Trump aid cuts deal a blow to HIV prevention in Africa
HIV
two months after U.S. President Donald
Trump
's administration cut access for at-risk groups like gay men and injecting drug users to medication that prevents infection.
Cherem admits he should have been more careful about practicing safe sex but had become accustomed to using the U.S.-supplied pharmaceutical. The drug - known as Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis, or
PrEP
- is typically taken daily as a tablet and can reduce the risk of contracting HIV through sex by 99%.
"I blame myself... Taking care of myself is my first duty as a person," Cherem said at his gym in Awka, the capital of Nigeria's southeastern state of Anambra.
"I equally blame the Trump administration because, you know, these things were available, and then, without prior notice, these things were cut off."
Trump ordered a 90-day pause on foreign aid after taking office in January and halted grants by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The agency was responsible for implementing the bulk of the assistance under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (
PEPFAR
), the world's leading HIV/AIDS initiative.
Sub-Saharan
Africa
remains the epicenter of the AIDS pandemic. Trump's cuts have restricted the availability of drugs that millions of Africans have taken to prevent infection - particularly vulnerable communities such as gay men and sex workers - as aid groups and public health systems in Africa strove to roll back the disease.
The number of initiations, or people who have taken at least one dose of the drug, rose in Africa from fewer than 700 in 2016 to more than 6 million by late 2024, according to PrEPWatch, a global tracker. More than 90% of new initiations last year were financed by PEPFAR, using cheap generic versions of the drug.
Sub-Saharan Africa had 390,000 AIDS-related deaths in 2023, or 62% of the global total, according to UNAIDS, the United Nations AIDS agency. However, progress has been made: that death toll was down by 56% from 2010, according to the World Health Organization.
Now, some of those who've lost access to the preventative medication because of U.S. cutbacks are already testing positive, according to 10 patients, health officials and activists.
Restrictions on PrEP have coincided with dwindling supplies of more widely used HIV prevention tools like condoms and lubricants "because of the US funding cuts", according to a UNAIDS fact sheet from May. The combination is creating what nine activists and three medical experts described as a major threat to prevention across the continent.
"I just see this as incredibly short-sighted because we were on a winning path," said Linda-Gail Bekker, an HIV expert at the University of Cape Town.
She said that many African governments did not have the resources to spend on PrEP drugs on top of treatment for HIV infections, risking a worsening of the pandemic.
"It's as predictable as if you take your eye off a smouldering bushfire and the wind is blowing: a bushfire will come back."
Trump has said that the United States pays disproportionately for foreign aid and he wants other countries to shoulder more of the burden, as he seeks to reduce U.S. government spending across the board. The U.S. disbursed $65 billion in foreign assistance last year, nearly half of it via USAID, according to government data.
"It's a question of who has primary responsibility for the health needs of citizens of other countries, and it's their own governments," said
Max Primorac
, a former senior USAID official who is now senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom.
"We all know, and this is a bipartisan issue, that aid dependency doesn't help these people - that the best solution is for these countries to be able to take over the responsibility of these programs."
A RISE IN CASES
UNAIDS says the permanent discontinuation of PEPFAR-supported prevention and treatment programs could lead to an additional 2,300 new HIV cases globally per day. There were 3,500 new cases per day in 2023.
Reuters spoke to 23 health workers, PrEP users and activists, nearly all of whom said that the increase in HIV infections since the funding cuts was impossible to quantify because many organisations working with vulnerable populations have been defunded.
A State Department waiver issued on February 1 allowed some PEPFAR activities to restart, but only covered HIV prevention for mother-to-child transmission.
That means PEPFAR-financed PrEP is no longer available for gay and bisexual men, sex workers and injecting drug users who are especially exposed to the virus. Many African governments had specifically targeted these groups in their PrEP programs.
A spokesperson for the State Department, which oversees USAID and the PEPFAR program, told Reuters it "continues to support lifesaving HIV testing, care and treatment, and prevention of mother to child transmission services approved by the Secretary of State."
"All other PEPFAR-funded services are being reviewed for assessment of programmatic efficiencies and consistency with United States foreign policy," the spokesperson said.
The spokesperson did not directly respond to a question about why the waiver had excluded vulnerable groups from PrEP distribution.
In East and Southern Africa, the sub-region that accounts for more than half of all people living with HIV, the U.S. had been funding nearly 45% of HIV prevention programming, UNAIDS said in March.
Some countries like Malawi, Zimbabwe and Mozambique were almost entirely dependent on PEPFAR for their HIV prevention programs, the agency said. In some wealthier nations, like South Africa and Kenya, PEPFAR represented less than 25% of spending on HIV prevention.
Russell Vought
, the director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, told a Congressional committee on June 4 that, due to high U.S. debt levels, Africa needed to shoulder more of the burden in fighting AIDS.
Asked specifically about restrictions on HIV prevention programs, Vought said: "We believe that many of these nonprofits are not geared toward the viewpoints of the administration." His office did not respond to a request for further details.
'I PRAY TRUMP CHANGES HIS POLICY'
Reuters spoke to four PrEP users in Nigeria, all gay or bisexual men, who have tested positive for HIV since January when they stopped being able to obtain more pills, after practicing unsafe sex.
Hearty Empowerment and Rights (HER) Initiative, a community-based organisation in southeastern Nigeria, worked with other groups that provide HIV/AIDS services to confirm the men's diagnosis and help secure treatment for them, said executive director Festus Alex Chinaza.
In Asaba, the capital of Nigeria's Delta state, Echezona, a 30-year-old gay man who took PrEP pills daily for more than three years, is struggling to come to terms with his HIV-positive test result, which he received in early May. He regrets that he had unprotected sex.
"I just pray and wish that Trump actually changes his policy and everything comes back to normal so that the spread and transmission of the virus would be reduced," said Echezona, who asked to be identified only by his first name for fear of stigma.
Like the other three men, he described being told by staff at community-based clinics that PrEP was only available to pregnant and lactating women, in line with the Trump administration guidelines.
Nigeria has an adult HIV prevalence rate of 1.3% and an estimated 2 million people living with HIV, the fourth-highest total globally, according to UNAIDS.
But for so-called key populations, the rates are much higher: 25% for men who have sex with men, according to a survey completed in 2021.
The Nigerian health ministry did not respond to a request for comment on the effects of the Trump administration's cuts to HIV prevention services.
South Africa - which has an estimated 7.7 million people living with HIV, according to UNAIDS, the highest number in the world - pays for its own PrEP pills.
But some clinics where so-called key populations obtained them relied on PEPFAR grants and have been forced to close in recent months.
PrEP is also available for free at public health centers, but gay men and sex workers often avoid such facilities, fearing discrimination and harassment, nine activists said.
Francois Venter, executive director of the Ezintsha medical research center at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, said PrEP distribution from public sector clinics in the city had shown almost no increase since the Trump cuts.
Foster Mohale, spokesperson for South Africa's health ministry, said the ministry was "not aware" of reports that key populations were avoiding health facilities due to stigma.
"We have sensitized health officials across the country to create (a) conducive environment for all healthcare seekers/clients to access the service without feeling judged or discriminated against," he said.
(Reporting and writing by Robbie Corey-BouletAdditional reporting by
Seun Sanni
in Awka, Nigeria,
Nellie Peyton
in Johannesburg, Amindeh Blaise Atabong in Yaounde, Ange Adihe Kasongo in Kinshasa, Maxwell Akalaare Adombila in Accra and Jennifer Rigby in London. Editing by Daniel Flynn)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
How healthcare cuts in the ‘big, beautiful bill' will affect Americans
After the House narrowly passed President Trump's tax-and-spending-cuts bill, he signed it into law on Friday. The passage of President Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill" has left some hospitals, doctors and patient-advocacy groups reeling. Millions of people will lose health-insurance coverage, and struggling hospitals across the country may have to close, lay off staff or shut down some services, they say. States will also face difficult budget choices as federal funds are reduced. 'The magnitude of these reductions—and the number of individuals who will lose health coverage—cannot be simply dismissed as waste, fraud, and abuse," Rick Pollack, president of the American Hospital Association, said after the House narrowly passed the bill. Trump signed the bill into law on Friday, Independence Day. The act slashes over $1 trillion in healthcare spending over the next decade, mostly from Medicaid, the joint federal and state program that provides health insurance to poor Americans. It is the biggest cut to federal healthcare spending—and to Medicaid—in history. The legislation's health provisions, including work requirements for Medicaid recipients, represent a fundamental shift in the federal government's approach to healthcare for its poorest citizens, both Republicans and Democrats have said. 'This is a much more conservative approach to healthcare," said David Mansdoerfer, a former health official in the first Trump administration. 'The big beautiful bill would represent a significant mindset change for federal safety-net programs." There will be nearly 8.7 million fewer people covered by Medicaid over the next decade because of the bill, according to an analysis by Manatt Health, a consulting firm that advises states and healthcare providers on Medicaid policy. Other provisions in the bill, including more-stringent requirements for people to enroll and retain health-insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, are projected to drive up the number of uninsured, healthcare experts said. Many who study healthcare policy say that people who lose insurance, or people who live in rural areas where doctors and hospitals are closing up shop, often delay preventive care, sometimes costing the system more later. Many of the Medicaid policy changes target the 40 states that expanded eligibility for Medicaid to low-income able-bodied adults. Those enrollees will now have to prove their incomes are below a certain threshold every six months to remain on Medicaid, instead of annually, as well as show that they have spent 80 hours a month working, volunteering or attending school. People in the lowest 10% of income distribution in the U.S. stand to lose noncash government benefits such as Medicaid coverage and food stamps worth nearly $1,600 annually on average, according to an analysis of an earlier version of the bill by the Congressional Budget Office. Hospitals say they are big losers under the new legislation. More uninsured people will mean more uncompensated healthcare costs, they say. And many hospitals now face reductions in some supplemental payments that most states have come to rely on to augment low Medicaid payment rates. Over the next decade, Medicaid payments to hospitals will be reduced by nearly $665 billion, an 18.2% reduction, according to analysis by Manatt. Meanwhile, hospitals' uncompensated care costs are projected to increase by upward of $84 billion in 2034, according to an analysis of the bill by America's Essential Hospitals, which represents some 350 hospitals nationwide. That number takes into account lower Medicaid payments and Medicaid payment shortfalls, as well as costs from caring for the uninsured. 'It is a double-whammy. We're going to have many millions more uninsured individuals showing up needing care," said Beth Feldpush, the group's senior vice president of advocacy and policy. 'But at the same time, hospitals won't be able to backfill financial holes." Medicaid payment rates are notoriously low compared with other types of insurance. States have increasingly boosted these rates in recent years through so-called state-directed payments, which can raise Medicaid payment rates to levels comparable with Medicare or even average commercial insurance rates. The bill clamps down on these payments. States that have expanded their Medicaid programs under Obamacare to include more low-income adults would have state-directed payment rates capped at 100% of Medicare rates; states that haven't adopted expansion would be capped at 110% of Medicare rates. The change will reduce federal spending by $149.4 billion over a decade, according to a CBO analysis. Hospitals in about 30 states will likely see reductions in the state-directed payments they receive once cuts go into effect, according to an analysis by KFF, a health-policy nonprofit. State hospital associations said these payments are lifelines for hospitals, many of which operate at or near a loss. Even before the bill's passage, several hospitals across the country laid off employees, froze hiring and tightened spending, citing the impending cuts to Medicaid as a factor. Providence, one of the country's largest health systems, said last month that it had implemented a restructuring plan that would lead to 600 employees losing their jobs. Other hospitals say they are bracing for the changes to come. Our Lady of the Angels Hospital, a safety-net hospital in Bogalusa, La., said it would have to consider closing its doors, and the University of Kentucky said it might have to pause construction on a new building dedicated to caring for cancer patients if state-directed payment cuts go into effect. The cuts may also eat into the earnings of for-profit hospitals like HCA Healthcare and Tenet Healthcare that have enjoyed lucrative boosts to their bottom lines from state-directed payments. The National Rural Health Association said it was worried that the bill's provisions would significantly hamper healthcare access in rural areas. Senate Republicans added a $50 billion relief fund to the bill at the last minute for rural hospitals, but Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine), who voted against the bill, said it wouldn't be enough to offset the other changes. For insurers, the biggest impact of the legislation is clear: fewer customers. Though Medicaid is a government program, most enrollees get their benefits through insurers that are paid with state and federal money. 'From a health insurer's perspective, that's a lot of business to lose," says Cynthia Cox, a vice president at KFF, a health-research nonprofit. The industry impact will be heaviest among companies with a focus on Medicaid. Among the largest are Centene, which has nearly 13 million Medicaid enrollees, Elevance Health, UnitedHealth Group, Molina Healthcare and CVS Health's Aetna. 'Revenue and profits will be pressured," said Sarah James, an analyst with Cantor Fitzgerald. A Wellcare location in New York City, part of Centene Corp., one of the largest Medicaid insurers. The cutbacks to Medicaid will come on top of blows to another key insurance market—Obamacare marketplace plans. Federal subsidies that help people pay for Obamacare plans are set to shrink next year, and the new legislation doesn't fill the gap. Along with other Trump administration changes to the rules for Obamacare plans, the reduction in subsidies is projected to reduce the number of people with coverage by another 5.1 million if Congress doesn't extend them. In Obamacare and Medicaid, the shrinking rolls are likely to create another headache for insurers. When people drop out of insurance markets, the healthier ones are often the first to go. That leaves a sicker, more costly pool of customers for insurers, which then seek to get paid more to cover those expenses. They demand higher premiums, either from state Medicaid agencies or from Obamacare customers. Nationally, states will have roughly $1.3 trillion dollars less in federal and state funds to spend on Medicaid over the next decade, according to Manatt. Most of the reductions—93%—will be in states that have expanded Medicaid to cover able-bodied adults. One of the biggest impacts will come from the bill's crackdown on so-called provider taxes, which states levy on hospitals and other healthcare providers to trigger federal matching funds. Most hospitals receive back more than they pay in taxes through higher payment rates via state-directed payments and other mechanisms. Currently, the taxes are capped at 6% of healthcare providers' net patient revenue, but will be reduced to 3.5% in expansion states. In non-expansion states such as Florida and Texas, tax rates will be frozen in place up to the 6% maximum on the date the bill is signed into law. Healthcare workers last month protested the Medicaid cuts proposed in the bill that President Trump signed Friday. The taxes have been criticized as a gimmick that exploits federal taxpayers without requiring states to put any skin in the game. President Obama twice proposed clamping down on provider taxes, including in his 2013 budget, which would have reduced the maximum rate to 3.5%. States use provider taxes to fund state-directed payments to hospitals and other providers. Some, such as North Carolina, have also designed the taxes to fund their Medicaid expansions. On a percentage basis, red and purple expansion states will be hit hardest since many of them tend to rely heavily on provider taxes, says Avi Herring, a Manatt managing director. Montana faces a 21% reduction in state and federal funds; Arizona, Kentucky and Virginia are each looking at reductions of about 18%. The largest blue states, which tend to have more generous Medicaid programs, face far bigger dollar cuts, though they are somewhat smaller proportionally. California is expected to see a 13% reduction. New York's spending will be reduced by nearly 9%. Write to Dominique Mosbergen at Joseph Walker at Liz Essley Whyte at and Josh Ulick at
Mint
16 hours ago
- Mint
When an HIV Scientific Breakthrough Isn't Enough
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- A landmark breakthrough in HIV prevention — a scientific feat decades in the making — received final approval from the Food and Drug Administration last month. Gilead Sciences' lenacapavir is so effective that global health leaders had started to cautiously talk about the end of an epidemic that continues to kill more than 600,000 people each year. We should be celebrating its arrival. Instead, aid groups and the countries most affected by HIV are reeling from the Trump administration's relentless attacks on the global health infrastructure. Instead of perfecting plans for a rollout of the medication, they are scrambling to ensure people with HIV have the drugs they need to survive. Last year, I wrote about the stunning — or as one HIV expert described it, 'spine-chilling'— results from a large study of lenacapavir. None of the women and adolescents who were given the twice-yearly injection in the trial became infected with HIV. In a second study involving men who have sex with men, and transgender individuals who have sex with men, the treatment was 96% effective. Even better, Gilead is working on a newer version that could potentially offer protection for a year or more. That's about as close to an HIV vaccine we're likely to get — at least for many years. It's also the world's best shot of achieving the goal of ending HIV by 2030. For low- and middle-income countries that continue to face frustratingly stubborn infection rates, a twice-yearly drug could be a game-changer. Although existing treatments of daily pills do an excellent job at preventing infection, getting people to use them consistently has been difficult. There is the stigma attached to the pills. Ensuring patients return for frequent testing and refills is also challenging — as is simply remembering to take them daily. Consider the typical day of a mom with a newborn and it's easy to understand how six months of protection could make a real difference in lowering HIV cases in women and infants. Some experts have even suggested lenacapavir is our best chance of wiping out new infections in children. That was before the Trump administration abruptly shut down USAID, the lead agency behind Pepfar. The global initiative to combat HIV/AIDS is credited with saving an estimated 26 million lives since its inception in 2003. Although the administration granted a limited waiver to allow some HIV services to continue, funding is significantly restrained. As health workers grapple with fewer resources, their focus has shifted to people living with HIV. 'When the chips are down, you safeguard treatment because those people will die if they don't get their antiretroviral,' says Linda-Gail Bekker, director of the Desmund Tutu HIV Centre at the University of Cape Town. And yet, she said, 'prevention we know is an absolute cornerstone to bringing this epidemic under control.' Because the situation is so dynamic, it's been difficult to capture what's happening on the ground. The best current model suggests the administration's actions could result in at least 70,000 additional new infections, and another 5,000 deaths in the next five years. UCLA infectious disease epidemiologist Dvora Joseph Davey says that in 2024, the eight public health clinics in Cape Town — where she is based — saw three infants who were HIV-positive at birth. In the first five months of this year, they've already seen three babies born with the infection. She knows there will be more. One pregnant woman with HIV recently came into the clinic and, at 37 weeks, her viral load was dauntingly high. She'd skipped picking up her last three-month supply of pills. The nurse she'd been seeing was let go as part of the funding cuts, and no one was available to do a blood draw at her last visit, Davey says. If the people who, in theory, should still be benefiting from global aid are falling through the cracks, what hope do we have for prevention? Prevention efforts have already been severely disrupted in some countries. Supply is responsible for some of the upheaval, but the more complicated problem is getting the drugs to the people who need them most. 'We need low-cost product and also a low-cost delivery mode,' says Carmen Pérez Casas, senior strategy lead at Unitaid, a global health initiative hosted by the World Health Organization. The situation for the latter 'has changed radically,' she says. HIV prevention is not as simple as just handing out a prescription. It's first identifying those most at risk of infection, getting them tested to confirm they are negative, and offering counseling about their options. It's ensuring they return for more testing and the next dose of their medication. That requires a vast support network ranging from doctors and nurses to counselors, pharmacists, lab technicians, data scientists and more. Pepfar supported all of that infrastructure. In South Africa, for example, cuts have resulted in lost jobs for some 8,000 health workers focused on HIV. Aid groups are doing their best to ensure the breakthrough's promise is not entirely lost. Their first hurdle is bridging the gap to the arrival of low-cost generic lenacapavir, which isn't expected until sometime in 2027. (Gilead is allowing a handful of drug companies to make and sell generic forms of lenacapavir in the countries most heavily impacted by HIV.) Global health agencies are anxiously awaiting the company's price tag for those countries to understand how far their funding can be stretched. Then they need to get the drug to patients. Experts tell me they've scaled back their expectations given the upheaval with Pepfar. The Trump administration's termination of National Institutes of Health grants to foreign countries has created additional hurdles. It's been particularly devastating in South Africa, where the NIH supported a significant chunk of research related to HIV. That means less money to conduct so-called implementation studies for lenacapavir, which are crucial for understanding how to improve the drug's use in the real world. One simple thing the Trump administration could do is free up funding for prevention. Pepfar continues to operate under a waiver that only allows PrEP money to be spent for those who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Groundbreaking science alone won't end HIV. It must be paired with affordability and access. The Trump administration's callous cuts to global health efforts put all of those things at risk — including the promising future where HIV is brought to heel. More From Bloomberg Opinion: This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. Lisa Jarvis is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering biotech, health care and the pharmaceutical industry. Previously, she was executive editor of Chemical & Engineering News. More stories like this are available on
India Today
2 days ago
- India Today
Quinoa explained: Nutrition, cooking tips, and everyday uses
Once a staple crop of the ancient Incas, quinoa has re-emerged as a global superfood in recent years. Technically a seed but prepared like a grain, quinoa offers a unique blend of nutrients, including all nine essential amino acids, making it a rare plant-based complete IS QUINOA?Quinoa (pronounced KEEN-wah) is a flowering plant native to the Andean region of South America. Though often referred to as a whole grain, it is actually a pseudocereal—a seed that is consumed like a cereal grain. It has been cultivated for over 5,000 years and played a central role in the diet of pre-Columbian are many varieties of quinoa, but the most common types available are white, red, and black. White quinoa has the mildest flavor and fluffiest texture when cooked, while red and black types offer nuttier tastes and slightly firmer PROFILE OF QUINOA Quinoa stands out among plant foods due to its rich nutrient content. A 1-cup serving (cooked) contains: 8 grams of protein5 grams of fiberIron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and folateAntioxidants like quercetin and kaempferolWhat makes quinoa especially notable is that it's a complete protein, containing all nine essential amino acids—something uncommon in plant-based is naturally gluten-free, making it a valuable dietary option for people with celiac disease or gluten BENEFITS OF QUINOAQuinoa offers several health benefits thanks to its nutritional density:Supports muscle health and repair due to its complete protein profileAids digestion and gut health with its high fiber contentHelps maintain blood sugar levels with a low glycemic indexContributes to heart health through magnesium and antioxidant contentProvides sustained energy from complex carbohydrates and essential mineralsBecause of these qualities, quinoa is often recommended in balanced diets, especially for vegetarians, vegans, and those managing chronic conditions like diabetes or heart FOR COOKING QUINOA Quinoa is quick and easy to prepare—usually ready in about 15 minutes. Before cooking, it's best to rinse it under cold water to remove its natural coating, called saponin, which can have a bitter cooking ratio1 cup of quinoa to 2 cups of water or brothBring to a boil, reduce to a simmer, cover, and cook for 15 minutesadvertisementLet it sit covered for 5 minutes, then fluff with a forkYou can use quinoa in salads, soups, breakfast bowls, stir-fries, or as a substitute for rice or couscousHOW TO INCLUDE QUINOA IN YOUR DIET Quinoa is incredibly versatile. Here are a few ideasAdd it to salads for extra proteinUse it as a base for grain bowlsMix into vegetable soups for added texturePrepare a breakfast porridge with milk, nuts, and fruitMake quinoa patties with herbs and spices as a plant-based burgerIts mild taste allows it to blend well with both sweet and savory QUINOA ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE?Quinoa's popularity has raised questions about sustainability and fair trade. Originally grown in Bolivia and Peru, high international demand led to changes in local food economics. However, efforts are being made to support ethical farming and diversified global production to ensure quinoa remains a sustainable crop. advertisementQuinoa is more than just a trendy health food—it's a nutrient-rich, adaptable, and culturally significant plant that fits into a wide range of diets. Whether you're seeking more plant-based proteins, managing dietary restrictions, or just adding variety to your meals, quinoa is a smart and satisfying choice.- Ends
