Global Fund provides a model for aid

Re “When foreign aid is an ATM,” Current, April 2

Though the facts related in Helen Epstein’s article on misappropriation of Global Fund money in Uganda are accurate, her piece leaves the overall impression that the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is a failure. This would be an extreme disservice to the millions of poor throughout the world who benefit from fund-backed programs.

As for transparency, the fact that the Ugandan scandal was brought to light demonstrates how seriously the Global Fund is committed to accountability. In years past, bilateral aid from the U.S. to corrupt governments disappeared by the billions without a word said.

If anything, the Global Fund provides a model for development aid that can and should be emulated in other areas. But don’t ask me if the Global Fund works. Ask the nearly 400,000 people living with AIDS in poor nations who are being kept alive with drugs provided through Global Fund projects.

STEVE VALK

Atlanta

*

Epstein claims that there are “no answers” to serious global problems and suggests that development projects target more modest goals. Tell that to the people who eradicated smallpox or the millions of people who are alive because of Global Fund investments. Modest goals address modest problems.

Epstein uses a bad situation in Uganda to cast a negative light on all development efforts. Like it or not, we function in an imperfect world, but we don’t stop paying taxes because the House majority leader is indicted, the president skirts wiretap laws or billions of dollars in no-bid contracts are awarded in Iraq and Louisiana. We can’t prevent corruption, even at home, but we can build systems that catch it early.

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has achieved greater success in addressing grand problems than most development efforts and deserves expanded U.S. financial support.

KEN PATTERSON

Swannanoa, N.C.

*

Though the April 1 editorial, “Slowing the spread of AIDS,” rightly touts the importance of aggressive HIV prevention efforts, it fails to address the reason why hundreds of thousands of children worldwide are needlessly infected every year. We know a simple drug intervention can block the spread of HIV from mothers to their babies, yet only a dismal 10% of pregnant women worldwide have access to these services. This is unacceptable when we consider the dramatic effect of similar interventions on infection rates here in the U.S. In 1990, an alarming 2,000 American children were born infected. With the advent of preventive drug therapies and an aggressive HIV testing campaign for pregnant women, that number soon dropped to fewer than 200 new infant cases per year.

We know how to replicate these efforts in poor countries and have had small pockets of success where prevention services are accessible, but more resources will be needed to expand. Until every mother can enjoy the news that her child is HIV-negative and healthy, there is little cause to celebrate.

PAMELA W. BARNES

President and Chief Executive

Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS

Foundation, Santa Monica