US spent $1.4B to stop HIV in Africa with abstinence programs. Did it work? (no)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Africa's a continent, not a country.

Take some of your money and improve your brain.



Pretty much.

Would you rather him say they should have used the money on our own continent?

We shouldn't use that money on the other six continents, we should use it on our own country.

What's wrong with my sentence?
 
I feel bad for this girl. So many online insults. Not her fault that her mom is a loud idiot who taught her wrong.

I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time it is grating to a lot of people that she earned millions spreading a harmful message while being a hypocrite about it.
 
Wait, we spent $1.4 billion dollars just to tell people not to have sex?

Jesus.

EDIT: Oh, we only spent 350 million telling people not to have sex. That's much better.
It was cumulatively $1.4 billion over the past decade ish.


Ediy: at least i think it says that... I'm not sure anymore
$1.4 billion over 9 years from 2004 to 2013



Oh so 4.2 billion total, with 1.4 going to these abstinence programs. Whoops.
since 2004, the overall program has spent much more. I edited the OP a bit to try to eliminate misunderstanding. Now that I read it again, I realize I didn't make it as clear as I could have.

The "misleading" part is that most of the overall PEPFAR aid program itself was not about abstinence, but rather about stuff that actually works.

The entire PEPFAR program as a whole from when it started until now has spent tens of billions of dollars. The abstinence education part of that has totaled $1.4 billion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/opinion/21tutu.html (the funding for stuff that works was pretty substantial)

Since 2004, Pepfar has spent $19 billion to help distribute anti-viral treatments to about 2.5 million Africans infected with H.I.V.

http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/35/5/856.abstract?sid=fd96f17d-72c6-43b6-8b7d-de1f4d5c1365 (the funding for stuff that doesn't work was relatively small, but that's still a lot of fucking money over the years.)

The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been the largest funder of abstinence and faithfulness programming in sub-Saharan Africa, with a cumulative investment of over US $1.4 billion in the period 2004–13.

We found no evidence to suggest that PEPFAR funding was associated with population-level reductions in any of the five outcomes. These results suggest that alternative funding priorities for HIV prevention may yield greater health benefits.
 
It's almost like telling an animal not to do something that it is biologically driven to do won't deter them much if no one is looking. Shocker.
 
Abstinence only doesn't work at all. Also, unfortunately, in a place where rape is used constantly as a method of war, its chances of working are even more greatly reduced.
 
So can someone change the stupid clickbait thread title to something more appropriate?

The American government has done some good work by fighting the AIDS epidemic throughout Africa, and I'm not sure why the OP feels the need to completely write the program off because some Congressmen wrote in a provision earmarking money for abstinence education. You know a large fraction on GAF doesn't actually read OPs.
 
Yeah the title makes it sounds like that's all the US spent money on when in actuality it's a fraction (1/3) of a much larger pool of spending on other non-abstinence programs
 
If a woman is not ovulating, and neither partner already has an STD, they could bathe themselves in an Olympic sized swimming pool of their bodily fluids while fucking like rabbits until the sun sets without risk. :P

This is actually false, as sperm can survive inside a woman for lengthy periods after sex.
 
Yeah the title makes it sounds like that's all the US spent money on when in actuality it's a fraction (1/3) of a much larger pool of spending on other non-abstinence programs

That's the title from the NPR article. I knew it sounded confusing, which is why I tried to clarify the meaning in the first few sentences of the OP.
 
This is actually false, as sperm can survive inside a woman for lengthy periods after sex.

as I said earlier, within a 3 day period (although apparently in the right conditions, sperm can survive up to 5 days. I think they basically need to be super sperm, and the woman has to be immunosuppressed for that to happen, though)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom