Media highlight SA’s shameful HIV/AIDS stats
According to a report on allAfrica.com by Health-e reporter Anso Thom, UNAIDS notes that sub-Saharan Africa is the region hardest hit in the world by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, and that infections are growing at an alarming rate. (See also Journ-AIDS Statistics Factsheet which has been updated this week to include the report.)
The allAfrica.com article, published on November 21, states:
“Sub-Saharan Africa remains hardest hit, and is home to 25,8 million people living with HIV, almost one million more than in 2003. Two thirds of all people living with HIV are in sub-Saharan Africa, as are 77% of all women with HIV.”
The same article points out that the UNAIDS report acknowledged a decline in new infections in Zimbabwe, which it attributed largely to “changes in sexual behaviour” such as a decrease in the average number of sexual partners people have and an increase in the use of condoms.
An article in The Star on November 22 on the same topic scrutinises South African statistics more closely, and notes our poor record in preventing mother-to-child transmission (MTCT).
“… of about 33 000 pregnant women testing HIV positive in South Africa, only 18 857 received protective treatment.”
Both articles regurgitate the facts and figures well enough, but what hasn’t been explored is what the international scrutiny might mean for the country or what the statistics mean for our people.
The Star ran a follow-up article the following day, quoting the health minister’s spokesperson, Sibani Mngadi, as saying:
“More than 90% of hospitals and 76% of clinics in the country provide prevention of mother-to-child transmission services, but the issues of stigma and discrimination prevent women opting to take the treatment.”
This smacks of spin. If these hospitals and clinics really were providing these services as Mngadi says, then surely these stats wouldn’t be this high? Or perhaps they are supplying MTCT, but not consistently? And how is it that “stigma” and “discrimination” don’t prevent mothers-to-be from taking the treatment in our neighbouring countries? Is HIV/AIDS-based discrimination really worse in South Africa , and if so, why? What is the government doing to counter this discrimination?
The AFP, among others, reported a health ministry statement blaming our AIDS problems on apartheid (yawn):
“The major challenge in curbing the spread of HIV infection has been the lack of government-led intervention before 1994 (the year of the first multiracial elections) when the infection rate was already increased rapidly,” the health ministry said in a statement.
“It was only after the advent of democracy that tangible efforts were made by government to curb the spread of HIV infection: provide treatment, care and support for those infected and affected, and address the stigma associated with HIV and AIDS.”
Former National Party Health Minister Rina Venter criticised Tshabalala-Msimang sharply for this statement, pointing out there was a detailed strategy for dealing with HIV even before 1994.
A November 24 article in The Star reads:
“‘She [Tshabalala-Msimang] wants to shift responsibility and pull the wool over people’s eyes. She must take cognisance of the World Health Organisation because it was involved in the development of our Aids strategy,’ Venter said.”
Tshabalala-Msimang has not exactly had a cordial relationship with the UN over the AIDS issue in the past few months. Her fallout with the special UN representative on HIV/AIDS in Africa , Stephen Lewis, was also extensively reported in the press recently after he wrote a book in which he strongly criticised the minister and President Thabo Mbeki.
The New York Times ran an article on this particular issue on October 25.
“Virtually every other nation in eastern and southern Africa ‘is working harder at treatment than is South Africa with relatively fewer resources, and in most cases nowhere near the infrastructure or human capacity of South Africa,’ Mr. Lewis says in the book, ‘Race Against Time’ (House of Anansi Press).
Mr. Lewis, a Canadian who has served since 2001 as the special envoy to Africa on AIDS for the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, wrote that ‘every senior U.N. official, engaged directly or indirectly in the struggle against AIDS, to whom I have spoken about South Africa, is completely bewildered by the policies of President Mbeki.’
He contended that his colleagues are ‘incredulous’ at how Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang has exaggerated the possible side effects of antiretroviral drugs and wrongly suggested that a diet of sweet potatoes and garlic can be as important as antiretrovirals in treating AIDS.”
Sadly, it wasn’t until after the New York Times’ article that the South African media picked up the story.
The Cape Times, for example, managed a feeble report on the New York Times’ report on the strained relationship between Tshabalala-Msimang and Lewis on October 26:
“According to the New York Times , Lewis’s ‘banning’ came after an argument with Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang in 2004. Lewis disagreed with the minister when she publicly questioned the safety of a drug used to prevent mother-to-child HIV transmission.”
As per usual, the minister reacted to Lewis’ book by saying nothing. According to the New York Times, Lewis had said that she had “banned” him from visiting South Africa, until he apologised to her, the president, and many organisations and groups.
It was left to Education Minister Naledi Pandor to stick up for Tshabalala-Msimang, saying in Parliament, according to the Cape Times on November 4:
“As far as our law states, the honourable minister of health cannot bar anyone from entering South Africa as long as they have the appropriate instrument to enter our country - a passport, visa or whatever. So there is no banning on [Stephen Lewis].”
Also in the news this week, the notorious vitamin promoter Matthias Rath is suing Health-e for “defamation” to the tune of R1.6 million after they exposed the operation of several of his illegal clinics in the Western Cape and the way he was pushing people to take his vitamins rather than antiretrovirals.
An article published on Health-e on November 21, reads:
“Rath is also suing a number of other people for defamation in a number of other cases, including editors and reporters from the Independent Group and HIV/AIDS expert Professor Jerry Coovadia.”
South Africa thus sits in a pool of quick sinking sand. The media rarely pose critical questions about HIV/AIDS, whilst the health minister alienates the country from the rest of the world with her strange views and her relative inaction.
The President hums himself into quiet oblivion regarding the matter, and more many more South Africans die than is necessary, while the rest of the continent fights the battle against HIV/AIDS far better than us. – Lunga Madlala & Tara Turkington