If you're still in any doubt that 'public health' is an arm of the socialist movement, I recommend taking a look at 'The Canadian Facts: The social determinants of health'. I was recently made aware of this publication by a Canadian medical student who tells me it is one of a small number of compulsory texts on his public health course.
There is very little about health and nothing about medicine in this textbook, but there is an awful lot about the pet causes of the Left. Inequality gets a full chapter, for instance, which explains how the Canadian economy works:
In Canada, public education until grade 12, necessary medically procedures, and libraries are funded by general revenues, but childcare, housing, post-secondary education, recreational opportunities, and resources for retirement must be bought and paid for by individuals.
That's right, recreational opportunities must be paid for by individuals, not the state. The socialist utopia is clearly still some way off in Canada.
The solutions offered in this chapter are predictably statist, including "increasing the minimum wage", "reducing inequalities in income and wealth through progressive taxation" and "a greater degree of unionised workplaces" to "set limits on the extent of profit-making that comes at the expense of employees’ health and wellbeing".
It is the same throughout the book. Whatever the issue—education, social exclusion, stress, housing, race—the answer is always more government spending and more government intervention.
But it is in the last chapter that the indoctrination becomes absolutely explicit. Titled 'What Can You Do', it says:
Since it appears that elected representatives and policymakers are aware of these problems yet choose to not act, social and political movements must be developed that will pressure governments and policymakers to enact health-supporting public policy.
Since this book cites The Spirit Level as a serious source, it is far from obvious that policymakers are "aware of these problems". Instead, they may have concluded that they are not problems at all, but excuses for creating a dirigiste economy in which the individual is subsumed by the state.
Another way to strengthen the social determinants of health is to support candidates of political parties that are receptive to the social determinants of health concept. Such candidates can be found in every political party, but are more likely to be found and influenced in some political parties than others.
Gosh, I wonder which political parties they mean?
Evidence is abundant that in Canada and elsewhere, political parties of the left have been more likely to develop and implement public policies such as universal healthcare, public pensions, housing programs, and universal childcare that support the social determinants of health.
Political parties of the left. Why, of course!
It is really no surprise that 'public health professionals' believe in big government and have zero understanding of economics if this is what they are being taught at university.