Bag's Rants

Now this seems worth something.

Well I don't know about you but I was fairly confident that women with HIV that were pregnant were almost certain that HIV would be passed on and there was very little we could do.

Imagine my surprise reading this article when I discovered that it was in fact the other way round and we could be fairly confident that HIV is not transmitted but that funding for baby food seemed the weak point that increases the risk.

Now, I'm still all for there being a coherent policy around this. Regardless of it's all being done for the right reasons. No point in saving them from one thing at great expense only for them to succumb to plain old starvation because they can't feed themselves. We of the West seem to have this thing about children. Must protect the children, what about the children, but then when they are sixteen, or whatever, it's now OK for them to die. I just don't understand that.

Anyway, this article makes it seem like there is something positive we can do and, to me, has the feeling that it is the right thing to do. It's a basis for a policy. Now if only Anita Roddick would spend her funds on this, read about her giving away £51M here, and make sure that a policy was put in place around it. That would make a difference. Or, am I being to simplistic? Is £51M enough to kick start this?

I probably thought the same thing about aid to the third world twenty years ago and little was done, then ten years ago and now, still no change. Will it be the same in another twenty years?

posted by Bag @ 11:25 am