Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Younger, Lecturer in Southern Ocean Vertebrate Ecology, Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania

Australia’s Antarctic territory represents the largest sliver of the ice continent. For decades, Australian scientists have headed to one of our three bases – Mawson, Davis and Casey – as well as the base on sub-Antarctic Macquarie Island, to research everything from ecology to climate science.

But despite our role as leaders in Antarctic science, Australian funding and logistics for Antarctic research hasn’t kept pace. Our single icebreaking vessel spends most of its time on resupply missions, restricting its use for actual science. And funding is often piecemeal, which makes it hard to plan the complex, multi-year efforts it takes to do research down on the ice.

This week, we saw a welcome change. The federal parliamentary committee on Australia’s external territories delivered a report calling for a second icebreaking vessel and more reliable funding. It also urged the government to progress work on marine protected areas in east Antarctica as well as resume fishing patrols, due to concern over illegal or exploitative fishing.

These measures are long overdue. For those of us who work and study on the ice continent, logistics and funding have long been a challenge. Illegal fishing in Antarctica must be stamped out, and a second vessel would support our ambitious, world-leading science.

Why is Antarctic science so important?

Antarctica is often out of sight, out of mind for many Australians. But what happens on the ice doesn’t stay there.

For climate science, Antarctica matters a great deal. For decades, much of the concern about melting ice focused on the Arctic and Greenland, while Antarctica stayed relatively stable. But this is now changing. Sea ice is melting more quickly than in the past. Glacial ice is retreating. Increased melting will affect sea level rise and ocean currents.

I study diseases such as the lethal strain of bird flu which has devastated bird and some mammals populations around the world. It recently reached Antarctica, where it killed large numbers of penguins, skuas, crabeater seals and more. I saw the devastation myself on my recent journey there.

If this strain makes it to Australia – the last continent free of it – it could come from the south and devastate both Australian wildlife and poultry.

To study these large and important changes, we need to be down there on the ice. It’s not an easy task. Keeping our bases functional means we need regular resupply missions. Repairs and extensions require tradies. Scientists and other workers need to be brought home.

Antarctic science has long relied on just one vessel, now the RSV Nuniya, which the Australian Antarctic Division describes as the “main lifeline to Australia’s Antarctic and sub-Antarctic research stations and the central platform of our Antarctic and Southern Ocean scientific research”.

The problem is, resupply can trump science. After all, no one wants bases running short of food or fuel. This is, in fact, what the Nuniya is largely doing.

Australia’s role is key

The Australian Antarctic Territory represents about 40% of the ice continent – the largest territory by far.

Territory, here, doesn’t mean exclusive rights. In 1959, 12 nations with a scientific interest in the ice continent signed the Antarctic Treaty. This treaty was an agreement that Antarctica – the only landmass with no indigenous human presence – would be reserved for peaceful, scientific purposes.

But in recent years, this treaty has come under pressure. Nations such as Norway and China have expanded fishing operations for krill. Illegal and unregulated fishing from various nations continues.

The report recommends the Australian government continue efforts to establish a marine protected area off East Antarctica – where fishing would be restricted – as well as reopening fishing patrols. China – which recently opened its fifth Antarctic base – is opposed to the idea of fishing-free zones and is pushing to expand fishing in the Southern Ocean.

Under Antarctica’s ice lie many resources. Mining is banned in Antarctica until 2048. What happens after that is uncertain. The race to tap critical minerals in Greenland signals what may lie ahead for Antarctica.

This is why Australia’s leadership in Antarctic science matters. Australia was an original signatory to the Antarctic Treaty, and has a long history of exploration and science. Hobart has long been the home of Australia’s Antarctic vessels.

As Antarctica changes, Australian scientists must be there to analyse, understand and report back. To do that, improvements are needed, including new vessels and longer-term funding. This report is the first step.

The government is yet to formally respond to the report’s recommendations. Let’s hope it takes heed of the findings.

Jane Younger receives funding from the Australian Research Council, WIRES Australia, the Geoffrey Evans Trust and the National Geographic Society.

– ref. Antarctic research has long been hamstrung by reliance on one icebreaker and sporadic funding. That might be about to change – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-research-has-long-been-hamstrung-by-reliance-on-one-icebreaker-and-sporadic-funding-that-might-be-about-to-change-249714

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meg Parsons, Associate Professor in Historical Geography, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Ciguatera fish poisoning is the world’s most frequently reported seafood-borne illness.

It poses a serious health risk to tropical coastal communities, with some of the highest rates reported in Vanuatu. But now, Indigenous knowledge provides crucial insights for predicting fish poisoning outbreaks.

Our study documents a collaboration between scientists and Indigenous knowledge holders on Vanuatu’s Ambae island. It offers a powerful new model designed to protect people’s health in vulnerable regions.

Ecological indicators and fish poisoning risk

Ciguatera poisoning occurs when people eat fish contaminated with ciguatoxins produced by marine algae that accumulate in reef-feeding fish. Symptoms can range from nausea and muscle pain to severe neurological effects. In some cases, the poisoning can lead to serious illness or even death.

For millennia, Ambae islanders have relied on their knowledge of the local environment to manage their lands and seas in a sustainable manner. They have observed ecological indicators, including environmental changes that precede ciguatera fish poisoning events, to monitor and respond to risks.

For instance, they note how heavy rains wash volcanic sediments into the ocean, triggering algal blooms that produce ciguatoxins. Likewise, jellyfish blooms and shifts in coral growth signal imbalances in the marine ecosystem, often preceding toxic fish contamination.

These ecological indicators, passed down through oral traditions, have guided community decisions about fishing practices and food consumption.

The islanders’ traditional observations are now being woven together with scientific data to create an early-warning system known as the Gigila Framework, named after a local term meaning “risk onset”, to aid public health responses.

Our research documents 14 key environmental indicators used by Ambae island communities. We cross-referenced these indicators with climate, geological and marine data to confirm their accuracy. By comparing Ambae islanders’ observations with scientific data, we identify which Indigenous indicators can be used to assess when and where ciguatera fish poisoning outbreaks take place.

Lessons for other regions

The Gigila framework is a community-driven early-warning system designed to reduce the risk of people eating contaminated fish. It uses visual markers, such as dials, to indicate risk levels.

Village elders appoint local people to act as observers to track environmental changes. They then share their observations (such as jellyfish blooms) with government agencies.

The Gigila model helps local community members make informed decisions about if and where they go fishing. It also strengthens collaborations between Indigenous knowledge holders, scientists and medical professionals.

The approach makes health risk information more accessible and practical. Instead of replacing Indigenous knowledge, it seeks to empower and enhance it. It also helps to ensure that younger generations learn about it.

Challenges of working with different knowledge systems

The weaving together of Indigenous knowledge with scientific knowledge is not without hurdles.

Indigenous knowledge practices are deeply rooted in local culture, passed on through oral traditions and combined with lived experiences. Scientific research, in contrast, relies on standardised testing, numerical data and universal theories.

Unsurprisingly, miscommunication between scientists and Indigenous knowledge holders abounds. Scientists sometimes misinterpret and misunderstand Indigenous knowledge and treat it like data to be extracted and exploited. In doing so, Indigenous peoples’ sacred knowledge systems, cultural identities and ways of life are disrespected and marginalised.

However, the success of the Gigila framework shows that respectful collaborations between scientists and Indigenous knowledge holders are possible. At the heart of this collaboration is respect for Indigenous knowledge holders’ expertise.

Another vital component is that Indigenous communities are active participants in helping to create and maintain the early-warning system designed to protect their health. This approach highlights the strengths of combining different knowledge systems to address local environmental issues, which can be adapted to fit different problems and risks.

Local and global applications

The Gigila framework holds potential beyond Vanuatu. Many small island nations face similar challenges from fish poisoning. Climate change is making these risks worse by creating the environmental conditions that toxic algae favour.

Warmer sea temperatures, ocean acidification, more intense and frequent extreme weather events and changes in the distribution of fish species are all contributing to more frequent fish poisoning outbreaks worldwide, including in areas with no history of it.

This highlights the need for enhanced monitoring and management strategies to reduce the impacts on human health and communities that depend on fisheries.

Other communities could develop their own early-warning systems drawing on the Gigila framework. Globally, Indigenous peoples manage vast ecosystems. Their knowledge and environmental guardianship practices are critical for sustainability and environmental health, but are often sidelined in science and policy.

The Gigila framework highlights the continued relevance and importance of Indigenous knowledge and the need for Indigenous knowledge holders and scientists to work together in a respectful and equitable manner.

As climate change accelerates, partnerships between communities and researchers will be crucial. Governments should support locally led initiatives that promote the deployment of Indigenous knowledge with scientific expertise to produce solutions that are both effective and culturally grounded.

The Gigila framework offers a compelling example of what’s possible when different ways of knowing are woven together. By embracing these approaches, we can build stronger, more resilient and adaptable communities in the face of an uncertain future.

Allan Rarai receives funding from the Association of the Commonwealth Universities through the Ocean Country Partnership Programme research grant.

Meg Parsons 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. Indigenous knowledge merges with science to protect people from fish poisoning in Vanuatu – https://theconversation.com/indigenous-knowledge-merges-with-science-to-protect-people-from-fish-poisoning-in-vanuatu-249469

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Dwyer, Research Director, Energy Futures, University of Technology Sydney

Our cars sit unused most of the time. If you have an electric vehicle, you might leave it charging at home or work after driving it. But there’s another step you could take. If you have a bidirectional charger, you can set it to sell power back to the grid when demand is high.

Fewer than ten people across Australia actually do this, because the technology – known as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) – is very new. To date, it only works with a single car model (Nissan LEAF) and a single charger (Wallbox Quasar 1). We’ve estimated the number of users based on sales of this charger. The chargers are expensive and there’s a thicket of regulations to navigate.

But that could soon change. Last year, Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen announced new Australian standards and communications protocols for bidirectional chargers in a bid to make it mainstream. Cheaper EVs and bidirectional chargers will make this more appealing.

If it takes off, V2G could become extremely useful to the power grid as a way to release power as required and stabilise the grid against fluctuations.

This week, Australia’s renewable energy agency released a V2G roadmap, which notes widespread uptake could “materially reduce electricity costs for consumers and accelerate national emissions reduction”.

To understand why people are using the technology and the challenges to do so, we interviewed five early adopters from New South Wales and South Australia. Our findings are released today.

Setting up V2G isn’t easy

Our interviewees reported a long, complex journey to set up V2G. These early adopters had no playbook to follow, so the process was one of trial and error.

Some relied on professional networks or social media groups to gather information. They spent significant time and energy finding electricians, installers and charger manufacturers to set up their systems. Strata approvals were required. They also had to negotiate with power retailers and distributors.

Delays were common, especially when seeking approval from the energy distributor. Some interviewees reported delays of months to years.

Most interviewees had experience in a technical field such as engineering or technology. Some reported a significant learning curve, while others using new software from their retailer reported a smoother “set and forget” process.

So why do it? Our interviewees had several reasons, ranging from getting the most out of expensive assets (solar and the EV) to offsetting power bills entirely.

Four out of five interviewees reported making a small profit of about A$1,000 annually instead of a bill. Many wanted to be able to reduce dependence on the grid and reduce their environmental impact.

As one told us:

you originally think of it as a car you can also use to power your house. [But actually] it’s a house battery you can drive around.

Maximising savings

Typically, our interviewees plugged their car in at home during the day to charge from their rooftop solar. In the evenings when power prices peaked, they used an app to sell power back to the grid. This maximised their cost savings for charging the car battery and their earnings from the grid.

For instance, a V2G user was alerted by their energy retailer that power prices had spiked to over $20 per kilowatt hour – far above normal rates of 25–45 cents. They immediately set their car and home battery to sell power back to the grid. In two hours, they sold 28 kilowatt hours of power to the grid and made more than $560. As they told us: “I look forward to more such events.”

Our interviewees often monitored energy prices, solar output and car battery levels to optimise their output. To avoid their EV battery getting too low, they set a lower limit – say 30% of charge – after which their car would stop exporting power.

Is there a downside?

One of the main reasons people are sceptical of V2G is due to concern about accelerated degradation of the battery.

This is a common concern. But to date, there’s no consensus showing V2G shortens the battery life of EVs significantly. One recent study shows it increases degradation by 0.3% a year. But another showed V2G might actually extend battery life in some scenarios.

Last year, we surveyed more than 1,300 members of a motoring organisation about their view of V2G technology. We found battery warranty was a bigger concern than battery life. This is because most EV manufacturers other than Nissan don’t mention V2G in their battery warranties, leading drivers to believe they might void their warranty by using V2G.

Awareness of V2G technology is growing. The survey also found almost 40% of respondents were very or somewhat familiar with V2G, a jump from the 17% who reported familiarity in 2022. Among EV owners, almost 90% reported knowledge of the concept.

Moving beyond early adopters

For V2G to go mainstream, the process must be much simpler, cheaper and easier to set up.

To accelerate uptake, reliable, accessible information is essential.

Expanding government incentive programs to include bidirectional chargers would cut the upfront cost and make it more accessible.

Even within the EV supply chain, knowledge of V2G is limited. Car dealerships will need to know which models work with V2G.

Electricians may need specific training to install and maintain these chargers.

EVs are falling in price as manufacturers vie for market share and cheaper options become available. V2G capabilities might help boost sales for competing car companies.

As more motorists switch to EVs, interest in V2G will increase. While V2G can boost the appeal of EVs, there are others, such as Vehicle-to-Home (using your car to power your home during blackouts or to save money) and Vehicle-to-Load (using your EV to run power tools or appliances).

Each of these can help consumers get more value from the vehicles parked in driveways and garages.

Scott Dwyer receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

Scott Dwyer receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

Kriti Nagrath receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

– ref. ‘A house battery you can drive around’: how a handful of Australians are selling power from their cars back to the grid – https://theconversation.com/a-house-battery-you-can-drive-around-how-a-handful-of-australians-are-selling-power-from-their-cars-back-to-the-grid-249696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aish Ravi, Lecturer in Curriculum, Teaching and Inclusive Education, Monash University

In October last year, the Australian Sports Commission (ASC) launched Dealing with the Moment: Anti-Racism in Community Sport, a free online course designed to help community coaches, parents, umpires and players respond to racism in sport.

The course equips people with the tools they need to intervene effectively when racism occurs, ensuring everyone feels safe, welcome and respected.

One of the key recommendations from the course is what to do if you hear someone say something racist on the sports field.

Why racist remarks are so damaging

Racist remarks hurt more than just a player’s feelings — they attack their sense of belonging and identity on the field.

I know from my own experiences.

During my years playing various community sports as a young adult, including Australian rules football, soccer and cricket, I was often one of the only people of colour.

In those moments, I wanted my play and skills to be the focus but unfortunately, my appearance often made me stand out, which led to racist comments.

Those remarks were deeply offensive and hurtful. They made me feel like I didn’t belong or shouldn’t be there.

Racism in sport sends a harmful message: that someone doesn’t belong because of their skin colour or background. These incidents leave lasting emotional and psychological scars, even if they don’t result in physical harm.

Why I helped develop the course

I worked on developing the course to address a significant gap in how racism is handled in community sport.

The course aims to ensure all sport participants have a positive and inclusive experience and that everyone understands the importance of addressing racism immediately – in the moment.

It’s not good enough to delay action, even if that’s how it has often been done in the past. Some organisations claim that delaying action allows for thorough investigations and careful consideration.

However, this is often a strategy to protect reputations and minimise backlash rather than address the root causes of the problem.

Such delays can silence victims, perpetuate harm, and show a lack of genuine commitment to tackling systemic racism. Immediate action is necessary to demonstrate accountability and foster meaningful change.

We must do better. We need to see progress, not stagnation.

So, what should you do after a racist comment?

If you don’t have time to dive into the full course, here are the key lessons:

• the first 60 seconds are crucial: intervening immediately sends a strong message that racism won’t be tolerated and shows support for the victim

• understand racism: recognise what racism is and how it affects people. Never dismiss someone’s experience by saying it’s “not racism” or telling them to “get over it”. Just because the harm isn’t physical doesn’t mean it’s not significant

• take action: the course provides clear guidance on how to respond effectively to incidents of racism and support those affected.

Why are the first 60 seconds so cruical?

Acting early allows you to nip the issue in the bud by calling it out and intervening on the spot. It leaves no room for misinterpretation of events or for the narrative to shift.

The longer the delay, the more time it allows for the situation to be downplayed, the narrative to change, or for excuses to be made.

Ultimately, delays often result in the issue being swept under the carpet, with no one taking accountability for the harm caused.

Immediate action demonstrates clarity, conviction, and a genuine commitment to addressing racism.

Strategies for coaches, parents and officials

Everyone — coaches, parents, officials, players and spectators — has a role to play when dealing with racism. Here are some practical strategies:

• acknowledge and act: staying silent is not an option. A simple statement like “that’s not okay” sends a strong message of support and sets a clear standard of behaviour

• use your authority: coaches can address players directly, officials can stop play, and parents can challenge inappropriate behaviour from the sidelines. Everyone has the power to intervene

• educate yourself: take the course or learn more about racism so you feel confident and empowered to act

• don’t minimise the impact: never tell someone to brush it off or suggest it’s not a big deal. Acknowledge their feelings, show empathy, and take the situation seriously

• apply this to all inappropriate behaviour: these strategies aren’t limited to racism. They apply to misogynistic, homophobic, or other harmful remarks as well.

Sport should be for everyone

We live in a multicultural society – a melting pot of diverse cultures that is beautifully reflected on our streets and in our classrooms. It would be wonderful to see this diversity equally represented in community sport.

Greater representation on the field and in the stands would create a sense of belonging and allow all players to thrive, regardless of their background.

This is why addressing racism is so crucial — it paves the way for more inclusive and equitable participation in sport.

The goal is to make sport a space where diversity is celebrated, teamwork is valued, and everyone can thrive without fear of discrimination.

We can all play a part in creating lasting change.

Aish Ravi receives funding from organisations for consulting work on training and education and evaluation work. She is also on various volunteer committees advocating for change.

– ref. You’re playing (or watching) sport and someone blurts out a racial slur. The next 60 seconds are crucial – https://theconversation.com/youre-playing-or-watching-sport-and-someone-blurts-out-a-racial-slur-the-next-60-seconds-are-crucial-248671

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scott Dwyer, Research Director, Energy Futures, University of Technology Sydney

Our cars sit unused most of the time. If you have an electric vehicle, you might leave it charging at home or work after driving it. But there’s another step you could take. If you have a bidirectional charger, you can set it to sell power back to the grid when demand is high.

Fewer than ten people across Australia actually do this, because the technology – known as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) – is very new. To date, it only works with a single car model (Nissan LEAF) and a single charger (Wallbox Quasar 1). We’ve estimated the number of users based on sales of this charger. The chargers are expensive and there’s a thicket of regulations to navigate.

But that could soon change. Last year, Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen announced new Australian standards and communications protocols for bidirectional chargers in a bid to make it mainstream. Cheaper EVs and bidirectional chargers will make this more appealing.

If it takes off, V2G could become extremely useful to the power grid as a way to release power as required and stabilise the grid against fluctuations.

This week, Australia’s renewable energy agency released a V2G roadmap, which notes widespread uptake could “materially reduce electricity costs for consumers and accelerate national emissions reduction”.

To understand why people are using the technology and the challenges to do so, we interviewed five early adopters from New South Wales and South Australia. Our findings are released today.

Setting up V2G isn’t easy

Our interviewees reported a long, complex journey to set up V2G. These early adopters had no playbook to follow, so the process was one of trial and error.

Some relied on professional networks or social media groups to gather information. They spent significant time and energy finding electricians, installers and charger manufacturers to set up their systems. Strata approvals were required. They also had to negotiate with power retailers and distributors.

Delays were common, especially when seeking approval from the energy distributor. Some interviewees reported delays of months to years.

Most interviewees had experience in a technical field such as engineering or technology. Some reported a significant learning curve, while others using new software from their retailer reported a smoother “set and forget” process.

So why do it? Our interviewees had several reasons, ranging from getting the most out of expensive assets (solar and the EV) to offsetting power bills entirely.

Four out of five interviewees reported making a small profit of about A$1,000 annually instead of a bill. Many wanted to be able to reduce dependence on the grid and reduce their environmental impact.

As one told us:

you originally think of it as a car you can also use to power your house. [But actually] it’s a house battery you can drive around.

Maximising savings

Typically, our interviewees plugged their car in at home during the day to charge from their rooftop solar. In the evenings when power prices peaked, they used an app to sell power back to the grid. This maximised their cost savings for charging the car battery and their earnings from the grid.

For instance, a V2G user was alerted by their energy retailer that power prices had spiked to over $20 per kilowatt hour – far above normal rates of 25–45 cents. They immediately set their car and home battery to sell power back to the grid. In two hours, they sold 28 kilowatt hours of power to the grid and made more than $560. As they told us: “I look forward to more such events.”

Our interviewees often monitored energy prices, solar output and car battery levels to optimise their output. To avoid their EV battery getting too low, they set a lower limit – say 30% of charge – after which their car would stop exporting power.

Is there a downside?

One of the main reasons people are sceptical of V2G is due to concern about accelerated degradation of the battery.

This is a common concern. But to date, there’s no consensus showing V2G shortens the battery life of EVs significantly. One recent study shows it increases degradation by 0.3% a year. But another showed V2G might actually extend battery life in some scenarios.

Last year, we surveyed more than 1,300 members of a motoring organisation about their view of V2G technology. We found battery warranty was a bigger concern than battery life. This is because most EV manufacturers other than Nissan don’t mention V2G in their battery warranties, leading drivers to believe they might void their warranty by using V2G.

Awareness of V2G technology is growing. The survey also found almost 40% of respondents were very or somewhat familiar with V2G, a jump from the 17% who reported familiarity in 2022. Among EV owners, almost 90% reported knowledge of the concept.

Moving beyond early adopters

For V2G to go mainstream, the process must be much simpler, cheaper and easier to set up.

To accelerate uptake, reliable, accessible information is essential.

Expanding government incentive programs to include bidirectional chargers would cut the upfront cost and make it more accessible.

Even within the EV supply chain, knowledge of V2G is limited. Car dealerships will need to know which models work with V2G.

Electricians may need specific training to install and maintain these chargers.

EVs are falling in price as manufacturers vie for market share and cheaper options become available. V2G capabilities might help boost sales for competing car companies.

As more motorists switch to EVs, interest in V2G will increase. While V2G can boost the appeal of EVs, there are others, such as Vehicle-to-Home (using your car to power your home during blackouts or to save money) and Vehicle-to-Load (using your EV to run power tools or appliances).

Each of these can help consumers get more value from the vehicles parked in driveways and garages.

Scott Dwyer receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

Scott Dwyer receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

Kriti Nagrath receives funding from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre and the NRMA for this project.

– ref. ‘It’s a house battery you can drive around’ – how a handful of Australians are selling power back to the grid from their cars – https://theconversation.com/its-a-house-battery-you-can-drive-around-how-a-handful-of-australians-are-selling-power-back-to-the-grid-from-their-cars-249696

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ajay Narendra, Associate Professor of Insect Neuroethology, Macquarie University

Jumping spiders – one of the largest spider families – get their name from the extraordinary jumps they make to hunt prey, to navigate and also to evade predators.

Male jumping spiders also jump to escape from cannibalistic females and competing males. So they are under tremendous pressure to jump efficiently and rapidly.

We studied the jumping abilities of miniature male and female Australian peacock spiders. We found that the males – incredibly light creatures, weighing just 2 milligrams – have the highest acceleration among any known jumping spider.

Our study is the first to explore and identify differences in how male and female jumping spiders undertake their impressive jumps. It’s now published in the Journal of Experimental Biology.

Unique hydraulics

Jumping is an energetically “expensive” movement strategy. To perform it, animals have to launch themselves from a surface by coordinating the movement of numerous body parts.

Some invertebrates, like ants, jump with the help of their muscles. Others, like fleas, use energy stored in internal structures that are rapidly released to trigger a leap.

Jumping spiders are different – they use a unique semi-hydraulic system. They don’t have muscles to extend their legs and power the jumps. Instead, they extend their legs by increasing the pressure of the haemolymph (fluid analogous to blood in invertebrates) in their legs, which triggers the jump.

Peacock spiders are well known for the elaborate courtship display males carry out to court females. It has captured the attention of biologists and non-scientific audiences alike. The display includes extending and waving their third pair of legs and opening the colourful flap-like extensions on the abdomen.

The quantitative description of jumping movements, known as jump kinematics, has only been conducted for four of the 6,000+ jumping spider species known worldwide. On top of this, scientists have never investigated differences in jump dynamics in male and female spiders.

Because male and female peacock spiders differ strongly in size from each other, they present a unique opportunity to identify sex-specific differences in jump kinematics.

Spiders on campus

We studied the Australian splendid peacock spider (Maratus splendens) found both on the Macquarie University campus in Sydney and in the surrounding area.

The females weighed more than twice as much as males, and the heaviest female was 6.6 times heavier than the lightest male. We scanned male and female specimens using micro-computed tomography and carried out a 3D reconstruction to determine the centre of mass of each sex.

We then filmed the jumps of male and female spiders using a high-speed camera, and tracked the animals’ centre of mass during each jump. From this, we measured a suite of kinematic measures, including jump take-off angle, acceleration, and g-force.

We found that these lighter male peacock spiders have a distinct jump choreography and kinematics compared to the heavier females.

High, fast and steep

We discovered that the splendid peacock spiders accelerated at 127.8 m/s² – more than twice as fast as the previous highest known acceleration in jumping spiders.

This rapid acceleration may have evolved to escape from predators or to track and capture fast-moving prey in their natural environments.

Though the lighter males accelerated faster, after controlling for body mass we found that acceleration in males was slower compared to females. Males and females experienced accelerations equivalent to 13.03 times and 12.5 times the force of gravity, respectively.

Interestingly, the jumps of males were at a steeper angle than those of females, which is likely an adaptation to rapidly escape from females and other males.

A question that remained was which of the four pairs of legs powered this rapid jump. To figure this out, we tracked multiple joints on all of the spiders’ legs throughout the jump.

We found that the joint on the third pair of legs had an extremely acute angle before jumping, and rapidly changed to something like a straight angle after attaining maximum acceleration. Our results show that it’s the third pair of legs that propels the splendid peacock spider into its impressive jumps.

Ajay Narendra receives funding from Australian Research Council.

– ref. Tiny splendid peacock spiders have the fastest known jump among their kin – new study – https://theconversation.com/tiny-splendid-peacock-spiders-have-the-fastest-known-jump-among-their-kin-new-study-247241

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Sheedy, Professor – Risk governance, culture, remuneration, Macquarie University

This week the corporate regulator is taking on executives and directors of Star Entertainment in the Federal Court, in a landmark case for Australian corporate governance.

ASIC will allege that despite multiple red flags that should have prompted internal investigation, directors at Star sat on their hands while accepting the considerable perks of the office.

Historically, ASIC has not been willing to go after apparently lax directors and executives and there are questions about its effectiveness as a regulator. Will this time be different?

What is Star accused of?

The case against Star Entertainment, like so many others, boils down to “acting with reasonable care and diligence” in respect of risk management. Did Star’s board and executives sufficiently focus on the well-known risks of money-laundering and criminal association in the operation of its casinos in Sydney and Queensland?

ASIC will seek to show that they did not. It is suing several former directors and executives, including the former chief executive, in a case expected to last six weeks. The defendants deny they breached their duties.

Warnings were ‘ignored’

In the first days of hearings, ASIC told the court the board had been given evidence of money-laundering risks from high-rollers with ties to criminal organisations, but that those warnings were ignored.

The court was told the board and executives were “incurious and complacent” about alleged criminal activity and money-laundering, with wads of cash delivered in a blue Esky and in paper bags to a private gambling room.

If the allegations are proven, it won’t be just the shareholders who have suffered. Anti-money-laundering laws exist because criminals need to clean their ill-gotten gains, or make them appear legitimate. While not alleged in this instance, in general, money-laundering enables crimes such as scams, fraud, child exploitation and drug/sex trafficking. There are many victims throughout society.

The issues at Star were uncovered by journalists in 2021. This was the catalyst for the NSW Independent Casino Commission to set up a review by Adam Bell SC. On August 31 2022, Bell handed down his findings into The Star casino’s suitability to hold a casino licence in NSW in a 946-page report.

Two months later, the NSW commission announced it had suspended Star’s licence indefinitely, fined the casino $100 million, and appointed an independent manager.

Share price tanked

Since 2021, the share price for Star Entertainment Group has collapsed from $3.76 to 13 cents today, wiping billions in market value.

It is true that Star Entertainment has been hurt by factors other than the financial allegations identified by Bell. But the collapse in revenue suggests the casino operator’s business model was inherently reliant on money-laundering. Strip that out, and what remains is a business that will likely not survive without a white knight.

To what extent can the directors be blamed for these failures? Based on the defences used during the Bell inquiry, they may claim they were not involved in the complex, day-to-day management of operations. Executives failed to inform them of risk-management issues. But are these adequate excuses?

According to the Australian Institute of Company Directors, of which the Star Entertainment directors were all alumni, directors must “apply an enquiring mind […] test information put before them by management and proactively consider what other information they require”. Bear in mind the handsome remuneration received by the directors to perform their oversight duties. The former chairman, John O’Neill, received a total of $484,500 in financial year 2021.

For this sort of money, shareholders might reasonably expect some tough questions would be asked, especially given the red flags that came to light. The internal audit team or external independent advisers could have been charged with further investigating issues of concern.

Putting directors on notice

Unfortunately, the scandal at Star Entertainment is not an isolated case of risk-governance failure. A royal commission found the directors of Crown Casino also failed properly to manage the risks of money-laundering.

The financial crime regulator, Austrac, has identified similar failures at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Westpac and Adelaide’s Sky City casino. Turning to cyber risk, it is clear that firms such as Medibank and Latitude Financial have failed to protect sensitive customer data.

While most of the above listed companies have been fined by regulators, the consequences for individual directors have been limited or non-existent. And herein lies the problem – lack of accountability breeds inattention, indolence and recklessness.

Where is the incentive for directors to ask those tough questions of the executive, to rock the boat on a nice cosy board? The reputation of ASIC as an ineffective corporate regulator has not served either shareholders or the Australian public well.

That is why the outcome of this case is so important. A win would put directors on notice that risk governance is a serious matter and they need to do more to earn their substantial fees.

Elizabeth Sheedy is on the advisory board of the Financial Integrity Hub and was previously on the board of the Australian Compliance Institute. In the past she has received research funding from financial institutions that have been accused of money-laundering, and from the Australian Compliance Institute.

– ref. ‘Multiple red flags’: ASIC’s court case against Star executives shows the risks of complacency – https://theconversation.com/multiple-red-flags-asics-court-case-against-star-executives-shows-the-risks-of-complacency-249599

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Allen, Senior Research Fellow, Monash University

It’s hard to remember a time the United States seemed as tense and divided as it does today. That should serve as a stark reminder of just how important it is to monitor the health of our own nation.

Today, our new report card on Australia’s progress will be launched in Canberra. It assesses progress on 80 economic, social and environmental targets and models a range of policy shifts that could boost progress.

We find that progress on more than half of these targets has either stagnated or is going backwards. And growing inequalities threaten the wellbeing of many Australians.

Our report comes on the heels of America’s own State of the Nation report, which puts the US near the bottom of global rankings on inequality, violence, trust and polarisation.

The situation in Australia is not yet as dire. However, our results signal a need to start thinking long-term and take bold action on inequality to avoid a similar fate.

Not an A+ student overall

Our report draws on the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to select a broad and balanced set of 80 economic, social and environmental indicators.

Each of our indicators can be grouped under one of these 17 goals and includes a 2030 target. We use this target to evaluate progress and allocate “traffic lights” that tell us about the direction in which the country is moving.

We also benchmark Australia against peer nations from the OECD, including the US.

The overall outlook for Australia is mixed. We aren’t completely on track to meet any of the 17 SDGs. And on some indicators, Australia is actually going backwards, away from the target.

Many areas of concern centre on increasing inequality. These include:

• a 30% decline in the share of wealth held by the bottom 40% of Australians since 2004
• almost 20% of Australians living in financial stress
• over 40% of lower-income renter households living in housing stress
• household debt levels now exceed Australia’s annual gross domestic product (GDP).

There are also some broader economic concerns. Australia’s level of investment in innovation is nearly 40% below OECD averages. Economic complexity – which measures the sophistication and diversity of what our economy produces – has fallen behind Honduras, Armenia and Uganda.

And there’s been a rapid decline in education outcomes for students from lower socio-economic groups.

Shining in some areas

On the other hand, Australia is on track and actually leading our peers in life expectancy, road fatalities, tertiary education, water efficiency and government debt.

We’re also above average on closing gender gaps in both income and political representation. Australia also has very low homicide rates and high feelings of safety and trust compared to our peers.

In some key areas, Australia is actually trending rapidly towards SDG targets.

The gender gap in superannuation, for example, has fallen from 53% in 2014 to 21% in 2021.

The share of renewable electricity in our national energy grid has climbed to 35% and greenhouse gas emissions are steadily falling.

And rates of unemployment, underemployment and youth unemployment have all declined to within or closer to SDG target levels of below 5-6%.

How does the US compare?

America’s State of the Nation report, which tracks progress on a range of similar measures to our report, paints a bleak picture.

There are only four measures where the US performs in the top 20% of high-income countries – economic output, productivity, years of education and long-term unemployment.

Compared to Australia, the US outperforms us on average per-capita income, investments in research and development and knowledge-based capital, economic complexity, household debt and broadband connection speeds.

But despite their apparent economic success, mental health and life satisfaction have deteriorated. Social connections are fraying with increased social isolation, polarisation and eroding trust.

Tragically, suicide rates, fatal overdoses and shootings have increased.

Far worse on some measures

In areas where Australia is also trending backwards, things in the US are often far worse.

Income and wealth inequality, for example, are much higher in the US. The top 1% of Americans hold around 35% of wealth – compared to 24% for the top 1% of Australians.

US welfare payments are almost 90% below the poverty line and the poverty rate is 30% higher than in Australia. Yet US government debt as a share of GDP is almost double that of Australia.

This stark contrast suggests America’s approach to pursuing material prosperity is undermining social wellbeing, with rising inequalities fuelling social tensions and polarisation.

Bold action needed

For the first time, our new report models two future scenarios for Australia, exploring policies that reverse negative trends and accelerate progress towards SDG targets by 2050.

Our modelling shows that with increased policy ambition, Australia can halve poverty and reduce income inequality by a third. We can also boost health, education and productivity, improve biodiversity, and deliver net-zero greenhouse gas emissions.

To do it, we’d need to increase public investment by around 7% a year over 10 years in key areas such as education and health, disaster resilience, sustainable food, energy and urban systems and the natural environment.

Our modelling shows that with these measures, Australia could achieve 90% of our Sustainable Development Goal targets by 2050.

Without them, our future prosperity is projected to stagnate and decline by 2050, reaching just 55% progress towards our targets and with GDP around A$300 billion lower than our more ambitious scenario.

There’s a famous aphorism that in the long run, economic productivity is almost everything. The social fissures in the US despite a strong economy would suggest otherwise.

Australia should take note and take action to ensure the long-term sustainable prosperity of our nation.

Cameron Allen receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

John Thwaites is Chair of Monash Sustainable Development Institute and Climateworks Centre which receive funding for research, education and action projects from the Commonwealth and state governments as well as from philanthropy and industry. He is a former Deputy Premier of Victoria (1999 – 2007)

– ref. A new report card shows inequality in Australia isn’t as bad as in the US – but we’re headed in the wrong direction – https://theconversation.com/a-new-report-card-shows-inequality-in-australia-isnt-as-bad-as-in-the-us-but-were-headed-in-the-wrong-direction-249579

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sam Burrow, PhD candidate, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Western Australia

Today marks 17 years since the apology to Australia’s Indigenous peoples for the forced removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families between the mid-1800s and 1970s.

Yet, communities and researchers are concerned that child protection systems are creating “another stolen generation” and a “crisis in infant removals”.

Statistics tell us Indigenous children are 11 times more likely to be removed by child protection systems than non-Indigenous children. Indigenous babies aged under one are at greatest risk.

But beyond the data, what do parents tell us about this experience?

Our recent study reviewed all the studies available about child protection processes in the perinatal period (during pregnancy and the year following birth) in Australia and across the world.

We looked at parents’ experiences across the board, with a special interest in whether First Nations families had been included in existing research.

What we already knew

Whistleblowers, including a former Aboriginal family support officer, have reported distressing child protection processes, including the removal of babies immediately following delivery.

Families that interact with child protection systems often already face multiple and complex forms of adversity. This can include poverty, homelessness, racism, intergenerational trauma, family violence, disability, mental illness, substance use and incarceration.

The perinatal period offers a unique window for early intervention and family support to reduce the risk of removal.

This could involve greater help accessing suitable housing and addressing family violence, and enhancing access to health care that is culturally safe and trauma-informed, before and after birth.

What we found

Our systematic review examined 24 studies about child protection services becoming involved with families during pregnancy and the first year after birth. This included research from Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, New Zealand and Sweden.

We looked at what parents told researchers about their experiences and found striking similarities, regardless of where they lived.

Globally, there were comparatively few studies including First Nations families. But both Indigenous and non-Indigenous parents reported punitive processes that had an enduring impact on the health and wellbeing of the parent and family.

They also agreed that early, transparent, compassionate and culturally appropriate support was required to address their needs. These included legal support to understand court processes, as well as being able to access health care without fear it could lead to removal.

Four themes emerged from these lived experiences. Here, we’ve included the voices of Aboriginal mothers who participated in a 2023 Australian study to illustrate the importance of these issues to Indigenous families.

1. A lack of support before and after removal

Parents often found the birth of their babies life-changing. However many believed child protection services didn’t adequately understand their experience or inform and support them at this time.

Mothers felt confused and overwhelmed, experiencing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and enduring grief following the removal of their babies.

Bridget*, an Aboriginal mother, told researchers:

There is no support… I think they should help towards improving family and helping family before taking a child away. It should be the absolute last option.

2. Devastating impact on relationships and wellbeing

Mothers often felt isolated and described negative interactions not only with child protection workers but also partners and families.

Fear of removal also prevented mothers from seeking antenatal care or professional support services, further compromising health and wellbeing.

Stacey said:

You have to do what they want; they control everything… who you hang out with, what you do […] There is no fixing the family… What they say goes or they take your kids.

3. Feeling powerless in the system

Many mothers had been in care themselves. They felt unfairly punished, because it was assumed they would not be capable parents due to past and present trauma.

First-time parents felt especially powerless to prove their parenting capacity.

Stacey said removing a baby from a first-time mum causes

a lot of stress and impact on everyone involved… It’s causing a lot of pain… give us the chance to be with our child to build that bond first.

Parents described surveillance framed as support, a lack of professional transparency, and often unexpected and acutely painful removals.

4. Harmful judgements and stereotypes

Insufficient support for poverty and homelessness before removal made it impossible to meet child protection requirements.

A mother who was homeless at the time her baby was removed said:

We had got secure accommodation with family. […] We weren’t doing any drugs; we were on the methadone… we had a caseworker…

They led us to believe we’re keeping her… [then] they handed me a piece of paper and said, “We’re taking your baby”. I was in shock… I felt like I was ambushed.

Parents with complex health issues also felt judged according to negative stereotypes and traditional, white, middle-class standards.

Some parents lost welfare entitlements and housing because babies had been removed, compounding their difficulties.

Where to from here?

In Australia, current Indigenous-led research and the work of Aboriginal state, territory, and national children’s commissioners is critical to guiding the development of support for families to stay together and thrive.

Parents and researchers are united about the immediate need for child protection systems to:

• provide early and sustained family-centred support during pregnancy and beyond
• address families’ practical and material needs, including poverty and homelessness
• train professionals to reduce power imbalances and build trusted relationships
• offer trauma-informed and culturally matched support services
• provide immediate and ongoing mental health support if babies are removed.

Renna (a co-author on this article and also a proud Walbunja woman from the Yuin Nation, academic and social worker) reflects on the removal of her baby not long before the apology.

Eighteen years later, I know we will never feel whole, left with empty arms, a life stolen, the shadow festers and grows.

Special thanks to our review co-authors Melissa O’Donnell, Lisa Wood, Colleen Fisher and Renée Usher, our expert advisory group, the Stan Perron Charitable Foundation and the original participants and researchers whose primary studies made our review and this article possible.

*Names have been changed for privacy.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14. 13YARN is a free and confidential 24/7 national crisis support line for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are feeling overwhelmed or having difficulty coping. Call 13 92 76.

Sam Burrow receives a PhD scholarship from the Stan Perron Charitable Foundation.

Renna Gayde is affiliated with SAFeST start coalition, a stream of the Replanting the Birthing Trees Project.

– ref. Removing babies is still harming First Nations families, almost two decades after the apology to Stolen Generations – https://theconversation.com/removing-babies-is-still-harming-first-nations-families-almost-two-decades-after-the-apology-to-stolen-generations-249353

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaitlin Barham, Wildlife ecology researcher, The University of Queensland

Crocodiles are hardy creatures, capable of adjusting their behaviour to cope with the heat of the tropics. But there’s a limit to their endurance.

Our new research shows the average body temperature of estuarine (saltwater) crocodiles in Far North Queensland has risen steadily over the past 15 years. The peaks align with heatwaves during El Niño events.

We tagged and tracked 203 crocodiles in the Steve Irwin Wildlife Reserve on Cape York Peninsula, to find out how they respond to rising temperatures. We know from our previous research that crocodiles can change their behaviour to quickly cool down, and might do this by diving deeper, seeking shade or hauling themselves out onto the riverbank at night.

We found hot crocodiles displayed more of these cooling behaviours, but this was not always enough to keep their body temperature under control. Crocodile diving performance decreased at body temperatures above 31–33°C. This could compromise other behaviours necessary for feeding, fleeing or reproducing.

How do crocs keep cool?

Crocodiles, like other reptiles, are “ectotherms”. This means their bodies heat up or cool down depending on the temperature of the surrounding environment.

They can’t control or adjust their own internal thermostat like birds or mammals. Instead, they regulate their body temperature by moving to a more comfortable place.

On hot nights the water stays warm, but the air cools down. So crocodiles will move onto the river bank at night to cool off. We call this “nocturnal basking”.

During the day, they might dive down really deep where it’s a bit cooler. Or they might lie on the bank in the shade with their mouth gaping wide, or sit in a cool freshwater creek.

Last year, we published research using data from thumb-sized temperature loggers implanted under the crocodile’s skin. By tracking when their body temperatures rose or fell rapidly, we were able to record “active cooling” and “active warming” periods during the day and night.

Active warming tended to occur on winter afternoons, and was likely achieved through basking in the sun on riverbanks and sand flats.

Active cooling was more common on hot summer nights. We think the crocodiles were either taking advantage of cool night air through nocturnal basking, or spending time in shady spots along the river.

But there’s a limit to how much warming crocodiles can take. Previous research has shown crocodiles have shorter dives at body temperatures above 32-33°C. This can reduce their ability to hunt for food or seek shelter.

How will crocs cope with climate change?

In our new research, we wanted to find out if crocodiles can reduce their exposure to high temperatures through active cooling behaviour.

With the help of Australia Zoo’s croc team, we tagged and tracked 203 wild estuarine crocodiles in the Wenlock and Ducie rivers of the Steve Irwin Wildlife Reserve, between 2008 and 2023.

During this time, the average air temperature in Far North Queensland rose by 0.08–0.30°C. Top temperatures peaked during El Niño events (2010 and 2016), whereas minimum temperatures peaked during La Niña events (2020–23).

We collected data on crocodile body temperature, daily distance travelled and diving behaviour. Then we compared it to local air temperatures.

We found body temperatures increased alongside rising air temperatures and peaked during El Niños such as the summer of 2015–16.

Almost all crocodiles spent time cooling during heatwaves. The hottest crocodiles switched almost exclusively to cooling behaviours, rather than warming behaviours. But in many cases their body temperatures still exceeded 32–34°C and their diving performance suffered.

Even when summer air temperatures rocketed to 40°C, crocodiles were able to limit their body temperature to 34°C. This feat demonstrates impressive resilience to heat.

What’s next for Queensland’s crocs?

While most estuarine crocodiles in Queensland are found in the north of the state, the occasional vagrant makes its way south below its natural range into more populated areas.

This includes the crocodile spotted around Inskip Point near K’gari (Fraser Island) on the Sunshine Coast just last week.

The crocodile population has grown since hunting was banned in 1974. So it is reasonable to wonder about the possibility of a southern expansion as warming continues. But there is currently no evidence to suggest Queensland’s crocodile population is moving south, or that this will become a concern in the near future with a warming climate.

Our new research shows crocodiles in the tropics are responding to higher temperatures. However, very little is known about how crocodiles in the southern, cooler part of their range behave in response to these conditions. This information could help to more effectively manage crocodiles and protect the general public.

Crocodiles are remarkably resilient predators that have evolved to survive in tropical conditions. Our research suggests they have the capacity to buffer themselves against the worst of the heat our current climate throws at them, without leaving their local river system.

But the trajectory of future climate change, coupled with the new findings, suggests crocodiles might struggle in a warmer world.

Kaitlin Barham receives funding from the Australian Research Council. The Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment – Equity Trustees Charitable Foundation & the Ecological Society of Australia funded travel to the field site for this research. She is affiliated with The University of Queensland.

Craig E. Franklin receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Wildlife Warriors. He is affiliated with The University of Queensland.

Ross Dwyer has been funded by grants from the Australian Research Council and the Queensland government for crocodile research in wild and captive environments. He is affiliated with The University of the Sunshine Coast.

– ref. Nocturnal basking and deep diving may not be enough to keep crocodiles cool in a warming world – https://theconversation.com/nocturnal-basking-and-deep-diving-may-not-be-enough-to-keep-crocodiles-cool-in-a-warming-world-248655

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Damien O’Meara, Lecturer, School of Media and Communication, RMIT University

Stan’s new series Invisible Boys follows four young gay men as they understand and explore their identities while living in Geraldton, a regional town in Western Australia.

Charlie Roth (Joseph Zada), Zeke Calogero (Aydan Clafiore), Kade “Hammer” Hammersmith (Zach Blampied) and Matt Jones (Joe Klocek) represent four very different young men. Yet they share the experience of feeling invisible because of their sexuality.

An adaptation of Holden Sheppard’s novel of the same name, the story challenges linear narratives of progress and typical ideals of queer life. It also shows how such mentalities can lead gay and bisexual men growing up in regional Australia to feel invisible, as they often don’t fit the neat narratives associated with “progress”.

Invisible Boys is an example of what my colleague Whitney Monaghan and I have termed a queer storyworld, which centres LGBTQIA+ stories, communities and issues in complex and nuanced ways.

Read more:
We studied two decades of queer representation on Australian TV, and found some interesting trends

Aussie teen drama is gritty and real

Australian teen drama found international success in the 1990s. Series such as Heartbreak High (1994–99) and Sweat (1996) included underrepresented stories of cultural diversity and diverse sexuality, and were promoted with reference to their “gritty” themes.

The terms “gritty” and “real” have become key markers of the Aussie teen drama. Journalist Grace Back notes how Heartbreak High’s appeal lay in its characters having to “grapple with gritty issues”.

Similarly, Janine Kelly from the Australian Children’s Television Foundation describes More Than This (2022) as a “real, gritty and powerful series [that] reflects the diversity of the suburban Australian public-school environment.”

The trailer for Invisible Boys features a review describing the show as “powerful, topical and all too real”, placing it alongside the bold teen dramas that have come before.

But I’d argue no previous teen drama has been quite as truthful in its representation of some young gay and bisexual men’s experiences.

Sexual desire in the gay teen narrative

Invisible Boys is set in 2017, against the backdrop of the highly visible and divisive same-sex marriage survey.

The show examines how gay teen sex manifests in environments that often aren’t very visible. In the first five minutes, we see 17-year-old Charlie attempting to have sex at a beat – a public space where gay men seek anonymous sexual intimacy.

Later, an inciting incident occurs when Charlie uses an app to arrange a sexual encounter with an older married man in his home, before being caught by his wife.

Invisible Boys examines how the sexual desires of gay and bisexual men do not hibernate in the face of oppression.

Research shows some older gay adolescents (under 18) seek out and have positive experiences of sex with older men. That these experiences exist means they should have a place in teen dramas, to examine and drive important conversations.

Queer as Folk (1999–2000) faced criticism for its underage sex storyline from the broader public and the LGBTQIA+ community alike, wherein the series opens with 15-year-old Nathan (Charlie Hunnam) seeking and finding a sexual partner on the gay scene in Manchester.

However, this story was based in something real: the oppressive Section 28 laws in England that made it illegal for gay and bisexual men under 18 to explore their sexuality. This drove them to spaces where they could remain anonymous.

Invisible Boys tackles the reality of gay and bisexual life in a regional town. Other teen series in other markets, such as Heartstopper (2022–), present a somewhat normative view of queer teen life under banners of “love is love”. And while this story is true for some, it has been told.

Challenging gay respectability politics

Respectability politics is the view that “marginalised groups must demonstrate that they adhere to normative values before they will be accepted or granted rights by dominant groups”. We see this in the dominance of homonormative representation in Australian TV, which sees heterosexual norms being applied to LGBTQIA+ people – as well as in its exclusion of gay sex.

Invisible Boys challenges the dominance of gay respectability politics in the teen drama genre.

While older Australian series such as Dance Academy (2010–13) (admittedly aimed at younger teen audiences) explored queer sexuality through chaste kisses and teen angst, primetime series such as Please Like Me (2013–16) and In Our Blood (2022) made headway by telling complex, intimate stories of gay men.

Similarly, the horny gay teen isn’t hidden away in Invisible Boys – nor are his choices always comfortable.

A sign for streamers and Australian TV

Streaming services have often struggled to nail Australia’s television sensibility. Netflix’s Tidelands (2018) was criticised for not quite capturing what made Australian series appealing, while Stan’s Eden (2021) was met with similar critiques.

More recently, Prime Video’s Deadloch (2023–) and the Netflix reboot of Heartbreak High (2022–24) have signalled a shift to something more suited to local viewers.

Yet the creators of Heartbreak High made certain decisions that stood out to local viewers, such as not including school uniforms (likely to appeal to a global audience). Invisible Boys does not dilute the specificity of regional Aussie experiences.

In the tradition of iconic teen dramas from 1970s and 1990s, such as Class of ‘74 (1974–75), the original Heartbreak High (1994–99), and Sweat (1996), the series is willing to go there by tackling the inconvenient truths of teenage life.

As someone who grew up gay in regional Australia, it feels like an authentic representation of my own experience. There’s something universal about Charlie, Zeke, Kade and Matt’s stories of not fitting in, and of being invisible to be safe.

Most striking is the way the series captures the complicated mix of joy and fear – the clash of opportunity and consequence – that accompanies becoming visibly gay in these environments.

Invisible Boys is streaming on Stan.

Damien O’Meara 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. Stan’s Invisible Boys carries the tradition of real, gritty Aussie teen drama, while smashing it into something new – https://theconversation.com/stans-invisible-boys-carries-the-tradition-of-real-gritty-aussie-teen-drama-while-smashing-it-into-something-new-248126

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luke Barnes, Lecturer in Physics, Western Sydney University

Three and a half kilometres beneath the Mediterranean Sea, around 80km off the coast of Sicily, lies half of a very unusual telescope called KM3NeT.

The enormous device is still under construction, but today the telescope’s scientific team announced they have already detected a particle from outer space with a staggering amount of energy.

In fact, as the team report in Nature, they found the most energetic neutrino anyone has ever seen – and it represents a tremendous leap forward in exploring the uncharted waters of the extreme universe.

To explain why it’s such a remarkable discovery, we need to understand what KM3NeT is, what it’s looking for, and what it saw.

What is KM3NeT?

KM3NeT is a gigantic deep sea telescope being built by an international collaboration of more than 300 scientists and engineers from 21 countries.

At the site off Sicily, and another off the coast of Provence in France, KM3NeT will be made up of more than 6,000 light detectors hanging in the pitch-black depths. When the telescope is complete, it will cover about a cubic kilometre of sea.

Down deep, KM3NeT is shielded from ordinary sources of light, such as the Sun. It is also shielded from other particles like electrons and protons, which are absorbed by the water long before they reach the detectors. So what does it see?

What is KM3NeT looking for?

Of all the particles that physicists have discovered, only the elusive neutrino can reach all the way down to KM3NeT.

The neutrino is an elementary particle with no electric charge and only a very tiny mass. It interacts with matter so weakly that it can pass through kilometres of ocean – and even thousands of kilometres of Earth itself – to reach the detector. That’s why KM3NeT is at the bottom of the sea: to see neutrinos, and only neutrinos.

But won’t the neutrinos pass through the detector, too? Yes, almost all of them.

But very rarely, a neutrino will crash right into a water molecule. When it does, it can pack an enormous punch.

The energy of the neutrino can create many more particles. As these particles blast through the water, they create a bluish glow. That’s what KM3NeT detectors see.

By analysing this bluish light, and by timing each flash, scientists can reconstruct the original energy of the neutrino, and the direction from which it came. (Either that, or they’ve just clocked one of those deep-sea glowing fish travelling at nearly the speed of light.)

The most energetic neutrino ever detected

On February 13 2023, KM3NeT detected a neutrino travelling so fast it had 30 times more energy than any previously detected.

The amount of energy is 220 petaelectronvolts, but that doesn’t mean much to a non-particle physicist. It’s hard to imagine, but let’s try.

The neutrino had 100 trillion times more energy than a typical particle at the centre of the Sun. It’s a trillion times more energy than medical X-rays, and ten billion times more than the most dangerous radioactive particles. Earth’s biggest particle accelerators can’t produce a particle with even one ten thousandth of this energy.

Short story: it’s a lot of energy for one particle.

Making neutrinos in space

Neutrinos interact with matter very weakly, so how could a single neutrino have been given so much energy? What sort of cosmic event could create such a particle?

That’s the exciting part: we don’t know.

We know there are colossal explosions in the universe, such as supernovas: when a star exhausts its fuel and collapses. And there are gamma ray bursts, which are even more energetic explosions of supermassive stars, or collisions of neutron stars. These create extremely energetic neutrinos.

But there are other candidates. Supermassive black holes at the centre of galaxies have millions to billions of times as much mass as the Sun.

As matter is swallowed by these black holes, it is accelerated to extreme speeds, and becomes wrapped around intense magnetic fields. The particles that aren’t swallowed can be shot out at extreme speeds. These “active galactic nuclei” are another way that the universe could create extreme neutrinos.

Third, the neutrinos could be created more locally (cosmically speaking). Explosions and active galactic nuclei also create cosmic rays: extremely energetic protons and electrons.

These could stream across the universe towards us, before colliding with a particle of light along the way. That collision can create an energetic neutrino.

How can we find the source?

Here’s where the Australian connection comes in. KM3NeT tells us this neutrino came from a particular spot in the southern sky.

If it came from an extreme explosion or an active galactic nucleus, we might hope to spot the source with other telescopes. In particular, both supernova remnants and active galactic nuclei can be spotted using radio waves.

Australia has the biggest radio telescopes in the southern hemisphere. The Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) has mapped a lot of the southern sky, and found many supernova remnants and active galactic nuclei.

My colleagues and I at Western Sydney University are using ASKAP to follow up on KM3NeT detections like this one. For this particular neutrino, there are no obvious candidates in the radio sky that it came from.

However, KM3NeT doesn’t provide a very accurate position, so we can’t be completely sure. We’ll keep looking.

KM3NeT is still under construction, and ASKAP continues to survey the sky. Our window on the extreme universe is just opening up.

Luke Barnes 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. 3.5 kilometres underwater, scientists found a staggeringly energetic particle from outer space – https://theconversation.com/3-5-kilometres-underwater-scientists-found-a-staggeringly-energetic-particle-from-outer-space-249590

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Jensen, Associate professor, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, University of Canberra

Hate speech on X was consistently 50% higher for at least eight months after tech billionaire Elon Musk bought the social media platform, new research has found.

The research looked at the prevalence of overt hate speech including a wide range of racist, homophobic and transphobic slurs.

The study, published today in PLOS ONE, was conducted by a team of researchers led by Daniel Hickney from the University of California, Berkeley.

It clearly demonstrates how a platform initially invented to help friends and family stay in touch has now metamorphosed into a place where hate speech is prolific. This is especially concerning given hate speech online has been linked to violent hate crimes offline.

A long list of promises

On October 27 2022, Musk officially purchased X (then known as Twitter) for US$44 billion and became its CEO. His takeover was accompanied by promises to reduce hate speech on the platform and tackle bots and other inauthentic accounts.

But after he bought X, Musk made several changes to the platform to reduce content moderation. For example, in November 2022 he fired much of the company’s full time workforce. He also fired outsourced content moderators who tracked abuse on X, despite research showing social medial platforms with high levels of content moderation contain less hate speech.

The following month, Musk also disbanded the platform’s Trust and Safety Council – a volunteer advisory group of independent human rights leaders and academics formed in 2016 to fight hate speech and other problems on the platform.

Previous research has shown hate speech increased on X immediately after Musk took over. So too did the prevalence of most types of bots.

This new study is the first to show that this wasn’t an anomaly.

More than 4 million posts

The study examined 4.7 million English language posts on X from the beginning of 2022 through to June 9 2023. This period includes the ten months before Musk bought X and the eight months afterwards.

The study measured overt hate speech, the meaning of which was clear to anyone who saw it – speech attacking identity groups or using toxic language. It did not measure covert types of hate speech, such as coded language used by some extremist groups to spread hate but plausibly deny doing so.

As well as measuring the amount of hate speech on X, the study also measured how much other users engaged with this material by liking it.

The researchers’ access to X data was cut off during the study due to a policy change by the platform, replacing free access to approved academic researchers with payment options which are generally unaffordable. This significantly hampered their ability to collect sample posts. But they don’t mention whether it affected their results.

A clear increase in hate

The study found “a clear increase” in the average number of posts containing hate speech following Musk’s purchase of X. Specifically, the volume of posts containing hate speech was “consistently” 50% higher after Musk took over X compared to beforehand – a jump from an estimated average of 2,179 to 3,246 posts containing hate speech per week.

Transphobic slurs saw the highest increase, rising from an average of roughly 115 posts per week before Musk’s acquisition to an average of 418 afterwards.

The level of user engagement with posts containing hate speech also increased under Musk’s watch. For example, the weekly rate at which hate speech content was liked by users jumped by 70%.

The researchers say these results suggest either hate speech wasn’t taken down, hateful users became more active, the platform’s algorithm unintentionally promoted hate speech to users who like such content – or a combination of these possibilities.

The study also detected no decrease in the activity of inauthentic accounts on X. In fact, it found a “potential increase” in the number of bot accounts partly based on a large upswing in posts promoting cryptocurrency, which are typically associated with bots.

An important data-driving deep dive

There were a number of limitations to the study. For example, it only measured hate speech posts in English, which accounts for only 31% of posts on the platform.

Even so, the study is an important, data-driven deep dive into the state of X. It shows it is a platform where hate speech is prolific. It also shows Musk has failed to fulfil his earlier promises to address problems on X such as hate speech and bot activity.

As Musk himself said at the White House earlier this week: “Some of the things I say will be incorrect and should be corrected”.

Michael Jensen receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Bayer, and the Australian Department of Defence Science and Technology Group.

– ref. Hate speech on X surged for at least 8 months after Elon Musk takeover – new research – https://theconversation.com/hate-speech-on-x-surged-for-at-least-8-months-after-elon-musk-takeover-new-research-249603

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Graham, Senior Lecturer in Economics, University of Sydney

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon wants New Zealand to “go for growth”.

But his plan, focused on reforming foreign investment, planning and competition laws, as well as boosting the tourism and mining sectors, is hampered by a fundamental reality of New Zealand’s economy: much of the country’s capital is tied up in unproductive (and expensive) housing.

While this issue is not new, with New Zealand’s economy once described as “a housing market with bits tacked on”, the solution may lie in making housing more readily available through deregulation and policy reform. This would free up capital for drivers of growth such as infrastructure and business investment.

The temptation of housing

Rapidly growing house prices over the past two decades have provided strong incentives to direct investment to the housing market.

On average, the price of a typical house has grown by around 8% per year, far outpacing household income growth. For example, in 2005 the median house price was roughly five times the average household income. By the middle of the pandemic house values had ballooned to nine times the average income.

Soaring prices have made residential investment extremely profitable for a long time. This means savings and investments have tended to flow into residential property rather than other productive sectors of the economy.

Constraints on housing supply

The problem is that in recent decades additional residential investment has not led to a substantial increase in new homes.

Local and central government rules and regulations have long hampered the construction of new houses. Instead, more investment in real estate has generally led to even higher prices.

As concerning as this is, it does not mean investments in housing have been misplaced. Rather, high prices and profits are what the market required in order to encourage those willing to build (few that there are) despite the costs, delays and uncertainties associated with bureaucratic battles with councils, planners and local NIMBY groups.

Banning property speculation might have kept prices down and reallocated investment to other productive uses. But in the absence of those speculators, the supply constraints would not have been any looser. Lower prices mean lower returns over building costs, leading to even fewer houses built.

Shifting capital out of the housing market in this way would not have benefited the country – we might have produced more and goods and services but fewer homes in which to live.

Reforming housing supply

Fortunately, New Zealand has made meaningful progress on housing supply recently. For example, Auckland and Lower Hutt changed zoning laws in the 2010s making it easier to build, and Wellington City has recently followed suit.

These changes have led to local construction booms and, crucially, lower house prices and rents.

More recently, central governments of both stripes introduced policies like the National Policy Statement on Urban Development, Medium Density Residential Standards, and housing growth targets for local councils.

These reforms make it easier to build, reduce house prices and mean less investment capital is required for each new house built. So these policies have the dual benefit of improving housing affordability and freeing up capital for other productive sectors of the economy.

As prices come down, New Zealanders will no longer need to pour nine times their income into a home.

That will free up funds for investments in new bridges and tunnels, small businesses, and exciting new startups that will help drive innovation and generate the long-run growth we seek.

New Zealand need not give up its housing dreams in order to get business moving. Rather, it can do both.

All that requires is for local and central government to continue to let people build the housing they want so that we can free up the capital our infrastructure and businesses need.

James Graham has received research funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute and is a member of Sydney YIMBY.

– ref. To achieve real growth, the NZ government needs to relax the rules around housing – https://theconversation.com/to-achieve-real-growth-the-nz-government-needs-to-relax-the-rules-around-housing-249000

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Appiah Takyi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Planning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST)

Street vending is a major economic activity in most of Ghana’s urban areas. The vendors bring everyday goods to residents and commuters at affordable prices in places convenient to them. However, the growing intensity of street vending activities in Ghanaian cities such as Accra and Kumasi is creating management problems for city authorities. Vendors are being removed as cities aim to “clean up” and modernise the urban landscape.

City authorities haven’t created ways to support street vendors. Instead, they treat them as a nuisance and use stringent regulations aimed at displacing them. This approach overlooks the potential benefits that the thriving street economy could bring to the local economy and social fabric. In contrast, for example, South Africa’s policy supports informal economic activities by providing vending spaces for street traders.

As academics who specialise in urban planning, we set out to investigate the rules around street vending in Ghana. Our study was conducted in Kumasi, the capital of the Ashanti region and the second most important city in Ghana. We found that the regulation of street vending in Ghana is unclear, contradictory and ineffective. It fails to provide a clear policy direction and adequate planning tools for integrating street vending into urban areas.

Our research reinforces the argument that the regulation of street vending is often ambiguous. We argue that these policy inconsistencies create loopholes for the hostile attitude of city authorities towards street vendors.

We call for policies that recognise the socioeconomic value of street vending and make urban spaces more inclusive.

The lay of the land

Our analysis is based on two national policy documents. These are the National Urban Policy Framework and the Local Governance Act 2016 (Act 936). We also rely on two local policy documents specific to the Kumasi Metropolitan Area. These are the Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly By-Laws on Control of Hawkers 1995 and the Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly Medium-Term Development Plan (2018–2021).

The National Urban Policy recognises and promotes street vending as part of the urban economy. It calls for local government authorities to recognise and include the informal sector.

But the overarching law regulating street vending in Ghana is the Local Governance Act. It authorises local government bodies (city authorities) to pass by-laws that forbid street vending. This is in conflict with the national policy.

The gaps

Our study revealed that in the Kumasi Metropolitan Area, the authorities seem to want to help street vendors in some ways – to strengthen the capacity of informal economic actors. But they don’t make plans or take actions to do so in the medium term development plan. Local government authorities sometimes evict street vendors from the central business district.

In Kumasi, urban policy, regulations and local development planning do not include street vending in the urban development process even though vendors are the largest group of business people in the city. Instead of building stalls and facilities to accommodate these economic operators, the authorities rather expropriate urban space from them to develop modern structures which are expensive for street vendors to occupy.

There is conflict over the use of urban public spaces. City authorities view the activities of street vendors as illegal, while the vendors see them as legitimate sources of livelihood. Authorities control vending through eviction and relocation.

In recent years, city authorities have adopted urban infrastructural planning and development as a strategy to remove street vendors. Take the case of the new Kejetia Market Redevelopment Project, which replaced the largest traditional market in west Africa with a modern urban market structure in Kumasi. Over 10,000 street vendors and 4,000 market traders were displaced.

The neglect of street vending in the design means vendors will have to earn a living informally – which simply adds to the “problem” as the city sees it.

What next?

Policies and practices that try to exclude people are not a solution to the problems of street vending. They are often counter productive. Regulating street vending requires inclusive policy measures and a clear policy direction to manage these activities. At present, Ghana, like many other African countries, lacks effective planning strategies to manage the activities of street vending.

Our recommendations include:

• coherent and inclusive policies that recognise the socioeconomic value of street vending and give vendors a rightful place in cities

• reforming urban governance to support the informal economy

• coherent and precise policies that give street vendors more security.

The current policy vacuum fuels repressive regulation and excludes street vendors from urban development processes.

To develop effective policy models, it is critical to learn from the experiences of street vendors and involve them in urban development processes. This starts with a change of attitude among city authorities.

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. Ghana’s urban strategies neglect the needs of street vendors: policy must catch up with reality – https://theconversation.com/ghanas-urban-strategies-neglect-the-needs-of-street-vendors-policy-must-catch-up-with-reality-248020

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

The Albanese government has secured bipartisan support for a major new regime covering political donations and spending, after making significant concessions.

The government agreed to increase the proposed threshold above which donations must be disclosed from $1000 to $5000. The present disclosure threshold is $16,900.

In addition, it has boosted the cap on individual donations to a candidate or party from the earlier proposed $20,000 to $50,000.

The deal was sealed on Wednesday when Special Minister of State Don Farrell had separate meetings on the final package with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition leader Peter Dutton.

The legislation had been expected to pass late last year but negotiations between the government and opposition stalled at the final moment.

The government concessions were to accommodate not just the Coalition but also to respond to a degree to criticism from crossbenchers and some stakeholders outside parliament.

The government needed to get opposition backing to ensure the legislation’s passage before parliament rises this week. If the PM called an April election this would be the last parliamentary sitting.

Also, it wanted to pass the measures with the support of the alternative government so the new regime would not be undone in the future.

The reforms are the most comprehensive changes to the electoral system in four decades. The government says they will stop big money coming to dominate politics. But they have been under attack from teal MPs and other critics, including Simon Holmes à Court from Climate 200, which has funded community independents. The critics say they favour the major parties and disadvantage new and small players.

The new regime will not come into operation until the next parliamentary term and so does not affect this election.

The changes include disclosure of donations in real time or near-real time, and a series of caps on spending, The cap on each candidate in an electorate would be $800,000, while a party’s national spending would also be capped. At the moment there are no spending caps.

The legislation increases public funding for elections from under $3.50 per vote to about $5.

Farrell has not proceeded with a separate measure on truth in advertising, saying there was not enough support for it.

The Greens described the deal as “a fix”. “Labor and the Coalition are agreeing on rigging the system to lock out their competitors.”

Independent Zoe Daniel, a teal, said the legislation “entrenches the dominance of the major parties and locks out independents and new competitors”.

She said it imposed “strict campaign spending caps on Independents while
allowing major parties to exploit loopholes to pour millions into key
electorates.

“Under the new rules, all an independent’s campaign materials – posters, ads, or billboards – would count towards the cap, while major party branding on billboards, leaflets and ads would not. This deliberate imbalance ensures that Labor and the Coalition maintain a financial stranglehold over elections,” Daniel said.

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. Government-Coalition deal secures sweeping new regime for political donations and spending – https://theconversation.com/government-coalition-deal-secures-sweeping-new-regime-for-political-donations-and-spending-249720

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

With the election only months away, the Labor government finds itself suddenly battling with the Trump administration for an exemption from new US tariffs on steel and aluminium.

The opposition has supported the effort, but it also claims a Coalition government would be better place to deal with Donald Trump.

Joining us on this podcast, Nationals leader David Littleproud says if Labor fails to get an exemption on the tariffs, a Dutton government would try again:

Of course we will and I think that the relationship that Peter Dutton had and still has in Washington will play very much towards that. In fact, I was in Washington with Peter in July last year and so he can walk the halls of Washington with authority and confidence. And I think it’s important that we want this solved and it doesn’t matter who’s in power. This is team Australia, and we’ve got to have a bipartisan approach and I think Pete has shown that leadership.

On net zero, while Littleproud firmly backs the target as in Australai’s national interest, he also says if the world walked away from it, so would we.

What everyone’s trying to do is protect regional Australia. But, just so everyone appreciates, if we’re not signed up to net zero by 2050, the people are hurt the most are the people in regional Australia, our farmers and our miners, because if we don’t sign up to what the rest of the world has, the world gets to impose on us a border adjustment mechanism. That’s a tariff and that means we get less for what we produce in regional Australia.

Now if the world changes and walks away from net zero, then we walk away with it. But we’re not the United States, we’re not the biggest economy in the world. You got to understand your place in the world, and you’ve got to understand the unintended consequences.

The government this week announced it would be willing to take over Rex Airlines if it can’t be sold. Littleproud is sceptical:

Well, I think we’ve spent over $130 million of Australian taxpayer’s money and don’t have a lot to show for it. I think what we’ve got to also look at is that Rex was a viable regional airline before they had a dalliance into competing with Qantas and Virgin in the golden triangle between Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. They couldn’t compete and instead of spending money on that, they should have upgraded their fleet.

The government has wasted enough time. They should open up conversation with the broader regional aviation sector, which they haven’t done, to find a solution, whether that be one in totality of a purchaser for Rex or whether that be a carve out of players and with policy levers is being pulled, rather than the Australian taxpayer having to cut the check in entirety. So I think we haven’t exhausted all the options.

On the coming election campaign, Littleproud stresses the closeness between the Nationals and the Liberals, rather than seeking to emphasise a separate Nationals’ pitch.

Peter and I, I think, have the tightest coalition that we’ve ever had. There’s not a piece of paper between us. We’re literally joined at the hip and our campaigns will complement one another and in fact, they’ll intertwine in many places. I think that’s important that the people of Australia understand that the only coalition that they can trust to form government is the Nationals and Liberals, not Labor, Greens and teals – that that is the only coalition that’ll give them stability, not chaos.

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: David Littleproud on US tariffs, a government-owned Rex, and the Nationals’ identity – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-david-littleproud-on-us-tariffs-a-government-owned-rex-and-the-nationals-identity-249708

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julee McDonagh, Senior Research Fellow of Frailty Research, University of Wollongong

Ageing is a normal part of the life course. It doesn’t matter how many green smoothies you drink, or how many “anti-ageing” skin care products you use, you can’t stop the ageing process.

But while we’re all getting older, not everyone who ages will necessarily become frail. Ageing and frailty are closely related, but they’re not the same thing.

Let’s break down the difference between the two.

What is ageing?

On a biological level, ageing is the result of the build-up of cellular and molecular damage in the body over time.

The ageing process causes a gradual decline in physical and mental function, a higher risk of disease, and eventual (and unavoidable) death.

Still, some people think they can cheat the system, spending millions trying to stay young forever. While we may be able to reduce the appearance of ageing, ultimately there’s no magic pill to increase our longevity.

Around one in six Australians are over the age of 65 (16% of the total population). Yet as individuals and a society many of us still have a fear of ageing.

But what is it about ageing we are so afraid of? When it comes down to it, many people are probably less afraid of ageing, and more afraid of becoming frail.

What is frailty?

Frailty is defined as a state of vulnerability characterised by a loss of reserve across multiple parts of the body.

Frailty is generally characterised by several physical symptoms, such as weakness, slow walking speed, exhaustion, unintentional weight loss, and low activity level.

Lower bone density and osteoporosis (a condition where the bones become weak and brittle) are also associated with frailty, increasing the risk of falls and fractures.

Notably, someone who is frail is less able to “bounce back” (or recover) after a stressor event compared to someone who is not frail. A stressor event could be, for example, having a fall, getting a urinary infection, or even being admitted to hospital.

Frailty is more common in older people. But in some cases, frailty can affect younger people too. For example, people with advanced chronic diseases, such as heart failure, can develop frailty much younger.

Frailty is dynamic. While it can get worse over time, in some cases frailty can also be reversed or even prevented through health and lifestyle changes.

For example, we know physical inactivity and a sedentary lifestyle can significantly increase a person’s risk of becoming frail. On the flip side, evidence shows doing more exercise can reduce frailty in older adults.

There are other lifestyle modifications we can make too. And the earlier we make these changes, the better.

Preventing frailty

Here are some key things you can do to help prevent frailty:

1. Get moving

Exercise more, including resistance training (such as squats and lunges, or grab some stretchy resistance bands). Many of these sorts of exercises can be done at home. YouTube has some great resources.

You might also consider joining a gym, or asking your GP about seeing an accredited exercise physiologist or physiotherapist. Medicare subsidies may be available for these specialists.

The physical activity guidelines for older Australians recommend at least 30 minutes of moderate intensity physical activity on most days or preferably every day.

The guidelines also highlight the importance of incorporating different types of activities (such as resistance, balance or flexibility exercises) and reducing the time you spend sitting down.

2. Stay socially active

Social isolation and loneliness can contribute to the progression of frailty. Reach out to friends and family for support or contact local community groups that you may be able to join. This might include your local Zumba class or bridge club.

3. Ask your doctor or pharmacist to regularly check your medications

“Polypharmacy” (when someone is prescribed five or more medications) is associated with an increased risk of frailty. The presence of frailty can also interfere with how the body absorbs medicines.

Home medicine reviews are available for older adults with a chronic medical condition or a complex medication regimen. These reviews aims to help people get the most benefit from their medicines and reduce their risk of experiencing adverse effects.

Always consult your doctor before making any changes to your current medications.

4. Eat a protein-rich diet with plenty of fruit and vegetables

Low nutrient intake can negatively impact physical function and may increase your risk of becoming frail. There’s some evidence to suggest eating more protein may delay the onset of frailty.

A food-first approach is best when looking to increase the protein in your diet. Protein is found in foods such as lean meats, poultry, seafood, eggs, dairy products, legumes and nuts.

Adults over 50 should aim to eat 64 grams of protein per day for men and 46g per day for women. Adults over 70 should aim for 81g per day for men and 57g per day for women.

Ask your GP for a referral to a dietitian who can provide advice on a dietary regime that is best for you.

Supplements may be recommended if you are struggling to meet your protein needs from diet alone.

Dr Julee McDonagh receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and the NSW Office of Health and Medical Research. She is also a member of the executive committee of the Cardiovascular Nursing Council of the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand and the Emerging Leaders Committee of the Australian Cardiovascular Alliance.

Professor Caleb Ferguson receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Medical Research Future Fund, Heart Foundation (Australia) and Stroke Foundation (Australia). He is a Board Director of the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand and Chair of the Cardiovascular Nursing Council. He is Associate Editor for European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing and Heart Lung and Circulation. He was a co-author of the Australian Heart Foundation & Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand clinical guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. He is co-leads the Western Sydney Clinical Frailty Registry, a clinical quality registry of older adults.

– ref. What’s the difference between ageing and frailty? One is inevitable – the other is not – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-ageing-and-frailty-one-is-inevitable-the-other-is-not-247450

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Hazel, Associate Professor, School of Animal and Veterinary Science, University of Adelaide

In some overseas countries, pets can travel with their owners in a plane’s cabin, in a carrier under a seat.

In Australia, pets must travel in the luggage hold of aircraft. But this may soon change. Virgin Australia last year announced it would allow small dogs and cats into the cabin from 2025. Now the plan has progressed further. The Australian newspaper this week reported two rows of Virgin aircraft will be designated as “pet friendly” on selected flights, although more work is needed before a trial begins.

Only small dogs or cats would be allowed in the cabin. They would have to be contained in a carrier and placed under the seat in front of their owner. The combined weight of pet and carrier must be no more than 8 kilograms.

Australians love their pets, and increasingly holiday with them. But the “pets on planes” policy is not without challenges. So how can the experience be made as smooth as possible for pets, pet owners and other passengers?

What are the potential negatives for pets?

Research shows pets kept in the luggage or cargo areas of planes face risks. These include being deprived of food and water and being exposed to extreme temperatures. Pet owners may also give their pets sedatives or other drugs to calm them down, which can cause harm.

Allowing pets to travel in a plane’s cabin, close to their owner, is likely to reduce these risks.

But the plane’s cabin is still an unfamiliar environment with strange smells, sounds and people. So, some dogs and cats may still find the experience stressful.

There are ways to minimise this. They include getting pets used to being in containers (a process known as “habituation”) and using positive reinforcement training to encourage pets to remain calm.

If a dog or cat is already anxious and you want to travel with them, it’s best to consult a vet well before you fly.

Some dogs and cats may benefit from a sedative or medication that reduces anxiety. This must be done in consultation with your vet, because these drugs may be dangerous for animals with certain health conditions.

Pets can die on flights

One study on dogs transported by air into the United States (many of which travelled in the cabin as “hand luggage”) found that every year, some pets die.

Media outlets have reported several instances of pets that died while travelling in the cargo hold or while left on the tarmac before their flight.

One risk factor occurs when the pet is a “brachycephalic” breed. These are dogs or cats with flat and shortened noses, such as pugs and the Boston terrier.

These animals have abnormal airways, meaning they are at higher risk of hyperthermia if the temperature is high, and can also have breathing difficulties.

What should pet owners do before flying?

Should the “pets on planes” policy at Virgin Australia come to pass, it’s still not clear how exactly practicalities such as offering food, water or managing toileting will work. The airline is yet to release these details.

It’s possible you would need to “fast” your pet before arriving at the airport – in other words, refrain from feeding them for a period of time, to reduce the chance they will vomit or need to defecate.

Melbourne and Sydney airports have reportedly upgraded their “pet relief” facilities – essentially pet toilets – to cope with increased future demand.

Guide and assistance dogs that currently use these facilities will always have priority. These dogs are trained to toilet on cue, making it much easier to travel with them.

If you and your pet would like to be frequent flyers, consider getting this type of training.

What about other passengers?

Virgin Australia is still consulting doctors and vets on their policy, including about risks to passengers with dog or cat allergies.

Clearly, the allergy risk to humans must be well managed – especially when in the air, isolated from medical services.

Air is filtered more frequently in plane cabins than in homes. However, even very low levels of an allergen can trigger severe reactions such as anaphylaxis or asthma attacks in some people. Also, pet dander (from shed skin cells) can remain on seats long after a pet has gone.

What’s more, some people may be frightened of, or have a phobia relating to dogs or cats. Phobia to dogs may be linked to a direct traumatic event. People with serious phobias may not be able to enter a plane if they need to walk past a dog or cat. So, placement of the pets in cabins will need to be carefully considered.

Pets are part of human lives and will likely be integrated more into transport in future, including planes. Careful planning will allow us to maximise the benefits for all: people travelling with and without pets, and the animals themselves.

Susan Hazel is affiliated with the Dog & Cat Management Board of South Australia and the RSPCA South Australia.

– ref. Australians may soon be able to fly with their pets in a plane’s cabin – but not every pet is suited to it – https://theconversation.com/australians-may-soon-be-able-to-fly-with-their-pets-in-a-planes-cabin-but-not-every-pet-is-suited-to-it-249689

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nial Wheate, Professor of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Macquarie University

The oral contraceptive pills Yaz and Yasmin will be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from March 1 2025, meaning Australian women will pay less for them.

This listing follows advice from the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, which recommended adding these pills to the PBS so women who find other contraceptive pills unsuitable have more options. These contraceptives also help manage acne and some other hormone-related conditions.

So how do Yaz and Yasmin work? And how much will they cost once they’re on the PBS?

What makes Yaz and Yasmin different?

Oral contraceptive pills prevent pregnancy primarily by stopping ovulation – the release of an egg from the ovaries.

They also thicken mucus in the cervix, making it harder for sperm to reach an egg. And they thin the lining of the uterus, reducing the likelihood of implantation.

Most combination oral contraceptive pills contain an oestrogen-based hormone (typically ethinylestradiol) and a progestogen hormone.

Both Yaz and Yasmin contain ethinylestradiol and a synthetic progestogen, called drospirenone. They both contain 3 milligrams of drospirenone.

They differ from each other in the amount of ethinylestradiol they contain. Yaz has 20 micrograms and Yasmin has 30 micrograms of the hormone. They also differ in the number of active and placebo pills a pack contains. Yaz has 24 active pills and 4 placebo pills while Yasmin has 21 active pills and 7 placebos.

Both contraceptives are just as effective in preventing pregnancies as other oral contraceptives. The chance of getting pregnant while taking either medication is around 9%.

In deciding which one is most suitable, a doctor will consider how their patient has responded to hormone treatment in the past and any other hormone-related conditions they have.

Both Yaz and Yasmin have benefits beyond birth control. Drospirenone is thought to help reduce hormone-related acne and hirsutism (excessive facial hair growth).

Premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) is a severe form of premenstrual syndrome that causes intense mood swings, depression, anxiety, and irritability before menstruation. The hormonal stability provided by Yaz, with its short hormone-free interval, can help alleviate PMDD symptoms.

Things to look out for if taking them

All combined oral contraceptive pills have common side effects that women may experience, including nausea, vomiting, break-through bleeding, absent or missed periods, headaches, irritability and breast tenderness.

There are some additional risks for the Yaz and Yasmin products. The drospirenone in the contraceptives has been associated with a slightly higher risk of blood clots when compared with other progestogens. The risk is low but may be higher in women who smoke, are over 35, or have other risk factors for clots.

Drospirenone can also cause a build up of potassium in the blood. This is a particular risk for women with kidney problems, and for those who also take diuretics or blood pressure medications, which can also raise potassium levels.

Elevated potassium can cause symptoms such as muscle weakness, fatigue, dizziness and an irregular heart rhythm.

What’s changing? How much will they cost?

These approvals are the first contraceptive pills to be added to the PBS in 30 years and are part of a larger package of women’s health measures the government announced on the weekend.

The government will also provide incentives for doctors and nurses to bulk bill services for implanting long-term contraceptives such as IUDs (intrauterine devices).

Currently, pharmacies advertise three-months’ supply of Yaz and Yasmin for around A$79 dollars ($316 per year).

Come March, the price women will pay will drop to $31.60 per box, or $126.40 per year. Concession card holders will pay $7.70 per box, or $30.80 per year.

But the price of Yaz and Yasmin will still be higher than other combined oral contraceptives (containing the hormones levonorgestrel and ethinylestradiol) on the PBS, which start at $22 for a four-month supply or $66 per year.

How can you switch?

If you are considering Yaz or Yasmin, speak to your doctor. They will take your medical history and discuss your lifestyle and any other specific health needs.

They will also explain the potential side effects to watch out for and any precautions you may need to take.

If you proceed, your doctor will outline a process for transitioning to the new medication, including timing and where to start in the pill sequence.

Read more:
What is premenstrual dysphoric disorder? And how is it different to PMS?

Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association and a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and was previously a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design, and testing.

Shoohb Alassadi 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. Yaz and Yasmin contraceptive pills will be cheaper from March. How are they different from other pills? – https://theconversation.com/yaz-and-yasmin-contraceptive-pills-will-be-cheaper-from-march-how-are-they-different-from-other-pills-249480

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Raffaele F Ciriello, Senior Lecturer in Business Information Systems, University of Sydney

OpenAI’s “deep research” is the latest artificial intelligence (AI) tool making waves and promising to do in minutes what would take hours for a human expert to complete.

Bundled as a feature in ChatGPT Pro and marketed as a research assistant that can match a trained analyst, it autonomously searches the web, compiles sources and delivers structured reports. It even scored 26.6% on Humanity’s Last Exam (HLE), a tough AI benchmark, outperforming many models.

But deep research doesn’t quite live up to the hype. While it produces polished reports, it also has serious flaws. According to journalists who’ve tried it, deep research can miss key details, struggle with recent information and sometimes invents facts.

OpenAI flags this when listing the limitations of its tool. The company also says it “can sometimes hallucinate facts in responses or make incorrect inferences, though at a notably lower rate than existing ChatGPT models, according to internal evaluations”.

It’s no surprise that unreliable data can slip in, since AI models don’t “know” things in the same way humans do.

The idea of an AI “research analyst” also raises a slew of questions. Can a machine – no matter how powerful – truly replace a trained expert? What would be the implications for knowledge work? And is AI really helping us think better, or just making it easier to stop thinking altogether?

What is ‘deep research’ and who is it for?

Marketed towards professionals in finance, science, policy, law and engineering, as well as academics, journalists and business strategists, deep research is the latest “agentic experience” OpenAI has rolled out in ChatGPT. It promises to do the heavy lifting of research in minutes.

Currently, deep research is only available to ChatGPT Pro users in the United States, at a cost of US$200 per month. OpenAI says it will roll out to Plus, Team and Enterprise users in the coming months, with a more cost-effective version planned for the future.

Unlike a standard chatbot that provides quick responses, deep research follows a multi-step process to produce a structured report:

1. The user submits a request. This could be anything from a market analysis to a legal case summary.
2. The AI clarifies the task. It may ask follow-up questions to refine the research scope.
3. The agent searches the web. It autonomously browses hundreds of sources, including news articles, research papers and online databases.
4. It synthesises its findings. The AI extracts key points, organises them into a structured report and cites its sources.
5. The final report is delivered. Within five to 30 minutes, the user receives a multi-page document – potentially even a PhD-level thesis – summarising the findings.

At first glance, it sounds like a dream tool for knowledge workers. A closer look reveals significant limitations.

Many early tests have exposed shortcomings:

• It lacks context. AI can summarise, but it doesn’t fully understand what’s important.
• It ignores new developments. It has missed major legal rulings and scientific updates.
• It makes things up. Like other AI models, it can confidently generate false information.
• It can’t tell fact from fiction. It doesn’t distinguish authoritative sources from unreliable ones.

While OpenAI claims its tool rivals human analysts, AI inevitably lacks the judgement, scrutiny and expertise that make good research valuable.

What AI can’t replace

ChatGPT isn’t the only AI tool that can scour the web and produce reports with just a few prompts. Notably, a mere 24 hours after OpenAI’s release, Hugging Face released a free, open-source version that nearly matches its performance.

The biggest risk of deep research and other AI tools marketed for “human-level” research is the illusion that AI can replace human thinking. AI can summarise information, but it can’t question its own assumptions, highlight knowledge gaps, think creatively or understand different perspectives.

And AI-generated summaries don’t match the depth of a skilled human researcher.

Any AI agent, no matter how fast, is still just a tool, not a replacement for human intelligence. For knowledge workers, it’s more important than ever to invest in skills that AI can’t replicate: critical thinking, fact-checking, deep expertise and creativity.

If you do want to use AI research tools, there are ways to do so responsibly. Thoughtful use of AI can enhance research without sacrificing accuracy or depth. You might use AI for efficiency, like summarising documents, but retain human judgement for making decisions.

Always verify sources, as AI-generated citations can be misleading. Don’t trust conclusions blindly, but apply critical thinking and cross-check information with reputable sources. For high-stakes topics — such as health, justice and democracy — supplement AI findings with expert input.

Despite prolific marketing that tries to tell us otherwise, generative AI still has plenty of limitations. Humans who can creatively synthesise information, challenge assumptions and think critically will remain in demand – AI can’t replace them just yet.

Raffaele F Ciriello 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. OpenAI’s new ‘deep research’ agent is still just a fallible tool – not a human-level expert – https://theconversation.com/openais-new-deep-research-agent-is-still-just-a-fallible-tool-not-a-human-level-expert-249496

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Murray Print, Professor of Education, University of Sydney

A federal parliamentary inquiry has just recommended civics and citizenship become a compulsory part of the Australian Curriculum, which covers the first year of school to Year 10.

The committee also recommended a mandatory civics and citizenship course for all Year 11 and 12 students to prepare them to vote.

This comes amid growing concern about misinformation on social media, as well as increasing antisemitism and declining social cohesion.

This is not the first time there have been calls to improve the quality of civics education in Australia – such calls have been made as far back as 1994.

As a researcher in political education, I argue we need to make sure civics education is relevant, engaging and given adequate space in the curriculum.

What is civics?

At the moment, civics and citizenship is included in the national Australian Curriculum. But it is not mandatory and many states only make passing reference to it in primary school. Some states provide more opportunities in high school.

The topics covered include how governments and democracy work, how laws work, the rights of individuals, diversity and national identity, and how to critically evaluate different sources of information.

Every three years since 2004, a national sample of Year 6 and Year 10 students are assessed on their civics knowledge, skills and attitudes through a national test.

In the most recent results from 2019, 53% of Year 6 students were at or above the national proficient standard for civics, while only 38% of Year 10 students were at or above the standard. Year 10 students’ results have shown a substantial decline since 2004.

This suggests many young people are leaving school without the knowledge, skills and values to sustain our democracy.

Both Australian and international studies have repeatedly shown civics and citizenship education makes a positive difference to young people’s political participation (including the likelihood they will vote), understanding of democracy and support for democratic values.

What does good civics education look like?

1. Make sure it has its own subject

At the moment, civics education might be included as part of students’ work in history or other humanities subjects. But research shows it should be taught as a separate subject, otherwise it can get lost among other material.

2. Don’t forget senior students

It should also be taught at relevant points in students’ lives.

While Year 11 and 12 are times when students get to pick most of their subjects for major exams, it is important they also study how the electoral system works. Many will vote in elections before they even leave school.

3. Make it relevant to young people

As important as they are, some aspects of civics – such as lawmaking or how parliament works – may seem dry to young people.

Research shows teachers need to make the content engaging. This means students are shown how lessons relate to the real world.

For example, a lesson on how parliament works could focus on the passage of contentious legislation such as banning social media for young people. Or lessons on misinformation could look at how social media had an impact on a particular issue or election.

4. Have class discussions

Research also shows students need to learn civics knowledge, skills and values in various ways, including role play, problem-solving, simulations and direct instruction.

Students should be encouraged to ask questions in an open classroom environment. Class discussions are important for controversial issues so both sides of issues can be discussed in a supervised environment.

5. Have school elections

My research has found school elections (for school captains or a student council) can engage students in democratic processes. This way, they see first-hand how elections work and how voting can have an impact on their lives.

6. Train teachers in law and government

It is also important for teachers to have specific training in law, government or politics. Research shows teachers with these backgrounds have a greater impact on students’ civic knowledge – students come away knowing more. Similarly, teachers with these backgrounds achieve better results with students’ civic media literacy – or ability to handle misinformation and “outrage” online.

This means existing teachers need to have professional opportunities to upgrade their civic knowledge and skills.

Ultimately, it will take well-trained teachers, teaching a compulsory subject, to see Australian students appropriately educated about our democracy and how to participate in it.

Murray Print receives funding from the Australian Research Council. An ARC grant was conducted in association with the Australian Electoral Commission.

– ref. There’s a new push to teach Australian students about civics. Here are 6 ways to do it well – https://theconversation.com/theres-a-new-push-to-teach-australian-students-about-civics-here-are-6-ways-to-do-it-well-249584

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phyllis Ohene-Agyei., Doctoral Researcher in Maternal Health, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

A growing number of women experience high blood sugar levels during pregnancy which typically resolve after birth.

Known as gestational diabetes, this is the most common metabolic disorder in pregnancy and affects one in seven women worldwide and one in sixteen in New Zealand.

Gestational diabetes is associated with complications during pregnancy. This includes high blood pressure, giving birth to a big baby (which increases the risk of vaginal birth complications) and increased rates of Caesarean section. It can also significantly affect the mother’s mental health and wellbeing.

Worryingly, more women are being diagnosed with gestational diabetes than ever before. Our new review of later health impacts for these women suggests they could be receiving better care after birth and in the long term.

Recommended care

Women who experienced gestational diabetes are ten times more likely to develop type 2 diabetes and twice as likely to experience cardiovascular disorders such as heart disease in the years following birth, compared to women who don’t develop gestational diabetes.

These mothers may also suffer from mental health problems, including depression, particularly in high-risk groups such as women of non-European ethnicity and those with a previous history of gestational diabetes.

For these reasons, care after birth for these women is important. This should include regular screening for blood sugar levels, cardiovascular problems and mental wellbeing after birth. It is also important women receive advice on diet and exercise.

Support for continued breastfeeding is also important as women who get gestational diabetes may experience a delay in milk flow and generally have lower breastfeeding rates compared to others. Breastfeeding may even reduce the risk of progression to type 2 diabetes.

Screening should continue for more than the first year after giving birth. Best practice would see women who had gestational diabetes being provided with long-term follow-up care, given their high risk for type 2 diabetes and heart problems.

Current evidence, however, suggests this isn’t necessarily happening. In a 2018 British study across several general practice centres, women who had gestational diabetes reported their levels of care during pregnancy dropped sharply after birth – to the point where they felt abandoned by the health system.

In a 2024 New Zealand study, mothers who had had gestational diabetes were interviewed five years after birth and expressed the need for more support from the health system.

While this study involved mothers’ perceptions about the optimal health and wellbeing for their children who were exposed to gestational diabetes, the findings also suggest room for improvement in care for the women themselves.

Gaps in clinical guidelines

Following on from this, our research team reviewed existing clinical practice guidelines to see if there were any gaps. These guidelines play an important role in contributing to quality care because they summarise research findings to provide recommendations for healthcare professionals to optimise health and reduce harm.

We looked at recommendations from 26 clinical practice guidelines published in the past decade in 22 countries, including New Zealand. The findings showed we could be doing better for women who have experienced gestational diabetes.

A key example relates to screening for diabetes after birth. It is common practice to check the blood sugar levels of women within three months of giving birth to see if they have gone back to normal.

This testing ensures any abnormalities (like high blood glucose, which may suggest diabetes) are detected so that appropriate management begins early on. Sadly, a nationwide study reported only about half of women receive this screening within six months after birth in New Zealand.

Sending reminders and combining these tests with other postnatal baby health checks and care procedures might encourage more women to check their blood sugar levels. However, very few guidelines we assessed recommend ways to raise the number of women who attend this screening.

Even fewer guidelines talk about screening for poor mental health, despite an increased chance these women could experience depression after birth.

Research we carried out in 2022, using randomised trial data of women with a previous history of gestational diabetes, revealed that around one in five self-reported symptoms of anxiety, depression or poor mental functioning at six months after birth.

Postnatal screening for mental health problems for all women who had gestational diabetes should be recommended to help improve quality of care.

Encouraging women who have had gestational diabetes to attend screening tests, continue breastfeeding and adopt healthy dietary choices and physical exercise requires health professionals to provide adequate counselling on the long-term risks of this condition. This will help women stick with their care plan after birth.

Phyllis Ohene-Agyei. 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. Diabetes during pregnancy can cause serious problems later – mothers need proper screening after birth – https://theconversation.com/diabetes-during-pregnancy-can-cause-serious-problems-later-mothers-need-proper-screening-after-birth-245658

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Salmon, Professor of Human Factors, University of the Sunshine Coast

This week, France hosted an AI Action Summit in Paris to discuss burning questions around artificial intelligence (AI), such as how people can trust AI technologies and how the world can govern them.

Sixty countries, including France, China, India, Japan, Australia and Canada, signed a declaration for “inclusive and sustainable” AI. The United Kingdom and United States notably refused to sign, with the UK saying the statement failed to address global governance and national security adequately, and US Vice President JD Vance criticising Europe’s “excessive regulation” of AI.

Critics say the summit sidelined safety concerns in favour of discussing commercial opportunities.

Last week, I attended the inaugural AI safety conference held by the International Association for Safe & Ethical AI, also in Paris, where I heard talks by AI luminaries Geoffrey Hinton, Yoshua Bengio, Anca Dragan, Margaret Mitchell, Max Tegmark, Kate Crawford, Joseph Stiglitz and Stuart Russell.

As I listened, I realised the disregard for AI safety concerns among governments and the public rests on a handful of comforting myths about AI that are no longer true – if they ever were.

1: Artificial general intelligence isn’t just science fiction

The most severe concerns about AI – that it could pose a threat to human existence – typically involve so-called artificial general intelligence (AGI). In theory, AGI will be far more advanced than current systems.

AGI systems will be able to learn, evolve and modify their own capabilities. They will be able to undertake tasks beyond those for which they were originally designed, and eventually surpass human intelligence.

AGI does not exist yet, and it is not certain it will ever be developed. Critics often dismiss AGI as something that belongs only in science fiction movies. As a result, the most critical risks are not taken seriously by some and are seen as fanciful by others.

However, many experts believe we are close to achieving AGI. Developers have suggested that, for the first time, they know what technical tasks are required to achieve the goal.

AGI will not stay solely in sci-fi forever. It will eventually be with us, and likely sooner than we think.

2: We already need to worry about current AI technologies

Given the most severe risks are often discussed in relation to AGI, there is often a misplaced belief we do not need to worry too much about the risks associated with contemporary “narrow” AI.

However, current AI technologies are already causing significant harm to humans and society. This includes through obvious mechanisms such as fatal road and aviation crashes, warfare, cyber incidents, and even encouraging suicide.

AI systems have also caused harm in more oblique ways, such as election interference, the replacement of human work, biased decision-making, deepfakes, and disinformation and misinformation.

According to MIT’s AI Incident Tracker, the harms caused by current AI technologies are on the rise. There is a critical need to manage current AI technologies as well as those that might appear in future.

3: Contemporary AI technologies are ‘smarter’ than we think

A third myth is that current AI technologies are not actually that clever and hence are easy to control. This myth is most often seen when discussing the large language models (LLMs) behind chatbots such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini.

There is plenty of debate about exactly how to define intelligence and whether AI technologies truly are intelligent, but for practical purposes these are distracting side issues.
It is enough that AI systems behave in unexpected ways and create unforeseen risks.

For example, existing AI technologies have been found to engage in behaviours that most people would not expect from non-intelligent entities. These include deceit, collusion, hacking, and even acting to ensure their own preservation.

Whether these behaviours are evidence of intelligence is a moot point. The behaviours may cause harm to humans either way.

What matters is that we have the controls in place to prevent harmful behaviour. The idea that “AI is dumb” isn’t helping anyone.

4: Regulation alone is not enough

Many people concerned about AI safety have advocated for AI safety regulations.

Last year the European Union’s AI Act, representing the world’s first AI law, was widely praised. It built on already established AI safety principles to provide guidance around AI safety and risk.

While regulation is crucial, it is not all that’s required to ensure AI is safe and beneficial. Regulation is only part of a complex network of controls required to keep AI safe.

These controls will also include codes of practice, standards, research, education and training, performance measurement and evaluation, procedures, security and privacy controls, incident reporting and learning systems, and more. The EU AI act is a step in the right direction, but a huge amount of work is still required to develop the appropriate mechanisms required to ensure it works.

5: It’s not just about the AI

The fifth and perhaps most entrenched myth centres around the idea that AI technologies themselves create risk.

AI technologies form one component of a broader “sociotechnical” system. There are many other essential components: humans, other technologies, data, artefacts, organisations, procedures and so on.

Safety depends on the behaviour of all these components and their interactions. This “systems thinking” philosophy demands a different approach to AI safety.

Instead of controlling the behaviour of individual components of the system, we need to manage interactions and emergent properties.

With AI agents on the rise – AI systems with more autonomy and the ability to carry out more tasks – the interactions between different AI technologies will become increasingly important.

At present, there has been little work examining these interactions and the risks that could arise in the broader sociotechnical system in which AI technologies are deployed. AI safety controls are required for all interactions within the system, not just the AI technologies themselves.

AI safety is arguably one of the most important challenges our societies face. To get anywhere in addressing it, we will need a shared understanding of what the risks really are.

Paul Salmon receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Nobody wants to talk about AI safety. Instead they cling to 5 comforting myths – https://theconversation.com/nobody-wants-to-talk-about-ai-safety-instead-they-cling-to-5-comforting-myths-249489

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hussein Dia, Professor of Future Urban Mobility, Swinburne University of Technology

Australia’s road tax system has a problem. Revenue from the fuel excise – the primary way we tax motoring – has been declining steadily as a proportion of government revenue over the past two decades.

Politicians, policy experts and business leaders have all long called for reform. Now, change could be on the horizon.

The Australian Financial Review reports that at a closed-door dinner with business leaders in Canberra last week, Treasurer Jim Chalmers hinted that addressing falling fuel excise revenue would be a tax reform priority if Labor is re-elected.

One option would be a road user charge on electric vehicles (EVs), which obviously don’t pay fuel excise. But singling them out would undermine the government’s own efforts in promoting EVs to help meet the nation’s emissions reduction targets.

There are also other inequities in the way the current fuel excise works. Our previous research has shown Australia is ready for a rational and transparent discussion about road-user charging on all vehicles, not just electric ones.

How we tax roads today

Currently, Australian motorists pay several government taxes and other fees on their vehicles.

One is the fuel excise. This tax, collected by the Commonwealth, is paid per litre of fuel purchased and is indexed every six months to account for inflation.

Then there are registration fees, typically paid every six or 12 months and collected by state and territory governments.

Vehicle owners also have to pay compulsory third-party insurance, which in some states is bundled with registration fees.

When buying or transferring ownership of a vehicle, other fees can apply. These include stamp duty as well as the luxury car tax on vehicles priced above a certain threshold.

The system isn’t working

As a proportion of Australian taxation revenue, revenue from the fuel excise has dwindled from 7.4% in 2000 to 3.9% in 2025.

It might be tempting to blame electric cars for this decline. But this share began declining steadily long before EVs were introduced in Australia, and is projected to fall further.

Falling fuel excise revenue can be attributed to a range of other factors. Improvements in engine fuel consumption have had a substantial impact on the number of litres used to travel the same distances.

In Australia, the average fuel consumption of passenger cars in 2005 was 11.3 litres per 100 kilometres. In 2024, this figure was around 6.9 litres.

Fuel consumption rates are expected to improve further and match those in other nations with the introduction of the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard, which came into effect at the start of this year.

Public transport usage has also been trending upwards in many of Australia’s major cities since the turn of the millennium, reducing reliance on private cars.

Need for an alternative

Australia’s current road taxes are blunt instruments that don’t reflect the true societal costs of driving.

The fuel excise, for example, does not properly account for traffic congestion or emissions. A driver who travels in regional Victoria or in an outer suburb of Sydney for local shopping or school drop-offs will pay the same excise as a driver who contributes to congestion by travelling into the city centre.

Similarly, car registration fees are not related to the number of kilometres travelled, congestion created, or emissions produced by driving.

One of the most widely known alternatives alternatives to a fuel excise tax is a pay-per-distance road user charge. Such charges work by charging vehicles a fee per kilometre travelled.

This would not be a new tax on top of existing taxes – it would replace current fuel excise and car registration fees.

Adjustments to this model can include exempting some groups from the charges (such as low-income families, taxis and emergency service vehicles), adjusting charges for different categories of vehicles, and applying congestion charges under certain conditions.

Failed attempts

Targeting electric vehicles with a road user charge has been an acute priority for many states, as they are currently completely exempt from paying the fuel excise.

In 2021, the Victorian government introduced a controversial distance-based charge for EVs. But this scheme was challenged in the High Court and ruled unconstitutional.

Victoria’s measure was found to be a form of excise, and only the Commonwealth can impose such a tax.

Following the ruling, the treasurer asked state and territory treasurers to look into the design of a national scheme in December 2023. But this process reportedly stalled.

Support for reform

Today, there are about 300,000 EVs on Australian roads (including around 248,000 battery electric cars and 53,500 plug-in hybrids).

That’s only a tiny fraction of the 21 million cars registered across the nation. Over coming decades, as EVs take a greater share of total vehicles on the road, the hit to already flagging fuel excise revenue will become acute.

In the meantime, our own previous research and public surveys show Australia is ready for a rational and transparent discussion about road-user charging on all vehicles, not only electric vehicles.

We found most respondents would support such charges if they were transparent, equitable and replace or reduce other road taxes.

There have already been several Australian studies around the shape and form of road user charges that can inform the discussions and public consultations.

We also found willingness to pay a road-user charge varies with the level of expected savings. Most respondents were willing to pay a road-user charge if it saved them on registration fees and fuel taxes.

If well planned and implemented, a national approach to road-user charges can raise enough revenue to replace the fuel excise tax. It will also ease congestion, promote sustainable transport and help achieve Australia’s targets for cutting transport emissions.

Hussein Dia receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre, Transport for New South Wales, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Victorian Department of Transport and Planning, and Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts.

Hadi Ghaderi receives funding from the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre, Transport for New South Wales, Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, Victorian Department of Transport and Planning, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, IVECO Trucks Australia limited, Innovative Manufacturing Cooperative Research Centre, Victoria Department of Education and Training, Australia Post, Bondi Laboratories, Innovative Manufacturing Cooperative Research Centre, Sphere for Good, Australian Meat Processor Corporation, City of Casey, 460degrees and Passel.

– ref. Jim Chalmers wants to fix Australia’s broken road tax system. Here’s what one solution might look like – https://theconversation.com/jim-chalmers-wants-to-fix-australias-broken-road-tax-system-heres-what-one-solution-might-look-like-249477

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Vogels, Senior Lecturer, School of Communication Studies, Auckland University of Technology

When Married at First Sight Australia bride Lauren Hall said her main goal was to “serve” her man, the reality show contestant was reflecting a growing trend in western culture – the so-called tradwife lifestyle.

Tradwives are women who choose to take up traditional gendered roles within the home, centred around serving their husband and children. This version of wifehood is underpinned by a deference to one’s husband.

Because of this, tradwives tend to be financially dependent on their husbands and many also give over decision-making rights to their husbands. In essence, the tradwife lifestyle rejects the past seven decades of feminism.

But why is being a tradwife growing in popularity in 2025, and how has it become so marketable?

The rise (or return) of tradwives

Social media is partly to blame. The tradwife trend has risen in visibility across platforms such as Instagram and TikTok.

Influencer Hannah Neeleman from Ballerina Farm is one of the most prolific tradwife influencers, topping ten-million followers on her Instagram page.

Other Instagram accounts such as Ekaterina Anderson and Aria Lewis are popular in their own right, with followers ranging from 100,000 to 200,000.

All promote a joy of domesticity. They post about their daily tasks of baking, preparing meals, raising children and, for many, connecting to the land and living sustainably.

However, underneath this joy of domesticity is often an advocation of subservience. Many tradwives openly promote the daily pleasure they get from serving their husbands, who they argue are the “natural” head of the household.

Marketing a romanticised lifestyle

Why, then, is this version of femininity so desirable?

For one, tradwives market a romanticised lifestyle. Theirs is reminiscent of the 1950s: a golden age economically, where employment was high, consumables were affordable and the male breadwinner was supported at home by a subservient wife.

The tradwife lifestyle also promotes a pioneering domesticity. Tradwife influencers often post about baking their own bread, make their own preserves and mending their family’s clothes.

Many also wear pioneering-type clothing – blouses and long skirts with the signature tradwife apron. A number of tradwives such as Aria Lewis also have their own clothing and merchandise lines for their followers to buy.

People’s need for “ontological security” (security of the self) – a term coined in 1984 by sociologist Anthony Giddens – is another reason why the tradwife lifestyle is followed by so many women today.

Broadly speaking, ontological security denotes a desire for a stable identity. Academics Catarina Kinnvall and Jennifer Mitzen offer this explanation:

As the world is becoming more fragile, contentious, and conflictual, we are, Giddens argues, prone to seek a sense of security, a “protective cocoon”, in established norms and routines and in beliefs about particular narratives of home and secure pasts.

The tradwife identity offers women this security: a stable, strictly defined and seemingly uncomplicated identity that is predicated solely on serving one’s husband and children. The nostalgia for the 1950s and the pioneering “return to basics” life feeds this sense of security.

A double entanglement

It also seems women are desiring the tradwife lifestyle due to the damaging effects of “double entanglement”.

Society constantly tells women they can “have it all”: sexual freedom, any career they desire and an ability to choose whether or not to become mothers.

In reality, however, this is an empty promise. Sexually assertive women, women who appear overly dominant in the workplace, and women who choose not to mother are often heavily shamed in society.

Herein lies the double-entanglement. Women are told they can choose how to live their lives but are then shamed for choosing ways of living that are actually seen as unfeminine.

It is possible the tradwife identity offers women a version of femininity that provides safe haven from being shamed as “pariahs” in society.

Sadly, though, there is no safe haven. When you strip away the romanticism of domesticity, the tradwife lifestyle only furthers the difficulties women face today by breeding a deep misogyny that is based on an intense subjugation of women.

The new female right

This misogyny is further entrenched by many tradwives’ association with the far-right women’s movement, which is gaining popularity within the United States.

The BBC’s America’s New Female Right documentary explores the rise of this movement and how it further feeds into narratives that femininity ought to be based on submission to men.

It seems this version of womanhood will only gain momentum as the world veers even farther to the far right. The uncertainty of today – with frequent economic crises, climate emergencies and other crises of humanity – will only fuel the need for a nostalgic, seemingly simpler life.

On the surface, this is what many feel a traditional return to womanhood offers. But the costs of giving up the gains of feminism are not clear.

Christina Vogels 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. With a ‘tradwife’ starring in Married at First Sight, a nostalgic vision of womanhood takes centre stage – https://theconversation.com/with-a-tradwife-starring-in-married-at-first-sight-a-nostalgic-vision-of-womanhood-takes-centre-stage-248861