From a global crisis to the "end of AIDS': New epidemics of signification
From a global crisis to the "end of AIDS': New epidemics of signification
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/17441692.2017.1365373
复制
发表时间：
2018-01-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Parker, Richard
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kenworthy, Nora;Thomann, Matthew;Parker, Richard
在过去的十年中，有关艾滋病的讨论发生了显着的、基本上毫无疑问的转变。尽管 2000 年代动员扩大治疗规模的前提是“流行病已失控”，但近年来，我们不断被告知，艾滋病的终结已是迫在眉睫。这一新的论述及其由此产生的政策是由后衰退的金融压力、全球机构领域的变化以及卫生和发展优先事项的变化所推动的。这些转变也反映了艾滋病毒预防和治疗方面的生物医学必胜论，即相对于抗逆转录病毒治疗的长期支持，提倡短期、私有化、技术性和成本效益的干预措施。为了探索这些变化，我们利用 Treichler 的[(1987)。如何在流行病中拥有理论：艾滋病的文化编年史。北卡罗来纳州达勒姆：杜克大学出版社]将艾滋病视为一种具有重要意义的流行病，以对近年来“终结艾滋病”的论述进行回顾。我们利用这次审查来调查重塑和重新定义这一流行病的努力所服务的政治和慈善利益。我们还针对资源匮乏国家获得治疗的现实进行这些讨论，在这些国家，“终结艾滋病”并没有预示着流行病本身的结束，而是预示着对治疗计划的外部支持的结束，突显了在这个流行病的新时代维持治疗的新困难。
In the past decade, discourses about AIDS have taken a remarkable, and largely unquestioned, turn. Whereas mobilisations for treatment scale-up during the 2000s were premised on perceptions of an epidemic out of control', we have repeatedly been informed in more recent years that an end to AIDS is immanent. This new discourse and its resulting policies are motivated by post-recession financial pressures, a changing field of global institutions, and shifting health and development priorities. These shifts also reflect a biomedical triumphalism in HIV prevention and treatment, whereby shorter term, privatised, technological, and cost-effective' interventions are promoted over long-term support for antiretroviral treatment. To explore these changes, we utilise Treichler's [(1987). How to have theory in an epidemic: Cultural chronicles of AIDS. Durham, NC: Duke University Press] view of AIDS as an epidemic of signification' to develop a review of End of AIDS' discourses in recent years. We use this review to investigate the political and philanthropic interests served by efforts to rebrand and re-signify the epidemic. We also hold up these discourses against the realities of treatment access in resource-poor countries, where Ending AIDS' has not heralded the end of an epidemic per se, but rather the end of external support for treatment programmes, highlighting new difficulties for sustaining treatment in this new era of the epidemic.