Search

To move or not to move: is it cheaper to find a new place or stay when your rent increases by 10%?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/park-thaichon-175182">Park Thaichon</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sara-quach-175976">Sara Quach</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> Your landlord has just raised your rent by 10% and your mind starts running the numbers – should you cop it sweet or look to move? It’s a familiar scenario in today’s unpredictable housing market. Understanding the real costs of staying versus moving is essential for making informed choices: renters must consider hidden expenses such as moving costs, deposits and changing rental rates, giving them tools to handle rising rent pressures more effectively. <h2>A grim time for many renters</h2> National median market rents have hit record highs, reaching $627 per week, with an average annual growth rate of 9.1% during the past three years, according to real estate giant <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/Budget/reviews/2024-25/Housing#:%7E:text=Based%20on%20April%202024%20CoreLogic,the%20past%203%20calendar%20years">CoreLogic</a>. <a href="https://www.corelogic.com.au/news-research/news/2024/rent-growth-picked-up-in-the-start-of-2024,-taking-rents-to-new-record-highs">CoreLogic</a> also reported annual rental changes (houses and units) in regional Australia are not far off from the big cities: annual rent changes were 9.4% for combined capital cities, 6.4% for combined regional areas, and 8.5% nationally. So, is it better to stay or move if your rent is raised by 10%? Let’s examine the costs and benefits of each option. <h2>A breakdown of typical moving costs</h2> We’ll start with the most obvious expense: moving costs. Professional moving services aren’t cheap. For example, moving a three-bedroom house in the Gold Coast costs <a href="https://www.muval.com.au/removalists/gold-coast">$1,095.25 on average</a>, with an hourly rate of $158.26. In a bigger city like Melbourne, the cost is slightly higher at <a href="https://www.muval.com.au/removalists/melbourne">about $1,118.46</a>. The moving costs between states or cities will be more expensive if you move further away. You could choose to handle packing yourself and hire some help with a truck – a common option with businesses such as “<a href="https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-removals-storage/gold-coast/2+men+and+a+truck/k0c18643l3006035">Two Men and a Truck</a>”, which typically costs around $100 per hour. Be aware, though, that the hourly rate often starts from the moment the truck leaves the company’s warehouse until it returns. Alternatively, you can rent a van for a lower price, such as $87 for a 24-hour <a href="https://www.bunnings.com.au/for-hire-handivan-24hr-first-100kms-inc-_p5470402">Handivan rental at Bunnings</a>. Don’t forget the cost of moving boxes, too: Bunnings’ 52 litre <a href="https://www.bunnings.com.au/bunnings-52l-light-duty-moving-carton_p0517130?srsltid=AfmBOoqCYAWT0P5apPiJpoOLRAIpUCHNi63ztvIZrG5CxCoNOv45G0TV">moving cartons</a> cost $2.66 each. End-of-lease or <a href="https://firstcallhomeservices.com.au/service-menu/bond-exit-end-lease-cleaning/">bond cleaning</a> is another common expense. For a typical three-bedroom property, internal cleaning can range from $365 to $500. If you have pets, or kids who love drawing on the walls, your cleaning costs might be a bit higher. Now, let’s look at utility connection expenses that can catch people by surprise. Cancelling your internet service can be costly if you don’t meet the exit or cancellation policies. With <a href="https://www.telstra.com.au/internet/5g-home-internet">Telstra Home Internet</a>, for example, if you cancel within the first 24 months, you must return your modem within 21 days to avoid a $400 non-return fee. Most providers charge a cancellation fee or require final device repayments, typically ranging from $100 to $500, depending on the remaining contract period. As a renter, it might be wise to choose a no-lock-in contract plan to avoid these fees if you need flexibility. Electricity and gas connection and disconnection fees are usually minor but can add up, often costing about $40 to $60 for <a href="https://www.energyon.com.au/fees-and-charges/">connection and disconnection fees</a> for electricity alone. If your house uses gas for hot water or cooking, you may have to pay additional fees for setting up service. However, there are also non-financial costs, like the time spent searching for a new home, attending inspections, and putting in applications. Moving takes effort and energy for packing, transporting and unpacking. Some people feel emotionally attached to their current home, which can make leaving harder. Older renters <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1353829218311304">seem to draw strength</a> from their familiarity with, attachment to, and enjoyment of their place and community. This is something to be considered. Plus, moving can take <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41537-023-00349-w">an emotional toll</a>. <h2>The benefits of not moving</h2> The clear benefit of staying is avoiding the hassle of relocating. Staying means saving on moving expenses and avoiding the time spent searching for a new place, packing and unpacking. This may also save some people from needing to take time off work. Changing and updating an address is also another tedious task that can be avoided by staying. Moving can hit the hip pocket with “after moving costs” that people may not initially consider. For instance, a new location might mean a longer commute. If each trip adds just 15 extra minutes, that could amount to an additional 11 hours per month over 22 workdays. For drivers, increased fuel and parking expenses might also come into play. Is the current or new location closer to a supermarket, hospital, and school? This proximity could be beneficial or detrimental, depending on the surrounding environment and available services. <h2>To move or not to move?</h2> One point to note is that overall, moving costs are likely to be similar between big cities and regional areas if you get moving supplies or rent a van from a large company such as Bunnings. In the end, moving costs will be around $2,000 based on the figures above, and it can be around $800 to $1,000 cheaper if you opt to rent a van instead of using a full-service moving company. Therefore, if the current rent is $600 per week and is about to increase by 10% to $660, the additional cost would be $3,120 per year. So is it cheaper to move or stay when your rent increases by 10%? The answer is moving may save about $1,000 to $2,000, but comes with the hassle and emotional toll of relocation. Staying will be more expensive, but with less hassle and emotional strain. The right choice depends on your situation.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/243155/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/park-thaichon-175182">Park Thaichon</a>, Associate Professor of Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sara-quach-175976">Sara Quach</a>, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/griffith-university-828">Griffith University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-move-or-not-to-move-is-it-cheaper-to-find-a-new-place-or-stay-when-your-rent-increases-by-10-243155">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

How to keep doing good once you’re gone

Most of us like to think that once we are no longer walking the Earth, we can still leave a legacy to mark our time here and contribute positively to those left behind. Doing so is not only possible but, as you’ll see below, fairly straightforward – providing you do some basic preparation beforehand. Seek the help of professional advice to ensure your plans can be enacted in full and deliver the best possible outcomes for everyone involved. Have your affairs in order Make things simpler for your grieving loved ones by having your wishes clearly outlined in writing, with specific instructions that leave no room for misinterpretation. Doing so makes your wishes easier to implement, faster to enact and reduces fights among your beneficiaries. Keep your will and other affairs updated as circumstances change too, so that everyone you want is included (such as kids and grandkids) and those you don’t, aren’t given an unexpected windfall (such as your ex or an adult child’s ex). Provide for everyone Providing for everyone is not necessarily straight forward, especially if you have a blended family. For instance, leaving your share of your home to your children from a previous relationship could lead to disagreements if your partner doesn’t want to leave. Instead, think about how your assets can be divided fairly without disadvantaging anyone. Children could be nominated beneficiaries of your superannuation and/or life insurance, leaving your home for your partner. Keep wealth flowing Certain structures can allow you to keep giving to your descendants long after you’re gone – offsetting their income and providing far greater wealth over time than any lump sum could achieve. A family or testamentary trust allows ongoing wealth creation through shared assets, with regular dividends paid out, creating a family legacy that can last for generations. Or a family company can allow a commercial entity to continue trading and growing as an asset. Manage tax impacts Implement tax-effective strategies that maximise how much your beneficiaries actually receive and minimise what the tax man pockets. While there isn’t an inheritance tax per se, beneficiaries can be hit with Capital Gains Tax (CGT) on asset sales plus transfer costs to put an asset into their own name – not to mention the ongoing maintenance and compliance costs of asset ownership. In some instances, your loved ones may benefit more if you sell assets now and leave them the proceeds, rather than leave them the asset – and its associated tax bill – once you’re gone. Ensure loved ones are home and housed Property is perhaps the biggest of all sources of wealth, yet it is increasingly difficult for younger people and singles to get (and stay) on the property ladder. Ensure everyone can reap the benefits of property ownership over their own lifetime, either by transferring ownership of properties in your name or contributing chunks of cash towards a deposit. However, it’s important to do so sustainably – gifting grandkids a large property they can’t afford to maintain isn’t going to work. Charitable donations Many people like to support charities and social causes once they are gone. Consider the end user here and what they stand to benefit from your donation – whether it be people, planet or both. It could be leaving a lump sum on your death, or regular ongoing donations from your estate. You may wish to do so anonymously, or include a message with your donation outlining your reasons why that particular charity/cause is important to you and what you hope the money will go towards. Donations may not necessarily be financial either – perhaps you have a valuable historic artefact that others could enjoy if donated to a museum? Organ donation The greatest gift of all is not money but life itself. So, consider whether organ donation is something you wish to do. While not suitable for everyone, and dependent on a range of factors including your age, health and religious beliefs, a single organ donor can save up to seven lives, as well as improve the quality of life of numerous others through eye and tissue donation. That is a lot of life you can give to others – and all without costing your own loved ones a cent! Helen Baker is a licensed Australian financial adviser and author of On Your Own Two Feet: The Essential Guide to Financial Independence for all Women. Helen is among the 1% of financial planners who hold a master’s degree in the field. Proceeds from book sales are donated to charities supporting disadvantaged women and children. Find out more at <a href="http://www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au/">www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au</a> Disclaimer: The information in this article is of a general nature only and does not constitute personal financial or product advice. Any opinions or views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent those of people, institutions or organisations the owner may be associated with in a professional or personal capacity unless explicitly stated. Helen Baker is an authorised representative of BPW Partners Pty Ltd AFSL 548754. Image credits: Shutterstock

Retirement Income

Is it worth selling my house if I’m going into aged care?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/colin-zhang-1234147">Colin Zhang</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> For senior Australians who cannot live independently at home, residential aged care can provide accommodation, personal care and general health care. People usually think this is expensive. And many assume they need to sell their home to pay for a lump-sum deposit. But that’s not necessarily the case. Here’s what you need to consider. <h2>You may get some financial support</h2> Fees for residential aged care are complex and can be confusing. Some are for your daily care, some are means-tested, some are for your accommodation and some pay for extras, such as cable TV. But it’s easier to think of these fees as falling into two categories: <ul> <li> an “entry deposit”, which is usually more than <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/06/eighth-report-on-the-funding-and-financing-of-the-aged-care-industry-july-2020-eighth-report-on-the-funding-and-financing-of-the-aged-care-industry-may-2020.pdf">$A300,000</a>, and is refunded when you leave aged care </li> <li> daily “<a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/aged-care-home-costs-and-fees">ongoing fees</a>”, which are $52.71-$300 a day, or more. These cover the basic daily fee, which everyone pays, and the means-tested care fee. </li> </ul> To find out how much government support you’ll receive for both these categories, you will have a “<a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/income-and-means-assessments/#aged-care-home">means test</a>” to assess your income and assets. This means test is similar (but different) to the means test for the aged pension. Generally speaking, the lower your aged-care means test amount, the more government support you’ll receive for aged care. With full support, you don’t need to pay an “entry deposit”. But you still need to pay the basic daily fee (currently, <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/aged-care-home-costs-and-fees">$52.71</a> a day), equivalent to 85% of your aged pension. If you get partial support, you pay less for your “entry deposit” and ongoing fees. <h2>You don’t need a lump sum</h2> You don’t have to pay for your “entry deposit” as a lump sum. You can choose to pay a rental-style daily cost instead. This is calculated as follows: you multiply the amount of the required “entry deposit” by the maximum permissible interest rate. This rate is set by government and is currently at <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/03/schedule-of-fees-and-charges-for-residential-and-home-care-schedule-from-20-march-2021_0.pdf">4.01%</a> per year for new residents. Then you divide that sum by 365 to give a daily rate. This option is like borrowing money to pay for your “entry deposit” via an interest-only loan. You can also pay for your “entry deposit” with a combination of a lump sum and a daily rental cost. As it’s not compulsory to pay a lump sum for your “entry deposit”, you have different options for dealing with your family home. <h2>Option 1: keep your house and rent it out</h2> This allows you to use the rental-style daily cost to finance your “entry deposit”. Pros <ul> <li> you could have more income from rent. This can help pay for the rental-style daily cost and “ongoing fees” of aged care </li> <li> you might have a special sentimental attachment to your family house. So keeping it might be a less confronting option </li> <li> keeping an expensive family house will not heavily impact your residential aged care cost. That’s because any value of your family house above <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/03/schedule-of-fees-and-charges-for-residential-and-home-care-schedule-from-20-march-2021_0.pdf">$173,075.20</a> will be excluded from your <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/organisations/health-professionals/services/aged-care-entry-requirements-providers/residential-care/residential-aged-care-means-assessment">means test</a> </li> <li> you can still access the capital gains of your house, as house prices rise. </li> </ul> Cons <ul> <li> your rental income needs to be included in the means test for your aged pension. So you might get less aged pension </li> <li> you might need to pay income tax on the rental income </li> <li> compared to the lump sum payment, choosing the rental-style daily cost means you will end up <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/seek-help-when-weighing-up-how-to-pay-for-your-aged-care-20191202-p53g16.html">paying more</a> </li> <li> you are subject to a changing rental market. </li> </ul> <h2>Option 2: keep your house and rent it out, with a twist</h2> If you have some savings, you can use a combination of a lump sum and daily rental cost to pay for your “entry deposit”. Pros <ul> <li> like option 1, you can keep your house and have a steady income </li> <li> the amount of lump sum deposit will not be counted as an asset in the pension means test. </li> </ul> Cons <ul> <li> like option 1, you could have less pension income, higher age-care costs and need to pay more income tax </li> <li> you have less liquid assets (assets you could quickly sell or access), which could be handy in an emergency. </li> </ul> <h2>Option 3: sell your house</h2> If you sell your house, you can use all or part of the proceeds to pay for your “entry deposit”. Pros <ul> <li> if you have any money left over after selling your house and paying for your “entry deposit”, you can invest the rest </li> <li> as your “entry deposit” is exempt from your aged pension means test, it means more pension income. </li> </ul> Cons <ul> <li>if you have money left over after selling your house, this will be included in the aged-care means test. So you can end up with less financial support for aged care.</li> </ul> <h2>In a nutshell</h2> Keeping your house and renting it out (option 1 or 2) can give you a better income stream, which you can use to cover other living costs. And if you’re not concerned about having access to liquid assets in an emergency, option 2 can be better for you than option 1. But selling your house (option 3) avoids you being exposed to a changing rental market, particularly if the economy is going into recession. It also gives you more capital, and you don’t need to pay a rental-style daily cost. <hr /> This article is general in nature, and should not be considered financial advice. For advice tailored to your individual situation and your personal finances, please see a qualified financial planner. Correction: this article previously stated the amount of lump sum deposit will not be counted as an asset in the aged-care means test, as a pro of option 2. In fact, the amount of lump sum deposit will not be counted as an asset in the pension means test.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161674/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/colin-zhang-1234147">Colin Zhang</a>, Lecturer, Department of Actuarial Studies and Business Analytics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-it-worth-selling-my-house-if-im-going-into-aged-care-161674">original article</a>. </div>

Retirement Income

Old grocery receipt highlights extortionate increase at supermarkets

An old Woolworths receipt from 2021 has revealed the grim reality of increased grocery prices, and how inflation has crippled many in just a few short years. A social media user on X, formerly Twitter, shared her receipt from a Melbourne Woolworths as she highlighted how much more common household items cost today. She said it showed how Aussies were shelling out for costs that appear to have moved well past official inflation levels, which rose to 3.8 per cent by the end of June. “We all knew we’re being ripped off! Australians are now paying up to 200% more for basic grocery items than they were a few years ago!” she wrote. “Oh but inflations (sic) currently back at around 3.8% … yeah my ass it is!!” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Found an old Woolworths receipt circa 2021. We all knew we re being ripped off! Australians are now paying up to 200% more for basic grocery items than they were a few years ago! Oh but inflations currently back at around 3.8% … yeh my ass it is!! Pink Lady Apply $2.90kg… <a href="https://t.co/9OPS6SnOqI">pic.twitter.com/9OPS6SnOqI</a> — Miss Madeleine (@MadsMelbourne) <a href="https://twitter.com/MadsMelbourne/status/1832282784431534448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 7, 2024</a></blockquote> Her docket shows how everyday items like coffee grounds, potato chips and stain removers have skyrocketed in price. In the receipt items such as a 250g packet of Bega cheese is priced at $4.50 – it’s now $6 for the same item, discounted from $7.50 according to online pricing. Deli fresh Champagne leg ham sold for $2.50 for 100g according to the receipt, while current prices put that at $4.20. Ozkleen prewash power stain remover is now currently listed as $7 for a 500ml bottle, more than 200 per cent higher than the $2.75 it sold for three years ago. The woman also posted another smaller receipt from the same year, in which she bought grapes and a watermelon. In addition to sharing the image, she wrote, "Another one to add! No wonder Australia is having a cost of living crises! Woolworths Receipt circa 2021. Grapes were $3.50kg, now $14.16 = 304% increase. Watermelon was $1.50 now $6.38kg = 325% increase." Grocery prices have come under the spotlight amid the cost-of-living crisis, with the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission tasked with probing the sector. “We know grocery prices have become a major concern for the millions of Australians experiencing cost of living pressures,” ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said in January. “When it comes to fresh produce, we understand that many farmers are concerned about weak correlation between the price they receive for their produce and the price consumers pay at the checkout.” Coles and Woolworths have defended the price rises as being pushed by supply chain struggles, while both companies posted profits of more than $1 billion in the last financial year. A spokesperson for Woolworths also released a statement saying "Ongoing economy-wide inflation means it costs more for many supermarket suppliers to manufacture their products than it did a few years ago. "We remain focussed on delivering lower prices where we can, with our average prices coming down in the last six months, and thousands of specials every week. "The price of fruit and vegetables can vary throughout the year due to weather, seasonality, supply and demand. For example, Haas avocados are currently not in season." Image credits: X / Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Does intermittent fasting increase or decrease our risk of cancer?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research) </a> Research over the years has suggested intermittent fasting has the potential to improve our health and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3946160/">reduce the likelihood</a> of developing cancer. So what should we make of a <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07840-z">new study</a> in mice suggesting fasting increases the risk of cancer? <h2>What is intermittent fasting?</h2> Intermittent fasting means switching between times of eating and not eating. Unlike traditional diets that focus on what to eat, this approach focuses on when to eat. There are lots of commonly used <a href="https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/intermittent-fasting">intermittent fasting schedules</a>. The 16/8 plan means you only eat within an eight-hour window, then fast for the remaining 16 hours. Another popular option is the 5:2 diet, where you eat normally for five days then restrict calories for two days. In Australia, poor diet contributes to <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/topics/food-and-nutrition/what-were-doing">7% of all cases of disease</a>, including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and cancers of the bowel and lung. Globally, poor diet is linked to <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(19)30041-8/fulltext">22% of deaths</a> in adults over the age of 25. Intermittent fasting has gained a lot of attention in recent years for its potential health benefits. Fasting <a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/conditionsandtreatments/metabolism">influences metabolism</a>, which is how your body processes food and energy. It can affect how the body absorbs nutrients from food and burns energy from sugar and fat. <h2>What did the new study find?</h2> The <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07840-z">new study</a>, published in Nature, found when mice ate again after fasting, their <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-024-01179-1">gut stem cells</a>, which help repair the intestine, became more active. The stem cells were better at regenerating compared with those of mice who were either totally fasting or eating normally. This suggests the body might be better at healing itself when eating after fasting. However, this could also have a downside. If there are <a href="https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/genetics/genetic-changes-infographic">genetic mutations</a> present, the burst of stem cell-driven regeneration after eating again might make it easier for cancer to develop. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4027058/">Polyamines</a> – small molecules important for cell growth – drive this regeneration after refeeding. These polyamines can be produced by the body, influenced by diet, or come from gut bacteria. The findings suggest that while fasting and refeeding can improve stem cell function and regeneration, there might be a tradeoff with an increased risk of cancer, especially if fasting and refeeding cycles are repeated over time. While this has been shown in mice, the link between intermittent fasting and cancer risk in humans is more complicated and not yet fully understood. <h2>What has other research found?</h2> <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-nutr-071816-064634">Studies in animals</a> have found intermittent fasting can help with weight loss, improve blood pressure and blood sugar levels, and subsequently <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27810402/">reduce the risks</a> of diabetes and heart disease. Research in humans <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2811116">suggests</a> intermittent fasting can reduce body weight, improve <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9361187/">metabolic health</a>, reduce inflammation, and enhance <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3946160/">cellular repair processes</a>, which remove damaged cells that could potentially turn cancerous. However, other studies warn that the benefits of intermittent fasting are the same as what can be achieved through <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2623528">calorie restriction</a>, and that there <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831322007542">isn’t enough evidence</a> to confirm it reduces cancer risk in humans. <h2>What about in people with cancer?</h2> In studies of people who have cancer, fasting has been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2815756/">reported to</a> protect against the side effects of chemotherapy and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7311547/">improve the effectiveness</a> of cancer treatments, while decreasing damage to healthy cells. Prolonged fasting in some patients who have cancer has been shown to be safe and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34383300/">may potentially</a> be able to decrease tumour growth. On the other hand, some experts advise caution. Studies in mice show intermittent fasting could <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-023-01033-w">weaken the immune system</a> and make the body less able to fight infection, potentially leading to worse health outcomes in people who are unwell. However, there is <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8757987/">currently no evidence</a> that fasting increases the risk of bacterial infections in humans. <h2>So is it OK to try intermittent fasting?</h2> The current view on intermittent fasting is that it can be beneficial, but experts agree more research is needed. Short-term benefits such as weight loss and better overall health are well supported. But we don’t fully understand the long-term effects, especially when it comes to cancer risk and other immune-related issues. Since there are many different methods of intermittent fasting and people react to them differently, it’s hard to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41423-023-01033-w">give advice that works for everyone</a>. And because most people who participated in the studies were overweight, or had diabetes or other health problems, we don’t know how the results apply to the broader population. For healthy people, intermittent fasting is generally considered safe. But it’s <a href="https://dietitiansaustralia.org.au/health-advice/intermittent-fasting">not suitable for everyone</a>, particularly those with certain medical conditions, pregnant or breastfeeding women, and people with a history of eating disorders. So consult your health-care provider before starting any fasting program.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/238071/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amali-cooray-1482458">Amali Cooray</a>, PhD Candidate in Genetic Engineering and Cancer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/wehi-walter-and-eliza-hall-institute-of-medical-research-822">WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research)</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-intermittent-fasting-increase-or-decrease-our-risk-of-cancer-238071">original article</a>. </div>

Body

The biggest faux pas for self-funded retirees

Whether you have been retired for some time or are still looking forward to the time you can step back, chances are there are important considerations you may have overlooked. From planning and pensions to family and housing, these are the biggest self-funded retirement mistakes I come across, and some insights into how to avoid repeating them: <ol> <li>Lack of a plan</li> </ol> Not having a retirement plan is perhaps the most basic faux pas, but often the most costly. A detailed plan should cover things like: <ul> <li>When you AND your partner will retire </li> <li>Where you will live (you may want to downsize, relocate, seek assisted living)</li> <li>Anticipated living costs (living situation, health, lifestyle)</li> <li>How you will spend your time (hobbies, travel, volunteering, time with family)</li> <li>Strategies to maximise investments and superannuation</li> <li>Tax minimisation strategies</li> </ul> Remember: failing to plan = planning to fail. <ol start="2"> <li>Poor planning</li> </ol> Having a plan is the starting point, but it won’t get you far if it’s incomplete, not updated as circumstances change, or omits critical factors. For couples, not considering age differences is a big mistake. One partner retiring before the other can have big shifts on financial and tax dynamics and even the relationship itself. Then there is end-of-life care, particularly if the younger partner is still working. Not building in a safety buffer is another no-no. Too many retirees have been caught out by the high inflation of recent years, having calculated their anticipated income needs on much lower living costs. Balance short-term and long-term goals: being overly conservative early on can limit your financial situation down the track. And no plan is complete without contingencies for worst case scenarios – insurances, protections, back-up options. <ol start="3"> <li>Insecure housing </li> </ol> Government data has long shown major differences in quality of life for retirees who own their home versus those who don’t. Homelessness or insecure housing, the mercy of the rental market, and inability to customise your home as you age or if you need specialised support with disability or health issues are some of the challenges renters face. Furthermore, public estimates of how much the average Australian needs to retire typically assume home ownership – meaning rent is not part of that calculation. That’s a huge living cost you may not have factored into your retirement planning. <ol start="4"> <li>Unclaimed pensions</li> </ol> Contrary to popular belief, self-funded retirement and claiming a pension are not mutually exclusive. You may be eligible for a part-pension, calculated pro-rata according to the value of your assets and other income. Claiming a part-pension, no matter how small it may be, reduces how much income you need to draw down from super – making it last longer. Don’t fall into another common trap when applying – overestimating your assets. It’s easy to assume your non-monetary assets are worth more than what they really are, reducing how much pension you receive or negating your eligibility altogether. <ol start="5"> <li>Depleted Bank of Mum and Dad</li> </ol> With home ownership increasingly out of reach for younger adults, the Bank of Mum and Dad is often sought to bridge the gap. How you do so will impact your own situation. Giving more than you can afford can leave you overstretched. Missed loan repayments could see you fall behind on your own bills. Not putting agreements in writing can lead to disputes down the track. Having a loan guarantee called in could see you homeless. Be wise about decisions you make here and don’t let heartstrings cloud your judgement. <ol start="6"> <li>Suffering in silence</li> </ol> Elder abuse is a sad but significant problem. Given they have money in the bank, self-funded retirees are often the most vulnerable. Its effects can be far-reaching, impacting your mental and physical health, financial wellbeing, social interactions, and quality of life. Be aware of <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/retirement-income/are-you-a-victim-of-elder-abuse-without-even-realising-it">the signs that something isn’t right</a>. If you recognise it happening to you – or someone you know – speak up and seek help. <ol start="7"> <li>Forgoing professional advice</li> </ol> How much of the above details did you already know? Chances are, not all of them. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Money is a complicated business and you simply don’t know what you don’t know, which is why seeking independent, tailored advice from a professional is so important. A good financial advisor can help you identify new opportunities and manage risks you may not have considered, limit expenses and also work with your accountant to minimise your tax. Helen Baker is a licensed Australian financial adviser and author of On Your Own Two Feet: The Essential Guide to Financial Independence for all Women. Helen is among the 1% of financial planners who hold a master’s degree in the field. Proceeds from book sales are donated to charities supporting disadvantaged women and children. Find out more at <a href="http://www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au/">www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au</a> Disclaimer: The information in this article is of a general nature only and does not constitute personal financial or product advice. Any opinions or views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent those of people, institutions or organisations the owner may be associated with in a professional or personal capacity unless explicitly stated. Helen Baker is an authorised representative of BPW Partners Pty Ltd AFSL 548754. Image credits: Shutterstock

Retirement Income

Retirement doesn’t just raise financial concerns – it can also mean feeling unmoored and irrelevant

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marianne-janack-681018">Marianne Janack</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/hamilton-college-2966">Hamilton College</a> Most discussions of retirement focus on the financial aspects of leaving the workforce: “<a href="https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/EBSA/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/publications/top-10-ways-to-prepare-for-retirement.pdf">How to save enough for retirement</a>” or “<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/investing/when-can-i-retire">How do you know if you have enough money for retirement</a>?” But this might not be the biggest problem that potential retirees face. The deeper issues of meaning, relevance and identity that retirement can bring to the fore are more significant to some workers. Work has <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/03/work-revolution-ai-wfh-new-book/673572/">become central to the modern American identity</a>, as <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/atlantic-editions/">journalist Derek Thompson bemoans</a> in The Atlantic. And some theorists have argued that work shapes what we are. For most people, as business ethicist <a href="https://www.luc.edu/quinlan/faculty/algini.shtml#:%7E:text=About,the%20Society%20for%20Business%20Ethics.">Al Gini</a> argues, one’s work – which is usually also one’s job – <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203950555">means more than a paycheck</a>. Work can structure our friendships, our understandings of ourselves and others, our ideas about free time, our forms of entertainment – indeed our lives. I <a href="https://www.hamilton.edu/academics/our-faculty/directory/faculty-detail/marianne-janack">teach a philosophy course about the self</a>, and I find that most of my students think of the problems of identity without thinking about how a job will make them into a particular kind of person. They think mostly about the prestige and pay that come with certain jobs, or about where jobs are located. But when we get to <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/">existentialist philosophers</a> such as <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sartre/">Jean-Paul Sartre</a> and <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/beauvoir/">Simone de Beauvoir</a>, I often urge them to think about what it means to say, as the existentialists do, <a href="https://philosophynow.org/issues/115/On_Being_An_Existentialist">that “you are what you do</a>.” How you spend 40 years of your life, I tell them, for at least 40 hours each week – the time many people spend at their jobs – is not just a financial decision. And I have come to see that retirement isn’t just a financial decision, either, as I consider that next phase of my life. <h2>Usefulness, tools and freedom</h2> For Greek and Roman philosophers, <a href="https://search.worldcat.org/title/Work-what-it-has-meant-to-men-through-the-ages/oclc/780872063">leisure was more noble than work</a>. The life of the craftsperson, artisan – or even that of the university professor or the lawyer – was to be avoided if wealth made that possible. The good life was a life not driven by the necessity of producing goods or making money. Work, Aristotle thought, was an obstacle to the achievement of the particular forms of excellence characteristic of human life, like thought, contemplation and study – <a href="https://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.7.vii.html">activities that express</a> the <a href="https://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.8.viii.html">particular character of human beings</a> and are done for their own sake. And so, one might surmise, retirement would be something that would allow people the kind of leisure that is essential to human excellence. But contemporary retirement does not seem to encourage leisure devoted to developing human excellence, partly because it follows a long period of making oneself into an object – something that is not free. German philosopher Immanuel Kant distinguished between the value of objects and of subjects by the idea of “use.” Objects are not free: They are meant to be used, like tools – their value is tied to their usefulness. But rational beings like humans, who are subjects, are more than their use value – <a href="https://search.worldcat.org/title/5796114">they are valuable in their own right</a>, unlike tools. And yet, much of contemporary work culture encourages workers to think of themselves and their value <a href="https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Bullshit-Jobs/David-Graeber/9781501143335">in terms of their use value</a>, a change that would have made both Kant and the ancient Greek and Roman philosophers wonder why people didn’t retire as soon as they could. <h2>‘What we do is what we are’</h2> But as one of my colleagues said when I asked him about retirement: “If I’m not a college professor, then what am I?” Another friend, who retired at 59, told me that she does not like to describe herself as retired, even though she is. “Retired implies useless,” she said. So retiring is not just giving up a way of making money; it is a deeply existential issue, one that challenges one’s idea of oneself, one’s place in the world, and one’s usefulness. One might want to say, with Kant and the ancients, that those of us who have tangled up our identities with our jobs have made ourselves into tools, and we should throw off our shackles by retiring as soon as possible. And perhaps from the outside perspective, that’s true. But from the participant perspective, it’s harder to resist the ways in which what we have done has made us what we are. Rather than worry about our finances, we should worry, as we think about retirement, more about what the good life for creatures like us – those who are now free from our jobs – should be.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/233963/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marianne-janack-681018">Marianne Janack</a>, John Stewart Kennedy Professor of Philosophy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/hamilton-college-2966">Hamilton College</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/retirement-doesnt-just-raise-financial-concerns-it-can-also-mean-feeling-unmoored-and-irrelevant-233963">original article</a>. </div>

Retirement Income

"Ridiculous": Debate erupts over whether grandparents should be paid to babysit

Any parent knows how difficult it is to get your child into daycare or preschool. With limited spaces across the country and rising costs, many are turning to their families for help. Many rely on grandma and grandpa to help out with the kids, and while some say they'd happily do it for free, others think it's time to put a price on it. According to a Nine.com.au poll 42 per cent of Aussies believe that grandparents should be paid for babysitting, while 58 per cent of them believe there's no need to pay grandparents for their services. However, the question is more complicated than a simple yes or no, with many explaining that it depends on the circumstance. "If grandparents are babysitting for special occasions or at their request then I don't think they should be paid. Most would do it for love and time with grandkids. If grandparents are providing child minding then that's different. If it's a regular occurrence then yes they should be paid," explained one person. "Grandparents should be paid to babysit if they are required for more than two full days a week," echoed another. "Grandparents should be paid, it is cheaper than creche and the kids won't be as sick mixing with a batch of others," a third wrote. For many there's a big difference between babysitting on a weekend or a one-off day versus during the week. "Being paid as a grandparent to babysit in my opinion is ridiculous, however if a grandparent is enlisted to provide child care more than two days a week so that parents can work, I think a payment in some form isn't unreasonable, even if it's a surprise gift intermittently," one wrote. "I babysit my grandchildren while my daughter works she pays me $20 for petrol, but if they want to go out and I babysit then she doesn't pay me which I'm OK with," added another person. The parents and grandparents' financial position was also a big factor. "I think the grandparent babysitting for payment is a personal thing. Some parents can really afford it, some are struggling and the grandparents do it to help out," one explained. Image: Shutterstock

Retirement Income

Constipation increases your risk of a heart attack, new study finds – and not just on the toilet

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/vincent-ho-141549">Vincent Ho</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> If you Google the terms “constipation” and “heart attack” it’s not long before the name Elvis Presley crops up. Elvis had a longstanding history of chronic constipation and <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/elvis-addiction-was-the-perfect-prescription-for-an-early-death">it’s believed</a> he was straining very hard to poo, which then led to a fatal heart attack. We don’t know what really happened to the so-called King of Rock “n” Roll back in 1977. There were likely several contributing factors to his death, and this theory is one of many. But after this famous case researchers took a strong interest in the link between constipation and the risk of a heart attack. This includes a recent <a href="https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/ajpheart.00519.2024">study</a> led by Australian researchers involving data from thousands of people. <h2>Are constipation and heart attacks linked?</h2> Large <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38068-y">population</a> <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32873621/">studies</a> show constipation is linked to an increased risk of heart attacks. For example, an <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38068-y">Australian study</a> involved more than 540,000 people over 60 in hospital for a range of conditions. It found constipated patients had a higher risk of high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes compared to non-constipated patients of the same age. A <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32873621/">Danish study</a> of more than 900,000 people from hospitals and hospital outpatient clinics also found that people who were constipated had an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. It was unclear, however, if this relationship between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes would hold true for healthy people outside hospital. These Australian and Danish studies also did not factor in the effects of drugs used to treat high blood pressure (hypertension), which can make you constipated. <h2>How about this new study?</h2> The recent <a href="https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/ajpheart.00519.2024">international study</a> led by Monash University researchers found a connection between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes and heart failure in a general population. The researchers analysed data from the <a href="https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk">UK Biobank</a>, a database of health-related information from about half a million people in the United Kingdom. The researchers identified more than 23,000 cases of constipation and accounted for the effect of drugs to treat high blood pressure, which can lead to constipation. People with constipation (identified through medical records or via a questionnaire) were twice as likely to have a heart attack, stroke or heart failure as those without constipation. The researchers found a strong link between high blood pressure and constipation. Individuals with hypertension who were also constipated had a 34% increased risk of a major heart event compared to those with just hypertension. The study only looked at the data from people of European ancestry. However, there is good reason to believe the link between constipation and heart attacks applies to other populations. A <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26812003/">Japanese study</a> looked at more than 45,000 men and women in the general population. It found people passing a bowel motion once every two to three days had a higher risk of dying from heart disease compared with ones who passed at least one bowel motion a day. <h2>How might constipation cause a heart attack?</h2> Chronic constipation can lead to straining when passing a stool. This can result in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">laboured breathing</a> and can lead to a rise in blood pressure. In <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">one Japanese study</a> including ten elderly people, blood pressure was high just before passing a bowel motion and continued to rise during the bowel motion. This increase in blood pressure lasted for an hour afterwards, a pattern not seen in younger Japanese people. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">One theory</a> is that older people have stiffer blood vessels due to atherosclerosis (thickening or hardening of the arteries caused by a build-up of plaque) and other age-related changes. So their high blood pressure can persist for some time after straining. But the blood pressure of younger people returns quickly to normal as they have more elastic blood vessels. As blood pressure rises, the risk of heart disease increases. The risk of developing heart disease <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12493255/">doubles</a> when systolic blood pressure (the top number in your blood pressure reading) rises permanently by 20 mmHg (millimetres of mercury, a standard measure of blood pressure). The systolic blood pressure rise with straining in passing a stool has been <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8030287/">reported to be</a> as high as 70 mmHg. This rise is only temporary but with persistent straining in chronic constipation this could lead to an increased risk of heart attacks. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22256893/">Some people</a> with chronic constipation may have an impaired function of their vagus nerve, which controls various bodily functions, including digestion, heart rate and breathing. This impaired function can result in abnormalities of heart rate and over-activation of the flight-fight response. This can, in turn, lead to elevated blood pressure. Another intriguing avenue of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6399019/">research</a> examines the imbalance in gut bacteria in people with <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3596341/">constipation</a>. This imbalance, known as dysbiosis, can result in microbes and other substances leaking through the gut barrier into the bloodstream and triggering an immune response. This, in turn, can lead to low-grade inflammation in the blood circulation and arteries becoming stiffer, increasing the risk of a heart attack. This latest study also explored genetic links between constipation and heart disease. The researchers found shared genetic factors that underlie both constipation and heart disease. <h2>What can we do about this?</h2> Constipation affects around <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36826591/">19% of the global population</a> aged 60 and older. So there is a substantial portion of the population at an increased risk of heart disease due to their bowel health. Managing chronic constipation through dietary changes (particularly increased dietary fibre), increased physical activity, ensuring adequate hydration and using medications, if necessary, are all important ways to help improve bowel function and reduce the risk of heart disease.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237209/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/vincent-ho-141549">Vincent Ho</a>, Associate Professor and clinical academic gastroenterologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/constipation-increases-your-risk-of-a-heart-attack-new-study-finds-and-not-just-on-the-toilet-237209">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Does eating ham, bacon and beef really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/duane-mellor-136502">Duane Mellor</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/aston-university-1107">Aston University</a> That lunchtime staple, the humble ham sandwich, has come in for a bashing in the press recently. According to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/aug/20/two-slices-of-ham-a-day-can-raise-type-2-diabetes-risk-by-15-research-suggests">many</a> <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13761253/Eating-ham-daily-linked-increase-risk-diabetes.html">reports</a>, eating two slices of ham a day can increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes. But what’s the science behind these headlines? The research offers a more complex picture. <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(24)00179-7/fulltext">A new study</a> from the University of Cambridge highlighted an association between developing type 2 diabetes and eating processed meat like ham and bacon, and red meat such as beef and lamb. This led to headlines suggesting the risk was mainly linked to <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/21/ham-sandwich-processed-meat-fresh-risk-link-type-2-diabetes/">ham sandwiches</a>. This seems to have come from the <a href="https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/red-and-processed-meat-consumption-associated-with-higher-type-2-diabetes-risk">press release</a>, which used ham as the example to quantify the amount of processed meat associated with a 15% increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes over ten years. The research found that this risk was linked to eating an extra 50g of processed meat every day, which happens to equate to two slices of ham. A useful example thus appears to have been taken up by the media as the main cause, perhaps ignoring some of the key messages coming from the study. So, can processed and red meat really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes? The <a href="https://www.diabetes.org.uk/diabetes-the-basics/types-of-diabetes/type-2/diabetes-risk-factors">biggest risk factors</a> linked to developing type 2 diabetes are being over 40, having family members with type 2 diabetes, being of South Asian or African descent, or having a higher body weight – and especially a larger waist. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EsOBcx2bJqU?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> The Cambridge study used data from nearly 2 million people from 31 studies. Participants were followed for an average of ten years. During this time, around one in 20 people developed type 2 diabetes. The research suggested that a 10% increase in the probability of developing type 2 diabetes was associated with every 100g of additional red meat eaten daily. Eating half as much extra processed meat every day was linked to an even greater increased risk of developing the disease. This is not the <a href="https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(23)66119-2/abstract">first time</a> that both processed and red meats have been linked with an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. However, the key strength of the Cambridge study was that it tried to control for many of the other factors linked to the disease, including smoking, having a higher body weight, dietary intake and exercise. However, the size of the increased risk is modest, considering few people included in the study ate 50g or more processed meat per day – meaning moderate ham consumption is likely to have <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9908545/">no meaningful effect</a> on your risk. <h2>What’s the link?</h2> Processed meat has been linked to increased risk of type 2 diabetes because of its nitrate and salt content – additives that are used to cure many processed meats. Nitrates and salt in processed meats have also <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893523/">been linked to</a> an increased risk of developing colon cancer. In fact, the World Health Organization classifies the additives as <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/cancer-carcinogenicity-of-the-consumption-of-red-meat-and-processed-meat">group 1 carcinogens</a>, which means they can cause a range of cancers. The mechanism linking processed meat to cancer seems to be similar to how it might be linked to type 2 diabetes. During digestion, processed meat produces <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6294997/">N-nitroso chemicals</a>, which can damage cells. This can lead to inflammation and affects how insulin, the hormone that controls blood glucose (sugar), works. This in turn can lead to <a href="https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/diabetes/overview/what-is-diabetes/prediabetes-insulin-resistance">insulin resistance</a>, when cells in your muscles, fat and liver don’t respond well to insulin and can’t easily take up glucose from your blood. Red meat, meanwhile, is <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/healthy-iron-rich-foods">rich in iron</a>. Research suggests that people with <a href="https://www.diabetes.org.uk/diabetes-the-basics/related-conditions/haemochromatosis-diabetes#:%7E:text=So%20a%20rise%20of%20iron,GP%20as%20soon%20as%20possible.">high levels of iron</a> are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes. However, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8744124/#:%7E:text=The%20WHO%20has%20recognised%20iron,being%20affected%20with%20this%20condition.">low levels of iron</a> are more of a health concern for the general population. Another potential link regarding red meat could be the way it is cooked. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5521980/">Previous studies</a> have suggested that charred meat, cooked over an open flame or at high temperature, is also linked to an increased risk of developing <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5911789/">type 2 diabetes</a>. Charring meat leads to formation of toxic chemicals such as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/pharmacology-toxicology-and-pharmaceutical-science/heterocyclic-amine#:%7E:text=Heterocyclic%20amines%20are%20aromatic%20compounds,of%20reactions%20called%20Maillard%20reactions.">heterocyclic aromatic amines</a> and harmful compounds like <a href="https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/advanced-glycation-end-products">advanced glycation end products</a>, both of which have been linked to <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21709297/">insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes</a>. <h2>Bye-bye barbecues and bacon butties?</h2> The key message is reduction, rather than avoidance. The UK government nutritional recommendations offer sound advice: limit your combined intake of red and processed meat to no more than <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/eat-well/food-types/meat-nutrition/#:%7E:text=Red%20meat%20and%20processed%20meat&text=If%20you%20currently%20eat%20more,%2C%20veal%2C%20venison%20and%20goat.">an average of 70g per day</a>. But these guidelines also suggest that red meat can be a valuable source of iron. So, if you decide to stop eating red meat, you should eat alternative sources of iron such as beans, lentils, dark green vegetables and fortified cereals. This needs to be done as part of a carefully planned diet. Non-meat sources of iron are more difficult for our bodies to absorb so should be eaten with a source of vitamin C, found in green vegetables and citrus fruit. The best advice to reduce your risk of developing type 2 diabetes is to maintain a healthy weight – consider losing weight if you have a higher body weight – and be as physically active as possible. A healthy diet should be based on plenty of vegetables, fruit, beans, peas, lentils, nuts and seeds, along with some wholegrain foods, some dairy products, fish and white meat (or vegetarian alternatives) – plus moderate amounts of red meat and minimal processed meat. This will help reduce your risk of type 2 diabetes, <a href="https://www.bhf.org.uk/informationsupport/support/healthy-living/healthy-eating">heart disease</a>, and <a href="https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/diet-and-cancer/does-having-a-healthy-diet-reduce-my-risk-of-cancer">many cancers</a> – as well being more <a href="https://www.bda.uk.com/static/539e2268-7991-4d24-b9ee867c1b2808fc/a1283104-a0dd-476b-bda723452ae93870/one%20blue%20dot%20reference%20guide.pdf">environmentally sustainable</a>. But if you have a penchant for ham sandwiches, rest assured you can continue to indulge as an occasional treat. It’s your overall lifestyle and diet that really matter for your health and risk of developing type 2 diabetes.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237346/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/duane-mellor-136502">Duane Mellor</a>, Visiting Academic, Aston Medical School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/aston-university-1107">Aston University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/does-eating-ham-bacon-and-beef-really-increase-your-risk-of-developing-type-2-diabetes-237346">original article</a>. </div>

Body

How long does back pain last? And how can learning about pain increase the chance of recovery?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-wallwork-1361569">Sarah Wallwork</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lorimer-moseley-1552">Lorimer Moseley</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Back pain is common. One in thirteen people have it right now and worldwide a staggering 619 million people will <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186678/">have it this year</a>. Chronic pain, of which back pain is the most common, is the world’s <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7186678/">most disabling</a> health problem. Its economic impact <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK92510/">dwarfs other health conditions</a>. If you get back pain, how long will it take to go away? We scoured the scientific literature to <a href="https://www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/196/2/E29.full.pdf">find out</a>. We found data on almost 20,000 people, from 95 different studies and split them into three groups: <ul> <li>acute – those with back pain that started less than six weeks ago</li> <li>subacute – where it started between six and 12 weeks ago</li> <li>chronic – where it started between three months and one year ago.</li> </ul> We found 70%–95% of people with acute back pain were likely to recover within six months. This dropped to 40%–70% for subacute back pain and to 12%–16% for chronic back pain. Clinical guidelines point to graded return to activity and pain education under the guidance of a health professional as the best ways to promote recovery. Yet these effective interventions are underfunded and hard to access. <h2>More pain doesn’t mean a more serious injury</h2> Most acute back pain episodes are <a href="https://www.racgp.org.au/getattachment/75af0cfd-6182-4328-ad23-04ad8618920f/attachment.aspx">not caused</a> by serious injury or disease. There are rare exceptions, which is why it’s wise to see your doctor or physio, who can check for signs and symptoms that warrant further investigation. But unless you have been in a significant accident or sustained a large blow, you are unlikely to have caused much damage to your spine. Even very minor back injuries can be brutally painful. This is, in part, because of how we are made. If you think of your spinal cord as a very precious asset (which it is), worthy of great protection (which it is), a bit like the crown jewels, then what would be the best way to keep it safe? Lots of protection and a highly sensitive alarm system. The spinal cord is protected by strong bones, thick ligaments, powerful muscles and a highly effective alarm system (your nervous system). This alarm system can trigger pain that is so unpleasant that you cannot possibly think of, let alone do, anything other than seek care or avoid movement. The messy truth is that when pain persists, the pain system becomes more sensitive, so a widening array of things contribute to pain. This pain system hypersensitivity is a result of neuroplasticity – your nervous system is becoming better at making pain. <h2>Reduce your chance of lasting pain</h2> Whether or not your pain resolves is not determined by the extent of injury to your back. We don’t know all the factors involved, but we do know there are things that you can do to reduce chronic back pain: <ul> <li> understand how pain really works. This will involve intentionally learning about modern pain science and care. It will be difficult but rewarding. It will help you work out what you can do to change your pain </li> <li> reduce your pain system sensitivity. With guidance, patience and persistence, you can learn how to gradually retrain your pain system back towards normal. </li> </ul> <h2>How to reduce your pain sensitivity and learn about pain</h2> Learning about “how pain works” provides the most sustainable <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj-2021-067718">improvements in chronic back pain</a>. Programs that combine pain education with graded brain and body exercises (gradual increases in movement) can reduce pain system sensitivity and help you return to the life you want. These programs have been in development for years, but high-quality clinical trials <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2794765">are now emerging</a> and it’s good news: they show most people with chronic back pain improve and many completely recover. But most clinicians aren’t equipped to deliver these effective programs – <a href="https://www.jpain.org/article/S1526-5900(23)00618-1/fulltext">good pain education</a> is not taught in most medical and health training degrees. Many patients still receive ineffective and often risky and expensive treatments, or keep seeking temporary pain relief, hoping for a cure. When health professionals don’t have adequate pain education training, they can deliver bad pain education, which leaves patients feeling like they’ve just <a href="https://www.jpain.org/article/S1526-5900(23)00618-1/fulltext">been told it’s all in their head</a>. Community-driven not-for-profit organisations such as <a href="https://www.painrevolution.org/">Pain Revolution</a> are training health professionals to be good pain educators and raising awareness among the general public about the modern science of pain and the best treatments. Pain Revolution has partnered with dozens of health services and community agencies to train more than <a href="https://www.painrevolution.org/find-a-lpe">80 local pain educators</a> and supported them to bring greater understanding and improved care to their colleagues and community. But a broader system-wide approach, with government, industry and philanthropic support, is needed to expand these programs and fund good pain education. To solve the massive problem of chronic back pain, effective interventions need to be part of standard care, not as a last resort after years of increasing pain, suffering and disability.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222513/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-wallwork-1361569">Sarah Wallwork</a>, Post-doctoral Researcher, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lorimer-moseley-1552">Lorimer Moseley</a>, Professor of Clinical Neurosciences and Foundation Chair in Physiotherapy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-long-does-back-pain-last-and-how-can-learning-about-pain-increase-the-chance-of-recovery-222513">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

While technology continues to advance, so does the way we pay for things. Many shopping outlets have turned to using digital payment methods rather than cash, which has divided many who find it easier to use cold hard cash than rely on technology. We asked our readers their thoughts on digital payments and the response was overwhelming. Here's what they said. Joan Hughes - Couldn’t go shopping due to bad pains in my leg and back, so my grandson did an online shop. Tried to use my card 5 times but wouldn’t accept it, so had to use my granddaughter's. This is the 3rd time my card has been rejected. Rubbish system, cash is definitely best. Johanna Shakes - Very hard to adjust for elderly. Debra Walker - Hate it! Cash is king. Lex Jordan - I think we should all stand and boycott these companies that don't accept cash. Patricia Tebbit - Don't mind using cards but access to cash is imperative. Think of small charity raffles, garage sales & countless other things where cash is required. Lyn Bradford - I love it, I use 95% card, 5% cash. So much easier. David Taylor - Just making it easier for hackers. Jennifer Bucktin - Cash is best. If digital goes down, you can't use anything. Steve Smith - The digital age is here to stay so it's going to be better for all to get used to it. Quentin Brown - Love them both, digital and cash as it's much easier to pay bills etc. Of course you have to be smart and not gullible. Why can't we have both? Kath Sheppard - Cash is king, a lot safer as well, can't overspend either or be charged fees. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Retirement tips for Australians without a full superannuation safety net

Most people who commenced paid work before the 1992 launch of compulsory employer contributions won’t have enjoyed money going into their retirement fund for the full duration of their working lives. Others have spent most or all of their adult lives as caregivers – stay-home parents, carers for elderly parents or relatives living with disability. Unquestionably valuable work, yet sadly unpaid – meaning no superannuation. Then there other factors impacting retirement savings – the gender pay gap, periods of unpaid leave, unemployment, working abroad, being a low income earner and more. So don’t think you are alone if you don’t have enough in superannuation for a comfortable retirement. Consider the following options to fall back on instead of, or as well as, your super: Age pension This is the most obvious alternative. What fewer realise, though, is that you may still be eligible for a part-pension, even if your assets exceed the eligibility threshold for the full amount. Claiming a part-pension will stretch what super you do have further. Plus, the related concession card entitles you to a range of discounts, reducing your living costs. Don’t overestimate the value of your assets under the pension means test – potentially denying yourself a legitimate source of income. Semi-retirement Consider transitioning to part-time work instead of retiring outright, allowing you to reduce your workload while still generating both income and employer contributions into your super. This could include self-employment – many retirees begin building a business out of their hobby or do paid consulting work within their industry (often a much higher hourly rate than as a permanent employee). Your home If you own your home, chances are you are sitting on a pile of equity. Yes, you would need to sell and move in order to unlock those funds. But it’s tax-free money. And it can be as much of a lifestyle opportunity as a financial one: downsize to a home with less maintenance needs; relocate nearer to grandkids; enjoy a seachange or treechange. Downsizer provisions also allow you to contribute a chunk of the proceeds into your superannuation over-and-above voluntary contribution caps. Investments Certain investments can deliver a lucrative passive income stream, which you can use in lieu of – or alongside – income from super. Think investment property rents, share dividends, even renting out your car/caravan/boat when you’re not using it. Or you could sell investments you own and use the proceeds to top up your super, which is typically more tax effective than holding as cash. Family business/trust If you have a family business or family trust, you may be able to draw down a regular income from it if structured correctly. Doing so over time from operating profits/investment returns, rather than as a lump sum, means a trust can continue as normal without being forced to sell assets or be wound up, while a business can continue trading under family ownership without the remaining directors having to find the cash to buy out your share (though this may be another option to explore with them). Living costs Your living costs are quite different in full-time retirement compared to full-time work. Goodbye to many commuting, clothing, personal grooming, professional development, registration/certification, lunches and coffees, and work-from-home expenses. Hello to greater energy bills (more time at home and no more remote working tax deductions), travel and lifestyle spending. Don’t overlook the power of updating your household spending and investments plan to reflect this new reality, cancel work-related outgoings and cut unnecessary spending. Timing Perhaps the most far-reaching, yet most commonly overlooked, aspect around retirement is timing. For instance: <ul> <li>the later in the financial year you retire, the more employment income you have accrued – potentially pushing you into a higher tax bracket and ballooning your tax bill.</li> <li>the proceeds from investments differ depending on when in the market cycle you sell them.</li> <li>retiring early may reduce employment bonuses, leave payouts, share option entitlements etc.</li> <li>both spouses/partners retiring simultaneously may reduce overall employment earnings, while conversely unlocking greater opportunities to do things together (like travel, shared hobbies, visiting family).</li> </ul> A qualified financial adviser can help you work through your various options and alternatives, allowing you the peace of mind to enjoy your golden years comfortably – whether that is with or without superannuation. Helen Baker is a licensed Australian financial adviser and author of On Your Own Two Feet: The Essential Guide to Financial Independence for all Women. Helen is among the 1% of financial planners who hold a master’s degree in the field. Proceeds from book sales are donated to charities supporting disadvantaged women and children. Find out more at <a href="http://www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au/">www.onyourowntwofeet.com.au</a> Disclaimer: The information in this article is of a general nature only and does not constitute personal financial or product advice. Any opinions or views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent those of people, institutions or organisations the owner may be associated with in a professional or personal capacity unless explicitly stated. Helen Baker is an authorised representative of BPW Partners Pty Ltd AFSL 548754. Image credits: Shutterstock

Retirement Income

"Dignified retirement": Aussies set for $21k cash boost

The average Australian is set to receive a $21,000 cash boost following a change to superannuation contributions. From July the superannuation guarantee increased from 11 to 11.5 per cent, meaning that the compulsory superannuation payments made by employers have risen. This means that an average worker earning around $72,000 would pocket an extra $21,000 at retirement as a result of the permanent increase, according to an analysis by the Treasury Department. “Wages growth and tax cuts are putting cash in people’s pockets now, and our increase to the super guarantee will put cash in people’s pockets for the future,” Treasurer Jim Chalmers said. “This will make a meaningful difference for millions of Australians who deserve a dignified retirement. “The superannuation guarantee has increased three times under our government.” The government has been progressively increasing the super guarantee rate until it hits 12 per cent, which will come into effect from July 2025. The concessional super contributions cap - the amount that you can invest into your super each year without copping extra tax and includes employer payments - also increased on July 1, up from $27,500 to $30,000 per year. In addition to this, the after-tax super or non-concessional super contributions cap has also been increased from $110,000 to $120,000. Image: Shutterstock

Retirement Income

Your parents’ income doesn’t determine yours – unless you’re ultra rich or extremely poor

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/catherine-de-fontenay-5631">Catherine de Fontenay</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Australia is among the strongest global performers in terms of income mobility between the generations, according to a new <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed/fairly-equal-mobility">Productivity Commission report</a>. The country’s long-term economic growth has led to each generation earning more than the last, on average. Our report finds 67% of the so-called <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/xennials-born-between-millennials-and-gen-x-2017-11">“Xennial”</a> generation – those born in 1976–1982, on the cusp of the Millennial/Gen X divide – earn more than their parents did at a similar age. This is particularly true of those born into poorer families. <hr /> <iframe id="NsmB3" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/NsmB3/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> When we look at where people rank in an income distribution, the picture is a little less rosy. While children with parents at the bottom or top of the income scale are more likely to remain there, almost 15% of people with parents in the lowest income decile, remain there while just 6% move to the top. And those living in poverty - who often include renters, people from migrant backgrounds who don’t speak English at home and single parents - face some of the biggest barriers to improving their economic lot. <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/research/completed/fairly-equal-mobility">Fairly Equal? Economic mobility in Australia</a>, released on Thursday, measures intergenerational income mobility by examining the relationship between a person’s income and the eventual income of their children. <h2>Measuring inequality</h2> Most countries anxiously monitor income distribution and economic mobility amid concerns inequality may be increasing. And countries with high inequality tend to have low mobility: the rungs of the social ladder are far apart making it difficult to move up to the next level. If mobility is low, the consequences are serious. Low mobility is discouraging, unproductive and unstable. If young people have little chance of achieving their aspirations, their wellbeing is affected. <a href="https://ideas.repec.org/p/cor/louvco/2023026.html">Social unrest is more likely</a>. And the abilities of young people from less affluent backgrounds are under-used. The next tech entrepreneur Steve Jobs may never be discovered, and many other opportunities are lost. In Australia we are used to thinking of ourselves as having inequality and mobility somewhere between Scandinavia and the US; but that comparison is not as comforting as it used to be, if inequality and mobility are worsening in the US. Our report considers people’s income mobility over the course of their lives, and across generations. If income mobility is low, people will struggle to recover from initial disadvantage, and those born into privilege will be financially secure. First we look at whether people move in the income distribution; there is a surprising amount of movement. And we look for evidence people can access opportunities throughout life, after setbacks. <h2>Recovering from setbacks</h2> There is not much evidence of recovery after a person experiences a severe illness or a job loss, perhaps because the causal factors are still at work. More encouragingly, the income of women who experience separation <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/4815110/HILDA-User-Manual-Release-22.0.pdf">does increase</a>, eventually restoring the buying power of their household. This is in part due to well-targeted government support. For intergenerational mobility, we extended the dataset developed by <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jel.20211413">an analytical dataset</a> to measure the influence parents’ income had on the income their offspring were likely to earn. We found Australia’s intergenerational mobility is actually higher than the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/sjoe.12197">Scandinavian</a> countries, and second only to <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3662560">Switzerland</a> among comparable studies. <hr /> <iframe id="5DFB9" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5DFB9/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> In all countries studied there was some link between parents’ income mobility and that of children, because parents pass on tastes, ambitions and abilities. And there was greater correlation between the incomes of mothers and daughters, and fathers and sons than with parents of the opposite gender, perhaps because of role model effects. <hr /> <iframe id="BJ4hD" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/BJ4hD/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> While Australia’s strong income mobility between generations is remarkable, it’s concerning there is less mobility among those at the very bottom and top of the income distribution scale. The fact children born into the poorest families were more likely to remain in the lowest deciles, while those born into the top earning families tended to remain in the top deciles, suggests privilege is often passed on. People who grew up in frequently poor households were <a href="https://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/3537441/HILDA-Statistical-report-2020.pdf">three time more likely</a> to be poor at age 26 to 32 than those who never experienced poverty. <hr /> <iframe id="SxHBo" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/SxHBo/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> And consistent with <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/37c2c8b7-328c-41e1-bace-87ed7a551777/australias-welfare-chapter-2-summary-18sept2019.pdf.aspx">other studies</a> we found children whose family received government payments were twice as likely to receive support as adults, compared with those whose families received no help. <h2>Movement in the middle</h2> Taken together, these results suggest some segmentation of opportunities. In the middle of the income distribution, there are opportunities to get ahead, and individuals’ careers are not restricted by their families’ circumstances. At the bottom, things are a lot more “sticky”, and finding opportunities to permanently escape poverty is more difficult. Some of this boils down where people live, peers, school quality and local job options. Researchers <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jel.20211413">Deutscher and Mazumder</a> (2023) have shown regional economic conditions have a big impact on mobility, and we show remoteness limits movement out of poverty. Overall, the mobility picture is extremely good news for most Australians. But this should not blind us how difficult it is to move out of poverty, especially for those in remote areas. Identifying where mobility fails to deliver allows us to focus our policy response.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/234158/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/catherine-de-fontenay-5631">Catherine de Fontenay</a>, Honorary Fellow, Department of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/your-parents-income-doesnt-determine-yours-unless-youre-ultra-rich-or-extremely-poor-234158">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Aussies working in "priority occupations" eligible for cash increase

Thousands of hard-working Aussies who work in certain areas are now eligible for new training and support payments of up to $10,000. The initiative comes to support Australians working in sectors with a high demand for skilled workers, and a commitment to clean energy. From July 1st, thousands of apprentices working in what the government deems as “priority occupations” are eligible for the $5,000 Australian Apprenticeship Training Support Payment. If those priority occupations also offer exposure and experience in “clean energy”, apprentices are instead eligible for the more lucrative New Energy Apprenticeship Support Payment of up to $10,000. The list of "priority occupations" is extensive and includes aged care workers, arborists, bakers, beauty therapists and many more. According to the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR), the jobs are characterised by a strong current demand for skilled workers, and a strong demand expected in the future. The clean energy jobs also include many different professions, with agricultural and agritech technicians, automotive electricians, regular electricians, gas fitters, glaziers, joiners, plumbers and welders all included. The full list of priority jobs can be found on the <a href="https://www.dewr.gov.au/skills-support-individuals/resources/appendix-australian-apprenticeship-priority-list-1-january-2024" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-link-type="article-inline">Department of Employment and Workplace Relations website.</a> For the Australian Apprenticeship Training Support Payment, the $5000 payment comes in four instalments over two years, while the New Energy Apprentice Support Payment is paid out over the course of the apprenticeship — up to $5000 for part-time apprentices and up to $10,000 for full-time apprentices. It is hoped the payments will incentivise apprentices to remain on the career pathway. Image credits: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

"Tax the boomers": Outrage over elderly couple's complaint after $1m Lotto win

A "greedy" elderly couple have been rinsed online after complaining about losing their age pension payments after they won the Lotto. The couple, aged 73 and 67, wrote into <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-retirement/we-won-the-lottery-but-lost-our-pension-could-we-have-prevented-this-20240702-p5jqga.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sydney Morning Herald</a>'s financial advice column with Noel Whittaker to ask how they could've prevented losing the government funds and still kept hold of their million-dollar winnings. The couple's submission read, "We are a couple... both retired and receiving the full aged pension. We recently won $1,000,000 in the lottery and have placed that money in a basic interest-bearing savings account with our bank." "We intend to use that money to buy a new house and sell our existing one but may just renovate. The windfall has stopped our pension completely until we spend the money, which is all good and well. But could we have prevented the pension loss in any way?" Whittaker responded that the couple should consider themselves extremely fortunate and enjoy the money, saying they "could have a far better lifestyle living off capital instead of relying on welfare". He also urged the couple not "spend to get a pension". The boomers' questions quickly drew attention online, with many flocking to Facebook comments to slam the couple for their "greed". One person wrote, "If you won the lotto, why would you want the pension?", while another added, "Ah yes, the call of the boomers everywhere, 'I have millions but where's my pension money?'" Others said the Lotto winners should consider themselves lucky they are now able to provide for themselves, with one person writing, "Pension is a support system to allow you to survive without/reduced work in retirement. If you are a multimillionaire then you don't need it." Another person echoed the sentiment, saying, "Wow, what entitlement. The pension is a safety net, if you don’t qualify for it think yourself lucky." Other social media users simply shared their outrage towards the boomer generation, as one frustrated person wrote, "Won a million and whinging they can't scam the taxpayers, what self-centered arrogance", while another added, "Tax the boomers! No more handouts." Image credits: Shutterstock <div class="x6s0dn4 x3nfvp2" style="font-family: inherit; align-items: center; display: inline-flex; min-width: 604px;"> <ul class="html-ul xe8uvvx xdj266r x4uap5 x18d9i69 xkhd6sd x1n0m28w x78zum5 x1wfe3co xat24cr xsgj6o6 x1o1nzlu xyqdw3p" style="list-style: none; margin: 0px -8px 0px 4px; padding: 3px 0px 0px; display: flex; min-height: 15px; line-height: 12px; caret-color: #1c1e21; color: #1c1e21; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif; font-size: 12.000001px;" aria-hidden="false"> <li class="html-li xe8uvvx xdj266r xat24cr xexx8yu x4uap5 x18d9i69 xkhd6sd x1rg5ohu x1emribx x1i64zmx" style="list-style: none; display: inline-block; padding: 0px; margin: 0px 8px;"> </li> </ul> </div>

Retirement Income

How do I plan for my retirement? Step one – start right away

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bomikazi-zeka-680577">Bomikazi Zeka</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-canberra-865">University of Canberra</a> Planning for retirement is important because it will help you build the nest egg you’ll need to financially sustain your retirement years. Past <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/03601277.2012.660859?needAccess=true">studies</a> have shown that those who plan for their retirement are more likely to be better off at retirement compared to those don’t. The sooner the planning process gets underway, the better. This gives your money more time to grow by generating investment returns. And the income from your first job is your first opportunity to save for retirement. As the saying goes: “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.” As people <a href="https://www.statssa.gov.za/?p=15601">can expect to live longer</a>, they must save more for retirement so that they don’t outlive their savings. This is particularly true given that the pensions landscape worldwide has undergone some major changes. In the past, governments and employers provided retirement income for individuals through government social security benefits and employment-based retirement funds. Because of increasing life expectancies, pension plans that guaranteed a retirement benefit to employees are now rare. Employees are now responsible for making contributions towards their own pensions as well as choosing the investments offered by the pension fund. Since employers are no longer responsible for funding their employees’ retirement and governments lack resources to provide a universal state pension, each person is ultimately responsible for ensuring they have enough retirement savings. So it’s very important to know the basics of the retirement planning process. As a researcher, I’m interested in how people use financial products to overcome economic challenges and build wealth. One of the things I investigate is whether planning for retirement leads to better retirement outcomes. For instance, my <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bomikazi-Zeka-2/publication/340130176_Retirement_funding_adequacy_in_black_South_African_townships/links/5e8bf3924585150839c6408b/Retirement-funding-adequacy-in-black-South-African-townships.pdf?_sg%5B0%5D=started_experiment_milestone&origin=journalDetail&_rtd=e30%3D">research</a> has found that individuals whose financial affairs are in order are more likely to maintain their standard of living at retirement. Given that everyone’s financial situation is unique, it’s always a good idea to speak to a financial planner for tailored financial advice. If you haven’t given retirement planning much thought or don’t know where to start, here are four points to help get the ball rolling. <h2>What are my retirement goals?</h2> Retirement goals make you think about what you want to achieve by the time you retire and what you need to do to achieve it. Some people may have a goal in mind about when they want to retire, or how much wealth they’d like to have by the time they retire. And since wealth has different meanings for different people, others may think about maintaining or improving their standard of living at retirement. Once you’ve thought about your retirement goals, the <a href="https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/smart-goal/">“smart” goals</a> framework is a useful guide. It outlines that goals should be: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound. When goals are clear, within reach, achievable, realistic and time-sensitive, they become a blueprint to help you turn them into a reality. <h2>How do I start saving for retirement?</h2> For those who have a job that comes with retirement fund membership, a workplace pension is used to provide for retirement. But there are also other options available to help you save. For instance, retirement annuity funds are voluntary retirement savings. Personal assets such as <a href="https://www.allangray.co.za/what-we-offer/unit-trust-investment/#fund-3">unit trusts</a> or <a href="https://www.gov.za/faq/money-matters/how-can-i-make-tax-free-investment">tax-free investments</a> can also be used as a savings tool. Unit trusts are generally better suited for people willing to take on risk because their value is tied to the movements of financial markets. In other words, they can generate positive returns but they can also lose value. The drawback of tax-free investments in South Africa is that they have a lifetime contribution limit. You can’t use them to save more than R500,000 (US$27,400). Each of these options has its advantages and disadvantages and what works best for one person may not be best for another. But there are several ways to save for retirement depending on your financial situation and retirement goals. Getting professional advice will help you determine what’s best for you. <h2>Will my retirement savings be enough?</h2> Once you’ve set your retirement goals and have a retirement savings plan in place, you can calculate whether you are saving enough to achieve your retirement goals. For example, if your retirement goal is: “I want to retire at the age of 65 years with an income equivalent to R35,000 (US$1,900) per month” then you can use a <a href="https://www.sanlam.co.za/tools/Pages/retirement.aspx">retirement calculator</a> to track your progress and determine whether you need to make adjustments to meet your goals. You might have to increase the monthly amount you’re putting away for retirement or reconsider your retirement age. The retirement calculators are also a useful tool for regular check-ins on your progress should your financial situation change – for example, if you change employers and earn a different salary. <h2>What other issues should I consider?</h2> It’s also important to think about your lifestyle and priorities. For instance: <ul> <li> do you aim to retire with your mortgage settled? </li> <li> are there debts you plan to clear before you retire or children who need financial support at retirement? </li> <li> would you like to renovate your home? </li> <li> would you like to buy a new car when you reach retirement age? </li> </ul> Another important consideration is healthcare costs. Many people assume that they will be able to work indefinitely and overlook the fact that healthcare costs may increase with age. <h2>Starting early matters</h2> Many people plan to work after retirement age, while others don’t plan to retire at all. It may be that they can’t afford to. They may have accessed their retirement benefits too soon, made inconsistent retirement fund contributions, or had to pay high administrative costs that eroded the final value of a retirement payout. So best be prepared. Retirement may seem like a distant event to plan and save for, especially when there are more pressing financial needs. It’s important to think about the financial decisions you make now that may cost you in the future. If you start to plan for your retirement now, your future self will thank you for it.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/230553/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bomikazi-zeka-680577">Bomikazi Zeka</a>, Assistant Professor in Finance and Financial Planning, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-canberra-865">University of Canberra</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-i-plan-for-my-retirement-step-one-start-right-away-230553">original article</a>. </div>

Retirement Income

Study finds new link for increased risk of Alzheimer’s

A new study has found that people suffering from anxiety disorders could be more likely to develop Alzheimer's disease. The study, which was published by brain researchers The Florey, analysed data from 2443 older Australians from Melbourne and Perth, who are part of a cohort for dementia research. Study leads Dr Yijun Pan and Dr Liang Jin found that anxiety and other neurological disorders are linked to an increased likelihood of developing Alzheimer's disease. "People with anxiety and neurological disorders are 1.5 and 2.5 times more likely to have Alzheimer's disease," Dr Pan said. "For people with anxiety, males have higher odds than females of developing Alzheimer's disease." They also found a few other medical conditions which were linked to a decreased risk of Alzheimer's, including arthritis, cancer, gastric complaints, and high cholesterol. The study leads said that the p53 protein - which causes neuron dysfunction and cell death in Alzheimer's patients - loses its function when someone has cancer, which could possibly explain the link between the two conditions. "We need further research to understand whether these diseases interfere with the evolution of Alzheimer's or whether there might be other reasons," Dr Pan said. "The medications or treatments used for these diseases may possibly contribute to this observation." The study however, did not find a link between Alzheimer's and depression, falls or strokes. "This is the first study to assess 20 comorbidity associations with cognitive impairment using a single Australian dataset, which allowed us to fully consider how these conditions affect the likelihood of developing Alzheimer's disease," Dr Pan said. "We also studied whether age, gender, smoking, education, alcohol consumption, and the APOE gene – believed to be connected to Alzheimer's - affects these associations. "Our study indicates a new opportunity for biologists to study the links between these 20 conditions with Alzheimer's disease. "This work also provides valuable epidemiological evidence to clinicians, which may help them to evaluate one's risk of developing Alzheimer's disease." Image: Nine

Caring

Menopause can bring increased cholesterol levels and other heart risks. Here’s why and what to do about it

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/treasure-mcguire-135225">Treasure McGuire</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> Menopause is a natural biological process that marks the end of a woman’s reproductive years, typically between 45 and 55. As women approach or experience menopause, common “change of life” <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9244939/">concerns</a> include hot flushes, sweats and mood swings, brain fog and fatigue. But many women may not be aware of the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32705886/">long-term effects</a> of menopause on the heart and blood vessels that make up the cardiovascular system. Heart disease accounts for <a href="http://world-heart-federation.org/what-we-do/women-cvd/">35% of deaths</a> in women each year – more than all cancers combined. What should women – and their doctors – know about these risks? <h2>Hormones protect hearts – until they don’t</h2> As early as 1976, the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/970770/">Framingham Heart Study</a> reported more than twice the rates of cardiovascular events in postmenopausal than pre-menopausal women of the same age. Early menopause (younger than age 40) also <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25331207/">increases heart risk</a>. Before menopause, women tend to be protected by their circulating hormones: oestrogen, to a lesser extent progesterone and low levels of testosterone. These sex hormones help to relax and dilate blood vessels, reduce inflammation and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10503403/">improve lipid (cholesterol) levels</a>. From the mid-40s, a decline in these hormone levels can <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10362825/">contribute to unfavourable changes</a> in cholesterol levels, blood pressure and weight gain – all risk factors for heart disease. <h2>4 ways hormone changes impact heart risk</h2> 1. Dyslipidaemia– Menopause often involves <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38002671/">atherogenic changes</a> – an unhealthy imbalance of lipids in the blood, with higher levels of total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C), dubbed the “bad” cholesterol. There are also reduced levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C) – the “good” cholesterol that helps remove LDL-C from blood. These changes are a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10503403/">major risk factor for heart attack or stroke</a>. 2. Hypertension – Declines in oestrogen and progesterone levels during menopause contribute to narrowing of the large blood vessels on the heart’s surface, arterial stiffness and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35722103/">raise blood pressure</a>. 3. Weight gain – Females are born with one to two million eggs, which develop in follicles. By the time they <a href="https://www.thewomens.org.au/health-information/fertility-information/getting-pregnant/ovulation-and-conception">stop ovulating</a> in midlife, fewer than 1,000 remain. This depletion progressively changes fat distribution and storage, from the hips to the waist and abdomen. Increased waist circumference (greater than 80–88 cm) has been <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18359190/">reported to contribute to heart risk</a> – though it is <a href="https://theconversation.com/good-news-midlife-health-is-about-more-than-a-waist-measurement-heres-why-226019">not the only factor to consider</a>. 4. Comorbidities – Changes in body composition, sex hormone decline, increased food consumption, weight gain and sedentary lifestyles impair the body’s ability to effectively use insulin. This <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11133069/">increases the risk</a> of developing metabolic syndromes such as type 2 diabetes. While risk factors apply to both genders, hypertension, smoking, obesity and type 2 diabetes confer a greater relative risk for heart disease in women. <h2>So, what can women do?</h2> Every woman has a different level of baseline cardiovascular and metabolic risk pre-menopause. This is based on their genetics and family history, diet, and lifestyle. But all women can <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8351755/">reduce their post-menopause heart risk with</a>: <ul> <li>regular moderate intensity exercise such as brisk walking, pushing a lawn mower, riding a bike or water aerobics for 30 minutes, four or five times every week</li> <li>a healthy heart diet with smaller portion sizes (try using a smaller plate or bowl) and more low-calorie, nutrient-rich foods such as vegetables, fruit and whole grains</li> <li>plant sterols (unrefined vegetable oil spreads, nuts, seeds and grains) each day. A review of 14 clinical trials found plant sterols, at doses of at least 2 grams a day, produced an average reduction in serum LDL-C (bad cholesterol) of about 9–14%. This could reduce the risk of heart disease by <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10731187/">25% in two years</a></li> <li>less unhealthy (saturated or trans) fats and more low-fat protein sources (lean meat, poultry, fish – especially oily fish high in omega-3 fatty acids), legumes and low-fat dairy</li> <li>less high-calorie, high-sodium foods such as processed or fast foods</li> <li>a reduction or cessation of smoking (nicotine or cannabis) and alcohol</li> <li>weight-gain management or prevention.</li> </ul> <h2>What about hormone therapy medications?</h2> Hormone therapy remains the most effective means of <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15495039/">managing hot flushes and night sweats</a> and is beneficial for <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18418063/">slowing the loss of bone mineral density</a>. The decision to recommend oestrogen alone or a combination of oestrogen plus progesterone hormone therapy depends on whether a woman has had a hysterectomy or not. The choice also depends on whether the hormone therapy benefit outweighs the woman’s disease risks. Where symptoms are bothersome, hormone therapy has <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33841322/">favourable or neutral effects on coronary heart disease risk</a> and medication risks are low for healthy women younger than 60 or within ten years of menopause. Depending on the level of stroke or heart risk and the response to lifestyle strategies, some women may also require medication management to <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8351755/">control high blood pressure or elevated cholesterol levels</a>. Up until the early 2000s, women were underrepresented in most outcome trials with lipid-lowering medicines. The <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25579834/">Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ Collaboration</a> analysed 27 clinical trials of statins (medications commonly prescribed to lower cholesterol) with a total of 174,000 participants, of whom 27% were women. Statins were about as effective in women and men who had similar risk of heart disease in preventing events such as stroke and heart attack. Every woman approaching menopause should ask their GP for a 20-minute <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/news/heart-health">Heart Health Check</a> to help better understand their risk of a heart attack or stroke and get tailored strategies to reduce it. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/treasure-mcguire-135225">Treasure McGuire</a>, Assistant Director of Pharmacy, Mater Health SEQ in conjoint appointment as Associate Professor of Pharmacology, Bond University and as Associate Professor (Clinical), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/menopause-can-bring-increased-cholesterol-levels-and-other-heart-risks-heres-why-and-what-to-do-about-it-228010">original article</a>. </div>

Body

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

To move or not to move: is it cheaper to find a new place or stay when your rent increases by 10%?

How to keep doing good once you’re gone

Is it worth selling my house if I’m going into aged care?

Old grocery receipt highlights extortionate increase at supermarkets

Does intermittent fasting increase or decrease our risk of cancer?

The biggest faux pas for self-funded retirees

Retirement doesn’t just raise financial concerns – it can also mean feeling unmoored and irrelevant

"Ridiculous": Debate erupts over whether grandparents should be paid to babysit

Constipation increases your risk of a heart attack, new study finds – and not just on the toilet

Does eating ham, bacon and beef really increase your risk of developing type 2 diabetes?

How long does back pain last? And how can learning about pain increase the chance of recovery?

Readers response: What are your thoughts on the increasing use of digital payments?

Retirement tips for Australians without a full superannuation safety net

"Dignified retirement": Aussies set for $21k cash boost

Your parents’ income doesn’t determine yours – unless you’re ultra rich or extremely poor

Aussies working in "priority occupations" eligible for cash increase

"Tax the boomers": Outrage over elderly couple's complaint after $1m Lotto win

How do I plan for my retirement? Step one – start right away

Study finds new link for increased risk of Alzheimer’s

Menopause can bring increased cholesterol levels and other heart risks. Here’s why and what to do about it

Our Partners