Re: India to cross-check AIDS numbers

[Guest guest]

Friends,

It is a good development that number of HIV persons in India shall be

estimated. It is even late to start up such a thing. Why only a

comparative estimation, why not such exrcise from time totime so that

concern authorities will also think twice before making clams that no.

of infection is drcreased from this figure to that figure, and

claiming that the reduction is effect of their intervention/prevention

programme.

Estimation may be in some particular locations because we may not have

the amount of money to invested in such an exercise for time again

again. But comparative assessments should be there. NGOs, individual

experts should be encouraged to to do so.

That way people can se the real picture of transmission trend. The

manipulation of figures by agencies like SACS by deleting, ommision

and addition without any scientific basis but solely to support their

claim of success in their intervention is leading us to nowhere.

Size estimation should beased on science not not subjective judgement.

Ngos who have professional expertise ned to converge on this issue for

the benefit of all the agencies including positive group and drug user

group.

Dr. Jayanta Kumae

Manipur

E-mail: <jayanta_dr@...>

[Guest guest]

Dear Readers,

Anyone with even a basic knowledge of surveillance principles would know

that the methods used by India to guestimate the numbers of infected are

seriously flawed.

Programs for better survielance have been written by skilled people. They

have aims, objectives, inputs and outputs and monitoring and appraisal.

They have been prepared after careful research and they are now gathering

dust in departmental offices.

Whenever their existence is challenged the author is called to provide

copies and always they are located gathering dust in departments whose

commitment to avoid wasting money on a health problem that seeks to help

people who will only die anyway, means that they are never actioned.

International comments often provoke the counters to revise their estimates

as they recently did changing the numbers from 4.2 million to 5.1 million

whilst at the same time leaving out a whole State from the official NACO

records. If that State was added it would have the highest numbers of

infected people and the C.M. would rather not have that statistic hanging

around his neck.

From the vantage point that I have, it would have to be nearer 14 to 15

million right now and when the government realises that it is as serious as

that it will have jumped to 20 to 22 million.

Gross domestic product will fall by several percentage points and a crisis

will become evident.

Politicians will say " why were we not informed " and the answer of course

will be that when the information sessions for MLA's numbering several

hundred were set up for briefing sessions in the parliament only 26 of them

turned up.

This week we have been examining initiatives in this connection in Jaipur as

a working group and quite some numbers of discussions have been had to

streamline the processes of service delivery and early detection. Models are

being worked through. Best practice is being examined but still intense

fear-based stigma and discrimination deters many from taking the simple test

to determine their status and if necessary change their behaviour. That part

of course is a community problem. We have to stop being scared of what is

better known and not so frightening and take steps to actively work on

keeping negative people negative and caring for those who are positive in

such a way as to prolong their lives and their usefulness.

Only then will be see the situation start to show promise. Examples of best

practice are being noted and should be being shared. Thanks to the author

who is also showing concern.

Geoffrey

E-mail: <gheaviside@...>