PEPFAR

The President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR/Emergency Plan) is a commitment of $15 billion over five years (2003–2008) by United States President George W. Bush to fight the global HIV/AIDS pandemic. As the largest international health initiative ever initiated by one nation to address a single disease, the program aimed to provide antiretroviral treatment (ART) to 2 million HIV-infected people in resource-limited settings, to prevent 7 million new infections, and to support care for 10 million people.

Sound too good to be true?

With this money came a number of caveats.

1. "Emergency Plan funds will not support needle or syringe exchange".

Many people have objected to this because needle exchange programs have been proven to help reduce the spread of blood-borne HIV by providing injecting drug users with sterile syringes, without encouraging drug use. In some areas, this may be part of a wider harm reduction strategy, whereby users are given a safe, monitored place to inject and/or pure uncontaminated drugs to reduce the risk of overdose. However, the U.S. government is opposed to such measures as it believes they make drug use seem more acceptable, and facilitate continued drug use.

2. "No funds made available to carry out this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, may be used to provide assistance to any group or organization that does not have a policy explicitly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking."

This condition, also called the "Prostitution Loyalty Oath," led to Brazil refusing $40 million of PEPFAR funds in May 2005. The director of Brazil's HIV/AIDS program explained, "Brazil has taken this decision in order to preserve its autonomy on issues related to HIV/AIDS as well as ethical and human rights principles". The Brazilian government and many organizations believed that adopting the PEPFAR condition would be a serious barrier to helping sex workers protect themselves and their clients from HIV.

3. Congress required that 1/3 of prevention funds be spent on abstinence-until-marriage programs.

As a percentage of money spent specifically on prevention of sexual transmission, close to two-thirds is spent on abstinence-only education. This ideological requirement has been shown to divert funds away from other methods of HIV-transmission prevention, such as prevention of maternal-to-child transmission and prevention targeting injecting drug users.

Talking to people who work on HIV education, prevention and control in Africa have said that PEPFAR funding is virtually useless to them. Funding required them to sign an oath not to acknowledge the sex industry. In other words, they would not be able to distribute condoms or assist infected sex workers, unless those workers agreed on abstinence. Not only would PEPFAR funded projects have to follow this requirement, but the entire foundation would have had to adapt this oath. Fortunately, since the initiation of PEPFAR, a bill was introduced that would remove the 33 percent abstinence-until-marriage earmark from HIV prevention programs.

Elizabeth Pisani, an epidemiologist with years of experience working on HIV/AIDS, and author of the book, The Wisdom of Whores: bureaucrats, brothels, and the business of AIDS, has said she has mixed feelings about PEPFAR. On one hand, the money going into treatment has undoubtedly saved the lives of hundreds of thousands. On the other, without adequate prevention strategies, the spread of HIV will continue to grow exponentially. As the number of people living with HIV increases, so does the risk of spreading the disease.

With earmarks and other restrictions, PEPFAR really isn't doing everything it can to bring the spread of HIV/AIDS under control. It makes me kind of angry that our government would impose it's own ideological point of view when there are far greater issues at stake. I suppose I should be glad that the U.S. is at least doing something to improve the global problem of HIV/AIDS. I can only hope that in the coming years this trend will continue. Perhaps a new government will be better at listening to what needs to be done and allowing the funding to go where it needs to go.

One can hope.

~flutteryblue

Image lifted from www.avert.org

The MBTA: aka the commute from hell

A recent article described how the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) services is looking increasingly attractive as gas prices soar. The Authorities on Transportation used this opportunity to launch a campaign promoting the use of public transportation in Boston.

As an ex-hippie, and non-car-owner, I'm all in favor of public transportation. In an ill-planned, one-way befuddled city like Boston, the "T" is often the best way to get around. That is, unless there is a breakdown in the system.

This weekend, unbenownst to me, the train from Kendall Square to Park Street was rerouted through a series of shuttles.

Day 1: Despite the lack of signage and knowledgeable individuals to direct us, the masses emerged from the Kendall Street stop and boarded (crammed) into the waiting shuttle buses. At Park Street station we were required to pay the fare again in order to get back on the train. There is nothing I love more than a delay in my morning commute other than double paying for it.

The way back home got even better. Park Street was a mass of confusion: tourists wandering in every direction, and no obvious sign to the shuttle stop to be found. After much searching I managed to find one MBTA officer who INDIVIDUALLY directed people down the street to South Station. SEVEN hot blocks later I reached South Station only to find even more mass confusion. After much searching I managed to find another single MBTA officer who INDIVIDUALLY directed people around the corner and across the street to the shuttles, where we were crammed, hip to hip, armpit to armpit, for the ride back to Kendall Square.

Day 2: See Day 1.

There are a couple of issues here:

1. Why not ANNOUNCE ahead of time that the MBTA is not in working order. A simple sign or something over the station loudspeakers would do.

2. Have some WELL-LABELED employees around to direct the thousands of people. Give them a loudspeaker or a large sign. FYI: Informing people one at a time of where to go is one of the most inefficient means of conveying information.

3. Add SIGNS that direct people to where they are supposed to pick up the shuttle. If the shuttle stop is a freaking 10 minute walk away, why not inform people of this fact BEFORE they exit the station. I can only imagine how handicapped people got around the city this weekend.

4. If you know that there are going to be delays, why not POST this on the front page of your WEBSITE rather than have people find out in the middle of their commute. If, for example, someone has a wedding to attend that evening, this sort of information would have come in handy ahead of time.

5. I understand that things happen and the trains will break down from time-to-time. These acts of god, however, are not MY FAULT. Do not make the good riders of the MBTA pay twice after rerouting by shuttle. If I were truly an ex-hippie I probably would not insist that the MBTA ought to pay ME for time lost. As things stand, I'm tempted to make that claim.

As I am a pseudo-ex-hippie without a car, I will continue to ride the MBTA. In fact, on Day 2, I took the "T" and double paid for the trip AGAIN. If only I could be assured that the extra income would do some good in this world. At least blogging about it makes me feel slightly better about myself.


~flutterbyblue

p.s. To the right is an image of the Park Street station. Imagine this place overrun by thousands of baffled tourists and commuters. You get the picture.

Images lifted from www.mbta.com and www.blog.netsnaps.com

Tim Russert: Farewell to a political icon

When I heard today that American political journalist, Tim Russert, had died suddenly of a heart attack, I was overcome by a wave of sadness and loss. It felt as though I had just heard of a favorite distant uncle passing on. "Meet the Press" is something I look forward to watching every single weekend. Except for the occasional perusal of the New York Times online, it's really my only source of political commentary. How will I know what's going on with the campaign without Russert's astute interviews? How will I entertain myself on the Monday morning commute without the podcast of Russert's biting and pointed questions? Where will I find a replacement Tim Russert on "Meet the Press"?

Sadly, there is no replacement.

Tim Russert, as far as I'm concerned, was the leading political journalist of our time. He was warm and friendly, with a wonderful sense of humor, yet he had no problem asking the hard questions of even the most powerful politician. He could hold his own among any well-informed political analyst or newscaster. The political world seems a lesser place in his absence.

We'll always remember,

If it's Sunday, it's "Meet the Press."

~flutterbyblue

The Chin Family Revisited

I generally assume that the only people reading my blog are my mother and a handful of friends. So every now and then I'm surprised to find that there are other readers as well. A recent posting on the "Chin Family" collection designed for Alessi by Stefano Giovannoni with the collaboration of Rumiko Takeda, got a response from "Matteo Alessi."

Although I feel slightly guilty for badmouthing the brand (I really do love most of the Alessi products!) as a friend of mine pointed out, I expressed a legitimate point of view. Out of curiosity, I did a google search to see if others feel the same way. Both JustHungry and yumsugar bring up similar issues about the racial connotations of "Chin Family" products, so at least I'm not alone in my concerns! According to my friend, just because it's legitimized by an Asian government, does not mean there isn't a lot of social baggage associated with the images used in the "Chin Family" design.

Whether the collection is truly "inspired" by "shape and figure" of other cultures or by the recent wave of adoration for all things "oriental," the end product remains somewhat insensitive to the racial associations with the Asian 'slit eyed' image. I would also like to add that the 'slit eye' representation only came into being after the Western world made contact with Asia. Let's turn that concept over in our heads...just because this is old racism, does that make it ok?


~flutterbyblue

p.s. Interestingly, one of my favorite blogs, Hostess with the Mostest just published on these funny looking kitchen oddities!

Image lifted from www.alessi.com

Racist bottle stoppers

Although I admit they're cute, these bottle stoppers strike me as somewhat racist:
They are part of the "Chin Family" collection created by Stefano Giovanni for Alessi (one of my favorite homegoods designers.) It's all part of a joint project between Alessi and the National Palace Museum in Taiwan. Maybe it can't really be racist if the production was given the nod by the NPM, but I still find it a bit unsettling to have funny, slit-eyed Asian dolls on my wine bottle.

Thoughts?

~flutterbyblue

Image lifted from www.unicahome.com

Top 10 fashion "must-haves" of 2007

So here is where I provide my unsolicited opinion on the Top 10 fashion "must-haves" of 2007 according to Time:

#1. The Tent Dress
This 1960's throwback appeared all over the place, from H&M to Neiman Marcus. Even American Apparel came out with a version. It's not that I have anything against the tent dress (other than the blah-name), but I probably wouldn't buy one for myself.

#2. White Sunglasses
Not too fond of these. White can look cheap and gets dirty easily. Maybe if one had a really expensive pair and happened to be walking down a really nice red carpet, it might be acceptable. I'd much rather have a pair of Ed Hardy sunnies!

#3. High-Waisted Jeans
Have to admit, another blogger already said it all. See Strictly Fabulous Style! I do have to say, these have the potential to look REALLY unflattering. It's not that I think everyone should wear the low-slung crack-baring style of jean, but the high-waist on the wrong body type can also be a true fashion disaster. Plus I figure if high-waisted jeans can make Mischa Barton look sort of dumpy, it doesn't bode well for the rest of us.

#4. Day Clutch
I do love clutches...of the elegant evening variety. During the day when I care about function and practicality I prefer to reduce my risk of losing my keys, cell phone and wallet, not increase it. Why would one carry around something that could very easily be left on the bus or train? Maybe I just lack the skills of a lady, but I imagine it would be very difficult to juggle the travel mug, umbrella AND a large day clutch while trying to fumble with my keys or I.D. badge. Furthermore, winter is the time of large, icy puddles. Imagine dropping that brand new day clutch into a particularly slushy pothole...

#5. Ankle Boots
I like ankle boots. I would never wear them often enough to justify the purchase, but they are quite trendy and lady-like. Alternatively, they can look very hip and rocker-chic. Either way, if you can pull it off, definitely do!

#6. Vests
I nearly bought a tuxedo version at H&M but it sold out before I could make up my mind. In restrospect I'm glad I didn't spring for the vest as it seems like the sort of trend that will be very short-lived...(and there are better fashion options out there anyhow!)

#7. Fedoras
Cute on some hipsters, gangsters and the occasional supermodel. On the everyday person, they just make it look like you are trying too hard to be cool.

#8. Bright Tights
omg. (See Chic&Charming entry on American Apparel.)

#9. Red Lipstick
#10. Cocktail Rings
Ok, FINALLY two things I would actually wear! I love red lipstick. Or rather, I love red lipgloss (never been much of a lipstick kind of girl. Red is bold, glam and a very worthy 2007 "must-have" in my opinion! Cocktail rings are also fabulous for a fun night out.

Images from www.dressaday.com, www.time.com, shop.nordstrom.com and americanapparel.net

~flutterbyblue