· · · · · 

GHC Panel: Jeffrey Sachs (Part 2)

This segment includes the second half of comments from Jeffrey Sachs. The first half of his comments are available in a previous post.

· · · · · 

GHC Panel: Ana Langer

This clip includes comments from Ana Langer. It is followed by a question & answer session moderated by Nils Daulaire.

· · · · · 

GHC Panel: Q & A (Part 2)

This clip includes the second portion of the question & answer session at the end of the presentation. It also includes closing remarks from Nils Daulaire.

· · · · · 

GHC Panel: RH Reality Check Interviews Ana Langer & Stan Bernstein

This additional clip includes interviews with Ana Langer and Stan Bernstein conducted by RH Reality Check after the panel discussion.

· · · · · 

US UNGASS Delegation Raises a Few Questions

The Administration recently released the list of members for the US delegation to the UN General Assembly Special Session (UNGASS) on HIV/AIDS, and it raised some eyebrows – both for the fact that it is so large (with 26 Administration members and 11 from the private sector) and on account of some of those who were selected. For an Administration that has left us all questioning its commitment to evidence-based public health policies, several of these nominees have quite questionable backgrounds on HIV. It appears that ideology is again the most important credential to this Administration.

· · · · · 

A Step Backward in Kenya

Following on the heels of coverage in the New York Times yesterday and Scott's post about it, we hear more today about the HIV epidemic in Kenya. First Lady Lucy Kibaki has made a strong statement against condom use:

"Those still in school and colleges have no business having access to condoms…"

Considering that the successes in lowering the infection rate in Kenya have been from comprehensive prevention campaigns, this statement could not have been a more obvious step backward.

· · · · · 

CFFC: Condoms, Catholics and AIDS

On Monday, Frances Kissling from Catholics for a Free Choice blogged with us about the Vatican's Condom Conundrum. Today, we bring you their latest podcast, "Condoms, Catholics and AIDS."

 

Listen to the audio here.

· · · · · 

Ab-Only Debacle Continues At CDC

A minor note to add to previous posts: Jackie Jadrnak’s blog for the Albuquerque Journal included an interesting bit of news today. You’ll recall that recently politicians overrode the scientific peer-review process and censored a panel on abstinence-only education at a conference focused on sexually transmitted infections. Supposedly, Centers for Disease Control spokesperson Mark Skinner told Jackie that in light of the “conflict”, the CDC would revisit its policy of using a peer-review process to accept papers and panelists for future conferences.

If scientists and doctors are no longer qualified to formulate discussions on science and medicine, who is? The politicians who censored this most recent panel? Could the CDC be serious?

Considering that the heat has been on CDC for bowing to political pressure and failing to be faithful to its medical mission, one would think they’d be affirming the peer-review process as the best way to avoid such conflict in the future. Apparently not.

· · · · · 

A Diamond In The Rough?

For many in the reproductive health community, evangelical Christians have become synonymous with retroactive policies, scientific ignorance, and in too many cases, bigotry and arrogance that together have made them the bane of protecting sexual and reproductive health and rights. For many in the HIV-positive community, these sentiments have often been felt with as much—if not more—fervor, as evangelicals’ dislike for homosexuality has nearly authorized widespread ignorance about the epidemic, and the epidemic has created a platform for expressing their views.

 

So when Rick & Kay Warren of Saddleback Church in Orange County start talking about HIV in a new way, all kinds of ears start listening…

· · · · · 

Rep. Souder Claims He’s Not “Political”

CDC is a medical body dedicated to “protecting the health and safety of all Americans.”  It seems like an obvious corollary then that medical science should be the guiding force in all of its work.  If this doesn’t happen, CDC would appear to be derelict in its duty to pursue its mission.  So CDC has done the right thing in choosing to investigate the events in which politics firmly vetoed the presentation of medical science at a conference on sexually transmitted infections (STIs), preventing a discussion of documented failures in the abstinence-only sex education programs promoted by the Bush Administration. 

· · · · ·