Clinical versus population-wide donor services.

摘要

In their important and critical paper, Monica Das Gupta and Lawrence Gostin (April 18, p 1395)1 argue that donors and international aid agencies should give priority to population-wide services over clinical services. I agree. Of concern is the fact that most donor and international aid agencies support health services that address a segment of a population (such as refugees, internally displaced people, and disaster-affected populations), effectively giving these individuals more advanced and high-quality services than the host communities. These discriminatory services are creating ill feeling between the different communities and are making vulnerable populations the targets of violence and further discrimination. Therefore focusing on population-wide health services could have a role in peace and reconciliation in conflict-affected areas, beyondthe wider public health benefits.