Government Health Policies and Science in the US

According to Michael Greenberg’s article titled: Impediments to Basing Government Health Policies on Science in the United State, there is no reliable link between public health policy and what the health researchers find (Greenberg, 1992, p.531). Greenberg states that while a number of scientific discoveries are swiftly integrated into private and political action, other findings are simply overlooked. His article discusses this contradiction with respect to individual response to risks, how the media present the risks, and diverse ability of individuals to react to health information. Greenberg also elucidates on political elite’s preference for advanced technology science, manipulation and resistance by commercial interests and bureaucratic manipulation for resources and control. He also articulates the vagueness and irregularity of some scientific outcomes (Greenberg, 1992, p. 531).

For example, tobacco smoking is listed by the federal government as the leading cause of death in the US. However, the same federal administration has also granted financial support to the tobacco industry and fights to create more markets for US tobacco exports abroad (Greenberg, 1992, p. 531). Tobacco smoking is a serious health concern because it has disastrous impact on smokers. For example, according to Missouri Department of Health, over 10, 400 tobacco smokers die in the Missouri state yearly (Givel & Glantz, 2000, p.7). In spite of this alarming report, there are no effective laws in the state to regulate tobacco use because the tobacco lobby groups have financed political campaigns for influential lawmakers in Missouri so as to enhance reciprocal political support and trust on a number of tobacco policy matters (Givel & Glantz, 2000, p.8).

Greenberg uses several secondary sources to discuss impediments related to government. He states that the major obstacles to the adoption of scientific health policies are: opposition by tobacco lobby groups and bureaucratic glitches; and the government’s preference for advanced technology as opposed to primary prevention methods. For example, following the culmination of World War II, the huge financial support made by the US federal government on advanced technology health research provided extensive political mileage for addressing health issues with least interference from political and economical system. In addition, a robust public support also played a key role in the adoption of advanced technology in healthcare. The media too played a role in this regard as it depicted scientists as individuals with exceptional qualities (Greenberg, 1992, p. 533).

Greenberg states that the US federal government is reluctant to invest in preventive public health programs. For instance, it is now common knowledge that HIV-testing programs should be offered free to individuals who what it. These programs need to be subsidized to make them affordable. However, the US federal government has not taken any step to subsidize HIV-testing programs (Kendal, 1998, p.1). The government has also not shown any interest to finance prevention-based research and execution programs that aim to curb diabetes, heart disease, cancer and other severe ailments to even a tiny percentage of the financial support offer for advanced technology (Greenberg, 1992, p. 534).

Greenberg sums up with an optimistic viewpoint about reducing these impediments. He suggests the need for an interactive forum between the government, corporate officials, scientists and the public to address the risks of tobacco smoking and the impact of adopting scientific-based health policies. Greenberg also suggest that the public should also play an active role in condemning passive smoking and the sale of drugs, and cigarettes to children (Greenberg, 1992, p. 537).

References

Givel, MS., & Glantz, SA. (2000). The public health undermined: The tobacco industry’s legacy in Missouri in the 1990’s. Web.

Greenberg, M. (1992). Impediments to Basing Government Health Policies on Science in the United States. Social Science & Medicine, 35(4), 531-540.

Kendal, B. (1998). Public Health, politics clash over HIV prevention. The Prism. Web.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

StudyCorgi. (2022, June 12). Government Health Policies and Science in the US. https://studycorgi.com/government-health-policies-and-science-in-the-us/

Work Cited

"Government Health Policies and Science in the US." StudyCorgi, 12 June 2022, studycorgi.com/government-health-policies-and-science-in-the-us/.

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

References

StudyCorgi. (2022) 'Government Health Policies and Science in the US'. 12 June.

1. StudyCorgi. "Government Health Policies and Science in the US." June 12, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/government-health-policies-and-science-in-the-us/.


Bibliography


StudyCorgi. "Government Health Policies and Science in the US." June 12, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/government-health-policies-and-science-in-the-us/.

References

StudyCorgi. 2022. "Government Health Policies and Science in the US." June 12, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/government-health-policies-and-science-in-the-us/.

This paper, “Government Health Policies and Science in the US”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal. Please use the “Donate your paper” form to submit an essay.