Rebuff to England's "Myths".

The article offers a response to Roger England's commentary on the mythology of international health planning. The author asserts that the comments of England provoked reconsideration of the prioritization of rural health services development, basic preventive methods, regionalization of care, auxiliary-based services, and reversal of brain drain. He points out that England's comment on rural development seems contradictory. He also claims that England has rejected reasonable approaches to the provision of health services in developing countries.