[ad_1]
The Covid-19 pandemic is still ongoing and the monkeypox has now been accounted for. A public health emergency in the US; We are now officially in the midst of two virus-disease crises. Public health professionals know what it takes to contain disease outbreaks – widespread detection/diagnosis, treatment and prevention. However, systemic problems in health care financing and operation in this country have created a public health system that is reactive rather than proactive. Consequently, our public health system. Chronic lack of fundsinadequate and in some areas being stripped of its legal authority.
Key federal public health preparedness and response programs at the US Department of Health and Human Services—including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Public Health Emergency Preparedness Cooperative Agreement, the Hospital Preparedness Program and Prevention, and the Public Health Fund—don’t get the resources they need. CDC budgetAfter adjusting for inflation, the primary source of funding for state and local health departments has increased by just 11 percent over the past decade. Public Health Emergency Preparedness Cooperative Agreement and Hospital Preparedness Program. In general, the budget will be reduced 48 percent and 61 percent, respectively, when accounting for inflation between the early 2000s and 2022. Emergency financial assistance So far, they have been doing well below their pre-pandemic peak in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Prevention and Public Health Fund was established as part of the Affordable Care Act but has He faced constant threats. From policy makers who try to use it to offset the costs of other administrative priorities. Meanwhile, it has financial support for regional and local health departments flat or rejected In the past decade, while Overcrowding of health department personnel 23 percent between 2008 and 2019.
The way US health departments are funded contributes to and is one of the reasons for their workforce shortage issues. 50,000 public health jobs lost In the year They were never replaced during the Great Recession of 2008. Many departments rely heavily on disease-specific grant funding, creating unstable and time-limited positions. The problem with this type of mutual fund is multifaceted. Applying for these grants takes time and resources, something most health departments already lack. Additionally, because funding is generally limited to use within a fiscal year, recruiting qualified personnel is challenging. With relatively low pay and uncertain funding year after year, more and more public health graduates are turning to Private sector for employment.
According to European estimates, more than 40 percent of public health workers may leave their jobs in the next five years. Based on the results obtained in 2021 Survey of public health workforce needs and wants. While the public health workforce remains underpaid and overstretched, the politicization of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has brought new issues, including negative public attention, that have contributed to staff attrition.
Most public health officials are used to being relatively anonymous while doing their jobs, but recently some have had to contend with armed protesters. Accidents that happen to themselves or personal property. As a Study in American Journal of Public Health57 percent of local health departments reported experiencing harassment during the Covid-19 outbreak, prompting 256 officials to resign between March 2020 and January 2021.
This exodus of skilled public health workers will slowly erode capacity within government public health agencies and weaken their ability to respond to future emergencies. This comes at a time when current estimates show that state and local public health departments need an 80 percent increase in manpower to provide the minimum set of public health services (eg, infectious disease control, chronic disease and injury prevention, evaluation and surveillance, policy). development and support, etc.) – as a From the report of the Beaumont Foundation. In simultaneous public health emergencies, such as the one we are experiencing now, additional manpower is needed to provide the necessary “man power” to slow the spread of disease.
Additionally, many conservative state legislators are pushing back. Authority of public health agencies or authorities To establish policies that protect public health. at least 26 states They passed laws that limited the public health authority. These include Legal trials To weaken the authority of public health agencies to shut down businesses in the name of public safety, mandate mask orders, vaccination requirements or quarantine vulnerable people. Political pressure also included threats. Attract or divert public health support. This undermines local, state, and national efforts to collectively tackle the next epidemic.
Unfortunately, public health is often a victim of its own success. No one can see the dangers that hinder preparedness, so it is easy to ignore the unseen. This feeds into a boom and bust cycle of public health spending in emergencies.
The public health funding purse is controlled by politicians voted into positions of power by voters. Studies show that the U.S Voters see politicians better Like the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, compared to the Preparedness Fund, there is a significant correlation between increased aid spending and more votes to deliver disaster relief spending. This encourages legislators to continue the practice of responsive funding.
Monkey disease has shown us that the next epidemic can happen before the previous one is properly controlled. It is therefore important to improve the public health system in this country and better prepare ourselves for another outbreak at any time.
A more proactive approach to supporting public health in this country involves not only spending more, but also changing how we allocate those funds. One option is for the government to increase mandatory public health spending rather than discretionary spending, which would reduce the year-to-year funding gap that negatively affects state and local health departments.
A second option is for the government to replace lump-sum or in-kind grants and instead provide public health agencies with more general funds to spend on priorities or emerging community needs.
A third option is for the government to provide financial support based on the needs of the community, for example “Environmental scarcity indexHe said. Doing so would be more equitable than funding through competitive grant programs, which would reward agencies with resources and skills that could make a greater difference by focusing successful grant applications on poor or underserved communities. No single policy can fix public health in this country, but these are some policies that can improve it.
[ad_2]
Source link