I was at a gay bar last night and the mistress of ceremonies during the drag show handed out to the audience doses of Narcan. The hostess said to the crowd that “we don’t shame people who do drugs, but we minimize harm” and said that everyone who took one is now a “first responder”. She said to give it only if your friend stopped breathing from an overdose, and that was about the only instruction.

Is this a good/productive use of Narcan, just giving it out randomly to a crowd a drag show? Or could there be harm in handing it out like this willy nilly with minimal instruction? I don’t think there was an expectation that people in the crowd would necessarily be taking opioid drugs but of course you never know. I’m not a public health professional but wanted to ask a group who is what they think? Productive step towards community safety by destigmatizing Narcan and making it more available or virtue signaling with potential negative consequences, or neither?

All questions on getting your start in public health - from choosing the right school to getting your first job, should go in here. Please report all other posts outside this thread for removal.

Hi, I am applying for the Fall 2025 cycle for DrPH programs and I read a thread on here about online programs being a last possible option. Granted, that was written prior to current political climates but as a Queer POC, I feel safer in NYC rather than moving to Atlanta (Emory) for example. Also, I graduated in 2023 and began my MPH right after, so I have limited work experience. If possible could anyone give me insight into these programs. Thank you in advance.

I am willing to move as far as Washington, D.C. I have 3 strong letters of recommendation and I have completed over 200 community service hours while working full time and pursuing my MPH.

Emory (online), John’s Hopkins (online & in person), Mercer (online), Meharry (PhD), CUNY SPH, Tulane (online).

My stats: Undergrad GPA- 2.97 Grad GPA - 3.61 Leadership positions - 10 Work Experience - 2 years

Hi everyone, I just started a position doing research in a topic that I am not the most familiar with. I am tasked with writing some of the intro, what do you suggest on finding the gaps of this research? I’ve seen videos before where people use a software but I personally cannot recall what that was and how to use it, any suggestions would be appreciated!

Hello!!

I’m a pre health student and we have to interview professionals in our field of interest for careers course and I was hoping to find a Canadian public health professional who’s willing to conduct a 15-20 minute zoom call to discuss the career and what it’s like. Please send me a private message if you’re interested :)

Trump won, RFK is looming and the situation is changing every day. Please keep any and all election related questions, news updates, anxiety posting and general doom in this daily thread. While this subreddit is very American, this is an international forum and our shitty situation is not the only public health issue right now.

​

​

Previous megathread here for anyone that would like to read the comments.

Write to your representatives! A template to do so can be found here and an easy way to find your representatives can be found here.

Hi guys! Student researcher here. Title says it all. Can’t find samples within my city and need help on where I get/buy some. I’m from the Philippines if that’s any help.

International sources are welcomed, though we would prefer local. :)

Hello everyone,

I'm in a bit of a dilemma. I had a bunch of job offers come in at the same time, and although I've tentatively accepted both offers, but I haven't filled out any paperwork yet. So, nothing is official, and am still not quite sure how to proceed.

I am a first-year MPH student majoring in Epidemiology. Most of my interests are related to microbiology/infectious disease and mental health. I used to work as a clinical microbiologist before I joined grad school, and returning to the lab after graduation is a possibility. I am also open to branching out into something new, such as surveillance or mental health, specifically neurodiversity (ADHD, ASD, etc.)!

Both positions are relevant to what I’d like to do in the future and so I’m having a hard time deciding between the two. I also don’t want to burn myself out too much…but I do want to gain relevant experience because I feel that it’ll be useful after graduation once I start trying to find a public health job.

Job #1

• TB Testing
• Relevant Interests : infectious disease, microbiology, laboratory, tuberculosis, infection control.
• Full-Time position, Part-Time school.
• Pros : pay is really good, work is relevant to what is like to do, company benefits are helpful. Can use my professional certifications.
• Cons : shift is really early in the morning, commute is a bit rough and far away, bit concerned about getting burnt out.

Job #2

• Autism Research
• Relevant Interests : neurodiversity, mental health, autism.
• Part-Time position, Full-Time school.
• Pros : research work, connections with professor, may be a good practicum opportunity or to publish research, project is interesting, commute to campus is decent.
• Cons : pay is quite low, position only lasts 6 months.

Kinda funny how all the offers hit right when Thanksgiving Break is starting! I’m hoping I can make the right decision. I’m at a crossroads the moment. The idea of working during grad school does appeal to me, and there are a lot of doors open right now. I just want to make sure I’m making the right decision and that I get a good opportunity, while preventing burnout in the process. Any advice would be appreciated!

Integrating antioxidants into alcoholic beverages would offer a scientifically supported opportunity to reduce alcohol-induced damage without altering the flavor.

Compounds like N-acetylcysteine (NAC), alpha-lipoic acid, and Vitamin E could mitigate these effects, with preliminary modeling suggesting reductions of oxidative damage in liver cells by up to 70%, lower alcohol-related cancer risks by 20–30%, and significant benefits for vulnerable populations such as heavy drinkers, women, and for those with ALDH2 deficiencies.

Overall Damage Reduction Estimate

• Acetaldehyde: Up to 70% reduction.
• ROS: Up to 90% reduction.
• Inflammation: Up to 70% reduction.
• Ethanol Direct Toxicity: Up to 20% indirect reduction

It would reduce 50–70% of alcohol-related physical toxicity

Broader Impacts:

1. Public Health Benefits:
   • Potentially save tens of thousands of lives annually by reducing alcohol-related diseases.
   • Improve quality of life for moderate and heavy drinkers by mitigating accumulated damage.
   • Extend healthy lifespans for older adults who consume alcohol.
2. Economic and Social Gains:
   • Reduced healthcare costs from alcohol-induced diseases.
   • A more capable workforce, with less cognitive and physical decline among moderate drinkers. Even a seamingly minute benefit to live long Cognition would have cumulative, compounding and messurable effect on GDP

I want advocate for a project akin to the fortification of salt with iodine but I am unsure where to start. Any suggestions?

The problem on YouTube is it’s usually very general videos on either dashboard or data analysis. Like is there someone who posts them doing a data analysis of NHANES/BRFSS/PRAMS/etc. or making a dashboard type resource for any of this? I know coursera and similar courses get a bit closer, but cost money and I’m not really interested in a class. I just want to watch something like this a little in the background at work to help give me more ideas and stuff like that. I hope that makes sense lol I usually play a podcast or YouTube video but I’m getting sick of it. Thanks :)

I am currently almost done with my MPH program, with just one semester left. I concentrated in epidemiology and am interning for a healthcare organization that conducts research on health issues and AI. I write and publish science articles for them and engage in other research projects. My professional experience includes survey interviewing (conducting health surveys), IRS customer service, and short stints as a laboratory and biomanufacturing technician. I also had some retail experience during college and currently volunteer at a local Red Cross blood drive. I have a BA in biology with a minor in sociology.

I am aware that the recent presidential results will unfortunately significantly downplay funding for public health agencies. I live in a blue state, however, so hopefully state, local, and nonprofit jobs will still be available for me. I am open to working in various public health roles after graduation, such as an epidemiologist, public health analyst, health communications specialist, etc., and have a preference for remote work. I have yet to start training on using statistical programming software like R and SAS, which are utilized in many epidemiology roles, but I will work on that. Do I stand a reasonable chance in this uncertain job market?

COVID funding has dried up in Canada and public health is a hard field to get into in Canada in any sector. I am attempting to get into it via as a registered nurse in a clinical area or as a health analyst with a Master's in Public Health (Epidemiology focus).

I am already a nurse here in Canada but I am wondering if I completed a master's does the US (any state for that matter) hire Canadian citizens for health analyst or public health jobs? Or do employers typically only hire US citizens as they don't need to sponsor them? Thanks.

Hi! I’m currently a second year MPH student, graduating in May. As I’m looking at potential jobs, I keep seeing “public health advisor” roles, generally with health departments. I’m assuming they advise on public health issues. But like, what do they actually do?

While this is nothing new I figured it would be a good idea to address people citing studies as fact to buttress their argument. A lot of this takes place in the context of our water fluoride discussion and an NIH monograph which people keep citing as something which can be extrapolated to the United States, none of this research took place in the United States and only involved one WHO water standard compliant nation. That said I'm not here to litigate a particular piece of research but to open a discussion on behaviors that lead people not to assess a study in it's entirety.

It's important to thoroughly understand a study. There are several things to keep in mind here: a single study isn't sufficient evidence to make a claim, no matter what authority publishes the study there can be errors and should not be taken as gospel, and assessing and confounders are an occupational obligation.

I think its important that we as a community take care in what we publish and what we cite otherwise we perpetuate narratives and poor science which ultimately undermine public health. Before we post something we should read and understand what we are sharing. We should not let our echo chambers or confirmation bias cloud our ability to accurately assess the literature.

With that said does anyone have any tips, tricks, or techniques for both those in our field and laypeople to understand literature and identity poor science? How do you think we should combat this epidemic?

I’m Latino and work for a NGO. We get funded through a partnership with a nearby R1 university. There are a few professors who claim to be experts in the Latinx community. Yet, they don’t know much about our community. I understand since they’re white, but I wish they would at least try to collect their own data. They always give the materials to our director and ask us to do the field work for them.

They’d analyze the data and present it to the community members like they’re experts. They have no idea of basic cultural values we have. I’m currently doing an online DrPH and I hope we can have a safe space to call these researchers out.

So I really enjoyed the first year of my fellowship at CDC, and decided to extend my contract with came with an increased stipend. Two months later, I feel as if my boss had become a different person and I’m honestly not even sure if my work has a path to publication (as I once thought)  which is a goal I set for myself. It may be because of the upcoming reorganization/change in presidential administration, but I’m now considering switching teams. I know this is possible because my ORISE PM said it is and I know others posted here that its possible. However, does anyone know here who has switched teams know if the stipend will change as well? For instance, if I’m second year fellow in my current fellowship will I suddenly be paid a first year fellow’s stipend just for not sticking it out? 

Through some other exchanges in this subreddit, it's come to my attention that not everyone understands the reasons behind or real life implications related to fluoride in drinking water.

I gave chat gpt bullet points so it sounds nice. Links at the bottom for sources.

Learn some key statistics so you can explain and argue in favor of fluoride with compelling arguments.

Fluoridation of Drinking Water: Science and Policy Overview

1. What is Fluoridation?

Water fluoridation is the controlled adjustment of fluoride in public water supplies to reduce tooth decay. Naturally present in water at varying levels, fluoride strengthens tooth enamel and prevents cavities when consumed in optimal amounts.

2. The Science Behind Fluoridation

Dental Health Benefits

According to the CDC, community water fluoridation reduces cavities by 25% in children and adults throughout their lives.

A study published in The Lancet found that fluoridated water significantly reduces tooth decay in children, particularly in underserved areas.

Optimal Fluoride Levels

The U.S. Public Health Service recommends a fluoride concentration of 0.7 mg/L in drinking water for dental health benefits without the risk of fluorosis (a cosmetic discoloration of teeth).

Safety

Decades of research, including reviews by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Academies of Sciences, confirm that fluoridated water is safe when managed properly.

High doses of fluoride (above 4 mg/L) can lead to health issues, but these levels are far above those used in fluoridation programs.

U.S. Public Health Service Recommendation: The U.S. Public Health Service recommends a fluoride concentration of 0.7 mg/L in drinking water for dental health benefits without the risk of fluorosis.

3. Policy Context

Global Perspective

Fluoridation is endorsed by major health organizations, including the World Health Organization, the American Dental Association (ADA), and the CDC, which calls it one of the "10 great public health achievements of the 20th century."

Over 25 countries and 400 million people worldwide benefit from fluoridated water.

U.S. Implementation

Approximately 73% of the U.S. population receives fluoridated water.

States and local governments typically decide on fluoridation policies, and programs are often funded through public health budgets.

Cost-Effectiveness

Water fluoridation is highly cost-effective. The CDC estimates that every $1 invested in fluoridation saves $38 in dental treatment costs.

4. Addressing Common Concerns

Fluoride and Health Risks

Some critics associate fluoride with potential health issues like bone fractures or thyroid problems. However, these claims are not supported by mainstream scientific evidence at the levels used in water fluoridation.

Long-term studies, including those from the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, consistently show no significant health risks when fluoride is consumed at recommended levels.

Ethical Considerations

Some argue against water fluoridation on the basis of personal choice. However, public health policies aim to balance individual freedoms with the collective benefit of reducing dental decay, especially in communities with limited access to dental care.

5. Key Statistics

Tooth decay is the most common chronic disease among children, affecting 42% of children aged 2-11 in the U.S.

Community water fluoridation has been shown to reduce cavities by 15-40%, depending on the population.

Annual per-person costs for water fluoridation are estimated at $0.50 to $3.00, making it a cost-effective public health measure.

6. Conclusion

Fluoridating drinking water is a scientifically supported, cost-effective public health intervention that has significantly reduced tooth decay rates worldwide. While it is essential to address community concerns, decades of research affirm that the benefits of fluoridation far outweigh the risks when implemented at recommended levels.

https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/about/statement-on-the-evidence-supporting-the-safety-and-effectiveness-of-community-water-fluoridation.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.ada.org/resources/community-initiatives/fluoride-in-water/fluoridation-faqs?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/about/statement-on-the-evidence-supporting-the-safety-and-effectiveness-of-community-water-fluoridation.html

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine/magazine_article/fluoridated-drinking-water/

I'll go first! I help do research for PSAs at a large ad frim.

Best: I get to play with a lot of super cool tech toys, do creative stuff, and talk to a lot of people all around the world. I'm able to use all of the languages I've learned over the years. I get satisfaction from my work and feel like I'm doing good, even though what I do is super niche and not highly valued in my country.

Worst: Pay is trash, literal trash, but I guess we don't go into public health for money. I work annoying long hours, my work week is 60-80 hours on average. I do a lot of, spur-of-the-moment travels and impromptu meetings. Engagements are low, the content we create may not ever be disseminated to a mass audience (espeically in the US) so we don't have an opportunity to make as large of an impact as we should.

What I would do to fix it: Hire more people and increase wages. Collaborate more with both the private and public sector to merge product ads with public health issues to raise awareness (increase engagements). Planning, everything would be planned, if it's not on the schedule for 3 days it's not getting done that day (I know this isn't feasible).

Trump won, RFK is looming and the situation is changing every day. Please keep any and all election related questions, news updates, anxiety posting and general doom in this daily thread. While this subreddit is very American, this is an international forum and our shitty situation is not the only public health issue right now.

​

​

Previous megathread here for anyone that would like to read the comments.

Write to your representatives! A template to do so can be found here and an easy way to find your representatives can be found here.

Hi all,

I have a Master of Public health (Behavioral, Social, and Community Health and Health Administration) and an RN but limited experience (because l've been in school forever getting these degrees). For someone who wants to utilize their MPH along with their RN but has limited experience, do you know of any leads for getting started in the job market right now?

Anyone has experience with name correction on PubMed. I was looking up one of my publications and I saw that the journal did not index my paper correctly on PubMed NLM. This publication is not population with my Author [auth] name. Need assistance and further leads.

Looking to purchase 2-4 blood pressure and/or health kiosks for my health department. Anyone have any they recommend? In the USA for reference, specifically the Northwest. Looking for the best prices, but also best quality.