Global AIDS Epidemic: Time to Turn the Tide
Peter Piot
HIV/AIDS is catastrophic both from a public health perspective and in terms of its
impact on economic and social stability in many of the most severely affected
nations, including virtually all of southern Africa. A public health response
alone is insufficient to address this devastating epidemic. Political
leadership at the highest levels is needed to mobilize a multisectoral response
to the impact of HIV/AIDS on educational systems, industry, agriculture, the
military, and other sectors. With a few notable exceptions, political response
was slow to mobilize in the early years of the epidemic, but response has
dramatically improved in the past 18 months. The Joint United Nations
Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) is involved in ongoing efforts to encourage
political leaders to make a multisectoral response to the epidemic a major
focus of their national plans.
Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), 20 Avenue Appia, Geneva
27, Switzerland.
The AIDS epidemic is not only pushing biomedical research to its frontiers but is also
taking public health into uncharted territories in the national and global
political arenas. It is sometimes argued that AIDS is treated unnecessarily as
a special issue rather than as another disease added to the long list of old
and new health problems plaguing the developing world. Such a view does not
take into account the full extent and nature of the pandemic.
1) In contrast to most health problems, it primarily affects young adults. This age
factor results in at least two of the major consequences of HIV/AIDS, including
the unusually high impact on the economy through lost productivity and the
large number of orphans left behind, creating a generation of desocialized
youth- and child-headed households.
2) Unlike most other infectious diseases, HIV also affects the educated and skilled,
further accentuating its economic impact. In the worst-affected countries, AIDS
is single-handedly wiping out decades of investments in education and human
resource development.
3) AIDS brings with it a stigma unprecedented in modern times, which is a major
impediment in responding to the epidemic.
The year 2000 opened with a debate in the United Nations (UN) Security Council
that recognized AIDS as an issue of human security, redefining security to mean
not just the presence or absence of armed conflict. Although history offers
other examples of destabilizing epidemics, such as Europe's bubonic plague, the
speed and scope of HIV transmission worldwide are unprecedented. That AIDS has
gone from a disease unknown to the global community to an epidemic infecting
50 million people and killing 19 million to date worldwide offers a
clearer lesson on globalization and the interconnectivity of the world than
does any media report on the global economy.
Indeed, unchecked, AIDS may become the first example of a massive nonconventional
threat to worldwide security, illustrating not only the globalization of
problems but the accompanying increase in vulnerability of all countries.
Already, in southern Africa, AIDS is devastating the ranks of the most
productive members of society with an efficacy history has reserved for great
armed conflicts. In the first 10 months of 1998, for example, Zambia
lost 1300 teachers--the equivalent of about two-thirds of all new teachers
trained annually (1). Life expectancy at birth in southern
Africa, which rose from 44 years in the early 1950s to 59 in the
early 1990s is set to recede to just 45 years between 2005 and
2010. (Figure 1 shows the predicted diminished life
expectancy of children born today in several AIDS-affected countries.)
Conversely, all-too-frequent armed conflicts and associated population
movements are themselves a fertile ground for the spread of HIV and an obstacle
to an effective response to the epidemic. The dilemmas raised by AIDS are thus
not simply limited to the field of health and science but fall squarely into
the political arena: namely, whether world leadership will meet the global
threat with a global political response.
Fig. 1.
The impact of HIV/AIDS on the life expectancy of newborn children in 10 developing
countries. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000. [View Larger Version of this Image (19K GIF
file)]
Whether we conceptualize AIDS as a health issue only or as a development and human
security issue is not just an academic exercise. It defines how we respond to
the epidemic, how much money is allocated to combating it, and what sectors of
government are involved in the response. Given all we now know about AIDS and
its implications for development and security, is the world responding
appropriately to AIDS today? With some early notable exceptions, particularly
Thailand, Brazil, Uganda, and Senegal, global political leadership is late in
responding to the wakeup call. In 1998, long after AIDS had emerged as the
leading threat to countries in the Southern Hemisphere, only $300 million in
international assistance funds was available for HIV/AIDS activities. Although
this figure shows signs of a sharp upward rise, it is estimated that between
$1.6 billion and $2.6 billion is needed annually just to mount an effective
response in sub-Saharan Africa.
The groundbreaking UN Security Council debate, the high-level political momentum
developing in the United States, and the announcement by other industrialized
donor countries of increased interest and supply of funds signal the emergence
of a new and welcome international response. But the front line of the epidemic
is in southern countries themselves, where positive evidence of the
impact of all actors coming together under national political leadership is
mounting. Indeed, the past 12 months have seen an unprecedented increase
in political commitment from leaders throughout the world in addressing the
epidemic. This not only takes the form of statements by heads of state and
other leaders, but such actions as the formation of high-level AIDS councils
with a mandate well beyond public health issues, and often chaired by the
president or his deputy.
Support of political advocacy is one of the key mandates of UNAIDS. With an annual
budget of $60 million, UNAIDS operates as a catalyst and coordinator of action
rather than as a direct funding or implementing agency. UNAIDS has worked to
keep the epidemic at the forefront of international political attention through
the collection and compilation of data on HIV prevalence, by consistently
monitoring and publicizing the status of the global response (or lack thereof)
to this crisis, and by formulating strategies to tackle the epidemic.
UN Theme Groups on HIV/AIDS have been successful in mobilizing political commitment in
over 100 affected countries. UNAIDS is also the Secretariat for the
International Partnership against AIDS in Africa (IPAA), a coalition of
governments, civil society, the UN, donors, and private-sector members that was
created in 1999. The IPAA works toward the accomplishment of existing
goals, such as the one set by the UN General Assembly Special Session on
the followup to the Fourth International Conference on Women: to ensure that
HIV incidence in 15- to 24-year-olds is reduced by 25% in the most
affected countries by 2005.
Within the UN, AIDS is now high on the institutional agenda. The Millennium Report of
the Secretary General (available at www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/key.htm)
sets specific targets for reducing HIV infection rates and providing young
adults access to HIV prevention information and services. The report recommends
that every seriously affected nation have an action plan in place 1 year
after the Millennium General Assembly, to be held in September 2000. We
also use forums such as meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World
Bank, the Organization of African Unity, the Economic Commission for Africa,
the International Labor Organization, and the Group of 77 South Summit,
recently held in Havana, to ensure that AIDS becomes a key part of the agenda
of government leaders.
This is a complex epidemic. Simple solutions are unlikely to be effective,
notwithstanding our collective desire for such simplicity. The response to the
epidemic is therefore not just about best practice (in public health, for
example) but about new practice. Access to care for people living with HIV is
undoubtedly one of the most complex development challenges that the world currently
faces, raising ethical, political, economic, and social issues that most of us
would prefer not to have to face.
The wide availability of highly effective antiretroviral therapy in high-income
countries has greatly increased the gap between the
North and the South. It is fueling growing anger against the pharmaceutical industry and
international development and financing agencies and is confronting governments in heavily
affected countries with tough, if not impossible, choices regarding the allocation of
meager public resources. Even considering the effects of poor infrastructure and the
absence of sustainable financing for health care, the current price of HIV-related
medicines is a major factor in the affordability of care for the majority of those who
need it. AIDS once more uncovers a conflict in contemporary society--in this particular
case, in how it deals with the protection of intellectual property. Although such
protection brings important gains in the discovery of new technologies for affluent
societies, it can be an obstacle to making these technologies and drugs widely accessible
at affordable prices in poor societies.
However, complexity should never be a barrier to action. Lifesaving prevention efforts
are not exclusively the domain of the industrialized world. Several countries
in Africa and Asia, even as they face sharp budgetary restrictions, devastation
of their economic base, and sharp decreases in skilled labor, have mounted
productive responses to HIV. (For examples of prevention efforts in
Uganda, Thailand, and Senegal, see Fig. 2.)
Fig. 2.
Trends in the seroprevalence of HIV in populations in Uganda, Thailand, and Senegal,
indicating the impact of effective government leadership in fighting the epidemic. ANC,
ante- natal clinic. Source: National STD/AIDS Control Programmes, Uganda and Senegal;
Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Thailand. [View Larger Version of this Image (18K GIF
file)]
Successful national programs appear to be characterized by at least seven features: the
impact of all actors coming together under one powerful strategic plan;
visibility and openness about the epidemic, including involving people with
AIDS, as a way of reducing stigma and shame; addressing core vulnerabilities
through social policies; recognizing the synergy between prevention and care;
targeting efforts to those who are most vulnerable to infection; focusing on
young people; and, last but not least, encouraging and supporting strong
community participation in the response.
It is an accepted wisdom that responses to the epidemic must be based on solid
scientific evidence. Unfortunately, too often science is neutralized by
ideology when it comes to issues that are difficult for some members of society
to accept. For example, harm reduction among injecting drug users, including
needle exchange programs, has been shown in numerous studies to reduce the risk
of HIV infection, and yet in most countries of the world such programs
are not supported by the government or are even against the law. Another
critical area is sex education for school-aged children. Again, there is sound
evidence from numerous studies that sex and life-skills education not only
results in safer sexual behavior but also does not lead to earlier onset of
sexual intercourse nor to increased sexual activity. So why do many school
authorities deny their children access to life-saving sex education?
The challenge now is to be highly strategic, highly skillful, highly coordinated, and
highly disciplined in applying what we know and to catalyze a social movement
against AIDS, fully involving those living with HIV. We should offer nothing
less than whole-hearted support. Our partners in developing countries should
accept nothing less.
REFERENCES AND NOTES
- UNAIDS, Report on the Global HIV/AIDS Epidemic-June
2000 (UNAIDS, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000). This report is available beginning
27 June 2000 at www.unaids.org (see also
B. Schwartlander et al., in preparation). More statistical information on the
AIDS epidemic is available at the UNAIDS Web site at www.unaids.org.
|