Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


“There was a tendency toward alarmism”

posted at 9:50 am on November 20, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

First, the good news: There are about a third fewer AIDS cases worldwide than has been estimated by the UN.

The latest estimates, due to be released publicly Tuesday, put the number of annual new HIV infections at 2.5 million, a cut of more than 40 percent from last year’s estimate, documents show. The worldwide total of people infected with HIV — estimated a year ago at nearly 40 million and rising — now will be reported as 33 million.

Now, the bad (though not unexpected) news: Politics drove the over-estimation of AIDS cases.

Having millions fewer people with a lethal contagious disease is good news. Some researchers, however, contend that persistent overestimates in the widely quoted U.N. reports have long skewed funding decisions and obscured potential lessons about how to slow the spread of HIV. Critics have also said that U.N. officials overstated the extent of the epidemic to help gather political and financial support for combating AIDS.

“There was a tendency toward alarmism, and that fit perhaps a certain fundraising agenda,” said Helen Epstein, author of “The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West, and the Fight Against AIDS.” “I hope these new numbers will help refocus the response in a more pragmatic way.”

The newer estimates are based on better methodologies, but the new report’s best feature may be the elimination of alarmist rhetoric.

The United Nations’ AIDS agency, known as UNAIDS and led by Belgian scientist Peter Piot since its founding in 1995, has been a major advocate for increasing spending to combat the epidemic. Over the past decade, global spending on AIDS has grown by a factor of 30, reaching as much as $10 billion a year.

But in its role in tracking the spread of the epidemic and recommending strategies to combat it, UNAIDS has drawn criticism in recent years from Epstein and others who have accused it of being politicized and not scientifically rigorous.

For years, UNAIDS reports have portrayed an epidemic that threatened to burst beyond its epicenter in southern Africa to generate widespread illness and death in other countries. In China alone, one report warned, there would be 10 million infections — up from 1 million in 2002 — by the end of the decade.

Piot often wrote personal prefaces to those reports warning of the dangers of inaction, saying in 2006 that “the pandemic and its toll are outstripping the worst predictions.”

But by then, several years’ worth of newer, more accurate studies already offered substantial evidence that the agency’s tools for measuring and predicting the course of the epidemic were flawed.

So the opinions of strategically placed advocates in the UN bureaucracy helped drive the worldwide politicization of AIDS policies, which resulted in widespread misperceptions of the science behind the estimates and distortions in funding for AIDS research across the board. And it took the UN years to figure all of this out.

What other science questions might the UN be giving similarly unwarranted alarmist treatment?


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

What other science questions might the UN be giving similarly unwarranted alarmist treatment?

I was actually kind of waiting for some UN official or leftist stooge to make a connection between the global aids crisis and global warming.
Maybe the bathhouses got so steamy because of global warming, you accidentally engaged in high risk behavior with multiple partners…or the presence of so many SUV’s caused you tap your feet in smelly men’s rooms to try and forget the trauma we’re inflicting on the planet. Yeah…that’s it.

austinnelly on November 20, 2007 at 9:56 AM

Which is it?
Do we have an aids problem or an over population problem?

TheSitRep on November 20, 2007 at 9:57 AM

The UN acting politically? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you!

Frozen Tex on November 20, 2007 at 9:58 AM

…but the new report’s best feature may be the elimination of alarmist rhetoric.

To quote John Kerry, “Would it were so…”

tree hugging sister on November 20, 2007 at 9:58 AM

it doesnt seem that this whole global warming stuff is really taking hold as well as they thought it would.
wonder what the next thing for them to obssess over and raise billions for so they can get their cut will be?

trailortrash on November 20, 2007 at 10:02 AM

wonder what the next thing for them to obssess over and raise billions for so they can get their cut will be?

trailortrash on November 20, 2007 at 10:02 AM

Hey, I have an idea…maybe the UN could devise a plan to trade an otherwise sanctioned country’s best export resource in exchange for something that they don’t have but need really, really badly. As the administrators of the program, of course, UN personnel would be compensated for their work on behalf of this humanitarian assistance program…perhaps an in-kind compensation via some sort of vouchers.

The beauty of this plan is that it would be self-sustaining…the sanctions would be blunted enough so that domestic pressure wouldn’t cause a change in policy that would have the effect of lifting the sanctions.

Thoughts?

James on November 20, 2007 at 10:10 AM

I found it shocking that anyone actually believed the numbers these groups claimed with a straight face. There were endlessly repeated numbers how many African countries had one-third of thier adult population infected. Ridiculous.

It just undermines support for a smart strategy to reduce HIV spread.

Clark1 on November 20, 2007 at 10:11 AM

And just like that, 7M people were miraculously cured.

AlexB on November 20, 2007 at 10:11 AM

My kids’ elementary school starts their AIDS awareness education in KINDERGARTEN.

JiangxiDad on November 20, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Why do they need studies to see the obvious…UN is purely political.
Didn’t, at one time, we spend more money on Aid’s research then cancer? Preposterous…

right2bright on November 20, 2007 at 10:14 AM

Just one more reason why an empowered UN is dangerous to the world and why the US needs to pull out of that organization.

I don’t know about other conservatives, but I will not support anyone who does not advocate the US leaving the UN and the UN (whatever is left of it) leaving the US.

No peerless, competitionless organization can be empowered and expected to grow in anything but grotesque and destructive ways. The UN is, in theory even, fated to abuse every bit of power given to it.

progressoverpeace on November 20, 2007 at 10:27 AM

Yawwwwnnn…I’m sorry, what were you saying? Oh, yeah, the UN is a political propaganda operation…I know.

Jaibones on November 20, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Yeah, sure, next thing ya know they’ll be tellin’ us that SARS isn’t gonna wipe us out.

Tony737 on November 20, 2007 at 10:44 AM

GRIDS

jummy on November 20, 2007 at 11:15 AM

What other science questions might the UN be giving similarly unwarranted alarmist treatment?

(Snort)

Yup.

Best part is that when the next generation is dealing with the next trumped up, ridiculous hysteria, and they’re being called “deniers,” they’ll point to the global warming hysteria – the same way we point to global cooling, or the population explosion, or massive starvation, or the Y2K bug (all predicted to just about end the world in past decades).

Our kids will point to global warming and say: “Don’t you remember that? Wasn’t that stupid? How do you know this scare isn’t the same?”

And nobody will listen.

It’s kinda funny. If you drink heavily before thinking about it.

Professor Blather on November 20, 2007 at 11:17 AM

There will come a day when we’ll read the same sort of thing about the global warming ponzi scam. But of course by that time billions of dollars will line the pockets of George Soros and his minion AlGore.

Buzzy on November 20, 2007 at 11:22 AM

Consider the source, the UN.

World Aids
Global Warming
Over Population
Genocide

All four points on the moral compass with no direction.

Kini on November 20, 2007 at 11:27 AM

Now, take the people who are really suffering from horrendous conditions (like, say, Ulcerative colitis, which my best friend suffered from for years and almost missed my wedding because of it) and have a derth of funding because so much cash is going to AIDS research. Can they now sue the UN, I hope?

crazy_legs on November 20, 2007 at 11:43 AM

Totally unjustifiable alarmism from the U.N.? Mindless propaganda being endlessly spewed to promote a UN agenda for more power and money? Really? Why does the IPCC suddenly come to mind?

Maxx on November 20, 2007 at 11:47 AM

Well, Fumento was right about the Myth of Hetrosexual AIDS.

Tim Burton on November 20, 2007 at 12:04 PM

and what about the movie “and the band played on” a Hollywood liberal propaganda piece that blamed AIDS on Ronald Reagan?

Kaptain Amerika on November 20, 2007 at 12:16 PM

U.N. The budding Caliphate.

TheSitRep on November 20, 2007 at 12:27 PM

There’s a chapter in Unprotected addressing this from the college “health services” point of view.

Oprah’s spouting (incorrectly) in the ’80s that AIDS is going to blaze through half the heterosexual population, but to this day you wouldn’t dare suggest where one might choose not to put one’s penis to prevent contracting and/or spreading it. You must have sex, just make sure it’s “safe sex.” Here, take these brochures and a handful of condoms for Sex Week.

However, if you inhale one breath of secondhand smoke from two houses away, you’ll certainly die of lung cancer.

Funny, I was slicing an apple this morning and was reminded of Meryl Streep’s Alar scare… there I am, holding certain death in my hand.

Things I’ve survived: DDT, Alar, acid rain, nuclear winter, El Nino, killer bees, Y2K, secondhand smoke, McDonald’s french fries, global warming, the ozone hole, aerosol cans… even AquaDots.

saint kansas on November 20, 2007 at 12:32 PM

Things I’ve survived: DDT, Alar, acid rain, nuclear winter, El Nino, killer bees, Y2K, secondhand smoke, McDonald’s french fries, global warming, the ozone hole, aerosol cans… even AquaDots.

In defense of the Y2K “scare,” I work in the tech industry and while a lot of people did make out like bandits during Y2k, there actually were legitimate issues that would’ve caused problems if they hadn’t been addressed. The reason why nothing happened is because a lot of people worked hard insuring that nothing did happen. Would it have been what the scare mongers were predicting – mass global civilizational collapse? Of course not. But there were issues with the year change that potentially could have caused problems.

The fact that so many people think Y2K was a hoax actually makes me proud of the fact that we did our jobs.

crazy_legs on November 20, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Things I’ve survived: DDT, Alar, acid rain, nuclear winter, El Nino, killer bees, Y2K, secondhand smoke, McDonald’s french fries, global warming, the ozone hole, aerosol cans… even AquaDots.

saint kansas on November 20, 2007 at 12:32 PM

You know, Saint Kanas, we are some tough mofos to have toughed out all that, eh? But these days it doesn’t seem to make us stronger. It’s more like: What doesn’t kill us makes us more gullible and likey to fall for the next panic du jour.
So assuming that future generations wont be living in some sort of nightmarish global caliphate will they look back at our generation in bemusement as the silliest in history? Hope so. Please, God, let our children be wiser.

mugged on November 20, 2007 at 12:54 PM

The fact that so many people think Y2K was a hoax actually makes me proud of the fact that we did our jobs.

crazy_legs on November 20, 2007 at 12:49 PM

I don’t think most people think it was a “hoax.” I certainly don’t.

But I do think it was wildly over-hyped and grossly exaggerated, by people who knew pretty darn well that it was either 1) a technically surmountable problem or 2) not quite the apocalyptic event they were pretending it was.

Speaking of global warming …

Professor Blather on November 20, 2007 at 1:16 PM

Autism, it’s the new thing. It’ll be linked to everything, except of course the natural get kids to play together outdoors obvious solution. More medicine for the kids!! Good for drug companies, video game makers, and blogs, bad for playground equipment manufacturers and stick ball.

James on November 20, 2007 at 2:03 PM

I finally stopped giving money to domestic AIDS/HIV charities in 1997 after doing volunteer work for Project Angel Food in Los Angeles.

I simply got fed up with delivering food to “needy AIDS patients” in WeHo who were either a) Indifferent and unappreciative b) Never home thereby leaving the food outside to spoil c) Answered the door hung over and/or tweaked out d) Lived in better apartments and neighborhoods than me…

I truly believe that the only reason national AIDS/HIV organizations still exist is to provide paychecks for their thousands of executives and employees.

Imagine if AIDS were ever declared non-existent in the United States….these people would all be out of jobs. Talk about your AIDS/HIV-industrial complex…

This is a totally preventable disease and there is simply no reason why it should still be getting contracted within the “gay community”.

I reserve exception only for children, surgery patients and women who’ve contract it from unknowingly bisexual husbands.

Call me callous but speaking as someone who was there at the beginning and watched countless friends die off before life-giving protease inhibitors came on the scene…I think my frankness speaks from experience.

The Ugly American on November 20, 2007 at 4:43 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.