Close to 80% of cumulative AIDS
deaths to date have occurred in Africa, the world’s
poorest continent.
“If the drugs cost a lot, there must be a reason,” she commented in a recent meeting. “Science made them, so science will have to find a way to get them to poor people, since we’re the ones who have AIDS.”
no wonder: globally, billions of dollars have been invested in AIDS prevention and treatment, but the epidemic marches on. AIDS-prevention efforts have failed in precisely those areas where they are needed most.
“One world, one hope,”
will this always remain just a slogan ?
Prevention is cheap, compared to therapy of already infected people. But what is the cost of focusing solely on prevention, given our current limitations?
Many children left to fend for themselves will eventually turn to sex work, crime, or perhaps become soldiers in some local confl
Treatment cannot be regarded as solely the province of wealthy countries .
In some settings, paradoxically, “the presence of health-education materials seemed to lead to lower frequency of condom use.”
Treatment cannot be regarded as solely the province of wealthy countries
the destitute sick remind us that sacrosanct market mechanisms will not serve the interests of global health equity.
Show us the data to support the assertion, widespread in international financial institutions, that the neoliberal economic policies now in favor will ever serve the interests of those living, already, with HIV. Show us the data to suggest that declining HIV incidence— and declining AIDS deaths— in wealthy countries will not be followed by decreasing investment in the basic research necessary for new drug and vaccine development. No such data exist. If they did, new antituberculosis agents, also sorely needed, could not be termed “orphan drugs”[35]— a great irony, since TB remains, along with AIDS, the leading infectious cause of adult death in the world today
Cost-effectiveness cannot become the sole gauge by which public-health interventions are judged
Market utilitarianism is a strange beast, since it seems to permit all sorts of ineffi ciencies as long as they benefit the right people— namely, the privileged.
Confident claims about what is cost-effective and what is not should be viewed with some suspicion by those bent on providing quality care to the destitute sick.
It sounds as if poor people are excellent lab rats but unlikely patients
it rings hollow to call people to participate in research for the greater good when the poor will rarely benefit from research outcomes.
We know that risk of acquiring HIV does not depend on knowledge of how the virus is transmitted, but rather on the freedom to make decisions. ( how many people really think a prostitute in kamathipura of Mumbai can force her John to wear a condom ?
Poverty is the great limiting factor of freedom. Indeed, gender inequality and poverty are far more important contributors to HIV risk than is ignorance of modes of transmission or “cultural beliefs” about HIV
Until we have effective, female-controlled prevention, whether a microbicide or another, and an effective vaccine, nothing we do should suggest that education can substitute for, or remove the necessity of, effective therapy for AIDS
The wealth of the world has not dried up, it has simply become unavailable to those who need it most
Even a doctor without formal economic training soon starts to wonder if the neoliberal agenda of the international financial
institutions might be driving up HIV risks even as these institutions slap the hands of those who dare to treat the destitute sick.
There is no wall between the worlds, as any honest assessment of either microbial traffi c or capital fl ows will show. Let the idiot PREZ T think he can build a wall to stop just the illegals .
“The pharmaceutical industry should be accountable to society at large"
Only by struggling for higher standards for the destitute sick will we avoid another unappealing role— that of academic Cassandras who prophesy the coming plagues, but do little to avert them. Then will come the time for universal tears, whether scant or copious. In the interim, shoring up double standards for the poor will be identified most closely with the shedding of crocodile tears.
Way to go guys! and gal !
Paul Farmer
David Walton
Laura Tarter
“If the drugs cost a lot, there must be a reason,” she commented in a recent meeting. “Science made them, so science will have to find a way to get them to poor people, since we’re the ones who have AIDS.”
no wonder: globally, billions of dollars have been invested in AIDS prevention and treatment, but the epidemic marches on. AIDS-prevention efforts have failed in precisely those areas where they are needed most.
“One world, one hope,”
will this always remain just a slogan ?
Prevention is cheap, compared to therapy of already infected people. But what is the cost of focusing solely on prevention, given our current limitations?
Many children left to fend for themselves will eventually turn to sex work, crime, or perhaps become soldiers in some local confl
Treatment cannot be regarded as solely the province of wealthy countries .
In some settings, paradoxically, “the presence of health-education materials seemed to lead to lower frequency of condom use.”
Treatment cannot be regarded as solely the province of wealthy countries
the destitute sick remind us that sacrosanct market mechanisms will not serve the interests of global health equity.
Show us the data to support the assertion, widespread in international financial institutions, that the neoliberal economic policies now in favor will ever serve the interests of those living, already, with HIV. Show us the data to suggest that declining HIV incidence— and declining AIDS deaths— in wealthy countries will not be followed by decreasing investment in the basic research necessary for new drug and vaccine development. No such data exist. If they did, new antituberculosis agents, also sorely needed, could not be termed “orphan drugs”[35]— a great irony, since TB remains, along with AIDS, the leading infectious cause of adult death in the world today
Cost-effectiveness cannot become the sole gauge by which public-health interventions are judged
Market utilitarianism is a strange beast, since it seems to permit all sorts of ineffi ciencies as long as they benefit the right people— namely, the privileged.
Confident claims about what is cost-effective and what is not should be viewed with some suspicion by those bent on providing quality care to the destitute sick.
It sounds as if poor people are excellent lab rats but unlikely patients
it rings hollow to call people to participate in research for the greater good when the poor will rarely benefit from research outcomes.
We know that risk of acquiring HIV does not depend on knowledge of how the virus is transmitted, but rather on the freedom to make decisions. ( how many people really think a prostitute in kamathipura of Mumbai can force her John to wear a condom ?
Poverty is the great limiting factor of freedom. Indeed, gender inequality and poverty are far more important contributors to HIV risk than is ignorance of modes of transmission or “cultural beliefs” about HIV
Until we have effective, female-controlled prevention, whether a microbicide or another, and an effective vaccine, nothing we do should suggest that education can substitute for, or remove the necessity of, effective therapy for AIDS
The wealth of the world has not dried up, it has simply become unavailable to those who need it most
Even a doctor without formal economic training soon starts to wonder if the neoliberal agenda of the international financial
institutions might be driving up HIV risks even as these institutions slap the hands of those who dare to treat the destitute sick.
There is no wall between the worlds, as any honest assessment of either microbial traffi c or capital fl ows will show. Let the idiot PREZ T think he can build a wall to stop just the illegals .
“The pharmaceutical industry should be accountable to society at large"
Only by struggling for higher standards for the destitute sick will we avoid another unappealing role— that of academic Cassandras who prophesy the coming plagues, but do little to avert them. Then will come the time for universal tears, whether scant or copious. In the interim, shoring up double standards for the poor will be identified most closely with the shedding of crocodile tears.
Way to go guys! and gal !
Paul Farmer
David Walton
Laura Tarter
No comments:
Post a Comment