An AIDS-Free Generation

More

Can the world break down the remaining scientific and economic barriers?

aids nov30 p.jpg

A health worker holds up a blood sample at hospital that provides treatment for HIV/AIDS patients in northern Vietnam / Reuters

In a speech on Tuesday at the National Institutes of  Health, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton  called for countries to work together to establish "an AIDS-free generation," meaning virtually no children are born HIV positive, they would have a far lower risk of HIV infection when they become teenagers than they do at present, and where people who become infected with HIV are prevented from developing AIDS and from spreading the virus. These ambitious objectives seemed impossible not long ago, but recent scientific advances make the notion of an AIDS-free generation conceivable. In the speech, Secretary Clinton proposed three main HIV/AIDS interventions, all based on successful clinical trials: voluntary medical circumcision for men, drug treatment for  infected pregnant women to prevent HIV transmission to the infant, and antiretroviral drugs for recently infected patients to reduce the risk that their sexual partners will contract HIV from them. Nevertheless, although the vision of an AIDS-free generation is tremendously exciting, generating sufficient funding for AIDS treatment and prevention remains a daunting task. At present, worldwide AIDS spending is about $16 billion each year. Even if only half of the 34 million infected individuals receive drug treatment by 2015, that would require worldwide AIDS spending to grow to $23 billion. Given the current state of the global economy, the challenges of increasing government contributions loom large.

Fighting a global scourge.
A special report

Reductions in the per capita cost of treating and preventing AIDS stand to mitigate some of the economic obstacles to achieving an AIDS-free generation. As Secretary Clinton explained, it cost about $1,100 to provide antiretroviral treatment to an individual in 2004, but only $335 in 2010. Reasons for this cost reduction include "a shift to generic drugs, reaping the benefits of initial investments in health systems, and supply chain efficiencies." The potential for new economies of scale in increasing the size of AIDS treatment and prevention efforts also seems significant. Of course, innovation rarely occurs without unintended consequences and complications. Last month, I wrote about a Lancet study that suggested that women who use long-lasting hormonal contraception are twice as likely to become infected with HIV, as were the male partners of HIV-positive women using long-lasting hormonal contraception. If this finding is accurate, the implications for HIV prevention in sub-Saharan African countries are grave: nearly 12 million women in the region rely on hormonal contraception. At present, the efforts to verify or reject the Lancet findings continue. A recent statement from the World Health Organization notes that "the weight of evidence" suggests that hormonal contraception does not increase the rate of HIV acquisition, transmission, or disease progression among the general population. Nevertheless, the organization intends to re-examine the relationship between hormonal contraception and HIV beginning in January 2012.

The economic, and scientific obstacles to an AIDS-free generation are clear. However, if various stakeholders rally behind this laudable goal, they could rewrite the previously bleak economic futures of communities devastated by AIDS around the world, but particularly in Africa. According to the October 2011 PLoS ONE article referenced in the Clinton speech, a $14.2 billion investment in antiretroviral treatment for 2011-2020 is predicted to "return $12 to $34 billion through increased labor productivity, averted orphan care, and deferred medical treatment for opportunistic infections and end-of-life care." This potential for economic growth marks a radical departure from past economic conditions that Secretary Clinton described, in which the only growth industry in some AIDS-ravaged communities is the funeral business.


This article originally appeared at CFR.org, an Atlantic partner site.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Isobel Coleman is the Senior Fellow and Director of the Civil Society, Markets, and Democracy Initiative and Director of the Women and Foreign Policy Program at Council on Foreign Relations. She writes at "Democracy in Development."

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Is Technology Making Us Better Storytellers?

How have stories changed in the age of social media? The minds behind House of Cards, This American Life, and The Moth discuss.


Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

Is Technology Making Us Better Storytellers?

The minds behind House of Cards and The Moth weigh in.

Video

A Short Film That Skewers Hollywood

A studio executive concocts an animated blockbuster. Who cares about the story?

Video

In Online Dating, Everyone's a Little Bit Racist

The co-founder of OKCupid shares findings from his analysis of millions of users' data.

Video

What Is a Sandwich?

We're overthinking sandwiches, so you don't have to.

Video

Let's Talk About Not Smoking

Why does smoking maintain its allure? James Hamblin seeks the wisdom of a cool person.

Writers

Up
Down

More in Global

Just In