this was required for my intro to public health class, and so far it's a pretty good accompaninent to our class lectures. however, often times, i find the explanations and supports they give too redundant. if you buy this and read it, i suggest not reading every paragraph. if you understand an idea or concept with just one example they give, don't feel as if you need to read the 2 or 3 other examples they go into detail for the next couple of pages.

so far, out of the 4 or 5 chapters i've read, i have actually found the prologue to be the most interesting. the prologue talks about some famous, most obvious cases of public health - i.e. AIDS and a water treatment caused breakout somewhere close the Great Lakes area. I'm not sure what this says about the book though...

Overall, good, strong introduction to Public Health, but redundant at times.

Truly a wonder. Not only is it full of useful information, well organized, thorough, and insightful - it's readable!!! For once, I could not put a book (other than a novel!) down! The author kept my interest alive with the excellent use of the language and the ability to keep even sub-sub-sections organized and to the point.

I turned to this book because I'm writing an evaluation of Washington State's substance abuse prevention efforts during the last few years, and my boss requested that I analyze it from the perspective of the public health model. I needed a review, and this book provided exactly what I needed.

I especially enjoyed the open, honest statements in the preface about how difficult it was to define public health during the author's involvement in establishing the School of Public Health in the University at Albany. The book is a delight to read and oh-so-useful.

This book is a good example of why public health has become irrelevant to the average citizen. The content was biased and relied heavily on progressive philosophy. Public Health should be integral to improving and restructuring the health care system. The content is replete with accusations and blame for poor funding and indifference to purpose. Any discipline should be able to define itself and provide a realistic scope of objectives,goals and services. The author's conclusion was that legislation and education were the primary functions of public health in America. (More taxes for that?!)
The system has not adapted to current problems and needs since the later 60s. Practical application was nonexistent in the 80s and 90s and accounted for lack of funding. AIDS should have been a reawakening for public health professionals but they were paralyzed with fear of creating offence or lacking "compassion" for the gay community. Too many academics, unable to define purpose, strategies and practical application. AIDS is a public health problem and should have been treated like TB, venereal disease, and the many others!
The book was expensive and my daughter's professor taught only the standard line contents.The assignments were unchallenging and lacked creativity. No wonder, students see future employment options only as PHDs and researchers. How exciting.
This is a critical time for public health with many opportunities and possibilities, but professors, you need to come out of the classroom and perhaps definition, scope and purpose may become clear to you.