The author takes the position that both epidemiology and bioethics, as practiced within academic establishments, have largely a
lthough not entirely
abstracted the public context of health and well-being from their respective disciplines. It is argued that by and large both d
isciplines have been highly
successful at what they do. However, this success can in part be attributed to each limiting its ability to look beyond its res
pective academic niche and
thus embrace challenges which are socially challenging, politically charged, and academically messy. This narrow focus has beco
me self-serving and
ultimately detracts from fundamental remits of both disciplines in protecting the public from harm. Furthermore, it may re-enfo
rce the inequalities of
research into health overall, whereby the greatest concentration of effort remains firmly focused upon those who already have t
he most. Currently
marginalized approaches to each of these disciplines – such as social epidemiology, global bioethics, and critical bioethics –
provide us with platforms
that challenge mainstream academic epidemiologists and bioethicists to seek out and reconnect their expertise with questions th
at are more relevant to
real-world situations.