Feb 17, 2006  |  By: ELIZABETH WEILL-GREENBERG  | COMMENTS     

Since bird flu starting grabbing international headlines in 2003, fear of a pandemic has swept across the globe and refocused health policies in some countries, including the United States.

In all, 91 people died of avian flu between 2003 and Feb. 13, 2006, according to the World Health Organization. There are no known cases of bird flu being transmitted from human to human, and no known cases of humans becoming infected from eating chicken or other poultry; only those in direct contact with the infected birds appear so far at risk.

During the same period, 9.1 million people were infected with HIV and AIDS, according to UN AIDS and the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Now, President Bush has proposed cutting $15 million in AIDS research at the National Institutes of Health, while increasing funds for studying avian flu and bio-terrorism.

Bush’s proposed 2007 federal budget calls for increasing by 0.3 percent funding for the Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases, which focuses on avian flu and biodefense. He also is calling for a 6.2 percent increase for other NIH biodefense projects, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science analysis of the president’s budget.

These changes were made despite the remote impact so far of the disease in this country, said Marc Siegel, a physician and author of the books, "Bird Flu: Everything You Need to Know About the Next Pandemic" and "False Alarm: The Truth About the Epidemic of Fear."

"There is not an imminent threat to human beings," said Siegel. It would be a mistake to move funds from AIDS to avian flu, he said.

"Worldwide resources should not be taken away from things already killing millions," he said. "We have a pandemic in Africa. It’s called HIV and [tuberculosis] and malaria."

The 91 deaths from bird flu have occurred in Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Iraq, Thailand, Turkey and Vietnam. Bird flu was recently discovered in poultry in Nigeria.

In November, Bush asked Congress for $7.1 billion to cover costs related to a possible bird flu pandemic, which would cover millions of vaccine doses.

Days of better funding

From 1998 to 2003, federal funding for the National Institutes of Health doubled to more than $27 billion. The AIDS research budget was $1.6 billion in 1998 and $2.7 billion in 2003, according to AMFAR, the American Foundation for AIDS Research.

Under Bush’s proposed budget, research progress made during that time is threatened, said Judy Auerbach, vice president of public policy and program development at AMFAR. In Bush’s 2007 budget, the only AIDS research area to receive an increase will be in the area of vaccines, she said.

"Things like biodefense and avian flu are being prioritized," Auerbach said.

Unlike AIDS, avian flu and biodefense "lack cultural controversy," she said. However, she added, this is not to minimize their importance.

Auerbach said that science has been increasingly politicized under the Bush administration. In the president’s 2007 budget, he asks for an increase of $28 million for abstinence only programs. The federal government has put money behind "ideological agendas that are not evidence based," Auerbach said.

"The Bush administration and Congress continue to cut domestic funding as the primary way to cut the deficit," said Kei Koizumi, R&D at the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

A battle of diseases

Many public health advocates say that diseases have been pitted against each other, vying for priority and funding.

"The administration and Congress made a decision to cut spending and increase tax relief for wealthy people," said Auerbach. "It puts agencies in a very uncomfortable position to make choices between one public health need and another."

In the past several months, avian flu has created confusion and fear about its potential harm and a possible pandemic. Unlike the early days of AIDS, avian flu has been in the media and political spotlight despite the relatively low number of deaths.

Terje Anderson, former executive director of the National Association of People With AIDS, said he hopes the early government response means officials have learned the consequences of ignoring public health problems, as he said politicians did with AIDS in the 1980s.

"In the early 1980s the federal government was scandalously slow to respond to the epidemic unfolding," he said, adding that the early victims of AIDS, primarily gay men, contributed to government apathy. "Hopefully they learned that lesson."

The difference between responses to AIDS in the 1980s and avian flu today ...