OK. I am no fun. But I just have to be outraged for a moment about THIS article.
Read it. It’s short. Just take a sec.
OK.
Now, I cannot access the article in the Lancet yet, so I can’t make cohesive comments about it. I will look more closely at it when I can and comment about the study itself later.
But I CAN rant about the news piece.
I am THRILLED that antiretroviral treatment is extending lives. THRILLED. But to say (and prominently quote, in the sidebar) that HIV is becoming a “chronic condition like diabetes” is really upsetting to me.
Why?
Because, first of all, diabetes and AIDS are nothing alike. (Diabetes is also given light press that puts people’s lives in danger! But that’s another post…) But more than that, it’s a dangerous comparison to make when 35 million people worldwide are infected and MOST of them do not belong to the “high income countries” to which the Lancet’s study population belonged. Most people who are HIV+ don’t have access to the latest and greatest antiretrovirals. It is irresponsible journalism to make the “chronic condition” point THREE times in the article, while simultaneously making the “oh, but be sure you get tested really early on or else this doesn’t apply to you” point a footnote at the end.
People are NOT getting tested when they should be. People are NOT having safer sex when they should be. There are NOT enough resources for needle exchange and other prevention measures, ANYWHERE in the world, let alone in the poorest, most AIDS-ravaged countries. AND, most importantly, millions upon millions of people do NOT have access to these wonderful, life-extending drugs!!!
EDUCATING folks about it = good. EXCITING people about new treatments = good. ENCOURAGING people to be tested early and start treatment right away so they can benefit from the good retrovirals = supergood.
But “chronic condition?” BAAAAAAD.
Since the VERY FIRST DAYS of the AIDS epidemic, the media has played a dramatic role in effecting how the public has responded to the crisis. I know this is not the first time “chronic condition” has been bandied about. It is an example of how the media effects public response, and how that response in turn has a direct effect on research.
I was just talking to a woman this morning who works at the NIH and studies traumatic brain injury. She said her department had trouble receiving funding until the news anchor came back from Iraq and went public with his own story. Suddenly, people were interested, and suddenly, there were funds.
Where were the funds before? People die when research is not allowed to progress. The media has a DIRECT impact on the health system in this country, and that’s crazy!! (I know this article is from the BBC, but it’s the same business.) The last thing any researchers need when they are asking for more funding for AIDS research is this lazy idea floating in policy wonks heads that “HIV is a chronic condition,” not a life-threatening, ravaging virus. AIDS research has ALWAYS been underfunded (partly because of journalism), and it’s … an unspeakable tragedy.
More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981.
Africa has 12 million AIDS orphans.
At the end of 2007, women accounted for 50% of all adults living with HIV worldwide, and for 61% in sub-Saharan Africa.
Young people (under 25 years old) account for half of all new HIV infections worldwide.
In developing and transitional countries, 9.7 million people are in immediate need of life-saving AIDS drugs; of these, only 2.99 million (31%) are receiving the drugs.
I am collecting opinions on this article and also trying to get the Lancet article. I’ll post again. You’ll get a Part Deux. (LUCKY YOU!)
