74 needs for specialized medical attention to be met, and there was a shortage of medicines; there were no educational, training or work programs; access to information was restricted; newspapers, magazines, radio and television were prohibited; the inmates had the right to a weekly visit by direct family members, but, since the prison was very remote, the inmates only received visits two or three times a year. 343 Agents of the Peruvian National Police were in charge of the prison’s internal and external security and members of the Peruvian Army also helped provide external security. 344 204. It is on record that, while Gladys Espinoza was at the Yanamayo Prison, reports on her health were prepared on August 24 345 and December 17, 1999. 346 The former indicated that she was “in apparent general good health” and she was diagnosed as being “clinically health.” The latter indicated that she had reported having “headaches, dizziness [and] nauseas”; she was diagnosed as having “vertiginous syndrome” and “allergic dermatitis,” treatment was prescribed and it was recommended that she be evaluated by a neurologist, while it was recorded that she was “in apparent general good health.” Gladys Espinoza has stated that, during the time she spent at the Yanamayo Prison she had bronchopneumonia, she was diagnosed with a brain injury, and advised to undergo a tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which was never carried out, and owing to the intense headaches, dizziness and vertigos she took “Sildenafil, Tonopah and Gravol (by injection).” 347 205. The Court has established that, under Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention, all those deprived of liberty have the right to live in detention conditions that are compatible with their personal dignity. In addition, the State must ensure the right to life and to personal integrity of those deprived of liberty because it occupies a special position of guarantor with regard to such persons, since the prison authorities have total control over them. 348 Likewise, the Court has indicated that prolonged isolation and incommunicado are, in themselves, forms of cruel and inhuman treatment (supra para. 186). 206. The Court has also indicated that the State has the obligation to safeguard the health and well-being of prisoners, providing them, inter alia, with any medical care they require, and to ensure that the manner and method of deprivation of liberty do not exceed the inevitable level of suffering inherent in detention. 349 Thus, the State has the duty to provide detainees with regular medical checkups and adequate care and treatment when this is required. 350 Thus, the absence of appropriate medical care for a person who is deprived of liberty and in the State’s custody may be considered a violation of Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention depending on the particular circumstances of the specific person, such as their state of health or type of 343 Cf. Report of the Peruvian Ombudsman on the Yanamayo Prison, Puno of, August 25, 1999 (evidence file, folios 1580 to 1588), and Affidavit made by Gladys Espinoza on March 26, 2014 (merits file, folio 907). 344 Cf. Report of the Peruvian Ombudsman on the Yanamayo Prison, Puno, of August 25, 1999 (evidence file, folios 1580 to 1588). 345 Cf. Report No. 143-99-INPE/DRAP-EPY-MIN of August 24, 1999 (evidence file, folio 1603). 346 Cf. Report No. 433-99-INPE-DRAP-EPMSY-MIN of December 17, 1999 (evidence file, folio 1578). 347 Cf. Affidavit made by Gladys Espinoza on March 26, 2014 (merits file, folios 907 and 908); Statement made by Gladys Espinoza in March 2010 (evidence file, folios 1462 and 1463); Report on the psychological and psychiatric appraisals made by Carmen Wurst de Landázuri on October 5, 2008 (evidence file, folio 1552), and Forensic report No. 003821-V of January 22, 2004, prepared by experts of the Institute of Forensic Medicine of the Public Prosecution Service (evidence file, folio 1561). 348 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Merits, supra, para. 60, and Case of Vera Vera et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 19, 2011. Series C No. 226, para. 42. 349 Cf. Case of the “Juvenile Re-education Institute” v. Paraguay. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 2, 2004. Series C No. 112, para. 159, and Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama, supra, para. 198. 350 Cf. Case of Tibi v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114, para. 156, and Case of Vélez Loor v. Panama, supra, para. 220.