Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Musgrave, Senior lecturer in Pharmacology, University of Adelaide

The Australian National Health and Medical research Council (NHMRC) has today released draft guidelines for acceptable levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, in drinking water.

PFAS chemicals are also known as “forever chemicals”, because they don’t break down easily and can persist in the environment, including drinking water supplies.

The new guidelines – which are not mandatory but will inform state and territory policy – are expected to be finalised in April 2025. They propose a reduction in the maximum levels previously considered safe for four key PFAS chemicals: PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS and PFBS.

Continually scrutinising and updating our PFAS regulations is important to ensure Australians’ safety. However, these updated guidelines are unlikely to have a significant impact on Australia’s drinking water. The majority of potable water supplies in Australia either have no detectable PFAS, or have levels already below the new limits.

What are PFAS chemicals?

PFAS are highly fat-soluble compounds that are very slow to break down. They are basically long chains of carbon atoms studded with fluorine molecules.

PFAS chemicals are inert, water-repellent and heat-resistant. These properties make them ideal for industrial usage and they have been used in firefighting foams and fire-retardant material. They have also been used in common household items such as nonstick pans and stain-resistant fabrics.

Unfortunately, their useful industrial stability means they persist in the environment and can accumulate in the human body. It can take five years for half an ingested dose of PFAS to be removed.

Given PFAS chemicals have the potential to mimic the body’s own fats, there has been concern they could harm our health if sufficient amounts accumulated in the body.

What sorts of health effects are they linked to?

The buildup of a chemical that’s hard to remove from our bodies is always of concern. Despite this, the potential health risks appear to be low. In 2018 the Australian Expert Health Panel for PFAS looked in detail at the evidence.

One of the largest concerns was PFAS chemicals’ ability to increase levels of cholesterol in the blood, potentially increasing heart disease risk. However, studies of people who have been chronically exposed to significant levels of PFOA have not shown statistically significant increases in heart disease.

In 2018, the report from Australia’s expert health panel stated:

Evidence to date does not establish whether PFAS at exposure levels seen in Australia might increase risks of cardiovascular disease… Established risk factors … are likely to be of a much greater magnitude than those potentially caused by PFAS.

Cancer has also been a concern. However the expert panel found no consistent evidence that PFAS chemicals are associated with cancer. One study even found exposure to PFOA decreased the incidence of bowel cancer.

However, the impact of PFAS on human health is continuously reviewed as new evidence comes to light.

Why has Australia revised its drinking water guidelines?

Australia began to phase out PFAS chemicals in the early 2000s. Since then, the levels of PFAS detected in the Australian population have steadily dropped.

Now that industrial use is being phased out, the main way we are exposed to PFAS is through things like persistent environmental contamination. While drinking water is not a major source of PFAS, water can be contaminated from environmental sources, for example, if contaminated dust or ground water makes its way into reservoirs.

The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines provide limits for how much PFAS is allowed to be in our drinking water.

The NHMRC periodically reviews the health evidence around PFAS used to develop these guidelines, which were last updated in 2018. The latest review looks at additional evidence available since then.

A few developments were of particular interest in this review: studies about the influence of PFAS on thyroid function. Altering thyroid function can be problematic because thyroid hormones regulate our metabolism, growth and development.

The International Agency for Cancer Research’s (IARC) recent ruling on PFAS and cancer also needed to be investigated. The IARC has classified PFOS – one of the four key chemicals Australia is regulating – as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”. However the IARC noted there was “inadequate” evidence PFOS directly causes any type of cancer in people.

This agency can rule on the probability that a chemical can cause cancer under any possible exposure, no matter how extreme. But it doesn’t evaluate the risk of cancer from ordinary exposure.

This means the NHMRC needed to reevaluate the evidence that the levels present in drinking water would constitute a risk.

What are the new PFAS limits?

The NHRMC considered evidence about PFAS exposure in animal studies, and by looking at human epidemiology.

In studies involving animals, the NHMRC review paid particular attention to what concentration of PFAS exposure had no effect on their health. This threshold is used to determine limits for humans, by adding a safety buffer usually a hundred times lower than the level that was safe for animals.

The limits are set are carefully considering the evidence about impact on human health, as well as evaluating how much PFAS exposure is likely from sources beyond drinking water, such as food and inhaled dust.

The proposed limits are:

These guidelines are unlikely to have a significant impact on health. As the NHMRC report shows, majority of potable water supplies in Australia have no detectable PFAS, or levels are already below these new limits.

For example, drinking water sampling for WaterNSW found PFOS levels were between 1.2ng/L and undectable. Similar results were found for PFHxS (between 1.4 and 0.1ng/L) and PFOA (basically undetectable).

While the concentration of PFAS in bores near contamination sites are higher, these are typically not used as sources of drinking water.

The Australian guidelines differ from some international guidelines. The draft guidelines note that different jurisdictions place different weighting on animal and human evidence, and this will affect these regulatory levels.

The draft guidelines are now open to public consultation, with submissions closing on November 22 2024. Final guidelines are expected to be released in April 2025.

Ian Musgrave has received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council to study adverse reactions to herbal medicines and has previously been funded by the Australian Research Council to study potential natural product treatments for Alzheimer’s disease. He has collaborated with SA Water on studies of cyanobacterial toxins and their implication for drinking water quality.

– ref. Draft guidelines for ‘forever chemicals’ have been released. Here’s what it means for drinking water safety in Australia – https://theconversation.com/draft-guidelines-for-forever-chemicals-have-been-released-heres-what-it-means-for-drinking-water-safety-in-australia-241773

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daryl Higgins, Professor & Director, Institute of Child Protection Studies, Australian Catholic University

An ABC report on Monday revealed a concerning rise in peer-on-peer sexual abuse within Australian primary schools.

Data on Victorian schools shows hundreds of such incidents were reported in 2022 and 2023, with many involving children under the age of ten.

The Australian Child Maltreatment Study also showed rates of sexual abuse inflicted by peers has been increasing. Overall, 18.2% of participants aged 16 to 24 reported being sexually abused by a peer during their childhood, compared to 12.1% of those aged 45 years and over.

Parents may be wondering how they can protect their children at school.

One of the most effective tools parents have is open, regular and age-appropriate conversations with their kids.

Read more:
There are reports some students are making sexual moaning noises at school. Here’s how parents and teachers can respond

Talk about boundaries and consent early

What should you be talking about?

It is crucial for parents to talk with their children about boundaries and consent from an early age. For younger children, this can be as simple as teaching them their body belongs to them and no one else has the right to touch them without permission. Asking if its OK for a hug, and respecting when children say “no” is a great start.

When discussing consent, it is important to highlight consent is not just about saying “no”, but also recognising and respecting others’ boundaries.

Peer relationships and trusted adults play a crucial role in a child’s life. Helping children identify adults they can trust if they need to talk about something is also very important. Peers are often the first to hear of concerns or are often the recipients of disclosures, so fostering healthy friendships and teaching children to report to trusted adults is crucial.

Addressing peer pressure and secrecy

Children may feel pressured by peers or may be told to keep certain behaviours secret.

It is essential for parents to emphasise no matter who asks them to keep a secret, they should always share concerns or things they are unsure about with a trusted adult.

Parents can reinforce the message that if someone tells them not to tell, it is a “red flag”.

Children can often feel unsure or scared of whether what has happened is wrong. This is why encouraging openness and creating a nonjudgmental space for children to share is important.

Discussing online safety

Research shows exposure to harmful material, like pornography, is a contributing factor to inappropriate sexual behaviour among peers.

Being aware of your child’s internet use and educating them on how to keep themselves safe online is crucial.

What else can parents do?

While conversations with your children are vital, parents can also take practical steps to ensure their child’s safety at school. These include:

• familiarising yourself with school policies: understand the school’s procedures for reporting bullying, harassment and sexual abuse. Parents should ask about how teachers manage supervision during breaks or other occasions where children may be less well unsupervised

• advocating for comprehensive sex education at your school: when parents are involved in sex education it leads to better outcomes for children. Check what your school covers in the curriculum. Ask about what supports are available to parents, and how you can be involved

• getting involved in your child’s social world: knowing who your child’s friends are and staying connected with teachers can offer insight into troubling dynamics. Create opportunities for your child to talk about their friendships and school experiences regularly. And as they start navigating the digital world, it’s even more important to know who they are engaging with

• teach assertiveness and confidence: find ways to empower your child to speak up for themselves when they are unsure, or something feels wrong. Don’t leave this up to a class teacher to deal with in respectful relationship education. At home, you can encourage assertiveness in expressing their preferences and boundaries. You can also model how to stand up to peer pressure. Children can learn and be encouraged to say simple phrases such as, “stop, I don’t like it” or “no, I don’t want to”.

If there is a problem

If you do come across an issue or problem, try and work with your school. Despite your distress, try not to be adversarial – rather pitch your conversation to the teacher or principal as “How can I help us work through this together?”

Parental involvement in education, can reduce the risk of child sexual abuse. If parents and schools can work together, they are more likely to be effective in keeping children safe.

Prevention requires vigilance, communication and support from both parents and schools. Parents play a crucial role in shaping their child’s understanding of what’s OK, what’s harmful, as well as boundaries, safety and consent.

By having ongoing conversations, staying informed, and working with schools, parents are the first step to creating safety for children – and supporting them if something goes wrong.

Daryl Higgins receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the National Health and Medical Research Council and a range of government departments, agencies, and service providers, including Bravehearts. He was a Chief Investigator on the Australian Child Maltreatment Study.

Gabrielle works with the Australian Child Maltreatment Study (ACMS) team as part of her PhD Candidature. She has also previously worked for Bravehearts in various roles, including for the Turning Corners program, which provides support to young people who have displayed harmful sexual behaviours.

– ref. With reports of students abusing peers in primary schools, how can parents help keep their kids safe? – https://theconversation.com/with-reports-of-students-abusing-peers-in-primary-schools-how-can-parents-help-keep-their-kids-safe-241786

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonathan Boymal, Associate Professor of Economics, RMIT University

Australia’s fertility rate has fallen to a new record low of 1.5 babies per woman. That’s well below the “replacement rate” of 2.1 needed to sustain a country’s population.

On face value, it might not seem like a big deal. But we can’t afford to ignore this issue. The health of an economy is deeply intertwined with the size and structure of its population.

Australians simply aren’t having as many babies as they used to, raising some serious questions about how we can maintain our country’s workforce, sustain economic growth and fund important services.

So what’s going on with fertility rates here and around the world, and what might it mean for the future of our economy? What can we do about it?

Are lower birth rates always a problem?

Falling fertility rates can actually have some short-term benefits. Having fewer dependent young people in an economy can increase workforce participation, as well as boost savings and wealth.

Smaller populations can also benefit from increased investment per person in education and health.

But the picture gets more complex in the long term, and less rosy. An ageing population can strain pensions, health care and social services. This can hinder economic growth, unless it’s offset by increased productivity.

Other scholars have warned that a falling population could stifle innovation, with fewer young people meaning fewer breakthrough ideas.

A global phenomenon

The trend towards women having fewer children is not unique to Australia. The global fertility rate has dropped over the past couple of decades, from 2.7 babies per woman in 2000 to 2.4 in 2023.

However, the distribution is not evenly spread. In 2021, 29% of the world’s babies were born in sub-Saharan Africa. This is projected to rise to 54% by 2100.

There’s also a regional-urban divide. Childbearing is often delayed in urban areas and late fertility is more common in cities.

In Australia, we see higher fertility rates in inner and outer regional areas than in metro areas. This could be because of more affordable housing and a better work-life balance.

But it raises questions about whether people are moving out of cities to start families, or if something intrinsic about living in the regions promotes higher birth rates.

Fewer workers, more pressure on services

Changes to the makeup of a population can be just as important as changes to its size. With fewer babies being born and increased life expectancy, the proportion of older Australians who have left the workforce will keep rising.

One way of tracking this is with a metric called the old-age dependency ratio – the number of people aged 65 and over per 100 working-age individuals.

In Australia, this ratio is currently about 27%. But according to the latest Intergenerational Report, it’s expected to rise to 38% by 2063.

An ageing population means greater demand for medical services and aged care. As the working-age population shrinks, the tax base that funds these services will also decline.

Unless this is offset by technological advances or policy innovations, it can mean higher taxes, longer working lives, or the government providing fewer public services in general.

What about housing?

It’s tempting to think a falling birth rate might be good news for Australia’s stubborn housing crisis.

The issues are linked – rising real estate prices have made it difficult for many young people to afford homes, with a significant number of people in their 20s still living with their parents.

This can mean delaying starting a family and reducing the number of children they have.

At the same time, if fertility rates stay low, demand for large family homes may decrease, impacting one of Australia’s most significant economic sectors and sources of household wealth.

Read more:
No savings? No plans? No Great Australian Dream. How housing is reshaping young people’s lives

Can governments turn the tide?

Governments worldwide, including Australia, have long experimented with policies that encourage families to have more children. Examples include paid parental leave, childcare subsidies and financial incentives, such as Australia’s “baby bonus”.

Many of these efforts have had only limited success. One reason is the rising average age at which women have their first child. In many developed countries, including Australia, the average age for first-time mothers has surpassed 30.

As women delay childbirth, they become less likely to have multiple children, further contributing to declining birth rates. Encouraging women to start a family earlier could be one policy lever, but it must be balanced with women’s growing workforce participation and career goals.

Research has previously highlighted the factors influencing fertility decisions, including levels of paternal involvement and workplace flexibility. Countries that offer part-time work or maternity leave without career penalties have seen a stabilisation or slight increases in fertility rates.

The way forward

Historically, one of the ways Australia has countered its low birth rate is through immigration. Bringing in a lot of people – especially skilled people of working age – can help offset the effects of a low fertility rate.

However, relying on immigration alone is not a long-term solution. The global fertility slump means that the pool of young, educated workers from other countries is shrinking, too. This makes it harder for Australia to attract the talent it needs to sustain economic growth.

Australia’s record-low fertility rate presents both challenges and opportunities. On one hand, the shrinking number of young people will place a strain on public services, innovation and the labour market.

On the other hand, advances in technology, particularly in artificial intelligence and robotics, may help ease the challenges of an ageing population.

That’s the optimistic scenario. AI and other tech-driven productivity gains could reduce the need for large workforces. And robotics could assist in aged care, lessening the impact of this demographic shift.

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. Australia’s fertility rate has reached a record low. What might that mean for the economy? – https://theconversation.com/australias-fertility-rate-has-reached-a-record-low-what-might-that-mean-for-the-economy-241577

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

Irish writer John Connolly once said:

The nature of humanity, its essence, is to feel another’s pain as one’s own, and to act to take that pain away.

For most of our history, we believed empathy was a uniquely human trait – a special ability that set us apart from machines and other animals. But this belief is now being challenged.

As AI becomes a bigger part of our lives, entering even our most intimate spheres, we’re faced with a philosophical conundrum: could attributing human qualities to AI diminish our own human essence? Our research suggests it can.

Digitising companionship

In recent years, AI “companion” apps such as Replika have attracted millions of users. Replika allows users to create custom digital partners to engage in intimate conversations. Members who pay for Replika Pro can even turn their AI into a “romantic partner”.

Physical AI companions aren’t far behind. Companies such as JoyLoveDolls are selling interactive sex robots with customisable features including breast size, ethnicity, movement and AI responses such as moaning and flirting.

While this is currently a niche market, history suggests today’s digital trends will become tomorrow’s global norms. With about one in four adults experiencing loneliness, the demand for AI companions will grow.

The dangers of humanising AI

Humans have long attributed human traits to non-human entities – a tendency known as anthropomorphism. It’s no surprise we’re doing this with AI tools such as ChatGPT, which appear to “think” and “feel”. But why is humanising AI a problem?

For one thing, it allows AI companies to exploit our tendency to form attachments with human-like entities. Replika is marketed as “the AI companion who cares”. However, to avoid legal issues, the company elsewhere points out Replika isn’t sentient and merely learns through millions of user interactions.

Some AI companies overtly claim their AI assistants have empathy and can even anticipate human needs. Such claims are misleading and can take advantage of people seeking companionship. Users may become deeply emotionally invested if they believe their AI companion truly understands them.

This raises serious ethical concerns. A user will hesitate to delete (that is, to “abandon” or “kill”) their AI companion once they’ve ascribed some kind of sentience to it.

But what happens when said companion unexpectedly disappears, such as if the user can no longer afford it, or if the company that runs it shuts down? While the companion may not be real, the feelings attached to it are.

Empathy – more than a programmable output

By reducing empathy to a programmable output, do we risk diminishing its true essence? To answer this, let’s first think about what empathy really is.

Empathy involves responding to other people with understanding and concern. It’s when you share your friend’s sorrow as they tell you about their heartache, or when you feel joy radiating from someone you care about. It’s a profound experience – rich and beyond simple forms of measurement.

A fundamental difference between humans and AI is that humans genuinely feel emotions, while AI can only simulate them. This touches on the hard problem of consciousness, which questions how subjective human experiences arise from physical processes in the brain.

While AI can simulate understanding, any “empathy” it purports to have is a result of programming that mimics empathetic language patterns. Unfortunately, AI providers have a financial incentive to trick users into growing attached to their seemingly empathetic products.

The dehumanAIsation hypothesis

Our “dehumanAIsation hypothesis” highlights the ethical concerns that come with trying to reduce humans to some basic functions that can be replicated by a machine. The more we humanise AI, the more we risk dehumanising ourselves.

For instance, depending on AI for emotional labour could make us less tolerant of the imperfections of real relationships. This could weaken our social bonds and even lead to emotional deskilling. Future generations may become less empathetic – losing their grasp on essential human qualities as emotional skills continue to be commodified and automated.

Also, as AI companions become more common, people may use them to replace real human relationships. This would likely increase loneliness and alienation – the very issues these systems claim to help with.

AI companies’ collection and analysis of emotional data also poses significant risks, as these data could be used to manipulate users and maximise profit. This would further erode our privacy and autonomy, taking surveillance capitalism to the next level.

Holding providers accountable

Regulators need to do more to hold AI providers accountable. AI companies should be honest about what their AI can and can’t do, especially when they risk exploiting users’ emotional vulnerabilities.

Exaggerated claims of “genuine empathy” should be made illegal. Companies making such claims should be fined – and repeat offenders shut down.

Data privacy policies should also be clear, fair and without hidden terms that allow companies to exploit user-generated content.

We must preserve the unique qualities that define the human experience. While AI can enhance certain aspects of life, it can’t – and shouldn’t – replace genuine human connection.

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. Humanising AI could lead us to dehumanise ourselves – https://theconversation.com/humanising-ai-could-lead-us-to-dehumanise-ourselves-240803

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Annette Greenhow, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Bond University

In September 2023, an Australian Senate committee released a landmark report on concussions and repeated head trauma in contact sports.

The committee made 13 recommendations to improve outcomes for past, present and future players.

The report emphasised shared responsibility and transparency in developing a national approach, with the government to lead nine of the recommendations.

As of October 2024, no official government update has been provided.

We’ve assessed the status of the recommendations – of the publicly available sources, we found evidence of action in some areas but no national strategy in directly addressing the focus of several key recommendations.

As part of this review, we searched the websites of the Australian government’s Department of Health and Aged Care and the Australian Sports Commission/Australian Institute of Sport (ASC/AIS).

We approached the Senate committee secretary and the Department of Health and Aged Care for more information but neither was able to comment.

We acknowledge there is likely more work going on behind the scenes, and these processes take time.

Here’s what we found.

Progress being made

In the past year, there has been progress made with several recommendations including those addressing community awareness, education and guidelines for amateur and youth sports.

The AIS continues to engage in health-led efforts with a suite of resources aimed at increasing community awareness and education.

In June this year, the institute published a new set of return-to-play guidelines specifically targeting community and youth athletes.

This represents a tangible response from a federally funded sporting body.

However, these guidelines must be easily implemented by clubs. To date, there is no indication the government plans to increase funding or resources to clubs to help do so.

The committee also called for national sporting organisations to “further explore rule modifications to prevent and reduce the impact of concussions and repeated head trauma, prioritising modifications for children and adolescents”.

Several major sporting codes have modified their rules and we expect them to remain focused on rule modifications to ensure the longevity of their sports.

General practitioners (GPs) are often the first port of call after a concussion, and the committee recommended the development of standardised guidelines for GPs and first aid responders.

This addresses concerns that GPs may require additional training in treating sport-related brain trauma.

In response, the AIS developed a free, online short course for registered GPs.

Work in progress, or lack of progress?

There appears to be work in progress or a lack of progress elsewhere, including key recommendations for a National Sports Injury Database (NSID) and professional sport data sharing.

The inquiry highlighted how patchy data collection had contributed to evidence gaps in understanding sports injury management and surveillance. The committee’s most urgent recommendation therefore was for the government to establish the NSID.

This would work closely with another recommendation that called for professional sport codes to collect and share de-identified concussion and sub-concussive event data with the NSID.

As of October 2024, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports the NSID is still under development and is not yet ready to receive data.

Other recommendations related to research – establishing an independent research pathway, ongoing funding commitments and a co-ordinated and consolidated funding framework.

These recommendations called for the government’s existing agencies, or a newly created body, to coordinate research on the effects of concussion and repeated head trauma.

No new dedicated sports-related concussion research pathways have emerged since the inquiry.

In terms of funding commitments, in April this year – after former rugby league star Wally Lewis’s National Press Club appearance – Dementia Australia reported the government had pledged $A18 million for concussion and CTE support services and education.

Read more:
Why a portrait of a former NRL great could spark greater concussion awareness in Australia

The May 2024 federal budget allocated $132.7 million to boost sports participation from grassroots to high performance. But this did not address concussion and repeated head trauma, and we haven’t been able to find evidence of a co-ordinated and consolidated funding framework.

Our view is concussion funding pools should be primarily focused on supporting independent research projects. However, sporting bodies clearly need to be involved – they provide access to athlete populations and most people in these organisations have a genuine care for athlete welfare.

Another recommendation called for a national concussion strategy. This should focus on binding return-to-play protocols and rules to protect participants from head injuries.

The recommendation included a role for government and whether any existing government bodies would be best placed to monitor, oversee and/or enforce concussion-related rules and protocols.

In our view, this recommendation involves much more than producing guidelines. It requires a more comprehensive national strategy, with consideration to monitoring compliance and enforcement.

We could not find any evidence indicating the current status of this recommendation.

Increased funding and support for affected athletes were also focus areas.

These recommendations called for a review to address barriers to workers’ compensation and ensure adequate insurance arrangements remain in place.

We could not find any evidence of whether state and territory governments are involved in the reviews of workers compensation to apply to professional athletes.

The committee recommenced the government consider measures to increase donations to brain banks for scientific research.

We couldn’t find any evidence of steps taken to implement this recommendation.

Moving forward

There has been progress in education and guidelines but a lack of the coordinated, transparent approach the committee envisioned.

A formal government response, as demonstrated in Canada and the United Kingdom, is essential to establish trust and chart a clear path forward.

The Australian government, as guardian of the Australian public’s health, has an opportunity to do the same.

Annette Greenhow receives funding from SSHRC Partnership Development Grant. Annette is a Board Member of the Australian and New Zealand Sports Law Association. The views expressed in this article are her own.

Stephen Townsend 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. A year on from the Senate inquiry into concussion, what’s changed and what comes next? – https://theconversation.com/a-year-on-from-the-senate-inquiry-into-concussion-whats-changed-and-what-comes-next-239929

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jongkil Jay Jeong, Senior Research Fellow in the School of Computing and Information System, The University of Melbourne

Despite huge advances in cyber security, one weakness continues to overshadow all others: human error.

Research has consistently shown human error is responsible for an overwhelming majority of successful cyber attacks. A recent report puts the figure at 68%.

No matter how advanced our technological defences become, the human element is likely to remain the weakest link in the cyber security chain. This weakness affects everyone using digital devices, yet traditional cyber education and awareness programs – and even new, forward-looking laws – fail to adequately address it.

So, how can we deal with human-centric cyber security related challenges?

Understanding human error

There are two types of human error in the context of cyber security.

The first is skills-based errors. These occur when people are doing routine things – especially when their attention is diverted.

For example, you might forget to back up desktop data from your computer. You know you should do it and know how to do it (because you have done it before). But because you need to get home early, forgot when you did it last or had lots of emails to respond to, you don’t. This may make you more exposed to a hacker’s demands in the event of a cyber attack, as there are no alternatives to retrieve the original data.

The second type is knowledge-based errors. These occur when someone with less experience makes cyber security mistakes because they lack important knowledge or don’t follow specific rules.

For example, you might click on a link in an email from an unknown contact, even if you don’t know what will happen. This could lead to you being hacked and losing your money and data, as the link might contain dangerous malware.

Traditional approaches fall short

Organisations and governments have invested heavily in cyber security education programs to address human error. However, these programs have had mixed results at best.

This is partly because many programs take a technology-centric, one-size-fits-all approach. They often focus on specific technical aspects, such as improving password hygiene or implementing multi-factor authentication. Yet, they don’t address the underlying psychological and behavioural issues that influence people’s actions.

The reality is that changing human behaviour is far more complex than simply providing information or mandating certain practices. This is especially true in the context of cyber security.

Public health campaigns such as the “Slip, Slop, Slap” sun safety initiative in Australia and New Zealand illustrate what works.

Since this campaign started four decades ago, melanoma cases in both countries have fallen significantly. Behavioural change requires ongoing investment into promoting awareness.

The same principle applies to cyber security education. Just because people know best practices doesn’t mean they will consistently apply them – especially when faced with competing priorities or time pressures.

New laws fall short

The Australian government’s proposed cyber security law focuses on several key areas, including:

• combating ransomware attacks
• enhancing information sharing between businesses and government agencies
• strengthening data protection in critical infrastructure sectors, such as energy, transport and communications
• expanding investigative powers for cyber incidents
• introducing minimum security standards for smart devices.

These measures are crucial. However, like traditional cyber security education programs, they primarily address technical and procedural aspects of cyber security.

The United States is taking a different approach. Its Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development Strategic Plan includes “human-centred cybersecurity” as its first and most important priority.

The plan says

A greater emphasis is needed on human-centered approaches to cybersecurity where people’s needs, motivations, behaviours, and abilities are at the forefront of determining the design, operation, and security of information technology systems.

3 rules for human-centric cyber security

So, how can we adequately address the issue of human error in cyber security? Here are three key strategies based on the latest research.

1. Minimise cognitive load. Cyber security practices should be designed to be as intuitive and effortless as possible. Training programs should focus on simplifying complex concepts and integrating security practices seamlessly into daily workflows.

2. Foster a positive cyber security attitude. Instead of relying on fear tactics, education should emphasise the positive outcomes of good cyber security practices. This approach can help motivate people to improve their cyber security behaviours.

3. Adopt a long-term perspective. Changing attitudes and behaviours is not a single event but a continuous process. Cyber security education should be ongoing, with regular updates to address evolving threats.

Ultimately, creating a truly secure digital environment requires a holistic approach. It needs to combine robust technology, sound policies, and, most importantly, ensuring people are well-educated and security conscious.

If we can better understand what’s behind human error, we can design more effective training programs and security practices that work with, rather than against, human nature.

Jongkil Jay Jeong 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. Human error is the weakest link in the cyber security chain. Here are 3 ways to fix it – https://theconversation.com/human-error-is-the-weakest-link-in-the-cyber-security-chain-here-are-3-ways-to-fix-it-241459

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland

Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s recent decision to approve expansion plans for three New South Wales coal mines disappointed many people concerned with stabilising the global climate.

Two of these mines, Narrabri and Mount Pleasant in New South Wales, featured in the high-profile but ultimately unsuccessful Living Wonders court case, intended to force the federal government to take account of climate damage done by coal mine approvals. A lawyer involved in the case said Plibersek’s decision showed a refusal to “recognise their climate harms”.

Why did Plibersek sign off on this? She has argued the mines will abide by domestic industrial emissions rules. As her spokesperson told the ABC:

The emissions from these projects will be considered by the minister for climate change and energy under the government’s strong climate laws.

But these laws apply only to emissions produced in Australia, which in this case will be from extracting and transporting coal and the relatively small amount of coal burned here. Most of the coal will be exported and burned overseas. Australian laws do not count those much larger emissions.

The government is effectively washing its hands of the far larger emissions created when the coal is burned overseas. Since taking office, the Albanese government has approved seven applications to open or expand coal mines. Just this week, NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said his state would keep exporting coal into the 2040s.

This reasoning doesn’t stack up. If we stopped expanding coal mines, coal would get more expensive – and we would accelerate the global shift to clean energy.

How can more coal be compatible with net zero?

Under the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate action, nations must publicly commit to domestic emissions reductions goals and are expected to steadily ramp up ambition.

But these emissions cuts are domestic only – we don’t measure the emissions we enable by exporting coal and gas.

The Albanese government has increased domestic ambition by committing to a 43% reduction on 2005 figures by 2030. This seems to be a substantial advance on the 26-28% commitment made by the previous government. In reality, internal tensions in the Morrison Coalition government handed Labor an unintentional gift.

In 2021, estimates suggested Australia was already on track for a 35% reduction. But internal opposition among Coalition backbenchers stopped Morrison announcing this as a target. As a result, Labor’s change looks about twice as impressive as it should.

Still, progress is happening. Domestically, Australia is now burning less and less coal.

But in terms of exports, the government’s position – clear in Plibersek’s decision as well as the government’s plan to keep gas flowing for decades – is as long as there is a demand for coal and gas from other countries, Australia will be ready and willing to meet it.

Most of the coal unlocked by Plibersek’s decision will go overseas, given NSW exports 85% of its coal to partners such as Japan, China, South Korea and Taiwan.

How does the government defend this?

Expanding coal mines while maintaining a public commitment to net zero is a consistent theme between this government and its predecessor, which also committed to net zero. It meets a minimal interpretation of our legal obligations under the Paris Agreement, but maintains the planet’s path towards dangerous warming.

In her statement of reasons given in 2023 as to why the Mount Pleasant mine expansion should be permitted, Plibersek and the Labor government offer several defences.

The first is she is simply acting in accordance with Australian law, as the project would comply with “applicable Commonwealth emissions reduction legislation”. This is a weak reed, to put it mildly. The Albanese government, with the support of Greens and independents, can change the law whenever it chooses.

In reality, the government has steadfastly resisted pressure to include a “climate trigger” in Australia’s environmental approval processes. Their resistance is relatively new – as recently as 2016, Labor policy included a climate trigger for land clearing.

Labor’s second defence has often been dubbed the “drug dealer’s defence”. That is, if Australia didn’t export coal, other producers would take our place. As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has put it:

policies that would just result in a replacement of Australian resources with resources that are less clean from other countries would lead to an increase in global emissions, not a decrease.

As I’ve argued previously, this defence doesn’t work. Coal is subject to a rising cost curve – if we stopped exporting it, new or expanded production from other sources would cost more to extract and hence be priced higher. More expensive coal would, in turn, accelerate the global energy transition. We do have agency – we could choose not to unlock more coal.

Finally, Plibersek claims emissions from burning Mount Pleasant coal – estimated at over 500 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent over the mine’s extended lifetime – would not be “substantial” relative to total global emissions. For context, Australia’s total emissions are now less than 500 million tonnes a year.

This “litterbug’s defence” suggest Australia’s emissions – whether produced domestically or exported – are not big enough to make a difference. This is not true – we are now the second largest exporter of emissions globally, after Russia. That is due largely to coal.

Are fossil fuel exports untouchable?

There’s a huge gap between global pledges to cut emissions and the reductions needed to actually achieve the Paris targets. Most countries we export coal and gas to are not yet on a path to achieve the reductions in emissions necessary to stabilise the global climate – though China’s emissions may, remarkably, be about to decline.

That’s why we need to press for decarbonisation at every stage of the energy system, from extraction of coal, oil and gas to the financing of new carbon-based projects as well as at the point where the fuel is burned and emissions produced generated.

The problem for Australia is we sell a lot of coal and gas – more than ever before. So even as solar and wind energy begins to displace coal and gas in domestic power generation, our coal and gas exports seem all but untouchable.

We should be saddened but not surprised at this pattern. The Albanese government seems guided by the principle of doing nothing to generate substantial opposition – and to count on the fact a Dutton Coalition government would do even less.

John Quiggin is a former member of the Climate Change Authority

– ref. Expanding coal mines – and reaching net zero? Tanya Plibersek seems to believe both are possible – https://theconversation.com/expanding-coal-mines-and-reaching-net-zero-tanya-plibersek-seems-to-believe-both-are-possible-241007

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Houlihan, PhD Candidate in History, Monash University

For anyone who has been online in Australia longer than a decade or so, the discussion around current proposals to set a minimum age for social media use might trigger a touch of déjà vu.

Between 2007 and 2012, the Rudd–Gillard government’s efforts to implement a “Clean Feed” internet filter sparked very similar debates.

Beset by technical problems and facing fierce opposition, the Clean Feed was eventually abandoned in favour of laws that already existed. Will the proposed social media ban face a similar fate?

How to regulate cyberspace

The question of how to regulate a cyberspace occupied by both adults and children has puzzled governments for a long time. Traditional controls on physical media are difficult to apply to online spaces, particularly when so much online media comes from overseas.

As early as 1998, an Australian Broadcasting Authority report noted a key difficulty in online regulation. Namely, balancing adults’ access to legal online spaces and content with restrictions on childrens’ access to age-inappropriate material and bans on illegal content.

The Clean Feed proposal attempted to address parental concerns about age-inappropriate websites. First raised in 2006 by Labor in opposition, it became a campaign promise at the 2007 election.

The proposal aimed to solve the issue of overseas content. Australian authorities could already require website owners in Australia to take down illegal content, but they had no power over international sites.

To address this, the Clean Feed would require internet service providers to run a government-created filter blocking all material given a “Refused” classification by the Australian Classification Board, which meant it was illegal. Labor argued the filter would protect children from “harmful and inappropriate” content, including child pornography and X-rated media. The Australian Communications and Media Authority created a “blacklist” of websites that the filter would block.

Technical trouble

The Clean Feed was plagued by technical issues. Trials in 2008 revealed it might slow internet speeds by up to 87%, block access to legal websites, and wouldn’t block all illegal content.

While the effect on speeds was improved, the 2008 trials and others in 2009 revealed another problem: determined users could bypass the filter.

There were also fears the blacklist would be used to block legal websites. While the government maintained the filter would only target illegal content, some questioned whether this was true.

Internet service providers were already required to prevent access to content that had been given a Refused classification. This, along with unclear government statements about removing age-inappropriate material, led many to believe the blacklist could be more far-reaching.

The government also planned to keep the list secret, on the grounds that a published list could become a guide for finding illegal material.

The blacklist

In 2009, the whistleblowing website Wikileaks published a list of sites blacklisted in Denmark. The government banned those pages of Wikileaks, and in response Wikileaks published what it said was the Australian government blacklist. (The government denied it was the actual blacklist.)

Newspapers noted that around half the websites on the published list were not related to child pornography.

The alleged blacklist also contained legal content, including Wikipedia pages, YouTube links, and even the website of a Queensland dentist. This lent weight to fears the filter would block more than just illegal websites.

More debates emerged surrounding how the Refused classification category was applied offline as well as on the internet.

In January 2010, the Australian Sex Party reported claims from pornography studios that customs officials had confiscated material featuring female ejaculation (as an “abhorrent depiction” or form of urination) and small-breasted adult women (who might appear to be minors). Many questioned whether these should be banned, and if such depictions would be added to the blacklist – including members of hacker-activist group Anonymous.

Operation Titstorm and the end of the Clean Feed

While Anonymous members had already protested the Clean Feed, this new information sparked a new protest action dubbed Operation Titstorm.

On February 10 2010, activists targeted several government websites. The Australian Parliament site was down for three days. Protesters also mass-emailed politicians and their staff the kinds of pornography set to be blocked by the filter.

While Operation Titstorm gained media attention, other digital activists (such as Electronic Frontiers Australia and other members of Anonymous) criticised its illegal tactics. Many dismissed the protest as juvenile.

However, one participant argued that many protesters were children, who had used these methods because “kids and teenagers don’t really get the chance to voice their opinions”. The protesters may have been the very people the Clean Feed was supposed to protect.

The government abandoned the Clean Feed in 2012 and used existing legislation to require internet service providers to block INTERPOL’s “worst of” child abuse list. It remains to be seen whether the social media minimum age will similarly crumble under the weight of controversy and be rendered redundant by existing legislation.

The same, but different

The Clean Feed tried to balance the rights of adults to access legal material with protecting children from age-inappropriate content and making cyberspace safer for them. In a sense, it did this by regulating adults.

The filter limited the material adults could access. Given it was government-created and mandatory, it also decided for parents what content was age-appropriate for their children.

The current proposal to set a minimum age for social media flips this solution by determining what online spaces children can occupy. Similar to the filter, it also makes this decision on parents’ behalf.

The Clean Feed saga reveals some of the difficulties of policing the internet. It also reminds us that anxiety about what Australian youth can interact with online is nothing new – and is unlikely to go away.

Rebecca Houlihan 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. A technical fix to keep kids safe online? Here’s what happened last time Australia tried to make a ‘clean’ internet – https://theconversation.com/a-technical-fix-to-keep-kids-safe-online-heres-what-happened-last-time-australia-tried-to-make-a-clean-internet-241371

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rhys Thomas White, Scientist, Genomics and Bioinformatics, ESR

Anyone who has spent time inside a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) knows it’s intense.

For the tiny babies cared for in these wards, any infection could prove fatal. Great care is taken to prevent the spread of pathogens, but outbreaks still occur.

Traditionally, detecting outbreaks within a NICU has been reactive – only after multiple babies fall ill at the same time.

Our research is advancing the use of whole-genome sequencing technologies to detect outbreaks early and stamp out bacteria before they threaten more babies.

From reactive to proactive

NICU outbreak surveillance usually involves monitoring rates of illness and identifying spikes and long-term trends that may point to a pathogen circulating on the ward.

When a potential outbreak is identified, bacteria may be cultured and retrospectively sequenced to determine if they can be linked to a shared source or transmission on the ward.

Wellington Regional Hospital has changed its approach to infection surveillance in the NICU. Rather than waiting for infants to fall ill, they are using the same sequencing technology we developed at the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) for genomic contact tracking during the COVID pandemic.

Infants in the unit have diagnostic swab samples taken as part of routine practice. If any key bacteria are cultured from these samples, they are sequenced promptly to identify possible transmission events in near real time. This allows us to monitor the situation closely and respond quickly to emerging outbreaks.

Because not all infants carrying a particular bacterial strain will experience a severe infection, this proactive approach can detect an outbreak before any babies fall ill.

And because whole-genome sequencing decodes the entire genetic makeup of bacteria, it also provides the NICU team with information on how pathogens are related to each other. This allows them to differentiate one-off cases imported to the unit from any circulating within it.

This level of detail allows for precise infection monitoring and fast, informed decisions on outbreak control.

A case study

This shift was recently tested when proactive genomic surveillance showed two infants in the NICU had eye infections caused by the same organism, an uncommon strain of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

MRSA is notorious for its resistance to common antibiotics, making it particularly dangerous in hospitals.

The onsite sequencing showed the two cases were likely linked. The priorities were to establish whether other infants were affected and limit the pathogen’s spread as quickly as possible. Screening of infants in the NICU found six more carrying the same strain of MRSA (though none with serious illness).

This meant these infants could be isolated rapidly and the outbreak contained before any others developed a significant infection. ESR’s experience as genomic contact tracers helped establish how these infections spread in the unit.

An outbreak response takes up resources and involves multiple steps, from the initial confirmation of the infection and its transmission route to communication with parents.

This proactive approach to infection surveillance provides an early-warning system. It means the NICU team can be confident an outbreak is underway and act quickly to contain it.

MRSA in New Zealand

The power of genome sequencing extends beyond immediate outbreak control.

By comparing the genomic data generated in the lab to that collected in national surveillance projects, our team was able to show the strain that caused the eye infections may have emerged in the early 1990s.

This strain has slowly accumulated the genes required to evade first-choice antibiotics, underpinning the risk of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Aotearoa New Zealand.

We also highlighted the power of genomics to reveal connections when we found the MRSA strain causing illness in the NICU was related to bacteria collected from cattle. This discovery underscores the concept of “One Health” – the idea that human health, animal health and environmental health are inextricably linked.

The data suggest bacteria from a cow milk tank and from babies in a hospital may have shared a common ancestor at some point.

Future focus

As we continue to unravel the complex world of microbes, tools like whole-genome sequencing offer hope in the ongoing battle against infectious diseases. The work at Wellington Regional Hospital’s NICU is just the beginning.

From protecting our most vulnerable newborns to uncovering unlikely connections between farm animals and hospital patients, genomic technology is changing how we combat infectious diseases.

As this technology continues to evolve, it promises to play an increasingly crucial role in safeguarding public health, one DNA sequence at a time.

In the face of growing antibiotic resistance and emerging pathogens, this proactive, genomics-based approach to infection control may well be our best defence.

We would like to acknowledge the contributions by Max Bloomfield and the teams at Awanui Labs, and Emma Voss and team at Livestock Improvement Corporation.

Rhys White received a travel bursary from Oxford Nanopore Technologies and a travel grant from the UK Microbiology Society.

David Winter and Suzanne Manning 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. Genome sequencing developed to trace COVID is now protecting babies in intensive care from infectious diseases – https://theconversation.com/genome-sequencing-developed-to-trace-covid-is-now-protecting-babies-in-intensive-care-from-infectious-diseases-240299

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Guastella, Professor and Clinical Psychologist, Michael Crouch Chair in Child and Youth Mental Health, University of Sydney

Neurodevelopmental conditions such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism affect about one in ten children. These conditions impact learning, behaviour and development.

Executive function delays are core to challenges people with neurodevelopmental conditions experience. This includes skills such as paying attention, switching attention, controlling impulses, planning, organising and problem-solving.

These skills are important for learning and long-term development. They have been linked with future occupational, social, academic and mental health outcomes. Children with improved executive function skills and supports for these skills do better long term.

Decades of studies have described how difficulties in attention and impulse control underpin ADHD. Meanwhile, difficulties with switching attention and flexibility of thinking have been proposed to underpin autism.

As a result, different supports and interventions developed for different neurodevelopmental conditions target these skills. It sets up a system where a diagnosis is made first, then a set of supports is provided based on that diagnosis.

But our recent study, published in Nature Human Behaviour, shows executive function problems are similar across all neurodevelopmental conditions. Understanding these common needs could lead to better access to supports before waiting for a specific diagnosis.

Our study found more similarities than differences

We looked at 180 studies, over 45 years, that compared executive function skills across two or more neurodevelopmental conditions.

We brought the research together for all neurodevelopmental conditions that have been defined by diagnostic manuals, including ADHD, Tourette’s syndrome, communication disorders and intellectual disabilities.

Surprisingly, we found most neurodevelopmental conditions showed very similar delays in their executive skills.

Children with ADHD showed difficulties with attention and impulse control, for example, but so did children with autism, communication and specific learning conditions.

There were very few differences between each neurodevelopmental condition and the type of executive function delay.

This suggests executive function delay is best considered as a common difficulty for all children with neurodevelopmental conditions. All of these children could benefit from similar supports to improve executive skills.

But supports have become siloed

For decades, research has failed to integrate findings across conditions. This has led to siloed research and practices across the education, health and disability sectors.

Our data showed a gradual shift in the type of conditions that have been studied since 1980. In the earlier days, as a percentage, there were a far greater proportion of studies conducted on tic disorders, such as Tourette’s syndrome. In the past ten years, autism has been of greater focus.

This means research and practice is also siloed, based on the focus on funding and interest in the community. Some groups miss out from good science and practice when they become less visible in the political landscape.

This has led to a skewed support system where only children with a specific diagnosis can be offered certain interventions. It also reduces access to supports if families can’t access diagnostic services, which can be particularly difficult in regional and rural communities.

Due to these diagnosis-driven research practices, there are now assessment services, guidelines and treatments that are recommended for autism. These are usually independent from and not offered to children with ADHD, Tourette’s syndrome, communication disorders or intellectual disabilities despite a significant overlap in children’s needs.

How does this affect access to support

Families often find it hard to get the help they need. They often describe the assessment and support process as confusing, with long wait times and lots of barriers.

We have previously shown caregivers often attend assessment and support services with a broad range of needs, but leave with many needs unaddressed.

Recent national child mental health, autism and ADHD guidelines call for more integrated supports for children. But most services are not well set up to do this. It will take time to drive such system change if this is to be achieved.

Why we need integrated research

More integrated research will lead to more cohesive support systems across education, health and disability for all children in need.

Studies show, for example, that many risk factors (genetic and environmental) are common to all neurodevelopmental conditions. These include a broad overlap of risk genes that are the same between conditions, and common environmental factors that influence development in the womb, such as the use of certain drugs, stress and a significant immune response.

Other studies show how most children diagnosed with one neurodevelopmental condition will also be diagnosed with others.

But gaps remain. While we know certain stimulant medications can work well for ADHD, for example, we have less information about how they might help children with other neurodevelopmental conditions who have attention difficulties.

Unlike our knowledge about social supports for children with autism, we don’t have much research on how we can help children with ADHD with their social needs.

We should take a wider view of children’s needs

It’s important for families to be aware that if their child meets criteria for one neurodevelopmental condition, it is very likely that they will meet criteria for other neurodvelopmental conditions. They will likely have many needs relevant to other conditions.

It is worth asking clinical services about broader needs beyond a diagnosis. This should include developmental, mental and physical health needs.

It is also important to consider that many common interventions may have potential to support all children with neurodevelopmental conditions.

This is an important issue for government. Reviews are under way for supporting the needs of people with autism, intellectual disability and ADHD.

It’s time to establish more integrated systems, supports and strategies for all people with neurodevelopmental conditions for their home, school, play and work.

Adam Guastella receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Australian Research Council for research into neurodevelopmental conditions. He is director of the Clinic for Autism and Neurodevelopmental Research and scientific chair of Neurodevelopment Australia, a scientific group seeking to improve the knowledge and supports for all people with neurodevelopmental conditions.

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

– ref. What are executive function delays? Research shows they’re similar in ADHD and autism – https://theconversation.com/what-are-executive-function-delays-research-shows-theyre-similar-in-adhd-and-autism-238760

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mike Lee, Professor in Evolutionary Biology (jointly appointed with South Australian Museum), Flinders University

Welcome to our ‘Light and health’ series. Over six articles, we look at how light affects our physical and mental health in sometimes surprising ways.

For most of our evolutionary history, human activity has been linked to daylight. Technology has liberated us from these ancient sleep-wake cycles, but there is evidence sunlight has left and continues to leave its mark.

Not only do we still tend to be awake in the daytime and sleep at night, we can thank light for many other aspects of our biology.

Light may have driven our ancestors to walk upright on two legs. Light helps explain the evolution of our skin colour, why some of us have curly hair, and even the size of our eyes.

As we’ll explore in future articles in this series, light helps shape our mood, our immune system, how our gut works, and much more. Light can make us sick, tell us why we’re sick, then treat us.

Million of years of evolutionary history means humans are still very much creatures of the light.

We stood up, then walked out of Africa

The first modern humans evolved in warm African climates. And reducing exposure to the harsh sunlight is one explanation for why humans began to walk upright on two legs. When we stand up and the Sun is directly overhead, far less sunshine hits our body.

Curly hair may have also protected us from the hot Sun. The idea is that it provides a thicker layer of insulation than straight hair to shield the scalp.

Early Homo sapiens had extra Sun protection in the form of strongly pigmented skin. Sunlight breaks down folate (vitamin B9), accelerates ageing and damages DNA. In our bright ancestral climates, dark skin protected against this. But this dark skin still admitted enough UV light to stimulate vital production of vitamin D.

However, when people colonised temperate zones, with weaker light, they repeatedly evolved lighter skin, via different genes in different populations. This happened rapidly, probably within the past 40,000 years.

With reduced UV radiation nearer the poles, less pigmentation was needed to protect sunlight from breaking down our folate. A lighter complexion also let in more of the scarce light so the body could make vitamin D. But there was one big drawback: less pigmentation meant less protection against Sun damage.

This evolutionary background contributes to Australia having among the highest rates of skin cancer in the world.

Our colonial history means more than 50% of Australians are of Anglo-Celtic descent, with light skin, transplanted into a high-UV environment. Little wonder we’re described as “a sunburnt country”.

Sunlight has also contributed to variation in human eyes. Humans from high latitudes have less protective pigment in their irises. They also have larger eye sockets (and presumably eyeballs), maybe to admit more precious light.

Again, these features make Australians of European descent especially vulnerable to our harsh light. So it’s no surprise Australia has unusually high rates of eye cancers.

We cannot shake our body clock

Our circadian rhythm – the wake-sleep cycle driven by our brains and hormones – is another piece of heavy evolutionary baggage triggered by light.

Humans are adapted to daylight. In bright light, humans can see well and have refined colour vision. But we see poorly in dim light, and we lack senses such as sharp hearing or acute smell, to make up for it.

Our nearest relatives (chimps, gorillas and orangutans) are also active during daylight and sleep at night, reinforcing the view that the earliest humans had similar diurnal behaviours.

This lifestyle likely stretches further back into our evolutionary history, before the great apes, to the very dawn of primates.

The earliest mammals were generally nocturnal, using their small size and the cover of darkness to hide from dinosaurs. However, the meteorite impact that wiped out these fearsome reptiles allowed some mammalian survivors, notably primates, to evolve largely diurnal lifestyles.

If we inherited our daylight activity pattern directly from these early primates, then this rhythm would have been part of our lineage’s evolutionary history for nearly 66 million years.

This explains why our 24-hour clock is very difficult to shake; it’s so deeply ingrained in our evolutionary history.

Successive improvements in lighting technology have increasingly liberated us from dependence on daylight: fire, candles, oil and gas lamps, and finally electric lighting. So we can theoretically work and play at any time.

However, our cognitive and physical performance deteriorates when our intrinsic daily cycles are disturbed, for instance through sleep deprivation, shift work or jet lag.

Futurists have already considered the circadian rhythms required for life on Mars. Luckily, a day on Mars is around 24.7 hours, so similar to our own. This slight difference should be the least of the worries for the first intrepid martian colonists.

Light is still changing us

In the past 200 years or so, artificial lighting has helped to (partly) decouple us from our ancestral circadian rhythms. But in recent decades, this has come at a cost to our eyesight.

Many genes associated with short-sightedness (myopia) have become more common in just 25 years, a striking example of rapid evolutionary change in the human gene pool.

And if you have some genetic predisposition to myopia, reduced exposure to natural light (and spending more time in artificial light) makes it more likely. These noticeable changes have occurred within many people’s lifetimes.

Light will no doubt continue to shape our biology over the coming millennia, but those longer-term effects might be difficult to predict.

Mike Lee receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Hermon Slade Foundation

– ref. How light helped shape our skin colour, eyes and curly hair – https://theconversation.com/how-light-helped-shape-our-skin-colour-eyes-and-curly-hair-237240

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Smit, Adjunct Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney

Statements have been circulating online, including leading news platforms, that battery electric cars will greatly increase the average mass of the on-road fleet. This claim is used as an argument against these cars.

Even the Australian motoring organisation NRMA has posed the question: “EVs are heavy. Are they safe on our roads and carparks?” (It does say the answer is yes.)

The stated reason for such concerns is generally that electric car batteries are heavy and increase overall vehicle mass. A heavier vehicle needs more energy to drive it and so will typically increase emissions. A greater mass also reduces traffic safety and could have damaging impacts on parking spaces and roads.

A critical review released yesterday took a closer look at these claims to see if they hold true in Australia. It finds these claims don’t stack up in a country where sales of fossil-fuelled (petrol, diesel, LPG) vehicles skew towards large and heavy utes and SUVs.

When adjusted for actual top 10 vehicles sold and using realistic mass values, the average mass of battery electric and fossil-fuelled cars differs by just 68 kilograms. That difference is not significant, especially because electric cars are much more energy-efficient.

Oversimplifying a complex topic

The claims being made often oversimplify a complex reality. They tell only part of the story, which can be misleading.

For instance, internal combustion engine cars have consistently increased in mass over time. Known as car obesity, this fact is often unfairly ignored in comparisons.

Similarly, these statements pretend to know how complex consumer behaviour will respond to future availability of battery electric cars and their fast-changing and improving features. Often, the results of overseas studies cannot be directly applied to different Australian conditions.

4 points of contention

Our report identifies and unpacks four main points of contention.

First, there are different ways to define and compare the mass of battery electric and combustion engine cars. In practice, the choice is rather arbitrary. Depending on the method, the comparison may be neither adequate nor accurate.

Often the comparison is made between similar or similarly sized battery electric and combustion engine cars. Or electric cars can be compared only to an equivalent non-electric version of models such as the VW Golf. Another variation is to simply compare the average mass of a large range of cars currently on sale, without considering the impact of sales volumes.

Second, a common argument is that batteries are heavy, so electric cars are heavier than fossil-fuelled cars. But this is simplistic – it’s not only the battery that matters.

Offsetting the extra battery mass, other parts of the electric car such as their motors are smaller and lighter. They can cut its mass by up to 50%.

And actual extra battery mass itself depends on a range of factors. Battery chemistry, battery size and energy storage capacity (which determines how often a car needs recharging) all affect the mass. Indeed, battery mass varies between 100 and 900 kilograms for cars.

Third, car obesity has greatly and consistently increased fossil-fuelled car mass. Unless we include this rise in car obesity, the comparison with battery electric cars tells only half the story.

Finally, it is challenging to accurately predict the mass impacts of electric cars. A common assumption is that future vehicle buyers’ behaviour does not change when switching to battery electric cars. This assumption seems unlikely and again oversimplifies the comparison.

For instance, market availability, marketing focus, purchase price and performance characteristics will largely guide buyers’ decisions. These considerations are all highly dynamic. They are changing significantly and fast.

So how do they compare in Australia?

A proper comparison needs, at least, to include realistic vehicle mass and sales data. Our study compares the differences in vehicle mass between the top ten best-selling cars for both battery electric and fossil-fuelled vehicles in Australia in 2022, as shown below.

Currently sold top 10 models of battery electric cars cluster more at the heavy end, but the most popular cars are relatively light. The top 10 models of fossil-fuelled cars have a larger spread in mass. Yet, when it comes to sales, most are relatively heavy SUVs or utes.

When ranked by popularity and compared, battery electric cars are not always heavier. They can be almost 300kg (12%) lighter to almost 800kg (55%) heavier than the corresponding fossil-fuelled car. Importantly, the overall difference in the average mass of the two categories when adjusted for sales is just 68kg (about 3% of total vehicle mass).

This small difference is insignificant in terms of energy and emission impacts. A more important factor here is the superior energy efficiency of battery electric vehicles.

How will they compare in future?

Clearly, future sales profiles may differ from current sales profiles. The current profile may be largely defined by a certain type of customer (such as a high-income early adopter). They might not be typical of mainstream consumers in coming years.

Buyers’ future behaviour is uncertain and hard to predict. It would depend on the effectiveness of (new) policy measures such as Australia’s New Vehicle Efficiency Standard, the actual vehicles offered for sale, marketing efforts by car suppliers and possibly also cultural changes.

Any shifts in buyer behaviour could greatly influence the car fleet’s average mass. They could continue the current trend towards larger and heavier vehicles, or shift to smaller and lighter vehicles.

But this is the point: the impacts of electrification of passenger vehicles on average mass are highly uncertain. Statements on the matter are often speculative and can be unfairly biased by the methods used.

In markets where heavy petrol and diesel vehicles dominate car sales, such as Australia and New Zealand, current evidence suggests increased electric car sales are unlikely to greatly increase average vehicle mass. In fact, average mass could actually go down as cheaper and lighter electric cars go on sale here.

Vehicle mass remains important

Importantly, the report is not downplaying the importance of vehicle mass for transport emission abatement.

In previous research it was estimated that only a passenger vehicle fleet dominated by small and light battery electric vehicles may get Australia close to achieving the net-zero emissions target in 2050.

To meet the target, it is thus important to reverse the trend of increasing car obesity, for all cars. But vehicle mass should not be used as an argument against electrification.

Robin Smit is the founding Research Director at the Transport Energy/Emission Research (TER) consultancy.

– ref. Do electric cars greatly increase the average mass of cars on the road? Not in Australia – https://theconversation.com/do-electric-cars-greatly-increase-the-average-mass-of-cars-on-the-road-not-in-australia-240555

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kayla Mildren, PhD Candidate in the politics of school uniform policies, Griffith University

A Queensland tribunal has ruled it is not discriminatory for a school to require girls to wear a skirt at formal events.

The private high school said girls needed to wear skirts for occasions including excursions, ceremonies and class photographs.

A female student had complained to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal about different treatment for boys and girls.

While the tribunal acknowledged there was “different treatment between the sexes”, it found there was not enough evidence to show this was “unfavourable”.

Why are female students still made to wear skirts and dresses? And why is this a problem?

Who decides?

In Australia, uniform rules are largely determined by individual schools.

Schools have some obligations to their communities, governing bodies (such as state education departments and independent school peak bodies) and anti-discrimination legislation.

For example, Victoria’s Education Department requires policies to include an exemption process and “support inclusion”.

But ultimately, it’s up to the school to decide how their uniform looks, who can access different items, where and when items may be worn, and what non-uniform items are regulated.

Read more:
No mullets, no mohawks, no ‘awkwardly contrasting colours’: what are school policies on hair and why do they matter so much?

The pants question

Pants occupy an odd space here. For public schools, most state education departments require girls to have the option of pants (which can include shorts or trousers), for both sport and regular uniforms.

This is a relatively new standard. For example, Queensland introduced this in 2019 and New South Wales allowed it from mid-2018.

Often, these changes were prompted by sustained campaigning by families and lobby groups.

But private schools do not have the same obligations. Some are starting to update their policies and allow girls to wear shorts or pants if they choose.

Others, however, have been met with conservative backlash when they do.

So, when can girls wear pants?

Girls’ access to pants is not as straightforward as a school including them within the uniform policy.

As researchers note, simply allowing girls to wear pants may not be enough. If school cultures are not welcoming, or if the design is uncomfortable, girls may still avoid them.

Or, as can be the case with private schools, a school may offer pants on a limited basis, such as only during winter. Alternatively, there may be a special order process for pants, making them difficult to obtain.

Or schools may permit their use, except on special occasions such as photo days or excursions, like the Queensland case.

Why does it matter?

The skirt itself isn’t the issue. The element of choice is.

As researchers note, skirts and dresses are linked to outdated expectations of modesty and femininity. They can be targets of fetish and harassment, and entrench binary ideals of gender.

Flexible policies support gender-diverse youth and enable all students to select uniform items based on their body rather than their gender. Research shows offering students pants or shorts can also promote physical activity.

These school uniform debates are also taking place amid concerns about misogyny and harassment of female students and teachers in schools and concern for queer young people’s wellbeing.

The longer gender-normativity is baked into school policies, the longer students are denied their right to equitable education. And the longer that schools promote the idea of “girl” and “boy” as opposite and concrete categories, the harder it will be to combat schoolyard misogyny and queerphobia.

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

– ref. Why do some schools still force girls to wear skirts or dresses? – https://theconversation.com/why-do-some-schools-still-force-girls-to-wear-skirts-or-dresses-241484

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Lindsey, Malcolm Smith Professor of Asian Law and Director of the Centre for Indonesian Law, Islam and Society, The University of Melbourne

Former General Prabowo Subianto will be sworn in as Indonesia’s eighth president today. Twenty-five years ago he was a pariah, and for good reason.

He faced accusations of human rights abuses in Papua and East Timor, and in 1998, special forces troops under his command had abducted democracy activists in Jakarta, 13 of whom have never been seen again. Those who did return had been tortured.

The students had been calling for the resignation of President Soeharto, Prabowo’s father-in-law, who finally stepped down in May 1998 after widespread rioting that many believe Prabowo helped engineer. Then, backed by troops under his command, Prabowo tried to storm the presidential palace, gun in hand, to threaten the new president, BJ Habibie.

Prabowo never went on trial for the disappearances of the activists, though he was banned from travelling to the United States for two decades.

And his cherished military career quickly ended – he was dismissed from the army for “misinterpreting orders”. Disgraced, and seen as embodying the violence and repression of Soeharto’s regime, Prabowo went into voluntary exile in Jordan. It seemed he had no future in the democratic Reformasi (reformation) system that began to emerge from the ruins of the repressive New Order.

But Prabowo was far from finished. His rehabilitation and extraordinary climb to the presidency may now signal the end of Indonesia’s fragile, aspirational liberal democracy and a return to the New Order model.

The end of Reformasi?

It is clear enough that Prabowo has no enthusiasm for democracy. He has said, for example, that it “very, very tiring” and “very, very messy and costly”.

Gerindra, the political party he founded and leads, even has, as its number one mission statement, a return to the Constitution “as stipulated on 18 August 1945”. This is the authoritarian original version of the Constitution that Soeharto relied on to rule. It did not guarantee human rights or a separation of powers, and it gave huge power to the president, who was not elected and had no term limit.

This Constitution was amended after Soeharto fell to bring in a liberal, democratic model. So, a return to the original 1945 Constitution would in itself likely end Indonesia’s hard-won, if troubled, democracy.

But Prabowo may not need to go this far to enjoy the sweeping power his former father-in-law exercised. Many of the elements of the New Order are already in place. Much of the work of dismantling Indonesia’s liberal democracy has already been done by the outgoing president, Joko Widodo (Jokowi), whose son, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, is now Prabowo’s vice president.

For example, a key pillar of the New Order was “dual function”, a doctrine that allowed serving military members to take civilian posts, allowing them to dominate the government. This was abolished after Soeharto fell.

But amendments to the civil service law passed last October again allow active members of the army and police to occupy civilian positions. Proposed amendments to the Indonesian National Army (TNI) Law now being debated could expand this. When questioned about the army’s return to civilian life, the armed forces commander welcomed the changes, saying the army would not be exercising a “dual function” but a “multi-function”.

Likewise, under Soeharto, repressive laws tightly restricted press freedom. Now, a controversial new criminal code that comes into force in 2026 will reinstate prohibitions on criticising the government that the Constitutional Court had previously struck out. A proposed new Broadcasting Law would also ban “broadcasting investigative journalism content”.

Under the New Order, civil society activism was also harshly restricted. In the last ten years under Jokowi, there has been a steady escalation of defamation actions and threats against government critics. And a law passed in 2017 allows the government to dissolve non-governmental organisations without any judicial process. Already, three NGOs have been banned.

Many activists now speak openly of their fear of being targeted and intimidated by government trolls or even the intelligence agencies. Others fear Prabowo will use his links to Muslim civil society organisations to pressure or delegitimise other groups he sees as critics.

Read more:
Journalists in Indonesia are being killed, threatened and jailed. A new draft law could make things even worse

Keeping the elites happy

Prabowo is also following in the footsteps of Soeharto and Jokowi by building a massive coalition in the national legislature, the DPR. More than 80% of members are already on board, with only one party holding out.

Prabowo will also expand his cabinet, allowing him to award places to supporters and co-opt others, including members of civil society. This will further weaken the opposition.

This kind of government of elite “unity” makes politics opaque. Political fights take place behind the scenes, resolved by power plays and deals before measures go to a vote. It would make the national legislature not much more than a rubber stamp, as it was under Soeharto.

This assumes Prabowo can manage Indonesia’s powerful political bosses – especially the feuding former presidents Megawati Soekarnoputri and Jokowi. Together, they now control the two biggest parties in the legislature (PDI-P and Golkar, respectively).

The still hugely popular Jokowi backed his former bitter enemy Prabowo in the February elections because he saw this as a way to maintain influence after he left office. But Prabowo will be reluctant to share real power with anyone for long. His relationship with Jokowi is likely to be one the biggest challenges to his rule.

Dealing with an obstructive court

One of the few remaining obstacles to Prabowo acquiring the sort of dictatorial powers Soeharto exercised is the Constitutional Court, which has the power to strike out laws. Prabowo will not want a non-compliant and obstructive (that is, independent) Constitutional Court. Already politicians are openly discussing the need to “assess its performance”.

If the legislature passes laws to weaken the court, the court could just strike them out, as it has done in the past.

But the court was established by the amendments to the original 1945 Constitution. This means that if government cannot pass laws to weaken the court, stack the court or intimidate independent judges, a return to the 1945 Constitution could be used to eliminate it.

Prabowo would need to feel his rule is secure and that he has the rock-solid support of the elites before doing this, but it is certainly possible. Returning to the original Constitution would simply require a two-thirds vote in the MPR, Indonesia’s highest representative assembly.

Bold promises on the economy

Soeharto’s system was based on a Faustian bargain that allowed him to rule corruptly and oppressively in return for high economic growth and development that lifted millions out of poverty.

Prabowo is likely to adopt the same approach. He campaigned on an annual GDP growth target of 8%, a rate reached under Soeharto, but never by subsequent governments. Jokowi also placed great emphasis on development (infrastructure in particular), but never got much above 5% growth per year.

Many are optimistic about the economy under the new president. Prabowo’s father was a prominent economist and a finance minister. Prabowo has also asked Jokowi’s highly-regarded finance minister, Sri Mulyani, to stay in her role.

However, Prabowo comes to office with some enormously expensive commitments that would make Sri Mulyani’s job extremely difficult. These include his free school lunches program (upwards of US$30 billion, or A$45 billion), which Sri Mulyani has publicly questioned, and Jokowi’s signature new capital city, Nusantara, currently under construction. (The initial phase alone will cost at least US$35 billion, or A$52 billion).

Moreover, Prabowo’s main priority will be to keep the elites happy and maintain his enormous coalition. His supporters and allies – including his brother, tycoon Hashim Djojohadikusumo who has funded his political career – will all demand access to concessions and lucrative appointments for their cronies to make good the vast amounts spent on the February elections. Rational economic policy-making will therefore be highly constrained.

Foreign investment has always been the key to high growth in Indonesia, but despite the constant rhetoric about Indonesia being open for business, it will undoubtedly remain protectionist in practice under Prabowo. That will likely make the 8% GDP annual growth target impossible.

More active foreign relations

Prabowo, who was educated overseas and speaks English fluently, feels comfortable on the global stage. He will want a more prominent place in world affairs for his country, reflecting its vast size and new status as a middle-income country.

As Jokowi’s defence minister, he was active internationally, even attempting to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. And, to his obvious delight, countries like the US that had previously denied him entry have congratulated him on his victory.

Prabowo’s main foreign affairs challenge will be the same as his predecessor’s: managing the difficult relationship with China.

Indonesians are deeply suspicious of China, an attitude driven by a potent mixture of deeply rooted racist attitudes, fear of communism and anxiety about China’s hegemonic ambitions. However, Indonesia is a major recipient of Belt and Road investments and the elite rely heavily on Chinese trade and investment.

Like Jokowi, Prabowo will have to manage this difficult balance.

Back to the future

Indonesian civil society leaders are already talking about the new administration as “New Order Volume II” or “neo-New Order”, and it is easy to see why. All the signs point to a continuation under Prabowo of the process begun under Jokowi: a slide towards something that looks much more like Soeharto’s system than the liberal democracy reformers tried to construct 25 years ago.

There is nothing in Prabowo’s past or his campaign promises to suggest otherwise. Perhaps the only question is how quickly it happens and how far he will go.

Tim Lindsey receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Indonesia’s new president, Prabowo Subianto, finds democracy ‘very tiring’. Are darker days ahead for the country? – https://theconversation.com/indonesias-new-president-prabowo-subianto-finds-democracy-very-tiring-are-darker-days-ahead-for-the-country-241256

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

The Labor Party has won a seventh consecutive ACT election.

The ACT uses the Hare Clark proportional representation method with five five-member electorates, for a total of 25 seats. A quota is one-sixth of the vote or 16.7%.

For Saturday’s election, the ABC is calling
ten Labor seats, eight Liberals, two Greens, one Independent for Canberra (IfC) and one other independent, with three still undecided.

Labor has won a seventh consecutive term, having governed in the ACT since 2001, often in coalition with the Greens. At the 2022 federal election, the ACT gave Labor a 67–33 two-party win, easily the most pro-Labor jurisdiction. This strong left lean makes it difficult for the Liberals to win ACT elections.

Vote shares were 34.5% Labor (down 3.3% since the 2020 election), 33.0% Liberals (down 0.9%), 12.5% Greens (down 1.0%), 8.5% Independents for Canberra (new) and 11.5% for all Others (down 3.3%). Postal votes have not yet been counted, and these should help the Liberals.

Nearly all pre-poll votes and some election day votes were cast electronically. Provisional preference distributions for these votes were published on election night, with paper ballots to be added to these electronic votes in the coming days.

Analysis of each of the five electorates follows. The final seat result will probably be ten Labor (steady since 2020), ten Liberals (up one), three Greens (down three), one IfC (new) and one other independent (up one). If this occurs, Labor and the Greens will retain their combined majority with 13 of the 25 seats.

In Brindabella, the Liberals won 2.57 quotas, Labor 2.05, the Greens 0.55 and IfC 0.45. Analyst Kevin Bonham says the Liberals are likely to win the last seat after postals are counted.

In Ginninderra, Labor has 2.26 quotas, the Liberals 1.52, the Greens 0.89 and IfC 0.45. Bonham says the Greens and Liberals easily win the final two seats on the provisional distribution.

In Kurrajong, Labor has 2.20 quotas, the Liberals 1.41, the Greens 1.07 and IfC 0.83. IfC easily wins the last seat on the provisional distribution.

In Murrumbidgee, the Liberals have 2.06 quotas, Labor 2.02, independent Fiona Carrick 0.78 and the Greens 0.57. Carrick easily wins the last seat.

In Yerrabi, the Liberals have 2.19 quotas, Labor 1.86, the Greens 0.71 and IfC 0.58. The Greens easily defeat IfC on the provisional distribution.

Harris dips in polls, but US presidential contest remains tight

The United States presidential election will be held on November 5. In analyst Nate Silver’s aggregate of national polls, Democrat Kamala Harris leads Republican Donald Trump by 49.1–46.8, a gain for Trump since last Monday, when Harris led by 49.3–46.5. Harris’ national lead peaked on October 2, when she led by 49.4–45.9.

Joe Biden’s final position before his withdrawal as Democratic candidate on July 21 was a national poll deficit against Trump of 45.2–41.2.

The US president isn’t elected by the national popular vote, but by the Electoral College, in which each state receives electoral votes equal to its federal House seats (population based) and senators (always two). Almost all states award their electoral votes as winner-takes-all, and it takes 270 electoral votes to win (out of 538 total).

Relative to the national popular vote, the Electoral College is biased to Trump, with Harris needing at least a two-point popular vote win to be the narrow Electoral College favourite in Silver’s model.

In Silver’s state poll aggregates, Harris leads by just 0.4 points in Pennsylvania (19 electoral votes) and Wisconsin (ten). She leads by about one point in Michigan (15 electoral votes) and Nevada (six). Trump leads by 0.8 points in North Carolina (16 electoral votes), 1.4 points in Georgia (16) and 1.8 points in Arizona (11).

If Harris holds her current leads in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nevada, she likely wins the Electoral College by at least 276–262. But Harris’ margins in these states are now very narrow.

While Silver’s model is still effectively a 50–50 toss-up, Trump is now the slight favourite with a 51% chance to win the Electoral College, up from 48% last Monday. Harris’ Electoral College win probability had peaked at 58% on September 27. There’s a 26% chance that Harris wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College.

While Trump was the favourite in Silver’s model between late August and mid-September, this is his first lead in FiveThirtyEight since early August.

Silver said on Friday that current economic conditions imply Harris should win the national popular vote by about one point, so the contest is trending towards this outcome. But Trump would be likely to win the Electoral College with just a one-point Harris advantage in the popular vote.

Liberals lose Pittwater to teal at NSW state byelections

Byelections occurred Saturday in the New South Wales state Liberal-held seats of Epping, Hornsby and Pittwater. Labor did not contest any of these byelections. In Pittwater, The Poll Bludger’s projections give teal independent Jacqui Scruby a 54.1–45.9 lead over the Liberals, a 4.8% swing to Scruby since the 2023 state election.

Current primary votes are 53.7% Scruby (up 17.3%), 42.4% Liberals (down 2.6%) and 3.9% for a Libertarian. The Greens had won 6.8% in 2023, but did not contest, presumably to stop left-wing votes exhausting under NSW’s optional preferential system.

The other two byelections were easy Liberal holds, with the Liberals beating the Greens by 61.6–38.4 in Hornsby (58.0–42.0 against Labor in 2023). The Liberals won Epping by 65.8–34.2 against the Greens (54.8–45.2 against Labor in 2023).

Federal Morgan poll and NT redistribution

A national Morgan poll, conducted October 7–13 from a sample of 1,697, had a 50–50 tie, unchanged from the September 30 to October 6 Morgan poll.

Primary votes were 37.5% Coalition (steady), 30% Labor (down 1.5), 14% Greens (up 1.5), 6% One Nation (up 0.5), 9% independents (steady) and 3.5% others (down 0.5).

The headline figure uses respondent preferences. By 2022 election preference flows, Labor led by 51–49, a one-point gain for the Coalition.

The Northern Territory has two federal electorates: Lingiari and Solomon. It had been seven years since the last NT redistribution, so a new redistribution was required, and this was released Friday.

ABC election analyst Antony Green said Labor’s margin in Lingiari was increased from 0.9% to 1.7%, but decreased in Solomon from 9.4% to 8.4%. This is a draft redistribution, but there are not expected to be any changes before finalisation.

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

– ref. Labor retains office at ACT election; US presidential election remains on a knife’s edge – https://theconversation.com/labor-retains-office-at-act-election-us-presidential-election-remains-on-a-knifes-edge-241678

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jens O. Zinn, T.R. Ashworth Associate Professor in Sociology, The University of Melbourne

Climate change is increasing the risk of extreme weather events for Australian households. Floods and bushfires are becoming more likely and severe. As a result, household insurance costs are soaring – tripling in some cases. High-risk areas might even become uninsurable.

The national housing crisis is pushing low-income households in particular to seek affordable housing in areas at risk of flooding. There they can become trapped in a vicious cycle. Unable to pay soaring insurance premiums in these areas, they also can’t afford housing elsewhere.

The regulation of housing in Australia traditionally relies on well-informed buyers being responsible for managing the risks. But our new study found home buyers are often not aware of the long-term risks.

Only after they’ve bought the home do they start thinking about these risks. When faced with unexpected high insurance costs, many opt to take the risk of being underinsured or even uninsured. This leaves them highly vulnerable.

The National Strategy for Disaster Resilience promotes a shared-responsibility concept. However, we found the main responsibility still lies with households. And they are not equipped to cope with the increasing complexity, impacts and costs of extreme weather events.

What’s wrong with the current approach?

The uncertain knowledge about future extreme weather events is challenging the traditional prioritising of individual responsibility. It’s becoming even harder for households to make informed decisions based on past experiences.

Government efforts to regulate increasing flooding events might not be effective when households do not want to relocate or cannot afford housing elsewhere.

Governments are also under pressure to jump in to compensate households for the costs of extreme weather damage.

Our research found a number of issues prevent efficient regulation:

• stakeholders such as the insurance industry and home lenders face legal hurdles to sharing data and giving financial advice for housing in high-risk areas

• well-intended measures such as buybacks and planned relocations can fail when they do not relate to people’s experiences and life situation, such as limited financial resources and deep connections to a place and community

• households’ motivation to insure themselves might decrease if they can expect government to provide compensation as a de facto last insurer.

Who is responsible for what?

In Australia, responsibility for managing extreme weather events is roughly divided among three main stakeholders: the three levels of government, businesses and households.

Within the three levels of government, states and territories bear the main responsibility for managing extreme weather events. They do so through disaster risk management plans and policies, hazard prevention and land-use planning.

Yet housing is still built in flood-prone regions. It happens where commercial interests conflict with regional planning, and governments are under pressure to deliver housing for growing populations.

After extreme weather hits, house and contents insurance cover is key for a household to recover. But insurance costs are based on the risk of events such as flooding. As these risks rise, premiums may also increase and become unaffordable. The Climate Council estimates one out of 25 properties will even become uninsurable by 2030.

When housing is built in at-risk areas, under the current system home buyers are largely responsible for informing themselves about the risks of floods, bushfires and other natural disasters. Our research suggests many are struggling to estimate what insurance is likely to cost them.

To prepare for these costs before they invest in a home, they must assess their own risk, know the value of their house and contents and calculate the costs of rebuilding after a disaster. They must also take into account increasing costs for builders and materials after an extreme weather event.

Climate change is making these already complex calculations even more difficult.

Our study is based on interviews with 26 insurance, legal, financial, policy and urban planning experts. Despite the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience’s concept of shared responsibility, we found most of the burden still falls on households.

Yet households often lack the knowledge to assess the risks. The data and information are either unavailable, or hard to access and understand.

These difficulties, coupled with the complex language of insurance contracts, contribute to high numbers of underinsured and uninsured households.

The Australian government responded in 2022 by setting up a cyclone reinsurance pool. Its aim is to keep premiums for households and businesses affordable.

There are also government buyback programs or relocation plans to move people out of high-risk regions. As noted above, though, these don’t always suit households when offered away from their communities or full costs aren’t adequately covered.

Governments must take on more responsibility

According to the experts we interviewed, households are no longer able to carry the main responsibilities for managing the risks of climate change. Government must take on more responsibility.

At the local level, councils need to better educate their staff on climate change risks. They should ban housing development in at-risk areas.

Better information and data sharing among stakeholders such as insurers and governments will also be crucial. Such data and information also need to be made more accessible and easier for households to understand.

In a climate change world, increasing extreme weather events result in new complexities. Households are not able to assess these new risks and complexities to make well-informed decisions.

Australia needs stronger sharing of responsibilities between different stakeholders such as insurers, governments and households. This includes changes to laws on information and data sharing between insurers, governments and households, bans on building in high-risk areas, and better advice about the costs of buying in high-risk regions.

Jens Zinn received funding from the Hanse Wissenschaftskolleg/Institute for Advanced Study, Delmenhorst/Germany (10/2023-05/2024).

Julia Plass has received funding for the data collection in the study mentioned in the article from the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

– ref. How extreme weather and costs of housing and insurance trap some households in a vicious cycle – https://theconversation.com/how-extreme-weather-and-costs-of-housing-and-insurance-trap-some-households-in-a-vicious-cycle-241572

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeannie Marie Paterson, Professor of Law, The University of Melbourne

In Australia, it’s scam victims who foot the bill for the overwhelming majority of the money lost to scams each year.

A 2023 review by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) found banks detected and stopped only a small proportion of scams. The total amount banks paid in compensation paled in comparison to total losses.

So, it was a strong statement this week when it was revealed the Australian Financial Conduct Authority (AFCA) had ordered a bank – HSBC – to compensate a customer who lost more than $47,000 through a sophisticated bank impersonation or “spoofing” scam.

This decision was significant. An AFCA determination is binding on the relevant bank or other financial institution, which has no direct right of appeal. It could have implications for the way similar cases are treated in future.

The ruling comes amid a broader push for sector-wide reforms to give banks more responsibility for detecting, deterring and responding to scams, as opposed to simply telling customers to be “more careful”.

Here’s what you should know about this landmark ruling, and what it might mean for consumers.

Read more:
Australia’s new scam prevention draft is welcome – but it needs to be broader in scope

A highly sophisticated ‘spoofing’ scam

You might be familiar with “push payment” scams that trick the victim into paying money to a dummy account. These include the “mum I’ve lost my phone” scam and some romance scams.

The recent case concerned an equally noxious “bank impersonation” or “spoofing” scam. The complainant – referred to as “Mr T” – was tricked into giving the scammer access to his HSBC account, from which an unauthorised payment was made.

The scammer sent Mr T a text message, purportedly asking him to investigate an attempted Amazon transaction.

In an effort to respond to the (fake) unauthorised Amazon purchase, Mr T revealed security passcodes to the scammer, enabling them to transfer $47,178.54 from his account and disappear with it.

The fact Mr T was dealing with scammers was far from obvious – scammers had information about him one might reasonably expect only a bank would know, such as his bank username.

On top of this, the scam text message appeared in a thread of other legitimate text messages that had previously been sent by the real HSBC.

AFCA’s ruling

HSBC argued to AFCA that having to pay compensation should be ruled out under the ePayments Code, a voluntary code of practice administered by ASIC.

Under this code, a bank is not required to compensate a customer for an unauthorised payment if that customer has disclosed their passcode. The bank argued the complainant had voluntarily disclosed these codes to the scammer, meaning the bank didn’t need to pay.

AFCA disagreed. It noted the very way the scam had worked was by creating a sense of urgency and crisis. AFCA considered that the complainant had been manipulated into disclosing the passcodes and had not acted voluntarily.

AFCA awarded compensation covering the vast majority of the disputed transaction amount, lost interest charged to a home loan account, and $5,000 towards Mr T’s legal costs.

It also ordered the bank to pay compensation of $1,000 for poor customer service in dealing with the matter, including communication delays.

Other cases may be more complex

In this case, the determination was relatively straightforward. It found Mr T had not voluntarily disclosed his account information, so was not excluded from being compensated under the ePayments Code.

However, many payment scams fall outside the ePayments Code because they involve the customer directly sending money to the scammer (as opposed to the scammer accessing the customer’s account). That means there is no code to direct compensation.

Still, AFCA’s jurisdiction is broader than merely applying a code. In considering compensation for scam losses, AFCA must consider what is “fair in all the circumstances”. This means taking into account:

• legal principles
• applicable industry codes
• good industry practice
• previous AFCA decisions.

Relevant factors might well include whether the bank was proactive in responding to known scams, as well as the challenges for individual customers in identifying scams.

Broader reforms are on the way

At the heart of this determination by AFCA is a recognition that, increasingly, detecting sophisticated scams can be next to impossible for customers, which can mean they don’t act voluntarily in making payments to scammers.

Similar reasoning has informed a range of recent reform initiatives that put more responsibility for detecting and responding to scams on the banks, rather than their customers.

In 2023, Australia’s banking sector committed to a new “Scam-Safe Accord”. This is a commitment to implement new measures to protect customers, including a confirmation of payee service, delays for new payments, and biometric identity checks for new accounts.

Changes on the horizon could be more ambitious and significant.

The proposed Scams Prevention Framework legislation would require Australian banks, telcos and digital platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent, detect, report, disrupt and respond to scams.

It would also include a compulsory external dispute resolution process, like AFCA’s, for consumers seeking compensation for when any of these institutions fail to comply.

Addressing scams is not just an Australian issue. In the United Kingdom, newly introduced rules make paying and receiving banks responsible for compensating customers, for scam losses up to £85,000 (A$165,136), unless the customer is grossly negligent.

Jeannie Marie Paterson has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council and conducted research for ASIC and AFCA. She is currently working on a project on AFCA determinations with Dr Nicola Howell and Evgenia Bourova. The scams research has been assisted by Andrew Lim.

Nicola Howell has previously conducted funded research for ASIC and is currently working on a project on AFCA determinations with Professor Jeannie Paterson and Evgenia Bourova. Nicola is affiliated with the Consumers’ Federation of Australia, as a member of the CFA Executive.

– ref. Could a recent ruling change the game for scam victims? Here’s why the banks will be watching closely – https://theconversation.com/could-a-recent-ruling-change-the-game-for-scam-victims-heres-why-the-banks-will-be-watching-closely-241558

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle O’Shea, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Western Sydney University

Brendan Cowell’s 2021 novel Plum has expertly wed two seemingly unnatural partners: rugby league and poetry. Cowell’s story is both an ode of love to rugby league, and a powerful exploration of the catastrophic effects of sport-induced brain injury.

This story has now been brought to life in an ABC drama of the same name. It brilliantly reflects the experience of many players who are left to suffer – often in silence – with the long-term costs of the game.

A theatre of damage revealed

Our introduction to the main character, Peter “The Plum” Lum (played by Cowell), is jarring. Plum’s body lies motionless in a darkened changing room, enveloped by the distant sounds of a roaring stadium full of fans, a sharp referee’s whistle and the commentator’s pitched voice: “this poor bloke, he has had his head absolutely battered”.

We watch the doctor’s light worryingly cast to and fro across Plum’s dazed gaze, while his heavily pregnant wife’s concerned face looms large. Much larger, however, is the coach’s demand: “get the salts doc” – and his insistence that “the only way he (Plum) isn’t going back out there (on the field) is if he is fucking dead”.

And so the act proceeds, with Plum, like many athletes before and after him, returning heroically to the field. Though his team is victorious – another trophy retained – we’re forced to consider the unspoken costs of his love for the game.

These costs are amplified once the adoration from Plum’s fans and teammates, and his mantle as Cronulla’s king, are no more. We come to know a shell of a man who is desperate to deny, despite the advice of his doctor, the cognitive and other effects of the “little jolts” and “hard head knocks” experienced throughout his career.

The intensity with which Plum keeps his health condition a secret, and the ongoing abuse he levels on his body, provide a window into the lived experiences of many rugby league players. While this game gives, it also takes more than its fair share.

Masculinity and collision sports

The series highlights the emerging scientific link between collision sports such as rugby league and degenerative brain conditions including CTE-induced dementia – as well as attempts to discredit this science and silence the voices of athletes and families seeking redress from league administrators.

Contact and collision sports have often required athletes to sacrifice their brains and bodies in the pursuit of glory and success.

While a diagnosis of the degenerative brain disease Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) can only be made posthumously, Plum displays many of the hallmark symptoms: impaired judgement, impulse control issues, aggression, depression and anxiety.

Viewers are taken into the deep fog of this existence. As a 1990s playmaker, Plum had fame but not fortune. Nearing 50, working at an airport, we see a traumatic near-miss as he experiences an epileptic seizure.

His forgetfulness leaves him unable to remember his favourite player’s name at a Cronulla Sharks corporate event. He suffers confusion and anxiety. Aggressive acts, including punching holes in bedroom walls, become his daily pain and shame.

Plum’s absent father’s advice to “never take a backwards step” also echoes throughout the series, reflecting the deeply embedded view of rugby league as a hard sport played by equally hard men.

This hard man veneer is grounded in stoicism – and for Plum and his former teammates, in unhealthy addictions to gambling, drugs and grog. Plum repels his family and friends, making his world intentionally small for fear he might forget something or someone. The series brings to the fore the raw and visceral effects of hypermasculinity and not speaking out.

Rugby league and poetry

The series also features poetry and the presence of past literary figures (conjured in Plum’s mind) such as Charles Bukowski and Sylvia Plath. As viewers, we see Plum’s internal dialogues with these apparitions, but his family and friends can’t.

Plum also joins a local poetry group, where his decaying brain finds purpose and connection. This unlikely outlet becomes his therapy. It comforts him and provides him a space to communicate his experiences with the outside world. Through his ode to rugby league, we witness him come closer to clarity.

Read more:
Why a portrait of a former NRL great could spark greater concussion awareness in Australia

All the while, Plum’s son is a talented player on the verge of a professional rugby league contract. And although Plum doesn’t regret a minute of his playing career, his prognosis leaves him urging his son away from the sport’s theatre of damage. This is a decision echoed by many parents in real life.

The future of collision sports

Reflecting on the potential impact of his book and the ABC series, Cowell imagines a space where the competitive commercial rivalries between football codes such as AFL, rugby union and soccer are suspended.

Instead of competing for a greater share of the market via trivial one-upmanship, sport leagues could pool their resources to invest in science that helps us understand and prevent sport-induced brain trauma.

Considering how many rugby players conceal and/or fail to report concussive episodes, we’ll need a major cultural shakeup at all levels of the game – because a love for the game should never come at the expense of oneself.

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. When does the love of the game outweigh the cost? ABC’s Plum brings rugby league’s concussion crisis to the fore – https://theconversation.com/when-does-the-love-of-the-game-outweigh-the-cost-abcs-plum-brings-rugby-leagues-concussion-crisis-to-the-fore-240550

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brett Montgomery, Senior Lecturer in General Practice, The University of Western Australia

A new study has found a link between hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs) and breast cancer.

The research is important, but media reports of a large increase in risk may be causing unnecessary worry.

Let’s put the findings in perspective for people who use IUDs.

What are IUDs?

IUDs are commonly used contraceptive devices. They sit inside the uterus (womb) to prevent pregnancy.

Older versions contain copper as their active ingredient. Newer “hormonal” IUDs slowly release a synthetic progesterone called levonorgestrel. This mimics the body’s natural progesterone hormone.

Both the copper and hormonal types of IUD are highly effective at preventing pregnancy over many years. Fertility is readily restored when they’re removed.

But the hormonal IUDs have the extra advantage of making periods lighter and less painful. Some people have one inserted for these reasons, even if they don’t need contraception.

Many women experience pain on insertion or spotting in the first few months of use. But compared to other contraceptives, women generally find IUDs very acceptable and continue to use them.

What did the new study find?

The new study, by researchers from Denmark, used data from national health registries to look for links between hormonal IUD use and breast cancer.

They tracked nearly 80,000 people who started hormonal IUDs across two decades. They compared these people to an equal number of people born at the same time who did not use hormonal IUDs.

On their raw numbers, you might think hormonal IUDs prevented breast cancer, because there were 720 cases of breast cancer in the hormonal IUD group, and nearly 900 in the other group. But that’s not the full story.

Ideally, when researchers study the effects of medicines, they do a “randomised controlled trial”, where researchers use chance to decide whether people get one treatment or another. This ensures the two groups are very similar apart from the treatment being studied. That’s not what happened here.

Read more:
Randomised control trials: what makes them the gold standard in medical research?

Instead, they simply studied people who had decided to have a hormonal IUD, and compared them to people who didn’t. This means the groups were different in many other ways.

So, the hormonal IUD group and the other group might appear to have a different risk of breast cancer – not because of the IUDs, but because of their other differences. For example, more highly educated women might be more likely to choose IUDs, and also more likely to attend breast cancer screening, where their breast cancer would be discovered.

The researchers “adjusted” their results to account for many differences between the two groups (including education, age, number of children, and some other medicines and medical conditions). After this “adjustment”, the numbers pointed in a different direction: towards a higher risk of breast cancer among people who used a hormonal IUD.

However, there are many other important risk factors for breast cancer the authors seem not to have adjusted for, such as body weight, alcohol use, smoking and physical activity. If there were differences between the two groups in these things, then the study’s results may still be biased. This makes me quite uncertain about the results.

Ultimately, we can’t say the IUDs caused the breast cancer – just that there’s an “association” or “link”.

Read more:
Clearing up confusion between correlation and causation

How big are the risks?

There are two different ways researchers express risk: “relative” and “absolute” risks. Here, the “relative” risk increase was about 30% for women using the IUDs for up to five years, 40% after 5–10 years, and 80% after 10–15 years of use.

These sound like massive risks. But though these statistics compare the risk of breast cancer in IUD users to the risk in non-users, they do not tell us the proportion of women who will get breast cancer. For that, we need to look at “absolute” risk increases.

These are much smaller. For every 10,000 women, this study suggests we might see an extra 14 cases of breast cancer after up to five years of use, 29 cases after 5–10 years use, and 71 cases after 10–15 years use. In “absolute” terms – as a proportion of all the IUD users – all of these risk increases are comfortably under 1%.

Reporting the dramatic relative risks, and not the much smaller absolute risks, is a common flaw in stories about health risk, and goes against science reporting recommendations.

What does other research say?

There are other studies on this topic, including a much larger recent study from Sweden based on data from more than half a million users of hormonal IUDs.

This suggested only a 13% relative risk increase in breast cancer – much smaller than the risk increases in the Danish study. This would mean an additional 1.46 cases of breast cancer for every 10,000 women per year.

This is in keeping with a recent large review of studies on this topic, which also found a much smaller risk than the new Danish paper.

The Swedish study also looked at other cancers. The results suggested a decreased risk of cancers of the cervix, ovaries and endometrium (womb lining). This mixed picture of some cancer risk and some cancer protection is also seen for traditional contraceptive pills.

And of course, all contraception protects women from the risks of pregnancy.

What does it mean for me?

The link between hormonal IUDs and breast cancer is probably very small, and might be a statistical illusion rather than a real thing.

Even if it’s a real risk, it may be offset by protection against other cancers.

And it may be dwarfed by other risks for breast cancer, such as high body weight, physical inactivity, alcohol use, and smoking. Online resources can help you visualise these risks.

Hormonal IUDs aren’t the right contraceptive choice for every woman. However, they deserve to stay high up on the menu of options.

Brett Montgomery is a GP who works academically and clinically. In his clinical work he sometimes discusses contraception with patients, including IUDs, but he does not insert IUDs himself. He has no commercial relationship with any IUD manufacturer.

– ref. Do IUDs cause breast cancer? Here’s what the evidence says – https://theconversation.com/do-iuds-cause-breast-cancer-heres-what-the-evidence-says-241663

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Thompson, Lecturer, Australian Catholic University

So, on we go
His welfare is of my concern
No burden is he to bear
We’ll get there
For I know
He would not encumber me
He ain’t heavy, he’s my brother
– He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother by The Hollies

Writer–Director David Vincent Smith’s reference to The Hollies’ 1969 hit as the title for his new film is not without irony.

Max (Sam Corlett) – drug-dependent and out of control – is clearly a crushing weight on his sister Jade (Leila George) and mother Bev (Greta Scacchi).

The opening scene of this compelling new Australian production throws us right into the chaos he visits upon them. The desperate, violent, off-camera shouts of abuse from Max as his sister sneaks past concerned neighbours and into their mother’s house are obviously nothing new.

Bev, seated at the kitchen table, shows none of the anxiety we see in Jade. Perhaps she’s beyond reacting to Max’s outbursts. Perhaps she looks past the ugly side of her son through eyes that see only with a mother’s love.

Jade, however, is at the end of her tether. Everything she’s tried has failed. She’s left with just one last desperate measure.

This desperate measure didn’t come to David Vincent Smith as a narrative conceit. It was much closer to home.

One night, Smith got a call from his mother who told him his own drug-addicted brother was outside their home. As he explains in the film’s press kit:

I could hear smashing windows in the background as he tried to claw his way inside. I was done. There had been many years of violence, emergency rooms and mental trauma […] my own life was suffering as a result […] what could I do? I had an idea – I could kidnap him. Take him out to the desert, throw away the car keys and resolve this once and for all.

Smith didn’t pursue that extreme thought in real life. Instead, it found its way onto the screen, first as a short “proof of concept” film – I’m Not Hurting You, which played at the 2019 Sydney Film Festival – and then as He Ain’t Heavy, his first feature film.

The kidnapping and withdrawal

Jade does indeed kidnap her brother. She sedates him and brings him to their dead grandparents’ home in the country, which Jade and Bev have been packing up in preparation to for its sale.

Here, we see Jade’s methodical preparation of the room where she will incarcerate Max, the food she will feed him, the posters and pamphlets that inform her how to manage a drug addict’s withdrawal.

The choice of the grandparents’ home is significant for our understanding of this fractured family. Here we find evidence that things weren’t always like this.

We see old photo albums of happier times, toys and games that are now just reminders of fun family visits, a guitar that was once part of Max’s promising singing career, the nearby waterhole where lazy days were spent, and pencil marks on the door jamb recording the siblings’ growth.

Perhaps the resonance of their better days will be as powerful as the enforced withdrawal in bringing Max back. But, of course, Jade’s best-laid plans don’t go as she might have hoped.

In many ways, Max’s drug addiction is what Alfred Hitchcock would have called a McGuffin – the story element you think the film is about, when in fact the film is about something else entirely.

In this case, that something else is love: the love Jade feels for her brother that leads to this extreme action, the love Bev feels for her son that makes her vulnerable to his unpredictable and violent behaviour, and the absence of love Max feels for himself – a void that sucks him into a self-destructive spiral.

He Ain’t Heavy is essentially a three-handed chamber piece that delivers a triumvirate of distinctive, grounded and well-delineated performances, each one serving a sharply written screenplay imbued with an authenticity that reflects Smith’s lived experience.

A powerful portrait of familial love

Without giving any spoilers, there are some narrative conveniences along the way that might detract from a lesser film. In this case, however, they are easy to forgive, in favour of the powerful viewing experience they help deliver.

If only for the curiosity factor, it’s worth noting Leila George is also Greta Scacchi’s real-life daughter (her father is Vincent D’Onofrio). This obviously doesn’t hurt when it comes to casting for family resemblance. But this tidbit of trivia is quickly forgotten in the moments of each of their finely crafted, absorbing performances.

In Smith’s earlier short film version, we see a plaque on the grandparents’ kitchen wall with the following aphorism:

RECIPE FOR LIFE – pinch of persistence, dash of kindness, spoonful of laughter, heap of love.

This is a story about a family that has exhausted its persistence, and for whom laughter is something of the past. But Jade’s extreme action is really an act of kindness. Both she and Bev, in their own ways, are driven by that heap of love.

He Ain’t Heavy is a film that deserves the same heap of love from its audience.

He Ain’t Heavy is in select cinemas from October 17.

Chris Thompson 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. A sister’s last hope to save her brother from addiction – David Vincent Smith’s He Ain’t Heavy is a triumphant debut – https://theconversation.com/a-sisters-last-hope-to-save-her-brother-from-addiction-david-vincent-smiths-he-aint-heavy-is-a-triumphant-debut-237764

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Williams, Associate Professor, Griffith University, Griffith University

It’s long been assumed the Queensland election of October 26 – to elect the state’s 58th (and second fixed, four-year) parliament – would be a tough ask for a tired-looking Labor government seeking a rare fourth term.

Having won the 2020 COVID-19 election with primary and two-party-preferred swings to it – and with a net gain in seats – Labor was always likely to suffer a major correction in 2024.

But few then could have anticipated just how large that correction would be. A Freshwater Strategy poll, the most recently released, has pegged Labor’s primary vote at just 30% (down 9.6 points from 2020). The Liberal-National Party (LNP) opposition is on 43% (up 7.1), the Greens (poised to seize between two and five seats in inner Brisbane) on 12% (up 2.5), Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party (PHON) on 8% (up 0.9) and others on 7% (up 1.3).

Labor, with just 44% of the two-party-preferred (2PP) vote, trails the LNP, on 56%, by 12 points. This represents a 9.2% swing since 2020. It would see Labor lose 22 seats (17 in the regions and five in Greater Brisbane) to the LNP, and at least two more in inner Brisbane to the Greens.

The 93-seat Queensland parliament would then be home to just 27 Labor MPs. The LNP would easily form government with 57 seats. The Greens and Katter’s Australian Party would each have four, and there would be one independent. For the first time in a decade, this election might see PHON with no representation.

So what went wrong for Labor?

Having been largely untroubled by the moderate and softly spoken LNP leader David Crisafulli throughout 2021, Labor suffered the first of a series of crises in early 2022 when integrity questions were asked of a Palaszczuk government accused of being too close to lobbyists and trade unions.

The LNP then launched a personal assault on the then premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk. She was accused of being a “part-time” and “red carpet” premier more interested in attending gala events than managing Queensland. In a state where the political culture esteems strong leaders but resents pampered “elites”, the LNP attacks were astonishingly successful.

By 2023, cost-of-living and youth crime crises only further burdened a premier hampered by hospital ramping and a seemingly shambolic rollout of Olympic Games infrastructure. By December 2023, a Resolve Strategic poll had found Palaszczuk – whose “next-door-neighbour” humility was once Labor’s best asset – trailing Crisafulli as preferred premier, 34 to 39%. Worse, a YouGov poll found Palaszczuk suffered a net approval rating of minus 20. Crisafulli enjoyed a plus-11-point position.

It was therefore inevitable the then deputy premier, Steven Miles – a PhD-qualified trade unionist from the Left now presenting as humble hubby and “daggy dad” – should topple (with support from Left-aligned unions) Palaszczuk last December.

While Miles’s honeymoon allowed Labor to briefly reset its fortunes – and, according to a UComms poll, attract 50% of the two-party preferred vote – the polls since February have been consistent in their forecast of a looming Labor decimation.

Despite this, nobody could accuse Miles or his government of giving up the ghost. Despite conceding an LNP victory was the “most likely” outcome, Miles has thrown everything into his bid for re-election. His promises include 50 cent public transport fares as part of a generous state budget (now matched by the LNP), a crackdown on youth crime, ambitious carbon emission and clean energy targets, state-owned electricity retailers and petrol stations, and even free lunches for all state primary school children.

By contrast, the LNP – enjoying a dream run since early 2022 and now campaigning heavily on youth crime and health – has met its first hurdles in recent weeks.

First, many, including conservative news media, are demanding Crisafulli provide much more policy detail. After long-trumpeting an “adult crime, adult time” slogan, for example, the LNP has only recently released vague details of an early intervention program to address youth crime.

Second – and potentially far more damaging – is the hand grenade Katter’s Australian Party (KAP) leader Robbie Katter lobbed at the LNP’s feet last week. Some time during the next parliament, Katter says, KAP will introduce a private member’s bill to repeal Labor’s popular 2018 reforms that removed abortion from the state’s Criminal Code.

While Crisafulli has ruled out any change to abortion law, there are fears conservative LNP MPs, if granted a “conscience vote”, could support Katter’s bill and recriminalise abortion. While such a move would hardly thwart LNP gains in the regions, it could prevent Crisafulli from making the necessary inroads into more progressive Brisbane seats.

While an LNP state victory is all but certain, federal Opposition Leader Peter Dutton can take little comfort from a local Labor loss. In short, Queensland isn’t Australia, and Australia isn’t Queensland. Labor, holding just four of the state’s 30 federal seats north of the Tweed, has little to lose. Even a 10-point swing to the state LNP in Queensland means little in terms of the 6.3% swing Dutton needs nationally to form majority government next May.

Facing certain defeat, Labor’s strategy is now to “save the furniture” in Greater Brisbane, including its seat of Waterford, held by high-profile Health Minister Shannon Fentiman, who could easily become Labor’s next leader. If Labor holds much of Brisbane, a relatively inexperienced LNP frontbench still burdened by the 2032 Olympics, the cost of living and youth crime will likely find its first term hard going.

Another single-term LNP government, like Campbell Newman’s between 2012 and 2015, is therefore hardly out of the question.

Paul Williams is an associate of the T. J. Ryan Foundation.

– ref. LNP is set for an easy win in Queensland, but its first term may pose a much greater challenge – https://theconversation.com/lnp-is-set-for-an-easy-win-in-queensland-but-its-first-term-may-pose-a-much-greater-challenge-241009

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Konstantine Panegyres, McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellow, researching Greco-Roman antiquity, The University of Melbourne

Today the perilous state of the environment is often in the news. Many stories describe how Earth is being damaged by human beings and discuss ways to prevent this.

These concerns are not new. Millennia ago, people in ancient Greece and Rome already knew humans were damaging the natural world. Literature from these ancient times contains many references to the environment and the harms it suffers.

Many of these insights ring true today. Polluting the soil we farm, air we breathe and water we drink has clear repercussions. We can only degrade the environment for so long before it will come back to haunt us.

So let’s explore what the ancient Greeks and Romans can teach us about nature and our place in the world.

An agent of destruction

The ancient Roman writer Pliny the Elder, who lived in the first century AD, was concerned about the way human beings were abusing Earth. In his work titled Natural History, he wrote:

We taint the rivers and the elements of nature, and the air itself, which is the main support of life, we turn into a medium for the destruction of life.

He thought of the planet as something humanity ought to protect rather than harm, because we owe our existence to mother Earth:

It is my pleasant duty first of all to champion Earth’s cause and to support her as the parent of all things.

Two millennia later, Pliny’s words seem directly relevant to us.

In the modern world, concerns about the health of the environment have become one of the hottest political topics.

For example, a survey last year of almost 20,000 young people in Australia showed 44% think the environment is the most important issue of our time.

A growing understanding

Roman writers noted their soldiers eventually poisoned the water and the air around their camps. The military writer Flavius Renatus Vegetius, who lived around the fourth and fifth centuries AD, observed:

if a numerous army continues long in one place in the summer or in the autumn, the waters become corrupt, and the air infected, from whence proceed malignant and fatal distempers, which nothing but frequent change of encampments can prevent.

Roman writers also had a lot to say about the pollution of the river Tiber, which runs through Rome.

The biographer Suetonius, who was born around 70AD, tells us the river had been “filled with rubbish and narrowed by jutting buildings” before emperor Augustus (63BC-14AD) took action to clean it up.

Bad policies had polluted the river’s waters. For example, the emperor Nero (37–68AD) dumped huge amounts of rotten grain into the river.

The Roman poet Juvenal (of the first and second centuries AD) referred to the Tiber as a “gushing sewer”. And the physician Galen (129–216AD) said the Tiber was so polluted that fish caught there were not safe to eat.

Measures to protect the environment

The Greeks and Romans introduced various measures to prevent or reduce environmental harm.

In 420BC, for example, the Athenians introduced a law to protect the river Ilissus:

It is forbidden to soak the coats [of animals] in the Ilissus above the sanctuary of Heracles and to tan them. It is forbidden to throw the residue of the laundering into the river.

Modern researchers think this measure might have helped the Ilissus stay clean. That’s because authors writing in the fourth century BC (after the law was introduced) describe the Ilissus as a pure and beautiful river.

Other measures to reduce pollution included banning public defecation and urination. Bans on washing clothes or throwing rubbish into rivers were also common. But it’s unlikely the public adhered to these restrictions all the time.

Some rulers also tried to do public works such as building sewers and aqueducts to clean up pollution.

For example, the emperor Nerva, who ruled 96–98AD, undertook a series of construction projects to make Rome cleaner and healthier.

Sextus Julius Frontinus (35–103AD), manager of Rome’s aqueducts, tells us that thanks to Nerva:

the appearance of the city is clean and altered; the air is purer; and the causes of the unwholesome atmosphere, which gave the air of the city so bad a name in former times, are now removed.

Damaging the environment harms our health

Sometime in the late first or early second century AD, the Roman aristocrat and lawyer Pliny the Younger (61/62–112AD) wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan, who ruled 98–117AD. He complained about a public health issue in the city of Amastris, in modern Turkey:

Among the chief features of Amastris, Sir, is a long street of great beauty. Throughout the length of this, however, there runs what is called a stream, but is in fact a filthy sewer, a disgusting eyesore which gives off a noxious stench. The health and appearance alike of the city will benefit if it is covered in, and with your permission this shall be done.

The emperor replied that he was happy for this to be done:

There is every reason, my dear Pliny, to cover the water which you say flows through the city of Amastris, if it is a danger to health while it remains uncovered.

This story shows the ancients were aware that the health of the land, air and water is intertwined with human health. So when the environment is in an unhealthy state, this is also damaging for our health and wellbeing.

The modern world can learn from antiquity

The message from the ancient Greeks and Romans is as true today for us as it was for them. As humanity grapples with multiple environmental crises, it’s worth reflecting on this age-old knowledge.

The bottom line is, keeping the planet in a healthy state is good not just for the environment, but also for ourselves.

In a modern world where stories about pollution and related environmental problems frequently appear in the news, this message of the ancients is well worth remembering.

Konstantine Panegyres 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. ‘The waters become corrupt, the air infected’: here’s how Ancient Greeks and Romans grappled with environmental damage – https://theconversation.com/the-waters-become-corrupt-the-air-infected-heres-how-ancient-greeks-and-romans-grappled-with-environmental-damage-236680

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

Peter Dutton has been receiving a good many political breaks recently – Anthony Albanese’s new house is the latest icing on the cake. Although the Coalition is not expected to win next year’s election, presently it looks placed to do well.

So, as they prepare their campaign, what issue would Liberal strategists be most afraid of? My bet would be the looming battle over industrial relations. This could be more dangerous for Dutton than his risky gamble to promote nuclear energy.

With the election set to be fought largely around the cost of living, the government will reach for workplace issues as a potential lifeline. Industrial relations is made for a ferocious Labor scare campaign that the Coalition will find extremely difficult to counter.

As the opposition keeps saying, the Albanese government has delivered extensively to the union movement’s demands, especially on behalf of low-paid workers.

It has supported wage rises and will itself pay for some (notably for child care staff).

It has legislated to protect the rights of casuals, provide minimum standards for gig workers, and stop employers using labour hire arrangements to undercut wages.

Wage theft has been outlawed; domestic violence leave granted; the “right to disconnect” introduced.

Most importantly, multi-employer bargaining – hated by parts of business – has been facilitated, and this is sure to spread in coming years.

You don’t need much of a head for political tactics to devise Labor’s campaign.

It would go something like this: “The Albanese government has advocated for higher wages and given you all these benefits and protections, that the Liberals will strip back. Remember the Howard government’s WorkChoices.”

This could be potent among the lower-to-middle income workers in the outer suburbs, to whom Dutton is pitching.

As in most areas, the opposition says it will release its industrial relations policy closer to the election.

So far, it has promised to restore the Australian Building and Construction Commission (the “cop on the beat”) and the Registered Organisations Commission (a regulatory body governing unions and employer organisations).

It has also said it will repeal the right to disconnect, review the labour hire law, change the definition of casual employment and reduce the regulatory burden on small business.

The Coalition is under pressure from business to agree to a wish list to tilt the playing field back towards employers. For instance this week, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry called for the definition of small businesses to be expanded, so that more firms would benefit from having fewer workplace burdens imposed on them.

The opposition must decide how many of the Labor changes it will pledge to roll back or alter. At the same time, it will have to try to reassure workers it doesn’t have a hidden agenda. Both will be difficult.

On the roll back, employers will be pressing for the Coalition to go further than is politically wise. There are senior voices within the Coalition urging caution. But whatever Dutton says he won’t do is likely to be met with scepticism by a distrustful electorate.

Regardless of the policy it announces, there’ll be no way the Coalition can avoid becoming a big target on industrial relations.

Moreover, its argument that the government’s IR changes are bad for the economy will be hard to prosecute because it will be some time before their full impact can be judged. The government itself has an independent review of its initial measures, due to report in January. That will allow it to either claim everything is hunky dory, or offer some fine-tuning.

Much of the nitty-gritty of the IR contest will be carried by Workplace Relations Minister Murray Watt and opposition spokeswoman Michaelia Cash.

Watt, from the left, who recently took over the portfolio from Tony Burke, is an articulate straight-talker. Formerly agriculture minister, he has been one of Albanese’s best-performing ministers.

Cash, who like Watt is in the Senate, has plenty of experience: she was industrial relations minister in the Morrison government. But she often comes across as shrill and reliant on slogans. In this election, the easy IR slogans will be on the government’s side. Cash is also media shy – she hates not knowing what’s coming.

On the ABC on Monday, Watt rehearsed the government’s lines. Declaring IR “a key defining topic and contrast between the two major parties of government”, he said: “What this comes down to is, at a time when Australians are already doing it tough, Peter Dutton and the Coalition will make things harder for Australians. It’s the worst possible time to be cutting pay and conditions.”

While the government is holding the upper hand on the politics of IR, the issue is not without  considerable problems for industrial and political Labor.

Installing an administrator into the crime-riddled CFMEU was a correct and inevitable step. But the action has triggered a reaction among some militants in the union movement who are now splitting from the ACTU.

This week a group from the National Building Industry Group of unions met to discuss tactics.

The rebels, who plan to hold a “Trade Unions for Democracy Summit” in December and are threatening to fund independent candidates (which in practice probably means Greens), hit out at both the government and the ACTU.

“The forced administration [of the CFMEU] driven by Albanese, Murray Watt, and Tony Burke, and supported by the ACTU, has opened the door for a sustained attack on construction workers,” they said in a statement.

The boss of the Electrical Trades Union, Michael Wright,  told The Australian: “There is a deep rupture  across the labour movement.”  He said the consequences were likely to be “far reaching”.

While the rebels are only a sliver of the wider union movement, with the ACTU retaining overwhelming support, the split is disruptive and difficult to handle both within the movement and for the Labor party. The latter will be some millions of dollars short for its campaign, and the Greens’ coffers are likely to be boosted.

Cleaning up the CFMEU – and the construction industry more generally – was not on the government’s “to do” list when it came to power. It was a reaction to revelations in the Nine media of the appalling conduct within this rogue union.

But the government will seek to turn it to its advantage in its IR campaigning, using it as an example of being willing to stand up to thuggery.

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. Grattan on Friday: whatever his policy, Peter Dutton will be a big target on workplace relations – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-whatever-his-policy-peter-dutton-will-be-a-big-target-on-workplace-relations-241568