Podcasts about new zealand society

It's been revealed the illegal pirate site Lib Gen has hoovered up thousands of books written by New Zealand authors. Some of that work is now being copied by Meta and other AI companies allegedly in breach of copyright and with no composition for the authors. It's believed their writing is being used to teach AI how to mimic similar genres. Jenny Nagle, the Chief Executive of the New Zealand Society of Authors spoke to Lisa Owen.

I popped along to the New Zealand Society of Authors — Wellington's first event of 2025, an open mic at Undercurrent bookshop. There were all sorts of readings from all sorts of readings, including from novels and short stories and memoir and children's books, and poetry. For my five-minute set, I read four poems from my latest collection, The Richard Poems. And you can listen to the recording here.It was also — of course — a chance to plug the upcoming show: Thanks for reading Sounds Good! ! This post is public so feel free to share it.Sounds Good! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Sounds Good! at simonsweetman.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of the Self-Publishing with ALLi Podcast, Anna Featherstone speaks with professional indexer Madeleine Davis, president of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Indexers. Together, they explore the critical role of indexes in nonfiction books, discussing why authors should consider investing in professional indexing, the process of creating an index, and how a great index can enhance the usability and longevity of a book. Davis also shares fascinating insights from her career, tips for working with indexers, and even some lighthearted moments from the world of indexing. Find more author advice, tips, and tools at our Self-Publishing Author Advice Center, with a huge archive of nearly 2,000 blog posts and a handy search box to find key info on the topic you need. And, if you haven't already, we invite you to join our organization and become a self-publishing ally. Now, go write and publish!  Sponsors This podcast is proudly sponsored by Bookvault. Sell high-quality, print-on-demand books directly to readers worldwide and earn maximum royalties selling directly. Automate fulfillment and create stunning special editions with BookvaultBespoke. Visit Bookvault.app today for an instant quote. This podcast is also sponsored by Gatekeeper Press, the all-inclusive Gold Standard in Publishing, offering authors 100% rights, royalties, satisfaction and worldwide distribution. Gatekeeper Press, Where Authors are Family. About the Host Anna Featherstone is ALLi's nonfiction adviser and an author advocate and mentor. A judge of The Australian Business Book Awards and Australian Society of Travel Writers awards, she's also the founder of Bold Authors and presents author marketing and self-publishing workshops for organizations, including Byron Writers Festival. Anna has authored books including how-to and memoirs and her book Look-It's Your Book! about writing, publishing, marketing, and leveraging nonfiction is on the Australian Society of Authors recommended reading list. When she's not being bookish, Anna's into bees, beings, and the big issues of our time. About the Guest Madeleine Davis is the president of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Indexers (ANZSI) and has been a professional indexer since 1994. She has provided back-of-book indexes for trade publishers and university publishers for general, academic, textbooks, and legal publications. She has also given presentations about indexing at various international indexing conferences and seminars and has had articles published in The Indexer, a journal published on behalf of indexing societies worldwide.

Presented in partnership with Fertility and Sterility onsite at the 2024 ANZSREI meeting in Sydney, Australia.  The ANZSREI 2024 debate discussed whether patients with unexplained infertility should go straight to IVF. Experts on both sides weighed the effectiveness, cost, and psychological impact of IVF versus alternatives like IUI. The pro side emphasized IVF's high success rates and diagnostic value, while the con side argued for less invasive, cost-effective options. The debate highlighted the need for individualized care, with no clear consensus reached among the audience. View Fertility and Sterility at https://www.fertstert.org/ TRANSCRIPT: Welcome to Fertility and Sterility On Air, the podcast where you can stay current on the latest global research in the field of reproductive medicine. This podcast brings you an overview of this month's journal, in-depth discussion with authors, and other special features. F&S On Air is brought to you by Fertility and Sterility family of journals in conjunction with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and is hosted by Dr. Kurt Barnhart, Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Eve Feinberg, Editorial Editor, Dr. Micah Hill, Media Editor, and Dr. Pietro Bordoletto, Interactive Associate-in-Chief. I'd just like to say welcome to our third and final day of the ANZSREI conference. We've got our now traditional F&S podcast where we've got an expert panel, we've got our international speaker, Pietro, and we've got a wonderful debate ahead of us. This is all being recorded. You're welcome, and please think of questions to ask the panel at the end, because it's quite an interactive session, and we're going to get some of the best advice on some of the really controversial areas, like unexplained infertility. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the second annual Fertility and Sterility Journal Club Global, coming to you live from the Australia and New Zealand Society for Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility meeting. I think I speak on behalf of everyone at F&S that we are so delighted to be here. Over the last two years, we've really made a concerted effort to take the podcast on the road, and this, I think, is a nice continuation of that. For the folks who are tuning in from home and listening to this podcast after the fact, the Australia and New Zealand Society for Reproductive Endocrinology is a group of over 100 certified reproductive endocrinologists across Australia and New Zealand, and this is their annual meeting live in Sydney, Australia. Today's debate is a topic that I think has vexed a lot of individuals, a lot of patients, a lot of professional groups. There's a fair amount of disagreement, and today we're going to try to unpack a little bit of unexplained infertility, and the question really is, should we be going straight to IVF? As always, we try to anchor to literature, and there are two wonderful documents in fertility and sterility that we'll be using as our guide for discussion today. The first one is a wonderful series that was published just a few months ago in the May issue, 2024, that is a views and reviews section, which means there's a series of three to five articles that kind of dig into this topic in depth. And the second article is our professional society guideline, the ASRM Committee Opinion, entitled Evidence-Based Treatments for Couples with Unexplained Infertility, a guideline. The format for today's discussion is debate style. We have a group of six experts, and I've asked them to randomly assign themselves to a pro and a con side. So I'll make the caveat here that the things that they may be saying, positions they may be trying to influence us on, are not necessarily things that they believe in their academic or clinical life, but for the purposes of a rich debate, they're going to have to be pretty deliberate in convincing us otherwise. I want to introduce my panel for today. We have on my immediate right, Dr. Raewyn Tierney. She's my co-moderator for tonight, and she's a practicing board-certified fertility specialist at IVF Australia. And on my immediate left, we have the con side. Going from left to right, Dr. Michelle Quick, practicing board-certified fertility specialist at IVF Australia. Dr. Robert LaHood, board-certified reproductive endocrinologist and clinical director of IVF Australia here in Sydney. And Dr. Clara Bothroyd, medical director at Care Fertility and the current president of the Asia Pacific Initiative in Reproduction. Welcome. On the pro side, going from right to left, I have Dr. Aurelia Liu. She is a practicing board-certified fertility specialist, medical director of Women's Health Melbourne, and clinical director at Life Fertility in Melbourne. Dr. Marcin Stankiewicz, a practicing board-certified fertility specialist and medical director at Family Fertility Centre in Adelaide. And finally, but certainly not least, the one who came with a tie this morning, Dr. Roger Hart, who is a professor of reproductive medicine at the University of Western Australia and the national medical director of City Fertility. Welcome, pro side. Thank you.  I feel naked without it. APPLAUSE I've asked both sides to prepare opening arguments. Think of this like a legal case. We want to hear from the defence, we want to hear from the plaintiffs, and I'm going to start with our pro side. I'd like to give them a few minutes to each kind of introduce their salient points for why we should be starting with IVF for patients with unexplained infertility. Thanks, Pietro. To provide a diagnosis of unexplained infertility, it's really a reflection of the degree investigation we've undertaken. I believe we all understand that unexplained infertility is diagnosed in the presence of adequate intercourse, normal semen parameters, an absence ovulatory disorder, patent fallopian tubes, and a normal detailed pelvic ultrasound examination. Now, the opposing team will try to convince you that I have not investigated the couple adequately. Personally, I'm affronted by that suggestion. But what possible causes of infertility have I not investigated? We cannot assess easily sperm fertilising capability, we cannot assess oocyte quality, oocyte fertilisation potential, embryonic development, euploidy rate, and implantation potential. Surely these causes of unexplained fertility will only become evident during an IVF cycle. As IVF is often diagnostic, it's also a therapeutic intervention. Now, I hear you cry, what about endometriosis? And I agree, what about endometriosis? Remember, we're discussing unexplained infertility here. Yes, there is very good evidence that laparoscopic treatment for symptomatic patients with endometriosis improves pelvic pain, but there is scant evidence that a diagnostic laparoscopy and treating any minor disease in the absence of pain symptoms will improve the chance of natural conception, or to that matter, improve the ultimate success of IVF. Indeed, in the absence of endometriomas, there is no negative impact on the serum AMH level in women with endometriosis who have not undergone surgery. Furthermore, there is no influence on the number of oocytes collected in an IVF cycle, the rate of embryonic aneuploidy, and the live birth rate after embryo transfer. So why put the woman through a painful, possibly expensive operation with its attendant risks as you're actually delaying her going straight to IVF? What do esteemed societies say about a diagnostic laparoscopy in the setting of unexplained infertility? The ESHRE guidelines state routine diagnostic laparoscopy is not recommended for the diagnosis of unexplained infertility. Indeed, our own ANZSREI consensus statement says that for a woman with a minimal and mild endometriosis, that the number of women needed to treat for one additional ongoing pregnancy is between 3 and 100 women with endometriosis. Is that reasonable to put an asymptomatic woman through a laparoscopy for that limited potential benefit? Now, regarding the guidelines for unexplained infertility, I agree the ASRM guidelines do not support IVF as a first-line therapy for unexplained infertility for women under 37 years of age. What they should say, and they don't, is that it is assumed that she is trying for her last child. There's no doubt if this is her last child, if it isn't her last child, sorry, she will be returning, seeking treatment, now over 37 years of age, where the guidelines do state there is good evidence that going straight to IVF may be associated with higher pregnancy rates, a shorter time to pregnancy, as opposed to other strategies. They then state it's important to note that many of these included studies were conducted in an area of low IVF success rates than those currently observed, which may alter this approach, suggesting they do not even endorse their own recommendations. The UK NICE guidelines, what do they say for unexplained infertility? Go straight to IVF. So while you're listening to my esteemed colleagues on my left speaking against the motion, I'd like to be thinking about other important factors that my colleagues on my right will discuss in more detail. Consider the superior efficacy of IVF versus IUI, the excellent safety profile of IVF and its cost-effectiveness. Further, other factors favouring a direct approach to IVF in the setting of unexplained infertility are what is the woman's desired family? We should not be focusing on her first child, we should be focusing on giving her the family that she desires and how we can minimise her inconvenience during treatment, as this has social, career and financial consequences for those impediments for her while we attempt to help her achieve her desired family. Thank you. APPLAUSE I think the young crowd would say that that was shots fired. LAUGHTER Con side? We're going to save the rebuttal for the time you've allocated to that, but first I want to put the case about unexplained infertility. Unexplained infertility in 2024 is very different to what it was 10 and 20 years ago when many of the randomised controlled trials that investigated unexplained infertility were performed. The armamentarium of investigative procedures and options that we have has changed, as indeed has our understanding of the mechanisms of infertility. So much so that that old definition of normal semen analysis, normal pelvis and ovulatory, which I think was in Roy Homburg's day, is now no longer fit for purpose as a definition of unexplained infertility. And I commend to you ICMART's very long definition of unexplained infertility, which really relies on a whole lot of things, which I'm going to now take you through what we need to do. It is said, or was said, that 30% of infertility was unexplained. I think it's way, way less than that if we actually look at our patients, both of them, carefully with history and examination and directed tests, and you will probably reduce that to about 3%. Let me take you through female age first. Now, in the old trials, some of the women recruited were as old as 42. That is not unexplained infertility. We know about oocyte aneuploidy and female ageing. 41, it's not unexplained. 40, it's not unexplained. 39, it's not unexplained. And I would put it to you that the cut-off where you start to see oocyte aneuploidy significantly constraining fertility is probably 35. So unexplained infertility has to, by definition, be a woman who is less than 35. I put that to you. Now, let's look at the male. Now, what do we know about the male, the effect of male age on fertility? We know that if the woman is over 35, and this is beautiful work that's really done many years ago in Europe, that if the woman is over 35 and the male is five years older than her, her chance of natural conception is reduced by a further 30%. So I put it to you that, therefore, the male age is relevant. And if she's 35 and has a partner who's 35 years older than her or more, it's not unexplained infertility. It's related to couple age. Now, we're going to... So that's age. Now, my colleagues are going to take you through a number of treatment interventions other than IVF, which we can do with good effect if we actually make the diagnosis and don't put them into the category of unexplained infertility. You will remember from the old trials that mild or moderate or mild or minimal endometriosis was often included, as was mild male factor or seminal fluid abnormalities. These were really multifactorial infertility, and I think that's the take-home message, that much of what we call unexplained is multifactorial. You have two minor components that act to reduce natural fecundability. So I now just want to take you through some of the diagnoses that contribute to infertility that we may not, in our routine laparoscopy and workup, we may not pick up and have previously been called unexplained infertility. For instance, we know that adenomyosis is probably one of the mechanisms by which endometriosis contributes to infertility. Chronic endometritis is now emerging as an operative factor in infertility, and that will not be diagnosed easily. Mild or minimal endometriosis, my colleagues will cover. The mid-cycle scan will lead you to the thin endometrium, which may be due to unexpected adhesive disease, but also a thin endometrium, which we know has a very adverse prognostic factor, may be due to long-term progestin contraception. We are starting to see this emerge. Secondary infertility after a caesarean section may be due to an isthma seal, and we won't recognise that unless we do mid-cycle scans. That's the female. Let's look at the male. We know now that seminal fluid analysis is not a good predictor of male fertility, and there is now evidence from Ranjith Ramasamy's work that we are missing clinical varicoceles because we failed to examine the male partner. My colleagues will talk more about that. We may miss DNA fragmentation, which again may contribute via the basic seminal fluid analysis. Now, most of these diagnoses can be made or sorted out or excluded within one or two months of your detailed assessment of both partners by history and examination. So it's not straight to IVF, ladies and gentlemen. It's just a little digression, a little lay-by, where you actually assess the patient thoroughly. She did not need a tie for that rebuttal. LAUGHTER Prasad. Thank you. Well, following from what Professor Hart has said, I'm going to show that IVF should be a go-to option because of its effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety. Now, let me first talk about the effectiveness, and as this is an interaction session, I would like to ask the audience, please, by show of hands, to show me how many of you would accept a medical treatment or buy a new incubator if it had a 94% chance of failure? Well, let the moderator please note that no hands have been raised. Thank you very much. Yet, the chance of live birth in Australian population following IUI is 6%, where, after IVF, the live birth is 40%. Almost seven times more. Now, why would we subject our patients to something we ourselves would not choose? Similarly, findings were reported from international studies that the hazard ratio of 1.25 favouring immediate IVF, and I will talk later about why it is important from a safety perspective. Cost-effectiveness. And I quote ESHRE guidelines. The costs, treatment options have not been subject to robust evaluations. Now, again, I would like to ask the audience, this time it's an easy question, how many of you would accept as standard an ongoing pregnancy rate of at least 38% for an average IVF cycle? Yeah, hands up. All right, I've got three-quarters of the room. OK. Well, I could really rest my case now, as we have good evidence that if a clinic has got an ongoing pregnancy rate of 38% or higher with IVF with single embryo transfer, then it is more effective, more cost-effective, and should be a treatment of choice. And that evidence comes from the authors that are sitting in this room. Again, what would the patients do? If the patients are paying for the treatment, would they do IUI? Most of them would actually go straight to IVF. And we also have very nice guidelines which advise against IUI based on cost-effectiveness. Another factor to mention briefly is the multiple births, which cost five to 20 times more than singleton. The neonatal cost of a twin birth costs about five times more than singletons, and pregnancy with delivery of triplets or more costs nearly 20 times. Now, the costs that I'm going to quote are in American dollars and from some time ago, from Fertility and Sterility. However, the total adjusted all healthcare costs for a single-dom delivery is about US$21,000, US$105,000 for twins, and US$400,000 for triplets and more. Then the very, very important is the psychological cost of the high risk of failure with IUI. Now, it is well established that infertility has a psychological impact on our patients. Studies have shown that prolonged time to conception extends stress, anxiety, and depression, and sexual functioning is significantly negatively impacted. Literature shows that 56% of women and 32% of men undergoing fertility treatment report significant symptoms of depression, and 76% of women and 61% of men report significant symptoms of anxiety. Shockingly, it is reported that 9.4% of women reported having suicidal thoughts or attempts. The longer the treatment takes, the more our patients display symptoms of distress, depression, and anxiety. Safety. Again, ESHRE guideline says the safety of treatment options have not been subjected to robust evaluation. But let me talk you through it. In our Australian expert hands, IVF is safe, with the risk of complications of ectopic being about 1 in 1,500 and other risks 1 in 3,000. However, let's think for a moment on impact of multiple births. A multiple pregnancy has significant psychological, physical, social, and financial consequences, which I can go further into details if required. I just want to mention that the stillbirth rate increases from under 1% for singleton pregnancies to 4.5% for twins and 8.3% for higher-order multiples, and that multiple pregnancies have potential long-term adverse health outcomes for the offspring, such as the increased risk of health issues through their life, increased learning difficulties, language delay, and attention and behavior problems. The lifelong disability is over 25% for babies weighing less than 1 kilogram at delivery. And please note that the quoted multiple pregnancy rates with IUI can reach up to 33%, although in expert hands it's usually around 15%, which is significantly higher than single embryo transfer. In conclusion, from the mother and child safety perspective, for the reason of medical efficacy and cost effectiveness, we have reasons to believe you should go straight to IVF. We're going to be doing these debates more often from Australia. This is a great panel. One side, please. Unexplained infertility. My colleagues were comparing IUI ovulation induction with IVF, but there are other ways of achieving pregnancies with unexplained fertility. I'm going to take the patient's perspective a little bit here. It's all about shared decision-making, so the patient needs to be involved in the decision-making. And it's quite clear from all the data that many patients with unexplained infertility will fall pregnant naturally by themselves even if you do nothing. So sometimes there's definitely a place in doing nothing, and the patient needs to be aware of that. So it's all about informed consent. How do we inform the patient? So we've got to make a proper diagnosis, as my colleague Dr. Boothright has already mentioned, and just to jump into IVF because it's cost-effective is not doing our patients a justice. The prognosis is really, really important, and even after 20 years of doing this, it's all about the duration of infertility, the age of the patient, and discussing that prognosis with the patient. We all know that patients who have been trying for longer and who are older do have a worse prognosis, and maybe they do need to look at treatment quicker, but there are many patients that we see that have a good prognosis, and just explaining that to them is all they need to achieve a pregnancy naturally. And then we're going to talk about other options. It's wrong not to offer those to patients, and my colleague Dr. Quick will talk about that in a moment. Look, we've all had patients that have been scarred by IVF who've spent a lot of money on IVF, did not fall pregnant, and I think the fact that they weren't informed properly, that the diagnosis wasn't made properly, is very frustrating to them. So to just jump into IVF again is not doing the patients a justice. And look, there are negatives to IVF. There's not just the cost to the patient, the cost to society. As taxpayers, we all pay for IVF. It's funded here, or sponsored to some degree, and it's also the family and everyone else that's involved in paying for this. So this is not a treatment that is without cost. There are some harms. We know that ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome still exists, even though it's much less than it used to be. There's a risk of infection and bleeding from the procedures. And we can look at the baby. The data still suggests that babies born from IVF are smaller and they're born earlier, and monozygotic twinning is more common with IVF, so these are high-risk pregnancies, and all this may have an impact on the long-term health of the babies somewhere down the track at the moment. That is important to still look out for. But I come back to the emotional toll. Our colleagues were saying that finishing infertility quicker helps to kind of reduce the emotional toll, but the procedure itself does have its own toll if it doesn't work, and so we've got to prepare patients, have them informed. But at the end of the day, it's all about patient choice. How can a patient make a choice if we don't make a proper diagnosis, give them a prognosis and offer them some other choices that exist? And running the anchor leg of the race for the pro side. IVF in couples with unexplained infertility is the best tool we have in our reproductive medicine toolkit for multiple reasons. Professor Hart has clarified the definition of unexplained infertility. As a reflection of the degree of investigation we've undertaken. He's explained that IVF is often importantly diagnostic as well as therapeutic, both demonstrating and overcoming barriers to natural conception. Dr Stankiewicz has convinced us that IVF is efficient, safe and cost-effective. My goal is to show you that IVF is the correct therapy to meet the immediate and big picture family planning goals for our patients with unexplained infertility. More than 80% of couples with defined unexplained infertility who attempt IVF treatment will have a baby. In Australia, ANZSREI data shows us that the average age of the female patients who present with primary unexplained infertility is over 35 years. And in fact the average is 38 years. We're all aware that the average age of first maternity in Australia has progressively become later over the past two decades. Currently it stands in the mothers and babies report at 32 years. If the average age of first maternity is 32 years, this means that at least 50% of women attempting their first pregnancy are over 32 years. Research I conducted in Melbourne University with my student Eugenie Pryor asking university students of their family planning intentions and aspirations demonstrated that most people, male and female, want to be parents and most want to have more than one child. However, in Australia, our most recent survey shows that births are at an all-time low, below replacement rate and falling, with an ever greater proportion of our population being unable to have the number of children they aspire to and an ever growing proportion seeking assisted reproductive care. Fertility declines with age. Factors include egg quality concerns, sperm quality concerns and the accumulation of pathologies over time. Adenomyosis, fibroids, endometriosis are concerns that no person is born with. They exist on a spectrum and progress over time and may be contributing factors for unexplained infertility. Our patients, when we meet them, are the best IVF candidates that they will ever be. They are the youngest they will ever be and they have the best ovarian reserve they will ever have. They will generate more euploid embryos now than they will in years to come. The sooner we get our patients pregnant, the sooner they will give birth. It takes nine months to have a baby, 12 months potentially to breastfeed and wean and of course most patients will need time to care for a young infant and recover prior to attempting another pregnancy. IVF and embryo banking may represent not only their best chance of conception with reduced time to pregnancy but also an opportunity for embryo banking to improve their cumulative live birth rate potential over time. By the time our 38-year-old patient returns to try to conceive for a second child, she will undoubtedly be aged over 40. Her chance of live birth per cycle initiated at IVF at this stage has reduced phenomenally. The ANZSREI dataset from our most recent report quotes that statistic to be 5%. Her chance of conception with an embryo frozen at 38 years, conversely, is one in three to one in four. There is no room for doubt that IVF gives couples with unexplained infertility not only the most effective treatment we have to help them have a baby, but their best opportunity to have a family. Last but certainly not least, Dr. Quick, to round out the con sides arguments before we open up for rebuttal. And I'll make a small plea that if you have questions that you'd like to pose directly to the panel, prepare them and we'll make sure we get to them from the audience shortly. Thank you. So, whilst we have heard that we may be bad doctors because we're delaying our patients' time to pregnancy, I would perhaps put it to you that unexplained infertility is a diagnosis which is made based on exclusion. So perhaps you are the bad doctors because you haven't looked hard enough for the cause of the unexplained infertility. So, in terms of the tests that we all would do, I think, we would all ensure that the woman has an ovarian reserve. We would all ensure that she has no structural anomaly inside the uterus. We would all ensure that her tubes are patent. We would all ensure that she has regular cycles. We would ensure that he has a normal semen analysis. I think these are tests that we would all do when trying to evaluate a couple for fertility who are struggling to conceive. And therefore, the chance of them getting pregnant naturally, it's never going to be zero. And one option therefore, instead of running straight to IVF, would be to say, OK, continue timed intercourse because the chance of you conceiving naturally is not actually zero and this would be the most natural way to conceive, the cheapest way to conceive, the least interventional way to conceive. And whether that be with cycle tracking to ensure appropriate timed intercourse, whether that be with cycle tracking to ensure adequate luteal phase support. When you clear the fallopian tubes, we know that there are studies showing an improvement in natural conception. Lipidol or oil-based tubal flushing techniques may also help couples to conceive naturally. And then you don't have this multiple pregnancy rate that IVF has. You don't have the cost that you incur with IVF, not just for the couple but to Australian society because IVF is subsidised in this country. You don't have the risks that the woman goes through to undergo IVF treatment. You don't have the risks that the baby takes on being conceived via IVF. And so conceiving naturally, because it's not going to be zero, is definitely an option for these couples. In terms of further tests or further investigations that you could do, some people would argue, yes, we haven't looked hard enough for the reason for infertility, therefore we know that ultrasound is notoriously bad at picking up superficial endometriosis. We know that ultrasound cannot pick up subtle changes in the endometrium, as Dr Boothroyd referred to chronic endometritis, for example. So these patients perhaps should undergo a hysteroscopy to see if there is an endometrial issue. Perhaps these patients should undergo a laparoscopy to see if there is superficial endometriosis. And there are meta-analyses showing that resecting or treating superficial endometriosis may actually help these couples conceive naturally down the track and then therefore they avoid having more interventional treatment in order to conceive. There is also intrauterine insemination with or without ovarian stimulation, which may improve their chances of conceiving naturally. And that again would be less invasive, less intervention and cheaper for the patient. And we know that therefore there are a lot of other treatment options available to help these couples to conceive. And if it's less invasive, it's more natural, it's cheaper, that ends up being better for the patient. Psychologically as well, which the other side have brought up, even with Dr Stankiewicz's 38% ongoing pregnancy rate, that also means that 62% of his patients are not going to be pregnant. The psychological impact of that cannot be underestimated because for a lot of patients, IVF is your last resort. And when you don't get pregnant with IVF, that creates an issue too for them. Embryo banking, which was also brought up, what happens when you create surplus embryos and what's the psychological impact of having to deal with embryos that you are then not going to use in the future? So therefore for those reasons we feel that IVF is not your first line treatment for couples who are diagnosed with unexplained infertility. There are many other ways to help these couples to conceive. We just have a multitude of things to unpack. And I want to start off by opening up an opportunity for rebuttal. I saw both sides of the panel here taking diligent notes. I think all of us have a full page worth of things that kind of stood out to us. Since the pro side had an opportunity to begin, I'm actually going to start with the con side and allow the con side to answer specific points made by the pro side and provide just a little bit more detail and clarity for why they think IVF is not the way forward. My learned first speaker, wearing his tie of course, indicated that it was all about laparoscopy and IUI, and it's way more than that. I just want to highlight to you the paper by Dressler in 2017 in the New England Journal of Medicine, a randomised controlled trial of what would be unexplained infertility according to the definition I put out, the less than 35 ovulatory normal semen analysis. And the intervention was an HSG with either oil-based contrast or water-based contrast. And over the six months, there was clear separation, and this is an effective treatment for unexplained infertility or mild or minimal endometriosis, however it might work. And there's probably separation out to three years. So as a single intervention, as an alternative to IVF, the use of oil-based contrast is an option. So it's not just about laparoscopy and IUI. I guess the other thing the second speaker did allude to, fairly abysmal success rates with IUI being 6%. That is a problem, and I would like to allude to a very good pragmatic trial conducted by Cindy Farquhar and Emily Lu and their co-workers in New Zealand that really swung the meta-analysis for the use of clomiphene and IUI to clinical efficacy. And they reported a 33% chance of live birth in their IUI and clomiphene arm. I'm going across to Auckland to see what the magic is in that city. What are they doing? The third speaker did allude to the problem of declining fertility, a global problem, and Australia is not alone. We have solved the problem to date, which we've had for 40 years, with immigration. But Georgina Chambers' work shows beautifully that IVF is not the answer to the falling fertility rates. It is a way more complex social problem and is probably outside the scope of today's discussion. So those are my three rebuttals to our wonderful team. Thank you very much. So... You can't bury them. We'll give them an opportunity. Thank you for the opportunity. So I'd like to address some of the points that my learned debaters on the opposition raised. The first speaker really suggested quite a few things that we probably omitted, like endometritis, failing to examine the male. I think things like that... I think, at a good history, that is essential what we do as part of our investigation. We're looking for a history of cesarean section, complications subsequent to that. We're doing a detailed scan, and that will exclude the fact that she's got a poor endometrium development, she's got a cesarean scar niche. A good history of a male will allude to the fact that he has some metabolic disorder, degree of hypogonadism. So we're not delaying anything by these appropriate investigations. Adenomyosis will be raised. I talked about a detailed gynaecological examination. So I honestly think that a very... As my opening line was, a detailed gynaecological scan, obviously with a very good history taken, is essential. We're not delaying her opportunity to go straight to IVF if we've addressed all these factors. The second speaker talked about shared decision-making, and we'd all completely agree with that. But we have to be honest and open about the success, which my second speaker talked about, the success of the treatment we're offering. And one thing we should sort of dwell on is it's all... It's a fundamental description of the success of treatment is probably all about prognostic models, and that who not model, that's the original model about the success of conception, is really... Everything flows on from that, which basically talks about a good prognosis patient. 30% chance of live birth after a year. That's what they talk about, a good prognosis patient. Perhaps the rest of the world is different to your average Australian patient, but if we talked about that being a good prognosis, you've got a one in three chance of being pregnant by a year. I think most of our patients would throttle us. So that is what all the models are sort of based on, that being a good prognosis patient. So I completely agree with the second speaker that we do have a shared decision. We have to be honest with our patients about the success. We have to be honest about giving them the prognosis of any treatment that we offer. But really, as my third speaker was talking about, it's about giving the patient the opportunity to have a family, minimal career disruption, minimal life disruption. We have to be honest and talk about the whole picture. They're focused on the first child because really they can't think beyond that. We're talking about giving them the family that they need. The third speaker spoke very eloquently about the risks associated with the treatment we offer. I believe we offer a very safe service with our IVF, particularly in Australia, with our 2% twin pregnancy rate. We talk about the higher risk of these pregnancies, but they perhaps don't relate to the treatment we're offering. Perhaps, unfortunately, is the patient, if she's got polycystic ovary syndrome, if she's more likely to have diabetes, premature delivery, preeclampsia. So I think often the risks associated with IVF and potentially the risks associated to the child born from IVF perhaps don't relate to the treatment of IVF per se. It may well be the woman and perhaps her partner, their underlying medical condition, which lead those risks. So I strongly would encourage you to believe that you take a very good history from your patient, you do a thorough investigation, as I've alluded to, looking for any signs of ovulatory disorder, any gynaecological disorder by a detailed scan, checking tubal patency and a detailed history and the similarities from the man, and then you'll find you're probably going straight to IVF. APPLAUSE I'd like to talk a bit about the embryo banking and having been in this field for a long time, as a word of caution, we're setting a lot of expectations. I remember going to an ASRM meeting probably 10 years ago where they had this headline, all your embryos in the freezer, your whole family in the freezer, basically expecting that if you get four or five embryos frozen that you'll end up with a family at the end. We all know that for the patient, they're not a percentage, it's either zero or 100%. And if all the embryos don't work, they don't have a family at the end, you know, it didn't work for them and their expectations haven't been met. And the way we talk about the percentages and that we can solve the patient's problems, that we can make families, it doesn't always happen. So the expectations our position is setting here, we're not always able to meet and so we're going to end up with very unhappy patients. So this is just a warning to everyone that we need to tell people that this doesn't always work and sometimes they'll end up with no success at all. And from that point of view, I think the way it's presented is way too simplistic and we've got to go back to looking at the other options and not promising things we can't always deliver. So just taking into account all our esteemed interlocutors have said, we don't necessarily disagree with the amount of investigations that they described because nowhere in our argument we said that as soon as the patient registers with the receptionist, they will direct it to an IVF lab. I think to imply so, we'd be very rich indeed. Maybe there are some clinics that are so efficient. I don't know how it works overseas, but certainly not in Australia. The other point that was made about the cost of IVF and our, again, esteemed interlocutors are very well aware from the studies done here in Australia that actually every baby that we have to conceive through IVF and create and lives is actually more than 10 to 100 times return on investment because we are creating future taxpayers. We are creating people that will repay the IVF treatment costs over and over and over again. So I'll put to you, Rob, that if you are saying that we can't do IVF because it costs money, you are robbing future treasurers of a huge amount of dollars. I hope the American audience is listening. In America, we call embryos unborn children in freezers in certain parts and here they're unborn taxpayers. Con side, final opportunity for rebuttal before some audience questions and one more word from the pro side. Well, actually, Dr Stankiewicz was very happy to hear that you're not going to send your patients straight to the IVF lab because we've managed to convince you that that's not the right thing to do. I clearly have forgotten how to debate because I did all my rebuttals at the end of my presentation but essentially I'll recap because when we're talking about IVF, as we're saying, the chance of pregnancy is not going to be 100% and so there is a psychological impact to IVF not working. There is a psychological impact to banking embryos and creating surplus embryos that eventually may not be used and they were my main rebuttal points in terms of why IVF was not the first-line treatment. Thank you. So we've heard from the opposition some very valid points of how our patients can be psychologically impacted when fertility treatment is unsuccessful. I will again remind you that IVF is the most successful fertility treatment we have in our treatment armoury. We are most likely to help our patients have a baby with IVF. The cumulative pregnancy rates for IVF have started back in the late 70s and early 80s in single-digit percentages. We now, with a best prognosis candidate, have at least a one-in-two chance of that patient having a baby per embryo transfer and in our patients with unexplained infertility, the vast majority of our patients will have success. We also heard from the negative team about the significant chance of pregnancy in patients with expectant management. You're right, there's not a 0% chance of natural conception in patients who have unexplained infertility, but there is a not very good chance. We know from data that we've had for a really long time, going back as far as the Hutterite data, to today's non-contradictory models, which tell us that a couple's chance of conception per month in best prognosis candidates is one in five. If they've been trying for six months, it's one in ten. If they've been trying for 12 months, it's only 5%, and if they've been trying for 24 months, it's less than 1%. So it may not be zero, but it isn't very good. In terms of our team reminding us of the extended ICMART definition of unexplained infertility, we don't argue. When we say someone has unexplained infertility, we make the assumption that they have been comprehensively diagnosed by a robust reproductive endocrinologist, as everyone in this room is. And I would say one closing rebuttal. IUI success rates have been the same for the last 50 years, whereas IVF success rates continue to improve. Why would you offer your patient a treatment from 50 years ago when you can offer them one from today? Thank you. APPLAUSE I'm going to take a personal privilege and ask the first question, in hoping that the microphone makes its way to the second question in the audience. My colleagues on the pro side have said IVF, IVF, IVF. Can you be a little bit more specific about what kind of IVF? Do you mean IVF with ICSI? Do you mean IVF, ICSI, and PGT? Be a little bit more deliberate for us and tell us exactly how the patient with unexplained infertility should receive IVF. As I said in my statement, I think it's a diagnostic evaluation. I think there is an argument to consider ICSI, but I think ICSI does have some negative consequences for children born. I think perhaps going straight to ICSI is too much. I think going straight to PGTA perhaps is too much, unless there is something in their history which should indicate that. But we're talking about unexplained infertility. So I believe a standard IVF cycle, looking at the opportunity to assess embryonic development, is the way to go. I do not think you should be going straight to ICSI. I think the principle of first do no harm is probably a safe approach. I don't know whether my colleagues have some other comments, but I think that would be the first approach rather than going all guns blazing. I can understand, though, in different settings in the world, there may have... We're very fortunate in Australia, we're very well supported from the government support for IVF, but I think the imperatives in different countries may be different. But I think that approach would be the right one first. We'll start with a question from the audience. And if you could introduce yourself and have the question allowed for our members in the audience who are not here. It's Louise Hull here from Adelaide. The question I would like to put to both the pro and con team is that Geeta Mishra from the University of Queensland showed that if you had diagnosed endometriosis before IVF, you were more likely to have a pregnancy and much less likely to have high-order IVF cycles. Given that we now have really good non-invasive diagnostics, we're actually... A lot of the time we can pick up superficial or stage 2 endometriosis if you get the right scan. We're going to do IVF better if we know about it. Can you comment on that impacting even the diagnosis of unexplained infertility? Thanks. I'd love to take that. Can I go first, Roger? LAUGHTER Please do. Look, I'd love to take that question. It's a really good question. And, of course, this is not unexplained infertility, so this is outside the scope here. And I think, really, what we're seeing now, in contrast to where we were at the time of the Markku study, which was all... And the Tulandy study on endometrioma excision, we now see that that is actually damaging to fertility, particularly where there is ovarian endometriosis, and that we compromise their ovarian reserve by doing this surgery before we preserve their fertility, be it oocyte cryopreservation or embryo cryopreservation. So I think it's a bit outside the scope of this talk, but I think the swing of the data now is that we should be doing fertility preservation before we do surgery for deeply infiltrated ovarian endometriosis. And that would fit with Gita's findings. A brief response. Thanks very much, Louise. Yeah, we're talking about unexplained infertility here, and my opening line was we need a history, but a detailed gynaecological ultrasound. I think it's important it's a really good ultrasound to exclude that, because the evidence around very minor endometriosis is not there. I agree with significant endometriosis, but that's not the subject of this discussion. But I do believe with very minimal endometriosis there is really no evidence for that. Janelle MacDonald from Sydney. I'm going to play devil's advocate here. So everyone is probably aware of the recent government inquiry about obstetric violence. I'm a little concerned that if we are perceived to be encouraging women to IVF first, are we guilty as a profession of performing fertility violence? That's just digressing a little bit, just thinking about how the consumers may perceive this. I think our patients want to have a baby, and that's why they come to see us, and that's what we help them to do through IVF. I'm not sure the microphone's working. And just introduce yourself. I'm from Sydney, Australia. Can I disagree with you, Roger, about that question about minimal and mild endometriosis? I'm 68, so I'm old enough to have read a whole lot of papers in the past that are probably seen as relics. But Mark Khoo published an unusual study, because it was actually an RCT. Well, sorry, not an RCT. It was a study whereby... Well, it was an RCT, and it was randomised really well. It was done in Canada, and there were about 350 subjects, and they were identified to have stage 1 or stage 2 endometriosis at laparoscopy. And the interesting thing is it was seen as an intervention which didn't greatly increase the chance of conception, but it doubled the monthly chance of conception. So there was clearly a difference between those patients who didn't have endometriosis and those that had stage 1 and stage 2 endometriosis. So the intervention did actually result in an improvement. One of the quotes was, well, I heard since then, well, it didn't make much difference. But when you realise that infertility is multifactorial, there were probably other factors involved as well. So any increase like that in stage 1 and stage 2 endometriosis sufferers was clearly beneficial for them. So I wouldn't disagree with you completely, but I do think you've got to take it on board that there is some evidence that surgical intervention can help. And certainly in those patients whereby the financial costs of IVF are still quite, even in Australia, astronomical. Many patients can get this through the public sector or the private sector treatment of their endometriosis laparoscopically very cheaply or at no cost. Thanks, Dr Persson. So you're right that there was also a counter-randomised controlled trial by the Grupo Italiano which was a counter to that. And actually did not show any benefit. But I believe the Marcu study demonstrated an excess of conception and with treatment of minima and endometriosis of about 4% per month for a few months. So absolutely, that shared decision-making. Personally, I wouldn't like a laparoscopy to give me an extra 4% chance of a natural conception for four months, which I think the data was. So basically, the basis to my statement that I said without going into great detail was a review article published by Samy Glarner recently in Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology. And their conclusions were what I basically said, that from looking at all the data, there is no real evidence of intervention for minor endometriosis. We're not talking about pain or significant diagnosed endometriosis on the outcomes of IVF, ovarian reserve, egg quality, embryo development, and euploidy rate. So that was the basis of my... I hate to disagree... I hate to agree with my opponents in a debate, but I'm going to... But there is actually a new network analysis by Rui Wang and some serious heavyweights in evidence-based medicine that pulls together the surgical studies. And the thing that made the most difference to this of mild and minimal endometriosis from a fertility point of view, not pain, is the use of oil-based uterine contrast. And I commend that paper to you, which fits with exactly what Roger is saying. Hi, my name's Lucy Prentice.  I work in Auckland. And I just wanted to point out the New Zealand perspective a little bit. Where we come from a country with very limited public funding for IVF. I'm currently running an RCT with Cindy Farquad directly looking at IVF versus IUI for unexplained infertility. And I'd just like to point out that both the ASRM and ESHRE guidelines, which are the most recent ones, both suggest that IUI should be a first-line treatment with oral ovarian stimulation. We have no evidence that IVF is superior based on an IPD meta-analysis published very recently and also a Cochrane review. And although we would love to be able to complete the family that our patients want from IVF and embryo banking, that option is really not available to a lot of people in New Zealand because of prohibitive costs. We know that IUI with ovarian stimulation is a very effective treatment for people with poor prognosis and unexplained infertility. And I also would just like to add that there's not a cost-effectiveness analysis that shows an improvement in cost-effectiveness for IVF. There's also never been a study looking at treatment tolerability between the two, so I don't think that you can say that IVF is a treatment that people prefer over IUI. So I may turn around and shoot myself in the foot based on our results that will be coming out next year, but I think at the moment I don't think you can say that IVF is better than IUI with ovarian stimulation for unexplained. We have time for two more questions from the audience, and we have two hands in the back. Now we can. It's the light green. OK. Hossam Zini from Melbourne. Thank you very much for the debate. It's very interesting. The problem is that all of the studies that have been done about comparing IUI to IVF, they are not head-to-head studies. The designs are different. They are having, like, algorithmic approach. For example, they compare three or four or five cycles of IUI to one cycle of IVF. But about 10 years ago, our group at the Royal Women's Hospital, we have done a study, a randomized control study, to compare IUI to IVF head-to-head, and we randomized the patients at the time of the trigger who only developed, so we did a low stimulation to get two to three follicles only, and that's why it was so hard to recruit lots of patients. So the criticism that was given to the study that it's a small sample size, but we end up with having IVF as a cost-effective treatment. Our IVF group had a live birth rate about 38%, and on the IUI, 12%. And with our cost calculations, we find out that the IVF is much more cost-effective than the IUI. But I believe that we all now believe in individualized kind of treatment, so patients probably who are younger than 34 years old probably wouldn't go straight to IVF. Maybe I'll do a laparoscopy and a histroscopy first, okay, and we may give them a chance to achieve a natural conception in the next three months or so. Patients who are older than 35, 37 years old probably will benefit straight from IVF. But again, in day-to-day life cases, we will not force the patient to go straight to IVF. I will talk to her and I'll tell her, these are your options, expectant treatment. This is the percentage that you would expect. IUI, this is what you expect. IUI with ovulation induction, this is what you expect. IVF, this is what you expect. And then she will discuss that with her partner and come back to me and tell me what she wants to do. Thanks. I saw a hand show up right next to you, so I'll add one more question given our time limitation. Thanks so much, Kate Stone-Mellon. I'd like to ask our panel to take themselves out of their role playing and put themselves in another role where they were the head of a very, very well-funded public service, and I'd like to ask the two sides what they really think about what they would do with a patient at the age of 35 with 12 months of unexplained infertility. Well, can I say that? Because that's my role in a different hat. LAUGHTER So, yeah, I run the state facility service in Western Australia. We looked at the data, because obviously that's what we're doing, IUI, IVF, and unfortunately we stopped doing IUI treatment. The success rate was so low. So we do go straight to IVF with unexplained infertility. Disappointing, as I'm sure you hear that, Kate, that we do. We looked at the data. Yeah, I think that I would still offer the patients the options, because some people don't want to do IVF. Even though it's completely free, they may not still want to do the injections and the procedure and take on the risks of the actual egg collection procedure. I don't know, religious issues with creating embryos. Yeah, I would still give patients the option. We have time for one more question in the back. We'll take the other ones offline afterwards. We'll get you a microphone just to make sure our listeners afterwards can listen. Following on from the New Zealand experience, which I've experienced... Hello? Yeah. From the New Zealand experience, and having worked here extensively and in New Zealand, you're not comparing apples with apples, Claire. That unexplained couple in New Zealand will wait five years to get funding and currently perhaps another two years to get any treatment. That's then an apples group compared to the pilot group who may, in fact, walk past the hospital and get treatment. The other thing about this, I think, that we need to forget, or don't forget, is the ethics of things here, two of which is that the whole understanding of unexplained infertility needs research and thinking. And if it wasn't for that understanding of what is the natural history of normal and then the understanding of pathology, we wouldn't do a lot of things in medicine. So if we have got a subgroup here that's unexplained, it's not just to the patient, we have a responsibility to future patients and ourselves to be honest and do research and learn about these factors. Now, it doesn't answer the debate, but it is something that's what drives the investigation and management of unexplained delay. And, for example, at the moment, there's quite a discussion about two issues of ethics, one about the involuntary childlessness of people that don't get to see us but don't have those children that they wanted to have because they didn't want to undergo treatment, or it was the involuntary childlessness of a second or subsequent child. And that's quite a big research issue in Europe, I realise, at the moment. And the final thing is about the information giving. The British case Montgomery 2015 has changed consent substantially, for those of you from England, that all information given to patients must include and document the discussion about expectant management versus all the different types of treatment, for and against and risks. And we're not currently doing that in IVF in this area, but if you read about what's happened in England, it's transformed consent in surgery. And I think a lot of our decision-making isn't in that way. So there are a couple of ethical principles to think about. Wonderful questions from the audience. Since we're coming up at the end of our time, we typically end the debate with closing remarks, but we'll forego that for this debate. And I'd actually like to just poll the audience. After hearing both the pro and the con side's arguments, by a show of hands, who in the audience believes that for the patient with unexplained infertility, as defined and detailed here broadly, should we be beginning with IVF? Should we be going straight to IVF? So by a show of hands. And I would say probably 50% of the room raised their hand. And those who think we should not be going straight to IVF? It feels like a little bit more. 40-60, now that I saw the other hands. Well, I'm going to call this a hung jury. I don't know that we have a definitive answer. Please join me in a round of applause for our panelists. In America, we would call that election interference. I wanted to thank our panelists, our live audience, and the listeners of the podcast. On behalf of Fertility and Sterility, thank you for the invitation to be here at your meeting and hosting this debate live from the Australian New Zealand Society for Reproductive Endocrinology meeting in Sydney, Australia. Thank you. This concludes our episode of Fertility and Sterility On Air, brought to you by the Fertility and Sterility family of journals in conjunction with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. This podcast was developed by Fertility and Sterility and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine as an educational resource and service to its members and other practicing clinicians. While the podcast reflects the views of the authors and the hosts, it is not intended to be the only approved standard of living or to direct an exclusive course of treatment. The opinions expressed are those of the discussants and do not reflect Fertility and Sterility or the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.    

In this episode of Bad Diaries Podcast, Tracy talks with award winning writer, reviewer, former literary festival director and ex-bass player Rachael King about reading journals, her love of a good boot, and why she's no longer writing novels for adults.Rachael's latest novel, The Grimmelings – “folk horror! for kids!” – is proper scary. And it's a finalist in the New Zealand Children's Book Awards, for the Esther Glen Award for Junior Fiction. In this episode of the podcast, we wonder whether writing for younger readers is having a bit of a buzzy moment – in Aotearoa New Zealand, at least – and we talk about why writing books for children is more important to Rachael than ever.We turn to diaries, and look at the unique perspective Rachael brings to the Bad Diaries universe. As literary director of WORD Christchurch festival, she booked the first Bad Diaries Salon outside Australia (and our first festival collab); she's been a Bad Diaries Salon reader; and she's been in the audience for several salons. We're thrilled to expand her connection to Bad Diaries, by welcoming her to the podcast.Rachael King is a writer from Aotearoa New Zealand. She is the author of two novels for children, The Grimmelings and Red Rocks. Red Rocks won the Esther Glen Medal in 2013, and is currently being produced for television by Libertine Pictures and Sky TV.Her first novel for adults, The Sound of Butterflies, was published internationally and translated into eight languages, and won the award for best first novel at the 2007 Montana New Zealand Book Awards. Her second novel, Magpie Hall, was longlisted for the IMPAC Dublin Literary Award. Rachael was programme director of WORD Christchurch Festival for eight years until late 2021. She received a Waitangi Day Honour Award in 2020 from the New Zealand Society of Authors (PEN NZ) for her work at WORD bringing exiled Kurdish writer Behrouz Boochani to New Zealand. In 2023 she was named Best Reviewer at the Voyager New Zealand Media Awards. She lives in Ōtautahi Christchurch.Find full show notes for this episode on the Bad Diaries Salon website baddiariessalon.com, or get in touch via Instagram or Facebook – we're @baddiariessalon everywhere.Thanks for joining us for Bad Diaries Podcast! Don't forget to subscribe, rate and review us, wherever you get your podcasts.Bad Diaries Podcast is recorded and produced in Naarm Melbourne, Australia, on the lands of the Kulin Nation; and in Te Whanganui-a-Tara Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand, on the iwi lands of Taranaki Whānui, and Ngāti Toa Rangatira. We pay our respects to Mana Whenua, and to Elders past, present and emerging, of these lands.

On today's episode, we interview Michael Weatherall, an expert in construction law and dispute resolution.  Michael has worked for Simpson Grierson since 1997, where he is now a partner and heads their construction law team. Michael has specialist expertise in virtually all areas of construction law.  Before joining Simpson Grierson in 1997, he worked for the largest construction law firm in the UK.  His first career was as a structural engineer and project manager with Beca.  He remains a Chartered Professional Engineer.  Michael is a past President of the New Zealand Society of Construction Law, and is a current member of the Standards New Zealand Committee which drafted the NZS3910:2023 Standard Conditions of Contract for Construction and Engineering Projects.  He is also co-author of Kennedy-Grant and Weatherall on Construction Law in New Zealand”, the country's leading practitioner text. We talk to Michael about all things construction law, including contracts and dispute resolution processes.  I hope you enjoy this episode with Michael Weatherall.

Legal and youth justice expert Faith Gordon joins Mark Kenny to discuss young people, social media and democracy.What should the age of criminal responsibility be? With younger generations becoming more politically engaged, should the voting age be lowered? And how can we make social media safe for young people, without causing civic disengagement? On this episode of Democracy Sausage Associate Professor Faith Gordon joins Professor Mark Kenny to talk about youth engagement, social media and democracy. Faith Gordon is an Associate Professor and Deputy Associate Dean of Research at the ANU College of Law. She is the Director of the Interdisciplinary International Youth Justice Network, and a co-founder and co-moderator of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology's Thematic Group on children, young people and the criminal justice system. Mark Kenny is the Director of the ANU Australian Studies Institute. He came to the University after a high-profile journalistic career including six years as chief political correspondent and national affairs editor for The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Canberra Times. Democracy Sausage with Mark Kenny is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. We'd love to hear your feedback on this series, so send in your questions, comments or suggestions for future episodes to democracysausage@anu.edu.au. This podcast is produced by The Australian National University. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sarah Hewitt is chair of the New Zealand Society of Genealogists. We discuss what records are available in New Zealand, where they are located, what is available for free including birth, marriage and death records, wills and probate, school records, immigration, newspaper and other archives plus the benefits of joining the New Zealand Society of Genealogists including access to the Kiwi Collection. Sarah has put together a resource sheet which is available via this blog post: https://emmacox.co.uk/researching-your-ancestors-in-new-zealand.  

The Retirement Income Interest Group which is part of the New Zealand Society of Actuaries has done a stocktake of retirement income policy, concluding that NZ Super doesn't need to be reformed, The report by Finance and Risk Specialist, Alison O'Connell and other actuaries have found that it is much more important to turn attention to Kiwisaver, rather than meddle with NZ Super. Dr O'Connell says NZ Super is an absolute basic requirement relied on by people of all ages - and is a basic need, particularly when previous research has found people actually underestimate how much they have - or will need in their Kiwisaver.

In The Best Country to Give Birth? medical historian Linda Bryder explores how New Zealand came to develop its unique approach to the role of midwives in childbirth. The 1990 Nurses Amendment Act allowed midwives to practise autonomously in the community without oversight by, or reference to, other health professionals and to set up training schemes separate from nursing. The College of Midwives celebrated this freedom as a win for women, but others expressed concerns about the unpreparedness of newly trained midwives to deal with emergencies. Linda Bryder is a Professor of History at Auckland University, a Fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand Te Aparangi, and is currently President of the Australian and New Zealand Society of the History of Medicine.

There has been a significant increase in sarcopenia research over the past decade, which has resulted in improved identification and management. Despite these advancements, Accredited Practising Dietitian and president-elect for the Australian and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (ANZSSFR), Dr Anthony Villani believes that dietitians can play a far more substantial role in this space. In this podcast, we sit down with Anthony to gain a deeper understanding of the condition, including the nuances of identification and treatment and actionable strategies for dietitians. Anthony also shares his unique career journey and sheds light on his initiatives as the president-elect for the ANZSSFR. For the shownotes: https://dietitianconnection.com/podcasts/managing-sarcopenia-dietitians-drivers-seat/  This podcast is not, and is not intended to be, medical advice, which should be tailored to your individual circumstances. This podcast is for your information only, and we advise that you exercise your own judgment before deciding to use the information provided. Professional medical advice should be obtained before taking action.  Please see here for terms and conditions.

The New Zealand Society of Authors Oral History Podcast is back with our fifth season! We start with two episodes featuring Witi Ihimaera. In this first episode we begin with Witi talking to Deborah Shepard about the writing scene he launched into in 1970's New Zealand. New episodes every 3 weeks.

Alarm bells are ringing over the pressures New Zealand's social cohesion is facing. Auckland University think tank, Koi Tu: The Centre for Informed Futures, has released a discussion document highlighting strains within New Zealand society. It says factors such as political, economic and environmental issues alongside increased misinformation are having a negative impact. Co-author of the report, Paul Spoonley told Mike Hosking they've seen some big changes since they first started looking into the issue. He says since 2020, there's been a decline in trust relating to core institutions such as the Government and the media. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Mark Evans, OBE is the Executive Lead for Future Policing with the New Zealand Police (NZP), and Vice President of the Australia and New Zealand Society of Evidence Based Policing. He is the chair of the independent advisory board at the Royal New Zealand Police College and has an operational portfolio focused on fair and equitable policing outcomes, evidence-based policing, and the future use of new technologies. In a previous career, he reinvigorated crime and intelligence analysis in the Police Service of Northern Ireland. We discuss what he has learned about change and innovation in policing in large agencies.

SARAH SULTOON - DIRT , RONNIE TURNER - SO PRETTY & VANDA SYMON - EXPECTANT chat to Paul Burke about their latest novels.   EXPECTANT A pregnant Sam Shephard investigates the murder of an expectant mother in Dunedin, as it becomes clear that the killer is ready to strike again … Queen of New Zealand Crime, Vanda Symon, returns with a shocking, twisty new Sam Shephard thriller…Vanda Symon is a crime writer, health researcher and radio host from Dunedin, New Zealand, and the chair of the Otago Southland branch of the New Zealand Society of Authors. The Sam Shephard series, which includes Overkill, The Ringmaster, Containment and Bound, hit number one on the New Zealand bestseller list, and has also been shortlisted for the Ngaio Marsh Award. Overkill was shortlisted for the CWA John Creasey (New Blood) Dagger. All four books have been ebook bestsellers. Vanda currently lives in Dunedin, with her husband and and a very demanding cat.SO PRETTYA young man arrives in a small town, hoping to leave his past behind him, but everything changes when he takes a job in a peculiar old shop, and meets a lonely single mother … A chillingly hypnotic gothic thriller and a Mesmerising study of identity and obsession.Ronnie Turner grew up in Cornwall, the youngest in a large family. At an early age, she discovered a love of literature. She now works as a Senior Waterstones Bookseller and barista. Ronnie lives in the South West with her family and three dogs. In her spare time, she enjoys traveling and taking long walks on the coast.DIRT A compulsive, searing political thriller set on a kibbutz in Northern Israel, where the discovery of the body of an Israeli-Arab worker sets off a devastating chain of events…Sarah Sultoon is a journalist and writer, whose work as an international news executive at CNN has taken her all over the world, from the seats of power in both Westminster and Washington to the frontlines of Iraq and Afghanistan. She has extensive experience in conflict zones, winning three Peabody awards for her work on the war in Syria, an Emmy for her contribution to the coverage of Europe's migrant crisis in 2015, and a number of Royal Television Society gongs. As passionate about fiction as nonfiction, she recently completed a Masters of Studies in Creative Writing at the University of Cambridge, adding to an undergraduate language degree in French and Spanish, and Masters of Philosophy in History, Film and Television. When not reading or writing she can usually be found somewhere outside, either running, swimming or throwing a ball for her three children and dog while she imagines what might happen if… Sarah lives in London with her family, and she's currently working on her second thriller. Catch up with her on Twitter @SultoonSarah.Final Roadshow Event: Tickets here↓Join Peter James, Graham Bartlett, Simon Toyne & William Shaw #OnTheSofa With Victoria Selman at the Friends Meeting House, Brighton 13th April. To get tickets click → Eventbrite.Produced by Junkyard DogMusic courtesy of Southgate and LeighCrime TimePaul Burke writes for Crime Time, Crime Fiction Lover and the European Literature Network. He is also a CWA Historical DagProduced by Junkyard DogMusic courtesy of Southgate and LeighCrime TimeCrime Time FM is the official podcast ofGwyl Crime Cymru Festival 2023CrimeFest 2023&CWA Daggers 2023

Dr. Kathryn Hagen is a specialist anaesthetist in Auckland City Hospital looking after the adult population. She is the immediate past president of the New Zealand Society of Anaesthetists and took on the deputy service clinical director role in 2020. She is passionate about encouraging people to consider how they can be part of finding solutions and solving problems. In this episode, we discuss her journey into anaesthetics, receiving critical feedback and how to respond to it, delivering feedback to others and unpack private practice - how it works, why it works, the pay difference, motivations, and its associated work-life balance. Support the showAs always, if you have any feedback or queries, or if you would like to get in touch with the speaker, feel free to get in touch at doctornos@pm.me. Audio credit:Bliss by Luke Bergs https://soundcloud.com/bergscloudCreative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported — CC BY-SA 3.0Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/33DJFs9Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/e9aXhBQDT9Y

This week Nancy and Kate discuss the tying up syndrome (RER) that appears to affect 8.4% of racehorses. Research Reference: https://www.nzsap.org/system/files/proceedings/trainers-perceptions-impact-different-feeding-and-management-practices-racehorses-they-identified.pdf Wood , LJ, Lancaster, B, Breheny, MR & Rogers, CW 2020, 'Trainers perceptions of the impact of different feeding and management practices on racehorses they identified displaying symptoms of recurrent exertional rhabdomyolysis', Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production, vol. 80, pp. 90- 94. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/nancy-mclean/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/nancy-mclean/support

Dr. Sarah Hart graduated as a doctor from Otago University in 1994. She has been practicing Cosmetic Medicine since 2001 and is now an international trainer and key opinion leader. She is passionate about natural results, and improving standards and safety in Cosmetic Medicine Dr Hart became a member of the New Zealand Society of Cosmetic Medicine (NZSCM) in 2006. NZSCM is the only body recognised by the Medical Council of NZ to train and regulate cosmetic doctors.Dr. Hart also has postgraduate training in Psychiatry. This gives her a unique position in the world of Cosmetic Medicine and has inspired her holistic approach. She now serves as Censor on the Executive Board of NZSCM, as a valued member of the NZSCM Education Faculty, and on the Botox, Juvederm and Belkyra Advisory Boards. Her passion for raising standards has led her to develop an international career lecturing about cosmetic injectables. She presents at top conferences around the world and trains practitioners across Australasia and China.Dr. Hart was truly honoured to be selected to represent NZ and Australia as one of twelve doctors internationally for personal mentorship by Dr Mauricio De Maio, one of the world's leading authorities on injectable treatments. She enjoys sharing the benefits of Cosmetic Medicine with a wide audience and has been able to do so with her work on three seasons of the TV series “Ten Years Younger in Ten Days”.Outside work, Dr Hart loves to enjoy time in nature with her doctor husband and two children, doing sports such as skiing, mountain-biking and horse-riding.In this episode, we discuss her journey from psychiatry to cosmetic medicine, the daily work and training involved, the overlap between aesthetic medicine/dermatology/plastic surgery, regulating the industry, social media trends and effect on the psyche of our youth, and navigating mental health in this space.Support the showAs always, if you have any feedback or queries, or if you would like to get in touch with the speaker, feel free to get in touch at doctornos@pm.me. Audio credit:Bliss by Luke Bergs https://soundcloud.com/bergscloudCreative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported — CC BY-SA 3.0Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/33DJFs9Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/e9aXhBQDT9Y

New Zealand Society of Authors - New Plymouth Roadshow - Witi Ihimaera. Broadcast on OAR 105.4FM Dunedin www.oar.org.nz

Author M. C Ronen (Maya Cohen-Ronen) is a New Zealand based vegan, feminist, and animal rights activist. She wrote The Liberation Trilogy out of disappointment at being unable to find mainstream books that avoid banal mentions of animal cruelty acts and/or everyday speciesism. Her deliberate intention was to create an exciting, page-turning fiction series that has a clear ethical undertone and message with a potential appeal to a wide range of readers.Maya is a member of The New Zealand Society of Authors - Te Puni Kaituhi O Aotearoa (PEN NZ Inc).You can find out more about M.C Ronen & The Liberation Trilogy at https://www.mcronenauthor.com/This episode is brought to you by Bloody Vegans Productions.For the first time here at Bloody Vegans Productions we are offering One to One learning sessions designed to help set you on your path to becoming a successful podcaster.We have a host of potential sessions available to book now covering a variety of subjects from choosing the right equipment to marketing your show & many more besides.All sessions are priced at £25 for an hour of one to one coaching bespoke to where you at on your podcasting journey.If you are passionate about becoming a podcaster or perhaps you are a podcaster in need of some support then don't hesitate to book your one to one session today at bloodyvegansproductions.comWe look forward to seeing you there.Finally a huge THANK YOU to Patreon supporter Little Pigeon Bird Sanctuary . You can support the sanctuary at https://www.littlegreenpigeon.co.uk Get bonus content on Patreon Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Professor Dr. Andrea B. Maier, MD, Ph.D., is the Oon Chiew Seng Professor in Medicine, Healthy Ageing and Dementia Research, and Co-Director of the Centre for Healthy Longevity, at the National University Of Singapore, Professor Maier also holds professorship appointments at VU University Medical Centre , Amsterdam, Netherlands, and University of Melbourne, Australia, as well as is Director of Medicine and Community Care at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia. Professor Maier is also the President of the Australia and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research, as well as Founding President of the Healthy Longevity Medicine Society - https://hlms.co/ . A Fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (FRACP), Professor Maier graduated in Medicine (MD) 2003 from the University of Lübeck (Germany), was registered 2009 in The Netherlands as Specialist in Internal Medicine-Geriatrics and was appointed Full Professor of Gerontology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (The Netherlands) in 2013 where she was the head of Geriatrics at the Vrije Universiteit Medical Center from 2012 to 2016. From 2016 to early 2021, Professor Maier served as Divisional Director of Medicine and Community Care at the Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia, and as Professor of Medicine and Aged Care at the University of Melbourne, Australia. Professor Maier's research focuses on unraveling the mechanisms of ageing and age-related diseases and during the last 10 years she has conducted multiple international observational cohort studies and intervention trials and has published more than 350 peer-reviewed articles. She is a frequent guest on radio and television programs to disseminate aging research and an invited member of several international academic and health policy committees, including the WHO. She also serves as selected Member of The Royal Holland Society of Sciences and Humanities.Dev InterruptedWhat the smartest minds in engineering are thinking about, working on and investing in.Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify Healthy Lifestyle Solutions with Maya AcostaAre you ready to upgrade your health to a new level and do so by learning from experts...Listen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify Stop Drinking and Start Living Podcast With Expert Holistic Alcohol Coach, Mary WagstaffPractical Tools & Strategies To Get Alcohol Out Of Your Way & Enhance Your LifeListen on: Apple Podcasts Spotify

It's been a while since our last New Zealand Society of Authors Oral History podcast episode, so we thought you'd enjoy being introduced to 'The Author's Tale'. This great podcast is presented and produced by NZSA member, Stephanie Frewen, and features casual conversations with prominent and influential New Zealand authors.

Dr Christine Ball is an anaesthetist at the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne and co-manages a Master of Medicine (Perioperative) at Monash University. She is the 2020–2024 Wood Library-Museum Laureate of the History of Anesthesiology. She has been an honorary curator at the Geoffrey Kaye Museum of Anaesthetic History for thirty years. Today we discuss her 2021 book "The Chloroformist", a fascinating read about the history of anaesthesia and detailed biographies of its pioneers including Dr Joseph Clover. Her book is available at all bookstores including Melbourne University Press.  Interested in the history of medicine?  I recently discovered and became a member of The Australian and New Zealand Society of the History of Medicine - check it out!   Interested in studying lifestyle medicine, health coaching and new models of care in health and wellbeing?  Check out the JCU postgraduate courses: Grad Cert, Grad Diploma, and Master.  If you find this podcast valuable then subscribing, sharing, rating it 5 stars and leaving a review is appreciated. If you would like to provide feedback or request a topic, please contact me via thegpshow.com  Thank you for listening and your support.

Our most vulnerable people requiring palliative care have a new group determined to give them the best care available. Palliative Care Collaborative Aotearoa has formed because they say the Government hasn't been listening as it cries out for help. They have six key focus areas to try and lift our end of life care ranking; we used to sit 3rd in 2009 but have dropped to 12th as of last year. NZ chair of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine and PCCA spokesperson Catherine D'Souza joined Mike Hosking. LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This weekend the New Zealand Society of Authors will mark the 50th birthday of Witi Ihimaera's groundbreaking collections of short stories, first published in 1972. Bryan Crump spike to Witi ahead of the celebration.

For Matariki, we have Dr. Zoe Raos! Dr. Zoe Raos (Te Āti Awa) is a gastroenterologist in Waitematā, Tāmaki Makaurau. She lives on the Shore with her husband Ben, their two tamariki and their dog. She completed medical school, basic and advanced gastroenterology and general medical training in Auckland, and was involved with leadership roles throughout her training, becoming the Chair of the Binational College Trainees' Committee which included being a Director of the RACP Board. She won the RACP Trainee of the Year Award, prior to starting a three-year clinical fellowship at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford in General Medicine, Hepatology, Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Endoscopy. Zoe has worked at Waitematā DHB since her return from the UK, and collaborated to set up the transition clinic for patients with IBD moving between paeds and adult services. She has written a popular study guide for the RACP exams, now in its second edition, with other collaborative publications themed around quality care. She is a RACP examiner for the Clinical Exam, and a Training Supervisor.Zoe joined the New Zealand Society of Gastroenterology Executive, was elected as president-elect and is the current President until November 2022. She has led the NZSG through times of great change, including developing a cohesive pandemic response, whilst navigating the Society through major externally-led structural changes. Zoe collaborates with other NZSG equity warriors, who have made positive steps towards celebrating diversity and, through governance, creating a future equitable gastroenterology workforce that honours Te Tiriti. She has lost count of the committees she is on – one of the most influential is a global Green Endoscopy Whatsapp group - and spends too much time on Twitter. She loves teaching and mentoring, and is proud to have received awards for both over the years. Zoe loves skiing, cooking and running, spending time with her beautiful whānau, hanging with wonderful friends and colleagues, playing the ukulele and has just started weaving tāniko as part of her cultural journey as a proud wahine Maori.In this episode, we discuss her journey into gastroenterology, indigenising medicine & gastroenterology, navigating motion sickness in scopes, The Aunties and their kaupapa, parenting and neurodiversity, environmental sustainability within medicine and of course, her love for gastroenterology. Mentioned in podcast:Peter Raos: https://peterraos.com/ & https://peter-raos.business.site/The Aunties: https://aunties.co.nz/about-the-aunties‘Autism' in Te Reo Māori: tangata whaitakiwātanga As always, if you have any feedback or queries, or if you would like to get in touch with the speaker, feel free to get in touch at doctornos@pm.me.Audio credit:Bliss by Luke Bergs https://soundcloud.com/bergscloudCreative Commons — Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported — CC BY-SA 3.0Free Download / Stream: https://bit.ly/33DJFs9Music promoted by Audio Library https://youtu.be/e9aXhBQDT9YSupport the show

Maternal health refers to the health of the women during pregnancy, childbirth, and the postnatal period.  Each stage should be a positive experience, ensuring women and their babies reach their full potential for health and well-being. Prenatal care includes screening and diagnostic tests and they can provide valuable information about the baby's health. Understand the risks and benefits. The obstetrician in partnership with the laboratory has tools that can contribute to maternal health, such as: • Prenatal screening tests which can identify potential genetic disorders and diagnostic tests, and, • Diagnostic test, which is the only way to be sure of a diagnosis.  Learn in this episode what are the strategies to minimize the risk of alloimmunization in the maternal population and what are the recommendations for antenatal and post-delivery care testing.   About Our Speaker:  Professor Robert Flower is a national leader in R&D at the Australian Red Cross Lifeblood. He has been teaching and supervising hospital and university blood banks for over 30 years. He has published over 400 publications with over 4000 citations and has helped over 50 students complete post-graduate research. In 2018, Dr. Flower was granted the Vice Chancellor's Award for Excellence at Queensland University of Technology. The following year, he was awarded the Peter Schiff Award from the Australia and New Zealand Society for Blood Transfusion. Dr. Flower's current interests include translating genetics to routine investigations, molecular modeling of the structures defining blood groups, and evidence-based modeling of the risk of transfusion-transmission for various agents.

Start your day the right way, with a stimulating discussion of the latest news headlines and hot button topics from The Advertiser and Sunday Mail. Today, hear from Amelia Chaplin, Rick Sarre and Chris Russell. Amelia Chaplin is passionate about demystifying climate science and the political jargon that surrounds it to empower young people with the knowledge and tools to make impactful change. She believes that the pathway out of the climate crisis is complete regeneration of our soils, sea's and communities and that everyone has the power to make a difference.  Rick Sarre is an Adjunct Professor of Law and Criminal Justice at the University of South Australia. He is a Fellow of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology, a previous Chair of the Academic Board of UniSA and a member of the University Council. Chris Russell has had many different roles at The Advertiser, including being business editor, national editor and acting chief of staff. He is currently the education reporter, covering schools and universities around South Australia. He also reports on energy, jobs, economics, infrastructure, the environment and other sectors. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the last of our New Zealand Society of Authors Summer Encore episodes, novelist Gigi Fenster introduces you to her favourite episode: the workshop 'Writing Process for Essay and Memoir Writers' with Lynn Jenner given at the 2018 National Writers Forum. Learn more about Gigi's books at: https://gigi-fenster.com/About More about Lynn Jenner at: https://pinklight.nz/about/ More about NZSA at: authors.org.nz/

Lecture summary: As the future of international law has become a growing site of struggle within and between powerful states, debates over the history of international law have become increasingly heated. In this lecture discussing her new book 'International Law and the Politics of History', Anne Orford explores the ideological, political, and material stakes of apparently technical disputes over how the legal past should be studied and understood. Drawing on a deep knowledge of the history, theory, and practice of international law, she argues that there can be no impartial accounts of international law's past and its relation to empire and capitalism. Rather than looking to history in a doomed attempt to find a new ground for formalist interpretations of what past legal texts really mean or what international regimes are really for, she urges lawyers and historians to embrace the creative role they play in making rather than finding the meaning of international law. Anne Orford is Melbourne Laureate Professor and Michael D Kirby Chair of International Law at Melbourne Law School, and Visiting Professor of Law and John Harvey Gregory Lecturer in World Organizations at Harvard Law School. She researches and teaches in the areas of international law, history and theory of international law, international dispute settlement, international economic law, and climate change. She is a Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and a past President of the Australian and New Zealand Society of International Law. Her publications include International Law and the Politics of History (Cambridge University Press, 2021), Pensée Critique et Pratique du Droit International (Pedone, 2020), International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect (Cambridge University Press, 2011), and Reading Humanitarian Intervention (Cambridge University Press, 2003), and the edited collections Revolutions in International Law: The Legacies of 1917 (Cambridge University Press, 2021) (co-editor), The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law (Oxford University Press, 2016) (co-editor), and International Law and its Others (Cambridge University Press, 2006). She presented a special course on Civil War and the Transformation of International Law at the Hague Academy of International Law in 2021. She has been awarded honorary doctorates in law by Lund University, the University of Gothenburg, and the University of Helsinki, and the Woodward Medal for Excellence in Humanities and Social Sciences by the University of Melbourne.

In the New Zealand Society of Authors Summer Encore Series, well known NZSA authors introduce you to some of their favourite episodes from the NZSA podcast. This week, James Russell, author of the Dragon Brothers Trilogy and Dragon Defenders series, introduces you to his favourite episode: Philip Temple's oral history conversation with Deborah Shepard discussing his life and work over half a century as a writer in Aotearoa. Learn more about James's books at: https://dragonbrothersbooks.com/ More about Philip Temple at: https://philiptemple.com/ More about NZSA at: authors.org.nz/

In the New Zealand Society of Authors Summer Encore Series, well known NZSA authors introduce you to some of their favourite episodes from the NZSA podcast. This week, Graci Kim, author of the instant US bestseller, 'The Last Fallen Star' (A Gifted Clans Novel 1), introduces you to her favourite episode: the panel discussion ‘Making it in the international market' from the 2018 National Writers Forum. The panel features Paula Morris, Tracey Farr, and David Ling. Learn more about Graci and her book at: https://www.gracikim.com/ More about NZSA at: authors.org.nz/

Welcome to the New Zealand Society of Authors Summer Encore Series, where we've asked well known NZSA authors to introduce you to some of their favourite episodes from the NZSA podcast so far. This week, Rosetta Allan, author of the recently released ‘Crazy Love' along with several other novels and poetry collections, introduces you to her favourite episode: Paula Morris' 2020 Janet Frame Memorial Lecture. Learn more about Rosetta and her new book ‘Crazy Love' at: https://rosettaallan.com/ More about Paula Morris: https://www.paula-morris.com/ More about the Janet Frame Lecture: https://authors.org.nz/janet-frame-lectures/ More about NZSA at: https://authors.org.nz/

The New Zealand Society of Authors Summer Encore Series is a podcast series where well known NZSA authors introduce you to some of their favourite episodes from the NZSA podcast so far. This week, Whiti Hereaka, author of the newly released ‘Kurangaituku' and successful playwright, novelist, screenwriter, introduces you to her favourite episode: the panel discussion ‘Getting Hot and Bothered' from the 2018 National Writers Forum. Learn more about Whiti and her new book Kurangaituku at: https://huia.co.nz/huia-bookshop/authors/author/54 More about NZSA at: https://authors.org.nz/ Please note, this episode is about writing sex scenes and does include adult content.

The face of a Kiwi is, by and large, a natural one. Compared to other parts of the world such as Europe, China and the US, we're a down-to-earth bunch - our age lines and imperfections are all right with us.But as Botox and fillers become more commonplace, plastic surgeons and cosmetic doctors are warning that without changes to legislation, the bubble may be about to burst on our cosmetically unenhanced innocence.For Auckland-based cosmetic doctor and censor of the New Zealand Society of Cosmetic Medicine (NZSCM), Dr Sarah Hart, she's seen the age bracket shift to a younger set of women wanting lip fillers and Botox. And in general, says the demand for injectables has quadrupled since lockdown.She spoke with Simon Barnett & James Daniels about her concerns about the lack of public understanding about what qualifications to look for in a practitioner and a legislation "loop hole" which means anyone can import and inject dermal fillers.LISTEN ABOVE

This episode of The Retrograde Approach is proudly supported by The Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery (anzsvs.org). We are excited to welcome Dr Nedal Katib (http://www.specialistvascular.com.au/dr-nedal-Katib/). Dr Katib completed his Vascular Surgery Training through the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, which took him to South Australia, New Zealand and New South Wales. He also completed a further fellowship in Belgium in advanced Endovascular and Minimally Invasive Surgery. Originally born in Melbourne, his career path has taken him all over the world including Dubai UAE and graduating from the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin Ireland before returning to Australia to continue his surgical career. During his training he completed his masters in surgical anatomy at Sydney University and his United States Medical Licensing Exams (ECFMG licence). Dr Katib is also the chair of communications for the ANZSVS.

Today's episode is all about Palliative Care, and we're very lucky to be joined by Leeroy William to help us unpack this complex area. Leeroy is the President of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine. He's also an Adjunct Clinical Professor at the University of Monash and Clinical Director of supportive and Palliative Care at Eastern Health in Melbourne. He came on the show to help us understand the scope of palliative care, and how it encompasses much more than just care in the final moments of someone's life. For a lot of our listeners working in the aged care space, death and dying are common scenarios and in this interview Leeroy shares with us a few tools to help support people better as they're approaching the end of their lives. We're also very excited to let you know that Leeroy has recently joined the SilVR Adventures' Board of Advisors and is helping with our plans to bring the benefits of Virtual Reality to people in palliative care. As always if you enjoy the show, we'd love it if you subscribed and maybe even left a review!

Margaret Mahy is New Zealand's most celebrated children's writer. She wrote over 100 books, published in 15 different languages, and continues to be read around the world. In May 2000, Alison Gray interviewed Margaret for the New Zealand Society of Authors Oral History Project.

A butterfly researcher finds himself trapped in Paradise - in Samoa to be exact - despite his increasingly desperate efforts to get home to New Zealand. That's the setup of a new novel called Both Feet In Paradise. Andy Southall won a New Zealand Society of Authors mentorship with award winning writer Pip Adam to work on the book.

New Zealand crime writer VANDA SYMON Chats to Paul Burke about her new Sam Shephard novel, BOUND, fourth in the Dunedin set series. Also 'Yeah-Noir', writing as a young mother, misogyny, science & the modern detective and Ngaio Marsh.Bound: The New Zealand city of Dunedin is rocked when a wealthy and apparently respectable businessman is murdered in his luxurious home while his wife is bound and gagged, and forced to watch. But when Detective Sam Shephard and her team start investigating the case, they discover that the victim had links with some dubious characters. The case seems cut and dried, but Sam has other ideas. Weighed down by her dad's terminal cancer diagnosis, and by complications in her relationship with Paul, she needs a distraction, and launches her own investigation. And when another murder throws the official case into chaos, it's up to Sam to prove that the killer is someone no one could ever suspect.Vanda Symon is a crime writer, TV presenter and radio host from Dunedin, New Zealand, and the chair of the Otago Southland branch of the New Zealand Society of Authors. The Sam Shephard series has climbed to number one on the New Zealand bestseller list, and also been shortlisted for the Ngaio Marsh Award for best crime novel. She currently lives in Dunedin, with her husband and two sons.Produced by: Jem & Son, Paul Burke.Music credits: Don't Wait by Southgate and LeighPaul Burke twitter @paulodaburkaCrimeTimeTo buy this book: BOUND

Start your day the right way, with a stimulating discussion of the latest news headlines and hot button topics from The Advertiser and Sunday Mail. Today, hear from Penny Wong, Rick Sarre and Lisa Woolford Rick Sarre Emeritus Professor Rick Sarre has degrees in law and criminology from universities in Adelaide, Toronto, and Canberra, and in 2015 was awarded an honorary doctorate from Umeå University, Sweden. He is a Fellow of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Criminology. He is a Professorial Fellow of the Australian Institute of Police Management. He retired as the Dean of Law at the School of Law, University of South Australia, in 2020. Penny Wong Senator Penny Wong is the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Labor Leader in the Senate. Born in Malaysia, Penny moved to Adelaide with her family as a child. She has been a proud representative of South Australia in the federal Parliament since 2001. Penny served as Minister for Climate Change and Water and then Minister for Finance and Deregulation during the Rudd and Gillard Governments – when she also became the first woman to lead the Government in the Senate. Penny lives in Adelaide with her partner and their two daughters. Lisa Woolford Lisa Woolford is News Corp's Deputy National TV editor and Head of Entertainment SA. She's been an entertainment journalist for more than five years, sharing exclusive A-list interviews and guiding viewers through the best each week in free-to-air, streaming and subscription television. She has more than 25 years' experience in journalism - including editing the Whyalla News. When she's not chatting with the leading lights of screen, stage and song, she's navigating life as a mum of two teen daughters.   See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

President of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Immunology, Professor Stephen Turner, says the jab is unlikely to provide herd immunity. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Vol 213, Issue 5: 24 August. Associate Professor Leeroy William is President of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Palliative Medicine. He discusses navigating the complexities of voluntary assisted dying in palliative care. With MJA news and online editor, Cate Swannell.

Care of older people in surgery (COPS). Are you properly assesing your patients for cognition? Surgery can be appropriate for some to reduce pain in palliative care, how do we make decisions regarding a possible intervention? How important is frailty in this process? The slides from this talk are here: http://www.anzca.edu.au/documents/03-jacqueline-close_care-of-older-people-in-surger.pdf Presented by Professor Jacqueline Close, Geriatrician, Prince Of Wales Hospital, Clinical Director, Falls, Balance and Injury Research Centre -- Brought to you by the Perioperative Medicine Special Interest Group (SIG) in association with the Australian and New Zealand Society for Geriatric Medicine and the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand at the 7th annual Australasian Symposium of Perioperative Medicine. The Perioperative Medicine Special Interest Group (SIG) has three aims; improve patient safety and outcomes, share knowledge and collaborate with specialty groups, develop the specialty of perioperative medicine with various craft groups. For more information follow this link here: http://www.anzca.edu.au/fellows/special-interest-groups/perioperative-medicine

Leading cardiologist, Dr. Ross Walker, discusses a new study published in "Heart, Lung and Circulation" (published by Elsevier for the Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand) that evaluates ubiquinol, the active form of the powerful antioxidant CoEnzyme Q10, for heart health in patients who are taking cholesterol management medication.

This invaluable piece is a chance to attend a workshop which looks at the latest thinking on "perioperative cognition" and 'post-operative cognitive dysfuntion'. We advise you use this link here to find the PDF of the paper being discussed: https://bjanaesthesia.org/article/S0007-0912(17)54082-9/fulltext Presented by David Scott, Professor, University of Melbourne, Director, Anaesthesia and Acute Pain Medicine, St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne and Lis Evered, Scientific Head of Research, Department of Anaesthesia, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne. This is Part 1, to find Part 2 go here: https://www.topmedtalk.com/sunday-special-the-perioperative-cognition-workshop-part-2/ Part 3 is here: https://www.topmedtalk.com/sunday-special-the-perioperative-cognition-workshop-part-3/ Part 4 is here: https://www.topmedtalk.com/sunday-special-the-perioperative-cognition-workshop-part-4/ Brought to you by the Perioperative Medicine Special Interest Group (SIG) in association with the Australian and New Zealand Society for Geriatric Medicine and the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand at the 7th annual Australasian Symposium of Perioperative Medicine. The Perioperative Medicine Special Interest Group (SIG) has three aims; improve patient safety and outcomes, share knowledge and collaborate with specialty groups, develop the specialty of perioperative medicine with various craft groups. For more information follow this link here: http://www.anzca.edu.au/fellows/special-interest-groups/perioperative-medicine

Economics Explained host Gene Tunny speaks to Dr Boyd Blackwell on the use of economic techniques to value the environment. Boyd is Director of AquaEquis Economic Consulting and the President of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Ecological Economics. Links relevant to the discussion include:Deloitte Value of the Great Barrier Reef reportConversation article critiquing economic value estimate of GBRBoyd’s economic analysis of Australian coastal wastewater outfallsSome number is better than no number articleNSW biodiversity offset schemeTravel cost method

Featured Guest Fiona Brooker Fiona Brooker is a professional genealogist (Memories In Time) who has been actively researching her family history for over 30 years, inspired by two marriage certificates and a collection of family letters written from New Zealand back to her immigrant ancestor's family in Devon. Whilst living and researching in the UK, she studied and gained a Higher Certificate in Genealogy from the Institute of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies. Fiona has served as both President and Treasurer of the New Zealand Society of Genealogists (NZSG). She is currently part of a ProGen study group.   Contact Links Website – Memories in Time Facebook Page – Memories in Time Pinterest – Memories in Time Links Mentioned Institute of Heraldic and Genealogical Studies – https://www.ihgs.ac.uk/ The New Zealand Society of Genealogists – https://www.genealogy.org.nz/ Talking Family History (Facebook) – https://www.facebook.com/talkingfamilyhistory/ Plan to Publish (Facebook) – https://www.facebook.com/groups/PlantoPublishYourFamilyHistory/ The Association of Professional Genealogists (APG) – https://www.apgen.org ProGen Study Group – https://www.progenstudy.org/ Thing You were most afraid of “Finding people who are actually going to pay you to do what you really love doing.” Best Advice You Received from Someone Else “Action not perfection. Do let the need for perfection stand in your way of just doing what needs to be done.” One Action Genealogists Can Take Right Now “Go out and look for what opportunities are out there. You just don't know what you can do until you see what others are doing as well. Get involved with projects in your local community.” Recommended Book Bringing Your Family History to Life through Social History by Katherine Scott Sturdevant Advice “You reap what you sow. Get out there and be involved in groups and do things like transcribing.” Action Item Today's action item comes straight from Fiona's lightning round suggestion. If you are looking for opportunities look right in your local community. What opportunities are there that you can get involved with? Are any local groups doing projects that could use your research expertise? Perhaps research into soldiers of past wars. Or perhaps researching the town founders in the local cemetery. Use these opportunities to build networks and to spread the word about your services and expertise. News The Genealogy Professional podcast is now available on Spotify. Search for either Marian Pierre-Louis or genealogy to find it. Don't forget to follow! If you're a YouTube you can also find all the episodes of the podcast on YouTube. Don't expect any video. It's just an audio-only file with a picture but I've put it over there because some people are more comfortable with that platform. Join the TGP Action Group on Facebook! You can find it at https://www.facebook.com/groups/TGPActionGroup/ If you're not on Facebook, follow the Genealogy Professional on LinkedIn. You can get new episode notices there. Go to Linkedin and search for The Genealogy Professional and hit the follow button. I'm continuing in my effort to get back on a bi-weekly schedule for the podcast. Eventually I'll settle on an exact release date twice a month. But in the meantime you can expect a new podcast generally every two weeks. Direct link to this post: https://www.thegenealogyprofessional.com/fiona-brooker

Listen NowIn late June, Professor Philip Alston, the UN's Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, published "Climate Change and Poverty."  The 20-page report is unsparing in its criticism of the response, or lack thereof, by corporations, governments, NGOs and the human rights community to the climate crisis, moreover their response concerning the effect the crisis will have on the poor - whom will disproportionately bear the burden of climate emergency.   "Government, and too many in the human rights community," he wrote, "have failed to seriously address climate change for decades."  "Most human rights bodies have barely begun," he stated, "to grapple with what climate change portends for human rights."  "There is no recognition of the need for seep social and economic transformation."  As a result, "Climate change threatens to undo the last 50 years of progress in development, global health and poverty reduction."  Professor Alston concludes his report by writing, "The human rights community, with a few notable exceptions, has been every bit as complacent as most governments in the face of the ultimate challenge to mankind represented by climate change. The steps taken by most United Nations human rights bodies have been patently inadequate and premised on forms of incremental managerialism and proceduralism which are entirely disproportionate to the urgency and magnitude of the threat.  Ticking boxes will not save humanity or the planet from impending disaster."  (This discussion is my 10th concerning the climate crisis over the past 2 plus years.)  During this 27 minute conversation Professor Alston describes the role of the Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, discusses the genesis of his report and provides an overview of its findings.  He comments what he terms the "patently inadequate" response to date by the human rights community including the UN's Human Rights Council, in response to the climate crisis.  He also discusses how the growing climate crisis refugee crisis is being addressed, as an international criminal law professor his view regarding prosecuting corporations and their CEOs for having devastated the environment, the Juliana and related court cases seeking climate justice, and the upcoming UM climate summit this September 23rd.   Philip Alston has served as the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights since 2014.  In forwarding his work he has reported on Chile, China, Mauritania, Romania, Saudi Arabia and the US.  He was previously UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions from 2004 to 2010.  He was a member of the Group of Experts on Darfur appointed in 2007 and served as special adviser to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Millennium Development Goals.  He has also served as UNICEF's legal adviser.  In the field of international law, Professor Alston was editor-in-chief of the European Journal of International Law from 1996 through 2007.  He was a co-founder of both the European Society of International Law and the Australian and New Zealand Society of International Law.  As a UN, he worked in Geneva on human rights issues from 1978 to 1984.  He has worked as a consultant to the ILO, the UNDP Human Development Report, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UNESCO, OECD, UNICEF, and many other inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations.  Professor Alston is also presently the John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law at New York University's Law School where his teaching focus is on international law, human rights law, and international criminal law.  He also co-chairs the NYU Center for Human Rights and Global Justice.  During the 1980s Professor Alston taught at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and at Harvard Law School.  Afterward, he became Professor of Law and Foundation Director of the Center for International and Public Law at the Australian National University, a post he held until 1995.  From 1996 to 2001 he was Professor of International Law at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, Italy, where he was also head of department and co-director of the Academy of European Law.  Professor Alston received degrees in law and in economics in Australia and a JSD from Berkeley.  Professor Alston's report is at: https://chrgj.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/UNSR-Poverty-Climate-Change-A_HRC_41_39.pdf.In May 2018 Professor Alston published a related report on extreme poverty in the US, it is at: “Report of the Special Rapporteur On Extreme Poverty and Human Rights on His Mission to the United States."  My summary of this report is at: https://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2018/08/22/the-uns-extreme-poverty-report-further-evidence-us-healthcare-is-divorced-from-reality/. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

In this episode of The Editing Podcast, Denise and Louise demystify publishing language – the terms professionals use to describe the parts of a book – so that you can talk with confidence about your text. Listen to find out more about: the beginning (or front matter; prelims), the main or body text and the end matter (or back matter) part titles, half titles, and title pages forewords and prefaces acknowledgements pages, page numbers, and folios double page spreads (DPSs) rectos and versos running heads and running feet drop caps or dropped capitals chapter drops appendices and glossaries footnotes and endnotes bibliographies, references, and indexes Editing biteshttps://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html (The Chicago Manual of Style) https://global.oup.com/academic/product/new-harts-rules-9780199570027?cc=gb&lang=en& ( New Hart's Rules) Indexing societieshttp://www.asindexing.org/ (American Society for Indexing) http://www.asaib.org.za/ (Association of Southern African Indexers and Bibliographers) http://www.anzsi.org/ (Australia and New Zealand Society of Indexers) http://www.cnindex.fudan.edu.cn/ (China Society of Indexers) (site in Chinese) http://www.d-indexer.org/ (Deutsches Netzwerk der Indexer/German Network of Indexers) http://www.indexers.ca/ (Indexing Society of Canada/Société canadienne d'indexation) http://www.indexers.nl/ (Nederlands Indexers Netwerk/Netherlands Indexing Network) https://www.indexers.org.uk/ (Society of Indexers) (UK) Ask us a questionThe easiest way to ping us a question is via Facebook Messenger: Visit the podcast's https://www.facebook.com/TheEditingPodcast (Facebook) page and click on the SEND MESSAGE button. Denise and Louisehttps://www.denisecowleeditorial.com/ (Denise Cowle Editorial Services) (non-fiction) Louise Harnby | Proofreader &...