I've run out of disappointment in conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation. In a "webmemo" by Katherine Bradley (what, "blogs" are only for commie-pinkos, Ms. Bradley?), she asserts that the budget included policies that "devalue human life, weaken civil society, and undermine the family".
What draconian policies could be doing this?
- The change in sex education. Bradley WILLFULLY MISREPRESENTS this change, saying that is "defunds the asbstinence-based education program" and puts a "condom-based sex education program" in its place. What is the truth? Peer-reviewed studies have time and time again showed that sex education programs that include a section on condom use are effective. Abstinence-only programs, on the other hand, have only been shown to be effective sometimes- these cases were smaller groups in peer-reviewed studies. With the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting sex education programs, Congress has chosen to mandate that all sex education programs include BOTH abstinence and condom-use components. Abstinence education is still funded and on-going.
- Allowing federal funding to be used for needle exchange. She writes, "Ostensibly to prevent the spread of infection, these programs settle for "harm reduction" rather than overcoming drug addiction." Ostensibly??? It has been PROVEN. Needle exchange programs serve as an important conduit for drug users to access drug addiction treatment programs. A lot of drug users are not ready for treatment services but still have health and social needs that aren't being met otherwise.
- Supporting family planning services domestically and abroad. Use of modern contraceptives improve rates of survival among mothers and their children under 5. Reducing access to family planning services and products would meaningfully contribute to death of mothers and children worldwide and increase the numbers of abortions.
Congress has made an important step to support families with important health and education programs.
Bradley's myopic view and representation of the issues perpetuate rumors and lies that undermine rational discussion. By blindly pushing a political agenda, she devalues the lives of injecting drug users and their families, of American youth, and of mothers and children worldwide. I wish she'd be more Christian, especially during the holiday season.
To read Bradley's article click here
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Hurrah for Needle Exchange
As a wonderful Christmas/Chanukah/Kwanzaa/Saturnalia present, Congress has finally passed the national budget that also removes the ban on federal funding for needle exchange.
As I've said before needle exchange is an effective tool to improve the lives of people who inject drugs.
Here is more: needle exchange has been thoroughly reviewed for (1) impact on HIV among injecting drug users, (2) uptake by injecting drug users of drug treatment programs, (3) impact on initiation of others to drugs and injecting, (4) impact on the neighborhood where the needle exchange point is placed.
What have the studies shown? Needle and Syringe Exchange Points: (1) reduce HIV incidence among injecting drug users- which also reduces the potential for HIV to be passed on to non-injectors through unprotected sex, (2) increase uptake of drug treatment programs, (3) DO NOT increase initiation among non-injectors and non-users to injecting drugs,(4)DO NOT hurt the neighborhoods around the points.
Needle and Syringe Exchange points are one of the few interventions that have been proven to effectively reduce HIV transmission rates among injecting drug users. There are really not many to choose from for this group. Finally, public health professionals funded by the US federal government can use these effective tools to address HIV among vulnerable groups.
As I've said before needle exchange is an effective tool to improve the lives of people who inject drugs.
Here is more: needle exchange has been thoroughly reviewed for (1) impact on HIV among injecting drug users, (2) uptake by injecting drug users of drug treatment programs, (3) impact on initiation of others to drugs and injecting, (4) impact on the neighborhood where the needle exchange point is placed.
What have the studies shown? Needle and Syringe Exchange Points: (1) reduce HIV incidence among injecting drug users- which also reduces the potential for HIV to be passed on to non-injectors through unprotected sex, (2) increase uptake of drug treatment programs, (3) DO NOT increase initiation among non-injectors and non-users to injecting drugs,(4)DO NOT hurt the neighborhoods around the points.
Needle and Syringe Exchange points are one of the few interventions that have been proven to effectively reduce HIV transmission rates among injecting drug users. There are really not many to choose from for this group. Finally, public health professionals funded by the US federal government can use these effective tools to address HIV among vulnerable groups.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
