Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4100RE: [ujeni] Just a thought

Expand Messages
  • Alice Kaunda
    Mar 11, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I entirely agree with your view Scott.

      Alice Kaunda (Malawi)

      --- Scott Geibel <scott@...> wrote:
      > Thanks Joanne. Your command of the facts is very
      > persuasive. I respectfully
      > disagree, however, that ARV monies are better-off
      > axed and reallocated.
      > For the first time in 8 years of this business, I am
      > actually observing
      > an HIV/AIDS intervention that appears to be having
      > immediate/incredible
      > results. Very sick Africans, some literally on the
      > brink of death (CD4<100)
      > are taking their medications at home voluntarily,
      > correctly, and routinely;
      > their health is improving, they are returning to
      > work/productivity, and
      > again providing for the livelihood of their large
      > overburdened households.
      > This stuff works. Alternatively throwing the sick a
      > bednet and nutri-bar
      > ain't gonna cut it in many cases.
      > If ARVs were there in the 90s, most of us knew a lot
      > of friends who might
      > be alive today--and they'd be buying bednets and
      > borehole spare parts and
      > tending their permaculture gardens--but hey they're
      > dead. This is a big
      > opportunity that, in my opinion, would be an
      > absolute wrong not to implement
      > immediately given the existing evidence-based facts.
      > Carry on, Bush. I think it's money well-spent (I'm
      > still not voting for
      > ya).
      > Scott
      > >-- Original Message --
      > >To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
      > >From: johooper@...
      > >Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 16:18:41 -0700
      > >Subject: RE: [ujeni] Just a thought
      > >Reply-To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >I too appreciated your thoughts Scott. I will have
      > to say, however,
      > >that I still think that monies would be better
      > spent on improving
      > >nutrition and sanitation (such as clean water
      > sources) rather than
      > >expensive chemotherapeutic interventions for
      > HIV/AIDS. For example,
      > >for the cost of one year of therapy for one person
      > receiving ARVs in
      > >Zambia's program over one hundred people could
      > receive insecticide
      > >treated mosquito nets. There are some studies
      > showing that increases
      > >in life expectancy that have been seen in the
      > developed world have
      > >been due to improvements in sanitation and
      > nutrition, not to
      > >chemotherapeutic interventions (much to my chagrin,
      > I have to admit
      > >since I also think that advancements in drug
      > therapies are also very
      > >exciting). I would like to see a study that
      > compares the efficacy of
      > >antiretrovirals verses improved nutrition and
      > preventing malaria in
      > >extending and improving the lives of AIDS patients.
      > That having been
      > >said, I also do recognize that while from a public
      > health perspective
      > >this focusing of resources on malnutrition and
      > malaria may seem
      > >logical, on a case by case basis, it is difficult
      > to deny someone
      > >needed medications that their counterparts in more
      > developed nations
      > >can access easily. However, I do think that AIDS
      > has much more
      > >glamour in the media than malnutrition and I do
      > think that peoples?
      > >obsession with getting AIDS meds to Africa with
      > little concern and
      > >press for much more basic problems such as
      > childhood mortality from
      > >malnutrition is a little like placing a Tiffany's
      > stained glass door
      > >on a house that doesn't have any walls or roof.
      > After all, when was
      > >the last time you heard Katie Couric talk about
      > stunting and wasting,
      > >diarrhea, or the killer common cold? And, the only
      > time that malaria
      > >makes major headlines is when our troops enter
      > malaria endemic
      > >regions.
      > >
      > >As far as malaria goes, what I have read about the
      > malaria projects in
      > >place such as Roll Back Malaria (RBM), GFATM (The
      > Global Fund to Fight
      > >AIDS, TB, and Malaria), MVI (The Malaria Vaccine
      > Project?created by
      > >the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), is that
      > they are incredibly
      > >segmented and operate in a piecemeal fashion.
      > Wouldn't it make more
      > >sense to pool funding from all agencies and
      > governments and come up
      > >with one plan of how to distribute nets
      > internationally? How to best
      > >to distribute them and get people to comply is
      > obviously a region-
      > >specific issue, but since the evidence suggests
      > that they work and at
      > >a very low per capita cost, why aren?t we focusing
      > more resources in a
      > >widespread effort that could actually have an
      > international impact.
      > >Why are health care workers not distributing nets
      > that they have
      > >available to them as Scott suggests, and is that an
      > answer that such
      > >programs do not work, or is it simply that the
      > healthcare workers have
      > >not been educated as to their efficacy and
      > importance? Perhaps this
      > >too is due to the fact that a fancy and expensive
      > pill is much sexier
      > >than a net. Shouldn?t health care workers practice
      > ?evidence-based?
      > >interventions? It bothers me that Bush has chosen
      > to put so much
      > >money into an expensive tertiary intervention when
      > many primary
      > >interventions have not been successfully funded or
      > implemented. I
      > >think that often the simplest interventions are the
      > most effective,
      > >and are often overlooked for more complex and
      > complicated
      > >interventions. Lastly, I think that it is
      > important to comment that
      > >while funding for malaria vaccine efforts has
      > increased in the last
      > >decade, funding available for a malaria vaccine is
      > only one tenth the
      > >amount of funding that vaccine development efforts
      > for HIV/AIDS
      > >receive.
      > >
      > >Joanna Hooper
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >

      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster
    • Show all 57 messages in this topic