Subject: [HEALTHGAP] WashPost: AIDS Activists Misfiring
Diary Prequel Package, pp.103-105 · diary_prequel:article:00001
Page text: p.103, p.104, p.105 · original PDF
- Date
- 2004-07-11 00:00 (day precision)
- Type
- article · publication
- author
- Sebastian Mallaby
Subject: [HEALTHGAP] WashPost: AIDS Activists Misfiring
AIDS Activists Misfiring
By Sebastian Mallaby
Monday, July 19, 2004; Page A17
In the past few years, global AIDS activists have worked miracles. They have shaken rich
governments awake, causing international AIDS funding to rise 15-fold. They have
beaten back big pharma's jihad against cheap, non-brand medicines, creating an
opportunity to treat millions of people in poor countries. But the activists, or at least some
of them, are in danger of tipping from heroism into shrill anti-Americanism. The sound
bites from last week's AIDS conference in Bangkok were straight out of a Michael Moore
movie.
Inconveniently for those who enjoy stereotypes, the Bush administration is far and away
the leader in the global AIDS fight. This year the United States will spend $2.4 billion on
the pandemic, nearly twice as much as all other donor governments combined; attacking
the Bush team for indifference to AIDS is like attacking it for inadequate defense
spending. But when Randall Tobias, the U.S. global AIDS coordinator, addressed the
Bangkok gathering last week, he had to endure 10 minutes of furious heckling before he
could get a word in edgewise.
What triggers this hostility? The activists' first complaint is that U.S. AIDS spending will
finance programs to promote sexual abstinence and fidelity. Never mind that only 7
percent of the money will be spent this way; the abstinence agenda is derided as some
kind of kooky anti-scientific plot cooked up by President Bush's evangelical supporters.
Yet the plotters actually include very un-evangelical people such as Edward Green, a
Harvard medical anthropologist (and liberal Democrat) who's written a book on AIDS
prevention. Green has shown how Uganda's success in cutting HIV infection rates from
21 percent to 6 percent depended crucially on teaching abstinence. In the first half of the
1990s, the number of young Ugandans engaging in premarital sex plummeted; by 1995,
fully 95 percent of Ugandans reported that they were either abstaining or monogamous.
Elsewhere in Africa, experience also supports the Bush administration's desire to make
abstinence and fidelity part of its prevention strategy. The evidence from Botswana,
South Africa, Kenya and Zimbabwe suggests that there's no clear link between the
availability of condoms and reduced HIV
rates: All four countries have plenty of condoms yet plenty of infection. Meanwhile in
South Africa, the single most promising development is that reported rates of teenage
sexual activity have fallen for three years straight, disproving the notion that there's no
point in telling youths to change their behavior. In sum, it is not the Bush administration
that is ignoring the evidence. It is Bush's critics.
The activists' second complaint about the U.S. AIDS program is that it is hostile to
generic medicines. Until recently, this was true: Perhaps because of its ties to the big
pharmaceutical companies that sell patented drugs, the administration has been
scandalously slow to allow cheaper generic copies to be used in its programs. But in May
the Bush team finally announced that generics were okay, subject only to a six-week
review by the Food and Drug Administration to determine safety and efficacy.
The activists do not believe the FDA's change is for real, and their suspicions are
reinforced by Cipla, a leading Indian producer of generic AIDS drugs. Cipla's charming
joint managing director, Amar Lulla, explains to anyone who calls that he would love to
get his drugs approved for distribution in U.S.-financed programs in the poor world but
that the Bush administration's fine print is cluttered with obstacles.
On close inspection, however, these obstacles aren't serious. For example, Cipla's best
known AIDS medicine is called Triomune; it combines three separate antiviral drugs in
one pill, simplifying treatment. Lulla says the FDA has not explained whether he needs to
demonstrate the safety of combining the drugs this way, in which case Cipla would have
to conduct prohibitively expensive clinical trials. But if you go to
www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/hiv/hivguidance.html, you'll find the explanation that Lulla
says he's waiting for. Attachment B lists three-drug cocktails that the FDA already
accepts as safe, among them one combining stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine, the
three constituents of Cipla's Triomune.
Cipla also says it worries that if it files an FDA application, it may be sued by U.S. patent
holders. But the FDA's rules allow Cipla to file a statement certifying that its pills are
intended for sale outside the United States, a maneuver that would almost certainly
eliminate the risk of being sued for U.S. patent infringement.
None of this is to deny that the Bush administration panders to the religious right on some
issues, or that it's cozy with pharmaceutical lobbyists. After misrepresentations on issues
from tax policy to Iraq intelligence, the suspicion with which Team Bush is greeted is
partly of its own making. And of course some criticisms of the administration's AIDS
program remain fair, notably that it shortchanges multilateral efforts against the killer.
And yet the bottom line on the Bush administration's AIDS initiative is that it is huge and
serious. The AIDS activists at last week's conference, whose motives are doubtless
honorable as well, would do better to redirect their heckling to countries such as Japan
and South Korea, which give shockingly little to their cause. When you're fighting an
enemy that takes 8,000 lives a day, it pays to pick your targets wisely.
mallabys@washpost.com
Links shared
- gov www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/hiv/hivguidance.html