Podcasts about unaids

Der Stopp der US-Hilfen für HIV-Programme gefährdet Menschenleben. Besonders in Ost- und Südafrika brechen Prävention und Versorgung zusammen. UNAIDS warnt: Ohne neue Gelder drohen 6,3 Millionen zusätzliche AIDS-Tote und eine Rückkehr der Pandemie. Weingart, Christopher www.deutschlandfunk.de, Forschung aktuell

OIM teve redução de 30% em volume de doações com mudanças que podem afetar funcionários e milhares de pessoas beneficiadas pelos programas da agência no mundo; Unaids diz que 6,3 milhões de pessoas podem morrer até 2029 se contribuições não retornarem.

Follow me for more content on these platforms!Twitter- https://twitter.com/Insideforwalls

Hii leo jaridani tunaangazia hatari za usitishwaji wa misaada kutoka marekani kwa waathirika wa viruzi vya Ukimwi, na ujumbe wa washiriki wa Mkutano wa CSW69 uliokunja chamvi Ijumaa wiki jana. Mashinani tunakupeleka nchini Tanzania, kulikoni?Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la kupambana na ukimwi UNAIDS leo limeonya kwamba kusitishwa kwa ufadhili wa Marekani sio tu janga kwa vita dhidi ya gonjwa hilo bali ni chachu ya vifo na ongezeko la maambukizi mapya. Flora Nducha amefuatilia onyo hilo lililotolewa leo mjini Geneva Uswisi na Mkurugenzi mtendaji wa UNAIDS Winnie Byanyima alipozungumza na waandishi wa habari.Wakati Mkutano wa Kamisheni ya Hali ya wanawake Duniani ulioleta pamoja wawakilishi wa nchi wanachama wa Umoja wa Mataifa na mashirika ya Umoja wa Mataifa  pamoja na mashirka yasiyo ya kiserikali(NGOs) ulikunja jamvi      ijumaa tarehe 21 Machi wiki jana tulipata kuzungumza na wawakilishi wa Shirika lisilo la kiserikali la Forum for Women Democracy Development and Justice, FODAJ ambalo linasaidia wasichana na wanawake waathirika wa ukatili wa kijinsia katika kaunti ya Kajiado nchini Kenya.Makala Anold Kayanda wa Idhaa hii baada ya kukamilika kwa Mkutano wa 69 wa Kamisheni ya Hali ya Wanawake CSW69 uliofikia tamati mwishoni mwa wiki amezungumza na Dkt. Rose Reuben, Mkurugenzi Mtendaji wa Chama cha Wanawake wa Vyombo vya Habari Tanzania (TAMWA) kuhusu tathimini yake ya hatua zilizopigwa katika miaka 30 tangu kuwekwa kwa Azimio la Beijing ili kumkomboa mwanamke.Na katika mashinani fursa ni yake Imani Ramadhani kutoka wilaya ya Kilolo, Iringa nchini Tanzania akieleza jinsi ambavyo maisha ya familia yake ilivyobadilika kupitia mradi wa Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la kuhudumia watotot UNICEF, uliofadhiliwa kwa ushirikiano na wadau wake unaolenga kuleta usafi enedelevu wa mazingira, ikiwa ni pamoja na vyoo safi na salama ili kupunguza hatari za kila mara za magonjwa yanayosababishwa na maji machafu.  Mwenyeji wako ni Leah Mushi, karibu! 

Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la kupambana na ukimwi UNAIDS leo limeonya kwamba kusitishwa kwa ufadhili wa Marekani sio tu janga kwa vita dhidi ya gonjwa hilo bali ni chachu ya vifo na ongezeko la maambukizi mapya. Flora Nducha amefuatilia onyo hilo lililotolewa leo mjini Geneva Uswisi na Mkurugenzi mtendaji wa UNAUDS Winnie Byanyima alipozungumza na waandishi wa habari.

This week, Sarah and Jess dive into the fallout from the fractured agreement between UNAIDS and the U.S. government. What happened, and what does this mean for the fight against HIV worldwide? We unpack the ripple effects that could reshape global health efforts. Sources Trump administration ends funding for UN program fighting HIV/Aids | Trump administration | The GuardianNew report flags severity of US funding cuts to global AIDS response | UN NewsComprehensive update on the impact of the U.S. funding freeze on HIV programmes in South Africa | UNAIDSUNAIDS Contributors | RESULTS AND TRANSPARENCY PORTALTo contact the podcast you can email office@tvps.org.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Dr. Gary Null provides a commentary on "Universal  Healthcare"       Universal Healthcare is the Solution to a Broken Medical System Gary Null, PhD Progressive Radio Network, March 3, 2025 For over 50 years, there has been no concerted or successful effort to bring down medical costs in the American healthcare system. Nor are the federal health agencies making disease prevention a priority. Regardless whether the political left or right sponsors proposals for reform, such measures are repeatedly defeated by both parties in Congress. As a result, the nation's healthcare system remains one of the most expensive and least efficient in the developed world. For the past 30 years, medical bills contributing to personal debt regularly rank among the top three causes of personal bankruptcy. This is a reality that reflects not only the financial strain on ordinary Americans but the systemic failure of the healthcare system itself. The urgent question is: If President Trump and his administration are truly seeking to reduce the nation's $36 trillion deficit, why is there no serious effort to reform the most bloated and corrupt sector of the economy? A key obstacle is the widespread misinformation campaign that falsely claims universal health care would cost an additional $2 trillion annually and further balloon the national debt. However, a more honest assessment reveals the opposite. If the US adopted a universal single-payer system, the nation could actually save up to $20 trillion over the next 10 years rather than add to the deficit. Even with the most ambitious efforts by people like Elon Musk to rein in federal spending or optimize government efficiency, the estimated savings would only amount to $500 billion. This is only a fraction of what could be achieved through comprehensive healthcare reform alone. Healthcare is the largest single expenditure of the federal budget. A careful examination of where the $5 trillion spent annually on healthcare actually goes reveals massive systemic fraud and inefficiency. Aside from emergency medicine, which accounts for only 10-12 percent of total healthcare expenditures, the bulk of this spending does not deliver better health outcomes nor reduce trends in physical and mental illness. Applying Ockham's Razor, the principle that the simplest solution is often the best, the obvious conclusion is that America's astronomical healthcare costs are the direct result of price gouging on an unimaginable scale. For example, in most small businesses, profit margins range between 1.6 and 2.5 percent, such as in grocery retail. Yet the pharmaceutical industrial complex routinely operates on markup rates as high as 150,000 percent for many prescription drugs. The chart below highlights the astronomical gap between the retail price of some top-selling patented pharmaceutical medications and their generic equivalents. Drug Condition Patent Price (per unit) Generic Price Estimated Manufacture Cost Markup Source Insulin (Humalog) Diabetes $300 $30 $3 10,000% Rand (2021) EpiPen Allergic reactions $600 $30 $10 6,000% BMJ (2022) Daraprim Toxoplasmosis $750/pill $2 $0.50 150,000% JAMA (2019) Harvoni Hepatitis C $94,500 (12 weeks) $30,000 $200 47,000% WHO Report (2018) Lipitor Cholesterol $150 $10 $0.50 29,900% Health Affairs (2020) Xarelto Blood Thinner $450 $25 $1.50 30,000% NEJM (2020) Abilify Schizophrenia $800 (30 tablets) $15 $2 39,900% AJMC (2019) Revlimid Cancer $16,000/mo $450 $150 10,500% Kaiser Health News (2021) Humira Arthritis $2,984/dose $400 $50 5,868% Rand (2021) Sovaldi Hepatitis C $1,000/pill $10 $2 49,900% JAMA (2021) Xolair Asthma $2,400/dose $300 $50 4,800% NEJM (2020) Gleevec Leukemia $10,000/mo $350 $200 4,900% Harvard Public Health Review (2020) OxyContin Pain Relief $600 (30 tablets) $15 $0.50 119,900% BMJ (2022) Remdesivir Covid-19 $3,120 (5 doses) N/A $10 31,100% The Lancet (2020) The corruption extends far beyond price gouging. Many pharmaceutical companies convince federal health agencies to fund their basic research and drug development with taxpayer dollars. Yet when these companies bring successful products to market, the profits are kept entirely by the corporations or shared with the agencies or groups of government scientists. On the other hand, the public, who funded the research, receives no financial return. This amounts to a systemic betrayal of the public trust on a scale of hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Another significant contributor to rising healthcare costs is the widespread practice of defensive medicine that is driven by the constant threat of litigation. Over the past 40 years, defensive medicine has become a cottage industry. Physicians order excessive diagnostic tests and unnecessary treatments simply to protect themselves from lawsuits. Study after study has shown that these over-performed procedures not only inflate costs but lead to iatrogenesis or medical injury and death caused by the medical  system and practices itself. The solution is simple: adopting no-fault healthcare coverage for everyone where patients receive care without needing to sue and thereby freeing doctors from the burden of excessive malpractice insurance. A single-payer universal healthcare system could fundamentally transform the entire industry by capping profits at every level — from drug manufacturers to hospitals to medical equipment suppliers. The Department of Health and Human Services would have the authority to set profit margins for medical procedures. This would ensure that healthcare is determined by outcomes, not profits. Additionally, the growing influence of private equity firms and vulture capitalists buying up hospitals and medical clinics across America must be reined in. These equity firms prioritize profit extraction over improving the quality of care. They often slash staff, raise prices, and dictate medical procedures based on what will yield the highest returns. Another vital reform would be to provide free medical education for doctors and nurses in exchange for five years of service under the universal system. Medical professionals would earn a realistic salary cap to prevent them from being lured into equity partnerships or charging exorbitant rates. The biggest single expense in the current system, however, is the private health insurance industry, which consumes 33 percent of the $5 trillion healthcare budget. Health insurance CEOs consistently rank among the highest-paid executives in the country. Their companies, who are nothing more than bean counters, decide what procedures and drugs will be covered, partially covered, or denied altogether. This entire industry is designed to place profits above patients' lives. If the US dismantled its existing insurance-based system and replaced it with a fully reformed national healthcare model, the country could save $2.7 trillion annually while simultaneously improving health outcomes. Over the course of 10 years, those savings would amount to $27 trillion. This could wipe out nearly the entire national debt in a short time. This solution has been available for decades but has been systematically blocked by corporate lobbying and bipartisan corruption in Washington. The path forward is clear but only if American citizens demand a system where healthcare is valued as a public service and not a commodity. The national healthcare crisis is not just a fiscal issue. It is a crucial moral failure of the highest order. With the right reforms, the nation could simultaneously restore its financial health and deliver the kind of healthcare system its citizens have long deserved. American Healthcare: Corrupt, Broken and Lethal Richard Gale and Gary Null Progressive Radio Network, March 3, 2025 For a nation that prides itself on being the world's wealthiest, most innovative and technologically advanced, the US' healthcare system is nothing less than a disaster and disgrace. Not only are Americans the least healthy among the most developed nations, but the US' health system ranks dead last among high-income countries. Despite rising costs and our unshakeable faith in American medical exceptionalism, average life expectancy in the US has remained lower than other OECD nations for many years and continues to decline. The United Nations recognizes healthcare as a human right. In 2018, former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon denounced the American healthcare system as "politically and morally wrong." During the pandemic it is estimated that two to three years was lost on average life expectancy. On the other hand, before the Covid-19 pandemic, countries with universal healthcare coverage found their average life expectancy stable or slowly increasing. The fundamental problem in the U.S. is that politics have been far too beholden to the pharmaceutical, HMO and private insurance industries. Neither party has made any concerted effort to reign in the corruption of corporate campaign funding and do what is sensible, financially feasible and morally correct to improve Americans' quality of health and well-being.   The fact that our healthcare system is horribly broken is proof that moneyed interests have become so powerful to keep single-payer debate out of the media spotlight and censored. Poll after poll shows that the American public favors the expansion of public health coverage. Other incremental proposals, including Medicare and Medicaid buy-in plans, are also widely preferred to the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare mess we are currently stuck with.   It is not difficult to understand how the dismal state of American medicine is the result of a system that has been sold out to the free-market and the bottom line interests of drug makers and an inflated private insurance industry. How advanced and ethically sound can a healthcare system be if tens of millions of people have no access to medical care because it is financially out of their reach?  The figures speak for themselves. The U.S. is burdened with a $41 trillion Medicare liability. The number of uninsured has declined during the past several years but still lingers around 25 million. An additional 30-35 million are underinsured. There are currently 65 million Medicare enrollees and 89 million Medicaid recipients. This is an extremely unhealthy snapshot of the country's ability to provide affordable healthcare and it is certainly unsustainable. The system is a public economic failure, benefiting no one except the large and increasingly consolidated insurance and pharmaceutical firms at the top that supervise the racket.   Our political parties have wrestled with single-payer or universal healthcare for decades. Obama ran his first 2008 presidential campaign on a single-payer platform. Since 1985, his campaign health adviser, the late Dr. Quentin Young from the University of Illinois Medical School, was one of the nation's leading voices calling for universal health coverage.  During a private conversation with Dr. Young shortly before his passing in 2016, he conveyed his sense of betrayal at the hands of the Obama administration. Dr. Young was in his 80s when he joined the Obama campaign team to help lead the young Senator to victory on a promise that America would finally catch up with other nations. The doctor sounded defeated. He shared how he was manipulated, and that Obama held no sincere intention to make universal healthcare a part of his administration's agenda. During the closed-door negotiations, which spawned the weak and compromised Affordable Care Act, Dr. Young was neither consulted nor invited to participate. In fact, he told us that he never heard from Obama again after his White House victory.   Past efforts to even raise the issue have been viciously attacked. A huge army of private interests is determined to keep the public enslaved to private insurers and high medical costs. The failure of our healthcare is in no small measure due to it being a fully for-profit operation. Last year, private health insurance accounted for 65 percent of coverage. Consider that there are over 900 private insurance companies in the US. National Health Expenditures (NHE) grew to $4.5 trillion in 2022, which was 17.3 percent of GDP. Older corporate rank-and-file Democrats and Republicans argue that a single-payer or socialized medical program is unaffordable. However, not only is single-payer affordable, it will end bankruptcies due to unpayable medical debt. In addition, universal healthcare, structured on a preventative model, will reduce disease rates at the outset.    Corporate Democrats argue that Obama's Affordable Care Act (ACA) was a positive step inching the country towards complete public coverage. However, aside from providing coverage to the poorest of Americans, Obamacare turned into another financial anchor around the necks of millions more. According to the health policy research group KFF, the average annual health insurance premium for single coverage is $8,400 and almost $24,000 for a family. In addition, patient out-of-pocket costs continue to increase, a 6.6% increase to $471 billion in 2022. Rather than healthcare spending falling, it has exploded, and the Trump and Biden administrations made matters worse.    Clearly, a universal healthcare program will require flipping the script on the entire private insurance industry, which employed over half a million people last year.  Obviously, the most volatile debate concerning a national universal healthcare system concerns cost. Although there is already a socialized healthcare system in place -- every federal legislator, bureaucrat, government employee and veteran benefits from it -- fiscal Republican conservatives and groups such as the Koch Brothers network are single-mindedly dedicated to preventing the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid. A Koch-funded Mercatus analysis made the outrageous claim that a single-payer system would increase federal health spending by $32 trillion in ten years. However, analyses and reviews by the Congressional Budget Office in the early 1990s concluded that such a system would only increase spending at the start; enormous savings would quickly offset it as the years pass. In one analysis, "the savings in administrative costs [10 percent of health spending] would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage."    Defenders of those advocating for funding a National Health Program argue this can primarily be accomplished by raising taxes to levels comparable to other developed nations. This was a platform Senator Bernie Sanders and some of the younger progressive Democrats in the House campaigned on. The strategy was to tax the highest multimillion-dollar earners 60-70 percent. Despite the outrage of its critics, including old rank-and-file multi-millionaire Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, this is still far less than in the past. During the Korean War, the top tax rate was 91 percent; it declined to 70 percent in the late 1960s. Throughout most of the 1970s, those in the lowest income bracket were taxed at 14 percent. We are not advocating for this strategy because it ignores where the funding is going, and the corruption in the system that is contributing to exorbitant waste.    But Democratic supporters of the ACA who oppose a universal healthcare plan ignore the additional taxes Obama levied to pay for the program. These included surtaxes on investment income, Medicare taxes from those earning over $200,000, taxes on tanning services, an excise tax on medical equipment, and a 40 percent tax on health coverage for costs over the designated cap that applied to flexible savings and health savings accounts. The entire ACA was reckless, sloppy and unnecessarily complicated from the start.    The fact that Obamacare further strengthened the distinctions between two parallel systems -- federal and private -- with entirely different economic structures created a labyrinth of red tape, rules, and wasteful bureaucracy. Since the ACA went into effect, over 150 new boards, agencies and programs have had to be established to monitor its 2,700 pages of gibberish. A federal single-payer system would easily eliminate this bureaucracy and waste.    A medical New Deal to establish universal healthcare coverage is a decisive step in the correct direction. But we must look at the crisis holistically and in a systematic way. Simply shuffling private insurance into a federal Medicare-for-all or buy-in program, funded by taxing the wealthiest of citizens, would only temporarily reduce costs. It will neither curtail nor slash escalating disease rates e. Any effective healthcare reform must also tackle the underlying reasons for Americans' poor state of health. We cannot shy away from examining the social illnesses infecting our entire free-market capitalist culture and its addiction to deregulation. A viable healthcare model would have to structurally transform how the medical economy operates. Finally, a successful medical New Deal must honestly evaluate the best and most reliable scientific evidence in order to effectively redirect public health spending.    For example, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a former Obama healthcare adviser, observed that AIDS-HIV measures consume the most public health spending, even though the disease "ranked 75th on the list of diseases by personal health expenditures." On the other hand, according to the American Medical Association, a large percentage of the nation's $3.4 trillion healthcare spending goes towards treating preventable diseases, notably diabetes, common forms of heart disease, and back and neck pain conditions. In 2016, these three conditions were the most costly and accounted for approximately $277 billion in spending. Last year, the CDC announced the autism rate is now 1 in 36 children compared to 1 in 44 two years ago. A retracted study by Mark Blaxill, an autism activist at the Holland Center and a friend of the authors, estimates that ASD costs will reach $589 billion annually by 2030. There are no signs that this alarming trend will reverse and decline; and yet, our entire federal health system has failed to conscientiously investigate the underlying causes of this epidemic. All explanations that might interfere with the pharmaceutical industry's unchecked growth, such as over-vaccination, are ignored and viciously discredited without any sound scientific evidence. Therefore, a proper medical New Deal will require a systemic overhaul and reform of our federal health agencies, especially the HHS, CDC and FDA. Only the Robert Kennedy Jr presidential campaign is even addressing the crisis and has an inexpensive and comprehensive plan to deal with it. For any medical revolution to succeed in advancing universal healthcare, the plan must prioritize spending in a manner that serves public health and not private interests. It will also require reshuffling private corporate interests and their lobbyists to the sidelines, away from any strategic planning, in order to break up the private interests' control over federal agencies and its revolving door policies. Aside from those who benefit from this medical corruption, the overwhelming majority of Americans would agree with this criticism. However, there is a complete lack of national trust that our legislators, including the so-called progressives, would be willing to undertake such actions.    In addition, America's healthcare system ignores the single most critical initiative to reduce costs - that is, preventative efforts and programs instead of deregulation and closing loopholes designed to protect the drug and insurance industries' bottom line. Prevention can begin with banning toxic chemicals that are proven health hazards associated with current disease epidemics, and it can begin by removing a 1,000-plus toxins already banned in Europe. This should be a no-brainer for any legislator who cares for public health. For example, Stacy Malkan, co-founder of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, notes that "the policy approach in the US and Europe is dramatically different" when it comes to chemical allowances in cosmetic products. Whereas the EU has banned 1,328 toxic substances from the cosmetic industry alone, the US has banned only 11. The US continues to allow carcinogenic formaldehyde, petroleum, forever chemicals, many parabens (an estrogen mimicker and endocrine hormone destroyer), the highly allergenic p-phenylenediamine or PBD, triclosan, which has been associated with the rise in antibiotic resistant bacteria, avobenzone, and many others to be used in cosmetics, sunscreens, shampoo and hair dyes.   Next, the food Americans consume can be reevaluated for its health benefits. There should be no hesitation to tax the unhealthiest foods, such as commercial junk food, sodas and candy relying on high fructose corn syrup, products that contain ingredients proven to be toxic, and meat products laden with dangerous chemicals including growth hormones and antibiotics. The scientific evidence that the average American diet is contributing to rising disease trends is indisputable. We could also implement additional taxes on the public advertising of these demonstrably unhealthy products. All such tax revenue would accrue to a national universal health program to offset medical expenditures associated with the very illnesses linked to these products. Although such tax measures would help pay for a new medical New Deal, it may be combined with programs to educate the public about healthy nutrition if it is to produce a reduction in the most common preventable diseases. In fact, comprehensive nutrition courses in medical schools should be mandatory because the average physician receives no education in this crucial subject.  In addition, preventative health education should be mandatory throughout public school systems.   Private insurers force hospitals, clinics and private physicians into financial corners, and this is contributing to prodigious waste in money and resources. Annually, healthcare spending towards medical liability insurance costs tens of billions of dollars. In particular, this economic burden has taxed small clinics and physicians. It is well past the time that physician liability insurance is replaced with no-fault options. Today's doctors are spending an inordinate amount of money to protect themselves. Legions of liability and trial lawyers seek big paydays for themselves stemming from physician error. This has created a culture of fear among doctors and hospitals, resulting in the overly cautious practice of defensive medicine, driving up costs and insurance premiums just to avoid lawsuits. Doctors are forced to order unnecessary tests and prescribe more medications and medical procedures just to cover their backsides. No-fault insurance is a common-sense plan that enables physicians to pursue their profession in a manner that will reduce iatrogenic injuries and costs. Individual cases requiring additional medical intervention and loss of income would still be compensated. This would generate huge savings.    No other nation suffers from the scourge of excessive drug price gouging like the US. After many years of haggling to lower prices and increase access to generic drugs, only a minute amount of progress has been made in recent years. A 60 Minutes feature about the Affordable Care Act reported an "orgy of lobbying and backroom deals in which just about everyone with a stake in the $3-trillion-a-year health industry came out ahead—except the taxpayers.” For example, Life Extension magazine reported that an antiviral cream (acyclovir), which had lost its patent protection, "was being sold to pharmacies for 7,500% over the active ingredient cost. The active ingredient (acyclovir) costs only 8 pennies, yet pharmacies are paying a generic maker $600 for this drug and selling it to consumers for around $700." Other examples include the antibiotic Doxycycline. The price per pill averages 7 cents to $3.36 but has a 5,300 percent markup when it reaches the consumer. The antidepressant Clomipramine is marked up 3,780 percent, and the anti-hypertensive drug Captopril's mark-up is 2,850 percent. And these are generic drugs!    Medication costs need to be dramatically cut to allow drug manufacturers a reasonable but not obscene profit margin. By capping profits approximately 100 percent above all costs, we would save our system hundreds of billions of dollars. Such a measure would also extirpate the growing corporate misdemeanors of pricing fraud, which forces patients to pay out-of-pocket in order to make up for the costs insurers are unwilling to pay.    Finally, we can acknowledge that our healthcare is fundamentally a despotic rationing system based upon high insurance costs vis-a-vis a toss of the dice to determine where a person sits on the economic ladder. For the past three decades it has contributed to inequality. The present insurance-based economic metrics cast millions of Americans out of coverage because private insurance costs are beyond their means. Uwe Reinhardt, a Princeton University political economist, has called our system "brutal" because it "rations [people] out of the system." He defined rationing as "withholding something from someone that is beneficial." Discriminatory healthcare rationing now affects upwards to 60 million people who have been either priced out of the system or under insured. They make too much to qualify for Medicare under Obamacare, yet earn far too little to afford private insurance costs and premiums. In the final analysis, the entire system is discriminatory and predatory.    However, we must be realistic. Almost every member of Congress has benefited from Big Pharma and private insurance lobbyists. The only way to begin to bring our healthcare program up to the level of a truly developed nation is to remove the drug industry's rampant and unnecessary profiteering from the equation.     How did Fauci memory-hole a cure for AIDS and get away with it?   By Helen Buyniski   Over 700,000 Americans have died of AIDS since 1981, with the disease claiming some 42.3 million victims worldwide. While an HIV diagnosis is no longer considered a certain death sentence, the disease looms large in the public imagination and in public health funding, with contemporary treatments running into thousands of dollars per patient annually.   But was there a cure for AIDS all this time - an affordable and safe treatment that was ruthlessly suppressed and attacked by the US public health bureaucracy and its agents? Could this have saved millions of lives and billions of dollars spent on AZT, ddI and failed HIV vaccine trials? What could possibly justify the decision to disappear a safe and effective approach down the memory hole?   The inventor of the cure, Gary Null, already had several decades of experience creating healing protocols for physicians to help patients not responding well to conventional treatments by the time AIDS was officially defined in 1981. Null, a registered dietitian and board-certified nutritionist with a PhD in human nutrition and public health science, was a senior research fellow and Director of Anti-Aging Medicine at the Institute of Applied Biology for 36 years and has published over 950 papers, conducting groundbreaking experiments in reversing biological aging as confirmed with DNA methylation testing. Additionally, Null is a multi-award-winning documentary filmmaker, bestselling author, and investigative journalist whose work exposing crimes against humanity over the last 50 years has highlighted abuses by Big Pharma, the military-industrial complex, the financial industry, and the permanent government stay-behind networks that have come to be known as the Deep State.   Null was contacted in 1974 by Dr. Stephen Caiazza, a physician working with a subculture of gay men in New York living the so-called “fast track” lifestyle, an extreme manifestation of the gay liberation movement that began with the Stonewall riots. Defined by rampant sexual promiscuity and copious use of illegal and prescription drugs, including heavy antibiotic use for a cornucopia of sexually-transmitted diseases, the fast-track never included more than about two percent of gay men, though these dominated many of the bathhouses and clubs that defined gay nightlife in the era. These patients had become seriously ill as a result of their indulgence, generally arriving at the clinic with multiple STDs including cytomegalovirus and several types of herpes and hepatitis, along with candida overgrowth, nutritional deficiencies, gut issues, and recurring pneumonia. Every week for the next 10 years, Null would counsel two or three of these men - a total of 800 patients - on how to detoxify their bodies and de-stress their lives, tracking their progress with Caiazza and the other providers at weekly feedback meetings that he credits with allowing the team to quickly evaluate which treatments were most effective. He observed that it only took about two years on the “fast track” for a healthy young person to begin seeing muscle loss and the recurrent, lingering opportunistic infections that would later come to be associated with AIDS - while those willing to commit to a healthier lifestyle could regain their health in about a year.    It was with this background that Null established the Tri-State Healing Center in Manhattan in 1980, staffing the facility with what would eventually run to 22 certified health professionals to offer safe, natural, and effective low- and no-cost treatments to thousands of patients with HIV and AIDS-defining conditions. Null and his staff used variations of the protocols he had perfected with Caiazza's patients, a multifactorial patient-tailored approach that included high-dose vitamin C drips, intravenous ozone therapy, juicing and nutritional improvements and supplementation, aspects of homeopathy and naturopathy with some Traditional Chinese Medicine and Ayurvedic practices. Additional services offered on-site included acupuncture and holistic dentistry, while peer support groups were also held at the facility so that patients could find community and a positive environment, healing their minds and spirits while they healed their bodies.   “Instead of trying to kill the virus with antiretroviral pharmaceuticals designed to stop viral replication before it kills patients, we focused on what benefits could be gained by building up the patients' natural immunity and restoring biochemical integrity so the body could fight for itself,” Null wrote in a 2014 article describing the philosophy behind the Center's approach, which was wholly at odds with the pharmaceutical model.1   Patients were comprehensively tested every week, with any “recovery” defined solely by the labs, which documented AIDS patient after patient - 1,200 of them - returning to good health and reversing their debilitating conditions. Null claims to have never lost an AIDS patient in the Center's care, even as the death toll for the disease - and its pharmaceutical standard of care AZT - reached an all-time high in the early 1990s. Eight patients who had opted for a more intensive course of treatment - visiting the Center six days a week rather than one - actually sero-deconverted, with repeated subsequent testing showing no trace of HIV in their bodies.   As an experienced clinical researcher himself, Null recognized that any claims made by the Center would be massively scrutinized, challenging as they did the prevailing scientific consensus that AIDS was an incurable, terminal illness. He freely gave his protocols to any medical practitioner who asked, understanding that his own work could be considered scientifically valid only if others could replicate it under the same conditions. After weeks of daily observational visits to the Center, Dr. Robert Cathcart took the protocols back to San Francisco, where he excitedly reported that patients were no longer dying in his care.    Null's own colleague at the Institute of Applied Biology, senior research fellow Elana Avram, set up IV drip rooms at the Institute and used his intensive protocols to sero-deconvert 10 patients over a two-year period. While the experiment had been conducted in secret, as the Institute had been funded by Big Pharma since its inception half a century earlier, Avram had hoped she would be able to publish a journal article to further publicize Null's protocols and potentially help AIDS patients, who were still dying at incredibly high rates thanks to Burroughs Wellcome's noxious but profitable AZT. But as she would later explain in a 2019 letter to Null, their groundbreaking research never made it into print - despite meticulous documentation of their successes - because the Institute's director and board feared their pharmaceutical benefactors would withdraw the funding on which they depended, given that Null's protocols did not involve any patentable or otherwise profitable drugs. When Avram approached them about publication, the board vetoed the idea, arguing that it would “draw negative attention because [the work] was contrary to standard drug treatments.” With no real point in continuing experiments along those lines without institutional support and no hope of obtaining funding from elsewhere, the department she had created specifically for these experiments shut down after a two-year followup with her test subjects - all of whom remained alive and healthy - was completed.2   While the Center was receiving regular visits by this time from medical professionals and, increasingly, black celebrities like Stokely Carmichael and Isaac Hayes, who would occasionally perform for the patients, the news was spreading by word of mouth alone - not a single media outlet had dared to document the clinic that was curing AIDS patients for free. Instead, they gave airtime to Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, who had for years been spreading baseless, hysteria-fueling claims about HIV and AIDS to any news outlet that would put him on. His claim that children could contract the virus from “ordinary household conduct” with an infected relative proved so outrageous he had to walk it back,3 and he never really stopped insisting the deadly plague associated with gays and drug users was about to explode like a nuclear bomb among the law-abiding heterosexual population. Fauci by this time controlled all government science funding through NIAID, and his zero-tolerance approach to dissent on the HIV/AIDS front had already seen prominent scientists like virologist Peter Duesberg stripped of the resources they needed for their work because they had dared to question his commandment: There is no cause of AIDS but HIV, and AZT is its treatment. Even the AIDS activist groups, which by then had been coopted by Big Pharma and essentially reduced to astroturfing for the toxic failed chemotherapy drug AZT backed by the institutional might of Fauci's NIAID,4 didn't seem to want to hear that there was a cure. Unconcerned with the irrationality of denouncing the man touting his free AIDS cure as an  “AIDS denier,” they warned journalists that platforming Null or anyone else rejecting the mainstream medical line would be met with organized demands for their firing.    Determined to breach the institutional iron curtain and get his message to the masses, Null and his team staged a press conference in New York, inviting scientists and doctors from around the world to share their research on alternative approaches to HIV and AIDS in 1993. To emphasize the sound scientific basis of the Center's protocols and encourage guests to adopt them into their own practices, Null printed out thousands of abstracts in support of each nutrient and treatment being used. However, despite over 7,000 invitations sent three times to major media, government figures, scientists, and activists, almost none of the intended audience members showed up. Over 100 AIDS patients and their doctors, whose charts exhaustively documented their improvements using natural and nontoxic modalities over the preceding 12 months, gave filmed testimonials, declaring that the feared disease was no longer a death sentence, but the conference had effectively been silenced. Bill Tatum, publisher of the Amsterdam News, suggested Null and his patients would find a more welcoming audience in his home neighborhood of Harlem - specifically, its iconic Apollo Theatre. For three nights, the theater was packed to capacity. Hit especially hard by the epidemic and distrustful of a medical system that had only recently stopped being openly racist (the Tuskegee syphilis experiment only ended in 1972), black Americans, at least, did not seem to care what Anthony Fauci would do if he found out they were investigating alternatives to AZT and death.    PBS journalist Tony Brown, having obtained a copy of the video of patient testimonials from the failed press conference, was among a handful of black journalists who began visiting the Center to investigate the legitimacy of Null's claims. Satisfied they had something significant to offer his audience, Brown invited eight patients - along with Null himself - onto his program over the course of several episodes to discuss the work. It was the first time these protocols had received any attention in the media, despite Null having released nearly two dozen articles and multiple documentaries on the subject by that time. A typical patient on one program, Al, a recovered IV drug user who was diagnosed with AIDS at age 32, described how he “panicked,” saw a doctor and started taking AZT despite his misgivings - only to be forced to discontinue the drug after just a few weeks due to his condition deteriorating rapidly. Researching alternatives brought him to Null, and after six months of “detoxing [his] lifestyle,” he observed his initial symptoms - swollen lymph nodes and weight loss - begin to reverse, culminating with sero-deconversion. On Bill McCreary's Channel 5 program, a married couple diagnosed with HIV described how they watched their T-cell counts increase as they cut out sugar, caffeine, smoking, and drinking and began eating a healthy diet. They also saw the virus leave their bodies.   For HIV-positive viewers surrounded by fear and negativity, watching healthy-looking, cheerful “AIDS patients” detail their recovery while Null backed up their claims with charts must have been balm for the soul. But the TV programs were also a form of outreach to the medical community, with patients' charts always on hand to convince skeptics the cure was scientifically valid. Null brought patients' charts to every program, urging them to keep an open mind: “Other physicians and public health officials should know that there's good science in the alternative perspective. It may not be a therapy that they're familiar with, because they're just not trained in it, but if the results are positive, and you can document them…” He challenged doubters to send in charts from their own sero-deconverted patients on AZT, and volunteered to debate proponents of the orthodox treatment paradigm - though the NIH and WHO both refused to participate in such a debate on Tony Brown's Journal, following Fauci's directive prohibiting engagement with forbidden ideas.    Aside from those few TV programs and Null's own films, suppression of Null's AIDS cure beyond word of mouth was total. The 2021 documentary The Cost of Denial, produced by the Society for Independent Journalists, tells the story of the Tri-State Healing Center and the medical paradigm that sought to destroy it, lamenting the loss of the lives that might have been saved in a more enlightened society. Nurse practitioner Luanne Pennesi, who treated many of the AIDS patients at the Center, speculated in the film that the refusal by the scientific establishment and AIDS activists to accept their successes was financially motivated. “It was as if they didn't want this information to get out. Understand that our healthcare system as we know it is a corporation, it's a corporate model, and it's about generating revenue. My concern was that maybe they couldn't generate enough revenue from these natural approaches.”5   Funding was certainly the main disciplinary tool Fauci's NIAID used to keep the scientific community in line. Despite the massive community interest in the work being done at the Center, no foundation or institution would defy Fauci and risk getting itself blacklisted, leaving Null to continue funding the operation out of his pocket with the profits from book sales. After 15 years, he left the Center in 1995, convinced the mainstream model had so thoroughly been institutionalized that there was no chance of overthrowing it. He has continued to counsel patients and advocate for a reappraisal of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis and its pharmaceutical treatments, highlighting the deeply flawed science underpinning the model of the disease espoused by the scientific establishment in 39 articles, six documentaries and a 700-page textbook on AIDS, but the Center's achievements have been effectively memory-holed by Fauci's multi-billion-dollar propaganda apparatus.     FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE   To understand just how much of a threat Null's work was to the HIV/AIDS establishment, it is instructive to revisit the 1984 paper, published by Dr. Robert Gallo of the National Cancer Institute, that established HIV as the sole cause of AIDS. The CDC's official recognition of AIDS in 1981 had done little to quell the mounting public panic over the mysterious illness afflicting gay men in the US, as the agency had effectively admitted it had no idea what was causing them to sicken and die. As years passed with no progress determining the causative agent of the plague, activist groups like Gay Men's Health Crisis disrupted public events and threatened further mass civil disobedience as they excoriated the NIH for its sluggish allocation of government science funding to uncovering the cause of the “gay cancer.”6 When Gallo published his paper declaring that the retrovirus we now know as HIV was the sole “probable” cause of AIDS, its simple, single-factor hypothesis was the answer to the scientific establishment's prayers. This was particularly true for Fauci, as the NIAID chief was able to claim the hot new disease as his agency's own domain in what has been described as a “dramatic confrontation” with his rival Sam Broder at the National Cancer Institute. After all, Fauci pointed out, Gallo's findings - presented by Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler as if they were gospel truth before any other scientists had had a chance to inspect them, never mind conduct a full peer review - clearly classified AIDS as an infectious disease, and not a cancer like the Kaposi's sarcoma which was at the time its most visible manifestation. Money and media attention began pouring in, even as funding for the investigation of other potential causes of AIDS dried up. Having already patented a diagnostic test for “his” retrovirus before introducing it to the world, Gallo was poised for a financial windfall, while Fauci was busily leveraging the discovery into full bureaucratic empire of the US scientific apparatus.   While it would serve as the sole basis for all US government-backed AIDS research to follow - quickly turning Gallo into the most-cited scientist in the world during the 1980s,7 Gallo's “discovery” of HIV was deeply problematic. The sample that yielded the momentous discovery actually belonged to Prof. Luc Montagnier of the French Institut Pasteur, a fact Gallo finally admitted in 1991, four years after a lawsuit from the French government challenged his patent on the HIV antibody test, forcing the US government to negotiate a hasty profit-sharing agreement between Gallo's and Montagnier's labs. That lawsuit triggered a cascade of official investigations into scientific misconduct by Gallo, and evidence submitted during one of these probes, unearthed in 2008 by journalist Janine Roberts, revealed a much deeper problem with the seminal “discovery.” While Gallo's co-author, Mikulas Popovic, had concluded after numerous experiments with the French samples that the virus they contained was not the cause of AIDS, Gallo had drastically altered the paper's conclusion, scribbling his notes in the margins, and submitted it for publication to the journal Science without informing his co-author.   After Roberts shared her discovery with contacts in the scientific community, 37 scientific experts wrote to the journal demanding that Gallo's career-defining HIV paper be retracted from Science for lacking scientific integrity.8 Their call, backed by an endorsement from the 2,600-member scientific organization Rethinking AIDS, was ignored by the publication and by the rest of mainstream science despite - or perhaps because of - its profound implications.   That 2008 letter, addressed to Science editor-in-chief Bruce Alberts and copied to American Association for the Advancement of Science CEO Alan Leshner, is worth reproducing here in its entirety, as it utterly dismantles Gallo's hypothesis - and with them the entire HIV is the sole cause of AIDS dogma upon which the contemporary medical model of the disease rests:   On May 4, 1984 your journal published four papers by a group led by Dr. Robert Gallo. We are writing to express our serious concerns with regard to the integrity and veracity of the lead paper among these four of which Dr. Mikulas Popovic is the lead author.[1] The other three are also of concern because they rely upon the conclusions of the lead paper .[2][3][4]  In the early 1990s, several highly critical reports on the research underlying these papers were produced as a result of governmental inquiries working under the supervision of scientists nominated by the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine. The Office of Research Integrity of the US Department of Health and Human Services concluded that the lead paper was “fraught with false and erroneous statements,” and that the “ORI believes that the careless and unacceptable keeping of research records...reflects irresponsible laboratory management that has permanently impaired the ability to retrace the important steps taken.”[5] Further, a Congressional Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations led by US Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan produced a staff report on the papers which contains scathing criticisms of their integrity.[6]  Despite the publically available record of challenges to their veracity, these papers have remained uncorrected and continue to be part of the scientific record.  What prompts our communication today is the recent revelation of an astonishing number of previously unreported deletions and unjustified alterations made by Gallo to the lead paper. There are several documents originating from Gallo's laboratory that, while available for some time, have only recently been fully analyzed. These include a draft of the lead paper typewritten by Popovic which contains handwritten changes made to it by Gallo.[7] This draft was the key evidence used in the above described inquiries to establish that Gallo had concealed his laboratory's use of a cell culture sample (known as LAV) which it received from the Institut Pasteur.  These earlier inquiries verified that the typed manuscript draft was produced by Popovic who had carried out the recorded experiment while his laboratory chief, Gallo, was in Europe and that, upon his return, Gallo changed the document by hand a few days before it was submitted to Science on March 30, 1984. According to the ORI investigation, “Dr. Gallo systematically rewrote the manuscript for what would become a renowned LTCB [Gallo's laboratory at the National Cancer Institute] paper.”[5]  This document provided the important evidence that established the basis for awarding Dr. Luc Montagnier and Dr. Francoise Barré-Sinoussi the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine for the discovery of the AIDS virus by proving it was their samples of LAV that Popovic used in his key experiment. The draft reveals that Popovic had forthrightly admitted using the French samples of LAV renamed as Gallo's virus, HTLV-III, and that Gallo had deleted this admission, concealing their use of LAV.  However, it has not been previously reported that on page three of this same document Gallo had also deleted Popovic's unambiguous statement that, "Despite intensive research efforts, the causative agent of AIDS has not yet been identified,” replacing it in the published paper with a statement that said practically the opposite, namely, “That a retrovirus of the HTLV family might be an etiologic agent of AIDS was suggested by the findings.”  It is clear that the rest of Popovic's typed paper is entirely consistent with his statement that the cause of AIDS had not been found, despite his use of the French LAV. Popovic's final conclusion was that the culture he produced “provides the possibility” for detailed studies. He claimed to have achieved nothing more. At no point in his paper did Popovic attempt to prove that any virus caused AIDS, and it is evident that Gallo concealed these key elements in Popovic's experimental findings.  It is astonishing now to discover these unreported changes to such a seminal document. We can only assume that Gallo's alterations of Popovic's conclusions were not highlighted by earlier inquiries because the focus at the time was on establishing that the sample used by Gallo's lab came from Montagnier and was not independently collected by Gallo. In fact, the only attention paid to the deletions made by Gallo pertains to his effort to hide the identity of the sample. The questions of whether Gallo and Popovic's research proved that LAV or any other virus was the cause of AIDS were clearly not considered.  Related to these questions are other long overlooked documents that merit your attention. One of these is a letter from Dr. Matthew A. Gonda, then Head of the Electron Microscopy Laboratory at the National Cancer Institute, which is addressed to Popovic, copied to Gallo and dated just four days prior to Gallo's submission to Science.[8] In this letter, Gonda remarks on samples he had been sent for imaging because “Dr Gallo wanted these micrographs for publication because they contain HTLV.” He states, “I do not believe any of the particles photographed are of HTLV-I, II or III.” According to Gonda, one sample contained cellular debris, while another had no particles near the size of a retrovirus. Despite Gonda's clearly worded statement, Science published on May 4, 1984 papers attributed to Gallo et al with micrographs attributed to Gonda and described unequivocally as HTLV-III.  In another letter by Gallo, dated one day before he submitted his papers to Science, Gallo states, “It's extremely rare to find fresh cells [from AIDS patients] expressing the virus... cell culture seems to be necessary to induce virus,” a statement which raises the possibility he was working with a laboratory artifact. [9]  Included here are copies of these documents and links to the same. The very serious flaws they reveal in the preparation of the lead paper published in your journal in 1984 prompts our request that this paper be withdrawn. It appears that key experimental findings have been concealed. We further request that the three associated papers published on the same date also be withdrawn as they depend on the accuracy of this paper.  For the scientific record to be reliable, it is vital that papers shown to be flawed, or falsified be retracted. Because a very public record now exists showing that the Gallo papers drew unjustified conclusions, their withdrawal from Science is all the more important to maintain integrity. Future researchers must also understand they cannot rely on the 1984 Gallo papers for statements about HIV and AIDS, and all authors of papers that previously relied on this set of four papers should have the opportunity to consider whether their own conclusions are weakened by these revelations.      Gallo's handwritten revision, submitted without his colleague's knowledge despite multiple experiments that failed to support the new conclusion, was the sole foundation for the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. Had Science published the manuscript the way Popovic had typed it, there would be no AIDS “pandemic” - merely small clusters of people with AIDS. Without a viral hypothesis backing the development of expensive and deadly pharmaceuticals, would Fauci have allowed these patients to learn about the cure that existed all along?   Faced with a potential rebellion, Fauci marshaled the full resources under his control to squelch the publication of the investigations into Gallo and restrict any discussion of competing hypotheses in the scientific and mainstream press, which had been running virus-scare stories full-time since 1984. The effect was total, according to biochemist Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure. In a 2009 interview, Mullis recalled his own shock when he attempted to unearth the experimental basis for the HIV=AIDS hypothesis. Despite his extensive inquiry into the literature, “there wasn't a scientific reference…[that] said ‘here's how come we know that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.' There was nothing out there like that.”9 This yawning void at the core of HIV/AIDS “science" turned him into a strident critic of AIDS dogma - and those views made him persona non grata where the scientific press was concerned, suddenly unable to publish a single paper despite having won the Nobel Prize for his invention of the PCR test just weeks before.  10   DISSENT BECOMES “DENIAL”   While many of those who dissent from the orthodox HIV=AIDS view believe HIV plays a role in the development of AIDS, they point to lifestyle and other co-factors as being equally if not more important. Individuals who test positive for HIV can live for decades in perfect health - so long as they don't take AZT or the other toxic antivirals fast-tracked by Fauci's NIAID - but those who developed full-blown AIDS generally engaged in highly risky behaviors like extreme promiscuity and prodigious drug abuse, contracting STDs they took large quantities of antibiotics to treat, further running down their immune systems. While AIDS was largely portrayed as a “gay disease,” it was only the “fast track” gays, hooking up with dozens of partners nightly in sex marathons fueled by “poppers” (nitrate inhalants notorious for their own devastating effects on the immune system), who became sick. Kaposi's sarcoma, one of the original AIDS-defining conditions, was widespread among poppers-using gay men, but never appeared among IV drug users or hemophiliacs, the other two main risk groups during the early years of the epidemic. Even Robert Gallo himself, at a 1994 conference on poppers held by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, would admit that the previously-rare form of skin cancer surging among gay men was not primarily caused by HIV - and that it was immune stimulation, rather than suppression, that was likely responsible.11 Similarly, IV drug users are often riddled with opportunistic infections as their habit depresses the immune system and their focus on maintaining their addiction means that healthier habits - like good nutrition and even basic hygiene - fall by the wayside.    Supporting the call for revising the HIV=AIDS hypothesis to include co-factors is the fact that the mass heterosexual outbreaks long predicted by Fauci and his ilk in seemingly every country on Earth have failed to materialize, except - supposedly - in Africa, where the diagnostic standard for AIDS differs dramatically from those of the West. Given the prohibitively high cost of HIV testing for poor African nations, the WHO in 1985 crafted a diagnostic loophole that became known as the “Bangui definition,” allowing medical professionals to diagnose AIDS in the absence of a test using just clinical symptoms: high fever, persistent cough, at least 30 days of diarrhea, and the loss of 10% of one's body weight within two months. Often suffering from malnutrition and without access to clean drinking water, many of the inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa fit the bill, especially when the WHO added tuberculosis to the list of AIDS-defining illnesses in 1993 - a move which may be responsible for as many as one half of African “AIDS” cases, according to journalist Christine Johnson. The WHO's former Chief of Global HIV Surveillance, James Chin, acknowledged their manipulation of statistics, but stressed that it was the entire AIDS industry - not just his organization - perpetrating the fraud. “There's the saying that, if you knew what sausages are made of, most people would hesitate to sort of eat them, because they wouldn't like what's in it. And if you knew how HIV/AIDS numbers are cooked, or made up, you would use them with extreme caution,” Chin told an interviewer in 2009.12   With infected numbers stubbornly remaining constant in the US despite Fauci's fearmongering projections of the looming heterosexually-transmitted plague, the CDC in 1993 broadened its definition of AIDS to include asymptomatic (that is, healthy) HIV-positive people with low T-cell counts - an absurd criteria given that an individual's T-cell count can fluctuate by hundreds within a single day. As a result, the number of “AIDS cases” in the US immediately doubled. Supervised by Fauci, the NIAID had been quietly piling on diseases into the “AIDS-related” category for years, bloating the list from just two conditions - pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and Kaposi's sarcoma - to 30 so fast it raised eyebrows among some of science's leading lights. Deeming the entire process “bizarre” and unprecedented, Kary Mullis wondered aloud why no one had called the AIDS establishment out: “There's something wrong here. And it's got to be financial.”13   Indeed, an early CDC public relations campaign was exposed by the Wall Street Journal in 1987 as having deliberately mischaracterized AIDS as a threat to the entire population so as to garner increased public and private funding for what was very much a niche issue, with the risk to average heterosexuals from a single act of sex “smaller than the risk of ever getting hit by lightning.” Ironically, the ads, which sought to humanize AIDS patients in an era when few Americans knew anyone with the disease and more than half the adult population thought infected people should be forced to carry cards warning of their status, could be seen as a reaction to the fear tactics deployed by Fauci early on.14   It's hard to tell where fraud ends and incompetence begins with Gallo's HIV antibody test. Much like Covid-19 would become a “pandemic of testing,” with murder victims and motorcycle crashes lumped into “Covid deaths” thanks to over-sensitized PCR tests that yielded as many as 90% false positives,15 HIV testing is fraught with false positives - and unlike with Covid-19, most people who hear they are HIV-positive still believe they are receiving a death sentence. Due to the difficulty of isolating HIV itself from human samples, the most common diagnostic tests, ELISA and the Western Blot, are designed to detect not the virus but antibodies to it, upending the traditional medical understanding that the presence of antibodies indicates only exposure - and often that the body has actually vanquished the pathogen. Patients are known to test positive for HIV antibodies in the absence of the virus due to at least 70 other conditions, including hepatitis, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, syphilis, recent vaccination or even pregnancy. (https://www.chcfl.org/diseases-that-can-cause-a-false-positive-hiv-test/) Positive results are often followed up with a PCR “viral load” test, even though the inventor of the PCR technique Kary Mullis famously condemned its misuse as a tool for diagnosing infection. Packaging inserts for all three tests warn the user that they cannot be reliably used to diagnose HIV.16 The ELISA HIV antibody test explicitly states: “At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV antibody in human blood.”17   That the public remains largely unaware of these and other massive holes in the supposedly airtight HIV=AIDS=DEATH paradigm is a testament to Fauci's multi-layered control of the press. Like the writers of the Great Barrington Declaration and other Covid-19 dissidents, scientists who question HIV/AIDS dogma have been brutally punished for their heresy, no matter how prestigious their prior standing in the field and no matter how much evidence they have for their own claims. In 1987, the year the FDA's approval of AZT made AIDS the most profitable epidemic yet (a dubious designation Covid-19 has since surpassed), Fauci made it clearer than ever that scientific inquiry and debate - the basis of the scientific method - would no longer be welcome in the American public health sector, eliminating retrovirologist Peter Duesberg, then one of the most prominent opponents of the HIV=AIDS hypothesis, from the scientific conversation with a professional disemboweling that would make a cartel hitman blush. Duesberg had just eviscerated Gallo's 1984 HIV paper with an article of his own in the journal Cancer Research, pointing out that retroviruses had never before been found to cause a single disease in humans - let alone 30 AIDS-defining diseases. Rather than allow Gallo or any of the other scientists in his camp to respond to the challenge, Fauci waged a scorched-earth campaign against Duesberg, who had until then been one of the most highly regarded researchers in his field. Every research grant he requested was denied; every media appearance was canceled or preempted. The University of California at Berkeley, unable to fully fire him due to tenure, took away his lab, his graduate students, and the rest of his funding. The few colleagues who dared speak up for him in public were also attacked, while enemies and opportunists were encouraged to slander Duesberg at the conferences he was barred from attending and in the journals that would no longer publish his replies. When Duesberg was summoned to the White House later that year by then-President Ronald Reagan to debate Fauci on the origins of AIDS, Fauci convinced the president to cancel, allegedly pulling rank on the Commander-in-Chief with an accusation that the “White House was interfering in scientific matters that belonged to the NIH and the Office of Science and Technology Assessment.” After seven years of this treatment, Duesberg was contacted by NIH official Stephen O'Brien and offered an escape from professional purgatory. He could have “everything back,” he was told, and shown a manuscript of a scientific paper - apparently commissioned by the editor of the journal Nature - “HIV Causes AIDS: Koch's Postulates Fulfilled” with his own name listed alongside O'Brien's as an author.18 His refusal to take the bribe effectively guaranteed the epithet “AIDS denier” will appear on his tombstone. The character assassination of Duesberg became a template that would be deployed to great effectiveness wherever Fauci encountered dissent - never debate, only demonize, deplatform and destroy.    Even Luc Montagnier, the real discoverer of HIV, soon found himself on the wrong side of the Fauci machine. With his 1990 declaration that “the HIV virus [by itself] is harmless and passive, a benign virus,” Montagnier began distancing himself from Gallo's fraud, effectively placing a target on his own back. In a 1995 interview, he elaborated: “four factors that have come together to account for the sudden epidemic [of AIDS]: HIV presence, immune hyper-activation, increased sexually transmitted disease incidence, sexual behavior changes and other behavioral changes” such as drug use, poor nutrition and stress - all of which he said had to occur “essentially simultaneously” for HIV to be transmitted, creating the modern epidemic. Like the professionals at the Tri-State Healing Center, Montagnier advocated for the use of antioxidants like vitamin C and N-acetyl cysteine, naming oxidative stress as a critical factor in the progression from HIV to AIDS.19 When Montagnier died in 2022, Fauci's media mouthpieces sneered that the scientist (who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2008 for his discovery of HIV, despite his flagging faith in that discovery's significance) “started espousing views devoid of a scientific basis” in the late 2000s, leading him to be “shunned by the scientific community.”20 In a particularly egregious jab, the Washington Post's obit sings the praises of Robert Gallo, implying it was the American scientist who really should have won the Nobel for HIV, while dismissing as “

Sex worker rights advocate, comedian, and writer, Kaytlin Bailey is the Founder & Executive Director of Old Pros, Old Pros is a nonprofit that uses storytelling to advocate for sex worker rights. Host of The Oldest Profession Podcast, she is also the creator of Whore's Eye View, a comedic mad dash through 10,000 years of history from a sex worker's perspective.A globally recognized leader in the sex worker rights movement, Kaytlin Bailey has been quoted in The New York Times, Rolling Stone, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, New York Post, The Village Voice, The Nation, Reason, and on NBC. She has written op-eds for The Daily Beast, Vice, and Reason magazine. Kaytlin Bailey has been invited to speak on Fox Business, Sirius XM, at Yale Law School, Penn University, and UCLA. Kaytlin Bailey's views are backed by Amnesty International, The World Health Organization, Human Rights Watch, and UNAids who all agree that the decriminalization of sex work is the only policy that reduces violence. This episode is brought to you by Olipop, a new healthy brand of soda. Go to https://drinkolipop.com/ and use code Marcela15 at checkout to get 15% off your first order. This episode is brought to you by Shopify. Shopify can help you take your business to the next level. Click HERE to set up your Shopify shop today and watch your business soar! This episode is brought to you by BranditScan, the best defese you have against social media fraud. Click HERE to get started with BranditScan today and get your first month for free. There is no better service to protect your social media accounts and your name and likeness. This episode is brought to you by Playboy. Click HERE to get a membership today and unlock a premium Playboy experience like no other. This episode is brought to you by Skillshare. Click HERE to start exploring all the courses Skillshare has to offer, from drawing and music, to graphic design and marketing, start expanding your knowledge today. This episode is brought to you by Fiverr. Click HERE to start hiring professionals to help you in various areas and take your business to the next level. This episode is brought to you by PodMatch. Click HERE to bring your podcasting journey to the next level by getting set up's Only Fans  VIP Membership HERE Free Membership HEREn

The global HIV landscape has undergone seismic shifts since the Trump administration took office, changes that will shape HIV history and its future. To understand what's happening and what lies ahead, we turn to those at the heart of global HIV support: UNAIDS. This week, Sarah and Jess sit down with Regan Hofmann, Senior Advisor at the Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and a powerful advocate openly living with HIV, for a conversation on the challenges, progress, and where we go from here.*Please note this episode was recorded on Wednesday 26th Feb 2025, so there may well have been changes since recording.Links mentioned in episodeStories and updates on the AIDS response | UNAIDS Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Matangazo ya nusu saa kuhusu habari za mapema asubuhi pamoja na habari za michezo.

Each week Hot off the Wire looks at a variety of stories in business, science, health and more. This week's headlines include: Trump tariffs rattle small business owners already dealing with tight margins. What's an atmospheric river? A pineapple express AP explains the weather phenomenon. Most US kids aren't gaining fast enough in reading and math. These schools are different. The US stopped allowing passport gender marker changes. Here are some of the people affected. Could obesity drugs help with alcohol cravings New study suggests potential. HIV infections could jump over 6 times if US support is dropped and not replaced, UNAIDS chief says. On this week's AP Religion Roundup, changes in migrant policy and cuts in US government aid draw alarm from Christian charities and churches. With metal detectors and patience, amateur treasure hunters unearth pieces of British history. Archaeologists unearth the remains of a Roman basilica on the site of a new London skyscraper. Elephants trumpet, squeak and flap their ears after their complex move across an Australian city. Pair of rare black wolves caught on camera in Polish forest by wildlife researchers. For flood survivors in Spain, a photo project helps recover memories. —The Associated Press About this program Host Terry Lipshetz is managing editor of the national newsroom for Lee Enterprises. Besides producing the daily Hot off the Wire news podcast, Terry conducts periodic interviews for this Behind the Headlines program, co-hosts the Streamed & Screened movies and television program and is the former producer of Across the Sky, a podcast dedicated to weather and climate. Theme music The News Tonight, used under license from Soundstripe. YouTube clearance: ZR2MOTROGI4XAHRX

More than 20 years ago, the U.S. became the leader in the worldwide fight against HIV/AIDS. The Bush administration initiative Pepfar was the largest health commitment made by a nation to combat a single disease. But Trump's cuts have thrown the initiative into a tailspin. Stephanie Sy discussed the shift in HIV funding with Angeli Achrekar of UNAIDS, which provides services in 55 countries. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

The wife of jailed Ugandan opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye says her husband is contemplating a hunger strike to protest his continued detention despite a Uganda Supreme Court ruling in his favor. Besigye and a co-defendant are on trial in a military court for the unlawful possession of ammunition and a firearm. However, the Supreme Court ruled on January 31 that the government should stop trying civilians in military courts and move Besigye's trial to the civilian courts. Besigye's wife, Winnie Byanyima, who is also executive director of the United Nations AIDS agency (UNAIDS), tells VOA's James Butty, her husband sees his continued detention as an injustice.

One person living with HIV has described how these cut would change their life and said "please tell the American government that this is a death trap for us. If I don't get my tablets next month and the following month, how much longer will I have to live?”USAID—the United States Agency for International Development—has funded life-saving aid across Africa for decades. Programmes assisting with famine, disease control, and poverty are now at-risk following President Trump's decision to cut its budget and merge the agency with the State Department. From HIV patients fearing a “death sentence”, to food aid programmes coming to a sudden stop, the effects are already being felt across Africa. Alan Kasujja speaks to Winnie Byanyima, Executive Director of UNAIDS, about the consequences of these cuts and whether African governments can step up in the face of an uncertain future for global aid.

AP correspondent Haya Panjwani reports on concerns over U.S. funding to fight global HIV infections.

Baada ya Serikali ya Marekani kutoa tangazo jipya sasa kwamba itaendelea kufadhili huduma zinazolenga vita dhidi ya Virusi vya Ukimwi (VVU), shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la kukabiliana na VVU na Ukimwi (UNAIDS) limeeleza kuupokea uamuzi huo kwa furaha na kuuita wa kuokoa maisha. Selina Jerobon na maelezo zaidi.

Em reação à nova decisão do Departamento de Estado, Unaids destaca restauração da esperança para pessoas vivendo com vírus da Aids; OMS diz que mundo tinha 39,9 milhões de soropositivos em 2023.

On a special special episode of This Week in Global Development, Winnie Byanyima, executive director of UNAIDS, warned of major consequences for people with HIV if U.S. under President Trump cuts funding to programs such as PEPFAR and the Global Fund. Sign up to the Devex Newswire and our other newsletters: https://www.devex.com/account/newsletters

The wife of jailed Ugandan opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye says her husband does not want to go on a hunger strike just to make a point. However, Winnie Byanyima, who is also executive director of the United Nations AIDS agency (UNAIDS), says her husband has been given impossible choices, including life in prison. Dr. Besigye and a co-defendant are on trial in a military court for the unlawful possession of ammunition and a firearm. Byanyima tells VOA's James Butty, prison authorities are denying Dr. Besigye his choice of family prepared food, contrary to prison practices

O HIV continua um desafio para a saúde pública. Em 2022, segundo a OMS (Organização Mundial da Saúde), 39 milhões de pessoas conviviam com o vírus em todo o mundo. Mais de dois terços dos pacientes estão na África.   Embora nenhum medicamento seja ainda capaz de eliminar completamente o HIV do organismo, um novo tratamento inovador, o lenacapavir, baseado em duas injeções anuais, é considerado extremamente promissor. Mas o custo do medicamento - cerca de US$ 40.000 - ainda continua elevado e as indicações de uso são específicas. O Sulenca, nome comercial do antirretroviral, é um inibidor da função do capsídeo, a capa da proteína que envolve o vírus HIV-1. Ele atua nos estágios iniciais e finais do ciclo de replicação.  Seu mecanismo de ação permite alcançar e bloquear vírus que se tornaram multirresistentes em pacientes soropositivos e por isso ele é indicado como tratamento complementar, ou seja, associado a outros comprimidos.Nos estudos, o lenacapavir, encontrado nas formas oral e injetável, também demonstrou uma eficácia de quase 100% na prevenção contra a contaminação no caso de uma exposição ao HIV. O laboratório Gilead, que fabrica a molécula, assinou um acordo com seis fabricantes que permite a produção genérica do medicamento e o tornará acessível em 120 países.O Brasil ficou de fora dessa lista e um grupo de organizações pediu no último dia 1º de dezembro, Dia Mundial de Combate à Aids, medidas para acelerar o acesso. Fim da epidemia?A OMS, o Fundo Global e o UNAIDS estabeleceram 2030 como meta para o fim da epidemia. O lenacapavir pode ajudar a atingir esse objetivo? Segundo o infectologista francês Jade Ghosn, ainda existem obstáculos para disseminar o uso da nova molécula. Ghosn é coordenador regional da luta contra o HIV e as Doenças Sexualmente Transmissíveis da região Île de France, onde está situada Paris. Segundo ele, a molécula tem duas principais vantagens."A primeira é que o lenacapavir vem de uma nova classe de medicamentos", explica. "A segunda é que ele foi formulado para ser injetado por via subcutânea, ou seja, da mesma forma que a insulina, heparina, ou os anticoagulantes, e é administrado a cada seis meses.”Atualmente, os comprimidos para tratar o HIV devem ser tomados diariamente, o que exige disciplina – as pílulas não devem ser consumidas em jejum, por exemplo. No cotidiano, essa organização gera uma sobrecarga mental elevada. "O paciente também deve andar com a caixa de remédios na bolsa", lembra o infectologista, o que pode colocá-lo em situações constrangedoras, ou o "obriga", socialmente, a ter que expor seu problema de saúde, explica.“Os remédios fazem o paciente lembrar diariamente que têm a doença, eles comentam. Em termos de carga mental, não ter que pensar nisso por seis meses é um verdadeiro alívio e uma melhoria real na qualidade de vida das pessoas”, explicou Ghosn.Mas, apesar de todas as vantagens e de ser uma pista para avanços concretos na gestão cotidiana da doença, o lenacapavir custa caro e ainda é um tratamento complementar, reitera. Para controlar a carga viral, ou torná-la indetectável, o paciente soropositivo deve utilizar uma combinação de medicamentos, já que o vírus sofre mutações muito rapidamente. “Isso significa que, hoje, se você quiser utilizar o lenacapavir no tratamento, ele deverá estar necessariamente associado a outros comprimidos. O paciente então perde o benefício do tratamento injetável. Se no futuro as pesquisas identificarem uma molécula associada eficaz que também possa ser administrada a cada seis meses, aí teremos realmente o benefício de um tratamento 100% injetável”, analisa. Acesso gratuitoDe acordo com o infectologista francês, a Agência Nacional de Pesquisa sobre Aids e Hepatites Virais está realizando uma série de estudos para avaliar como a nova droga poderá ser integrada aos sistemas de saúde dos diferentes países, incluindo a França. No país, desde 2013, todos os soropositivos têm acesso gratuito aos tratamentos, independentemente da carga viral. Mas, o grande desafio continua sendo o diagnóstico, já que muitas pessoas não sabem que foram contaminadas e continuam transmitindo o vírus. Cerca de 43% das infecções são descobertas em um estágio avançado. Para o infectologista francês, os pacientes ainda têm medo de descobrir que são soropositivos e serem estigmatizados, mesmo após mais de 40 anos da descoberta do vírus.  Em sua opinião, há também menos informação do que deveria sobre as terapias que impedem a contaminação e controlam a evolução da doença. “O que é importante é que a mensagem e a comunicação em torno da infecção pelo HVI sejam mais positivas. Temos que explicar às pessoas que existem opções. Você é negativo? O importante é continuar negativo. Há ferramentas para evitar a contaminação", ressalta."Caso você seja positivo, hoje tratamos a infecção como uma doença crônica, como hipertensão, diabetes ou colesterol. Temos tratamentos que vão estabilizar a doença de forma permanente. A infecção nunca evoluirá para a AIDS e, principalmente, o vírus não será transmitido aos seus parceiros se você for tratado”, resume o infectologista francês.

This December 1st, Project HOPE was among the many organizations commemorating World AIDS Day as well as the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence. Over two decades, significant progress in HIV control, particularly in Africa, has been achieved through initiatives like President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Since 2003, PEPFAR has enabled over 20 million people to access antiretroviral therapy and prevented 5.5 million HIV-positive births. However, challenges persist in meeting UNAIDS' 95-95-95 targets—ensuring widespread testing, treatment, and viral suppression. Barriers include funding shortages, stigma, and competing health crises like COVID-19. Adolescents, especially girls and young women, face heightened risk due to social vulnerabilities and limited access to youth-friendly services. Mvemba is joined by Dr. Uche Ralph-Opara, Chief Health Officer at Project HOPE, to discuss the progress made and the hurdles that remain in achieving epidemic control. Their conversation highlights innovative approaches to addressing gender inequality and empowering vulnerable populations.

Em Dia Internacional, secretário-geral questiona políticas e práticas discriminatórias que afastam as pessoas de cuidados essenciais; relatório da Unaids aponta 630 mil mortes em 2023 e uma nova infecção a cada 25 segundos. 

21-year-old South African activist living with HIV, Ibanomonde Ngema, will today take charge of Charlize Theron's Instagram account for World AIDS Day campaign. This initiative, announced by UNAIDS, aims to spotlight the lived experiences of young people living with HIV and to challenge the stigma surrounding the virus.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Title: 2024 UNAIDS World AIDS Day Report: The Rights Way to End the Epidemic? Host: Ben Plumley, Global Health Strategist Guest: Christine Stegling, Deputy Executive Director, UNAIDS Episode Summary: Welcome to A Shot in the Arm Podcast! In this first of a set of special World AIDS Day 2024 episodes, host Ben Plumley chats with Christine Stegling, Deputy Executive Director of UNAIDS. They delve into the key themes of this World AIDS Day's UNAIDS report, "Taking the Rights Path to End AIDS", which profiles the critical role of human rights in tackling the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Christine highlights the intersection of biomedical interventions and human rights, explaining why creating an enabling environment is essential for ending the AIDS epidemic. A skeptical Ben asks if this is possible by the international target of 2030. Other topics include the challenges posed by stigma, discrimination, and policy barriers, and how countries can ensure equitable access to prevention and treatment services. Key Takeaways: The 2030 Goal: is it possible? What does it mean to end AIDS as a public health threat? Human Rights Approach: Why protecting human rights is as crucial as advancing biomedical interventions. Global Challenges: Updates on rights rollbacks, policy barriers, and their impact on HIV prevention in countries like Uganda and the Philippines. Country Leadership: How UNAIDS supports nations in creating sustainable, inclusive HIV responses. Bright Spots: Positive changes in Botswana under new leadership with a strong human rights focus. Additional Insights: The episode also touches on global advocacy strategies for HIV prevention amidst political and social challenges, including UNAIDS' role in navigating shifting donor priorities and supporting countries to take ownership of their epidemic responses. Resources Mentioned: UNAIDS 2024 Report: Taking the Rights Path to End AIDS Learn more about UNAIDS' global initiatives: UNAIDS Website Producer: Erik Espera, NewDoc Media   Subscribe for more episodes focusing on global health equity and innovation!   Follow us on Spotify, YouTube, and wherever you get your podcasts. #WorldAIDSDay2024 #EndAIDS2030 #HumanRights #GlobalHealth #UNAIDS #HIVAwareness

Hii leo jaridani Assumpta Massoi anamulika adha zinazokumba raia kwenye eneo la Palestina linalokaliwa na Israeli; hakari za kukabili UKIMWI Afrika Kusini; IFAD ilivyonusuru vijana na safari za kwenda Ulaya zinazohatarisha maisha yao; Mkimbizi wa ndani Gaza anayezungumzia harakati za kusaka mkate ili kulisha familia yake.Mkuu wa haki za binadamu wa Umoja wa Mataifa katika ofisi ya eneo la Palestina linalokaliwa na Israeli, Ajith Sungay amesema miezi 13 ya vita imeufanya Ukanda wa Gaza kuwa kama jehanamu, kwani kuna uharibifu usio na kifani, njaa isiyoelezeka magonjwa na kuendelea kwa mashambulizi ya mabomu yanayotawanya raia kila uchao. Flora Nducha na taarifa zaidi.Kuelekea ya Siku ya Kimataifa ya UKIMWI itakayoadhimishwa Jumapili hii, ripoti ya Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la Kukabiliana na UKIMWI (UNAIDS) iliyotolewa juzi Jumatano imeeleza kuwa dunia inaweza kufikia lengo lililokubaliwa la kukomesha UKIMWI kama tishio la afya ya umma ifikapo mwaka 2030 lakini kwa sharti kwamba viongozi ni lazima walinde haki za binadamu za kila mtu anayeishi na Virusi Vya UKIMWI, VVU au aliyeko hatarini kuambukizwa. Anold Kayanda ameangazia mfano mzuri wa Afrika Kusini unaofahamika kama “Takuwani Riime”.Mkala inayokupeleka nchini Senegal kusikia jinsi mradi wa mfuko wa Umoja wa Mataifa wa Maendeleo ya Kilimo IFAD umewezesha vijana kuondokana na mawazo ya kuweka rehani maisha yao wakisaka maisha bora Ulaya. Mwenyeji wako ni Bosco Cosmas.Mashinani fursa ni yake nampisha Abu Muhammad, mkimbizi wa ndani huko Deir Al Balah, Ukanda wa Gaza akielezea umuhimu wa mgao wa mikate kutoka shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la Mpango wa Chakula, WFP, kwa wakimbizi hao wakati huu ambapo vita inaendelea eneo hilo.

Kuelekea ya Siku ya Kimataifa ya UKIMWI itakayoadhimishwa Jumapili hii, ripoti ya Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la Kukabiliana na UKIMWI (UNAIDS) iliyotolewa juzi Jumatano imeeleza kuwa dunia inaweza kufikia lengo lililokubaliwa la kukomesha UKIMWI kama tishio la afya ya umma ifikapo mwaka 2030 lakini kwa sharti kwamba viongozi ni lazima walinde haki za binadamu za kila mtu anayeishi na Virusi Vya UKIMWI, VVU au aliyeko hatarini kuambukizwa. Anold Kayanda ameangazia mfano mzuri wa Afrika Kusini unaofahamika kama “Takuwani Riime”.

December 1st, 2024 represents the 36th commemoration of World AIDS Day and is an opportunity to reflect on the many persons who have died from AIDS related causes in Saint Lucia, the region and the world. The theme, this year is “Take The Rights Path”. From the start of the AIDS epidemic, about 43 years ago, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) estimated that 78 million persons have become infected with HIV and 35 million persons have died from AIDS related illnesses. According to UNAIDS, the world can end AIDS – if everyone's rights are protected; with human rights at the centre and communities in the lead, the world can end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030. The awareness of human rights is crucial not only to protecting the rights and dignity of those infected and affected by HIV and AIDS, but also to reducing the vulnerability of all individuals. Human rights can determine the degree to which individuals are protected from HIV infection. A lack of respect for human rights fuels the HIV epidemic and increases its impact. Under international human rights laws and treaties, every person has a right to health and to access HIV and other health care services. Stigma and discrimination based on health status, including HIV, are human rights violations. Many people continue to face human rights related barriers to essential HIV and other healthcare services. The persons facing those barriers are often the most marginalized, stigmatized and vulnerable to HIV. Therefore, the protection, promotion, respect and fulfillment of people's human rights are critical to guarantee access to HIV services and enable a continued and effective response to the HIV epidemic. Discrimination of people living with HIV has deprived them of basic human rights that other people, including other patients, enjoy. Saint Lucia has been a member of the United Nations General Assembly since September 18, 1979 and follows the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. The right to confidentiality is important and Article 12 of the Declaration speaks to this. Article 16 (1) states that “everyone has the right to marry and found a family.” All persons living with HIV have the right to have children and in Saint Lucia medication is available, that women living with HIV who are pregnant, can take to reduce the risk of transmitting the virus to their unborn child. Another basic human right is the right to treatment and Article 25 (1) states that “everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services”. Saint Lucia has available, comprehensive treatment, care and support which includes access to antiretroviral therapy and other medicines, diagnostics and treatment for related opportunistic infections. Currently, there are just under 1000 thousand persons living with HIV in Saint Lucia. Of those persons, only 284 are actively collecting their antiretroviral medication. Those 1000 are the known diagnosed cases of HIV. There are persons who are undiagnosed and thus, unaware of their HIV status and anyone who is sexually active, is at risk for contracting HIV and any other sexually transmitted infections. Sixteen persons died from AIDS related causes in 2023. Just think, an HIV positive person can be you, your child, your parent, your sibling, your spouse, your friend or your co-worker; anyone! As we reflect on Taking the Rights Path for World AIDS Day 2024, consider this, by protecting everyone's right to health, through ensuring equity in service provision and eliminating stigma and discrimination, we can achieve an AIDS free Saint Lucia.

World Aids Day falls on 1 December annually when people from around the world unite to show support for people living with HIV and to remember those who have died from Aids-related illnesses. World AIDS Day also serves as an important reminder that we must remain determined in our commitment to prevent new HIV infections and provide essential services to all people living with HIV globally. The theme for World Aids Day this year is “Let Communities Lead”. Some numbers quickly: Fewer people contracted HIV last year than at any point since the rise of the disease in the late 1980s, according to a UNAIDS report. Last year also saw around 630,000 people die from AIDS-related illnesses, the lowest level since a peak of 2.1 million in 2004. So it looks like we're making progress. To discuss all of this in a little more depth as well as everything else about the virus, Carol spoke to good friend of the show and popular Durban general practitioner, Dr Devarshni Reddy.

Stigma, discrimination, and punitive laws are hindering progress in global efforts to stamp out HIV and AIDS.Ahead of World AIDS Day on 1 December, the UN agency leading the fight against the disease is highlighting how upholding human rights is key to ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.Dr. Angeli Achrekar, Assistant Secretary General and Deputy Executive Director of UNAIDS, discusses their latest report with UN News's Dianne Penn.  

The wife of Ugandan opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye says her husband was kidnapped in Kenya and is being held at a military jail in Kampala. The story broke early Wednesday morning local time, and we have not been able to reach Uganda authorities for confirmation. However, Winnie Byanyima, who is also executive director of the United Nations AIDS agency (UNAIDS) says her husband went missing on Saturday in Nairobi where he had gone to attend a book launch by Kenyan opposition leader Martha Karua. Byanyima tells VOA's James Butty, the family is demanding to see Dr. Besigye.

Lecture summary: In this talk Sharifah Sekalala examines this critical moment in the making of Global Health Law, with two treaty making processes: the newly finalised revisions of the International Health Regulations and ongoing negotiations by the Intergovernmental Negotiation Body for a possible pandemic Accord or Instrument, as we well as soft-law proposals for the World Health Organization proposal for a medical countermeasures platform. The lecture will illustrate that despite the laudable objectives of creating a new system of international law that attempts to redress previous inequalities in accessing vaccines and countermeasures, they are unlikely to meet these broader objectives. The lecture will argue that this is because, despite being a public good, Global Health Law has always been underpinned by capitalist and post-colonial rationales which privilege trade. In order to make lasting changes, the current system of Global Health Law must focus on broader questions of ‘reparations’ that will achieve greater equity. Sharifah is a Professor of Global Health Law at the University of Warwick and the Director of the Warwick Global Health Centre. She is an interdisciplinary researcher whose work is at the intersection of international law, public policy and global health. Professor Sekalala is particularly focused on the role of human rights frameworks in addressing global health inequalities. Her research has focused on health crises in Sub-Saharan Africa, international financing institutions and the rise of non-communicable diseases and she has published in leading legal, international relations and public health journals. Prof Sekalala is currently the PI on a Wellcome-Trust-funded project on digital health apps in Sub-Saharan Africa. Professor Sekalala is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences (FaSS) and she has consulted on human rights and health in many developing countries and worked for international organisations such as UNAIDS, the WHO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Her research has also been funded by the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, ESRC, Open Society Foundation and international organisations including the International Labour Organisation and the WHO. Sharifah also sits on the Strategic Advisory Network of the ESRC. Sharifah holds a PhD in Law (Warwick, 2012), an LLM in Public International Law (Distinction in research, Nottingham, 2006) and an LLB Honours (Makerere University, Uganda 2004). She was called to the Ugandan Bar in 2005.

Lecture summary: In this talk Sharifah Sekalala examines this critical moment in the making of Global Health Law, with two treaty making processes: the newly finalised revisions of the International Health Regulations and ongoing negotiations by the Intergovernmental Negotiation Body for a possible pandemic Accord or Instrument, as we well as soft-law proposals for the World Health Organization proposal for a medical countermeasures platform.The lecture will illustrate that despite the laudable objectives of creating a new system of international law that attempts to redress previous inequalities in accessing vaccines and countermeasures, they are unlikely to meet these broader objectives. The lecture will argue that this is because, despite being a public good, Global Health Law has always been underpinned by capitalist and post-colonial rationales which privilege trade. In order to make lasting changes, the current system of Global Health Law must focus on broader questions of ‘reparations' that will achieve greater equity.Sharifah is a Professor of Global Health Law at the University of Warwick and the Director of the Warwick Global Health Centre. She is an interdisciplinary researcher whose work is at the intersection of international law, public policy and global health. Professor Sekalala is particularly focused on the role of human rights frameworks in addressing global health inequalities. Her research has focused on health crises in Sub-Saharan Africa, international financing institutions and the rise of non-communicable diseases and she has published in leading legal, international relations and public health journals.Prof Sekalala is currently the PI on a Wellcome-Trust-funded project on digital health apps in Sub-Saharan Africa. Professor Sekalala is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences (FaSS) and she has consulted on human rights and health in many developing countries and worked for international organisations such as UNAIDS, the WHO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Her research has also been funded by the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, ESRC, Open Society Foundation and international organisations including the International Labour Organisation and the WHO. Sharifah also sits on the Strategic Advisory Network of the ESRC.Sharifah holds a PhD in Law (Warwick, 2012), an LLM in Public International Law (Distinction in research, Nottingham, 2006) and an LLB Honours (Makerere University, Uganda 2004). She was called to the Ugandan Bar in 2005.

Lecture summary: In this talk Sharifah Sekalala examines this critical moment in the making of Global Health Law, with two treaty making processes: the newly finalised revisions of the International Health Regulations and ongoing negotiations by the Intergovernmental Negotiation Body for a possible pandemic Accord or Instrument, as we well as soft-law proposals for the World Health Organization proposal for a medical countermeasures platform.The lecture will illustrate that despite the laudable objectives of creating a new system of international law that attempts to redress previous inequalities in accessing vaccines and countermeasures, they are unlikely to meet these broader objectives. The lecture will argue that this is because, despite being a public good, Global Health Law has always been underpinned by capitalist and post-colonial rationales which privilege trade. In order to make lasting changes, the current system of Global Health Law must focus on broader questions of ‘reparations' that will achieve greater equity.Sharifah is a Professor of Global Health Law at the University of Warwick and the Director of the Warwick Global Health Centre. She is an interdisciplinary researcher whose work is at the intersection of international law, public policy and global health. Professor Sekalala is particularly focused on the role of human rights frameworks in addressing global health inequalities. Her research has focused on health crises in Sub-Saharan Africa, international financing institutions and the rise of non-communicable diseases and she has published in leading legal, international relations and public health journals.Prof Sekalala is currently the PI on a Wellcome-Trust-funded project on digital health apps in Sub-Saharan Africa. Professor Sekalala is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences (FaSS) and she has consulted on human rights and health in many developing countries and worked for international organisations such as UNAIDS, the WHO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Her research has also been funded by the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, ESRC, Open Society Foundation and international organisations including the International Labour Organisation and the WHO. Sharifah also sits on the Strategic Advisory Network of the ESRC.Sharifah holds a PhD in Law (Warwick, 2012), an LLM in Public International Law (Distinction in research, Nottingham, 2006) and an LLB Honours (Makerere University, Uganda 2004). She was called to the Ugandan Bar in 2005.

Lecture summary: In this talk Sharifah Sekalala examines this critical moment in the making of Global Health Law, with two treaty making processes: the newly finalised revisions of the International Health Regulations and ongoing negotiations by the Intergovernmental Negotiation Body for a possible pandemic Accord or Instrument, as we well as soft-law proposals for the World Health Organization proposal for a medical countermeasures platform.The lecture will illustrate that despite the laudable objectives of creating a new system of international law that attempts to redress previous inequalities in accessing vaccines and countermeasures, they are unlikely to meet these broader objectives. The lecture will argue that this is because, despite being a public good, Global Health Law has always been underpinned by capitalist and post-colonial rationales which privilege trade. In order to make lasting changes, the current system of Global Health Law must focus on broader questions of ‘reparations' that will achieve greater equity.Sharifah is a Professor of Global Health Law at the University of Warwick and the Director of the Warwick Global Health Centre. She is an interdisciplinary researcher whose work is at the intersection of international law, public policy and global health. Professor Sekalala is particularly focused on the role of human rights frameworks in addressing global health inequalities. Her research has focused on health crises in Sub-Saharan Africa, international financing institutions and the rise of non-communicable diseases and she has published in leading legal, international relations and public health journals.Prof Sekalala is currently the PI on a Wellcome-Trust-funded project on digital health apps in Sub-Saharan Africa. Professor Sekalala is a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences (FaSS) and she has consulted on human rights and health in many developing countries and worked for international organisations such as UNAIDS, the WHO and the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Her research has also been funded by the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, ESRC, Open Society Foundation and international organisations including the International Labour Organisation and the WHO. Sharifah also sits on the Strategic Advisory Network of the ESRC.Sharifah holds a PhD in Law (Warwick, 2012), an LLM in Public International Law (Distinction in research, Nottingham, 2006) and an LLB Honours (Makerere University, Uganda 2004). She was called to the Ugandan Bar in 2005.

To Snip or Not to Snip - prepare for a “Cut” above the rest. On this episode of the MCG Pediatric Podcast, Dr. Bradley Morganstern, a Pediatric Urology physician, joins General Pediatrician Dr. Lauren Smith and Pediatric Resident Dr. My Duyen Vo to discuss the procedure of routine neonatal male circumcision, including benefits, potential complications, and contraindications. In this podcast, they will: Review the basic procedure for routine neonatal circumcision Discuss the benefits and risks associated with circumcision Depict the potential complications from circumcision that may require further intervention from urology Present the current guidelines on male circumcision from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Explore the history and cultural traditions surrounding circumcision Special thanks to Dr. Rebecca Yang and Dr. Alice Little Caldwell for peer reviewing this episode CME Credit (requires free sign up): Link coming soon! References: Aggleton, Peter (2007). “Just a Snip?”: A Social History of Male Circumcision, Reproductive Health Matters, 15:29, 15-21, DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(07)29303-6 Blank MD, S., Brady MD, M., Buerk MD, E., Carlo MD, W., Diekema MD, D., Freedman MD, A., Maxwell MD, L., Wegner MD, S. (2012). TASK FORCE ON CIRCUMCISION. Circumcision Policy Statement. Pediatrics, 130 (3): 585-586. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-1989 Blank MD, S., Brady MD, M., Buerk MD, E., Carlo MD, W., Diekema MD, D., Freedman MD, A., Maxwell MD, L., Wegner MD, S. (2012). TASK FORCE ON CIRCUMCISION. Male Circumcision Technical Report. Pediatrics, 130 (3): e756–e785. 10.1542/peds.2012-1990 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). Protect Your Baby from Bleeds – Talk to Your Healthcare Provider about Vitamin K [Fact Sheet]. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/blooddisorders/documents/vitamin-k-p.pdf Kaweblum, Y. A., Press, S., Kogan, L., et al (1984). Circumcision using the Mogen clamp. Clin Pediatr (Phila.) 23:679-82. Morris, B. J., Bailis, S. A., Wiswell, T. E. (2014). Circumcision Rates in the United States: Rising or Falling? What Effect Might the New Affirmative Pediatric Policy Statement Have? Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 89 (5): 677-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001 Owings M, Uddin S, Williams S. (2013). Trends in circumcision for male newborns in U.S. hospitals: 1979-2010. Atlanta, Georgia: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/circumcision_2013/circumcision_2013.pdf Smith, L. The History of Male Infant Circumcision(Medical resident thesis).  WHO, UNAIDS (2010). Neonatal and child male circumcision: A global review. www.circlist.com/considering/neonatal_child_MC_UNAIDS.pdf

Die Namibië volhoubaarheidspadkaart belanghebbende vergadering oor MIV is aan die gang by die Windhoek Buiteklub, gefokus op die finalisering van die padkaart vir die implementering daarvan op 1 Desember. In sy openingstoespraak het Ben Nangombe, uitvoerende direkteur van die gesondheidministerie, die vordering wat gemaak is met die finalisering van die Nasionale Operasionele Plan en Volhoubaarheidspadkaart vir MIV, TB, malaria en hepatitis onderstreep. Nangombe beklemtoon dat volhoubaarheid gaan oor die handhawing van 'n langtermyn gesondheidsreaksie, eerder as om skenkerondersteuning te beëindig. Nangombe het die waarde van vennootskappe met sleutelbelanghebbendes soos Pepfar en UNAids beklemtoon om 'n veerkragtige gesondheidstelsel te bou.

This week, Jean-Bernard Simeon, Senior Vice President and Head, ViiV Healthcare Europe, sits down with the EMJ GOLD team to share his thoughts on the current landscape for patients with HIV in Europe.   Together, JB and Jade explore the UNAIDS roadmap to end the HIV epidemic by 2030, the barriers faced by people living with HIV in Europe, stigmas still surrounding the condition and much more.   

Hii leo jaridani tuankuletea mada kwa kina inayotupeleka nchini Sudan Kusini kufuatilia changamoto za kibinadamu na jinsi ambavyo mashirika ya Umoja wa Mataifa yanavyozitatua. Pi atunakuletea muhtasari wa habari kama zifuatazo na ufafanuzi wa methali.Licha ya kuongezeka kwa majanga duniani, kuanzia umaskini hadi dharura ya tabianchi, Umoja wa Mataifa umesalia na azma yake ya kusongesha amani, maendeleo endelevu na kupunguza machungu yanayowapata binadamu, amesema Katibu Mkuu wa Umoja wa Mataifa António Guterres katika ripoti yake ya mwaka ya utendaji wa Umoja wa Mataifa iliyotolewa leo jijini New York, Marekani kabla ya kuanza kwa Mjadala Mkuu wa  mkutano wa 79 wa Baraza Kuu la Umoja wa Mataifa, UNGA79.Shirika la Umoja wa Mataifa la kukabiliana na Ukimwi, UNAIDS hii leo limetoa ripoti yake huko Geneva, Uswisi ikionesha kuwa mzigo wa madeni unaokabili nchi za Afrika zilizo Kusini mwa jangwa la Sahara unasababisha zibakie na fedha kidogo kugharimia huduma za afya, pamoja na huduma muhimu zaidi dhidi ya Virusi vya Ukimwi, VVU. Idadi kubwa ya watu wanaoishi na VVU duniani wako eneo hilo lakini mzigo wa madeni unarudisha nyuma maendeleo yaliyopatikana ya kutokomeza Ukimwi ifikapo 2030.Tukisalia na suala hilo hilo la UKIMWI, UNAIDS inasema vijana wawili wanaoishi na Virusi vya Ukimwi na pia wana ushawishi mkubwa kwenye mitandao ya kijamii, Ibanomonde Ngema kutoka Afrika Kusini, na Jerop Limo kutoka Kenya, wako njiani kuja New York, Marekani kushiriki UNGA79 na Mkutano wa Zama Zijazo kwa lengo la kusihi viongozi wa dunia kushirikiana na vijana katika kutokomeza Ukimwi.Na katika kujifunza lugha ya Kiswahili, mchambuzi wetu Dkt. Josephat Gitonga, kutoka Kenya ambaye ni mhadhiri katika Chuo Kikuu cha Nairobi kwenye kitivo cha tafsiri na ukalimani anatufafanulia maana ya methali “Mke ni nguomgomba ni kupalilia.”.Mwenyeji wako ni Anold Kayanda, karibu! 

Thursday, July 25th 2024Today, the Democratic National Convention Rules Committee has passed a nomination process proposal; Vote.org has announced a 700% increase in daily voter registrations in the past 48 hours; the Harris Campaign has added Pete Buttegieg to the list of VP candidates they're considering; FBI Director Chris Wray tells Congress it's not clear whether Trump was hit by a bullet or shrapnel; the Citizens Redistricting Commission proposal has qualified for the November ballot in Ohio; Elon Musk has canceled his $45M per month contribution to Donald Trump as Tesla profit tanks by 45%; experts say a twice-yearly injection that offers 100% protection against HIV is ‘stunning'; plus Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Answer The Call! Thursday, July 25 8:30pmhttps://twitter.com/shannonrwattsStoriesDemocrats poised to virtually nominate Harris — and her running mate — by Aug. 7 (AP News)Surprise: Elon Musk Says He Isn't Actually Donating $45 Million a Month to Trump (Vanity Fair)Proposal to create a new political mapmaking system in Ohio qualifies for November ballot (AP News)Experts say a twice-yearly injection that offers 100% protection against HIV is ‘stunning' (AP News)Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe to Lawyers, Guns, And MoneyAd-free premium feed: https://lawyersgunsandmoney.supercast.comSubscribe for free everywhere else:https://lawyersgunsandmoney.simplecast.com/episodes/1-miami-1985Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Follow Mueller, She Wrote on Posthttps://post.news/@/MuellerSheWrote?utm_source=TwitterAG&utm_medium=creator_organic&utm_campaign=muellershewrote&utm_content=FollowMehttps://muellershewrote.substack.comhttps://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrotehttps://www.threads.net/@muellershewrotehttps://www.tiktok.com/@muellershewrotehttps://instagram.com/muellershewroteDana Goldberghttps://twitter.com/DGComedyhttps://www.instagram.com/dgcomedyhttps://www.facebook.com/dgcomedyhttps://danagoldberg.comHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/From The Good NewsSharon McMahon's substack, The PreambleHopium Chronicles By Simon Rosenberg | SubstackCoyote and Crow Tabletop game (coyoteandcrow.net)https://curectnnb1.orghttps://ctnnb1-foundation.org Live Show Ticket Links:https://allisongill.com (for all tickets and show dates)Friday August 16th Washington, DC - with Andy McCabe, Pete Strzok, Glenn Kirschner https://tinyurl.com/Beans-in-DCSaturday August 24 San Francisco, CA https://tinyurl.com/Beans-SF Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/OrPatreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Canada soccer spying, Netanyahu addresses congress, Disney song rankings, Newfoundland and Labrador burial costs, UNAIDS prevention cost, Harris fundraiser, and more.

The executive director of the United Nations AIDS agency (UNAIDS) says several countries in Africa are making good progress towards achieving the worldwide goal to end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030. However, Winnie Byanyima says for the international community to be successful, world leaders must ensure adequate resources, resolve the debt burden of low-income countries, and protect rights by ending discrimination. Byanyima spoke with VOA's James Butty from Munich, Germany, where this year's global AIDS conference is taking place

“I have lived with HIV for 25 years out of 50. I just turned 50, and I was diagnosed in 1999 at the age of 25 with HIV.”The HIV/AIDS epidemic has significantly impacted African countries south of the Sahara. By late 2001, over half of the world's HIV cases were in sub-Saharan Africa. UNAIDS, the organisation advocating for accelerated and effective global action on the HIV pandemic, is leading efforts to eradicate the virus by 2030. They will hold their 25th conference next week. In today's Africa Daily Alan Kasujja speaks to Friedel Dausab, a gay man living in Namibia who remembers a time when treatment was unavailable, that changed for him in 2002, and Winnie Byanyima, the Executive Director of UNAIDS.

This is part 8 of a special series focusing on the community of Honoring Our Experience, and their work with long-term survivors of the HIV/AIDS virus.Today on the podcast we're revisiting a conversation from Season 2, with Martina Clark. Author, Activist, and HIV survivor.Imagine being 28 years old, arguably at the beginning of your life, and told you have 5 years to live. With a sense of nothing to lose, Martina Clark, writer, teacher, and activist, dove into an activism that led her to becoming the first openly HIV-positive person to work for UNAIDS in 1996. She captured that life in her memoir, My Unexpected Life, a mix of personal story, travel, humor and an up-close look at the squishy underbelly of the United Nations that follows her personal journey—emotional and physical—interwoven with her professional path. It is an insider's view to the history of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, particularly as pertains to women. A native Californian, Martina teaches in the City University of New York system at Laguardia Community College where she empowers the next generation of young people to explore their passions to find their voice in the world.To learn more about Martina's work visit her website:martina@martina-clark.commartina-clark.comTo learn more about Robert Maggio, the composer of "Where Love is Love," our theme music, please check out his website.To learn more about Suzanne, visit her website. To learn more about the inspiration for this podcast, please check out Suzanne's memoir, Estrellas - Moments of Illumination Along El Camino de SantiagoFollow Suzanne on Social Media Instagram @suzannemaggio_author Facebook @ Suzanne Maggio author Twitter @ bottomofninth

Howie and Harlan catch up on healthcare headlines, including the politics of treating gun violence as a public health crisis, the growing evidence for the dangers of artificial sweeteners, and the latest on the bird flu outbreak. Links: Aspen Ideas: Health 2024 Harlan Krumholz: “The Next Era of JACC” "First Issue of JACC Debuts Under Harlan M. Krumholz" "U.S. clinical trials begin for twice-yearly HIV prevention injection" UNAIDS: 2023 Fact Sheet Rush University System: Dr. Omar B. Lateef "Rush Signs on as First Partner for Local Laundry Service" “Health Equity as a System Strategy: The Rush University Medical Center Framework” "Surgeon General Declares Gun Violence a Public Health Crisis" Surgeon General's Advisory on Firearm Violence "Surgeon General: Why I'm Calling for a Warning Label on Social Media Platforms" “Patient Navigation for Lung Cancer Screening at a Health Care for the Homeless Program A Randomized Clinical Trial” Vinay Prasad: “CT screening for lung cancer for homeless people: the new JAMA IM paper” Supreme Court: Murthy v. Missouri Opinion "US supreme court allows government to request removal of misinformation on social media" Harlan Krumholz: “Why One Cardiologist Has Drunk His Last Diet Soda" “Xylitol is prothrombotic and associated with cardiovascular risk” "Is Xylitol Dangerous?" CDC: A(H5N1) Bird Flu Response Update June 21, 2024 "Michigan stands out for its aggressive bird flu response. Will other states follow its lead?" "Finland to offer bird flu vaccinations to at-risk residents in a world first" Learn more about the MBA for Executives program at Yale SOM. Email Howie and Harlan comments or questions.

Dr. Rochelle Walensky served as the 19th Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2021-23), Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School (2012-2021), and Chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital (2017-2021). Dr. Walensky is an infectious disease clinician whose research career is guided by a belief that the clinical and economic outcomes of medical decisions can be improved through the explicit articulation of choices, the systematic assembly of evidence, and the careful assessment of comparative costs and benefits. She has focused these beliefs on mathematical model-based research toward the promotion of global access to HIV prevention, screening, and care. Her ground-breaking work and over 300 research publications have motivated changes to US HIV testing and immigration policy; promoted expanded funding for HIV-related research, treatment, and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPfAR); and led to policy revisions toward aggressive HIV screening – especially for the underserved – and earlier treatment in resource-limited international settings. In light of these contributions, Dr. Walensky has been an active member of policy discussions at the WHO, UNAIDS, the DHHS HIV Guidelines Committee, and the NIH Office of AIDS Research.

Ben is joined by two friends of the pod, Christine Stegling, Deputy Director of UNAIDS, and Vuyiseka Dubula, Department Head, Community Rights & Gender at the Global Fund, to reflect on what this week's developments at the WHA, mean for the global AIDS response, and why the lessons of HIV do not seem to have been learned in access to medicines and pandemics preparation. And that's a wrap from the 77th World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland! Thanks for joining us! https://www.unaids.org/en https://www.theglobalfund.org/en #WHA77 #HIV #AIDS #pandemicspreparedness #accesstomedicines

Die Gesamentlike Verenigde Nasies-program oor MIV en Vigs het die belangrikheid uitgelig van geslagsgelykheid, die bemagtiging van vroue en meisies en hulle reg tot gesonder lewens. Dit gebeur voor Internasionale Vrouedag, wat Vrydag herdenk word. In ooreenstemming met vanjaar se tema, doen die uitvoerende direkteur van Unaids, Winnie Byanyima, 'n beroep op Afrikalande om te belê in vroue om vooruitgang te versnel.

Dr Kapila has extensive experience in global and public health,  international development, humanitarian affairs, conflict and security issues, human rights, diplomacy, and social entrepreneurship, with substantive leadership roles in government, United Nations system and multilateral agencies, International Red Cross and Red Crescent, civil society, and academia. His work has taken him to some 120 countries in all continents. Originally schooled in India and England, Dr Kapila graduated in medicine from the University of Oxford and received postgraduate qualifications in public health from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.   Since 2012, Dr Kapila has been the Professor (now Emeritus) of Global Health & Humanitarian Affairs at the University of Manchester, UK, where he also founded and chaired the Manchester Global Foundation.  Since 2020, he is also Senior Adviser to the Parliamentary Assembly for the Mediterranean, the principal forum for 29 national parliaments of the Euro-Mediterranean region, deliberating on the creation of the best political, social, economic and cultural environment for fellow citizens of member states. He also serves as an adviser on several international bodies, including on the Strategic and Technical Advisory Group for Antimicrobial Resistance for the World Health Organization. After an initial clinical career (1980-1984) in hospitals and general practice in Cambridge,  and then in public health (1984-1990), including initiating and leading the first National UK HIV/AIDS Programme, Dr Kapila joined what is now called the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in 1990 where he oversaw British aid health programmes in Asia and Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, followed by a spell based in Central and Southern Africa.   Dr Kapila was seconded by the UK Government to the United Nations in 2002-03, initially as Special Adviser to the UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General in Afghanistan and then to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.  He then became the United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Co-ordinator for Sudan (2003-04), leading what was, at the time, the UN's biggest operation in the world. In 2004, he arrived at the headquarters of the World Health Organization in Geneva as Director of Emergency Response, handling major operations such as the Indian Ocean Tsunami.   In 2006, he joined the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies,  the world's largest humanitarian and development network serving in different roles such as Special Representative of the Secretary General, Director of Policy and Planning, and finally as Undersecretary General where he oversaw several transformations and strategic interventions to scale-up programming.   Dr Kapila has also served in many policy advisory roles, conducted strategic reviews and formulated new programmes with several other international agencies such as the World Bank, UNAIDS, International Labour Organization, UN OCHA and ISDR, as well as served on the Boards of the UN Institute for Training and Research, the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, and the International Peace Academy. He was an early member of the UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination System.    He returned to the United Nations in 2015-2016 to serve as Special Adviser for the first-ever World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul, and then in 2018-2019 to found and direct the innovative Defeat-NCD Partnership at the UN.     Additionally, he has been active in several civil society groups including chairing the Council of Minority Rights Group International, and chairing the Board of Nonviolent Peaceforce that was nominated for the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize. He has initiated new initiatives on sexual and gender based violence and, as Special Representative of the Aegis Trust,  on the prevention of genocide and other crimes against humanity.  These came out of his personal experiences in witnessing, at first hand, the genocidal atrocities in Rwanda, Srebrenica, and Darfur. Dr Kapila has been a public motivational  and keynote speaker at numerous events including at TedX, and delivered in Nairobi in 2013, the memorial lecture in honour of Nobel Prize winning environmental activist Wangari Maathai.  He has written extensively and served on editorial boards of several publications such as Global Governance and the International Journal of Humanitarian Studies. His memoir “Against a Tide of Evil” was nominated for the 2013 Best Non-Fiction Book award by the Crime Writers Association. His latest book (2019) is entitled “No Stranger to Kindness”.  Some of his other writings can be accessed on his website.   www.mukeshkapila.org Twitter @mukeshkapila

Today I have got the honor of talking to Dr. Mukesh Kapila about the Israel-Hamas war and the wider situation within the Middle East.  Dr Kapila has extensive experience in global and public health,  international development, humanitarian affairs, conflict and security issues, human rights, diplomacy, and social entrepreneurship, with substantive leadership roles in government, United Nations system and multilateral agencies, International Red Cross and Red Crescent, civil society, and academia. His work has taken him to some 120 countries in all continents. Originally schooled in India and England, Dr Kapila graduated in medicine from the University of Oxford and received postgraduate qualifications  in public health from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.   Since 2012, Dr Kapila has been the Professor (now Emeritus) of Global Health & Humanitarian Affairs at the University of Manchester, UK where he also founded and chaired the Manchester Global Foundation.  Since 2020, he is also Senior Adviser to the Parliamentary Assembly for the Mediterranean, the principal forum for 29 national parliaments of the Euro-Mediterranean region deliberating on the creation of the best political, social, economic and cultural environment for fellow citizens of member states. He also serves as adviser on several international bodies including on the Strategic and Technical Advisory Group for Antimicrobial Resistance for the World Health Organization. After an initial clinical career (1980-1984) in hospitals and general practice in Cambridge,  and then in public health (1984-1990) including initiating and leading the first National UK HIV/AIDS Programme, Dr Kapila joined what is now called the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in 1990 where he oversaw British aid health programmes in Asia and Pacific, Latin America and Caribbean, followed by a spell based in Central and Southern Africa.   Dr Kapila was seconded by the UK Government to the United Nations in 2002-03 initially as Special Adviser to the UN Special Representative of the Secretary General in Afghanistan and then to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.  He then became the United Nations' Resident and Humanitarian Co-ordinator for Sudan (2003-04) leading what was at the time, the UN's biggest operation in the world.  in 2004, he arrived at the headquarters of the World Health Organization in Geneva as Director for Emergency Response handling major operations such as for the Indian Ocean Tsunami.   In 2006, he joined the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies,  the world's largest humanitarian and development network serving in different roles such as Special Representative of the Secretary General, Director of Policy and Planning, and finally as Undersecretary General where he oversaw several transformations and strategic interventions to scale-up programming.   Dr Kapila has also served in many policy advisory roles, conducted strategic reviews and formulated new programmes with several other international agencies such as the World Bank, UNAIDS, International Labour Organization, UN OCHA and ISDR, as well as served on the Boards of the UN Institute for Training and Research, the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces, and  the International Peace Academy. He was an early member of the UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination System.    He returned to the United Nations in 2015-2016 to serve as Special Adviser for the first-ever World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul, and then in 2018-2019 to found and direct the innovative Defeat-NCD Partnership at the UN.     Additionally, he has been active in several civil society groups including chairing the Council of Minority Rights Group International, and chairing the Board of Nonviolent Peaceforce that was nominated for the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize. He has initiated new initiatives on sexual and gender based violence and, as Special Representative of the Aegis Trust,  on the prevention of genocide and other crimes against humanity.  These came out of his personal experiences in witnessing, at first hand, the genocidal atrocities in Rwanda, Srebrenica, and Darfur. Dr Kapila has been a public motivational  and keynote speaker at numerous events including at TedX, and delivered in Nairobi in 2013, the memorial lecture in honour of Nobel Prize winning environmental activist Wangari Maathai.  He has written extensively and served on editorial boards of several publications such as Global Governance and the International Journal of Humanitarian Studies. His memoir “Against a Tide of Evil” was nominated for the 2013 Best Non-Fiction Book award by the Crime Writers Association. His latest book (2019) is entitled “No Stranger to Kindness”.  Some of his other writings can be accessed on his website.   www.mukeshkapila.org Twitter @mukeshkapila

Join Amanda in a stirring narrative following Martina Clark's journey from being diagnosed with HIV in 1992 and defying the prognosis of being given 5 years to live, to thriving three decades later. Tune in as she challenges stereotypes, advocates for HIV awareness and education, and sparks a vital shift in societal perspectives.1. The prejudice received for being diagnosed with HIV and the decades of stigma surrounding it2. Drawbacks of women's underrepresentation in HIV clinical trials3. What it's like to age with HIV and its impact on a woman's body4. Advice for women recently diagnosed with HIV5. Assistance programs and cost of treatment for people with HIVResources mentioned in this episode WomenHIV.org  The Daily | Apple Podcast and Spotify Why One Drug Company Held Back a Better Drug My Unexpected Life by Martina Clark | Kindle, Audiobook, and Paperback  UNAIDS ADAP DirectoryAbout Martina ClarkIn 1992, Martina Clark was told she had HIV and maybe a “good five years to live.” Today, 31 years later, Martina Clark is a professor and the award-winning author and narrator of My Unexpected Life: An International Memoir of Two Pandemics, HIV and COVID-19. She writes memoirs, personal essays, and travel narratives. Before teaching, she worked for the United Nations system (including UNAIDS, UNICEF, and Peacekeeping) for decades. She has lived with HIV for over half her life – 31 years and counting – and survived COVID-19, the original recipe. Martina has traveled to over 90 countries and conducted condom demonstrations in at least 50. She's traveled by boat, bus, and plane but never by elephant or camel.Connect with MartinaWebsite: Martina Clark Support the show! Want to learn more about us? Visit our website at www.periodtopause.com or send an email to amanda@periodtopause.comFollow us on Instagram: @periodtopauseFollow our Facebook Page: Period to Pause