The points I followed up on to get a better understanding of disaster aftermaths, especially ones involving nuclear technology were: 1) Fukushima 2) Three Mile Island and 3) more research into the Chernobyl incident through other articles.
How did it happen (complete failure of cooling and reactors exploding)?
Although the earthquakes killed workers and wreaked havoc on the region, Japans’ nuclear plants were not compromised by the quakes. It was only the tsunami that caused Fukushima Daiichi 1, 2, & 3’s power and backup power to fail, allowing the meltdown to take place. (world-nuclearworld-nuclear.org)
Why was radioactive water released (purposely) into the ocean as stated in the article?
I found that although radioactive water was never “purposely” released into the ocean, it was known that it would likely end up there due to the failed ocean barrier wall. The water came from the necessity of cooling the overheated plants to prevent further meltdown and further contamination. The good news is that by 2012 the water within the Fukushima area was considered non-toxic to humans and aquatic species that live there. However, less is known about the effects on the ocean floor, where the radioactive matter is collecting in the sediment. (cnn.com)
What (if anything) has been done to further an international response team/plan for nuclear emergencies?
While my research turned up little results for international response development, countries have been developing their own response teams. China will have a national nuclear response team by the end of 2018 which will be made up of over 300 individuals and will meet the requirements for an international response team. This makes sense since China has more nuclear power plants than any other country in the world and expects to double its nuclear output over the next few decades. (firedirect.net)
Dr. Byron Good is a professor of Medical Anthropology at Harvard University. “Dr. Good’s present work focuses on research and mental health services development in Asian societies, particularly Indonesia. He has been a frequent visiting professor in the Faculty of Medicine, Gadjah Mada University, in Jogyakarta, Indonesia. He has conducted research with colleagues there on the early phases of psychotic illness for more than 10 years, and is co-director of the International Pilot Study of the Onset of Psychosis (IPSOS)” (Harvard bio).
This article draws mainly from Partners In Health projects in Rwanda and Haiti, using them as case studies to support their argument.
The majority of citations are attributed to MSF and other humanitarian organizations. This incite frames the viewpoint from which this article was made.
The majority of the data supporting their argument came from examples from outbreaks (such as AIDS), the United States Government (like the anthrax and smallpox threats in early 2000s), and the WHO (such as disease outbreak control in developing countries).
Dr. Schmid discusses emergency response to nuclear incidents, albeit at a very high level. She deals much more with the large scale factors involved in responding to an incident rather than the individual locality. She also addresses the importance of international NGOs in assisting locals after the first-responders have done what they can.
The film takes more of an observer stance than an active role. The corrective action I imagine being effective is better preparedness on the local national and international level to be able to better respond not only to the direct impact of the disease but also the secondary social impacts to the community such as food, water, enforcing emergency orders, and travel restrictions.
This article was published on PLOS.org and has been viewed over 96,000 times and has been cited over 175 times. An attempt to access the exact articles in which it had been cited was made, but that information was hidden behind a paywall.