The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

Dear friends and fellow South Africans,

There is an interesting debate at the moment, both in medical circles
and around kitchen tables, about the cause of diabetes. As a diabetic
of many years, it has caught my attention.

Throughout the world, diabetes is on the rise, and in some countries,
spectacularly so. This year, in his State of the Nation Address,
President Zuma specifically mentioned diabetes as a challenge to our
nation. I think it was more than a nod to his fiancée, Ms Bongi
Ngema-Zuma, whose Foundation raises awareness on diabetes. It was, I
believe, a call to our Government to prioritise prevention and
treatment of this growing disease.

I was a little concerned, therefore, about the President's reference
to "encouraging South Africans to live healthier lives to reduce the
impact of? diabetes". While we all know that we should exercise, get
enough sleep, drink enough water and have a balanced diet, is
Government willing to take the next step and endorse current science?
Is there enough commitment to move from vague references to healthy
lifestyles, towards educating South Africans on food choices ? from
what we eat to where it comes from?

One of South Africa's leading sports scientists, Professor Tim Noakes,
is in the thick of the debate over the role of carbohydrates in
accelerating the onset and worsening of diabetes. Science indicates
that a high-carbohydrate diet is a diabetes no-no. Professor Noakes
himself is genetically predisposed to diabetes through his family
history, and has adopted a low-carbohydrate, high protein, high-fat
diet, with good results. But he is not alone.

I have managed my diabetes for several decades purely through diet. I
seldom eat carbohydrates, but I eat a good amount of fresh vegetables,
chicken and fish. Considering the schedule I manage, as an
octogenarian, I consider my health sufficient evidence that there is
something worth pursuing in the low-carbohydrate argument against
diabetes.

Professor Noakes has pointed out that in the 1920s the medical
community believed that diabetics should stay away from potatoes, rice
and bread. That message was subverted in America, where
high-carbohydrate diets were encouraged. The standard nutritional
guide emerged that protein should form the smallest portion of any
meal. Now America has a dual problem, widespread obesity and
escalating diabetes.

If South Africa is to wage war on diabetes, Government is going to
have to weigh-in on this debate. It is not the sole domain of
health-nuts and doctors. It affects the insurance industry, the food
industry, labour, finance and health.

In last week's Sunday Times, the nutrition manager of the South
African sugar Association claimed that carbohydrates are the "only
source of fuel for the brain", that eliminating them from one's diet
"will be detrimental to health", and that low-carbohydrate diets are
"impractical for the South African population to follow" because they
are costly.

Science will have to deal with some of the arguments thrown at this
debate. But I think Government has a responsibility not only to listen
to science, but to find ways around the financial obstacles, if they
exist. The IFP promoted this same message when we urged the former
President and the late former Minister of Health to stick to science
in the fight against HIV/Aids. We then secured free anti-retrovirals
in KwaZulu Natal from Bohringer-Ingelheim to get around the obstacle
of cost. That is the responsibility of leaders.

In this case, though, I disagree that a low-carbohydrate diet is
prohibitively costly. The point is not to eat red meat at every meal.
It is to move towards dramatically increasing the consumption of fresh
vegetables and fruits.

I have spoken before of my grave concern when I travel throughout
South Africa and see fallow land where once there were cultivated
fields. Many of our people who previously relied on subsistence
agriculture are now buying their food, and often buying it in bulk.
This translates into less fresh produce, more preservatives and higher
carbohydrate consumption.

The IFP has championed a return to subsistence farming because we see
the threat to food security as something that must be solved, and
something that can be solved. There is a great deal of underutilized
land and a great number of unemployed people in our country. Should we
not be teaching people to grow food for their families?

It worries me that farmers are being pushed out of South Africa by
insecurity, both physical and financial. The uncertainty around land
reform policy has seen thousands of farmers changing their profession.
Yet half of Government's land reform projects have failed to
permanently improve the quality of life of their beneficiaries. In
many cases, new farm owners are not equipped with the skills to make
it work.

The point is that South Africa is moving away from subsistence farming
and embracing a government-sponsored culture of dependency. I wonder
then whether Government will buy into the South African Sugar
Association's argument that our people cannot afford to follow a diet
that will reduce the prevalence of diabetes. Unfortunately, the ruling
Party is adept at ignoring the facts because they are hard to act on.

Changing South Africa's diet will mean removing the obstacles to a
flourishing agricultural sector.

Yours in the service of our nation,

Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi MP