Things could be worse
Acknowledging what remains valuable can sustain hope without denying bad news. Galef illustrates this through AIDS activists who found comfort in companionship while facing a disappointing treatment result.
THE IDEA
Things could be worse
The summer of 1993 has been called "the most disillusioning moment in AIDS treatment history."10 For several years, desperate patients had pinned their hopes on a new drug called azidothymidine, or AZT, that was supposed to slow the onset of the disease. Early clinical trials in the United States had suggested that AZT was promising.
However, a European research group had also been running a study of AZT. When they published their results in 1993 after three years of data collection, the news was devastating: AZT didn’t work any better than a placebo. Ninety-two percent of the people taking AZT had survived the study, compared to 93 percent who survived on the placebo.
To make matters worse, there were no other drugs in the pipeline. After the early trials had seemed to show AZT to be effective, the government had stopped working on alternatives. Many activists gave up, and many patients sank into depression—the false promise of AZT had been the one thing keeping them going.
But not everyone felt like giving up. In his history of the AIDS crisis, How to Survive a Plague, David France profiles a small group of activists called the Treatment Action Group. They had been following the drug-testing process closely and knew that the odds of finding a miracle drug right away were slim. When the bad news about AZT broke in the summer of 1993, they were disappointed—but not crushed.
Most of the activists in the Treatment Action Group were HIV-positive themselves. How had they kept up their spirits despite their realism about the chance of a cure? In part, by focusing on their gratitude for the things that could have been worse. France describes a meeting during that dispiriting summer at which one of the activists, a man named Peter Staley, said:
Maybe that is our future, that we’re gonna watch each other die. And that’s going to be awful, if that’s the case. It’s already been awful, so there’s not too much we can do about that . . . I’m just—you know, I really honestly feel glad that I’ve got people to be with. Not many people have that.11
The Treatment Action Group’s ability to stay positive without denying the reality of their situation was a crucial strength—and one that would become especially valuable in the following months, as we’ll see when we return to their story in Chapter 14.
When to use it
When receiving a disappointing medical diagnosis, focusing on aspects of health that are still present and treatments that may still work.
During a business downturn, appreciating the loyal customers and team members that remain rather than only lamenting losses.
In social activism or community organizing, maintaining morale by celebrating small wins and the support of the group despite overall setbacks.
After a personal failure, recognizing that the experience provided valuable lessons and that you still possess other strengths and opportunities.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
AZT Trial and the Treatment Action Group
In Galef’s account, a European study reported in 1993 found no survival advantage for AZT over placebo in that trial. Members of the Treatment Action Group faced the disappointment while expressing gratitude for one another’s company.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Think of a current challenge you are facing. How could it be worse? What are you grateful for in that situation?
Recall a time when you or someone you know maintained hope by acknowledging what was still good despite bad news. How did that mindset affect the outcome?
How can you practice the 'things could be worse' mindset without ignoring real problems or falling into toxic positivity?
References
- How to Survive a Plague — David France (2016)
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- The Scout Mindset (Julia Galef)