Health Affairs, 28, no. 6 (2009): 1666-1676 doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.28.6.1666 © 2009 by Project HOPE	New Online   Senate Health Reform Bill   Rewarding Providers   Public Option Policy Brief   Health Reform & Abortion   Delivery System Reform

This Article Full Text (HTML) Reprint (PDF) Submit a response to this article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to Citation Manager Reprints & Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Brock, D. W. Articles by Wikler, D. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Brock, D. W. Articles by Wikler, D. Related Collections Access To Care Ethical Issues AIDS/HIV International Issues

Fighting HIV/AIDS

Ethical Challenges In Long-Term Funding For HIV/AIDS

The global response to the AIDS pandemic aims for universal access to treatment and for pursuing every possible avenue to prevention. Skeptics, doubting that the huge increases in current funding levels needed for universal treatment will ever happen, would scale back antiretroviral treatment in favor of more cost-effective preventive interventions. Economics, politics, and science figure in this debate. But there is also a question of ethical principle: Is there a moral imperative to emphasize treatment, even if emphasizing prevention would save more lives? The authors examine moral arguments that address this question, and come down on the side of saving the most lives via prevention.

                      What's this?