Key federal election asks from across the health sector, scope of practice matters, and wide-ranging rural health and workforce concerns are covered in the column this week.
Our columnist also shares a lobbying tip for those seeking to influence Federal Budget outcomes, and recommendations to improve the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) safety net system and the uptake of 60-day scripts.
Diverging views about aged care star ratings, and some significant gaps in the Royal Australian College of GPs response to the first interim report of the Medicare Urgent Care Clinics (UCC) Program Evaluation are also detailed.
The quotable?
SNAICC is encouraging all sides of government to invest in evidence-based policies that we know work, rather than feeding into ill-informed, fear-driven narratives that ultimately don’t serve our children, families or the wider community.”
Charles Maskell-Knight writes:
Soon after the Prime Minister announced on 28 March that the next federal election would be held on 3 May, Croakey inboxes began receiving media releases from health groups setting out their policy prescriptions for whoever wins the election.
First cab off the rank was Catholic Health Australia (CHA), with a media release issued at 8.10 am setting out a number of priorities, including ensuring the long-term viability of private hospitals and reforming private health insurance.
The Royal Australian College of GPs (RACGP) followed less than two minutes later, reiterating its call for a 40 percent increase in patient rebates for longer consults and a 25 percent increase in patient rebates for mental health.
SNAICC – National Voice for our Children called for a bipartisan approach to Closing the Gap for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, and said it was “more important than ever that we see a bipartisan commitment to early education and child and family safety to ensure our children get the best start in life”.
“The 2025 election comes at a critical time when Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are removed from their families, communities and cultures and placed into child protection and juvenile justice systems at appallingly disproportionate rates, with little to no early intervention and diversion programs to help,” said CEO Catherine Liddle, in an election statement.
“Addressing this national disgrace should be top of mind for all Australian political parties and decision makers. SNAICC is encouraging all sides of government to invest in evidence-based policies that we know work, rather than feeding into ill-informed, fear-driven narratives that ultimately don’t serve our children, families or the wider community.”
Advanced Pharmacy Australia recommended expansion of the Partnered Pharmacists Medication Prescribing collaborative care model; establishment of bilateral Pharmaceutical Reform Agreements in NSW and ACT; and formation of a dedicated Medicine Shortages and Discontinuations Clinical Advice Service.
The Association of Australian Medical Research Institutes (AAMRI) called for immediate action – particularly funding research on-costs – to ensure the survival of the nation’s health and medical research sector. This follows AAMRI’s Budget night comment that “it was shocked to learn that research funds have not even increased in line with inflation – in reality, funding has actually gone backwards”.
The Australian College of Nursing called on all parties to commit to implementing the “practical, sensible and affordable” recommendations of the Scope of Practice Review.
The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation (ANMF) said “we now need all of our political leaders to outline how they will work with the ANMF to build on the wins we’ve achieved under the Albanese Government – and how they will stand-up for nurses and midwives with measures which improve their pay and everyday working conditions and with more cost-of-living relief”.
The Australian Physiotherapy Association recommended allowing patients to see physiotherapists without a GP referral for MBS-funded services; developing musculoskeletal care pathways to reduce reliance on surgery and opioids; and investment in preventive programs, including falls and chronic pain management.
The National Rural Health Alliance urged all parties to “implement a National Rural Health Strategy to coordinate Commonwealth, State, and Territory policy, investment and service delivery”.
Occupational Therapy Australia released its federal election toolkit, with “27 strategic calls to action” across workforce, disability, mental health, primary care, aged care, and veterans’ services.
Rural Doctors Association of Australia (RDAA) President Dr RT Lewandowski said “for rural doctors so far the indicators are pretty poor that either Labor, Liberal or even the Nationals are going to give any attention to actually improving access to a doctor, or other health care providers, for rural and remote Australians… We are hopeful that there are announcements yet to come that will look to this major issue”.
The Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) also urged all political parties to prioritise the needs of rural, remote, and First Nations communities, particularly by strengthening the Rural Generalist workforce.
The Alliance for Gambling Reform (AGR) issued a statement encouraging Australians to talk to candidates about banning gambling advertisements.
AGR said “almost two years ago, a parliamentary inquiry into online gambling headed by one of the government’s own, the late Peta Murphy MP, presented 31 recommendations that would significantly reduce gambling harm – including a full ban on all gambling advertising and inducements”.
“The Government still has not officially responded to the report, and the Opposition hasn’t done much better… We want all candidates to publicly commit to supporting the Murphy Report recommendations, especially the ban on gambling ads.
“When you speak with candidates in your electorate, ask them directly: ‘Will you commit to banning gambling ads?’
“Tell them that 76 percent of Australians support this change.”
The Budget
The election announcement was made while the ink on the Budget papers was barely dry. The Budget handed down on 25 March did not include any significant new announcements for health (or anything else much, except income tax cuts).
Croakey has covered reaction to the Budget from First Nations groups here and from numerous other groups here, and published an article from Peter Breadon and Elizabeth Baldwin of the Grattan Institute about “the cost of leaving” important health reform agenda issues unaddressed.
Croakey editor-in-chief Dr Melissa Sweet has compiled a series of suggestions from health sector groups and commentators on what else the Budget could have done here, while my views on the Budget – “no surprises and some significant disappointments” – can be found here.
This column will only include Budget reaction from groups not included elsewhere in Croakey’s coverage, as well as non-Budget news.
A number of groups issued statements on Monday calling on the Government to include items in the Budget, and then expressed disappointment on Tuesday evening when their suggestions were not accepted.
Here is a pro lobbying tip for them: submissions to the Expenditure Review Committee are usually finalised two or three months before the Budget, which means that the time for lobbying for a pet project or program is at least six months before the Budget, not 24 hours.
In Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s reply to the Budget he announced that, if elected, the Coalition would spend an additional $400 million on youth and mental health services.
He undertook to “expand the remit of the National Centre for Excellence in Youth Mental Health [he] created in 2014 into a National Institute [and] boost regional services and expand treatment to place Australia at the forefront of youth mental health treatment in the world”.
Mental Health Australia welcomed these commitments.
Dutton also gave a curious undertaking to introducing a “guaranteed funding for health, education and essential services bill”, with no further detail about what this would contain or achieve.
World Tuberculosis Day
Moving away from the Budget, 24 March is World Tuberculosis Day, chosen to mark the date in 1882 when Robert Koch announced his discovery of the bacterium that causes tuberculosis.
(It is also the date of the death of Queen Elizabeth I (1603), the dedication of the Brandenburg Concertos by Johann Sebastian Bach (1721), and my birthday.)
The World Health Organization (WHO) said the theme for this year was “Yes! We Can End TB: Commit, Invest, Deliver”, and that the day “offered an opportunity to reflect on ongoing efforts and encourage stronger commitment at local, national and international levels to end TB”.
In a veiled reference to the US, the WHO went on to argue that “stronger commitment is crucial, especially as declining international funding for TB in the current geopolitical climate threatens the achievement of global targets to end TB by 2030”.
In Australia the Burnet Institute published an article marking the day by Professor Helen Cox, head of prevention of tuberculosis and other airborne pathogens.
Cox wrote “there are currently close to 11 million people who develop TB every year and more than a million people will die as a result. More lives will be lost to TB as a result of the near total withdrawal of US funding for essential TB services…”
“While the effects [of the dismantling of USAID] will be felt most acutely across Africa, we will also feel the effects in our region.”
She went on “continued Australian leadership in TB could play a key role, both in funding innovation and in supporting national leadership within affected countries”.
“Australia has provided substantial support for the Papua New Guinean TB program which has directly saved lives, strengthened local capacity and prevented cross-border spread…
“Given the immediate shortfall in TB funding, now is the time for donors and individual countries to action that commitment, followed by sustained support for TB elimination.”
The ABC reported that as part of the Budget and a redirection of aid funds to Asia and the Pacific, the Government is “delaying or suspending payments worth $119 million to global funds designed to fight poverty and disease – including the UN Development Program, the Global Fund to Fight HIV, Malaria and TB, and the Global Partnership for Education.”.
More details can be found in an article by Melissa Conley Tyler, Honorary Fellow at The University of Melbourne’s Asia Institute, which was republished by Croakey from The Conversation.
Ministers and government
Aged Care Minister Anika Wells issued statements on price guidance under the Support at Home program due to begin on 1 July for providers and consumers.
Articles in trade ezines and chatter on social media platforms suggests apprehension on the part of both groups about how the transition to the new pricing regime will work.
Late last year the Department of Health and Aged Care undertook a public consultation on proposed design changes to the aged care star ratings system. Last week it released a summary report on the consultations, prepared by KPMG, including the views of providers as well as older people and their families.
These groups often had sharply different perspectives. For example, “among older people and their representatives, 60 percent agreed or strongly agreed [that a home should be limited to three stars for one year after a formal regulatory notice has been resolved], compared to 64 percent of providers who disagreed or strongly disagreed”.
While providers’ views may be interesting, the point of the aged care star ratings is to help inform the public of the comparative quality of aged care homes, and the public’s views should be given far more weight.
On 27 March the Department released the first interim report of the Medicare Urgent Care Clinics (UCC) Program Evaluation – two months after it was presented to the Department by consultancy group Nous.
The Royal Australian College of GPs (RACGP) seized on the finding that the average UCC presentation cost $246.50, arguing that “this sum is cheaper than a visit to a hospital emergency department; however, it’s significantly more expensive than a standard GP consult, which costs taxpayers a little over $42. So, your average urgent care clinic visit, seeing a GP who you may not even know, is more than five times as expensive as a consult with your regular GP”.
The interim evaluation “estimates that around 334,000 ED presentations would be avoided annually if Medicare UCCs were operating at their stabilised activity levels post-opening”, and that “the average Government funding that would be paid… for these avoided ED attendances is estimated… to be $616 per presentation”.
After allowing for the slightly higher than average UCC cost of avoided ED presentations, the evaluation estimates “a net saving to governments of around $368 per presentation”.
It is also worth noting that the RACGP comparison implicitly assumes that GP services are widely available after hours and at weekends, when they clearly aren’t. And while the cost to taxpayers may be a little over $42, the cost to patients in many areas will be $50 or more if the GP does not bulkbill.
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) announced it had seized more than 5,000 vapes, 7,000 nicotine pouches, and over 2,000 units of alleged illicit sildenafil in two locations in Penrith.
The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) released monthly data on the MBS and PBS, as well as a report on Queensland performance against the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework, a report on oral health outreach services provided to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the NT, and a report on clients receiving opioid pharmacotherapy in Australia, as well as prescribers and dispensers.
It also released a series of articles on injuries, hospitalisations and deaths due to choking and suffocation, drowning and submersion, and electricity and air pressure (including radiation and extreme ambient air temperature).
The AIHW also reported on Residential Aged Care Quality Indicators for the December quarter last year.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics released data on Apparent Consumption of Selected Foodstuffs under cover of a media release, Australians eating more meat but less chocolate.
Consumer and public health groups
Before the Budget, the Consumers Health Forum (CHF) welcomed the reduction in the PBS general copayment, but argued that the Government should automate the PBS safety net system.
Under current arrangements, patients have to keep track of copayments manually, which is difficult for those using more than one pharmacy.
CHF said almost 500,000 people who qualified for reduced copayments in 2024 missed out due to the current paper-based tracking system.
CHF CEO Dr Elizabeth Deveny argued “the Government needs to introduce an automated real-time PBS spend tracking system that would automatically apply benefits once consumers hit the threshold, similar to the Medicare Safety Net”.
Peter Breadon and Wendy Hu from the Grattan Institute wrote an article in The Conversation on the introduction of 60-day scripts under the PBS, which they said was not living up to its promise.
Their analysis showed that a year after the first tranche of medicines became available for a 60-day scripts, only 30 percent were dispensed on that basis.
Currently only 21 percent of all eligible medicines are dispensed under a 60-day script.
They suggest that inertia may be to blame for the low take-up, as prescribing software will automatically generate the same script it generated last time.
Breadon and Wu suggest that:
- prescribing software should be amended to have 60-days as the default option for relevant medicines
- the RACGP should encourage GPs to write longer scripts
- Primary Health Networks should provide feedback to GPs on how they compare with their peers
- the Government and consumer groups should run campaigns to inform patients about their options.
They conclude that “longer scripts are a triple win: savings on medicines for patients, budget savings for the government, and more time for GPs and pharmacists”.
Palliative Care Australia (PCA) presented a petition with 40,000 signatures to Parliament on Budget day calling for better access to palliative care.
CEO Camilla Rowland said “as expected, this week’s Budget didn’t contain any new measures specifically directed at palliative care; but we hope that as the election campaign unfolds, we will hear more from all sides about better access to palliative care”.
Trade unions
Before the Budget, the Australian College of Nursing called on the Government “to fund measures to support nurses experiencing perimenopause and menopause, [including] $5 million for a national awareness campaign about the impacts of perimenopause and menopause in the nursing workforce; and $3 million to develop and deliver an online perimenopause and menopause education program for nurses, incorporating a train-the-trainer approach”.
As I predicted in last week’s column, all groups involved in the private health sector are in favour of more transparency, but every group has a different view about what should be transparent.
The Australian Dental Association (ADA) issued a statement “calling for more transparency around the muddy waters of private health insurance policies to bring clarity to around 15 million Australian policyholders”.
ADA President Dr Chris Sanzaro said people “sign up for policies believing these will make medical and dental care more affordable but say they don’t know what’s covered”.
“The policy small print doesn’t even cover what’s included and what isn’t – hidden ‘business rules’ from insurers deny claims at the time they’re needed,” Sanzaro said.
The one-page Private Health Information Statements insurers are required to provide policyholders – and which can also be found at www.privatehealth.gov.au – already show annual limits and example rebates.
But given there are hundreds of items on the ADA schedule, showing rebates for every item would take up a dozen pages and bore most policyholders to tears.
All policyholders really need to know is that for everything except routine care, the average rebate for virtually all dental services will be about half the fee charged.
The Australian Medical Association (AMA) warned that “falling influenza immunisation rates due to vaccine fatigue and misinformation, combined with the risk of a horror flu season like the one experienced in the Northern Hemisphere, could result in more lives lost from flu and other respiratory diseases this year”.
It encouraged people to start booking vaccinations now.
The day before the Budget, the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia (PSA) released its 2025 federal election platform, including proposals to:
- fund measures to enhance the professional practice of pharmacists
- fund training programs to upskill pharmacists to practice at their full scope
- allow pharmacists to prescribe PBS medicines within their scope of practice
- implement a national incident logging and pharmacovigilance system
- remove service provider caps for Home Medicines Reviews
- increase remuneration for Aged Care Onsite Pharmacists
- embed pharmacists in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Services
- double Workforce Incentive Program (WIP) funding to support more pharmacists in general practice.
Nobody can argue against health workers operating at the top of their scope of practice.
However, the fact that pharmacists need to be “upskilled” to practise at their full scope suggests that it isn’t in fact the full scope for which they are trained and qualified – it is something more.
The RACGP said its New South Wales and ACT Chair, Dr Rebekah Hoffman, was visiting GP clinics across the New England region “to discuss how to further improve rural general practice care so that no patients miss out”.
After acknowledging current programs that are assisting to place trainees in the region, Hoffman said more was needed.
“We must fix the ‘broken pipeline’ and ensure medical students have a way to continue training regionally as they move into their postgraduate years,” Hoffman said.
“So, we continue to urge state and local governments to work together and offer incentives such as housing, childcare, spousal employment and other benefits to boost the attractiveness of working as a GP in a rural or remote area and make the transition as smooth as possible. We also repeat our calls for government to facilitate more regional and rural placements for medical school students.”
Hoffman also called for more assistance for rural practices taking on GP trainees.
The day before the Budget, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) called for the Budget to include action to address medicine shortages and the long waits to see specialists faced by rural Australians.
RACP President Professor Jennifer Martin said Australia needs to invest in domestic manufacturing of medicine and in better systems to monitor medicine shortages and improve communication to prescribers.
Martin also called on the Government to fund additional specialist training positions in regional and rural communities, saying that “the data shows that medical specialists who train in rural areas are more likely to stay and practise there”.
Finally, Martin called for increased investment to deal with the health impacts of climate change.
“The increased frequency and intensity of weather events such as extreme heat, floods and cyclones like the one which has just battered our east coast are harming patients and putting immense pressure on our healthcare system.”
“We are looking to the Government to fully fund the National Health and Climate Strategy to ensure health systems can keep up, and to fund a rapid transition to a low carbon economy.”
The day after the Budget, the RACP warned that “widespread medicine shortages will continue without funding to address them”.
Martin also said the RACP was “disappointed there was not more in the budget to fix the shortage of medical specialists and address the health impacts of climate change”.
Perhaps next time the RACP can provide its ideas for the Budget to the Government before the printing presses start to roll.
The RDAA urged the Government before the Budget “to commit to a National Rural Health Strategy… to ensure the healthcare needs of rural and remote communities get the focus they deserve in the development of federal health policies and measures”.
RDAA President Dr RT Lewandowski said “metro-centric policy making” fails to recognise the particular issues with health delivery in the bush, and that policies need to be designed specifically to work in the bush.
He said “when rural and remote policy is developed by rural and remote clinicians and consumers, the results seem to hit the mark”.
“As an example, in recent times, the National Rural Generalist Pathway and Single Employer Model initiatives have demonstrated encouraging results in increasing access to medical services in rural and remote Australia,” he said.
He argued that “a National Rural Health Strategy would enable outcomes from the Federal Government’s recent Review of General Practice Incentives, Review of After-hours Primary Care Programs and Policy, Working Better for Medicare Review and Scope of Practice Review to be fully considered through a ‘rural lens’ so recommendations can be progressed appropriately, and we can get the policy settings right for the rural and remote context”.
SARRAH (Services for Australian Rural and Remote Allied Health) “expressed profound disappointment with the 2025 Federal Budget, which has once again ignored the critical contributions allied health professionals make to the health and wellbeing of all Australians”.
“Despite repeated calls for investment and persistent workforce shortages in this sector, the Budget has failed to allocate any funding to support these essential healthcare providers”.
Industry groups
Ageing Australia (the aged care providers organisation) made a series of recommendations ahead of the Budget “aimed at relieving the ongoing workforce crisis in Australian aged care, transitioning to the New Aged Care Act and supporting sustainability”.
One of the recommendations was that the Government “cost and fund high quality care, including new program administration and business costs, as per the definitions in the new Act”.
Given the new Act does not impose a duty to provide high quality care, this recommendation seems unnecessary!
Other Ageing Australia recommendations included $391.5 million annually to re-introduce the Aged Care Payroll Tax Supplement paid to private residential care providers; $600 million to establish an ICT grant program for aged care providers to meet the obligations of the new Act; and the ability to charge Care Management fees of 20 percent for the first year of the Support at Home program “to support transition and market stability”.
Following the Budget, Ageing Australia welcomed the Government’s commitment to funding wage increases for aged care staff, noting that it was “hearing reports from across the sector that it’s becoming easier to attract and keep aged care workers”.
However, it was disappointed that its other requests for funding were not met, and expressed concern at the lack of transition time to the new Act beginning on 1 July.
The Australian Diagnostic Imaging Association welcomed “moves by the Government to address Medicare settings that previously prevented women from claiming multiple breast imaging services on the same day”.
But the association said it was “disappointed that a crucial review announced in the last Budget to ‘identify any gender bias in the rates of Medicare rebates and payments’ appears to have stalled”.
The Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association (AHHA) announced the release by the Deeble Institute for Health Policy Research of an Evidence Brief Delivering tangible population-based outcomes via an alliance model: South West Primary Health Care Alliance Queensland.
AHHA Chief Executive Kylie Woolcock said “‘the alliance governance framework…allows for whole-of-system population-based healthcare delivery bringing independent organisations together around improving outcomes for the people in their communities”.
Catholic Health Australia (CHA) released its response to the exposure draft of the new Financial and Prudential Standards released by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission.
CHA said that “the proposed Liquidity Standard would have a significantly detrimental impact on providers’ operations and the investability of the aged care sector to little discernible benefit on the sector’s financial and prudential health”.
“CHA and its members have serious concerns relating to the scope outlined in the proposed new Liquidity Standard, with extensive unintended consequences noted on investing in property and refurbishments; on retirement villages, independent living units and other entities of the provider; and on the ability of CHA members to invest in our Mission work. The transition timeframe is also far too short and would be extremely hard for many providers’ Boards to comply with.”
Day Hospitals Australia (DHA) said it was pleased to announce that the Government had decided to defer to 1 July 2026 reclassifying MBS item 42738 (“paracentesis of anterior chamber or vitreous cavity, or both, for the injection of therapeutic substances, or the removal of aqueous or vitreous humours for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes, 1 or more of, as an independent procedure”) from a Type B procedure to a Type C procedure.
The reclassification was recommended by the MBS review of ophthalmology, and had been due to take effect from 1 July 2025.
If a Type B procedure is carried out in a day hospital rather than a doctor’s rooms, private health insurers must pay a hospital benefit of at least $274 for it – even though the MBS review of ophthalmology said this particular service was “a procedure which does not normally require hospital treatment and can be safely performed out-of-hospital”.
Last financial year almost 660,000 procedures were provided. If a quarter of these were carried out in day hospitals (as seems likely based on the rate of growth identified in the MBS review report), insurers would have paid about $45 million in benefits to day hospitals for treatment that a committee of ophthalmologists considers does not require a hospital admission.
No wonder DHA is pleased that the status quo will continue for another 15 months.
Medicines Australia welcomed the health initiatives in the Budget, but called for a focus on health technology assessment reform to reduce the time between a medicine being registered by the TGA and included on the PBS.
Private Healthcare Australia (PHA, the private health insurers lobby group) released a report on out-of-pocket medical costs for hospital services by state.
It found “the median out-of-pocket fee for a medical procedure in the private health system was $240 nationwide in 2023”.
However, the ACT median was $591, or 146 percent higher than the national average. The NSW and Queensland medians were also above the national figure at $279 and $258 respectively.
The data also showed a 12 percent rise in fees in 2023 following a period of relative stability.
PHA CEO Dr Rachel David said “we urgently need more transparency of medical billing so consumers and their GPs can see a specialist doctor’s fees before choosing one, and we need to ensure consumers are provided with clear, easy to understand quotes for medical treatment so they don’t get surprised by unexpected fees during or after the process”.
Politicians and parliamentary committees
The Senate Community Affairs Committee inquiry into access to diagnosis and treatment for people in Australia with tick-borne diseases delivered its report on 26 March.
In a rare show of restraint by a Senate committee, the report included only seven recommendations, including proposals for better data collection, better public information, and more research.
The Senate Select Committee inquiry into PFAS delivered an interim report recommending that:
- the committee be reappointed in the 48th Parliament
- various Departments work with the Wreck Bay Aboriginal Community Council “to improve signage, messaging and information provided to the community”
- the Parliament consider an inquiry into “governance, representation, and service provision in the Jervis Bay Territory”.
International organisations
The WHO joined UNICEF, the World Bank, and the UN Department of Economic and Social Affair in warning that “decades of progress in child survival are now at risk as major donors have announced or indicated significant funding cuts to aid ahead”.
“Reduced global funding for life-saving child survival programmes is causing healthcare worker shortages, clinic closures, vaccination programme disruptions, and a lack of essential supplies, such as malaria treatments,” the agencies said.
“These cuts are severely impacting regions in humanitarian crises, debt-stricken countries, and areas with already high child mortality rates. Global funding cuts could also undermine monitoring and tracking efforts, making it harder to reach the most vulnerable children.”
Finally
The appalling approach of the Trump Administration to health, science and diversity was reflected in the cancellation of numerous National Institutes of Health (NIH) research grants on 21 March.
Here are a few examples that popped up in my LinkedIn and Bluesky feeds (and also see more examples in the Croakey archives on the Trump Administration and health).
The first related to maternal and infant mortality.
By way of context, the maternal mortality rate in the US is about 18 per 100,000 births, over three times the European average, while for Black women the rate is about 50 per 100,000 live births, or ten times the European average.
The same broad pattern applies to infant mortality – a European average of under three deaths per 1,000 infants, a US rate about double that, and a Black US rate about 2.5 times the US average.
Associate Professor Jaime Slaughter-Acey from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has been carrying out a research project funded by the NIH “focused on the social environment, lifecourse, epigenetics, and birth outcomes in Black families”.
Slaughter-Acey said the “research aimed to uncover the complex interactions between social factors and biological processes that affect birth outcomes, with the goal of developing interventions to improve the health and well-being of Black mothers and their children”.
This week she was notified by the NIH that the project grant had been terminated because “this award no longer effectuates agency priorities” and that research programs based on “amorphous equity objectives” are considered “antithetical to scientific inquiry.”
As Slaughter-Acey said “this rationale disregards the critical need to address health disparities and the systemic inequities that contribute to the high mortality rates among Black mothers and infants… [the decision] undermines progress in understanding the unique challenges Black families face and developing strategies to address them”.
“It also sends a discouraging message to researchers committed to advancing health equity and reducing disparities.”
Another researcher whose grant was terminated was Assistant Professor Kirsty Clark from Vanderbilt University, who was investigating “alarming and disturbing trends” in preteen suicide, especially among “children who report a minority sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression”.
Clark was told that “research programs based on gender identity are often unscientific, have little identifiable return on investment, and do nothing to enhance the health of many Americans”.
She wrote “whether or not you choose to believe it, sexual and gender minority children, teens, and families exist”.
“They deserve to be included in our research. Without data, we don’t know how to prevent harm [and] we can’t prevent deaths.”
Based on these examples, it would appear that for the Trump Administration research is fine as long as it focuses on white cisgender Americans, but research that acknowledges any sort of diversity is not.
However, another project that was cancelled was the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPPOS), “a 30-year longitudinal study which continues to follow 1,700 dedicated participants in 30 institutions across the US to better understand the relationship between diet and exercise, diabetes and Alzheimer’s Disease”.
The American Diabetes Association (ADA) said “eliminating funding for the DPPOS 30-year nationwide study of program participants means the loss of a decade’s worth of important findings and progress toward diabetes prevention and understanding Alzheimer’s disease and associated dementia in diabetes, a recent focus of the study”.
“The ADA is engaging with congressional leaders on diabetes and the Trump Administration to express our concerns, especially as this funding decision seems to be at odds with the Department of Health and Human Services’ commitment to combatting chronic disease in the United States.”
Perhaps the Trump Administration believes only Black people get diabetes.
Consultations and inquiries
Here is our weekly list of requests by government bodies and parliamentary committees for responses to consultations or submissions to inquiries, arranged in order of submission deadlines. Please let us know if there are any to add for next week’s column.
Department of Health and Aged Care
Consultation on PHI Rules sunsetting in October 2025
31 March
Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission
Consultation on cost recovery arrangements
1 April
Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care
Public consultation on potential changes to the accreditation of general practices
4 April
Department of Health and Aged Care
Emerging Mental Health Curriculum Framework for Undergraduate Health Degrees
4 April
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
Caffeine in sports foods and general foods
15 April
Coalition of Peaks
Independent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-Led Review of the Closing the Gap agreement
16 April
Department of Health and Aged Care
Design of a national registration scheme to support personal care workers employed in aged care
17 April
Department of Health and Aged Care
Draft Quality Standards for Human Research Ethics Committees and their Host Institutions
17 April
Department of Health and Aged Care – Gene Technology Regulator
Invitation to comment on a field trial of genetically modified canola
17 April
National Health and Medical Research Council
Scoping survey on clinical practice guidelines on the diagnosis and management of myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome
27 April
Department of Health and Aged Care – Gene Technology Regulator
Trial of a genetically modified (GM) vaccine for the prevention of respiratory disease in horses
28 April
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
Permitting small dogs and cats in aircraft cabins
30 April
Department of Health and Aged Care – Gene Technology Regulator
Clinical trial of a genetically modified human adenovirus for treatment of melanoma
6 May
Therapeutic Goods Administration
Proposed changes to the IVD medical device classifications and definitions
8 May
Department of Health and Aged Care
Updating clinical guidelines for dementia care
31 December
Charles Maskell-Knight PSM was a senior public servant in the Commonwealth Department of Health for over 25 years before retiring in 2021. He worked as a senior adviser to the Aged Care Royal Commission in 2019-20. He is a member of Croakey Health Media; we thank and acknowledge him for providing this column as a probono service to our readers. Follow on X/Twitter at @CharlesAndrewMK, and on Bluesky at: @charlesmk.bsky.social.
