How should the Federal Government prioritise medical research?
Published 07-SEP-2016 14:05 P.M.
3 minute read
Hey! Looks like you have stumbled on the section of our website where we have archived articles from our old business model.
In 2019 the original founding team returned to run Next Investors, we changed our business model to only write about stocks we carefully research and are invested in for the long term.
The below articles were written under our previous business model. We have kept these articles online here for your reference.
Our new mission is to build a high performing ASX micro cap investment portfolio and share our research, analysis and investment strategy with our readers.
Click Here to View Latest Articles
Eighty-seven per cent of Australians support the Federal Government’s investment in the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF).
That is the verdict of a Roy Morgan Research poll of 1,040 people conducted on behalf of Research Australia, which also shows 78 per cent of Australians believe the MRFF will lead to better health outcomes.
The Medical Research Future Fund will reach capacity in the next decade and deliver about $1 billion a year for new therapies, treatments, drugs and devices with direct benefits to Australians.
“It is clear there is significant support for the Medical Research Future Fund and Australians want to see it become a reality,” said CEO of Research Australia, Nadia Levin.
“The MRFF will make an enormous difference to the health of Australians and the health of our economy, and people realise that and the contribution of medical research.
“The community recognises medical research is paramount to improving health outcomes and want to see medical breakthroughs brought from the laboratory into hospitals and medical clinics.
“They see stories about potential medical breakthroughs and new hope on their TVs – and they want to then see that reflected in their hospitals and doctor’s surgeries as soon as possible.
“The MRFF is a key to bridging this gap, providing new therapies, treatments, drugs and devices that will directly benefit Australians.”
The question is: how do you prioritise which treatments are deserving of funding and how much should they receive?
Health Minister Susan Ley announced the MRFF back in April this year. It is led by Professor Ian Frazer, one of Australia’s most innovative and successful researchers who developed the highly successful human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine that protects against cervical cancer.
It would seem that funding is in the hands of the right man.
However as The Conversation editorialised earlier this year: “Prioritising a health condition is tempting for governments. No-one would argue against the strongest possible worldwide research effort on any area of ill health, whether it’s to defeat, say, dementia, breast cancer or diabetes.
“But it is a poor way to get the most benefit for Australia. Even devoting all of the Australian MRFF to a single disease would represent only a tiny increase in the worldwide research effort (perhaps by 1-2%). This is unlikely to make much difference, no matter how large the burden of the disease on individuals and societies.”
Even back in August 2015, there were concerns about how the funds would be allocated.
Michael Edwards of the ABC’s AM program reported, “Doctors are welcoming the establishment of Australia’s medical research fund but concerns persist about how the grants will be allocated.”
However, Edwards went on to report that according to the government the multi-billion-dollar-program will strengthen Australia’s standing as a global leader in research.
Which is a benefit in itself.
Another positive of the MRFF, despite Labor concerns the grant is open to political interference, is the amount of money being allocated per year.
At one billion dollars every year, medical research should receive a significant boost.
It is hoped that research being done in the small cap space will benefit as much as the large research companies and big pharma and that companies such as Dimerix, Actinogen Medical, Noxopharm, Cellmid, MGC Pharma, MMJ Phytotech and Race Oncology, which are all doing important work in the spheres of cancer, diabetes, epilepsy and Alzeimer’s Disease, could potentially benefit.
The MRFF will be working closely with the government on policy settings and projects over the coming weeks and months.
Highlights of the poll include:
- 87% of Australians support the MRFF and 78% believe research funded by the MRFF will lead to better health.
- 88% of Australians believe healthcare is the area where scientific research is most important.
- Health and medical research is ‘very’ and ‘extremely’ important to making discoveries about human health and disease (85%), and turning discoveries into new drugs and treatments (84%).
- 88% of people rated ‘basing healthcare on the best and most recent research’ as key to improving the health system, compared to reducing waiting times in emergency departments (80%) and more doctors in regional areas (78%).
For a copy of the full poll: http://researchaustralia.org/reports/public-opinion-polling/
General Information Only
S3 Consortium Pty Ltd (S3, ‘we’, ‘us’, ‘our’) (CAR No. 433913) is a corporate authorised representative of LeMessurier Securities Pty Ltd (AFSL No. 296877). The information contained in this article is general information and is for informational purposes only. Any advice is general advice only. Any advice contained in this article does not constitute personal advice and S3 has not taken into consideration your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Please seek your own independent professional advice before making any financial investment decision. Those persons acting upon information contained in this article do so entirely at their own risk.
Conflicts of Interest Notice
S3 and its associated entities may hold investments in companies featured in its articles, including through being paid in the securities of the companies we provide commentary on. We disclose the securities held in relation to a particular company that we provide commentary on. Refer to our Disclosure Policy for information on our self-imposed trading blackouts, hold conditions and de-risking (sell conditions) which seek to mitigate against any potential conflicts of interest.
Publication Notice and Disclaimer
The information contained in this article is current as at the publication date. At the time of publishing, the information contained in this article is based on sources which are available in the public domain that we consider to be reliable, and our own analysis of those sources. The views of the author may not reflect the views of the AFSL holder. Any decision by you to purchase securities in the companies featured in this article should be done so after you have sought your own independent professional advice regarding this information and made your own inquiries as to the validity of any information in this article.
Any forward-looking statements contained in this article are not guarantees or predictions of future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, and which may cause actual results or performance of companies featured to differ materially from those expressed in the statements contained in this article. S3 cannot and does not give any assurance that the results or performance expressed or implied by any forward-looking statements contained in this article will actually occur and readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
This article may include references to our past investing performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of our future investing performance.