Editor—McPherson's letter exemplifies the problem inherent in the demedicalisation of public health medicine.1 Of course the quality of the training available to non-medical public health workers needs to be improved. So do career and pay structures to recruit and retain those highly skilled individuals from a variety of specialties who make up the public health team, particularly public health infection control nurses, who are in extremely short supply.
A broad range of skills is required to make public health teams function properly in the real world. Different members of the team bring different knowledge and skills, and these are not readily interchangeable.
But McPherson trivialises what medical training is. A medical degree is much more than studying the illness of individuals. Most courses are designed to enable prospective doctors to do their jobs, which means they will deal compassionately with sick and well people, understand and treat illness as a social and individual phenomenon, and work with others in teams. The breadth of the scientific and social compass of medical training mirrors the range of additional skills needed if we are to be effective improvers of the public's health. Doctors who work in public health build on this foundation and develop sufficient competence in most of the skills needed in any public health team either to lead specific areas of work or to understand what others will contribute. No other discipline in the team can do this, but this kind of understanding is essential for its proper leadership. This is why we believe that doctors should lead public health departments.
References
- 1.McPherson K. Removing barriers to career development in public health. BMJ. 2000;320:448. . (12 February.) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]