Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
19 March 2021 | Story Nombulelo Shange | Photo Andre Damons
Adnombulelo
Nombulelo Shange says this year it is important to look inward, focus on individual healing, growth and reflect on the losses pre- and post-COVID-19.

By Nombulelo Shange, lecturer in the Department of Sociology, University of the Free State

With Human Rights Day nearing it is important to remember the sacrifice of those who lost their lives in the 1960 Sharpeville Massacre in the fight for our freedom. This year I think it is also important to look inward, focus on individual healing, growth and reflect on the losses pre- and post-COVID-19.

The strength and resilience of the Sharpeville community is an important reminder of the hardship we have to overcome; it is an important reminder that we can overcome even this challenge. But on this Human Rights Day our strength lies in our vulnerability and being strong enough to admit we are not okay and ask for help even when societal norms make it hard to do so. Do this without being embarrassed or carry resentment when those we lean on can’t be there because they are also not coping. And for those who give a lot of themselves, it is okay to admit that you have nothing left to give and that you need time to replenish yourself because you can’t bring light into other people’s lives while your own flame is dimming.

The collective cannot be strong when individuals are broken

Many of us were raised in families where communalism, ubuntu and caring for the collective are prioritised over the individual. And to put ourselves and our own wellbeing first feels like a betrayal of these virtues we were brought up with. But I would argue the opposite is true, the collective cannot be strong when it is made up of broken individuals.

Not putting ourselves first would be a betrayal to the same ideals of ubuntu many of us were brought up with. It sounds like a contradiction because we are taught to look at the world in polarised ways and ubuntu ends up being portrayed as a philosophy that puts the masses first and sometimes at the expense of the individual. We see this kind of thinking and application in our own lives where families and communities at times uncritically impose ideas and practices that seemingly benefit the community over individuals. We see it in African discourse that theorises ubuntu and its relevance to traditional and modern spaces, its relevance in human rights discourse, decolonial discourse that broadly calls for “African solutions for African problems”. All of these are important and provide useful analysis, but they sometimes erase the individual.

Individualism is associated with Western imperialism and is rejected and vilified

Individualism is often rejected and vilified because it is associated with Western imperialism that saw the introduction of a greedy capitalist system in Africa that goes against almost every core belief we have. The capitalist system broke our connection to the environment and turned it into a commodity to be exploited for economic gain. It pushed competition and individual wealth over social wellbeing and community. And most importantly it took everything from Africans, our land, language, culture and sense of self. So as we grow and rebuild, it is difficult for us to imagine that these two seemingly contradictory ideals can coexist, where individualism is celebrated and encouraged for the betterment of a collective that will be stronger because it is made up of strong individuals. Instead we polarise, we conclude that if Western imperialism is exploitive and individualism is closely associated with it, then individualism must be bad too. If ubuntu and the collectivist thought around it protected the environment and promoted social wellbeing, then collectivism is good and to question it is to put your own selfish individual needs over the needs of the community and collective human rights.

But if we step away and look at ubuntu beyond our polarised ways of thinking, we see that ubuntu does place a great deal of importance on the individual. The main theoretical tenet of ubuntu says, “Umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu”, which translates to “I am because we are”. This expression shows the mutually beneficial coexistence of the individual and the collective. The collective is nothing without the individuals, and if the individuals who make up the collective are weak, the collective will also be weak. Individuals also need the community for their own enrichment, sense of self and overall wellbeing. If individuals are not nurtured and supported by the collective, they will not be able to give back to the collective, and the cycle continues.

It is time for us to focus on healing and introspection

So, what do we do when our collectivism is threatened by a global pandemic that is threatening to topple even the world’s strongest nations? What do we do when we can no longer tap into the collective strength we have built everything on? So much of our way of life is built on this collective strength as Africans, from the monthly stokvel meetings that offer people solutions to the worst socioeconomic challenges, while offering support and strength. Even church spaces are more than just a place to worship. It is here where people discuss the challenges faced by the community and offer whatever they can to address them. Our funerals and weddings do not just bring families together they bring communities together in shared grief or celebration. You do not even have to invite neighbours to events. The moment they see the tents, chairs, animal sacrifice etc arrive, they come days prior to the event to help the family prepare, celebrate, or cry. Even our ritualistic healing practices are not an individual lonely process in the way that Western biomedical models offer healing. At some point or another, the involvement of family and even the community will become important in African healing practices.

COVID-19 has threatened all of this and future environmental and public health crises might test us even more than COVID-19 has. I think this is the time for us to focus on healing and introspection, many of us were broken long before the pandemic hit. We have carried past intergenerational traumas into our present, but we have an opportunity to ensure that we do not carry them into our futures. We have been depleted by systems that seek to erase our entire existence as people of colour, women, LGBT+ communities and people with disabilities. After a while we start to believe that we are not worthy of love, we believe our poverty is a result of our own laziness and discount the fact that we have been starved of opportunities and resources. We stop challenging the abuses of our individual and collective human rights. This forced isolation is an ideal time to reflect on these things, heal and build ourselves as individuals through talking and sharing deep intimate pain with loved ones, trying to be in nature, attempting to “phahla” or mediate. The process will be different for everyone. Our own mental health depends on it and so does part of our ability to access our human rights. The restoration of our strength as communities will also depend on it during COVID-19 and beyond.

News Archive

Bloemfontein's quality of tap water compares very favourably with bottled water
2009-08-04

The quality of the drinking water of five suburbs in Bloemfontein is at least as good as or better than bottled water. This is the result of a standard and chemical bacterial analysis done by the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Centre for Environmental Management in collaboration with the Institute for Groundwater Studies (IGS).

Five samples were taken from tap water sources in the suburbs of Universitas, Brandwag, Bain’s Vlei, Langenhoven Park and Bayswater and 15 samples were taken of different brands of still and unflavoured bottled water. The samples were analysed at the laboratory of the IGS, while the interpretation of the analysis was done by the Centre for Environmental Management.

“We wanted to evaluate the difference in quality for human consumption between tap water and that of the different brands of bottled water,” said Prof. Maitland Seaman, Head of the Centre for Environmental Management.

“With the exception of two samples produced by multinational companies at their plants in South Africa, the different brands of bottled water used for the study were produced by South African companies, including a local small-scale Bloemfontein producer,” said Prof. Seaman.

According to the labels, the sources of the water vary from pure spring water, to partial reverse osmosis (as an aid to standardise salt, i.e. mineral, content), to only reverse osmosis (to remove salts). (Reverse osmosis is a process in which water is forced under pressure through a pipe with minute pores through which water passes but no – or very low concentrations of – salts pass.)

According to Prof. Seaman, the analysis revealed some interesting findings, such as:

• It is generally accepted that drinking water should have an acceptable level of salt content, as the body needs salts. Most mineral contents were relatively higher in the tap water samples than the bottled water samples and were very much within the acceptable range of drinkable water quality. One of the bottled samples, however, had a very low mineral content, as the water was produced by reverse osmosis, as stated on the bottle. While reverse osmosis is used by various producers, most producers use it as an aid, not as a single method to remove nearly all the salts. Drinking only such water over a prolonged period may probably have a negative effect on the human physiology.

• The pH values of the tap water samples (8,12–8,40) were found to be slightly higher (slightly alkaline), like in all south-eastern Free State rivers (from where the water is sourced) than the pH of most of the bottled water samples, most of which are sourced and/or treated in other areas. Two brands of bottled water were found to have relatively low pH levels (both 4,5, i.e. acidic) as indicated on their bottles and as confirmed by the IGS analysis. The health implication of this range of pH is not significant.

• The analysis showed differences in the mineral content given on the labels of most of the water bottles compared to that found by IGS analysis. The possibility of seasonal fluctuation in content, depending on various factors, is expected and most of the bottling companies also indicate this on their labels. What was a rather interesting finding was that two pairs of bottled water brands claimed exactly the same mineral content but appeared under different brand names and were also priced differently. In each case, one of the pair was a well-known house brand, and the other obviously the original producer. In one of these paired cases, the house brand stated that the water was spring water, while the other (identical) “original” brand stated that it was spring water treated by reverse osmosis and oxygen-enriched.

• Nitrate (NO3) levels were uniformly low except in one bottled sample, suggesting a low (non-threatening) level of organic pollution in the source water. Otherwise, none of the water showed any sign of pollution.

• The bacterial analysis confirmed the absence of any traces of coliforms or E.coli in any of the samples, as was also indicated by the bottling companies. This is very reassuring. What is not known is how all these waters were sterilised, which could be anything from irradiation to chlorine or ozone treatment.

• The price of the different brands of bottled water, each containing 500 ml of still water, ranged between R3,99 and R8,99, with R5,03 being the average price. A comparison between the least expensive and the most expensive bottles of water indicated no significant difference in quality. In fact, discrepancies were observed in the most expensive bottle in that the amount of Calcium (Ca) claimed to be present in it was found to be significantly different from what the analysis indicated (29,6 mg/l versus 0,92 mg/l). The alkalinity (CaCO3 mg/l) indicated on the bottle was also found to differ considerably (83 mg/l versus 9,4 mg/l). The concentration of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS) was not given on the product.

“The preference for bottled water as compared to Bloemfontein’s tap water from a qualitative perspective as well as the price discrepancy is unjustifiable. The environmental footprint of bottled water is also large. Sourcing, treating, bottling, packaging and transporting, to mention but a few of the steps involved in the processing of bottled water, entail a huge carbon footprint, as well as a large water footprint, because it also requires water for treating and rinsing to process bottled water,” said Prof. Seaman.

Media Release
Lacea Loader
Deputy Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
3 August 2009

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept