WILLisms.com: Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 444 -- We Spend Way Too Much On AIDS.

« Libby Gets Out Of Jail, Not Quite Free | WILLisms.com | Only The West Offers Freedom To Muslims »

Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 444 -- We Spend Way Too Much On AIDS.

AIDS Funding Out Of Whack-

In the recent Democratic Presidential debate, Hillary Clinton suggested that it was disgraceful that President Bush has let the Ryan White CARE Act (AIDS funding) remain flat, at ONLY 2 billion dollars per year. Mrs. Clinton also noted that AIDS disproportionately affects black women, one of the core political constituencies in her potential electoral coalition.

Government AIDS funding, in reality (and as noted here before), is completely out of whack, relative to the actual scope of the problem.

The total number of AIDS deaths, ever, do not equal the number of cancer deaths in a single year:

Cancer, meanwhile, is the second leading cause of death in America, accounting for 1 out of every 4 deaths (564,830 deaths due to cancer in 2006 -- .pdf). Certain cancers can be prevented with a healthy lifestyle (using sunscreen, not smoking, staying in shape) and diet (high fiber can prevent colon cancer, for example), but, unlike heart disease or AIDS, the overwhelming majority of cancer cases are not the "fault" of the victim.

Cancer deaths versus AIDS deaths, and federal cancer funding versus federal AIDS funding, a visual:

Shouldn't our scarce public resources go toward the sorts of diseases that are not easily preventable? Shouldn't the way we fund scientific and medical research provide societal and individual incentives for healthy and productive behavior?

Ultimately, shouldn't our collectively funded scientific and medical research programs serve the collective? As long as our money is being forcibly confiscated by the government, shouldn't that money at least go toward projects that would help a wide cross-section of people, rather than a small slice of people who-- overwhelmingly-- could have avoided their plight?

Sure, a small number of people contract AIDS by no fault of their own. Some children even get it. Those exceptions are truly tragic and heartbreaking.

But, ultimately, exceptions should not drive public policy. Smart allocation of scarce resources requires one to neutralize emotionalism and look at the big picture. Accordingly, AIDS research is overfunded, not-- as Hillary Clinton suggests-- underfunded.

-------------------------------------

Previous Trivia Tidbit: Journalism = Code For Left-Wing Activism.

Posted by Will Franklin · 2 July 2007 09:38 PM

Comments

Regardless of fault, number of deaths should be a key consideration in govt. funding of research.

Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at July 2, 2007 10:18 PM

I would say that in addition to number of deaths, we should also factor in elements like preventability and long-term survivability. As an example. drunk driving, though not a disease, is 100% preventable, and the campaigns against it have been highly successful (though it should be noted that the illegal aliens from Mexico find it "macho" to drive drunk, and so it isn't even seen as a problem--yet another reason to remove them from our midst and prevent them from entering in the first place).

AIDS has become less of a killer and more of a long-term disability. As it is also highly preventable, less funding should go towards its "cure" and more towards its prevention.

Posted by: Nathan Hale at July 3, 2007 12:11 AM

With the exception of children born with AIDS due to sins of the father (or mother) and the rare rape case the disease is roughly equal in terms of prevention as falling off of a building.

If anything, falling off of a building is easier to do, because you can accidentally fall off of something. I've never heard of anyone accidentally having unprotected sex.

Posted by: k2aggie07 at July 3, 2007 09:16 AM

Will illustrates what happens when you try to take two small pieces of data, make a comparison, and try to arrive at a sweeping, all-conclusive conclusion.

Merely saying AIDS gets $X and cancer gets $Y and trying to reach some far-reaching conclusion is something that wouldn't get a passing grade in a high school logic course.

What Will misses in his homophobic talking points is that research in one area often overlaps other areas. For example, most AIDS-related research also impacts a full range of viral and immunological problems. Thus, while monies may be designated as "AIDS-related" research, it is helping provide solutions to infectious diseases that aren't AIDS-related as well as T-cell biology, which has implications for many forms of cancers.

Further, pretending that we shouldn't bother with so-called 'behavior' diseases is also blindingly shortsighted. The fact remains that everyone is affected by disease whether or not one engages in behavior one may find objectionable. There are economic costs we all pay.

Posted by: Jadegold at July 3, 2007 09:52 AM

Jadegold: "Further, pretending that we shouldn't bother with so-called 'behavior' diseases is also blindingly shortsighted. The fact remains that everyone is affected by disease whether or not one engages in behavior one may find objectionable. There are economic costs we all pay."

I wholeheartedly agree that we all pay ... we pay with taxes that the federal government, which can use the force of incarceration to encourage compliance, then doles out oftentimes to the "squeekiest" wheel.

Will has dome something here that I have done before at my blog. Where he compared AIDS and Cancer I have repeatedly compared Breast Cancer and Heart Disease.

AIDS and Breast Cancer are deemed "worthy" by the elite and, therefore, tend to get large sums of money for everything from research to prevention. But Cancer and Heart Disease are so "boring" and "proletariat" that, even though far more people are diagnosed, treated, and die from them, they don't get anywhere close to the same proportion of taxpayer-supplied funds.

And while you state that it is "shortsighted" to hold back federal funding of "so-called 'behavior' diseases", I find it terribly irritating that dollars are taken, by force if necessary, out of my wallet just because Joe and Jack can't be bothered with responsible sex. Do you realize that the US could all but eradicate AIDS in this country with responsible sex (not even abstinence, just responsible) and without spending one dime of taxpayer money?

What if I couldn't be bothered with responsible drinking and driving? Would you champion my "rights" to receive ever-increasing federal funding for my "so-called 'behavior' disease"?

Posted by: Shamalama at July 3, 2007 11:30 AM

jadegold, the general point that there are considerations other than number of deaths and number of dollars is a reasonable one, because there are, as you note, medical discoveries which overlap into other areas. It is for this reason that I used the word "a" key consideration in my first comment. That is not a strong argument for AIDS research - at least not yet - however. Much has been promised but little delivered on that score. As to the politics of the matter, overlap research has never been the point in AIDS funding advocacy. It would of course be nice if we obtained other benefits, but if that were the point it would have been also nice if advocates had told us that up front. That they did not is telling as to their actual motives. I have maintained for 2 decades that if an AIDS vaccine were developed, the political pressure for further research - the current sufferering notwithstanding - would evaporate. I say this because in a public psychiatric hospital all AIDS advocacy got to us pretty quickly and I dealt with these folks a lot. Since the maintenance treatments came on board - not so much.

A stronger argument would be "years of life lost" or "years of function lost." Lung cancer kills many, but it doesn't tend to kill them at 25 - ditto cardiac problems. AIDS would have a somewhat improved claim there. It still would not reach the level of the diseases that actually kill most of us, but it would be closer.

If we go to that argument, however, I would put in my bid for mental illness research. Most SMI's have an onset between 16-24 and represent decades of wasted life, plus an enormous early suicide rate.

Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot at July 3, 2007 03:07 PM

If there was a disease associated with the act of oh, I don't know,say, kneeling down before ones creator and praying, would there be ANY public funds transfered to an effort to cure THAT ?

Not in a million 2nd comings.

I know, I know, you're asking yourself,"Geez, why is Mark such a hate filled guy ?" I don't know,for some reason that whole,"Let's find a cure for this horrible disease,and oh,by the way, don't anyone dare hint to any kids that there might actually be a moral component involved when people engage in unnatural acts..(Oops, there I go again)", just doesn't sound sensible to me. But hey,just a dumb sinner here,still tryin' to get it right. I'll never make it in modren society.....At least I've got THAT going for me. Thank you Heavenly Father,thank you for my conscience and my common sense. I pray that my fellow men will listen to theirs.

p.s. I'll keep working on the compassion thing

Posted by: pudge at July 3, 2007 08:24 PM

Jadegold again manages to miss the point and be offensive--all at once!

"What Will misses in his homophobic talking points..."

Will didn't mention homosexuality--you did. Furthermore, homosexuals got the message about the dangers of unsafe sex, and generally abstain from it. As I understand it, a lot more people get AIDS from shared needles than from homosexual "unnatural acts" (as pudge put it).

In any case, your ranting merely illustrates the liberal love of the Other (i.e., those who are unlike us) while concomitantly ignoring or denigrating the majority.

All WIll is saying is that cancer kills more people than AIDS, and should receive more funding because advances in cancer research will benefit a greater number of people. What's homophobic--or even illogical--about that?

Oh, wait. Never mind. For a moment I forgot that you are incapable of engaging in reasoned debate. All you can do is repeat talking points (though you did sound surprisingly intelligent when mentioning the benefits of research overlap. I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.).

Posted by: Nathan Hale at July 3, 2007 11:19 PM

Pudge really ought to keep working on the intelligence thing.

Shamalamadingdong also needs work on the intelligence thingy as well. Could AIDS be eradicated by "responsible" sex? Probably not. But let's assume it could be. The fact is most diseases--cancers included--could be eradicated by altering lifestyles. A lot of heart disease goes away if we ate a lot less red meat, processed foods, and sugar. Same goes for cancers--why not outlaw smoking and the use of various chemicals in our foods and air?

Posted by: Jadegold at July 5, 2007 07:59 AM

Hello. NDJIB5 [url=http://www.tNDJIB3.com] NDJIB6 [/url] Thanks

Posted by: NDJIB4 at July 11, 2007 02:18 PM

unicorn white wolfmother malaysia immigration natural abortion scabies remedy calorie guide nutrition starbucks bike cheap exercise treadmill wipe and clean temporary kid reef sandal birthday high idea musical party school anal girl pain

Posted by: unicorn white wolfmother at July 11, 2007 06:52 PM

daddy daughter dance wedding song holland hootenanny jools fat girl at the beach equipment manufacturing skateboard carp river kelis milkshake video montana shelby barbecue best chicken recipe asia euro travel apartment charleston south carolina

Posted by: daddy daughter dance wedding song at July 11, 2007 06:56 PM

human like robot japanese goth girl hormone receptors steroid baby food goose mother shower cam laptop review web huge shes pipe tobacco wholesale credit earn extra home money data lyman reloading 1970 challenger dodge t

Posted by: human like robot at July 11, 2007 06:59 PM

blood lab location quest test code discount gymboree promotion dodge header hemi ram business center conference diabetes kid symptom alligator cartoon picture buyer farm pa tree fear of going crazy 20 inch screen laptop alt carol poster

Posted by: blood lab location quest test at July 11, 2007 07:03 PM

english horn picture chart flute note adoption league pet yukon asbestos by cancer exposure lung tire chain alternative free jolly phonics worksheets lemon love story vampire book feist jim odds sports breckenridge myra myron hot sweaty man