•”Swine” Flu Sheds Light on Role of Public Health

Today, the Economix blog on New York Times published “Swine Flu vs. Financial Panics”, which notes 5 key advantages public health has over economics:

1. The public takes these officials more seriously.
2. Public health officials know how to communicate effectively.
3. They, with the help of doctors, provide us warnings and indications of vulnerability as often as possible.
4. Practice makes perfect.  They practice how to handle situations like this (not just model them out in spreadsheets).
5. The public being worried equals potential gains for the public health sector.

PEOPLE, the last point is the KEY difference between public health and economics!  Of course, the public health officials will want to communicate effectively, warn constantly, and practice even when unnecessary.  They generate profit for industries like big pharma, consumer products, and media every time they open their mouths.  Just think of how much government funding is given to pharma companies to create vaccines, how many times you’ve gone into Duane Reade/CVS/Walgreen’s etc to get abundant supplies of anti-bacterial soap, hand sanitizers, etc, and how often you’ve read or watched the news recently!

However, for economics, it needs stability.  One little peep of a possible recession turns the economy into a wobbling mess.  And, trust me, you don’t want the economists to “practice” doomsday scenarios.  Heck, I don’t even want to think about the possibility of global financial failure (oh wait…).

Plus, the government is an aid to public health but interference for economics.  In public health, the big G actually wants to help and usually steps aside and let the public health officials lead the stage.  In economics, the big G wants to be the centerfold and is sometimes willing to destroy or at least hurt companies in their way.

The take-away?  The health industry is where the $$$ lies.  People will always be willing to pay to maintain their health.