Changes in international health funding and the direction of the fight against AIDS were discussed by experts on the second day (December 5th) of the 4th Act of Symposium IOC Jubilee 125 years.
In a joint session with the Center for Studies of the Oswaldo Cruz Institute (IOC/FiocRuz), the lecture 'A critical analysis of international funding trends for HIV and AIDS activities' also marked World AIDS Day, commemorated on December 1st.
The international response to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), which for decades was an example of global mobilization and solidarity among countries, is now experiencing a profound crisis, marked by a decrease in donations to programs that historically funded prevention and treatment efforts.
The diagnosis was presented by sociologist Richard Parker, professor emeritus at Columbia University in the United States, and visiting professor at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), who gave the lecture.
Watch the event in full:
With live broadcast on the Channel IOCThe meeting was moderated by Kenneth Camargo Jr., a researcher at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), and also included the participation of Simone Monteiro, a researcher at the Laboratory for Education in Environment and Health, and the Vice-President of Education, Information and Communication of the FiocRuz, Marly Marques da Cruz.
Opening the event, the director of IOCTania Araujo-Jorge celebrated Elimination of vertical transmission of HIV. — from mothers to children — as a public health problem in Brazil, resulting from public policies of prevention, diagnosis and care.
For her, this national milestone makes the debate on international funding even more urgent, in order to ensure that the progress achieved here is maintained and can be expanded in the coming years.
According to UNAIDS, approximately 40,8 million people worldwide are living with HIV. In Brazil, the estimated number is around 1 million.
Identified in the early 1980s, AIDS quickly established itself as one of the greatest health emergencies in contemporary history.
The lack of effective treatment in the early years of the epidemic exposed deep inequalities and led to strong stigmatization of the most affected populations, while at the same time fueling the emergence of social movements and community networks that transformed the way public health is done around the world.
According to Parker, the period was marked by global mobilizations that brought together governments, researchers, non-profit organizations, and civil society around a common goal.
This historical collaboration contributed to expanding access to antiretroviral medications, which transformed HIV into a manageable chronic disease.
Despite the progress made in recent decades, the researcher highlighted that the current challenges are of a different nature, marked by decreased international funding and a global political landscape unfavorable to public health policies.
“The United Nations [UN] and UNAIDS have been announcing the imminent end of AIDS for almost ten years, but today it seems that we are experiencing more the end of the global response to the pandemic than the end of AIDS itself,” Parker pointed out.
According to the researcher, many of the major international donors have withdrawn from the field of HIV/AIDS in recent years.
Traditional funds, previously maintained by large philanthropic foundations, have reduced or ceased their activities in this area.
At the same time, institutions that played a decisive role in the 1990s and 2000s—such as the Ford Foundation and the World Bank—ceased supporting projects specifically aimed at the epidemic, ending their funding lines.
With this gradual withdrawal, the scenario became increasingly dependent on a few funders, especially private foundations and pharmaceutical companies based in the United States.
The concentration increased so much that two donors came to account for more than half of all private resources allocated to the fight against HIV worldwide. The trend was similar at the governmental level.
"The other donor countries decreased their contributions throughout the 2010s. The budget remained stable because the contribution from the American government increased, eventually concentrating about 70% of international resources," he said.
This funding model, concentrated mostly in the United States, left the entire global structure for combating HIV exposed to political and economic instability—a weakness that, according to Parker, has ultimately been confirmed.
"With almost two-thirds or three-quarters of all global health funding concentrated in the United States, we've created a 'perfect storm' if something goes wrong in the country," he explained.
The 'perfect storm' began to take shape with the Covid-19 pandemic. According to Parker, the global health crisis shifted political and financial attention away from HIV/AIDS, interrupting initiatives, delaying funding, and significantly reducing the visibility of the issue on the international agenda.
Although resources did not disappear completely, there was an abrupt pause in the flow of investments. At the same time, wealthier countries focused their efforts on their own responses to Covid, which left low- and middle-income nations even more underserved in HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment efforts.
According to the researcher, the situation worsened with the re-election of Donald Trump in 2025, whose decisions directly impacted the main pillars of global health.
Among the first measures taken by the US president were the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), the closure of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and substantial cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and UNAIDS.
According to the sociologist, the consequences of the measures announced by the Trump administration are severe and immediate, even though their final implementation depends on lengthy political and legal disputes in the United States.
The impact also reaches Brazil. Programs maintained with US funding were quickly affected, such as 'The Time is Now', which suffered cuts and operational restrictions. Parker recalled that, although the country has consolidated its own policies, it is not isolated from the effects of external crises.
"Brazil is not an island. In a globalized world, it is impossible to avoid being affected by external crises," he stated.
Subsequently, Kenneth Camargo Jr. broadened the debate by connecting the weakening of the global response to HIV with political and economic transformations of recent decades. According to him, the rise of conservative governments and the crisis of multilateralism—which weakens institutions like the UN and the WHO—have a direct impact on countries' ability to maintain sustainable health policies.
"A fertile ground has been created for the reemergence of the far-right on a global scale, and its ideological agenda clashes head-on with any pandemic response policy, especially in the case of AIDS," he noted.
Despite the uncertainties, experts emphasized that the history of the response to HIV/AIDS shows that profound transformations only occurred when governments, researchers, and civil society worked together.
In this context, the international downturn and recent political crises not only impose new obstacles, but also present the global community with the chance—and the responsibility—to rebuild alliances and renew commitments.
For Kenneth, this reconstruction necessarily involves the leading role of the Global South. Countries like Brazil need to take the lead in defending universal access to medicines, in international cooperation in health, and in building solidarity-based responses.
Changes in international health funding and the direction of the fight against AIDS were discussed by experts on the second day (December 5th) of the 4th Act of Symposium IOC Jubilee 125 years.
In a joint session with the Center for Studies of the Oswaldo Cruz Institute (IOC/FiocRuz), the lecture 'A critical analysis of international funding trends for HIV and AIDS activities' also marked World AIDS Day, commemorated on December 1st.
The international response to the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), which for decades was an example of global mobilization and solidarity among countries, is now experiencing a profound crisis, marked by a decrease in donations to programs that historically funded prevention and treatment efforts.
The diagnosis was presented by sociologist Richard Parker, professor emeritus at Columbia University in the United States, and visiting professor at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), who gave the lecture.
Watch the event in full:
With live broadcast on the Channel IOCThe meeting was moderated by Kenneth Camargo Jr., a researcher at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), and also included the participation of Simone Monteiro, a researcher at the Laboratory for Education in Environment and Health, and the Vice-President of Education, Information and Communication of the FiocRuz, Marly Marques da Cruz.
Opening the event, the director of IOCTania Araujo-Jorge celebrated Elimination of vertical transmission of HIV. — from mothers to children — as a public health problem in Brazil, resulting from public policies of prevention, diagnosis and care.
For her, this national milestone makes the debate on international funding even more urgent, in order to ensure that the progress achieved here is maintained and can be expanded in the coming years.
According to UNAIDS, approximately 40,8 million people worldwide are living with HIV. In Brazil, the estimated number is around 1 million.
Identified in the early 1980s, AIDS quickly established itself as one of the greatest health emergencies in contemporary history.
The lack of effective treatment in the early years of the epidemic exposed deep inequalities and led to strong stigmatization of the most affected populations, while at the same time fueling the emergence of social movements and community networks that transformed the way public health is done around the world.
According to Parker, the period was marked by global mobilizations that brought together governments, researchers, non-profit organizations, and civil society around a common goal.
This historical collaboration contributed to expanding access to antiretroviral medications, which transformed HIV into a manageable chronic disease.
Despite the progress made in recent decades, the researcher highlighted that the current challenges are of a different nature, marked by decreased international funding and a global political landscape unfavorable to public health policies.
“The United Nations [UN] and UNAIDS have been announcing the imminent end of AIDS for almost ten years, but today it seems that we are experiencing more the end of the global response to the pandemic than the end of AIDS itself,” Parker pointed out.
According to the researcher, many of the major international donors have withdrawn from the field of HIV/AIDS in recent years.
Traditional funds, previously maintained by large philanthropic foundations, have reduced or ceased their activities in this area.
At the same time, institutions that played a decisive role in the 1990s and 2000s—such as the Ford Foundation and the World Bank—ceased supporting projects specifically aimed at the epidemic, ending their funding lines.
With this gradual withdrawal, the scenario became increasingly dependent on a few funders, especially private foundations and pharmaceutical companies based in the United States.
The concentration increased so much that two donors came to account for more than half of all private resources allocated to the fight against HIV worldwide. The trend was similar at the governmental level.
"The other donor countries decreased their contributions throughout the 2010s. The budget remained stable because the contribution from the American government increased, eventually concentrating about 70% of international resources," he said.
This funding model, concentrated mostly in the United States, left the entire global structure for combating HIV exposed to political and economic instability—a weakness that, according to Parker, has ultimately been confirmed.
"With almost two-thirds or three-quarters of all global health funding concentrated in the United States, we've created a 'perfect storm' if something goes wrong in the country," he explained.
The 'perfect storm' began to take shape with the Covid-19 pandemic. According to Parker, the global health crisis shifted political and financial attention away from HIV/AIDS, interrupting initiatives, delaying funding, and significantly reducing the visibility of the issue on the international agenda.
Although resources did not disappear completely, there was an abrupt pause in the flow of investments. At the same time, wealthier countries focused their efforts on their own responses to Covid, which left low- and middle-income nations even more underserved in HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment efforts.
According to the researcher, the situation worsened with the re-election of Donald Trump in 2025, whose decisions directly impacted the main pillars of global health.
Among the first measures taken by the US president were the withdrawal of the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), the closure of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and substantial cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and UNAIDS.
According to the sociologist, the consequences of the measures announced by the Trump administration are severe and immediate, even though their final implementation depends on lengthy political and legal disputes in the United States.
The impact also reaches Brazil. Programs maintained with US funding were quickly affected, such as 'The Time is Now', which suffered cuts and operational restrictions. Parker recalled that, although the country has consolidated its own policies, it is not isolated from the effects of external crises.
"Brazil is not an island. In a globalized world, it is impossible to avoid being affected by external crises," he stated.
Subsequently, Kenneth Camargo Jr. broadened the debate by connecting the weakening of the global response to HIV with political and economic transformations of recent decades. According to him, the rise of conservative governments and the crisis of multilateralism—which weakens institutions like the UN and the WHO—have a direct impact on countries' ability to maintain sustainable health policies.
"A fertile ground has been created for the reemergence of the far-right on a global scale, and its ideological agenda clashes head-on with any pandemic response policy, especially in the case of AIDS," he noted.
Despite the uncertainties, experts emphasized that the history of the response to HIV/AIDS shows that profound transformations only occurred when governments, researchers, and civil society worked together.
In this context, the international downturn and recent political crises not only impose new obstacles, but also present the global community with the chance—and the responsibility—to rebuild alliances and renew commitments.
For Kenneth, this reconstruction necessarily involves the leading role of the Global South. Countries like Brazil need to take the lead in defending universal access to medicines, in international cooperation in health, and in building solidarity-based responses.
The non-profit reproduction of the text is allowed as long as the source is cited (Comunicação / Instituto Oswaldo Cruz)
 |
 |
