Inclusive Epidemiology

The starting point of the discussion in the parallel session on inclusive epidemiology was how to sustain and improve the research that has been done. Everybody agreed that we can try as best as we can, but we need money and time to ensure our efforts have results.
First, the discussion focused on where to find resources, and that it is also important to look outside traditional funding mechanisms to start making an impact. It is important to tell that even though migrants and ethnic minorities are relatively small groups, research that focusses on them is good for the overall health of the population, because migrants are among the most vulnerable.

Then the discussion shifted to how to define the most vulnerable. Is it a highly educated expat? Of only migrants from lower socio-economic backgrounds? How long (or how many generations) does someone have to be in this country to no longer be vulnerable?

Next, we talked about how to prevent that research into minorities and migrants becomes highly politicized. Of this, there are two sides: on the one hand, research can be hijacked by the media, who we cannot control. On the other hand, there is our relationship with the participants. After the studies in Spring 2020 that showed that Amsterdam Zuid-Oost was disproportionally affected by Coved-19, a lot of the inhabitants of Zuid-Oost felt that they were publically shamed and stereotyped. It is therefore extremely important to continue to invest in the trust that researchers build between themselves and the participants of their studies. We need to feed our research back into the communities.

Lastly, plans were made to write an impact statement, that could serve as a starting point for a lobby group that would strive for more (national) funding.