Fight looms over global AIDS program

[Dale_M]

A five-year, $15 billion effort to combat AIDS in Africa and other areas — arguably the most important and popular international program of the Bush presidency — may become a political battleground as it comes up for renewal.

President Bush wants to double and House Democrats want to triple spending on a program that is now treating 1.4 million people, most of them in sub-Saharan Africa, where he will visit in two weeks.

Democrats also want to slash spending on a multimillion-dollar component that emphasizes sexual abstinence. And that has conservative groups furious.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080202/ap_on_go_pr_wh/global_aids;_ylt=ArBrNbHw73bNGjgB_ICo11.s0NUE

I don’t understand the Democrats opposition to abstinence education. It works, at least for teens.

What works even better, at least in Uganda, is fidelity encouragement. Often abstinence and fidelity get lumped together, but they are distinctly different. I am not sure from the article whether the Democrats are opposed to fidelity programs.

 

[puzzleannie]

t. I am not sure from the article whether the Democrats are opposed to fidelity programs.

well I don’t know I guess we would just have to poll them and see how well they are doing with the whole fidelity thing.

the Democrats are interested in quick cheap fixes that are paid for by someone else. If they can dump a planeload of condoms over some under-developed nation they can boast that “we have a program to beat AIDS, we have carried it out, problem solved” and hand the bill to the taxpayers.

 

[Deusdonat]

President Bush has made some dire mistakes and miscalculations during his term. And he has also made some incredibly good and Christian choices as well. Among the top 3; banning partial birth abortion, appointing justice Alito to the supreme court and his AIDS spending in Africa. May God bless him for his efforts here.

 

[SILVERNAME]

Bush should shut down this aids program and then start a new one that is abstinence and fidelity only.

No condoms, no contraceptives, none of that immoral garbage.

 

[ribozyme]

well I don’t know I guess we would just have to poll them and see how well they are doing with the whole fidelity thing.

the Democrats are interested in quick cheap fixes that are paid for by someone else. If they can dump a planeload of condoms over some under-developed nation they can boast that “we have a program to beat AIDS, we have carried it out, problem solved” and hand the bill to the taxpayers.

prove it! Do you have a link to a liberal policy institute that endorses that solution?

I guess reverse Robin Hood scenarios are even better.

Better yet… let’s dump etravirine, ritonavir, darunavir, lopinavir, raltegravir, tenofovir, emtricitabine, efavirenz, lamivudine, zidovudine, etc. in their water supply.

 

[KathleenElsie]

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080202/ap_on_go_pr_wh/global_aids;_ylt=ArBrNbHw73bNGjgB_ICo11.s0NUE

I don’t understand the Democrats opposition to abstinence education. It works, at least for teens.

What works even better, at least in Uganda, is fidelity encouragement. Often abstinence and fidelity get lumped together, but they are distinctly different. I am not sure from the article whether the Democrats are opposed to fidelity programs.

My opinion.

There is no money to be made with abstinence and fidelity.

Sexually active people spend lots of money. ABC, STD’s, abortion, medical complications, mental health, advertising, family planning clinics, pharmaceuticals and lots more.

As far as fidelity goes the money spent on intact families is lower then the money it takes to maintain two or more households.

 

[jimcav]

My opinion.

There is no money to be made with abstinence and fidelity.

Sexually active people spend lots of money. ABC, STD’s, abortion, medical complications, mental health, advertising, family planning clinics, pharmaceuticals and lots more…

I agree.

I’d like to think that our President is being Christian with this aid, but unfortunately IMO, this is little more than a huge gift to the pharmeceutical industry, which stands to get much of that 15 billion dollars worth of aid distributing their drugs in Africa.

I’m so jaded these days, I can hardly stand it…

 

[Dale_M]

unfortunately IMO, this is little more than a huge gift to the pharmeceutical industry, which stands to get much of that 15 billion dollars worth of aid distributing their drugs in Africa.

That thought has crossed my mind as well. The drug distribution program does do a lot of good, but it could have done more if the PEPFAR program hadn’t dragged its feet regarding the use of generic anti-retrovirals.

Some activists have also argued that instead of spending massive amounts of money on pharmaceuticals, Africans (at least) would be better served by programs to make clean drinking water, adequate nutrition and basic health care available. It is pointed out that taking anti-retroviral drugs do little good if the patient is swallowing them by drinking polluted water.

I don’t know what is best. But certainly President Bush deserves a lot of credit for backing anti-AIDS measures.

 

[Scottgun]

Diogenes over at Off the Record (Catholic World News) hit it out of the park back in Decemeber when commenting on Worlds AIDS day:

World AIDS Day, like AIDS Awareness generally, is a hoax. This can be conclusively demonstrated by comparing the evasive language and equivocal semiotics of the AIDS activists with – to take one example – the expertlygruesomeposters employed in the Montana Meth Project, which are designed neither to make us feel good about meth junkies nor to make meth junkies feel good about themselves, but which instead are designed to prevent kids from doing meth in the first place. The catch-phrase of the anti-meth campaign is Not Even Once. Ever hear that expression applied to extra-marital sex in an AIDS program?

The difference in the two approaches has a simple explanation: the folks who created the Montana Meth Project really care about the kids at risk of meth addiction and really want them not to start. AIDS activists, by contrast, are principally concerned with changing sexual mores in conformity to their own: this in order to justify their own moral choices. The epidemic levels of HIV, far from harming their true cause, are a boon, annually funneling millions of dollars into their hands for propaganda purposes. Unconvinced? Look no further than the recent announcement that the U.N. has overstated the number of HIV infections by some six million. Far from celebrating the news, our betters have struggled to conceal their disappointment.

 

[ribozyme]

I agree.

I’d like to think that our President is being Christian with this aid, but unfortunately IMO, this is little more than a huge gift to the pharmeceutical industry, which stands to get much of that 15 billion dollars worth of aid distributing their drugs in Africa.

I’m so jaded these days, I can hardly stand it…

Well, the pharmaceutical companies are not selling their drugs in Africa at the European or North American market price. Some however are willing to sell it at a price near the mariginal cost of production.

 

[brycelaliberte]

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” -somebody

Since it’s cheaper, why don’t we also triple abstinence and fidelity education? It would produce the same results (of less AIDS) but in a much cheaper, moral way. Plus, who could be against it?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Not so long ago, we had a debate on AIDS which included a UN AIDS worker from South Africa. She had worked on Botswana, where the AIDS rate has soared to about 40%.

She was a firm believer in condoms. Of course Botswana, which is a small, homogenious nation with a basically law-abiding population with income from diamonds ought to be the ideal testing ground for AIDS prevention. So why the high AIDS rate?

Well, she explained, people there have group sex.

So we asked, it is possible that you encouraged them to have sex by telling them there is such a thing as “safe sex?”

What a tap-dance!! First of all, she claimed no one ever said there was such a thing as “safe sex” – just “safer sex.” And besides, people get drunk, use drugs, and don’t use the condoms properly, or don’t use them at all.

And in the background, I could hear a brass band playing, “Whoda Thunkit.”

By our failure to act quickly – to require AIDS testing, to publicize the fact that only sex between faithful partners is “safe,” and by not pushing measures to deal with the behavior that spreads the disease, we have created a monster.

 

[Dale_M]

Well, she explained, people there have group sex.

hmmm… I thought she meant that people have multiple sexual relationships during the same period of time.

I’d try to re-check, but as I recall those threads ran into scores of pages.

By our failure to act quickly – to require AIDS testing, to publicize the fact that only sex between faithful partners is “safe,” and by not pushing measures to deal with the behavior that spreads the disease, we have created a monster.

I agree. And UNAIDS and WHO ended a recent joint statement by observing:

A comprehensive HIV prevention package includes, but is not limited to, delaying sexual debut, mutual fidelity, reduction of the number of sexual partners, avoidance of penetration, safer sex including correct and consistent male and female condom use, and early and effective treatment for sexually transmitted infections.

data.unaids.org/pub/PressStatement/2008/080201_hivtransmission_en.pdf

I hope the US Congress takes their views into account.

 

[bpbasilphx]

What good does urging abstince to stupid, ignorant people who think they can get rid of AIDS if they have sex with a virgin?

That’s why so many little girls in Africa are infected now.

 

[Dale_M]

What good does urging abstince to stupid, ignorant people who think they can get rid of AIDS if they have sex with a virgin?

Yes, that is a myth among some men in the country of South Africa, but we can’t generalize that to the whole continent, nor even to most men in South Africa

That’s why so many little girls in Africa are infected now.

Perhaps an even greater threat is the sugar daddy phenomenon, where older men act as a patron for young women or even teen aged girls. This seems to be more wide-spread.

 

[seekerz]

What good does urging abstince to stupid, ignorant people who think they can get rid of AIDS if they have sex with a virgin?

That’s why so many little girls in Africa are infected now.

Stupid, ignorant…was that really necessary? Do you know anything about these people you so flippantly label?