Can evidence drive health equity in the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond?

Using scoping review methods, we systematically searched multiple online databases for publications in the first year of the pandemic that proposed pragmatic population or health system-level solutions to health inequities. We found 77 publications with proposed solutions to pandemic-related health inequities. Most were commentaries, letters, or editorials from the USA, offering untested solutions, and no robust evidence on effectiveness. Some of the proposed solutions could unintentionally exacerbate health inequities. We call on health policymakers to co-create, co-design, and co-produce equity-focussed, evidence-based interventions with communities, focussing on those most at risk to protect the population as a whole. Epidemiologists collaborating with people from other relevant disciplines may provide methodological expertise for these processes. As epidemiologists, we must interrogate our own methods to avoid propagating any unscientific biases we may hold. Epidemiology must be used to address, and never exacerbate, health inequities-in the pandemic and beyond.

A Bioethics for Democracy: Restoring Civic Vision.

Democracy-as a form of governance, a moral community, and a way of life-is under great stress. The prospects for democracy and bioethics are linked because bioethics relies on an open society and a democratic cultural environment in order to flourish. For its part, democracy can be restored and strengthened by widespread cultural and psychological support for the values of mutual recognition, equal dignity and respect for persons, and solidarity, interdependence, and the common good. Promoting values such as these is in keeping with the founding vision of bioethics, which was a civic vision. At the present time, bioethics can and should continue to be a bioethics for democracy by engaging directly in civic learning and civic place-making. These have a significant impact on health as well as on democracy.

John Rawls, Godfather of Bioethics.

At a time when ethical and political philosophy were thought passé, John Rawls gave serious attention to ethical questions, providing them with a renewed academic legitimacy. This helped fields of practical ethics such as bioethics become established in higher education and in public affairs. This essay addresses the influence Rawls has had on bioethics through both the style and the substance of his ethical argumentation. The essay argues that his distinctive rhetorical strategy and tone attempted to rein in the scope of normative commitments in order to make an equilibrium between refined understandings of freedom and equality possible and sustainable. Bioethics has been strongly influenced by this approach to maintaining social stability in a liberal society that has become highly stratified and culturally diverse. Bioethics continues to echo the Rawlsian call for a calmly reasoned political life but finds that call increasingly difficult to answer.

A Gay Epidemiologist and the DC Commission of Public Health AIDS Advisory Committee.

Based upon the lead author's deep personal and professional experience, this case narrative illustrates the importance of engagement between public health practitioners and members of affected populations and their advocates. The case underscores the need to build strong coalitions to address serious public health and social issues. It also illustrates how decisions about control groups in research raise ethical issues. In addition, the case illustrates the reality that public health and social services are sometimes inadequate in the face of dire circumstances. Justice in public health has both a distributive aspect (how to allocate limited resources and distribute potential benefits as fairly as possible) and a procedural dimension (ensuring public participation, especially of those most affected). Frameworks for public health ethics, which post-date the events detailed in the autobiographical case narrative, highlight both distributive justice and procedural justice.

Civic Learning for a Democracy in Crisis.

This essay introduces a special report from The Hastings Center entitled Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, which grew out of a project supported by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. This multiauthored report offers wide-ranging assessments of increasing polarization and partisanship in American government and politics, and it proposes constructive responses to this in the provision of objective information, institutional reforms in government and the electoral system, and a reexamination of cultural and political values needed if democracy is to function well in a pluralistic and diverse society. The essays in the special report explore the norms of civic learning and institutions, social movements, and communal innovations that can revitalize civic learning in practice. This introductory essay defines and explains the notion of civic learning, which is a lynchpin connecting many of the essays in the report. Civic learning pertains to the ways in which citizens learn about collective social problems and make decisions about them that reflect the duties and responsibilities of citizenship. Such learning can occur in many social settings in everyday life, and it can also be facilitated through participation in the processes of democratic governance on many levels. Civic learning is not doctrinaire and is compatible with a range of public goals and policies. It is an activity that increases what might be called the democratic capability of a people.

Recommendations for Better Civic Learning: Building and Rebuilding Democracy.

This is the concluding essay for a special report from The Hastings Center entitled Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, which grew out of a project supported by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. This essay provides an integrative discussion of various theoretical and practical reform perspectives offered by other essays in the report. It also offers a number of recommendations. It notes that the aim of the special report is not to propose specific reform measures but, rather, to consider larger, more theoretic concerns related to political and economic questions, which are personal and structural-psychological, cultural, and institutional-at the same time. In response, this essay argues that the best relationship between the citizenry and government in a democracy is not one of deference, nor one of contestation, but one that is critically constructive, which in turn is linked to practices of civic learning. To be constructive, citizens need scientific literacy, an understanding of how government and other institutions work, critical thinking abilities, and many open and diverse forums for civic learning to offset the increasingly isolating media "bubbles" that are the only source of information for many. The essay then formulates five recommendations designed to facilitate critically constructive citizenship and civic learning. These are creating a basis for civic participation, acquiring information, talking to each other, designing institutional change, and achieving deliberation.

Redoing the Demos.

Forces including extreme economic inequality, cultural polarization, and the monetizing and privatizing of persons as commodities are undermining the forms of moral recognition and mutuality upon which democratic practices and institutions depend. These underlying factors, together with more direct modes of political corruption, manipulation, and authoritarian nationalism, are undoing Western democracies. This essay identifies and explores some vital underpinnings of democratic citizenship and civic learning that remain open to revitalization and repair. Building care structures and practices from the ground up and developing inclusive and egalitarian modes of solidarity in a pluralistic society are the focus of discussion. The essay argues that solidarity and care are essential relationships and practices of moral recognition upon which democratic political agency and freedom rest. The social-relational lifeworld and the democratic lifeworld are interdependent. Democratic citizenship is itself a relational practice that supports other practices. Democratic governance properly carried out fosters an underlying social solidarity and care and in turn draws moral and political legitimacy upward from them.

Remembering Hospice.

This book review essay discusses The Crisis of US Hospice Care: Family and Freedom at the End of Life (2019), by Harold Braswell.

Ethics codes and reflective practice in public health.

In public health, acting ethically and fulfilling obligations to the public requires careful reflection and intentional decision making. This article discusses the role that an ethics code in public health can play in providing both an educational tool and a behavioral standard. It argues that maintaining public trust requires that public health personnel to live up to standards of professionalism in their conduct, and in order to do so they must have the capabilities necessary to cope in an ethically reflective manner with the pressures and decisions they face. The article illustrates this perspective by discussing the public health ethics code revision process currently underway in the USA.

Daniel Callahan and the Vocation of Bioethics.

Did Dan Callahan know the calling he was displaying in his own work and offering to others in the special intellectual garden of The Hastings Center, which he cocreated, with Will Gaylin, and went on to prune and tend for nearly four decades? I would say, yes, he knew what he was about. Successful people usually have self-confidence and drive in abundance, but in Dan's case, there was something more profound and interesting at work. Having gone through the endnotes of his latest book one day, I asked him how he found time to read so widely. He said he had learned to be an efficient skimmer who could pull out the nuggets he valued from another's work because he had a few magnetic ideas from which he would brook no distraction.

Relational Ethics for Public Health: Interpreting Solidarity and Care.

This article defends 'relational theorizing' in bioethics and public health ethics and describes its importance. It then offers an interpretation of solidarity and care understood as normatively patterned and psychologically and socially structured modes of relationality; in a word, solidarity and care understood as 'practices.' Solidarity is characterized as affirming the moral standing of others and their membership in a community of equal dignity and respect. Care is characterized as paying attention to the moral (and mortal) being of others and their needs, suffering, and vulnerability. The wager of relational theorizing in health care and public health is that substantive ethical visions of solidarity and care will provide support for more just and egalitarian health care and public health policies.

Solidarity and Care Coming of Age: New Reasons in the Politics of Social Welfare Policy.

Aging brings about the ordeal of coping. Younger people also cope, but for those in old age, the ordeal is so often elegiac, forced upon the self by changing functions within the body and by the outside social world, with its many impediments to the continuity of former roles, pursuits, and self-identities. Coping with change can be affirming, but when what is being forgone seems more valuable than what lies ahead, it is travail. For most, the coping is managed more moderately by a sense of resignation. This is especially true for those who survive into profound old age, when one is viewed as if being old is one's essential identity and nature. We must recognize and affirm difference and change without stigmatizing or losing sight of the specific capabilities and circumstances of the individual. This is what I think the often-used, but less often clearly defined, notion of a "person-centered" orientation should signify. Individuals age, but so do societies, not simply because they have a large population over age sixty-five, but in the sense that societies as a whole are also buffeted by significant disruption in orders of meaning. Aging has a public as well as a private manifestation, a social as well as a personal embodiment, and how it is paid attention to in culture, politics, and policy makes a great difference to how aging is concretely experienced in human lives. In this essay, I explore how the moral imagination nurtured by the practices of solidarity and care-and nurturing them in turn-can come of age-and how these practices can take their rightful place in an ethically mature political culture.

Solidarity and care as relational practices.

Many working in bioethics today are engaging in forms of normative interpretation concerning the meaningful contexts of relational agency and institutional structures of power. Using the framework of relational bioethics, this article focuses on two significant social practices that are significant for health policy and public health: the practices of solidarity and the practices of care. The main argument is that the affirming recognition of, and caring attention paid to, persons as moral subjects can politically motivate a society in three respects. The recognition of solidarity and the attention of care can prompt progressive change toward a democratic willingness: (a) to provide for equal respect for rights and dignity; (b) to provide the social resources and services needed for just health and well-being; and (c) to focus its creativity and wealth on the actualization of potential flourishing of each and all. Solidarity is discussed as a morally developmental stance that moves from standing up for another, standing up with another, and standing up as another. Care is discussed as a morally developmental stance that moves from the attentive rehabilitation of another, attentive companionship with and for another, and attentive commitment to another.

Water Safety and Lead Regulation: Physicians' Community Health Responsibilities.

This article reviews the regulation of lead in drinking water, highlighting its epidemiological, engineering, and ethical aspects with a focus on the Flint water crisis. We first discuss water quality policy and its implementation with a focus on lead contamination of water, primarily from pipe systems between a water treatment facility and a tap. We then discuss physicians' roles and ethical responsibilities regarding safe drinking water using a human rights framework. We argue that physicians can play an important role in safeguarding drinking water in their communities by being vigilant, honoring the community's trust in them, and warning, educating, and empowering patients and broader communities so as to protect tap water safety and public health.

De-extinction and Conservation.

We are living in what is widely considered the sixth major extinction. Most ecologists believe that biodiversity is disappearing at an alarming rate, with up to 150 species going extinct per day according to scientists working with the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. Part of the reason the loss signified by biological extinction feels painful is that it seems irremediable. These creatures are gone, and there's nothing to be done about it. In recent years, however, the possibility has been broached that, just possibly, something can be done, in at least some cases. Human ingenuity, a contributing factor in the extinction crisis, might achieve their "de-extinction"-in at least some cases, and with sometimes significant qualifications about whether the original species had been "recreated" and whether it could resume its original place in the environment. De-extinction is an entry point into a larger set of questions about how biotechnological tools can support, coexist with, or undermine the goals of conservation and about the very meaning of conservation. Are we beings in control of the world or beings who prosper by accommodating ourselves to webs of symbiotic interdependencies? Are we creators or creatures, or both-and if both, then how can we achieve the balance between them that might be called humility? The interplay of perfecting and accommodating is not unique to human beings-perhaps it characterizes all forms of life on Earth-but with humans, these modes of being are distinctive, and our technology greatly expands their scale and effects. It is such questions that the ten essays in this special report explore.

The Moral Imagination of De-extinction.

We live amidst the sixth great extinction of life on Earth, and we live under the sign of molecular biology and biotechnology. An ethical maxim that is well-nigh universally acknowledged holds that with great power comes great moral responsibility. For those who accept the science and embrace the responsibility, there are two rather different kinds of moral vision and moral imagination at work. Detractors of biotechnology say that we should see ourselves as creaturely good citizens of the biotic community, accepting and accommodating what evolutionary natural selection has bequeathed to us, warts and all. Boosters of biotechnology say that we should see ourselves as its sovereigns, fashioning better forms of synthetic life and genetically driving evolution in better ways through anthropogenic selection. Faced with biodiversity loss, technology boosters, or eco-modernists, tend to respond by upping the ante on technology in hopes of increasing the benefits and lessening the impact of human relations with nature. The detractors, or eco-communitarians, respond by seeking to restructure the relationship between humans and nature by lowering the profile of human power so as to hear the voice of nonhuman being and better attune ourselves to it. Undergirding both of these moral visions is atonement. As a way of providing atonement, however, de-extinction fails.

Bioethics and Populism: How Should Our Field Respond?

Across the world, an authoritarian and exclusionary form of populism is gaining political traction. Historically, some populist movements have been democratic and based on a sense of inclusive justice and the common good. But the populism on the rise at present speaks and acts otherwise. It is challenging constitutional democracies. The polarization seen in authoritarian populism goes beyond the familiar left-right political spectrum and generates disturbing forms of extremism, including the so-called alternative right in the United States and similar ethnic and nationalistic political movements in other countries. The field of bioethics will be profoundly affected if authoritarian populism displaces constitutional democracy. But the field has a significant contribution to make to rebuilding the communal and civic foundations upon which constitutional democracy rests.

Right Relation and Right Recognition in Public Health Ethics: Thinking Through the Republic of Health.

The further development of public health ethics will be assisted by a more direct engagement with political theory. In this way, the moral vocabulary of the liberal tradition should be supplemented-but not supplanted-by different conceptual and normative resources available from other traditions of political and social thought. This article discusses four lines of further development that the normative conceptual discourse of public health ethics might take. (i) The relational turn. The implications for public health ethics of the new 'ecological' or 'relational' interpretation that is emerging for concepts such as agency, self-identity, autonomy, liberty and justice. (ii) Governing the health commons. The framework of collective action problems is giving way to notions of democratic governance and management of common resources. (iii) The concept of membership. Membership is specified by the notions of equal respect and parity of voice and agency. (iv) The concept of mutuality. Mutuality is specified by the notions of interdependent concern and care.