the WHO.
The data used to produce the claims in the report were investigations of past American disasters and how these shortcomings eventually lead to a failure for those investigating 9/11. Direct quotes and explanation of each of the historical events were also used to support the claims made.
The author is Didier Fassin, he is an anthropologist and socialogist who conducted research in Senegal, Ecuador, South AFrica and France. He used to be a doctor, but now is a professor at Princeton. He is suited in respect to emergency response because studying the people is how to help those affected by disaster.
7. The article’s bibliography is extensive, this points out that there was time and effort put in place to gather the proper evidence in order to prove their argument. There is also a lot of supporting evidence, proving that the argument is valid.
Routes of user engagement include an account customizable features, search engine, a mobile app (text and video chat enabled) as well as a wearable tracker feature.
This article has been referenced and discussed at nuclear response seminars and as a resource for why these teams are needed in the first place.
This study has travelled via the definition of cultural competence on many academic and medical websites regarding psychological ideologies.
The methodology of the study involves looking at past epidemics in the world countries and connect the dots. How did these epedemics happen? Due to a natural disaster? Okay why? Looking at factors that cause each epidemic and trying to discover a parallel. While this is not a new way of studying an issue it is an inventive way because it can be a new way to treat global epidemics: through disaster preparation.
The actors that are referred to are FDNY EMTs- those who treated the patient and stopped the cops from harming them and emergency service unit officers (ESU)- those who harmed the patient further.
The main point of the article is despite the positive impact doctors/nurses and those who advocate against Ebola, many of the citizens in remote areas do not trust those who have the resources to 'cure' or to eradicate the illness, instead they believe that these workers bring diease. Some resort to violence to reaffirm this point through stoning healthcare workers and even killing them. This article exposes the issues on treating an epidemic, the 'growing pains' of helping thrid world countries and the dark side of helping others. The article is supported through direct quotes from healthcare workers as evidence (stats) and quotes from people that live in West Africa.