Connect with us

Health and Wellness

Are you planning for your old age? Here’s what changes to aged care mean for you

Published

on

Last week, Parliament passed sweeping reforms to Australia’s aged care system. These “once in a generation”, which is due to start on July 1 next yr, goals to improve the best way care is delivered to older Australians at home, of their communities and in care homes.

The recent Act on Care for the Elderly focuses on: improving quality and safety, protecting rights older people and ensuring financial stability caregivers of the elderly.

The key change is the introduction of a brand new payment system, requiring wealthier people to pay more for non-clinical services.

If you – or a loved one – are planning to care for older people, here’s what these changes could mean for you.

What to expect from a house care review

Over the last decade, there was a noticeable shift towards “aging at home.” The variety of Australians using home care has greater than 4 timesexceeding the number living in nursing homes.

To meet the growing demand, the federal government is adding home care places over the following two years, with the goal of reducing waiting times to just three months.

From July 1, 2025 Support at home will replace Home care packages program. The table below shows a few of the key differences between the 2 programs.


Department of Health 2024

Home Care Packages are currently delivered as a part of 4 annual levels of presidency subsidiescovering the prices of care and management of healthcare providers. As a part of home support, the variety of home care budget tiers will double to eightwith the high rising to A$78,000.

This is to provide more tailored support and to accommodate those requiring a better level of care.

Under the brand new system, recipients will receive quarterly budgets tailored to their funding level and can work with their chosen provider to allocate funds between three broad categories of services: :

  • clinical care equivalent to nursing or physiotherapy

  • independence support, including personal care, transport and social support

  • assistance with on a regular basis life, e.g. cleansing, gardening and delivering meals.

Clinical care services can be fully funded by the federal government as they’re crucial to supporting health and stopping hospitalization.

However, beneficiaries will contribute to the fee of independence and every day living services under a brand new payment model, reflecting the Government’s position that these are services that folks have traditionally self-funded throughout their lives.

This will replace the fundamental every day fee and means-tested care fee that some people currently pay. Contributions will vary depending on income and assets (based on retirement means a test) and by service type.


Department of Health 2024

Home support also includes additional funding for specific needs:

  • older Australians with lower than three months to live will get priority access to $25,000 in funding for 12 weeks

  • Up to $15,000 can be available for assistive technology and residential modifications eliminating the necessity reserve home care budgets for them.

What if I or my loved one already receives a Home Care Package?

If you were picking up a parcel, on waiting listor deemed eligible for one on September 12, 2024, Govt.no worse” guarantees that you won’t pay more in the brand new system.

Current home support recipients’ budget can be adjusted to their existing package and any unspent funds can be carried over.

How will fees for care in nursing homes change?

Australia’s care home sector is struggling financially 67% of suppliers operating at a loss. To ensure sustainable development and support the modernization of facilities, the federal government is introducing major changes to financing.

What stays the identical?

The basic every day rate paid by all people in care homes is ready at 85% of the fundamental pension (currently $63.57 per day or $23,200 per yr) won’t change.

What’s changing?

Currently, the federal government pays a hotel complement of $12.55 per day per resident to cover the fee of every day services equivalent to cleansing, meals and laundry ($4,581 per yr).

From July 1, 2025, this allowance will depend upon income. Residents with annual incomes greater than $95,400 or assets greater than $238,000 (or a mixture thereof) can be make a partial or full contribution to this cost.

Currently, residents with sufficient means also pay an means-tested fee for care $0 to $403.24 per day. It can be replaced by “contribution to non-clinical care”, capped at $101.16 per day and payable for the primary 4 years of care. Only individuals with assets over $502,981 or income over $131,279 (or a mixture thereof) pays this premium.

Importantly, nobody pays greater than $130,000 in combined premiums over their lifetime for home support and non-clinical care in nursing homes.

Changes to accommodation fees

From July 1, 2025, the tactic of paying for accommodation in a nursing home may even change:

  • residents who pay the room rate in a refundable lump sum could have 2% of their payments are withheld yearly by the supplier, up to a maximum of 10% over five years. For example, a one-time payment of $400,000 would end in a refund of $360,000 if the person stayed at the ability for five years or longer, with the provider retaining $40,000

  • every day accommodation fees (a rent-like interest fee) will now not remain constant throughout the person’s stay within the care home. Instead, these payments can be indexed twice a yr to the Consumer Price Index

  • service providers will have the ability to price rooms up to $750,000 without government approval, a rise from the present limit of $550,000.

These changes won’t affect people on lower incomes (those that are fully subsidized by the federal government to cover their housing costs).

What if I own my home?

Family home treatment under the Nursing Home Cost Study can be remain unchanged.

Its value is simply assessed if no “protected person” (e.g. spouse) lives there, and even then its value is capped at $206,039 (as of September 20, 2024).

What will occur to the present nursing home residents?

The recent rules on contributions and accommodation will only apply to people entering care homes from July 1, 2025.

The current residents will keep the present arrangements and can be there no worse.

Feeling overwhelmed?

These reforms aim to improve care delivery, fairness and sustainability, with the Government highlighting that many older Australians – particularly those with lower income and assets – I won’t pay more.

The government has provided case studies illustrating how to do that home care AND nursing home costs will vary under the brand new system for individuals with different levels of income and wealth.

Still, planning for elder care could be difficult. For more tailored advice and supportconsider contacting financial advisors, servicesor online tools to help you navigate changes and make informed decisions.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Health and Wellness

Jury awarded $310 million to parents of teenager who died after falling on a ride at Florida amusement park – Essence

Published

on

By

Sun Sentinel/Getty Images

The family of Tire Sampson, the 14-yr-old who tragically died on an amusement park ride in Orlando, Florida, in 2022, has been awarded $310 million in a civil lawsuit.

Tire, who was visiting ICON Park along with his family on March 24, 2022, fell from the FreeFall drop tower. Although he was taken to a nearby hospital, he didn’t survive his injuries.

Now, greater than two years later, a jury has held the vehicle manufacturer, Austria-based Funtime Handels, responsible for the accident and awarded the Tire family $310 million. According to reports from local news stations WFTV AND KSDKthe jury reached its verdict after about an hour of deliberation.

Tyre’s parents will each receive $155 million, according to attorney spokesman Michael Haggard.

Attorneys Ben Crump and Natalie Jackson, who represented Tyre’s family, shared their thoughts on this landmark decision via X (formerly Twitter). “This ruling is a step forward in holding corporations accountable for the safety of their products,” they said in a statement.

Lawyers stressed that Tyre’s death was attributable to “gross negligence and a failure to put safety before profits.” They added that the ride’s manufacturer had “neglected its duty to protect passengers” and that the substantial award ensured it could “face the consequences of its decisions.”

Crump and Jackson said they hope the result will encourage change throughout the theme park industry. “We hope this will spur the entire industry to enforce more stringent safety measures,” they said. “Tire heritage will provide a safer future for drivers around the world.”

An investigation previously found that Tyre’s harness was locked through the descent, but he dislodged from his seat through the 430-foot fall when the magnets engaged. Tire’s death was ruled the result of “multiple injuries and trauma.”

ICON Park said at the time that it could “fully cooperate” with the authorities.

This article was originally published on : www.essence.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Tireless HIV/AIDS advocate A. Cornelius Baker dies

Published

on

By

HIV/AIDS Advocate, A. Cornelius Baker


A. Cornelius Baker, a tireless advocate of HIV and AIDS testing, research and vaccination, died Nov. 8 at his home in Washington, D.C., of hypertensive, atherosclerotic heart problems, in response to his partner, Gregory Nevins.

As previously reported, Baker was an early supporter for people living with HIV and AIDS within the Nineteen Eighties, when misinformation and fear-mongering in regards to the disease were rampant.

According to Douglas M. Brooks, director of the Office of National AIDS Policy under President Obama, it was Baker’s Christian faith that guided him toward compassion for others.

“He was very kind, very warm and inclusive – his circles, both professional and personal, were the most diverse I have ever seen, and he was guided by his Christian values,” Brooks told the outlet. “His ferocity was on display when people were marginalized, rejected or forgotten.”

In 1995, when he was executive director of the National AIDS Association, Baker pushed for June 27 to be designated National HIV Testing Day.

In 2012, he later wrote on the web site of the Global Health Advisor for which he was a technical advisor that: “These efforts were intended to help reduce the stigma associated with HIV testing and normalize it as part of regular screening.”

https://twitter.com/NBJContheMove/status/1856725113967632663?s=19

Baker also feared that men like himself, black gay men, and other men from marginalized communities were disproportionately affected by HIV and AIDS.

Baker pressured the Clinton administration to incorporate black and Latino people in clinical drug trials, and in 1994 he pointedly told the Clinton administration that he was bored with hearing guarantees but seeing no motion.

According to Lambda Legal CEO Kevin Jennings, yes that daring attitude that defines Baker’s legacy in the world of ​​HIV/AIDS promotion.

“Cornelius was a legendary leader in the fight for equality for LGBTQ+ people and all people living with HIV,” Jennings said in a press release. “In the more than twenty years that I knew him, I was continually impressed not only by how effective he was as a leader, but also by how he managed to strike the balance between being fierce and kind at the same time. His loss is devastating.”

Jennings continued: “Cornelius’ leadership can’t be overstated. For many years, he was one in all the nation’s leading HIV/AIDS warriors, working locally, nationally and internationally. No matter where he went, he proudly supported the HIV/AIDS community from the Nineteen Eighties until his death, serving in various positions including the Department of Health and Human Services, the National Association of Persons with Disabilities AIDS, and the Whitman-Walker Clinic . Jennings explained.

Jennings concluded: “His career also included several honors, including being the first recipient of the American Foundation for AIDS Research Foundation’s organization-building Courage Award. Our communities have lost a pillar in Cornelius, and as we mourn his death, we will be forever grateful for his decades of service to the community.”

Kaye Hayes, deputy assistant secretary for communicable diseases and director of the Office of Infectious Diseases and HIV/AIDS Policy, in her comment about his legacy, she called Baker “the North Star.”.

“It is difficult to overstate the impact his loss had on public health, the HIV/AIDS community or the place he held in my heart personally,” Hayes told Hiv.gov. “He was pushing us, charging us, pulling us, pushing us. With his unwavering commitment to the HIV movement, he represented the north star, constructing coalitions across sectors and dealing with leaders across the political spectrum to deal with health disparities and advocate for access to HIV treatment and look after all. He said, “The work isn’t done, the charge is still there, move on – you know what you have to do.” It’s in my ear and in my heart in the case of this job.

Hayes added: “His death is a significant loss to the public health community and to the many others who benefited from Cornelius’ vigilance. His legacy will continue to inspire and motivate us all.”

Baker is survived by his mother, Shirley Baker; his partner Nevins, who can be senior counsel at Lambda Legal; his sisters Chandrika Baker, Nadine Wallace and Yavodka Bishop; in addition to his two brothers, Kareem and Roosevelt Dowdell; along with the larger HIV/AIDS advocacy community.


This article was originally published on : www.blackenterprise.com
Continue Reading

Health and Wellness

Bovaer is added to cow feed to reduce methane emissions. Does it pass into milk and meat? And is it harmful to humans?

Published

on

By

There are growing concerns in regards to the use of feed supplements, Bowar 10to reduce methane production in cows.

Bovaer 10 consists of silicon dioxide (mainly sand), propylene glycol (food stabilizer approved by Food Safety Australia New Zealand) and lively substance 3-nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP).

There has been an enormous amount of misinformation in regards to the safety of 3-NOP, with some milk from herds fed this additive being labeled “Frankenmilk”. Others feared it could get to humans through beef.

The most significant thing is that 3-NOP is secure. Let’s clear up some major misconceptions.

Why do we want to limit methane production?

In our attempts to limit global warming, we’ve placed the best emphasis on CO₂ because the major man-made greenhouse gas. But methane is also a greenhouse gas, and although we produce less of it, it is: a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO₂.

Agriculture is the largest a man-made source of methane. As cattle herds expand to meet our growing demand for meat and milk, reducing methane production from cows is a vital way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

There are several ways to do that. Stopping bacteria within the stomachs of cows that produce methane one approach is to produce methane.

The methane produced by cows and sheep doesn’t come from the animals themselves, but from the microbes living of their digestive systems. 3-NO stop the enzymes that perform the last step of methane synthesis in these microorganisms.

3-NOP is not the one compound tested as a feed additive. Australian product based on seaweed, Rumin8for instance, it is also in development. Saponins, soap-like chemicals present in plants, and essential oils as well has been examined.

However, 3-NOP is currently one of the popular effective treatments.

Nitrooxypropanol structure: red balls are oxygen, gray carbon, blue nitrogen and white hydrogen.
PubChem

But is not it poison?

There are concerns on social media that Bovaer is “poisoning our food.”

But, as we are saying in toxicology, it’s the dose that makes the poison. For example, arsenic is deadly 2–20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.

In contrast, 3-NOP was not lethal on the doses utilized in safety studies, up to 600 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight. At a dose of 100 mg per kg body weight in rats, it didn’t cause any adversarial effects.

What about reproductive issues?

The effect of 3-NOP on the reproductive organs has generated numerous commentary.

Studies in rats and cows showed that doses of 300–500 mg per kg body weight caused: contraction of the ovaries and testicles.

In comparison, to achieve the identical exposure in humans, a 70 kg human would want to eat 21–35 grams (about 2 tablespoons) of pure 3-NOP every day for a lot of weeks to see this effect.

No human will likely be exposed to this amount because 3-NOP doesn’t pass into milk – is fully metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

No cow will likely be exposed to these levels either.

The cow licks itself
Cows will not be exposed to levels tested on animals in laboratory studies.
Ground photo/Shutterstock

What about cancer?

3-NOP is not genotoxic or mutagenicwhich implies it cannot damage DNA. Thus, the results of 3-NOP are dose-limited, meaning that small doses will not be harmful, while very high doses are (unlike radiation where there is no secure dose).

Scientists found that at a dose of 300 mg per kilogram of body weight benign tumors of the small intestine of female ratsbut not male rats, after 2 years of every day consumption. At a dose of 100 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight, no tumors were observed.

Cows eat lower than 2 grams of Bovaer 10 per day (of which only 10% or 0.2 grams is 3-NOP). This is about 1,000 times lower than the appropriate every day intake 1 mg 3-NOP per kg body weight per day for a cow weighing 450 kg.

This level of consumption will likely be not the result in cancer or any of them other adversarial effects.

So how much are people exposed to?

Milk and meat consumers will likely be exposed to zero 3-NOP. 3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat: is completely metabolized within the cow’s intestines.

Farmers could also be exposed to small amounts of the feed additive, and industrial employees producing 3-NOP will potentially be exposed to larger amounts. Farmers and industrial employees already wear personal protective equipment to reduce exposure to other agricultural chemicals – and it is advisable to do that with Bovear 10 as well.

Milk
3-NOP doesn’t penetrate milk and meat.
Shutterstock

How widely has it been tested?

3-NOP has been in development for 15 years and has been subject to multiple reviews by European Food Safety Authority, UK Food Safety Authority AND others.

It has been extensively tested over months of exposure to cattle and has produced no unintended effects. Some studies actually say so improves the standard of milk and meat.

Bovaer was approved for use in dairy cattle by the European Union from 2022 and Japan in 2024. It is also utilized in many other countries, including: in beef products, amongst others Australia.

A really small amount of 3-NOP enters the environment (lower than 0.2% of the dose taken), no accumulates and is easily decomposed subsequently, it doesn’t pose a threat to the environment.

Since humans will not be exposed to 3-NOP through milk and meat, long-term exposure is not an issue.

What does Bill Gates have to do with this?

Bill Gates has invested in a distinct feed processing method for methane, Australian seaweed-based Rumin8. But he has nothing to do with Bovaer 10.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awarded research grants to the corporate producing 3-NOP for malaria control researchnot for 3-NOP.

The bottom line is that adding 3-NOP to animal feed doesn’t pose any risk to consumers, animals or the environment.

This article was originally published on : theconversation.com
Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe Us To Receive Our Latest News Directly In Your Inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Trending