AIDS is a huge problem in South Africa. One of pandemic proportions as a matter of fact. According to a website called Avert, “almost half of all deaths in South Africa, and a staggering 71% of deaths among those aged between 15 and 49, are caused by AIDS. So many people are dying from AIDS that in some parts of the country, cemeteries are running out of space for the dead. A recent survey found that South Africans spent more time at funerals than they did having their hair cut, shopping or having barbecues. It also found that more than twice as many people had been to a funeral in the past month than had been to a wedding.”

This is shocking information. And amidst all of this, the Minister of Health, Manto Tshabalala-Msimang has recently said that “…the 2007 (HIV antenatal ) survey would show that HIV prevalence had declined by 1,2 percent (from 29,2 percent in 2006 to 28 percent in 2007) among antenatal patients and by 0,8 percent (from 13,7 percent to 12,9 percent) among 15- to 19-year-olds” According to the article, which appeared in The Star on Friday, Ms Tshabalala-Msimang was also quoted as saying: “I am therefore delighted to report to this house that through our collective efforts we have begun to reverse (previous) trends... We are achieving these encouraging trends because of our intensive prevention campaign, which we believe is starting to make a difference,”

Statistically speaking, is a 1.2 and 0.8 percent difference really a difference? How accurate are these figures? How can we be sure that an adequate number of woman even participated in their survey? And should government be congratulating themselves at all when they have been widely criticised about the lack of access to antiretroviral treatment across the country. The government has also been condemned for failing to provide drugs that could prevent mother-to-child-transmission of HIV. Even their AIDS-awareness campaigns, such as loveLife, have been subjected to serious critisim. Global Fund, one of their main financial backers, felt that it was poorly targeted and implemented, and hence withdrew all funding.

So instead of saying that her department “had achieved much in the past years”, they should be more critical of themselves and actually really try to make a difference.