Article  Public health fails in ways it can’t even see

#1
C C Offline
https://www.drvinayprasad.com/p/public-h...ys-it-cant

INTRO: Public health is supposed to focus on the big picture. A cancer doctor will spend an afternoon slogging away in clinic with the hope of adding 1 month of survival for one patient, or 3 months of PFS for another. A heart failure doctor might want to add a year if they do everything right. But a public health doctor should be thinking about doing the most for the greatest number of people.

Three of the biggest public health issues right now that are not discussed:

Who will be screened imminently with multi-cancer early detection tests— will they experience net benefit or net harm— when Grail is approved and later covered by Medicare (Congress already authorized the payment)— what will happen?. What about when imaging is added— like midjourney or prenuvo? What about all the downstream investigations?

Which GLP-1 will save the most lives? Are some dangerous? Will the increased HR of retratrutide mean that it is worse than tirezepatide? Running a head to head trial of these agents powered for hard endpoints would be a boon— and will soon be a vital question. Raising HR is generally not a good idea with weight loss products.

What if: a widely used prescription medicine that is supported by disease specific regulatory endpoints increases mortality. This could be catastrophic. How could public health detect and stop this?

These three questions will soon account for a trillion dollars in health care spending, and many millions of disability adjusted life years. The importance of them is staggering. But public health doesn’t talk about these things.

Instead, I hear endlessly about a measles outbreak in Pennsylvania, and some contaminated lettuce from Mexico. I hear panic then silence about Hantavirus on a cruise ship, and that I should take an annual flu shot. I hear about the importance of pregnant women taking SSRIs and tylenol.

In some cases, I don’t disagree. MMR is important, contaminated lettuce is bad, and pregnant women should minimize medications (like SSRIs), but the evidence linking Tylenol to autism is weak. At the same time, taking Tylenol for no good reason is silly.

But none of these are the most important public health questions of our times. Public health is so nakedly liberal and reactionary that it only talks about issues in response to what the Rs are doing, and can’t seem to formulate ideas on its own... (MORE - details)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article Junk science presented as public health research + Science under seige C C 8 1,721 Sep 30, 2025 09:29 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Article What must science do to regain public trust? C C 0 655 Nov 22, 2024 07:24 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article 5 ways ‘honest’ placebos can help + Social scientists should embrace chaos theory C C 1 916 Nov 1, 2024 07:03 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Is psychology good for anything? + Public is OK, it's scientists who are the problem C C 0 659 Oct 5, 2023 05:15 AM
Last Post: C C
  Canadian activists want to ban flame retardant - bad news for public safety C C 0 577 May 20, 2022 05:29 PM
Last Post: C C
  Even "good racism" can't base special needs on mere appearances & ethnic claims? C C 0 656 Mar 18, 2022 07:26 PM
Last Post: C C
  Coronavirus: five reasons public health experts have lost credibility C C 2 1,037 Jul 18, 2020 10:02 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Class on how marginalized scientists could yield “different ways of knowing" C C 1 979 Dec 6, 2018 07:57 PM
Last Post: Syne
  The public mostly trusts science. So why are scientists worried? C C 1 887 Feb 19, 2018 06:38 AM
Last Post: Syne
  Science is a public good in peril – here’s how to fix it C C 3 1,985 Nov 18, 2017 12:04 PM
Last Post: RainbowUnicorn



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)