Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 October 2024 | Story André Damons | Photo Supplied
Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo
Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo, academic in the Division of Public Health within the Faculty of Health Sciences at UFS.

Dr Mutshidzi Mulondo, an academic in the Division of Public Health within the Faculty of Health Sciences, at the University of the Free State (UFS), has won a prestigious Global Health Award at the margins of the Global Health Summit in London, the UK.

Dr Mulondo, who is a Novartis Reimagining Healthcare Scholar and a Visiting Scholar at the Beaver College of Health Sciences at Appalachian State University, in the US, was a finalist in two categories: ‘Mental Health and Well-being’ and ‘Rising Star’. She won the Zenith Global Health Award under the category ‘Mental Health and Well-being’. The awards ceremony took place on 28 September and saw health professionals and academics gather in Europe for the auspicious occasion.

“This nomination and selection are an honour that bears testament to my dedication and commitment to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). I hope this win serves as inspiration to young people, particularly to young women in academia and in the sciences,” says Dr Mulondo. The awards are an esteemed platform renowned for celebrating global recognition and excellence, fostering collaboration and innovation in the healthcare sector. They further serve as recognition for contributions made through education, research and/or technology and innovation.

Eco-anxiety

Dr Mulondo, who was invited to attend the summit for the first time, joined a panel of speakers on the session theme ‘mental health and climate change’ where she shared insights on eco-anxiety – the intersection of climate change and mental health which was coined by Albrecht as the chronic fear of environmental change.

Research by the McKinsey Health Institute, says Dr Mulondo, a fellow of the UFS Emerging Scholar Accelerator Programme (ESAP) and member of the UNESCO AG for Women in Science, indicates that more than 75% of young people are pessimistic about the future due to climate change. Most young people in the activism frontlines experience activist burn-out from consistent campaigning, while others experience eco-gaslighting from those who feel climate change is a non-issue. These negative emotions are further exacerbated by young people’s exposure to social media of constant images and conversations about environmental degradation due to climate change.

Pact for the future

Dr Mulondo flew to London from New York after participating in the 79th United Nations General Assembly’s Summit of the Future and Science Summit, as well as the New York Climate Week. She further provided insights into the adoption of the Pact for the Future which was adopted during the Summit of the Future. “With only 17% of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets on track to be achieved by 2030, 18% stagnant and 17% regressed to pre-2015 when the goals were first adopted (SDG Report 2024), Mental Health still remains among 10 global health issues to track according to the World Health Organisation (WHO),” says Dr Mulondo.

“The Summit of the Future, which is regarded as a once-in-a-generation high-level event,” she continues, “was aimed at establishing a new global consensus to safeguard the present and future generations. Current challenges such as health pandemics, political unrest, and climatic changes were factored into discussions to keep apace with the changing world in the adoption of the Pact for the Future”.

Recommendations and mitigation efforts should focus on encouraging those experiencing eco-anxiety to focus on joining collective action efforts (i.e. campaigns to clean ocean and beach environments (etc,) so that they feel they are doing something towards saving the planet. “This will help alleviate the feelings of ‘hopelessness’ which some experience from not knowing what to do about the environmental degradation. Furthermore, intergenerational collaboration is necessary for young people to voice their concerns and innovative ideas on the issue, while the older generation listens and further shares their lived wisdom. Ultimately, collective support (Ubuntu) is what is needed as part of the mitigation efforts,” concludes Dr Mulondo.

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