Health
We Are Pushing Nature to the Edge—But Solutions Are Within Reach: Global Conversations on Sustainable Health
By Davidson Ndyabahika and Johanna Blomgren
We’ve all done it—tossed leftovers, ignored wilted greens, or shrugged at a half-eaten meal. Food waste is a quiet guilt we all share, a reflex in a world of abundance and scarcity. But what if this small act connects to a larger global issue? On February 26, 2025, experts from Uganda, Sweden, and beyond gathered in a virtual seminar, asking, “How can we nourish ourselves without harming the planet?” Hosted by the Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Health (CESH), the discussion revealed a harsh truth—our food habits are draining the Earth.
The discussion on sustainable food systems marked the beginning of the annual four-part global conversation on sustainable health, organized through a collaboration between Sweden’s Karolinska Institutet and Uganda’s Makerere University under the auspices of CESH.
In Kampala, the paradox is stark. Every day, 750 tons of food waste fill the city’s landfills, enough to feed thousands. Rotten mangoes spill from crates in Nakasero Market, and half-eaten Rolex wraps pile behind street stalls. Uganda’s Food Rights Alliance shows 37.8% of this waste comes from plates and markets. Across East Africa, organic waste, like spoiled vegetables and discarded tubers, makes up 79% of urban trash—a grim reflection of broken systems. Beyond this is a city stuck with piles and piles of organic trash, which has previously been fatal with a slide in one of Kampala’s major landfills. Meanwhile, 26% of Uganda’s children remain stunted.
At the heart of this week’s global conversation was the WWF’s Living Planet Report 2024, a sobering revelation of a 73% decline in global wildlife populations since 1970. Freshwater ecosystems have hemorrhaged 85% of biodiversity, Latin America’s species richness has plummeted by 95%, and Africa—home to smallholder farmers who feed millions—has lost 76%. “Nature is disappearing at an alarming rate,” warned Harold Turinawe, WWF Uganda’s Forest Markets Transformation Manager, his voice weighted with urgency.
“We are pushing Earth’s systems to irreversible tipping points, and despite the increase in food production and land use and the destruction of habitats, the world is still hungry; we have over 735 million people going to bed hungry every other night. The contradiction is striking,” Turinawe added.
The report highlights the Amazon’s lush canopies that are felled for cattle ranches. The interplay of man’s unsustainable utilization of Mother Nature, leading to the food paradox, feast, famine, and ecological ruin, underscores the urgency of addressing global goals in a coordinated manner.
The report’s indictment of industrial food systems is clear: agriculture claims 40% of habitable land, 70% of freshwater, and drives 25% of greenhouse emissions. Yet, 735 million people still starve nightly. “Our obsession with monocultures and processed foods isn’t just destroying habitats—it’s failing humanity,” said Dr. Rawlance Ndejjo, the seminar’s moderator and a public health lecturer at Makerere University.
Florence Tushemerirwe, a Ugandan public health nutrition expert based at Makerere University’s School of Public Health, pointed out the irony: 26% of children are stunted, while obesity rises among adults in Uganda. “We grow nutrient-rich crops but export them, leaving people dependent on cheap, processed imports. In fact, many people do not appreciate their nutrient value,” she said. Uganda’s iodine-depleted soils now rely on fortified foods—a temporary fix for a growing crisis.
All through the seminar, the message was clear: we are wasting abundance while ecosystems crumble and people go hungry. “Our salt is iodized because our soils no longer provide it. Biodiversity loss isn’t abstract—it’s stealing nutrients from our plates. But if we don’t maintain our nature’s health, or our environmental health, or our natural resources health, it means that whatever food we grow, we actually do not carry the nutrients we need to maintain a diverse diet,” said Tushemerirwe.
The panel dissected global food trade’s role. WWF’s Turinawe lamented, “90% of deforestation is for agriculture. In Uganda, the once-vibrant wetland ecosystems of Lwera at the shores of Lake Victoria now face severe degradation due to large-scale rice growers; in the Amazon, its cattle ranches.”
Dr. Rachel Marie Mazac of Stockholm Resilience Centre stressed Europe’s complicity: “Sweden’s ‘virtual biodiversity loss’—importing deforestation via beef and soy—shows how our diets export destruction.”
“From a Swedish perspective, we are highly dependent on imports, particularly raw materials, which contribute significantly to biodiversity loss in other regions. It’s difficult to pinpoint the exact impact, especially with biodiversity, but there’s a concept of “virtual impact,” says Dr. Mazac.
Food consumed in Sweden, though produced elsewhere, contributes to biodiversity loss in those areas. The issue links to trade, food production, and distribution. It’s not just about production or waste but also equitable distribution.
Dr. Ndejjo added starkly, “You could be eating a burger from a cow grazed on razed Amazon forest. Guilt isn’t enough—we need systemic change.”
Amid the grim statistics, the panelists outlined a roadmap for redemption: nature-positive agriculture, subsidy policy reform, improved localized diets, global accountability, and honest discussions on the GMO dilemma.
Turinawe emphasized the need for agroecology in extension services—integrating trees, crops, and livestock to rebuild soil health and biodiversity. He stressed while critiquing Uganda’s Parish Development Extension Model for prioritizing enterprises for profit over sustainability. “We are saying get one million to a farmer. What are they producing? They are engaging in commodities that are predetermined. Nobody’s talking about Mother Nature. Who takes care of the soil? Who takes care of the water needs? Who takes care of the diversification we are talking about? But diversification in the diet begins with diversification on the farm. So my first issue is strengthening the agricultural extension services,” says Turinawe.
Adding that things like soil health management, land tenure system farmer-to-farmer network for peer learning, and fair farmer subsidies should be key to planning and agricultural extension.
“In Uganda, where I come from, and currently in Kampala, if you head north towards Zirobwe in Luweero District, you’ll find people we call Bibanja owners—essentially squatters who don’t own the land they occupy. These individuals cannot engage in sustainable agriculture as we’re discussing; their focus is survival. What we need are programs that give farmers secure land rights, which can motivate them to invest in soil health and environmental conservation—investments that take time. Improving soil is not a short-term effort; it requires long-term actions like planting trees, integrating practices, and using farmyard manure. None of this is realistic for someone who fears being displaced tomorrow. We need to approach this challenge collectively.”
Subsidies must reward sustainable practices, not industrial giants.
“Why not tax breaks for farmers using organic manure?” Turinawe challenged. “I would love to hear that a farmer that is engaged in sustainable cocoa production and coffee production gets a tax holiday rather than having a blanket of investors getting a holiday. Put subsidies and investment incentives in the right direction. We shall spur production, and of course, this will also bring in corporate partnerships, and we can make our supply chains safer, better, more green, and more sustainable,” Turinawe added.
Dr. Mazac noted that “nature-positive production can feed the world by optimizing crops, livestock, and wild fisheries, and supporting aquaculture that works with wetlands, not against them.” For Mazac, policy is key: She is also an advocate of subsidies and taxes that benefit farmers. Those that ensure incentives that improve soil health and maintain water quality as well as tackle climate change in order to make sustainability profitable.
“We must rethink trade to avoid widening the gap between food-producing areas and markets and instead support local farmers. Subsidies and taxes should empower these communities to nourish their populations before focusing on exports. While exports generate income, they also have significant impacts. A possible solution is changing production systems, but we must also shift dietary and consumption habits, making this a collective effort, not just an individual responsibility.”
Tushemerirwe is hungry for reviving indigenous crops and regulating predatory marketing. “Awareness is power. We must teach communities to value their traditional foods over processed substitutes.”
“There is good food grown in rural areas and available in markets, but people don’t recognize its value due to lack of guidance. We need food-based data guidelines to raise awareness. The Uganda Ministry of Health has a draft for this, along with draft policies to regulate unhealthy food marketing, especially to children. Junk food is advertised everywhere: hospitals, schools, and even street billboards, with fast food chains clustered together. We must regulate this and educate people on the nutritional benefits of eating what they grow over imported alternatives,” she stated.
Dr. Ndejjo believes these draft guidelines to regulate unhealthy food marketing should be finalized into policies and urges policymakers and implementers to prioritize the urgent need for these documents.
The conversation also weighed in on the genetic engineering in agriculture for increased crop yields, popular for GMOs, a dilemma that panelists called for their democratization rather than demonizing them. While Dr. Mazac cautioned against corporate-controlled seeds, Turinawe acknowledged their potential: “If democratized, drought-resistant crops could save farms in a warming world.”
Dr. Mazac noted that while in Europe and the European Union, they are not allowed to grow or sell foods that have been genetically modified, the essence of them should not be overlooked, since they are a technology that seeks to solve the future food crisis.
“GMOs aren’t inherently evil. Drought-resistant crops could save farms—but corporate patents trap farmers,” she said.
Turinawe added, “Our approach to GMO’s is a measure one bordering more on ethics and responsible use of GMOs; we see GMOs as a tool to promote resilience, especially since everything has changed—the food we once relied on can no longer grow in the same way. If GMOs help improve crop resilience, that’s a valuable tool. However, there are concerns that companies like Monsanto could use the GMO technology as a tool of exclusion, e.g., the fear of monopolizing future seed markets. This is where caution is needed.”
A Call for Radical Collaboration
The seminar’s resounding theme was unity: multi-sectoral collaboration is non-negotiable. From street food vendors to policymakers in the boardrooms, every actor must align. “Food systems aren’t siloed,” Dr. Mazac asserted. “They’re woven into climate, economy, and culture.”
“I think we need to sit and agree and engage quite regularly and find solutions for us to be able to produce food but sustainably,” concluded Tushemerirwe.
The Path Ahead
CESH’s global conversations on sustainable health are a microcosm of a global awakening, especially in tracking progress to meet our goals for 2030 and beyond: This seminar on food systems emphasizes the interconnectedness of food security and biodiversity. With the next UN Climate Summit (COP29) on the horizon, the panel’s message is clear—transformative change is possible, but only through courage, equity, and an unyielding reverence for nature.
To find more about this global conversation on sustainable health and more, visit CESH.health
Davidson Ndyabahika and Johanna Blomgren are the co-organisers of the global conversation on sustainable health
Uganda’s latest national HIV survey reveals lower viral suppression among adolescents and young adults living with HIV than among older adults, even as the country records substantial improvements in controlling the virus. The findings come from Uganda Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment (UPHIA 2025), a national household survey examining HIV prevalence and whether people living with the virus know their status, receive treatment, and achieve viral suppression.
Releasing the preliminary UPHIA 2025 findings at the Uganda Media Centre on 1 October 2026, Minister of Health Hon. Dr. Chris Baryomunsi called for earlier prevention and testing, particularly among adolescent girls and young women, alongside support for treatment adherence. “We must reach out to the young people, ensure that they have information, they test, take treatment, and adhere to the treatment guidance,” he urged.
Hon. Baryomunsi recalled how fear had discouraged testing during his university years: “I remember when we were at university, we went for testing at the university hospital. We sat there for three hours. Some of us left without even testing because it was scary.” Today, he explained, “even if you test HIV positive, you can be initiated on treatment, and you live normally like the rest of those who don’t have HIV.”
UPHIA 2025 was locally led under the Ministry of Health’s overall leadership, with Makerere University School of Public Health serving as the prime implementer, a role ICAP at Columbia University held in the previous two surveys. The Uganda Bureau of Statistics led sampling, while the Uganda Virus Research Institute and National Health Laboratory and Diagnostic Services led laboratory operations. Regional referral hospitals and local governments supported implementation, and the U.S. government provided US$10 million through PEPFAR, along with technical assistance from the U.S. CDC.
UPHIA collected data from July to September 2025 among people aged 15 and above, including those outside routine treatment services. Of 6,283 eligible households, 94.4% completed interviews. Researchers interviewed 13,801 people and tested 13,477 for HIV.
Testing followed Uganda’s national algorithm, with laboratory confirmation of positive samples, viral-load measurement, and checks for antiretroviral medicines to establish treatment use. Researchers weighted the estimates to account for the sampling design. Participants received counselling and results, and those who tested positive were referred for treatment.
Hon. Baryomunsi thanked participants and their families for welcoming survey staff and contributing their time, information and samples, without which the national evidence would not have been available.
National progress and the youth gap
The survey estimated HIV prevalence, which means the proportion of people living with HIV, at 5.9% among those aged 15 and above, corresponding to about 1.496 million people in this age group nationwide. Prevalence was 7.3% among women and 4.1% among men, ranging from 1.3% in Karamoja to 8% in the South Western region.
Among people aged 15 and above living with HIV, 86% had achieved viral suppression, meaning a low amount of HIV in the blood, measured in UPHIA as fewer than 1,000 copies per millilitre. Suppression stood at 69.3% among adolescents and young adults aged 15–24 living with HIV, compared with 89.9% among those aged 50 and above. These estimates cover people living with HIV regardless of whether they know their status or receive treatment.
HIV prevalence among people aged 15–24 was 1.5%, including 2% among young women and 1% among young men. Among young women, prevalence was 1.3% at ages 15–19 and 2.8% at ages 20–24. These differences support attention to earlier prevention and testing, although they do not establish when infections occurred.
The highest prevalence estimates occurred among middle-aged adults: 15.7% among women aged 40–44 and 11.7% among men aged 45–49. Lower suppression among young people therefore requires attention alongside the higher HIV prevalence among middle-aged adults. Comparing the same age group across both surveys, viral suppression among people aged 15–64 increased from 74.9% in 2020–21 to 86.1% in 2025, while HIV prevalence remained at 5.9%.
Diagnosis and the path to 2030
The treatment results identify diagnosis as the main national gap. Among people aged 15 and above living with HIV, 85.3% knew their status. Of those aware, 99.1% were receiving treatment; among those receiving treatment, 96.5% had achieved suppression.
The 95-95-95 targets aimed for 95% of people living with HIV to know their status, 95% of those diagnosed to receive treatment, and 95% of those receiving treatment to achieve viral suppression by 2025. Among people aged 15 and above, Uganda exceeded the treatment and suppression targets, while diagnosis remained below target. UNAIDS’s Global AIDS Strategy 2026–2031 retains these targets towards ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.
According to WHO, viral suppression protects health and helps prevent HIV transmission. Uncontrolled HIV weakens the immune system, increasing the risk of serious illness. With continued treatment as prescribed, sexual transmission risk is negligible when HIV remains suppressed but detectable, and zero when undetectable. The Uganda AIDS Commission estimated over 34,000 new HIV infections in 2025, underscoring the importance of early diagnosis, timely treatment, and sustained suppression alongside other prevention measures.
The demographic stakes are substantial. People aged 15–24 constituted 21.2% of Uganda’s population in the 2024 census. The country’s Fourth National Development Plan, covering 2025–2030, prioritises a healthy, knowledgeable, skilled and productive population and reducing HIV through primary health care. Protecting young people’s health, therefore, supports their participation in education, work, and national development; UPHIA helps identify where services need greater attention.
Turning evidence into action
The study’s conclusions identify three priorities: sustain treatment outcomes, find people unaware of their status, and improve suppression among younger people. Permanent Secretary Dr. Diana Atwine connected the findings to the Ministry’s planning.
“We do believe that these results are a true reflection of what is happening in our country as far as the HIV status is concerned, and we do believe that it will give us a very clear direction and the roadmap that we are going to take in the next five years to target and to get our targets achieved.”
Acting on these priorities requires funding for services and research. Hon. Baryomunsi outlined plans to target resources where needs are greatest, strengthen district services and align partner support with government priorities. Responding to journalists’ questions, he noted the government’s intention to increase domestic funding for the HIV response, including research.
“The HIV/AIDS response, including research and surveys such as this one, has largely been funded by partners in the past. The government of Uganda is committed to allocating more resources from our domestic budget to support the response and research,” he noted.
For the first time in the UPHIA series, the survey assessed selected noncommunicable disease indicators among people aged 15 and above: 15.5% had elevated blood pressure, 24.8% were overweight or obese, and 0.9% had raised random blood glucose. These screening findings align with the Ministry’s integration agenda and Hon. Baryomunsi’s call to bring HIV and chronic care services together to address people’s wider health needs.
Speaking at the release of the preliminary results, U.S. Embassy Chargé d’Affaires Mikael (Mika) Cleverley described UPHIA 2025 as the first Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment worldwide fully led and implemented by the country itself.
“The study was led by Ugandan scientists, Ugandan managers, Ugandan public servants, Ugandan field teams, from design to data collection to analysis. And this is what two decades of focused strategic U.S. foreign investments in the public health sector was meant to produce, is to reinforce Ugandan leadership and Ugandan-led efforts.”
At the survey launch on 29 May 2025, MakSPH Dean Prof. Rhoda Wanyenze highlighted the partnership’s contribution: “The partnership between Makerere University and CDC has not only helped build national capacity in surveillance and epidemiology, but has also strengthened our ability to lead high-quality, large-scale national surveys.”
The Dean added: “After two decades of joint work, we are proud that UPHIA is now a fully Ugandan-led effort. This is critical to the sustainability of the skills and knowledge generation to inform our local response.”
UPHIA 2025 shows how far Uganda’s HIV response has advanced and where gaps remain. As the country works towards ending AIDS as a public health threat by 2030, reaching young people with testing, treatment, and continued care will be essential to extending those gains.
Read the full UPHIA 2025 summary results here:
Uganda has released the preliminary findings of the 2025 Uganda Population-Based HIV Impact Assessment (UPHIA 2025), a national household survey that provides a current picture of the country’s HIV response and selected non-communicable disease indicators.
At the Uganda Media Centre today, 1 October 2026, the Minister of Health, Hon. Dr Chris Baryomunsi, released the preliminary results and said the evidence would guide policy, resource allocation and service improvement, with particular attention to people and communities with the greatest gaps. He urged Ugandans to know their HIV status, use prevention services and, when diagnosed, start treatment promptly and adhere to it.
Among adults aged 15 years and above, HIV prevalence was 5.9 percent, including 7.3 percent among women and 4.1 percent among men. Among adults aged 15–64, prevalence was also 5.9 percent, unchanged from 2020/21. Across the country, prevalence ranged from 1.3 percent in Karamoja to 8.0 percent in the South Western region. Of adults living with HIV, 85.3 percent knew their status; 99.1 percent of those aware were on treatment; and 96.5 percent of those on treatment had achieved viral load suppression. HIV-status awareness remains the central gap in the 95-95-95 cascade.
The survey also measured selected non-communicable disease indicators for the first time. Elevated blood pressure affected 15.5 percent of adults, while 24.8 percent had overweight or obesity and 0.9 percent had raised blood glucose.
Conducted from July to September 2025, UPHIA 2025 was the first population-based HIV impact assessment to be fully country-led. The Ministry of Health provided overall leadership, while Makerere University School of Public Health served as the prime implementing organisation, working with UVRI, UBOS, regional referral hospitals and local governments. PEPFAR funded the survey through the U.S. CDC.
Watch the UPHIA 2025 preliminary results launch:
https://www.youtube.com/live/QfHFBaJ-L-w
Read the UPHIA 2025 summary results:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nElGNwgcAcZyAo9CLCQKRpO2jJgyxjSc/view?usp=drive_link
-
General2 weeks agoCall for Applications: RLRH Graduate Traineeship Programme
-
General6 days agoStatement on Concerns Circulating Regarding a Member of Academic Staff
-
Research2 weeks agoCall for Makerere Staff PhD Completion Grant Applications, 2026-27
-
Engineering, Art & Tech2 weeks agoPublic Art Talk Sparks Dialogue on Contemporary Art Practices at MTSIFA
-
General1 week agoMakerere Marathon 2026 – Running to Equip the Disability Support Center