Beyond the Headlines: Rebuilding Trust in Public Health Policy
In the wake of recent Senate hearings, especially Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s appearance before the Senate Finance Committee, public health has again been in the national spotlight. Unfortunately, much of that attention has been shaped by political theater, soundbites, and misconceptions about public health.
The truth is, public health policy is not about telling people how to live their lives. It is about developing evidence-based strategies, grounded in science and data, that protect communities and improve the quality of life. These policies are informed by rigorous review, statistical analysis, and the best available evidence — and they evolve when new, more substantial evidence emerges (KFF, n.d.).
Many of my colleagues and myself watched this hearing with our hearts in our throats.
Public Health: Policy, Not Policing
The core mission of public health is to develop policies for the public's benefit, not to police individual behavior. These policies are built on a foundation of science, statistical analysis, and rigorous peer review. In his recent Senate Finance Committee testimony, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. mischaracterized this role, framing public health as an enforcement arm rather than a policy-shaping discipline. That distinction matters: while enforcement may be carried out by other agencies, public health's strength lies in identifying risks, recommending evidence-based interventions, and guiding decision-makers toward strategies that protect communities at scale (KFF, n.d.). It also creates the public perception that public health hasn’t done anything for them.
The truth is a bit more complex than that, though. Take the adoption of folic acid as a recommendation for expecting mothers or those hoping to get pregnant. That recommendation was born from the data and research conducted, presented, and ultimately adopted. The same can be said for vaccine schedules, dietary recommendations, annual testing, etc.
The process behind successful public health initiatives
The Imperfect but Self-Correcting Nature of Science
Public health, like all scientific disciplines, is not infallible. Policies are developed using the best available evidence at the time, but as new research, data, and lived experience come to light, those policies are reassessed and refined. This continuous improvement process — grounded in science, statistics, and rigorous review- is a strength, not a flaw. It ensures that public health recommendations evolve to reflect the most accurate and relevant information, even if that means changing course when better evidence emerges (George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, n.d.).
Not to dwell too much on the past, but COVID is a prime example of this. I can remember reviewing the articles in the morning, having a plan and then having to pivot based on the most recent information. It also showed us the gaps. Information must be strictly reviewed and audited to ensure the best possible information is released. In the early days of the COVID outbreak, the information was absolutely flooding, leading to mixed messaging, recommendations countermanding each other, and a general lack of direction. Worst of all, this was done in full public view, further tearing down the general public's trust in these agencies.
National Data, Local Action
State public health agencies depend on national data systems — such as disease surveillance networks, laboratory reporting, and large-scale health surveys to guide their work. These datasets are expensive and resource-intensive to produce, often requiring coordination between federal agencies, healthcare providers, and laboratories nationwide (KFF, n.d.). Once collected, the data is analyzed to identify trends, emerging threats, and disparities.
From there, state agencies translate those national insights into local priorities: a rural county might focus on agricultural injury prevention or access to maternal care. At the same time, an urban center might prioritize air quality monitoring or chronic disease prevention. This approach ensures that every community benefits from the same high-quality evidence base, while tailoring strategies to its unique needs and realities (Feedspot, 2025).
Why Public Health Is Unpopular
Several factors contribute to the public health image problem:
Visibility only in crisis — When tensions are high, most people encounter public health during emergencies.
Politicization — Scientific recommendations are often reframed as political positions.
Misinformation — Complex data is easily distorted in the public sphere.
Communication gaps — Technical language can alienate the communities public health serves (Feedspot, 2025).
A Personal Perspective
As I complete my Master of Public Health, I bring to this conversation a career shaped by two worlds that thrive on precision, discipline, and service: laboratory science and the U.S. military. My years in the lab taught me the value of rigorous data, quality control, and evidence-based decision-making. My military service instilled in me the importance of mission-driven leadership, adaptability under pressure, and protecting the well-being of a community — whether that community is a unit in the field or a population at home.
These experiences converge in my public health work today. I understand the technical rigor required to generate reliable data and the operational strategy to translate that data into action. At Sparks & Sage Consulting, a veteran consulting firm, I help healthcare, public health, and laboratory leaders bridge those worlds — aligning healthcare strategy, behavioral health integration, and operational excellence to create measurable impact.
A Hopeful Path Forward
Rebuilding trust in public health will take:
Transparency is the key to rebuilding trust in public health. It is not just about sharing the 'what' but also the 'why' behind recommendations. This approach ensures that the public is fully informed and included in the decision-making process, fostering a sense of trust and understanding.
Community engagement is a crucial aspect of public health. It's about listening before prescribing solutions, understanding the unique needs and challenges of each community, and valuing their input. This approach makes the audience feel heard, respected, and integral to the public health process.
Clear, relatable communication is essential in public health. It's about translating complex data into meaningful stories that resonate with the public, making them feel connected, understood, and part of the solution. This approach bridges the gap between technical language and public understanding, fostering a sense of unity and shared purpose.
Consistency — Following through on commitments and acknowledging when things change.
“Public health’s most significant victories are often invisible — the outbreaks that never happen, the lives quietly saved, the healthier futures made possible by prevention. We can restore the trust that makes those victories possible by focusing on evidence, transparency, and partnership.”
Further Reading
Feedspot. (2025, January). 25 best health policy blogs and news websites in 2025. Feedspot. https://blog.feedspot.com/health_policy_blogs/
George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health. (n.d.). 50 public health blogs worth connecting with. https://onlinepublichealth.gwu.edu/resources/50-public-health-blogs/
KFF. (n.d.). KFF: Health policy analysis, polling, and journalism. KFF. https://www.kff.org/
