So. This "underlying health conditions" / "pre-existing health conditions" framing is understandably upsetting b/c amid the COVID public health emergency, it became a way of discounting the morbidity or mortality of chronically ill & disabled people. The people behind MAHA leveraged this framing.
The New York TimesBreaking News: Two deaths in Michigan have been linked to cyclospora. Both people who had the parasite also had underlying health issues.
For me, it's less "what are the risk factors for me?" and more "the precautions wouldn't change if I was more or less "at risk" because a food-borne illness outbreak *should* prompt a population-level (regulatory, administrative, etc) response, rather than sheer individual-level effort / vigilance."
It's like the "ideal" or modal person is non-disabled with no "pre-existing conditions", and everyone else is assigned a fractional (<1) value on the basis of their deviation from that "ideal". That's quite reminiscent of eugenicist logics.
Arrianna Marie Planey, PhD MASo. This "underlying health conditions" / "pre-existing health conditions" framing is understandably upsetting b/c amid the COVID public health emergency, it became a way of discounting the morbidity or mortality of chronically ill & disabled people. The people behind MAHA leveraged this framing.
Also, I totally think this is ironic and it parallels individual-level explanations for poverty. In both, ecological correlations serve as the basis for causal prescriptions for individual behavioral change.
Arrianna Marie Planey, PhD MAIt's an "individualization" of public health, which is (ironically?) premised on ecological data (e.g., XYZ "risk factors" identified among those sickened / dead of a given infectious disease). It also dovetails w/ reform eugenics, wherein health must be optimized at the indiv level w/ indiv effort
