{"id":"F2008L00027","name":"Statement of Principles concerning diabetes mellitus No. 9 of 2008","slug":"statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"repealed","isInForce":false,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":72121,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2008L00027-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"Repealed","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Statement of Principles concerning diabetes mellitus No. 9 of 2008","content":"Amendment Statement of Principles\n\nconcerning\n\nDIABETES MELLITUS\n\nNo. 9 of 2008\n\nfor the purposes of the\n\nVeterans’ Entitlements Act 1986\n\nand\n\nMilitary Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004\n\n1.  This Instrument may be cited as Statement of Principles concerning diabetes mellitus No. 9 of 2008.\n\n2. The Repatriation Medical Authority amends, under subsection 196B(8) of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986, Statement of Principles concerning diabetes mellitus Instrument No. 11 of 2004 by:\n\n(A) replacing factors (a) and (v) in clause 5 with the following:\n\n\"(a) for type 1 diabetes only, being infected with a Coxsackie B virus before the clinical onset of diabetes mellitus; or\"; and\n\n\"(v) for type 1 diabetes only, being infected with a Coxsackie B virus before the clinical worsening of diabetes mellitus; or\";\n\n(B) deleting the definitions of \"rubella virus\" and \"Coxsackie B virus\" in clause 8; and\n\n(C) inserting the following definition of \"being infected with a Coxsackie B virus\" after the definition of \"acromegaly\" in clause 8:\n\n'\"being infected with a Coxsackie B virus\" means\n\n(i) having positive serology for a Coxsackie B virus; or\n\n(ii) being positive on polymerase chain reaction testing for Coxsackie B virus ribonucleic acid (RNA);'.\n\n3. The amendment made by this instrument applies to all matters to which Instrument No.11 of 2004, section 120A of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and section 338 of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 apply.\n\n4. The amendment made by this instrument takes effect from 9 January 2008.\n\nDated this twentieth day of December 2007\n\nThe Common Seal of the )\n\nRepatriation Medical Authority )\n\nwas affixed to this instrument )\n\nin the presence of )\n\nKEN DONALD\n\nCHAIRPERSON","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"_metrics":{"model":"kimi-k2.5","source":"moonshot-batch","completionTokens":1799},"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This amendment represents a technical refinement rather than a scope expansion. It narrows the application of an existing medical factor (Coxsackie B virus infection) to type 1 diabetes specifically and provides precise diagnostic criteria. The amendment maintains the original purpose of establishing medical principles for determining service-related diabetes claims without introducing new categories of eligibility."},"complexity_factors":["Requires cross-referencing with Instrument No. 11 of 2004 to understand the full context of the amendments","Use of specific medical terminology including 'polymerase chain reaction', 'serology', and 'ribonucleic acid (RNA)'","Dual statutory framework applying under both Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004","Conditional logic restricting the Coxsackie B virus factor to 'type 1 diabetes only' for both onset and worsening of the condition"],"plain_english_summary":"This technical update to veterans’ medical rules narrows and clarifies how Coxsackie B virus is treated in diabetes compensation claims: it applies only to type 1 diabetes and requires specific laboratory proof (positive serology or PCR for viral RNA). It also removes obsolete virus definitions. The change affects veterans and decision-makers by tightening scientific standards for linking diabetes to service and preventing misapplication of the Coxsackie B factor to type 2 cases."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008","history":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008/history","analysis":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/statement-of-principles-concerning-diabetes-mellitus-no-9-of-2008/documents"}}