Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

My recent research trip to the Thai town of Mae Sot on the Myanmar border coincided with two big events. The heavens opened for several days with the first big rains of the monsoon season. And across the border, the Myanmar opposition forces took control of Lashio, a major military stronghold and key city on Myanmar’s trade route with China.

On July 25, the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), an ethnic opposition group, claimed it had captured the Northeast Regional Military Command of the Myanmar junta. It is the first time one of the 14 regional military commands around the country has fallen to an ethnic armed group in more than 50 years of military rule.

The rebels claim the regional commander was also captured – the highest ranking military officer to be apprehended. And they said more than 4,000 troops had been arrested.

This is an historic and humiliating setback for Myanmar’s military junta in its war with the opposition forces, which are comprised of ethnic armed groups and the People’s Defence Force, drawn from the democratic opposition.

But will this offensive be a turning point? While there remains no clear end point for the civil war, the opposition continues to make significant gains. This is giving them important resources, a significant morale boost and leverage in any future negotiations.

For Myanmar’s neighbours, particularly China, there is also increasing concern over the instability in the region and growing impatience with the junta.

What is happening in Shan State?

The recent successes by the opposition forces in northern Shan State are part of the second phase of Operation 1027. This operation was launched by the Three Brotherhood Alliance – a group of ethnic rebel armies – in October.

In January, after the alliance took over the cyber-scamming centre of Laukkai on the Chinese border, China brokered a ceasefire between opposing forces.

In June, however, the military attacked rebel targets from the air and hostilities resumed. The alliance began rapidly advancing across Shan State and neighbouring Mandalay region, taking control of key towns such as Nawnghkio and Mogok, a lucrative hub for ruby production.

The biggest prize of the offensive, however, was the military’s Northeast Regional Command, which oversees the junta’s operations across Shan State. While some fighting continues, the MNDAA is tightening the noose around the remaining junta forces and setting up its own civil administration.

The rebels also took control of the local prison and released 200 political prisoners, including Tun Tun Hein, who was deputy speaker of the Myanmar parliament’s lower house and a key figure in Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party before the coup.

A map of the area taken by the opposition in the first and second phases of the offensive demonstrates the extent of their dominance across the state.

What is China’s role in the conflict?

China plays a somewhat ambiguous role in Myanmar’s conflicts and the extent of its influence, while undoubtedly significant, is difficult to gauge. It managed to negotiate a ceasefire between the combatants in January, but appeared to be unable to prevent both sides from returning to hostilities.

Myanmar’s mountainous borders with China and Thailand have always been unregulated grey zones with opium growing, methamphetamine production, gambling and online scam centres, along with more traditional natural resource extraction.

This has provided huge opportunities for the armed insurgent groups – as well as the military and its cronies – to accumulate wealth to fund their operations.

There is a complex interplay between the various ethnic militias in the region and their relationships with China.

The United Wa State Army, for instance, has a 30,000-strong military force and runs two autonomous border regions in Shan State, supported by China. During the rebel alliance’s attacks on Lashio, the army entered the city “to protect residents, its liaison office, and properties it owns”, although it made clear it received permission from both the junta and the MNDAA and that it wouldn’t be taking sides.

While the ethnic armed groups in Myanmar are relatively independent, rather than Chinese pawns, the recent movements by the Wa indicate that China may be losing confidence in the ability of the junta to manage and control its northern frontiers. As a result, China may be deploying its ethnic proxy army instead.

What happens now?

On July 22, the junta announced that coup leader Senior General Min Aung Hlaing would become Myanmar’s interim president, replacing Myint Swe due to health issues. This is in addition to his responsibilities as commander in chief of the military, prime minister and chair of the ruling State Administration Council.

A few days later, the junta again extended Myanmar’s state of emergency by six months in order to “prepare valid and accurate ballots” for elections. However, these proposed elections will likely never happen. Even if a vote of some sort is held, it will be so bereft of legitimacy it will be rendered meaningless.

The last democratic elections, held in November 2020 before the February 2021 coup, were a fair representation of the electorate’s will. Voters comprehensively rejected any role for the military in running the country.

As the monsoon gradually shifts from Myanmar’s southern lowlands to the mountainous northern border regions, opposition forces will endeavour to solidify their control over Shan State.

There is very little chance that negotiations alone will resolve the conflict in Myanmar – the military leadership and Min Aung Hlaing have too much to lose, unless their hand is forced.

As a result, it’s up to the international community to assist the pro-democracy forces however they can – militarily, diplomatically and through humanitarian aid – so the country can finally achieve a lasting peace.

Adam Simpson 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. Myanmar’s junta has suffered a humiliating military defeat. Could it be a turning point in the war? – https://theconversation.com/myanmars-junta-has-suffered-a-humiliating-military-defeat-could-it-be-a-turning-point-in-the-war-236142

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael B. Charles, Associate Professor, Management Discipline, Faculty of Business, Arts and Law, Southern Cross University

Imagine, for a moment, you are a Roman soldier at war. In the midst of battle, you are confronted with an enormous and loudly trumpeting creature you’ve never seen before.

It appears to have sharp spears protruding from either side of its mouth and a bizarre, powerful limb extending from its face. Armed men ride atop this towering beast, which, running toward you at speed, is crushing your comrades underfoot.

Roman soldiers were reportedly terrified the first time they faced war elephants on the battlefield. It’s hard not to feel bad for the elephants too, as using animals this way in war is undoubtedly cruel.

But Rome’s enemies, particularly various Hellenistic kingdoms and the Carthaginians, did indeed use war elephants. So, how did they acquire and deploy them in battle – and how did the Romans respond?

Alexander encountered war elephants in India

Alexander the Great brought elephants back to the Mediterranean world after campaigning in northern India, where elephants had been used for centuries in warfare – and would be used for centuries to come.

Alexander had fought against an elephant-equipped army at the Battle of the Hydaspes (in modern-day Pakistan) in 326 BCE and had obviously been impressed by the animals. So began the ancient Mediterranean world’s (rather misguided) fascination with war elephants.

Many of the so-called Successor kingdoms that arose in the Hellenistic world in the wake of Alexander’s death in 323 BCE – such as the Seleucids of Syria, the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Antigonids of Macedonia – enthusiastically incorporated the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) into their ranks. So equipped, they often went to war with each other.

Most of these elephants had to be imported from friendly Indian kingdoms, although the Ptolemies of Egypt eventually secured African elephants from beyond the southern borders of their kingdom after their rivals, the Seleucids, cut them off from Asian supplies.

One Greek leader who equipped his army with war elephants was King Pyrrhus of Epirus, who eventually went to war with the then-emerging power of Rome – and reportedly introduced them to war elephants.

Romans meet elephants

Pyrrhus – from whose name we get the phrase “Pyrrhic victory”, meaning to win the battle but at great cost – met the Romans several times in combat.

His army beat the Romans at Heraclea in southern Italy not far from Tarentum in 280 BCE, where Pyrrhus’ elephants supposedly terrified the Roman cavalry. He defeated the Romans again in Asculum 279 BCE (this was the battle that gave us the phrase “Pyrrhic victory”).

Pyrrhus later met the Romans at Beneventum (southern Italy) in 275 BCE. This time, the Romans were better prepared. Though initially successful in forcing back the Roman forces, the elephants – eventually tormented by the missile weapons of the Romans – ran back and stampeded Pyrrhus’ own men.

This revealed perhaps the biggest weakness of using elephants in battle: they could be as much danger to their own side as to the enemy.

Hannibal, the Carthaginians and war elephants

The Romans next faced off against the growing Carthaginian threat coming from north Africa in the Punic Wars.

The Carthaginians had no ready access to Asian elephants, so they procured their elephants more locally, such as in the Atlas Mountains, spanning Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.

This population of elephants is now gone. They were once assumed to be African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis), smaller than both the Asian elephant and the very large African bush or savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana). After looking at a variety of evidence in my research, I believe these north African elephants were either bush elephants or a subspecies that closely resembled them.

The Carthaginians made some use of elephants during the First Punic War, such as in the battle at Bagradas River (255 BCE) in modern Tunisia. Here, around 100 elephants helped to crush a Roman expeditionary force. But at a later battle at Panormus (250 BCE) in Sicily, the Carthaginians’ elephants characteristically turned on their own troops.

During the Second Punic War, the famed Carthaginian general Hannibal Barca famously took 37 elephants across the Rhône and the Alps into northern Italy.

Hannibal’s elephants were posted towards the wings of his formation at the Battle of the Trebbia River against the Romans in 218 BCE. The degree to which the elephants contributed to Hannibal’s victory here is uncertain, but they almost all died during the subsequent harsh winter.

Hannibal seems to have received more elephants to continue the fight in the Italian peninsula after his rout of the Roman legions at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BCE.

But Rome had an ace up her sleeve: the young Roman general Scipio.

Scipio was born Publius Cornelius Scipio but later, after his African campaign, became known as Scipio Africanus. He had been successful against the Carthaginian forces in Spain, where Rome’s enemy had used elephants (albeit in small numbers).

Rome’s plan was to send Scipio to Africa with a large expeditionary force, and draw Hannibal out of Italy to defend his home turf.

Hannibal took the bait and rebuilt his armies in readiness for the ultimate showdown. Among his recruits were at least 80 elephants, likely captured only recently, and thus unlikely to be as well trained as his earlier ones.

Scipio and Hannibal’s forces met at Zama (in what is now Tunisia) in 202 BCE. Hannibal drew up his 80 or so elephants in front of his battle line.

But Scipio was prepared. He had arranged for passages or pathways to be set up between the heavy infantry of the legions.

These passages were filled with highly mobile missile-armed light infantry. When the elephants charged, the light infantry ran to the rear or clung to the sides of the legionary formations to reveal the passages.

The elephants were ushered through these passages while being assailed with the light infantry’s missile weapons.

Some of the maddened beasts supposedly fell back on the two wings of Hannibal’s force, causing considerable confusion and damage to their own cavalry.

Elephants are a double-edged sword

Overall, war elephants in the ancient Mediterranean world could be useful against infantry – and especially horses – that had not experienced them before.

But once that initial fear was mastered, elephants often proved to be a double-edged sword, trampling their own side’s men.

Elephants also require prodigious amounts of water and feed, and slowed down the armies that travelled with them.

This is likely why the Romans, who relied heavily on the mobility of their troops, decided against incorporating elephants into their own ranks.

Michael B. Charles 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. Romans were terrified by war elephants at first – but eventually found a way to defeat them in battle – https://theconversation.com/romans-were-terrified-by-war-elephants-at-first-but-eventually-found-a-way-to-defeat-them-in-battle-234484

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Senior Lecturer of Urban Mobility, Public Safety & Disaster Risk, UNSW Sydney

ASIO has raised Australia’s national terrorism threat level from “possible” to “probable”.

In Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s announcement, he said “probable does not mean inevitable, and it does not mean there is intelligence about an imminent threat or danger.”

Instead, the elevated threat level is largely because more Australians are “embracing extremist ideologies”, indicating an increased risk of ideological terrorism and politically motivated violence.

How does ASIO decide what the threat level should be? And what do these decisions mean for the public?

How is the threat level decided?

Australia’s National Terrorism Threat Advisory System is a five-tier, colour-coded scale that informs the public about the likelihood of a terrorist act occurring. It’s sorted into certain (red), expected (orange), probable (yellow), possible (blue) and not expected (green). The threat level had been lowered to “possible” in November 2022.

Probable means “credible intelligence, assessed by our security agencies, indicates that individuals or groups continue to possess the intent and capability to conduct a terrorist attack in Australia”.

Since the introduction of this five-tier system, the threat level has been regularly reviewed and revised a few times based on ongoing intelligence assessments and changes in the security environment.

In September 2014, Australia’s terrorism threat level was elevated for the first time since the system was introduced in 2002. This was because of the increasing threat from Islamic State and the potential for domestic terrorist attacks.

Less than two weeks later, a radicalised youth attacked police in Victoria in a violent act of terrorism. The recent announcement is the first time the threat level has been elevated in a decade.

Where do we sit globally?

A look at the Global Terrorism Database reveals 120 incidents of terror attacks in Australia over the period 1970–2020. Among them, 18 cases have led to loss of life, with a total of 27 fatalities.

Currently, Australia ranks 57th based on the Global Terrorism Index (GTI) with a score of 1.48. Lower scores and lower positions in the rankings mean more favourable and safer conditions.

On top of this list are Burkina Faso (8.571), Israel (8.143), Mali (7.998), Pakistan (7.916) and Syria (7.890). This rating evaluates countries based on the number of terrorist incidents, fatalities, injuries and hostages over a five-year period.

Australia’s position based on this scale has varied over time. Statistics show over the past decade or so, Australia’s global position has got marginally worse.

Why does this matter to me?

The prime minister announces a change in the terrorism threat level to ensure the public is aware of the current risk environment. Such information allows individuals and communities to take appropriate precautions and be more vigilant in their daily activities.

Research has shown that public awareness of the terrorism threat level fosters a culture of preparedness and resilience. When communities are informed, they can engage in proactive measures such as emergency planning and participating in local and organisational safety programs. However, this mustn’t lead to disproportionate levels of anxiety.

Effective public involvement often includes reporting suspicious activities, staying informed about potential threats, and participating in community safety initiatives. The “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign in the United States, for example, emphasises the importance of public vigilance in identifying and reporting potential terrorist threats.

Public vigilance has, in fact, proven instrumental in preventing several terrorist attacks worldwide. In 2010, street vendors in New York City noticed a suspicious vehicle emitting smoke in Times Square. Their report led authorities to discover and defuse a car bomb, potentially saving many lives.

It’s not only the public who play a crucial role in preventing terrorist attacks. Businesses and private security providers are equally important. Venues that host large numbers of people, such as sports arenas, concert halls and shopping malls, can be prime targets for terrorism.

Their vigilance, proportional to the existing threat levels, can provide a significant layer of defence. A prominent example is the story of Richard Jewell. Working as a security guard during the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Jewell noticed an unattended backpack under a bench, which contained a bomb. His quick actions in alerting authorities and helping to evacuate the area saved many lives.

While it’s the job of Australian intelligence and law enforcement agencies to detect, combat and neutralise terrorist threats, the threat of terrorism is complex and often hard to detect. This is especially the case when it involves “lone actors” who are not part of a known terrorist organisation. Community-level vigilance and awareness add an additional layer of protection.

As such, keeping the public informed and engaged in national security is important, even though the elevated threat level is not a cause for high levels of concern.

What now?

Community awareness requires a nuanced approach rather than an alarmist one. Extreme ideologies increasingly intersect with one another and blend with social media-fuelled personal grievances, forming a complex and dynamic threat landscape.

However, the intertwining of political ideology and personal grievance is not new. These elements have always been interconnected to varying degrees.

One of the complex issues to consider is the low level of trust in government among fringe groups. New announcements regarding elevated threat levels can potentially exacerbate polarisation and backlash, as seen in other countries such as the United Kingdom.

In Monday’s announcement, ASIO chief Mike Burgess said the organisation is “seeing spikes in political polarisation and intolerance”. It’s therefore crucial to communicate security updates in a way that builds trust rather than exacerbates division.

Preventing the stigmatisation of certain population groups is also important. The focus on Islamist and far-right extremism alike should be handled carefully to avoid creating “suspect communities”. Counterterrorism measures should not unjustly target or marginalise specific groups. That can lead to further alienation and radicalisation.

Milad Haghani receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Ramon Spaaij receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. ASIO has now declared the terrorist threat to Australia is ‘probable’. What does this mean? – https://theconversation.com/asio-has-now-declared-the-terrorist-threat-to-australia-is-probable-what-does-this-mean-236131

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charles Livingstone, Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University

The federal government is due to respond to a parliamentary inquiry into online gambling.

Last year the inquiry, led by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy, recommended phasing out gambling advertising over three years leading to a total ban.

But there are reports the government will stop at a partial ban. This could take gambling off social media and stop ads from airing within an hour (before and after) sporting matches.

How effective would a partial ban be? History shows it may not be enough.

Advertising normalises gambling

Advertising is one way industries normalise harmful commodities such as gambling. They also use marketing, such as sponsorships, celebrity endorsements and charitable donations.

These same tactics have been employed by alcohol, tobacco and gambling businesses.

The effect on young people can be profound. Numerous studies linked tobacco advertising with young people’s uptake of smoking. Similar research has shown young people exposed to gambling marketing are also more likely to take up gambling and experience harm from it.

Most parents are aware of this, which is why so many Australians – at least 70% – oppose gambling advertising.

The inquiry

Murphy launched the online gambling inquiry in September 2022. The committee expressed concern about the “increasing reach of online gambling platforms into Australians’ lives”, and especially the impact on children and young people.

When the report was published in June 2023, the committee – whose members represented every party and the crossbench – made 31 recommendations.

These included four steps to phase out gambling advertising altogether.

Limits on ads would increase over a three-year period, starting immediately. Online advertising restrictions would be introduced, alongside rules for radio and stadiums. For example, one phase could ban ads on commercial radio during school drop-off and pick-up times. Another phase could ban ads being shown one hour either side of sports coverage.

The Murphy reforms would also prohibit on-field gambling signage and logos on sporting uniforms.

There would be bans on inducements, such as offers of “free money” to encourage account holders to make bets.

The final phase is total: it bans all advertising and sponsorship by gambling organisations.

It is not yet clear which elements of the committee’s advertising recommendations the government will endorse. But if it chooses to only partially adopt some of the recommendation’s phases, it leaves major loopholes for continued gambling promotion.

Could a partial ban work? Lessons from tobacco

History shows wherever there is an opportunity to promote their product, harmful commodity industries will exploit it.

Tobacco companies employed this strategy until the government torpedoed it by introducing comprehensive bans on advertising, sponsorship and marketing.

Australia’s initial response to the recognition of tobacco’s harms focused on a concerted campaign to ban broadcast advertising. Between 1973 and 1976, tobacco advertising was phased out.

However, the tobacco industry continued to pursue incidental advertising – such as advertisements at sports grounds and on player’s uniforms.

Denormalisation was key to successful campaigns to reduce harm from tobacco. This involved restricting and then banning advertising, sponsorship and other marketing – along with restricting where tobacco could be consumed.

The lessons of tobacco make it clear that if the Murphy recommendations are only partially adopted, gambling businesses will increase spending on anything still allowed.

Do sporting codes need the money?

The pushback from sporting codes and broadcasters recalls the time when tobacco advertising was restricted.

Sporting codes including the AFL and NRL – alongside some media companies – argue the sky will fall in if gambling revenue declines.

Broadcasters sell premium advertising slots during popular sports coverage and pay a premium to sporting codes for the rights to do so.

But sporting codes and broadcasters didn’t collapse when tobacco advertising was restricted. They are unlikely to do so because of a gambling ad ban. And Murphy’s recommendations address these concerns through the proposed phase-in.

Advertising bans have been effective in other countries. In Spain, the gambling regulator reported no dire consequences for broadcasters and sports teams when ads were banned.

Gambling ads have also been banned in Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands. And broadcast ads have been banned in Germany. Celebrity endorsements have been prohibited in the Netherlands and Canada.

Where to from here

It’s possible reports of the government’s intentions are incorrect. The government says it is still consulting and will make an announcement in the coming weeks. Certainly, the Murphy report recommendations require serious consideration.

It’s not yet clear how the government proposes to deal with the 30 other recommendations contained in the report. These argue for:

• a national online gambling regulator
• more research funding and access to de-identified gambling data
• international agreements to regulate online gambling.

Action to reduce the “gamblification” of video games is also recommended.

Adopting only some of the recommendations doesn’t do enough to stop the promotion of gambling and will continue to expose young people to its life-destroying harms.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, visit https://gamblershelp.com.au/get-help/ or call 1800 858 858.

Charles Livingstone has received funding from the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, the (former) Victorian Gambling Research Panel, and the South Australian Independent Gambling Authority (the funds for which were derived from hypothecation of gambling tax revenue to research purposes), from the Australian and New Zealand School of Government and the Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education, and from non-government organisations for research into multiple aspects of poker machine gambling, including regulatory reform, existing harm minimisation practices, and technical characteristics of gambling forms. He has received travel and co-operation grants from the Alberta Problem Gambling Research Institute, the Finnish Institute for Public Health, the Finnish Alcohol Research Foundation, the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Committee, the Turkish Red Crescent Society, and the Problem Gambling Foundation of New Zealand. He was a Chief Investigator on an Australian Research Council funded project researching mechanisms of influence on government by the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries. He has undertaken consultancy research for local governments and non-government organisations in Australia and the UK seeking to restrict or reduce the concentration of poker machines and gambling impacts, and was a member of the Australian government’s Ministerial Expert Advisory Group on Gambling in 2010-11. He is a member of the Lancet Public Health Commission into gambling, and of the World Health Organisation expert group on gambling and gambling harm. He made a submission to and appeared before the HoR Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs inquiry into online gambling and its impacts on those experiencing gambling harm.

– ref. The government is under pressure to ban gambling ads. History shows half-measures don’t work – https://theconversation.com/the-government-is-under-pressure-to-ban-gambling-ads-history-shows-half-measures-dont-work-235592

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bhavna Middha, ARC DECRA and Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University

In recent years, the question of what to do with our household waste has become more pressing. In 2018, China stopped accepting many types of recyclable plastic waste from Australia. Four years later, Australia’s main soft plastics recycling scheme, REDcycle, collapsed, leaving behind big stockpiles. Food scraps or non-recyclable plastics in recycling bins slash the value of these waste streams.

This year, Australia’s second most populous state, Victoria, is trying to improve matters with a proposed waste system using four bins across all 79 council areas and its alpine resorts. The state government is seeking your feedback on these changes and how they would be implemented. Our research suggests there’s much to like in these changes, but there are also big sticking points.

What would the new system look like?

Many Victorians will be familiar with the first two bins:

• general rubbish (goes to landfill)
• mixed recycling (goes to various recyclers)

But the two other streams will be new to many, namely:

• glass recycling (goes to glass recyclers)
• food organics and garden organics (goes to councils or other providers to be composted or mulched)

Some councils have already trialled or rolled out all four bins to their residents.

Why would more bins help?

While recycling and reducing waste enjoy widespread support, there’s often a gap between how we feel and what actually happens.

For instance, a survey of 1,000 Australians this year found 89% see recycling as important and 74% of us believe our own recycling practices are good or very good.

But in Victoria, the actual rate of recycling is only 45%. That means more than half of all recyclable materials end up in other waste streams – mainly landfill.

Worse, our waste streams are very often contaminated. If there are meat scraps in the recycling bin, or polystyrene in the food waste bin, the entire truckload may have no recycling or composting value.

Will the government’s proposal improve the situation?

There’s much to like in Victoria’s plan.

Standardised bin colours will help people recognise waste streams even if they move houses.

There will be much-needed clarity over what to do with a pizza box – you will be able to recycle them, if they are shaken out.

Another big plus is proposing to let households throw soft plastics into mixed recycling. However, under the proposal, councils could decide not to offer this service. This is because only some councils have access to soft-plastic recycling at present, which is not ideal.

Glass-only recycling bins will help avoid the common problem of broken bottles contaminating paper in the mixed recycling bin. One issue is Victoria has only just introduced a Container Deposit Scheme offering 10 cents per eligible glass container, which may compete with the glass bin at home, which would not be eligible.

Big gaps remain

There’s not enough focus on reducing waste, especially plastic, in the first place.

Plastic production is soaring and our current plastic recycling options are limited. Many types of plastic can’t be recycled. The recycling process steadily degrades plastics, making all plastic into landfill eventually. It would be far better to focus on cutting demand for virgin plastics.

It would also be better to focus on reusing glass, rather than recycling it, as recycling glass is energy intensive.

Apartment residents also look to miss out. Victoria’s proposed new system would only apply to residents with access to council rubbish services or hard waste collection. Most apartments are privately serviced, meaning they have to contract waste contractors directly. This is expensive, and can lead to issues such as littering

Then there is the issue of compostable kitchen caddy liners. Many of us use these liners to make our food and organic waste bins less gross. But the Victorian plan would ban compostable liners due to concerns over contamination. The concern is real – these liners vary a lot and cannot be guaranteed to actually decompose.

If the ban happens, it’s likely some people will put food waste in their general waste bin to avoid the yuck factor, just as residents did after a similar ban took effect in the United Kingdom.

On the plus side, the proposed changes give clarity over “compostable” and “biodegradable” liners and coffee cups – they cannot be put in the food and organic waste bin.

What should we do?

Redesigning a waste system is hard. Here are some ideas to make the Victorian proposal even better:

• The new system should be ubiquitous. The four options should be available on streets, at home, at work and in public places.

• Collection sites for the container deposit scheme should be located next to supermarkets to boost convenience and as a backup for housing unable to accommodate glass bins.

• Soft plastics recycling should be rolled out statewide. This should be paired with a gradual phase out of hard or impossible to recycle materials and products such as polystyrene and composite materials.

• Regulate compostable bin liners so only genuinely biodegradable liners can be sold. In the interim, replace these liners with paper.

• Give apartments the same waste options as residents of freestanding houses to avoid further disadvantaging apartment residents. Design better bin-sharing systems with robust ways of ensuring waste streams don’t get contaminated.

From Victoria to the nation

Our research suggests consistency and standardisation is central to recycling success – not just in Victoria but nationally. At present, there’s great variation across states and territories.

South Australia and New South Wales have three bins, one each for landfill, mixed recycling and green waste. But neither has plans for a glass bin, as South Australia has had a container scheme for 45 years and NSW for around seven.

In Queensland, most households have two bins. Many councils are now rolling out a green and food waste bin. Queensland does not have a glass bin but has made wine and spirit bottles eligible for its container scheme in an Australian first.

To really make our system work, we need federal standardisation – just as New Zealand has done.

Bhavna Middha receives funding from the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Early Career Researcher Award programme.

Ralph Horne receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Kingston and Hobson Bay Councils, and the Municipal Association of Victoria

– ref. Soft plastics, glass bins and bans on compostable liners: will Victoria’s new recycling proposal be a step forward? – https://theconversation.com/soft-plastics-glass-bins-and-bans-on-compostable-liners-will-victorias-new-recycling-proposal-be-a-step-forward-235513

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sumudu Mallawaarachchi, Research Fellow, ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, University of Wollongong

Screen time is one of the top worries for Australian parents. In a national February 2021 poll by the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne, parents rated it as the number-one health issue facing their children.

Our previous research also shows parents feel guilty about screens, even though they are all around us.

At the same time, guidance on what parents should be doing is confusing. According to the World Health Organization and the Australian government, young children’s screen time should be limited to no more than one hour per day for two- to five-year-olds, while children under two shouldn’t be exposed to screens at all.

But the UK Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health has said it is “impossible to give comprehensive national guidance or limits” because the effect of screens depends so much on context and the evidence is uncertain.

This made us wonder what else matters for children’s healthy development beyond “screen time”. So we gathered all available evidence on the context in which children use screens.

Our research

In our new research, published in JAMA Pediatrics, we reviewed 100 studies on the influence of screen use contexts on the cognitive (brain), social and emotional development in children from birth to five years. The screens included TV, computer games, smartphones and tablets.

These studies, published between 1978 and 2023, involved more than 176,000 children and their families from 30 countries. This included the United States, United Kingdom, China, Canada, Japan and Australia.

From this, we distilled four research-based ways parents can help their children use screens in healthy ways.

1. Make screen time together time

The studies we analysed show that if children and caregivers use screens together (also called co-viewing or co-use), it is beneficial for children’s thinking and reasoning skills. It is especially beneficial for their language development, including the number of words children know, their social communication skills, language understanding and processing.

When you watch together you can have conversations about what children are seeing or doing, help them understand the content (for example, “Why did Bluey hide that from Chilli?”) and draw connections to the real world (“How do you think Bingo is feeling right now?”). This can help their language development and learning.

2. Choose age-appropriate content that encourages play

Not all screen time is “bad” but we should consider the content and how it might influence a child’s development and behaviour.

Our research found a link between children watching age-inappropriate content and poor social skills and behaviour.

This highlights the importance of purposeful and high-quality screen experiences for children. Parents might ask themselves, what age or developmental stage is the content designed for and does it promote learning and development (for example, Sesame Street)?

Does it stimulate imaginative play and creativity in the real world (such as Playschool)? Does the content have positive social messages (Bluey)? Does it encourage movement like dancing to music (Ready, Steady, Wiggle)?

Avoiding violent content and content for mature audiences is key, and parents can use trustworthy guides like those from Common Sense Media if they have any doubts.

3. Don’t let screens get in the way of parent-child interactions

Mobile technologies mean children can use screens almost anywhere and anytime. The same is also true for parents.

Sometimes parents’ screens can interfere with conversations and connections between them and their child. In our study, children had better social skills, behaviour and ability to regulate their emotions when parents avoided screen use during interactions and routines like family meals.

When parents are distracted, it can affect the quality and quantity of interactions with their child.

4. Don’t have the TV on in the background

Children learn from their environments and background TV may divert a child’s attention from play and learning. Our research found children had better thinking, reasoning and language abilities when there was less background TV in the home.

This can also be because of less conversations between parents and children when there is a TV on in the background.

So, when the TV is not actively being watched, consider turning it off so children can play, listen and learn.

Jade Burley co-led the research described in this article.

Dylan Cliff receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Sumudu Mallawaarachchi 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. We reviewed 100 studies about little kids and screens. Here are 4 ways to help your child use them well – https://theconversation.com/we-reviewed-100-studies-about-little-kids-and-screens-here-are-4-ways-to-help-your-child-use-them-well-233564

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Daniel Angus, Professor of Digital Communication, Queensland University of Technology

Over the past 20 years, social media has transformed how we communicate, share information and form social connections. A federal parliamentary committee is currently trying to come to grips with these changes, and work out what to do about them.

The social media platforms where we spend so much time are powered by algorithms that exercise significant control over what content each user sees. But researchers know little specific detail about how they work, and how users experience them.

This is because social media companies closely guard information about their algorithms and operations. However, in recent weeks my colleagues and I announced a new national infrastructure project to help us find out what they are up to.

Our project, the Australian Internet Observatory, will investigate how social media users interact and the content on their feeds. But the federal government can also help by forcing tech companies to let some light in to the closed black boxes that power their business.

Resistance to data access

To understand the impact of social media, we need to first understand its inner workings. This requires observing the content shared by users and the algorithms that control what content is visible and recommended.

We must also observe how users interact with these platforms in an everyday setting.

This is important because social media is personal and increasingly ephemeral. Content differs for every user and quickly disappears from feeds.

This makes it challenging to draw general conclusions about the experiences of users and the broader impact of social media on society.

But the companies behind social media platforms refuse to let the public peer under the hood. They often cite privacy concerns and competitive interests as reasons for limiting data access.

These concerns are possibly valid. But they are often cynically deployed. And they should not preclude the possibility of more transparent and ethical research data access.

As a result, my colleagues and I have had to be inventive to gain insights into the inner workings of social media. We use methods such as scraping public data, platform audits and other forensic methods.

However, these methods are often limited and fraught with legal risk.

The Australian Internet Observatory

In the absence of direct platform data access, we are also using other methods, such as data donation, to understand how social media platforms operate.

Data donation enables people to voluntarily share specific parts of their social media experience for independent study conducted under strict ethical guidelines. This provides invaluable insights while respecting user privacy and autonomy.

Two data donation projects have already improved our understanding of internet search and targeted advertising in Australia.

Over the next four years we will rapidly expand the scope of data donation through the new Australian Internet Observatory. This research infrastructure will collect and analyse the data of users of social media platforms such as Facebook, TikTok and YouTube.

This will shed new light not just on on how people interact on social media platforms but also on what content they see and how it is distributed. This enhanced visibility will improve our knowledge of the algorithms that power social media platforms – and their impact on society.

For example, since its launch in 2021, the Australian Ad Observatory has amassed nearly 800,000 Facebook ad donations from over 2,100 ordinary Australians.

This significant corpus of Facebook advertising data has allowed us to uncover illegal gambling advertising and track the prevalence of scam ads. We have also used this evidence to inform inquiries into unhealthy food advertising and “green washing”.

More than just being able to uncover what forms of advertising are prevalent and to whom they are targeted, this work has also helped us uncover details about the algorithmic targeting process itself.

The Australian Internet Observatory aims to further deepen our understanding of this and similar processes across many more platforms. We will soon be inviting members of the public to donate data from their social media platforms to help us achieve this.

Legislating data access in Australia

The Australian government has attempted to regulate various aspects of the internet and social media.

The Online Safety Act and recently proposed legislation targeting misinformation and disinformation illustrate the government’s concern over the influence of digital platforms.

However, these regulatory efforts have been flawed. Crucially, they are often proceeding without a comprehensive understanding of the actual activities and interactions taking place online.

Without this knowledge, regulations risk being either too broad, impacting legitimate expression and access, or too narrow, failing to address the root causes of online harms.

To strengthen the efforts of researchers to understand the impact social media platforms are having on society, it’s essential the Australian government follow the lead of the European Union by passing legislation which compels social media platforms to provide access to crucial data.

This would allow increased platform accountability. It would also empower researchers to conduct vital, independent, public-interest research with the transparency and support necessary to safeguard our digital future.

Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery Projects DP200100519 ‘Using machine vision to explore Instagram’s everyday promotional cultures’, DP200101317 ‘Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation’, and Linkage Project LP190101051 ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is an Associate Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society, CE200100005.

– ref. Social media algorithms are shrouded in secrecy. We’re trying to change that – https://theconversation.com/social-media-algorithms-are-shrouded-in-secrecy-were-trying-to-change-that-236057

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

Around half of Australian aged care homes are losing money, prompting concerns about their long-term financial viability and the potential for closures – particularly in the country.

Aged care homes in rural and remote areas face many specific challenges. Servicing a dispersed population of older people in need, they tend to be smaller in scale, find it hard to attract and retain staff, and face high costs and ongoing losses.

And yet data shows the levels of care that these homes deliver, on average, exceed that of homes in the cities. Similarly, residents in rural homes rate their own experiences more highly.

Rural aged care has many financial challenges

Aged care homes in small rural towns and remote communities have long suffered high operating losses, averaging A$2,200 per resident a year in 2018–19. This compares to homes in the cities achieving a small financial surplus of around $2,500 per resident.

Five years later, the situation has deteriorated for homes across all regions. But the losses faced by rural and remote homes have blown out to $8,600 per resident a year, nearly twice that of their city counterparts at $4,500.

Contributing factors for these financial outcomes have been:

• lower occupancy rates
• greater reliance on high-cost agency nurses and personal care workers
• higher costs of providing food, laundry, cleaning and other everyday living services and accommodation.

Home closures in these small towns and villages cause significant disruptions for residents, their families and friends. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety heard that 40–60% of older people living in these areas already had to leave their lifelong communities and travel more than 100 kilometres to access residential care, compared to less than 5% of those who live in the major cities.

The health, care and other support workers and small businesses are also heavily affected when a major business, such as the only aged care home in town, closes.

Since October 2022, a change in how the government funds direct care has brought some relief for these homes. A portion of homes’ direct care funding is now paid as a fixed base amount, which is higher for those in rural and remote areas to account for their higher operating costs.

Remote homes are further protected from fluctuations in occupancy by having their fixed funding tied to the number of operational beds rather than the ever-changing number of residents.

Our analysis shows that during 2022–23, rural and remote homes still had the highest direct care costs but also had the highest revenue. This meant they produced, on average, a small positive margin for direct care services. This helped offset their ongoing losses from everyday living services and accommodation.

There have also been other government initiatives to support these homes, such as through business and workforce advisory services and direct financial aid.

Better staffing and resident experiences in rural and remote homes

While the overall financial viability of rural and remote homes has been a long-term concern, the actual level of care and residents’ experience of that care appears to be better than in the cities.

In October 2023, it became mandatory for aged care homes to deliver a level of care, on average, of at least 200 minutes of nursing and personal care to each of their residents on a daily basis, with 40 minutes to be provided by registered nurses.

The largest workforces in the economy are, of course, in the major cities and large regional centres. So it is reasonable to expect homes in those areas to be better positioned to attract the necessary workforce.

However, our analysis of the first half of the 2023–24 financial year shows that compliance rates get better – not worse – as you move further from the major centres.

For example, around 80% of homes in the very remote areas of Australia have met both their staffing targets, compared to about 35% in major cities.

To a certain extent, rural and remote homes are assisted to meet their targets by new funding arrangements. A registered nurse supplement is paid to smaller homes to ensure around-the-clock care.

However, they are also more likely to be run by government and not-for-profit providers, which the latest data shows have significantly outperformed for-profit providers in their level of delivery of nursing and personal care.

Residents in rural and remote areas also appear to rate the quality of their aged care homes more highly. Each year, current residents are surveyed about their experience living in their aged care home, including the staff knowledge, communication, care and food. These results are published as part of the Star Ratings.

The latest results, available on our dashboard tool show, on average, rural and remote homes score 3.8 out of 5 stars for resident experience. This is almost half a star higher than homes in major cities, which scored 3.4.

It is hoped that the new direct care funding arrangements will result in quality care across all regions. This would free up government capacity to provide more bespoke support to assist rural and remote homes and other specialist providers deliver continuity of access to care in their communities.

It would also enable the government to direct its policy focus to finally addressing the large and ongoing losses homes incur in delivering everyday living services and accommodation to their residents. While the Aged Care Taskforce recommendations are a good place to start in undertaking this reform agenda, the government is yet to respond to the proposals it received in December last year.

Michael Woods is Professor of Health Economics at the UTS Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation. He is Policy Advisor to the UTS Ageing Research Collaborative (UARC) and Chairs the Editorial Board of Australia’s Aged Care Sector. He is a Member of IHACP’s Aged Care Advisory Committee and undertakes policy research for the Commonwealth Government and the aged care sector. Michael was a former Deputy Chair of the Productivity Commission. He has no funding or other conflicts of interest related to this article.

Nicole Sutton receives funding from the Department of Health and Aged Care. She is currently the Treasurer of Palliative Care NSW.

– ref. Rural Australia delivers quality aged care, despite many homes doing it tough – https://theconversation.com/rural-australia-delivers-quality-aged-care-despite-many-homes-doing-it-tough-235783

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Duffy, Associate Professor, Monash Business School, Director Corporate Law, Organisation and Litigation Research Group (CLOL), Monash University

Few industries remain untouched by the potential for transformation through artificial intelligence (AI) – or at least the hype.

For business, the technology’s promise goes far beyond writing emails. It’s already being used to automate a wide range of business processes and interactions, coach employees, and even help doctors analyse medical data.

Competition between the various creators of AI models – including OpenAI, Meta, Anthropic and Google – will continue to drive rapid improvement.

We should expect these systems to get much smarter over time, which means we may begin to trust them with more and more responsibility.

The big question then becomes: what if something goes badly wrong? Who’s ultimately responsible for the decisions made by a machine?

My research has examined this very problem. Worryingly, our current legal frameworks may not be up to scratch.

We seem to have avoided catastrophe – so far

As any technology advances, it is inevitable things will go wrong. We’ve already seen this with the internet, which has delivered enormous benefits to society but also created a host of new problems – such as social media addiction, data breaches and the rise of cybercrime.

So far, we seem to have avoided a global internet catastrophe. Yet the CrowdStrike outage in July – which quickly brought businesses and many other services to a standstill – offered a timely reminder of just how reliant on technology we’ve become, and how quickly things can fall apart in such an interdependent web.

Read more:
One small update brought down millions of IT systems around the world. It’s a timely warning

Like the early internet, generative AI also promises society immense benefits, but is likely to have some significant and unpredictable downsides.

There’s certainly been no shortage of warnings. At the extreme, some experts believe out-of-control AI could pose a “nuclear-level” threat, and present a major existential risk for humanity.

One of the most obvious risks is that “bad actors” – such as organised crime groups and rogue nation states – use the technology to deliberately cause harm. This could include using deepfakes and other misinformation to influence elections, or to conduct cybercrimes en masse. We’ve already seen examples of such use.

Less dramatic, but still highly problematic, are the risks that arise when we entrust important tasks and responsibilities to AI, particularly in running businesses and other essential services. It’s certainly no stretch of the imagination to envisage a future global tech outage caused by computer code written and shipped entirely by AI.

When these AIs make autonomous decisions that inadvertently cause harm – whether financial loss or actual injury – whom do we hold liable?

Our laws aren’t prepared

Worryingly, our existing theories of legal liability may be ill-equipped for this new reality.

This is because apart from some product liability laws, current theories often require fault through an intention, or at least provable negligence by an individual.

A claim for negligence, for example, will require that the harm was reasonably foreseeable and actually caused by the conduct of the designer, manufacturer, seller or whoever else might be defendant in a particular case.

But as AI systems continue to advance and become more intelligent, they will almost certainly do things with outcomes that may not have been completely expected or anticipated by their manufacturers, designers, and so on.

This “emergent behaviour” could arise because the AI has become more intelligent than its creators. But it could also reflect self-protective and then self-interested drives or objectives by advanced AI systems.

My own research seeks to highlight a major looming problem in the way we assess liability.

In a hypothetical case in which an AI has caused significant harm, its human and corporate creators may be able to shield themselves from criminal or civil liability.

They could do this by arguing that the damage was not reasonably foreseeable by them, or that the AI’s unexpected actions broke the chain of causation between the conduct of the manufacturer and the loss, damage or harm suffered by the victims.

These would be possible defences to both criminal or civil actions.

So, too, would be the criminal defence argument that what’s called the “fault element” of an offence – intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence – of the AI system’s designer had not been matched by the necessary “physical element” – which in this instance would have been committed by a machine.

We need to prepare now

Market forces are already driving things rapidly forward in artificial intelligence. To where, exactly, is less certain.

It may turn out that the common law we have now, developed through the courts, is adaptable enough to deal with these new problems. But it’s also possible we’ll find current laws lacking, which could add a sense of injustice to any future disasters.

It will be important to make sure those corporations who have profited most from the development of AI are also made responsible for its costs and consequences if things go wrong.

Preparing to address this problem should be a priority for the courts and governments of all nation states, not just Australia.

Michael Duffy in 2017 received funding from the private legal profession to research issues in connection with access to justice.

– ref. The rise of the ‘machine defendant’ – who’s to blame when an AI makes mistakes? – https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-the-machine-defendant-whos-to-blame-when-an-ai-makes-mistakes-235019

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Jucker, Senior Lecturer in Atmospheric Science, UNSW Sydney

Australia’s south and east have seen freezing temperatures and wild weather this winter. At the same time, the continent as a whole – and the globe – have continued to warm.

What’s going on? As ever, it’s hard to pinpoint a single cause for weather events. But a key player is likely an event unfolding high above Antarctica, which itself may have been triggered by a heatwave at surface level on the frozen continent.

Here’s what’s happening – and what it might mean for the rest of this year’s weather.

When the stratosphere heats up

Out story begins in the cold air over Antarctica. July temperatures in the stratosphere, the layer of air stretching between altitudes of around 10 and 50 kilometres, are typically around –80°C.

The winds are also very strong, averaging about 300 kilometres per hour in winter. These cold, fast winds loop around above the pole in what is called the stratospheric polar vortex.

Occasionally, persistent high air pressure in the lower atmosphere can influence large-scale waves that extend around the globe and up into the stratosphere. There they cause the strong winds to slow down, and the air high above the pole to become much warmer than normal.

In extreme situations the stratospheric winds can completely break down, in what is called a “sudden stratospheric warming” event. These events occur every few years in the northern hemisphere, but only one has ever been observed in the south, in 2002 (though another almost happened in 2019).

Pushing polar weather our way

Once the polar vortex is disturbed, it can in turn influence the weather at the surface by steering weather systems from the Southern Ocean towards the Equator. However, this is a slow process.

The impact at the surface may not be felt until a few weeks or even months after the initial weakening of the stratospheric polar vortex. Once it begins, the stratospheric influence can prevail for more weeks or months, and helps meteorologists make long-range weather forecasts.

In climate science terms, the weak stratospheric winds put an atmospheric system called the Southern Annular Mode into a negative phase. The main effect of this on surface weather is to bring westerly winds further north.

In winter, this means polar air outbreaks can reach places like Sydney more easily. As a result, we see more rain over much of southern Australia, and snowfall in alpine regions. In spring and summer it means westerly winds blow over the continent before reaching the east coast, bringing warm and dry air to southeastern Australia.

The exact impact of a weaker polar vortex depends on how much and for how long the weather systems are being pushed further northward. It will also depend on other weather influencers such as El Niño and the Indian Ocean Dipole.

This winter’s weirdness

Unpicking exactly why any weather event occurs is tricky at the moment, because global weather has been absolutely crazy over the past 12 months or so. Global temperatures are much higher than usual, which is making unusual weather very common.

But there are indications that the stratosphere is having some influence on our weather this winter.

The stratospheric polar vortex started to warm in mid-July, and is about 20°C warmer than the long-term average. At the time of writing, the winds slowed down to about 230 kilometres per hour, 70 kilometres per hour slower than average.

These numbers mean that, technically, the event does not qualify as a sudden stratospheric warming. However, further warming may still occur.

If we look at how southern hemisphere winds have evolved in the past few weeks, we see a pattern which looks like what we would expect from a sudden stratospheric warming.

First, we see warming in the stratosphere which is at first accompanied by a poleward shift of weather systems.

The stratosphere’s influence then propagates downward and seems to induce many weeks of weather systems shifted towards the equator.

This coincides with the period of cold and rainy weather along Australia’s east coast in late July and the beginning of August. Forecasts suggest the Southern Annular Mode will be a long way from normal conditions in the first half of August – four standard deviations below average, which is extremely rare.

A surface disturbance

The main reason for the polar vortex to slow down is disturbances from the surface. Weather over the Amundsen Sea near Antarctica in the South Pacific is an important source of these disturbances.

This year, we have seen disturbances of this sort. There have been near-record surface temperatures around Antarctica.

These disturbances may be due to the globally high ocean temperatures, or even lingering effects of the eruption of the Hunga Tonga volcano in 2022. But more research will be required to confirm the causes.

What should we expect for the rest of the year?

There are two pathways until the end of the year. One is that the stratospheric winds and temperatures recover to their usual values and no longer influence surface weather. This is what the forecasts from Ozone Watch seem to suggest.

Another is that the stratosphere keeps warming and the winds keep being slower all the way into summer. In this scenario, we would expect a persistent negative Southern Annular Mode, which would mean a spring and potentially even summer with warmer and drier than usual weather over southeastern Australia, and a small ozone hole.

The seasonal forecasting models from the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts seem to favour this second scenario.

Martin Jucker receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the NSW Government.

– ref. Antarctic heat, wild Australian winter: what’s happening to the weather and what it means for the rest of the year – https://theconversation.com/antarctic-heat-wild-australian-winter-whats-happening-to-the-weather-and-what-it-means-for-the-rest-of-the-year-236067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emily Burch, Accredited Practising Dietitian and Lecturer, Southern Cross University

If you spend any time looking at diet and lifestyle content on social media, you may well have encountered a variety of weight loss “hacks”.

One of the more recent trends is a home-made drink called ricezempic, made by soaking uncooked rice and then straining it to drink the leftover starchy water. Sounds delicious, right?

Its proponents claim it leads to weight loss by making you feel fuller for longer and suppressing your appetite, working in a similar way to the sought-after drug Ozempic – hence the name.

So does this drink actually mimic the weight loss effects of Ozempic? Spoiler alert – probably not. But let’s look at what the evidence tells us.

How do you make ricezempic?

While the recipe can vary slightly depending on who you ask, the most common steps to make ricezempic are:

1. soak half a cup of white rice (unrinsed) in one cup of warm or hot water up to overnight

2. drain the rice mixture into a fresh glass using a strainer

3. discard the rice (but keep the starchy water)

4. add the juice of half a lime or lemon to the starchy water and drink.

TikTokers advise that best results will happen if you drink this concoction once a day, first thing in the morning, before eating.

The idea is that the longer you consume ricezempic for, the more weight you’ll lose. Some claim introducing the drink into your diet can lead to a weight loss of up to 27 kilograms in two months.

Resistant starch

Those touting ricezempic argue it leads to weight loss because of the resistant starch rice contains. Resistant starch is a type of dietary fibre (also classified as a prebiotic). There’s no strong evidence it makes you feel fuller for longer, but it does have proven health benefits.

Studies have shown consuming resistant starch may help regulate blood sugar, aid weight loss and improve gut health.

Research has also shown eating resistant starch reduces the risk of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other chronic diseases.

Resistant starch is found in many foods. These include beans, lentils, wholegrains (oats, barley, and rice – particularly brown rice), bananas (especially when they’re under-ripe or green), potatoes, and nuts and seeds (particularly chia seeds, flaxseeds and almonds).

Half a cup of uncooked white rice (as per the ricezempic recipe) contains around 0.6 grams of resistant starch. For optimal health benefits, a daily intake of 15–20 grams of resistant starch is recommended. Although there is no concrete evidence on the amount of resistant starch that leaches from rice into water, it’s likely to be significantly less than 0.6 grams as the whole rice grain is not being consumed.

Ricezempic vs Ozempic

Ozempic was originally developed to help people with diabetes manage their blood sugar levels but is now commonly used for weight loss.

Ozempic, along with similar medications such as Wegovy and Trulicity, is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist. These drugs mimic the GLP-1 hormone the body naturally produces. By doing so, they slow down the digestive process, which helps people feel fuller for longer, and curbs their appetite.

While the resistant starch in rice could induce some similar benefits to Ozempic (such as feeling full and therefore reducing energy intake), no scientific studies have trialled ricezempic using the recipes promoted on social media.

Ozempic has a long half-life, remaining active in the body for about seven days. In contrast, consuming one cup of rice provides a feeling of fullness for only a few hours. And simply soaking rice in water and drinking the starchy water will not provide the same level of satiety as eating the rice itself.

Other ways to get resistant starch in your diet

There are several ways to consume more resistant starch while also gaining additional nutrients and vitamins compared to what you get from ricezempic.

1. Cooked and cooled rice

Letting cooked rice cool over time increases its resistant starch content. Reheating the rice does not significantly reduce the amount of resistant starch that forms during cooling. Brown rice is preferable to white rice due to its higher fibre content and additional micronutrients such as phosphorus and magnesium.

2. More legumes

These are high in resistant starch and have been shown to promote weight management when eaten regularly. Why not try a recipe that has pinto beans, chickpeas, black beans or peas for dinner tonight?

3. Cooked and cooled potatoes

Cooking potatoes and allowing them to cool for at least a few hours increases their resistant starch content. Fully cooled potatoes are a rich source of resistant starch and also provide essential nutrients like potassium and vitamin C. Making a potato salad as a side dish is a great way to get these benefits.

In a nutshell

Although many people on social media have reported benefits, there’s no scientific evidence drinking rice water or “ricezempic” is effective for weight loss. You probably won’t see any significant changes in your weight by drinking ricezempic and making no other adjustments to your diet or lifestyle.

While the drink may provide a small amount of resistant starch residue from the rice, and some hydration from the water, consuming foods that contain resistant starch in their full form would offer significantly more nutritional benefits.

More broadly, be weary of the weight loss hacks you see on social media. Achieving lasting weight loss boils down to gradually adopting healthy eating habits and regular exercise, ensuring these changes become lifelong habits.

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

Lauren Ball works for The University of Queensland and receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Queensland Health and Mater Misericordia. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.

– ref. Ricezempic: is there any evidence this TikTok trend will help you lose weight? – https://theconversation.com/ricezempic-is-there-any-evidence-this-tiktok-trend-will-help-you-lose-weight-234368

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

When the review of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was handed down at the end of last year, one of the more controversial recommendations was to make provider registration mandatory.

The review – and NDIS Minister Bill Shorten – argued these changes were needed to make NDIS participants safer. But many in the disability community were worried these changes could restrict their choice and control over services.

Shorten established an expert taskforce to provide advice on the design and implementation of a new registration model in consultation with the disability community. This advice has just been published.

At the same time, a short public consultation period has opened so people can have their say on what supports should be funded under the NDIS, following headlines about ballooning costs and what funds are being used for.

Together, these developments might achieve a balance between safety concerns and allowing NDIS participants to manage their services in a way that works for them.

What the NDIS review recommended

Currently, only some NDIS service providers are registered with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. To do so, they must undertake compliance and auditing processes, which can be time-consuming and expensive.

All NDIS participants can purchase supports from registered providers, but some (those who are self-managed or plan-managed, rather than NDIS-managed) can also buy services from providers who are unregistered. About 7% of service providers in the NDIS are registered, but only around two-fifths of NDIS payments go to unregistered providers. Unregistered providers tend to be smaller operators and there are more of them.

The NDIS review suggested a mandatory risk-proportionate model to improve visibility and regulation for all providers.

This means all NDIS providers would need to be registered or enrolled and participants would not be able to purchase goods or services from providers that are not. Some providers say they would not become registered because of the significant costs and administrative burdens involved.

This might not seem like a particularly controversial recommendation, but it has split the disability community.

Some see it as a way to prevent some of the horrific abuse some people with disability experience.

But others are concerned it would shrink their choice of provider, lead some to go without services and increase the cost of the scheme.

Read more:
Choice and control: what can the ACCC do to stop NDIS price gouging and reduce costs?

Who were on the taskforce and what did they do?

Chaired by disability rights lawyer and activist, Natalie Wade, the taskforce met with more than 2,200 people with disability, allies, service providers and others over three months. The taskforce disagreed with the NDIS review that all providers should be registered, but said a new risk-proportionate model is needed.

The taskforce outlines four categories of registration:

• advanced registration for providers offering high-risk supports often in high-risk settings (such as group homes)

• general registration for those offering medium-risk supports or those who require additional skill and training or involve significant one-to-one contact with disabled people (such as some complex bowel care or giving injections)

• self-directed registration for participants or their guardian or legal representative who get supports through direct employment or independent contractors

• basic registration for providers offering lower-risk supports such as social and community participation and supports with more limited one-to-one contact.

Each of these categories comes with different requirements in terms of worker screening, practice standards, complaints processes and performance measurement requirements.

A fifth category set out by the taskforce does not require registration. This is for goods bought from mainstream retailers (such as a noise-cancelling headphones from an online store or a ramp from a hardware store) where there is no direct support provided to the participant.

The taskforce also suggests changes to:

• worker registration
• the NDIS Code of Conduct
• how provider performance is measured
• how provider audits are conducted
• how the Quality and Safeguards Commission receives and handles complaints.

Some of these changes will take time as new systems and processes will need to be developed; others are more urgent.

This is particularly the case for people accessing supported independent living services, who need help at home all the time. Often, these are people with intellectual disability who have large NDIS budgets and are more likely to live in group settings. They are also more likely to experience violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. The taskforce recommends all such providers be registered within 12 months.

There is still some detail to be worked out about these recommendations and more co-design needed to make sure the system works for everyone. But these suggestions seem to do a good job of balancing protections and choice and control.

The report acknowledges many of the complex issues relating to this topic and suggests a possible pathway.

Read more:
Choice and control: people with disability feel safer when they can select their NDIS providers

What about NDIS supports?

The taskforce report lands in the wake of the government’s underwhelming response to the disability royal commission.

Meanwhile, the progress of legislative NDIS reform to get the scheme “back on track” through the Senate has been delayed by amendments and disagreements.

There is ongoing tension with the states and territories over who will fund foundational support.

Proposed lists of what supports will be covered under the NDIS have also been controversial. The government has just opened public consultation so people with disability can help define what should be funded and what should not. But the timescales for consultation are very short, which might prevent all those who are interested from engaging on this topic.

What happens next?

The government now needs to decide how it wants to act on the provider and worker registration taskforce’s advice.

The taskforce report acknowledges further consultation with the disability community is needed. It will be important that the government listens more closely.

Helen Dickinson receives funding from ARC, NHMRC, CYDA. She was a member of the Academic and Policy Advisory Group that was consulted by the taskforce.

– ref. Tiered NDIS provider registration and a say on supports. Are we finally listening to people with disability? – https://theconversation.com/tiered-ndis-provider-registration-and-a-say-on-supports-are-we-finally-listening-to-people-with-disability-233657

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jane Simon, Senior Lecturer in Media, Macquarie University

In the work of Hiroshi Sugimoto, photography is a type of embalmment, a tactic of preservation, and an instrument of experimentation.

Born in 1948, Japanese artist Sugimoto works with photography, site-specific sculpture and architecture. Time Machine at the Museum of Contemporary Art surveys over five decades of his work. The exhibition highlights Sugimoto’s conceptual approach to images and his continual investigation of the photographic form.

Sugimoto’s photographs reveal his reverence for technique. They are primarily in black and white, and often made with an analogue large-format camera. These are images made with intent; carefully planned, and often slowly executed.

Sugimoto’s work engages with the history of photographic materials and processes. His Lightning Fields (2006–) prints are camera-less photographs, images made through the direct use of light or chemicals on light-sensitive paper or film.

These images gesture to William Henry Fox Talbot’s early experiments with static electricity: Sugimoto’s photographs are the outcome of electrical currents meeting unexposed film. The prints feature dramatic forms that look like splayed branches, sprawling veins or plant roots: fireworks on paper.

Grandness askew

At first glance, many of Sugimoto’s photographs direct attention to the legendary and the monumental: they picture Modernist architecture, portraits of royals and infamous leaders, and wild animals poised to hunt.

But they tilt instead towards less certain territory. Through Sugimoto’s use of bokeh, or blur, the Eiffel Tower in his Architecture series is out of focus.

The beautifully lit portrait of Princess Diana, hands behind her back and looking away from the camera, is of her wax likeness: a portrait made at Madame Tussauds two years after she died.

The proud polar bear about to dive on its prey is a photograph of the enclosed space of a diorama: the animal forever poised before the meal it will never have.

Sugimoto’s lens underscores eminence and beauty with uncertainty about the appearance of reality. His work raises questions about where existence begins, ends, or transforms.

The skin between life and death, monument and ruin, surfaces in many of Sugimoto’s photographs. Sugimoto’s “time machine” moves between time gone, spent time and a sense of being beyond time.

A tiny room in the centre of the exhibition – relieved from its usual role as a storage cupboard – contains the exhibition’s smallest prints. This tight space, with its industrial lighting and exposed air conditioning ducts, is a fitting stage for Sugimoto’s Chamber of Horrors (1994). This series features wax figures of infamous murders and their instruments of torture and death.

The claustrophobia in the images is replicated in the tiny space.

Small differences

Sugimoto’s on-going Seascape series with their uniform divide between sky and ocean, are quiet black-and-white images. There are no swimmers, seabirds or ships at sea here: simply water, sky and light from the moon or sun. Subtle differences in tone, wave patterns and light reveal themselves with sustained looking.

The vantage point from which Sugimoto photographs is never revealed, although each image is titled by geographic location. Ligurian Sea, Framura (1993) is one of the darkest and most nuanced in tone: a nocturnal seascape lit barely by moonlight.

A length of wall features Sea of Buddha (1995). Sea of Buddha is a series made in Sanjūsangen-dō (三十三間堂), a 12th-century Buddhist temple in Kyoto.

These black and white prints share the subtle play of differences in Sugimoto’s Seascapes. Sea of Buddha pictures the 1,001 wooden sculptures of Buddha gilded with gold, a collective of not-quite identical sculptures, small variations revealed through Sugimoto’s lens as light catches the shimmer of gold.

Light and decay

Sugimoto’s celebrated Theaters (1976–) images are made by using an exposure time equal to the screening time of a film. Sugimoto opens the camera shutter as the film begins and closes it only once the film has finished. The result is a luminous screen framed by the interior of a theatre: a single photograph of an entire film.

The detail of these interiors is lit only by the cumulative light from the projected film.

While some interiors in these photographs retain their original ornate décor, Sugimoto’s Abandoned Theatres (2015) document the spaces in varying states of decay.

These images of the theatres’ afterlife are displayed in frames, allowing the patina of ruin to spill beyond the enclosed photographs as the lead oxidises.

The weathering of the theatre interior in Opera House, Philadelphia (2015) is lit by the central luminous film screen. The ceiling is falling in, the side balconies gutted, and a section of the front stage stairs are askew. The decay itself is embalmed, preserved, and transformed by the projected film and Sugimoto’s camera.

This section of the gallery spaces also contains Sugimoto’s Drive-Ins series. In these photographs, the outdoor cinema screens, through Sugimoto’s long exposure, light up exterior spaces.

In Tri City Drive In (1993) the projected film lights the empty playground in front of the screen. A set of swings and slides sit unused. The sky behind the screen contains lines of light: the result of stars and planes moving across the sky during the film’s duration.

The sky is yet another screen for the play of light to be transformed by the machine of time, Sugimoto reminds us.

Hiroshi Sugimoto: Time Machine is at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Sydney, until October 27.

Jane Simon 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 photography of Japanese artist Hiroshi Sugimoto captures uncertainty, ruin and empty splendour – https://theconversation.com/the-photography-of-japanese-artist-hiroshi-sugimoto-captures-uncertainty-ruin-and-empty-splendour-235666

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Hastings, Professor of International Relations and Comparative Politics, University of Sydney

It may not have attracted much attention in recent months with global attention focused elsewhere. But the international sanctions monitoring regime on North Korea has been disbanded, raising concerns about the unimpeded flow of North Korean weapons to global hotspots from Ukraine to Gaza.

Enforcement of United Nations sanctions against North Korea has actually been eroding for years. The final coup de grace came in March when Russia vetoed the renewal of a committee known as the Panel of Experts, which was tasked with monitoring and reporting on North Korean sanctions violations.

While UN sanctions are technically still in force, and the United States, European Union, Australia, Japan and other countries still abide by them, Russia and China do not.

With no enforcement oversight in place anymore, North Korea will now be able to ship its weapons and other black-market goods to its allies – most notably Russia, China, Iran and Syria – with less worry of repercussions.

Elaborate efforts to dodge sanctions

Since 2006, the UN has passed a number of resolutions imposing sanctions against North Korea for its nuclear program. In recent years, though, North Korea has tried to find inventive new ways to get around them.

For example, North Korea has bought a number of ships that it uses to disguise its trading activities through front companies. It operates the ships under “flags of convenience”, which arouse less suspicion in international waters, before eventually taking direct ownership of them under North Korean flags.

The Panel of Experts reported in 2023 that the time between the acquisition of the ships and the reflagging of them as North Korean has been decreasing. This means the government is expending less effort to conceal the fact the ships were purchased to conduct illicit trade.

To further facilitate its illicit trade, North Korea also continues to use Automated Identification System (AIS) spoofing for its ships. This allows its ships to transmit a false identity and/or location to law enforcement, port and trade authorities, and other ships.

The government also creates fake ship registrations to “launder”, or conceal, the true identities of its ships to evade sanctions.

In addition, North Korea’s ships are physically altered in shipyards, often in China, where they remain for months at a time.

For example, North Korean recently altered two ships (the Tomi Haru and Toyo Haru) in Chinese shipyards to conduct trade without arousing suspicion, seemingly with the help of non-North Korean firms.

The ships were owned and managed by several front companies that had Chinese nationals as their directors and were incorporated in Hong Kong and the Seychelles. After being used for suspicious trade for some time, they were later officially “acquired” by the North Korean government in early 2022.

Trading out in the open

North Korea also feels increasingly comfortable engaging with a set of countries (notably Russia and China) that will most likely not enforce sanctions.

For example, it is no longer engaging in convoluted maritime trade routes to disguise its transactions. According to Panel of Experts reports, a number of North Korea-linked ships are simply plying a direct route between North Korea and China, without any additional stops.

Brokers operating on North Korea’s behalf (particularly those in China) often trade goods for the regime without any issues.

And many of North Korea’s transactions, particularly those involving oil, are happening as ship-to-ship transfers in waters around Northeast Asia. This alleviates the need for North Korean-linked ships to use foreign ports, which is denied by UN sanctions.

While most transfers are in North Korean territorial waters, the UN Panel of Experts has reported clusters of transfers well within China’s exclusive economic zone off its eastern coast. This, again, suggests the North Koreans are unconcerned about detection.

North Korean weapons in Ukraine, Africa and the Middle East

North Korea has used this slackening of sanctions enforcement to ramp up its weapons exports and consolidate its alliances, particularly with Russia.

After North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s visit to Russia in September 2023, the country illegally transported some 6,700 containers (loaded with three million artillery shells) to Russia by sea and rail by February 2024, according to South Korean intelligence. It also boosted its factory output to provide new supplies to Russia.

Russia has since used a number of North Korean short-range ballistic missiles in its attacks on Ukraine. The missile components indicate they arrived via an extensive importation program facilitated by North Korea.

In early 2024, the non-governmental organisation Conflict Armament Research examined the remnants of a North Korean missile in Kharkiv, Ukraine, and discovered 290 components that reportedly came from 26 companies in eight countries. Three-quarters of those components came from the United States. The components had likely been sold to companies in third countries acting on behalf of North Korean buyers, and then re-exported to North Korea.

Now, the end of much enforcement of North Korean exports will enable it to further expand its buyer network.

For example, a 2024 Panel of Experts report noted meetings between representatives of KOMID (North Korea’s main weapons seller) and a Myanmar company in 2022. Meetings were also held between a North Korean diplomat in Guinea and members of the junta in neighbouring Mali to discuss building an ammunition factory in that country in 2023.

Worryingly, North Korea may also now seek to bolster its military (and potentially nuclear) relationships with Iran and Syria.

North Korean weapons were reportedly used by Hamas in its operations against Israel from October 2023 onward. These were possibly transported from Iran’s stocks.

While North Korea has long had ties with Iran, any increased access to China and Russia as stopover points for personnel and goods would enhance the country’s ability to share its military technology and know-how with Tehran.

However, the fact that Russia and China are increasingly running interference for North Korea does not necessarily mean the three countries are forming an alliance. Indeed, China is sensitive to such claims.

During the Cold War, North Korea traditionally played the Soviet Union and China off one another, taking advantage of their rivalry to extract benefits from both without being forced fully into the camp of either.

With that said, where Russian and Chinese interests are aligned vis-à-vis North Korea, there is the potential for cooperation. All three countries have a strategic interest in minimising American influence in East Asia (and globally). In this, North Korea has been able to make common cause with its friends.

Ending sanctions reporting and oversight will now allow these relationships to flourish, and for North Korea to develop its weapons export industry with less interference.

Justin Hastings has received relevant external funding from the Australian Research Council and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

– ref. With UN oversight of sanctions against North Korea now scrapped, its weapons are going global – https://theconversation.com/with-un-oversight-of-sanctions-against-north-korea-now-scrapped-its-weapons-are-going-global-232716

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Holly Thorpe, Professor in Sociology of Sport and Gender, University of Waikato

In a preliminary women’s under 66kg boxing match at the Paris Olympics last week between Algerian Imane Khelif and Italian Angela Carini, a powerful punch to the face resulted in Carini withdrawing after 46 seconds.

Carini dissolved into tears, crying “this is unfair”, and “I have never been hit so hard in my life”.

Almost immediately, journalists and commentators jumped to Carini’s defence, raising questions about International Olympic Committee (IOC) policies and making many false assertions about Khelif’s gender identity.

The backstory

In the face of harmful inaccuracies and widespread online hate speech it is important to outline some of the basics.

Khelif has identified as female since birth and lived her entire life as a woman, including throughout her sporting career.

She is not transgender. She did not go through puberty as a male and then transition later.

Her passport marks her identity as female, thus meeting the IOC criteria for gender classification of boxers.

In her first international boxing competition in 2018, she lost five of six elite level bouts. She went to the Tokyo Olympics in 2021 as one of Algeria’s first Olympic boxers and while she won her opening bout, she lost her second.

Khelif has had some previous international success but she has been beaten by nine women boxers prior to the Paris games.

Boxing’s questionable approach to gender testing

In 2023, a boxing competition held in Russia and run by the International Boxing Association (IBA) questioned the gender identity of Khelif and Taiwan’s Lin Yu-Ting (who is also competing at the Paris Olympics).

The IBA president, Umar Kremlev of Russia, was quoted as saying the two athletes had XY chromosomes and thus were subsequently disqualified.

Elsewhere, it was stated the athletes presented with “elevated” levels of testosterone.

The facts are yet to be confirmed and it is not the role of an international sports organisation to be handing out personal and private information.

Upon request from the athletes, the IBA refused to provide evidence of the tests undertaken.

The IBA minutes (available on its website) state the decision to disqualify Khelif and Lin was initially taken solely by the IBA secretary general and CEO.

The IBA board only ratified it afterwards, with the minutes stating the organisation needs to “establish a clear procedure on gender testing”.

As the records suggest, the IBA did not follow ethical practice regarding the disqualification of Khelif and Yu-Ting. In fact, the very use of such tests to identify an athlete’s sex and/or gender are highly problematic.

Sex testing in question

Since 1968, some sportswomen competing in the Olympics have had to undergo humiliating tests “proving” their gender identities. This often involved visual examinations of their genitals in front of doctors and other medical experts.

Mandated by the IOC, “gender verification” tests were then implemented by international sports organisations.

Underpinning such practices was a set of problematic assumptions, particularly that a woman who is good at sport could perhaps be a man masquerading as female.

Beyond visual examinations, blood tests documenting hormone levels and/or chromosome testing were used. But as research has revealed, the effects of testosterone on performance are often overstated, and understandings of sporting performance and gender require much more nuanced approaches.

After many years of critique, the IOC halted such practices in 1999.

In place of outdated sex tests that fail to recognise the physiological and socio-psychological complexities of gender identity, the IOC introduced a new set of guidelines prioritising the basic human rights of privacy, inclusion and participation.

While the IOC sets out the framework in the hope of guiding other international organisations towards more inclusive understandings of gender, the guidelines remain contested.

Some organisations opted to take alternative approaches to testing and proving an athlete’s “true” gender identity – for example, World Athletics continue to use testosterone testing.

Read more:
A win for transgender athletes and athletes with sex variations: the Olympics shifts away from testosterone tests and toward human rights

Boxing and the IOC: a clash of ethics

The boxing events at the Paris Olympics are not being organised by the IBA, but instead by a special IOC-appointed unit.

The IBA was suspended in 2019 by the IOC, and last year stripped of its status as the world governing body of amateur boxing due to concerns regarding its governance, financial transparency and integrity of its officials.

The IOC was also concerned the IBA refused to follow their approach in issuing sanctions on Russian athletes over the Ukraine war.

With the Russian leadership of the IBA, this position highlights another layer of geopolitical complexity in this case.

Responding to the media frenzy after the Khelif-Carini bout, the Paris 2024 boxing unit stated: “all athletes participating in the boxing tournament comply with the competition’s eligibility and entry regulations, as well as all applicable medical regulations set by the Paris 2024 Boxing Unit (PBU)”.

The IBA has responded by offering Carini and her coach a payment similar to the purse awarded to the Olympic champion (US$100,000).

Since the incident, Carini has apologised to Khelif for her reaction and the resulting abuse, stating she would “embrace her” the next time they meet.

The real issues for women in sport

In the contemporary context, many sportswomen who appear too powerful, too successful, or look “too masculine” according to a particular set of values are at risk of being targeted. Importantly, it is most often non-white athletes who face the most scrutiny of their gendered sporting bodies.

Beyond the ethics of the tests being used, the extreme levels of online abuse directed to sportswomen such as Khelif and Lin reveal new ways in which women’s bodies are being policed and regulated.

To avoid such accusations, many sportswomen are engaging in what scholars have termed “emphasised femininity” – wearing long lashes, jewellery, make-up, painted nails and overtly feminine clothing. This is not because it enhances their performance but to reassure audiences (and critics) of their femininity.

If they do not offer a convincing performance that meets limited versions of femininity, they may also face surveillance of their gendered bodies, and public attack and online abuse.

However, this recent controversy may be a distraction from the real issues affecting women’s sport, such as safeguarding against systematic abuse, which has been seen in recent high-profile cases involving Volleyball Australia and USA Gymnastics.

While the Paris Olympic and Paralympics may be celebrated as the first “gender equitable” games, with 50% female participation, the abuse faced by Khelif and Yu-Ting highlight the challenges many women still face in sport.

Holly Thorpe has previously received funding from an IOC research programme grant to study youth perceptions of the Olympic Games.

Ryan Storr consults to Proud2Play. He has received funding from VicHealth and the Australian Sport Commission. He is affiliated with Proud2Play..

– ref. Misinformation, abuse and injustice: breaking down the Olympic boxing firestorm – https://theconversation.com/misinformation-abuse-and-injustice-breaking-down-the-olympic-boxing-firestorm-236061

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 United States presidential election will be held on November 5. Election analyst Nate Silver’s national poll aggregate has Democratic nominee and current vice president Kamala Harris leading Republican nominee and former president Donald Trump by 45.5–44.1%, with 5.0% for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

When President Joe Biden withdrew from the contest on July 21, Trump had a 45.2–41.2% lead over Biden, so Harris has improved on Biden’s net margin by 5.4 points. By the election, Biden will be almost 82, Trump is now 78 and Harris will be 60.

Silver’s model gave Trump a 73% chance to win the election when Biden was his opponent. When the Harris vs Trump model was launched last Tuesday, Trump had a 62% chance to win. The model now gives Harris very slight favouritism, with a 50.5% chance to win.

The US president isn’t elected by the national popular vote, but by the Electoral College, in which each state receives electoral votes based mostly on population. Almost all states award their electoral votes winner takes all, and it takes 270 electoral votes to win (out of 538 total).

Silver’s model gives Harris a 66% chance to win the popular vote, compared to a 50.5% chance in the Electoral College. The model indicates Harris needs to win the popular vote by at least two points to be the favourite to win the Electoral College.

It’s still very close to a 50–50 chance for either Harris or Trump, but Harris has greatly improved on the situation under Biden. Switching from Biden to Harris was clearly the correct decision for Democrats.

In economic data, the unemployment rate rose 0.2% to 4.3% in July, the highest it has been since October 2021, when the US was recovering from the COVID recession. A weaker economy is likely to assist Trump.

Australian politics: the inflation report

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released the June quarter inflation report on July 31.

Inflation increased 1%, the same as in the March quarter, for a 12-month rate of 3.8%. However, the trimmed mean and weighted median measures of core inflation were both lower than headline inflation at 0.8% in the June quarter.

The ABC reported economists thought an interest rate rise was unlikely after this inflation report, and the next interest rate move is much more likely to be down, though not until early 2025.

The cost of living has been by far voters’ biggest concern, so this report is modest good news for Labor. The polls below include a bad Redbridge poll for Labor that was conducted in mid-July.

Essential poll: Labor gains to be just ahead

A national Essential poll, conducted July 24–28 from a sample of 1,137, gave Labor a 47–46% lead including undecided, a reversal of a 48–46% Coalition lead in mid-July.

Primary votes were 34% Coalition (up one), 32% Labor (up three), 11% Greens (down two), 7% One Nation (down one), 2% UAP (down one), 9% for all Others (steady) and 6% undecided (steady).

This is the second Labor lead in Essential’s fortnightly polls since April. Labor’s poor position in this poll has been partly due to weak respondent allocated preference flows.

Anthony Albanese had a -3 net approval, up six points since early July, with 46% disapproving and 43% approving. Peter Dutton’s net approval improved two points to +1.

By 56–36%, Australians had an unfavourable opinion of Trump, a large improvement for Trump from 72–20% unfavourable after the 2020 US election. By 48–25%, they had a favourable opinion of Harris. By 37–23%, voters thought Australia’s relationship with the US would become worse if Trump is elected president.

On union membership, 11% said they were currently union members, 28% were not currently members but had been previously and 58% had never been a member. By 64–26%, voters thought unions important (60–24% in 2020). By 51–26%, they thought workers would be better off with stronger unions (50–24% in 2020).

Labor’s relationship with unions was thought too close by 33%, about right by 33% and not close enough by 10%.

Morgan poll: 50.5–49.5% to Labor

A national Morgan poll, conducted July 15–21 from a sample of 1,752, gave the Coalition a 51–49% lead, a 0.5-point gain for the Coalition since the July 8–14 poll.

In the Morgan poll conducted July 22–28 from a sample of 1,652, Labor led by 50.5–49.5%.

Primary votes were 37.5% Coalition (down two since July 15–21), 30.5% Labor (down one), 13% Greens (steady), 6.5% One Nation (up 1.5), 8.5% independents (up one) and 4% others (up 0.5).

Using preferences allocated by 2022 election flows, Labor led by 51–49%, a 0.5-point gain for Labor.

Redbridge poll: big swing to Coalition gives them lead

A national Redbridge poll, conducted July 10–19 from a sample of 1,505, gave the Coalition a 51.5–48.5% lead, a 3.5-point gain for the Coalition since a Redbridge April poll.

Primary votes were 41% Coalition (up four), 32% Labor (down one), 11% Greens (down one) and 16% for all Others (down two).

By 48–27%, voters did not think the Albanese government was focused on the right priorities (50–34% in April). By 40–34%, they did not think the Coalition led by Dutton is ready for government (45–36% previously).

By 38–37%, voters opposed the development of nuclear power plants, but by 33–29% they thought the Coalition had a better plan than Labor for future energy reliability and affordability.

YouGov poll: 51–49% to Labor

A national YouGov poll, conducted July 12–17 from a sample of 1,528, gave Labor a 51–49% lead, a one-point gain for Labor since the previous YouGov poll in early June.

Primary votes were 38% Coalition (steady), 31% Labor (up one), 13% Greens (down one), 7% One Nation (down one) and 11% for all Others (up one).

Albanese’s net approval improved two points to -10, with 52% satisfied and 42% dissatisfied. Dutton’s net approval surged nine points to -4. Albanese led as preferred PM by 45–37% (47–36% in June).

When asked whether they could name something the government had done to make them personally financially better off, 73% said “no” and 27% “yes”, with tax cuts the most popular at 10%. Asked the same question in a poll before the May budget, 82% had responded “no”.

In additional questions from the previous YouGov poll, 31% had a leaning towards more capitalism, 27% towards more socialism and 42% were neutral. By 50–27%, voters thought the government should support low-cost airlines.

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. Kamala Harris edges ahead of Donald Trump in national polls for US election – https://theconversation.com/kamala-harris-edges-ahead-of-donald-trump-in-national-polls-for-us-election-235187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Irma Mooi-Reci, Professor in Labour Sociology, The University of Melbourne

Across developed countries, including Australia, fewer babies are being born.

In 2023, 289,100 babies were born in Australia, a big drop from the 2021 post-lockdown spike during which there was 315,200 births, an analysis by KPMG has found.

Among the different explanations for this trend, employment insecurity looms large.

A major concern is many young people are in casual jobs or on part-time contracts.

These so-called non-standard employment arrangements, and especially casual work, are strongly tied with job insecurity, unpredictable working hours and fluctuating pay, making it difficult for people to commit to starting a family.

In Australia, more than 40% of all employment over the past two decades (2001-2022) has been engaged in non-standard work. The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey found about 19% of workers did casual hours over the past two decades.

What we know about casual workers and their desire to have children?

Internationally, and in Australia studies show a strong correlation between casual work and lower fertility.

However, it is unclear if temporary or casual work leads to fewer children, or if people who want fewer children are more likely to choose temporary or casual jobs.

This is what we wanted to find out in our study based on an analysis of 19 years of data from the HILDA Survey. We make two key observations:

• working in temporary and casual jobs was linked with a lower desire to have children, particularly among men. This was nearly twice as strong for men in temporary jobs than those in casual roles

• there was great variation in the desire to have children across different groups.

For example, well-educated and high-income men in temporary jobs were the least likely to plan on starting a family.

Conversely, casual work had a more significant negative impact on the desire to have children among men with limited education, low income, and low-status positions.

These findings suggest having a job with no guarantee of continuity reduces people’s plans to have a baby.

So, why do workers with irregular pay have fewer babies?

Lower earnings are part of the answer. In a study published earlier this year, we showed women in casual jobs earn lower wages often because they are working fewer hours than they would actually prefer.

Indeed, underemployment is common among Australian women in casual jobs and is coupled with lower pay.

And as women look for jobs with longer hours and better pay or take on second jobs, their plans to start a family and have children are not just delayed but often abandoned.

Another part of the answer is job insecurity. Women in casual and temporary jobs often feel less secure and worry about losing their jobs, making them less inclined to have children.

Moving in and out of employment often comes with a big drop in income. This is because Australia’s unemployment payments cover only a small percentage of a worker’s previous wages and are ranked amongst the lowest in OECD countries.

In fact, in Australia, income drops during unemployment can be so high that they can push families into poverty.

This situation makes it hard, especially for those with insecure work – to cover basic needs and create a safe, healthy environment, let alone raise children.

How can we boost the birth rate?

While cutting down on temporary and casual jobs in Australia may sound like a solution, it won’t solve the problem of fewer births. In fact, it could hurt the economy by making it harder for employers to create new jobs.

Instead, the fertility problem could be fixed by:

Creating more secure full-time jobs. We found casual workers earn less because they often work fewer hours and are underemployed. This limits opportunities to start a family. Creating more full-time, secure jobs with career growth opportunities is crucial.

Reducing the real costs of job loss. Australia’s unemployment support system offers minimal financial support and few incentives to find work. An insurance-based benefit system could fix this, reducing the actual costs of unemployment and worries about future job loss.

In most OECD countries, insurance-based unemployment benefits are funded by contributions from employers and employees, similar to Australia’s superannuation system.

When people lose their jobs, these benefits replace a portion of their lost wages for a limited time. An unemployment insurance system offers three key advantages over Australia’s current unemployment payments:

1. it provides more generous and personalised payments than the current JobSeeker payments

2. it encourages workforce participation by giving all workers, including those in part-time, temporary or casual jobs, the opportunity to save and transfer unused benefits for future periods of unemployment

3. it improves job matching and reduces underemployment by giving people the financial means to find jobs matching their skills and preferred hours without immediate financial pressure.

The Albanese government’s Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee has already recommended boosting current unemployment payments.

However, more significant reforms are needed to future-proof the unemployment benefit system. Creating more secure full-time jobs and lowering the costs of job loss would help increase the birth rate.

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. More secure jobs and higher unemployment benefits would help lift Australia’s birth rate – https://theconversation.com/more-secure-jobs-and-higher-unemployment-benefits-would-help-lift-australias-birth-rate-230538

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Anderson, Associate Professor, National Centre for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Wellbeing Research, Australian National University

Australian children are among the healthiest in the world. However, First Nations children continue to be left behind. To break the cycle of disadvantage, we need to foster First Nations children’s wellbeing so they can enjoy strong, happy childhoods.

Research can help us achieve this, but there’s a critical challenge – how do we include the voices of First Nations children in the research that aims to support them? We must do this safely and effectively.

One of the biggest hurdles is that participating in research can be boring, if not downright scary, for many children.

We’ve come up with a unique approach to overcome this challenge – a culturally informed app that makes research for First Nations children fun and familiar.

Culturally relevant wellbeing measures are essential

Assessing and supporting the wellbeing of anybody must be done in a culturally relevant way. But when it comes to First Nations children, there has historically been a lack of wellbeing measures which take into account their unique cultural, spiritual, family and community needs. This has been a major barrier to achieving real change in advancing the wellbeing of First Nations children.

Our national project, What Matters 2 Kids, is filling this gap. It combines art, storytelling and technology to develop a nationally relevant, strengths-based wellbeing measure for First Nations children aged five to 11 years. This measure can then inform clinical and policy decision-making.

The project’s First Nations facilitators are engaging children around the country in art and yarning workshops to understand what is important for their wellbeing.

While these workshops use plenty of pencils, crayons, paint and paper, our project team saw the need to give children other options in how they engage with the study and share their views.

A new app

To achieve this, the project team turned to technology first developed by David Ireland from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) to help children living with chronic pain communicate their pain to their therapists and how it affects their daily life.

In collaboration, we developed a culturally grounded app that engages First Nations children in research about their own health and wellbeing in a fun and familiar way.

This app was designed to follow the format of the face-to-face art and yarning workshops. It invites the child to draw on a tablet and prompts them to describe what they have drawn and why it’s important to them.

To make the app more welcoming, the research team used a real human voice instead of an artificially generated one. A talented young First Nations girl, Stevie Fagan, recorded the voiceover to make sure that the voice sounded friendly for the children using the app.

The icons in the app are designed with culturally grounded imagery created by Craig Carson, a proud Wakka Wakka man, artist and Senior Community Engagement Officer at the University of Queensland.

Combined, these features ensure the app is as inclusive and culturally respectful as possible. It gives children who might feel shy or uncomfortable sharing their stories face-to-face an opportunity to open up about what is important to their wellbeing on their own terms, and with space and privacy.

In short, it gives children control over the research we are doing.

The project team are now using the app at a variety of sites around Australia to collect data with children. The team is aiming to have a draft wellbeing measure ready for testing by the end of next year, and the project will run until December 2027.

Lessons for other researchers

By weaving together First Nations culture with new technologies, the What Matters 2 Kids project is leading the way in developing and testing new ways of including the voices of First Nations people in research.

The new app has broad implications for research, policy and program development, as it demonstrates that the inclusion of First Nations children’s voices in projects about them is not “too hard”.

Instead, it can engage and empower the next generation of First Nations leaders.

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. What matters to First Nations children in Australia? A new app is helping us find out – https://theconversation.com/what-matters-to-first-nations-children-in-australia-a-new-app-is-helping-us-find-out-235593

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ava Kalinauskas, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

Now that US Vice President Kamala Harris has sewn up the Democratic presidential nomination, she has a busy few weeks ahead of her. After she announces her vice-presidential running mate, the pair will campaign in seven swing states in four days. Then comes the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, starting on August 19.

With her campaign revving up, many are starting to wonder what a possible Harris presidency could mean for the world if she beats Republican Donald Trump in November. And how might it differ from President Joe Biden’s time in office?

Rejecting isolationism

Biden is one of the most experienced foreign policy hands to have served as president. He spent 36 years in the Senate, including 30 years on the influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He then had two terms leading critical foreign policy initiatives as Barack Obama’s vice president.

As president, Biden has deepened and broadened America’s engagement with its allies and partners around the world. This has included reaffirming US support for NATO and Ukraine, forging the AUKUS pact with the United Kingdom and Australia, and elevating the Quad diplomatic grouping between the US, Australia, India and Japan to counter China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region.

The Biden administration also launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, an economic partnership involving the US and 13 countries in Asia and the Pacific. It seeks to re-engage the US economically in the region following Trump’s 2017 withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Harris, on the other hand, entered the White House with little foreign policy experience of her own. As vice president, she has learned on the job, particularly through her travels to more than 20 countries and meetings with over 150 world leaders.

Harris’ foreign policy outlook appears to align with Biden’s internationalist approach, albeit with a more progressive inclination in some areas.

She views US-led post-war global institutions and norms as the country’s greatest foreign policy achievement, and has cautioned against calls for the US to pull back from its commitments on the global stage.

For example, in her time as vice president, Harris has met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky half-a-dozen times. She has stepped in for Biden at three annual Munich Security Conferences — one of the most important international security summits.

At this year’s conference, she pledged the US would support Ukraine for “as long as it takes”.

According to reports, Harris also helped negotiate the landmark US-Russia prisoner-swap deal during a closed-door meeting with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at this year’s Munich Security Conference.

And more recently, Harris pushed back on Trump’s claim that he would pull the US out of NATO, describing it as “the greatest military alliance the world has ever known”.

A firm commitment to US allies in Asia

Not surprisingly, Harris shares many of the same priorities as Biden, including his strong commitment to US allies in Asia.

As Biden’s second-in-command, however, Harris has carved out her own niche in foreign affairs. For instance, she has devoted time to America’s oft-neglected relationships in South-East Asia. She has stepped in for Biden at many regional summits including the East Asia and US-ASEAN summits in 2023.

Harris also stepped in for Biden at the 2022 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, meeting briefly with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Perhaps more importantly, on that same trip, she made a very visible show of the United States’ commitment to the Philippines amid its heightened tensions with China.

Stopping on the island of Palawan, Harris said the US would stand by its ally to uphold “the rules-based international maritime order in the South China Sea”. It was a critical declaration given the two countries have a pact to come to each other’s defence if they are attacked.

On Taiwan, Biden has been explicit multiple times in his presidency about the US coming to the island’s defence if it was invaded by China. He has taken a much stronger stance than previous presidents, though his aides have repeatedly tried to walk back his comments.

Harris has stuck more to the script. She has, for instance, stressed the US “will continue to support Taiwan’s self-defence, consistent with our long-standing policy”. She is unlikely to be prone to Biden’s gaffes on Taiwan as president.

Differences with Biden

Harris would likely differ from Biden in other ways, too.

For example, Harris has been described as having a more “empathetic” approach to Israel’s war in Gaza.

Harris was one of the administration’s first high-profile voices to call for an immediate temporary ceasefire in March. She has described the civilian death toll in Gaza as a “humanitarian catastrophe”.

She has also reportedly privately urged Biden to take a stronger stance against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

As president, Harris may demonstrate a greater willingness than her predecssor to publicly criticise Netanyahu. Biden has described himself as a Zionist and defended Israel more stridently than progressive Democrats would have liked.

After meeting Netanyahu in Washington in late July, for instance, Harris said:

We cannot allow ourselves to be numb to the suffering and I will not be silent.

Trade remains another area where Harris may differ from Biden. She has expressed scepticism about free trade dating back to her Senate run in 2016. During that race, she opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership — then a landmark accomplishment of the Obama-Biden administration.

Harris denied she was a “protectionist Democrat” during her 2020 presidential campaign. However, she said she would not have voted for NAFTA and felt the TPP failed to adequately protect American workers or environmental standards.

A Harris administration may not be as divided on trade issues as the Biden administration has been. The future of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework has been in doubt, for instance, due to Democratic concerns it would hurt American workers — echoing Harris’ criticisms of other trade agreements.

Though Harris started with a thin foreign policy CV, in her three years as Biden’s loyal deputy she has quickly gained on-the-ground experience. But stepping into the role of US chief executive would be an opportunity for her to stamp her own mark on foreign policy and America’s standing on the global stage.

Nevertheless, if Harris wins in November, the world can expect to see more continuity than change.

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. What a Kamala Harris presidency could mean for the world – and where she differs from Joe Biden – https://theconversation.com/what-a-kamala-harris-presidency-could-mean-for-the-world-and-where-she-differs-from-joe-biden-235651

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Phoebe Williams, Paediatrician & Infectious Diseases Physician; Senior Lecturer & NHMRC Fellow, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney

So far in 2024 there have been more than 17,000 cases of whooping cough (pertussis) across Australia. This is well above our usual national average. It’s already six times more cases than we saw in all of 2023.

News headlines in multiple states have warned of whooping cough outbreaks over recent weeks and months. Most recently, Western Australia has reported a surge, highest in the state’s south-west.

Young infants are at the greatest risk of severe disease and death as whooping cough numbers continue to climb.

So why has it been such a big year for whooping cough? And how can we prevent this dangerous disease spreading further?

First, what is whooping cough?

Whooping cough is an infection that affects the lungs and airways. It’s caused by the bacterium Bordetella pertussis. Like other respiratory infections, it passes easily from person to person via coughing, sneezing or talking.

Adults and children can get sick with whooping cough and suffer prolonged periods of coughing that may last weeks or months. In infants, the cough is characterised by a “whoop” sound when they breathe in, and they may vomit after coughing. In some cases, there may be no cough at all, and babies under one year can experience pauses in their breathing or turn blue.

Babies younger than six months are particularly vulnerable to whooping cough as they’re not yet fully immunised. Infants under four months have the highest rate of hospitalisation. Around one in 100 hospitalised children under one may die from the infection.

Why are cases surging this year?

Along with other infectious diseases, including viral infections such as influenza and bacterial infections such as group A streptococcal infection, whooping cough all but disappeared at the height of the COVID pandemic.

After social distancing measures were eased, we’ve seen a higher-than-usual burden of circulating respiratory infections. This is particularly true for children, who had less exposure to common bugs during the lockdown period than they would normally have.

Whooping cough usually surges every three to four years, but social distancing, border controls, lockdowns and mask wearing during the pandemic meant our last peak occurred in 2016. Therefore many people now have less immunity to whooping cough than normal.

Further, whooping cough is highly infectious and immunity – from either immunisation or natural infection – wanes over time. This leaves people vulnerable to repeat infections.

What about the vaccine?

Immunisation is the best way to protect both yourself and vulnerable babies from whooping cough infections.

In Australia, children receive six pertussis vaccinations at the ages of six weeks, four months and six months (the primary course). “Booster” doses are given at 18 months, age four and year 7.

Maternal vaccination is the best way to protect very young infants. Whooping cough booster doses are recommended for pregnant women, from 20 weeks of pregnancy, in every pregnancy.

This allows the transfer of protective antibodies to the baby, reducing the chances of catching whooping cough during their first few months of life – particularly before receiving their first vaccination at six weeks.

Booster doses are also recommended for health-care workers and adults who come into close contact with infants, or care for young babies.

How effective is the vaccine?

The vaccines recommended currently are good at providing protection against severe whooping cough (around 85% efficacy). They are less able to protect against milder infections in children. This means they don’t have much impact on reducing the transmission of whooping cough, which tends to occur when people with milder infections are well enough to be out and about in the community.

Whooping cough vaccines available in Australia are “acellular” vaccines. These are made using purified proteins, rather than “whole cell” inactivated vaccines (based on a whole inactivated version of Bordetella pertussis).

Whole cell vaccines were used previously and provoked a better immune response, but were also associated with more side effects, such as fever or reactions at the injection site. The acellular vaccines cause fewer side effects and are very safe, but may result in a slightly lower immune response, which also wanes over time.

To address this, research is under way to reconsider the role of the whole cell vaccine. Other research is testing novel vaccine delivery methods, such as a nasal spray, which may be able to better reduce community transmission of whooping cough.

How can we stop the surge?

The COVID pandemic resulted in drops in routine vaccination coverage. This was due to a combination of practical access issues – for example, people were concerned about catching COVID when visiting their GP – and lower vaccine acceptance. The latter resulted from a rise in vaccine misinformation on social media, mistrust in government, and increased scrutiny of vaccine safety, among other factors.

Across Australia, up-to-date pertussis vaccination coverage in young children declined from 94.2% in 2021 to 93.6% in 2022. This drop represents thousands of children and sends us further below our 95% coverage target.

Coverage was even lower in adolescents in 2022 (86.9%), with many children missing their year 7 booster doses.

We haven’t previously had good national data on maternal vaccination, because historically the Australian Immunisation Register didn’t record pregnancy status. But research has shown coverage is variable in expectant mothers (between 49% and 89%). Rates are particularly low among Indigenous women, culturally and linguistically diverse women and those of lower socioeconomic status.

Recent updates to the Australian Immunisation Register, allowing documentation of pregnancy, will improve our understanding of vaccine coverage in this group.

It’s essential pregnant women and parents ensure they and their children are up to date with routine vaccinations. This will help protect everyone against vaccine-preventable illnesses, including young infants who are most vulnerable to getting very sick from whooping cough and other infections.

Candice Holland from Queensland Health contributed to this article.

Phoebe Williams receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is affiliated with the Australian Society for Infectious Diseases Advocacy and Policy Committee and the Sydney Institute for Infectious Diseases.

Archana Koirala has been involved in research activities which receive funding from the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, NSW Ministry of Health and the Snow Foundation. She is affiliated with the Australian Society for Infectious Diseases: chair of the Vaccination Special Interest Group and a member of the Australian and New Zealand Paediatric Infectious Diseases Group.

Katie Flanagan has received funding from NHMRC, Clifford Craig Foundation and the Medical Research Council (UK) for studies of pertussis vaccination. She is immediate Past-President of the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases (ASID), Co-Chair of the ASID Advocacy and Policy Committee, and a member of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). These are her personal views.

Prof Margie Danchin receives funding from the Victorian and Commonwealth governments, MRFF, NHMRC and DFAT. She is a member of the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases (ASID) Advocacy and Policy Committee and Vaccination Special Interest Group (VACSIG) the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). These are her personal views.

– ref. Whooping cough can be deadly for young babies. Vaccination is our best defence – https://theconversation.com/whooping-cough-can-be-deadly-for-young-babies-vaccination-is-our-best-defence-235527

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Ward, Lecturer, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University

Since European colonisation, 29 million hectares (54%) of the forests and woodlands that once existed in New South Wales have been destroyed. A further 9 million ha have been degraded in the past two centuries. This amounts to more than 60% of the state’s forest estate.

We will never know the full impacts this rampant clearing and degradation have had on the state’s wildlife and plants. But it is now possible to put into perspective the impacts of logging practices in the past two decades on species that have already suffered enormous loss.

Cutting down native vegetation for timber destroys habitat for forest-dependent species. Our research, published today, has found ongoing logging in NSW affects the habitat of at least 150 species considered at risk of extinction, due mostly to historical deforestation and degradation.

Thirteen of these species are listed as critically endangered. This means there is a 20% probability of extinction in ten years (or five generations, whichever is longer) without urgent conservation action.

The bare and highly disturbed areas created by logging also increase risks of erosion, fire and invasion by non-native species.

Other states and countries ban native forest logging

Despite these impacts, Australia still logs native forests.

Many countries have now banned native forest logging. They have recognised the enormous impact of intact forests on biodiversity and climate change, and rely entirely on plantations for wood production. New Zealand, for example, banned native forest logging two decades ago, in 2002.

In Australia, South Australia has protected native forests since the 1870s. The ACT banned logging in the 1980s. As of 2024, Western Australia and Victoria have ended their native forest logging operations (except logging for fire breaks, salvage logging after windstorms, and logging on private land).

The reasons are clear: native forestry is unpopular and unprofitable, contributes heavily to climate change and is a major cause of species decline.

Yet government-owned logging operations in NSW, Tasmania and Queensland continue to erode their remaining forest estates.

Logging impacts on habitats and species add up

The current practice of impact assessment means logging activities are evaluated individually, without looking at the broader history of land management. On their own, small areas of logging might seem insignificant. However, logging these small areas can add up to a much larger long-term habitat loss.

To assess what logging today means in terms of impacts on species, we need to assess how much habitat has been lost or degraded over long time periods.

We used historical loss and degradation as a baseline to evaluate recent logging events (from 2000 to 2022) across NSW. We found continued logging is having impacts on 150 threatened species.

Forty-three of these species now have 50% or less of their intact habitat remaining in NSW. They include the three brothers wattle, regent parrot and growling grass frog. Two species, Sloane’s froglet and Glenugie karaka, have less than 10% of intact habitat remaining.

Some species’ distributions had high overlaps with recent logging. They include the floodplain rustyhood (75% overlap with logging), Orara boronia (26%), Hakea archaeoides (24%), long-footed potoroo (14%), southern mainland long-nosed potoroo (12%) and southern brown bandicoot (9%). Species with the most distribution by area that overlapped with logging included koala (400,000 ha), south-eastern glossy black-cockatoo (370,000 ha) and spot-tailed quoll (southeast mainland population, 310,000 ha).

Our research shows the importance of a historical perspective. Almost all the forest-dependent species we assessed have suffered terribly from land clearing and fires over the past two centuries. They now survive in small parts of their natural range.

Logging this remaining habitat is forcing many of these species into an extinction vortex. Environmental impact assessments and decisions about land use (such as converting land into conservation zones, solar farms or logging areas) must consider the historical legacies of logging for these species.

How can we retain our remaining forest estate?

Australia is a signatory to many international conservation goals. For instance, the Global Biodiversity Framework aims to “ensure urgent management actions to halt human-induced extinction of known threatened species and for the recovery and conservation of species”. The Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration committed us to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030.

Logging native forests stands in stark contrast to these undertakings.

In Australia, the states regulate forestry and, strangely, own the forestry business themselves. However, the Commonwealth has the power to intervene and halt native forest logging. With the federal government in the throes of reforming nature laws and an election coming up, the choice is simple: lock in extinction by continuing rampant logging, or lock in species recovery by working with land managers to secure the future of these species.

Australia has a chequered recent history when it comes to protecting its environment. We have one of the highest mammal extinction rates in the world and the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions of all OECD member countries. We are also the only developed nation identified as a deforestation hotspot.

Native forests are essential for carbon sequestration, biodiversity and the cultural wellbeing of First Nations and local communities. An easy win for all these interests is within our reach. Shifting from native forest logging to sustainable plantations will help protect these essential forests while still meeting wood demands.

Michelle Ward has received funding from The Australian Research Council and the Commonwealth National Environmental Science Program. She was Science and Research Lead at WWF-Australia and is currently on a Technical Advisory Panel for a project run by the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists.

David Lindenmayer receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Victorian Government, the Australian Government and the Ian Potter Foundation. He is a member of the Biodiversity Council and Birds Australia.

James Watson has received funding from the Australian Research Council, National Environmental Science Program, South Australia’s Department of Environment and Water, Queensland’s Depart of Environment, Science and Innovation as well as from Bush Heritage Australia, Queensland Conservation Council, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society and Birdlife Australia. He serves on scientific committees for Subak Australia and BirdLife Australia and has a long-term scientific relationship with Bush Heritage Australia and Wildlife Conservation Society. He serves on the Queensland Government’s Land Restoration Fund’s Investment Panel as the Deputy Chair.

– ref. More than half of NSW’s forests and woodlands are gone as ongoing logging increases extinction risks, study shows – https://theconversation.com/more-than-half-of-nsws-forests-and-woodlands-are-gone-as-ongoing-logging-increases-extinction-risks-study-shows-235416

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Norton, Professor in the Practice of Higher Education Policy, Australian National University

This week a Senate inquiry will look at the federal government’s controversial legislation to cap international student numbers in Australia from next year.

University-commissioned research predicts caps will cause a significant loss of revenue and jobs, including flow-on effects to the broader economy.

But my new report for the ANU’s Migration Hub, argues there are yet more reasons why the government’s international student cap is a bad idea.

The caps would add to many recent migration policy changes already reducing international student arrivals. Instead, we should wait to see whether these changes have done enough to bring numbers back to target levels.

What happened with international students?

Until late 2023, the Albanese government supported the return of international student numbers.

During 2022 and 2023 it cleared a backlog of student visa applications. It gave international students an additional two years in Australia after they graduated, provided they had one of a long list of qualifications.

These policies successfully rebuilt international education after the pandemic downturn. By May 2024 the resident student visa holder population, including partners and children of students, was 674,000. This was 58,000 more than the pre-COVID peak level. The combined total of students and temporary graduate visa holders was 887,000.

But by late 2023, the recovery of international education collided with rising rents and shrinking accommodation availability. The government hit the brakes on international education, and implemented multiple migration policy changes. Then, just before the May budget, it announced the caps, which it hopes will send student numbers into reverse.

The move to cap international students

If the legislation passes, the education minister will be able to cap international students by education provider, campus location and course. From January 1 2025, caps would apply to new international students, with ongoing students included in later years.

The legislation covers 1,500 education providers that deliver more than 25,000 courses in 3,900 locations. This includes schools, English language colleges, vocational education providers, universities, and non-university higher education providers such as the pathway colleges that many international students attend before moving on to a university.

At this point, there is no plan to cap school or research degree students. The focus of the 2025 caps will be non-school education providers in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane as these are the most popular cities for international students.

The case against caps

With course caps, the government hopes to steer international students away from current popular choices such as business degrees, and towards courses that meet Australia’s skills needs, such as in health and education.

The in-principle case against caps is that students should be free to choose their own courses and education providers.

But the policy rationale of meeting Australi’s skills needs is also flawed, as fewer than 20% of international students end up as permanent residents in Australia.

Principles aside, the education and migration systems are not ready to implement a capping regime in less than six months.

Several government agencies – the vocational education regulator, higher education regulator and Department of Home affairs (which manages student visas) – are so concerned they have gone public in Senate inquiry submissions. They say they cannot implement the caps with their existing setups.

9 changes already

To make matters more complex, Australia student migration system has already undergone significant changes in the past year.

Since 2023 the government has introduced nine major migration policy changes affecting future and former international students, with a tenth foreshadowed for later in 2024. Many of them have sensible goals.

To get a visa, prospective international students now need higher levels of English and more savings to support their stay in Australia.

The government has also introduced policies to block “non-genuine” students coming to Australia to work rather than study.

It has also more than doubled the visa application fee to A$1,600, which will divert student demand to other countries.

Other changes mean former students can spend less time in Australia. The government has also stopped temporary graduate visas to international graduates aged over 35, and reversed its earlier two-year extension of this visa.

Have we already done enough?

Several migration changes, including the higher visa application fee, are too recent to show in visa data.

But my report, using month-to-month data, shows the government’s policies have already had significant effects on vocational education, which includes students studying at TAFEs and their private-sector equivalents. In early 2024, monthly visa grants fell to the lowest level since 2005 apart from the two years of COVID border closure.

Higher education has been more resilient, but visa grants in early 2024 were running below their pre-COVID levels.

Policy changes aside, 2025 will be a more “normal” year in international education. The past few years have seen pent-up demand from 2020 and 2021, when students could not come to Australia, together with the students who would have arrived between 2022 and 2024 anyway.

As these students complete their courses and leave Australia, we will return to the usual pattern of departures significantly offsetting arrivals.

The government should wait and see

Amid all these changes and possible further disruption from caps, we are missing a key part of the puzzle.

The government should announce the target student visa levels underlying its capping policy.

It should then wait to see whether student visa application and grants for the remainder of 2024 and first semester 2025 put us on track to achieve them.

If not, then perhaps education provider caps should go back onto the policy agenda. Going ahead now risks far more harm to education providers, and the students who want to enrol with them, than is necessary to reduce Australia’s population.

Andrew Norton works for the Australian National University, which like all higher education institutions offering courses to international students is likely to incur significant revenue losses due to the policies described in the article.

– ref. Australia made 9 changes to student migration rules over the past year. We don’t need international student caps as well – https://theconversation.com/australia-made-9-changes-to-student-migration-rules-over-the-past-year-we-dont-need-international-student-caps-as-well-235964

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Wastnage, Adjunct Industry Fellow, Griffith Institute for Tourism, Griffith University

The financial difficulties of Rex Airlines, coming so soon after the bankruptcy of Bonza, have brought into sharp focus one of the federal government’s key priorities for aviation: enhancing passenger rights.

In each case, passengers were left with tickets for flights that did not fly. In the case of Rex, tickets were honoured by rivals Virgin Australia and Qantas, possibly trying to recapture the small toehold Rex had established in the Brisbane-Sydney-Melbourne golden triangle.

The Bonza story was more complex as the fledgling airline, which collapsed in May, had sought to exploit under-serviced routes to smaller leisure-based cities including Maroochydore and Port Macquarie.

In many cases, passengers were left out-of-pocket and stranded.

Support for an ombudsman

These failures will have emboldened the federal government’s plans to introduce stronger passenger protections and an airline ombudsman.

The release of its policy white paper is imminent. The paper covers aviation issues including competition between airports and airlines, the sector’s environmental impact and better mechanisms for consultation.

After years of opposition, Qantas and Virgin quietly fell in behind the idea in May, signalling a deal is close to being announced.

The ombudsman is designed to protect consumer rights in what is often monopolistic or quasi-monopolistic operating environments. With the exception of residents of southeast Queensland and the western suburbs of Melbourne, most Australians only have one airport from which to fly.

This, coupled with an effective airline duopoly, can lead to higher prices and poorer service for consumers, the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission (ACCC) has argued.

The ACCC has been calling for better passenger rights for more than a decade. But its calls grew louder after it fined Qantas A$120 million for selling “ghost” flights in May.

Passengers did receive refunds, but the process was not easy compared to many overseas jurisdictions where compensation is automatic and based on distance travelled.

Australia is rare among developed countries for not having automatic compensation if a flight is cancelled or delayed.

The EU model

The leader in air passenger rights, as in many areas of consumer protection, is the European Union. The EU Passenger Rights regulation is 20 years old and now also applies to rail and bus passengers.

The regulation favours the passenger and awards compensation of up to €600 (almost A$1,000) for delays or cancellations. There are clauses for when a delay is unavoidable, but generally airlines have now built the scheme into their costs of doing business.

The scheme is well publicised and in 2022, about eight million passengers were eligible for refunds.

Air passenger rights in the UK continued in the EU mould after Brexit and were even strengthened.

But in a 2023 review into the UK scheme, some airlines argued “private insurance was a better option for some passengers”, particularly those with disabilities.

The same reasoning led to the removal of Australia’s previous consumer protection scheme for airline passengers, the Travel Compensation Fund, which refunded customers when airlines or travel agencies went bankrupt.

The scheme was ended under the Abbott government in June 2014, with travellers told instead to take out their own travel insurance.

Labor is expected to reintroduce an element of corporate responsibility for airline delays, not least since Brazil, Canada and Türkiye have also followed the EU’s lead.

Brazil’s scheme is particularly generous, with up to R7,500 (A$1,950) available to passengers who have to pay for last minute accommodation if their flight is cancelled.

Lawmakers there countered claims by airlines that low cost airline passengers could stay in cheaper hotels, by applying the compensation uniformly, regardless of travel class.

Popular with voters

Air passenger rights can be a vote winner, too. Before he withdrew his bid for reelection, US President Joe Biden trumpeted the automatic airline compensation scheme the US Department for Transportation will bring in this year.

Until now, airline compensation was mandated by the states without coordinated processes meaning some airlines used vouchers, some credits and a few cash to compensate customers.

Despite this, about US$3 billion (A$4.6 billion) in refunds have been issued to US passengers since 2020, including more than US$600 million to Southwest Airlines passengers alone.

This was due to a serious scheduling crisis which forced the low-cost carrier to cancel almost 60% of its flights in the 2022 summer.

By contrast, in Australia, air passengers have only had basic protections under consumer rights law since deregulation in 2002.

There is no guarantee of a seat or even flight the consumer purchased. This has led consumer advocates including Choice to support calls for an airline ombudsman and automatic delay and cancellation compensation.

The author previously worked as the director of aviation policy at the Tourism & Transport Forum that received funding from major airlines and airports.

– ref. If Australia had an aviation ombudsman, passengers could get compensation for cancelled flights – https://theconversation.com/if-australia-had-an-aviation-ombudsman-passengers-could-get-compensation-for-cancelled-flights-235679