Follow-up to yesterday

I wrote a more thoughtful response on facebook:

"I get the rationale that it's mostly a spokesperson job, and Gupta has had his face on TV talking about health stuff a lot, but nothing in his training gives him any expertise in public health. His training isn't even in general or preventive medicine. Frankly I'm sick of MDs getting a pass into the public health world without the requisite training, and this is just such an egregious example."

I'm bothered by two things here, both of which converge in Sanjay Gupta. One is the tendency for cable news to rely on familiar faces to be experts in everything, instead of actually seeking out and talking to experts. While not every expert is super articulate and it may be useful in a TV format to have recognizable journalists distill expert opinion, that's not generally what I see happening. On health, education, foreign relations and almost any complicated where there do exist people who have devoted their lives to figuring out what works and what doesn't, you see talking heads yammering inexpertly like it's all just a matter of opinion. And that is so annoying. I don't want to see this tendency entrenched in government.

The second strand I refer to in my facebook comment, which is that all too often, people who are trained in the medical world are able to just dance over to the public health world, without additional training. Many docs have the sense to at least get an MPH (like my fine students), but there are a lot of folks out there who really don't have the cred. Maybe I'm extra biased because the social and behavioral sciences are a lot more essential to public health than to most areas of medicine (although medicine could use a little more understanding of people and society), but I don't think training in medicine (particularly in specialty areas) gives you any cred to talk public health.

That's all I have to say on that.