Author's Response to Cunningham.

The article refutes the arguments raised by Nicholas Cunningham concerning the commentary on the mythology of international health planning. The author argues that Cunningham has misrepresented his points. On the issue of rural development, he asserts that development projects invariably operate at levels of resource and skill input. He further contends that the said projects do not constitute development because they do not widely effect distribution. On the issue of prevention, he points out that the cost-effectiveness of measles immunization has been questioned because of its massive expansion without evaluation.