Vote

Ok, I’m trying to get back on the blog. I know, you’re all probably super-excited. In any case, I have a legit request: vote.

For the second year in a row, Sacred Heart University finished on top of the charts for the ONE Campus Challenge and received yet another $1,000 grant to make poverty history in our area.

Now is your chance to help out! Head to http://www.one.org/projects/ and vote for Sacred Heart’s final project! It took a lot of work and planning, but it came together nicely! Check out our video and see the impact we had – from financing 8 incredible individuals around the world to petitioning our Senators to support the International Affairs portion of the FY2010 Federal Budget.

The winning school will be chosen based on a panel of judges as well as the “popular vote”, and the winner will gain incredible recognition as the number 1 poverty fighting school in the country!

We’re still in 9th place at the moment, but please vote and pass this along to any faculty/staff/coworkers/friends/family that would like to get involved! Anyone can vote, and you don’t have to be affiliated with SHU or any other unversity to do so!

We’re not asking for your money – we’re asking for your voice. Use your voice and VOTE FOR SHU!

Don’t Vote

Civil rights, health care, human rights, abortion, women’s rights, gun control, gas prices, social security, welfare, education, minimum wage, the war, the economy, global warming, the first amendment, the second amendment, all the amendments…that stuff sucks. Don’t vote.

Send it to 5 friends. And, don’t forget to vote.

ADMI(RED)

As promised, here’s part two of my series on AIDS relief.This is coming out after recent reports the the number of infected individuals in the U.S. rival some Africa nations. Additionally, this week, 25,000 professionals are flocking to Mexico City, Mexico, for the XVII International AIDS Conference. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, said that “We have made considerable progress against HIV/AIDS, not only on the scientific front, but also with regard to the political will, funding and essential public health efforts on the ground that are delivering medicine, care and prevention services. However, much remains to be done, as 2.7 million people worldwide were infected with HIV in 2007.” You can read his full article here, but what does this have to do with relief? Well, as you can see, the problem is enormous – which is why I’m continually impressed with organizations that have decided to do something. I’m not just talking about incredibly effective, yet somewhat traditional non-profits like the U.N.’s Global Fund – I’m talking about innovative initiatives like the(RED) business model.

(RED) is a brand that was created by Bono and Bobby Shriver to eliminate AIDS in Africa. The global pandemic of AIDS affects over 35 million people across the globe, and while there is no cure for the degenerative disease, it is treatable and preventable. These treatments, better known as Anti-retrovirals, or ARV’s, consist of 2 pills and are readily available in North America and in Europe for the equivalent of 40 cents per day. Unfortunately, these same effective and affordable medicines are not available for much of Sub-Saharan Africa, in which more than 25 million, or 68% of the infected population, is forced to live.

What (RED) does is partner with major, name-brand companies to create specific Product (RED) lines. Currently (RED) partners with 9 companies, including GAP, Apple, Motorola, Converse, Emporio Armani, Windows, Dell, American Express, and Hallmark, with new partners to be announced within the year. When a Product (RED) item sells, a portion of that company’s proceeds go directly to The Global Fund, a 501(c)3 non-profit set up by the United Nations to combat AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.

There are several innovative concepts (RED) has presented the private sector with. The first is simply by providing a guilt-free environment to purchase what the consumer wants while giving others exactly what they need. (RED) doesn’t promote excessive consumerism. Instead, (RED) promotes their products side-by-side with items you intend to buy, such as clothing, shoes, cell phones and computers. (RED) products don’t cost any more or less than items of comparable value. For example, (RED) iPod nanos are the same price as the black, white, and green ones – $199. The only difference is that by buying (RED), a portion of the proceeds go to eliminating AIDS in Africa and legitimately save a life.

Most importantly, by mobilizing the private sector, it thereby creates a sustainable source of aid for those countries that need it most. Although ludicrously cheap, once ARV’s are started, they can’t be stopped or the infected individuals revert back to their prior state. By taking ARV’s consistently, however, results in what (RED) calls the Lazarus effect. Drawing upon John 11:38-43 in which Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead, much the same occurs when a person receives regulated treatments. They are, quite simply, given a new life.

Do the companies that (RED) partners with make money? Of course they do. Each company designates a different percentage of their profits that goes directly to the Global Fund. That means the money doesn’t ever pass back through (RED)’s hands. It all comes back to sustainability. If the companies didn’t make money, they would not be motivated to continue with these product lines. However, if they’re still turning a profit, they’re more than willing to help. This isn’t to say they’re only in it for the money or publicity. It’s not just an image, it’s genuine gesture of goodwill.

Others argue against the excessive marketing campaigns. None of that money actually comes from (RED) – it’s all from funds that are put aside from partner companies that would be used for advertising anyway. So whether GAP is advertising a new crew neck t-shirt or the (RED) version, they’re still spending the same amount of money. And, in effect, the money they spent will in the long run be shadowed by the colossal funds (RED) has helped gather for the Global Fund.

So, the big question; Is it effective? You bet. In the past two years, (RED) has raised over $110 million through their partners for the Global Fund. To put that number into perspective, from 2002-2006, the private sector had raised little more than $5 million. Again, (RED) never takes any of the money – 100% of the proceeds go directly to the Global Fund and never pass through their hands. The only fees ever collected are for licensing and use of the logo.

Because of all this and more, generations of Africans have the opportunity to grow up focusing on their futures; not just the necessity to stay alive for another day. This not only satisfies a moral imperative, but this ultimately supports the growing economy. By giving a new life to these individuals, we are helping grow the global market and filtering more nations into globalization. Africa is the last major, populated continent that hasn’t been overrun with technology and new advancements. Relief also strengthens our own national security by reducing long-term threats of unstable governments and societies.Additionally, as countries in the third world grow and recover, they will be introduced back into the economy and become full partners in the age of globalization. Improving upon foreign assistance is simply an effective and morally just way of responding to global crises, which will ultimately improve the lives of countless individuals.

Am I somehow saying that we should ignore the prevalence of AIDS in the U.S. and solely focus on sub-Saharan Africa? Of course not. But I’m also saying that the opposite is equally ludicrous. We can’t merely focus on “our own” and neglect those who are in desperate need of assistance. Truly, I hate when individuals use the phrase “take care of our own first”. We’re not identified solely by our geography, or our political and religious affiliations – we’re united by our common humanity. It’s a difficult concept to grasp, but given enough thought, the answer is not so elusive. Put in simple terms, in 1981 when the disease was officially recognized, a person in either North America or Africa, once diagnosed, would be considered dead in about a month. Today, a person diagnosed in North America can almost be assured to live a long, fruitful life with the assistance of ARV’s. Today, if diagnosed in Africa, they’re still dead within a month. Geography is not a just reason to determine whether a person should live or die.

This battle for knowledge and understanding is still being fought in North America; however significant revelations have integrated themselves into the minds of civilians. Development assistance through initiatives such as the Global Development Alliance are helping the public gain knowledge and are building valuable contacts within the business community. These alliances forge partnerships with the private sector to advance development goals, such as the Millennium Development Goals set forth by the United Nations.  By partnering with big corporations and the brilliant minds behind them, we are mobilizing some of the industry’s most capable professionals to aid these developing nations.

PEPFAR in Perspective

It’s always easier to cast the first stone instead of building upon lofty, if flawed ideas. I’ve witnessed the phenomenon hundreds of times – everyone’s a critic, and I’m certainly not excluded. It’s a well known fact that I’m passionate about a number of topics, many related to humanitarian efforts. Anyway, I realize that hardly anything is ever perfect – but life is a process that is continually going through revisions. My philosophy is that we should discard ideas that don’t work and stick with the ones that do. So, this is going to be the first post in a series of two – focusing on two great ideas. The first, here, defends PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and the second, coming soon, for Product (RED).

Since 1981, the first reported cases of acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or AIDS, in Los Angeles, CA have spread across the globe to virtually every populated continent. President Bush has been the first U.S. leader since to address the issue with full force, pledging $15 billion dollars over five years to fight HIV/AIDS with the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). In order to battle the disease effectively, high-risk, resource limited countries across the globe have been targeted through the plan, which has been praised as the largest international health initiative ever undertaken by one nation to address a single disease. Using the 2-7-10 goals, it aims to provide anti-retroviral treatment (ART) to 2 million HIV-infected people in resource-limited settings, to prevent 7 million new infections, and to support care for 10 million people.

The Epidemic

The global pandemic of AIDS affects over 35 million people across the globe, and while there is no cure for the degenerative disease, it is treatable and preventable. These treatments, better known as anti-retrovirals, or ARVs, consist of 2 pills and are readily available in North America and in Europe for the equivalent of 40 cents per day. Unfortunately, these same effective and affordable medicines are not available for much of Sub-Saharan Africa, in which more than 25 million, or 68% of the infected population, is forced to live. For this reason 12 of the 15 focus countries are in Africa, including Botswana, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. Guyana, Haiti, and Vietnam are the only three on other continents which still make up a significant portion of the infected population.

While the $15 billion is a daunting number that has a significant affect on the crisis, critics say that $50 billion would be a more suitable amount to ensure adequate coverage in each of the 15 countries. Contrary to popular belief, the money is not evenly distributed and is given on an “as needed” basis per country. It is distributed based on prevention, care, and treatment.

On the Ground

PEPFAR has most notably helped pay for not only these ARV’s, but for education and contraceptives, which are integral in stopping the disease at its foundation. The program is structured in an “ABC” format, which was borrowed from a similar Ugandan campaign. ABC stands for abstinence, be faithful, and correct and consistent use of condoms. The initiative has stated that this is, in their opinion, the most reliable and noteworthy approach to eradicating the spread of the disease.

Additionally, the program funds counseling programs in which the currently afflicted can receive support. This is vital, especially in youth and women, because life is difficult even after receiving treatment. In much of Africa, AIDS is still an unmentionable topic that is associated with homosexuality, rape, and poverty. To the dismay of many health officials, the program has abstained from supporting any organization that gives aid to those in marginalized social groups, such as those involved with commercial sex work. Likewise, the taboo – yet effective – practice of safe needle exchange among drug addicts has also been rejected.

President Bush’s support through the program has also helped destroy the stigma set forth by the American population in regards to the disease. AIDS is no longer identified as a “homosexual” disease, and enjoys much of the same following and support that the American Cancer Society has developed over the years. Additionally, interest groups such as the ONE Campaign and international 501(C)3 non-profits like the U.N.’s Global Fund have produced overwhelming support and results in fighting the spread of the disease.

Results

When President Bush announced PEPFAR in 2003, it was estimated that less than 50,000 people were receiving treatment for HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa. The official reports now suggest that through 2007, in just four years, the plan has provided life saving treatments for nearly 1.73 million individuals worldwide – 1.3 million specifically in the focus countries.

In the same countries, 930,000 individuals on anti-retroviral treatment as a result of direct PEPFAR support are women and girls, while 86,000 are children ages 14 and under. Through prevention strategies, mother-to-child HIV transmission rates have gone down in nearly 12.7 million pregnancies. This has directly helped prevent an estimated 194,000 infant infections. The plan has also supported care for more than 6.6 million, including 2.7 million orphans and vulnerable children, while still supporting over 33 million counseling and testing sessions to date.

By publicizing the audacity of the plan’s work, President Bush attests to mobilizing the American people in one of the greatest humanitarian events in world history – a feat which truly cannot be argued against.

Criticism

There has been, of course, criticism of the program. Other AIDS activist organizations, including the Global AIDS Alliance, state that the plan is riddled with vast conservative, evangelical beliefs which focus on subjectively moral issues opposed to public health. Another significant criticism that has since been resolved is the initial conception that only “brand name” ARVs would be used opposed to generics, which are inconceivably cheaper. With newly accepted procedures, generic ARVs have been used since. PEPFAR Watch, a project of the Center for Health and Gender Equity, is active in the initiative’s on-goings, and has also provided its own suggestions on how PEPFAR can improve.

Several think-tanks such as Foreign Policy in Focus have provided new acronyms to contradict the “ABC’s”, such as “ACTION”, which stands for additional new money, cancellation of international debts, treatment access, infrastructure development, offer preventative measures – now. This has become accepted as the most substantial and widely publicized change yet to be made to the PEPFAR program.

National Opinion

President Bush’s plan is not held without accountability. He reports to Congress at the end of each fiscal year of the program, which has been for the most part enormously successful. While it has enjoyed bipartisan support, there is an undertone of mistaken public opinion.

83% said they support U.S. humanitarian development assistance to other countries, including 86% of Republicans and 80% of Democrats (Interaction). Still, 75% of Americans believe that the United States spends far too much in foreign aid, when in reality it equates to less than 1% of the entire budget. Even smaller is the fraction specified for AIDS relief programs like PEPFAR. When faced with those facts, 33.5% still said the number was too great (Interaction). Because of the discrepancy between groups, support from the public remains widely touch and go.

Since relatively little is known about treatment for the disease, the question of reliability comes into question again. Many argue against giving aid, hoping the infected will simply die out and the problem will be solved. Simply ignoring the problem won’t make it go away – it will only make things worse. The problem is enormous, and giving assistance can be justified simply by the millions suffering worldwide. Relief also strengthens our own national security, ultimately reducing long-term threats of unstable governments and societies. Additionally, as countries grow and recover, they will be introduced back into world economies and become full partners in the age of globalization. Improving upon foreign assistance is simply an effective and morally just way of responding to global crises, which will ultimately improve the lives of countless individuals.

Future Projects

On July 17th, 2008, PEPFAR was re-authorized. The Senate agreed to more than double President Bush’s initial plan, bringing the budget to $48 billion under the next 5 year cycle. By renewing the program, the U.S. will continue striving to meet the United Nation’s proposed Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which aims to have universal HIV/AIDS treatment for all by 2010. These actions have been praised by numerous organizations and philanthropists, including the prominent Democratic and Republican candidates for the presidency. Both Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama have pledged to continue with the program and visit afflicted African countries within their first year of office.

***

Ultimately, President Bush’s impact on the global HIV/AIDS community has been substantially recognized with praise both at home and abroad, although the future remains uncertain. The United States is in a unique position, in which the eradication of HIV/AIDS and other major diseases is at hand. History will certainly show just how far the impact of the current government’s actions will reach – the only question that remains is whether or not the country will hold strong and finish what it has started.