The Pandemic Has Set Back the Fight Against HIV, TB and Malaria (nytimes.com) 55
The Covid-19 pandemic has severely set back the fight against other global scourges like H.I.V., tuberculosis and malaria, according to a sobering new report released on Tuesday. From a report: Before the pandemic, the world had been making strides against these illnesses. Overall, deaths from those diseases have dropped by about half since 2004. "The advent of a fourth pandemic, in Covid, puts these hard-fought gains in great jeopardy," said Mitchell Warren, executive director of AVAC, a nonprofit organization promoting H.I.V. treatment worldwide. The pandemic has flooded hospitals and disrupted supply chains for tests and treatments. In many poor countries, the coronavirus crisis diverted limited public health resources away from treatment and prevention of these diseases. Many fewer people sought diagnosis or medication, because they were afraid of becoming infected with the coronavirus at clinics. And some patients were denied care because their symptoms, such as a cough or a fever, resembled those of Covid-19.
Unless comprehensive efforts to beat back the illnesses resume, "we'll continue to play emergency response and global health Whac-a-Mole," Mr. Warren said. The report was compiled by the Global Fund, an advocacy group that funds campaigns against H.I.V., malaria and tuberculosis. Before the arrival of the coronavirus, TB was the biggest infectious-disease killer worldwide, claiming more than one million lives each year. The pandemic has exacerbated the damage. In 2020, about one million fewer people were tested and treated for TB, compared with 2019 -- a drop of about 18 percent, according to the new report. The number of people treated for drug-resistant TB declined by 19 percent, and for extensively drug-resistant TB by 37 percent. Nearly 500,000 people were diagnosed with drug-resistant TB in 2019.
Unless comprehensive efforts to beat back the illnesses resume, "we'll continue to play emergency response and global health Whac-a-Mole," Mr. Warren said. The report was compiled by the Global Fund, an advocacy group that funds campaigns against H.I.V., malaria and tuberculosis. Before the arrival of the coronavirus, TB was the biggest infectious-disease killer worldwide, claiming more than one million lives each year. The pandemic has exacerbated the damage. In 2020, about one million fewer people were tested and treated for TB, compared with 2019 -- a drop of about 18 percent, according to the new report. The number of people treated for drug-resistant TB declined by 19 percent, and for extensively drug-resistant TB by 37 percent. Nearly 500,000 people were diagnosed with drug-resistant TB in 2019.
Why would it be a surprise? (Score:3, Interesting)
What next? Studies that show Weekly scrubbing of bathtubs for soap scum gets neglected in homes dealing with flash floods?
Re: (Score:2)
If a tornado rips through a neighborhood, you would naturally expect the usual yard maintenance, shrub trimming, etc to suffer till the neighborhood recovers. If it does, sometimes the effects are permanent.
What next? Studies that show Weekly scrubbing of bathtubs for soap scum gets neglected in homes dealing with flash floods?
As a matter of fact, yes. What else would you expect from a "news" industry that prioritizes clicks and likes over content or quality?
You should expect a "water is wet" analysis to be included in that flash flood study too, along with an "urgent" message about the dangers of inhaling Dihydrogen Monoxide, because that's just how far gone reporting has become.
Re: (Score:2)
because that's just how far gone reporting has become.
There's probably a bit of the usual rose-tinted "things in the past were much better" mentality in that sentiment, but I question how try it really is. I think things were always as shit as they are now only it was far less noticeable. Back in the day practically no one had access to the kind of information or data necessary to do any kind of analysis on reporting and the number of sources were so limited for most people that they might not even be aware of any kind of dissenting opinions or other partially
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why would it be a surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)
In other ways I do think it may still be apt even if we read into it in the same way you have. Those other diseases are themselves really serious and just as (if not more in certain parts of the world) deadly than COVID, but compared to COVID they haven't been treated as seriously in many senses. They've been around long enough that they get treated as almost a routine part of life. When people die in these "routine" ways no one gets upset or acts alarmed. But when it's something unexpected or novel (like COVID) then people behave differently.
Either way I don't think your conclusion is a very charitable assessment.
Re: (Score:2)
Those other diseases are themselves really serious and just as (if not more in certain parts of the world) deadly than COVID, but compared to COVID they haven't been treated as seriously in many senses.
What do you think is more likely to be true - that these other diseases are treated with all due seriousness they deserve or that COVID is the only disease in history that was taken with appropriate level of seriousness?
Quite the opposite (Score:4, Insightful)
Short term, maybe there's an increase of people catching diseases like H.I.V. and not getting treatment...
But what does that really matter long term? That is just treating what has happened.
Instead you are overlooking the very, very bright side - mRNA vaccines, and even other forms of new vaccines have sprung into being that are technologies you can quickly adapt to other viruses - including HIV [clinicaltrialsarena.com], and Malara [reuters.com]
Let's all look forward to a not so distant future when we don't have to worry about treating HIV or Malaria, because at-risk people can simply get vaccinated for it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Quite the opposite (Score:2)
People can already use PreP to prevent HIV infection . Most don't because they are either unaware, or have issues with accessing those very expensive daily medications. A vaccine would be easier to take to be sure, if one is ever successful.
Side effects seem poor (Score:1)
People can already use PreP to prevent HIV infection
How effective is that? I couldn't find any percentages.
The list of side effects I did find rather sucked:
Common side effects in people taking DESCOVY for PrEP are diarrhea, nausea, headache, fatigue, and stomach pain. Tell your healthcare provider if you have any side effects that bother you or do not go away.
And as you said, that is also more expensive, so it's probably not protecting a ton of people that would benefit most from protection.
It really see
Re: Side effects seem poor (Score:2)
Nonsense. Spending on HIV research is massively disproportionate to its impact. The NIH in 2015 spent around the same on HIV research as they did on heart disease and cardiovascular diseases combined. Even Cancer spending was maybe 40% higher than HIV spending. See https://www.fiercebiotech.com/... [fiercebiotech.com]
Conditions that kill massively more people are proportionately less funded than HIV research. This despite HIV being among the easiest to avoid. In short, don't be promiscuous, avoid anal sex between men, and don'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
PrEP is close to 100% effective. There are only a handful of cases worldwide of patients who were taking their PrEP as directed and ended up contracting HIV.
Descovy is fairly well tolerated by most. Most people don't have those side effects. The long-term ones are the problem. It's not as bad as Truvada, though.
A lot of people who take PrEP are people who just don't want to use condoms. Mostly gay and bi men, because other populations are just unaware of it, even though they could benefit a lot from it too,
Re: (Score:1)
Interesting, it didn't realize it was so effective - it still seems like one shot that you take maybe every few years, would be a lot more popular?
Or at least, maybe it will be used by the wider population that as you said doesn't use PrEP but really needs protection from AIDS...
Re: (Score:2)
Short term, maybe there's an increase of people catching diseases like H.I.V. and not getting treatment...
But what does that really matter long term? That is just treating what has happened.
Instead you are overlooking the very, very bright side - mRNA vaccines, and even other forms of new vaccines have sprung into being that are technologies you can quickly adapt to other viruses - including HIV [clinicaltrialsarena.com], and Malara [reuters.com]
Let's all look forward to a not so distant future when we don't have to worry about treating HIV or Malaria, because at-risk people can simply get vaccinated for it.
Exactly what I was thinking with regards to mRNA development. Instead of listening to people condemning all the work and focus that shifted in the last 18 months, how about we consider taking advantage of it. Also, gut feeling is like many other socially interactive diseases, the infection rates for HIV likely went down when everyone was quarantined. Naturally, you'll find no one reporting on that good news. Only bad news sells clicks and likes these days.
And to be quite honest as an American, I'd more
Re: (Score:1)
What we're really celebrating is the vast pool of test subjects that materialized
Created or not, that is a great point - mRNA has been around but how long would it have been before it was in any kind of wide use - ten years?
Instead because of Covid, every government was willing to jump in feet first on the basis of historically very scant testing, because the world needed something now, not three years from now.
So far things are looking good so that will probably green-light a lot of newer mRNA vaccines muc
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they have been in development for decades. This is the first approved use of them, however. Another is right around the corner.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Let's all look forward to a not so distant future when we don't have to worry about treating HIV or Malaria, because at-risk people can simply get vaccinated for it.
People get vaccinated... I don't know about that.
Maybe I've been reading the news too much lately, but it sure seems like more people have either become suspicious of vaccines or are completely anti-vax because someone told them it was a secret liberal plot [reuters.com] for a mass death campaign [nbcnews.com]. So instead of taking an FDA approvied vaccine that has been shown to be effective, they opt to take some unproven or known to not be effective drug instead because someone [cnbc.com] they follow or a group they are a member of told them t
Re: (Score:1)
Simple solution: (Score:2)
Just infect HIV, TB, and Malaria itself with Covid. Solved!
What a surprise (Score:3, Insightful)
Idealists only have the brain capacity to focus on one issue at a time. There is no middle ground there is no time to waste on "other stuff", there is only the balls out singular focus on the shiniest ball in the room.
Have fun with a ruined economy, increased world poverty, "other diseases" and a broken supply chain.
Re: (Score:3)
That's called "triaging". The most pressing matter (COVID-19) is being focused on first, mainly because it caused all the things you listed plus millions of deaths.
By this point I would expect people to realize that just letting everyone get sick and fill up the hospitals isn't an economically beneficial strategy.
Re: (Score:3)
These people put up "ruined economies" (my 401k has never been better), other health issues (they never cared about and did not want to fund) and poverty (never cared about, would not spend money alleviating), but they don't really care about them.
What they care about is that their cheap hustle or MLM quit paying out in the pandemic, and they can't hang out in the bar/pub/club.
Re: (Score:2)
> These people put up "ruined economies" (my 401k has never been better)
My net worth jumped significantly since the pandemic, but are we richer or did all the printed money debase the currency and we ONLY have the same purchasing power? Time will tell. We're certainly better off than someone whose net worth went down. But while you're stroking your dick about your perceived 401k gains the real point is how much you don't understand about the intricacies of the actual economy. And nothing proves my po
Re: (Score:1)
The left under Trump Presidency: "the stock market isn't the economy idiots"
The left under Biden Presidency: " money printer go burrrr.."
Re: (Score:2)
Those aren't even conflicting idea. The stock market isn't the economy. All presidents since Clinton have been deficit spending
Re: Our scientists have too much money (Score:4, Insightful)
That is ridiculous, we do not have anywhere near enough money for science. You idiots who failed all your science courses in middle school do not appreciate the magnitude of the problems and challenges we face. There are so many of them.
How do you stop aging? Do you even know the numerous processes involved in that?
How do you regenerate spinal cords?
How do you dissolve cholesterol plaques from blood vessels?
How do you end Parkinsonâ(TM)s disease?
How do you cure cancer?
How do you reverse or halt dementia?
Letâ(TM)s take regenerating spinal cords .. do you have ANY idea what happens when there is a spinal cord injury .. how many different types of cells and inflammatory signals there are? How scar tissue forms. How you eliminate the scar tissue without it forming back? What are all the correct chemical signals you have to send so that the nerves regrow? Do you think those are easy to figure out?
There is a reason you could not handle science. What do you think is in all those pages in the thick books you could not read.
These problems need a LOT of money and people to research. If it could be solved with less money; why has it not been.
Re: (Score:2)
You assume that the OP, or anyone like them, actually cares about any of those questions.
SPOILER ALERT....THEY DON'T.
Re: (Score:1)
That the scientists' priorities don't match those you or I have, is the unfortunate result of the government — rather than the Free Market — doing most of these allocations.
Fortunately, I'm not entrusted with "handling" science. My point is, those, who are so entrusted, don't do a good job either.
Next time you see Tony, ask him this question: why did he authorize funding for bat-virus resear
Re: (Score:2)
The bat virus research is very important. We have to do virus research, how else do we find out how these viruses work and how to fight them? Do you want to sit around and wait for pandemics and be clueless as to how viruses work? Do you want to see a repeat of bubonic plague, Spanish flu, and other pandemics?
Re: (Score:2)
Is it? Can you convince me — without calling me names?
In the case of COVID-19, we've created the very virus we were afraid might occur naturally. The whole world would've been much better off, if we simply didn't do it. It was the classic "solution looking for problem" — except that the search for the solution created the very problem before the solution was
Re: Our scientists have too much money (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That is ridiculous, we do not have anywhere near enough money for science. You idiots who failed all your science courses in middle school do not appreciate the magnitude of the problems and challenges we face. There are so many of them.
Starting with the idiots who flunked middle school science.
In a perverse way, the GP is right. We have more money to spend on science than we can possibly spend in the U.S., largely because there are not enough people going into science-related fields, which in turn is because our education system is churning out too many science-illiterate people.
And the inevitable result of that deficiency in science aptitude is that we end up shipping R&D dollars to countries with more lax standards of safety, resul
Re: (Score:2)
Right, less put less funding towards virus research so we can better treat viruses! Wait...that's insane.
I guess it's not scientists that have too much money, it's trolls have too much time
Re: (Score:2)
So that we don't have the viruses like COVID-19.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hope it was worth it (Score:4, Informative)
Covid-19's IFR is .68, meaning 68 people will die for every 10,000 infected. The season flu is .1, so Covid's IFR is 6.8 times higher.
Further, Covid has a much higher reproduction number, which is the number of people who get infected for every person who becomes infected. The flu's R is 1.3, whereas Covid is around 2.2 to 2.8, varying wildly depending on country, vaccination rates, and population density.
So you have around twice as many people infected for every person who gets infected, and 6.8X the mortality rate. Covid is exponentially more dangerous than the flu.
I'd post links to support what I just said, but given I found multiple peer reviewed papers supporting these facts with a 5 second Google search, I think you can do some basic research yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop throwing out misinformation.
Covid-19's IFR is .68, meaning 68 people will die for every 10,000 infected. The season flu is .1, so Covid's IFR is 6.8 times higher.
You're overestimating influenza's IFR by a decent margin. A large, detailed IFR out of New Zealand estimated that the IFR for seasonal flu is 0.039% (39 per 100k) [biomedcentral.com], and the IFR for COVID is 0.68% (680 per 100k). So COVID's IFR is O(20) times that of flu.
Further, Covid has a much higher reproduction number, which is the number of people who get infected for every person who becomes infected. The flu's R is 1.3, whereas Covid is around 2.2 to 2.8, varying wildly depending on country, vaccination rates, and population density.
The delta variant has an estimated R0 of between 6 and 8. So again, you're understating things a bit. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
And you're confusing CFR with IFR. Or you're just a liar telling mistruths on purpose.
At the point that WHO announced breathlessly that it estimated 1/10 of the earth population had been infected (that's what IFR is, it's not detected cases), within a month, the UN also breathlessly announced 1 million people had died from COVID. That was Sept 2020 (I use it because the numbers are convenient and round.)
1 million/750 million = 0.0013 = 0.13%
The actual IFR (again, not CFR) of flu is 0.09 to 0.14 depending
Upshot (Score:3)
well, we finally completely eradicated the flu. so there's that.
But...? (Score:3)
What gives?
Re: (Score:2)
Treatment and prevention means distributing condoms, HIV meds, PreP, things that all exist today. The Moderna trial is research. It can't help anyone yet.
Re: (Score:2)
And BioNTech was (pre-covid) busy working on immunotherapy cures for cancer. The couple the started that company do not seem like the sort to retire on a tropical island now they are billionaires. My guess is they will plough their new found hordes of cash into accelerating their life-time work, ironically freed from commercial constraints.
Immunotherapy was already very exciting and now we are going to see progress like never before.
The guy who knows disagrees (Score:3)
https://www.gatesnotes.com/Hea... [gatesnotes.com]
I’m happy to be able to report that this worst-case scenario, at least for now, has been avoided. This is thanks to the leadership of African countries, which quickly adapted their malaria programs to meet the challenges of the pandemic. Practicing social distancing and other safety measures, malaria workers were able to carry out their duties, delivering long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets, controlling mosquito populations with indoor spraying, and providing preventive treatment for pregnant women and children. In Nigeria, which still suffers from 60 million cases of malaria each year, health workers managed to even increase their delivery of malaria control, protecting millions of children in one of their largest campaigns to date.
At the same time, malaria resources have served double duty, tackling the mosquito-borne disease and helping to control the spread of COVID-19.
In Zambia, the scientists and equipment in the National Malaria Elimination Program’s genomic surveillance laboratory used to monitor malaria drug resistance quickly pivoted to find COVID-19 variants in the country. In Mozambique, an app created for health workers to provide real-time reporting of malaria cases and fevers has supplied critical data to the national COVID response.
My 1988 biology textbook notes that at that time worldwide spending for malaria research and prevention, which was the largest killer in the world at the time, was $8 million. At the same time spending on cancer research and treatment in the US alone was over $500 million. Malaria research is on the worldwide stage almost exclusively because the Gates Foundation put it there and kept it there. You may not like the guy, but unlike most rich people he's trying to do something good with his money.
Re: What about the media? (Score:2)
Yep, the media and academia have to answer for. Given black Americans are over represented among people not getting vaccinated, it wouldn't be a surprise to find that the prevailing narrative of systemic racism bears some blame.
Why would anybody trust the establishment when they're being told that the system is out to get them? These identitarian leftists create the very problems they purport to combat through their endless activism.