[imagesource: GCIS]

Professor Glenda Gray grabbed headlines over the weekend when she spoke out against South Africa’s lockdown in a News24 exclusive.

She was soon joined by other members of the ministerial advisory committee (MAC), which advises the government on its response to the pandemic, who spoke with the Sunday Times on condition of anonymity.

Gray used words like “nonsensical” and “unscientific”, and the other members of the MAC spoke about being sidelined in the government’s decision-making progress, calling it a “catastrophe”, and adding that “no single scientist would have supported the cigarette ban”.

Health Minister Dr Zweli Mkhize would tell you that it’s important to remember that the MAC consists of more than 50 experts and advisors, and last night he came out swinging against some of Gray’s claims.

Reporting below via TimesLIVE:

In a statement late on Wednesday night, Mkhize went on the offensive, saying that Gray made “factually incorrect and unfounded statements”. He also accused Gray of being unprofessional and of showing “unbecoming conduct”, particularly as the Medical Research Council [of which Gray is the chair] fell under the ambit of the health department.

He was particularly critical of the malnutrition claim, slating Gray for using “anecdotal evidence [which] ends up causing unnecessary anxiety to our citizens”.

Gray was quoted as saying that malnutrition was now being seen for the first time at Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital, and following some backlash, amendments were made to the original News24 article.

Mkhize pointed out that there were actually fewer malnutrition admissions at the hospital in March and April of this year than there were last year.

He then focuses on claims that Gray and other experts were being sidelined in the decision-making process:

He said in the statement: “Since the establishment of the MAC, 50 advisories have been given to the minister of health, all of which have been accepted. At no point has the department of health or government as a whole ignored and not responded to the advice of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Covid-19. The statement made by Prof Glenda Gray is at the least devoid of the truth.

“Having read the article, I have been taken aback by the obvious inaccuracies it contains which have, in my view, caused unnecessary sensationalism and doubt on the work and effort of the government in dealing with Covid-19.”

…The minister said Gray’s behaviour was “potentially destructive”.

The health minister went on to say that government “welcomes” divergent views and  “robust engagement”, asking that members of the MAC “desist from potentially destructive behaviour and continue to engage constructively with government as they are mandated”.

Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in the middle, and Gray and Mkhize both raise valid points, but it’s clear that all is not well within the ministerial advisory committee.

If you want to better understand why this kind of tension in the scientific community is more common than you think, read this excellent article by Bhekisa’s Mia Malan. Here’s a taster:

…place a bunch of A-rated scientists on the same committee, many who are conducting COVID-19 research of their own and are therefore competing for funding and recognition, and you’re heading for trouble. Add a disease for which there is no cure or treatment, a lack of clear scientific guidance and a government reluctant to release data that committee members are demanding, and the problem gets more complex.

You can read that in full here.

One thing scientists do seem to agree on is that South Africa is set to have a spike in infections, and deaths, in the months to come.

A recent projection, presented by the SA COVID-19 modelling consortium, puts our national death toll at between 40 000 and 48 000 by November.

We will need our ministerial advisory committee pulling in the same direction these coming months.

[sources:timeslive&bhekisa]