U.S. Politicians, Health Leaders Must Not Allow Limits To Language In Public Health Budget Discussions
Rewire: The CDC’s Language Ban Is More Than an Attack on Words — It’s an Attack on Basic Public Health Values
Sarah Roberts, associate professor at ANSIRH at the University of California, San Francisco; Ashish Premkumar, fellow in maternal-fetal medicine in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and graduate student in anthropology at Northwestern University; and Monica R. McLemore, assistant professor in the UCSF Family Health Care Nursing Department, clinician-scientist at ANSIRH at UCSF, and member of the Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health
“…What are the implications for banning (at worst) or deeming unseemly (at best) words in budget discussions about the public health of our nation, and what does this mean for the future of public health in the United States? … We call upon members of the HHS and the CDC to both denounce such obvious manipulations of language while emphasizing transparency around budgetary policy and funding opportunities as they relate to public health and biomedical research and practice. Especially in our current political climate, physicians, nurses, public health leaders, and others engaged in preserving the health of our country will not stand idly by, nor will we stop critically evaluating data coming from the highest levels of government. We as biomedical and public health professionals are tasked with a responsibility to understand and promote good health for everyone in the United States; it is time for our elected and appointed officials to do the same” (12/19).
The KFF Daily Global Health Policy Report summarized news and information on global health policy from hundreds of sources, from May 2009 through December 2020. All summaries are archived and available via search.