I about spit out my coffee when she said that.

I guess this is the only health issue in the world that RFK thinks it's worth giving up completely on prevention and going all in on any pharmaceutical intervention suggested by the person who happens to be sitting directly on his left at any given moment.

RFK's opening tirade is one of the least coherent things I've ever heard.

We don't academic research, but we need... "some way" to assess the efficacy of treatments and find biomarkers. In other words... Academic research.

It's kinda wild that they didn't consider long COVID at all, but that just means that NPIs are way *more* cost effective than they estimated.

Big yikes.

It's more than a minor oversight - if you're studying antisemitism you can't just be needlessly sloppy in your definitions/inclusion criteria for Jewish identity. Seems almost by design to solicit the opinions of religiously active Jews and represent those as the views of the whole.

It's hard to say when the question wording explicitly asks about religious affiliation. Pew data show roughly a third of Jews choose no religion on similar questions. I took the Columbia survey and don't actually remember if I checked the Jewish box or not.

Feel similarly about supervising interns who are getting their masters in public health

I haven't seen anyone write about this, but this survey defined Jewish by religious affiliation only - not as a cultural or ethnic group. It does not include secular and non practicing Jews (which is a significant % of young Jewish people)

There are other journals - but these publications filled a needed space for disseminating descriptive public health data, regardless of whether the subject matter or methodology is "novel" or "high impact".

HHS Journals - MMWR, Preventing Chronic Disease, Public Health Reports, Emerging Infectious Diseases - play a vital role in the public health publishing ecosystem, but they're out of bounds for equity-literate researchers as long as these clowns are in power. #episky

More prominent journals haven't expressed interest because it's not methodologically sexy - despite using a large and well designed population-based survey, it's just descriptive epidemiology.

Just a note to someone who listens to a lot of audiobooks but mostly non-fiction, some of these questions only apply to fiction and aren't skippable