Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Helen Dickinson, Professor, Public Service Research, UNSW Sydney

Mark Butler, the minister for Disability and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), today announced a new plan to “secure the future” of the NDIS.

Central to this plan is that children under nine with mild to moderate developmental delays or autism will transition from the NDIS to a new foundational support program called Thriving Kids.

Speaking at the National Press Club, Butler argued the NDIS was never intended to serve this age group and it’s currently falling short of meeting their needs.

Thriving Kids will be jointly funded by the federal government and states and territories, with an initial A$2 billion committed from the Commonwealth.

The program is set to launch in July 2026 and roll out over the following 12 months. From mid-2027, children in this group will no longer enter the NDIS, but instead receive support through Thriving Kids.

So what’s behind this change, and is it a good idea?

Sustainability struggles

Since returning to office in 2022, the Labor government has introduced several reforms to the NDIS which, over time, has ballooned in cost.

According to Butler, much more work is needed to get it back on track. But he highlighted two challenges in particular:

1. returning the scheme to its original purpose of supporting those with significant and permanent care and support needs

2. ensuring the scheme is sustainable from a budget perspective.

The original 2011 estimates for the scheme were that the NDIS would cover 411,000 participants and cost $13.6 billion per year. Today there are more than 740,000 participants, and it’s forecast to cost $64 billion by 2029.

The government has set a target to reduce annual growth of the scheme from 22% a year to 8% by next year. However Butler described this as only an interim measure, noting growth needed to be further restricted.

Children aged under 15 years are over-represented in the scheme, making up just under half of NDIS participants. Half of new entrants are under nine. Across the country, one in ten six-year-olds is on the NDIS.

Butler emphasised families were not to blame. Rather, the issue is the lack of alternative support systems. The NDIS Review highlighted this gap and recommended the development of foundational supports: services for people with disability that sit outside the NDIS.

However negotiations between federal, state, and territory governments to establish foundational supports recently stalled.

In establishing Thriving Kids, the minister argued children will be better served and there will be less budgetary pressure on the NDIS.

Is it a good idea?

There have been concerns for some time that the NDIS is not working well for some young children. Best practice in early childhood intervention and care generally suggests children should be integrated into mainstream settings where they live, play and learn.

Parents and caregivers of young children on the NDIS receive individual funding that they use to pay for therapies and other supports which are largely delivered on a one-to-one basis outside these settings.

For families, it can be confusing and difficult to choose between different NDIS supports and providers to work out what will be best for their child.

Rather than providing individualised funding to families, Thriving Kids will leverage existing systems including:

• infant or child and maternal systems (community-based nurses who see children at health and developmental check-ups from birth to 3.5 years)
• GPs
• early learning centres
• community centres
• schools.

These are services most families are already engaged with. The minister says this should result in a more integrated and universal offering to all children – not just children with disability.

New Medicare items will be introduced so families are able to continue to access allied health services such as occupational therapy, speech pathology and psychosocial therapy. We don’t know whether families will have to contribute towards the cost of these services.

Whether Thriving Kids delivers all that is promised will depend on the design of the program and whether it can be effectively implemented, particularly within a short time frame.

Although the government has said access processes to the NDIS will not change until 2027, a number of families over the past six months have found their child has been reassessed and determined ineligible for the scheme.

Yet there are few other support options for these families. An important step will be making sure that while Thriving Kids is being established, children and families don’t miss out on support.

There could be some challenges

Over the past year, relations between state/territory and federal governments have become more fractious.

Thriving Kids will be a national program led by the federal government, but will require close work with other levels of government if it’s to be successful.

States and territories are responsible for many of the services that Thriving Kids will leverage. This program will also need good understanding of local areas to make sure it’s appropriate and doesn’t lead to any gaps in services.

Some experts have argued that we have seen diagnostic drift in relation to autism in recent years, with some children being diagnosed as having moderate autism when previously it would have been diagnosed as mild.

Creating a system where some children are eligible for the NDIS (such as those with severe autism) and others for Thriving Kids (those with mild to moderate developmental delays or autism) could accentuate this. Some health professionals or families may seek a diagnosis that gives them access to better support.

Costs and pricing also need to be harmonised across systems, so families are not incentivised to access services through one system over the other. Services and support funded through Thriving Kids should not incur out-of-pocket costs and payments to providers should not differ between the systems.

Another challenge will be to ensure those groups who are most marginalised and disadvantaged under the current NDIS – for example culturally and linguistically diverse families or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people – receive equitable benefits from the Thriving Kids program.

Helen Dickinson receives funding from NHMRC, ARC, MRFF and Australian governments.

Anne Kavanagh receives funding from the NHMRC, MRFF, ARC, MS Australia, and the Australian government.

Catherine Smith has previously received research funding from Children and Young People with Disability Australia (CYDA) and Down Syndrome Victoria.

– ref. ‘Thriving Kids’ could help secure the future of the NDIS. But what will the program mean for children and families? – https://theconversation.com/thriving-kids-could-help-secure-the-future-of-the-ndis-but-what-will-the-program-mean-for-children-and-families-263532

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

It’s too early to make a judgement about how productive the government’s economic reform (also known as productivity roundtable) will be, but the fact it’s behind closed doors is making it a rather amorphous affair to follow.

Its sessions are clearly defined, and there seems agreement Treasurer Jim Chalmers is proving a good chair. But, although participants are not sworn to silence about the conversation in the room, what’s coming out depends partly on which players decide to be interviewed or to chat in the corridors.

Talking to the ABC, the ACTU’s Sally McManus admitted to feeling rather lonely in some of the discussions. This followed business representatives on Tuesday predictably shooting down a union proposal for a training levy on employers.

Apart from the financial burden, a similar scheme was less than effective previously.

McManus also anticipated that “I think it may be a bit lonely on AI, but we’ll see”. The unions want substantial regulation of AI; business and Chalmers favour a light touch.

Meanwhile, Nationals senator Matt Canavan organised for Wednesday an alternative roundtable, held in a parliamentary committee room, that he dubbed the “real productivity roundtable”. Canavan worked for the Productivity Commission in an earlier life.

A while after the current chair of the Productivity Commission, Danielle Wood, addressed the Chalmers roundtable, Gary Banks, who once headed that commission, told the Canavan gathering, “the government’s productivity agenda is mainly a spending agenda”.

“It’s not one that involves, well as to date anyway, the kind of regulatory reforms that are needed.” Indeed, he said, energy and labour markets were areas that had been “casualties” of reform.

In the cabinet room, Wood had a stack of slides documenting the productivity problem and how to tackle the “thicket” of regulations.

On its day two, the roundtable had substantial discussions about housing and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, both hampered by excessive regulation.

There was also consideration of a road user charge. That was strongly advocated by former treasury secretary Ken Henry.

The chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Gina Cass-Gottlieb, told the roundtable Commonwealth regulators – all 22 of them apparently – were working together to improve the regulatory regime.

“There is a recognition of the critical element of reducing regulatory duplication […] including in information gathering,” she said.

Chalmers said that on the regulatory challenge, the government had “more than 100 ideas we’re progressing, about 100 that require legislative change and about 100 that we’re still considering”.

He said a lot of those ideas weren’t ambitious enough. “Some are”, he said, and gave the example of RG97 (a regulation relating to restrictions on superannuation funds that has the effect of discouraging investment in housing).

Chalmers flagged he wanted the regulators to be “even more ambitious” in their ideas to boost productivity.

Former head of the ACCC Rod Sims, talking in the session about competition, made an obvious but important point.

“Doing things that mean we ‘can’ increase productivity does not mean that we ‘will’ increase productivity. Boosting skills, or lowering taxes may increase the ‘can’ but not the ‘will’. To get increased productivity we need increased competition so that companies are required to increase their performance to remain competitive.”

Chalmers said at the end of day two that it had been “dominated by how we can boost housing supply, how we can responsibly reduce and improve regulation and speed up approvals”.

“I’m really encouraged by the consensus in the room for economic reform in these areas, and we’re enthusiastic about some of the policies that participants put on the table.

“We’ve already got a big agenda to ease the burden on businesses, cut red tape and build more homes but we’re keen to do more where we can.

“There is a real prospect of a useful consensus emerging on a number of key reform areas.”

The message from Canavan after his (much briefer) roundtable was: “to make our economy bigger, we need to make our government smaller”.

Day three of the roundtable is about budget sustainability. Minister for Health and Ageing, and Minister for Disability and the National Disability Scheme, Mark Butler has already announced his bit on that quest, outlining at the National Press Club on Wednesday plans to curb the huge growth in the NDIS.

On Wednesday evening, the roundtable participants went off to The Lodge for drinks, and to meet Toto the dog, who had played her part by posing with the prime minister and treasurer in their show of pre-roundtable unity on Monday.

The rebel roundtable attendees had earlier snacked on protein balls and Anzac biscuits.

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. View from The Hill: Everyone wants a slice of the productivity action – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-everyone-wants-a-slice-of-the-productivity-action-263431

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Danielle Ireland-Piper, Associate Professor of Law, National Security College, Australian National University

The Australian government has cancelled the visa of Israeli politician Simcha Rothman, setting off a diplomatic falling out that’s escalated over the course of the week.

Rothman is a member of a far-right political party, Mafdal-Religious Zionism, which is part of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling coalition.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke says the visa was cancelled because of comments Rothman had made about Palestinian children. Israel then retaliated by revoking the visas of some Australian diplomats.

While the government stands by the decision in the face of intense criticism from Netanyahu, the Liberal Party has had a different take. Shadow Home Affairs Minister Andrew Hastie has said the government shouldn’t be stopping foreign elected representatives from entering the country.

These sorts of cancellations raise a number of issues, including freedom of expression, public safety, national security and international law.

So what does the law say about whether foreign politicians should be subject to different rules, particularly ones from nations with which Australia has diplomatic ties?

The basic visa laws

Australia’s federal government has discretion over which non-citizens can enter the country. Other than the specific rights of those seeking protection under international law, such as refugees, the capacity of a non-citizen to enter Australia is a privilege, not a right.

This is a big part of how all nations protect their sovereignty.

There are several grounds on which a minister can decline a visa. These include someone’s criminal record and concerns about domestic violence or terrorist activity.

The minister can also consider the risk of vilification of a segment of the community, including conduct likely to be incompatible with the smooth operation of a multicultural society.

It is not unusual for visas to be cancelled or knocked back for this reason. Notably, a Palestinian cookbook author, Mona Zahed, also had her visa cancelled this month for reportedly expressing support for the terrorist organisation Hamas.

These cases can have broader implications for freedom of expression, generally. Constitutionally, for example, the implied freedom of political communication can lawfully be burdened where there is a legitimate public interest (like protection from vilification). The means used must be proportionate to that legitimate public interest.

Overall, the minister is to consider the best interests of the Australian community.

Importantly, ministerial decisions about visas cannot be reviewed. The minister’s decision is final.

What about foreign politicians?

For private individuals, the way visa laws are applied is relatively straightforward.

Rothman’s case is more complicated. He is not merely an individual travelling to Australia to air personal views, but a member of a democratically elected government with which Australia has diplomatic relations. Rothman is the chair of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee.

Under international law, heads of state, ministers and diplomats have a special status and can be generally seen to be acting on behalf of the nation-state.

This means the decision to revoke the visa of a senior politician may make a political statement not just about a person, but a government and, by extension, a state.

This is why it has implications for Australia’s international relations, despite the fact Rothman is not a foreign or senior minister.

Not cancelling the visa may also have signalled a political and legal position on the actions of Israel in relation to the conflict in Gaza. Rothman is part of a government whose prime minister is the subject of a warrant from the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes, including:

starvation as a method of warfare, and

intentionally directing an attack against the [Gazan] civilian population.

Further, even if we accept the argument that Rothman is visiting as an official representative of the state of Israel, then it is relevant to consider the current international position of Israel.

In July 2024, the International Court of Justice delivered an advisory opinion confirming its view that the occupation of Palestine was illegal. It said Israel had an obligation to leave the occupied territory.

Australia seeks to promote the international rule of law to the world, so these matters may be relevant factors.

Social cohesion means safety

This is also a national security issue.

In February 2025, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) Director-General Mike Burgess gave his annual threat assessment. He noted a “polarised, grievance-rich environment” in which “social cohesion will remain strained and we can expect spikes in communal violence”.

Read more:
The ASIO threat assessment is a dark outlook for Australia’s security. Are our laws up to the task?

This observation was made against a backdrop of a widely reported and marked increase in antisemitic and Islamaphobic incidents in Australia since October 2023.

In the year after the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry reported a 316% increase in the number of reported antisemitic incidents in Australia compared with the same period in the previous year.

The Islamophobia Register Australia has recorded a surge of more than 530% in Islamophobic incidents being reported between October 2023 and July 2025.

A 2024 report on social cohesion showed negative attitudes towards Muslims remain by far the highest of any single faith group for more than ten years.

This unrest threatens both the safety of individuals and the stability of our entire society. It increases our vulnerability to external threats, including foreign interference. This may have also been taken into consideration when deciding whether to cancel the visa.

A fine balancing act

In short, freedom of expression is a basic human right and our relationships with other countries matter, even countries with whom we disagree.

After all, Australia receives many foreign officials from countries that may not share our values. Decisions like these have consequences for our international relations.

At this point in history, however, we should take care when considering to whom we grant a platform.

The issue of visa cancellations of foreign officials is complex and nuanced. There is not always an easy answer.

Danielle Ireland-Piper has previously received funding from the Department of Defence.

– ref. Granting visas to enter Australia is a delicate balancing act – whether you’re a politician or not – https://theconversation.com/granting-visas-to-enter-australia-is-a-delicate-balancing-act-whether-youre-a-politician-or-not-263528

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

The peak body of Australian Jewry has delivered a stinging rebuke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as strongly chastising Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, in letters to the two leaders.

The Executive Council of Australia Jewry has told both leaders, in the letters sent on Wednesday, to address their two governments’ policy differences “through diplomacy rather than public posturing”, and accused them of playing to their respective domestic constituencies.

In the letter to Netanyahu, the council condemned his denouncing Albanese on social media as “a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia’s Jews”.

It said these comments were “inflammatory and provocative, and demonstrated a woeful lack of understanding of social and political conditions in Australia”.

“These comments have played straight into the hands of opponents of Israel and antisemites, to the detriment of the Australian Jewish community.

“Had we been consulted, we would have warned against such a clumsy intervention into Australia’s domestic politics. The charge of antisemitism, whether made directly or indirectly, is a serious one and never to be made lightly. Doing so only invites scepticism, and undermines the efforts we and the government have been making to combat this pernicious phenomenon.”

In both letters the council expressed “deep dismay and concern” at the “war of words” between the two leaders. Both parties had been at fault, it said.

In the letter to Albanese the council said his July 30 statement accusing Netanyahu of being “in denial” about the consequences of the Gaza war “was excessive and gratuitously insulting”.

“It was unseemly for an Australian Prime Minister to depart from diplomatic norms concerning the leader of a country with which Australia has had friendly relations for many decades.

“You could simply have said that you vehemently disagreed with the Israeli Prime Minister, without descending into a personal attack,” the letter said.

It also condemned Wednesday’s comment by Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke, who, responding to Netanyahu’s description of Albanese as weak, said, “strength is not measured by how many people you can blow up, or how many children you can leave hungry”.

“This from a senior minister whose responsibilities go directly to maintaining social cohesion in Australia, a priority to which you have repeatedly committed your government,” the letter said.

The council told both leaders, “the Australian Jewish community will not be left to deal with the fallout of a spat between two leaders who are playing to their respective domestic audiences”.

The dramatically deteriorating relations between the traditional allies has presented a fork in the road for many Australian Jews, with leading figures increasingly critical of the Israeli prime minister.

Albanese on Wednesday said of the Netanyahu attack, “I don’t take these things personally. I engage with people diplomatically. He has had similar things to say about other leaders.”

The Israeli government is reacting to Albanese’s announcement Australia will recognise a Palestinian state, and the government’s refusal of visas for high profile Israeli figures to visit Australia, including right wing parliamentarian Simcha Rothman.

Sky News has revealed Netanyahu also wrote to Albanese on Monday accusing him of “pouring fuel on this antisemitic fire” by the Palestinian decision.

Ophir Falk, foreign policy adviser to Netanyahu, told the ABC late Wednesday, the Albanese government was “morally bankrupt”.

“Instead of supporting Israel and demanding the unconditional and the immediate release of the hostages, the Australians government chooses to recognise a Palestinian state, on the backdrop of the October 7 massacre. It’s a huge, huge, huge prize for terrorism.”

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar told the Erin Molan Show this week that “what the Australian government is doing these days is shameful”.

“Instead of battling against antisemitism in Australia, as they should, they are doing the opposite – they are fuelling antisemitism.”

He described as “mad” the government’s banning “the entrance to Australia of Israeli politicians and other figures, with no justification, by saying that will be against the public order or will cause emotions among the Muslim population in Australia.” This was “totally false”, he said.

Albanese told a news conference, “Australians look at their TV coverage […] They look at the increased settler violence in the West Bank, they look at the decision that Israel has made in March to restrict the access of aid, food and water that people in Gaza needed, and they look at that and they think that something needs to change. The cycle of violence needs to change. Australia is a part of a global community.”

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. Australian Jewish representatives deliver stinging rebukes to Netanyahu and Albanese – https://theconversation.com/australian-jewish-representatives-deliver-stinging-rebukes-to-netanyahu-and-albanese-263430

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duygu Yengin, Associate Professor of Economics; President, Economic Society of Australia (SA); Deputy Chair, Women in Economics Network, University of Adelaide

Productivity is the buzzword at this week’s economic reform roundtable in Canberra. It’s about how effectively we turn our time, skills and resources into goods and services. Who wouldn’t want to get more done with less?

As Productivity Commission chair Danielle Wood said,

Productivity growth is the only way to sustainably lift wages and opportunities over time — important for all of us but especially for young people with their working life ahead of them.

The problem is Australia is falling behind. The Reserve Bank now expects productivity to grow by just 0.7% a year, which in turn will drag down wage growth.

Yet even now, with just one day left of the summit, we’re yet to hear much about a multi-billion-dollar opportunity: boosting women’s workforce participation.

What have you done for growth today?

Day two of the three-day roundtable focused on cutting red tape, boosting innovation with AI, and keeping markets competitive. Tackling these issues means asking hard questions and finding real answers. In Wood’s words,

No one wants to be the ‘big meanie’, but not delivering enough housing, infrastructure or innovation comes with a cost.

Wood has explained boosting productivity requires a “growth mindset” and steady, incremental reforms. Every policy — from housing and infrastructure to innovation and care — should consider its impact on long-term growth.

She reportedly told Tuesday’s session the government should review sectors where growing regulatory burdens are a concern, especially construction and finance.

Some of the attendees on Tuesday discussed a pause on changes to the National Construction Code, which governs building standards but has blown out to 2,000 pages.

Similarly, former Treasury Secretary Ken Henry, who is attending the roundtable, has called out Australia’s system of environmental impact assessments as “slow, opaque, duplicative, and contested”.

Regulation was a consistent theme of the day. Australia ranks 14th in a World Bank study for ease of doing business.

Red tape delays housing and climate projects and burdens care providers with overlapping accreditation rules. Half of small businesses said they spent more time on regulatory compliance than the year before. There is backlog of 30,000 housing projects waiting for environmental approval. The average renewables project takes 500 days for approval.

Streamlining these processes is central to lifting productivity. As Treasurer Jim Chalmers told the participants:

Making sure approvals can be quicker, without ignoring our responsibility to our communities or to the environment.

Is AI coming to the rescue?

Next on the agenda was artificial intelligence (AI) and innovation.
A recent report by the Productivity Commission estimates AI could add more than 4% to labour productivity and $116 billion in economic activity, over the next decade.

In the public sector, AI can sift through huge amounts of data, spot problems, and support faster, smarter decision-making. If used carefully, it could cut costs, improve efficiency, and make public services more transparent and accountable.

OECD data shows about 70% of countries use AI to improve internal operations, and 67% apply it to public service design and delivery.

Competition matters too

Also on the agenda was “economic dynamism”. Dynamic markets encourage firms to try new ideas, adopt better technologies, and work more efficiently.

The stakes are high. In just a year, business efficiency, covering productivity, management practices, and the labour market, dropped from 22nd to 37th in Institute for Management Development’s World Competitiveness Ranking.

Wood flagged that inconsistent state regulations hold businesses back. A national approach, guided by the National Competition Policy, could make it easier to start and grow businesses across borders.

We talk about productivity, but overlook half the workforce

Productivity is about removing barriers so innovation and growth can happen. Day two made it clear: cut red tape, embrace AI, keep markets dynamic.

Yet one major driver is being overlooked, including so far at this summit: women’s productivity.

Australian women make up just 39.6% of full-time workers. Almost half are in part-time roles, well above the rich country average of 28%.

With 80% of Australians in gender-segregated jobs, many women’s skills sit idle, contributing to skill shortages and slowing productivity.

Life still built for a 1950s family

The biggest barrier is care. Nearly six in ten women who want to work but aren’t available say caring for children or family is the reason, compared to just 7% of men.

School finishes well before the workday ends, and after-school care is scarce. Everyday systems – from sports to medical appointments and therapy – still assume a parent, usually the mother, is free in the middle of the day.

Mental load translates into stress, burnout, and lower productivity. About 61% of women report experiencing burnout in the past year due to balancing home and work.

The economic cost

The cost is huge. If women’s workforce participation matched men’s, there would be an additional one million workers with post-school qualifications, boosting economic growth by 8.7% or $31 billion by 2050.

Matching the participation rate of Nordic countries could lift Australia’s gross domestic product by $132 billion and tax revenue by $38 billion each year.

This would be enough to fund universal after-school and early childhood care many times over. Publicly provided care also improves children’s long-term labour outcomes and future productivity.

The gains wouldn’t just come from more hours worked. They would come from better use of skills, more women in higher-paying and higher-skilled jobs, and reduced career interruptions.

Despite record female workforce participation, men still out-earn women in 98% of occupations. A 25-year-old mother is on track to earn $2 million less over her lifetime than a father, costing the economy an estimated $93 billion a year.

Equal Pay Day on August 19 was a reminder that women must work 50 extra days a year just to catch up. Closing the gap could lift long-term productivity growth by 5.7%. It’s a reform too big to ignore.

Duygu Yengin is affiliated with the Women in Economics Network and the Economic Society of Australia.

– ref. Productivity is the buzzword of the week, but we’re not making the most of half the workforce – https://theconversation.com/productivity-is-the-buzzword-of-the-week-but-were-not-making-the-most-of-half-the-workforce-263187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milena Heinsch, Professor and Head of Social Work, University of Tasmania

Talking about suicide can feel scary. But new data has found one in three Australian teenagers have thought about, planned or attempted suicide in the last 12 months – so starting the conversation is crucial.

The report, released on Tuesday by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, found female teens were more likely (38%) than males (31%) to report suicidal thoughts and behaviours. These peaked for both at 16–17 years old.

For girls these experiences begin to decline after 17. But for boys they either stayed the same or, in the case of planning, continued to increase between 17 and 19.

Worryingly, for some (9% of males and 6% of females) a suicide attempt did not always involve prior thinking or planning.

But there can be warning signs.

If you’re concerned about your teenager, or you notice changes in how they’re talking or behaving, it’s best to speak up. You might worry it will make things worse, but research confirms there is no harm and can actually help. Asking directly and listening without judgement lets your teen know they’re not alone.

Signs your teen might be struggling

Suicidal thoughts can be difficult to spot, but there are things you can look for. These include:

• sudden changes in mood, including becoming unusually angry or irritable

• talking about feeling hopeless or worthless

• saying things like “I don’t want to be here any more”

• withdrawing from friends and family

• losing interest in things they once enjoyed

• changes in eating, sleeping, or personal hygiene

• using drugs or alcohol more often

• talking or writing about death

• giving away special belongings or making plans for after they’re gone.

Self-harm – such as cutting, burning or hitting themselves – is also a warning sign. It’s usually not about wanting to die, but a way of coping with emotional pain. Self-harm should always be taken seriously.

Should I talk to them about it?

Yes. Even if you’re unsure, it’s better to have the conversation than to stay silent. You could start with:

“You don’t seem like yourself right now. I care about you – is it okay if we talk?”

Give them space to talk. Don’t interrupt or try to fix things straight away. Just listen and thank them for trusting you if they open up.

How to ask about suicide and why it matters

This is the hardest part, but it’s also the most important. If you’re really worried, ask directly:

“Are you thinking about suicide?”

“Have you thought about ending your life?”

Avoid saying things like “You’re not thinking about doing something silly, are you?” This can feel dismissive or judgmental.

If they say yes, try to understand more:

“Do you have a plan for how you would end your life?”

“Have you thought about when or how you would end your life?”

“Have you done anything to prepare?”

People who have a plan are usually at the highest immediate risk of suicide. These questions can help you assess how serious things are and whether to seek assistance from emergency services.

What to do next

If you’re worried your teen is in immediate danger – for example, if they have a plan and intend to act on it – call 000 and ask for an ambulance.

Let them know you love them and that there is hope. Stay with them until help arrives.

At the emergency department, a mental health worker will assess your child and may speak with you both together and separately. They may recommend admission, but more often your child will go home with a treatment plan and a handover for your GP. They may also arrange for a community-based follow up.

If your teen refuses to go in an ambulance, you can contact the local Crisis Assessment and Treatment Team (CATT) through your closest public hospital. This is sometimes called the Psychiatric Emergency Team (PET).

These teams involve mental health professionals who can assess the risk and decide how best to support your teen. This may be a home visit or a stay in hospital.

If they’re not in immediate danger, take your teen to a GP, who can create a mental health treatment plan and refer them to a specialist such as a psychologist or psychiatrist.

There can be long wait times for a specialist appointment. While you wait, you may want to ask your GP to help develop a plan with practical strategies. Or you can visit a walk-in Medicare mental health centre, which provides immediate, free, short and medium-term care. You can also access free and immediate support from the organisations listed below.

It’s also a good idea to work together on a safety plan – a step-by-step guide for what to do if the thoughts come back. Free tools such as the Beyond Now app can help them create and share this plan.

Don’t forget to look after yourself

Supporting a child with suicidal thoughts is incredibly hard and feeling scared, exhausted or helpless is normal.

But you don’t have to do it alone. Talk to a friend, doctor or counsellor. Looking after yourself puts you in a stronger position to support your child.

You are not alone

If you or your child need urgent support, help is available 24/7:

• Lifeline: 13 11 14 or lifeline.org.au

• Kids Helpline (ages 5–25 and parents): 1800 55 1800 or kidshelpline.com.au

• Suicide Call Back Service (ages 15+): 1300 659 467 or suicidecallbackservice.org.au

• 13YARN (First Nations support): 13 92 76 or 13yarn.org.au.

Reaching out can feel scary, but it can make a real difference, and it might be what your child needs most right now.

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. 1 in 3 teens has thought about suicide this year. Here’s what to look for – and where to get help – https://theconversation.com/1-in-3-teens-has-thought-about-suicide-this-year-heres-what-to-look-for-and-where-to-get-help-263422

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kelvin (Shiu Fung) Wong, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Psychology, Swinburne University of Technology

Personality tests have become increasingly popular in daily life. From hiring to dating, they promise to help us understand who we are and how we are similar, or different, to others.

But do these tests paint an accurate picture? And could it be harmful to take them too seriously?

What are personality tests?

A personality test is an instrument designed to elicit a response that may reveal someone’s “personality” – that is, their patterns of behaving and thinking across different situations.

These tests can take the form of self-reporting questionnaires, such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (first developed in the 1940s) and the Big Five Inventory (developed in the 1990s).

Or they may be “projective” tests, where the individual talks freely about their interpretation of ambiguous stimuli. One famous example of this is the Rorschach inkblot test, developed in the early 1920s by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach.

Early beginnings

Personality testing isn’t new. Historical texts from across the globe suggest humans have been interested in understanding and categorising personality for thousands of years.

Around 400 BCE, Greek philosopher Hippocrates suggested an individual’s temperament was influenced by the balance of four bodily fluids, known as “humours”.

Even earlier, around 1115 BCE, government officials in ancient China examined the behaviour and character of individuals to determine their suitability for different jobs in the public system.

However, the systematic and scientific development of tools to understand and categorise personality only began in the 20th century.

One of the first was developed in 1917 by the United States army to predict how new recruits may react to war, and whether they were at risk of “shell shock” (now classified as post-traumatic stress disorder). The goal was to identify individuals who may be unsuitable for combat.

This assessment had 116 “yes” or “no” items, including questions about somatic symptoms, social adjustment, and medical and family history. Examples included “Have you ever fainted away?” and “Do you usually feel well and strong?”. Those who scored highly were referred to a psychologist for further assessment.

Since then, thousands of similar “personality” tests have been developed and used across clinical, occupational and educational settings. Many of these, such as the Myers-Briggs test, have gained mainstream appeal thanks to the internet and media.

Why are we drawn to these tests?

The answer to this lies not in the specific characteristics of the tests, but in the deep-seated psychological need they promise to satisfy.

The drive to understand oneself starts at an early age and continues throughout life. We ask ourselves questions such as “who am I?” and “how do I fit into the world?”

Personality tests are a simple way to get answers to these difficult questions. It can be quite comforting – even exhilarating – to see yourself reflected in the results.

According to American psychologist Abraham Maslow’s theory of human needs, people are driven towards self-improvement and “self-actualisation”, which broadly refers to the realisation of one’s potential.

So, people may be drawn to personality tests in the hope that knowing their personality “type” will help them make better choices for their personal growth, whether that’s in their career, relationships, or health.

Maslow also identified another human need: the need for belonging. Learning your personality type, and the types of those around you, is one way to find “your kind of people”. According to social identity theory, finding a group we feel we belong to feeds back into our sense of who we are.

The Barnum effect

It’s worth noting there is psychological research which questions the validity and reliability of the Myers-Briggs test.

One of the main critiques is that completing the test more than once within a short period of time can generate different results (what is called poor “test-retest reliability”). Since personality is generally stable in the short-term, you would ideally expect the same results.

Furthermore, Myers-Briggs and similar tests use broad, positive, and sufficiently vague language when describing personality types. In doing so, they effectively harness the “Barnum effect” or “Forer effect”: the tendency for people to accept general statements as unique descriptions of themselves.

Sound familiar? That’s because horoscopes do the same thing. The results of horoscopes and personality tests can “feel right” because they are designed to resonate with universal human experiences and aspirations.

That said, personality tests are still routinely used in research and clinical practice – although experts suggest using measures that are proven to be scientifically sound.

One common test used in clinical practice is the revised form of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2-RF). This 338-item test measures problematic personality traits that may impact an individual’s mental health.

While it has its own set of problems, the MMPI-2-RF is useful in accurately assessing for symptoms of personality disorders, and predicting how different personality traits may impact treatment outcomes.

Taking tests too seriously

If you pigeonhole yourself into a rigid personality type, you run the danger of limiting yourself to the boundaries of this label. You may even use the label to excuse your own or others’ problematic behaviours as “just ESTP things”.

Moreover, by seeing the world purely through these simplified categories, we may ignore the fact that personality can evolve over long periods. By putting others, or ourselves, into a box, we fail to see people as individuals who are capable of change and growth.

While there’s nothing wrong with taking a personality test for fun, out of curiosity, or even to explore aspects of your identity, it’s important to not get too attached to the labels – lest they become all that you are.

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. Are you really an ISFJ? The truth about personality tests – and why we keep taking them – https://theconversation.com/are-you-really-an-isfj-the-truth-about-personality-tests-and-why-we-keep-taking-them-261183

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Rudge, Law Lecturer, University of Sydney

A small Australian trial that used psychedelic-assisted therapy to improve the mental health and wellbeing of terminally ill patients is in the news today.

The results are based on research conducted in Melbourne involving 35 people. All had an advanced, life-threatening illness, such as cancer or motor neurone disease. They also had anxiety and/or depression.

In the first part of the trial, they took either a synthetic version of psilocybin (usually found in magic mushrooms) or a placebo. In the second part, all participants took psilocybin.

Patients had psychotherapy with trained clinicians before and after taking the drugs.

Benefits included reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression, and improved spiritual wellbeing and quality of life.

One person withdrew from the trial due to anxiety during dosing. Others withdrew for a number of reasons unrelated to the treatment, including their medical condition worsening, leaving 25 people to complete the trial.

Several clinical trials in Australia and New Zealand are testing psychedelic drugs for a range of conditions. For example, trials have focused on depression, anxiety, prolonged grief, anorexia and addiction.

Psychedelic-assisted therapy offers promise. But in other new research, which has been accepted for publication, we show that the path to safe and equitable access is complex.

What is psychedelic-assisted therapy?

Psychedelic-assisted therapy, also known as psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy, involves a patient taking a psychedelic substance in a clinical setting, guided by trained health professionals.

For about two years, Australian psychiatrists have had a legal pathway to do this. They’ve been allowed to prescribe MDMA and psilocybin for specific mental health conditions.

When the scheme began in July 2023, Australia became the first country to establish a national, regulated clinical model for these therapies.

‘Too fast and too soon’?

In Australia, a human research ethics committee must approve a psychiatrist’s treatment plan.

The psychiatrist then applies to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Australia’s medicines regulator, to become an “authorised prescriber” of MDMA for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression (depression that hasn’t responded to other treatments).

The TGA’s decision to allow psychedelic-assisted therapy was controversial. Its own expert panel concluded the available evidence to support its use was of low quality.

One panel member later criticised the decision as “too fast and too soon”.

These concerns were echoed in June 2024, when a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committee voted against approving MDMA for PTSD.

Now, officials in the new US administration signal they may fast-track the approval of psychedelics for psychotherapy. This includes backing from Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Slow uptake in Australia

These treatments are still rare in Australia. In the scheme’s first six months, only one patient was prescribed MDMA, and none received psilocybin.

At that time, up to six psychiatrists were authorised to prescribe them. By early 2024, at least ten psychiatrists had been.

Mind Medicine Australia, which advocates for psychedelic-assisted therapy,
estimates about 80 patients had the therapy in 2024.

But we don’t have official data.

Unlawful promotion is a major concern

Promoting prescription drugs directly to the public is illegal in Australia.

Yet, the TGA has already issued more than a dozen warning letters for the unlawful promotion of MDMA and psilocybin, compelling clinics, researchers, and media outlets to remove or amend their advertising.

In the US, however, direct-to-consumer drug advertising is legal, pervasive – even celebrated. So medicalising psychedelics in the US would likely fuel online promotion that would inevitably influence Australian attitudes.

Misconduct and patient risk

A deep concern internationally is professional misconduct surrounding psychedelic-assisted therapy, especially sexual boundary violations. This is any form of sexualised behaviour by a practitioner towards a patient – a profound and harmful betrayal of trust.

Our research, and that of others, suggests the risk of boundary violations is higher in psychedelic-assisted therapy.

The substances can make patients suggestible, lowering social inhibitions while fostering intense bonds with their therapist.

Evidence of therapist misconduct – including allegations of sexual abuse in the US clinical trials – was a key factor in the FDA’s decision to reject MDMA therapy.

Based on the same unethical conduct, the journal Psychopharmacology retracted three pivotal papers analysing the MDMA trial data.

While there have been no public reports of such misconduct in Australia, the international reports raise a serious red flag.

A patchwork of regulations creates barriers

Differences have emerged in how different states and territories apply psychedelic-assisted therapy regulations.

In New South Wales, practitioners need a separate approval from the state’s health department for every patient. Treatment must also occur in a licensed private mental health facility, yet none is licensed for the required day-stay procedure. This has forced NSW patients to travel to Victoria for treatment.

South Australia defines these substances as “drugs of dependence”, and practitioners need special authorisation from the state health minister to prescribe them a full treatment course.

In Victoria, authorised prescribers notify the health department before they treat a patient, with no restrictions on the type of facility.

This inconsistency between jurisdictions creates a “postcode lottery” for care.

A cautionary lesson?

Australia’s decision to medicalise psychedelics was a bold step. But the scheme’s flaws show that legalisation is not a simple switch.

It requires a robust, nationally consistent framework that prioritises patient safety and confronts the unique ethical risks of these powerful medicines.

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. Two years on from Australia’s bold psychedelic experiment, here are our concerns – https://theconversation.com/two-years-on-from-australias-bold-psychedelic-experiment-here-are-our-concerns-261367

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Baker, Professor of Housing Research, University of Adelaide

Most Australians invest much of their income into housing, making employment, education and retirement decisions based on the location, timing and strength of their housing investment.

Across the nation, the housing choices of the last four generations have shaped our cities’ economic success and productivity. Stable housing enabled development, and affordable housing provided a stable workforce fuelling this progress.

Yet, in recent decades, policymakers have largely lost sight of how important housing is for productivity. It’s pleasing to see it’s a focus of discussions at the government’s economic roundtable.

Australia’s housing affordability crisis is undermining the economies of our cities, which have become too expensive for many to live in, work, start businesses or pursue education. Growing numbers of Australians are forced to move to the urban fringes and endure long commutes to work.

Many in job-dense areas live in poor-quality dwellings, which they cannot afford to repair. Poor-quality housing worsens health, which is a drag on productivity.

So how can we harness housing to drive up productivity? Here are five ways.

1. Build houses more efficiently

The way we build Australian homes is wildly inefficient.

A key reason is that subcontracting has fragmented the construction industry. A head contractor signs on dozens of subcontractors. Then, costs grow due to days with no-one on site, or with delays due to a specific subcontractor being unavailable.

Modern methods of construction can speed up the construction workflow and revolutionise the way we deliver housing.

This will require rapid testing and scaling up a range of innovative technologies such as prefabrication, alternative materials (such as recycled steel), 3D printing and robotics to deliver housing more quickly, and standardisation to deliver more efficiently.

2. Use our housing stock more productively

As the population ages and household composition changes, we need to move beyond the myth of the quarter-acre block, Hills Hoist and Victa mower.

Our current average household size of 2.5 people is around half the household size 100 years ago. Yet Australian homes are now, on average, the largest on Earth and double the size of housing in most European and Asian nations.

Greater stock diversity through townhouses, apartments and other higher density forms will narrow the mismatch between the housing stock and population needs.

Almost all of tomorrow’s housing supply already exists today. So there is much to gain from re-purposing ageing stock and increasing its use, and even adapting former office accommodation.

Abolishing stamp duties on home purchases and replacing them with a broad-based land tax will also promote labour mobility and downsizing.

3. Streamline government responsibility for housing

If we want to increase housing supply and improve productivity, we need to consider integrated policy.

Federal and state governments need to think about impact: aligning the housing and cities portfolios under one minister, with a mandate to deliver housing first and foremost. We need to get away from multiple ministers and departments tripping over each other.

We’ve seen successful streamlining already in some states. In South Australia, ministers have combined housing and planning responsibility as the head of a housing “super department”.

4. Tap into economic potential beyond cities

Our national target of 1.2 million well-located homes should not be misunderstood as 1.2 million inner-city homes. New builds don’t have to be in the biggest cities.

Our regions have boomed in recent years and could grow further if governments gave priority to planning their future and delivering infrastructure, unlocking tens of thousands of new homes.

Pressure would come off big city housing markets, while more regional housing would provide the workforce needed to deliver national ambitions around a better connected electricity grid and strong regions.

5. Embrace housing innovation

Australia has many housing markets that behave very differently across urban, regional and remote areas.

Waves of AI innovation not only provide the promise of streamlined planning processes, but now make it possible to generate precise predictions of housing behaviours at the individual level through machine learning models.

These are already being tested in the health sector to screen for disease risk.

They can be turned into reality in the housing space through partnerships built on leading edge housing and computing science.

Housing programs such as the HomeBuilder and Commonwealth Rent Assistance have earned unwelcome reputations for being badly targeted. Machine learning models offer much-needed tools to achieve laser-like precision in housing modelling.

This will deliver overdue improvements in housing policy designs.

Time for new thinking

We need to abandon the search for some singular silver bullet to solve the housing affordability crisis. It is time to tackle policy inertia and experiment with new solutions.

The Australian government, states and territories, the private sector and individual communities need to undertake pilots, acknowledge what fails and then scale-up the most promising innovations.

For instance, emerging construction methods could be pioneered in regional areas where the supply chain is fragile, then rolled out nationally.

As Australia’s productivity levels hit all-time lows, the need to understand, discuss and act upon the wider housing system has never been more urgent.

Like labour and capital investment, housing is essential economic infrastructure. It’s a massive and powerful lever that needs to be harnessed to reverse declines in productivity and revive prospects for long-term economic growth.

The authors would like to acknowledge the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute’s Managing Director, Michael Fotheringham, for his contributions to this article.

Emma Baker receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

Andrew Beer receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Centre, the City of Lithgow and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.

Rachel Ong ViforJ receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

– ref. Housing can be good for productivity. Here are 5 ways we can build it better – https://theconversation.com/housing-can-be-good-for-productivity-here-are-5-ways-we-can-build-it-better-263335

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Boucaut, Lecturer, media and cultural studies, University of Adelaide

The AFL is facing a monumental stress test in its efforts to tackle homophobia, with one of the league’s biggest stars facing a season-ending suspension on the eve of the finals series.

Adelaide star Izak Rankine has joined a growing number of AFL players and coaches who have been sanctioned for anti-gay language in the past two seasons.

These offenders have been hit with suspensions, fines and mandatory sensitivity training.

However, Rankine’s case is putting the AFL’s policy under increased scrutiny because he is a star player on a league-leading team gearing up for its first finals run since 2017.

High stakes as finals loom

There is a high-stakes, on-field storyline here. The length of Rankine’s suspension will have a significant impact on how the finals play out.

Indeed, much of the coverage and commentary across AFL media is focused on how many games he will miss and how this will affect the Crows’ chances.

This demonstrates a shortcoming in how the AFL media understands and communicates cultural homophobia.

We have spent the past ten months researching homophobia in the AFL, specifically looking at how a cultural issue like homophobia is understood and communicated across AFL media.

We analysed news and commentary about instances of homophobic abuse across the 2024 season, from mainstream outlets including The Age, AFL Media and FoxFooty.

We found the reporting prioritised on-field consequences, precedent and punishment. This imagines homophobia as a problem of individual players to be “solved” with the right length of suspension.

While anti-gay slurs on the field clearly need to be stamped out, reporters and commentators also need to be telling a broader story about the AFL’s attempts to change its culture.

Homophobia and elite sports

There has long been a link between elite sports and homophobia.

Australian sporting institutions, such as the AFL or rugby league, have been accused of marginalising gay players. When violent masculinity is a valued attribute of a sporting culture, traits such as femininity or queerness can be seen as threats to a team’s success.

Indeed, homophobia is difficult for the AFL to reconcile, given it’s believed to be the only major sporting code in the world where no past or present male player has identified publicly as gay.

A slur isn’t a high bump or tackle

Researchers have noted how the Australian public’s appetite for year-round AFL news has empowered the league to act as a gate-keeper to stories and players, leading to favourable coverage.

In our yet-to-be-published research, we also found the decision-making processes of the AFL tribunal and the league’s integrity unit dictate the terms by which stories about impropriety or misconduct are constructed in AFL coverage.

This has implications on how a cultural challenge like homophobia is understood. It also affects how meaningfully the AFL is then compelled to respond.

Themes of “precedent”, “consistency” and “fairness” are overwhelmingly represented in coverage of homophobic incidents.

All of these themes are focused on punishment against a player for their transgression.

This is inadequate for understanding long-held cultural problems, because it presents intolerance as contained and solvable. Punishment may be deemed “too soft” or “an overreaction”, but it is then the end of the story.

The tribunal is generally a mechanism for dealing with physical harm during play. This means reportage also encourages a strange debate in football media about the severity and context of using anti-gay slurs.

We observed this when the integrity unit was investigating Port Adelaide player Jeremy Finlayson’s 2024 on-field use of a slur, months after North Melbourne coach Alastair Clarkson used a different slur against an opposing player.

In speculating on the precedent that Clarkson’s suspended ban set, AFL media voices – such as ESPN’s Footy Podcast – were awkwardly debating which homophobic slur was worse and why. One slur was likened to “striking” and the other “bumping”.

Notably, the reportage often falls short of interrogating the issue of homophobia beyond the incidents in question.

A high-profile investigation from Louise Milligan for Four Corners in 2023 was the most robust attempt so far. She observed the league was so resistant to her enquiries that the report was titled “the silence”.

That so many reports of anti-gay language and resulting suspensions have occurred since Milligan’s story is a promising sign the AFL is taking the issue seriously.

Yet, in obsessing over precedent, context and on-field consequences, coverage of anti-gay slurs individualises these incidents and moves the conversation onto the AFL’s terms.

A stress test on the AFL

The Rankine case is a turning point given the stakes: a star player of the ladder-topping team.

If precedent dictates a five-match suspension, he will miss a potential Grand Final.

Media figures have expressed sympathy for the Crows. What is missing is sympathy for closeted gay players, umpires, staff or fans who have been historically ostracised from the game.

The AFL has a reputational problem with homophobia that it has neglected for too long, and which likely dissuades gay players from coming out.

How the league responds to the high stakes of the Rankine case will be telling.

The story should not stop at a penalty against an individual, and the AFL needs to front harder questions about ongoing efforts to improve its culture.

Our research into the AFL media’s coverage of anti-gay abuse advocates instead for stronger and more consistent scrutiny into proactive measures by the AFL across all levels of its playing culture.

Problems such as homophobia require collective solutions: continuing to rely on punishment frameworks would be too soft.

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. Australian sports media is compounding the AFL’s homophobia problem – https://theconversation.com/australian-sports-media-is-compounding-the-afls-homophobia-problem-263427

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eva F Nisa, Associate Professor, Cultural Anthropology, Australian National University

As the world grapples with myriad environmental problems, a growing number of studies shows the role of religion is key.

Religion influences people’s worldviews, including how we think about nature and our roles within it. This is true of Islam, one of the world’s biggest and fastest-growing religions.

Islamic teachings on protecting nature can help inform how we respond to the ecological and climate crises. In particular, Australia can look to our neighbour, Indonesia, where the “Green Islam” movement is growing.

So let’s take a closer look at how Islamic teachings promote care for nature, establishing common ground for environmental action across faiths and cultures.

What is Green Islam?

In Islam, humans are described as khalīfah, or caretakers of the Earth. Islamic teaching also states that Islam is rahmatan lil‘ālamīn – a mercy to all creation.

This means Muslims are responsible for the wellbeing of everything on Earth – humans, animals, plants, land and water. Taking care of the environment is considered an act of worship.

The colour green has always held special meaning in Islam. It is said to have been the Prophet Muhammad’s favoured colour, symbolising hope, paradise and new life.

The Qur’an – Islam’s sacred scripture and the main source of Islamic teaching – frequently discusses nature. It describes the sky, trees, rivers and animals, and the beauty of the natural world. It also reminds people to live in mīzān, or balance, with the environment, in verses such as:

He has raised up the sky. He has set the balance, so that you may not exceed in the balance: weigh with justice and do not fall short in the balance.

The hadith, another source of Islamic teaching, also promotes environmental care. The hadith is a collection of words, actions, and approvals attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, the last prophet of Islam. One such hadith refers to care for nature as an act of giving:

There is none amongst the Muslims who plants a tree or sows seeds, and then a bird, or a person or an animal eats from it, but is regarded as a charitable gift from him.

The emergence of Green Islam

While the Qur’an and hadith have long talked about nature, the Green Islam movement emerged much more recently.

Muslim scholar Seyyed Hossein Nasr was among the first to articulate the idea. In the late 1960s, he argued environmental problems were not only physical but also spiritual and moral. He believed people, regardless of their faith, should reconnect with spiritual values that teach care and balance.

In following decades, as environmental problems worsened, more Muslim voices began calling for environmental responsibility based on Islamic principles. This was supported by a growing body of research exploring the relationship between Islam and environmental care.

Over the past 25 years or so, Green Islam has moved from theory to real-life action. Today, the ideas are practised in many Muslim nations and communities around the world.

A spotlight on Indonesia

Indonesia faces a number of pressing environmental problems, including deforestation, air pollution and marine pollution. It is also among the world’s top ten greenhouse gas emitters.

Indonesia is also the world’s largest Muslim-majority country, and is at the forefront of the Green Islam movement. There, Green Islam is helping to mobilise leaders and communities to support environmental protection.

Environmentalism is taught at Islamic schools across Indonesia. This is supported by the nation’s Green Islamic Boarding School program known as Pesantren Hijau.

Indonesia’s Islamic boarding schools, or pesantren, are large and well-established, and their teachers and students are well respected. This makes the school network an effective way to encourage green practices both within the schools and in the broader community.

In 2022, Indonesia’s national mosque, Istiqlal, became the world’s first place of worship to be environmentally certified by the International Finance Corporation.

The mosque building includes reflective paint for the roof and external walls, energy-saving lighting, smart energy meters and solar panels. It also features low-flow taps and water recycling. Professor Nasaruddin Umar, Grand Imam of Istiqlal, said the mosque had become a “centre of enlightenment for environmental protection”, adding:

Muslims feel a strong imperative for mosques to go green to enhance the quality of their worship and honour the leadership of the [Prophet Muhammad] Rasulullah SAW who insisted on the need to protect the environment.

The Indonesian government has also urged religious leaders to include environmental themes in sermons. For example, in April this year the Ministry of Religious Affairs encouraged preachers to talk about environmental protection during Friday prayers, to coincide with Earth Day.

Australia and Indonesia are working together on environmental protection. Programs include collaboration on a just energy transition, emisisons reduction and addressing forest and land fires.

To ensure more effective and respectful cooperation with Indonesia, Australia should recognise and respect how Green Islam can help care for our shared planet.

Looking to a green future

Prominent examples of Green Islam can be found around the world.

Morocco, for example, has a green mosques movement. In Egypt, the Islamic authority Dar al-Ifta has issued a “fatwa” (religious edict) prohibiting activities that harm nature.

And many countries support environmental initiatives through Green Sukuk, an instrument to fund eco-friendly projects that align with Islamic principles.

In a time of mounting ecological challenges, all sources of wisdom are vital. Islamic teachings, along with that of other faiths, offer guidance for living in harmony with nature. Together, they can inspire meaningful and practical action for the planet.

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. ‘Green Islam’: how Muslims are powering environmental action across the world – https://theconversation.com/green-islam-how-muslims-are-powering-environmental-action-across-the-world-261380

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tania Barone, Research Associate in Galaxy Evolution, Swinburne University of Technology

Astronomers are living in a golden age of bigger and better telescopes. But even our most advanced technology pales in comparison to the power of nature’s own “cosmic magnifying glasses” – strong gravitational lenses.

In less than 50 years we have gone from the first-ever discovery of a strong gravitational lens to now finding thousands. As new telescopes come online, we’re expecting to discover thousands more.

With these lenses, we can look deep into the universe, and catch glimpses into the most puzzling of contemporary cosmic mysteries: dark matter and dark energy.

So, what are gravitational lenses and how do they work?

A spectacular demonstration of gravity

Gravitational lenses are the most visually spectacular demonstration of Albert Einstein’s theories of gravity.

According to Einstein, mass bends and warps the very fabric of space, in much the same way that a heavy bowling bowl placed on a mattress will bend the mattress beneath it.

Everything with mass (you, me, a leaf, an atom) bends space-time in this way.

But it’s only when an object is really massive – such as entire galaxies and clusters of galaxies – that this effect becomes so apparent. As light travels from distant objects and passes these massive galaxies, the warped space-time around them bends and focuses this light, magnifying it for us to see.

We’re not always in the right place to see this effect. Just like how you need to align a magnifying glass in front of your eye, we only observe the gravitational lensing effect when there is a chance alignment of the background object, the foreground lens, and us.

On the rare occasions when this happens, through our telescopes we see multiple, distorted but magnified versions of an object that we wouldn’t otherwise be able to see because it’s too faint.

Revealing the invisible

Even Einstein couldn’t have predicted how important gravitational lenses would become to modern astronomy. In fact, he believed them impossible to observe at all.

This was because Einstein was thinking about gravitational lensing around individual stars, not galaxies. It wasn’t until decades later that astronomers came to realise just how massive galaxies are, and just how full of them our universe is.

Impressively, gravitational lenses can also reveal details about things we can’t see at all.

Theories predict about 85% of the matter that makes up the universe is invisible stuff called dark matter. The way a gravitational lens bends and warps light allows us to measure how much matter is in galaxies – not just the regular matter we can see, but dark matter as well.

Gravitational lenses can also help us map galaxy clusters across the universe, helping us to understand its shape. Is our universe perfectly flat like a sheet of paper? Or does it have curvature to it like a sphere, or flare outwards like a horse saddle?

That depends on how dense the universe is, and mapping galaxy clusters helps us measure the density of a hypothetical force known as dark energy.

Looking at the distant universe

Gravitational lenses typically make the background objects ten to 100 times brighter than they would be otherwise. This effect provides a high-definition view of the distant universe.

The James Webb Space Telescope has been taking advantage of this magnification boost to get a glimpse into what the universe was like in its infancy more than 13 billion years ago, shortly (300 million years) after the Big Bang.

Looking far into the past helps us piece together how our own celestial home, the Milky Way galaxy, formed and how it might change in the future.

We’re about to be spoilt for choice

The catch to all this is gravitational lenses are rare – akin to a needle in a cosmic-scale haystack. To find them, we need high quality images of large swaths of the night sky.

This year, two new skywatching projects are expected to revolutionise the field: the European Space Agency’s Euclid space telescope and the Vera Rubin Observatory in Chile.

Euclid, which launched in 2023 and released its first batch of data earlier this year, will image a monumental one-third of the entire sky, with a clarity that only comes from being in space.

Conversely, the Vera Rubin Observatory will be working from the ground, but will image the entire southern hemisphere sky. It will create the most detailed time-lapsed view of the cosmos ever seen.

Over their lifetimes Euclid and the Vera Rubin Observatory are predicted to unveil 100,000 new gravitational lenses, 100 times more than we currently know.

How do we find these 100,000 gravitational lenses among the billions of galaxies observed by these telescopes? It is not feasible for scientists to wade through that many images alone.

Instead, Euclid is relying on citizen scientists to help train AI models to know what to look for. By having people each look through a few images and classifying whether they are gravitational lenses or not, AI models can learn from these examples and can then search the entire dataset (if you want to get involved, check out their website).

From individual lenses providing unique new insights into distant galaxies, to studying the effect over large statistical samples to understand the very nature of the universe, gravitational lenses do it all. They are the Swiss Army knife in an astronomer’s toolkit, and we’re about to be spoilt for choice.

Tania Barone receives funding from the Australian Research Council for research with gravitational lenses.

– ref. The most powerful tool in an astronomer’s arsenal is a lens – but not the kind you might think – https://theconversation.com/the-most-powerful-tool-in-an-astronomers-arsenal-is-a-lens-but-not-the-kind-you-might-think-262630

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

The Liberals won 14 of the 35 lower house seats at the July 19 Tasmanian state election, Labor ten, the Greens five, independents five and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers one.

Liberal Jeremy Rockliff was reappointed premier pending parliament’s resumption on Tuesday. Labor moved a no-confidence motion in Rockliff, but it failed by 24 votes to 10. Labor didn’t get votes from any non-Labor MP. The Liberals will continue to govern Tasmania, with Labor’s last period in government ending in 2014.

The no-confidence motion was doomed after the Greens announced they would not support it on Monday. I previously wrote that the Greens had been frustrated by their negotiations with Labor.

Four of the five independents are left-leaning, with the Shooter the only right-leaning crossbencher. In total, Labor, the Greens and left-leaning independents won 19 of the 35 seats, against 15 for the Liberals and Shooters. Yet no left-leaning independents or Greens supported Labor’s motion.

Under Labor party rules, when they lose an election the leadership is spilled. Current leader Dean Winter could be challenged. If there is a Labor leadership election, the new leader will be decided by a combined vote of Labor party members and state delegates.

A more left-wing Labor leader than Winter may have had a better relationship with the Greens and left-leaning independents, which could have helped Labor to form government.

In a Tasmanian EMRS poll, conducted August 12–14 from a sample of 503, respondents opposed Labor’s no-confidence motion by 49–35 (44–38 were in favour of a Liberal over a Labor minority government in late July). Excluding undecided, Greens support for the motion fell from 90–10 to 73–27. On budget repair, abandoning the Macquarie Point stadium was supported by 56–33.

Respondents supported the Liberals phasing out greyhound racing by 2029 by 74–14. They supported the Liberals abandoning their proposal to open up 40,000 hectares of native forestry to harvesting by 61–24.

Federal polls give Labor big leads

A national Newspoll, conducted August 11–14 from a sample of 1,283, gave Labor a 56–44 lead, a one-point gain for the Coalition since the July Newspoll. Primary votes were 36% Labor (steady), 30% Coalition (up one), 12% Greens (steady), 9% One Nation (up one) and 13% for all Others (down two).

Anthony Albanese’s net approval was up three points to +3, with 49% satisfied and 46% dissatisfied. This is his first positive net approval in Newspoll since September 2023. Liberal leader Sussan Ley’s net approval was down two points to -9. Albanese led Ley as better PM by 51–31 (52–32 previously).

This is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll with a trend line. The trend line is below the latest two data points.

Asked whether they were more worried about Donald Trump’s tariffs or China’s military threat, voters selected tariffs by 42–37, with Labor and Greens voters strongly favouring tariffs.

A national Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, conducted August 11–16 from a sample of 1,800, gave Labor a 59–41 lead by respondent preferences, a three-point gain for Labor since the July Resolve poll.

Primary votes were 37% Labor (up two), 29% Coalition (steady), 12% Greens (steady), 9% One Nation (up one), 8% independents (steady) and 6% others (down two). By 2025 preference flows, Labor led by about 57–43.

Albanese’s net approval was down five points to -2, with 45% giving him a poor rating and 43% a good rating. Ley’s net approval was steady at +9. Albanese led Ley as preferred PM by 41–26 (40–25 in July).

Labor led the Liberals on economic management by 34–28 (31–30 previously). On keeping the cost of living low, Labor led by 32–26 (30–26 previously).

The question on Australia’s recognition of Palestine is biased and confusing. The 44% who wanted “no change” in Australia’s existing policy would include many who confused this with a don’t know option.

Now 29% said they were more sympathetic to Gaza than when the conflict began (up nine since October 2024), while 16% were more sympathetic to Israel. On Australia’s security, 41% (down ten since January) said Australia was less safe as a result of the Middle East conflict.

On the economic roundtable, 51% thought the government should act now on important reforms, while 22% said they should take proposals to the next election. Voters were opposed by 51–20 to an increase in the GST rate and by 44–26 to broadening the GST. They were in favour of other proposed reforms.

Adrian Beaumont 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. Liberals retain government in Tasmania, while federal Labor keeps big lead in polls – https://theconversation.com/liberals-retain-government-in-tasmania-while-federal-labor-keeps-big-lead-in-polls-263306

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna Marie Brennan, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Waikato

This week, Russia is expected to launch its Bion-M No.2 biosatellite from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, carrying 75 mice and 1,500 fruit flies.

While the mission underscores Russia’s ongoing investment in space medicine, it reignites ethical concerns over the treatment of animals in space research.

Animals have played a pivotal role in space exploration since the 1950s. The former Soviet Union’s launch of the stray dog Laika aboard Sputnik 2 in 1957 marked the first living creature in orbit.

Laika’s cramped, stressful conditions and eventual death from oxygen deprivation highlighted the harsh realities of early space missions.

The US followed suit in 1961 with Ham, a chimpanzee sent on a suborbital flight to test task performance in space. Ham endured invasive monitoring, electric shocks for incorrect responses and severe dehydration. Although he recovered physically, he showed signs of psychological trauma following the mission.

As space exploration expands, the absence of legal protections for animals becomes increasingly problematic. International regulations are long overdue to formally recognise the sentience of animals in outer-space law and to safeguard their welfare before, during and after missions.

Forgotten animal casualties of space exploration

Despite technological advances, animal casualties persist. In 2019, Israel’s Beresheet spacecraft crash-landed on the Moon with thousands of tardigrades aboard. The fate of these eight-legged microscopic animals, also known as water bears or moss piglets, remains unknown.

Often, animals used in missions are deemed surplus afterwards, with little legal obligation for their continued care. For example, France’s Félicette, a cat sent into orbit in 1963, was euthanised post-mission for brain study, despite surviving re-entry.

Unlike military working animals, which undergo transition programmes for civilian life, space animals lack formal exit protocols.

Records of their fates are scarce, and their legal status remains ambiguous. This gap stems partly from the absence of animal considerations in outer-space law.

International responses and ethical shifts

Activist pressure, particularly from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), has led to some reforms.

In 1996, NASA withdrew from the BION programme and introduced the Principles for the Ethical Care and Use of Animals. These guidelines were prompted by the Belmont Report which was commissioned in 1974 by the US Congress following controversy about unethical practices in research.

The guidelines emphasise bioethical responsibility, acknowledging that animals “warrant moral concern”.

NASA committed to stewardship of research animals, encompassing acquisition, care and what happens to them after the space mission. The principles outline three core ethical tenets:

1. Respect for life: use only appropriate species in minimal numbers necessary for valid results.

2. Societal benefit: weigh the ethical value of animal use against potential societal gains.

3. Non-maleficence: minimise pain and distress, recognising that animals may suffer similarly to humans.

While these principles don’t ban animal use, they promote ethical reflection and accountability.

Some agencies have followed suit. In 2010, the European Space Agency rejected primate research, opting for simulation technologies to study astronaut health risks.

NASA briefly considered resuming primate experiments in 2010, but PETA’s lobbying led to the cancellation of proposed research at Brookhaven National Laboratory.

Nonetheless, NASA continues to use mice in space studies. In 2024, a group of mice was sent to the International Space Station to examine the effects of space on bodily systems.

Private companies have also faced scrutiny. In 2022, KEKA Aerospace in the Democratic Republic of Congo pledged to stop using animals after a rat named Kavira died aboard its Troposphere 5 rocket.

Legal gaps in outer-space law

Despite growing awareness, the legal and ethical frameworks surrounding animals in space remain underdeveloped. The lack of formal protections and transparency continues to raise questions about the ethical and moral cost of scientific progress.

There are five core outer space treaties, covering issues such as the peaceful use of outer space, the rescue of astronauts, the registration of space objects and liability for damage. But despite the long history of animals participating in space missions, none offers formal protections, focusing solely on human and state interests.

A common argument is that prioritising animal welfare could hinder scientific progress. While violence against humans is prohibited, harm to animals for food, research, medicine and other purposes remains widely accepted on Earth. Some question whether it would be inconsistent to restrict harm to animals in space, where human casualties are more likely.

However, two key observations challenge this view.

First, many countries, including New Zealand, now legally recognise animals as sentient beings, deserving moral and legal consideration. Just as human rights evolved after the second world war, the animal welfare movement has gradually secured protections against cruelty and neglect. Yet, space law remains largely silent on the physical and psychological harm animals endure during missions.

Second, concerns that animal welfare might overshadow human safety are unfounded. Outer-space law is already flexible enough to ensure human protection takes precedence. The real question is whether space law can evolve to safeguard both human and animal interests without conflict.

Importantly, the types of harm animals face in space – stress, injury and death – are not fundamentally different from those permitted on Earth in service of human needs. In both contexts, animals are used to advance human survival or ambition. Thus, the perceived inconsistency in protecting animals in space may be less significant than it appears.

We need a more balanced framework – one that acknowledges animals as sentient participants and ensures their welfare is considered alongside human interests.

Anna Marie Brennan was awarded the Borrin Foundation’s Women Leaders in Law Fellowship in 2024.

– ref. We’ve been sending animals into space for 7 decades – yet there are still no rules to protect them from harm – https://theconversation.com/weve-been-sending-animals-into-space-for-7-decades-yet-there-are-still-no-rules-to-protect-them-from-harm-263332

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland

Ever ordered a salad on a first date when you really wanted the burger?

Many of us eat differently when we’re around other people, often without realising it. Our food choices shift depending on who’s at the table, who’s watching, or who might see our food if it’s shared online.

This isn’t just about manners or appetite. Experts are increasingly interested in the ways in which meals aren’t just eaten, but are curated. Psychologists and nutrition researchers call this “performative eating”.

The most recent viral example of this comes from TikTok, in the form of performative matcha. These videos show young, well-dressed men roaming in public with a matcha drink in one hand and a novel in the other – ostensibly to look attractive to women.

What is performative eating?

Performative eating refers to how we choose or avoid certain foods based not on taste or nutrition, but on what we think it signals to others. Food can be a powerful tool to signal identity and build connection.

People might consume certain foods to send a message about their

• health – such as by opting for a salad to appear “disciplined”

• gender – such as ordering a steak or beer to look “masculine”, or avoiding a “feminine” dessert or cocktail

• morals – such as by eating plant-based, to emphasise environmental values

• aesthetic – such as when people curate meals so they will look beautiful on social media feeds.

The way we eat is often shaped by social influences. We are aware of some of these influences, such as when we choose certain foods to fit in with family or friends. Others happen without us even noticing.

The role of social media

Food has been performative for hundreds of years (maybe more) – especially considering the luxurious and decorative eating habits of royal families.

Social media magnifies the dynamics of performative eating. Platforms such as Instagram and TikTok are inundated with food content, from aesthetic smoothie bowls, and matcha creations, to viral “what I eat in a day” videos.

These posts don’t just entertain – they influence.

Viewers may copy the meals, lifestyles, or even the values of creators they admire. As such, social media doesn’t just reflect eating trends. It also helps create and reinforce them.

The psychology and sociology of food

As social beings, our eating habits are deeply influenced by social modelling, wherein we tend to mirror what and how much others eat – especially when we like them or feel similar to them.

Research has found that knowing what foods or drinks others have chosen can influence us to make similar choices. Research also suggests people typically eat more when dining with friends or family, compared to when they eat alone. This suggests familiarity and social connection play a role in how much we eat.

Our food choices are also shaped by broader cultural beliefs, or what society says is “good” or “bad”. Online trends such as “trad wives” baking sourdough, detox regimens, and strict diets such as raw foodism can represent ideals of “purity” or discipline, or a desire to belong to a a particular community.

The reverse of this is also visible in popular culture, where indulgence is celebrated. Take mukbangs – videos where people eat large amounts of (often unhealthy) food while chatting with viewers. Originating in South Korea, mukbang videos have become a global trend, with some videos getting more than 30 million views.

Research shows mukbang videos can shape viewers’ eating habits. A recent review of the evidence suggests that for some they are helpful as they can encourage regular eating, and reduce binge eating or loneliness. But for others, they can trigger restrictive eating habits, or relapses into what is called “loss-of-control eating”.

When does it become a problem?

Performative eating sits on a spectrum. Sometimes it’s positive to share in certain foods, such as to connect with friends or family, or to celebrate your culture.

But it crosses the line when most of the focus is on appearing a certain way to others. This influence is particularly strong among adolescents and young adults. People in these age groups are often still figuring out who they are and where they belong, so fitting in can feel very important.

There are a range of potential downsides to performative eating. In more extreme cases, it might lead to disordered eating and body image concerns. For example, striving to present a “perfect”, socially approved diet can spiral into rigid rules or restriction that undermine one’s mental and physical health.

Performative eating may lead to reduced food enjoyment, as meals become more about spectacle rather than moments of nourishment or pleasure.

It can also lead to food shortages or strain on food supply, as we’ve seen in past matcha shortages.

Reconnecting with food

Performative eating isn’t always harmful. But if you think it could be affecting your physical or mental health in any way, you can ask yourself these questions:

• am I consuming this food or drink because I enjoy it, or because I will be viewed a certain way for it?

• do I order what I actually want to eat, or what I think I should be ordering?

• what emotions do I feel before and after engaging with various food content online?

Parents and caregivers can help children build lifelong positive relationships with food by modelling healthy eating, avoiding food restrictions, and encouraging autonomy in childrens’ food choices.

Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Health and Wellbeing Queensland, Heart Foundation and Mater Misericordia, Springfield City Group. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network, a Director of Food Standards Australia and New Zealand and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.

Emily Burch 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.

Pearl Wong receives funding from the Australian Government and The University of Queensland. She is a member of Dietitians Australia, serves as the Student Representatives Coordinator for the Dietitians Australia Queensland Branch Leadership Committee, and is also a member of Queensland Health Nutrition Education Materials Online (NEMO) Mental Health Group.

– ref. Matcha latte for the likes: how ‘performative eating’ is changing our relationship with food – https://theconversation.com/matcha-latte-for-the-likes-how-performative-eating-is-changing-our-relationship-with-food-262620

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Niven Winchester, Professor of Economics, Auckland University of Technology

Women’s rugby is growing rapidly worldwide, and now accounts for 25% of the total global playing base. US women’s rugby star Ilona Maher is the most followed rugby player in the world, ahead of men’s stars Siya Kolisi and Antoine Dupont.

So there’s more interest than ever in the tenth Women’s Rugby World Cup, which kicks off in England on August 23. As with any big sports event, the pundits will be picking their winners based on recent win-loss records and overall performance trends – key factors that underpin official rankings.

Rugby Vision, a suite of statistical models I developed to predict outcomes for major competitions, uses similar information but with some important differences. Notably, it is less sensitive to the outcome of any single game.

The model uses three main components: a rating system for international teams; estimation of expected outcomes for each World Cup game using those ratings; and 10,000 simulations of the tournament to account for uncertainty around expected outcomes.

Rugby Vision has outperformed betting markets and other algorithms in recent men’s Rugby World Cups. I should add, though, it is not designed to support sports betting, but rather to illustrate how statistical modelling compares with real-world results.

Picking a winner

The probability of each team advancing to each stage of the tournament is shown in the table below. England, which has dominated women’s rugby in recent years and has home advantage, is overwhelming favourite with a 70.3% chance of winning the tournament.

New Zealand, which won the previous tournament, is second favourite with an 18.8% chance of defending their title. The next most likely winners are consistent performers Canada (6.7%) and France (3.9%). There is a 99.7% chance the winner will be one of these top four teams.

In each pool, one team (from the top four) is almost assured of making the quarterfinals, one team is “likely”, and one team has a fighting chance. For example, in Pool B, Canada has a 99.4% chance of being quarter-finalists, Scotland a 69.8% probability, and Wales a 27.5% chance.

Given the tournament schedule, Canada will likely play New Zealand in one semifinal, while England will face France in another. This is a key reason why France has a 75.5% chance of reaching the semifinals, but only a 12.1% chance of playing in the final.

Behind the algorithm

The simulations are based on an algorithm used to rank teams. The algorithm used here differs from that used for the official World Rugby Rankings.

Rugby Vision rankings and rating points for the participants are shown in the table below. England (with 136.8 rating points) is ranked number one, with a large lead over New Zealand (125.4), Canada (117.5) and France (114.6). Brazil (49.5), which will make its World Cup debut, rounds out the rankings.

The Rugby Vision rankings are comparable to the official World Rugby rankings, but a key difference is that Canada is ranked ahead of New Zealand in the official standings.

The rating points can be used to predict game results. For the first round of games at the tournament, the table below shows the expected winning margin of the favourite and the probability of each team winning.

For example, in the game between Scotland and Wales, Scotland is expected to win by nine points, but there is a 29.5% chance Wales will win.

While England enters the tournament as clear favourite, rugby has never been short of surprises. Past Rugby World Cups have seen giants fall and underdogs rise. The simulations give us a guide, but they are not a crystal ball.

What is certain is that the women’s game is in excellent shape – growing fast, drawing crowds and showcasing world-class talent. This tournament is bound to be a spectacle.

The author acknowledges the assistance of Soren Winchester, whose data collection contributed to the forecasts included in this article.

Niven Winchester 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. Who will win the 2025 Women’s Rugby World Cup? We ran 10,000 simulations to rank the contenders – https://theconversation.com/who-will-win-the-2025-womens-rugby-world-cup-we-ran-10-000-simulations-to-rank-the-contenders-262795

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

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has lashed out at prime minister Anthony Albanese, accusing him of betraying Israel and abandoning Australia’s Jews.

The extraordinary outburst follows Israel revoking the visas of Australian diplomats to the Palestinian Authority in retaliation for the Albanese government announcing it will recognise a Palestinian state and also banning a visit by a right-wing Israeli parliamentarian.

In a post on X Netanyahu said, “History will remember Albanese for what he is: A weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia’s Jews.”

One interpretation of the Netanyahu attack is that he is seeking to warn other countries from moving to recognise a Palestinian state.

The latest words and actions from Israel take the bilateral relationship to a new low.

The deteriorating relations is dismaying many in the Australian Jewish community.

Co-chief executive of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, Alex Ryvchin, “Allies with extensive economic, scientific and cultural ties should not be engaging in a diplomatic tit-for-tat that erodes the goodwill and cooperation built up over decades.”

“Calm heads need to take control of the situation otherwise there will be a risk to some $2 billion in bilateral trade, extensive investment in Australian start-ups, vital security cooperation and the Israeli-made medicine and medical technology that we all rely on.

“There are real-life consequences here and we want to see the countries work through any issues before things get out of hand.”

The revoking of the Australian diplomats’ visas will make it much more difficult for the Australian government to have ready contact with the Palestinian authority.

The diplomats have been visiting the West-Bank daily and Australia has an office there.

Albanese spoke with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas before the recognition announcement and lined up a meeting when the two attend the United Nations in September. Australian recognition of a Palestinian state will take effect during Albanese’s UN trip.

Simcha Rotman had his visa blocked by the Home Affairs department on the grounds that his presence in Australia would risk provoking a reaction from the Muslim community.

It has been reported he had planned a speaking tour but is now intending to speak remotely to an Australian audience.

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. Israeli PM Netanyahu denounces ‘weak’ Albanese in social media outburst. – https://theconversation.com/israeli-pm-netanyahu-denounces-weak-albanese-in-social-media-outburst-263473

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sonia Mycak, Research Fellow in Ukrainian Studies, Australian National University

The last time Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky visited the White House earlier this year, he was berated by Donald Trump.

On Monday, he returned with European leaders by his side. He emerged with some signs of progress on a peace deal to end Russia’s war against Ukraine.

The presence of the European leaders no doubt had a great impact on the meeting. After Trump’s recent summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska, they were concerned he was aligning the United States with the Russian position by supporting Putin’s maximalist demands.

We see from Trump’s statements over the last couple of months, the only pullback from his erratic pronouncements, largely based on Russian disinformation, seems to come when a body politic around him brings him back to a more realistic and informed position. So, this show of European unity was very important.

Security guarantees remain vital

There was considerable progress on one critical part of the negotiations: security guarantees for Ukraine.

It is significant that the US is to be involved in future security guarantees. It was not that long ago Trump was placing all the responsibility on Europe. So, this signals a positive development.

I listened to the briefing Zelensky gave outside the White House in Ukrainian for Ukrainian journalists. He explained it will take time to sort out the details of any future arrangement, as many countries would be involved in Ukraine’s future security guarantees, each with different capabilities to assist. Some would help Ukraine finance their security needs, others could provide military assistance.

Zelensky also emphasised that funding and assistance for the Ukrainian military will be a part of any future security arrangement. This would involve strategic partnerships in development and production, as well as procurement.

Zelensky made a point of this at a news conference in Brussels prior to Monday’s meeting. It is a priority for Ukraine to have a military strong enough to defend itself from future Russian attacks.

Reports also indicate the security guarantees would involve Ukraine buying around US$90 billion (A$138 billion) of US military equipment through its European allies. Zelensky also suggested the possibility of the US buying Ukrainian-made drones in the future.

According to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, there was also discussion about an Article 5-type security guarantee for Ukraine, referring to the part of the NATO treaty that enshrines the principle of collective defence for all members.

However, contrary to popular belief, NATO’s Article 5 does not actually commit members of the alliance to full military intervention if any one member is attacked. It allows NATO states to decide what type of support, if any, to provide. This would not be enough for Ukraine.

Ukraine has already seen the result of a failed security arrangement. In the
Budapest Memorandum of 1994, the United States, the United Kingdom and Russia guaranteed to respect Ukraine’s borders and territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine giving up the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world.

However, look what happened. Russia invaded in 2014 without any serious consequences, and then launched a full-scale invasion in 2022.

Given this, any future security guarantee for Ukraine will need to be rigorous. Ukrainians are very cognisant of this.

Loss of Ukrainian territory

Prior to his Alaska summit with Trump, I would have said Putin is not interested in any kind of deal. We saw how in previous meetings in Istanbul, Russia sent low-level delegations, not authorised to make any decisions at all.

However, I think the scenario has changed because, unfortunately, in Alaska, Trump aligned himself with Putin in supporting Russia’s maximalist demands. It’s highly likely Putin now believes he has an advocate for those demands in the White House.

This could mean Putin now perceives there is a realistic chance Russia could secure Donbas, the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk.

I don’t believe Ukraine would ever agree to any formal or legal recognition of a Russian annexation of Crimea or any of the other four regions that Russia now partly occupies – Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia.

Zelensky has been adamant Ukraine would not cede territory to Russia in any peace deal. And he alone cannot make such a decision. Changing any borders would need a referendum and a change to the constitution. This would not be easy to do. For one thing, it’s a very unpopular move. And Ukrainians living in Russian-occupied territory would not be given a free and fair vote.

Putin’s war against Ukraine is an attempt at illegally appropriating very valuable land. In Alaska, he demanded Russia essentially be gifted the entire regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, including land not currently occupied by the Russian military.

This land has extensive Ukrainian military fortifications. Giving up this territory would leave Ukraine completely exposed to future Russian invasions – the country would effectively have no military protection along its eastern border regions. This would put Russia in a very advantageous position in future plans to regroup and attack again.

Even if Zelensky felt compelled to agree to some kind of temporary occupation and a frozen conflict along the current front lines, I don’t believe Ukraine could give up any land still under Ukrainian control.

In a recent Gallup poll, 69% of Ukrainians favoured a negotiated settlement to the war as soon as possible. In my view, this reflects the fact the United States, under the Trump administration, is proving to be an unreliable partner.

A settlement that rewards Russia for its genocidal war against Ukraine would set a very dangerous precedent, not only for the future of Ukraine but for Europe and the rest of the world.

At recent negotiations between the two sides in Istanbul, the head of the Russian delegation reportedly said “Russia is prepared to fight forever”.

That has not changed, no matter what niceties have occurred between Trump and Putin. They are prepared to continue to fight.

Sonia Mycak 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. Zelensky leaves Washington with Trump’s security guarantees, but are they enough? – https://theconversation.com/zelensky-leaves-washington-with-trumps-security-guarantees-but-are-they-enough-263423

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

The Israeli government has revoked the visas of Australian diplomats to the Palestinian Authority, in the latest deterioration of relations between the two countries.

In a statement on social media Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said he had also told the Israeli ambassador in Canberra “to carefully examine any official Australian visa application for entry to Israel”.

He said the decision followed Australia’s announcement that it will recognise a Palestine state.

It was “also against the backdrop of Australia’s unjustified refusal to grant visas to a number of Israeli figures”, he said.

These included former minister Ayelet Shaked and the Chairman of the Knesset’s constitution, law and justice committee, Simcha Rothman.

Rothman’s scheduled visit to Australia was stopped by the Home Affairs Department this week. The right-wing parliamentarian has made inflammatory comments including describing Gazan children as “enemies”. It was decided his presence in Australia would risk a reaction from the Islamic community.

Three Australian diplomats based in Israel have visas for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. They go to the West Bank every day, where they have an office and speak with the Palestinian Authority.

They also provide consular assistance to Australians when needed, and were involved in the exit of Australians and family members who received visas to come to Australia in the early stages of the conflict.

These diplomats are likely now to leave Israel, given they cannot do the work assigned to them.

Before announcing Australia’s planned recognition, which will happen at the United Nations next month, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese spoke with the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbes, and obtained various assurances ahead of the announcement.

The Israeli government’s decision will make the Australian government’s dialogue with the Palestinian Authority more difficult and complicated.

Foreign Minister Penny Wong said Israel’s decision was “an unjustified reaction” following the recognition decision.

“At a time when dialogue and diplomacy are needed more than ever, the Netanyahu government is isolating Israel and undermining international efforts towards peace.

“We will continue to work with partners as we contribute international momentum to a two-state solution, a ceasefire in Gaza and release of the hostages.”

Sa’ar said antisemitism was “raging in Australia”. “The Australian government is choosing to fuel it by false accusations, as if the visit of Israeli figures will disrupt public order and harm Australia’s Muslim population. It is shameful and unacceptable.”

Opposition leader Sussan Ley said she regretted how the relationship between the governments of Australia and Israel was deteriorating. On the visa rejection, she said Rothman was “an elected member of the Israeli parliament and it’s a very unusual thing to refuse a visa”.

This coming Sunday pro-Palestine marches will be held in more than 30 cities and towns across the country. There will also be a demonstration at Pine Gap, the joint Australian-US facility near Alice Springs.

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. Israel bans Australian diplomats from occupied territories, as bilateral relations dive further – https://theconversation.com/israel-bans-australian-diplomats-from-occupied-territories-as-bilateral-relations-dive-further-262604

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Turnbull, Senior Research Data Specialist, The University of Melbourne

In 1770, after Captain Cook’s Endeavour struck the Great Barrier Reef and was held up for repairs, botanists Joseph Banks and Daniel Solander collected hundreds of plants.

One of those pressed plants is among 170,000 specimens in the herbarium at the University of Melbourne.

Worldwide, more than 395 million specimens are housed in herbaria. Together they comprise an unparalleled record of Earth’s plant and fungal life over time.

We wanted to find a better, faster way to tap into this wealth of information. Our new research describes the development and testing of a new AI-driven tool Hespi (short for “herbarium specimen sheet pipeline”). It has the potential to revolutionise access to biodiversity data and open up new avenues for research.

The digitisation challenge

To unlock the full potential of herbaria, institutions worldwide are striving to digitise them. This means photographing each specimen at high resolution and converting the information on its label into searchable digital data.

Once digitised, specimen records can be made available to the public through online databases such as the University of Melbourne Herbarium Collection Online. They are also fed into large biodiversity portals such as the Australasian Virtual Herbarium, the Atlas of Living Australia, or the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. These platforms make centuries of botanical knowledge accessible to researchers everywhere.

But digitisation is a monumental task. Large herbaria, such as the National Herbarium of New South Wales and the Australian National Herbarium have used high-capacity conveyor belt systems to rapidly image millions of specimens. Even with this level of automation, digitising the 1.15 million specimens at the National Herbarium of NSW took more than three years.

For smaller institutions without industrial-scale setups, the process is far slower. Staff, volunteers and citizen scientists photograph specimens and painstakingly transcribe their labels by hand.

At the current pace, many collections won’t be fully digitised for decades. This delay keeps vast amounts of biodiversity data locked away. Researchers in ecology, evolution, climate science and conservation urgently need access to large-scale, accurate biodiversity datasets. A faster approach is essential.

How AI is speeding things up

To address this challenge, we created Hespi – open-source software for automatically extracting information from herbarium specimens.

Hespi combines advanced computer vision techniques with AI tools such as object detection, image classification and large language models.

First, it takes an image of the specimen sheet which comprises the pressed plant and identifying text. Then it recognises and extracts text, using a combination of optical character recognition and handwritten text recognition.

Deciphering handwriting is challenging for people and computers alike. So Hespi passes the extracted text through OpenAI’s GPT-4o Large Language Model to correct any errors. This substantially improves the results.

So in seconds, Hespi locates the main specimen label on a herbarium sheet and reads the information it contains. This includes taxonomic names, collector details, location, latitude and longitude, and collection dates. It captures the data and converts it into a digital format, ready for use in research.

For example, Hespi correctly detected and extracted all relevant components from the herbarium sheet below. This large brown algae specimen was collected in 1883 at St Kilda.

We tested Hespi on thousands of specimen images from the University of Melbourne Herbarium and other collections worldwide. We created test datasets for different stages in the pipeline and assessed the various components.

It achieved a high degree of accuracy. So it has the potential to save a lot of time, compared to manual data extraction.

We are developing a graphical user interface for the software so herbarium curators will be able to manually check and correct the results.

Just the beginning

Herbaria already contribute to society in many ways: from species identification and taxonomy to ecological monitoring, conservation, education, and even forensic investigations.

By mobilising large volumes of specimen-associated data, AI systems such as Hespi are enabling new and innovative applications at a scale never before possible.

AI has been used to automatically extract detailed leaf measurements and other traits from digitised specimens, unlocking centuries of historical collections for rapid research into plant evolution and ecology.

And this is just the beginning — computer vision and AI could soon be applied in many other ways, further accelerating and expanding botanical research in the years ahead.

Beyond herbaria

AI pipelines such as Hespi have the potential to extract text from labels in any museum or archival collection where high-quality digital images exist.

Our next step is a collaboration with Museums Victoria to adapt Hespi to create an AI digitisation pipeline suitable for museum collections. The AI pipeline will mobilise biodiversity data for about 12,500 specimens in the museum’s globally-significant fossil graptolite collection.

We are also starting a new project with the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) to make the software more flexible. This will allow curators in museums and other institutions to customise Hespi to extract data from all kinds of collections — not just plant specimens.

Tranformational technology

Just as AI is reshaping many aspects of daily life, these technologies can transform access to biodiversity data. Human-AI collaborations could help overcome one of the biggest bottlenecks in collection digitisation — the slow, manual transcription of label data.

Mobilising the information already locked in herbaria, museums, and archives worldwide is essential to make it available for the cross-disciplinary research needed to understand and address the biodiversity crisis.

We wish to acknowledge our colleagues at the Melbourne Data Analytics Platform, including Karen Thompson and Emily Fitzgerald, who contributed to this research.

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. Botanical time machines: AI is unlocking a treasure trove of data held in herbarium collections – https://theconversation.com/botanical-time-machines-ai-is-unlocking-a-treasure-trove-of-data-held-in-herbarium-collections-253236

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

You may have heard high-impact activity – exercise such as running, jumping, football and basketball – is good at building bone density and strength. But what about when you’re standing still, lifting weights at the gym?

The good news is weight training is great for bone health. But some exercises are more effective than others. Here’s what the science says.

What is bone density?

Bone density, also known as bone mineral density, is essentially a measure of how many minerals (such as calcium and phosphorus) are packed into your bones.

It gives you an indication of how solid your bones are, which is important because denser bones are generally less likely to break.

However, bone density is not quite the same as bone strength.

Bones also rely on a range of other compounds (such as collagen) to provide support and structure. So, even dense bones can become brittle if they are lacking these key structural components.

However, bone mineral density (measured with a bone scan) is still considered one of the best indicators of bone health because it is strongly linked to fracture risk.

While there is likely a genetic component to bone health, your daily choices can have a big impact.

What affects your bone health?

Research shows a few factors can influence how strong and dense your bones are:

Getting older: As we age, our bone mineral density tends to decrease. This decline is generally greater in women after menopause, but it occurs in everyone.

Nutrition: Eating calcium-rich foods – dairy in particular, but also many vegetables, nuts, legumes, eggs and meat – has been shown to have a small impact on bone density (although the extent to which this reduces fracture risk is unclear).

Exposure to sun: Sunlight helps your body make vitamin D, which helps you absorb calcium, and has been linked to better bone density.

Exercise: It is well established that people who do high-impact and high-load exercise (such as sprinting and weight training) tend to have denser and stronger bones than those who don’t.

Smoking: Older people who smoke tend to have lower bone density than those who don’t smoke.

Why does movement improve bone density?

In the same way that your muscles get stronger when you expose them to stress, your bones get stronger when they’re asked to handle more load. This is why exercise is so important for bone health – because it tells your bones to adapt and become stronger.

Many of us know that people at risk for bone loss – post-menopausal women and older adults – should be focused on exercising for bone health.

However, everyone can benefit from targeted exercise, and it’s arguably just as important to prevent declines in bone health.

In fact, whether you are male or female, the younger you start, the more likely you are to have denser bones into your older life. This is crucial for long-term bone health.

Do weights improve bone density?

Yes. One of the most effective exercises for bone health is lifting weights.

When you lift weights, your muscles pull on your bones, sending signals that encourage new bone formation. There is a large body of evidence showing weight training can improve bone density in adults, including in post-menopausal women.

But not all exercises are created equal. For example, some evidence suggests large compound exercises that place more load on the skeleton – such as squats and deadlifts – are particularly effective at increasing density in the spine and hips, two areas prone to fractures.

What type of weight training is best?

Lifting heavier weights is thought to produce better results than lifting lighter ones. This means doing sets of three to eight repetitions using heavy weights is likely to have a greater impact on your bones than doing many repetitions with lighter ones.

Similarly, it takes a long time for your bones to adapt and become denser – usually six months or more. This means for healthy bones, it’s better to integrate weight training into your weekly routine rather than do it in bursts for a few weeks at a time.

Exercises that use body weight, such as yoga and pilates, have many health benefits. However they are unlikely to have a significant impact on bone density, as they tend to put only light stress on your bones.

If you are new to weight training, you might need to start a bit lighter and get used to the movements before adding weight. And if you need help, finding an exercise professional in your local area might be a great first step.

Exercising for bone health is not complex. Just a couple of (heavy) weight training sessions per week can make a big difference.

If you’re concerned you have low bone density, speak to your doctor. They can assess whether you need to go for a scan.

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. Does weightlifting improve bone density? – https://theconversation.com/does-weightlifting-improve-bone-density-263045

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

If you’ve spent time on social media recently you have probably been exposed to questionable “wellness” content. You may have been instructed to dip your toes in icy water or let the sun shine where it usually doesn’t.

Wellness trends such as drinking “loaded” water or taking ice baths may be benign for most people, while others such as drinking raw milk, eating raw organ meats, or taping your mouth while you sleep carry real risks.

The online spaces where they circulate can also be harmful, serving as breeding grounds for conspiracy theories, anti-vaccination sentiment, and misuse of appearance- and performance-enhancing drugs.

It’s easy to dismiss followers of extreme wellness trends as gullible or misinformed. But research suggests personality traits may help explain why some educated, well-intentioned people sometimes reject conventional medicine in favour of fringe practices.

The big five personality traits

Psychologists have shown that many aspects of human personality can be described via five fundamental dimensions, of which we all have varying levels.

Two of these “big five” traits – openness and agreeableness – are particularly relevant to people’s interest in alternative health practices. (The remaining three traits are conscientiousness, extraversion and neuroticism.)

People high in openness are curious, imaginative and adventurous. They question tradition and are attracted to novelty and unconventional ideas. As a result, they are more likely to try new and unorthodox diets or treatments.

Highly agreeable people are trusting, cooperative and empathetic. They are very receptive to emotional messages, especially when they appeal to ideas of caring for others and benefiting the community.

Read more:
Personality traits may drive our ideas about fairness and sharing

These personality traits also influence how people search for and evaluate online information. People higher in openness tend to adopt an exploratory search strategy, preferring to seek novel or unconventional sources rather than relying on established information channels.

Because they value harmony, trust and maintaining relationships, highly agreeable people tend to give greater weight to information that comes from familiar or socially endorsed sources. They do so even when this information has not been critically evaluated.

Personality and persuasive influence

In the online wellness ecosystem, high levels of openness and agreeableness can make people susceptible to persuasion.

Influencers have a powerful advantage. They can position themselves as both novel and trustworthy. Open people can be seduced by original, eye-catching content, and agreeable people by community-focused narratives.

Influencers cultivate one-sided “parasocial” relationships in which followers feel an intimate connection with someone they have never met. These close bonds, coupled with the open personality’s attraction to unconventional ideas, can draw people into extreme, untested and unsafe health practices.

Openness to new experiences and being interpersonally agreeable are usually seen as strengths. However, in the buzzing, emotionally charged environment of online wellness culture they can become vulnerabilities.

From ice baths to anti-vax

Not all wellness practices peddled by online influencers are harmful. But some relatively innocuous trends can be a gateway to more extreme practices.

Someone might start taking ice baths for a mood boost, move on to restrictive raw diets for “clean eating”, and eventually arrive at anti-vaccine beliefs grounded in deep mistrust of health authorities.

Gateway effects can occur if a trusted influencer makes increasingly extreme recommendations. If the influencer pivots to more dangerous ideas, many followers will follow.

Over time, exposure to fringe wellness narratives can erode trust in mainstream institutions. What began as curiosity and warmth may, through repeated exposure to extreme content, shift towards cynicism and institutional mistrust.

How can public health messages adapt?

Public health campaigns sometimes assume people reject mainstream health advice because they lack knowledge or have low “health literacy”.

But if personality traits influence receptiveness to alternative wellness claims, simply giving people more information may not produce positive change.

Public health campaigns should consider personality traits for more effective preventive interventions. They can target people high in openness, for example, by presenting health science as dynamic and evolving, not just a set of rules and prescriptions. They can reach highly agreeable people with health messages that emphasise empathy and community.

To be effective for all of us, public health communication needs to be as engaging as the messages emanating from influencers. It must use eye-catching visuals, personal stories, and moral hooks while remaining truthful.

People who engage in extreme or unusual wellness practices aren’t merely misinformed. Often, they’re driven by the same urge to explore, connect, and live well as everyone else. The challenge we face is to steer that drive toward health, not harm.

Samuel Cornell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Nick Haslam receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Why do smart people get hooked on wellness trends? Personality traits may play a role – https://theconversation.com/why-do-smart-people-get-hooked-on-wellness-trends-personality-traits-may-play-a-role-263041

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mojtaba Rajabi, Senior Lecturer in Geoscience, The University of Queensland

Last Saturday at 9:49am local time, a magnitude 5.6 earthquake occurred about 50km west of Gympie in Queensland. The earthquake was experienced as strong shaking locally, but did not produce any significant damage, likely because of the remote location of the epicentre.

However, the quake was felt far and wide and small aftershocks continue. More than 24,000 people across eastern Australia reported it, not only in the nearest big city (Brisbane) but as far away as Cairns and Sydney. This was the largest earthquake in onshore southeast Queensland since 1935, when an earthquake of magnitude 5.5 occurred near Gayndah.

Most of the world’s earthquake hotspots are near the boundaries between tectonic plates – places such as New Zealand, Japan and Indonesia. Here, earthquakes are frequent because of the immense forces where two plates collide or slide past one another.

But Australia sits in the middle of the Australian tectonic plate, far from any plate edges. So why do earthquakes still happen here?

Tectonically ‘quiet’ – but not silent

Australia is often seen as tectonically “quiet” and stable.

But this picture is only partly true. As Saturday’s seismic event shows, earthquakes do happen here, and Australia has a rich record of recent faults and seismic activity.

On average, Australia has an earthquake larger than magnitude 6.0 about once every seven years, and one greater than magnitude 5.0 roughly once a year. Geological studies of recent faults tell us that Australia could host an earthquake up to around magnitude 7.5.

What drives earthquakes in Australia?

Even though Australia is far from the edges of tectonic plates, the continent is still being squeezed and stressed by the large forces at those distant plate boundaries. These stresses travel deep into the plate and build up.

When the stress becomes too great, it is suddenly released along zones of weakness in the crust (known as fault zones). That release is what we feel as an earthquake.

The map below shows just how widespread earthquakes and active faults are across the continent.

The Australian stress field

Over the past four decades, scientists have built up a detailed picture of the stresses acting in the Australian crust. This comes from many sources including earthquake information, borehole data, mining sites, and large-scale engineering projects.

The results have been compiled in two projects: the Australian Stress Map and the World Stress Map. These show Australia’s stress patterns are highly variable and different from those of other continents.

Unlike some continents, where the direction of maximum horizontal stress tends to line up neatly with the movement of plates, Australia’s stresses twist and turn, changing direction across the country. Large-scale computer modeling shows this can be explained by the combined effect of tectonic forces at the edges of the Indo-Australian Plate.

Stress and earthquakes in Queensland

The recent earthquake occurred near Kilkivan, west of Gympie, in an area where many faults are aligned in a northwest–southeast direction. One of the most important of these is the North Pine Fault System, a wide zone made of many separate fault segments.

This network of fractures tells a long geological story of movement, stretching back millions of years, that has shaped the landscape of eastern Australia. Geoscientists believe the fault system is quite ancient – between around 50 million and 250 million years old.

However, there have been numerous modern earthquakes in the surrounding region, which suggests the fault system may still be active. The area has experienced several significant earthquakes in the past, including events in 1883, 1918, 1935 and more recently, 2015.

The maximum stress in this region is directed from northeast to southwest. The driving forces come from far beyond Australia.

The Australian tectonic plate is compressed from the north and east by the Pacific plate, particularly along boundaries near the New Hebrides, the Solomon Islands, and the Tonga–Kermadec zone which stretches from New Zealand to Tonga. This compression reaches deep into Queensland.

It is these forces from distant plate boundaries that are behind Australian earthquakes like the recent one in Kilkivan, even though we are far from the world’s active plate edges.

Since Saturday morning’s earthquake, more than 15 aftershocks have been recorded. Most have been quite small, with magnitudes less than 2.0. A main shock of the moderate magnitude experienced near Gympie will typically produce an aftershock as large as magnitude 4.5, in addition to the many more smaller events.

So, as the crust adjusts to the changes in local stress produced by this earthquake, seismic activity is expected to continue for days or weeks, but with overall smaller and less frequent earthquakes as time goes on.

Mojtaba Rajabi leads the Australian Stress Map project and serves as deputy head of the World Stress Map project. His research on Australia’s stress field is supported by the Australian Research Council through a Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DE200101361).

Dee Ninis works at the Seismology Research Centre, is Vice-President of the Australian Earthquake Engineering Society, and a Committee Member for the Geological Society of Australia – Victoria Division.

Abbas Babaahmadi 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 does Australia have earthquakes? The whole continent is under stress from distant forces – https://theconversation.com/why-does-australia-have-earthquakes-the-whole-continent-is-under-stress-from-distant-forces-263334