• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Didn't work for Bristol Palin either.

Title is a little misleading, but that's what could fit. All of the funding wasn't for abstinence programs, but a part of it was. It's a good thing that part is much smaller than it used to be.

The other parts of the program were pretty good, and aid money for AIDS relief is one of the things that the Bush administration is praised for.

EDIT: To be a little clear-

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.

http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsan...ies&utm_term=artsculture&utm_content=20160504

In the past 12 years, the U.S. has spent more than $1.4 billion funding abstinence programs in Africa. They're part of a larger program — called the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief — aimed at stopping the spread of HIV around the world.

Many health officials consider PEPFAR a succes. It is credited with giving lifesaving HIV drugs to more than 5 million people and preventing nearly 1 million babies from getting HIV from their mothers.

But a study, published Monday in Health Affairs, finds the abstinence programs have been a failure.

Congress funded the program with bipartisan support. But one part of the plan was controversial: A third of the money going toward HIV prevention was earmarked for programs teaching abstinence before marriage and faithfulness. This included sex education classes in schools and public health announcements on billboards and the radio.

Some critics worried the abstinence programs would use aid to impose American values on Africans, says John Dietrich, a professor of political science at Bryant University.

The earmark was added to please some Republicans, Dietrich says, "who wanted to make sure the money wouldn't be spent on anything that might be seen as promoting teenage sex or promiscuity."

At the time, there was little evidence to suggest abstinence programs work. Randomized-control trials in the U.S. had shown that abstinence education programs didn't prevent teenage pregnancies or decrease high-risk sexual behavior.

The results were clear: PEPFAR funding wasn't associated with changes in young people's choices about sex. Bendavid and his team could find no detectable differences in the rates of teenage pregnancies, average number of sexual partners and age at first sexual intercourse in countries that had received PEFPAR money compared with those that hadn't.

It takes more than billboards or radio messages to change people's behavior, Bendavid says. "I think the decisions about sexual behavior and preferences are much deeper," he says. "They're much more deeply rooted."
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
The earmark was added to please some Republicans, Dietrich says, "who wanted to make sure the money wouldn't be spent on anything that might be seen as promoting teenage sex or promiscuity."

The idea that teaching proper birth control usage somehow "promotes teenage sex or promiscuity" is mind-boggling to me.
 
Wouldn't be surprised if those abstinence programs were co-opted by religious groups looking to freely spread a message. So glad I grew up in a school system that took sex education seriously. We never learned abstinence, but rather how to make sex safe.
 

BriGuy

Member
It's silly shit wasting that kind of money to placate unreasonable ideologues, but 2/3 of the money going to a good cause is better than 0/3 of it going nowhere. Vote in midterm elections too, people!
 

ItIsOkBro

Member
What the heck is abstinence education anyways. Like, how can you create some kind of education program around not doing something.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Wouldn't be surprised if those abstinence programs were co-opted by religious groups looking to freely spread a message. So glad I grew up in a school system that took sex education seriously. We never learned abstinence, but rather how to make sex safe.

My public school was in a very conservative area but our health teacher taught it the right way:

Don't want any chance at pregnancy or disease? Abstinence is the key.

Want to have sex? Here's how to protect yourself.

I don't understand what the problem is with that message.
 

Monocle

Member
Abstinence programs are such a joke. Proved ineffective time and time again, yet conservatives keep on pushing them in place of actual sex education because Sex Is Bad™.
 
I listened to this story on the way home yesterday. How stupid. It didn't work here why did they think just telling teen not to have sex would work in Africa?
My public school was in a very conservative area but our health teacher taught it the right way:

Don't want any chance at pregnancy or disease? Abstinence is the key.

Want to have sex? Here's how to protect yourself.

I don't understand what the problem is with that message.
Nothing. On paper.

The problem is conservatives/religious types get pissed when a kid raises their hand and says: "But what if I have sex anyway?" and someone dares tells that child they should use protection and teaches them about the types out there and how to practice safe sex
 
My public school was in a very conservative area but our health teacher taught it the right way:

Don't want any chance at pregnancy or disease? Abstinence is the key.

Want to have sex? Here's how to protect yourself.

I don't understand what the problem is with that message.

Nothing wrong with that particular message. It's abstinence-only education that's the issue.
 

ISOM

Member
My public school was in a very conservative area but our health teacher taught it the right way:

Don't want any chance at pregnancy or disease? Abstinence is the key.

Want to have sex? Here's how to protect yourself.

I don't understand what the problem is with that message.

From what I gather most leave out the "want to have sex?" as that is you know bad.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
My public school was in a very conservative area but our health teacher taught it the right way:

Don't want any chance at pregnancy or disease? Abstinence is the key.

Want to have sex? Here's how to protect yourself.

I don't understand what the problem is with that message.
"Don't have sex" is not advice worth teaching. It goes against our biology and is doomed to fail.

Access to abortion, STD screening, birth control, communication between sexual partners about their last year of sexual activity and test results, and teaching women about tracking their menstrual cycles, is just as big a guarantee.

STDs are not created from sexual intercourse, only transmitted. Pregnancy can't occur unless intercourse is within 72 hours or so of a woman's period.

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
 

hoos30

Member
We should be thankful that only 1/3 of the money was wasted in this fashion...it could have been a lot worse.

This program was one of a half-dozen things that Bush did right during his term.
 

Galang

Banned
I listened to this story on the way home yesterday. How stupid. It didn't work here why did they think just telling teen not to have sex would work in Africa?

Nothing. On paper.

The problem is conservatives/religious types get pissed when a kid raises their hand and says: "But what if I have sex anyway?" and someone dares tells that child they should use protection and teaches them about the types out there and how to practice safe sex

It's ridiculous how many adults act all high on mighty about not having sex when most of the same ones are some hardcore freaks on the side. And the way they pretend like they never had sexual thoughts when they were teenagers. Gimme a break
 
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

They could drown.

Now I'm imaging death by inhalation of ejaculatory fluids. Thanks a lot.

No seriously, thanks.
 
What the heck is abstinence education anyways. Like, how can you create some kind of education program around not doing something.
There are tons of safety training programs that are essentially centered around not doing something, not to mention sexual harassment training. There is plenty of training around getting people to not do something.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
The idea that teaching proper birth control usage somehow "promotes teenage sex or promiscuity" is mind-boggling to me.

I think the logic is like this: they will be afraid of getting pregnant, if we teach them to use prophylactics and that fear is gone, there will be nothing to stop them.
 

hwalker84

Member
I've been to third world countries in Africa. How you going to teach abstinence when these people don't have schools, TV's, electricity, and cannot read?
 

Amory

Member
So to be clear, we're shitting on the US for sending $1.4 billion in programs/medicine to help the African HIV epidemic?
 
US wasting money that they don't even have, how much of that was borrowed from China?
This $1.4 B will pay dividends in the future. And also just because we are decent human beings.

We really do have a defense force for everything including a defense force for not giving medicine to the impoverished.
 

LilZippa

Member
This $1.4B probably saved the lives of at least 5 million people, and an additional 1 million kids from having the life of having HIV. I say it's $1.4 (mostly) well spent.

The wording is funny. I would say that the way the op is written it was 1.4b for just the abstinence programs which are part of a larger program all together. This is over 12 years mind you that is 117m a year.

EDIT:
Funding for abstinence programs peaked in 2008, when the U.S. spent about $250 million. That year, the requirement that PEPFAR fund abstinence programs was lifted when Congress reauthorized the AIDS program. Since then, funding for abstinence programs has steadily declined. In 2013, the U.S. government spent about $40 million a year on these programs in Africa.

I would take from this that others didn't see as much value in that part of the program and lowered its funding over time.
 

Kinitari

Black Canada Mafia
So about 350 million spent on abstinence programs? Ideologists should always make sure that their ideals are evidence based before they start spending money
 
How was the money even spent? Hiring a bunch of people who go to the towns and villages and tell everyone not to have sex shouldn't be that expensive.
 

LilZippa

Member
How was the money even spent? Hiring a bunch of people who go to the towns and villages and tell everyone not to have sex shouldn't be that expensive.

From the link:
Congress funded the program with bipartisan support. But one part of the plan was controversial: A third of the money going toward HIV prevention was earmarked for programs teaching abstinence before marriage and faithfulness. This included sex education classes in schools and public health announcements on billboards and the radio.
 

Amory

Member
So about 350 million spent on abstinence programs? Ideologists should always make sure that their ideals are evidence based before they start spending money

When did abstinence become akin to creationism? I'm not saying it's the most practical way to try to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS but it's a viable option for preventing STDs. I'm sure there were programs dedicated to safe sex too.
 

jblank83

Member
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.
 

Kinitari

Black Canada Mafia
When did abstinence become akin to creationism? I'm not saying it's the most practical way to try to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS but it's a viable option for preventing STDs. I'm sure there were programs dedicated to safe sex too.
The idea that you can convince people to not have sex before marriage is bonkers, and all the evidence says it doesn't ever work. 350mil of that money was earmarked for abstinence education, I'm sure a significant amount of the rest of the money was earmarked for other stuff.

The idea that you can convince people to not have sex is like the idea that you make the streets safer by giving more people guns. It's working backwards from a conclusion.

Wait, we spent $1.4 billion dollars just to tell people not to have sex?

Jesus.
No, it says a third of that was earmarked for abstinence only marketing.

Ediy: at least i think it says that... I'm not sure anymore
 
Wait, we spent $1.4 billion dollars just to tell people not to have sex?

Jesus.

No, it's broken down pretty clearly in the OP. About a third went to abstinence only crap. The rest was practical education and supplies that actually did significantly help.
 
When did abstinence become akin to creationism? I'm not saying it's the most practical way to try to prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS but it's a viable option for preventing STDs. I'm sure there were programs dedicated to safe sex too.

Calling it an "abstinence program" implies they were teaching that abstinence is the only way to prevent HIV infections. (rather than the best way)

i.e. they weren't being taught about contraceptives and how to use them safely/properly.

edit: also the reason it's being linked to creationism is because many of the Abrahamic religions are notorious for using the abstinence-only approach towards sexual education.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom