Re: Discusison on NACP III: Lessons from NACP II

[Guest guest]

Dear moderator,

We are at the end of NACP II and designing NACPIII.I agree with Mr. Rajeev

sadanandan that we should learn from our experiences in the past. We have learnt

(?) a lot from our experiences of national TB and leprosy control programs and

the revised programs. The best way to counter stigma is to provide treatment and

avoid isolation.So we should have an integrated and functional program which

have vertical components.

The medical response ( remember this is not equal to airdropping ART) should not

be confused with just providing medicines. We should see HIV as an opportunity

to scale up our health care delivery system, integrate testing,counseling and

continuum of care with health care delivery system.

In places we don't have any effective health care system , what is the use of

HIV care centers? Also I don't understand why pretest counseling should not be

important before a biopsy when you suspect an inoperable cancer and why

counseling is not important when you see a patients who is destined to live with

mutilating rheumatoid arthritis. HIV has helped us to sensitize ourselves with

issues we were ignoring all these days.

Also NACPIII should not miss the opportunity to plan things ahead of time and

get outdated towards the end of the program. This happened for NACPII in which

medical care was not given any importance and

the country was not ready for ART when it was introduced.We should have

reevaluation of program targets atleast every year and plan it according to the

changing trends in the epidemic.

So in short NACP III should not end up as a program in isolation it should be

able to address the needs and provide them in integration with other programs

(atleast RNTCP,STD and family and mental health programs)and it should be

updated frequently.

Dr ajith

E-mail: <trc_ajisudha@...>