Crisis? What crisis in UK gambling policy reform?

The field of gambling studies is dynamic and subject to extensive critique, and rightly so (Collins et al., Citation2020; Griffiths & Auer, Citation2015; Kim et al., Citation2016; Livingstone & Adams, Citation2016). Indeed, the numerous domains impacted by gambling and related harm necessitates that the setting of research priorities, sources of funding, and the integrity and practice of gambling research, prevention or treatment approaches be continually appraised (Bowden Jones et al., Citation2022; Louderback et al., Citation2021; Nikkinen, Citation2019; Thomas et al., Citation2023; van Schalkwyk et al., Citation2021). Recently, van Schalkwyk and Cassidy (Citation2024) stated that transformational change was needed in the United Kingdom (UK) gambling policy to address the public health challenges posed by gambling harm. While we heartily agree with the point that stronger action is needed from policymakers to reflect the evidence-base regarding the magnitude of gambling harms, we write this rejoinder to contest their diagnosis of the four main areas holding back reform. We contend that progress is being made in all four research-related areas and call for stakeholders to assist in these ongoing efforts in order for independent and rigorous research to better inform gambling policymaking and reform.