Academic epidemiology has failed to develop the scientific methods and the knowledge base to support the fundamental public health mission of preventing disease and promoting health through organized community efforts. As a basic science of public health, epidemiology should attempt to understand health and disease from a community and ecologic perspective as a consequence of how society is organized and behaves, what impact social and economic forces have on disease incidence rates, and what community actions will be effective in altering incidence rates. However, as taught in most textbooks and as widely practiced by academicians, epidemiology has become a biomedical discipline focused on the distribution and determinants of disease in groups of individuals who happen to have some common characteristics, exposures, or diseases. The ecology of human health has not been addressed, and the societal context in which disease occurs has been either disregarded or deliberately abstracted from consideration. By essentially assuming that risk factors for disease in individuals can be summed to understand the causes of disease in populations, academic epidemiology has limited itself to a narrow biomedical perspective, thereby committing the biomedical fallacy of inferring that disease in populations can be understood by studying risk factors for disease in individuals. Epidemiology should be redefined as a study of the distribution and societal determinants of the health status of populations. This definition provides a stronger link to the primary mission of public hearth and places an appropriate emphasis on the social, economic, environmental, and cultural determinants of population hearth. Epidemiology must cross the boundaries of other population sciences and add to its scope a macro-epidemiology, a study of causes from a truly population perspective, considering health and disease within the context of the total human environment. Am J Epidemiol 1997;145:479–84.