Invaluable guidance on how scientists can communicate the societal benefits of their work to the public and funding agencies. This will help scientists submit proposals to the US National Science Foundation and other funding agencies with a 'Broader Impacts' section, as well as helping to develop successful wider outreach activities.

Does the general public need to understand science? And if so, is it scientists' responsibility to communicate? Critics have argued that, despite the huge strides made in technology, we live in a "scientifically illiterate" society--one that thinks about the world and makes important decisions without taking scientific knowledge into account. But is the solution to this "illiteracy" to deluge the layman with scientific information? Or does science news need to be focused around specific issues and organized into stories that are meaningful and relevant to people's lives? In this unprecedented, comprehensive look at a new field, Jane Gregory and Steve Miller point the way to a more effective public understanding of science in the years ahead.

In contemporary manifestations of public health rituals and events, people are being increasingly united around what they hold in common--their material being and humanity. As a cult of humanity, public health provides a moral force in society that replaces 'traditional' religions in times of great diversity or heterogeneity of peoples, activities and desires. This is in contrast to public health's foundation in science, particularly the science of epidemiology. The rigid rules of 'scientific evidence' used to determine the cause of illness and disease can work against the most vulnerable in society by putting sectors of the population, such as underrepresented workers, at a disadvantage. This study focuses on this tension between traditional science and the changing vision articulated within public health (and across many disciplines) that calls for a collective response to uncontrolled capitalism and unremitting globalization, and to the way in which health inequalities and their association with social inequalities provides a political rhetoric that calls for a new redistributive social programme. Drawing on decades of research, the author argues that public health is both a cult and a science of contemporary society.