3 Possible Sources:

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002181
     This source is an academic writing in the field of public health, as it is new research. It has the credibility of the CDC. The (numerous) professionals who authored keep the diction intelligent and relating to an educated audience. It is still, however, still understandable to me, a fairly new student to Public Health. The information is clearly organized by headings, therefore you can find the information and purpose you are looking for quite easily. Those facts are surface analysis but it will help me dig deeper into the next.

https://search.lib.uiowa.edu/primo-explore/fulldisplay?docid=TN_gale_ofg364331344&context=PC&vid=01IOWA&lang=en_US&search_scope=default_scope&adaptor=primo_central_multiple_fe&tab=default_tab&query=any,contains,public%20health&sortby=rank
     The second link is a peer reviewed journal from our library. Being peer reviewed, multiple professionals have studied this writing over and given approval. It is rather on the non-academic side. This article shows how people writing for promotion of public health may have to write in an argument style to promote their purpose.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/978-1-137-46745-4_6
     I particularly like this source so far. It does write about the past, but it was written in 2016, making its relevancy appropriate. The author, who is female this time, is talking of the history of public health, and the effects it has today. She is reporting on many aspects of her field of study, but like many public health professionals, there is an argument for the need of public health, so I can study the language of these professionals in the persuasive style still.