Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
28 June 2023 Photo Supplied
UFS Experts
Ms Akani Baloyi is from the Disaster Management Training and Education Centre for Africa (DiMTEC) at the University of the Free State. | Dr Olivia Kunguma is from the Disaster Management Training and Education Centre for Africa (DiMTEC) at the University of the Free State. | Dr Arishka Kalicharan, Department of Basic Medical Sciences, UFS

 


Opinion article by Ms Akani Baloyi; Dr Olivia Kunguma, Disaster Management Training and Education Centre for Africa (DiMTEC) at the University of the Free State; and Dr Arishka Kalicharan, Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Free State.

Since the 1800s, many countries globally have had a long history of cholera outbreaks, with several countries experiencing periodic outbreaks and the disease remaining a public health concern. In Africa, countries like Senegal, Malawi, Zimbabwe, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania and many more have suffered greatly from this water-borne plague.

South Africa is among these countries – one of its major outbreaks, in 2008, killed more than 65 people, with more than 12 000 cases reported. The outbreak spread from Musina in Limpopo to the other provinces. The spread of cholera from Musina was attributed to a 2008/2009 outbreak in Zimbabwe, which affected more than 98 000 people; this was a case of disease contagion.

The 2008/2009 Zimbabwe outbreak was rated the country and the world’s largest ever recorded. Due to its political and economic crises, thousands of Zimbabweans migrated to South Africa. The movement of people from Zimbabwe helped spread the disease, as it is highly contagious. Because South Africa also had its own political and economic issues, cholera started spreading like wildfire. Similarly to Zimbabwe, South Africa is struggling with service delivery by local authorities due to poor governance and corruption.

In an effort to improve Zimbabwe’s health  system after that outbreak, the United Nations donated almost $5 million. Despite such a big cash injection, the country’s health system is still not of a standard that can help mitigate and prevent cholera. The country still finds itself losing people due to cholera outbreaks.

The challenge in Africa is that decision-makers suffer from ‘reactive syndrome’, i.e. they wait for an outbreak before intiating activities like surveillance, health promotion, encouraging of laboratory testing, assessing and maintaining boreholes/ municipal water plants, and providing temporary emergency water, sanitation and hygiene. Only when an outbreak is already under way do they remember the existence of emergency and response plans, and then start updating them.

A recent cholera outbreak in Hammanskraal, north of Tshwane in Gauteng, South Africa, had claimed 23 lives by 28 May after residents were diagnosed with diarrhoeal disease due to cholera. In the neighbouring Free State, two deaths had been reported by 9 June.

It has become common knowledge that the main source of cholera infection is poor sanitation, lack of clean water, and contaminated food. But it is important to also know that most people exposed to the cholera bacterium do not get sick. They are unaware they have been infected, unless they start displaying symptoms such as diarrhoea, vomiting, and muscle cramps. Excessive diarrhoea can lead to dehydration, making it difficult for the body to perform basic functions. If left untreated, diarrhoea can be fatal.

The root causes are exacerbated by poor investment in public health and an unsettled political environment, in particular governance of municipalities and neglect of water treatment plants. The prevalence of this preventable infectious disease demands immediate attention from policymakers, health organisations, and society in general. Addressing the root causes, boosting preventative measures, and ensuring access to clean water and adequate healthcare services to eradicate cholera in South Africa is crucial.

How can we mitigate and prevent the spread of cholera?

While we lobby for policymakers or people who hold political power to be called to account and advocate for large-scale investment in establishing and maintaining water and sanitation facilities and the strengthening of public health community engagement, we need to consider some methods the public can explore.

Most infected people will have few to mild symptoms, which can be successfully treated with an oral rehydration solution. This solution replenishes the body’s fluid levels and can treat mild dehydration caused by diarrhoea, vomiting, or other medical conditions. Oral rehydration solutions can be made at home with the following ingredients:

  • 1 litre of preboiled water (an effective way to disinfect the water)
  • 6 level teaspoons of sugar (improves the absorption of electrolytes and water)
  • ½ teaspoon of salt (promotes water absorption, since there is significant fluid loss due to diarrhoea)
  • 1 tablespoon (or a palatable amount) of white vinegar (contains antimicrobial properties for preventing and treating infections)

This solution should be consumed after every loose stool, or as often as possible. If a child has been infected with the disease, in addition to the oral solution, give the child 20 mg (over 6 months of age) or 10 mg (under 6 months of age) zinc per day (tablet or syrup).

We should also always adhere to cost-effective habits such as routinely washing our hands and consuming preboiled water.

There are also three World Health Organisation (WHO) pre-approved oral cholera vaccines, namely Dukoral, Shanchol, and Euvichol-Plus. They all require two doses for full protection. These vaccines are available at the nearest clinic or hospital, and are relatively cost-effective.

Cholera and several other public health crises should not exist in the modern economy we are living in. Africa has the resources needed, including several medical interventions. Africa must address its issue regarding political leadership, which is its biggest challenge. There is an urgent need for proactiveness among our political leaders and government authorities which should see them take the lead in continuous multi-sectoral collaboration. They should invest in preparedness programmes that include training health workers and surveillance. And lastly, there is an urgent need for an accountability system for all the funds donated and invested towards improving a country’s healthcare system.

News Archive

To tan or not to tan: a burning issue
2009-12-08

 Prof. Werner Sinclair

“Some evidence exists which implies that sunscreens could indeed be responsible for the dramatic rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past three decades, the period during which the use of sunscreens became very popular,” says Prof. Werner Sinclair, Head of the Department of Dermatology at the University of the Free State. His inaugural lecture was on the topic Sunscreens – Curse or Blessing?

Prof. Sinclair says the use of sunscreen preparations is widely advocated as a measure to prevent acute sunburn, chronic sun damage and resultant premature skin aging as well as skin malignancies, including malignant melanoma. There is inconclusive evidence to prove that these preparations do indeed achieve all of these claims. The question is whether these preparations are doing more harm than good?

He says the incidence of skin cancer is rising dramatically and these tumours are induced mostly by the ultra-violet rays.

Of the UV light that reaches the earth 90-95% belongs to the UVA fraction. UVC is normally filtered out by the ozone layer. UVB leads to sunburn while UVA leads to pigmentation (tanning). Because frequent sunburn was often associated with skin cancer, UVB was assumed, naively, to be the culprit, he says.

Exposure to sunlight induces a sense of well-being, increases the libido, reduces appetite and induces the synthesis of large amounts of vitamin D, an essential nutritional factor. The use of sunscreen creams reduces vitamin D levels and low levels of vitamin D have been associated with breast and colon cancer. Prof. Sinclair says the 17% increase in breast cancer from 1981 to 1991 parallels the vigorous use of sunscreens over the same period.

Among the risk factors for the development of tumours are a family history, tendency to freckle, more than three episodes of severe sunburn during childhood, and the use of artificial UV light tanning booths. He says it remains a question whether to tan or not. It was earlier believed that the main carcinogenic rays were UVB and that UVA merely induced a tan. The increase in UVA exposure could have severe consequences.

Prof. Sinclair says the UV light used in artificial tanning booths consists mainly of pure UVA which are highly dangerous rays. It has been estimated that six per cent of all melanoma deaths in the UK can be directly attributed to the use of artificial tanning lights. The use of an artificial tanning booth will double the melanoma risk of a person. “UVA is solely responsible for solar skin aging and it is ironical that tanning addicts, who want to look beautiful, are inflicting accelerated ageing in the process,” he says.

On the use of sunscreens he says it can prevent painful sunburn, but UVA-induced damage continues unnoticed. UVB blockers decrease vitamin D synthesis, which is a particular problem in the elderly. It also prevents the sunburn warning and therefore increases the UVA dosage that an individual receives. It creates a false sense of security which is the biggest problem associated with sunscreens.

Evidence obtained from the state of Queensland in Australia, where the heaviest and longest use of sunscreens occurred, boasted the highest incidence of melanoma in the world. A huge study in Norway has shown a 350% increase in melanoma for men and 440% for women. This paralleled the increase in the use of UVB blocking sunscreens while there was no change in the ozone layer. It did however, occur during that time when tanning became fashionable in Norway and there was an increase especially in artificial tanning.

Prof. Sinclair says: “We believe that sunscreen use does not directly lead to melanoma, but UVA exposure does. The Melanoma Epidemic is a reality. Sunscreen preparations are not the magical answer in the fight against melanoma and the irresponsible use of these preparations can worsen the problem.”

Media Release
Issued by: Mangaliso Radebe
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2828
Cell: 078 460 3320
E-mail: radebemt.stg@ufs.ac.za
7 December 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