It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
With the sheer volume of patients with HIV or AIDS one would assume that governments would be stepping up to help confront the problems faced by what now amounts to millions of people.
“This is a major step backwards,” said Jodi Jacobson, head of Change, a Washington, DC-based charity monitoring the effect of US policy on women’s health. “The US doesn’t want to commit to any targets by which it can be held accountable, and it doesn’t want anyone else to commit either.”
Colin Powell, then US secretary of state, addressed the 2001 assembly, but this time Laura Bush, the First Lady, will speak instead. “She’s been to Africa, but she has no decision-making power,” said David Bryden from the Global Aids Alliance.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
This to me is really shocking, not so much shocking because I would never expect it, but shocking because of the Impact of AIDS on the world community and the syphon on reasources it has become. Second, only to cancer, in research funding, AIDS has trully ate away at the Cutting edge of pharmacology.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
By stepping away from thier goals and pushing for other countries do to the same, I think that US government is attempting to bring about new social rules in regards to how much governments help those afflicted by disease and illness.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
This further reinforces the idea in my mind that government is now a buisness. Instead of caring about the individual the government is instead interested in overhead costs and end of the year profits.
Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
"You can judge a government by how it takes care of sick, eldery, and criminal populations" what does that say about our government?