The battle to hinder the spread of AIDS, and the attempt to find an adequate drug to prolong the lives of those inflicted with the disease, have been filled with confrontation, and often also with cries of despair and confusion.

It might seem futile to some to try to save the lives of AIDS victims who have virtually no chance at long-term survival. The common thought is that they have no chance, so why spend the time, money and effort?

This is a fatalistic approach to a problem that needs to be understood and analyzed until something can be done to help those who have “no chance.”

The drug AZT is the only drug to be approved to stop the reproduction of the AIDS virus. Recently, AIDS programs at the National Institutes of Health have been cut to help fund the AZT program. If the money was not earmarked for the drug, officials say those who could not afford the drug would have no alternative in obtaining it.

The cuts in the NIH will come largely in research, and many of those researchers are angered over the reduction in funding for their programs.

The cuts amount to just over 1 percent of the $1.3 billion the Public Health Service will spend on AIDS research this year. A drop in the bucket? Perhaps.

The AZT program is designed to help those who make too much money to receive Medicaid and those whose insurance or savings cannot cover the expensive drug. Reports estimate that a year’s supply of the drug costs about $8,000.

The cost factor should never be the most important reason for such a program. The most important reason to fund the program is to keep people alive. If we take the position that it is useless to help those with the virus, we will be reverting to killing off those with handicaps and other debilitating diseases.