Open letter to Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi: Please explain the HIV numbers
Dear Minister Motsoaledi,
We write to you in response to your 15 May 2025 press statement and subsequent remarks in Parliament on the current status of the national HIV, Aids, and TB campaign.
You stated that since the launch of the Close the Gap campaign, 520,700 people have been initiated on HIV treatment, reaching 'more than 50% of the target'. You also stated that 5.9 million people were currently on antiretroviral therapy (ART). However, at the campaign's launch on 25 February 2025, you reported the same number on HIV treatment — 5.9 million. This raises a critical question: If more than half a million people have started or restarted treatment, why has the total number of people on treatment not increased?
If both figures are accurate, this would mean that approximately 520,000 people have been lost from care over the past few months — a deeply concerning and unprecedented level of attrition. We respectfully request that you provide the underlying data and clarify the current total number of people remaining on HIV treatment.
There are several reasons why we are concerned:
Static treatment numbers: As noted, the number on treatment was reported as 5.9 million in both February and May 2025. If 520,700 people have been initiated or re-initiated during this period, the same number must have exited care — a scenario that requires urgent explanation.
Slow growth in the number of people on treatment: According to official statements, the total number of people on HIV treatment increased by only 100,000 between March and December 2023 — from over 5.7 million to 5.8 million. The claim that the cohort has now grown by more than 500,000 in a matter of months contradicts recent trends.
Declining lab numbers: National Health Laboratory Service data reported by the Daily Maverick and Reuters, show notable declines in viral load testing and early infant diagnosis in March and April 2025 compared with the same months in 2024. These indicators should increase alongside meaningful growth in treatment uptake — not decrease.
In light of these concerns, we believe it is essential that you provide a transparent accounting of the current number of people on treatment and the metrics being used to assess progress under the Close the Gap campaign. Specifically, we request data demonstrating that the programme is on track to meet its stated goal: increasing the number of people on treatment from 5.9 million to 7 million.
We share your commitment to a strong and effective HIV response, especially in this period of financial and operational strain. Like you, we believe it is vital that accurate and complete information is shared with the public and Parliament at this critical moment. DM
Anna Grimsrud is an epidemiologist with a PhD in Public Health and writes in her personal capacity. Sibongile Tshabalala-Madhlala is openly living with HIV and currently serves as the National Chairperson of the Treatment Action Campaign (TAC). Change is a coalition of more than 1 500 people from civil society organisations in South Africa and around the world — people living with HIV, activists, community health workers, researchers, programme members, epidemiologists, clinicians, economists, and others. Change stands for Community Health & HIV Advocate Navigating Global Emergencies.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
6 hours ago
- The Citizen
University jumps in to fight SA's GBV
The president has declared GBV as a pandemic in South Africa. Activists fighting against gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) and crime experts are welcoming North-West University's (NWU) launch of a GBVF Empowerment Centre. It was recently launched at the NWU Vanderbijlpark campus to serve as a one-stop hub offering psychosocial support, legal case navigation and proactive advocacy. Key partners include the Gauteng department of Community Safety, Sonke Gender Justice, Higher Health, Ikhaya le Themba Empowerment Centre and international collaborators such as University College Dublin and Dublin Rape Crisis Centre. Dr Vedhna Dayanand-Lalla from NWU said, 'The president has noted that South Africa is facing a GBVF pandemic. ' Like other institutions of higher learning, we have encountered cases of GBVF. Through the centre, we aim to address all GBVF matters effectively and efficiently. 'The centre will adhere to a strict professional and confidential process. Social workers from Ikhaya le Themba will be at the centre twice a week to provide professional services. 'Vereeniging SA Police Service members will work closely with us to ensure a smooth and qualified process for all cases. 'We plan to train student leaders to respond to trauma in a supportive manner, especially as first responders within the residences. 'We hope to include social work students and honours psychology students as interns at the centre in the near future. 'We envision a focus on research alongside community service. We hope the centre will generate quality research that will serve as the foundation for our interventions while contributing to preventative processes and programmes.' The centre will be open to the surrounding community. To kick-start community education, they partnered with Ubuntu Evolution Hub, which will train 52 school principals on GBVF, handling and reporting statutory rape, HIV/Aids and pupil pregnancy. GBV activist Prince Ntsikelelo Soga, executive director of the organisation I Am That Man, said the centre would bridge critical gaps in offering psychosocial care, legal guidance and proactive advocacy under one roof. Willem Els of the Institute for Security Studies said it was part of the bigger strategy needed, as government and law enforcement agencies do not have enough impact. – [email protected]
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
Inside SA's multi-million rand plan to fill US funding void
The current tranche of money comes from Treasury's contingency reserve. Health Minister 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. ALSO READ: Treasury allocates R750m to offset Pepfar funding withdrawal as Motsoaledi tables health budget The health department is planning to submit 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 appropriately 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 National 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. READ MORE: Over 8 000 SA healthcare jobs lost – and more could follow – after US Pepfar aid cuts 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 earmarked 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 earmarking 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 'finalising 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.' READ MORE: Health experts warn of 'huge disaster' as USAID terminates Pepfar HIV funding in SA 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,' he said. 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. READ MORE: SA funds 90% of its HIV/Aids ARV programme, Motsoaledi reveals amid Pepfar uncertainty 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 subawardee, 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 republished from GroundUp under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here.
The Citizen
3 days ago
- The Citizen
Health Department doesn't track foreign nationals using public facilities
Treatment is still provided to those who cannot produce documents to verify their identity. Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi says his department does not track the number of foreign nationals using public healthcare facilities. Motsoaledi revealed this in a recent written parliamentary reply to ActionSA MP Tebogo Letlape, who had asked for the total number of documented and undocumented foreign nationals recorded as accessing public healthcare in the past five years. Letlape also wanted to know how many illegal immigrants had been reported to the Department of Home Affairs by healthcare facilities, as required by law. Motsoaledi on foreign nationals using public healthcare facilities In his response, Motsoaledi explained that provincial health departments keep no such records – and that the same applies to undocumented South Africans. 'In accordance with Section 27 of the constitution of the Republic of South Africa, everyone has the right to access healthcare services, including reproductive healthcare, and no one may be refused emergency medical treatment. 'Health care is provided based on clinical need, not on nationality or documentation status,' he said. Addressing the question about reporting to Home Affairs, the minister said while patients are requested to provide identification to verify their identity, treatment is still provided to those who cannot produce such documents. 'The patient administration and records systems utilised in public health facilities across the country do not classify or record individuals as South African or foreign and are therefore unable to provide a total number of undocumented people who accessed healthcare services over the past five years.' ALSO READ: 'We've not broken any laws': Operation Dudula to press on with ID checks after members freed on warning Motsoaledi also highlighted that many South African citizens also access healthcare without identification, often because they have no ID issued by Home Affairs or any other official authority. 'This makes it impossible to determine whether such undocumented patients are foreign nationals or not.' He added that civil registration systems across Africa remain underdeveloped and are 'lagging behind'. Egypt leads the continent with a civil registration rate of 98%, followed by South Africa at 89%, according to the minister. 'This means that 11% of South Africans are also undocumented, but cannot said to be illegal in their own country. Some countries on this continent are still between 1% and 5% registered.' Practitioners employed in public health sector A separate parliamentary reply highlighted significant shifts in the number of health practitioners employed in South Africa's public health sector over the past five years, with certain provinces recording growth while others seeing declines. Motsoaledi provided a breakdown from the Persal system detailing the total number of active health professionals by province and category – namely nursing professionals, medical practitioners, and other health professionals – between April 2020 and March 2025. The figures for the 2024/2025 financial year showed KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) employed the highest number of nursing professionals at 32 151, followed closely by Gauteng with 30 456. Gauteng also leads in medical practitioners (7 268) and 'other health professionals' (5 748). READ MORE: Motsoaledi announces 1 650 new healthcare jobs and R1.3bn to be spent on hospital equipment Moreover, KZN saw sustained growth in nursing staff since 2020, though numbers for medical practitioners dropped slightly from a peak of 5 938 in 2021/2022 to 4 868 in the most recent year. Free State experienced a steady decline in nursing staff from 8 264 in 2021/2022 to 7 283 in 2024/2025, while Limpopo saw a drop from 16 625 in 2021/2022 to 14 807 in 2024/2025. Mpumalanga's nursing workforce also decreased slightly after peaking in 2021/2022. The Northern Cape consistently has the smallest personnel, with only 2 544 nursing professionals, 521 medical practitioners, and 667 other health professionals in 2024/2025.
