The economic recession is technically over, at least by appellation. But the road to recovery is a laborious and gradual process, and social programs are often hit the hardest. The need is greater than ever, while financial resources are scarce. However, there is no dearth of willing, eager workers: specifically, global health workers. With a contracted economy, there is no better time to tap into the vast number of recent college graduates, idealistic and ravenous for social change. As the products of a recent boom in university international health programs, these global health aficionados are quite possibly the best solution to America’s global health challenges, for now, the next 15 years, and generations to come.

Let me tell you why. With at least 46 American universities graduating students from their emergent global health programs, there are more young people than ever, eager to engage in international work. But these graduates face a disproportional lack of opportunity. Students can participate in the Peace Corps or international volunteering, but paid positions in global health are reserved for a highly specialized few. As such, many recent graduates resort to more lucrative entry‐level jobs with pharmaceutical companies and consulting firms. Herein lies a genuine missed opportunity. Recent graduates are in many ways the best suited for work in international health. If for nothing else, they are some of the most itinerant, low‐maintenance members of society, accustomed to living in disheveled college homes and subsisting on Ramen noodles and coffee. Young workers can serve as a relatively inexpensive, but impactful, boost in sheer manpower across the globe.

But beyond the low standards which recent university graduates are willing to endure, I believe they are equipped with assets and skill sets that current American global health programs should utilize. Students of international health learn in the context of globalization, collaboration, and critical analysis; meanwhile, both American and international health programs consistently fall short as a result of independent, unquestioned action. Through unpretentious young ambassadors, the necessary partnerships between the United States, the European Union, and international health organizations will thrive, forming global health policies and initiatives that not only seek global change, but also are fundamentally global from inception.

Some may scoff at the suggestion that an unskilled twenty‐something could immediately undertake roles in the international arena. But the deprofessionalization of healthcare could be the key to improving global health outcomes. Models of community healthcare around the world have repeatedly produced drastic improvements in health conditions: HIV/AIDS patients are reminded by community health partners to take their daily regimens of antiretrovirals; women learn the importance of breast feeding from community lactation consultants; diarrheal disease is controlled by solutions of salt and sugar, a technique taught by community health workers. The model of peer health can reach all corners of the globe; and further, these programs can be administered and monitored by young adults.

Recent graduates can also work on the international level through apprenticeships. While the school is an adequate way to learn, it is a traditional and sometimes limited model to account for the way in which one gains knowledge. Aspiring nurses, doctors, epidemiologists, and policy‐makers alike can learn from experienced professionals in the field. With university tuition at crippling highs, graduates of bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral programs are often constrained by their debts. A new model of education that incorporates more work and less school could both bolster the number of healthcare workers and increase the quality of professionals.

But giving young professionals the opportunity to work in global health is not only beneficial in the short term. By investing in future professionals, global health initiatives will thrive in 15 years under the leadership of seasoned, innovative workers. The United States will be able to rely on well‐rounded global health professionals, rather than an often‐fragmented combination of clinicians and administrators. Further, by investing more American professionals in international healthcare, our country’s failing domestic initiatives will be subjected to a more discerning, internationally cultured perspective. We can learn from the strengths and successes of our global partners, accepting that truly global healthcare requires the United States to address its domestic shortcomings.

This year, the newly establish Global Health Corps has sent its inaugural group of fellows abroad as partners with non‐profits and NGOs. This organization— created for young professionals, by young professionals—is a model for the future of global health. In the spirit of Barack Obama’s push for community service and social change, it is time that the field of global health takes advantage of the eager, fresh perspectives of its youngest generation of workers. Believe me: we will gladly accept the responsibility.