The minister’s candour

The Page 1 anchor story ‘Minister writes in Lancet, flays health policies’ (IE, October 6) should have treated the threat of chron...

The Page 1 anchor story ‘Minister writes in Lancet, flays health policies’ (IE, October 6) should have treated the threat of chronic disease epidemics in India as well as the stand of the health minister with greater respect and understanding. As the principal author of the Lancet article, I wish to clarify issues of content and context that your story missed.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) released a landmark report on October 5, drawing global attention to the huge health and economic burdens that major chronic diseases (heart diseases, strokes, cancers, diabetes) are increasingly imposing on developing countries. The report especially highlighted the massive costs that countries like India and China would incur if these epidemics went unchecked.

Simultaneously, the Lancet, one of the two highest ranking medical journals in the world, published a special issue on chronic diseases, focusing on developing countries. India and China formed the subject of centerpiece articles. With 53 per cent of deaths in India caused by chronic diseases, the need for effective measures was noted to be urgent.

Story continues below this ad

Based on a request from WHO, the article on China was co-authored by the Chinese Vice-Minister for Health. Similarly the report on India was co-authored by the Indian Health Minister. It was appropriate that Dr Ramadoss, a medical professional himself, guided the preparation of this article, which was published after the usual peer review process. It is customary for medical journals to list the senior-most author as the last author. That honour deservedly went to Dr Ramadoss.

The headline of your story stated that the health minister ‘‘flayed’’ health policies. The article, in fact, describes how health policy must evolve to meet the mounting threat of chronic diseases. The priorities thus far have rightly been focused on control of infectious diseases and protection of maternal and child health. Action must now be upscaled in health promotion and chronic disease prevention.

The health minister deserves to be congratulated for eschewing platitude and adopting a professional approach to policy and programme development. He has set a remarkable precedent by engaging openly in policy analysis in a respected and scientific forum.

The Lancet article is not ‘‘critical’’ of India’s health policies. Candour should not be mistaken for criticism. The article cites established programmes for cancer control, applauds successes in blindness prevention and records the fact that India is now recognised as a global leader in tobacco control. It lists new initiatives for prevention and control of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes and points to the great potential of the National Rural Health Mission.

Story continues below this ad

It appears the media finds it easy to lampoon a politician but difficult to appreciate a minister who takes a public stance on policy issues in a professional forum. Would your paper be equally facetious if any minister heading an economic ministry spoke or wrote candidly of difficulties in the country’s economic situation and suggested ways to overcome them? Why should you treat health and its minister differently?

The writer is professor and head, Dept. of Cardiology, AIIMS