September 14, 2024 • 12 mins
This week on the Sunday Panel, editor and journalist Jo McCarroll and NZ Herald senior writer Simon Wilson joined in on a discussion about the following issues of the week - and more!
Should insurers have access to genetic testing or be able to force genetic testing, to set premiums? Do we need more regulations here?
The Australian Government is looking to ban social media for children, with legislation set to come through by the end of the year. Is a ban the solution? Do we need to educate children to stay safe online?
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News TALKZEDB.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Wendy Woo Tours is the leading specialist and fully inclusive
group tours. They've just released their early bird specials for
traveling twenty twenty five and twenty twenty six, with savings
of up to one thousand dollars per person. Whether it's
marveling at the ancient wonders of the world, discovering new cultures,
or uncovering hidden gems off the beaten path, unleash your
sense of wonder with this great offer. From the majestic
(00:37):
cruise down the Yanksee in China, to watching the sunrise
over Mount Fuji in Japan, eating kimchi in Korea, or
experience from the beauty of Halong Bay and Vietnam. The
world is brimming with wonders waiting to be explored. Choose
from over one hundred unique group itineries across the world.
You'll be spoilt for choice, but getting quick and discounts
(00:58):
are limited. Book now to secure your amazing early bird discount.
Visit Wendywoo Tours dot co dot Nz or contact your
life called travel agent.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
All the highs and lows, talking the big issues of
the week the panel on the Sunday Session.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
Enjoining me today on the panel, we have got New
Zealand HEROLD senior writer Simon Wilson. Hi, Simon, Hi there, Francesca,
and we're also joined by editor and journalist Joe McCarroll.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Good morning, Joe, Good morning, franchise. They're good morning, Simon.
Speaker 4 (01:27):
Hi there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
I'm not sure if either of you heard my first interview.
At the beginning of the morning, I was speaking to
Emma Warren and she is a lawyer and we were
just talking about how far insurance company should be able
to go when it comes to assessing your risk. And
I had no idea that we had not looked at
these laws, insurance laws for about one hundred years, and
(01:49):
that's what we're doing at the moment. And I think
this is absolutely something that we should be clarifying while
we can.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Simon, I think you're absolutely right. This is extraordinary, isn't
it a hundred years? I think the starting point in
a way is that you know, we ensure is a
sesque individual risk now and this DNA testing is going
to give them better tools from their point of view
(02:16):
to do that more precisely. Yeah, it feels to me
like a very slippery slope.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Joe, your thoughts, how would you feel that if your
insurance company said, Okay, if we're going to look at
life and health insurance, we'd like you to do some
genetic texting, would you be keen to do that?
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (02:33):
I'd feel like I'd woken up in Gatika. To be honest, Francesca,
I mean it. I mean, these are commercial companies and
they are designed to make a profit rather than look
out for your best interest, and sometimes that can coincide,
But you wonder if it didn't coincide, whether they would
skew towards the profit rather than your a better outcome
(02:55):
for you. You assume these results will be used to
determine pre existing conditions and raise your premiums and deny
you cover. You know, I think personally, genetic based medicine
is going to play an increasingly massive role for us,
and that's really useful, and it might be times when
your doctor or even sort of drug manufacturers you know,
(03:18):
might use that information for your good and for the
public good. But the idea that we are leaving it
in such I mean, I did hear your interview with
Emma Mirand it's in such an unregulated and undefined space
that it seems to me we're allowing the insurance companies
to make the rules, and I dealt whether they're going
to make them in a way that we're choosing to mate.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Genetic testing can be incredibly useful and valuable to an individual,
and I understand why going forward, as it probably becomes
more accessible, insurance companies would like to be able to
use it as well. But what concerns me, Simon, is
that you may show a rescue, may show you have
a particular gene maybe that makes you susceptible to something,
(04:02):
but it doesn't necessarily mean that you may suffer from
that disease or syndrome. All that you will get it.
So I would feel very I feel a little bit
put out, Simon, if I found myself paying a higher
premium for something I never suffer from in my throughout
my life, but I had a risk.
Speaker 3 (04:20):
That I might.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
You know, I think that's absolutely right. I think genetic
testing has to be voluntary. You have to decide I
would like to know what my risk is of something,
because there are downsides to it. If you know that
you're at risk of what there are obvious upsides if
you know you're at risk of a particular kind of
cancer and your later life. You might resolve then and
there to eat healthily and live healthily and hope that
(04:43):
that will avoid the cancer coming on, and you might
win on that one, But there are other genetic tests
that might show that it might just leave you with
ten twenty thirty years of anxiety and nothing you can
do about it, and so those things are difficult. My
feeling about this is that where people if you look
(05:03):
across the wider field of insurance and responsibility, where people
make choices, and I'm thinking about things like you with
house insurance. If you choose to build a house in
a place where it's quite likely that it will fall
into the sea or is a real an obvious risk there,
and that's determined by engineers, you choose to do that,
(05:25):
then I think you should pay very steep insurance premium.
And I don't want my insurance premiums supporting you in
that way because you're choosing to do that. But I
think in other cases, when we're talking about the things
we haven't chosen, it would be nice to think there
was a reasonable degree of universality that applied. We accept
that principle superannuation with everybody's right to go to hospital,
(05:49):
those sorts of things, and I think in general health
insurance that it should be similar.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Very nice use of opening another can of wounds. Their
silent to make a point. You make a very good point.
I mean, it kind of makes sense, right.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Joe, although I almost would reverse that. Like I am
thinking of someone I know who had breast cancer and
she was offered the brackettest to see if she had
the genetic disposition to breast cancer, and she told me
she refused because she was conscious that, as New Zealand
law stands today, she was conscious that down the line,
(06:23):
it might impact on the cover that was available not
just for her, but for her daughter and her sister
and her niece. Because once you know, you have to
disclose honestly.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
And it's unfair because she should be able to take
that test. She shouldn't be the.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Priorit that information if she chooses it, and she might
have decided not to get the test anyway, you have
the right not to know. But I think the way
New Zealand law stands, we are almost discouraged from using
this genetic testing in a way that might benefit us.
Speaker 4 (06:55):
That's right should be used for healthcare rather than primarily surant.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
I don't know about the two of you. The thing
that I found most fascinating though about this, One of
the things I found really something about the story is
that we have laws in this country that haven't been
changed for one hundred years. I mean, I was, I
was really sort of taken back by that, and I
actually did a I went down a rabbit hole and
I did a quick google. In a twenty and sixteen
there was a bill that was passed that cleaned up
(07:24):
about one hundred and thirty two quite archaic laws that
we did have in the country. Someonere no longer even
sort of relevant or you know. But there was one
that they looked at which was from eighteen seventy I think,
which was a law which was put in place to
allow an English insurance company to set up in New Zealand.
(07:44):
So so actually the insurance laws have been in place
for a very very long time, and I just think
that's crazy. I just, yeah's let's sort this out.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Okay, I get an intern onto that.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Yeah that you know, I mean It's crazy, isn't it. Anyway?
Speaker 4 (07:59):
It's stuff that is useful to think that Parliament is
on top of those things, but really gets high enough
up the picking in order to get time.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Well, with the house system the way it is and
their cost of insurance, I think it's absolutely something we
should be making sure that we're covering everything off as
thoroughly as we can. Yeah. Right, The Australian Federal Government
is committed to a national plan to band children from
social media. We don't have a lot of details at
this particular time, and I think we'd probably all agree
(08:33):
that less screens are good. Less engagement with social media
is probably beneficial to all of us. Having really good
conversations about gaming and addiction and algorithms and how this
whole thing works is really important. I'm not entirely sure
that a band is going to do the trick. At
some point a young person will start using social media
(08:56):
at the end of the day, it's the way you
educate them that is going to make a difference to
their well being.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
Simon your thoughts, well, I think of it in terms
of bears and wolves. What I'm thinking is that we
have always lived. Humanity has always lived in a big, bad,
dangerous world, and the answer didn't used to be never
go outside because there are bears and wolves and of
course I'm not really thinking of New Zealand or.
Speaker 2 (09:23):
Dogs stray dogs.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
And the answer the answer was we have to learn
how to understand their behavior so we know when they're
dangerous and when they're not. We have to learn how
to defend ourselves from them, and we have to learn
how to coexist with them, rather than killing all the
bears and wolves. And I think that the analogy kind
(09:45):
of holds now. We still live in a big, bad world.
There will always be more problems, more bad, more risks
and dangers in the world than can be legislated against.
So an alert and aware citizenry and in particular children,
of course, is the first line and the best line
(10:06):
of defense learning how to cope with those things. Having
said that, we at the moment the prevailing ethic and
our education system is doing the basics brilliantly to quate
the Prime Minister. And I'd like to think that there
were scope in that for basic understanding of how social
media is trying to wreck us all, not just children,
(10:30):
was a part of it.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
But yeah, I think I think there can be a
huge amount of value in our digital lives Simon. But
but I think we no longer ask ourselves what value
is it giving? What value does it bring to our lives?
And I think we're sort of all caught up in
it and we're not standing back going actually that is
that useful? Is that helpful? Does it make me feel
(10:52):
good or not? And picking and choosing what aspects sort
of our digital life kind of works for us and
adds value to our lives. And I don't think it's
going to go away. It's not a problem that you
can just ban and hope that it's it's going to
be solved.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Joe Oh, one hundred percent agree. I mean, I think
the I think that digital literacy is something we urgently
need education on as a as a population, as the
world population. It's not just young people. I think it's
sort of so many parallels to the idea of sex education.
(11:23):
And I feel like the idea of this band, the
social media ban is like telling children, don't worry, just
abstain from sex until you get married. And so it's
a theory, it's fine, it just doesn't really work in practice.
You know, knowledge is power. The more factually informed they are,
the safety that they'll be. You cannot opt out of
the digital space, and I don't think you can shield
children from it entirely. I don't think it keeps them safe,
(11:45):
whereas I think educating them is an armor that can
protect them from harm. And I am one hundred percent
backing children and teenagers to get round any ban immediately anyway,
So you might as well skill them up with the facts.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Yeah, No, they're clever like that. Simon Wilson and Joe Mcarell,
thank you so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
For more from the Sunday session with Franchessca, Ron can
listen live to News Talks a B from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News TALKZEDB.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Wendy Woo Tours is the leading specialist and fully inclusive
group tours. They've just released their early bird specials for
traveling twenty twenty five and twenty twenty six, with savings
of up to one thousand dollars per person. Whether it's
marveling at the ancient wonders of the world, discovering new cultures,
or uncovering hidden gems off the beaten path, unleash your
sense of wonder with this great offer. From the majestic
(00:37):
cruise down the Yanksee in China, to watching the sunrise
over Mount Fuji in Japan, eating kimchi in Korea, or
experience from the beauty of Halong Bay and Vietnam. The
world is brimming with wonders waiting to be explored. Choose
from over one hundred unique group itineries across the world.
You'll be spoilt for choice, but getting quick and discounts
(00:58):
are limited. Book now to secure your amazing early bird discount.
Visit Wendywoo Tours dot co dot Nz or contact your
life called travel agent.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
All the highs and lows, talking the big issues of
the week the panel on the Sunday Session.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
Enjoining me today on the panel, we have got New
Zealand HEROLD senior writer Simon Wilson. Hi, Simon, Hi there, Francesca,
and we're also joined by editor and journalist Joe McCarroll.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
Good morning, Joe, Good morning, franchise. They're good morning, Simon.
Speaker 4 (01:27):
Hi there. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
I'm not sure if either of you heard my first interview.
At the beginning of the morning, I was speaking to
Emma Warren and she is a lawyer and we were
just talking about how far insurance company should be able
to go when it comes to assessing your risk. And
I had no idea that we had not looked at
these laws, insurance laws for about one hundred years, and
(01:49):
that's what we're doing at the moment. And I think
this is absolutely something that we should be clarifying while
we can.
Speaker 4 (01:56):
Simon, I think you're absolutely right. This is extraordinary, isn't
it a hundred years? I think the starting point in
a way is that you know, we ensure is a
sesque individual risk now and this DNA testing is going
to give them better tools from their point of view
(02:16):
to do that more precisely. Yeah, it feels to me
like a very slippery slope.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Joe, your thoughts, how would you feel that if your
insurance company said, Okay, if we're going to look at
life and health insurance, we'd like you to do some
genetic texting, would you be keen to do that?
Speaker 4 (02:33):
Oh?
Speaker 3 (02:33):
I'd feel like I'd woken up in Gatika. To be honest, Francesca,
I mean it. I mean, these are commercial companies and
they are designed to make a profit rather than look
out for your best interest, and sometimes that can coincide,
But you wonder if it didn't coincide, whether they would
skew towards the profit rather than your a better outcome
(02:55):
for you. You assume these results will be used to
determine pre existing conditions and raise your premiums and deny
you cover. You know, I think personally, genetic based medicine
is going to play an increasingly massive role for us,
and that's really useful, and it might be times when
your doctor or even sort of drug manufacturers you know,
(03:18):
might use that information for your good and for the
public good. But the idea that we are leaving it
in such I mean, I did hear your interview with
Emma Mirand it's in such an unregulated and undefined space
that it seems to me we're allowing the insurance companies
to make the rules, and I dealt whether they're going
to make them in a way that we're choosing to mate.
Speaker 2 (03:42):
Genetic testing can be incredibly useful and valuable to an individual,
and I understand why going forward, as it probably becomes
more accessible, insurance companies would like to be able to
use it as well. But what concerns me, Simon, is
that you may show a rescue, may show you have
a particular gene maybe that makes you susceptible to something,
(04:02):
but it doesn't necessarily mean that you may suffer from
that disease or syndrome. All that you will get it.
So I would feel very I feel a little bit
put out, Simon, if I found myself paying a higher
premium for something I never suffer from in my throughout
my life, but I had a risk.
Speaker 3 (04:20):
That I might.
Speaker 4 (04:20):
You know, I think that's absolutely right. I think genetic
testing has to be voluntary. You have to decide I
would like to know what my risk is of something,
because there are downsides to it. If you know that
you're at risk of what there are obvious upsides if
you know you're at risk of a particular kind of
cancer and your later life. You might resolve then and
there to eat healthily and live healthily and hope that
(04:43):
that will avoid the cancer coming on, and you might
win on that one, But there are other genetic tests
that might show that it might just leave you with
ten twenty thirty years of anxiety and nothing you can
do about it, and so those things are difficult. My
feeling about this is that where people if you look
(05:03):
across the wider field of insurance and responsibility, where people
make choices, and I'm thinking about things like you with
house insurance. If you choose to build a house in
a place where it's quite likely that it will fall
into the sea or is a real an obvious risk there,
and that's determined by engineers, you choose to do that,
(05:25):
then I think you should pay very steep insurance premium.
And I don't want my insurance premiums supporting you in
that way because you're choosing to do that. But I
think in other cases, when we're talking about the things
we haven't chosen, it would be nice to think there
was a reasonable degree of universality that applied. We accept
that principle superannuation with everybody's right to go to hospital,
(05:49):
those sorts of things, and I think in general health
insurance that it should be similar.
Speaker 2 (05:55):
Very nice use of opening another can of wounds. Their
silent to make a point. You make a very good point.
I mean, it kind of makes sense, right.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
Joe, although I almost would reverse that. Like I am
thinking of someone I know who had breast cancer and
she was offered the brackettest to see if she had
the genetic disposition to breast cancer, and she told me
she refused because she was conscious that, as New Zealand
law stands today, she was conscious that down the line,
(06:23):
it might impact on the cover that was available not
just for her, but for her daughter and her sister
and her niece. Because once you know, you have to
disclose honestly.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
And it's unfair because she should be able to take
that test. She shouldn't be the.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Priorit that information if she chooses it, and she might
have decided not to get the test anyway, you have
the right not to know. But I think the way
New Zealand law stands, we are almost discouraged from using
this genetic testing in a way that might benefit us.
Speaker 4 (06:55):
That's right should be used for healthcare rather than primarily surant.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
I don't know about the two of you. The thing
that I found most fascinating though about this, One of
the things I found really something about the story is
that we have laws in this country that haven't been
changed for one hundred years. I mean, I was, I
was really sort of taken back by that, and I
actually did a I went down a rabbit hole and
I did a quick google. In a twenty and sixteen
there was a bill that was passed that cleaned up
(07:24):
about one hundred and thirty two quite archaic laws that
we did have in the country. Someonere no longer even
sort of relevant or you know. But there was one
that they looked at which was from eighteen seventy I think,
which was a law which was put in place to
allow an English insurance company to set up in New Zealand.
(07:44):
So so actually the insurance laws have been in place
for a very very long time, and I just think
that's crazy. I just, yeah's let's sort this out.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Okay, I get an intern onto that.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Yeah that you know, I mean It's crazy, isn't it. Anyway?
Speaker 4 (07:59):
It's stuff that is useful to think that Parliament is
on top of those things, but really gets high enough
up the picking in order to get time.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Well, with the house system the way it is and
their cost of insurance, I think it's absolutely something we
should be making sure that we're covering everything off as
thoroughly as we can. Yeah. Right, The Australian Federal Government
is committed to a national plan to band children from
social media. We don't have a lot of details at
this particular time, and I think we'd probably all agree
(08:33):
that less screens are good. Less engagement with social media
is probably beneficial to all of us. Having really good
conversations about gaming and addiction and algorithms and how this
whole thing works is really important. I'm not entirely sure
that a band is going to do the trick. At
some point a young person will start using social media
(08:56):
at the end of the day, it's the way you
educate them that is going to make a difference to
their well being.
Speaker 4 (09:01):
Simon your thoughts, well, I think of it in terms
of bears and wolves. What I'm thinking is that we
have always lived. Humanity has always lived in a big, bad,
dangerous world, and the answer didn't used to be never
go outside because there are bears and wolves and of
course I'm not really thinking of New Zealand or.
Speaker 2 (09:23):
Dogs stray dogs.
Speaker 4 (09:24):
And the answer the answer was we have to learn
how to understand their behavior so we know when they're
dangerous and when they're not. We have to learn how
to defend ourselves from them, and we have to learn
how to coexist with them, rather than killing all the
bears and wolves. And I think that the analogy kind
(09:45):
of holds now. We still live in a big, bad world.
There will always be more problems, more bad, more risks
and dangers in the world than can be legislated against.
So an alert and aware citizenry and in particular children,
of course, is the first line and the best line
(10:06):
of defense learning how to cope with those things. Having
said that, we at the moment the prevailing ethic and
our education system is doing the basics brilliantly to quate
the Prime Minister. And I'd like to think that there
were scope in that for basic understanding of how social
media is trying to wreck us all, not just children,
(10:30):
was a part of it.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
But yeah, I think I think there can be a
huge amount of value in our digital lives Simon. But
but I think we no longer ask ourselves what value
is it giving? What value does it bring to our lives?
And I think we're sort of all caught up in
it and we're not standing back going actually that is
that useful? Is that helpful? Does it make me feel
(10:52):
good or not? And picking and choosing what aspects sort
of our digital life kind of works for us and
adds value to our lives. And I don't think it's
going to go away. It's not a problem that you
can just ban and hope that it's it's going to
be solved.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
Joe Oh, one hundred percent agree. I mean, I think
the I think that digital literacy is something we urgently
need education on as a as a population, as the
world population. It's not just young people. I think it's
sort of so many parallels to the idea of sex education.
(11:23):
And I feel like the idea of this band, the
social media ban is like telling children, don't worry, just
abstain from sex until you get married. And so it's
a theory, it's fine, it just doesn't really work in practice.
You know, knowledge is power. The more factually informed they are,
the safety that they'll be. You cannot opt out of
the digital space, and I don't think you can shield
children from it entirely. I don't think it keeps them safe,
(11:45):
whereas I think educating them is an armor that can
protect them from harm. And I am one hundred percent
backing children and teenagers to get round any ban immediately anyway,
So you might as well skill them up with the facts.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Yeah, No, they're clever like that. Simon Wilson and Joe Mcarell,
thank you so much for your time this morning.
Speaker 1 (12:03):
For more from the Sunday session with Franchessca, Ron can
listen live to News Talks a B from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.