[Stay tuned Monday for a new paper on empirical impacts]
Criminalization of same-sex relationships, drug use, sex work, and HIV exposure remain wide-spread despite clear evidence and global norms against. New UN targets: reduce the orange and yellow bars to 10%. Lots to do.
But there are many protective laws that also need adopting. Strong gender-based violence laws have been adopted by 114 countries, but more work to do on adoption & implementation.
Having strong, independent human rights institutions is key to allow PLHIV and KPs to report rights violations and seek redress... 39% of countries do, 61% dont have.
Non-discrimination laws, too, are more widely needed--just 23% of countries prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and HIV status.
Law & policy change is possible... good news that countries like Angola and India have decriminalized same-sex relationships, New Zealand decriminalized sex work, Colombia decriminalized HIV exposure, and Portugal decriminalized drug use.
The continuing work of the @HIVLawCom continues to spotlight these issues--powerful to see #HumanRights moving into concrete, if aspirational, goals in the new #HLM2021AIDS draft text. Law reform is key.
Read 👇 Dear Journalism:Does this pass muster @VanityFair? Innuendo, implications, Eban teases as breaking story. Zero new evidence. Lots of fmr Trump admin people saying there's a cover up, with no evidence. How is this not just spreading misinformation? vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/t…
YES we need more info on #COVID#Origins. Yes a lab leak is a possibility, but as many have said it has not been high on priority b/c there is quite literally no evidence for it. Eban doesn't find any either. But she does fall for all sorts of canards...
For example, Eban falls for the one about how @WHO didn't appoint US officials suggested for the independent expert team. This has been being shopped around by Trump admin folks for months. Eban takes the bait, reports it as if it's a shocking piece of new information. But...
Argument that compelling knowledge sharing= theft=no future innovation simply not credible in context of #COVID19. Asks huge leaps of imagination.
1st: the imagination here is that a GLOBAL monopoly is required to incentivize science. India, SAfrica, US must be one monopoly...
2nd: universities, which have done much of research leading to these vaccines, will stop accepting public funds to research vaccines and such. Not credible.
3rd: $€£ billions of direct funding + adv-market-commit hasn't been what incentivized development of these vaccines? not credible. #COVID19 is the very best example of public-sector funding driving development on a clear, urgent outbreak. US, UK, EU funding drove dev. As planned
Take: on list of important things to sort out during this pandemic, the origins (animal vs lab leak) is in the bottom half. It’s predictably getting attention disproportionate to its value, given politics. Need to stop ignoring instrumentalizing of global health
... I think @amymaxmen gets the story right here. And it’s not a story mostly about “science”
breathtaking. declaring population-based distribution of vaccines to low/middle-income countries unethical but ignoring global allocation & WHY they’re getting 3% now;20% of pops vaccinated in 2021 via covax.
No! This is not an ethics frame work... nytimes.com/2021/05/24/opi…
How can you consider ethics while ignoring rich countries? Authors treat “nations expecting to have extra doses, including the United States and Britain” as arbiters of ethics as they vaccinate young and heathy people, refuse to share doses or knowledge? No....
No. The ethics prob is NOT attempts to avoid a crisis and cover all HCW in LMICs. Show me the ethical framework in which High Income countries hoarding vaccines should decide who needs the left overs they have more... no.
Governments can do multiple things at once on global #COVIDVaccine access. At risk of over-political-scienceing: Need to disntinguish 2 agenda-setting arguments re WTO waiver as "distraction"
-Govts can't do waiver and X (not a real argument)
-Govts might use to distract (fair)
We know (takes Baum&Jones off shelf) govts have limited political attention:
Aside: FAR too little focus on political strategy for vaccine equity. I see this as core prob of COVAX. Political agenda occupied by sharing doses (implausible) instead of knowledge to produce.
But PLENTY of political attention to both do TRIPS waiver and do tech transfer + funding. WTO negotiations will be done by trade ministers/reps with significant capacity. Issues are straightforward. I can say talking to USG, WH+State+HHS have plenty capacity to walk + chew gum.
Economists please meet the idea of multiple causality. Insufficient supply of vaccines IS driven by WTO rules & IP monopolies. It's not the ONLY cause. We also need tech transfer & funding & more @ATabarrok gets so many things here wrong…
a quick list🧵 marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolu…
“Licenses are widely available” They are not. Most of the world has been dependent on ONE exclusive license to ONE manufacturer, Serum Institute. Many other high-quality firms could be making vaxs but monopoly holders said no. Because of monopoly they can. 2/11
“J&J’s vaccine has been licensed for production in… South Africa.” Nope.
One company has a “fill and finish” contract with J&N in SA. They have been been given the right or the tech to make the full vax or distribute on their own. Sub-contractors are not what’s needed here 3/11