Editorial
Ideology and AIDS
February 26, 2005
The Bush
administration has contributed to suffering and death
through the so-called global gag rule, which prohibits
Washington from giving money to any group that performs
- or even talks about - abortions. Organizations that
provide desperately needed family planning and women's
health services have lost their financing. Now there
are moves in Congress and inside the administration
to apply a similar rule to needle exchange programs.
That would be an even more deadly mistake.
Allowing
drug users to trade used needles for clean ones gets
dangerous needles off the street and minimizes needle
sharing. A proven weapon against AIDS transmission,
it has not been shown to increase drug use, and indeed
may reduce drug addiction by providing a way to talk
to drug users and lead them to treatment. It is endorsed
by virtually every mainstream public health group.
Getting
users into drug treatment is the best way to keep
them safe. But the push for treatment - which is expensive
and difficult - should come with needle exchanges.
Drug use
is not a significant source of AIDS infection in Africa.
In parts of Asia, the former Soviet bloc and Eastern
Europe, needles are the major source of infection;
three-quarters of all newly infected people in Russia
are intravenous drug abusers, as are half of those
newly infected in China. These are just the places
where the AIDS epidemic is likely to explode next.
A bumper poppy crop in Afghanistan will worsen the
outlook, producing cheap heroin that could turn opium
smokers into heroin injectors and thus fuel the epidemic.
Opponents
of needle exchanges, mainly among the religious right,
argue that the practice muddies the message that illegal
drug use is unacceptable, and keeps drug abusers from
suffering the consequences of their addiction. By
this twisted logic, doctors should refuse to treat
lung cancer in smokers. In any case, AIDS infections
from sharing needles are not limited to drug users.
They infect sexual partners, spreading the epidemic
through societies.
While
Washington does not buy syringes for needle-exchange
programs, it does give money to groups that use other
people's money to administer needle exchanges. But
some conservatives are attempting to stop even that.
The assistant secretary of state for international
narcotics and law enforcement, Robert Charles, warned
the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, which
currently holds the rotating chairmanship of the joint
program Unaids, that the organization should not work
on needle exchange issues and should remove positive
references to them from its Web site, which it did.
Representatives
Mark Souder of Indiana and Tom Davis of Virginia,
both Republicans, have asked the United States Agency
for International Development for details on all financing
for programs in which any group strongly advocating
needle exchanges also participates. These lawmakers
claim that a U.N. drug agency report attacks needle
exchange as encouraging drug use. In fact, the report
makes no such accusation and endorses needle exchanges.
In the
Senate, a member of the staff of Sam Brownback, the
Kansas Republican, has compiled a grossly inaccurate
chart of programs financed by the Global Fund to fight
AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria that is subtitled "Immoral,
Illegal (with bilateral funds) or Inconsistent with
U.S. Foreign Policy." Needle exchanges rank high.
At the moment, Mr. Brownback's office says he does
not intend to attempt to block these programs. But
some newer right-wing lawmakers are considering it.
So far,
attempts to eliminate needle-exchange programs overseas
seem to have limited support. Many administration
officials and conservatives in Congress do not want
to see crucial AIDS prevention measures derailed or
American support withdrawn from such organizations
as the Global Fund. One important test will be what
the administration does in early March at the annual
meeting of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic
Drugs. Last year, United States representatives there
attacked the scientific evidence in favor of needle
exchanges as unconvincing. This year, the United States
should refrain from such attacks - and members of
Congress should call off their budding witch hunt.
Washington's
antipathy toward needle exchanges is a triumph of
ideology over science, logic and compassion. The United
States should help pay for these important programs.
If it cannot bring itself to do so, it should at least
allow the rest of the world to get on with saving
millions of lives...
link
to original New York Times article
Copyright
2005 The New York Times Company
|