Tag: South Africa

#InsideTheBox with Dr Andy Gray | Public Participation in Medicines Selection and Regulation – Lacking?

#InsideTheBox is a column by Dr Andy Gray, a pharmaceutical sciences expert at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and Co-Director of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Pharmaceutical Policy and Evidence Based Practice. (Photo: Supplied)

By Andy Gray

In several countries, the public is given an opportunity to share their views with regulators before new medicines are registered or to engage with those choosing essential medicines. In South Africa, however, opportunities for such public participation remains limited. In his latest #InsideTheBox column, Dr Andy Gray takes a look at how public participation is handled elsewhere and how it could be improved here.

One of the rallying cries of patient and community-based organisations has long been “nothing about us, without us”. The “patient voice” is, however, not always heard in medicines selection or medicines regulation.

How it works in the US and Europe

Recent highly contested medicines regulatory decisions in the United States, such as the warnings about paracetamol use in pregnancy, have highlighted the role of advisory committees to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA relies on a number of such committees to provide advice on regulatory questions, such as whether to approve a new medicine or how to manage emergent safety signals. The FDA usually follows the advice provided by these independent structures, but is not bound to do so.

The fact that advisory committees meet in open session, and that their recommendations are transparent to the public, means that the final decision by the FDA can be contrasted with the scientific advice. The curricula vitae of advisory committee members are posted on the FDA website and updated annually. Critically, when an advisory committee meeting is scheduled, the date and time is announced at least 15 days in advance of the meeting, and this serves as an invitation to interested parties to register to make oral submissions during the Open Public Hearing portion of the meeting.

In addition to providing opportunities for public engagement in this manner, the FDA has also operated a Patient Representative Program since 2024. FDA Patient Representatives are appointed, provided with training, and may then engage with the scientific and other expert members of the advisory committees. Among the criteria applied in their selection are personal experience with a particular disease as a patient or primary caregiver, knowledge about the treatment options and research in that area, and the willingness and ability to communicate in public, as well as being objective while representing the concerns of others affected by the disease.

Similar mechanisms have been put in place in Europe. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has enabled the appointment of patients as members of its management board and scientific committees. In addition, the EMA Patients’ and Consumers’ Working Party provides a venue for ongoing engagement. The EMA engagement framework explicitly aims to ensure “access to patients’ real-life experiences of living with a condition, its management and the current use of medicines, complementing the scientific evidence provided during the evaluation process” and “the generation, collection and use of evidence-based patient experience data for benefit-risk decision-making”.

How it works in South Africa

Section 3(9) of the Medicines and Related Substances Act, 1965, instructs the chief executive officer of the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) to appoint advisory committees. The wording is peremptory, but also broadly enabling: “The Chief Executive Officer shall, in consultation with the Board, appoint committees, as he or she may deem necessary, to investigate and report to the Authority on any matter within its purview in terms of this Act.” Provided there is consultation with the Board of the Authority, the number of committees and their membership is left to the CEO to decide.

To date, however, there has been no deliberate effort to include patient or consumer representatives on any of the advisory committees.

More importantly, meetings of the committees are not open to the public, nor are their recommendations to the regulatory authority placed in the public domain. The “patient voice” is therefore potentially missed, and stakeholders are unable to determine when or how final decisions taken by the Authority may differ from the recommendations made by the technical advisory committees. In that sense, SAHPRA is no more transparent than its predecessor the Medicines Control Council, which also laboured under the same antiquated secrecy provision in the Act. Section 34 of the Act is actually labelled “Preservation of secrecy”.

Similar concerns with medicines selection

Medicines regulators determine whether medicines should be allowed onto the market and how those should be controlled. Similar dynamics are at play in determining which medicines are “essential” and should be procured or reimbursed by health systems.

At a global level, the World Health Organization (WHO) updates its Model List of Essential Medicines every two years. The Model List is a starting point for many countries’ efforts to develop national essential medicines lists, guiding procurement in their public sectors. Although the expert committee responsible for this work does not explicitly include patient representatives, all proposals submitted are placed in the public domain, as are the reviews conducted, and an account of the final decisions. On the first day of the meeting, an open session is held at which stakeholders are invited to apply to present.

One of the most trusted medicine selection bodies is the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), which also has a deliberate process for stakeholder engagement at multiple steps in its guideline development. For example, right at the outset, this invitation is issued: “NICE invites all stakeholder organisations to attend a scoping workshop. You will be sent a first draft of the scope, which will be discussed at the meeting. We encourage you to send someone who knows about and can represent patients and carers’ interests.”

Medicines selection in the South African public sector is evolving, embracing the challenge of health technology assessment. While there are as yet no patient representatives on either the Expert Review Committee or the National Essential Medicines List Committee, there are opportunities for stakeholder engagement with draft guidelines and increasing transparency, with medicines evaluation reports posted on the Department of Health website.

Full medicine reviews follow an evidence-to-decision framework that was first piloted during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the questions posed reads: “Is there important uncertainty or variability about how much people value the options?” This question is aligned with what the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development refers to as “values and preferences”. For example, the WHO guidance calls for evidence of the “values and preferences of the people receiving the intervention or experiencing the outcomes the intervention can affect”. While that evidence may sometimes be reported in the scientific literature, all too often it is lacking.

Ultimately, “nothing about us, without us” should not only be a demand made by patients, but also by those who care about the quality, reliability and acceptability of medicines selection and regulatory decisions. Improving the transparency of decision-making processes is critical, but so is creating, promoting and protecting the spaces for an effective “patient voice”. Doing so is a critical investment in building trust, which is so easily eroded.

*Dr Gray is a Senior Lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and Co-Director of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Pharmaceutical Policy and Evidence Based Practice. This is part of a series of #InsideTheBox columns he is writing for Spotlight.

Disclosure: Gray is a member of South Africa’s National Essential Medicines List Committee and co-chairs its Expert Review Committee.

Note: Spotlight aims to deepen public understanding of important health issues by publishing a variety of views on its opinion pages. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily shared by the Spotlight editors.

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons licence.

Read the original article.

Aplastic Anaemia: A Stem Cell Donor Is the Difference Between a Future and a Fight for Life 

Both Leathan (L) and Godfrey (R) have aplastic anaemia, which can treated with a stem cell donation. Leathan received stem cells from his twin sister, who is a perfect match. But Godfrey must travels from KwaMhlanga to Pretoria for life-sustaining blood transfusions.

When aplastic anaemia struck two young South Africans, their fates diverged dramatically. While one received a life-saving stem cell transplant, the other continues to fight every day. The rare blood disease affects fewer than six people per million, but for Leathan and Godfrey, the statistics became deeply personal. 

Understanding Aplastic Anaemia: When Hope Meets Science 

Aplastic anaemia is a devastating condition where the bone marrow fails to produce sufficient blood cells, leaving patients vulnerable to infections, bleeding, and severe anaemia. Given this rare disease’s high mortality rates, prompt recognition and immediate action are critical for survival. “The challenge with aplastic anaemia is that early symptoms can be subtle,” explains Dr Gugulethu Jali, a Clinical Haematologist and Haematopathologist at the Department of Health Kwa-Zulu Natal. “However, advances in treatment, particularly hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), have transformed the prognosis, with survival rates now exceeding 80% when matched donors are found.” 

Leathan’s Journey: From Crisis to Recovery 

Seventeen-year-old Leathan had his whole life mapped out. The passionate soccer player dreamed of becoming a criminal lawyer, balancing his love for the game with serious academic ambitions. But subtle symptoms began to appear, including weight loss and nosebleeds that seemed minor at first. 

When he suddenly collapsed at home, his family rushed him to hospital where doctors discovered his blood levels were critically low. Tests revealed that his bone marrow had completely stopped producing blood cells. Without immediate intervention, he would need blood transfusions and platelets for the rest of his life. 

But Leathan had something that changes everything in aplastic anaemia cases: a perfect genetic match. His twin sister, without hesitation, donated her stem cells , giving her brother the ultimate gift of life. 

Today, Leathan represents the success story that medical advances have made possible. Since the transplant, he has not needed further transfusions, and his blood counts are steadily stabilising. However, he may still need additional stem cell support to fully restore his health.  

Currently, he’s on the path back to his soccer dreams and law school aspirations, a living example of what’s achievable when the right match is found. 

Godfrey’s Battle: The Same Disease, Different Circumstances 

While Leathan’s recovery shows what’s possible, eleven-year-old Godfrey from KwaMhlanga, Mpumalanga, is still living with the daily reality of aplastic anaemia. Like Leathan, Godfrey was once full of energy and loved soccer. 

Then the familiar pattern began to emerge: Godfrey started moving more slowly, struggling with everyday tasks that once came easily. When uncontrollable bleeding began, his family knew something was seriously wrong. After a long diagnostic journey that began in 2019, Godfrey received the same diagnosis Leathan had faced: aplastic anaemia. 

Unlike Leathan, Godfrey doesn’t have a twin sister who’s a perfect match. Instead, every month, he travels from KwaMhlanga to Pretoria for life-sustaining blood transfusions. The physical and emotional toll has been devastating. He was unable to pass Grade 5 last year, not because he lacks ability, but because fighting for your life leaves little energy for schoolwork. 

Your Role in Changing Godfrey’s Story 

For Godfrey to follow the same path as Leathan, he needs his genetic match. That person could be you. 

Compatible donors are often found within similar ethnic backgrounds, making diversity in donor registries crucial for patients like Godfrey. If you’re between 17 and 55 and in good health, registering as a stem cell donor takes minutes and costs nothing. Register today at https://www.dkms-africa.org/save-lives.  

Webber Wentzel Secures Landmark Constitutional Court Ruling Reforming South Africa’s Parental Leave Laws

Photograph by Drew Hays on Unsplash

Webber Wentzel’s Pro Bono team represented Mr and Mrs van Wyk in a landmark case that has resulted in the Constitutional Court confirming that South Africa’s statutory four months of parental leave may be shared between both parents. The ruling marks a significant step toward gender equality in the workplace and family law.

The case challenged the unequal parental leave provisions under section 25 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), which granted birthing mothers up to four months of maternity leave while limiting fathers to only 10 days.

Webber Wentzel argued that section 25 of the BCEA unfairly discriminated against fathers and placed an undue burden on birthing mothers by not allowing families to decide who should be the primary caregiver. The court agreed and criticised the 10-day leave for fathers by rejecting the cultural norms that reinforce gendered parenting roles as inconsistent with constitutional values.

The application was supported by the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) and Sonke Gender Justice (Sonke). CGE advocated for equal parental leave for adoptive and surrogacy-commissioning parents, which the court partially granted. Sonke’s request for an equal 16-week leave for both parents was not granted.

The Constitutional Court, in a unanimous judgment delivered by the Honourable Justice Tshiqi, confirmed that sections 25, 25A, 25B and 25C of the BCEA, along with corresponding provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Fund Act (UIF Act), are unconstitutional. The Court held that these provisions violate the rights to equality and human dignity under sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution.

The Minister of Employment and Labour accepted that differentiation exists between birthing mothers and other categories of parents is automatically unfair as it is based on grounds specified in section 9(3) of the Constitution. Further, the Minister acknowledges that there is a need for reform in the current legislation pertaining to the parental leave regime contained in the BCEA.

As a result of the ruling in the Constitutional Court, the 4 months of maternal and the 10 days of parental leave will be combined into a total of 4 months and 10 days, which parents may now share as they choose. If no agreement is reached, the leave will be split equally. Where only one parent is employed, that parent will be entitled to the 4 consecutive months of parental leave.

The Constitutional Court also confirmed that the same parental leave provisions apply to adoptive parents and commissioning parents in a surrogacy arrangement.

The Constitutional Court has suspended the declaration of invalidity of the relevant BCEA and UIF Act provisions for a period of 36 months, to allow the legislature to remedy the necessary constitutional defects.  In the interim, the following principles will apply:

  • A single parent or a parent who is the only employed parent is entitled to four months’ consecutive parental leave.
  • Parents who are both employed may share the allocated parental leave of four months and 10 days between them, concurrently or consecutively.
  • An adoptive parent of a child younger than two years is entitled to four months’ consecutive parental leave.
  • If an adoption order is granted in respect of two parents, they may share the allocated parental leave of four months and 10 days between them, concurrently or consecutively.
  • A commissioning parent is entitled to four months’ consecutive parental leave.
  • Where there are two commissioning parents, they may share the allocated parental leave of four months and 10 days between them, concurrently or consecutively.

Employers are encouraged to review and, where necessary, update their leave policies and employment contracts to reflect the new parental leave framework.

“This judgment is a powerful affirmation of the constitutional rights to equality and dignity,” said Nkosinathi Thema, senior associate, Webber Wentzel. “It recognises that caregiving is not the exclusive responsibility of mothers and that both parents should have the freedom to decide how best to care for their child.”

The Webber Wentzel team comprised Ayanda Khumalo, Nkosinathi Thema and Lize-Mari Doubell. Counsel Nasreen Rajab-Budlender SC, Liam Minné and Sanan Mirzoyev appeared on a pro bono basis.

The judgment can be read here.

Ends…

Founded in 1868, Webber Wentzel is a leading full-service law firm providing clients with innovative solutions to their most complex legal and tax issues across Sub-Saharan Africa. With over 450 lawyers, their multi-disciplinary expertise is consistently ranked top tier in leading directories and awards, both in South Africa and on the African continent. Their collaborative alliance with Linklaters and their deep relationships with outstanding law firms across Africa provide clients with market-leading support wherever they do business.

SA has Very Low Organ Donation Rates – How Can We Fix it?

The country that performed the first successful heart transplant has very low organ donation rates. Now a student-run medical non-profit is hoping to make a difference. (Photo: Nasief Manie/Spotlight)

By Elri Voigt

Thousands of people in South Africa are waiting for a life-saving organ transplant, but our very low organ donation rates mean that many won’t get a transplant in time. Spotlight asks the experts why our donation rates are so low and what can be done about it.


Back in 2002, Rentia le Roux received a horrifying diagnosis that her kidneys were failing. “My kids still need me, they are still small, what are we going to do?” Le Roux recalls telling her doctor. After a long journey trying to manage her kidney failure, she would eventually get a kidney from her sister in 2011.

Le Roux, now the chairperson of the Western Cape Transplant Sports Association, is one of the lucky ones. She spoke to Spotlight ahead of a trip to Germany to take part in the 2025 World Transplant Games.

“There are so many people that are on the list waiting for an organ and the waiting period, it can take many years,” she says.

Incomplete data

While there isn’t a coordinated, centralised database of everyone in South Africa who needs a lifesaving organ transplant, various groups do collect data. This is according to Professor David Thomson, an abdominal transplant surgeon and a critical care sub-specialist. Thomson is also the head of the Transplant Centre of Excellence Project at Groote Schuur Hospital in Cape Town.

“Various entities do collect levels of data, but it’s not very centralised and coordinated, and it could be better…we do have the renal registry that’s trying to track the number of people on dialysis, that’s a good source of information,” Thomson says. The Renal registry is a not-for-profit database that collects and publishes data on dialysis and transplant patients in the country. The database itself is an initiative of the South African Nephrology Society, an NPO that aims to further the field of nephrology and improve patient care.

The society estimates that in 2022, just over 9000 people across the public and private healthcare system were receiving “kidney replacement therapy” – which were either medications to help kidney function, dialysis or a kidney transplant.

A report by the South African Transplant society, an NPO that seeks to advance tissue and organ donation and transplantation, estimated that in 2021, across South Africa’s private and public hospitals, 2 586 people were on a waitlist for a lifesaving organ. Of those, 2382 people were waiting for a kidney, 52 needed a liver, 108 needed a heart transplant, and 44 were waiting for a lung.

But in the same year, the report recorded only 229 transplants done across the country.

South Africa does not have a good organ donation culture, says Professor Mignon McCulloch, the head of paediatric nephrology and solid organ transplant at the Red Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital. In fact, according to McCulloch, and other experts we spoke to, South Africa has some of the lowest transplantation rates in the world.

While we couldn’t find any straightforward ranking system of organ donation rates, reports by the Global Observatory on Donation and Transplantation (GODT) do provide some insight into how some countries compare to one other. In 2017, according to data from the GODT cited in this 2020 study published in the South African Medical Journal, South Africa had 91 deceased donors, which is a rate of 1.6 per million. By contrast, Spain, which is regarded as having one of the highest rates of organ donation in the world, had 2183 deceased donors, a rate of 47.05 per million.

How it works

Organ donation is broadly classified into living donation and deceased donation.

There are two scenarios where someone can become an organ donor. The first, Thomson explains, is when a healthy person donates an organ without which they can live a normal life, like one of their kidneys. The second is when someone has been declared brain dead and is on a mechanical ventilator or when someone has experienced circulatory death -meaning their heart has stopped beating and “futile non-beneficial treatments have been stopped”. The latter is less common in South Africa.

For deceased donation from a brain-dead patient to take place, the potential donor needs to be in an ICU facility on a mechanical ventilator and referred by their clinical team to a transplant coordinator, says Thomson. If that person is eligible, then the transplant team has to get permission from the next of kin who ultimately have the final say even if the potential donor is registered as an organ donor.

“Organ donation can only happen if someone is on a mechanical ventilator in the end-of-life care pathway, so that is always a complicated and emotional discussion,” he says. “Tissue donations such as corneas, bones, skin, that can happen at the mortuary afterwards and there’s a slightly longer period for when these can be successfully recovered but all donation still requires you to have conversations with and get permission from grieving families.”

Juggling resources

McCulloch describes organ donation as being a bit like “a silent Cinderella”, until someone needs a lifesaving transplant, “and then people suddenly start asking questions about why, why don’t we have more transplantation?”

One reason for this is the allocation of resources and competing priorities within the healthcare system.

Thomson says that organ transplants are a “health intensive resource”, and it’s important to acknowledge that it exists in the context of an already overburdened healthcare system. There is a Deputy Director of dialysis and transplantation within the National Department of Health, Thomson explains, but there isn’t an “overarching central coordinating authority supporting deceased donation”. Instead, he says it is driven by hospital groups and within the provincial healthcare departments by healthcare workers

Adding to this, McCulloch says that doctors are always having to “juggle resources” and if there is only one bed available in an ICU, weighing up whether to give it to someone who will potentially become an organ donor or someone with pneumonia and will likely have a good outcome, is difficult.

Another challenge is the limited number of surgeons, physicians, and hospitals with the skill and equipment to perform an organ transplant. This strategy roadmap document by the South African Transplant Society list 21 transplants centres across the whole country – 14 of them offer kidney transplants, six offer heart transplants, four offer lung transplants, four offer liver transplants, and only one offers pancreas transplants.

Graphic of transplant centres in South Africa. (Source: Organ and Tissue Donation in South Africa – Creating a National Strategy Roadmap)

One can save seven

Earlier this year, an unused room in Tygerberg Hospital got a face-lift and a new purpose from a student-run medical non-profit. The initiative called Save7 was kickstarted by a conversation on kidney donation on Stellenbosch University’s Medical Campus. Its initial goal was to raise awareness, particularly among students, that one donor can save up to seven lives. And if tissue like corneas, heart valves, bone and skin are donated, one person can improve the lives of around 50 people.

Jonty Wright, who cofounded Save7, tells Spotlight that the organisation’s founding group of four has now grown to over 200 across multiple universities countrywide. Among others, the group created a Lifepod to solve a transplant-related problem at Tygerberg Hospital. Doctors and staff involved in transplantation at the hospital were citing competing resources as the reason behind low referral rates of potential organ donors by healthcare providers.

The solution posed by Save7, professors on the campus and some of the doctors involved with transplantation was to create a designated bed space for patients who are brain dead and are potential organ donors. The hope was that referrals for potential organ donations would be increased.

The room, Wright says, was an old minor operating theatre and storeroom that belonged to the orthopaedic surgery department and was situated in an ideal spot – in a corridor between the emergency medicine and trauma admissions.

Three of the Save7 co-founders, from left to right Jonty Wright, Suhayl Khalfey and Sachen Naidu. (Photo: Nasief Manie/Spotlight)

About three months ago, after fundraising efforts and backing by the Health Foundation and other partners, the Lifepod opened. The room currently holds a hospital bed, a ventilator on lease from the surgical department, vitals monitor, cardiac monitor, infusion pumps, emergency trolley, fridge, and crash cart. All the things needed to keep someone who is brain dead’s body comfortable and allow the doctors to counsel their loved ones about potentially donating their organs.

So far, according to Wright, referrals of potential candidates for organ donation at Tygerberg have gone up by 500%, but at the time of the interview none of the next of kin have consented to donating their loved one’s organs. (Data on this has not yet been published).

This ties onto another layer of complexity around organ donation, the reasons why next of kin don’t always give permission.

Need for better education

Samantha Nichols, the executive director of operations for the Organ Donor Foundation, an NGO advocating for organ donations, tells Spotlight that the problem isn’t so much a lack of awareness of organ donation, as a lack of good education around it. She says this affects everyone, including healthcare workers.

Nichols says that “it’s almost like the stars have to align” for a deceased donor to donate their organs, because of how many steps and doctors are involved in the process.

“[W]hen a person is sent to an ICU or trauma unit, the team of doctors that work on that person to save their life is a totally different team to the transplant team,” she says. A transplant team is only ever called in if a potential donor has been declared brain dead by two different doctors who aren’t part of or affiliated with a transplant team.

“[O]nly then can they start the process of talking to the family, and then they still need to get consent from the family before the organs are removed,” she says.

The Opt-in versus Opt-out debate

When it comes to consent for organ donation, South Africa has what is referred to as an opt-in system. An opt-in system means that someone must provide explicit consent of their desire to donate an organ. While an opt-out system means all adults are automatically considered organ donors after death, unless they explicitly withdraw consent beforehand.

There has been some debate about whether switching to opt-out systems would improve organ donation rates. One recent study, in which researchers analysed deceased donor rates in five countries that had switched from an opt-in to an opt-out system, did not find an increase in organ donation rates.

“Unless flanked by investments in healthcare, public awareness campaigns, and efforts to address the concerns of the deceased’s relatives, a shift to an opt-out default is unlikely to increase organ donations,” the researchers concluded.

2024 editorial in the Lancet medical journal made a similar point, saying “a simplistic switch to the ‘opt-out’ model is alone not sufficient to boost donation”. Instead, it lists the three components that makes Spain’s transplant programme so successful. “A solid legislative framework, strong clinical leadership, and a highly organised logistics network overseen by the National Transplant Organization.” An opt-out system is also unlikely to work well in South Africa from a legislative perspective, since it might be seen by some to impinge upon an “individual’s rights to personal autonomy and bodily and psychological integrity”, as argued in this article in the Conversation.

The experts Spotlight spoke to instead point to several other changes that could be made to improve donation rates.

‘Everyone can do a bit better’

The responsibility around improving organ transplantation rests on us as society and as a coordinated healthcare system, according to Thomson.

“[E]veryone can do a bit better…and I don’t think you want to make it one person’s responsibility for the performance. It’s actually a collective and how we work together,” Thomson says. “…a lot of things like supporting donation actually links into good palliative care services, and that should be something we’re offering to everyone.”

Thomson advocates for upskilling healthcare workers to be able to better counsel families during end-of-life care, not necessarily just around organ donation but around “engaging humanely with “families and end of life and navigating that complexity with them as the healthcare team”.

He recommends making counselling of grieving families and palliative care discussion a hospital system issue, instead of an individual responsibility by adding it to institutional operating standards. “And then you actually need to audit it, measure it, reflect on it and monitor the outcomes,” he says.

Suhayl Khalfey, a Save7 cofounder, says now that the Lifepod is ready to use, their focus is shifting to educate people about the importance of organ donation. As part of its education efforts, Khalfey says Save7 is putting together a database of different religious leaders to help counsel families uncertain about their faith’s stance on organ donation.

Nichols stresses that transplant teams will honour different religious beliefs and funeral practises and that a donor’s body will not appear disfigured in any way after they’ve donated their organs.

Start by having the conversation

Anyone can register as an organ donor with the Organ Donor Foundation, says Nichols. The process is free and will take less than a minute (see their website here). If a situation arises where you are brain dead and you are a candidate for organ donation your family will still need to give permission.

This is why it is so important to have the conversation with your loved ones about what your wishes are, says Khalfey.

Sachen Naidu, another cofounder of Save7, adds to this saying that often with the students they’ve spoken to, organ donation is viewed as something to think about in the distant future. He encourages young people to reconsider this mindset.

Even children can learn about organ donation.

The non-profit organisation Transplant Education for Living Legacies (TELL) recently launched an educational campaign in South Africa aimed at children in the 5 to 11 age group. The initiative, called the Orgamites Mighty Education Programme, is an international child health education programme originating from Canada. At its heart, the programme is a conversation starter, says Thomson who spoke on a TELL webinar.

“All we want is for people to be having educated conversations about it [organ donations],” he says. “Children need transplants too.”

For McCulloch, organ donation goes beyond impacting just the recipients. She uses the example of families who have lost a child in a tragic accident.

“You had a completely well child five minutes ago and then something terrible happened, and now you’ve got a child who’s died and you’re going to go home with a gap in your heart. Whereas at least when you donate [the] organs to another child, something good can come of out of a really hopeless, tragic situation,” she says.

Thomson adds to this saying: “And that’s a memory that lives with that family for a long time afterwards …not just that time point. That’s what they’re going to remember as part of that event, and it really does offer them a degree of solace for a tragedy.”

And the difference to those receiving organs can obviously be life changing. Receiving a kidney gave Le Roux the chance to see her children grow up. “So, every [milestone] when they wrote matric, when they got their degrees, everything. It’s like a step forward, something I can tick off, I’m still here. I’m able, I’m healthy,” she says.

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons licence.

Read the original article.

The Future of Pharmacies in South Africa Lies in Sustainable Expansion

Photo by National Cancer Institute on Unsplash

By Christina Mooki, Head of Acquisition Operations at Merchant Capital

Pharmacies, especially ones in rural areas, are often the cornerstone of their communities. Beyond filling prescriptions, they provide medication, medical equipment, and counselling, sometimes serving as multi-service clinics in small towns and outlying areas. When people cannot wait weeks for a doctor’s appointment or need trusted advice, the local pharmacy is their first stop.

In many outlying areas, it is not just the most practical option, but often the only one. With the country’s high and rising burden of chronic disease, this role will only grow in importance.

The sector is indeed expanding. In just two years, 2020 and 2021, about 648 new community pharmacies opened across South Africa. By 2021, the total number stood at roughly 3580 outlets, and nearly 70% of these were independent rather than corporate-owned. That is over 2000 small businesses carrying community healthcare.

Christina Mooki, Head of Acquisition Operations at Merchant Capital

But every pharmacy is also a business. Behind the scenes, owners are juggling supplier deliveries, unpredictable supply chain issues, negotiating credit terms, paying staff, and trying to keep overheads under control. Balancing that with the responsibility of keeping communities healthy makes pharmacy ownership uniquely challenging and uniquely important.

Why more pharmacies are needed

A growing number of South Africans are living with chronic illness such as diabetes, hypertension, and HIV. These patients cannot miss their repeat medications and local pharmacy access becomes essential. Independent outlets do more than only dispense medicine, they also cut travel time, keep treatment within reach, and help build local economies.

Around the world, the role of a pharmacy is expanding. They are no longer limited to handing out prescriptions. According to Deloitte, many pharmacies are transforming into community health hubs by adding point-of-care testing, preventative health screening, and digital services to meet the changing expectations of modern consumers. Locally, they are also incorporating retail services to diversify their offerings further.

Running a pharmacy like a retailer

Passion for helping people will take you far as a pharmacist, but on its own, it will not keep the doors open. Independent pharmacies need to be run with the same discipline as any other retailer. Cash flow must be watched so staff are paid and suppliers are not left waiting. Shelves must carry the medicines that matter most without tying up money in products that sit for months. Costs like rent and electricity creep up quickly, and if unchecked, margins vanish.

Strong supplier relationships also make a difference. Paying on time, negotiating fairly, and keeping that trust intact can protect a business when times are tough. And like any other retailer, pharmacy owners have to be careful about how much debt they take on. Too much, too soon, can put even a busy store under pressure.

When these basics are in place, a pharmacy is not just a trusted point of care. It is also a resilient business that can think about growing, instead of simply surviving.

Where funding helps

Growth always asks for money before it offers returns. Anyone who has opened a second branch, hired staff, or added delivery knows this reality. The bills arrive first, and only later does the revenue follow. For a small independent owner working on thin margins, that can feel like a brick wall.

This is also the point where funding can be an enabler rather than a burden. At Merchant Capital, we treat pharmacies like retail businesses because that is what they are. They need capital that moves quickly, without red tape, and repayment models that flex with real turnover rather than with a rigid schedule. That flexibility gives owners breathing space, the confidence to back their instinct, invest in a new outlet, upgrade systems, or respond to their community.

Looking ahead

Independent pharmacies have already shown how vital they are to South Africa’s healthcare system. The next step is ensuring more of them open in the areas where they are most needed. With sound business management and access to the right kind of funding, these enterprises can grow their footprint, create jobs, and continue to provide reliable access to healthcare.

South African Hunters Chewed the Kanna Plant for Endurance: New Study Tests its Effects on Mouse Brain Chemistry

Sceletium tortuosum – Kougoed. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

Catherine H Kaschula, Stellenbosch University

Sceletium tortuosum is a little succulent plant that grows in the semi-arid Karoo and Namaqualand regions of South Africa. It has a long history of traditional use among the hunter-gatherers of the region.

The plant, known as kanna or kougoed by the San and Khoikhoi people, was mainly chewed or smoked to stay alert and suppress appetite during long hunts. The San were traditionally hunter-gatherers, while the Khoikhoi were pastoralists who herded livestock.

The name kanna (meaning “eland” in the click language of the San), has a symbolic reference to this large antelope, as the “trance animal”, which was called upon during religious and spiritual gatherings. Kougoed is Afrikaans for “something to chew”. The plant can be chewed after being dried and fermented, which is believed to intensify its effects.

The first colonial governor of the Cape colony, Simon van der Stel, in 1685 wrote about kanna in his journal:

They chew mostly a certain plant which they call Canna and which they bruise, roots as well as the stem, between the stones and store and preserve in sewn-up sheepskins.

I’m part of a group of scientists from different disciplines with an interest in this plant and we pooled our expertise to understand its effects on neurochemical concentrations in different parts of the brain.

Our studies were done in mice, so there is caution about establishing effectiveness on humans. Still, the results are striking.

As a chemist with an interest in natural products, I wanted to know which alkaloids in the plant were important in bringing about these effects.

Our latest study explored the effects of Sceletium tortuosum extracts on mouse brain chemistry.

We found that Sceletium increased the levels of certain brain chemicals which may balance mood and reduce stress. These findings lend support to the calming and mood-enhancing use of this plant in traditional medicine.

Plant chemistry

Our study examined how extracts from different chemotypes of Sceletium tortuosum can have different effects on brain chemistry. Chemotypes are groups of the same plant species that differ in the alkaloids they produce. This is because plants often produce alkaloids in response to external cues such as the weather or the presence of a plant-eating animal or pathogen.

Alkaloids are carbon-based compounds produced by plants. They are often toxic or taste bitter, making the plants less appealing or even harmful to the predators or invaders that want to eat or inhabit them. Alkaloids generally have physiological effects of use to humans. Some commonly used ones include caffeine, morphine and quinine.

We harvested two chemotypes of kanna from the Touwsrivier and De Rust regions of South Africa. These areas were chosen because of their interesting and unusual alkaloid profiles. The chemotypes were given to healthy mice as a supplement once a day for one month. The mice were monitored every day for behavioural or unexpected adverse reactions but none were noted.

At the end of the month, the levels of chemicals in the mouse brain were measured. Both the chemotypes were found to cause a marked increase in noradrenaline and a decrease in GABA in all brain regions studied. Both molecules are neurotransmitters that transmit nerve signals in the brain affecting memory, mood, attention and sleep.

This effect on noradrenaline supports kanna’s traditional use as an appetite suppressing drug. Increased noradrenergic stimulation is also the basis of many anti-depressants as well as drugs that improve attention and alertness.

We also found an impact on the brain chemicals serotonin and dopamine which may act together to balance mood and reduce stress. Serotonin affects emotional well-being and mood; dopamine motivates feelings of pleasure and satisfaction. These findings lend support to the calming and mood-enhancing use of this plant in traditional medicine.

Importantly, the control kanna extracts that did not have the interesting alkaloid profiles did not cause any of these chemical changes in the mouse brain.

Most studies on kanna have focused on the alkaloid mesembrine. The two specific chemotypes of kanna harvested from the Touwsrivier and De Rust regions of South Africa do have the mesembrine, but they are also packed with some other lesser-known or “minor” alkaloids. These differences in alkaloids may arise from a combination of geographic, environmental and inherent genetic factors found in a particular subset of plants.

Both the Touwsrivier and De Rust plants contained higher levels of alkaloids called mesembrine alcohols, which are different from mesembrine, and were barely present in the control extract. Another minor alkaloid, known as sceletium A4, was also identified as possibly being important. Mesembrine alcohols and sceletium A4 may be the ones responsible for the activity.

This suggests that the source of the plant, and the area in which it is grown, can influence its potential as a natural treatment for mood disorders and sleep.

What the results tell us

Stress, anxiety and depression pose a risk to the ability to lead a meaningful life. The World Health Organization has reported a 25% increase in anxiety and depression worldwide since the emergence of COVID-19.

Our study showed that the plant extracts had a broad noradrenergic effect in mice. But we have to be careful about making connections between results in mice and in humans. We need to explore the behavioural impact of these extracts in both mice and humans, especially in relation to sleep, alertness and mood.

The results also highlighted that without understanding the complex chemical composition of these plants, we risk overgeneralising their benefits, or worse, using them inappropriately.

Our findings have two implications.

First, they point towards a future of precision phytotherapy (use of plants for medicinal purposes), where natural remedies are tailored not just to individuals but to selecting certain plant chemotypes that produce certain combinations of alkaloids. Manipulating the growing conditions and genetic make-up of plants to optimise for alkaloid content is an age-old art.

Second, they remind us of the enormous, still largely untapped potential of African medicinal plants in global health innovation if we invest in research that honours both indigenous knowledge and scientific rigour.

As the world searches for safer, more sustainable ways to treat mental health conditions, South Africa’s kanna plant may hold secrets worth rediscovering.

Catherine H Kaschula, Senior Lecturer, Stellenbosch University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Home-based Hypertension Care is Effective in Rural South Africa

Photo by Mockup Graphics on Unsplash

Home-based hypertension care led to reductions in systolic blood pressure and improvements in hypertension control in South Africa, according to late-breaking research presented in a Hot Line session at ESC Congress 20251 and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.  

“Hypertension is the primary risk factor for stroke and heart disease, which are leading causes of death in South Africa. Despite the wide availability of low-cost, effective therapies, hypertension control remains extremely poor in resource-limited settings. Obstacles include a lack of patient confidence to manage their own hypertension care, overcrowded clinics with long wait times and the cost of transport to clinics,” explained the IMPACT-BP trial’s Co-Principal Investigator Doctor Thomas Gaziano from Mass General Brigham (MGB) and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA. “Our trial aimed to assess the effectiveness and implementation of reliable, home-based, technology-supported interventions to improve blood pressure control in low-resourced rural South Africa.”  

IMPACT-BP was an open-label, randomised controlled trial conducted at the Africa Health Research Institute (AHRI) in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, in which patients were recruited from two public-sector primary healthcare clinics. The implementation study was designed with Co-Principal Investigator, Doctor Mark Siedner of AHRI and MGH, Professor Nombulelo Magula of the University of KwaZulu-Natal, and the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Department of Health. 

Adult patients were eligible if they had evidence of uncontrolled hypertension as defined by South African Department of Health Guidelines: two measurements of systolic blood pressure (SBP) >140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) >90 mmHg, taken a minimum of 6 months apart. 

Patients were randomised to one of three strategies: 1) standard-of-care, clinic-based blood pressure (BP) management; 2) home-based BP self-monitoring supported by the provision of BP machines, community health workers (CHWs) who conducted home visits for data collection and medication delivery, and remote nurse-led care assisted by a mobile application with decision support; or 3) an enhanced CHW group in which BP machines included cellular technology to transmit BP readings automatically to the mobile application. The primary outcome was change in SBP from enrolment to 6 months. 

In total, 774 patients were randomised. The mean age was 62 years, 76% were women, 14% had diabetes and 47% were living with HIV. 

Compared with standard-of-care, mean SBP at 6 months was lower in the CHW group (−7.9mmHg; 95% confidence interval [CI] −10.5 to −5.3; p < 0.001) and the enhanced CHW group (−9.1mmHg; 95% CI −11.7 to −6.4; p < 0.001). In the standard-of-care group, hypertension control at 6 months was 57.6% compared with 76.9% in the CHW group and 82.8% in the enhanced CHW group. Improved BP with home-based care appeared to persist at 12 months. 

Severe adverse events (2.7%) and deaths (1.0%) were uncommon overall and similar across groups. Retention in care remained more than 95% in both intervention groups, with patients reported to have enjoyed managing their own hypertension.  

Summarising, Doctor Siedner said, “This study is an important example of how making models of chronic disease care more convenient – taking it from the clinic to patients’ homes and letting them play a major role in their own care – can substantially improve hypertension outcomes.” 

Of particular value was that the programme was successful in a community that has historically had low access to care. Professor Magula concluded: “Achieving hypertension control in over 80% of people in a predominantly Black African community in rural South Africa is a clear example that equitable health care access can be achieved in disadvantaged communities. Similar models of care that address structural barriers could be considered to improve hypertension control in other remote and resource-limited settings. Expansion of the model to include the care of people with multiple comorbidities may also be valuable.” 

Source: European Society of Cardiology

‘We Can’t Save Them Anymore’: Doctors Raise Alarm About Crippling Cuts at Major KZN Hospital

Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital is KwaZulu-Natal’s only public hospital with a functioning cardiac unit. Photo by Hush Naidoo Jade Photography on Unsplash

By Chris Bateman

Doctors have blown the whistle about a crisis at one of KwaZulu-Natal’s most important public hospitals, saying it is functioning far under capacity due to a series of crippling cuts.

The Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital in Durban’s Cato Manor is operating at around 40% below surgical capacity, according to senior doctors there. As one of a small number of central hospitals in South Africa, it provides specialist services unavailable elsewhere in KwaZulu-Natal and serves as a critical hub for training healthcare workers.

Several doctors who work at Albert Luthuli, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals, told Spotlight that frozen posts, severely understaffed ICUs, shortages of surgical consumables, and delays in diagnostic tests have combined to drive an austerity-fuelled collapse they say is costing lives.

One doctor said theatre slates – daily surgery schedules – have been cut by as much as 60% compared to pre-pandemic levels. Some described the situation as worse than during COVID-19, when all elective surgeries were cancelled.

“Patients have to wait or be sent home when they can’t get on a theatre list. Then they’re either lost to follow-up or they present ‘in extremis’ later,” said one senior doctor. “Paediatric cases are among the worst. They should be referred on day one, but because of ICU nursing shortages they only get admitted on day four or five – if at all. Often, they’re too ill for our care to be effective.”

Spotlight put these allegations to the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Health, but the department had not responded by deadline despite several follow-ups.

Collapsing specialist services

Albert Luthuli is KwaZulu-Natal’s only public hospital with a functioning cardiac unit, according to one of the doctors who spoke to Spotlight. The doctor said the province has just one adult cardiologist in the public sector who sees over 60 patients per day and that cardiac surgeries have dropped from 600 per year to under 300 projected for 2025. By contrast, there are over 30 adult cardiologists working in the private sector in the province.

Anaesthesiology is among the hardest hit areas. According to Spotlight’s sources, eight anaesthetic consultants resigned in the past year, citing burnout and workload. Where nine or ten theatre slates once ran daily, there are now only four or five. Eleven anaesthetists remain to cover 19 theatres.

“I never thought I’d see the day when I wouldn’t want to come in. We are four ICU consultants covering nine beds. ICU needs one nurse per bed, but we’re usually staffed with six or seven nurses in total. Across six ICUs, we’ve got 25 nurses. We pull in ward staff or rely on overtime. You can’t have one nurse running between beds – it spreads infection, mistakes happen. It’s impossible,” one ICU doctor told Spotlight.

Doctors estimate a 45% shortage of qualified ICU nurses. “It’s like airplanes circling, running out of fuel, and crashing before they can land,” one senior doctor said. “Patients deteriorate while waiting for beds or for a theatre list to open.”

Specialist theatre nursing posts have also been cut, compounding the strain.

Registrars squeezed, training undermined

The hospital is meant to offer advanced procedures, experimental treatments, innovative research, and specialist training. Instead, registrars – these are doctors in specialist training – say they are losing out on irreplaceable experience.

Junior registrars are allegedly blocked from logging procedures they need to qualify, because seniors are prioritised to assist with the shrinking pool of operations.

Spotlight has seen a grievance letter from the Anaesthetics Department’s Registrar Representative, addressed to the hospital CEO, medical manager, the SA Society of Anaesthesiologists, and training stakeholders. It warns that the consultant exodus has left registrars running high-risk cases with inadequate supervision, “directly compromising both patient safety and registrar training.”

One senior doctor said theatre usage had more than halved in recent months compared to historical averages. With no new registrar intake and no appointments of departed registrars to consultant posts, it is projected only 10 or 12 permanent consultants will remain for the hospital’s 846 beds – there should be at least 21 consultants. (A registrar becomes a consultant, or qualified specialist, once their training is complete.)

“This is no longer a looming concern, but an active crisis,” the letter warned, threatening patient safety, staff wellbeing, and the integrity of training in KwaZulu-Natal.

“What they broke in six months will take years to fix,” said one registrar.

But some are more positive. Professor Dean Gopalan, Head of Anaesthesiology, Pain Medicine & Critical Care at UKZN’s School of Medicine, said austerity cuts had dented efforts to achieve excellence, but “we remain above required training norms”. He said he was awaiting feedback from the Health Professions Council (HPCSA), which inspected the hospital in July and raised concerns about specialist and nurse shortages. Spotlight followed up with the HPCSA, but had not received a response by the time of publication.

Not all departments are as fortunate. One doctor said it would be “almost impossible” to meet training accreditation standards for cardiology given the patient workload.

Human cost

Doctors say the crisis is most visible in paediatric congenital heart disease cases.

“These children could live normal lives if operated on early. Instead, they wait until they are drastically sick before making the theatre slate – often six months later,” said one doctor. “People forget surgery is also a primary healthcare intervention. Breadwinners sit at home unable to work, while their families suffer.”

In orthopaedics, doctors say the waiting list exceeds 1 300 patients, with the first elective surgery dates only available in March 2028. Before COVID-19, they say the waiting period was seven months.

“Many patients are unable to work due to their conditions and would be able to get back to work if they had their operations,” said one source. “We try prioritising them, but then you put them ahead of others also in severe pain. Complications are already coming in from other hospitals due to unavailable implants and delayed treatments.”

Procurement freeze

Several doctors trace the crisis to a “G77 notice” issued by the KZN Department of Health on 14 November 2024, freezing new purchase orders until April 2025 to “manage accruals” and reduce overspending. Exceptions required approval from head office.

While a less prescriptive circular has since replaced it, procurement remains “extremely difficult”, sources said.

Doctors said the freeze caused months-long delays in acquiring consumables, drugs, and equipment. “We’re almost at the point where we’re only doing emergencies,” said one doctor. “We prioritise cancer patients for chemo or radiation instead of urgently needed surgery. But in cardiac surgery, there’s definite mortality. You can’t avoid it when you can’t do bypasses or valve replacements. Waiting lists are years long.”

One anaesthetist recalled a patient being “closed” mid-operation because a critical consumable was unavailable.

A national problem?

The situation at Albert Luthuli hospital partly reflects a wider national crisis in specialist care. A 2019 government strategy paper noted only 16.5 specialists per 100 000 people overall, with just seven per 100 000 in the public sector, compared to 69 per 100 000 in private.

Professor Eric Buch, CEO of the Colleges of Medicine of SA, said austerity has worsened matters by reducing registrar posts and constricting the pipeline. “Specialist posts are being frozen, impeding access to specialist care and reducing the number of specialists available to train registrars. Even before austerity we had far too few specialists. Some registrars waited up to two years for a post.”

The Albert Luthuli hospital crisis is “not unique”, said Dr Reno Morar, COO of Nelson Mandela University’s Faculty of Health Sciences.

“Equity of access to specialised services simply does not exist,” he said. “Despite the mess, there are pockets of excellence, but there’s no strategic national vision for highly specialised services.”

Health Ombud Professor Taole Mokoena told Spotlight his office had not specifically investigated Albert Luthuli, but said that, “sadly, there are reports not dissimilar from many hospitals in the country,” citing Helen Joseph Hospital in Johannesburg and Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe Hospital in Kimberley.

Doctors at Albert Luthuli hospital have indicated to Spotlight they will lodge a formal complaint with the health Ombud.

Posts advertised

While the KZN Department of Health did not respond to Spotlight’s questions, there are signs of movement. Two days after we requested comment, a circular went out advertising dozens of specialist posts across provincial referral hospitals, including 12 anaesthetics posts, five of them at Albert Luthuli, plus 100 staff nurse and 50 registered nurse posts.

We also understand that an internal briefing of department heads was called for 27 August, 36 hours after Spotlight’s first request for comment.

Doctors, however, remain sceptical.

“Nothing will change for six months as we go through the interview, verification, and induction processes. Why did they take so long to listen? The damage is done. Relief is 18 to 24 months too late,” said one doctor.

Another senior doctor said that with each resignation over the past year, he lined up replacements and pleaded in vain for permission to advertise. “Since posts reopened this week, I know of just one applicant. Do they expect specialists to suddenly appear out of the woodwork?”

The job advertisements are for “far less than what has been lost and needed. And it’s far more than just numbers – it’s skills and experience”, noted another doctor. “It will take years to get back to where we were.”

Despair among staff

Several doctors expressed despair at what they see as a lack of urgency from government.

“It makes me wonder how resources are managed. Local cuts feel disproportionate compared to national ones. It’s disheartening. Some of us are here to make a difference, but we’re starting to lose hope,” one said.

Another added: “If you know there’s light at the end of the tunnel, you can keep going. But when it feels endless, it’s damn hard. We try to hide our disenchantment, but it’s becoming impossible.”

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons licence.

Read the original article.

What Next for Cancer Patients as Court Again Rules Against Gauteng Health Department?

Photo by Bill Oxford on Unsplash

By Ufrieda Ho

In the latest chapter of a long-running legal battle over the Gauteng Department of Health’s obligation to provide people in the province with radiation oncology services, the department has suffered another loss in the courts. Spotlight assesses the legal situation and asks what it means for people still waiting for the life-saving treatment.

With another court loss suffered this August, the Gauteng Department of Health has once again been ordered to urgently provide treatment for cancer patients who have been left in the lurch.

This ruling, handed down on August 5 by Judge Evette Dippenaar, follows urgent legal action brought by the Cancer Alliance. It was in response to the Gauteng health department’s appeal against a ruling handed down on March 27 by acting Judge Stephen van Nieuwenhuizen. That order compelled the department to clear its years-long backlogs in getting cancer treatment to patients.

In its March ruling, the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg found the department’s failure to deliver this critical treatment to be unconstitutional and unlawful. The decision follows the department’s failure to spend a R784 million allocation granted by the provincial Treasury in 2023 to reduce the treatment backlog by outsourcing services to the private sector over a three-year period. Due to severe delays, the department was forced to return the first R250 million tranche.

Van Nieuwenhuizen strongly criticised the department, stating: “The provincial health respondents have done nothing meaningful since the money was allocated in March 2023 to actually provide radiation oncology treatment to the cancer patients. Meanwhile, the health and general well-being of the patients has significantly deteriorated. There is clear, ongoing, and irreparable harm being suffered by those still waiting for treatment.”

He also condemned the department for its lack of accountability and poor management of public resources, finding that it had failed to uphold ethical standards, act transparently, or respond to patients’ needs fairly and effectively.

The court instructed the department to:

  • Take immediate action, including diversion to private facilities, to provide radiation oncology services to all patients on the backlog list,
  • Update the backlog list within 45 days,
  • Submit a detailed progress report on efforts to deliver treatment, and
  • Present a long-term plan for ongoing cancer treatment services within three months.

But Gauteng health MEC Nomantu Nkomo-Ralehoko and the health department challenged the judgment in May, just as their 45 days to act ran out. They chose instead to take the entire matter on appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA).

In response, the Cancer Alliance, represented by SECTION27 (*see disclosure), went back to court for an interim order to make the March 27 ruling immediately enforceable, and not suspended until a ruling is made by the SCA. It is in response to this application that Judge Dippenaar ruled on August 5 that the March ruling is indeed immediately enforceable.

Two courts have now sent a clear message to the Gauteng health department, says attorney Khanyisa Mapipa, who heads health rights at SECTION27. She adds: “The Gauteng Department of Health’s action should be in the interest of the person who is seeking treatment. It should not be to deny, deny, deny and then to fight in the courts and not take any accountability.”

The waiting list

The estimated number of people on a waiting list for cancer treatment in 2022 was around 3 000 people. New data on this has not been made publicly available.

There are some signs of progress, although details are hard to pin down. In a statement released on August 24, which reiterates a July 20 statement, the Gauteng health department said it had introduced a strategic partnership with private service providers. “As the beginning of August 2025, 563 patients were receiving radiation oncology care through private partnerships, while 1 076 patients had completed treatment by end of July 2025,” it stated.

Both statements also noted that work was underway to complete new radiotherapy centres at Chris Hani Baragwanath and Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospitals.

But Mapipa says they still don’t have full details that comply with the court order. “What we’re asking for essentially is what the department should be doing anyway and that is for them to go through their patient files to establish who is still on the backlog list; who has passed away, who has received treatment, when patients were last assessed and what treatment they qualify for; and if it was a public facility or were they diverted to a private facility,” she says.

“As the judge pointed out in March, the department has to do this as a constitutional obligation, whether they fight this to the Constitutional Court or not, their obligation is to provide treatment for people who meet the criteria. Those on the backlog list meets the criteria,” she says.

Part of the March order also compelled the department to file progress reports with the court within three months on the measures taken to provide treatment and its long-term plans to resolve the ongoing cancer treatment crisis in Gauteng. Spotlight’s understanding is that these progress reports have not been submitted.

This is an important measure, Mapipa says, given the department’s poor track record. “The court rulings in both judgments found that because they have failed to be transparent throughout this process, the department is compelled to provide these reports to the courts,” she adds.

It is as yet unclear how the Gauteng health department plans to proceed. The department, in its three-paragraph statement following the August judgment, stated that it would review “the contents and implications” to determine and communicate its next steps. Their deadline to appeal the August 5 ruling was 26 August 2025. The department did not respond to questions from Spotlight.

Calls for accountability

Jack Bloom, Democratic Alliance shadow health MEC in Gauteng, says that without a proper audit and update of the backlog list of patients needing care, the “cancer treatment scandal has probably cost more lives than the 144 mental patients who died in the Life Esidimeni tragedy when they were sent to illegal NGOs”.

Bloom is calling for heads to roll, with Nkomo-Ralehoko and head of department Arnold Lesiba Malotana in his crosshairs.

“The DA condemns the department’s legal stalling tactics that harms patients who urgently require lifesaving treatment…Premier [Panyaza] Lesufi should not allow this cancer disaster to continue,” he says.

Salomé Meyer, spokesperson for Cancer Alliance, says that the legal proceedings are a distraction of the realities on the hospital floor. Charlotte Maxeke Johannesburg Academic Hospital for instance, she says, remains in “crisis”. She maintains there is a scarcity of sufficient and operational radiation oncology machinery, as well as extreme shortages in radiation oncology staff to operate the machines.

Meyer says the situation at Charlotte Maxeke Hospital dates back to 2017 when CEO Gladys Bagoshi was made aware of mounting challenges from a shortage of equipment and staffing.

“In 2021, Bagoshi turned down an equipment allocation, which Charlotte Maxeke Hospital desperately needed, so this allocation went to George Mukhari Hospital and Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital instead. But the cobalt bunkers required to house the machines at these hospitals had not been built and are only expected to be completed in 2026 – so the machines remain in storage. In 2022, an order was finally placed for additional linacs [used for high energy beam radiation treatments] for the existing cobalt bunkers at Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, but that tender is still not finalised,” says Meyer.

She adds: “This is a failure of planning, governance, and accountability and we have to ask who is being held accountable when the same CEO has remained in place all these years.”

Neither Bagoshi nor the health department responded to questions on these assertions.

Disclosure: SECTION27 was involved in the court proceedings described in this article. Spotlight is published by SECTION27, but is editorially independent – an independence that the editors guard jealously. The Spotlight editors gave special attention to maintaining this editorial firewall in the production of this story.

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons licence.

Read the original article.

Inside SA’s Multi-million Rand Plan to Fill US Funding Void

Photo by Miguel Á. Padriñán

By Jesse Copelyn

In response to US funding cuts for South African health services and research projects, National Treasury has provided the National Department of Health with hundreds of millions of rands in emergency funds. Spotlight and GroundUp look at how precisely the government intends to spend this money.

Health Minister Dr Aaron Motsoaledi recently announced that National Treasury had released roughly R753 million to help plug the gap left by US funding cuts to South Africa’s health system. Another R268 million is also being released in the following two years for researchers that lost their US grants.

But this may only constitute the first round of emergency funds from government, according to sources we spoke to. The health department is planning on submitting a bid for an additional allocation later on, which will be considered by Treasury. But this will likely only be approved if the first tranche of funding is properly used.

So how is the money supposed to be used? To find out, we spoke with officials from the National Treasury, the National Department of Health and the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC).

Money for provinces is for saving jobs at government clinics

The current tranche of money comes from Treasury’s contingency reserve, which exists partially to deal with unforeseen funding shortfalls. It was released in terms of Section 16 of the Public Finance Management Act.

Of the R753 million that’s been announced for this year, Motsoaledi stated that R590 million would be going to provincial health departments via the District Health Programme Grant – a conditional grant for funding the country’s public health efforts, particularly HIV, TB, and other communicable diseases. Such conditional grants typically give the health department more say over how provincial departments spend money than is the case with most other health funding in provinces.

To explain how government officials arrived at this figure, it’s worth recapping what services the US previously supported within provinces.

Prior to Donald Trump becoming US president on 20 January, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) had financed health programmes in specific districts with high rates of HIV. These districts were scattered across all South Africa’s provinces, save for the Northern Cape.

The funds were typically channelled by USAID to non-governmental organisations (NGOs), which used the money to assist the districts in two ways.

The first is that NGOs would hire and deploy health workers at government clinics. The second is that the NGOs would run independent mobile clinics and drop-in centres, which assisted so-called key populations, such as men who have sex with men, sex workers, transgender people, and people who inject drugs.

Following the US funding cuts, thousands of NGO-funded health workers lost their jobs at government clinics, while many of the health centres catering to key populations were forced to close.

In response, the health department began negotiations with Treasury to get emergency funding to restore some of these services. As part of its application, the health department submitted proposals for each province, which specified how much money was needed and how it would be used. (Though this only took place after significant delay and confusion).

Since Treasury couldn’t afford to plug the entire gap left by the US funding cuts, the provincial-level proposals only requested money for some of the services that had been terminated. For instance, funding was not requested for the key populations health centres. Instead, the priority was to secure the jobs that had been lost at government health facilities.

As such, the total amount that was requested from Treasury for each province was largely calculated by taking the total number of health workers that NGOs had hired at clinics and working out how much it would cost to rehire them for 12 months.

Rather than paying the NGOs a grant to deploy these workers as was done by USAID, the health department proposed hiring them directly. This meant that they calculated their wages according to standard government pay scales, which is less than what these workers would have earned from the NGOs.

The total came to just under R1.2 billion for all the provinces combined.

Treasury awarded roughly half of this on the basis that the money would be used to finance these wages for six months, rather than 12. This amounts to the R590 million for provinces that was announced by Motsoaledi.

If all goes smoothly and this money is used effectively to hire these staff over the next six months, then a new tranche of Section 16 funding could be released in order to continue hiring them. Funds might also be released to fund the key populations health sites.

A concern, however, is that the money may just be used by provinces to augment their ordinary budgets. If the funds aren’t actually used to respond to the US cuts, then it is much less likely that more emergency funding will be released.

At this stage, it is too early to tell how provinces will use the money, particularly given that it appears that at least some of them haven’t gotten it yet.

Spotlight and GroundUp sent questions to several provincial health departments. Only the Western Cape responded. The province’s MEC for Health and Wellness, Mireille Wenger, said that the funds have not yet been received by her department, but that once they were, they would be directed to several key priority areas, including digitisation of health records, and the strengthening of the primary healthcare system.

It’s thus not clear whether the province will be using any of the funds to employ health staff axed by US-funded NGOs. In response to a question about this, Wenger stated that “further clarity is still required from the National Department of Health and National Treasury regarding the precise provincial allocations and conditions tied to the additional funding”.

What about research?

Of the R753 million that’s been released for this year, R132 million has been allocated to mitigate the funding cuts for research by US federal institutions, primarily the National Institutes for Health (NIH). Unlike USAID, the NIH is not an aid body. It provides grants to researchers who are testing new treatments and medical interventions that ultimately benefit everyone. These grants can be awarded to researchers in the US or abroad as part of a highly competitive application process.

Researchers in South Africa are awarded a few billion rands worth of grants from the NIH each year, largely due to their expertise in HIV and TB. But over the last few months, much of this funding has been terminated or left in limbo. (See a detailed explanation of the situation here).

The R132 million issued by Treasury is supposed to assist some of these researchers. It will be followed by another R268 million over the following two years. The Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust are chipping in an additional R100 million each – though in their case, the funds are being provided upfront.

All of this money – R600 million in total – is being channelled to the SAMRC, which will release it to researchers via a competitive grant allocation system.

According to SAMRC spokesperson Tendani Tsedu, they have already received the R132 million from Treasury, though they are still “finalizing the processes with the Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust for receipt of [their donations]”.

The SAMRC is also in negotiation with a French research body about securing more funds, though these talks are ongoing.

In the meantime, the SAMRC has sent out a request for grant applications from researchers who have lost their US money. The memo states: “Applicants may apply for funding support for up to 12 months to continue, wind down or complete critical research activities and sustain the projects until U.S. funding is resumed or alternative funds are sourced.”

“The plan,” Tsedu said, “is to award these grants as soon as possible this year.”

Professor Linda-Gail Bekker, CEO of the Desmond Tutu Health Foundation, told us that the hope is that the grants could fill some of the gaps. “This is a bridge and it is certainly going to save some people’s jobs, and some research,” she said, but “it isn’t going to completely fill the gap”.

Indeed, the SAMRC has made clear that its grants aren’t intended to replace the US funding awards entirely. This is unsurprising given that the money that’s being made available is a tiny fraction of the total grant funding awarded by the NIH.

It’s unlikely that research projects will continue to operate as before, and will instead be pared down, said Bekker.

“It’s going to be about getting the absolute minimum done so you either save the outcome, or get an outcome rather than no outcome,” she said.

In other cases, the funds may simply “allow you to more ethically close [the research project] down,” Bekker added.

For some, this funding may also have come too late. Many researchers have already had to lay off staff. Additionally, patients who had been on experimental treatments may have already been transitioned back into routine care. It’s unclear how such projects could be resumed months later.

In response, Tsedu stated: “For projects that have already closed as a result of the funding cuts, the principal investigator will need to motivate whether the study can be appropriately resurrected if new funds are secured.”

The SAMRC has established a steering committee which will adjudicate bids. They will be considering a range of criteria, Tsedu said, including how beneficial the research might be for the South African health system, and how heavily the project was impacted by the US funding cuts. They will also consider how an SAMRC grant could “be leveraged for future sustainability of the project, personnel or unit”, added Tsedu.

An endless back and forth

The job of the SAMRC steering committee will likely be made a lot more complicated by the erratic policy changes within the NIH. On 25 March, the body sent a memo to staff – leaked to Nature and Bhekisisa – instructing them to hold all funding awards to researchers in South Africa. After this, numerous researchers in the country said they couldn’t renew their grants.

However, last month, Science reported that a new memo had been sent to NIH staff which said that while South African researchers still couldn’t get new grants, active awards could be resumed.

Since then, some funds appear to be trickling back into the country, but certainly not all. For instance, Spotlight and GroundUp spoke to one researcher who had two active NIH awards before the cuts. He stated that one of these was resumed last month, while the other is still paused.

Bekker also told us that she had heard of one or two research grants being resumed in the last week, though she said the bulk of active awards to South Africa are still pending.

“Where people are the prime recipients [of an NIH grant] without a sub awardee, there seems to be a queue and backlog but some [of those awards] are coming through,” said Bekker. “But how long this is going to take and when it might come through, we’re waiting to hear.” She said a strategy might be to apply for the SAMRC bridging funding and “if by some miracle the [NIH funding is resumed]” then researchers could then presumably retract their SAMRC application.

In the meantime, health researchers will have to continue spending their time working out how to respond to the abrupt and increasingly confusing changes to funding guidelines that have dogged them since Trump assumed office.

“It’s such a dreadful waste of energy,” said Bekker. “If we were just getting on with the research, it would be so much better.”

This article was jointly produced by Spotlight and GroundUp.

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons licence.

Read the original article.