Search

The COVID-19 crisis has magnified existing social, economic and political inequities. People who use drugs are particularly vulnerable due to criminalisation and stigma and often experience underlying health conditions, higher rates of poverty, unemployment and homelessness, as well as a lack of access to vital resources - putting them at greater risk of infection. On the other hand, COVID-19 presents an opportunity to confront the mistakes of the past and re-negotiate a new social contract. The International Network of People who use Drugs (INPUD) believe that this crisis must be an occasion to rethink the function of punishment, to reform the system and to work towards ending the war on drugs. This commentary presents a set of recommendations to UN agencies, governments, donor agencies, academics, researchers and civil society, challenging these actors to work alongside people who use drugs to enact a new reality based on solidarity and cooperation, protection of health, restoration of rights and dignity and most importantly to mobilise to win the peace., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests The authors have no conflict of interest. No financial support was provided for the completion of this article., (Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Background: Harm reduction is an evidence-based, effective response to HIV transmission and other harms faced by people who inject drugs, and is explicitly supported by the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. In spite of this, people who inject drugs continue to have poor and inequitable access to these services and face widespread stigma and discrimination. In 2013, the Global Fund launched a new funding model-signalling the end of the previous rounds-based model that had operated since its founding in 2002. This study updates previous analyses to assess Global Fund investments in harm reduction interventions for the duration of the rounds-based model, from 2002 to 2014., Methods: Global Fund HIV and TB/HIV grant documents from 2002 to 2014 were reviewed to identify grants that contained activities for people who inject drugs. Data were collected from detailed grant budgets, and relevant budget lines were recorded and analysed to determine the resources allocated to different interventions that were specifically targeted at people who inject drugs., Results: 151 grants for 58 countries, plus one regional proposal, contained activities targeting people who inject drugs-for a total investment of US$ 620 million. Two-thirds of this budgeted amount was for interventions in the "comprehensive package" defined by the United Nations. 91% of the identified amount was for Eastern Europe and Asia., Conclusion: This study represents an updated, comprehensive assessment of Global Fund investments in harm reduction from its founding (2002) until the start of the new funding model (2014). It also highlights the overall shortfall of harm reduction funding, with the estimated global need being US$ 2.3 billion for harm reduction in 2015 alone. Using this baseline, the Global Fund must carefully monitor its new funding model and ensure that investments in harm reduction are maintained or scaled-up. There are widespread concerns regarding the withdrawal from middle-income countries where harm reduction remains essential and unfunded through other sources: for example, 15% of the identified investments were for countries which are now ineligible for Global Fund support., (Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Amphetamine type stimulants (ATS) have become the focus of increasing attention worldwide. There are understandable concerns over potential harms including the transmission of HIV. However, there have been no previous global reviews of the extent to which these drugs are injected or levels of HIV among users. A comprehensive search of the international peer-reviewed and grey literature was undertaken. Multiple electronic databases were searched and documents and datasets were provided by UN agencies and key experts from around the world in response to requests for information on the epidemiology of use. Amphetamine or methamphetamine (meth/amphetamine, M/A) use was documented in 110 countries, and injection in 60 of those. Use may be more prevalent in East and South East Asia, North America, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and a number of European countries. In countries where the crystalline form is available, evidence suggests users are more likely to smoke or inject the drug; in such countries, higher levels of dependence may be occurring. Equivocal evidence exists as to whether people who inject M/A are at differing risk of HIV infection than other drug injectors; few countries document HIV prevalence/incidence among M/A injectors. High risk sexual behaviour among M/A users may contribute to increased risk of HIV infection, but available evidence is not sufficient to determine if the association is causal. A range of possible responses to M/A use and harm are discussed, ranging from supply and precursor control, to demand and harm reduction. Evidence suggests that complex issues surround M/A, requiring novel and sophisticated approaches, which have not yet been met with sufficient investment of time or resources to address them. Significant levels of M/A in many countries require a response to reduce harms that in many cases remain poorly understood. More active models of engagement with M/A users and provision of services that meet their specific needs are required., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There is a widespread acknowledgment that successful treatment with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) requires the patient to maintain consistent adherence to the prescribed regimen on a long-term basis. Adherent patients have been shown to have reduced viral loads and increased CD4 counts, live longer, and have better quality-adjusted survival. The consequences of nonadherence are also obvious: poorer adherence leads to inadequate viral suppression and continued disease progression. With the astonishing advances in medical therapeutics during the past two decades, one may expect a similar proliferation of studies of the nature of nonadherence and tests of strategies to help patients overcome it. However, the literature and the know-how concerning interventions to improve adherence are still surprisingly weak. The unique challenges posed by combination therapies for HIV and AIDS require healthcare providers to address the issues created by adherence to complex regimens through multifactorial interventions tailored to patients' needs.