- Need for reflexivity while designing engagement with public health programs - Learnings gleaned from observing such an engagement in the context of a national program for elimination of a disease X among historically disadvantaged populations - Scientist in natural sciences with a POC technology for disease X; Forms private company to make their innovation available to markets (as is often pushed for in many big research orgs); Regulatory approvals somewhat available, but regulatory approvals for diagnostic devises in India is quite problematic - on one hand need for "less regulation" (on ensuring speed for devices that need to be urgenlty made available) vs need for "more regulation" for devices that are potentially poor in quality or even potentially harmful by giving poor quality readings (of which they are many!) - In this case, the device in question for disease X shows poor performance in lab validation studies by independent person --> reported to the PI but no action - Instead the scientist pushes for partnership with NGOs & CBOs (who are not really equipped to be able to tell this apart) & banking on the credibilty of the scientists' institute (a national level govt one!)  - Meanwhile, generally not showing up for meetings on not seen on-ground, no effort at understanding challegnes of pepole in the health services/CHWs; No engagement with public health as such in terms of understanding the program - Scientist seeks large grant from PSU CSR who has not done any due diligence on the tech nor the partnership; High influence on the public health program at the state level to buy their tech by pushing it forward in the (credible) name of the govt institution; even the institutional internal commitee raises objections but sidelined through social networks--->Program deploys a very large number of kits to screen people - Ethically, given the engagement with historically disadvantaged population, the need to use POCTs that yield best results needed --> so that effort at engaging with communities is not wasted & also because much more than everyone else this community deserves the best available & appropriate tech - not experimental ones! What was done: Concerns shared via letter the program; some corrective action initiated by the program head, which is encouraging _Internal note: Consider comment for IJME to analyse CoIs and how this operates in the context of researcher-NGO-CBO-academic experts-entrepreneur-State-CSR relationships_