AIDS crisis overblown? Some experts dare to say so

#1 | AIDS crisis overblown? Some experts dare to say so


LONDON -- As World AIDS Day is marked Monday, some experts are growing more outspoken in complaining that AIDS is eating up funding at the expense of more pressing health needs.
They argue that the world has entered a post-AIDS era in which the disease's spread has largely been curbed in much of the world, except Africa.
"AIDS is a terrible humanitarian tragedy, but it's just one of many terrible humanitarian tragedies," said Jeremy Shiffman, who studies health spending at Syracuse University.
Roger England of Health Systems Workshop, a think-tank based in the Caribbean island of Grenada, goes further. He argues that UNAIDS, the United Nations agency leading the fight against the disease, has outlived its purpose and should be disbanded.
"The global HIV industry is too big and out of control. We have created a monster with too many vested interests and reputations at stake, ... too many relatively well paid HIV staff in affected countries, and too many rock stars with AIDS support as a fashion accessory," he wrote in the British Medical Journal in May.

Quote has been trimmed
Ha ha.... that's kinda funny.

"So Charles, I was saying to Chamile the other day that the amount of runny fecal matter coming out of the children these days is simply atrocious...."

*puffs on pipe and takes a sip of his cocktail*

"Yes, quite"


These competing claims on public money are likely to grow louder as the world financial meltdown threatens to deplete health dollars.

"We cannot afford, in this time of crisis, to squander our investments," Dr. Margaret Chan, WHO's director-general, said in a recent statement.

Some experts ask whether it makes sense to have UNAIDS, WHO, UNICEF, the World Bank, the Global Fund plus countless other AIDS organizations, all serving the same cause.

"I do not want to see the cause of AIDS harmed," said Shiffman of Syracuse University. But "For AIDS to crowd out other issues is ethically unjust."

De Lay argues that the solution is not to reshuffle resources but to boost them.

"To take money away from AIDS and give it to diarrheal diseases or onchocerciasis (river blindness) or leishmaniasis (disfiguring parasites) doesn't make any sense," he said. "We'd just be doing a worse job in everything else."

Hey you work with what you got.... he claims it's not a good idea to reshuffle resources but we should boost them? WTF are you gonna get the money to boost it all?

Nowhere that's where.

Funding for these types of things, among everything else these days is already tight for many obvious reasons and he thinks simply getting more money to put into it is going to work?

Sure it would if you got the money in the first place.

Much of what was said does make sense.... why have that many organizations for one cause? If more people are dying from other illnesses much greater then AIDS/HIV, then where is the logic in not shifting the funding to those more important to get them back down to decent levels?

It is a pretty bad illness and would be nice to wipe off the map, but it also makes sense to better manage the funds and money supporting other causes as well.

There's only so much money to go around and if you put all your money into your car, then what do you have left for your bills and food? All are important, but if you don't balance it all out, you may end up losing it all. Same thing for this. If you focus all the funding and money into one problem, then what happens to the other problems in the world in regards to illnesses?

They get worse. And in the long run, what is the best solution when facing that?
Africa, you say. Pity.

Until you get a lot of Africfolks to realize that having sex with a virgin does not cure aids, all the bucks in the world, and all the vaccines, are not going to do a helluvalota good.

Malaria, the biggest killer. Oh pshaw!! Couldn't be.

Good to know that a disease that 33.2 million people live with worldwide, and has killed an estimated 2.1 million people, including 330,000 children is not a big deal!!!!
Quote: Originally Posted by TyrView Post


Good to know that a disease that 33.2 million people live with worldwide, and has killed an estimated 2.1 million people, including 330,000 children is not a big deal!!!!

Except in Africa. Tsk, tsk.
I can get what they're saying.

They're not saying it's no big deal, but, that there are other pressing issues that require attention as well. Makes sense.

Similar Threads

'Give a day' to help end AIDS crisis
by Andem | Dec 1st, 2008
I dare Quebec to try it now
by quebecgetlost | Feb 14th, 2008
The Triple-Dog Dare
by Haggis McBagpipe | Mar 12th, 2006
Will Anyone Dare to Ask Why?
by moghrabi | Jul 11th, 2004
no new posts