 
March 25, 2009
Advocates Rebuke Questionable AIDS Charity
The Beverly Hills–based Center for AIDS Prevention has launched a nationwide fund-raising campaign—making it all the way to The New York Times’ website—but advocates are accusing the charity of spreading false information about HIV prevention and treatment, ProPublica reports.
According to the article, the Center for AIDS Prevention website features incorrect information about the virus, such as suggesting that birth control pills are an effective form of HIV prevention. The site also has ties to a for-profit company that sells ineffective herbal remedies as a replacement for antiretroviral therapy.
Peter Taback, communications director for the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, said the center is committing “public health malpractice.” He added, “To have misinformation like that on the website is profoundly disturbing.”
In addition to facing these accusations, the center also has a troubling financial history. According to the center’s tax filings with the IRS, it showed no revenues, expenses or assets in 2006 and 2007.
Steve Neely, director of the Center for AIDS Prevention, told ProPublica that he started the nonprofit in 1987 to help pay for funeral expenses after a cousin died from an AIDS-related illness. The charity folded after the relative was buried, but Neely attempted to revive it in 2007 under the motto, “Fighting the AIDS Epidemic for Over 20 Years.”
“We’re taking that down,” Neely told ProPublica. He said the center would remove false HIV/AIDS information, but he maintained that 90 percent of the information on the site is accurate and correct.
Search: Center for AIDS Prevention, Beverly Hills, birth control, New York Times
Scroll down to comment on this story.
Previous Comments:
comments 1 - 2 (of 2 total)
mrwillis, Baltimore, 2009-03-26 15:22:35
Check out The Center for AIDS Prevention's website. 90% of the information there may be true, but the writing is so poor it is impossible to know.
Donald A Baxter, Iowa City, 2009-03-26 11:42:44
And this link still persists on the Times website. I would urge anyone concerned about this to contact the New York Times public editor.
comments 1 - 2 (of 2 total)
[Go to top]
|
