Cargando…

Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines

This study analyses the priorities of public donors in funding HIV prevention by either integrated condom programming or HIV preventive microbicides and vaccines in the period between 2000 and 2008. It further compares the public funding investments of the USA government and European governments, in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peters, Anny JTP, Scharf, Maja Micevska, van Driel, Francien TM, Jansen, Willy HM
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3023651/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21192787
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-6-23
_version_ 1782196673516142592
author Peters, Anny JTP
Scharf, Maja Micevska
van Driel, Francien TM
Jansen, Willy HM
author_facet Peters, Anny JTP
Scharf, Maja Micevska
van Driel, Francien TM
Jansen, Willy HM
author_sort Peters, Anny JTP
collection PubMed
description This study analyses the priorities of public donors in funding HIV prevention by either integrated condom programming or HIV preventive microbicides and vaccines in the period between 2000 and 2008. It further compares the public funding investments of the USA government and European governments, including the EU, as we expect the two groups to invest differently in HIV prevention options, because their policies on sexual and reproductive health and rights are different. We use two existing officially UN endorsed databases to compare the public donor funding streams for HIV prevention of these two distinct contributors. In the period 2000-2008, the relative share of public funding for integrated condom programming dropped significantly, while that for research on vaccines and microbicides increased. The European public donors gave a larger share to condom programming than the United States, but exhibited a similar downward trend in favour of funding research on vaccines and microbicides. Both public donor parties invested progressively more in research on vaccines and microbicides rather than addressing the shortage of condoms and improving access to integrated condom programming in developing countries.
format Text
id pubmed-3023651
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30236512011-01-20 Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines Peters, Anny JTP Scharf, Maja Micevska van Driel, Francien TM Jansen, Willy HM Global Health Research This study analyses the priorities of public donors in funding HIV prevention by either integrated condom programming or HIV preventive microbicides and vaccines in the period between 2000 and 2008. It further compares the public funding investments of the USA government and European governments, including the EU, as we expect the two groups to invest differently in HIV prevention options, because their policies on sexual and reproductive health and rights are different. We use two existing officially UN endorsed databases to compare the public donor funding streams for HIV prevention of these two distinct contributors. In the period 2000-2008, the relative share of public funding for integrated condom programming dropped significantly, while that for research on vaccines and microbicides increased. The European public donors gave a larger share to condom programming than the United States, but exhibited a similar downward trend in favour of funding research on vaccines and microbicides. Both public donor parties invested progressively more in research on vaccines and microbicides rather than addressing the shortage of condoms and improving access to integrated condom programming in developing countries. BioMed Central 2010-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3023651/ /pubmed/21192787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-6-23 Text en Copyright ©2010 Peters et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (<url>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0</url>), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Peters, Anny JTP
Scharf, Maja Micevska
van Driel, Francien TM
Jansen, Willy HM
Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title_full Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title_fullStr Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title_full_unstemmed Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title_short Where does public funding for HIV prevention go to? The case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
title_sort where does public funding for hiv prevention go to? the case of condoms versus microbicides and vaccines
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3023651/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21192787
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-6-23
work_keys_str_mv AT petersannyjtp wheredoespublicfundingforhivpreventiongotothecaseofcondomsversusmicrobicidesandvaccines
AT scharfmajamicevska wheredoespublicfundingforhivpreventiongotothecaseofcondomsversusmicrobicidesandvaccines
AT vandrielfrancientm wheredoespublicfundingforhivpreventiongotothecaseofcondomsversusmicrobicidesandvaccines
AT jansenwillyhm wheredoespublicfundingforhivpreventiongotothecaseofcondomsversusmicrobicidesandvaccines