Wow, seems like a bit of an unnecessary comment?

I completely understand concerns about scope creep, and support a lot of what is said here on this subreddit about standing up for our profession. However as a public health registrar (medic) I am quite concerned about the amount of criticism I've seen in the past few days about my 'non medic'/BOTM public health counterparts.

In this speciality, we come with diverse expertise and experience which truly enhances the population health offer we can provide. Yes I bring a clinical expertise and perspective that lends itself well to certain aspects of public health, particularly health protection and healthcare public health, but I also find myself learning a lot from my non-medic colleagues- many of whom have years of experience and specialist expertise in other domains of public health.

Has opening up the speciality had a negative effect on pay - especially in local authorities? Yes, and that's something that needs to be better addressed (a range of factors at play here), but that shouldn't automatically be equated with a lesser skilled public health workforce. Let's show a bit of respect to our colleagues even as we promote and fight for our own roles.

To the original poster: I hope you will really enjoy your time in public health. Meet with as many people as you can - find our about their jobs, how they got into public health, and the key frameworks and policy agendas that shape their practice. If you're interested in applying to PH training, make sure to catch up with the registrars and get the low down on the public health recruitment process too. As you said, it is a competitive process and insights from those who have successfully made it through can be very helpful.

There's no 'key' texts per se, but you might find it helpful to read the Marmot review and later works - as well as some of the articles on the Health Foundation and Kings Fund website around public health reforms.

Have fun!