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

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

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