The Illusion of Equity: How Politics Undermines Public Health Progress

It’s February 1st, 2025, and a lot has happened in the United States. We have a new administration signing executive orders left and right—erasing and dismantling years of progress, right? How far we have come to center equity, only to overuse the word into oblivion.

Since 2025, health equity has been a buzzword that organizations used to appear more liberal, open, and futuristic. I sat on tens of health equity panels that talked endlessly about DEI. Not health equity. But DEI strategies and tools.

DEI can be a part of health equity, but they are not the same. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, according to the University of Michigan (2025):

Diversity broadly represents the variety of identities, perspectives, and experiences that individuals collectively bring to an environment.

Equity is a principle that centers on creating systems, organizations, and societies that are fair and just.

Inclusion involves active, intentional, and ongoing efforts to create environments where all individuals are welcomed, feel a sense of belonging, and are respected, supported, and valued to fully participate.

DEI became a buzzword after the murder of George Floyd in 2020.

Was the thought that hiring diverse people and developing resources for them would create belonging and reduce racism and microaggressions?

The one word that was lost—equity.

Equity is when everyone has a fair and just opportunity like everyone else. Some people need more resources to reach milestones compared to others. Most marginalized communities have fewer resources than their counterparts, leading to lower levels of education, income, high-quality care, and safe environments—not to mention health outcomes.

Those who overused the word to go with the status quo in 2020 abandoned their DEI efforts when it went against the status quo in 2024/2025.

Equity is something public health professionals have been striving for, for years. If everyone had tailored resources, knowledge, motivation, and skills—if we provided what everyone needed to reach their highest self-efficacy, healthiest, and best self—would public health professionals still have jobs?

I used to think no. Public health professionals need people to be unhealthy. We need negative health outcomes and inequities, right?

WRONG.

Communities can never have true equity because we have politicians who are against science, public health, and marginalized communities. We need public health expertise at the decision-making table. If subject matter experts are not determining which public health measures should be cut or signed, then every day will bring another crisis for public health professionals to solve.

The weight is already unbearable.