Broken Promise, Lost Lives: Government's Bowel Cancer Screening Pledge 98% Undelivered
Bowel Cancer New Zealand (NZ) is calling for urgent Government action this Bowel Cancer Awareness Month. It warns that the delay in delivering a promised screening age reduction results in over 350 preventable cancers, and 80 people losing their lives every year.
Despite a 2023 election pledge from Christopher Luxon and the Health Minister to lower the screening age from 60 to 45 to match Australia, just 2% of that commitment has been delivered. More than 900,000 New Zealanders remain without access to the screening that is standard care across the Tasman— a tool proven to detect cancer earlier and save lives.
Bowel Cancer NZ has presented the Government with a clinically backed, affordable proposal to protect one million more New Zealanders by lowering the screening age to 45 for all, and to 35 for Māori and Pasifika, who face higher risk at younger ages. A petition supporting its proposal has been signed by 13,000 New Zealanders and is before Parliament.
Peter Huskinson, Chief Executive of Bowel Cancer NZ says New Zealand has one of the highest rates of bowel cancer in the world. It remains the country's second deadliest cancer, despite the fact 90% of cases can be treated successfully if caught early.
'Sadly 1,200 lives are lost to bowel cancer in New Zealand every year, including 350 under the age of 50. And new research[i] is telling us that early onset bowel cancer is on the rise.'
Huskinson says screening is a simple, cost-effective solution that saves lives, and the Government must act now.
'Bowel cancer screening is a $30 test that prevents an $80,000 cancer. The human cost of delay is tragic – and the economic case for early detection couldn't be clearer. It is indefensible for more Kiwis to continue losing their lives to this preventable, treatable disease.'
To date, the Government has added just 20,000 people to the screening programme – scrapping a fully funded plan to screen 100,000 Māori and Pasifika aged 50–59 and instead extending eligibility to all 58–59-year-olds (120,000 people). This is despite clear evidence that Māori and Pasifika face significantly higher risk at younger ages.
'More than half of all Māori bowel cancers occur before the current screening age of 60 and for those diagnosed, it's often at a later stage when it's less treatable,' says Professor Sue Crengle, Medical Advisor for Bowel Cancer NZ.
"As a result, they have less opportunity to benefit from bowel cancer screening in its current form than other ethnic groups.'
As well as a higher risk of getting Bowel Cancer younger, data shows Māori are 46% more likely to die from bowel cancer than non-Māori, while Pasifika are 60% more likely.
'The system isn't acting early enough and is causing unnecessary suffering and deaths among Māori and Pacific communities - deaths that can be prevented with proper screening at the right age,' says Professor Crengle.
This Bowel Cancer Awareness Month, Bowel Cancer NZ is urging New Zealanders to know the symptoms, demand action, and add their voice to the call for a reduction in the screening age by writing a letter to their local MP. More information on this including MP details and a letter template can be found at https://bowelcancernz.org.nz/what-we-do/advocacy/
Know your symptoms: Bowel cancer symptoms can come and go. Don't wait — see your GP if you experience:
Bleeding from the bottom (rectal bleeding)
Change in bowel habits that come and go over several weeks
Persistent or sporadic abdominal pain
Loss of weight for no obvious reason and/or feel tired and weak (symptoms of anaemia)
Lump or swelling in the abdomen
Bowel cancer is preventable and treatable — but only if it's caught early. If something doesn't feel right, see your doctor.
More information on bowel cancer and the Bowel Cancer New Zealand charity can be found at
Note:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
17 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Accident numbers putting pressure on ACC
Nearly half the population of Otago had active Accident Compensation Corporation injury claims last year, prompting the government agency to raise concerns about the financial pressure it was putting on the sustainability of the scheme. In 2024, there were 100,336 new injury claims and 124,269 active injury claims made to ACC from people in the Otago region, costing the taxpayer more than $312 million to help them recover. Otago's total population in 2024 was 251,300. ACC injury prevention leader James Whitaker said the number of injury claims and associated costs were the highest in the Otago region for the past five years, and the numbers reflected a nationwide trend. "In 2020, ACC accepted 90,375 injury claims from the Otago region at a cost of $189m. "To put it simply, more people are getting injured, and it is taking longer and costing more for them to recover." He said the data had showed ACC needed to look more seriously at raising collective awareness of the need to prevent injuries. In 2024, ACC accepted two million injury claims from 1.6 million New Zealanders, and it cost nearly $7b to help people recover from these injuries and to maintain some form of income (weekly compensation). A total of $4.4b of these costs went towards rehabilitation expenses. He said over the past 20 years, the costs of supporting New Zealanders with injuries had climbed from just under $1b in 2004, to nearly $4.4b in 2024. Mr Whitaker said the high number of injury claims and costs was putting pressure on the sustainability of the ACC scheme. "We want all New Zealanders to get the help and support they need when they're injured now and for many generations to come. "What we all need to do is be more mindful and present when there is injury risk present. If I get hurt, what is the impact on those people who I care about?" The most common injuries occurred at home or in the community (61,920 costing $167m); sport/recreation (26,660 costing $58m); and work (10,346 costing $66m). ACC Minister Scott Simpson said a report titled "Injuries in New Zealand" would be released annually to help raise the collective awareness and promote injury prevention. "ACC is a unique and world-leading scheme and one that we cannot afford to take for granted. "Injuries cause harm to the person injured, but they also put pressure on business productivity and on the financial position of the ACC scheme. "We need to safeguard ACC, so it is there to help and support our future generations. "One of the key areas [in which] we need to improve is reducing injuries." Whether it was at home and in our communities, at work, in sport and recreation or on our roads, the number of people getting injured was too high — especially considering most injuries were preventable, he said. Mr Whitaker said independent research indicated more New Zealanders were now taking actions to prevent injuries to themselves and other people. "By being present in the moments when there is injury risk, we can get the job done and continue to do the things we love. "This is far better than experiencing pain, creating flow-on effects for friends and family, and facing a long rehabilitation."
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Housed youth commit less crime: study
Having a safe, stable roof overhead appears to be one of the key factors in curbing New Zealand's high rate of youth offending. New research looked at the relationship between emergency housing, public housing, accommodation supplements and the involvement of the youth justice system. Lead author and University of Otago (Wellington) public health research fellow Dr Chang Yu said the study found clear links between housing deprivation and alleged youth offending. "We found offending decreased significantly among young people living in public housing or receiving the accommodation supplement, compared with the general population. "Emergency housing, which provides accommodation for seven nights, remains a highly debated model, attracting both support and criticism. "This study adds to the debate by showing that emergency housing does not appear to reduce youth offending." Dr Yu said the research, published in Urban Policy and Research, underscored the importance of stability in housing assistance. Compared with the general youth population, the study found three years after moving into public housing, alleged offences reduced by 11.7% and court charges among young people reduced by 10.9%. Rates of alleged offending also decreased by 13% among those receiving an accommodation supplement, and court charges decreased by 8.6%. Dr Yu said the study found Māori and Pacific youth faced systemic disadvantages in both the housing and justice systems. "Housing deprivation is closely linked to justice sector involvement. "This suggests that youth offending cannot be addressed in isolation from housing conditions. "Addressing structural inequities in housing is essential for meaningful justice reform." He believed stable housing played a crucial role in promoting social cohesion and reducing risk factors associated with youth offending. "The security provided by guaranteed housing enables young people to more consistently attend school and establish strong community bonds, resulting in them being more engaged at school and better supported socially. "Studies have also shown that having a stable home may lead to parents having more time to spend with their children, resulting in stronger parent-child bonds, and better emotional and physical wellbeing for the child." He said the research had important implications. "Especially as the government restructures Kāinga Ora and considers the future of public housing provision. "A 2019 Ministry of Justice report called for a 'fundamental reshaping of New Zealand's justice system' to reduce harm and support community restoration. "Our findings support this vision." He said the study was "a starting point" for future research in the area and researchers had already started work on analysing how housing assistance impacts perceived quality of life, certain types of youth offending, education and school attendance. "This work could, for example, enable policymakers to prioritise housing assistance for individuals with specific offending histories."
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Diagnosis is that team work is needed
Gil Barbezat asks what is needed for vital healthcare reform. For many years, New Zealanders have enjoyed state-provided medical services. An ageing and growing population, technological development and practice refinements mean our medical workforce and infrastructure no longer meet evolving needs. Daily media critiques of shortcomings in our healthcare expose serious problems. Decline in access and equity of services Healthcare problems have increased steadily since the 1990s introduction of neoliberal health policies. Recent surveys of OECD countries suggested New Zealand generally provided good care, but problems were identified relating to access and equity. Differences between patients of high- and low-income, urban or rural residence and ethnic and gender issues feature prominently among our troublesome statistics. Politicians of various persuasions have failed to maintain their obligations towards modern patient-based services. Neglecting maintenance of hospital buildings and development for decades is now predictably taking its toll. What is required? • Staffing needs Medical professional education at our two existing medical schools needs greater support. Access to foreign graduates becomes difficult in a competitive healthcare labour market. Patient-related clinical experience in public (not private) hospitals is essential for professional training. Clinic- and hospital-based specialist services should be staffed and equipped to modern standards. Hard decisions are required to determine where these services are made available. Some (e.g., organ transplantation) will remain in major centres. • Working environment Collaborative teamwork at all levels is required for successful staff recruitment and retention. Existing staff are frustrated by insufficient operating and procedure time allocation to meet patient demand. Morbidity and mortality increase, particularly for cancer and heart conditions. Negotiating salary scales with staff who are overworked and have insufficient support while struggling in crumbling facilities is unnecessarily antagonistic. Outsourcing patients to private facilities relies predominantly on the same staff, merely shifting the venue and diluting public hospital staff at increased cost. GPs provide the backbone of our system; more are urgently needed, especially in rural areas. Services should be integrated collaboratively with accessible specialist services (investigations and treatments). The current situation where GP practices become a cul de sac for patients normally requiring specialist care elsewhere is frustrating, dangerous and costs lives. • Operational management Medical professionals provide medical advice at the interface between clinical demands and the community. In the current environment, that treatment or advice is too often futile as it has become unavailable. Crucial decisions are determined by budgets allocated by politicians and implemented by appointed managers, neither of whom have direct contact with patients. Clinicians exceeding budgets are regarded as inefficient. More clinical input is essential in determining budgets. Administrators and politicians laud evidence-based management outputs, but resist attempts to measure the gap between patient demand and service delivery. They evade accountability for service deficiencies by actively avoiding the collection of data on that topic. Budget adjustments — who pays? State-run public healthcare systems are most economical. Private practice remains a choice. Two-tiered healthcare, where timely diagnosis and treatment are available only to those who can afford to pay, is unacceptable. Some claim they would give anything to regain their health and be happy to pay for it. But what happens to those who cannot afford anything beyond their daily living costs? Early care saves future expense. Dollars spent on healthcare return a handsome dividend. Preventive medicine is cost-effective, but requires time and appropriate investment in staff and infrastructure. ACC delivering prompt access to fully funded treatment has improved outcomes. Despite its expense, care is more accessible and equitable compared to that for other medical conditions. Some similar funding stream could be found for other services. Any public-private partnership (PPP) includes investors' profit. PPPs provided rapid improvement to an ailing United Kingdom National Health Service system in the 1990s, only to lead to eventual added expense when inevitable interest payments became increasingly burdensome. Procedures are more expensive in the private sector. Just as wine is far more expensive in a restaurant, healthcare is far more expensive in the private sector. Public service costs could be regarded as wholesale rates, avoiding the markup inevitable in profit-driven systems. Profiteering is not confined to supermarkets. Despite the highest per capita spending on health, the United States has the worst health statistics among most OECD countries. Meeting the health requirements of New Zealanders requires further investment of government funds, but money is not of sole importance. Happy and productive staff deliver the best collaborative and economical care. Better staffed public hospitals serve more contented communities. Our government recently found a large financial cache to increase military spending. Is universal healthcare less important? Revenue generation through some form of equitable, innovative taxation must provide much needed additional funding. Urgent collaborative action required Collaboration beyond party politics is required for equitable access to good clinical care for all Kiwis. Health outcome measurements can monitor the success or failure of their actions. • Gil Barbezat is an emeritus professor of medicine.
