|
What are the benefits to Mexico of allowing AIDS clinics
to operate in the country?
James
W. Adams & Ruth Massingill-Pate
UCLA/Sam
Houston State University
HIV/AIDS has killed at least 28 million people since 1982. The number
of HIV/AIDS infected now surpasses 50 million (USAID), and this figure may
be underreported. HIV/AIDS is worse than a terrible pandemic; its
debilitating effects upon a country’s work force and limited national
health resources are a macro-economic disaster. To most of the world, an
HIV/AIDS diagnosis is tantamount to a death sentence. This is both tragic
and unnecessary. Physician-led clinics in Uganda, Kenya, and South Africa,
for example, have demonstrated clinical successes in treating
HIV/AIDS.
Since successful treatments exist and Mexico has an AIDS problem (an
official prevalence rate of 0.4 percent is considered by many to be very
optimistic), why doesn't Mexico allow AIDS treatment clinics? Mexico has
been loath to approve and promote establishment of such clinics for a
number of reasons, including the Free Trade Zone (FTZ) agreement between
the U.S. and Mexico that precludes infectious clinics in the FTZ. Also,
the Mexican pharmaceutical industry, valued at US $11.3 billion in 2005,
is the leading Latin American market and the tenth largest worldwide--that
industry stands to lose financially if alternative and highly successful
therapies were to be used.
Further, the focus of social marketing campaigns is typically on
prevention, not treatment. Mexican marketing campaigns are no exception,
being designed to motivate low-income and high-risk people to adopt
healthy behaviors, but giving little to no information about innovative
treatment choices.
Other considerations include [1] the stigma of HIV/AIDS in a
predominately Roman Catholic country, [2] the unavailability of
state-sponsored healthcare for AIDS, and [3] the instability of donor
funds (which make up almost half of Mexico's expenditures on treatment and
prevention of AIDS). The authors of this paper pose the question: What are
the benefits to Mexico of allowing AIDS clinics to operate in the country?
The authors also invite dialogue about the advantages to Mexico’s
citizens for new, previously unavailable, HIV/AIDS healthcare in addition
to the financial boon new HIV/AIDS clinics would provide.
Summary Thesis:
Successful HIV/AIDS treatments exist and have been clinically proven;
therefore, utilizing progressive Mexican health laws will provide both
social and financial benefits to Mexican citizens. HIV/AIDS has killed at
least 28 million people since 1982. The number of HIV/AIDS infected now
surpasses 50 million (USAID), and this figure may be underreported.
HIV/AIDS is worse than a terrible pandemic; its debilitating effects upon
a country’s work force and limited national health resources are a
macro-economic disaster.
To most of the world, an HIV/AIDS diagnosis is tantamount to a death
sentence. This is both tragic and unnecessary. Physician-led clinics in
Uganda, Kenya, and South Africa, for example, have demonstrated clinical
successes in treating HIV/AIDS. Since successful treatments exist and
Mexico has an AIDS problem (an official prevalence rate of 0.4 percent is
considered by many to be very optimistic), why doesn't Mexico allow AIDS
treatment clinics? Mexico has been loath to approve and promote
establishment of such clinics for a number of reasons, including the Free
Trade Zone (FTZ) agreement between the U.S. and Mexico that precludes
infectious clinics in the FTZ. Also, the Mexican pharmaceutical industry,
valued at US $11.3 billion in 2005, is the leading Latin American market
and the tenth largest worldwide--that industry stands to lose financially
if alternative and highly successful therapies were to be used. Further,
the focus of social marketing campaigns is typically on prevention, not
treatment. Mexican marketing campaigns are no exception, being designed to
motivate low-income and high-risk people to adopt healthy behaviors, but
giving little to no information about innovative treatment choices.
Other considerations include [1] the stigma of HIV/AIDS in a
predominately Roman Catholic country, [2] the unavailability of
state-sponsored healthcare for AIDS, and [3] the instability of donor
funds (which make up almost half of Mexico's expenditures on treatment and
prevention of AIDS). The authors of this paper pose the question: What are
the benefits to Mexico of allowing AIDS clinics to operate in the country?
The authors also invite dialogue about the advantages to Mexico’s
citizens for new, previously unavailable, HIV/AIDS healthcare in addition
to the financial boon new HIV/AIDS clinics would provide.
Summary Thesis: Successful HIV/AIDS treatments exist and have been
clinically proven; therefore, utilizing progressive Mexican health laws
will provide both social and financial benefits to Mexican citizens.
Curing AIDS in Mexico |
