The argument is supported through a combination of historical description, statistical aspects of the health care system available to exposed citizens, and accounts from doctors and sufferers of radiation poisoning. The use of such diverse methods gives a more complete picture of the long term effects of Chernobyl and how it continues to dictate the work, education, and health care options of those in the surrounding area.
“Within the nuclear industry, an almost exclusive emphasis on accident avoidance has given way to a new strategy of accident preparedness.” (Schmid 207)
“…creating a group or agency that is both capable of assembling the needed expertise for effective emergency response, and that also is accepted as legitimate by the broader public.” (Schmid, 195)
“...an emergency response requires…expertise, trust, legitimacy, as well as public engagement as part of that response” (Schmid 195)
The main argument is supported primarily through interviews with many individuals living in Ankara, through which they describe the first presentation of their seizures and in many cases the steps they tool to attempt a cure. Along with the interviews, statistics of the individuals interviewed and their diagnoses is used to provide a reference point to better understand their stories. Finally the article includes an analysis of narratives in a more general sense that can be applied to the narrative of an illness.
The argument is supported through a combination of historical information including rates of AIDS in the early 1990’s and a study done in Baltimore in an effort to reduce AIDS rates in African Americans, who were more likely to be in poverty, by addressing monetary barriers to heath care. Two more recent cases are also used to support the main argument, implementing a method created by the Partners in Health to prevent transmission and provide AIDS care in rural Haiti and rural Rwanda. Throughout the article references were made to the current medical professional’s dilemma, where they are in a position to see the social inequalities contributing to disease rates but not trained to report or change common social contributing factors. This makes the article more relatable to the reader that may have experience in the medical field which elps to support the argument.
The film suggests a change in the treatment of terminal patients nearing the end of their lives. Several doctors in the film expressed that they were unprepared to deal with that part of medicine. Experience is the most effective means of education in the medical field, however the film seems to suggest that more training in medical school would be a good first step in preparing doctors not to see the loss of terminal patients as a failure, but in many cases as an inevitability.
The articles has not been referenced in other papers that are publicly available, likely due to the very recent publication. It has been published through several platforms and is widely available.
These systems would all be difficult to use if the user was in a situation with a risk of sexual assault, although the apps claim to be for specifically these situations. If in a dangerous situation, spending time to open an app that may or may not be of help is not the best use of time.
The World Trade Center collapse was a unique disaster for American organizations to deal with, the aftermath and subsequent investigation into the collapse shows a need for a unified system of authority between investigative organizations. The paper shows the development of his system using several other disasters throughout American history.
The policy is at the moment limited to a single town, and therefore not well known to the public. The article describing this policy does not go into detail as to the public opinion, but only the opinions of first responders.
The argument is supported through a combination of personal stories, historical changes in protocol, and analysis of the reasons why applicants resort to a medical argument for residence permits. The use of personal stories of applicants highlights the inconsistencies in the process largely due to compassionate bias on the part of officials reading the applications, as well as the resources available in different cities. As the protocols were changed the article shows that while some of the inconsistencies were resolved, the process of determining who can and cannot receive medical treatment necessitates personal judgment which inevitably affects the outcome.