Chikungunya cases surge in Telangana; Centre and State report contradictory figures
The data was shared in Parliament on July 25 by Anupriya Patel, Minister of State for Health and Family Welfare, in response to a question on the status of vector-borne diseases across the country. According to the Minister's written reply in the Lok Sabha, several States and Union Territories have seen marginal rise in seasonal diseases.
'Cases of other vector-borne diseases marginally increased in some of the States and Union Territories due to enhanced surveillance and paperless reporting on Integrated Health Information Platform (IHIP) in 2025 as compared to corresponding period in 2024,' the Minister's Lok Sabha response said.
But Telangana's Directorate of Public Health (DPH) has raised concerns about the accuracy of the chikungunya numbers cited by the Centre. 'The actual number of cases recorded until June is around 240, and those too have been effectively controlled to prevent any further rise. Regular monitoring is being carried out and the situation remains under control.,' said Amar Singh Naik, Additional Director in DPH.
He added, 'The number presented in the Lok Sabha is wrong. We don't know how that data was generated, but it is not consistent with our records.'
Meanwhile, the Minister's response stated that proactive steps have been taken in anticipation of seasonal outbreaks with the onset of the monsoon. These include intensified surveillance for early detection of vector-borne diseases, anti-larval operations in mosquito breeding hotspots and awareness campaigns at the community level. States, including Telangana, have been supplied with diagnostic kits, treatment materials and budgetary assistance under the National Health Mission.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Shivamogga MP meets Finance Minister, seeks inclusion of Kollur under PRASHAD scheme
MP for Shivamogga B.Y. Raghavendra on Wednesday met Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in Delhi, discussed key projects concerning Karnataka, and sought her support for the inclusion of Kollur in Udupi distrit under the PRASHAD (Pilgrimage Rejuvenation and Spiritual Augmentation Drive) scheme. A communique released by the MP's office said that Mr. Raghavendra requested the Minister to support the proposal to tap the tourism potential of Kollur under the PRASHAD scheme. Kollur was known for the Mookambika Temple, and development of the place with an eye on tourism would ensure growth in the region, he stated. Mr. Raghavendra requested the Minister to grant funds to set up wellness centres at Shivamogga, Mangaluru, and Udupi under the Central Government Health Scheme and recruit people for the centres. The Lok Sabha member said that he had a fruitful discussion with the Minister, and he was confident that she would consider his pleas and extend her support for the benefit of people in Karnataka.
The Hindu
7 hours ago
- The Hindu
Closure of Jan Aushadi Kendras: Karnataka's Health Minister justifies move, says it is to ensure free medicines
Justifying Karnataka's move to close Jan Aushadi Kendras on the premises of government-run hospitals, Health Minister Dinesh Gundu Rao wrote to Union Health Minister J.P. Nadda on Tuesday stating that the move was intended to ensure free and assured supply of essential medicines to patients. Responding to the Union Health Minister's letter to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on the issue, Mr. Rao has said the intention to close the kendras only on the premises of government hospitals is to reduce the out-of-pocket expenditure for patients. 'The decision was taken to prevent doctors from directing patients to purchase medicines from these commercial outlets, thereby ensuring they are not denied free medicines available at the hospitals,' he said in the letter. Karnataka ranks among the top States in terms of the number of operational Jan Aushadi Kendras, with over 1,417 currently functioning. Of these, only 184 are located on the premises of government hospitals under the Department of Health and Family Welfare, while the rest operate independently outside government hospital campuses. Free supply Stating that the Karnataka government is committed to the free supply of all essential medicines, as listed in the Essential Medicines List (EML), across public healthcare institutions, Mr. Rao's letter said: 'To streamline public healthcare delivery and eliminate the risk of patients being denied medicines at government facilities, the State government has directed that prescriptions by government doctors be limited to medicines available within the hospital supply.' 'Medicines are regularly provided to government hospitals through Karnataka State Medical Supplies Corporation Limited (KSMSCL). Hospitals have also been allocated sufficient funds and have standing instructions to purchase medicines locally in case of any shortage. This effort is aimed at ensuring universal access to essential medicines for patients visiting government hospitals — entirely free of cost,' Mr. Rao said in the letter. Asserting that the decision does not restrict the operation of Jan Aushadhi Kendras outside government hospital premises, Mr. Rao said citizens are free to access them as per their choice. 'This move is primarily aimed at benefiting poor and marginalised patients who rely heavily on government hospitals for healthcare,' the Minister said in the letter. Subsidised rate Highlighting the affordability of medicines sold under the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP), Mr. Rao noted that the scheme offers medicines at prices 50% to 80% lower than branded alternatives. PMBJP is implemented by the Pharma and Medical Bureau of India (PMBI), a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. Mr. Rao urged Mr. Nadda to direct PMBI to supply medicines to Karnataka's Health Department at the same rates offered to Jan Aushadi Kendras. 'This will go a long way in supporting the State's free drug supply initiative,' he added.
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
Abortion law faces heat in HC over mental health clause
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday issued notice to the Union government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a 57-year-old Hisar resident challenging the legal provision that allows abortions based on presumed mental health injury without requiring evaluation by a psychiatrist. Deepak Kumar, the petitioner, has sought a declaration that a key clause under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971, particularly Section 3(2) and Explanation 1, is unconstitutional. He argues that the provision violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by allowing gynaecologists to terminate pregnancies on mental health grounds, even though they are not qualified to assess psychological conditions. He has also asked the court to rule that abortions should only be allowed when the life of the woman or the fetus is in immediate danger, not in cases of failed contraception or presumed mental anguish. The PIL, filed through advocates Dr Pankaj Nanhera, Sanchar Anand, Nitin Verma, and Yogesh Vashista, came up for hearing before the division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, which issued notice to the Union government and fixed the next hearing for September 16. Section 3(2) of the MTP Act allows a registered medical practitioner to terminate a pregnancy if it risks the woman's life or may cause 'grave injury' to her physical or mental health. For pregnancies up to 20 weeks, the opinion of one doctor is sufficient; between 20 and 24 weeks, two doctors must concur for certain categories of women. Explanation 1 to this section presumes that if a pregnancy results from the failure of contraceptive methods, the resulting mental anguish is automatically considered a grave mental health injury, making abortion legally permissible. The PIL argues that: • Gynaecologists are not trained to assess mental health and should not be given the power to presume psychological harm. • Only psychiatrists can evaluate whether a woman is experiencing mental anguish severe enough to justify an abortion. • The automatic presumption that contraceptive failure causes grave mental injury is arbitrary and may lead to misuse of the law. • The law lacks clear definitions of what qualifies as 'grave injury' to mental health, giving doctors unchecked discretion. The petitioner contends that these provisions enable abortions in situations that fall outside the core intent of the MTP Act, and that such broad presumptions may undermine fetal rights and open doors to female feticide. Among other reliefs, Deepak Kumar has requested the court to: • Declare Section 3(2) and its Explanation 1 unconstitutional. • Clarify that 'grave injury' to mental health should not include distress caused by unintended pregnancies due to failed contraception. • Limit the scope of legal abortions to life-threatening situations for the woman or fetus. The court has admitted the petition and listed it for further hearing on September 16.
