As far as I understand it, Thabo Mbeki’s exit from office was not directly attributable to his reprehensible policies on AIDS. But, on their own, they are sufficient grounds to disgrace his legacy. The New York Times reports on an epidemiological study by researchers at Harvard University’s School of Public Health of the human cost of those policies.
From the study’s abstract:
Using modeling, we compared the number of persons who received ARVs for treatment and prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission between 2000 and 2005 with an alternative of what was reasonably feasible in the country during that period. More than 330,000 lives or approximately 2.2 million person-years were lost because a feasible and timely ARV treatment program was not implemented in South Africa. Thirty-five thousand babies were born with HIV, resulting in 1.6 million person-years lost by not implementing a mother-to-child transmission prophylaxis program using nevirapine. The total lost benefits of ARVs are at least 3.8 million person-years for the period 2000–2005.
The Times article goes on to detail Mbeki’s personal responsibility for South Africa’s AIDS policies in the early 2000s. The evidence the Times presents suggests rather strongly that Mbeki’s ego, as well as a perception that Western scientists’ views were tainted by racist views of Africans, were primary reasons for the delayed response.
The disaster of South’s Africa’s response to the AIDS epidemic is a tragic example of what happens when politicians ignore scientific advice they don’t like. Here’s hoping that the world stops making the same mistake when it comes to climate science.
Thabo – very poor leadership. Will Mr Mbeki still retain influence (in one faction) if the ANC splits? What does the South African public think of this anthropogenic mortality?
Not to mention the fact that he alone had the power to stop or temper Mugabe. Like Hitler, Mugabe values his position above all else and will wreck his country before he gives up the trappings of office. Mbeki shows that “quiet diplomacy” can be easily confused with dithering.
Well, he was a major stumbling block over Mugabe, who I understand happens to be his brother-in-law. It’s amazing how countries get held to ransom over their leaders’ ideologies and egos. Hopefully, his successor won’t let his/her giant ego get in the way of doing what’s best for the people.
AIDS is a right bugger!
In previous LP threads on Mugabe, some commenters explained that domestic South African politics on the situation are weird, and Mugabe has a lot of admirers.
Ambigulous: I wouldn’t dare to venture an opinion on the matter, but I’m hoping that some more knowledgeable people turn up on the thread to do so!
Even post-apartheid Soth Africa has it’s crimes against humanity. There is no other way to describe Mbeki’s stance over HIV/AIDS.
Uganda has turned around the worst horrors of HIV/AIDS here is a link to a very worthy NGO and you can donate direct. http://www.nyakaschool.org/ Nyaka AIDS Orphans School
Ambigulous,
You may have seen that a new party has been formed called ‘Congress of the People’. It’d led by Terror Lekota (former Defence Minister and Premier of the Free State) and it’s in large part for people in the ANC who were unhappy with the way Mbeki was removed. So we might expect that Mbeki will have influence within COPE. It’s not so simple though, Lekota and Shilowa (the Deputy and former Premier of Gauteng) are big characters themselves. Where will each of the Parties stand on HIV? Well, I suspect that neither will return to the bad old days of Mbeki and Tshabalala-Msimang. The current president has appointed Barbara Hogan and Health Minister, and she is absolutely fantastic. COPE has many supporters who have joined because they are dismayed with the outrageous sexism and corruption of Jacob Zuma… Not sure if that answered your question!
thanks, pipsickle
It is utterly disgraceful.
However I think drawing an analogy between that and climate science scepticism is also a pretty low jab though. If you test positive for HIV anti bodies and you remain untreated you will die in every instance, a perfect corelation of 1. To suggest the statistics supporting AGW is coming out with an irrefutable correlation is claptrap.
Timely, given that 1 December is World AIDS Day. If you’re in the Brisbane CBD on Monday the 1st, drop by the activities in Radacliffe Place (you know, the place between the Treasury and the new BCC building where everyone goes for a smoke) and pick up a red ribbon to wear. People living with HIV have enough crap to deal with; please do your small bit to ensure that mindless bigotry isn’t yet another dollop.
I understand a lot of AID’s denial gets pumped out of Berkeley in California and that Obama has yet to specifically disavow his long-time pastors AID’s conspiracism.
Correct me if I’m wrong. If that is the case then I think AID’s denial has reached the level where Holocaust denial type laws should be used against those propagating it. ( With the offset that the web itself is left well alone)
And I think the new president elect ought to slam that fool Charles Wright and his own stupid personal stupid gullibility in a live-broadcast in front of AID’s victims.
‘ I have sinnned ‘ sorta deal. ‘ Never again!’. Call it a PR strategy.
Kingsley: there’s more to Mbeki’s denialist position on AIDS than not understanding Koch’s postulates. He seems to have thought predictions of AIDS’ rapid spread through the South African population were due to white Western stereotypes of wildly promiscuous Africans.
And who was the charmer who proclaimed that a way to cure one’s own AIDS was to have sex with a young virgin? (I heard this from a South African.)Disgusting.
Here is a link with an overview of recent history and current events is respect of the South African Govt and its response to the HIV-Aids pandemic. Scroll down to latest developments – as pipsickle outlined @ 8. (Just a v. general overview btw.)
http://www.avert.org/aids-south-africa.htm
And you just can’t say enough angry things about Mbeki (and Mugabe etc) – however, the rates of HIV-Aids in many sub-Saharan African countries is still so devastating even without what denialists like Mbeki and Tshabalala-Msimang have wrought in SA, which I agree could be rated as a crime against humanity.
Botswana even though it responded in a completely different way has a rate of 26% from a much smaller population base. There has been a slowing in transmission rates in many countries and areas with successful prevention campaigns, but the mortality rate will remain high for quite some time.
http://www.avert.org/subaadults.htm
On top of everything else Africa has to deal with – civil/colonial/cold wars for decades, then a ‘third world war’ mostly involving civilians which has raged for more than a decade and hasn’t ended, famines and food shortages, malaria and a hundred other ‘orrible diseases, HIV-Aids has been a cruel blow.
I was hoping many years ago now, that this century would be an African century but these days I’m just hoping that I’ll still be alive to see the continent emerge from such terrible times. Obviously there are some countries and regions which have to some degree remained fairly sane islands of stability in comparison to the the chaos surrounding them, but too few and far between for so many millions & millions of people.
A donation to an African Aids Charity is a great idea, thanks Harley for the timely reminder!
Self rule in Africa has been a very sad leftist experiment to watch.
The only potentially good thing is that AIDS/HIV may have the same economic impact as the Black Death did in Europe.
Ambigulous @14, a belief also held in India, not just as a cure for HIV/AIDS, but for any other sexually transmitted disease.
Razor @ 16, instead of just sounding off from your armchair, why don’t you have the courage of your convictions, take a plane to J’berg and tell those uppity niggers how good they had it when the white man ruled?
Mercurius @ 18, how is that the logical (or reasoned, or what-have-you) response to anything?
Ocka, pleez.
*sigh*
I dunno JPZ, Razor wants to use Thabo Mbeki’s miserable attitude towards the management of AIDS as a stick with which to bash the notion of self-rule for Africa, and BTW it’s all the fault of the left, or some such.
Robert suggested that this whole episode is a “tragic example of what happens when politicians ignore scientific advice they don’t like”. That, to me, seems like a worthwhile point and one we could usefully apply here in Australia and elsewhere in all sorts of areas including resource management, medicine and, heck, just about anything.
But what does Razor do? Ignores the potential lesson and asserts a lot of pious nostrums about self rule and leftists. What’s Razor getting at here? That a colonial right government which ignored the medical advice about AIDS would somehow magically *avoid* having hundreds of thousands of AIDS babies?
JPZ, what do *you* suggest is a logical, reasoned response to such mindless twaddle?
Personally, I think a loud raspberry accompanied by flatulent flapping of right hand under left armpit would be a response roughly on par with the level of grown-upedness that Razor’s remark suggests. In that light, my response was a paragon of forbearance.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think it’s beneath contempt to use dead AIDS babies to push a political barrow?
So, like I said, man up Razor and go tell those Africans what’s good for ‘em: a nice bit of colonial oversight is just what they need, eh, what?
If the idea that people should have the freedom to choose their own leaders is leftist, can I assume the right-wing position is that they should not?
wizofaus, Razor’s comment would seem to indicate an approval of suppressing democracy in Africa, I agree.
The economic consequence of the Black Death (or at least a temporal correlation) was a period of stagnant economies as well (lasting at least a century), so I’m not sure why he’s wishing that on Africa and other countries dealing with an HIV/AIDS crisis.
“…a tragic example of what happens when politicians ignore scientific advice they don’t like”
Well if that were the case, Mercurius, then I reckon you’d be forced to abandon leftist positions wholesale. Somehow I don’t see that coming, so I reckon there are other forces remaining at play (not to your credit).
“…what do you suggest….?”
You know, after the battle of Little Big Horn, in which the US Army was decisively routed by the Lakota Sioux, somebody asked a victorious Lakota warrior how long the battle had lasted.
He famously replied, “about as long as it takes for a hungry man to eat his dinner.”
How poetic. But if you had asked the same question of a defeated US Army soldier, he would have answered, “Well let me look at my high-precision mass-manufactured time-measuring device and I’ll tell you.”. And in that moment you could tell who would win the battle, and who would win the war.
Does that answer your question, cupcake?
You’re obviously dying to tell us which leftist positions are ignoring scientific advice, j_p_z, so don’t leave us in suspense.
The “cupcake” bullshit isn’t at all helpful, BTW.
Enough with the patronising “cupcake”, sugar tits.
Self-rule isn’t a leftist position, it’s the default position for all countries. You seem to have the bizarre notion that being ruled by others is, for Africa, the natural way to go. The colonial mindset is mighty ingrained.
That was a reply to Japers #23, btw.
JPZ @ 23:
Yes, if the question was “are there people who still believe the fairytale that due to their high-precision mass-manufacturing industrial base in the 19th century, the manifest destiny and natural right of the colonial powers was to hang on to Africa, the Middle East, India, China, Southeast Asia, the Pacific Islands and South America forever?”
Which, as history tells us, is exactly what happened next.
Yours truly,
Sugar Plum-Fizzlebritches III.