Battling AIDS
It's a dreadful disease, it most surely is. Respecting no boundaries, infecting where it can and will, whether babies in the womb, unsuspecting wives, same-sex lovers; in short anyone sufficiently vulnerable and unprotected. When it first came on the scene in the mid- to late-80s, it was a death sentence, pure and simple. A deadly onslaught, an excruciatingly painful process toward death. At that time it was homosexuals alone who were stricken, and now, decades later, AIDS strikes where it will. It will, and it does, just about anywhere and everywhere.There is scientific research resulting in a better understanding of the disease and its trajectory, and also in medications that permit people to live much longer lives with the disease they've somehow contracted. In Europe and North America and in other economy-rich countries the means to live with AIDS are readily available. In poor, third-world countries the population at large is highly at risk, and as we've seen in Africa and increasingly in India now, the old are deprived of their sons and daughters and are raising their AIDS-infected grandchildren.
So we have an International AIDS Conference (the 16th such) in Toronto currently wrapping up. There have been roughly 25,000 delegates to this conference in Toronto coming from far reaches of the globe, with a substantial presence from Africa. One wonders what is the purpose of such a conference. After all, if the conference happened to be a concatenation of scientific, medical researchers and health-care professionals alone it would provide a splendid opportunity for cross-fertilization, the exchange of information, data and therapies.
Is the purpose of the conference to publicize, enlarge public awareness of AIDS and its universal ravages? Don't we already, the great public, know about this? Aren't we all more than a trifle aware of the devastating effects of this scourge? Is it to prick our collective consciences, to feel a sense of guilt because we in the more privileged communities and countries haven't the burden that underprivileged communities in poor countries have?
Is the purpose of the conference to celebrate the presence of world-renowned and amply-celebrated personalities the likes of Bill and Melissa Gates, former President Bill Clinton, Hollywood actor Richard Gere? Is it a love-in of celebrity self-congratulation? An opportunity to verbally flagellate world leaders whom conference organizers love to claim don't care enough to allocate sufficient funds to fight this affliction?
Is Stephen Lewis, special envoy to Africa representing the United Nations, anointed by Kofi Annan, not sufficiently recognized for the self-effacing public relations job he's doing? Is it really his job to castigate the decision of the Prime Minister of this country for non-attendance, deeming the presence of no fewer than three Cabinet Ministers and the country's Head of State insufficient homage to his endeavours? Is bringing all these elements together in a mutual celebration of need-and-response the point to all of this?
Well, 25,000 delegates is a whole lot of people. Just think of the costs associated with travel to and from points of origin to Toronto, then add up the costs of accommodation and food for the duration of the conference. That would be one huge sum of money. That is a fund that surely could be utilized in a more pedestrian, but infinitely more useful manner.
I'd bet that amount of money could build a few badly-needed AIDS clinics, fund quite a few research grants, pay for a goodly number of health-care professionals' salaries in the ongoing fight against AIDS.
Wot's up?
posted by Pieface @ Thursday, August 17, 2006
<< Home