Clash of two health expert committees

Friday, 8 January 2021 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

It has been reported in media that some members of the previous HEC clashed with the present HEC over the decision of the later on burial.

Minister Dilum Amunugama in an interview with Headline News had said that any committee can recommend anything, but the final decision was with the Government because people didn’t vote for expert committees but for the Government.

Meanwhile, Minister Dr. Sudarshani Fernandopulle is trying to hide a pumpkin in a handful of cooked rice by saying a second committee was not appointed at all. We also see some mudslinging attempts against the members of the present HEC.

We are a literate nation guided by scientific findings, and this is the image we have built up over the past internationally, but this image is beginning to suffer the worst. We will not be surprised if the international community soon brands us as the illiterate nation guided by superstitions.

The Health Ministry letter of appointment to the present HEC clearly says: “With the availability of limited evidence at the beginning, mandatory cremation has been identified as the sole method of safe disposal… and with the development of more information and knowledge, the Ministry of Health has identified the need for revisiting the guidelines initially developed.” Amidst these reasonable justifications by Health Ministry, some still question why the present committee was appointed. The present HEC is comprised of virologists, bacteriologists and immunologists of high expertise.

This committee, as reported by Daily Mirror, was also questioned on its findings by a panel comprising Health Ministers Pavithra Wanniarachchi and Dr. Sudarshani Fernandopulle, epidemiologists and health officials.

Therefore, the present committee was appointed on justifiable reasons to revisit the first guidelines. Here ‘revisit’ means ‘to talk or think about something again, with the intention of improving it or changing it’. No reason whatsoever for the previous committee to arbitrarily argue with the present committee and engage in mudslinging.

Therefore, I sincerely hope that the interested parties will accept the findings of the present committee without further misleading the people here and abroad.

M. A. Kaleel

Kalmunai