I’ve received a bunch of Whatsapp messages from Ugandan friends who are very very worried about what this might mean not only for patients (the main issue), but also for jobs and the livelihood of many local NGOS.
I think it could be pretty effective for your Ugandan friends to record videos interviewing people who have been helped by the program, and post the videos online.
A lot of skepticism of foreign aid is driven by the fear that the aid is being captured somewhere along the way, either here in the US or in the target country. Hearing directly from the aid recipients helps address that fear.
As an American, it feels like good things the US does are taken for granted, and the US will be criticized relentlessly by people in other countries no matter what we do. So I wouldn’t suggest scolding the US for withdrawing funds. And in any case, rewards usually work better than punishments for modifying behavior. I think saying thanks, and talking about what it would mean for the program to continue, would be a lot more powerful than scolding. Even for Americans who aren’t particularly altruistic, this would provide tangible evidence that the program is improving America’s reputation.
One mental model I have is that the US is suffering from something akin to EA burnout, and the solution to both “US burnout” and “EA burnout” is a stronger culture of gratitude. In principle, I could imagine that a really good response to this PEPFAR situation actually ends up motivating the US to fund additional effective aid programs.
Strongly second this—it helps a lot to hear from people on the ground as many details as they can share while respecting patient privacy about who they serve and what it’s like.
That’s a good point about patient privacy. On X, you suggested that PEPFAR has had a sizable macro impact on AIDS in Africa. Maybe Africans who are old enough to remember could talk about what AIDS was like in Africa before and after PEPFAR, as a way to illustrate that macro impact without violating the privacy of any individual patients.
Of course, insofar as individual patients are willing to speak about their experiences, possibly with some light anonymization such as looking away from the camera, that seems really good to me too.
A couple other thoughts:
If access to ARV drugs is interrupted, I imagine that could lead to drug-resistant HIV strains, same way your doctor tells you to take your antibiotics consistently.
This really speaks my mind. I think rather than scolding Trump, we might need to know why the Congress is taking the decision. What if the funding are actually being “captured somewhere along the way”? That might truly be the fear.
I think it could be pretty effective for your Ugandan friends to record videos interviewing people who have been helped by the program, and post the videos online.
A lot of skepticism of foreign aid is driven by the fear that the aid is being captured somewhere along the way, either here in the US or in the target country. Hearing directly from the aid recipients helps address that fear.
As an American, it feels like good things the US does are taken for granted, and the US will be criticized relentlessly by people in other countries no matter what we do. So I wouldn’t suggest scolding the US for withdrawing funds. And in any case, rewards usually work better than punishments for modifying behavior. I think saying thanks, and talking about what it would mean for the program to continue, would be a lot more powerful than scolding. Even for Americans who aren’t particularly altruistic, this would provide tangible evidence that the program is improving America’s reputation.
One mental model I have is that the US is suffering from something akin to EA burnout, and the solution to both “US burnout” and “EA burnout” is a stronger culture of gratitude. In principle, I could imagine that a really good response to this PEPFAR situation actually ends up motivating the US to fund additional effective aid programs.
Strongly second this—it helps a lot to hear from people on the ground as many details as they can share while respecting patient privacy about who they serve and what it’s like.
That’s a good point about patient privacy. On X, you suggested that PEPFAR has had a sizable macro impact on AIDS in Africa. Maybe Africans who are old enough to remember could talk about what AIDS was like in Africa before and after PEPFAR, as a way to illustrate that macro impact without violating the privacy of any individual patients.
Of course, insofar as individual patients are willing to speak about their experiences, possibly with some light anonymization such as looking away from the camera, that seems really good to me too.
A couple other thoughts:
If access to ARV drugs is interrupted, I imagine that could lead to drug-resistant HIV strains, same way your doctor tells you to take your antibiotics consistently.
Having a big population of immunocompromised people in Africa seems bad in terms of mutation speed for future pandemics. Here’s a paper I just found on Google, about COVID variants which are thought to have arisen from immunocompromised patients.
This really speaks my mind. I think rather than scolding Trump, we might need to know why the Congress is taking the decision. What if the funding are actually being “captured somewhere along the way”? That might truly be the fear.