Why student vulnerability fuels HIV infections
Bamwine says universities and other institutions of learning are meant to be centres of knowledge, innovation and personal growth. Yet they are also becoming places where some students encounter drugs, exploitation and destructive lifestyles.
Quillino Bamwine
By Quillino Bamwine
The recent appearance of Uganda National Students Association (UNSA) president Sheila Ainembabazi before Parliament's Committee on HIV/AIDS sparked nationwide debate.
Her remarks highlighted an issue many parents, educators and policymakers would rather avoid confronting: the growing culture of drug abuse, risky social behaviour and economic vulnerability among students.
Among the concerns raised were reports of drug-laced cookies and other substances allegedly circulating at student parties, adding another layer to the challenges facing young people today.
Predictably, some focused on the mention of cookies and missed the broader message. HIV is not transmitted through food, drinks or cookies. No one can contract HIV by eating or sharing a drug-laced snack.
However, dismissing the concerns on those grounds alone would be a mistake. The real issue is not the cookie itself but the chain of behaviour and vulnerability it may trigger.
Drug abuse among young people is an increasing concern. Whether consumed through alcohol, narcotics or edible products disguised as ordinary snacks, intoxicating substances impair judgment and decision-making.
Under the influence, young people may become more vulnerable to peer pressure and less likely to assess risks carefully. Decisions that might otherwise be rejected can suddenly seem harmless or exciting.
In such circumstances, risky sexual behaviour becomes more likely, increasing exposure to HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.
This is where Ainembabazi's warning deserves serious attention. She was not merely speaking about substances consumed at parties. She was drawing attention to a broader environment in which young people are increasingly exposed to influences that compromise their safety and future.
The most significant threat identified by the student leader, however, was not drugs but poverty
Across the country, many students struggle to meet their most basic needs. Some cannot afford adequate meals. Others struggle with accommodation, transport and essential personal expenses.
For female students, additional costs related to health and hygiene can further stretch already limited resources. While public discussions often focus on academic performance, far less attention is paid to the hardships many students quietly endure.
Economic hardship creates vulnerability. A student who cannot afford food, rent or transport may become dependent on individuals willing to provide support in exchange for favours.
In some cases, such arrangements evolve into transactional relationships. The power imbalance inherent in these relationships often leaves young people unable to negotiate safer choices or protect themselves from exploitation. What begins as a search for survival can result in emotional trauma, interrupted education or exposure to life-threatening diseases.
This reality should prompt Uganda to rethink aspects of its HIV prevention strategy. For decades, the country has invested heavily in awareness campaigns. Billboards, radio programmes, school initiatives and community outreach efforts have delivered important prevention messages and saved countless lives. These efforts remain vital and should continue.
Yet awareness alone is not enough.
Knowledge does not eliminate hunger. Information cannot pay hostel fees. A counselling session cannot replace a meal. When poverty becomes overwhelming, people often make decisions based on immediate survival rather than long-term consequences.
If Uganda is serious about reducing HIV infections among young people, it must confront the economic conditions that make risky behaviour attractive, and sometimes unavoidable.
Parents also have a critical role to play. Even where resources are limited, consistent communication and emotional support can make a difference. Students who feel supported are often better equipped to resist negative influences and navigate peer pressure.
Educational institutions must also do more. Universities and schools need stronger counselling services, effective anti-drug programmes and safe reporting mechanisms for students facing exploitation.
Student welfare should not be treated as a secondary concern. It is central to both academic success and personal development.
Government agencies, meanwhile, should intensify efforts to disrupt drug distribution networks that target young people.
The sale of intoxicating substances disguised as ordinary consumer products is particularly troubling because it lowers suspicion and broadens access. At the same time, policymakers should invest more in student welfare programmes and economic empowerment initiatives that reduce vulnerability.
The debate sparked by Ainembabazi should therefore move beyond drug-laced cookies.
The real challenge lies in the circumstances that leave students vulnerable to drugs, exploitation and risky behaviour in the first place. Poverty, substance abuse and HIV are interconnected problems that cannot be addressed in isolation.
Uganda's young people are among the country's greatest assets. Protecting them requires more than warning them about HIV.
It requires creating conditions in which they can pursue education without being forced into choices that jeopardise their health and future. The fight against HIV will be won not only in hospitals and testing centres but also in classrooms, hostels, homes and communities where vulnerability takes root.
The message is simple: the danger is not in the cookies. The danger is in the conditions that make young people vulnerable.
Until those conditions are addressed, Uganda will continue treating the symptoms while neglecting the deeper causes that sustain the problem. This calls for a holistic response that tackles not only disease prevention but also the underlying social and economic realities that shape young people's choices.
The writer studied Political Science and Political Economy.