Your tax dollars at work: Teaching Chinese hookers to drink responsibly
posted at 2:05 pm on May 12, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
In a time of deep recession, the American taxpayer might assume that our government has taken care to spend its money responsibly. (All right, stop laughing, you know I’m setting a stage here.) Even when we hear about monumentally stupid outlays like the snowmaking machine in Duluth in the Porkulus wish list, we assume that the monumentally stupid spending will remain in the US. Not so, as CNS points out about a curious grant awarded to Wayne State University:
The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will pay $2.6 million in U.S. tax dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly on the job.
Dr. Xiaoming Li, the researcher conducting the program, is director of the Prevention Research Center at Wayne State University School of Medicine in Detroit.
The grant, made last November, refers to prostitutes as “female sex workers”–or FSW–and their handlers as “gatekeepers.”
“Previous studies in Asia and Africa and our own data from FSWs [female sex workers] in China suggest that the social norms and institutional policy within commercial sex venues as well as agents overseeing the FSWs (i.e., the ‘gatekeepers’, defined as persons who manage the establishments and/or sex workers) are potentially of great importance in influencing alcohol use and sexual behavior among establishment-based FSWs,” says the NIH grant abstract submitted by Dr. Li.
“Therefore, in this application, we propose to develop, implement, and evaluate a venue-based alcohol use and HIV risk reduction intervention focusing on both environmental and individual factors among venue-based FSWs in China,” says the abstract.
Almost three million dollars to teach Chinese hookers how to hold their liquor? In the middle of a recession? This can’t be real; it’s a “too good to check” item, right? Wrong, although CNS discounts the high-minded motive behind the study:
A $2.6 million grant will help a Wayne State University School of Medicine researcher establish and evaluate whether an alcohol and HIV intervention center can assist in reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS among sex workers in China. …
“The global literature indicates an important role of alcohol use, especially problem drinking (abuse), in facilitating HIV/AIDS transmission in commercial sex venues where elevated alcohol use/abuse and sexual risk behaviors frequently co-occur,” Dr. Li said. “We expect that the intervention will improve protective normative beliefs and institutional support regarding alcohol use and HIV protection.”
It’s still a multimillion-dollar study that essentially teaches Chinese hookers to sober up when plying their trade, the better to prevent the spread of disease. That may be a good idea for a project for the Chinese government to fund — and cynics can point out that the Chinese are funding our budget deficits, so it may all be moot anyway — but the NIH might want to study those effects here in the US instead. After all, if the American taxpayer is funding the study, how about preventing disease amplification here rather than in Guangxi?










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: « Previous 1 2
The photograph does not belong to this story, the subjects are venue-based FSWs, not street walking FSWs.
http://factsanddetails.com/media/2/20080226-prostitute070409_4_560%20New%20YorkMagazine55.jpg
slp on May 12, 2009 at 3:41 PM
SOME FUCKING PROFESSOR NEEDS TO BE PUT AGAINST A WALL AND SHOT!
GarandFan on May 12, 2009 at 3:43 PM
A difference without a distinction.
erp on May 12, 2009 at 3:50 PM
The point is not the merit of the study but if we should be spending taxpayer dollars on it. When budgets are tight things need to get cut, but liberals never find anything to cut. It’s this type of idiotic thinking that attaches merit to any idea however absurd that causes the government to spend so much money.
dpierson on May 12, 2009 at 3:51 PM
More stupid logic: If I make hundred of the small grants they add up. If we want to fund research then let’s do it without MY money, especially if we are already running a deficit.
dpierson on May 12, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Bubba Clinton feels their pain…. and anything else he can get his hands on.
viking01 on May 12, 2009 at 3:54 PM
Well we wouldn’t want them to do anything indiscreet, now would we?
TheUnrepentantGeek on May 12, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Puuuurrrrfict. A more polished professional class of filthy whores. Just like the new Democrat party.
saiga on May 12, 2009 at 3:59 PM
Pardon my ignorance on the topic, but what is a venue-based prostitute?
Daggett on May 12, 2009 at 4:10 PM
A typical venue in China are clubs and ‘KTV’ establishments where groups of men go to drink, play drinking games, sing karaoke, etc. in private rooms. They select individual female drinking/gaming/singing/groping companions from among a group of candidates who are paraded through the room soon after the guests arrive. Many of these go on to additional off-site activities afterward.
DarkCurrent on May 12, 2009 at 4:39 PM
Hey, this is appropriate. We are going to pay to help Chinese Hookers to drink responsibly.
They are going to get Screwed and the U.S. Government is going to Screw us too. This is just another way redistributing it so everyone gets their fair share.
The ultimate consequence of Community Organizing.
Uniblogger on May 12, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Easy Fix- 3 Million Dollar Research not needed:
Postcard to distribute:
Picture of FSW drinking, guy drinking, sex scene, picture of a man and woman in last stages of HIV, paupers grave.
Ditto for gay bar scene research in Brazil.
But they won’t do it-why- because it might offend someone to tell them the truth about the consequences of their decisions. So they will research this and quietly file away their results and the actions they think need to be taken. And we will be 3 million plus interest deeper in debt.
Money spent on childrens cancer or cleaning up toxic landfills.
journeyintothewhirlwind on May 12, 2009 at 4:49 PM
My first post addressed this: Should the federal government fund the study? Maybe, maybe not. Is the study without merit? Absolutely not.
Again, this was already approved before Obama. And I’m not sure what your specific objection is to this particular study. (The reasons I’ve seen so far have been originalism, protectionism, and the giggles.) You want to put America-first provisions on federal funds? Fine. But don’t expect to save money that way. This study would cost far more in the U.S. than in China, just as demanding that conference trips be booked on U.S. airlines means that sharing research findings costs more.
This is like the Pentagon’s “$600 toilet seats.” It makes a great headline, but that’s all it makes. Going after small potatoes based on value as a headline only — rather than the actual issue and cost-benefit analysis — shows that you’re not serious about the problem. If this is what the Republicans plan to seize on, then the 2010 election — which should be an easy win after Obama’s overreach — might not go so well for them.
calbear on May 12, 2009 at 4:49 PM
But Ed, you just don’t get it! This is Detroit–what is an unemployed $70 / hour UAW guy going to do if he can’t make cars? Make believe he’s Eliot Spitzer in Beijing?
Of course, with 120 Chinese men for every 100 Chinese women, the FSW’s probably have lots of clients who can’t find “it” for free–data are easier to obtain!
Steve Z on May 12, 2009 at 5:06 PM
I lurve me some Chinese hooker.
pabarge on May 12, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Oh, Sorry, Jammiewearingfool beat me to it.
LegendHasIt on May 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM
If you take every penny I’ve had to pay the government in 38 years of working, add in about a half-dozen poor sods like me, you get the amount that is being spent on this.
michaelo on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
This is RACIST; We have plenty of evidence and material for a class action EEO Complaint against the Obama Administration!
Cybergeezer on May 12, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Mee soooo HAWNeeeee, me love you long time….
mountainmanbob on May 12, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Obama will take care of this research personally. He has the solution in hand, got the problem licked, and will leave no hookers behind.
MaiDee on May 12, 2009 at 6:54 PM
You get tax long time…you tax sooooo big…
right2bright on May 12, 2009 at 7:06 PM
It’s a way to funnel money to colleges–get them hooked on OPM and you have them for life.
PattyJ on May 12, 2009 at 10:03 PM
No. The argument that the United States should be spending money on it is wholly without merit. If this was us advising the Chinese, perhaps. This is analgous to us going in and advising other nation’s militaries to act in a manner we’d like them to; I think you’d see that in a different light. The only way we should be spending a dime of public money on Chinese hookers is if it’s through the CIA and they are feeding us good intel.
Here’s the thing: it doesn’t matter if the decision was made yesterday or 100 years ago; the current administration has the authority to withhold funds. Also, your obscene argument that such a study would cost more to perform in the US (outsourcing research?) is without merit, because the benefits derived from the study, if there were any, would he had by US citizens and/or legal residents by reduced HIV/AIDS rates in this country. That would be covered under “general welfare” and while still questionable would have far more metit then the US government participating in outreach programs to study and modify the behaviors of citizens in foreign nations.
flashoverride on May 13, 2009 at 1:57 AM
I think that money should be granted to me for a site visit as the project manager to beta test the outcome of this study.
Alden Pyle on May 13, 2009 at 8:08 AM
2nd thought maybe this isn’t such a good idea, if the Chinese sober up will they still fund our debt?
Alden Pyle on May 13, 2009 at 8:10 AM
Again, your tax dollars hard at work. I am surprised that Gerafalo has not taken up this issue because it is racist, against U.S. hookers who should be unionized and run by the government-at least her real love President Crinton tried to turn the White House into a brothel.
MSGTAS on May 13, 2009 at 10:59 AM
President Obama” I’m going to go through the budget line by line…………….”
bullsh!t
UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on May 13, 2009 at 12:02 PM
They should sign Teddy Kennedy up for this program, HE IS A DRUNKEN FILTHY WHORE
UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on May 13, 2009 at 12:08 PM
There are about 20 of these types of bars in San Francisco, they don’t allow non-Asians, when you get to the door they tell you its a private club I’ve only been in(with a suspicious eye) because Asian clients have taken me. The additional “activities” happen both on and off site.
borg on May 13, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2