Latest news with #PEPFAR
IOL News
2 days ago
- Health
- IOL News
South Africa's HIV Response: Hope, Tools, and Resolve
South Africa has the world's largest HIV treatment programme, with over 5.5 million people receiving antiretrovirals (ARVs). Yet we still see more than 100 000 new HIV infections each year. That is unacceptable — and preventable. Image: Tumi Pakkies/ Independent Newspapers Earlier this month, more than 3,600 scientists, activists, policymakers, and journalists gathered in Kigali, Rwanda, for the 13th International AIDS Society (IAS) Conference on HIV Science. It was the first time this major global event took place in an African city outside South Africa, marking a powerful recognition of the continent's critical role in the global HIV response. The conference came on the heels of deeply concerning news: in January, the US government announced sharp cuts to funding for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), a move that cast a long shadow over the global fight against HIV, particularly in Africa. The numbers are staggering: of the 40.8 million people living with HIV globally, over 26 million (65%) are in Africa. And more than half of all new infections in 2024 occurred on the continent. A Call to Stay the Course Despite fears about reduced funding, the mood in Kigali was one of resolve. Delegates affirmed their commitment to ending HIV, recognising the extraordinary progress made in Eastern and Southern Africa. Many echoed a common sentiment: "We cannot stop now. We must fight to the end", emphasising the need for sustained commitment and effort to achieve an AIDS-free future. That optimism was reinforced by encouraging developments. The pharmaceutical company Gilead announced that Lenacapavir, a new HIV prevention drug administered via two injections a year, has shown high efficacy in clinical trials. If made widely accessible, this could be a game-changer— especially for those who struggle with daily pill regimens. Further hope came when the US Congress ultimately approved continued PEPFAR funding, although uncertainties remain around the duration and scope of future support. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading What This Means for South Africa South Africa has the world's largest HIV treatment programme, with over 5.5 million people receiving antiretrovirals (ARVs). Yet we still see more than 100 000 new HIV infections each year. That is unacceptable — and preventable. To address this, the government launched the '1.1 Million Campaign' in February to close the gap between those who know their HIV status and those who are virally suppressed. But for this initiative to succeed, we need national mobilisation. Every political leader, community organiser, religious institution, and employer must actively support the campaign. Unfortunately, media coverage has been limited, and public awareness remains low. Doing More with Less With reductions in funding from the Global Fund and PEPFAR, and despite increased domestic investment, every rand in our HIV response must count. Managers and community activists in the health and social development sectors must track data rigorously: Who is being tested? Who is on treatment? Who is virally suppressed? Who is using Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) — and who should be, but isn't? We must also stand firm against stigma. There is no justification for discrimination against people living with HIV or those using preventive treatments like PrEP. They are taking responsible steps to protect themselves and others. They should be commended and supported, not shamed. The Tools Are in Our Hands We now have powerful tools to fight HIV. HIV self-test kits are available free at public clinics and affordable at private pharmacies. Oral PrEP— a once-a-day pill to prevent HIV — is also free at government health facilities. And injectable PrEP, which could significantly improve adherence, is expected to be available next year. Condoms remain a highly effective prevention method. Let's not forget—they also prevent sexually transmitted infections like syphilis and gonorrhoea and help avoid unplanned pregnancies. They are free at all public clinics. Let's also remember the link between HIV and tuberculosis (TB). People with HIV are more susceptible to TB. If you have symptoms or have been in contact with someone with TB, get tested. Early detection saves lives. Health Is Everyone's Business Building a healthier South Africa is not just about medicine—it is about national prosperity. A healthy population is more productive, more resilient, and more able to seize economic opportunity. Each of us has a role to play in protecting our health and the health of our communities. Let's work together to end HIV. The finish line is in sight—but only if we don't stop now. Prof Yogan Pillay is the Director for HIV and TB delivery at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He was previously the Country Director of the Clinton Health Access Initiative in South Africa and senior director for universal health coverage. He has worked in various capacities at the National Department of Health. In 2021, the University of Cape Town awarded him an honorary doctorate, and in the same year, he was appointed extraordinary professor in the Division of Health Systems and Public Health, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University. Foster Mohale is the National Department of Health Spokesperson
CBC
2 days ago
- Health
- CBC
Local Thunder Bay organizations feeling impact of global cuts to HIV funding
Researchers and support workers who focus on HIV prevention and education in Thunder Bay are worried about the potential consequences here in Canada as cuts, particularly from the US, take hold. A majority of the major cuts to funding have come from the US government severing its ties with UNAIDS in February. The move paused funding for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS relief (PEPFAR), a program responsible for roughly seventy percent of financing for HIV research and support services worldwide since 2003. Pauline Sameshima is a member of Lakehead University's faculty of education, and a member of the international HIV Obstruction by Programmed Epigenetics (HOPE) Collaboratory, whose research focuses on finding a cure for HIV. HOPE brings in researchers from around the world to develop a strategy of blocking HIV reactivation, while locking it in in a dormant state and making it permanently defective through gene editing therapies and techniques. The research program received a five-year, $26.5 million grant from the U.S. National Institutes of Health in 2021. Funding cuts have Sameshima worried if funding for HOPE will continue into the fifth year of the grant. The Lakehead University professor is a part of the collaboratory's community engagement team. "I lead the CARE program, which is community arts, integrated research and education portion and the goal is to advance HIV cure research through community engagement," Sameshima said, noting that much of her work involves engaging with 2SLGBTQ+ and minority groups. However, given the U.S. government's recent cuts toward universities over their Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) polices, Sameshima says that funding for the community engagement team on the HOPE collaboratory has been cancelled. "All community engagement work has been cut because it's all to do with EDI connections," Sameshima said. "And LGBTQ groups are resulting as one of the largest trans populations that have been part of HIV research." For local support workers, community engagement research continues to inform their own approaches to ensuring people of all backgrounds have equitable access to care specific to their needs. Global decisions on a local level "That community engagement part is extremely important because evidence or research in a lab, standalone, doesn't really address the gaps that we're seeing in equity to access to care and all of those things," said Kandace Belanger, who manages Thunder Bay District Health Unit (TBDHU)'s street outreach, harm reduction and sexual health programs. Belanger knows first-hand how important the knowledge is of up-to-date knowledge of up-to-date HIV medication strategies and medications. In 2019, TBDHU declared an HIV outbreak, after the region reported eight new cases within the first half of the year. "Our outbreak response really focused on efforts to increase access to prevention. That includes harm reduction and things like condoms and injection supplies, along with the education and information that helps support that use," Belanger said. Her team works closely with those diagnosed with HIV to provide support testing and referrals to treatment providers. Growing cases of HIV are already a concern in Canada, with 2024 seeing a 35% increase in new HIV cases compared to the year before. Compared to its G7 counterparts, the country ranks lowest in preventing the spread of new HIV infections. Canada has, however, stepped up efforts as of late to increase HIV research and support funding. In 2022, the country increased its contributions to the Global Fund to fight AIDS by 30 percent, pledging $1.21 billion between 2023 and 2025. Domestically, the government invested $99.5 million over the past year in funding to address sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections, according to a statement from Health Canada. Canada is also steadily working toward UNAIDS's 95-95-95 target. The target means that 95 percent of HIV patients know they have the disease, are diagnosed with antiretroviral treatment, and are able to achieve viral suppression — factors which could end AIDS as an epidemic. By 2022, 89 percent of people living with HIV had been diagnosed and only 85% were on treatment, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada. Still, Belanger said she is worried that if Canada does not step up further in its funding, both domestically and internationally, we could see these percentages start to decline, amounting to a greater strain on our healthcare system. Sameshima said in order for countries like Canada to be able to meet the 95-95-95 threshold, more funding needs to be put forward for community engagement work in particular, as research teams like the HOPE collaboratory continue to face cuts when it comes to community-based research. The engagement part is really crucial to HIV research because a lot of the reason why we've not been able to reach a threshold is there needs to be funding to get there, Sameshima said. "All of this progress to reach the 95 [percent threshold] is about education, helping people to get access so they can know their status, access antiretroviral treatment and then also know if they are virally suppressed." When it comes to the global picture, the 2025 UNAIDS report reported that the number of new cases of HIV discovered in 2024 was 40 percent lower than in 2010. UNAIDS estimates that continued cuts to PEPFAR could mean an additional four million AIDS-related deaths and at least six million new HIV infections globally by 2030. The stark decrease in international funding for HIV research cannot be attributed to the U.S. alone, as the report also noted there was a 77 percent decrease in funding from bilateral donors, not including the United States, since 2010.
The Hill
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
A postmortem on the dismantling of USAID
On the first day of his second term, President Trump issued an executive order suspending all foreign aid expenditures, except for those providing emergency and military assistance. On March 10, the administration cancelled 83 percent of the programs run by the U.S. Agency for International Development. USAID, Trump declared, had been 'run by a bunch of radical lunatics.' Elon Musk opined that the agency was 'a criminal organization.' Social media outlets spread false allegations that USAID had spent $60 million on condoms for South Africa. On May 21, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 'No one has died because of USAID.' Lawmakers presented him with credible evidence that he was wrong. By the middle of the year, 94 percent of USAID's 4,500 employees, many of them living overseas, had been laid off. As of July 1, Rubio announced, 'USAID will officially cease to implement foreign assistance.' The State Department would only implement existing and new foreign aid programs if they advanced the administration's 'America First' agenda by privileging 'trade over aid, opportunity over dependency, investment over assistance.' The dismantling of USAID has already had a negative impact on the lives of tens of millions of poor and vulnerable people in some 130 countries. And the evisceration of USAID is undermining our national interest. Established in 1961, USAID became the world's leading donor of humanitarian, economic development and democracy-promoting programs. The organization has had considerable success in alleviating poverty and malnutrition, decreasing the spread of infectious diseases and increasing access to safer drinking water and sanitation. Its programs helped mitigate the effect of natural disasters and achieve substantial reductions in mortality rates across all ages and causes, death rates from HIV/AIDS, malaria and tropical diseases. Working with non-government organizations, USAID provided educational opportunities for women in Afghanistan and supported independent media committed to correcting disinformation campaigns by state-controlled outlets in Eastern Europe. Although MAGA Republicans have denounced USAID as 'woke,' the agency's largest implementing partner in 2024 was Catholic Charities. In the last four years, Samantha's Purse, founded by Franklin Graham, the son of evangelical minister Billy Graham, received $90 million in USAID funds. A study recently published in The Lancet, the respected scientific and medical journal, estimates that the implications of dismantling USAID could 'reverberate for decades,' with an impact 'similar in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict.' By 2030, an additional 14 million people, 4 million of them children under five years old, could die. 630,000 of those deaths would be associated with dramatic reductions in staff, medications and treatment through PEPFAR, President George W. Bush's signature foreign aid initiative. USAID is a paradigmatic example of the exercise of 'soft power,' a difficult to quantify strategy of exerting national influence through trade, economic assistance, educational exchanges, public-private partnerships and relationships with business and political leaders. China had already strengthened its global ties by investing $679 billion — more than nine times the foreign aid expenditures of the U.S. — between 2013 and 2021 to construct or repair roads, railways, airports and energy and digital infrastructure. It began filling the soft power void created by the dismantling of USAID almost immediately in Nepal and Colombia. U.S. foreign aid, moreover, is relatively inexpensive. In 2023, total expenditures for non-military foreign aid were $71.9 billion, 1.2 percent of the $6.1 trillion federal budget. USAID was responsible for $43.5 billion of the $71.9 billion. The U.S., it's worth noting, gives a relatively low percentage of its GDP in aid compared to most other wealthy nations. As Trump and Rubio surely know, a substantial majority of Americans do not understand the aims and achievements of foreign aid or know how much the U.S. spends on it. On average, Americans believe that foreign aid constitutes 31 percent of the federal budget. About 70 percent of Americans (and 9 out of 10 Republicans) think Washington spends too much money assisting other countries. Trump and Rubio are not attempting to enlighten them. The dismantling of USAID provides a teachable moment. Referring to PEPFAR, former President Bush recently asked and answered a rhetorical question: 'Is it in our national interest that 25 million people who would have died now live? I think it is.' Providing humanitarian assistance is the right thing for the wealthiest country in the world to do, whether or not there's an immediate payoff. But it is also one of many ways, in our increasingly interconnected and interdependent planet, in which a robust USAID served — and might again serve — America's national interest.
Kuwait Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Kuwait Times
In victory for Trump, US Senate passes aid, broadcasting cuts
$9 billion in cuts passes by narrowest possible margin WASHINGTON: The US Senate early on Thursday approved President Donald Trump's plan for billions of dollars in cuts to funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting, handing the Republican president another victory as he exerts control over Congress with little opposition. The Senate voted 51 to 48 in favor of Trump's request to cut $9 billion in spending already approved by Congress. Most of the cuts are to programs to assist foreign countries suffering from disease, war and natural disasters, but the plan also eliminates all $1.1 billion the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was due to receive over the next two years. Trump and many of his fellow Republicans argue that spending on public broadcasting is an unnecessary expense and reject its news coverage as suffering from anti-right bias. Standalone rescissions packages have not passed in decades, with lawmakers reluctant to cede their constitutionally mandated control of spending. But Trump's Republicans, who hold narrow majorities in the Senate and House, have shown little appetite for resisting his policies since he began his second term in January. The $9 billion at stake is extremely small in the context of the $6.8 trillion federal budget, and represents only a tiny portion of all the funds approved by Congress that the Trump administration has held up while it has pursued sweeping cuts, many ordered by billionaire Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. As of mid-June, Trump was blocking $425 billion in funding that had already been appropriated and previously approved by Congress, according to Democratic lawmakers tracking frozen funding. However, Trump and his supporters have promised more of the 'rescission' requests to eliminate previously approved spending in what they say is an effort to pare back the federal government. The House of Representatives passed the rescissions legislation without altering Trump's request by 214-212 last month. Four Republicans joined 208 Democrats in voting no. But after a handful of Republican senators balked at the extent of the cuts to global health programs, Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on Tuesday that PEPFAR, a global program to fight HIV/AIDS launched in 2003 by then-President George W. Bush, was being exempted. The change brought the size of the package of cuts to $9 billion from $9.4 billion, requiring another House vote before the measure can be sent to the White House for Trump to sign into law. The rescissions must pass by Friday. Otherwise, the request would expire and the White House will be required to adhere to spending plans passed by Congress. Republican 'no' votes Two of the Senate's 53 Republicans - Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine - joined Democrats in voting against the legislation. 'You don't need to gut the entire Corporation for Public Broadcasting,' Murkowski said in a Senate speech. She said the Trump administration also had not provided assurances that battles against diseases such as malaria and polio worldwide would be maintained. Most of all, Murkowski said, Congress must assert its role in deciding how federal funds were spent. Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota called Trump's request a 'small, but important step toward fiscal sanity.' Democrats scoffed at that, noting that congressional Republicans earlier this month passed a massive package of tax and spending cuts that nonpartisan analysts estimated would add more than $3 trillion to the nation's $36.2 trillion debt. Democrats charged Republicans with giving up Congress' Constitutionally-mandated control of federal spending. 'Today, Senate Republicans turn this chamber into a subservient rubber stamp for the executive, at the behest of Donald Trump,' Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said. 'Republicans embrace the credo of cut, cut, cut now, and ask questions later,' Schumer said. The cuts would overturn bipartisan spending agreements most recently passed in a full-year stopgap funding bill in March. Democrats warn a partisan cut now could make it more difficult to negotiate government funding bills that must pass with bipartisan agreement by September 30 to avoid a shutdown. Appropriations bills require 60 votes to move ahead in the Senate, but the rescissions package needs just 51, meaning Republicans can pass it without Democratic support.— Reuters
Vox
4 days ago
- Politics
- Vox
Trump's attack on NPR and PBS, briefly explained
This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here. Welcome to The Logoff: The House passed a bill clawing back billions in federal funding for foreign aid and public media early Friday morning, sending it to President Donald Trump's desk for a signature. What does the bill do? The bill, called a rescissions package, targeted about $9 billion in total funding and originates from a White House request to withdraw funding that had already been allocated. The vast majority of that money comes from foreign aid programs. The remainder, some $1.1 billion, was money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which funds PBS, NPR, and their affiliate stations. What does this mean for foreign aid? The rescissions request impacts $7.9 billion in foreign aid spending, including money for migration and refugee assistance, international peacekeeping, development assistance, and disaster relief. One foreign aid program, PEPFAR, escaped. A $400 million cut to the enormously effective HIV/AIDS prevention program, which has saved millions of lives in its 20-plus years of existence, was removed from the rescissions package after pushback by Senate Republicans. What about public media? National Public Radio receives only a small portion of its funding from CPB, but the cuts stand to impact local affiliate stations and PBS more substantially. CPB warned in a statement that the bill's passage will mean 'many local public radio and television stations will be forced to shut down,' and noted it could also impact access to emergency alerts. The Logoff The email you need to stay informed about Trump — without letting the news take over your life. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Why does this matter? This was a relatively small amount of money in the context of the federal budget, but the lost funding will have real impacts. The bill also reflects an ongoing effort by Trump to seize the power of the purse from Congress. As Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, one of two Republican senators to oppose the measure, put it, 'What we're getting now is a direction from the White House and being told, 'This is the priority. We want you to execute on it.'' And with that, it's time to log off…
