Abstract #344  -  Review of the reports from the community voices in the field involved with the tenofovir controversy
Authors:   Presenting Author:   Dr Morenike Ukpong - Obafemi Awolowo University
Additional Authors:  Prof Kris Peterson, Ms Olayide Akanni,
Aim: A review of the anecdoctal report from four countries - Cameroon, Cambodia, Nigeria and Thailand - involved with the tenofovir controversy as reported by a publication by the New HIV Vaccine and Microbicide Advocacy Society.
Method / Issue: A review of the anecdoctal report from four countries - Cameroon, Cambodia, Nigeria and Thailand - involved with the tenofovir controversy as reported by a publication by the New HIV vaccine and Microbicide Advocacy Society. A review of reports of the controversy in the literature A Review of the Good Participatory Practice (GPP) document.
Results / Comments: Unlike what is reported in the literature, it is clear that communities in each country were well organized by themselves and took actions through a self informed process with only invited external input. Secondly, these organised communities equivocally requested for protocol review so that it takes cognizance of their concerns which was not adequately addressed in the early versions of the protocol. None requested for a discontinuation of the trial. The importance of early community participation in research protocol development it is well recognized and reiterated in the GPP document and the Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical HIV Prevention Research. Thirdly, the communities clearly expressed an interest in dialogue which the researchers' were unwillingness to engage in.
Discussion: One can then insinuate that community perspectives of the ethics of research somehow differ from the researcher perspectives: some of what the community oftentimes refer to as unethical are issues least considered for ethical deliberation by the researchers. Often times, the two communities use the same words; but then the words convey different meanings to either group. Another important theme is the Good Participatory Practice (GPP) document that arose out of the ashes of the trials. The reports all acknowledged that this was a welcome tool for ‘legalising’ community advocates’ voices over the issue of engaging communities as partners in research design and implementation: community need to have a say in matters that affects them and their lives.
Go Back