Discover and read the best of Twitter Threads about #SocEpi
Most recents (2)
In my work I offer some reasons why we hang on to micro-level interventions even when the evidence is clear that they exert only modest, transient effects.
For one, macro- and meso- level work is challenging and often requires destabilizations of power.
1/
For one, macro- and meso- level work is challenging and often requires destabilizations of power.
1/
Yet, as I often argue, for our anti-stigma work we actually DO need micro-level interventions like educations and trainings. They DO have some effects and are easier to implement.
2/
2/
The only problem is when micro-level interventions come to dominate the entire field of our anti-stigma work, which the evidence suggests happens, especially in public health spaces.
Instead, my teams and I advance a tripartite anti-stigma approach.
3/
Instead, my teams and I advance a tripartite anti-stigma approach.
3/
Honestly, the complete takeover of population health policy and approaches by a #medicalized notion of #MethodologicalIndividualism sort of fills me with despair -- not just now, but for the future of public health.
1/
npr.org/sections/healt…
1/
npr.org/sections/healt…
Of all the missteps CDC has made, the doubling-down on approaches that position the individual as the unit of change (#MethodologicalIndividualism and b/c of the source) essentially sanctions it as the dominant mode for public health practice is arguably rock bottom.
2/
2/
It's in the scientific guidance as well. Look at this sentence:
This is of course NOT a Whole Population Approach or even a structural approach to health equity which would require action from those with the power and agency to redress the effects of #StructuralViolence and
3/
This is of course NOT a Whole Population Approach or even a structural approach to health equity which would require action from those with the power and agency to redress the effects of #StructuralViolence and
3/
