Let's assume that foundation assets are roughly what they were in 1999. Yes, foundation stock portfolios, like personal accounts, no doubt took their lumps in 2000, but of course these losses would be offset by billions in new donations since 1999. Unlike the drug companies, America's foundations don't have a rational argument for sitting on the sidelines. The drug firms can of course explain that if they have to abandon profits on existing medicines, they'll have less money to invest in new cures to disease, and they'll attract less investment from the capital markets. Shareholders demand big profits as compensation for underwriting research and development.
Foundations are under no such pressure.
There is a crisis in the world, a monumental tragedy, a problem that literally can be solved in large part by throwing money at it.