Thailand, Bangkok in particular, has long been looked at as the Far East's answer to Amsterdam or Las Vegas; an adults-only playground where behavior thought unacceptable at home is not only condoned, but in many cases encouraged. The federal government has recently decided to drop some cash in this Southeast Asian nation, and they're investing in something a little bit more expensive than knockoff Levi's or certain, um, "pharmaceuticals" of questionable legality.
According to Fox News, the National Institute of Health recently commissioned a $178,000 study to "investigate the sociocultural contexts of HIV risk behaviors and drug use among Thai female and male-to-female transgender (kathoey) sex workers." Fox News' Joseph Abrams reports that NIH researchers will interview 60 sex workers to understand the factors that make the prostitutes susceptible to HIV, factors expected to range from economic pressures to what is described as "Buddhist fatalism."
While the focus of the NIH's work might be surprising to some, what is not surprising is that government watchdog groups are not too impressed with the institute's efforts.
"This is really a complete waste of money and should not be funded by the taxpayer," David Williams of the Citizens Against Government Waste bluntly told Fox News. "It really boggles the mind to think this is what NIH is studying," he continued. "We don't have an infinite number of tax dollars to work with here, and the ones that we do pay should go to benefit the research in this country."
Abrams reports that the NIH has funded several studies focusing on HIV
risk and prevention in an attempt to develop effective treatment and
intervention plans to be used in the United States. According to
Abrams, the NIH spends $29 billion annually to fund international
studies such as a $2.6 million effort dedicated to teaching Chinese
prostitutes to drink less while "on the job." The United Nations
estimates that about one percent of Thailand's 66 million person
population (660,000) is infected with HIV -- three times the amount of
cases in the United States.
The NIH responded to Fox's report by issuing a statement that claimed their research "aims to better understand how to prevent HIV transmission among many different groups of vulnerable populations around the world, since HIV/AIDS is a global epidemic." They defended their work by pointing out that "the research is easy to ridicule if it is taken out of its public health context. The fact is we need to explore a range of research avenues in vulnerable populations around the world to learn the best ways to control the transmission of HIV." The statement concludes by making the point that advances in HIV research "can be of great benefit to individuals worldwide."
The institute is right on two counts; HIV research can in fact be of great benefit to the general population, and it is very easy to ridicule this type of public expenditure. However, it is probably fair to assume that most Americans are not overly concerned about the health hazards of being a transgender Thai prostitute -- well maybe some are morbidly curious but would never actually admit it. But is it fair to gang up on the NIH as some sort of government pork-mill?
The fact remains that this is for the most part an organization that does invaluable research. The institute's website lists the amount of money spent each year on researching public health concerns; concerns that usually don't even have anything to do with Thai prostitutes. Citizens Against Government Waste would probably be the ones being ridiculed if they had chosen to speak out against items like the $412 million the NIH spent on Alzheimer's Disease research in 2008, or the $194 million dedicated to the study of Brain Cancer. No one wants to be the person who opposes something like Alzheimer's research, besides that wouldn't get as much press as the transgender Thai hookers.
Is spending $178,000 on studying the sex habits of Thai prostitutes most likely a spectacular waste of taxpayer money?
In the grand scheme of a $29 billion NIH budget, the amount seems more like a weekly allowance. But in the midst of a massive recessive, unprecedented government spending, and a string of bailouts, perhaps studying populations across the world isn't the wisest use of funds, when there are plenty of homeless, HIV-infected prostitutes right here at home to talk to.
Also Interesting:
[+] AARP names NIH one of the best employers for workers over 50
[+] Bill would ban free publication of taxpayer funded research
[+] 2010 Budget notes: Department of Health and Human Services ($99.2B)
[+] Medical records of Congressional Privacy Caucus Chairman stolen