Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
03 May 2021 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Robert Bragg recently participated in a live panel discussion with leaders from the food and beverage sector, debating the challenges facing the industry and sharing their lessons and solutions.

Prof Robert Bragg from the Department of Microbiology and Biochemistry at the University of the Free State formed part of a live panel discussion with leaders from the food and beverage sector, debating the challenges facing the industry and sharing their lessons and solutions.

The discussion, part of a week-long virtual event (19-23 April), was attended by more than 1 300 attendees representing 500 food manufacturers, retailers, ingredient companies, and laboratories from 83 countries.

The magazine, New Food, coordinated the initiative that focused on food integrity. Speaking with Prof Bragg at the session that centred around animal welfare, zoonotic disease, and antibiotics, were Catherine McLaughlin, Chair, Responsible Use of Medicines in Agriculture (RUMA); Vicky Bond, UK Managing Director, The Humane League; and Daniela Battaglia, Livestock Development Officer, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

The rise of antibiotic resistance

James Russell, President of the British Veterinary Association (BVA), was the moderator of the discussion that also touched on the issues surrounding animal welfare; how animal welfare can impact meat quality; avoiding future zoonotic disease; the rise of antibiotic resistance; ethical considerations to be mindful of; and the use of pesticides and safety considerations.

Prof Bragg specifically talked about antibiotic resistance. “Mankind has major problems with antibiotics,” he said. 

He asked if animal agriculture can be sustained without the use of antibiotics and stated that it was necessary to look at alternatives. Possible solutions he suggested include improved vaccines, bacteriophages, and phage enzymes. He, however, believes that biosecurity will be the most effective alternative. 

Living in a post-antibiotic area

Disinfectants are one of the biosecurity measures taken to minimise the risk of infectious diseases. “But it is important to be aware of the fact that as resistance to antibiotics increases the resistance to disinfectants also increases,” said Prof Bragg. 

He continued: “An increase in the use of disinfectants increases the resistance to disinfectants. This is also evident in humans, especially now during the COVID-19 pandemic. Much of these disinfectants are also of poor quality,” he said. 

According to Prof Bragg, we are living in a post-antibiotic era. “Although food standards are higher in developed countries such as in Europe – where people can pay more for poultry that were fed diets with reduced antibiotics, it is important to keep in mind that people cannot pay the same for poultry in developing countries. These countries often import poultry from countries where the food standards are not that high and where birds were treated to diets containing more antibiotics. A large supplier of poultry in Africa is small-scale farmers, who also feed their birds food containing higher levels of antibiotics.” 

“We need to look at the antibiotic problem as a global problem; a concern that will be with us for a while,” said Prof Bragg.

One solution provided by the group was for mankind to reduce its meat intake and moving to a more plant-based diet. This will have a significant effect on animal welfare as well as reducing the demand for antibiotics.

News Archive

Lessons of The Spear
2012-08-16

Discussing weighty issues at the UFS were from left: Prof. Jonathan Jansen; Vice-Chancellor and Rector; Nic Dawes, Editor-in-Chief, Mail & Guardian; Max du Preez: Investigative journalist and political columnist; Ferial Haffajee: Editor, City Press; and Justice Malala: Political commentator and newspaper columnist.
Photo: Johan Roux
14 August 2012

What were South Africans left with after The Spear? More importantly, what did we learn from The Spear?

These were the issues discussed at a seminar, Beyond the Spear, on the controversial Brett Murray painting at the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS) on Monday 13 August 2012.

The university hosted this seminar, Beyond the Spear, in conjunction with acclaimed journalists, to look deeper into the lessons that South Africans learnt from this painting and the reaction from the public and politicians following soon after it went on display at the Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg.

The four panellists, Mr Justice Malala (political analyst, journalist and host of the news show, The Justice Factor), Mr Nic Dawes (editor in chief of Mail & Guardian), Mr Max du Preez (investigative journalist and political columnist) and Ms Ferial Haffajee (editor of City Press), all presented their views and experiences on the public’s perceptions of this artwork.

In his opening remarks, Prof. Jonathan Jansen, Vice-Chancellor and Rector, said the purpose of the seminar was to help us make sense of what happened. Prof. Jansen also chaired this seminar.

“This being South Africa, there will be more ‘Spears’. More public crises will unfold that divide the nation and that will stir the emotions. We need to understand what happened so that we are better prepared to deal with the coming ‘Spears’.”

Issues on leadership, South Africa’s hurtful past and the freedom of expression were some of the topics raised by the panellists.

“This has taught us that South Africans – especially the older generation – still need to vent their anger… White South Africa must be patient and allow black citizens to shout at them,” said Mr Du Preez. He warned that this anger should serve a constructive purpose. In reaction to a question if Brett Murray did not disrespect Pres. Jacob Zuma’s dignity with his controversial painting, he said that this painting was “…rude and disrespectful.”

“It was meant to be. It was not honouring him.” He said that politicians will do anything, including messing with the country’s stability, to further their own interests. “From now on we need to be far more alert, far more cynical about our politicians.”

Mr Dawes shared his experience and said that the debates around The Spear were very painful considering where the nation has come from. He said the painting opened up painful pasts and difficult spaces. “It is up to the media to open up these difficult spaces.” He said the painting also brought up questions of how South Africans deal and live with pain. “South Africa must live with its past. The debate should now be how to preserve space for the country’s ghosts and how its citizens could get the resilience to deal with it.”

Ms Haffajee, who was caught in the crossfire between freedom of expression and human dignity and who refused to remove a picture of the painting from the City Press website, said that the media was viciously played by politicians.

“This had shown that achieving freedom took many lives, but it took very little to kill it.” She said The Spear is art that it is part of a rich cultural heritage of protest art.

Mr Malala said with the debates around The Spear painting, something died in South Africa. “The debate was taken away from us. We let politicians get to us.”

After the panellists delivered their presentations, Prof. Jansen led a discussion session between the audience and the panellists.

 

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