Osteoporosis medication dispensing for older Australian women from 2002 to 2010: Influences of publications, guidelines, marketing activities and policy

Purpose Developments in anti-osteoporosis medications (AOMs) have led to changes in guidelines and policy, which, along with media and marketing strategies, have had an impact upon the prescribing of AOM. The aim was to examine patterns of AOM dispensing in older women (aged 76–81 years at baseline) from 2002 to 2010. Methods Administrative claims data were used to describe AOM dispensing in 4649 participants (born in 1921–1926 and still alive in 2011) in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health. The patterns were interpreted in the context of changes in guidelines, indications for subsidy, publications (scholarly and general media), and marketing activities. Results Total use of AOM increased from 134 DDD/1000/day in 2002 to 216 DDD/1000/day in 2007 but then decreased to 184 DDD/1000/day in 2010. Alendronate was the most commonly dispensed AOM but decreased from 2007, while use of risedronate (2002 onward), strontium ranelate (2007 onward) and zoledronic acid (2008 onward) increased. Etidronate and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) prescriptions gradually decreased over time. The decline in alendronate dispensing coincided with increases of other bisphosphonates and publicity about potential adverse effects of bisphosphonates, despite relaxing indications for bone density testing and subsidy for AOM. Conclusions Overall dispense of AOM from 2002 reached a peak in 2007 and thereafter declined despite increases in therapeutic options and improved subsidised access. The recent decline in overall AOM dispensing seems to be explained largely by negative publicity rather than specific changes in guidelines and policy.

Teaching about deliberative politics: Case studies of classroom–community learning projects in four nations

Theories of deliberative politics position grass-roots community members as more than spectators of politics, and instead recognize their capacity for political engagement by discussing and evaluating options in order to make decisions about issues affecting community life. The processes and products of journalism can assist deliberative politics by providing community members with information resources that are vital for understanding the root causes of problems, weighing up competing claims, forming networks around shared concerns, reaching decisions and undertaking action. This article presents the findings of case studies of four community–classroom projects--one each from Australia, New Zealand, the United States and South Africa--that develop the capacity of journalism students to be effective contributors to deliberative politics. The research points to the importance of learning activities that prepare students to work in diverse communities, map significant community places and structures, identify leaders and stakeholders, engage in respectful dialogue about problems and perspectives, and appreciate community frames and values.

Zaburoni HIV case: The law can sometimes be an ass, but not in this case

Lana Nowakowski's opinion piece on the High Court decision in the Zaburoni HIV case attacks "Queensland's absurd necessity to prove intention on transmission" and argues that "changes to the law are long overdue". Both claims are wrong...

Food waste, power, and corporate social responsibility in the Australian food supply chain

By examining corporate social responsibility (CSR) and power within the context of the food supply chain, this paper illustrates how food retailers claim to address food waste while simultaneously setting standards that result in the large-scale rejection of edible food on cosmetic grounds. Specifically, this paper considers the powerful role of food retailers and how they may be considered to be legitimately engaging in socially responsible behaviors to lower food waste, yet implement practices that ultimately contribute to higher levels of food waste elsewhere in the supply chain. Through interviews with key actors in the Australian fresh fruit and vegetable supply chain, we highlight the existence of a legitimacy gap in corporate social responsibility whereby undesirable behaviors are pushed elsewhere in the supply chain. It is argued that the structural power held by Australia’s retail duopoly means that supermarkets are able to claim virtuous and responsible behaviors, despite counter claims from within the fresh food industry that the food supermarkets’ private quality standards mean that fresh food is wasted. We argue that the supermarkets claim CSR kudos for reducing food waste at the expense of other supply chain actors who bear both the economic cost and the moral burden of waste, and that this is a consequence of supermarkets’ remarkable market power in Australia.