The Trump Administration's HIV Prevention Contradictions
Is shutting down the CDC's HIV prevention division a good idea?

HIV attacks the body's immune system and without treatment, it can lead to AIDS. The virus is transmitted via contact with body fluids such as semen, blood, and other bodily discharges.
The new head of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has expressed some doubts about those facts. Now the Trump administration is contemplating the elimination of the HIV prevention division that is a part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), according to NBC News.
If the CDC is anything, it is supposed to be the chief agency that detects, controls, and eliminates infectious diseases. HIV is just such a communicable microbe. The CDC estimates 31,800 Americans were infected with it in 2022, the year in which the latest data are available. The CDC also estimates that "approximately 1.2 million people in the U.S. have HIV. About 13 percent of them don't know it and need testing."

Oddly, efforts to cut back on the CDC's programs aimed at reducing HIV infections stand in contradiction to President Donald Trump's own Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S. (EHE) initiative that he announced during his 2019 State of the Union address. Trump's original EHE goal was to end the HIV epidemic in the United States by 2030. The EHE initiative boosted preventative strategies including increased HIV testing and the promotion of effective new pre-exposure prophylaxis medications. Thanks in part to the EHE, the rate of HIV infections is down 19 percent since 2016.
The Trump administration's ultimate plans with respect to the CDC's HIV prevention division are not yet public, but some reporting suggests that at least some of its programs may be shifted to the Health Resources and Services Administration. As KFF, a health care policy nonprofit, observes, the agency's primary focus has historically been the delivery of medical care, not implementing preventive strategies.
"We are deeply concerned by the Trump administration's reckless moves to defund and deprioritize HIV prevention," warns a statement released on behalf of 13 LGBTQ+ and health care organizations. "These abrupt and incomprehensible possible cuts threaten to reverse decades of progress, exposing our nation to a resurgence of a preventable disease with devastating and avoidable human and financial costs."
It is certainly true that the CDC lost its focus on combatting infectious diseases over the decades. Instead, the agency turned more of its attention to non-communicable lifestyle "epidemics" of obesity, smoking, and violence. Attempting to remedy these lifestyle maladies actually seems more in line with HHS Secretary Kennedy's own priorities. "We're going to give drug development and infectious disease a break—a little break, a little bit of a break—for about eight years. And we're going to study chronic disease," RFK, Jr. said before suspending his presidential campaign. Infectious diseases are, however, not going to give the HHS secretary or the rest of us a break.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The CDC estimates 31,800 Americans were infected with it in 2022
Yep, 31,800 random Americans get HIV, the are no behaviors those individuals engaged in that put them at greater risk than anyone else. If only we understood how the virus moves between humans, and the ways to avoid infection.
So saeth Ron Bailey, so saeth Oprah. But maybe incentivizing risky behavior is a bad idea.
I thought it was well known that butt sex is the primary way people get HIV. Maybe people should stop having butt sex? Or do we need more testing.
Full disclosure: RB;dr.
The truth rears its head. Ron will most undoubtedly turn the other cheek.
Some people are anal about this kind of stuff.
Looks like the CDC will be pulling out where this priority will be coming in the end.
Don’t be an ass.
I agree with the gist of the final paragraph that the CDC should be focused on communicable diseases (especially pandemic level threats) not on lifestyle diseases or gun violence.
My praise ends there.
The entire article is a predicated on a hearsay. If you click the Elimination link that supposed supports this rumor, it takes you to an article at the "American Journal of Managed Care - an MJH Life Sciences® Brand". This article references a single news report at NBC. Its support for the rumor comes from an anonymous source with this quote in the second sentence of the article: "The plan to eliminate the CDC's Division on HIV Prevention is still in the "very, very preliminary stages," the source said, and no final call has been made yet."
That's it. thats the story.
Every other news report cites anonymous officials or anonymous former officials. At Politico, they've got an anon quote of the following: No decision has been made and an HHS official, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, said that “if this decision is even made, this work would be continued elsewhere at HHS.”
But Orangemanbad.
MAGA is a death cult.
You are a massive retard.
^ This
You.
Are.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Is there any evidence to support that the CDCs efforts have ever had any effect on a diseases prevalence?
Yes. In the 80s HIV was a death sentence. Now with education and decades of drug research, people with HIV have almost no detectable viral load. Also due to CDC education, infections are way down.
Prove it had anything to do with the CDC.
30k cases to 1.5m - seems like failure to me.
Government did something. Something got better. Therefor government doing something made things better. I don't know if you ever had any exposure to logic, but you certainly have never learned anything about epidemiology or cause and effect!
"Yes. In the 80s HIV was a death sentence. Now with education and decades of drug research, people with HIV have almost no detectable viral load. Also due to CDC education, infections are way down."
In the '80s, I put my tiger repellant rock on my back porch and haven't had a tiger show up since.
Being the fucking imbecilic pile of lefty shit you are, I'm sure you'll see cause and effect.
Fuck off and die, slimy pile of lying lefty shit.
At the beginning - Fauci made things worse.
Scary bad thing. Justification - funding. In perpetuity.
Although self-contradiction is Trump's middle name, in this case the operative concept is "if the CDC is anything" - it is not anything and should not be made into anything. The Federal government should not in any way be trying to fight disease in any form. There might be a possible justification for a Federal agency that tries to detect incoming threats to national security in the form of infectious diseases. That would not require an entire cabinet-level department to accomplish. It is especially ironic that the CDC was complicit in creating a viral threat to national security in the name of fighting disease.
Should gay men be forced to social distance from the eager asses of other gay men like progressives pushed on the general population during covid?
Obviously you would be disappointed.
Did your gay male lover think that was clever, beefeater?
I’m so sorry if I misgendered you, chumby. Cough, cough. Ok if you gals take it in the keister I guess.
I’m guessing his gay male lover thinks it’s clever, even if both of them are fully retarded with a cumulative IQ below room temperature.
Can’t you see I’m here laboring? It isn’t like I visit the docks you frequent and knock the sailors’ penises out of your mouth. You can have your trickle down economics…five bucks at a time.
I'm sorry such a pathetic pile of TDS-addled lying lefty shit shows up here.
Fuck off and die, asshole
We know how HIV is transmitted. The rate of HIV in lesbians is rather low and, much as they hate to admit it, if you ask penis-in-vagina sex without drug use and your odds of acquiring HIV is a nil above absolute zero.
But I do like this never-ending string of "Libertarians for government agencies" articles this site is laden with.
You're like mildly less judgy Democrats. Extremely mildly less judgy.
This is no surprise considering who is most likely to get the virus. Remember that when it comes to Trump and his defenders, it’s always who not what.
You still mad Trump didn’t vote for Chase?
You still so deranged you think SGT is a Jesse sock?
This headlines defies the rule of headlines. The answer is "yes".
No, it's not. D&D.
>Is shutting down the CDC's HIV prevention division a good idea?
Is there anything left for it to do?
The AIDS epidemic is long over, everyone knows about safe sex, there are treatments - including prophylactic treatments for prevention.
Gay men still have sex with more people on a long weekend than straight guys will in a decade - monkeypox.
This division looks like they’ll be taking it up the ass.
"Is shutting down the CDC's HIV prevention division a good idea?"
Yes, absolutely.
We know what causes HIV; why are we paying to continue to tell bone-headed assholes about it?
With freedoms comes responsibilities, according to a view known as 'libertarian'.
No, you know, I know, I'm sorry, this is dark - but I loved the 80s-90s. I genuinely miss them.
I want them back. HIV rampaging the LGBT pedos and all. I can live with that. It was 100% preventable in the first place, and nothing has changed between then and now. It's like monkeypox. Just don't do gross stuff, and you're effectively immune. (If not absolutely immune, because we're a lot better about blood transfusions these days.)
I crave the nostalgia.
Hell, if most gay men were the monogamous loving couples they lied about to champion gay marriage, AIDS would be as close to a non-issue as possible.
But they ain't.
First you have to decide whether you are promoting sick perverted behavior or not. Then you have to decide what human rights someone has whether perverted or not.
As you love to say "if you subsidize something you get more of it"
All the three-letter agencies must be abolished. What the fuck kind of “libertarian” magazine is this anyway?
One that shilled for a closet progressive candidate while possibly actually voting for Harris.
All the money that goes to HIV from our limited resources is taken for sick children and others who do not get sick from perverted behavior. There are behaviors on the heterosexual side that mirror some of the gay (promiscuity, perversion, etc) that will greatly abominate. Yes, even if you have nothing against homosexuality, it doesn't mean you can't be a sick menace to society
"The high cost of HIV treatment, including medications and healthcare, places a significant burden on individuals, healthcare systems, and society, with lifetime medical costs estimated at hundreds of thousands of dollars per person. "
Help them because they are human,but speak the truth : Homosexuality is not right, not moral, not in any way good
"...Homosexuality is not right, not moral, not in any way good..."
Disagreed; do you presume to determine what others find as 'good'? What gives you the right to do so?
REALITY CHECK...
"Is shutting down the CDC's HIV prevention division a good idea?"
How's that relevant to the article???
Only Gov-'Guns' against those 'icky' people can do HIV prevention???
^THAT is the mentality that is killing the USA.
'Guns' don't cure disease... Wrong tool for the job to begin with.
Of course it's not a good idea. It's a Trump Administration idea.
Fake news. Anonymous source