Ego and pig-headedness
South Africa’s anti-retroviral (ARV) medication versus nutrition debate is not unique in the world. But what is unique to this country is its scale and that the government is placed within the ”alternative” camp, with civil society, including the Treatment Action Campaign, the protagonist of mainstream science and medicine. This has led to a highly polarised situation, with common sense nowhere in sight and those infected being the victims.
Initially, the ARV lobby groups’ opposition to promoting nutritional measures was to ensure that ARV access was placed at the forefront of government responsibilities to those infected. This was understandable and laudable. Indeed, their efforts were essential in making ARVs more widely available to those infected, and yes, more work is required to make drugs more widely available.
In response, some of the ”nutrition-only” protagonists escalated their efforts and claims, telling people that ARVs are deadly and that Aids can be cured with plants, vitamins and minerals.
Why, in a civilised society, are people being asked to choose between appropriate medication and food to keep their body healthy? Do we ask the same of those with diabetes or heart disease? Since when has maintaining body strength through exercise and nutrition been in conflict with proper medical treatment?
One of us, David Patient, has had HIV since 1983, and was involved in HIV/Aids activism long before ARVs arrived. He took part in the first human clinical trials, in 1986 at Duke University, on AZT. When second-generation ARVs became available in the early 1990s both authors helped get these medications to South African Aids patients.
We have also been part of the nutrition and HIV debate since its early days and, in some instances, instigated it.
We have investigated many products, herbal and otherwise, sometimes through personal trials. Our conclusions are:
l There is no HIV cure from the medical, traditional healing or ”alternative” fraternities. But there are proven methods of keeping HIV under control, for example through ARVs, and for strengthening the immune system, through sound nutrition and other practical measures.
l ARVs extend the productive health of those living with Aids by four or more years. Yes, some respond badly, and long-term use often leads to side effects such as liver problems. Early ARVs did indeed have severe side effects due to high dose levels. But the disadvantages of medication are outweighed by the clearly demonstrated benefits.
l Nutrition likewise extends life by focusing on providing the body with what it needs to create new immune cells. These two methods are complementary, not conflicting.
l ARVs are appropriate when a person living with HIV reaches a CD4 count of 200, or when an Aids illness emerges. But nutrition and other practical measures such as exercise provide effective measures for people living with HIV to get involved in their health long before Aids emerges.
During the longest period of living with HIV, from diagnosis to CD4 of 200, you need to take care of your body and give it what it needs to keep HIV under control. There are proven, natural methods that enhance your body’s ability to do this. However, when your immune system becomes compromised and your CD4 count drops below 200 and your viral load increases, ARVs are critical.
Patient used nutrition for most of his HIV infection. Now he needs ARVs because his immune system is starting to show wear and tear. He takes his drugs religiously each day, but still eats well, takes his supplements, does exercise, and generally takes care of his body. His CD4 is at 900, his viral load undetectable, and his liver enzyme tests normal.
So what, we ask, is the debate really about? How much of it is about ego and sheer pig-headedness? — David Patient and Neil Orr
It would appear that for the Department of Health and the Medicines Control Council, anyone can make any claims about their so-called ”treatments” having healing qualities without having to lift a finger to prove them.
This would be cause for wry smiles and sniggers if it was not for the fact that, as a result of these unethical and unmonitored so-called ”trials” and unproven claims, desperate people living with HIV/Aids are being subjected to unnecessary suffering and premature death by misguided persons like Tine van der Maas. — John Gosling, medical practitioner, Cape Town
![]()
The ”mystery of discordance” (M&G Online, May 26) is not really a mystery at all. HIV is a relatively poorly transmitted virus and the likelihood of infection on a sexual exposure is extremely low — often less than 1:100 and even as low as 1:1 000.
The likelihood of infection is even lower given good genital health and if the HIV-positive partner is not in the first few months of infection, when viral levels are particularly high.
This should not encourage people to chance their luck — the bells can ring for you the first time you play the gambling machine. — Dr Clive Evian
![]()
Your editorial (”Dangerous quackery”, May 26) omitted the key issue. While some treatments may well be more effective than others, the eventual solution to HIV/Aids requires a national change of heart. Our collective effort must be directed towards avoiding, instead of managing, the disease. — Michael Noyce, Hillcrest
![]()
Gender activists miss the point
The next president should not be a polygamist who has sex with an HIV-positive woman. Umsholozi has discredited himself and let us down.
But I am concerned that the gender activism around the Jacob Zuma trial was an opportunity for some to further their careers, rather than an expression of genuine concern for the needs and struggles of South African women.
The generalisations activists drew from the Zuma case made them seem vengeful, and their claim that women would now be afraid to report rape cases lame. The failure to report rape is a long-standing problem, and it is unfair to pin it on one person.
Women’s rights will be promoted if all citizens have respect for the law. I fail to understand what undermining fair court proceedings can do for the cause.
When President Thabo Mbeki humiliated Winnie Madikizela-Mandela by pushing her at a public gathering while the nation watched, I felt violated. He was not forced to apologise to all South African women. Nor did the African National Congress Women’s League or gender activists voice concern.
Mbeki never acknowledges his wife in front of the South African public, and gets away with it.
And look at the women he promotes: Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka and Manto Tshabalala-Msimang do not represent women’s interests.
Why don’t activists look at how women are treated in the ANC and the way the women’s league has no influence on the party?
It is not enough for the women’s struggle to have a female president. Whoever is chosen must have leadership skills and be capable of running the country; I do not think Mlambo-Ngcuka has these qualities.
For too long, university gender studies courses have demonised and neglected African culture. Activists and scholars have to represent the majority of women in our country; they need to have more understanding of the cultures of the women they are meant to serve.
Gender activists are not exempt from protecting the law and our Constitution and respecting democracy. — Yolanda Radebe, Wits University
![]()
Checkpoints the real crime
Khadija Magardie makes a shaky argument against female conscription in Israel (Body Language, May 26).
To bolster her argument she uses stereotypical images of 18-year-old women (”keeping fashion off the army’s doorstep seems almost impossible”, ”chewing gum, a nipper and strutting around like a popinjay in hipsters”). But similar stereotypes could be used to argue against male conscription at the age of 18!
Particularly weak is the argument that female soldiers are doing damage to ”the psyche of the Palestinian man” and the implication that the Israeli authorities actively recruit women to rub them in Palestinian faces.
Israel does not appear to consider it very important to take Palestinian views and values into account, as shown by its reaction to the democratically elected Hamas government and countless other actions.
But Magardie is, in effect, saying that women should never be put in positions of power because this offends against traditionally assigned gender roles.
A checkpoint with a male soldier is as bad as a checkpoint with a woman. It is the checkpoints that are the issue, not the gender of the soldiers. — Charles Copley, Grahamstown
![]()
Does Magardie truly believe 18-year-old Israeli girls want to become soldiers? Does she believe Israeli mothers wave their daughters and sons off to the army with glee?
To quote Golda Meir: ”I can forgive the Arabs anything but not for making Jewish boys into soldiers.” We now, sadly, have to add ”and girls”. — Monessa Shapiro, Israel Media Team
![]()
Magardie asks why Israeli women should be allowed in the army. We all know that women should be subservient and keep to their rightful places behind the oven or underneath their men. That’s the way it was done during the time of the Norsemen and Homer, wasn’t it?
She describes Ariel Sharon as a ”vegetable”. They should most definitely pull the plug. What kind of nation has a leader that suffers from health conditions? The weaklings.
She says that no one considers the poor Palestinian men who suffer terribly if a woman shows off more than her eyes or, heaven forbid, speaks to them.
Women should be banned from giving poor men orders. Do they not understand the psychological trauma this causes?
And ”The lands of Islam”. Damn straight. Who the hell do the United Nations and the entire world think they are to recognise Israel? — Derwent Maggs
![]()
NUM boss out of touch
The statement by National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) president Senzeni Zokwana that ”we are not Christians … We don’t listen to the Ten Commandments and don’t have to listen when Christians tell us adultery is wrong” must rate as one of the most unfortunate, out-of-touch and irresponsible statements by an elected representative of the workers in our 10 years of freedom. In what direction is such a ”leader” taking our nation?
A simple show of hands among NUM conference delegates would prove his statements untrue. Most South Africans, including NUM members, are not ashamed of being Christians.
A show of hands among the same delegates would prove that most NUM members do listen to the Ten Commandments.
A show of hands would also prove that the majority of NUM members consider adultery to be wrong, immoral and unacceptable.
Becoming a NUM member does not make a person less self-respecting. Our fathers, brothers and cousins joined the union that was led by Cyril Ramaphosa, Elijah Barayi and others because they wanted to participate in creating a society of ”people who love their people and their country” as reflected in the Freedom Charter. — Dumisani Sondlo, Cape Town
![]()
Strike back!
Cedrina Cloberie (Letters, May 26) is wrong to believe that white male motorists’ aggression is directed only at black women.
I am a white woman in my fifties, and have twice been abused by white men younger, stronger and richer than myself.
Recently I politely pointed out to a driver that he was illegally driving through a zone banned to traffic on weekdays. His hysterical and threatening response left me shaken.
I have laid charges. We women have to strike back, no matter how unpleasant and inconvenient it might be. — Dr Beverley Roos Muller, Cape Town