XIII INTERNATIONAL AIDS CONFERENCE
http://www.aids2000.com/
GENERAL AIDS NEWS
April 14, 2000
Daily focus on the burning issues in the global AIDS arena.
|
| INTERNATIONAL AIDS CONFERENCE: AIDS Experts Urged to Attend | Denouncing calls for a boycott of the XIII International AIDS Conference (AIDS 2000) in Durban, South Africa, this summer, International AIDS Vaccine Initiative President Dr. Seth Berkley said, "This is not the time to undercut efforts to address developing country issues." 12/04/00
READ |
; | OPINION: KwaZulu-Natal Health Minister, ANC Provincial Deputy Chairperson and member of the ANC NEC Dr Zweli Mkhize | "The Ongoing HIV/AIDS Dabate RE: "Dissidents"
READ |
; | UNAIDS Declares Continued Support For The AIDS 2000 Conference | As a co-organiser of the AIDS 2000 Conference, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) wishes to declare its continued support for the upcoming AIDS 2000 Conference to take place in Durban from 9-14 July 2000.
READ |
|
| | |
INTERNATIONAL AIDS CONFERENCE: AIDS Experts Urged to Attend
Denouncing calls for a boycott of the XIII International AIDS Conference (AIDS 2000) in Durban, South Africa, this summer, International AIDS Vaccine Initiative President Dr. Seth Berkley said, "This is not the time to undercut efforts to address developing country issues."
Berkley responded this week to the calls for a boycott, which stemmed from South African President Thabo Mbeki's willingness to consult AIDS dissidents. Noting that this is the first international AIDS conference to be held in a developing nation, he added, "For the first time in history, conference organizers have gone out of their way to ensure that an international conference is firmly rooted in the issues that affect developing countries," such as vertical transmission, vaccine research and access to anti-AIDS therapies (IAVI release, 4/10).
At the heart of the matter is recent criticism of Mbeki, who has expressed interest in AIDS dissenters, questioned whether AIDS is caused by HIV and refused to provide AZT to HIV-positive pregnant women.
"People are thinking of boycotting the conference because of all of these issues," an IAVI spokesperson said, but added that the conference "is a chance to get all of these issues out in the open" (Reaney, Reuters/Contra Costa Times, 4/10).
This article is reprinted with permission from the Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report. The Daily HIV/AIDS Report is published for The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation by National Journal Group Inc. Copyright 2000 by National Journal Group Inc., 1501 M St., N.W., Washington, DC 20005. All rights reserved. The Kaiser Daily HIV/AIDS Report is available in its entirety free on the Kaiser Family Foundation's Web site,www.kff.org. You may also register for free e-mail delivery at: www.kff.org/register.
OPINION: KwaZulu-Natal Health Minister, ANC Provincial Deputy Chairperson and member of the ANC NEC Dr Zweli Mkhize
In the past few weeks there has been extensive publicity and discussion about a group of intellectuals who hold rather unusual views on the matter of HIV/AIDS that they are generally referred to as "dissidents". The so-called "dissidents" hold a view that there is no evidence to confirm the link between HIV infections and AIDS. While there is nothing new in their recent statements, their claim to have discussed these matters with the State President, Mr Thabo Mbeki, has generated media attention of unbelievable proportions.
As a result of this claim, criticism has been leveled at the government by the media, AIDS researchers, scientists, intellectuals and some political parties. This list includes well known personalities in AIDS work. Recently, the media reported that other scientists were so upset that they were considering boycotting the International AIDS Conference to be held in Durban in July this year. The general thrust of their criticism is based on a claim that by the President talking to the "dissidents", the government has changed its policy and believes, as "dissidents" say, that there is no link between HIV infection and AIDS. To confirm this incorrect conclusion, reference has been made to the President's remarks in parliament where the toxicity of AZT was highlighted.
Coming from the enlightened and sophisticated individuals, this reaction is most surprising. But for the record let me put it up front and clearly that there is no change in government policy on HIV/AIDS. The current strategy and programmes to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS are based on the guidance of internationally accepted theories, research and experience, and is in line with the thinking of many known South African scientists and researchers such as Prof Makgoba, Coovadia, Abdool-Karim and others. There has been no statement from government indicating that the widely held view on HIV/AIDS has been rejected. The question one asks is: Why then such condemnation of government?
It is clear that this is an attempt to portray the President and the government as uncaring and not concerned about people who die of HIV/AIDS. Government has been blamed for not giving anti-retroviral drugs such as AZT to HIV positive pregnant mothers and other patients. This has in reality deflected attention from the real issue that all South Africans should be fighting.
The issue is that the cost of anti-retroviral drugs is far too expensive for South Africa and other African countries to afford. It is the pharmaceutical industry and not the government that controls the prices of medicine. The economy of the country is such that South Africa cannot afford the cost of drugs such as AZT, and other related medication. Why are all these scientists, researchers and the media not focussing on this matter? Some of the medication used for secondary infections in HIV positive patients such as fluconazole, are much cheaper in other countries yet in South Africa their exorbitant cost is responsible for deaths especially amongst poor people who are unable to purchase these drugs.
The question still remains why such a vociferous condemnation of government when the pharmaceutical industry controls the prices of medicines that the country cannot afford to purchase for its citizens? This is the central issue which should dominate debate on HIV/AIDS in South Africa.
The issue of "dissidents" is peripheral. Firstly, for the fact that their views are not universally accepted, nobody should feel threatened by these views. Amongst intellectuals, open debate is accepted, views are tolerated even if there are disagreements in a debate. It is the facts and logical evidence that establishes the superiority of arguments in a debate. No intellectual should fear a debate if his point of view is substantiated by scientific research findings. The coming AIDS Conference has been organised by scientists, AIDS researchers and workers, but has been fully supported by the government which provided R6 million as initial payment to ensure its success. The organisers have had support from the Premier of KwaZulu-Natal and Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang, all of whom see the conference as a historic event that will bring hope to many people who are affected by the HIV infection. Threats of boycotting the AIDS Conference are shocking.
As we search for answers and solutions to fight HIV/AIDS, the world needs all the contributions that the world best brains can make. Even during times of extreme political conflict in this country, intolerance of opposing views was condemned. It is inconceivable that the AIDS Conference can become a "no go zone" for some scientist because the President of South Africa had the nerve to talk to "dissidents"! These individuals are neither his advisors nor are they the only intellectuals, scientists or researchers, Mr Mbeki has discussed with.
I happened to have come across the letter that was written by Mr David Rasnick on 2 March 2000, entitled "Talked with President Thabo Mbeki" and opens by a greeting "Dear everyone". I believe this is where most of the emotions and criticism emanate from. In this letter, the authors question the connection between HIV and AIDS. They further refer to questions exchanged between themselves and the President and their views about this telephonic discussion. What is quite clear is that these individuals already possessed these views and were not persuaded by their discussion with the President to adopt such unusual ideas.
I find nothing wrong with the President discussing any matter with any individual. The essence of accessibility means that the President (as we expect all our leaders) may listen to views which he does not agree with. It was indeed a privilege for Mr David Rasnick to discuss with the President of South Africa. But for him to publicise such a private discussion is the most discourteous abuse of a rare privilege, it is most distasteful and unacceptable. But by Mr Rasnick own record, nowhere is it indicated that these extreme views are acceptable to the government or to the President. I still don't find the basis for claims by those critics who claim that the government has changed its AIDS policy.
Having practiced as a doctor before the prevalence of HIV, I have seen people suffering from malnutrition, tuberculosis and myriad combination of infections. Certainly when HIV infection came to the fore, the picture of clinical medicine drastically changed. Some of the questions raised by Mr Rasnick are for me irrelevant: such questions as the difference between pneumonia or tuberculosis with or without HIV infection. However, my disagreement with these views and approach, is one matter. His right to express his views is his democratic right. Intellectual censorship cannot be encouraged.
It is up to the intellectuals, scientists and researchers to create an appropriate forum to thrash out differing views and resolve their differences in an open debate - where they may even agree to disagree. The international panel of experts that has been mooted may offer such a forum. The intention of such a forum will be to search for solutions to one of Africa's major catastrophes.
The other matter that has been misinterpreted, is the reference that has been made about the toxicity of anti-retroviral drugs in particular AZT. The reality is that very few drugs have no side effects. Many drugs are used with due recognition of side effects because in the balance of probabilities, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Drugs used for cancer treatment have similar problems, which are well documented and are acknowledged by the manufacturers. Long term complications of some of the drugs will only be known in the future when some people may have suffered already. Such a statement is not said to criticise the current medication in use. We must always be cognisant of the limitations of the most recent medication and technology that we utilise.
Let the intellectuals, scientists, the media, the public and leaders return to the central issue, that is, South Africa and most of the developing world cannot afford the cost of anti-retroviral medication, even that which is produced in South Africa. When we begin to look for solutions to that problem, we will realise that talking to "dissidents", or listening to views we disagree with is not heresy but part of a new culture of tolerance and accessibility.
In overwhelming numbers people in this country will continue the campaign against HIV/AIDS undeterred by this debate as long as no new evidence suggests that the current strategies and programmes need to be changed.
The extent of political commitment that has been demonstrated in South Africa has been higher than has been seen in many countries in Africa, and the developing world.
The sad reality about this pandemic is that for the majority of poor people in the developing world, it is a debilitating scourge and a ruthless killer, but it is also a high profit business for a few in this country and in developed countries. Blaming government is a convenient way of obscuring this reality.
Written by the KwaZulu-Natal Health Minister, ANC Provincial Deputy Chairperson and member of the ANC NEC Dr Zweli Mkhize.
UNAIDS Declares Continued Support For The AIDS 2000 Conference
As a co-organiser of the AIDS 2000 Conference, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) wishes to declare its continued support for the upcoming AIDS 2000 Conference to take place in Durban from 9-14 July 2000.
UNAIDS reaffirms that its Executive Director, Dr Peter Piot, will participate in the Conference together with other high ranking officials from UNAIDS Cosponsors and other organisations.
UNAIDS believes that the fact that this is the first International AIDS Conference to take place on the African continent provides an important opportunity to focus attention on the epidemic where its impact is being felt the most by individuals, communities and countries.
The Conference will focus on the broader factors that are fuelling the epidemic and its social and economic impacts, as well as the health and medical aspects of the epidemic.
UNAIDS calls on the international scientific AIDS community to show its solidarity with those infected and affected by the epidemic through attending the Conference.
A boycott of the AIDS 2000 Conference would be counterproductive and would only serve to deviate attention from the seriousness of the issue at hand.
Tel: (+27 12) 338 5294
Ref: rcd/media