Abbott's budget puts HIV prevention in danger

I'm surprised I can't find anything from the HIV world yet in response to the federal budget. Is it because it's so obvious?

People have worked long and hard over the years to address HIV in Australia. The latest campaign launched earlier this year aims to reduce the rate of HIV infection by 80% by 2020. The campaign involves getting tested, starting meds early if you are positive, and staying safe after that. 

Called Ending HIV, the campaign aims to educate gay men – the population group in NSW most at risk from HIV – about the real possibility that HIV transmission in NSW could be virtually eliminated by 2020 as a result of advances in testing technologies and HIV treatments. 

The campaign seeks to educate gay men in particular about three key activities they need to undertake to help end the epidemic: 

1) Test More – sexually active gay men need to get tested for HIV at least twice a year, as this is the only way that undiagnosed infections can be decreased and access to treatment can be increased 
2) Treat Early – advances in HIV medicines offer improved health benefits for people with HIV and can reduce traces of the virus in their body to an undetectable level, significantly reducing the likelihood of them transmitting HIV 
3) Stay Safe – condoms and other risk reduction strategies remain central to the fight against HIV so gay men need to maintain a culture of safe sex 

Produced by ACON, NSW’s largest community-based HIV and GLBT health organisation, the campaign will be heavily promoted throughout the Mardi Gras festival. The campaign will then be promoted across GLBT, mainstream and social media for the next 12 months. - See more

Not all people will be able to fulfill all those requirements, but a lot will, thus over time reducing HIV infections drastically. The campaign also addressed the wider community in newspapers and posters around the place, which wasn't normally done with an HIV prevention campaign. Posters at bus stops for example:

Needless to say, such preventative measures and treatment involves being treated by a doctor, regular blood tests, and regular prescription medication. People who have HIV aren't necessarily well off, and in fact can be struggling to make ends meet just like everyone else. 

Paying 3 times as much for doctor visits, tests, and prescriptions when you're already struggling is not the way to encourage more testing and the early taking of medication. Of course there will be people who simply won't get tested or treated because they haven't got $30 or so to cough up. It's a simple fact that this disincentive alone will decrease the effectiveness of the HIV campaign and therefore endanger the goals of HIV reduction.

And of course this will be far more expensive in the long run. Even today, there are still the odd people who present in Emergency depts seriously ill with no idea that they've not only got HIV but that it's already progressed to AIDS. (How many people may have been infected by such a person over time?) I dunno what the cost would be of treating someone like that, but I'm sure it's be a damn sight cheaper than the $30-40 disincentive the budget Medicare changes are.