Freeze on HIV spending sparks concern in Africa

[korean_guy_01]

Freeze on HIV spending (by the US) sparks concern in AfricaDo you think this is a good decision? Do you think we should not have provided aid for this in the first place? What American needs that aren't currently addressed by the USG do you think should be funded with this money instead of for HIV treatment in Africa? Does this freeze go against

Comments

[surferelf]

First you complain about a spending freeze, and then you complain about the spending? Could you make up your mind please?

[korean_guy_01]

It's clear I'm talking about the escalation in the deficit, and not spending in general. When deficits were around a 1/3 of what they are now, we were spending on HIV in Africa.

[anfalicious]

Actually, I thought you were complaining about the spending freeze in AIDS funding to Africa...

[chessdev]

You silly... that was just the reason to complain. He doesn't actually care about Africa.

[retrofire]

I wonder if it has to do with the expired drugs problem.
Also, test kits that are expired don't provide accurate results.

[retrofire]

This article explains the problem.

"According to a cost analysis from the Center for Global Development, an independent research organization, maintaining present successes for the ever-increasing number of patients would cause U.S. AIDS spending to swell to $12 billion by 2016, consuming half the foreign-assistance budget and squeezing out U.S. spending on other programs, including other health initiatives."

[mrsilence]

Not to mention that there about a half dozen other diseases in Africa that pose a far worse health issue to more people than AIDS does.

[retrofire]

Also, abstinence only education has proven to be as much of a failure in Africa as it was in the US.

[policraticus]

You know, they told me if I voted for McCain the government would abandon the needy, and they were right.

[mcpreacher]

and here i thought the government had no place in helping the needy

you seem indecisive

[policraticus]

I'm not indecisive, I am ironical.

FWIW, what Africa needs it can't get from AIDS relief or all the other money that has been spent on it for the last 50 years.

FYI Guys

[mrsilence]

The funding not being spend on treating new AIDS patients (existing patients will continue to receive free treatment), is actually being shifted into AIDS prevention.

[mahnmut]

Do you think we should not have provided aid for this in the first place?

First of all, spending PEPFAR funds on prevention in an effort to slow the HIV/AIDS epidemic was a fake argument to begin with. An effective prevention strategy relies on testing. Guess why were people getting tests? It's because treatment was available.

But fine, freeze HIV spending in Africa. Actually, freeze all aid to Africa. But meanwhile, give'm equal trade rules that don't discriminate against them, and they'll produce their own food. And stop imposing your interests on their pharmaceutical industry, and they'll produce their own generic drugs that treat their diseases. You won't? Sure you won't. It'd hit your precious trade interests, right?

Speaking of trade interests, turns out you can suck out Africa's oil through your drilling companies, and its gold & diamonds & metals through your digging companies, but you wouldn't care about countering the negative social impact that this creates? Sure you won't. Because it wouldn't match your economic

[mrsilence]

I'll be the first to admit I don't know jack about these funding issues and what it actually does, except what I read today about it, but do you really think that no-one would bother getting tested if they had no option to receive treatment?

[mahnmut]

do you really think that no-one would

Shortly: no.

[ironhawke]

Geez, you sound like you're actually from there, and are personally affected by all this. sheesh. Even though I know better, I'm gonna pretend that your icon is a pic of you and go for the ironic-lulz here.