AUSTRALIAN ACADEMIC CALLS FOR BOYCOTT OF UN PARTNERED ANTI-MALARIA CHARITY

Hedge Funds vs. Malaria has launched a malaria awareness and fund-raising campaign, Dunk Malaria. The campaign is supported by the Malaria Foundation International and the United Nations.

The campaign is opposed by self-appointed malaria expert Tim Lambert – a computer scientist – who advises readers not to give:

Dunk Malaria is organizing a Malaria Action Day on March 19th, to raise awareness of malaria. The idea is that people net a basketball to symbolize the insecticide treated netting that is the best weapon against malaria. Good. Except that number 2 on their list of charities is the execrable Africa Fighting Malaria, who are trying to prevent bednets from being used to fight malaria.

I think that we here at Deltoid can, right now, do more to fight malaria than Africa Fighting Malaria has ever done. I will match, up to a total of $300, donations to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. Leave your pledges in comments.

As far as I know, Africa Fighting Malaria regards bednets as comparatively ineffective but has not actively tried to prevent their use. Lambert really should document this claim. Regardless, the UN's Dunk Malaria press release is clear on bednets:

The three speakers stressed that prevention of malaria could be as cheap as buying treated nets for children to sleep under at night.

(By the way, the Malaria Foundation International is promoting a separate bednet campaign, so it's not like bednets aren't getting charitable support.)

Lambert's request that readers donate to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria puts him in direct opposition to Dunk Malaria which notes:

There are few relevant charitable efforts focused exclusively on malaria. Governmental spending on malaria control initiatives worldwide are inexcusably low (and difficult to audit). These problems are exacerbated by the fact that malaria is normally subsumed under the overall banner of world poverty and aids. Malaria needs to stand out on its own. We believe that only by making malaria an independent cause can it be eradicated.

Lambert's past DDT/malaria posts have been harmless enough despite the malicious ranting. He's now gone way over the top in slamming a good faith effort to fight malaria. His call could well encourage readers, who might have been inclined to give, not to give. He should retract the post and apologise to the folks at Dunk Malaria. He wouldn't want to be responsible for hurting the anti-malaria effort, now would he? Someone could die.

Update: Lance Laifer, organiser of Hedge Funds Vs Malaria, comments on the fight against malaria and corrects Lambert on Africa Fighting Malaria:

I have spent the last eight months researching and fighting malaria (almost full time and learning as much as I can - though admittedly I am limited by a lack of scientific background - and low iq- My university chemistry teacher will attest to this fact) and I have not found one person or group doing more than Africa Fighting Malaria to combat this emergency, which I firmly believe requires bednets, medications, insecticides and other transformative ecological measures such as swamp draining (not to mention the long term need to make up for the dearth of health professionals in Africa).

Laifer also thanks Lambert for the bednet "support" but notes that bednets are not the solution:

I think you should note that most of the other charities on the list are also utilizing bednets as a first line of defense, but we need to do many more thinks (sic) like worry about transportation of people in rural places to hospitals - please see riders.org for more on this issue.

Laifer seems to be a really nice guy who's grateful for any publicity that promotes the anti-malaria cause, even if it's from a dubious source like Lambert. Obviously, no publicity is bad publicity.

Update II: the much reviled Richard Tren of Africa Fighting Malaria responds to my email request for his position on the bednets:

Africa Fighting Malaria fully recognises that bednets are an important, valuable and effective tool against malaria and should be supported by aid agencies, donors, the private sector and governments. We are not 'anti-bednet' in any way. We are against the recent trend in malaria funding which has promoted bednets ahead of and to the exclusion of other interventions that are also effective, such as indoor residual spraying with insecticides, like DDT. The reality of the last two decades is that donor agencies have not funded indoor residual spraying in any significant way and the result has been a steady increase in malaria incidence. We are working to redress that balance and most crucially we hope to give malaria scientists and experts in the countries affected a greater say in how to fight malaria in their own countries and to determine the best possible tools for their circumstances.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Editing note: The issue here should be the fight against malaria, not Lambert's delusions. I have therefore removed the original update II above and replaced it with a statement from Mr Tren on AFM's position on bednets.