I think that nabla9 by "human rights" refers to human rights as a universal concept (and probably under their own accepted definition) rather than the specific definition by the UN.
Right-libertarians generally don't believe that you have a right to any of those things if nobody else wants to give those things to you.
Generally this is talked about as the conflict between positive vs negative rights, or human rights vs property rights.
I mean, you could come up with some version of "human rights" that doesn't include the right to food, shelter and medical care... but you could also come up with a definition of libertarianisim that includes some form of welfare for everyone. I personally know several people who identify as libertarians who also support universal basic income...
I'm just saying, that's not how those words are usually used. Usually 'human rights' includes some kind of positive rights, and usually 'libertarian' means 'primarily focuses on property rights'