Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Immigration has once again become a hot button issue, from weekend protests featuring neo-Nazis to a new A$408 million deal with Nauru to accept former immigration detainees Australia cannot legally deport back to their own countries.

The federal government has also just belatedly announced the permanent migration figure for this financial year. At 185,000, it’s unchanged from the previous year.

On this podcast we’re joined by Abul Rizvi, a former deputy secretary of the Department of Immigration under the Howard government turned media commentator. He says it was “very, very unusual” that it took the Albanese government so long to announce the latest migration figures.

The delay was unprecedented. I cannot remember a year in which the government did not announce the programme for the relevant year before that year started.

But Rizvi says both major political parties should take responsibility for fuelling public concerns about immigration, after two decades of stalling on hard decisions and avoiding difficult conversations.

At least since Kevin Rudd unleashed on us the big Australia debate […] both major parties have been reluctant to talk about immigration policy […] They have lacked a will to explain our long-term directions in terms of population and net overseas migration. And as a result, I think they have left a vacuum.

And that vacuum is now being filled […] by extremists such as neo-Nazis and others. But I think they are a small portion of the people that the government needs to be talking to. They need to be talking to middle Australia, who just wants to know that immigration is being managed in the national interest.

Rizvi says successive federal governments have failed to properly manage or explain how they’re dealing with migrant numbers. That’s having unintended consequences, both for families and businesses trying to bring workers or loved ones to Australia.

The big pressure is under employer-sponsored migration, where I suspect what [the government will] do is simply slow processing. And that will just make employers angry. It will make the applicants angry. It’s just really poor practice.

But more importantly, they’re confronted with a massive backlog of partner visa applications, which on my estimates […] the backlog is around 100,000 […] They come under the Permanent Migration Programme, so they’ve got to be fit within that programme. We’re getting about 60,000 to 65,000 applications per annum, and the government has allocated 40,000 places for partner visas.

In other words, it’s saying, yet again for another year, they’re just going to let the backlog grow. The law, the Migration Act, says the government must manage these visas on a demand-driven basis. And the government proudly puts that on the website, that it does that. But when you’re constantly letting the backlog grow and grow and grow, you’re not really managing it on a demand-driven basis.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Abul Rizvi on how silence and stalling stoke anti-migrant fears – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-abul-rizvi-on-how-silence-and-stalling-stoke-anti-migrant-fears-264351

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ger Post, Lecturer Neuroscience, PhD student collaborative reasoning, The University of Melbourne

With the AFL finals approaching, discussions about the league’s clutch players – those who excel under pressure – will soon appear in the media and be debated among fans.

Last year, Gold Coast captain Noah Anderson was ranked highest in a list of AFL clutch players, followed by more established names including the Western Bulldogs’ Tom Liberatore and Geelong’s Patrick Dangerfield.

But what does clutch really mean and is it possible for athletes to be “clutch”?

The power of labels and narratives

While most people struggle when the pressure rises – they may even “choke”, where they lose the ability to perform a skill in front of an audience – clutch players seem to excel in these circumstances.

They thrive when the heat is on and seem to save something special for these moments.

The label of being a clutch player is often shaped by stereotypical narratives of, as some media commentary has put it, “hardened, stubborn men” who will “take themselves to the next level through sheer guts and an iron will”.

In 2018, former Port Adelaide great and outspoken media pundit Kane Cornes earmarked Bulldogs champion Marcus Bontempelli as a clutch player:

The one player who I want with the ball in their hands, when the game is on the line is “The Bont”. For me, Marcus Bontempelli, is right now the best clutch performer in the competition.

More recently, Carlton’s Blake Acres was described as “intense, desperate and completely unwilling to give an inch” in the finals:

Acres was the big moment player, full of desperation, intensity and a relentless attack on the ball.

But are these players really clutch?

Blindspots and biases

These character sketches and rankings of clutch players mask many blind spots and biases in how the data are compiled and interpreted.

For example, the data tend to favour players who generate impact with eye-catching and easily measurable actions (such as Bontempelli, who often brilliantly takes marks and kicks goals) while undervaluing those who do the less glamorous grunt work that helps the rest of the team (such as Liberatore, who plays a more selfless role).

More importantly, the data don’t reflect whether a player actually improves under pressure (the definition of clutch).

In the case of Anderson, is he indeed performing better than others in the final quarters of tight games? Or is he just more talented than others and ranks higher in all quarters of games?

Or maybe he is better in the first three quarters of the game and then declines in the fourth quarter – yet he is he still better than the rest?

We don’t know solely from assessing his performances in final quarters.

Studies from other team sports including basketball, soccer and baseball cannot definitely prove players excel under pressure.

No one saves something special for when it’s needed most.

It seems more likely that clutch performances simply stick in our memories: game-deciding moments are more memorable than efforts that fail to seal victory.

There could be other reasons, too.

The power of opportunity

Statistics from many sports show even if athletes are involved in more goals or baskets when the game is on the line, it doesn’t necessarily mean they excel in these moments.

When late-game performances by basketball legends including LeBron James and Kobe Bryant were analysed, another option surfaced: clutch performers seem to be doing more instead of better in the last minutes of tight games.

Their scoring accuracy doesn’t improve in these moments (they miss, on average, just as much as most players) but they do get more scoring opportunities.

These opportunities are created by many involved, not in the least the teammates who pass the ball to the clutch player.

These teammates often follow the instructions from their coaches to get the clutch player in scoring position in the dying seconds.

Opponents can, unintentionally, assist by making more fouls on clutch players when the heat is on, giving them more free throws to seal the victory.

Finally, there are fans and pundits who label these players as the ones who should decide the game.

So to get more opportunities to decide a match, an athlete needs to build a reputation that they will take themselves “to the next level” when it matters most. Tattooing “CHOSEN1” on your back might help build these reputations, as LeBron James did.

Even better is when others talk about your confidence, hunger for victories, or hardened, stubborn competitiveness. This signals to fans, teammates and coaches that you are the one who should be getting the ball to decide the game.

More opportunities means more game-winning shots, which reinforces the idea you are a clutch player.

Being listed as one of the most clutch players of the competition might be the best assist an athlete can get to decide a final.

Ger Post does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. So-called ‘clutch’ athletes might be more hype than nerveless match-winners – https://theconversation.com/so-called-clutch-athletes-might-be-more-hype-than-nerveless-match-winners-263111

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Clare Collins, Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Newcastle

If you follow wellness content on social media or in the news, you’ve probably heard that processed food is not just unhealthy, but can cause serious harm.

Eating a diet dominated by highly processed foods means you’re likely to consume more kilojoules than you need, and greater amounts of salt, sugar – as well as food additives.

But not all processed foods are equal, nor bad for you. Here’s what to look out for on food labels if you want to buy processed, but convenient, foods.

What do the processing categories mean?

Researchers use the Nova processed food classification system to group foods into four processing levels.

Group 1: Unprocessed or minimally processed foods are either in their natural state or have minimal processing. They’re basic foods you could eat straight away, such as vegetables and fruit, or foods that only need minimal processing to make them safe and palatable, such as eggs, meat, poultry, fish, oats, other grains, plain pasta, legumes, milk, plain yoghurt, ground herbs and spices, or nuts with shells.

Group 2: Processed culinary ingredients are derived from group 1. These are used in cooking to enhance flavour and texture, and include oils, sugar and honey.

Group 3: Processed foods are treated using traditional processing methods such as canning, bottling, fermenting, or salting to extend shelf life. These include canned fruits, tomato paste, cheese, salted fish, and breads with minimal ingredients. You could make these foods in a home kitchen.

Group 4: Ultra-processed foods are industrially produced with ingredients and additives not normally found in home kitchens, and have little, if any, group 1 items left intact. These foods are engineered to be hyper-palatable, meaning you can’t stop eating them, and have long shelf lives. Products include factory-made biscuits, snack foods, instant meals, frozen desserts, preserved meats, instant noodles, margarine, some breakfast cereals and sugar-sweetened drinks.

However, group 4 products vary greatly in their nutritional quality and the number and type of food additives used to manufacture them.

What’s the concern about eating lots of ultra-processed foods?

About 42% of Australians’ total energy intake comes from ultra-processed foods. These are relatively cheap and are energy-dense, but nutrient-poor. This means they can contain a lot of kilojules, salt and added sugars but are poor sources of nutrients the body needs such as vitamins, minerals and dietary fibre.

Studies have linked higher intakes of ultra-processed foods with poorer diet quality and worse health outcomes. A review of 122 observational studies found people with the highest intakes (compared with the lowest) were about 25% more likely to have had a decline in kidney function. They were 20% more likely to be overweight, or have obesity or diabetes, and were 40% more likely to have common mental health conditions such as depression.

However, a recent review highlighted that the health impact of these foods and drinks varies depending on their category. Products such as sugar-sweetened drinks can negatively affect health, while others – such as cereals with added vitamins and minerals and some dairy products – can be neutral or even protective.

Some level of food processing can improve food safety, extend shelf life and reduce food waste. This is likely to include the use of additives, such as emulsifiers, flavour enhancers, preservatives, food acids, colours and raising agents. Additives need to be approved by Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) after a safety assessment, with the lowest amount added to achieve the specific purpose in the food product.

However, some adults and children eat a lot of ultra-processed foods. This means they have high intakes of food additives, in terms of total amount and different types.

Researchers have raised concerns about a potential link between high intakes and increased risks of some health conditions, ranging from mental health disorders to heart disease and metabolic disorders such as diabetes. The researchers called for transparent use of evidence to ensure public health messaging is kept up to date.

An observational study in more than 100,000 French adults also raised concerns about potential “cocktail” effects of food additive combinations. Although more research is needed, they found some additive combinations were associated with a higher risk for developing type 2 diabetes.

Finally, a recent review highlighted the potential for additives, particularly emulsifiers, to damage the gut lining and alter the balance of healthy versus unhealthy gut microbes. This could potentially increase the risk of developing inflammatory bowel conditions.

What processed foods should you choose?

It depends on how they’re made, the additives used, how often you eat them, and how much you have.

When choosing processed foods:

1. Read the ingredient list on the food label. It tells you a lot about the level of processing and additives used. Look for products that contain minimal to no additives, and ingredients that could be found in a home kitchen. Note that additives could be listed by name or number.

2. If there are a number of products in the same category, choose the one with more Health Stars as it will contain less salt, saturated fat and added sugars, compared to products with fewer Health Stars.

3. Think about how often you eat the product. If you do eat it weekly or more often, spend more time comparing products before making a final choice.

While you might expect all Nova 3 processed foods to be healthier than Nova group 4 (ultra-processed), this isn’t always the case. Nova group 3 items don’t necessarily meet the nutrient criteria that deems them “healthy”. They could still contain excessive amounts of added salt, saturated fat or sugars.

For help to review the level of processing alongside the nutrient criteria, consider using an app such as Open Food Facts. This assigns food products a Nova group score, a nutrition score, and another to rate its impact on the environment.

Read more:
Ultra-processed foods might not be the real villain in our diets – here’s what our research found

Clare Collins AO is a Laureate Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, NSW and a Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) affiliated researcher. She is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF, HMRI, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, WA Dept. Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk, Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update, the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns and was Co-Chair of the Guidelines Development Advisory Committee for Clinical Practice Guidelines for Treatment of Obesity 2025.

– ref. Not all processed foods are bad for you. Here’s what you can tell from reading the label – https://theconversation.com/not-all-processed-foods-are-bad-for-you-heres-what-you-can-tell-from-reading-the-label-260818

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Margaret Murray, Senior Lecturer, Nutrition, Swinburne University of Technology

The hype around protein intake doesn’t seem to be going away.

Social media is full of people urging you to eat more protein, including via supplements such as protein shakes. Food companies have also started highlighting protein content on food packages to promote sales.

But is all the extra protein giving us any benefit – and can you have too much protein?

Protein’s important – but many eat more than they need

Eating enough protein is important. It helps form muscle tissue, enzymes and hormones and it plays a role in immune function. It can also give you energy.

Australia’s healthy eating guidelines, penned by experts and backed by government, recommend we get 15–25% of our daily energy needs from protein.

The recommended daily intake of protein for adults is 0.84 grams per kilogram of body weight for men and 0.75 grams per kilogram of body weight for women

This is about 76 grams per day for a 90 kilogram man or 53 grams per day for a 70 kilogram woman. (It’s a bit more if you’re over 70 or a child, though).

Most Australian adults are already eating plenty of protein.

Even so, many people still go out of their way to add even more protein to their diet.

For people working to increase muscle mass through resistance training, such as lifting weights, a protein intake up to 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight per day (that’s 144 grams a day for a 90 kilogram person) can help with increasing muscle strength and size.

But research shows there is no additional muscle gain benefit from eating any more than that.

For most of us, there’s no benefit in consuming protein above the recommended level.

In fact, having too much protein can cause problems.

What happens when I eat too much protein?

Excess protein is not all simply excreted from the body in urine or faeces. It stays in the body and has various effects.

Protein is a source of energy, so eating more protein means taking in more energy.

When we consume more energy than we need, our body converts any excess into fatty tissue for storage.

There are some health conditions where excess protein intake should be avoided. For example, people with chronic kidney disease should closely monitor their protein intake, under the supervision of a dietitian, to avoid damage to the kidneys.

There is also a condition called protein poisoning, which is where you eat too many proteins without getting enough fats, carbohydrates and other nutrients.

It’s also known as “rabbit starvation”, a term often linked to early 20th century explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson, in reference to the fact that those who subsisted on a diet of mainly rabbits (which are famously lean) quickly fell dangerously ill.

Where you get your protein from matters

We can get protein in our diets from plant sources (such as beans, lentils, wholegrains) and animal sources (such as eggs, dairy, meat or fish).

A high intake of protein from animal sources has been associated with an increased risk of premature death among older Australians (especially death from cancer).

High animal protein intake is also associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes.

On the other hand, consuming more plant sources of protein is associated with:

• a lower risk of dying from cancer
• a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes and
• improved blood cholesterol levels.

Many animal sources of protein are also relatively high in fat, particularly saturated fat.

A high intake of saturated fat contributes to increased risk of chronic diseases such as heart disease. Many Australians already eat more saturated fat than we need.

Many plant sources of protein, however, are also sources of dietary fibre, which most Australians don’t get enough of.

Having more dietary fibre helps reduce the risk of chronic diseases (such as heart disease) and supports gut health.

Striking a balance

Overall, where you get protein from – and having a balance between animal and plant sources – is more important than simply just trying to add ever more protein to your diet.

Protein, fats and carbohydrates all work together to keep your body healthy and the engine running smoothly.

We need all of these macro nutrients, along with vitamins and minerals, in the right proportions to support our health.

Margaret Murray does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What happens if I eat too much protein? – https://theconversation.com/what-happens-if-i-eat-too-much-protein-261849

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sanné Mestrom, Senior Lecturer, DECRA Fellow, Sydney College of the Arts, University of Sydney

Walk into most art galleries with children, and you’ll hear the familiar refrain “look but don’t touch”. This instruction reveals something troubling about how cultural institutions understand learning. Museums have become temples to visual consumption, where knowledge is received through eyes rather than constructed through bodies.

This fundamentally misunderstands how humans learn – and what we deny young people when we privilege looking over all other forms of engagement.

At my exhibition The Whole is Greater Than the Sum of Her Parts, I have watched visitors consistently spend significantly longer with touchable elements compared to visual-only displays. Visitors engaging tactilely ask fundamentally different questions, too, moving from “what is this?” to “how was this made?” and “what if I tried…?”

So what happens when we design cultural spaces honouring the full range of human learning capacities?

Touch reveals what eyes miss

My exhibition includes bronze reliefs visitors can touch while viewing corresponding paintings. This simple addition reveals artistic knowledge that visual observation alone cannot provide.

Take a moment I witnessed with the work The Weight of Connection, where a child placed her hands on reliefs while looking at paintings.

These bronze sculptures translate semi-abstract paintings into three-dimensional form, but with a twist. What appears to recede in the painting might actually protrude in the bronze relief.

“This looks like the background, but it feels raised,” she said, as her fingers traced raised areas that appeared sunken in the painting. Suddenly she had to work harder to understand what was actually happening, comparing what her eyes told her with what her hands discovered.

This is spatial reasoning in action: understanding emerging not from a single sense, but from reconciling conflicting information.

The exhibition’s large playable sculpture, Ludic Folly, transforms semi-abstract figurative forms into an interactive adventure. Visitors climb, rest and navigate space. I repeatedly observe children and adults having “aha moments” as physical position fundamentally changes their understanding of sculptural forms.

My research has shown children naturally learn by building foam compositions on this interactive sculpture, stacking geometric shapes while balancing on curved surfaces.

I’ve watched them discover triangular forms won’t balance the same way rectangular ones do, and weight distribution changes everything. Their whole body becomes part of the learning process.

When children build these compositions together, they don’t just absorb information, they negotiate what works. I’ve seen two kids argue about whether a foam cube should go “on top or underneath”, then test both options, their hands and bodies providing immediate feedback about balance and stability.

When foam structures topple over in Ludic Folly, children don’t see catastrophe, they see information. “Oh, it needs more support here,” one child told me after her tower collapsed, immediately rebuilding with a wider base.

Embracing risk

My research explores a concerning pattern: students from highly supervised, risk-averse childhoods often struggle with creative risk-taking in young adulthood. Physical risks in early childhood build resilience, enabling later intellectual and creative risks.

Museums maintaining “look but don’t touch” policies aren’t just being conservative. They’re reinforcing educational approaches that produce passive, risk-averse learners precisely when society increasingly needs creative problem-solvers.

When children in Ludic Folly climb, balance and build structures that might fall, they’re developing both physical confidence and intellectual courage.

In the real world, we never rely on just our eyes. When you’re cooking, you’re listening to the sizzle, feeling the heat, smelling when something’s ready, tasting as you go. When you’re fixing something, your hands tell you as much as your eyes do.

Yet, somehow, we’ve convinced ourselves that in museums learning should happen only through looking.

A path forward

Cultural institutions can implement embodied learning approaches without major infrastructure changes. They can:

• allow visitors to explore exhibitions with their hands, providing various textures, weights and temperatures for visitors to manipulate while studying artworks

• design exhibitions requiring physical navigation and multiple viewpoints, rather than static observation

• create spaces where visitors build, arrange and problem-solve together using loose parts or modular elements

• allow visitors to handle tools, materials or work-in-progress pieces revealing artistic processes typically hidden behind finished works.

Throughout my exhibition, these bronze reliefs and the large playable sculpture contain “embodied knowledge” – understanding existing only through physical creation and accessible only through physical engagement. This isn’t secondary information; it’s primary artistic knowledge completely inaccessible through visual observation alone.

Just like artists, children build knowledge in their bodies. The acquisition of tacit knowledge is a deeply immersive process.

Over time, the artist’s body becomes a repository of knowledge, with each movement and gesture informed by years of practice. This allows the artist to work with a level of precision and artistry often described as second nature. For children, this process happens through play and exploration.

Museums embracing all of our senses aren’t just being more inclusive; they’re being more effective educators, spaces where learning becomes collaborative rather than passive.

To accompany the exhibition, I developed a comprehensive learning resource with essays, activities, and inquiry questions that help educators and families understand how children learn through embodied knowledge. It’s time our cultural institutions caught up with what children have always known: real learning engages the whole person, not just the eyes.

The Whole is Greater Than the Sum of Her Parts is at the National Gallery of Australia, Canberra, until September 21.

Sanné Mestrom receives funding from the Australian Research Council. The work discussed here was commissioned by the National Gallery of Australia.

– ref. Touch reveals what eyes can’t see – so museums should embrace interactivity – https://theconversation.com/touch-reveals-what-eyes-cant-see-so-museums-should-embrace-interactivity-257325

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karin Hammarberg, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Global and Women’s Health, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University

Australia’s fertility sector has been rocked by yet more reports of serious errors, this time involving sperm donors from overseas.

On Monday, an ABC investigation revealed a Brisbane couple had signed a non-disclosure agreement after discovering that sperm from the wrong overseas donor had been used to conceive their child, who was born in 2014.

The same fertility clinic had keep secret an audit that found there was a “high risk” that sperm frozen before 2020 did not match the donor on the label. This included sperm from two overseas banks.

It’ well known that informal sperm donation, where people find a sperm donor online, is risky. But now formal sperm donation is in the spotlight. So how is it regulated and what do we know about donors? And how safe is it?

How does sperm donation work in Australia?

Formal fertility treatment, including sperm donation, is almost exclusively provided by private clinics. Medicare subsidises this treatment but patients still pay significant out-of-pocket costs.

Sperm donation is mainly used by single women and same-sex female couples. Couples who want to avoid passing on a known genetic condition, and some men who have had cancer treatment, may also choose to use a sperm donor.

Clinics provide those who need donor sperm with non-identifying details about several donors, and allow them to choose. Characteristics include the donors’ ethnicity, eye and hair colour, height and blood group, and whether they are a domestic or overseas donor.

Women with no known fertility problems may use a simple procedure called intrauterine insemination (IUI), where a small amount of the donor’s sperm is placed in the woman’s uterus when she is ovulating.

Women with fertility problems and those who have tried IUI without success need IVF to conceive. This involves fertilising eggs with donor sperm in the laboratory to form embryos, and then placing one in the woman’s uterus.

Who are the sperm donors?

Donors may be known – for example, a relative, friend or someone the recipient has connected with online.

De-identified donors, the most commonly used donors, are recruited by fertility clinics and aren’t known to the recipient.

Clinics have to record all donors’ identifying details so their offspring can access them when they reach adulthood.

International research shows most sperm donors are motivated by altruism and want to help people have children.

In Australia, donors can’t be paid for providing sperm. They must also agree to release their identity to any child born from their donation.

Potential donors undergo rigorous medical and psychological screening, which means only a small proportion of men who offer to donate sperm are accepted.

A study of more than 11,000 men who applied to become a sperm donor in Denmark and the United States found fewer than 5% were accepted and had samples frozen. Some men withdrew or didn’t respond; others had disqualifying health conditions or low sperm count.

As demand for donor sperm in Australia far outstrips supply, clinics import sperm from international sperm banks, mostly in the US or Denmark.

There are no national data on the proportions of sperm donation treatments that involve overseas or domestic donors. However, in 2024 clinics in Victoria stored sperm from 578 donors patients recruited, 1,001 donors clinics recruited, and only 46 donors recruited overseas.

Choosing a clinic and an overseas donor can be difficult. It also comes with added risks, such as the donor having donated to many clinics and people discovering their children have dozens or hundreds of half-siblings.

And, as demonstrated by the recent sperm mix-up report, the double witnessing procedures that are required in Australia may not have occurred for some imported sperm.

The rules for imported sperm vary slightly by state. But they are essentially the same as those for domestic donors.

What are the rules for donors?

Sperm donation is regulated through state and territory laws, the National Health and Medical Research Council Ethical Guidelines and the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee Code of Practice.

Although there are some differences between states, certain rules apply across all states and territories:

• a donor can’t receive any payment or inducement (apart from expenses incurred as a result of the donation, such as travel costs)

• potential donors and recipients must be counselled about the medical, special, psychological and legal implications of sperm donation

• potential donors must be screened for infectious and genetic diseases

• recipients are entitled to access information about the donor’s medical history, physical characteristics, and the number and sex of children born from that donor

• children born from sperm donation have the right to access information about the donor as adults. This includes identifying information such as their full name and date of birth

• clinics must maintain detailed records – including identifying and non-identifying information – of donors, recipients and offspring

• a donor has no legal responsibility for a child born from his donation

• a maximum number of families can be created with one donor’s sperm (five to ten, depending on state).

Clinics are required to report serious adverse events to the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee, but the committee doesn’t make this information public. So there is no way of knowing whether there has been other mixups, beyond what has been reported.

Is sperm donation safe?

In broad terms, fertility treatment – including sperm donation – is practised responsibly in Australia.

However, the reports of serious errors of the past few months, including reports of sperm and embryo mixups, as well as the use of non-disclosure agreements, raise questions about transparency within the industry.

As a result, in June, state and federal government ministers announced a rapid review of the fertility sector, and are currently awaiting its recommendations.

The review will consider whether the current patchwork of regulation should be replaced with national regulation, the merits of a national register of donors, recipients and offspring, and whether the current industry sponsored clinic accrediting body should be replaced by an independent body.

Based on the reported errors, it’s clear the sector needs an independent overseeing body to restore trust and confidence in the system.

Karin Hammarberg does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Here’s what we know – and don’t know – about using IVF sperm donors from overseas – https://theconversation.com/heres-what-we-know-and-dont-know-about-using-ivf-sperm-donors-from-overseas-264276

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Callum Jones, Associate research fellow, Deakin University

Over the weekend, rallies were staged across various Australian cities under the branding “March for Australia”. The rallies, which were attended by avowed neo-Nazis and elected politicians alike, called for an end to mass migration.

These protests are not unique to Australia. Recently, the United Kingdom has seen its own wave of anti-migrant demonstrations in cities such as London, Bristol and Birmingham.

Despite claims by some that the Australian rallies were “hijacked” by the neo-Nazi National Socialist Network (NSN), they were deeply rooted in the far-right, white nationalist ideas of “remigration” and the Great Replacement theory.

An ABC investigation in the lead-up to the rallies found that “remigration” was listed on the organisers’ website as a key reason for marching, before later being deleted.

Significantly, the March for Australia rallies also received high-profile, online support from far-right figures overseas, including Alex Jones, Tommy Robinson, Jack Posobiec and Elon Musk.

Musk retweeted a post erroneously claiming 150,000 people took part in the rallies, while Jones retweeted a post claiming a crowd size of half a million.

For the rally organisers, public support from figures such as these greatly expands the reach of their message, and repositions them from isolated fringe events to vital parts of a global anti-immigration movement.

This is not the first time Musk has inserted himself in the domestic politics of a foreign country to bolster the far right. The tech billionaire notably gave his support to Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany party in recent elections, describing it as the “best hope”“ for the country.

In recent days, he also posted the phrase ”remigration is the only way“ in response to a post about foreigners in the UK.

Remigration refers to the mass deportation of non-white immigrants to their so-called countries of origin.

It is an ideological cornerstone of ”identitarianism“, a European far-right movement centred on preserving white European identities. These are perceived to be under attack by immigration, globalisation and multiculturalism.

Global growth of the far right

This online support for March for Australia underscores the growing transnational links among far-right movements.

These movements increasingly see themselves as united by shared concerns over the defence of so-called “Western Civilisation”, opposition to mass immigration, the preservation of white identity, and beliefs in conspiratorial narratives such as the Great Replacement theory.

And this transnational growth wouldn’t be possible without the proliferation of social media in recent years.

In Australia, for example, research shows how “indispensable” mainstream social media platforms have been in the development of anti-Islamic far-right movements such as the United Patriots Front, going back to the 2010s.

The far right also capitalises on virality and humour to extend the dissemination of their ideology online. In particular, this is done through memes.

Research has found, for example, that one particularly prominent transnational far-right meme, Pepe the Frog, has been localised for an Australian audience through the addition of a Ned Kelly mask.

Research also shows how international slogans travel across borders. US President Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” mantra, for instance, has been adapted into a distinctly local form for Australians: “Make Australia Grouse Again”.

The online space makes it easier for extreme views and rhetoric to permeate into mainstream political discourse, as well.

When elements of the far right get removed from mainstream social media platforms— a process known as “deplatforming” — they often find a new home on alternative platforms such as Telegram. Research shows they now host a range of Australian neo-Nazi groups.

It’s noteworthy that many of the key figures lending support for March for Australia, including Robinson and Jones, were previously deplatformed from Twitter before Musk acquired the company and reinstated them.

Social media has also allowed neo-Nazis such as Tom Sewell, who is essentially persona non grata in Australian mainstream media, to build a large and highly influential profile among international far-right audiences.

With Musk’s vows to defend “free speech” on X, and Mark Zuckerberg’s dramatic shift in Meta’s approach to content moderation, the mainstream social media environment is becoming even more hospitable to far-right movements. This is a worrying trend.

For the Australian far right, the support of figures such as Musk and Robinson signals an opportunity to increase their mobilising potential. It could also lead to the transnational exchange of information, resources and tactical support.

As the far right becomes increasingly emboldened, mainstreamed and normalised, we should expect to see more public and increasingly violent demonstrations across Australian cities – and support for these among a global audience online.

Kurt Sengul has received funding from the NSW Government’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) and Social Cohesion Research Program.

Callum Jones does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How Australia’s anti-immigration rallies were amplified online by the global far right – https://theconversation.com/how-australias-anti-immigration-rallies-were-amplified-online-by-the-global-far-right-264269

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lucia McCallum, Senior Scientist in Geodesy, University of Tasmania

On Sunday, a plane carrying European Union chief Ursula von der Leyen was reportedly forced to land in Bulgaria using paper maps after its GPS navigation systems were jammed. Bulgarian authorities claim the jamming was deliberate Russian interference, though a Kremlin spokesperson told the Financial Times this was “incorrect”.

GPS interference is on the rise, so you might be wondering how it works. And can anything be done about it? And – perhaps most importantly – do you need to worry?

How does GPS jamming work?

The Global Positioning System (GPS) and other satellite navigation systems use radio signals from satellites to calculate position. To determine position, a GPS needs a direct line of sight to at least four satellites.

There are two ways to disrupt satellite navigation.

The first is jamming. This works by simply broadcasting high-intensity radio noise in the same frequency band used by the navigation satellites.

Jamming drowns out the satellite signal, like a person shouting loudly in your ear stops you hearing what someone is saying on the other side of the room. This appears to be what happened in Bulgaria.

The second way to interfere with satellite navigation is called spoofing, and it’s a little more elegant. Spoofing involves sending radio signals that pretend to be coming from the navigation satellites.

Where jamming stops the satellite navigation system from producing any location, spoofing tricks it into giving a false location – with potentially catastrophic results.

Are jamming and spoofing becoming more common?

Jamming and spoofing do appear to be growing more common, especially in conflict zones in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

A clandestine Russian base near the Polish border is reportedly responsible for satnav interference in the Baltic region.

Ships in the Red Sea report frequent interference, likely from Houthi rebels in Yemen.

These increasingly common incidents highlight how vulnerable our reliance on satellite navigation makes us.

What can be done about interference?

The best response to interference is to have backup navigation options in place. The US-run GPS is the best known and most commonly used satellite navigation system, but there are others.

The EU runs a parallel system called Galileo, while Russia has one called GLONASS and China operates its own BeiDou satellites.

Each of these systems operates using slightly different radio frequencies. Some navigation systems can tune in to more than one set of satellites – so even if one is jammed, others may be available.

Galileo also has a “safety of life” feature, which allows users to detect spoofing. Australia’s in-development SouthPAN system will also offer a similar feature.

Another common feature of navigation systems is inertial sensing. This relies on sensors such as gyroscopes and barometers to directly detect movement and calculate position.

Most car navigation systems use inertial sensors to track location in cities or tunnels where there is no direct line of sight to satellites. Inertial sensing works well for short periods of time, but quickly becomes inaccurate and needs to be recalibrated by checking in with satellite systems.

Many researchers around the world are trying to develop new alternatives to satellite navigation using extremely precise sensors. One recent development uses tiny fluctuations in Earth’s magnetic field to detect position, for example.

Read more:
Quantum navigation could transform how we travel. So what is it, and how does it work?

Should you be worried about flying?

Everyday air passengers have no need to worry about jamming or spoofing. For one thing, it’s very rare – especially outside conflict zones.

For another, the aviation industry is highly regulated and extremely safe. Even where satellite navigation doesn’t work, there are backup options.

What all of us can take away from this latest incident is how dependent we have become on satellite navigation. What matters is that we have a diverse range of systems so we are not dependent on just one.

Lucia McCallum does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Russia’s GPS interference: do I need to worry when flying? – https://theconversation.com/russias-gps-interference-do-i-need-to-worry-when-flying-264334

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

The government will keep the permanent migration level for 2025-26 at 185,000, the same level as the previous financial year.

Immigration Minister Tony Burke announced the figure amid a fresh divisive debate about immigration, intensified by the weekend marches calling for lower numbers.

Neo-Nazis were prominent, especially in Melbourne, while on Tuesday self-identifying Neo-Nazi Thomas Sewell interrupted a news conference by Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan.

Burke said the announcement followed consultation with the states and territories which “recommended maintaining the size and composition of the program, with a focus on skilled migration”.

This figure is distinct from Net Overseas Migration (NOM), the overall measure that includes students and temporary workers. The NOM jumped dramatically after the end of COVID, and the government has been actively reducing it, including by limits on overseas students.

The NOM peaked at 538,000 in 2022-23. For the 12 months to December 31 2024, the NOM was 341,000. That was 37% down compared to the peak.

For the December quarter 2024, the NOM was 68,000. This was the lowest December quarter since December 2021 when border restrictions were lifted.

Student NOM arrivals in the December quarter 2024 (22,000) were 10,000 fewer than the December quarter 2023 (32,000) and have fallen below pre-pandemic levels.

In caucus the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he was shocked to see people at the rallies openly in uniform.

But he made it clear that not all who turned up at the marches were extremists.

“We need to make sure we give people space to move away and not push them further down that rabbit hole,” he said.

“A lot of these fears are being reinforced online, and we have challenges with polarisation.”

He said he would be meeting during the day with leaders within the Islamic community, and stressed how important it was for everybody to be reaching out to different communities.

The government is about to release the report from the envoy to combat Islamopbobia, Aftab Malik An earlier report came from the envoy to fight antisemitism, Jillian Segal; it received a mixed reception and the government is yet to give its response to her recommendations.

Meanwhile. the opposition has decided to press for a very brief Senate inquiry into the government’s agreement with Nauru to send the large cohort of former immigration detainees there.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Albanese government sets unchanged 185,000 intake under permanent migration program – https://theconversation.com/albanese-government-sets-unchanged-185-000-intake-under-permanent-migration-program-263910

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Haswell, Professor of Health, Safety and Environment, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology

Environment groups have called for federal intervention following revelations an LNG export hub in Darwin has emitted large volumes of methane from an LNG storage tank since 2006.

The ABC on Monday revealed years of failures to address the leak. State and federal authorities reportedly approved Santos’ controversial 25-year Barossa offshore gas project without requiring the leak to be repaired or replaced.

The incident adds to serious doubts about whether Australia can meet its commitment to reduce emissions of methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas.

The vital pledge will only be met if governments and industry prioritise climate action and human health over profits.

What happened in Darwin?

The Darwin case demonstrates dangers of relying on industry to assess and manage risks to the climate and human health.

The leak involved an enormous above-ground tank which contained highly processed methane derived from LNG (liquified natural gas).

According to the ABC, the leak was caused by a design flaw. The reports said the tank’s original owner, ConocoPhillips, discovered the leak in 2006 and reported it to the Northern Territory’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), describing the emissions as “minute”. The tank held gas for the next 18 years.

Two measurements using drone technology, in 2019 and 2020, reportedly indicated the leak was bigger than initially thought – up to 184 kilograms of methane was leaking per hour. This was not reported to the EPA until months later, according to the ABC.

Gas giant Santos now operates the tank, which is now reportedly empty. But it’s set to be filled again, as part of Santos’ Barossa gas project.

The ABC says state and federal regulators have not forced Santos to repair or replace the tank, adding:

They and the company say the leak is stable, and poses a moderate climate risk but no immediate threat to the public or the environment.

Santos told the ABC regulatory approvals and an ongoing monitoring program were in place, and the company reports its greenhouse gas emissions annually.

Methane: a major climate culprit

Methane is a dangerous greenhouse gas which drives about 30% of global warming. While it does not last in the atmosphere as long as carbon dioxide, its ability to trap heat is potent. In fact, methane is about 86 times more harmful than carbon dioxide (CO₂) in global warming terms, when measured over two decades.

Aside from the harms caused by escaped methane, the leak also represents an enormous waste of a substance produced at a very high cost to the climate. Natural gas extracted from the ground is transported to processing plants and liquified for export, by cooling it to about -160°C. This is an extremely energy-intensive process which itself is powered by natural gas and creates substantial greenhouse gas emissions.

Methane reduction is considered a crucial step towards averting a climate disaster. The International Energy Agency says methane abatement from oil and gas operations offers some of the world’s best opportunities to cut emissions – was also likely to give companies a commercial advantage.

In 2022, Australia signed the Global Methane Pledge, a non-binding commitment to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030. Australia’s energy producers also claim they are committed to reducing methane emissions in Australia.

The Darwin methane leak reveals a host of problems with gas regulation in Australia – including a lack of public transparency issues with the methods used to quantify leaks. These problems undermine industry and government pledges to reduce emissions.

A health time bomb

Bushfires and backburning already pollute the air around Darwin.

What’s more, the neighbouring Inpex LNG plant in Darwin has also consistently released huge amounts of highly toxic substances including hydrogen sulphide, nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds.

Methane adds to the problem. It reacts with other chemicals in the atmosphere to form a dangerous air pollutant known as “ground-level ozone”.

Research has found each year, ground-level ozone contributes to up to 1.4 million deaths globally, from respiratory and cardiovascular disease.

Tropical areas immediately adjacent to cities, such as Darwin’s outer suburbs, are most at risk from such pollution.

Environment Centre NT has also expressed fears the leaking methane presents an explosion risk.

A challenge exposed

The problem of methane emissions is not confined to gas projects. For example, research earlier this year showed methane emissions from an open-cut coal mine in Queensland were up to eight times higher than reported annually by the operator.

And the problem is not confined to Darwin. Methane-emitting fossil fuel projects are proliferating across Australia. Recent approvals include expansion of Woodside’s Northwest Shelf gas project and numerous coal mines.

What’s more, Australia does a poor job of measuring and reporting methane emissions.

Australian governments and their agencies must get serious about acting on climate change. This includes efforts to rapidly curb methane emissions – while also dramatically cutting CO₂ emissions.

No industry in the world carries more power to secure the planet’s future than the fossil fuel operators. Together, industry and governments must stop fuelling our demise.

Melissa Haswell has received grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, National Suicide Prevention Strategy, Australian Health Ministers Priority Driven Research, Department of Families, Communities and Indigenous Affairs, CRC for Aboriginal Health and Queensland Department of Environment and Science and Queensland Health.

She is affiliated with Doctors for the Environment Australia (Honorary Member), the Climate and Health Alliance, the Public Health Association Australia, Psychology for a Safe Climate and the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology. Melissa also supports Northside Community Voices and Land for Wildlife in her local region.

– ref. Long-hidden methane leak in Darwin raises fresh doubts over Australia’s climate action – https://theconversation.com/long-hidden-methane-leak-in-darwin-raises-fresh-doubts-over-australias-climate-action-264260

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Hall, Professor of International Relations, Griffith University

Just months into President Donald Trump’s second term in office, one of the United States’ most important strategic partnerships is in crisis.

Relations between the US and India are at their lowest ebb in a quarter of a century. Things are so bad that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has reportedly refused to accept calls from Trump for more than two months.

In recent days, Trump labelled trade ties with India a “totally one-sided disaster” and a report emerged that he is no longer planning to visit India later this year for a summit of the Quad partners (India, the US, Australia and Japan).

So bad, so quickly

Things were not meant to happen this way. Many in New Delhi were delighted when Trump won the election last year. Modi congratulated his “friend” on X, along with pictures of the two embracing and holding hands.

India’s foreign minister, S. Jaishankar, told journalists that while other countries might be “nervous” about Trump’s return, India was not.

Feeling confident, Modi went to Washington to meet Trump days after his return to office. The encounter did not go well.

On the eve of the meeting, Modi was embarrassed by distressing images of Indian nationals, handcuffed and shackled, being deported from the US on a military aircraft.

In the Oval Office, he promised to buy more US arms, oil and gas, and asked that Trump not impose punitive tariffs on India. Modi failed to get that commitment.

A few weeks later, Trump announced India would be hit with a 27% tariff – far higher than the 10% imposed on China – unless it could negotiate something better.

Crisis in Kashmir

Begrudgingly, New Delhi began to talk trade. US Vice President JD Vance visited India in late April and both sides made positive noises about a deal. But while Vance was in town, India was engulfed in a new crisis.

On April 22, terrorists killed 26 people – mostly Hindu tourists – in Kashmir, long the site of simmering conflict between India and Pakistan. The Modi government pledged to respond with force, as it had done in the past after similar incidents.

On May 7, India bombed what it claimed were militant camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. A rapidly escalating, unpredictable conflict followed, as both sides used drones and missiles to attack one another.

Alarmed, governments around the world urged the two nuclear-armed states to end hostilities before matters got out of control. Early in the morning on May 10, they did, and agreed to a ceasefire.

Trump anoints himself peacemaker

Before either the Indian or Pakistani governments had a chance to say anything, Trump stepped in to take credit.

On social media, he announced both sides had agreed a deal. The next day he claimed they would soon sit down with him as mediator and find a solution to the Kashmir conflict.

Islamabad was jubilant at this outcome. New Delhi, meanwhile, was furious.

India’s longstanding view is that the Kashmir dispute must be settled bilaterally, without third-party involvement. The US has accepted this position for more than 20 years. Now it appeared Trump was taking a different view.

This put Modi in a bind. Keen to maintain a mutually beneficial partnership and avoid punitive tariffs, he did not wish to upset Trump.

But he could not acknowledge Trump’s claims without setting aside a fundamental principle of Indian policy. So, Modi called Washington and explained he would not accept mediation over Kashmir.

The final straw

Meanwhile, Pakistan saw an opportunity to win favour in Washington and drive a wedge between the US and India.

Recognising that Trump covets a Nobel Peace Prize, Islamabad nominated him for his supposed role in ending the conflict.

Enthused, Trump called Modi on June 17 and asked him to do the same. Worse still, Trump requested Modi stop in Washington on the way back from the G7 summit in Canada, and meet with Pakistan’s military chief, Asim Munir.

According to a recent report, that was the final straw for Modi. He flatly refused both requests. The two men reportedly haven’t spoken since.

Piqued, Trump responded by punishing India for continuing to buy Russian oil by lifting its tariff rate to 50% and postponing trade talks.

New Delhi’s dilemma

Trump’s actions have ordinary Indians seething and demanding action, but the Modi government does not have good options.

Giving in to coercion would make Modi – dubbed by political opponents “Narender Surrender” – look weak. Yet, no other major power can offer India what it needs in terms of markets, investment, technology, weapons and diplomatic support.

With US-India relations strained, New Delhi has been working hard to stabilise its relationship with China, which has been tense since bloody border clashes between the two in 2020.

Modi went to China for the first time in seven years on August 31 to further that aim, shaking hands with President Xi Jinping. But although Xi emphasised the need for amicable ties – he said the “elephant and dragon should dance together” – there is little trust between India and China at present.

Modi has more faith in Russia. In China, Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly spoke for nearly an hour in Putin’s limousine. And Modi will host the Russian leader for more talks in India later this year. However, Russia remains a pariah in Europe, with limited means to help.

Other countries, like Japan, where Modi stopped off on his way to China, could also help India navigate the current crisis. But they do not have the clout to resolve it.

Unless Modi can find a way to win Trump back, India’s next few years could be very difficult.

Ian Hall has received funding from the Australian Research Council, Department of Defence, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. He is an honorary Academic Fellow of the Australia India Institute.

– ref. Donald Trump was once India’s best friend. How did it all go wrong? – https://theconversation.com/donald-trump-was-once-indias-best-friend-how-did-it-all-go-wrong-264272

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

If there was any doubt about neo-Nazi leader Thomas Sewell’s racist and anti-democratic attitudes, they were dispelled on the morning of September 2 when he gatecrashed a press conference by Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan and Treasurer Jaclyn Symes. In disrupting the conference, Sewell yelled that Australians did not have the right to protest and made the false claim that 50,000 protesters attended the “March for Australia” rally in Melbourne over the weekend.

The press conference was abandoned and Allan subsequently put out a statement saying she was unharmed and undeterred. She added:

But this isn’t about me. It’s about all the other people in the community who Nazis target – like multicultural people, LGBTIQA+ people, First Peoples, and Jews.

The symbolism of Sewell’s actions went well beyond the disruption of a press conference. It was an attempt to insert a neo-Nazi presence into the democratic process, and served to underline what was really behind the weekend’s events.

Media misjudgments

There were omissions and misjudgments in the media’s coverage of last weekend’s so-called anti-immigration rallies in eight Australian capital cities, leaving an unintentionally sanitised account of what occurred.

The main misjudgment was to persist in using the organisers’ description of the rallies as “March for Australia” and “anti-immigration” after it had become obvious the emotional dynamo behind them was racism.

It is true that they were in part anti-immigration, and it was clear from the coverage that some, perhaps most, people joined in because they were genuinely opposed to immigration for reasons not connected with race, but to do with issues such as housing.

But the fact is that the leadership of the Melbourne rally was provided by the National Socialist Network, a neo-Nazi organisation, and it became clear as events unfolded, especially in Melbourne and Sydney, that the terms “anti-immigration” and “March for Australia” were merely a smokescreen.

It became even clearer when a phalanx of neo-Nazis attacked an Indigenous protest site called Camp Sovereignty in Kings Domain, Melbourne. That had nothing to do with immigration: it was all about racism.

It also became clear when the main speaker at the Melbourne rally was Sewell. As The Age and Sydney Morning Herald’s Michael Bachelard reported:

[…] to the extent there was any sign of organisation among the grab-bag of grievances ranging over the streets of Melbourne’s CBD, it was the National Socialist Network that provided it.

It was a similar story in Sydney, where Joel Davis, a leader in the National Socialist Network who has openly praised Adolf Hitler, addressed the rally there.

However, by adopting the ambiguous title “March for Australia” and claiming a focus on immigration, the organisers masked the racist impulse driving them. Racism is a defining characteristic of Nazism. The neo-Nazis took a leading role. It follows that these were primarily racist rallies.

There were sound reasons for the media to suspect their true nature, reasons grounded in good reporting prior to the event.

On August 29, the Sydney Morning Herald published a story seeking to establish who was behind them. A Facebook group had popped up on August 9, but when the Herald
asked who was behind it, a spokesperson who would not be identified said there was no “overall organiser” but “a number of people” providing logistical and social media support.

Evasive, yes, but the racist nature of the enterprise was clear.

The Herald also reported that “Bec Freedom”, the online pseudonym for a woman who claimed to have lodged the protest application form with NSW Police, was heard on a livestream on August 11 instructing march promoters to use messaging about protecting Australian heritage, which she said meant “white heritage”.

That is racist by definition. The organisers, whose unwillingness to be identified should have added to the suspicion, disclaimed connections with the National Socialist Network. So they now have to explain how it was that the neo-Nazis took over the Melbourne rally and provided principal speakers both there and in Sydney.

Moreover, the organisers drew on the rhetoric of the “great replacement theory” in a flyer that singled out Indian immigrants, claiming that the reason for increased Indian migration to Australia is “replacement, plain and simple”.

This theory asserts that some Western elites are conspiring to replace white Americans and Europeans with people of non-European descent, particularly Asians and Africans.

It was invoked by the Australian white-supremacist terrorist Brenton Harrison Tarrant, who massacred 51 Muslims at prayer in Christchurch in 2019, and by Anders Breivik, who massacred 69 young people in Norway in 2011.

The failure to draw attention to this connection was another omission in the coverage of the weekend’s violence.

And a third was the failure to point out the contrast between the scale and orderliness of the huge pro-Palestine marches of August 3 2025, which attracted largely peaceful crowds estimated at 100,000 in Sydney and 25,000 in Melbourne, compared with the disorder generated by crowds estimated 15,000 in Sydney and 9,000, including 3,000 counter-protesters, in Melbourne last weekend.

Calling the rallies for what they are

Having said that, the focus of last weekend’s news coverage was rightly on what happened on the streets, and in that respect the coverage was comprehensive and, so far as it was possible to tell, accurate and impartial. The language used was proportional to the events and properly focused on the violence, which was a clear and present danger to public safety.

However, the way the media name things matters, and in this respect there was enough evidence to call the rallies for what they were, rather than what the evasive and shadowy organisers said they were.

Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Neo-Nazis and racist rallies: why it’s important the Australian media call them for what they are – https://theconversation.com/neo-nazis-and-racist-rallies-why-its-important-the-australian-media-call-them-for-what-they-are-264329

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Associate Professor, School of Medical Science & Sydney Infectious Diseases Institute; Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney

Mosquito bites are annoying. They can also have deadly consequences. So what diseases do mosquitoes in Australia carry?

And with warmer weather on its way and rain expected to continue, how can you prepare for the coming mosquito season?

Mosquitoes are deadliest animal

Mosquitoes kill more people than any other animal. Worldwide, more than half a million people die each year from mosquito bites that transmit malaria parasites.

Australia is fortunate to be free of major outbreaks of malaria, though occasional cases do occur.

The most common mosquito-borne disease in Australia is caused by Ross River virus. Around 5,000 cases are reported each year and, while never fatal, the illness can be severely debilitating. Symptoms include fever, rash, joint pain and fatigue.

Murray Valley encephalitis virus is responsible for very rare but potentially fatal disease. It’s detected most years in northern Australia.

There has been a resurgence of the virus in southeastern parts of Australia following flooding in recent years. Mosquitoes pick up the virus from waterbirds throughout the Murray Darling Basin before they pass on the pathogen to people. Mosquito and waterbird populations both boom after flooding.

Mosquitoes in some coastal areas of Victoria can also pass on the flesh-eating bacteria that can cause Buruli ulcer.

What about Japanese encephalitis?

Japanese encephalitis virus can cause fever, headaches, vomiting and, in rare cases, death.

Over the summer of 2021-22, there were 45 cases of Japanese encephalitis in southeastern Australia. This virus was never expected to spread so widely. In some parts of Australia, people died due to mosquito bites for the first time in around 50 years.

Scientists and health authorities thought Japanese encephalitis virus would transmit in a similar way to the closely related Murray Valley encephalitis virus, with outbreaks typically occurring after flooding that provided ideal conditions for both mosquitoes and the waterbirds carrying the virus.

But we now know pigs – especially feral pigs – are in the mix too, along with a range of other animals.

With gaps in our understanding of what drives local transmission, predictions of Japanese encephalitis activity are now proving to be less reliable. This makes it hard to work out the threat it may pose this summer.

Last summer, despite the lack of any substantial rainfall, the virus turned up even though mosquito (and waterbird) populations were generally low.

The virus also wasn’t limited to those areas where we’d expect to see it. There is growing evidence it’s made its way to the east coast, with the virus detected in the suburbs of Brisbane.

How will the weather impact mosquitoes this season?

Like all insects, mosquitoes thrive in warmer weather. But they also need water.

It doesn’t really matter if it’s a “wet” or “dry” summer, mosquitoes are always active. But sometimes there are more – lots more.

In most parts of Australia, there is currently no shortage of water. Some regions have had record rainfall this winter, with more on the way.

The Bureau of Meteorology is predicting above-average rainfall through to the end of the year. Once the weather warms up, it could be a “buzzy” start to mosquito season.

This doesn’t mean outbreaks of mosquito-borne disease are inevitable. But we need to be alert to the risks and how best to protect ourselves and family.

Monitoring mozzies

More rain means a greater risk of mosquito-borne disease. But outbreaks aren’t easy to predict, so surveillance is critical.

Australian state and territory health authorities undertake monitoring of mosquitoes and the pathogens they carry each year. The objective is to provide an early warning of elevated risk of mosquito-borne diseases. This may be due to increased mosquito activity or the detection of mosquito-borne pathogens.

Given the uncertainty around Japanese encephalitis, it’s also important to monitor locations where the virus has not yet been detected.

How to stay safe this spring and summer

There’s a lot you can do to protect yourself and family from mosquito bites and mosquito-borne disease.

A vaccine is available for those at risk of Japanese encephalitis. See your local health professional for advice on accessing the vaccine.

But there aren’t vaccines for the other local mosquito-borne diseases. Nor are there any specific treatments for these diseases. So preventing mosquito bites is the best way to protect yourself.

If you’re outdoors when mosquitoes are active, cover up with long pants, a long-sleeved shirt and covered shoes. Apply an insect repellent containing diethyltoluamide, picaridin, or oil of lemon eucalyptus to all exposed skin.

Skip the stickers, patches and wristbands, as the evidence shows they aren’t a reliable way to prevent bites.

Keep your property free of mosquito breeding grounds, too. Mosquitoes can lay eggs in any container that fills with water: a plant saucer, a bird bath, discarded plastic buckets, bottles or tins. Tip them out each week, cover them up or throw them away.

Cameron Webb and the Department of Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology and University of Sydney, have been engaged by a wide range of insect repellent and insecticide manufacturers to provide testing of products and provide expert advice on medically important arthropods, including mosquitoes. Cameron has also received funding from local, state and federal agencies to undertake research into various aspects of mosquito and mosquito-borne disease management.

– ref. A warm, wet spring means more mozzies. How to protect yourself from the diseases they spread – https://theconversation.com/a-warm-wet-spring-means-more-mozzies-how-to-protect-yourself-from-the-diseases-they-spread-263340

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Hurley, Lecturer in Criminology, police and policing, Dept of Security Studies & Criminology, Macquarie University, Macquarie University

From the time accused police killer Dezi Freeman escaped into bushland heavily armed, Victoria’s Special Operations Group and the Negotiation Unit would have drawn up surrender plan scenarios if he decided to give himself up.

I was a former police hostage negotiator for eight years – this is how and why surrender plans are used in these situations.

What is a surrender plan?

Surrender plans are a very simple set of instructions given to the person wanted by police. They are easily understandable and remembered and can be carried out with minimal thinking.

While surrender plans are drawn up immediately in a hostage or a wanted search like this, they are rarely made public.

Making a surrender plan public too soon may alert criminals and those who support them what police are thinking.

Police will have Freeman’s mobile phone number and will have been trying to contact him since he fled into bushland.

While mobile signals may be patchy, or his phone may have run out of battery, there’s still a chance Freeman is online and following the news.

The aim of the surrender plan is to ensure the alleged offender knows what to expect so they and police negotiators are not surprised during this process.

Negotiators want an alleged offender fully compliant during their surrender, to control their every movement.

To get this control, negotiators will say:

You will come out with your hands raised. Do not drop them. You will take five steps forward and stop. Do you understand that?

Once the alleged offender says “yes”, the negotiator knows several things about them immediately:

• they can hear what police are saying, so their audio functioning is good
• they can see if the offender has any physical injuries that might prevent them following some instructions
• they can gauge through the wanted person’s speech and body coordination if they have the mental capacity to understand what is being said and carry out the instructions.

The negotiator will then ask them to repeat the instructions back so everyone involved is fully aware of what is expected.

The negotiator will then tell the alleged offender if they stray outside of the instructions, it may be considered a threat and police might take alternative actions.

Again, the negotiator will ask the wanted person if they understand this and have this repeated to them.

The negotiator will tell the wanted person to take five steps and on the fifth step to stop.

The negotiator will then issue another set of simple instructions and again ask the offender if they understand and to repeat them back.

This will be repeated until the alleged offender is laying face down and handcuffed.

Read more:
Treacherous terrain: the search for alleged police killer Dezi Freeman

Why keeping things simple is crucial

This repetitive, simple, two-way conversation is important to reduce any misunderstanding](https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001528) between the wanted person and the negotiator about what is expected.

It also helps negotiators constantly assess the mental and physical condition of the alleged offender.

The surrender will not be rushed because the wanted person will be nervous and physically and mentally exhausted.

In the case of Freeman, his exposure to challenging weather, mountainous terrain and likely lack of food and water will have fatigued him.

He may also be fatigued mentally as he realises the ordeal has come to an end.

All these physical and psychological factors may affect his judgement.

The aim of a surrender plan

The purpose of a surrender plan is to ensure the safety of the wanted person. Police want to get them before a court to hold them to account, and also allow the victims’ families to seek explanations and possibly some form of closure.

During a surrender, police will be following the letter of the law and their training to ensure they cannot be criticised in court, opening a possible opportunity for an appeal based on the arrest.

The Victorian police commissioner’s appeal to surrender, echoed by Freeman’s wife, are intentional.

It is to send a message to Freeman that despite what he has allegedly done, he has options open to him to bring this to peaceful end.

Police do not want him to believe the only option is to fight his way out.

The appeal is also to send a message to others who might be considering assisting him with food or shelter.

This is to reduce possible lines of inquiries in trying to find Freeman. It can save time and resources and prevent police from being unnecessarily distracted by false or misleading sightings.

What happened at Porepunkah is uncommon in Australia, with only two similar events occurring in the past 13 years.

In 2012, convicted killer Malcolm Naden – who also shot a police officer – was arrested after one of the biggest manhunts in New South Wales history. He is now serving a life sentence.

Ten years later in Wieambilla, Queensland, Stacey, Gareth and Nathaniel Train ambushed and killed two police officers and a neighbour before being gunned down by Queensland police.

The surrender plan is an attempt from police to reassure Freeman they are not seeking revenge and there may be a way to bring this search to a close without further violence.

Vincent Hurley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. I’m a former hostage negotiator. Here’s why police offered a surrender plan to fugitive Dezi Freeman – https://theconversation.com/im-a-former-hostage-negotiator-heres-why-police-offered-a-surrender-plan-to-fugitive-dezi-freeman-264270

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Francesco Bailo, Lecturer in Data Analytics in the Social Sciences, University of Sydney

Digital platforms have become the essential infrastructure of modern life. They power everything from our group chats to businesses, shopping, election campaigns and emergency coordination. They instantly connect us and continuously feed us information.

Yet although they broker information everywhere, the power of digital platforms remains largely invisible.

They control content and harvest information from behind a curtain, and avoid accountability by claiming they’re neutral. Section 230, the United States law that states online platforms can’t be treated as publishers, helps them avoid legal responsibility for the content they host.

In a new study published in Political Communication with Francesco Marolla, Marilù Miotto and Giovanni Cassani, we look behind the curtain into how this power works and what it means for democratic politics.

What is a digital platform, exactly?

When we think about digital platforms, we usually think about the apps and services we use every day, such as Google, Instagram or TikTok.

Yet digital platforms should be thought of as an ecosystem dominated by a small number of big tech companies. Governments have their own platforms in this ecosystem, such as GOV.UK or Australia’s myGov. But they still depend on private platforms – app stores, social media apps, payment systems and cloud services – to reach their citizens. The same is true for political parties and civic groups.

In our paper, we developed and tested a theory for understanding the political power of platforms.

Three forms of power

We studied Italy’s anti-establishment party, the Five Star Movement, using a large dataset of user interactions spanning five digital platforms.

The movement emerged in 2005 from its founder’s blog and, in its early years, used multiple platforms to enable direct participation. This makes it an ideal case study for understanding how platforms shape power within political organisations.

Building on previous theories, we have revealed how three critical forms of power emerge in the platform ecosystem.

Political actors either surrender or compete unequally for these powers with the owners and administrators of platforms.

Network-making power represents the ability to determine network shape and boundaries. It controls how users connect and which groups they can form, shaping their behaviour.

Networked power represents direct communication influence within networks, controlling which way the information flows and what people see.

System administration power controls access and the rules users must follow within the platform – from using pseudonyms instead of real names to the length of posts they can publish. It determines who can participate in digital political spaces and how.

Here’s how these powers play out

Platforms maintain complete control over system administration power, similar to how countries have sovereignty within their territories. Users give up control of this power when they participate in the platform ecosystem.

Platforms don’t like to exercise this power, but sometimes they do. We saw this with the systematic deplatformisation of far-right social media app Gab in 2018 or when US President Donald Trump’s social media accounts were locked in 2021 after January 6 violence on Capitol Hill.

By contrast, platform users can exercise some network-making and networked powers. For example, party leaders can mobilise supporters through viral posts and livestreams, while regular members organise local meetups and coordinate protests through online groups and events.

Platforms exercise network-making power through surveillance, control and modification of behaviours. They use algorithms and data analysis to shape user behaviours at scale, which determines how networks form and evolve. Facebook has used this power to manipulate users’ emotions and influence voting behaviour.

At the networked power level, platforms wield curation powers: they filter, amplify, or suppress content according to their goals. They decide which content ranks at the top of your news feed, and what gets ranked down or even shadowbanned.

Constrained, yet powerful

If platform owners have so much power over users, why do 96% of political parties across 48 countries still use them?

Because even under these constraints, political leaders, parties and grassroots organisations can use platforms for essential communication – and achieve their goals.

Political leaders can directly use platforms to promote collective action among their followers. This is the power Trump exercised when he tweeted “Be there, will be wild!” in December 2020 in reference to what became the Capitol Hill riots.

Meanwhile, grassroots activism can grow on platforms through “connective action”. This means people loosely coordinate online to form self-organised protest networks – examples of this are the Arab spring, the indignados in Spain and the #MeToo movement.

Political turbulence

Our findings reveal a critical issue in contemporary politics. Platforms concentrate unprecedented communication power, yet political actors remain dependent on these very systems for democratic participation.

This asymmetrical power structure has serious implications. Even when political organisations successfully use digital platforms – such as for reaching their constituents – they do so under the rules platforms have imposed.

Democratic discussion increasingly happens online, but platforms maintain full control over these digital spaces. A change in ownership or policies can abruptly disband established political networks. It can also reconfigure conversations completely.

The fragmentation of audiences across platforms creates additional problems.
Our work and others shows users tend to cluster within single platforms rather than engaging across multiple spaces. This leads to distinct communities with their own communication norms and discussion topics.

This fragmentation can both strengthen and weaken political organisations. While it allows for diverse participation, it also makes it difficult to maintain consistent messaging.

All this leads to ongoing “political turbulence” where people’s attention and leadership credibility rises and falls dramatically.

Behind the scenes, digital platforms fragment public discourse while amplifying cynicism, distrust and rage-driven engagement. Their power can be repurposed to align with different goals: for financial gains, for political dominance, or for both.

Francesco Bailo have received funding from the Facebook (now Meta) and the Australian Department of Defence.

– ref. Digital platforms are now the ultimate political power brokers, with consequences for democracy – https://theconversation.com/digital-platforms-are-now-the-ultimate-political-power-brokers-with-consequences-for-democracy-263537

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Iftekhar Ahmed, Associate Professor in Construction Management/Disaster Resilience, University of Newcastle

The death toll following the recent earthquake in Afghanistan continues to rise. Taliban-led health authorities now say at least 800 people have been killed and 2,000 injured.

The earthquake struck just before midnight local time on Sunday in a mountainous region near the city of Jalalabad, along the eastern border with Pakistan. It was of a relatively low 6.0 magnitude. But its epicentre was shallow at 8km underground, resulting in strong shaking on the surface and a series of aftershocks.

Most of the dead and injured were sleeping indoors at the time of the earthquake, and were crushed by collapsing buildings. Because of the remoteness of the affected areas, and also blockage of road networks from landslides caused by the earthquake, the exact death toll may take a long time to find out.

A region prone to earthquakes

The Himalaya and Hindu Kush mountains, and their foothills, where the impacted area in Afghanistan is located, are seismically active because of the ongoing friction between the Eurasian and Indian tectonic plates.

This has led to some of the most devastating earthquakes in the region such as the 2015 Gorkha earthquake in Nepal and 2005 Kashmir earthquake in Pakistan.

Afghanistan also has its fair share of earthquakes, especially in the currently impacted region. In October 2023 an earthquake here killed more than 1,500 people. The previous year, more than 1,000 people were killed by another earthquake.

The 2011 earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand, was of a similar magnitude and occurred at a shallower depth as the most recent one in Afghanistan. Yet, even though it impacted a built-up city, only 185 people died.

The hundreds of deaths in scattered rural hamlets in Afghanistan present a sharp contrast.

Earthquakes don’t kill people, buildings do

An oft-quoted phrase, “earthquakes don’t kill people, buildings do”, is helpful to understand the factors that contribute to the high death toll of this earthquake and past ones in Afghanistan.

Rural communities in Afghanistan can’t afford sturdy and manufactured building materials. Because of this they build homes with locally available natural materials such as earth, stone and raw lumber.

Such buildings do not follow engineered designs, building codes or formal professional standards that prevent easy damage by earthquakes in wealthier countries.

A typical form of construction in Afghan rural areas is walls made of mud bricks or stone masonry. This is known as “monolithic” construction.

Such construction is unable to resist the strong side-to-side shaking caused by an earthquake. As a result, buildings easily tumble and crush people. Reports of collapsed rubble where there were once buildings are emerging widely from Afghanistan, as was also the case in previous earthquakes.

A trigger for design change

Examples from other countries in the region demonstrate a better level of earthquake-resilient building design can be achieved in similar socio-economic conditions.

After the 2005 Kashmir Earthquake in Pakistan, the government established the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority. It assisted in helping affected people build safer houses through a community-based program backed by technical guidance.

In Nepal, after the 2015 Gorkha earthquakes the government established the minimum standards of their National Building Code, that allow rules of thumb to comply with a basic level of earthquake resilience.

More than 25 years ago, Indian earthquake engineer Anand Arya pioneered his approach to reducing earthquake risk for “non-engineered” buildings. Among other techniques, this approach includes adding continuous bands in the walls, and reinforcements in the corners of a building and along doors and windows, which can provide strength to traditional masonry buildings.

These examples demonstrate that not a lot of money is always required to improve earthquake resilience. Rather, a degree of technical and institutional support can achieve safety in cost-effective ways.

Admittedly, such buildings would not be entirely earthquake-proof. But they would still impart a level of strength that can lead to less damage, and importantly, save lives.

One can hope this earthquake will be a trigger for such an initiative in Afghanistan, so a “building back better” process can assist the impacted communities to be more resilient to future earthquakes.

Iftekhar Ahmed does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why was the Afghanistan earthquake so deadly? A disaster resilience expert explains – https://theconversation.com/why-was-the-afghanistan-earthquake-so-deadly-a-disaster-resilience-expert-explains-264274

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, University of South Australia

If you’re feeling sore from a run or gym session, you might wonder whether it’s better to push through or give your body a rest.

This achy or stiff feeling in your muscles after exercise is known as “delayed onset muscle soreness” (DOMS). Soreness usually sets in within the first 12–24 hours after your exercise session, and often peaks 24–72 hours after.

In most instances, DOMS will disappear completely in three to five days. But what should you do in the meantime? Is it OK to exercise if you’re still sore? Here’s what the evidence says.

Why do muscles get sore after a workout?

When you exercise, tiny tears (also called “microtears”) occur in your muscles. Then, as your body floods the area with fluids and nutrients to repair them, it causes inflammation. This is part of the normal recovery process, and helps stimulate increases in muscle strength and size.

But inflammation also stimulates pain receptors, which makes you feel sore in the days after your workout.

How sore you feel will depend on the exercise you do. DOMS is more likely when you haven’t exercised for a while, you do a new type of exercise, or it puts a large load on your muscles (for example, weight training or running).

Basically, it’s your muscles’ response to doing something more demanding or challenging than usual.

The more often you do the same type of exercise, the less likely you are to feel sore.

Should you be sore after every workout?

Muscle soreness is completely normal, especially if you are new to exercise. But it’s not necessarily a good indicator of progress.

All it really tells us is that our body is adapting to a new form of exercise or a sudden increase in load.

It doesn’t tell us whether or not that exercise was effective at building muscle and improving fitness – especially if you’ve been exercising consistently and gradually increasing your load or frequency.

For example, someone who runs regularly is unlikely to feel sore after a single running session, but it will still improve their fitness.

Similarly, if you lift weights regularly, using heavier weights than usual will at most give you only mild DOMS. Yet each training session will still be helping you improve strength and build muscle.

So, should I exercise if I am still sore?

It depends if you’re concerned about injury or performance.

Exercising while recovering from DOMS won’t hurt you. But some evidence suggests your strength and performance may decline when you’re sore. This means you probably won’t be able to lift as much or run as fast while you have DOMS.

Some research has also shown that muscle damage can negatively affect balance. This might increase your risk of falling or even getting an injury such as a sprained ankle.

Another study found soreness can also reduce your skill performance (in this case basketball shooting accuracy). So you might notice an impact if you’re exercising with certain performance goals in mind.

What about rest days?

Taking days off for recovery in between exercise sessions doesn’t seem to make much difference for long-term progress building strength or fitness.

Research has compared training on consecutive days – for example, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday – with non-consecutive days – Monday, Wednesday, Friday.

And it doesn’t seem to make a difference.

For example, one study had two groups perform the same full-body weight training routine for seven weeks, either on three consecutive or three non-consecutive days. Both groups saw similar improvements in building muscle strength and size.

Similarly, another study compared two groups of cyclists doing the same high-intensity interval training program routine on three consecutive or three non-consecutive days. After three weeks both groups showed the same overall improvements in aerobic fitness and time trial performance.

These were relatively short-term studies. So it’s also possible that over the course of a training year, taking a rest day here and there will help maintain motivation and avoid injury.

Bottom line

While you’ll probably feel slower or stiffer, exercising with sore muscles won’t hurt you and is unlikely to hinder your training progress.

However, you might want to avoid exercises that rely on balance – such as intense jumping and landing movements – as your risk of injury could be slightly greater.

If you are really sore, there is some evidence massage or even an ice bath might help you recover, although the effect is small.

And while muscle soreness is normal, it’s still important to listen to your body. Never push through intense discomfort or pain, as this could be the sign of an injury.

You should talk to a doctor if:

• your muscles feel extremely sore and it lasts for more than seven days
• you have visible muscle bruising where the muscle is sore
• you have sharp pain.

Hunter Bennett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Should I exercise if I’m still sore from last time? – https://theconversation.com/should-i-exercise-if-im-still-sore-from-last-time-263046

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Serena Love, Honorary Research Fellow in Archaeology, The University of Queensland

In ancient Egypt, did pyramids really have booby traps? Why was treasure hidden inside? – Effie, age 8, New Plymouth, New Zealand.

When the ancient Egyptians built their giant pyramids, they wanted to keep the Pharaoh’s sacred mummy safe from thieves.

But unlike in the movies and comics – where pyramids seem to always have swinging blades, secret snakes, or sneaky poison darts – the real pyramids did not have dangerous booby traps.

Instead, the pyramid builders were very clever. They made the inside of the pyramids like a tricky maze. Imagine walking through tunnels that lead nowhere, with fake doors and dead ends.

This way, if someone tried to find the Pharaoh’s burial chamber, they could easily get lost.

These confusing passages made it very hard for thieves to reach the mummy.

Sometimes, they even put huge, heavy stones to block off passages and stop anyone from getting inside.

These stones were so big and heavy one person could never move them alone, and even groups would have a very hard time getting past.

Blocking the way with huge stone slabs was a natural barrier that made the tomb difficult to enter without special tools or many people.

Also, sometimes there were deep holes or hidden pits but these were just simple obstacles – not deadly traps. The robber would walk out the way they came in; nothing was lethal.

They might have been meant to trip up or slow down robbers, rather than seriously hurt them.

The Egyptians also wrote curses.

These were scary messages painted or carved on the walls, saying that anyone who disturbed the tomb would be cursed with bad luck or punished by the gods.

The Egyptians believed strongly in their gods and thought these curses might protect the tomb by making robbers too afraid to enter.

While these were not physical traps, the curses acted like a kind of magic protection, using fear and belief to help keep the tomb safe.

There was no magic in these curses – just words.

Why was treasure hidden inside the pyramids?

The ancient Egyptians believed that when a Pharaoh died, he would need all his personal things in the next life – food, furniture, clothes, jewellery, and especially gold.

Gold was not just used because it was valuable – ancient Egyptians believed gold was magical. Its bright yellow colour made people think of the Sun, and the Sun was linked to Ra, the supreme god who gave light and life to the world.

Gold was called “the flesh of the gods,” and using it in tombs and treasures helped connect the Pharaoh to Ra. They hoped it would help him live forever, just like the eternal Sun. By surrounding the Pharaoh with treasures, especially things made of gold, they believed he would be safe, strong and happy forever in the afterlife.

Some of these treasures were common everyday things, like beds, chairs and boxes so the Pharaoh could rest in the afterlife just like in real life.

Food and drinks, such as bread, fruits and wine, were there too, so the Pharaoh would never be hungry or thirsty.

Weapons and tools, such as daggers and chariots, were included to ensure the Pharaoh could defend himself and travel in the afterlife.

The walls were decorated with colourful paintings and writings telling stories about the Pharaoh’s life and magical spells to keep him safe.

Finally, statues of gods were put inside the tomb to bring blessings, and keep the Pharaoh strong and protected.

A serious crime

Stealing from a Pharaoh’s tomb was a very serious crime and was forbidden. Because the tombs often held many valuable things, including gold and jewels, robbers were always trying to break in to steal these treasures.

But sometimes thieves got caught robbing tombs and were punished very harshly. The punishments for stealing from a Pharaoh were often severe; robbers could be beaten, have their hands cut off, or even be put to death, because stealing from the Pharaoh was a crime against the king and the gods.

Ancient Egyptian records, like the famous Tomb Robbers Papyrus (from 1110 BCE) talk about court cases where robbers admitted to breaking into royal tombs, such as that of King Ramesses VI.

This shows us that the Egyptians worked hard to protect their sacred mummies and treasures with strong laws.

So, the Pharaoh’s sacred mummy was protected by clever tricks and scary words, not by the dangerous traps from the movies.

Anyone who tried to rob the tomb was taking a big risk because both the ancient police and the law were ready to punish them.

Serena Love does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Curious Kids: in ancient Egypt, did pyramids really have booby traps? Why was treasure hidden inside? – https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-in-ancient-egypt-did-pyramids-really-have-booby-traps-why-was-treasure-hidden-inside-262319

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Carson, Historian of Emotions and Australian Society, University of Adelaide

Gee I am lonely sweetheart, it may sound silly having so many men and cobbers around me, but when I say lonely I don’t mean lack of company, I am lonely for you, only you can fill the gap in my heart dearest, as each moment passes I seem to miss you and love you more, I shall never get used to living without you […] in fact I am sure we were meant to be together all the time.

My great-grandfather Bill Wiseman wrote this to my great-grandmother Florence in a letter dated October 20 1944.

Aside from when Bill briefly returned on leave from his service for the 2/48 Battalion of the Australian Imperial Force (AIF), he had been separated from Florence since September 1941. Bill would not permanently return to Florence and their children until his discharge from the military on November 8 1945.

It was a long time to be away from his family, and Bill often reflected on the emotional toll their separation had on him.

Loneliness is a common emotion in letters written by Australian service personnel and their loved ones. Rather than a complete physical isolation from others, this situational loneliness was characterised by the absence of a certain person: one’s partner, parents or children.

As Bill acknowledged, while he was surrounded by “cobbers”, it was Florence who he was “lonely for”.

Separations over oceans

Like other historical events that caused mass displacement and separation, the second world war fostered an almost universal sense of situational loneliness.

Emotional experiences and expressions were often dictated by real physical distance. Methods of travel and communication were significantly limited. It could take months for a letter to reach its destination.

Other circumstances influenced how separated families felt and articulated their loneliness in wartime. This could include factors such as how long they had been apart, whether personnel could return home on leave, the intensity of military campaigns which might restrict mail exchanges, and if personnel were injured or captured by enemy forces.

While letters could never completely substitute for the absent person, Australian military personnel and their loved ones recognised the importance of exchanging correspondence to ease their loneliness.

AIF Sergeant Robert Graham implored his fiancée Jane Melrose to write more regularly, as it improved his morale:

I received your ever welcomed and much needed letter yesterday and it made me feel a lot better + miles happier too. Jane whatever you do pleased write as often as you can […] I feel so depressed when mail comes in and I don’t get any from you. It doesn’t matter who I get mail from I’m still not happy unless I recognise your handwriting on the envelope.

Barbara Welbourn, a soil scientist at the University of Adelaide, wrote to her fiancé, Sergeant David Sheppard, about the “renewal” his letters provided when she was lonely:

Your [76th letter] was waiting for me last night; such a blessed end to the day + so longed for […] I am so dependent, my sweet David on your love, its constant renewal, even more wonderful by letters that I will be adrift in sad seas without them.

Women’s Auxiliary Australian Air Force Aircraftwoman Doris Plummer wrote she was “dying” for news from her husband Private Walter Plummer, who served in the Volunteer Defence Corps.

She wanted to hear about his Christmas, because as it would make her feel closer their family:

Hope you tell me everyone you saw everything you said and did. How many fish you caught, how many times you swam and missing no details. They are the little unimportant things that make me feel I am not so far away.

Patience and perseverance

While loneliness was (and still often is) perceived as a negative emotion, characterised by mental pain and absence, letter writers from the war often discussed how experiencing these uncomfortable feelings ultimately transformed their relationships for the better.

Albert Gerrard, a private in the Australian Army Medical Corps, assured Margaret James that he believed separation ultimately prepared them for marriage:

Three years have not been wasted, I think we’ve both learned a lot. I have anyway, patience, perseverance, and over + above all else, what a loyal little darling you are. It has also knocked a lot of conceit + selfishness out of me. Generally speaking, I’m better for it.

Lance Corporal George Seagrove outlined how he believed the longing he felt for his wife Marjorie made him appreciate the joy she brought him.

In one such letter, George wrote:

This parting, more than anything else, has made me realise how big you have been in my life […] It’s like a soul split in two. When I see anything I always want to rush to my pen and tell you about it. If it is something funny I can hear you laughing because I know you laugh at the same things as I do […] Every day when the mail comes my heart beats a little bit quicker and your familiar handwriting brings a big smile to my face.

Letter writers on the home and battle fronts showed a great capacity to express vulnerability by describing their loneliness.

Through their heartache and anxiety about the uncertainty of their futures, separated spouses realised their love for one another was undeniable.

Emma Carson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. It was lonely during WWII. Those at home and away coped through letters – https://theconversation.com/it-was-lonely-during-wwii-those-at-home-and-away-coped-through-letters-258577

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barbara Padalino, Associate Professor of Animal Behaviour, Husbandry and Welfare, Southern Cross University

In Australia, there are some 5 million pet cats, and several million feral cats that live outdoors and away from human care, with devastating consequences for native wildlife.

While there’s debate over just how much domestic cats harm wildlife, two-thirds of Australians support keeping cats indoors only.

An increasing number of councils around the country either have overnight or 24-hour curfews for our furry, clawed friends.

But if your cat is used to going outside unsupervised at least some of the time, is it possible to transition them to an indoor-only lifestyle? Here are the welfare questions to consider.

Do cats need outdoor access?

In 2023, the European Union adopted a scientific report on dog and cat welfare in commercial breeding establishments. This work, which I participated in, was a thorough review of the current literature and national regulations.

Based on the scientific evidence, access to outdoor space was requested for dogs, but did not become a requirement for cats in Europe. The necessity for cats to have outdoor access remains a matter of scientific debate.

Meanwhile, the Australian Veterinary Association recommends keeping pet cats contained “on their owners’ properties”:

Contained cats require an appropriate environment with enrichment that meets the cats’ physical and mental needs, allows expression of natural behaviours, promotes good health and welfare and minimises stress. This should include controlled outdoor access where possible.

On the one hand, many cat owners, particular those living in rural areas, prefer to let their cats roam free, as they believe the outdoors provides cats with exercise and allows them to engage in natural behaviours such as hunting, exploring and climbing.

But uncontrolled outdoor access has many negative impacts on the welfare of pet cats. Free-roaming cats are at a higher risk of disease and parasites, injuries or death from car accidents, accidentally ingesting toxins, unwanted pregnancies, and becoming lost.

How can I safely contain my cat?

Whether you’re moving house and can’t provide outdoor access any more, or your council is implementing a curfew on cats, you may find yourself in a situation where your outdoors-loving cat now has to be confined.

A good indoor home for a cat must have easy access to food, water and a litter tray, a safe physical environment, comfortable places to sleep or to hide, and plenty of ways to engage in play and other activities, including scratching posts and raised platforms to survey their territory from.

Hopefully, your cat already has all of these things.

Read more:
How can I keep my cat happy? 5 tips from a vet to help your feline friend live their best life

However, our pets’ experiences and attitudes are also shaped by their breed, temperament, and the environment they grow up in. A cat that’s only lived indoors in a good home is more likely to be content and happy in its confinement.

But a pet cat that’s always been allowed to wander around and suddenly isn’t allowed to do so, may end up distressed and “act out”.

One of the most common behavioural problems is soiling outside the litter tray. That’s because a cat who’s been habitually using the outdoors as a toilet may not like the litter box as much.

However, a cat may also be stressed by a change in its environment, which can increase the risk of developing a urinary tract infection. In such cases, the cat might start peeing outside the litter box, often choosing cool surfaces such as sinks or bathtubs. Because house soiling can have both medical and behavioural causes, it is always best to consult a veterinarian.

Other signs of distress can be increased aggression, or becoming depressed and spending lots of time hiding. So, if you notice any changes in your cat’s behaviour, consult your vet. They can first rule out any stress-related medical conditions and then guide you on how to best support your cat through this transition.

It’s not all or nothing

Among the many good recommendations for making your cat’s indoor environment more engaging is the use of cognitive enrichment. You can offer puzzle feeders or play hide-and-seek with your cat.

Another effective option is a clicker training program, which has been shown to provide both mental stimulation and improved welfare for cats. It involves using a small clicker device and an immediate treat to reward the animal for a desired behaviour.

With clicker training, you can teach your cat a variety of simple tasks, turning learning into a fun and rewarding activity. For example, clicker training can help your cat become more comfortable entering a pet carrier, enjoying car rides, or even walking on a leash – so you can start bringing your cat outdoors with you.

While free roaming may no longer be an option for your cat, it doesn’t mean they can’t experience any outdoor time at all.

Where possible, you could build a cat-proof fence on your yard, have a fully enclosed outdoor space (a “catio”) or even investigate virtual fencing options if they are permitted in your state. These involve a transmitter paired with a collar that makes a sound or vibrates when the cat reaches an invisible boundary.

You can also make sure your cat has a GPS tracker on their collar in case they do manage to escape.

Ultimately, the response to permanent confinement will vary among individual cats. As the owner, you are best placed to watch them for any behavioural changes and make sure their quality of life is still good.

Barbara Padalino receives funding from the European Food Safety Authority.

– ref. My cat needs to be contained indoors – how do I make sure it stays happy? – https://theconversation.com/my-cat-needs-to-be-contained-indoors-how-do-i-make-sure-it-stays-happy-263333

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Woods, Professor of Health Economics, University of Technology Sydney

Federal Aged Care Minister Sam Rae was heavily questioned in parliament yesterday for delaying the release of 83,000 new home care packages, from July 1 to November 1.

In March 2025, more than 289,000 older Australians had a home care package. But more Australians are needing these services than there are places, so the wait list continues to grow.

Reacting to widespread complaints, the Senate stepped in to conduct a short inquiry into the impact of the delay on older Australians.

Our research and submission to the Senate inquiry show the government should immediately release the additional packages. But its not yet clear whether it will do so.

Remind me, what are home care packages?

Home care packages are bundles of services that help older people with complex needs to live at home for longer.

There are four levels of funding, depending on need. Each package can include help with household tasks, but there is also an emphasis on personal and clinical care, including nursing, physiotherapy and other allied health care.

The 2021 Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety recommended the government significantly increase the number of home care packages, as it was clear older people wanted to stay at home for as long as possible.

It found in-home care can prevent the avoidable decline of older people’s health and independence, enable them to remain a part of their local community, and delay (or avoid) entry into residential aged care or hospital.

The waiting list went down. Now it’s up again

The number of people receiving a home care package increased from 128,781 at the end of 2019 to 258,374 in June 2023. During that time the government was releasing 40,000 to 50,000 packages per quarter.

This exceeded the number of people being approved for packages. So the waiting list was declining by as much as 10,000 people per quarter, reaching a low of 28,665 by June 2023.

Number of people with a home care package and waiting for a home care package

However, from mid-2023 the government reduced the release of new packages to a little over 30,000 per quarter. Meanwhile, the number of older people being approved for a package continued to grow in line with Australia’s ageing population.

As a result, waiting lists rose strongly each quarter and reached 87,597 by March 2025.

What was due to start in July?

With pressure mounting from the sector, the then-minister for aged care announced in November 2024 that a new Aged Care Act would start in July 2025.

It would include significant reform to in-home aged care, including a new Support at Home program, as well as significant reforms to residential aged care facilities and how they’re funded.

As part of the reforms, the government committed to funding an additional 83,000 home care packages in 2025–26. This was a marked increase on the 24,000 in 2024–25.

The government also committed to reducing wait times to an average of three months by 2027.

However, the start of the new Aged Care Act 2024 – and the rollout of the 83,000 additional packages – was subsequently deferred until November 1 2025. At the time, the government said the supporting regulation was not fully ready for consideration by Parliament in time to allow older people, providers and the workforce to prepare for the changes.

What has the Senate inquiry found so far?

The Senate inquiry investigating the impact on older Australians is due to report on September 15.

In a submission to the inquiry, the former Inspector-General of Aged Care said the care wait list continued to spiral upwards and was forecast to exceed 102,000 by the end of October 2025.

In evidence to the inquiry on Friday, the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing confirmed that when an existing package became vacant it was re-released to a new client. However, there had been no increase in the overall number of packages since the beginning of July.

The department also advised that at the end of July 121,596 people were waiting for an assessment and more than 87,000 have been assessed but have not received their package.

While the wait list grows, the time that older Australians are having to wait is getting longer. The department’s submission reported that older people assessed as medium priority have an estimated wait time, across all packages, of 9–12 months.

But the government’s data refers only to the time taken between being assessed for home care and being assigned a package. Older people also have to wait another month or more, on average, between applying to be assessed and having that assessment. Then there is, on average, another month between being assigned a package and having the first service actually delivered.

Greater transparency about how long older people actually have to wait would help hold the government to account.

There are longer-term issues yet to be addressed

The release of some of the 83,000 packages over the next two months would make a short-term dent in the current wait list, although this gain will largely disappear when some of the backlog of 120,000 people waiting to be assessed is finally tackled.

But adding more packages doesn’t go far enough to address the long-term aged care structural issues facing older people and taxpayers.

The growing demand for in-home aged care is being driven by the influx of Baby Boomers over the next two decades (the oldest are currently aged 79) and by increases in chronic illnesses, such as those arising from greater obesity.

These drivers will place growing stress on the ability of constrained government budgets to increase the supply of services.

The availability of a skilled and committed workforce to deliver the services is yet another challenge which is economy-wide and needs to be addressed if the system is to meet the rising demands for home-based care.

Michael Woods receives funding from government agencies to conduct research on aged care policy.

Jin Sug Yang, Louise Malady, and Nelson Ma do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Ageing Australians are waiting too long for home care packages. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/ageing-australians-are-waiting-too-long-for-home-care-packages-heres-why-264125

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stacey Pizzino, Lecturer, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland

On September 2, 1945, the second world war ended when Japan officially surrendered. Today, on the 80th anniversary, the physical legacy of the conflict remains etched into land and sea.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Pacific. There, fierce battles left behind sunken warships, aircraft and unexploded bombs. These remnants are not only historical artefacts but toxic time capsules.

They leak fuel, heavy metals and other hazardous substances into fragile ecosystems, threatening biodiversity and, potentially, human health.

This problem is a reminder of the enduring environmental harms of conflict. Toxic remnants of war can damage ecosystems and communities long after the fighting stops.

The Pacific as a dumping ground

World War II in the Pacific involved four years of conflict between Japan and Allied forces. The war began in the region in December 1941 when Japan attacked a United States naval base at Pearl Harbour, Hawaii.

The Pacific conflict included the Battle of the Coral Sea, the Battle of Midway and the Guadalcanal campaign in the Solomon Islands.

Pacific islands became staging grounds for battles. Weapons were stockpiled and hazardous material discarded. Ships and aircraft were sunk. When the war ended, much of this material was simply left behind.

Among the remains are an estimated 3,800 wrecks still lying on the Pacific Ocean floor.

An environmental hazard

As remnants of war degrade, they often leach toxic pollutants into nearby waters and soils. These can build up in marine life, enter the food chain and pose serious risks to both biodiversity.

At Palau, a WWII Japanese ship sank in Koror Harbour and became known as the Helmet Wreck. It contains Japanese depth charges leaking acid into surrounding waters.

Researchers have shown the long-term environmental impacts in the Baltic Sea of unexploded WWII ordnance – bombs, shells and grenades that failed to detonate. An estimated 3000kg of dissolved ammunition chemicals have been found.

Coral reefs and mangroves, which are vital for coastal protection, are especially vulnerable to both chemical exposure and physical damage.

For example, researchers examined the effects off Puerto Rico of unexploded ordnance. They found nearby sea animals contained potentially toxic compounds leaking from the ordnance, which meant the substances had entered the food web.

Human communities on high alert

Unexploded ordnance continues to endanger communities. Just last year, for example, more than 200 bombs were found buried beneath a school in the Solomon Islands.

In places such as Palau, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, these dangers are unearthed regularly. They can be found by farmers working their land, children playing or fisherman working.

Buried bombs, sunken ships and downed aircraft often contain fuel and heavy metals. This includes lead and cadmium which can interfere with the body’s hormone system and cause serious health issues.

Research into the human health impacts of war remains is limited – especially in the Pacific. But existing studies suggest exposure is linked to serious consequences.

For example, parental exposure to wartime contaminants has been linked to birth defects in Gaza and Vietnam.

And a study of Britsh Army ammunition technicians released earlier this year found significantly higher rates of bladder cancer than the general population. This suggests occupational exposure to explosive compounds may pose long-term health risks.

Climate change is increasing the risk

As Earth’s climate warms, extreme weather events are worsening and seas are rising. This is exacerbating the dangers posed by wartime remnants.

For example Cyclone Pam, in March 2015, exposed unexploded WWII ordnance in Kiribati and Tuvalu. Further investigations revealed remnants including high explosive projectiles, mortars and 5,300 rounds of ammunition.

In 2020, a visiting fisherman found an unexploded bomb near Lord Howe Island. Then-Environment Minister Sussan Ley suggested the device may have been shifted by a cyclone or ocean currents.

Similarly, floods and landslides can move these hazards over significant distances, increasing uncertainty around their locations and complicating clearance efforts.

Rising sea levels are threatening to breach one of the Pacific’s most toxic legacies – the Runit Dome in the Marshall Islands. This concrete structure was built in the late 1970s to contain radioactive waste from US nuclear testing decades earlier.

Research shows extreme storms could increase radioactive sediments in the area to up to 84 times higher than normal. There are also concerns cracks in the dome’s surface could lead to contamination of surrounding waters.

Reflecting on war’s toxic legacy

Despite the risks to people and health in the Pacific, remediation has been slow. The 80th anniversary of WWII offers an opportunity to reflect on the toxic legacy of war – and to act.

The scale of the problem demands coordinated, well-funded action. The work should not just remove dangerous materials, but restore damaged ecosystems and monitor long-term health impacts.

Some support has been offered. It includes Operation Render Safe, a program to remove war remnants led by the Australian Defence Force. But more is needed.

Regional partners – including Australia, New Zealand, Japan and the United States – have a chance to lead. This means investing in environmental cleanup, supporting affected communities and acknowledging historical responsibility.

It also means listening to Pacific voices, who have long called for greater attention to the war’s toxic legacy. Their knowledge, resilience and lived experience must be central to any response.

The authors acknowledge Nixon Panda for his contribution to this article.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. 80 years since the end of World War II, a dangerous legacy lingers in the Pacific – https://theconversation.com/80-years-since-the-end-of-world-war-ii-a-dangerous-legacy-lingers-in-the-pacific-264127

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robyn Johns, Associate Professor in Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations, University of Technology Sydney

Midway through a difficult discussion in her performance review, an employee named Jane finally cracks, and the tears start. Her boss doesn’t know what to do and handles the situation awkwardly.

Ask yourself: how would you react in this situation? And would you have the same reaction if it were not Jane who was crying but a different employee, Mike?

It can feel like the consensus is that crying should not take place at work. But crying at work is not unusual.

According to a recent survey by mental health app company Headspace, 48% of in-person workers and 44% of hybrid workers have cried due to work. Among fully remote workers, the figure was 70%.

So, do we need to rethink our attitude towards it? And what can you do if you or somebody you know cries at work?

It’s OK to cry

There are many different reasons people cry at work. Difficulties meeting workload demands, interpersonal conflict and major workplace change are all examples of stressors that can contribute to poor mental health and crying.

But people may also be distressed at work for personal reasons completely unrelated to their work. Whatever the reason, crying is a normal healthy response that should not be suppressed.

Why does crying at work feel different? Crying outside of work is not uncommon – it’s normal at weddings, funerals and other life events. But in the workplace, it can feel unexpected, intense and out of character, making the crier and those around them uncomfortable.

The resulting awkwardness may lead to questions about the motives of the crier. Is this person crying because they are genuinely upset, or are they trying to manipulate the situation?

If a colleague or manager sees the crying as insincere, they will react differently than if they think it’s a display of real emotion. If the crying is believed to relate to an acceptable reason, such as passion or care for the work or significant personal circumstances, the crier is more likely to be excused.

Crying at work may negatively impact career progression, particularly if it is a regular occurrence and distracting from performance.

Gendered norms

Gender norms can also be a factor in crying and how others react to it. Women are more likely to cry and suffer from the consequences of negative stereotypes, including being viewed as emotional, weak or unprofessional. For men, crying is regarded as less acceptable and in violation of male stereotypes.

Regardless of gender, the fear of being seen as unprofessional or insincere can discourage people from crying at work. An organisation’s unique social norms and culture may also influence the way tears are interpreted.

In some workplaces, employees may feel pressured to regulate their emotions, while in more supportive workplaces, emotions are regarded as being part of the human experience.

How to respond

When someone is crying at work, keeping a few important things in mind can help everyone involved feel seen and supported. Here are some tips.

For the person crying:

1. Shift your focus. Take a deep breath and redirect your thoughts. This will allow you to focus on the matter at hand rather than the tears.

2. Take a break. Ask for time out to compose yourself. This demonstrates emotional maturity and acknowledges your crying may cause others discomfort.

3. Reframe the emotion. Help others understand that your response comes from a place of care and deep passion. Clarify if the tears are work or non-work-related to give perspective and understanding.

4. Seek help if you need it. Consider sources of additional support, such as a doctor or a counsellor.

For a manager or colleague:

1. Be prepared. Workers are human, and sometimes they cry. Having an appropriate location for people to take some time out – and small touches like offering a box of tissues – can make a big difference.

2. Show empathy. Listen actively, don’t jump to conclusions and respect boundaries. Your reaction and behaviours can have a big influence on what happens next.

3. Challenge your bias. One crying episode does not necessarily demonstrate weakness or a lack of professionalism.

4. Understand your zone of influence. Is the crying a result of something you, as a manager, have control over? Know your responsibilities and obligations.

5. Seek help. Unless you are a trained counsellor, you are not a trained counsellor. Know when to seek professional support for yourself or others.

With the intensity and uncertainty of life, it is not surprising that workers may become overwhelmed at times. Crying is a natural part of human behaviour, and it should not come as a surprise in the workplace.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. It’s OK for people to cry at work. Here’s how you can respond as a colleague or manager – https://theconversation.com/its-ok-for-people-to-cry-at-work-heres-how-you-can-respond-as-a-colleague-or-manager-263632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Carson, Historian of Emotions and Australian Society, University of Adelaide

Gee I am lonely sweetheart, it may sound silly having so many men and cobbers around me, but when I say lonely I don’t mean lack of company, I am lonely for you, only you can fill the gap in my heart dearest, as each moment passes I seem to miss you and love you more, I shall never get used to living without you […] in fact I am sure we were meant to be together all the time.

My great-grandfather Bill Wiseman wrote this to my great-grandmother Florence in a letter dated October 20 1944.

Aside from when Bill briefly returned on leave from his service for the 2/48 Battalion of the Australian Imperial Force (AIF), he had been separated from Florence since September 1941. Bill would not permanently return to Florence and their children until his discharge from the military on November 8 1945.

It was a long time to be away from his family, and Bill often reflected on the emotional toll their separation had on him.

Loneliness is a common emotion in letters written by Australian service personnel and their loved ones. Rather than a complete physical isolation from others, this situational loneliness was characterised by the absence of a certain person: one’s partner, parents or children.

As Bill acknowledged, while he was surrounded by “cobbers”, it was Florence who he was “lonely for”.

Separations over oceans

Like other historical events that caused mass displacement and separation, the second world war fostered an almost universal sense of situational loneliness.

Emotional experiences and expressions were often dictated by real physical distance. Methods of travel and communication were significantly limited. It could take months for a letter to reach its destination.

Other circumstances influenced how separated families felt and articulated their loneliness in wartime. This could include factors such as how long they had been apart, whether personnel could return home on leave, the intensity of military campaigns which might restrict mail exchanges, and if personnel were injured or captured by enemy forces.

While letters could never completely substitute for the absent person, Australian military personnel and their loved ones recognised the importance of exchanging correspondence to ease their loneliness.

AIF Sergeant Robert Graham implored his fiancée Jane Melrose to write more regularly, as it improved his morale:

I received your ever welcomed and much needed letter yesterday and it made me feel a lot better + miles happier too. Jane whatever you do pleased write as often as you can […] I feel so depressed when mail comes in and I don’t get any from you. It doesn’t matter who I get mail from I’m still not happy unless I recognise your handwriting on the envelope.

Barbara Welbourn, a soil scientist at the University of Adelaide, wrote to her fiancé, Sergeant David Sheppard, about the “renewal” his letters provided when she was lonely:

Your [76th letter] was waiting for me last night; such a blessed end to the day + so longed for […] I am so dependent, my sweet David on your love, its constant renewal, even more wonderful by letters that I will be adrift in sad seas without them.

Women’s Auxiliary Australian Air Force Aircraftwoman Doris Plummer wrote she was “dying” for news from her husband Private Walter Plummer, who served in the Volunteer Defence Corps.

She wanted to hear about his Christmas, because as it would make her feel closer their family:

Hope you tell me everyone you saw everything you said and did. How many fish you caught, how many times you swam and missing no details. They are the little unimportant things that make me feel I am not so far away.

Patience and perseverance

While loneliness was (and still often is) perceived as a negative emotion, characterised by mental pain and absence, letter writers from the war often discussed how experiencing these uncomfortable feelings ultimately transformed their relationships for the better.

Albert Gerrard, a private in the Australian Army Medical Corps, assured Margaret James that he believed separation ultimately prepared them for marriage:

Three years have not been wasted, I think we’ve both learned a lot. I have anyway, patience, perseverance, and over + above all else, what a loyal little darling you are. It has also knocked a lot of conceit + selfishness out of me. Generally speaking, I’m better for it.

Lance Corporal George Seagrove outlined how he believed the longing he felt for his wife Marjorie made him appreciate the joy she brought him.

In one such letter, George wrote:

This parting, more than anything else, has made me realise how big you have been in my life […] It’s like a soul split in two. When I see anything I always want to rush to my pen and tell you about it. If it is something funny I can hear you laughing because I know you laugh at the same things as I do […] Every day when the mail comes my heart beats a little bit quicker and your familiar handwriting brings a big smile to my face.

Letter writers on the home and battle fronts showed a great capacity to express vulnerability by describing their loneliness.

Through their heartache and anxiety about the uncertainty of their futures, separated spouses realised their love for one another was undeniable.

Emma Carson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. It was lonely during WII. Those at home and away coped through letters – https://theconversation.com/it-was-lonely-during-wii-those-at-home-and-away-coped-through-letters-258577

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa M. Given, Professor of Information Sciences & Director, Social Change Enabling Impact Platform, RMIT University

The Australian government today released a long-awaited report on a trial of automated tools for determining a person’s age.

So-called age assurance technology is expected to play a key role in enforcing the ban on social media accounts for under-16s that will come into effect in December this year.

The report suggests existing age assurance technology can be used to determine whether social media users are over 16. However, many details of how the technology might be used are still unclear – and concerns over privacy, security and reliability remain.

What did the trial find?

The core aim of the trial was to “understand if age assurance can be done without compromising Australian citizens’ privacy and security”. It also aimed to “inform consideration of best practice and potential regulatory approaches”.

The trial evaluated over 60 technologies, from 48 age assurance technology providers. It was designed to see “if the technologies as a whole work”, to provide a snapshot on the current “state of the art” of age assurance technologies.

The report’s key findings argue age assurance “can be done”. With some caveats, it said there are “no substantial technological limitations” to prevent using these systems to enforce the social media ban.

Prone to errors

Some initial findings of the trial were released in June. At the time, other experts and I raised concerns about the limitations of the technology.

The new report provides more detail, but only reinforces these existing concerns.

The report’s findings show age estimation is possible with available technologies. However, it makes clear that errors of up to two or three years are common.

This means people as young as 13 or 14 could be estimated to be 16 years of age, and gain access to platforms when they should be blocked. And some 16- and 17-year-olds could be marked under age and restricted.

The technologies can also be more error-prone for young women, compared to young men, and for those with darker skin tones.

Many questions remain

Parents may be left with a false sense of security that these tools will keep their under-16 children from holding social media accounts. At the same time, users who are wrongly deemed under age may need to go through additional checks.

However, it is not yet clear how further age verification would work. We don’t know whether Australians will be able to verify age via third parties, such as linking to a digital government ID platform. The process may involve providing government-issued ID directly to technology companies.

Australian consumers have raised concerns about privacy implications of requests for ID, given the number of large-scale data breaches affecting large companies.

The report also found “concerning evidence” some age assurance providers were building tools to enable data tracing, with potential for data breaches.

The report also makes clear that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for age assurance. Individual social media companies will decide what approach they want to take to ensure young people are restricted from holding social media accounts.

Australians may face multiple requests for age assurance when using various social media platforms. It’s unclear whether a one-time assurance will be sufficient. Users may need to perform an age check with every sign-in.

With the social media ban looming, Australians are left with many unanswered questions. In the coming weeks, the government will release further guidance on the “reasonable steps” platforms must take to comply with the social media ban legislation.

This is when Australians will finally understand what will be expected of them, as well, to confirm their social media account access.

Lisa M. Given receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and the Association for Information Science and Technology.

– ref. Australia’s government says social media age checks ‘can be done’, despite errors and privacy risks – https://theconversation.com/australias-government-says-social-media-age-checks-can-be-done-despite-errors-and-privacy-risks-264257

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch University

The Home Affairs minister, Tony Burke, revealed late last week he had visited Nauru in August and signed a memorandum of understanding with its government.

Under the agreement, Nauru will grant long-term visas to members of a group known as the “NZYQ cohort”. These people, many of whom have had visas cancelled on character grounds or committed crimes, are in Australia on bridging visas granted after a 2023 High Court case that centred on this group.

In return, the Australian government has agreed to pay A$408 million in the first year and $70 million per year to support “resettlement efforts”. However, the exact details remain unclear.

How did we get here?

This agreement follows a 2023 High Court decision in a case about a Rohingya man who was given the pseudonym NZYQ.

The judge in this case ruled that indefinitely detaining individuals who cannot be removed from Australia is unconstitutional.

After this decision, hundreds of non-citizens (many of whom had been convicted of crimes and had served their prison sentences) were released from immigration detention into the Australian community on bridging visas.

In December 2024, the government passed legislation that allowed for the government to transfer non-citizens, including those in the NZYQ group, to third countries (in this case Nauru) under “third country reception arrangements.”

Just over 350 people are now in the NZYQ group.

Environment Minister Murray Watt has said the Nauru deal will involve “hundreds” from the NZYQ cohort. The government plans to gradually increase transferring people to Nauru, but hasn’t specified total figures.

Meanwhile, a bill introduced to parliament last week builds on laws passed in 2024.

These proposed laws remove the requirement for natural justice or procedural fairness when the government enters into or implements third-country reception arrangements.

This means that if a person is told they will be sent to Nauru, the government is not required to give them an opportunity to explain how the transfer might affect them personally.

It wouldn’t have to consider their individual circumstances before making the decision.

How will Nauru be able to support these people?

A recent Federal Court judgment revealed Australia and Nauru had entered into preliminary agreements for the long-term reception arrangements involving financial support and phased settlement of people in the NZYQ cohort.

The arrangement includes specific conditions for long-term stay visas and Nauru’s commitment to support settled individuals. This includes access to housing, health care, education and work rights.

But Nauru is a small, poor island nation, with a population of around 13,000.

It has high unemployment and is increasingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, such as sea-level rise.

Critics of the plan have raised concerns about the limited level of health care available to asylum seekers transferred to Nauru.

Nauru is also currently dealing with an outbreak of dengue fever, resulting in two deaths.

What obligations does Australia have to non-citizens who’ve committed crimes?

The individuals in the NZYQ group cannot be returned to their country of origin.

There are a variety of reasons for this. For some, there may be practical or legal barriers that prevent their removal. They may, for instance, have no recognised nationality and no country to accept them.

For others, it may be because international law prevents Australia returning them to places where they may face harm. This principle is known as “non-refoulement”.

These obligations arise under Australia’s commitment to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and other international human rights obligations.

Under these commitments, Australia cannot return people to places where they may face a risk of harm – such as torture; cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment; or punishment.

But sending these individuals to Nauru doesn’t solve the issue; it just means the Australian government is shifting its responsibilities for these non-citizens elsewhere.

While the removal of these non-citizens to Nauru may not be a direct breach of Australia’s non-refoulement obligations, the Australian government has obligations to ensure the ongoing protection of human rights of these individuals.

These rights include access to health, housing, education and protection from arbitrary detention and “chain refoulement”. That’s where people get passed from one country to another until they end up back at their country of origin, where they face significant danger.

What could Australia do instead?

Those in the NZYQ group have already served prison sentences for their crimes in Australia.

Some were convicted of offences committed while they were children and have not reoffended for some period of time.

Many have spent long periods in detention (some longer than they have served in prison). Many have families and long-standing connections to Australia.

While these people have been painted as representing a risk or danger to the Australian community, their status as a non-citizen makes them vulnerable to this removal over an Australian citizen who may have committed the same, or worse, criminal acts.

It is unclear whether any of the funding provided by the Australian government under this deal will actually ensure effective rehabilitation or support for this cohort in Nauru.

Without proper support, this could create the risk for re-offending in Nauru and lead to their Nauruan visa being cancelled.

Instead of working to rehabilitate or reintegrate this cohort in the Australian community, Australia is exploiting Nauru’s financial dependence and status as a poorer country to absorb these people into their community.

Mary Anne Kenny is a member of the Migration Institute of Australia and the Law Council of Australia and an affiliate of the UNSW Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law. She was on the Joint Advisory Committee (an independent advisory body advising the governments of Australia and Nauru on Offshore Processing) between 2012 and 2018.

Lisa van Toor receives funding from Research Training Plan (RTP) scholarship for her PhD. She is currently a PhD candidate with the UNSW Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law. She previously was a Judge’s Associate in the Supreme Court of Nauru between 2018-2019. Lisa is a member of the Greens WA.

– ref. By sending non-visa holders to Nauru, Australia is shifting its responsibilities – https://theconversation.com/by-sending-non-visa-holders-to-nauru-australia-is-shifting-its-responsibilities-264256

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane McAdam, Scientia Professor and ARC Laureate Fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney

For decades now, public discourse about refugees and immigrants has become increasingly fractured, ugly and untrue.

From John Howard’s “we will decide who comes to this country” mantra, to Kevin Rudd’s “if you come by boat you will never permanently live in Australia” in 2013, through to Tony Abbott’s “stop the boats” election victory that same year, it has been a prominent feature of Australia’s recent political landscape.

For the Coalition, it was about stopping so-called “illegals”.

For Labor, it was framed as “saving lives at sea”.

For both, it was about keeping people seeking asylum out of contact with the Australian community, demonised and dehumanised, called by numbers, not names.

Against this backdrop, it’s perhaps unsurprising Australians turned out in the thousands to rally against immigration this weekend. It could be seen as the culmination of years of MPs using immigration issues for short-term political gain.

But just as government messaging has partly contributed to this situation, it could also help get us out of it.

Not always ‘sinister invaders’

Political language about immigration wasn’t always so negative.

At the end of the second world war, then-Prime Minister Ben Chifley welcomed 170,000 refugees and other displaced people from Europe.

In the 1970s, when the first boats of Vietnamese asylum seekers arrived in Australia’s north, Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser insisted they be treated humanely and processed fairly.

As writer Thomas Keneally recalled:

there was no long-term mandatory detention involved. The newcomers were not depicted as sinister invaders […] language was not misused and neither were human souls.

And as former Immigration Minister Andrew Giles said in 2023:

Seventy years ago, of course, we embarked on a migration journey that has transformed our nation into a diverse and dynamic multicultural society […] in very large part […] shaped by the nearly one million refugees who have come to Australia since the end of WWII. We should take great pride in this.

‘Real people, real families’

The threatening thuggery on display at the weekend’s anti-immigration marches has been rightly called out by Australian politicians on both sides.

In a change from her predecessor’s hardline approach, Federal Opposition Leader Sussan Ley said while “strong borders keep us safe, they also allow us to be generous and compassionate to those fleeing conflict”.

Meanwhile, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke reiterated “there is no place in our country for people who seek to divide and undermine our social cohesion”.

At the same time, we can’t simply ignore concerns people have about the impact of immigration on housing, cost of living and infrastructure – much of which is based on misinformation which feeds a far-right agenda, according to Multicultural Affairs Minister Anne Aly.

When misinformation spreads, it impedes evidence-based decision-making and results in poor laws and policies.

The positive role of immigration is something the opposition’s new immigration spokesman, Senator Paul Scarr, wants to stress.

He seems to be setting a new tone based on empathy, not division, drawing on his deep “respect and admiration” for migrant and refugee communities who are making “an outstanding contribution”.

When “we talk about immigration”, he says, “we should never forget that we’re actually talking about real people, real families”.

When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese came to office in 2022, he stressed the importance of a vision for Australia that promotes “unity and optimism, not fear and division”.

For the first time in a long while, there does seem to be bipartisan support for this approach.

Walking the walk

The dissonance, though, is that the broader architecture of Australia’s asylum policies remains squarely in place. It’s largely about deterrence, interception and offshoring.

And this week, parliament is expected to progress a bill that would facilitate the swift removal of around 350 non-citizens to Nauru.

In 2023, the High Court of Australia ruled it was unlawful to hold people in immigration detention indefinitely, so for the extraordinary sum of A$408 million up-front, and $70 million a year, Australia will pay Nauru to take them.

While the deal may solve a political problem for the government, it does so at great financial and moral cost.

As Australia’s Race Discrimination Commissioner, Giridharan Sivaraman, has warned:

economic inequality, housing stress, and job insecurity are real and urgent challenges, including for people from migrant backgrounds. We need genuine solutions to these challenges – not dangerous, exploitative, anti-migrant rhetoric.

Telling a new story

The more positive public statements we have seen in recent days and months will remain hollow unless we start to see real policy change.

Governments can, and should, help people around the world who are struggling most.

Read more:
Think curbing overseas migration will end the housing crisis? It won’t – and we can’t afford to do it

This doesn’t mean shying away from people’s legitimate concerns about housing, infrastructure and cost-of-living pressures.

But it does mean explaining migrants are not the cause of these challenges, and that reducing immigration could in fact be counterproductive.

While the evidence shows immigration isn’t behind Australia’s housing woes, for instance, there’s plenty of proof migrants are crucial for the country’s economic development.

The latter is the story politicians should be telling. Some have started to, but counteracting decades of messaging to the contrary will take time.

Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council. In 2024-25, she served as a member of the Ministerial Advisory Council on Skilled Migration’s Expert Sub-Committee.

– ref. Politicians have scapegoated immigration for decades. It’s time to flip the script – https://theconversation.com/politicians-have-scapegoated-immigration-for-decades-its-time-to-flip-the-script-264266