From “Trust science!” to “trust-science”

 

There is an evangelistic strain in humanity that propels both progress and chaos.  The word “should” can precede a gift of precious wisdom or a put-down.  We have all been on both sides of advice giving and know how getting advice can breed reactions spanning gratitude to resentment.  Giving advice can arise from selfish and altruistic motives- often both.

 

The promise of the public health profession has been discovering scientific facts that allow communities to work together to create the conditions for health.  The public health cycle assesses population health, develops policy, assures solutions, and then repeats.  Some areas in public health make progress within insulated circles of scientists and technocrats.  For example, the basic scientists in public health work out biological mechanisms of what causes diseases and exchange their ideas with their professional enclave.  However, the closer one gets to applying discoveries—changing policies, norms, practices, and environments, the more one needs additional skills in partnership and communication.  Pontification does not win hearts or minds in policy circles.

 

Speaking to the public as an expert can risk come off as dogmatic or condescending.  An essential competency in public health communication is the ability to create relational conditions of trust based on respect and repeated interaction.  The competency of community trust-building is neglected as a research field and as an area of pedagogy.  Academic careers are made by published discoveries, not by policy translation. Public health mentors with this experience are scarce.   

 

Higher education and the highly educated have an internal culture that supports deference to experts and hierarchy.  Science and technical professions keep entry selective to those with the highest aptitude for their respective fields.  People admitted to a profession are made to feel special in an almost priestly way with honorifics, white coats, and annual rituals with black robes and mortarboards.  The incentive system driving academic leaders is self-reinforcing and unlikely to change on its own.  Being elitist is a success strategy for top schools and top academics. 

 

Here is why we can be hopeful.  Communities themselves are asking for accountability.  Instead of writing blank checks, governments are asking public universities to show how knowledge is being used for public well-being.  Universities with schools of public  health are at an advantage if their faculty can show meaningful partnerships, borne of co-production and equality.  In-coming students of public health can do their part by demanding and co-creating new curricula in authentic community engagement.   The people who come to the profession of public health are drawn by a need to see positive changes come about through science.  The science of trust-building is rising and needs our fullest attention.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Final Score on Who Handled COVID-19 Best

Image
  There is no perfect way to measure which government did best in managing the COVID-19 pandemic.   But with 48 full months of data from January 20, 2020 to January 27, it is now possible to score which area did best across the whole marathon.   For example, Hong Kong was an early sprinter getting an A+ and then faltering in vaccinating seniors and withstanding Omicron variant.   Other jurisdictions fumbled the exit ramp from Zero Covid-type policies to opening their economies.     Because testing rates varied, a measure like COVID cases, hospitalizations, or deaths could cover up a lot of hidden illness and deaths in places that could not or did not test as much as others.   This post uses Cumulative Excess Mortality numbers drawn from Our World In Data   (OWID) which were drawn from The Economist .   OWID published data for all jurisdictions regardless of how good the estimates were. I advise against making distinc...
Read more

Asset-Demiology: Public Health's Best Old Idea is the Key to Rebuild Trust

Image
Asset- demiology is a neologism that does not come up in Google (yet) 1 .  Sound it out—the “ ology ” of peoples ’ assets and strengths.  It is the logical comp anion , but neglected anti-thesis of the usual approach to health.     Health care work is all about deficits .  The work of a doctor, whether human or robot, is to transform a living breathing human into a diagnosis, problem list and treatment plan. Medical s tudents and interns are socialized to walk out of the treatment room and recite to their supervisors all the deficits and problems they uncovered.  There is no place in a standard medical record to actually list a patient’s strengths and capabilities.   The AI-training sets for robot ic medical algorithms have no way to learn the clinical relevance of patients’ strengths. To a doctor , patient=problem list .   Public health has the same pessimistic vibe.     A deficit focus has rubbed off on public healt...
Read more

Watched but Not Seen

  Among the Zulu people of South Africa the traditional greeting is “Sawubona” literally “I see you”.   Contrast that to the English, “How are you?” -- literally a demand for an evaluation.  Evaluations, peer reviews, and performance reviews can be friendly or not.   Jeremy Bentham deserves partial credit for their dark side. Jeremy Bentham thought prisons should be designed around a central panopticon , a tower that would allow the guards to watch every prisoner around the clock to deter mischief.    Modern philosophers like Michel Foucault see panopticons as pervasive in modern society–we are all under the surveillance of others and we all stay on guard to conform. Performance is quantified on scales that are tied to carrots and sticks. The numbers have a hard time saying full sentences about who we are and how we matter.   Throughout the year the sense that one is constantly being watched by a corporate evaluator leads to the stress of chronic...
Read more