Page 14 of 43
There was quite a discussion on the issue of mental health and some support for including it
in the current priorities that will be considered at the high-level meeting. This was a theme
at some of the regional consultations. The strong links between mental health disorders,
including substance use disorders, and other NCDs was emphasized.
It was noted that some governments also want to include mental health as part of the
current work. Another participant noted that all chronic diseases will benefit both
immediately and in the future if we capitalize on the political opportunity afforded by the
high-level meeting. Dr Ala Alwan from WHO briefly outlined the key reasons why mental
health is not included in the current focus:
−
The Global Strategy on NCDs, which dates from 2000, is focused on the four main
diseases – cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancers and chronic respiratory diseases –
and these are also the focus of resolutions agreed by Member States related to the
UN high-level meeting
−
Together these four diseases account for around 80% of NCD-related deaths
globally.
−
These four diseases share the same main risk factors so prevention approaches are
similar, while prevention approaches
for mental health disorders
Dr Alwan noted that improvements to health care will benefit both mental health disorders
and the priority NCDs: health workforce training, access to essential drugs, health
information systems and health financing.
The question was raised as to how the global response to NCD prevention and control will
be funded – the figure of USD9 billion per annum has been proposed by some
commentators. On a related note, access to affordable medicines in low-income countries
was identified as a key challenge by several participants. This will require solutions involving
both the research-based and generic pharmaceutical industries, but ultimately depends on the
prudent policies on the part of governments.
Panellists commented that funding will require political leadership that goes beyond
ministers of health, and clearly innovative financing mechanism will be needed.
Governments will need to identify funding sources, and need to receive a clear message that
this would be a very good investment given the potential health care costs averted. It was
noted that the private sector is also a significant potential source of funds through
appropriate partnerships.
There was a call for extending education about NCD prevention to lay people, who are able
to undertake quite a lot of the preventive activities, which don't require trained health
professionals: public health is everybody's concern. The value of extending education to
children was also emphasized.
Page 15 of 43
Several specific points were made to which the panellists then responded. First, the
significance of the relationship between NCDs and ageing was highlighted as a potential way
to engage finance and other government sectors. Second, the question was specifically asked
about whether NCDs should be included in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).
Finally, the point was made that, for youth, NCDs are the social justice challenge of their
generation much as HIV/AIDS was for the previous one. They have an important and
unique contribution to make, not least the use of social media to build momentum.
There were different views on whether NCDs should be included in the MDGs. It was
pointed out that in the last MDG review in 2010, NCDs were not added to the current
MDG indicators. However, there was agreement that an accountability framework with
NCD-related goals and targets, and monitoring of progress in achieving them, are essential.
There was a call for meaningful patient engagement in decisions about both policy and
practice. Patients are well connected to their communities and have an important role to
play in raising awareness and improving health literacy.
The analogy of the health care process – taking a history, doing the relevant diagnostic tests,
making a diagnosis and then treating appropriately – was used to frame the need to clearly
convince governments of the need to invest in NCD prevention. The point was made that
while the health care system 'owns' diseases, nobody owns primary prevention. This
underscores the need to intervene in non-health care settings, in particular in educational
institutions.
To close, the moderator asked each of the panellists to comment on the lessons from
addressing the HIV/AIDs challenge for the current NCD one, and to identify their single
top priority for the high-level meeting in September. Mr Wooldrigde noted that at the
World Economic Forum in January 2011, the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon had
emphasized the importance of political action and commitment in moving the NCD agenda
forward and that this was critical in making progress on HIV/AIDS.
Regarding the lessons learnt, it was noted that NCDs are a much bigger problem that
HIV/AIDS could ever be so the challenge is even greater. Thinking about NCDs as an
epidemic, as happened with HIV/AIDS, is important as it emphasizes the reversibility of the
problem. Mobilizing a wide base of support through broad-based partnerships was critical
to the success of the response to HIV/AIDS. Public-private partnerships can work, but
require a 'grown-up discussion' that we still need to have in the NCD arena. Time-bound
and specific commitments were essential for making progress, as was regular monitoring and
reporting of progress towards their achievement. It is important not to set different
conditions in competition, and a holistic approach is needed that caters to the needs of
people who often have both communicable and noncommunicable diseases simultaneously.
Finally, innovative resourcing and procurement systems have been developed that provide a
template for the NCD response.