Latest news with #PharmaceuticalBenefitsScheme
Sydney Morning Herald
6 hours ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Beef order appears to come with side of appeasement
It will take a lot to convince me that relaxing long-standing, science-based biosecurity protections on US beef is anything other than political appeasement toward Donald Trump (' Albanese accused of appeasing Donald Trump with move to allow US beef in ', July 24). How can we now be confident we will stand firm to protect our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme against the same bullying interference? After that, what next? Meanwhile, we continue to pay billions in the deluded hope nuclear submarines and some filtered intel will defend us in 20 years' time. This behaviour in a romantic relationship (rather than a political one) would probably be deemed 'coercive control' and wise heads would be encouraging us to distance ourselves from it. We are probably better off spending our time, money and energy with more respectful, less self-serving partners. Mark Sapsford, North Turramurra Let us hope it's just a coincidence that Australia's removal of the US beef ban has occurred just days before President Trump's latest tariff deadline. It would be disappointing if the government was appeasing the Trump administration in any way that threatened Australia's biosecurity. No more coincidences before August 1, please, Mr Prime Minister. Paul McGee, Springwood As tempting as it may seem, giving in to a spoilt toddler who consistently wants their own way may seem like a good idea at the time, but let me tell you, it's simply not. It'll only reinforce negative behaviours and impede healthy development. The toddler will become increasingly demanding and objectionable. Setting clear boundaries for the toddler is essential. You need to show that there are consequences for their demands and tantrums. The toddler needs to learn to manage their emotions to truly appreciate what they have already. Albo, you need to be strong and not be a pushover for that out-of-control child. Kathleen Molloy, Thornleigh Maybe I'm economically naive, but why does Australia need to both sell beef to the US and buy their beef? Surely this just adds to the costs for both countries and to our carbon footprint. And, for most of us, one cow tastes much the same as another, even if they are raised in different countries. It seems to me that trade in all goods should simply be selling our excess, and buying things we don't produce enough of ourselves. Judy Christian, The Ponds I would rather heed the advice of the Farmers Association biosecurity committee chair as to what is safe for us. At least he knows which end of the beast to feed, rather than the stuff from the other end possibly being fed to us at ministerial level. David Sayers, Gwandalan Metal misdeeds It was interesting to read in Stephen Bartholomeusz's analysis that US domestic producers are using the price rises on imported products resulting from Donald Trump's tariffs to opportunistically raise the prices of their locally produced goods (' Trump sparks a $6.4 billion wipeout for a US icon ', July 24). The example given was of US steel and aluminium producers increasing their prices by 16 per cent to match the imported metals, dealing a huge blow to US manufacturer General Motors and adding to America's rising inflation. Great economic management, Trump. Mark Berg, Caringbah South Trump's panic over the Epstein files could not be more obvious (' Trumps accuses Obama of 'treason' ', July 24). He is jumping from conspiracy to conspiracy in a vain attempt to distract from these files. However, accusing Obama of treason is a stretch even for him. Trump in panic mode is not a pretty sight. He is unable to maintain focus and his speech becomes garbled. He accused Obama of being 'sedatious' (seditious). His latest attempt to distract from the Epstein files may bring cheers from the usual toadies, such as Fox News, but will have the opposite effect on those seeking transparency and truth. If Obama had even a minor misdemeanour on his record, Trump would have pounced on it long ago. Dare we hope that Tump may finally get his comeuppance? Graham Lum, North Rocks I, too, have had letters printed in the Herald that were critical of Trump and was a tad nervous about how far the US Homeland Security tentacles reached when we arrived at US customs in May (' Trump is becoming the Basil Fawlty of American tourism ', July 24). Having lived in Pennsylvania, and having made multiple visits over the decades, we stayed with friends and family, all booked and paid for before Trump was re-elected. It's a great pity that this beautiful country is being trashed by its leader. Despite not encountering problems, we will not be visiting again in the foreseeable future. Sally Spurr, Lane Cove Sub-normal behaviour The second AUKUS payment takes Australia's contribution to $1.6 billion (' Australia quietly pays US another $800 million for AUKUS despite review ', July 24). The problem with this is that there is no guarantee AUKUS will continue. Given the state of the federal debt, I believe both sides of politics should seriously consider pulling out of the venture and putting the money into more productive endeavours such as housing and health. These submarines will not be ready until at least 2040, and given the past issues with building these things, that date is probably very optimistic. Given the advances with warfare technology, my view is that they will almost obsolete by 2040. Just look at the way cheap drone technology is reaping havoc in Ukraine and the Middle East, costing, in comparison, practically nothing. Just image how easy it will be to detect submarines and blow them out of the water with the rapid pace of technology. The reality is the next big conflict will be all over before a submarine can get into position to do any good. Norman Arnott, Forestville The article in the Herald says it all. Just like a dog that always gets a kick, we are always there for the US, our tails wagging. What a nice present Scottie from marketing left for the current government. Joe Weller, Mittagong Rabbi off the mark Rabbi Marcus Solomon expressed shock in his article, and I am shocked at his response (' When I visited Sydney, I was shocked by the antisemitism I encountered ', July 24). He was happy to receive sympathy for antisemitism in Ireland from the Irish couple, but not happy to receive political criticism of Israel from the man he asked directions from. Apparently, he is unable to distinguish the latter from antisemitism. He seems to be calling Australian critics of Israel 'idiots'. Here was an opportunity for an Australian Jew to express horror at the carnage being inflicted on Gazans by the Israeli government, but he didn't follow it up. To simply describe it as a 'tragedy that has befallen the Palestinian people' doesn't go nearly far enough. I am sorry he was shocked by the father calling out 'Free Palestine', but he needs to reflect on how other Australians view morality. Bob Hinchcliffe, Wahroonga Richard Abram writes that Jewish Australians don't deserve persecution for the actions of a foreign state, namely Israel (Letters, July 24). That's certainly right, but they do deserve criticism if they support the actions of that foreign state, which is engaged in the mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. Gay O'Connor, Manly One size definitely does not fit all in the voting-age argument (Letters, July 24). During my long teaching career I have taught many outstanding 16-year-olds who are mature, responsible and thoughtful, with an understanding of political issues and problems. I have also taught many who are virtually the opposite, with either zero interest in politics or else an impressionable, superficial or misinformed one. Our commendable mandatory voting system would give these young, easily influenced people political power, which could be easily abused or misdirected. Listen to their concerns and perspectives by all means, but the vote needs a few more years of life experience behind it. Robert Hickey, Green Point If the voting age is lowered to 16, the curriculum should include a mandatory civics unit in year 10. While some teenagers are passionate about issues such as the environment, all would benefit from understanding how our political system works. A school trip to Canberra at a younger age is merely sightseeing. Learning about the roles of the different levels of government and the election process (special shout out to Taswegians) closer to the action would be more likely to attract their attention and help inform their decisions. Judith Campbell, Drummoyne While we're discussing changes to the voting age, can we consider removing compulsory votes for aged care residents? My 95-year-old mother is bright and engaged for her age; however, she informs me that it's difficult to engage in intellectual conversations as most residents in her non-dementia section have some degree of dementia, or are simply not following the political debate. This leaves them vulnerable to undue influence. It would also make life easier for aged care residents and carers. Anne Matheson, Gordon Bad gas … deal Chevron's exit from Barrow Island has left WA taxpayers with a $500 million clean-up bill – all because of a deal most people have never heard of (' Taxpayers face $500 million bill to clean up Chevron's WA oil field ', July 23). It turns out that once production stops, the company actually gets its gas royalties refunded. For years we were told gas would be a win for the economy. But now we're not just stuck with the environmental mess – we're literally paying the companies back after they've made their money. And this isn't some one-off blunder. It shows just how much influence the gas industry has had over governments for decades. These kinds of deals don't get made out in the open – and they certainly don't get made with public support. But they happen anyway because the industry has always been able to get what it wants. Barrow Island makes it clear: we've never really known what we're getting out of these gas projects. What we do know is what we're left with – and it's not looking like a great deal. Karen Lamb, Geelong (Vic) Finish the job Completing the partially built station in Woollahra is in line with my view that the government should first utilise sites it already owns before imposing rezoning on residential and other land whose residents or owners do not want it – even with the prospect of an uplift in the value of their asset (' NSW Libs wicked problem: Housing ', July 24). In my own municipality of Ku-ring-gai, which is under pressure to change low-rise dwellings into high-rise, there are several cuttings on the rail line big enough to be developed. This would help to reach the housing target and avoid aggravating residents. For this to happen, the government needs to create a platform for such development to occur. Similar opportunities can be found all over Sydney. Peter Thornton, Killara Alexandra Smith's article overlooks one of the biggest contributors to the housing crisis – population growth. Surely the time has come when we can discuss population without being called xenophobic, racist or selfish. Given Australia's low fertility rate of 1.5, and the 50,000 or so people who leave every year, there is still good scope for refugees, essential workers and family reunions in a migrant intake of about 100,000. Returning to our pre-COVID growth rate of 1.6 per cent would mean we shall have 100 million people in 90 years' time. Our disastrous environmental record over the past 130 years, with an average population of some 10 million, is surely another reason to have a proper talk about population. It's not only the housing crisis but also many aspects of our environmental and social future that are at stake. Ignoring the effect of exponential population growth on future generations really is selfish. John Burke, Wahroonga A new investment When looking at government handouts and the effect on productivity, let's not forget the handout of negative gearing (Letters, July 24). It encourages investment in a totally non-productive area and denies permanent homes to millions. Let's get the money invested in real estate, propped up by this insidious form of welfare, back into the economy where it can be effective, and the government money saved back into social housing, so people can live in our major cities and start economically producing. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga Decent proposal Ross Gittins correctly identifies the elephant in the room ('HECS cuts the least PM should do', July 23). Gittins correctly identifies one of the main hurdles in overcoming the 'fair go' that most Australians aspire to – 'by making a percentage cut, rather than a flat dollar amount'. In the current proposal for a cut in HECS, 20 per cent of $100,000 is much more than 20 per cent of $5000. It would be fairer if the government instead took 20 per cent of the median debt and subtracted that amount from all debts. Some people would even get a refund. With tax reform on the table, all changes similar to this should be scrutinised for who benefits the most. Philip Jirman, Wallabi Point Once upon a time, many Australians were able to attend university free, in some cases even receiving an allowance for books or childcare (Letters, July 24). I was one of them; so were many of my 'mature age student' friends who were already parents. We studied nursing, teaching and social work, and worked and paid taxes for the next 30 years or more. Thanks, Gough. Margaret Wilkie, Peregian Beach (Qld)
West Australian
a day ago
- Health
- West Australian
Testosterone cream developed in WA revolutionises treatment for menopausal women but at treble the price
A testosterone cream developed in WA is revolutionising the way doctors treat a common side effect of menopause. But the medication is not listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and costs three times more than the men's version of the product. Androfeme is the only testosterone cream in Australia approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration to treat hypo-active sexual desire dysfunction — a common side effect of menopause responsible for a distressing loss of libido. Doctors and pharmacists have labelled medication a game changer but it's inaccessible to many women as it's not listed on the PBS, costing $100 for a tube that lasts 100 days. The equivalent treatment for men is on the PBS and costs less than a third of the price at $31.60. When mum-of-two Jane Capelli turned 40, she experienced hot flushes, insomnia, irritability, headaches, and zero libido. 'I didnt feel like my old self, something was missing,' she said. Her hormone levels plummeted while she was in the midst of perimenopause. Her doctor prescribed hormone replacement therapy but it was the testosterone cream, Androfeme, that made the biggest difference. 'I feel like my old self again, energy and clarity have improved, the fog feels like its lifting,' she said. Doctors hope Androfeme will be added to the PBS this year to help women like Ms Capelli. Lawley Pharmaceuticals pharmacist Michael Buckley said the product was a 'game changer' for women. 'Up until then women didn't have a female specific testosterone treatment and if they were going to be treated they were forced to use male products that couldn't be measured easily,' she said. General practitioner Lucy Caratti said testosterone had a huge impact on women's health. 'Testosterone is a huge player in women and it's been very much overlooked, been thought of as very much a male hormone, but we know its effects on the brain, heart, bones and of course the libido,' she said. 'Women are already paying quite a lot for their estrogen and progesterone so being able to subsidise some of the testosterone will make a really big difference for people to be able to afford it.' The company behind Androfeme is conducting trials to measure the impact of testosterone cream on other common menopause side effects including bone loss, loss of muscle strength and brain fog. If the results are positive, the cream could eventually be used to treat those symptoms.
9 News
4 days ago
- Health
- 9 News
Light plane crashes in Queensland
Cancer drug that offers rare cancer sufferers hope is listed on PBS A new drug that is the first of its kind for cancer is now on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
AU Financial Review
5 days ago
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Trade stand-off continues as US drug tariffs loom
Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme is not up for negotiation, says the federal government in the face of ramped-up US threats to triple the price of foreign medicines. In a continuation of his erratic approach to trade policy, President Donald Trump says taxes on drug imports could be announced as soon as the end of the month, with eventual tariff rates of up to 200 per cent. 'We're going to start off with a low tariff and give the pharmaceutical companies a year or so to build, and then we're going to make it a very high tariff,' Trump said. Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, under which the government negotiates medicine prices with manufacturers before subsidising them for patients, is reportedly in the crosshairs of US pharmaceutical companies lobbying the White House. The Albanese government has flatly refused any negotiation on the PBS. 'Obviously, they are being lobbied, as other US presidents have been for many years by the US big pharma industry, which wants not just Australia's scheme but other schemes like it around the world ... they want that freed up,' federal health minister Mark Butler said on Wednesday. 'They want to see their profits increased. That's been the case for decades and decades.' The PBS is crucial to ensure equitable and affordable access to medicines, according to Royal Australian College of GPs president Michael Wright. 'We should be proud of the prime minister and treasurer's steadfast support for maintaining the PBS, regardless of external pressure.' But complaints about such pricing schemes are common across the industry and include Australian medicine manufacturers, says Melbourne University research fellow Joe Carrello. 'They argue the increasing costs it takes to investigate and run trials and bring a new drug to market aren't keeping up with what the return is, given what the government is willing to pay,' Dr Carrello said. Dr Carrello, who helps evaluate medicines proposed for the PBS after their approval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, said there could be consequences to a relatively small market like Australia negotiating such lean prices. 'The fear is some US companies may decide against launching new drugs in Australia because comparatively, they're not going to get a good price,' he said. In the US, where a relatively free-market approach has been favoured, drug prices are almost three times higher than in 33 comparable income countries, according to RAND research. Australians have an average life expectancy of 83.2 years, compared to 77.4 years in the US, World Bank data shows. 'Without the PBS, we'd see people losing access to affordable medications and an increased spend per person on average but it wouldn't be evenly distributed,' Dr Carrello said.
West Australian
5 days ago
- Business
- West Australian
Trade stand-off continues as US drug tariffs loom
Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme is not up for negotiation, says the federal government in the face of ramped-up US threats to triple the price of foreign medicines. In a continuation of his erratic approach to trade policy, President Donald Trump says taxes on drug imports could be announced as soon as the end of the month, with eventual tariff rates of up to 200 per cent. "We're going to start off with a low tariff and give the pharmaceutical companies a year or so to build, and then we're going to make it a very high tariff," Mr Trump said. Australia's Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, under which the government negotiates medicine prices with manufacturers before subsidising them for patients, is reportedly in the crosshairs of US pharmaceutical companies lobbying the White House. The Albanese government has flatly refused any negotiation on the PBS. "Obviously, they are being lobbied, as other US Presidents have been for many years by the US big pharma industry, which wants not just Australia's scheme but other schemes like it around the world ... they want that freed up," federal health minister Mark Butler said on Wednesday. "They want to see their profits increased. That's been the case for decades and decades." The PBS is crucial to ensure equitable and affordable access to medicines, according to Royal Australian College of GPs president Michael Wright. "We should be proud of the prime minister and treasurer's steadfast support for maintaining the PBS, regardless of external pressure." But complaints about such pricing schemes are common across the industry and include Australian medicine manufacturers, says Melbourne University research fellow Joe Carrello. "They argue the increasing costs it takes to investigate and run trials and bring a new drug to market aren't keeping up with what the return is, given what the government is willing to pay," Dr Carrello told AAP. Dr Carrello, who helps evaluate medicines proposed for the PBS after their approval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, said there could be consequences to a relatively small market like Australia negotiating such lean prices. "The fear is some US companies may decide against launching new drugs in Australia because comparatively, they're not going to get a good price," he said. In the US, where a relatively free-market approach has been favoured, drug prices are almost three times higher than in 33 comparable income countries, according to RAND research. Australians have an average life expectancy of 83.2 years, compared to 77.4 years in the US, World Bank data shows. "Without the PBS, we'd see people losing access to affordable medications and an increased spend per person on average but it wouldn't be evenly distributed," Dr Carrello said. In a submission to a Productivity Commission inquiry, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer criticised the PBS's assessment process, claiming it under-accounted for drug and vaccine benefits over multiple budget cycles and missed broader social benefits. "Over the last decade, while the total PBS spend has increased, the proportion of the PBS that funds innovative medicines has seen minimal growth," Pfizer wrote in its submission. "This means, as a proportion of GDP, the government's expenditure on innovative medicines is going backwards." Federal treasurer Jim Chalmers has joined the health minister in ruling out any changes to the PBS in US trade negotiations. "This Albanese Labor government is about strengthening the PBS in the interests of our people, not weakening it in the interests of American multinationals," he recently said. As for Australian drug producers, the federal government was still weighing the impacts of the proposed tariffs on Australian exports, which were worth $2.2 billion in 2024. "(President Trump) indicated there was a long lead time, a long period where he'd be considering this possible step," Dr Chalmers said. That lead time was cut by a matter of months this week, in a sign the United States' push may be turning to a shove.
