Leaving a Legal Legacy: Honoring a Public Health Visionary, Dr. Lloyd Novick

To fully grasp the contributions of Dr. Lloyd Novick, as founder and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Public Health Management 241-243), is similarly under frontal assault. Remarkably, we are more prepared for this pivotal moment than the casual observer might imagine. Groundwork has been underway for over a decade—well before COVID and its many implications. How so? Much of the basis for public health authority and power is embedded in law via statute, ordinance, case law, and rules/regulations. A casual glance at the Ten Great Public Health Achievements of the Twentieth Century reveals the critical importance of policy and legal frameworks challenging the status quo, with 7 or more representing dramatic commitments favoring the adoption of health against often powerful opposing forces (see Table 1). The suite of policies and laws promulgated to reduce lead exposures in children and adults working in industry is another powerful example with startling real-world results. TABLE 1 - Ten Great Public Health Achievements—United States, 1900-1999 Vaccination Motor-vehicle safety Safer workplaces Control of infectious diseases Decline in deaths from coronary heart disease and stroke Safer and healthier foods Healthier mothers and babies Family planning Fluoridation of drinking water Recognition of tobacco use as a health hazard Source: 10 Great Public Health Achievements (April 2, 1999). MMWR, pp. 241-243. Only relatively recently has our discipline adopted an evidence-based scientific approach towards influencing public health policy and law. In isolation, many practitioners have recognized the importance of these tools and policy levers. Yet sometimes it takes a visionary to propel the field forward. Dr. Lloyd Novick, Editor-in-Chief of JPHMP, provided just such an opportunity, and a visible forum. As a public health practitioner and as an academic, he recognized the unique value and power of public health legal tools. Accordingly, he championed this journal to serve as a showcase for the scientific application of law and policy to facilitate practice at the local, state, and federal levels. He intuitively understood the importance of legal epidemiology, the necessity to build a strong science base in policy and law. Besides encouraging the submission of numerous articles on a panoply of innovative public health legal topics and emphasizing the influential role of policy to achieve elusive public health outcomes, Dr. Novick endorsed the publication of special supplementary issues dedicated to public health law and policy topics, providing a forum for a deeper dive. Some examples include entire journal issues focused on "Advancing Legal Epidemiology," "Lead Poisoning Prevention," and "Public Health Interventions to Address Health Disparities Associated with Structural Racism," to name but a few. Dr. Novick's singular focus was on the public health practitioner, and he never wavered in that commitment. Law and policy, even within public health circles, can be perceived as arcane and distant, even pedantic. As editor-in-chief, he strived to make the products of academicians accessible and user friendly for those tasked with utilizing tools as fulcrums to improve health. Dr. Novick's strong background in epidemiology and health policy allowed him to deploy his editorial lens to ensure the published public health law and policy products met his epidemiological rigor while remaining grounded in applicability for the practitioner community. Additionally, as editor, Dr. Novick was an ardent supporter of many important policy topics, often early in their evolution. Health in all policies, determinants of health, and even preparedness have direct linear implications for public health policy and law. He wanted to make certain those relationships were explicit, and that articles and commentaries provided roadmaps and tools for practitioners to implement relevant polices/laws. More on the policy side of the ledger, from a discipline-wide perspective, this journal, under Dr. Novick's leadership, similarly championed key topics to enhance how public health operates with greater effectiveness. Consider such fundamental areas as quality improvement/performance management, public health department accreditation, and workforce development. In a sense, these "internal" policies play a foundational role in shaping how health departments are organized and how they serve their constituents. In fact, so many articles focused on these subjects have appeared in the journal that they are showcased as "series" on the JPHMP website for easy access. I would be remiss if I did not mention Dr. Lloyd Novick, the person. The esteem and respect my colleagues and I hold for him is limitless. He generously offered his time and attention to generations of aspiring public health practitioners, scholars, and novice authors. I certainly benefitted from his selfless guidance, and occasionally his direct (and warranted) criticism. All was delivered with a personal touch and humility that belied his place as a giant presence in public health as a practitioner, scholar, and thought leader. His unique ability to digest simultaneously the latest edition of the New York Times and a draft scientific paper, within minutes, always remained a marvel to me! Finally, although I intentionally painted a dire portrait of public health at the outset of this commentary, I wish to close more optimistically (the proverbial glass half full). The very forces that hold the potential to decimate decades of dedicated public health progress that has saved millions of lives, and improved countless others, can be challenged and surmounted. Although stretched to its limits, and under duress, the United States remains dedicated to the rule of law. The very same legal/policy tools presented in this journal under the aegis of its founder, Dr. Lloyd Novick, will be instrumental in shaping the revitalization of public health.