The Acton Institute Logo    
Printer Friendly    Send to Friend

Acton Commentary

bringing moral reflection to bear upon current events

November 21, 2007

Fighting AIDS with African Common Sense

Amid reports that the United Nations has been grossly overestimating the scope of the global AIDS pandemic, a new book points to what may be an even greater miscalculation: AIDS relief efforts have failed to understand the crucial role of family and community networks in controlling the disease.

International aid agencies assumed that reducing the spread of AIDS was primarily a matter of hygiene and health care. UNAIDS, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, estimates that total spending on AIDS programs will increase 12 percent this year to $10 billion. Yet, relief organizations have overlooked actual social behavior and sexual practices.

This is the message of Helen Epstein’s important new book, The Invisible Cure: Africa, the West and the Fight Against Aids. Her book is one long testimony to the necessity of at least some social structures operating on a human scale. Although Epstein doesn’t cite the principle of subsidiarity from Catholic social teaching, or the corresponding principle of sphere sovereignty from the Dutch Reformed tradition, the importance of intensely local communities as “first responders” is clearly highlighted. Her book shows that the few noteworthy successes in slowing the spread of AIDS and comforting the sick have not come from sophisticated international organizations, but from local communities.

In Africa, HIV spread among ordinary people who were nowhere near as promiscuous as high-risk Western groups such as prostitutes or gay men. By contrast, about 40 percent of Ugandan men and 30 percent of women have ongoing relationships with a small number of people -- perhaps two or three -- at a time. These ‘concurrent’ relationships might overlap for months or years, or even, in the case of polygamous marriages, a lifetime.

As Epstein explains, these concurrent relationships are at higher risk for spreading HIV for two reasons. First, a person recently infected with HIV may be a hundred times more likely to transmit the virus than someone who has been infected for a few months or years. Most Westerners tend to practice “serial monogamy,” having only one partner at a time, and will usually only infect a current partner. By contrast, a polygamous man who becomes infected with HIV is likely to infect all his concurrent partners.

Concurrent relationships are also at higher risk for spreading HIV because the degree of intimacy and trust in these relationships means that people don’t think they need to use condoms. Many faithful African women became infected with HIV because of their husbands’ behavior. Few health officials from international aid organizations were aware of any of this.

Many western AIDS researchers believe that promoting condoms among high risk groups, such as prostitutes and their clients, is the best way to slow the spread of HIV. But HIV continued to spread throughout eastern and southern Africa, even when condom use soared. Epstein argues that some of the condom campaigns backfired. “By associating AIDS with beer drinking, premarital sex, prostitution … womanizing and rape, the lusty condom ads\... clashed disastrously with local sensibility concerning decency and self-respect,” Epstein writes. One of her African sources stated bluntly, “The campaigns were totally wrong. The message was you had to be a prostitute or truck driver to get AIDS.”

A Ugandan prevention campaign focused specifically on issues of concurrent relationships. It developed the slogans “Love Carefully” and “Zero Grazing” – meaning, in the words of the head of Uganda’s AIDS Control Program, “avoid indiscriminate and free-ranging sexual relations.” These slogans were posted on public buildings, broadcast on radio, and bellowed in speeches by government officials. The Ugandan Association of Co-Wives and Concubines -- hardly something any Western aid organization would have instituted -- got involved, too. These women policed the behavior of polygamous men, encouraging them to avoid the casual affairs that could endanger all their wives and future children. One of their messages was: “If your husband is unfaithful and is going to kill you with AIDS, you divorce him.”

The result of all this was a steep decline in the number of sexual partners, a basic step in controlling any sexually transmitted disease.

As Ugandans were becoming aware that even respectable people could contract HIV, they began taking personal care of the sick, through small-scale service programs. By 1991, there were hundreds of community and church-based AIDS care and support groups in Uganda. Medically, there wasn’t much that could be done for people with AIDS. But Ugandans pioneered the concept of home-based care, which is now a central activity of AIDS organizations throughout Africa.

“There was a lot of stigma and fear at first,” said Sister Ursula Sharp, the Catholic nun who founded Kitovu Mobile, a home-based care program. “It was hard to get nurses to work with me. There was fear of contamination and also fear of witchcraft. Some of our volunteers’ huts were burned down because there was a rumor that we were poisoning people in the community. But we kept going back and going back and going back. We’d never miss an appointment with a patient. They knew we’d be there if we promised to come, rain or shine.”

The contrast between the common sense of the Ugandans and the blindness of the international aid organizations demonstrates the abiding good sense of the principle of subsidiarity. Groups such as UNAIDS and the World Health Organization seek to organize the response to AIDS at the international level, the highest possible level of social organization. Although there are functions that only these large scale agencies can perform, leaving out the local level, which operates on the truly human scale, is a recipe for disaster. Helen Epstein’s fine book is a testament to this fact.

Jennifer Roback Morse is a Senior Research Fellow in Economics at the Acton Institute, and the author of “Smart Sex: Finding Life-long Love in a Hook-up World.”



Comments

janet: crackerjs@gmail.com
hello, i was browsing various websites and came across this one. i have been trying to research for an article i want to write for journalism. The topic is about supporting AIDS and how it is effective. i also need to explain the various relief organizations that there are. i only know several such as (RED),CDC,UNAIDS...so if anyone can possibly give me any useful information, it would help me out alot. :) thank you for your time.
please email me asap!
Jack Hartley: jhartle@columbus.rr.com
I still view Africa as the next thing to a mystery story. The average American; heterosexual, Angelo-Saxson, English speaking, male/female with children and grand-children simply doesn't comprehend HIV-Aids. We grew up with Polio, Measles and the Mumps. There was no such thing as being homosexual or promiscuous. The Bible is a book to live by. The ravages of "Pestilence, Famine, War and Disease".
chanshi Chanda:
It is not true that anal sex is part of the African culture. In fact this is an abomination in the eyes of the African culture. However, you can find such practice, but the percentage is very very minimal and it is belived this is imported practice. To state more specifically, anal sex has been reported to happen between an African and a non-African. In short, it is not true that this is part of the culture.
Jennifer Roback Morse: jrobackmorse@sbcglobal.net
Hi Everyone and thanks for your comments on my article. To answer one of the questions: Helen Epstein specifically states that Africans are actually less promiscous than the average Westerner, if you count the lifetime number of partners. Of course, the average African has FAR fewer lifetime partners than the typical Western "high-risk" person, such as prostitutes and gay men. I may be posting more about this book on my own website. Check back and see. www.jennifer-roback-morse.com.
thanks again everyone.
Dr Morse
Paul Rinderle:
We have all been fooled. We* discuss HIV/AIDS at a "level 2 " that has nothing to do about the "causes" of HIV/AIDS. This level 2 of discussion centers about, vaccines, and drugs as preventatives and life sustaining cures. This level 2 includes condoms, gels, and suppositories as preventatives.

We have to talk about "Level 1" to get at the cause of HIV/AIDS. Level 1 where the real action is, where the rubber meets the road.

Level 1(one) is Anal, Oral and Vaginal Sex.

Avoid Anal and Oral sex and HIV will virtually go away.

Without going into detail, think about the big picture.

In the Western World the heterosexuals are not conflicted to any large degree with HIV/AIDS i.e. there is no World outcry to save us all from this pandemic because it is primarily isolated to the Gay community that promiscuously engage only in Anal and Oral sex.

Regarding African uniqueness: (1) "general" promiscuousness, and (2) it is documented(go to Google) that Africans engage frequently in Anal sex as part of their sex culture.

It does not affect the heterosexual world because the vaginal wall is far far stronger than the anal wall to abrasion letting in HIV.

On and on goes the evidence if you stay at level 1. Go to level two and the battle is lost.









*(influenced by the Gay advocating Major media, and a now established humongous Industry, of job producing, drug manufacturing, paid speech making etc dependents)
Chanshi: chanshi@coppernet.zm
On a mathematical note, polygamy increases the number of infections: all those ladies married to that man. in Africa though, polygamy is not viewed as casual sex, demonique, but life lasting relationship in the light of a monogamous western or African marriage, and circumstances behind polygamy determine if the community approves it or not. Also, someone has to check if casual sex is higher in Africa more than any other part of the globe and that for the most part AIDS cases result from polygamous marraiges; that would be an interesting study for us.
dave:
I personally do not believe the U.N. and the pro-abortion groups that tout widespread condom distribution really want the epidemic to subside. The real agenda behind these groups is and always has been... radical reduction of humanity, by whatever means... abortion, birth control, euthanasia, and yes, even infanticide. To put these very same people in charge of saving lives is like putting a hungry tiger in charge of babysitting our children.

I applaud this woman and the logic that seems to be taking hold in some parts of Africa. The best thing the U.N. and WHO could do for everyone is to pack up and go home. Home-based and country-based outcomes will prevail if there is no interference from the outside. Throwing money and condoms at the problem is like trying to tame a lion with a piece of latex.

If the U.N., WHO and their pro-abortion allies care so much for humanity, then how come they took nearly nine years to acknowledge that Non-Oxynol 9 was more of a help to the AIDS virus than a hindrance, when that information was known by at least one Pro-Life rubber scientist at the Naval Research Laboratories nearly a decade previous? Seems to me AIDS has worked to the advantage of the pro-aborts, eugenists and anti-humanists far more than anyone cares to admit
Beryl Khabeer, MA: bjkhabeer@gmail.com
Please, forward a copy of this superb article to me by e-mail. And send any related reviews on the two books. It doesn't print out in entirety for me. Nice review and research into the vitally important topic of the AIDS pandemic in Africa. I had no idea that polygomy is co-responsible for the spread. Thank you. -Beryl Khabeer, MA.

Fighting AIDS with African Common Sense

Name *
E-mail  
Comment *
In order to prevent "spam entries", we require that you enter the numerical code in the grey box, as you submit your posting. Thank you for your cooperation.
number     
You may edit it as long as you don't exit your browser. After moderator approval, it will be visible for public.

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, Senior Fellow in Economics at the Acton Institute and regular contributor to National Review Online and The National Catholic Register, received her Ph.D. in economics from the University of Rochester. Until recently, she was a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. She has been on the faculty of Yale University and George Mason University, and is the author of Love and Economics: Why the Laissez-Faire Family doesn't work.

More commentaries by
Jennifer Morse Ph.D. »