Beware the Singular “Community” (Sometimes)

A group of doodles are in a box labeled Community. A perplexed doodle on the outside of the box says, I don't think we'll all fit.

If there’s 1 word we say a lot in public health, it’s “community.” In addition to how it comes up anecdotally in our work, the word is baked into key public health concepts — think “community health,” “community-based orgs,” “community-based participatory research,” and the like. This makes perfect sense, as oftentimes public health professionals do work in a single, specific community.

But today we want to talk about a different use of the word “community” that we’ve been noodling on here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ: when health comm and public health professionals use the singular form of “community” to write (and talk) at a high level about our audiences. So, the LGBTQ+ community. The Black community. The autistic community.

Though it’s not uncommon to use the word like this (we’ve all done it!), let’s pause and think about what it implies when we “singular community” those groups of people. (And yes, we just used “singular community” as a verb, which it’s not — but stick with us.) There certainly isn’t only 1 LGBTQ+ community, is there? What about a single Black community? One set of autistic people comprising 1 autistic community? Absolutely not!

Rather, we know that our audiences reflect and include the diverse identities of all the individuals within those audiences. Which is exactly why we think it’s time to banish these massively oversimplified catchall terms from our health comm vocabularies! Sometimes, this is as simple as switching to plural:

  • Instead of: The Black community in the United States has been disproportionately affected by COVID-19.
  • Use: Black communities in the United States have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19.

And other times, you might want to skip “community” altogether:

  • Instead of: The autistic community often prefers identity-first language.
  • Use: Many autistic people prefer identity-first language.

One more thing: In addition to being reductive, normalizing use of the singular form of “community” to refer to our audiences can have sneaky implications. Words are powerful, and when we acknowledge through the language we use that there isn’t just 1 LGBTQ+ or Black or autistic community — even when talking to each other — it can serve as a reminder to keep the needs of our diverse audiences top of mind (hello, audience segmentation and intersectionality!). And that, dear readers, is a critical part of our job as health communicators.

The bottom line: Beware of the singular “community” when writing and talking about your audiences. Groups of individual people are never monolithic.


Copy and paste to share on social (and tag us!): Think twice before you use the singular “community” to refer to your #HealthComm audiences, says CommunicateHealth. Remember, groups of individual people are never monolithic! Read more: https://bit.ly/3V38WrD #HealthLiteracy #HealthCommunication

Inclusive Language Tips for Writing About Families

3 happy, diverse doodle families: one adoptive family, one with grandparents raising a small child, and a single-parent household.

Love is (still) in the air — but don’t worry, we’re not here to talk about romance via overpriced chocolates and flowers. Instead, we wanted to chat about another kind of emotional bond: family relationships. More specifically, we’ve been thinking about the language we use to talk about families — and how we, as health communicators, can make that language as inclusive as possible.

Fortunately, the days of assuming that a “family” comprises a mom, a dad, and biological children (the “nuclear” family) are long gone. There are tons of different family models — single-parent households, adoptive or foster parents, grandparents raising kids, “blended” families… the list goes on.

In most public health communication materials, the classic “parent” has been replaced by “parent or caregiver” in an effort to include other family models. That’s a good start — but we can take it further. When writing for and about families, think carefully before using the terms below — and if in doubt, swap them out for more inclusive options:

  • “Mom,” “dad,” or “parent.” Depending on context and your audience, consider using “caregiver,” “adult,” or “grown-up” instead. It also may be worth giving some thought to whether you want a plural or singular term, since there may only be 1 person caring for a child at home.
  • “Daughter” or “son.” Opt for more inclusive terms like “child” or “kid,” which have the added benefit of being gender neutral.
  • “Household members” or “members of a household.” If you’re using this term to mean families, keep in mind that families don’t always live together — they may have parents who are divorced or incarcerated, for example. Instead, just say “family members.”
  • “Extended family.” This is usually meant to include grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins. But in many cultures, this isn’t “extended” family — it’s just family.

And one more thing to keep in mind: Avoid making assumptions about who does what in a family. Consider this header: “5 quick and healthy recipes for busy moms.” This assumes not only that mom does the cooking — but that there’s a mom in the family to do it in the first place. Instead, you might say: “5 quick and healthy recipes for busy families.”

The bottom line: When we model respect for families by using inclusive language, we create a connection — and that makes our public health communications more effective.


Copy and paste to share on social: In #HealthComm materials, we sometimes write about families. Let’s make sure we do that using inclusive language! CommunicateHealth has some thoughts: https://bit.ly/4bYeD06 #HealthLiteracy

15 Favorites (for the 15th!)

2 doodles with birthday hats on hold up a 15th birthday candle

As we told you last week, dear readers, February 9 marked CH’s 15th birthday! So to keep the celebration going just a bit longer, in lieu of our standard archive post this week (which just happens to fall on the 15th), we’re rounding up 15 favorites from the archive.

And it wasn’t easy to choose just 15! A couple were pretty clear off the bat — of course we had to include the launch of our Equity-Centered Health Communication Framework, for example. There have also been a handful of posts that feel similarly foundational to our work and our company, like those on the importance of empathy in health comm and how health literacy, as we ❤️ to say, is a state and not a trait.

We also wanted to include a few posts from our unofficial series on common public health industry terms that we think need to go. We’re looking at you “target audience,” “hard-to-reach populations,” and “vulnerable communities!”

And in perhaps the understatement of the century, COVID gave us a lot to think and write about. You could even say that the pandemic put health comm on the proverbial map (we did say that, actually), and it put massively important conversations — like how we need to name racism (not race) as a risk factor for disease — on display in the mainstream, where they belong.

COVID also had us thinking a lot about how to dispel harmful myths, even how to get ahead of those myths before they get too much traction. And although the post is from pre-COVID times, tips for writing about U-turns in health guidance proved useful again and again.

It seems wrong not to include at least a couple of posts on more technical writing topics, so here we’ll remind plain language writers everywhere of 2 of your very best friends: the Oxford comma (superpower: ensuring clarity) and also zombies (superpower: fighting passive voice).

Finally, we’re going to close this post out with a bit of an outlier — but we enjoyed researching and writing it so much that we want to make sure you caught our celebration of LGBTQ+ public health/health comm heroes!

Whew, we’re pretty worn out after all that reminiscing. Time to relax with a movie. Perhaps we’ll throw on… Contagion?


Copy and paste to share on social: This week, to keep the 15th birthday celebration going, the CommunicateHealth team is rounding up 15 favorite We ❤️ Health Literacy posts (and on the 15th no less!): https://bit.ly/4bC7cLM #HealthLiteracy #HealthComm

CommunicateHealth Is 15

A 15th anniversary celebratory version of CommunicateHealth's logo appears on a stage

This week, we’re deviating from our regular programming (and regular schedule) to bring you an exciting update from our main Headquarters: Today, CommunicateHealth is 15 years old. 15! That’s 15 years of work based on a single, shared belief: Everyone deserves clear and simple information about their health. Huge shout out to the stellar clients and inspiring colleagues who made this possible. We’re very proud — and even more thankful.

As you may have noticed over the years, we try to keep this blog focused on actionable content for health communicators. But it feels important to share this milestone anniversary with you, dear readers. After all, some of you have been with us for 11 of those 15 years (the inaugural We ❤️ Health Literacy post ran in July of 2013)!

And with that in mind, you probably know what we’re going to say next. But since it’s both true and important to us, we’re going to say it anyway: You make our work better, and for that we thank you sincerely.

Oh, and keep an eye out — especially on our LinkedIn page — over the next few months for some anniversary-themed content!

With gratitude (and unwavering ❤️ for health literacy),
Your friends at CommunicateHealth

Things We ❤️: Science Vs.

A doodle wearing headphones holds their phone showing Science Vs. podcast branding.

Here at We ❤️ Health Literacy Headquarters, we’re avid podcast listeners — and you won’t be surprised to learn that health, medicine, and science podcasts are at the top of our listening lists. So you can imagine how excited we were when we discovered a science podcast that presents the facts about a huge variety of (often health-related) topics in a way that’s easy to understand and super fun!

Science Vs. regularly tackles new fads and trends (should we guzzle tons of water to stay healthy?) and dives into long-running debates (do we really need to floss?) The host and producers don’t shy away from more serious topics either (like the misinformation surrounding gender-affirming health care for transgender kids).

No matter the topic, the folks at Science Vs. are pros at explaining it in plain language. In fact, we’ve turned to Science Vs. episodes more than once to help us explain something to our own audiences!

The bottom line: Science Vs. is an entertaining podcast that clearly explains what the science says about a whole host of topics. It’s well worth a listen!


Copy and paste this post to share: Looking for a new podcast? Science Vs. serves up entertaining #PlainLanguage explanations of tricky science-y (and often health-related) topics, says CommunicateHealth: https://bit.ly/49lXefJ @sciencevs #HealthComm #HealthLiteracy

TV Club: Call the Midwife

A doodle gestures to a TV screen with a scene from Call the Midwife on.

We probably don’t have to tell you, dear readers, that there have been some very chilly days as of late. With much of the country walloped by Arctic air and wintry precipitation, we’ve been spending lots of time engaged in one of America’s favorite pastimes: watching television.

So this week we’re suggesting that you check out Call the Midwife (currently on Netflix), the perfect January binge for public health professionals. The show isn’t new — quite the reverse, actually: It’s already been going for an impressive 13 seasons, and it shows no sign of slowing down yet. It fact, BBC has renewed it for at least 2 more seasons.  

And we’re glad to hear it because we ❤️ Call the Midwife! This heartwarming British drama follows a group of nurse midwives working in the underserved Poplar district of London’s East End in the 1950s and 60s. The show was originally based on the very real memoirs of Jennifer Worth, a nurse midwife who trained in Poplar, arriving to home births on her trusty bicycle.

And while the primary duty of the nurse midwives was to provide obstetric care, their work extended far beyond babies. We also see them running community-based health clinics where they counsel patients and distribute health information (hello, health literacy). And they pay close attention to health-adjacent goings-on in the community. In fact, Call the Midwife could be a PSA for community-based public health/health care approaches. The nurse midwives get to know the families they serve in their own homes, in their own neighborhoods. They earn the trust of people in Poplar — they are witnesses to their patients’ needs, challenges, and relationships. They watch, they learn, and they approach their work with humility and respect for the people they serve.  

You could also say Call the Midwife is something of a love letter to vaccines. We see the devastating effects of outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, standard fare in communities like Poplar at the time. We see the nurse midwives promote the benefits of new vaccines as they hold vaccine clinics in the community (trusted messengers, anyone?). And we see the impact of vaccines unfold. The show highlights the importance of other forms of preventive care, too — like cervical cancer screening. Actually, it touches on pretty much everything you can think of in the health space, including some things you don’t often see in hit television shows — like female genital mutilation and incest.

And on a final note, the nurse midwives live at an Anglican convent during their time serving the people of Poplar. We hope you’ll enjoy the dynamic as eager nurse midwives mix with a delightful group of nuns — some, midwives themselves — who don’t always condone the secular women’s life choices.

The bottom line: Call the Midwife is packed with public health goodness, critical health care lessons, and health literacy highlights.


Post about it on X: This week, @CommunicateHlth is bringing you the latest installment of the We ❤️ Health Literacy TV Club — all about Call the Midwife: https://bit.ly/42g7pQk #HealthLiteracy

Health Comm Headlines: Let’s Talk About Ozempic

A doodle reads a newspaper and the headline says, Oh oh oh Ozempic.

If your news feed is anything like ours, dear readers, you’ve probably seen plenty of headlines about Ozempic. This popular medication is part of an emerging class of drugs called GLP-1 receptor agonists that are revolutionizing type 2 diabetes treatment. These drugs can also help people lose weight — and they’re changing the way many health professionals think about, talk about, and treat obesity. Meanwhile, patients are facing big decisions about these medications at a time when they’re so new, even the experts don’t have all the answers.

Sounds like a case for health communicators! So in today’s edition of Health Comm Headlines, we’re looking past the hype to explore how Ozempic and similar drugs are affecting people’s everyday lives. Onto the headlines!

  • FDA Approves Zepbound, a New Obesity Drug That Will Take On Wegovy (NPR)
    While Ozempic dominated headlines in 2023, pharmaceutical companies are racing to develop even more effective diabetes and weight loss medications. In November of last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Eli Lilly’s new weight loss drug, Zepbound. (It’s already sold as a type 2 diabetes medication under the name Mounjaro.) In clinical trials, people who took Zepbound lost an average of 20% of their body weight — results on par with bariatric surgery.
  • Obesity in the Age of Ozempic (Vox)
    Over the past decade, conversations about weight stigma, diet culture, and bias in health care have entered the mainstream, slowly shifting long-held assumptions about the relationship between weight and health. With the arrival of Ozempic and other GLP-1 medications, however, a new narrative has taken center stage: Obesity is a chronic health condition that needs to be managed with lifelong treatment. Some people who are taking GLP-1 meds struggle to reconcile these conflicting ideas about weight and figure out the best way to care for their health.
  • Supply Problems and Insurance Issues Make Popular Weight-Loss Drugs Hard to Get (AP)
    Imagine wondering “Will I be able to get my medicine this time?” every time you need a refill. Due to surging demand, pharmacies can’t keep GLP-1 meds in stock, leaving many people scrambling. Pricing is another barrier: These drugs can cost more than $1,000 per month out of pocket, and some insurance companies won’t cover them (or will only cover them for people with type 2 diabetes). These challenges have sparked ethical debates about who “should” have access to GLP-1 medications. If these drugs are only accessible to people who have certain health insurance plans — or thousands of dollars to spend on meds — health disparities linked to diabetes and obesity may continue to grow.
  • We Need to Talk About Teens and Weight-Loss Drugs (Romper)
    In 2023, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) released new guidelines for treating childhood obesity, noting that medication can be an effective treatment option for some teens who’ve struggled to lose weight through other methods. The topic of weight loss medication for teens raises complex questions about consent and body autonomy. To add even more complexity, we don’t know how GLP-1 meds may affect people’s health years down the road. Do people who lose weight on these medications really need to continue taking them for the rest of their lives? For many, the long-term plan is unclear.
  • How a Canadian Scientist and a Venomous Lizard Helped Pave the Way for Ozempic (Global News)
    If you’re not tired of reading about GLP-1 medications yet, join us for this fascinating look back at scientific history. This article chronicles the breakthroughs that led to Ozempic’s development. (Spoiler alert: A Gila monster plays a key role.)

The bottom line: Ozempic and other GLP-1 medications are revolutionizing type 2 diabetes treatment — and changing the way health professionals approach obesity. As health communicators, we can help people make sense of these new medications and make informed decisions.

Continue reading “Health Comm Headlines: Let’s Talk About Ozempic”

Health Comm Headlines: 2023 in Review

A doodle holds up a newspaper. The headline reads Goodbye 2023... Hello 2024.

Happy New Year, dear readers! Here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ, we’re looking forward to another year of health comm adventures — and we’re thrilled that you’re along for the ride with us. To start us off, we compiled just a few of the health topics that made headlines in 2023 — and added a couple things to watch for in 2024. Enjoy!

The bottom line: It’s bound to be another eventful year — and we’ll be here advocating for the clear communication and access to resources that everyone deserves to protect their health.

Continue reading “Health Comm Headlines: 2023 in Review”

Happy Holidays from the We ❤️ Health Literacy Team!

A truck drives across the screen against a backdrop of snowy mountains. The text reads Happy holidays from the CH Family!

As is always the case this time of year, we’re feeling so fortunate to be part of this health literacy community. Thank you, dear readers, for another year of thoughtful, inspirational conversation — we simply couldn’t do what we do without you! Wishing you and yours a fun-filled, healthy holiday season.

Happiest holidays from all of us at CommunicateHealth!

How Can Health Communicators Respond to Self-Diagnosis?

A confused doodle holds up a phone. The screen reads, Top 5 Signs You Might Have Cat Head.

Over the past few years, self-diagnosis has become a hot topic. Social media platforms like TikTok have created new ways for people to learn about disabilities, chronic illnesses, and mental health conditions. With all this content about oft-stigmatized topics at our fingertips, some health professionals have shared concerns that more people are diagnosing themselves via online research.

If your health literacy alarm bells are going off, dear readers, you’re in good company. As health communicators, we know there’s a ton of misinformation on social media! And when people are overwhelmed or have limited context about a topic, they may take social content at face value (see also: health literacy is a state, not a trait). An inaccurate self-diagnosis could steer someone down the wrong path, leading them to seek care that doesn’t match their needs. Plus, people need a formal diagnosis to access some treatment options, accommodations, and other resources.

So, with all this misinformation online, it’s tempting to dismiss self-diagnosis. But while we don’t want to minimize the risks, we think it’s worth considering the reasons why people may self-diagnose. Because of bias in our health care system, it can be harder for many people to get accurate diagnoses, including people of color, women, transgender or nonbinary people, and people at a higher weight. Also, getting a diagnosis for tricky-to-identify conditions often means seeing multiple specialists, which can be complicated — and very expensive. And for many people, especially in rural areas, it can be hard to even find a specialist close to home.

For some people, self-diagnosis can be a stepping stone to a formal diagnosis. Others may choose not to pursue a diagnosis because having that “label” on their medical record could lead to discrimination. For example, some U.S. states have passed laws that restrict access to gender-affirming care for people with specific diagnoses. Until and unless medical discrimination becomes a thing of the past, self-diagnosis will continue to fill unmet needs. If we don’t acknowledge that reality, we risk alienating people who may already feel unheard.

So what’s a health communicator to do when self-diagnosis enters the conversation? We have some ideas:

  • Meet people where they are. Acknowledge common barriers to diagnosis like bias in the health care system, long wait times, and expensive assessments.
  • Stick to the facts. If you’re addressing misinformation, focus on sharing reliable info — and avoid commenting on people’s personal experiences.
  • Share guidance to help people advocate for themselves at the doctor’s office.
  • Explain the benefits and risks of pursuing a formal diagnosis so readers can make an informed decision based on their own situation.
  • Suggest ways to make diagnosis more affordable, like sliding scale providers or organizations that provide funding for people seeking a diagnosis.
  • Recommend specialists who have experience working with your audience, like doctors who specialize in diagnosing learning disabilities in adults, for example.
  • Clarify who qualifies for services. If your organization provides services for people with specific health conditions, note if people need a formal diagnosis to qualify.

If we come to the conversation with empathy, we can build trust and empower our audiences to make informed decisions about seeking a diagnosis.

The bottom line: Self-diagnosis is a nuanced topic — but by addressing barriers to diagnosis and approaching the conversation with empathy, we can empower our audiences to make informed decisions that are right for them.


Post about it on X: This week, @CommunicateHlth explores how health communicators can address #SelfDiagnosis with #Empathy: https://bit.ly/41eB2kx #DEI #HealthComm #HealthLiteracy