In September, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the HIV/AIDS epidemic a global health emergency requiring a rapid scaled-up treatment response, but researchers in British Medical Journal argue that governments should go one step further and treat it as a disaster. In fact, governments should be encouraged and rewarded for adopting a disaster response to HIV and AIDS, they say.

Declaring a state of emergency in a country plagued by HIV and AIDS could speed up the response. It would overcome barriers to co-operation and facilitate access to cheaper drugs. Resources could also be better co-ordinated, eliminating duplication and ensuring everyone is working to the same goal.

However, declaring a state of emergency forces the government to publicly admit that their country is in a vulnerable condition, which may lead to strained international trade ties, add the authors.

"We hope, however, that our suggestions will provide a basis for generating new thinking and a better co-ordinated, more effective and timely response to the mounting HIV/AIDS crisis," they conclude. >from *AIDS epidemic should be treated as a disaster. Reframing HIV and AIDS*. November 6, 2003

related context
> Vatican - condoms don't stop HIV. BBC1 Panorama programme, Sex and the Holy City. october 10, 2003
> World Health Organization says failure to deliver AIDS medicines is a global health emergency. Global AIDS treatment emergency requires urgent response
no more business as usual. "we have the medicines to treat people for a dollar a day or less but these medicines are not getting to the people who need them." september 22, 2003
> world aids day: link and think. december 1, 2001

imago
> do national organizations respond to aids epidemic disaster?