When you’re in a new era, you need a new vocabulary. As our nation undergoes significant changes, it behooves organizations working in health and related fields to take stock of how national leaders are talking about topics relevant to their missions, consider how their health care messaging aligns or differs, and determine whether they might adapt some of their current vocabulary to communicate effectively.
As health care PR professionals at The Reis Group, we pay close attention to the evolving conversations in the health and life sciences arenas to provide our clients with actionable advice on their communications that will help increase their visibility, bolster their reputations and advance their efforts to promote health and well-being.
We reviewed speeches, interviews, commentaries and other material from top government leaders, and we identified several top-line themes running through their messaging that can resonate with health and life science organizations. Our review also highlighted phrasing that Trump administration leaders are using to talk about these themes, which may affect how organizations communicate about their work.
Reevaluating messaging is a useful tactic, whether an organization supports or opposes administration policies. In this process, it is vital that organizations’ health care messaging and positioning stay true to their core purposes and values; adapting does not mean adopting others’ phrasing or positions wholesale.
Disease Prevention Through Lifestyle vs. Medical Therapies
The administration has emphasized discussions about disease prevention, citing the dangers of unhealthy diets, poor nutrition, lack of physical activity, and chronic stress. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others have asserted that lifestyle changes, including better nutrition, physical fitness and spiritual growth can outperform medications in terms of outcomes and cost effectiveness.
The focus comes as a welcome change to a significant percentage of the public who believe our nation overemphasizes costly treatments over wellness. These are also issues that medical and public health professionals have long underscored as needing greater attention and funding.
One element behind this thinking is a distrust of the health care industry broadly, and the pharmaceutical industry in particular, held by many who see these industries as more concerned with profit than health, according to polls. Their concerns are underscored by the ballooning costs of health care.
While many organizations strongly oppose the administration’s cuts to health and research programs, the emphasis on healthy lifestyles can provide opportunities for organizations to advance aspects of their agendas. The University of Pennsylvania-affiliated PEACH Lab offers a prime example of using the Make America Healthy Again Report as a springboard to highlight science-based policies for better nutrition.
Organizations may want to shift emphasis in their health care messaging to talk about how their work contributes to chronic disease prevention and wellness promotion, if applicable to their missions. Health systems might highlight their community outreach programs that offer healthy cooking workshops or fitness classes. Organizations that have pursued efforts to expand “food as medicine” might spotlight these initiatives, although it’s worth noting that the administration generally has not used that phrase, instead talking about the importance of “whole foods” and “clean foods.”
Personal Responsibility for Health
While administration health leaders blame “perverse incentives” from the food and medical industries for America’s chronic disease crisis, they also call on people to take responsibility for their health. They frequently refer to “personal agency” and talk of health as a “patriotic” and “moral” duty.
Administration health leaders say they will promote policies and programs to incentivize people to make healthy choices, including a plan to launch a national “Take Back Your Health” ad campaign that will promote healthy diets, physical fitness and spiritual growth. They also have touted wearable health devices as keys to getting people to pay more attention to their health and make healthy choices.
Choosing Your Words
The extent to which organizations adopt or adapt to current language in their health care messaging depends on their work, their goals, and their need to stay true to their values and mission. While many organizations may not elect to talk about health as a “patriotic duty,” they may find it useful to adopt administration phrasing at times. For example, The Alliance of Community Health Plans took up phrases such as “reducing waste, fraud and abuse” in a letter to the administration and in a separate statement noted how its Chronic Disease Pledge aligns with the MAHA ethos. Even so, ACHP has not shied away from issuing statements criticizing cuts to Medicaid.
In some cases, taking an oppositional stance may be the necessary recourse, as in the case of the American Academy of Pediatrics offering guidance on vaccines rather than continuing to endorse recommendations from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
As the nation continues to navigate this time of change, keeping an ear on the national discourse on health and determining whether, when and how to tailor health care messaging will be imperative for organizations that want to adapt to turbulent times.
