History and development of public health

This chapter and the others that follow have the study of population health as their focus, as opposed to a focus on individual care and treatment. Clearly, however, we are concerned with the way in which population health is influenced by biomedical theories and practices, and the way population health is funded, and is influenced by the importance placed on therapeutic medicine. The discussions that follow include a brief overview of the ancient history of public health, and the modern history of Western public health dating from 1850. This date signifies the beginnings of a more organised, collective effort to protect the public’s health. These discussions will help you further expand your definition of public health. You will have an entertaining journey through public health achievements, and less successful outcomes, by examining the historical developments that have led us to a modern understanding of public health. The ancient Greeks and Romans, for example, had public health measures to ensure the safety and health of their populations, for a range of social and economic reasons. Convicts arrived in Australia with many health problems, and were put to work to satisfy the needs of a fledgling colony. It is important to understand the historical journey of public health and the way it is critically analysed, as it provides a looking-glass onto the present and the future.

Introduction to Public Health [3rd Ed.]

Why is public health important? An Introduction to Public Health is about the discipline of public health, the nature and scope of public health activity, and the challenges that face public health in the twenty-first century. The book is designed as an introductory text to the principles and practice of public health. This is a complex and multifaceted area. What we have tried to do in this book is make public health easy to understand without making it simplistic. As many authors have stated, public health is essentially about the organised efforts of society to promote, protect and restore the public’s health (Brownson 2011, Last 2001, Schneider 2011, Turnock 2012, Winslow 1920). It is multidisciplinary in nature, and it is influenced by genetic, physical, social, cultural, economic and political determinants of health. How do we define public health, and what are the disciplines that contribute to public health? How has the area changed over time? Are there health issues in the twenty-first century that change the focus and activity of public health? Yes, there are! There are many challenges facing public health now and in the future, just as there have been over the course of the history of organised public health efforts, dating from around 1850 in the Western world. Of what relevance is public health to the many health disciplines that contribute to it? How might an understanding of public health contribute to a range of health professionals who use the principles and practices of public health in their professional activities? These are the questions that this book addresses. Introduction to Public Health leads the reader on a journey of discovery that concludes with an understanding of the nature and scope of public health and the challenges facing the field into the future. In this edition we have included one new chapter, ‘Public health and social policy’, in order to broaden our understanding of the policy influences on public health. The book is designed for a range of students undertaking health courses where there is a focus on advancing the health of the population. While it is imperative that people wanting to be public health professionals understand the theory and practice of public health, many other health workers contribute to effective public health practice. The book would also be relevant to a range of undergraduate students who want an introductory understanding of public health and its practice.

Avian diversification patterns across the K-Pg boundary: Influence of calibrations, datasets, and model misspecification

Birds represent the most diverse extant tetrapod clade, with ca. 10,000 extant species, and the timing of the crown avian radiation remains hotly debated. The fossil record supports a primarily Cenozoic radiation of crown birds, whereas molecular divergence dating analyses generally imply that this radiation was well underway during the Cretaceous. Furthermore, substantial differences have been noted between published divergence estimates. These have been variously attributed to clock model, calibration regime, and gene type. One underappreciated phenomenon is that disparity between fossil ages and molecular dates tends to be proportionally greater for shallower nodes in the avian Tree of Life. Here, we explore potential drivers of disparity in avian divergence dates through a set of analyses applying various calibration strategies and coding methods to a mitochondrial genome dataset and an 18-gene nuclear dataset, both sampled across 72 taxa. Our analyses support the occurrence of two deep divergences (i.e., the Palaeognathae/Neognathae split and the Galloanserae/Neoaves split) well within the Cretaceous, followed by a rapid radiation of Neoaves near the K-Pg boundary. However, 95% highest posterior density intervals for most basal divergences in Neoaves cross the boundary, and we emphasize that, barring unreasonably strict prior distributions, distinguishing between a rapid Early Paleocene radiation and a Late Cretaceous radiation may be beyond the resolving power of currently favored divergence dating methods. In contrast to recent observations for placental mammals, constraining all divergences within Neoaves to occur in the Cenozoic does not result in unreasonably high inferred substitution rates. Comparisons of nuclear DNA (nDNA) versus mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) datasets and NT- versus RY-coded mitochondrial data reveal patterns of disparity that are consistent with substitution model misspecifications that result in tree compression/tree extension artifacts, which may explain some discordance between previous divergence estimates based on different sequence types. Comparisons of fully calibrated and nominally calibrated trees support a correlation between body mass and apparent dating error. Overall, our results are consistent with (but do not require) a Paleogene radiation for most major clades of crown birds.