Q & R 10/8/09

QUESTION #1.) What makes an opinion different from a "fact"? Are all opinions equally valid? If so, why? If not, why not? What impact do opinions and "facts" have on individual consumer health and on the health of a whole population of consumers?

RESPONSE #1.) For myself, there are several differences between the two. The way that I see it is that an opinion is subject to change, be faulty, and is based on someone’s own personal knowledge. My understanding of the term “fact” is that it is completely truthful, known by many, and is concrete information. Whether or not all opinions are equally valid ones, is questionable to me. I feel that for the most part that the majority of opinions are not equally valid. The Merriam-Webber Dictionary has valid defined as, “well-grounded or justifiable; being at once relevant and meaningful; logically correct.” Not everyone’s opinion is logical and or any of those definitions. Therefore I cannot conclude that everyone’s opinion is equally valid.
The impact that opinions and “facts” has on individual consumer health and health of a whole population is immense. Everyday people are not going to know or understand everyday health issue, let alone major health issues such as the health reform currently being debated. They turn to us, the health professionals, as well as the people who run our country for advice, and information that enables them to form their own opinion. Now the hard part is differentiating the “facts” from opinion. Sometimes consumers are actually being told opinions, but are seeing the opinions as facts. This is an issue because the American consumer has the right to know the real facts about what is happening, right, and or wrong in the world of health; not someone’s opinion of what is happening, right, and or wrong.

Background for #2:A "market" perspective (aka free market perspective) is one that says, basically, supply and demand will work together to solve a problem. Little or no government involvement is needed, and the government should actually be seen as inappropriate according to this point of view.

QUESTION #2.) In our Public Health Code of Ethics, an underlying value is that "Humans have a right to the resources necessary for health" (Public Health Leadership Society, 2002, p. 2). How does this underlying value add to our basic three ethics to help explain why the majority of public health professionals do not encourage using the free market perspective as a base for health care systems?

RESPONSE #2: The majority of public health professionals do not encourage using the free market because a free market does not fall under the guidelines of the government. As public health educators, we believe in our government. We believe that their guidelines are there to protect the public and consumers. So anything that is not approved or inspected by the government is not something that we as public health professions approve of.

QUESTION #3.) When looking at the "new media" out there - the grassroots groups on the web, Twitters that seem to get a lot of attention, talk radio, 24-hour news channels, etc - do you see more of the market perspective or more that appears to be based on a Public Health ethics perspective? What does the general public need to know? What are the barriers to them knowing it?

RESPONSE #3: I feel that when looking at the “new media” that is available now I see a mixture of the market perspective and the perspectives that are based on Public Health ethics. When watching CNN, Good Morning America, and other news shows, I see a lot of arguments made for both sides of the case; one representing the Public Health’s perspective. They are both able to explain their points. This however is not the case for all “new media” that I have seen. Some just show the market perspective because it is what is popular or what is wanted to be put out to the public.
The general public needs to know the truth; no matter what it is. It is a basic right for Americans to know what is going on about health issues that will directly and or indirectly affect them. Understanding the truth will enable the general public to make their own valid opinions. The barriers to the general public knowing the truth is in fact the “new media”, reporting the market perspective. Many people do not understand that there are differences between media sources; meaning that some are valid, reliable, and factual, while others are none of that. This keeps them from learning the truth and thus keeps them from knowing what they need to know.