Tag: public health

Why does Australia pay to lock people up rather than fix the reasons they leave?

Australia spends huge sums punishing desperate people at the border instead of spending earlier on the health, sanitation and opportunity that might help people build a life at home.

Sri Lanka has forced me to see something I have managed to avoid for years. I have travelled in first world countries, stayed in clean places, come home with photos and impressions, and rarely had to think about the public health conditions that shape daily life for millions of people. This trip changed that within hours. The vaccines alone told part of the story. The streets, the water and the smell told the rest.

Before I left Australia, I went to my chemist to check what I needed. COVID, flu, diphtheria, tetanus. Then typhoid. A check on hepatitis A. A conversation about Japanese encephalitis. Malaria risk. It felt like a long list for a short trip.

Then I arrived and understood exactly why the list exists.

You step outside and you see how easily disease can move. Waste sits in the open. Water carries what it should not. Heat amplifies all of it. This is daily life for people who do not have the infrastructure many Australians take for granted.

I am drinking a cocktail standing in water that you wouldn’t dream of drinking 

And then, in the middle of this, 0ur guide pointed out bus shelters funded by Australia.  He asked if we knew why they were there. We did not. He told us they carried warnings about people smugglers. Sri Lankans, he said, look to Australia and want the life they believe exists there.

Of course they do.

You can see the reasons from here. Reliable health care. Clean water. Education that leads somewhere. Jobs that pay. A future that feels secure. Add to this a strong Sri Lankan community already in place, people who help new arrivals find work, housing, a foothold.

So people make a calculation. They sell what they have. They take risks. They hand money to operators who promise a way out.

And this is where we shake our heads.

Australia spends huge sums punishing desperate people at the border instead of spending earlier on the health, sanitation and opportunity that might help people build a life at home.

We will pay a fortune to lock people up after they leave, still we drag our feet on helping create the conditions that might let them stay.

Standing here, that choice looks harder and harder and harder to defend.

We already spend money in places like this. Those bus shelters prove it. We fund messages telling people not to leave. We fund systems at the other end designed to stop them arriving. The spending is real. The intent is clear.

Still the gap sits in front of you.

What would change if a share of that money went into the basics people talk about here every day. Clean water systems. Waste management. Local health services. Vaccination programs delivered as standard care, not as travel protection for visitors. The kind of infrastructure that reduces disease, improves daily life and gives people a reason to stay.

The aim does not change. Fewer dangerous journeys. Fewer families risking everything. Less money flowing to people smugglers.

The starting point shifts.

Travel can be many things. This trip has stripped something back for me. Vaccines protect people like me when I arrive. Investment in public health and basic infrastructure could do far more for the people who live here.

Here is the question again for all of us.

Why are we willing to pay a fortune to lock people up after they leave, still so reluctant to help create the conditions that might let them stay?

The Danger of Celebrity Influence in Medical Treatment Decisions

Of all the money I have contributed to Elle Macpherson’s empire, it’s the $13 spent on that e-book that I regret the most. Because after reading about the “learnings” from her cancer journey, I cried. A lot.

I was diagnosed with stage 3 inflammatory breast cancer in November 2022. Since then, I’ve been fighting the cancer and learning about it. But one thing I have never done is blame myself for getting cancer in the first place. And nothing I have read, seen or heard had caused me to even consider it was my fault. Until I read Macpherson’s book. Source I never blamed myself for having breast cancer. Until I read Elle Macpherson’s book

 

As science progresses, researchers and medical experts readily acknowledge that what is considered best practice today may evolve in the future. Treatments for diseases, including cancer, are continuously refined as new research emerges. What is accepted as the most effective treatment today may well look different in a decade. However, when celebrities use their platform to promote unproven alternative treatments—particularly when they stand to gain financially—there is a real risk that their influence could lead to tragic consequences.

Elle Macpherson, a renowned supermodel, recently revealed in her memoir how she refused chemotherapy for her breast cancer diagnosis, despite the advice of 32 doctors. Instead, she chose a holistic approach involving meditation, acupuncture, and plant-based remedies. While Macpherson’s decision to forgo conventional treatment was her personal choice, her promotion of this approach raises important questions about the responsibility of public figures who are admired by millions.

In this instance, it is not merely a matter of personal autonomy. Macpherson is a global icon whose decisions are watched by millions of women, many of whom may be facing their own health challenges. Her choice to reject chemotherapy—widely regarded as a cornerstone in cancer treatment—has the potential to mislead women into thinking that a holistic approach might be equally effective in treating life-threatening diseases. The problem arises when a celebrity’s influence intersects with unproven medical treatments, particularly when the celebrity also profits from the wellness industry, as Macpherson does through her company, WelleCo.

The potential for harm is vast. Cancer treatment is a matter of life and death, and the promotion of alternative therapies not backed by science can result in unnecessary fatalities. Dr. Liz O’Riordan, a retired breast surgeon, has highlighted that choosing alternative treatments can increase the risk of dying by six times. Cancer researcher Dr. David Robert Grimes has labeled Macpherson’s promotion of holistic therapies as “incredibly irresponsible,” a sentiment echoed by many experts who understand the gravity of ignoring conventional treatments.

Medical professionals understand that navigating a cancer diagnosis is a deeply personal journey, and treatments are tailored to each individual. But these decisions should be grounded in robust clinical evidence, not anecdotal success stories or celebrity-endorsed wellness trends. The risk of allowing a star’s health choices to overshadow medical facts is that it can mislead people into thinking there are shortcuts around proven treatments, when in reality, lives are at stake.

It’s critical that we, as a society, approach wellness with an evidence-based mindset, not one influenced by those who stand to gain financially. Public figures must be aware of the weight their words carry, especially when it comes to health. We can only hope that celebrities promoting such approaches fully understand the consequences of their endorsements. Because while holistic treatments may provide comfort, no amount of meditation or tea ceremonies can replace the life-saving potential of evidence-based medicine.

#BreastCancerAwareness #MedicalEthics #CelebrityInfluence #AlternativeMedicine #ScienceAndHealth #CancerTreatment #HolisticTherapies #EvidenceBasedMedicine #WellnessIndustry #PublicHealth #ellemcpherson

Understanding the Roots. Why People Turn to Drugs to Cope in Today’s World

In today’s fast-paced, high-pressure society, the increasing use of drugs as a coping mechanism is a critical issue that often goes unaddressed in meaningful ways. This blog post aims to explore the deep-seated reasons behind this trend and suggest ways we can collectively address the underlying causes.

This post is a follow up to one in a series  “Beyond Crisis: Unveiling the Hidden Battles in Mental Health and Addiction” 

The Stigma and Silence

One of the most significant barriers to addressing drug use is the stigma attached to it. Drug addiction is frequently seen as a moral failing rather than a health issue. This perspective breeds judgment rather than support, silence instead of dialogue. As a result, individuals struggling with drug use often feel isolated and misunderstood, which only exacerbates the problem. By shifting our perception from blame to understanding, we can begin to break down the barriers that prevent effective solutions.

The Mental Health Crisis

It’s no secret that mental health challenges are on the rise, exacerbated by the isolation and stress of modern life. Yet, despite increasing awareness, mental health services remain inaccessible for many. High costs, long wait times, and limited resources mean that those who need help the most are often left to fend for themselves. Without proper support, drugs can seem like a quick fix to numb pain or escape reality, filling the gap left by inadequate mental health care.

Economic Despair

Economic instability is another powerful force driving individuals toward substance use. In areas where jobs are scarce and poverty is high, drugs can offer an escape from the harsh realities of everyday life. Moreover, the lack of economic opportunities can lead to feelings of hopelessness and low self-worth, which are often managed through drug use. Addressing this issue requires more than just economic policies; it demands a holistic approach to community development and support.

Prevention and Education

Preventive measures and education programs often miss the mark by focusing solely on the dangers of drug use or advocating for abstinence. What is frequently missing is an understanding of why individuals turn to drugs in the first place. Effective education needs to address the emotional and psychological aspects of drug use, teaching coping mechanisms that can replace the need for substances. Additionally, community-based programs that offer engagement and support can help fill the social void that many drug users experience.

Insights from the Front Lines: BlueLights Session 2

The insights from “Blue Lights”  Series 2, drawing from over 20 years of experience in pharmacy and involvement in the methadone program,   emphasise practical knowledge that we are yet to fully implement. These insights can guide us in refining our approach to drug-related issues, demonstrating the value of experience in creating more effective health strategies. It’s clear that the lessons learned in specialised programs like these are crucial for developing targeted interventions that address the specific needs of those affected by drug dependency.

The Role of First Responders

This episode of BlueLights sheds light on the extraordinary challenges that first responders face in the field. It brings to the forefront an important consideration: first responders shouldn’t be our first point of contact in mental health crises. Relying solely on first responders for incidents involving mental health or drug-related issues places undue stress on them and may not provide the best care for the individual in crisis. This underscores the need for accessible and specialised mental health services that can intervene before situations escalate to the point of requiring emergency response.

Moving Forward: A Call to Action

To truly address the issue of drug use as a coping mechanism, we need a compassionate, multi-pronged approach:

  1. Enhance Mental Health Services: Increase funding for mental health services to make them more accessible and affordable. Support should be readily available to those in crisis without bureaucratic hurdles.
  2. Economic and Community Development: Invest in communities, particularly those hit hardest by economic decline, to provide hope and opportunities that can reduce the appeal of drug use.
  3. Change the Narrative: Work towards destigmatising drug use. Encourage open conversations about addiction and mental health, and frame drug use as a public health issue, not a criminal one.
  4. Educate Effectively: Revamp educational programs to focus not just on the dangers of drugs, but also on teaching healthy coping mechanisms and understanding the psychological triggers for drug use.

By understanding the underlying reasons why people turn to drugs and addressing these issues head-on, we can begin to mitigate the need for such coping mechanisms. This is not just a health

#MentalHealthAwareness #DrugPrevention #PublicHealth #EndTheStigma #CommunitySupport #EconomicRecovery #FirstResponders #BlueLights #MentalHealthCare #CopingMechanism #PharmacyGuildAustralia

Reflecting on the Realities of Pharmacy Practice. A Closer Look at the UK Experience and the Dangers of a Top Down Approach

As I sit here watching the second season of “Blue Lights” on SBS, my thoughts drift back to my time in the UK, specifically my role in a well-being initiative within a corporate setting. The project involved setting up private consultation areas in pharmacies, designed to offer a space for pharmacists to have one-on-one conversations with their customers.

This seemed like a progressive idea at first, intended to foster a sense of confidentiality and personalised care. However, the reality of the situation was far more complex and, in some respects, very concerning.

The primary goal was to enhance patient engagement and privacy, but the implementation raised significant safety concerns for the pharmacists themselves. By confining these interactions to small, isolated boxes, they  inadvertently compromised the pharmacists’ safety. These professionals often found themselves in vulnerable situations, secluded and unseen by others, which is particularly risky when dealing with various challenging scenarios that arise in a pharmacy setting.

One of the fundamental issues here is the wide array of motivations that drive people into pharmacies. For some, like those managing chronic illnesses or seeking routine health advice, the pharmacy is a beacon of support. For others, including individuals struggling with drug addiction, it represents a focal point in their own complex, often fraught narratives. This diversity of customer needs and backgrounds can sometimes place pharmacists in unpredictable and potentially hazardous situations.

The unfortunate truth is that this initiative, like many others driven by corporate mandates, seemed to lack a deep understanding of the practical implications and the human element at the core of pharmacy work. Decision-makers are too often detached from the day-to-day realities faced by the pharmacists on the ground.

In reflecting on this experience, I’m reminded of the broader issue of corporate strategies that fail to grasp the intricacies of human interactions and the real-world environments in which these policies are deployed. As I engage with the real world and consider their perceptions of such corporate interventions, it becomes increasingly clear that there is a disconnect. Many people outside these settings are unaware of the complexities and dangers potentially lurking behind seemingly beneficial corporate policies.

This realisation calls for a more nuanced approach to corporate strategy in healthcare settings, one that prioritises the safety and well-being of all parties involved, particularly those on the front lines. It’s about finding a balance that respects the needs of the patients while ensuring the security and support of the healthcare providers. In essence, this is a call for empathy, understanding, and, most importantly, a commitment to real and meaningful engagement with the realities on the ground.

#PharmacySafety #HealthcarePolicy #CorporateWellbeing #PatientCare #PharmacistSupport #HealthcareInnovation #DrugSafety #PublicHealth #UKHealthcare  #HealthcareReform #llyodspharmacy