Jose E. Serrano of the Washington Post reports on the banning of federal funded syringe exchange programs in the United States. This program allows used needles to be exchanged at hospitals for clean needles to prevent against the spread of HIV. The syringe exchange ban has been in place since 1988 and Congress has yet to repeal this ruling. Serrano argues that the occurrence of HIV within Latinos and African Americans in the United States is on the rise-- yet the government is not taking steps to prevent this dangerous increase. Currently, Latinos in Washington have the “highest rate of new AIDS cases in the country”.
Serrano suggests the reopening of syringe exchange programs given the fact that since 2006, more than 300,000 AIDS cases were linked to needle use. This 300,000 makes up one-third of all AIDS cases in the United States. Opponents to the program argue that syringe exchange programs would promote the use of drugs, specifically those requiring intravenous needles (cocaine, speed, or heroin for example). The word of Elias A. Zerhouni, director of the National Institutes of Health, claims that, “A number of studies conducted in the United States have shown that syringe exchange programs do no increase drug use among participants or surrounding community members and are associated with reductions in the incidence of HIV and Hepatitis B and C in the drug-using population”. Serrano is frustrated that more officials do not take Zerhouni’s assertion on this matter.
Serrano contends, also, that these programs would not only benefit the United States of America, but also “reduce infection rates around the globe”. Having said that, the spreading of HIV and attempted prevention by use of syringe exchange programs would decrease HIV and AIDS rates worldwide. Serrano’s last attempt at appealing to the audience’s sense of rationality is to compare the prices of health-care for an HIV patient over a lifetime (618,900) versus the cost of a syringe (eight cents).
It is important for the public, especially the public of America, to realize the scale of the AIDs problem, but also to see a positive solution. The leaning of the article to the liberal, democratic side is discouraging and makes the article seem less informative and almost completely persuasive. The fact that the author is of Hispanic heritage and has written his own bill on the subject proves that he is close to the issue and is almost positively knowledgeable on the subject matter. Serrano may, however, be too close and too personally invested in the topic to be as unbiased and objective as is necessary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/28/AR2008082803109.html
2 comments:
I can understand his origins and possible connection to the issue making his opinion subjective, and his supposed blaming the government for lack of care for minority health care strikes me as unfounded and juvenile. However the effort as a whole I can't imagine costs all that much, and is a rather nice insurance all the same. I mean i think its needless to say that if you had the choice between a resterilized needle with some risks, and a completely new needle, you would want the safest option. All I'm saying is it couldn't hurt and would put to rest some fears and accusations.
I feel that exchanging used needles for clean needles is somewhat of a good idea. I feel that it does not so much promotes drug use nor does it support HIV increase. People regardless are going to continue using needles for whatever purpose. So why not help them out by making sure or giving them the option to be more careful when using needles.
Post a Comment