logo
Foreign aid cuts will lead to more HIV infections and deaths, study suggests

Foreign aid cuts will lead to more HIV infections and deaths, study suggests

Yahoo26-03-2025

HIV infections and deaths will rise as a result of cuts to foreign aid, according to a study.
Researchers said that funding cuts could undo decades of progress.
A new report says that infections and deaths could surge to levels not seen for more than two decades.
Experts, led by academics from Australia, estimate there could be up to 10.8 million additional HIV infections by 2030 in low-and-middle income countries as a result of the cuts.
And there could be up to 2.9 million HIV-related deaths between 2025 and 2030 if funding cuts proposed by the top five donor countries, including the USA and the UK, are not mitigated.
Sir Keir Starmer recently slashed overseas aid spending to fund defence commitments he said were necessary to protect the UK amid uncertainty over the Ukraine war and its implications for European security.
Anneliese Dodds resigned as international development minister over the decision, which will see the budget cut from 0.5% of gross national income to 0.3% in the next two years.
After taking up post in January, US president Donald Trump announced a pause in most US foreign aid spending. He also announced that the US would withdraw from the World Health Organisation.
It is with sadness that I have had to tender my resignation as Minister for International Development and for Women and Equalities.
While I disagree with the ODA decision, I continue to support the government and its determination to deliver the change our country needs. pic.twitter.com/44sCrX2p8z
— Anneliese Dodds (@AnnelieseDodds) February 28, 2025
A paper, published in The Lancet HIV, highlights how international donors have contributed to 40% of all HIV funding in low-and-middle income countries since 2015.
The USA, UK, France, Germany, and the Netherlands together account for more than 90% of international funding, but they have each recently announced plans to implement significant cuts to foreign aid, the article adds.
It is estimated that these plans will lead to a 24% reduction in international HIV funding by 2026.
As a result, the team modelled the human cost of the cuts.
They estimated there could be between 4.4 million to 10.8 million additional HIV infections by 2030 in low-and-middle income countries.
And between 770,000 to 2.9 million HIV-related deaths in children and adults could occur in the same time frame.
'Unmitigated funding reductions could significantly reverse progress in the HIV response by 2030, disproportionately affecting sub-Saharan African countries and key and vulnerable populations,' the authors wrote.
It comes after the UN programme for combating HIV and Aids, UNAids, said that daily new HIV infections around the world could almost double without the aid provided by the United States.
'The United States has historically been the largest contributor to global efforts to treat and prevent HIV, but the current cuts to Pepfar (the US President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief) and USaid-supported programmes have already disrupted access to essential HIV services including for antiretroviral therapy and HIV prevention and testing,' said co-lead study author Dr Debra ten Brink of the Burnet Institute (Australia).
'Looking ahead, if other donor countries reduce funding, decades of progress to treat and prevent HIV could be unravelled.
'It is imperative to secure sustainable financing and avoid a resurgence of the HIV epidemic which could have devastating consequences, not just in regions such as sub-Saharan Africa, but globally.'
And reports suggest that the Trump administration is planning to end funding for Gavi, the vaccine alliance.
Responding to the reports, Professor Sir Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group at the University of Oxford, said: 'The funding cuts in the first three months of this year affecting USaid, ODA, WHO and now Gavi are suffocating global health.'
Commenting on the study, the National Aids Trust said it is 'extremely alarmed' by the potential impact of proposed cuts.
Daniel Fluskey, director of policy, research and influencing at the charity, said: 'These funding cuts will have a devastating impact for millions of people across the world as well as threatening the progress that has been made, both globally and in the UK, on ending the HIV epidemic.
'Like any virus, HIV does not stop at international borders. We will not reach the goal of ending new transmissions by 2030 in the UK with a resurgence of HIV across the world.'
Anne Aslett, chief executive of the Elton John Aids Foundation, added: 'This report demonstrates the critical and urgent need for donors to recognise the cumulative impact of their decisions to cut aid budgets.
'If funding for the global HIV response falls away to the extent this report suggests it could, millions more people will get sick, and health budgets will simply not be able to cope.'
A Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office spokesperson said: 'The UK provides significant funding to the global HIV response, supporting work to end Aids-related deaths and prevent new HIV infections.
'We remain firmly committed to tackling global health challenges, not only because it is the right thing to do, but also because it will help us deliver on our Plan for Change in the UK by supporting global stability and growth.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Now that Musk has turned his chainsaw on Trump, what happens to all the government data he accessed?
Now that Musk has turned his chainsaw on Trump, what happens to all the government data he accessed?

San Francisco Chronicle​

time32 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Now that Musk has turned his chainsaw on Trump, what happens to all the government data he accessed?

For anyone who's seen the quintessential slasher classic 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,' the destructive power of a man wielding a chainsaw is the indisputable stuff of nightmares. But the same could easily be said about this year's remake featuring Elon Musk, where the dancing chainsaw slasher reenacted, for Conservative Political Action Conference theatergoers, a scene eerily reminiscent of the original. I'm thinking, specifically, of that unforgettable final scene, where Leatherface fades to black swinging his gas-powered murder weapon wildly through the air as he helplessly watches his last potential victim make her last-minute daring escape, dangling from the back of a stranger's pickup truck. Social Security? Gutted. Veterans programs? Gutted. Alzheimer's, cancer and climate research? Gutted. School lunches, Head Start, the entire Department of Education? All gutted. Air safety, food safety, consumer protections? Gutted. Gutted. Gutted. Museums, libraries, hospitals, childcare? You get the drift. And what about all those thousands of federal workers whose jobs were cut? It'll take us years to recover from these self-inflicted wounds. Not to mention the generational damage wrought to our standing in the global community by what is possibly Musk's proudest personal achievement: the decimation of America's foreign assistance programs feeding starving children, combating human trafficking, fighting malaria and reducing the transmission of HIV. All summarized, of course, by the heartless tweet: 'We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper.' While the long-term consequences of these actions may be difficult to gauge, conservative estimates are measured in the tens of thousands. But now, apparently, our modern-day Leatherface has turned his power tool on the guy who gave him the chainsaw in the first place. Even implying that his former boss was involved in the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking conspiracy, and has since conspired to bury the evidence that would expose Trump's connections to Epstein's decades-long criminal activities — sort of hard to put that toothpaste back into the tube, wouldn't you say? At first glance, this appears to have all the makings of an Ultimate Fighting Championship bout, fought in the middle of a monster truck rally. This calls to mind the 1990s Claymation TV show 'Celebrity Deathmatch,' where preposterously paired big-name personalities (Hillary vs. Monica? Prince Charles vs. Prince?) fought to the death. Promises to be one hell of a show! What America may be in danger of losing sight of in the ensuing spectacle is the real threat to our national security posed by the world's richest man, who, until quite recently, enjoyed unfettered access to everything the government knows about you. Never before has the data your federal government collects about every American been consolidated into a single database. It has always, religiously, been 'siloed' into disconnected data systems — some at the Treasury Department, some at the Education Department, some at the Veterans Affairs and the Social Security Administration, among other agencies — but always carefully stored and guarded by the separate entities collecting the data. The New York Times, for example, recently published a comprehensive story detailing 314 specific personal details your government potentially knows about you. I suggest giving that a read. A week ago, this casual observer would have assumed these two men, Trump and Musk, were acting with a single motive. Assembling the master data that could make possible Trump's ambitions for sweeping dictatorial powers, and for Musk's ambitions. The sheer volume of data, of course, far outstrips anything that social media titans like Mark Zuckerberg or Musk could legally monetize. And, in any event, certainly not the quid pro quo one might expect for a $288 million campaign contribution. Musk seemed, instead, to be carving himself a unique role in a near-future authoritarian oligarchy, as the undisputed Richelieu to Trump's Louis XIII. But, alas, that was not to be. What is to be, is the shocking revelation that a man who just days ago was given the ceremonial key to the White House — and in the weeks prior, the key to just about every federal government data base — has now cut all ties, and who we know talks regularly with Vladimir Putin, with whom he enjoys a reportedly friendly relationship, is now a free agent. Did Musk take the data with him? To me, the answer seems obvious. The way his pot-smoking 'college dropouts' sauntered into agency after rarified government agency, enjoying open access to virtually anything they wanted — and then they were called out by a whistleblower for uploading huge troves of data to an unsecured server. Within minutes, after Russian hackers had apparently been tipped off, they tried to download it using the correct passwords. We are told that in the end, the Russians were unable to access the data. Whether or not that denial is accurate and truthful, however, again, what should be obvious is that Musk's team successfully spirited your personal information from secure government databases to god knows where. That is the reality to which we wake today, and now every day. Let's hope that after those two Claymation figures have beaten the clay out of each other, someone comes up with a plan to clean up the mess they made. Before it's too late. Brett Wagner, now retired, served as professor of national security decision making for the U.S. Naval War College and adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

New Yorkers searched web for ‘Free Palestine' info more than any other state, study finds
New Yorkers searched web for ‘Free Palestine' info more than any other state, study finds

New York Post

time43 minutes ago

  • New York Post

New Yorkers searched web for ‘Free Palestine' info more than any other state, study finds

New Yorkers scoured the web for information on Palestine-related phrases more than any other state in the US, a new study found. Since the start of the year, the Empire State averaged 8,260 searches per month for phrases including: 'Palestine protests,' 'Free Palestine movement' and 'free Palestine flag' — more than any other place in the country per capita. For every 100,000 people in the state, there were more than 41 searches for the 'free Palestine'-related phrases, the analysis of Google Trends data conducted by Ladah Law found. Advertisement Protesters descended on Times Square in April to call for the release of Columbia student Mahmoud Khalil. James Keivom The most popular phrase in New York, with 3,600 searches, was 'Free Palestine,' followed by 'Palestine protest,' with 1,600 searches. NYC's Columbia University was the epicenter of violent anti-Israel protests last year, with similar ones taking place throughout California and across the country. Advertisement Other Google entries part of the study included, 'free Palestine stickers,' 'free Palestine posters' and 'is Palestine free?' Vermont took second place with nearly 34 searches per 100,000 residents and California followed with just under 32, according to the Las Vegas-based firm. New Yorkers searched online information on Palestine more than any other state. Thaspol – For every 100,000 of California's nearly 40 million residents, there were approximately 12,570 searches for info on the movement, which spread across the nation following Hamas terrorists' deadly Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel and subsequent anti-Israel protests. Advertisement Behind the Green Mountain and Golden states were Massachusetts, Oregon and Connecticut. Arkansas saw the fewest searches related to the conflict, according to the findings.

NHS set for boost of up to £30bn as other budgets feel squeeze
NHS set for boost of up to £30bn as other budgets feel squeeze

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

NHS set for boost of up to £30bn as other budgets feel squeeze

The NHS is expected to receive a funding boost of up to £30 billion in the spending review next week at the expense of other public services. The Department of Health is set to be handed a 2.8% annual increase in its day-to-day budget over a three-year period. The cash injection, which amounts to a rise of about £30 billion by 2028, or £17 billion in real terms, will see other areas including police and councils squeezed, The Times newspaper reported. Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to ensure that by the next election 92% of patients in England waiting for planned treatment are seen within 18 weeks of being referred. Latest NHS data suggests around 60% of people are currently seen in this time and figures released last month showed the overall number of patients on waiting lists had risen slightly from 6.24 million to 6.25 million. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has acknowledged that she had been forced to turn down requests for funding in a sign of the behind-the-scenes wrangling over her spending review. She insisted the blame for the tight economic situation lay with the Conservatives rather than her rigid rules on borrowing and spending. The Chancellor said despite a £190 billion increase in funding over the spending review period 'not every department will get everything that they want next week and I have had to say no to things that I want to do too'. On top of the increase in day-to-day spending, funded in part by the tax hikes Ms Reeves set out in her budget, looser borrowing rules will help support a £113 billion investment package. Economists have warned the Chancellor faces 'unavoidably' tough choices when she sets out departmental spending plans on June 11. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) think tank said defence and the NHS will dominate the review, raising the prospect of cuts to other unprotected departments.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store