Golden Kiwi Breakfast Smoothie

I have been really enjoying the golden kiwi fruits lately. They are so much sweeter than the green ones, but of course you could use the green ones if that is all you have available. My favourite breakfast smoothie right now is:

2-3 ripe bananas

3-4 golden kiwi fruits (you have to wait until they have softened slightly)

1 cup baby greens (my favourite is mixed baby lettuce leaves)

1 stick of celery (or 1/3 zucchini)

1/2-1 cup of water

Blend in the blender until smooth. Deliciously refreshing!

Bacteria and Viruses: Not Guilty!

Extract from “The Live Food Factor” by Susan Schenk:

Presently, the germ theory promoted by the medical, pharmaceutical and advertising industries remains a hugely powerful persuasive force worldwide. Even today, the public still demands pills and vaccinations to kill or stave off germs, thus carrying on the hysteria begun more than a century ago. It is, and always has been, a hysteria based upon a complete lie. It makes a lot of people a lot of money as new diseases are identified or made up and blamed on new germ culprits suspected to be responsible for new diseases that are then put on trial and declared guilty!

In our alternative model, microorganisms are termed either friendly or unfriendly, depending on whether they serve us in health or hasten our demise in disease, respectively. Bacteria remain our friends so long as we keep ourselves internally clean. When we do so, we no longer have to fret about visiting sick friends, worrying that we too will “catch the bug” going around. Wherever we may go, we no longer have to fear people sneezing on us, passing on viruses by shaking hands with us or by breathing germs upon us.

Germ phobia began in the 1860s. Louis Pasteur proposed that germs played the primary role in causing disease. He popularized the notion that one unique germ causes one specific disease. To get rid of the specific disease, one must rid himself of the corresponding unique germ culprit.

At the same time, biochemist Antoine Bechamp, who remains unrenowned to this day, discovered micozymas, who are the smallest living unit in all living organisms. Bechamp found that microzymas changed their forms (pleomorphism) according to the general health of the cells they inhabited.

He declared that when the body’s chemistry was healthy, the microzymas developed into benign or even helpful bacteria. When the body’s chemistry was out of balance, as from malnutrition or toxicity, some of the microzymas transferred into harmful forms that contributed to furthering the disease process. He summarized his findings by boldly denouncing Pasteur, declaring “The soil is everything!”

Later German doctor Gunther Enderlein, through sixty years of observing human blood, proved Bechamp’s theory of pleomorphism to be correct. It states that microzymas, or protest, change form according to conditions in the blood. He concluded, “The most powerful diet for bringing a diseased biological terrain back to normal is live foods.”

Thus there arose two conflicting theories about what is to blame for disease: the presence of a pathogen versus the condition of the biological terrain. Pasteur’s theory ultimately won out because establishment leaders found it easier and much more profitable to convince people that they had to wage war against germs rather than teach people that they had to take good care of themselves with healthful living practices.

Pasteur’s victory led to great profits for food processors from pasteurization. Since the late 1800s, vast sums have been made creating vaccinations and other drugs to kill germs. Today, the war on germs is a multibillion-dollar industry.

“The American Medical Association, pharmaceutical companies and others wish us to plan our health care around this scientific error” (Dr Robert Young, author of Sick and Tired?).

“Virulent bacteria find soil in dead food substances only and cannot exist on living cells. Cooked food spoils rapidly, both inside and outside our body, whereas living foods are slow to lose their vital qualities and do not as readily become soil for bacterial decay” (Arthur M. Baker author of Awakening Our Self-Healing Body).

Raw food experts and virtually all biologists and physiologists go a step beyond viewing germs as merely friendly or unfriendly. These experts claim that microorganisms do us a necessary service by helping us clean up our internal and external environments.

Skin Hydration

I am always amazed by the products that are put into skin care lotions and potions that are advertised as natural and we are expected to believe are good for our skin. Many of the products that I have tried from supposedly pure skin care brands are way too strong and/or highly scented (with ‘natural’ oils) for my skin.  Essential oils are a particular bug bear of mine because they are very intense medicinal quality products and truly not good for regular use (or at all?) on our skin and yet so many people persist in believing they will do wonders if used on their skin every day. I find them too strong, drying and irritating to my skin and nose.

Scented skin care products should be avoided

Lavender oil, for example, is bad for skin and yet it is in so many products and its presence is advertised as a selling point! The Paula’s Choice website which is a site devoted to providing information on the effects of various substances that go into skin care products states that lavender oil can have a damaging effect on the skin in as little a concentration as 0.25%. Cancer patients on the Gerson Diet treatment are warned to stay away from all skin care products giving rosewater a special mention because of the essential rose oil in it. They consider it a toxin and their patients need to reduce as much toxicity in their body as possible to enable healing to take place.

Are oil based products really what our skin needs?

I always look for products that are unscented, with no essential oils, and have little to no chemicals added. This has usually led me to oil based products with ingredients like olive oil, shea butter, coconut oil, etc. Recently I found out to my great disappointment that coconut oil is not actually good for our skin because it is comedogenic meaning that it tends to clog pores. Coconut oil used to be my one product does it all product and it felt great to radically simplify my skin care routine. But I had begun to notice that my skin didn’t always feel great with just coconut oil.

Hydration from the inside out is superior to any topical product

This made me begin to question what, if anything, is truly good for our skin. I began to wonder why, if refined oils are toxic to eat, do we put them on our skin? I also began to wonder if hydration is the key to skin care rather than moisturization. My basic understanding of the difference is that hydration is about adding water to our skin and moisturization is about creating a barrier to seal in the water. Both are working on making sure our skin has enough water, but a barrier to the skin doesn’t sound good to me so surely the focus should be on hydration.

If moisturization is removed from the process then we are left with either letting nature (i.e. not using any products) and a water rich diet do its thing and hydrate us from within or switching to the cleanest most pure hydrating products we can find (plus the water rich diet of course!).

Water rich foods hydrate our skin

There seems to be some support for my theory. Even a quick search online led me to the following article where a leading dermatologist says that moisturizers are completely unnecessary and that they actually hinder our skin’s natural ability to hydrate:

I am going to embark on an experiment and give up oil based moisturizers and see where it leads me…wish me luck or better yet join me and let me know how it goes!

Is fruit eating really worthwhile?

Man has suffered like no other living creature on this earth in his drive to gain knowledge. His brain has developed and he certainly can do wonderful things, but do we really use our advanced knowledge to our advantage? Are we moving in the right direction?

Yes, fruitarianism is worthwhile. At this point in time we are still riddled with disease, hospitals are filled with the sick, the aged, and the dying. We have ever so many new diseases, we look a sorry sight compared to the animals who are still living in harmony with nature. We cannot boast that we are rejuvenating. We have just become extremely clever at doctoring the results of our bad habits, and at postponing death. But without a total rebirth of body and soul man seems to be heading for a crash.

We can see man becoming more diseased, more helpless, more perverse. In time there will not be enough doctors to cope with the sick and the dying and the variety of diseases we bring upon ourselves, blindly or willingly. There will not be enough drugs and medicine to save all the sick and transplants to supply the ranks of living robots with artificial blood, hearts, brains and kidneys.

The solution of many problems nowadays, as many people see it, is in instant solutions which demand no effort or adaptation whatsoever, just swallow a pill and behold, the problem is solved! But why is there a problem? Why is there an everlasting search for wonder medicines which must rectify the frustration of our way of life? Why are we ill? Why have we too high a cholesterol level? Why is there cancer and why must arthritis plague us?

A way of life which in its origin brings with it such results, surely is not a good road to follow, it just brings us head-on to stand before a precipice and it is of no account how we buck-jump and what wonder medicine we shall discover, we are not going to avoid that precipice, it remains there, yawning and terrifying.

Do we want to leave such an inheritance to the human race? Do we want to camp forever before the abyss, or do we wish to take a road with better results, better horizons and better prospects, not only for us, but also for those who must inherit this earth after us. This is what fruit eating is about, why no wonder-medicine will ever be able to replace it, for there is indeed no other way. We can change direction and look forward to a human race which is going to become more and more beautiful and more and more fit.

To my mind the problem today is no longer what we should eat, that seems clear and straightforward, but how to implement it in a world built on everything but the paradisiacal menu, a society with a taste so changed that man’s natural nutrition has become absurd and seems dull and uninteresting to the modern palate in an economy that has thrived for centuries on the artificial diet which leads to self-destruction, disease and death!

But so heavily is our food capitalized that it seems impossible to change the system. Yet, there is so much we can do to regain paradise and the food that was created for man.

We can withdraw our energy from everything that still supports the degeneration and destruction of our very lives.

Yes, we can turn our sick world into a garden of life and our diseased bodies into living temples for the soul. To eat fruit is an integral part of building a new life in a new day where man will rise triumphant. The time has come for us to leave the sinking ship so we had better begin to say “halt” to may old habits including nutrition and get on with the job of survival fast.

Source: Essie Honiball in I Live on Fruit (And Nothing Else), Pretoria: South Africa

Permaculture is the way forward

What is Permaculture?

The philosophy behind permaculture was developed about thirty years ago in Australia by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren.

During his many years as a wildlife biologist Bill Mollison had witnessed first hand the destruction that humans are causing in natural systems, but he also had a chance to observe how these natural ecosystems work and what keeps them in balance. Permaculture design is a result of these observations.

Bill Mollison and his then student David Holmgren first published their ideas in 1978, in a book called Permaculture One, introducing a “design system for creating sustainable human environments”, based on close observation of natural systems.

In a later book, Introduction to Permaculture, Bill Mollison writes:

“The aim is to create systems that are ecologically-sound and economically viable, which provide for their own needs, do not exploit or pollute, and are therefore sustainable in the long term.”

“Permaculture uses the inherent qualities of plants and animals combined with the natural characteristics of landscapes and structures to produce a life-supporting system for city and country, using the smallest practical area.”

What Bill Mollinson describes in his books is a totally integrated design system that’s modelled on nature. If you design your garden or farm like a natural system you can save yourself a lot of work, save energy, and eliminate waste.

Think about it, nobody digs and sows, plants and weeds, or sprays bugs in a forest. Still, all those chores are taken care of somehow. The forest grows and feeds its inhabitants, doesn’t it?

If any task in your garden is an unpleasant chore then there is definitely a better way to do it or to eliminate it. Learn from nature. Nature has already developed a solution to every problem that you could possibly encounter in your garden.

Nature is also the ultimate recycler. Everything goes round and round. There is no such thing as “waste”. Everything is a resource.

And most importantly, it’s sustainable. It’s something that works in the long run, not something that is based on inputs that will eventually run out, not something that creates waste and problems that will eventually upset the system.

The beauty of it is that permaculture principles work everywhere, in every climate and on every scale. They can be applied to whole villages or housing estates (though it takes a deeper understanding and more planning to do that), or to a tiny backyard or balcony (which can be done very easily).

If you think ahead and design your permaculture garden right, it won’t take much effort, it will mostly look after itself, and it will also be incredibly productive and beautiful and attractive to wildlife.


Insects boost crop yields!

Man has messed with nature so much he has come to believe that his intervention is essential. Adventurous farmers are discovering that the opposite is true.

The following article appeared in Die Landbouweekblad (South Africa):

While most of the fruit farmers in the Letsitele area keep up intensive spraying programs with chemical means in order to eradicate pests and plagues, there is one farmer who does everything in his power to create a favorable climate for all kinds of insects in his orchards.

Mr Hennie Wagenaar applies biological control and after it having gone very hard for a few years, it now looks as if he has restored the balance of nature and is beginning to reap the fruits of it. His production is rising, the average size of his fruit is improving more and more and he obtains noticeably high prices.

He started farming about ten years ago on the farm Mangorand with mangoes as his main product. Apart from 6000 mango trees, there are also 1000 citrus trees and he has just planted 10ha with pawpaws.

Poison food

When he started farming there, he applied the usual practices of the region. Between the fruit trees cotton and other cash crops were planted. In the orchards an intensive spraying programme with pest and insect eradicators was also followed. About seven years ago he noticed a big increase in diseases and pests such as bacterial spot and fruit flies in his mango orchards in spite of control programs. He surmised that sprays he had used for the cotton, had disturbed the ecological balance. Mr Wagenaar discussed the matter with the farmers in his neighborhood and read as much as possible on the subject and came to the conclusion that he had to return to the biological control of pests and plagues.

When he came to this decision, he immediately suspended the cultivation of cash crops in his orchards and up to a kilometer from his orchards. At that stage he treated his mayo trees against downy mildew and scale insects and applied ant control. For the first two years after the switch-over he still used copper and sulphur for the control of rust mites.

Bird Bowls

In those years bacterial spot nearly finished him, but he decided to take a grip on himself and not to use any chemical means of control. Two years later he abandoned chemical spraying completely in his orchards. At that time, however, he took other precautions: He believed that, in order to let biological control succeed, a big variety of trees was essential, so that all the necessary insects could have their favourite habitats. At about the same time his father-in-law one day remarked that there were pitifully few birds on the farm and that that was probably the reason for the serious ant problem.

He immediately took the matter in hand and built bird bowls. Recently he counted 120 birds in one tree. The interesting thing is that there is no noticeable increase in damage by birds to the fruit. Today there are about thirty kinds of fruit trees on his farm including inter alia coffee, guavas, naartjies, nuts, grapefruit and pawpaws.

But at the start things were tricky. Although he had to throw away a goodly amount of fruit, he could still market a harvest. After harvesting, the fruit was treated in warm water with a fungicide to ensure a long life on the shelves. After a few years of this he realized that his plan was succeeding. Meanwhile the pests and plagues were diminishing and he could stop the after-harvest treatment with a fungicide and warm water. He now rejects less than one percent of the fruit during packing.

Better prices

Some of the farmers in the same region had to throw away up to half of their fruit this year because of bacterial cancer, after some of the orchards had been sprayed with chemical control measure from seven to eleven times. Bacterial black spot is now a big problem too, but in Mr Wagenaar’s orchards it seldom appears. At the market his fruit obtains 50c to a rand more than the average market price. He attributes this to the size of the fruit and the good appearance of the product.

He does not apply exceptional planting or cultivation methods, but uses organic fertilizer. Every other year a potassium carbonate fertilizer is given by way of supplement. Cultivars are planted higgledy-piggledy in the orchards. Altogether seven kinds of mangoes and various other fruit trees are planted in close proximity. The latter are there to ensure that there is always a variety of trees relatively close to one another. He believes that certain cultivars are a more natural habitat for certain insects than others. “By planting together like this, one facilitates things for the natural enemies of the pests and plagues to exercise control”.


Since he started with biological control, there has been a dramatic change on the farm. Squirrels, which for years were not seen there, are back, for the first time in ten years there are sea-eagles breeding there, the bird life has increased drastically, earthworms are back and rare types of ants are to be seen again. there is no longer an ant problem which he ascribes to the increase in the number of birds and the fact that there is now a variety of types of ants, which probably keep one another in check.

Lice on citrus is extremely rare and plant lice just do not occur any more. Yet diseases and pests which formerly were rife on his farm, still cause heavy damage elsewhere in the vicinity. Lice appear very early in the season, mainly on the leaves, but their natural enemies kill them off before they attack the fruit. Those leaves then drop early on and new clean leaves develop. The old ones rot away in the rainy season and it looks as if this is nature’s way of providing organic food for the plant. It seems to Mr Wagenaar that he now has the insect population correct and the various types control one another.

This year he has exceptionally good fruit. No weedkillers are used in the orchards – grass and weeds are controlled with shrub beaters. He read somewhere that the microbes in the soil have their own method of storing moisture and that tilling of the ground greatly harms the system. He therefore also stopped mechanical cultivation between his trees as far as possible, as the microbes provide good soil structure, the conveyance of oxygen and the combating of root diseases.

Owing to the success he has achieved, he has a totally new approach to insects in his orchards. they are his friends one and all, because he believes each has a purpose in nature. If one removes only certain ones, one disturbs the balance and others get out of hand.

Source: Essie Honiball, I Live On Fruit (And Nothing Else), Benedic Books: Pretoria, South Africa

Are Pesticides Really Necessary?

In my garden there was a tomato tree and one morning, as I was walking past, I noticed little black lice on the back of the leaves. The temptation to grab poisons was great. However, I decided not to use any, but to leave the tree to carry on. The lice increased until the leaves were covered. Then all the leaves dropped and the tree still with its branches bare. to my surprise new leaves came, green and shining and that year the tree bore a beautiful load of tomatoes.

In a publication of the Department of Health and Environmental Affairs, Mr F E Towreck of the Walvis Bay Municipality writes about how they let nature go its way. Twenty years ago he helped with the laying out of the town’s first park and pests were of course ‘controlled’ according to the fashion of the day. In course of time the pests increased ever more, until one day it was decided to remove all the plants and the soil and to start again from scratch.

This, however, was too drastic and Mr Towreck instructed the gardener to call a halt for the moment as regards the sprays. During the first spring the caterpillars ate bare the lawn. But after the grass grew again, hundreds of birds grazed on the lawns (where formerly bucketsful of dead birds had to be removed), the fungi on the leaves and branches of the trees gradually disappeared, as also did the nodules on the roots. The ‘wild’ park is proof to Mr Towreck that nature fares better without poison. Is not the fact that we use poisons an admission that we do not understand nature?

Source: Essie Honiball, I Live On Fruit (And Nothing Else), Benedic Books: Pretoria, South Africa, 1989

Cooked Food Is Unnatural

Man is the only living creature on earth to cook his food – and at what a price in illness and suffering! By cooking, the constituents of food so important to life are destroyed very successfully. Why eat dead food, robbed of all its life-giving and healthgiving characteristics? Why not rather eat wholesome fruit cooked by the sun, as intended by nature and at the same time enjoy the privileges of health, energy and joyful living?

From a scientific point of view, there is no doubt that man, physiologically and anatomically, exactly like the unbelievably strong gorilla, chimpanzee or orangutang, is a fruit eater. The orangutang and the gorilla live on fruit and nuts and on this diet they develop such power, that it is a known fact that an orangoutang jerked a young tree out of the hands of six English sailors and that a gorilla fought a lion, crushing it in its mighty embrace. Man lives under the misplaced impression that he becomes strong by becoming fat and heavy on cooked food. Nothing can be further from the truth and this is proved by the appalling frequency of illness in this country. South Africans are the biggest sufferers of heart diseases in the whole world! And how about cancer, to mention only one other.

I suggest to any family afflicted by poor health that they go on to a diet of fruit and nuts for a few months. Illness will disappear and will be replaced by good health and happiness! Persevere and you will not regret it.

Source: Essie Honiball, I Live On Fruit (And Nothing Else), Benedic Books: Pretoria, South Africa, 1989

The Grape Cure in Action

Here is the experience of a woman who, despite the medical profession’s best efforts (in the form of two operations), remained profoundly unwell and uncured until she switched to a fruit only diet:

“After the operation (an emergency hysterectomy) I was seriously ill. I never thought anyone could survive so much suffering. Six weeks after the operation the doctor made an appointment for me with a radiologist, and I immediately realized that I had cancer!

Another six weeks later (and some 20kg lighter), I took stock of my life, with the little strength remaining to me. By the grace of God I at this time got hold of a copy of The Grape Cure by Johanna Brandt. I knew intuitively that that book held the answer to my problems. I knew that it took more than an operation to cure cancer.

The book made me realize that I had to undergo a purification process physically and mentally. I had two little children at home and knew that I could not leave them in the lurch.

From that time on I always saw to it that I had enough grapes at home so that I could live on them alone, but I felt no better on this diet. As a matter of fact, I felt dreadful. It was only Johanna Brandt’s book which made me persevere, for it taught me that I would feel uncomfortable while the poisons were being expelled from my body.

After six weeks I took a break by eating other fruit as well for one month. Then it was back to the grapes. At the same time I did breathing exercises and bathed naked in the sun for hours on end. The sun is, I believe, a lifegiving force.

At this stage I wrote to Johanna Brandt and her reply from Cape Town was short and sweet: ‘Come!’ For two weeks I visited her in her home. She is a wonderful person – she seems to radiate light. I was there for only a few days when she said to me: ‘My child, you are healed. If you ever had cancer, you definitely do not have it now.’

For the next three years I let no other food than fresh fruit pass my lips. I did not want to die. Three of my friends who suffered from cancer at the same time as I and underwent the same treatment, have since died. We had the same form of cancer, although they had it in a milder form than I did; and yet they died.

My body and thoughts first had to be cleansed before I could even start thinking of a cure. The symptom had been removed, but the cause was still there. More doctors ought to convey this to their patients.”

Source: Essie Honiball, I Live On Fruit (And Nothing Else), Benedic Books: Pretoria, South Africa, 1989

Raising A Baby On A Fruit Diet

Here is the fascinating experience of a mother of a 3 yr old whose diet consists of fruit only:

My little Fruit Fly is three years old now and radiates good health. When he was five months old he ate grated apple for the first time, but this was the only fruit he had until he was a year old. Apart from that he had only mother’s milk. At that time I, his mother, was a vegetarian and really overindulged. I contracted a breast infection and overnight I had to change my little Fruit Fly’s diet.

His first fruit meal consisted of orange juice, apples and bananas and he really enjoyed it. Surprisingly enough, it gave him no stomach ache or any other ache.

For the next three months he ate only fruit, and just as before he grew and developed beautifully. In those first fifteen months of his life he never once had an upset stomach, a cold, fever, or other illness, although he sometimes came into contact with sick children and even romped around outside in the wet Cape winter.

He did not like raw vegetables, and we let him eat just fruit. One day in October his Granny decided that he was big enough to eat “proper” food, and gave him a potato, carrots and peas, without salt and cooked just lightly. Little Fruit Fly was rather surprised at the steaming, warm objects on his plate, but being curious as all children are, he tasted it and apparently liked it. He ate the potato and two tablespoons full of carrots and peas. Half an hour later he had stomach ache for the first time in his life and started becoming feverish. And for the first time in his life his nose started running.

For the next six months he again ate only fruit. When he was a year and nine months old, we again tried to give him a cooked meal of potatoes and vegetables – once again cooked very lightly and without salt or any other seasoning. That was the second time in his life that he became ill. That convinced me that fruit was the only food for him and that all unnatural or dead things were bad for him.

When little Fruit Fly was two and a half years old he spent Christmas with his Granddad and on every second or third day he ate potatoes and squash, and was given a piece of honey cake once, plus started drinking rooibos tea with cow’s milk. After he had eaten these things for a fortnight, he started becoming feverish, the glands in his throat and around his ears swelling and he became really ill. I then gave him nothing but prickly pears to eat and after he had had a high fever for eight days, a thick, yellow blister formed just above his two front teeth, burst open and the poison of incorrect feeding was discharged. After that he was healthy again and since then he has eaten nothing but fresh fruit.

Others sometimes hand him a biscuit before we can stop them, and a day later the blister reappears above his teeth. Fortunately this has happened only twice so far. When he is given sweets, which often happens, he just plays with them, as he does not know what one’s supposed to do with them. And just as well!

I also found that mentally he is developing in a very interesting way. Could this also be because so few poisons which can cause disruption enter his body? I find that not only is his mind very receptive, but all his sense are more alive than are those of children of his age in general. He already has a grasp of figures and his memory is excellent.

Psychologically he is also developing quickly. After I had recovered from the breast infection, fasted for ten days, and afterwards lived on mainly fresh fruit, my milk returned, and after a month’s break little Fruit Fly had his glass of mother’s milk each night with his fruit meal. When he was two and a half years old, he suddenly became shy and reserved at breast feeding time, and not long afterwards he weaned himself.

His physical development is also different from that of children on the traditional diet. I think this might be because other children drink cow’s milk. A calf doubles its weight within 6 weeks after birth, which a baby only does after five months. A calf therefore has to receive enough growth hormones to enable it to be more or less fully grown within 15 months. People only reach that stage at 15 years. Could it be, I wondered, that the growth hormones a child gets from cow’s milk, promote the rapid growth of bones and make children grow faster? Does cow’s milk possibly promote the same mental development? These were questions which arose while I raised my fruit-eating baby.

Are bigger children better off than smaller children? Would little Fruit Fly have been a bigger child on another kind of diet? But would he then be as full of sparkle, have so much vitality and joy of life?

Physically little Fruit Fly is smaller than children of his age, but mentally it is another story. His arms and legs are thinner, and there is no sign of fat. Although he is growing all the time and constantly outgrows his shoes and clothes, his weight has not increased over the past year. His weight gain is the only “worrying” aspect of the diet, but when I consider that he is an exceptionally healthy, happy, intelligent and vital child, I can only think that surplus mass is not necessarily an asset. Is it not perhaps an asset to have so little mass? Is oxygen not used more advantageously in a body built and fed on a pure fuel?

Having a fruit-eating child at home is a great joy. He is never ill, never troublesome or emotional; physically and mentally he is alert and bright and I have very little trouble preparing his food.

Source: Essie Honiball, I Live On Fruit (And Nothing Else), 1989, Pretoria: South Africa