Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Garry Jennings, Professor of Medicine, University of Sydney

Nobody dies in good health, at least in their final moments. But to think the causes of death are easy to count or that there is generally a single reason somebody passes is an oversimplification.

In fact, in 2022, four out of five Australians had multiple conditions at the time of death listed on their death certificate, and almost one-quarter had five or more recorded. This is one of many key findings from a new report from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW).

The report distinguishes between three types of causes of death – underlying, direct, and contributory. An underlying cause is the condition that initiates the chain of events leading to death, such as having coronary heart disease. The direct cause of death is what the person died from (rather than with), like a heart attack. Contributory causes are things that significantly contributed to the chain of events leading to death but are not directly involved, like having high blood pressure. The report also tracks how these three types of causes can overlap in deaths involving multiple causes.

In 2022 the top five conditions involved in deaths in Australia were coronary heart disease (20% of deaths), dementia (18%), hypertension, or high blood pressure (12%), cerebrovascular disease such as stroke (11.5%), and diabetes (11.4%).

When the underlying cause of death was examined, the list was similar (coronary heart disease 10%, dementia 9%, cerebrovascular disease 5%, followed by COVID and lung cancer, each 5%). This means coronary heart disease was not just lurking at the time of death but also the major underlying cause.

The direct cause of death however was most often a lower respiratory condition (8%), cardiac or respiratory arrest (6.5%), sepsis (6%), pneumonitis, or lung inflammation (4%) or hypertension (4%).

Why is this important?

Without looking at all the contributing causes of death, the role of important factors such as coronary heart disease, sepsis, depression, high blood pressure and alcohol use can be underestimated.

Even more importantly, the various causes draw attention to the areas where we should be focusing public health prevention. The report also helps us understand which groups to focus on for prevention and health care. For example, the number one cause of death in women was dementia, whereas in men it was coronary heart disease.

People aged under 55 tended to die from external events such as accidents and violence, whereas older people died against a background of chronic disease.

We cannot prevent death, but we can prevent many diseases and injuries. And this report highlights that many of these causes of death, both for younger Australians and older, are preventable. The top five conditions involved in death (coronary heart disease, dementia, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease and diabetes) all share common risk factors such as tobacco use, high cholesterol, poor nutrition, physical inactivity, or are risk factors themselves, like hypertension or diabetes.

Tobacco use, high blood pressure, being overweight or obese and poor diet were attributable to a combined 44% of all deaths in this report. This suggests a comprehensive approach to health promotion, disease prevention and management is needed.

This should include strategies and programs encouraging eating a healthy diet, participating in regular physical activity, limiting or eliminating alcohol consumption, quitting smoking, and seeing a doctor for regular health screenings, such as the Medicare-funded Heart Health Checks. Programs directed at accident prevention, mental health and violence, especially gender-related violence, will address untimely deaths in the young.

Garry Jennings receives funding from the National Heart Foundation and The American Heart Association.

– ref. 1 in 5 deaths are caused by heart disease, but what else are Australians dying from? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231598

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tianyi Ma, Distinguished Professor in Chemistry and Renewable Energy, RMIT University

Renewable energy sources such as wind and solar are vital tools to help us make cuts to the 36 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases we emit each year.

But renewables alone can’t get us to net zero. Sectors such as cement, steel and chemical manufacturing produce significant carbon dioxide emissions difficult to eliminate through renewable energy alone.

This is why carbon capture, utilisation and storage has a place. This technology – invented by the oil and gas industry – is the best solution we have at present to capture these emissions at their source, before they can escape to the atmosphere.

Environmentalists have long been sceptical of carbon capture, warning it could be used to prolong fossil fuel dependence. That’s a matter for policy – the science is clear. We will need to capture carbon for the time being.

While essential, the roll out of carbon capture is sluggish. As a new report shows today, we’re removing just two billion tonnes of CO₂ from the atmosphere each year – and almost all of that is by planting trees. Carbon capture accounts for less than 0.1% so far.

How does carbon capture and storage work?

The technology was first used in the 1920s to separate carbon dioxide out from methane in fossil gas deposits.

By the 1970s, it had found use in boosting oil recovery – if you separate out the CO₂, you can pump it back down into the oil field and get more out. To date, the world’s largest carbon capture operation is in Western Australia, where Chevron is pumping carbon dioxide filtered from natural gas back underground%20facility%20on%20Barrow%20Island.). This history is why there’s been so much scepticism about the technology.

This is not entirely fair. The technology itself is neutral. If we detach it from its history, we can better assess its worth.

What carbon capture and storage offers is the ability to capture carbon dioxide emitted by the manufacture of cement and iron/steel. Together these account for about 15% of the world’s emissions total (8% and 7.2% respectively).

Once we capture carbon dioxide, we can use it in industrial processes such as chemical synthesis and food preservation. This approach can cut emissions while adding value, if waste CO₂ can be used for valuable products.

Alternatively, it can be stored in deep underground in stable geological formations such as porous sandstone capped with impermeable rock, or salt caverns, either natural or human-made. Here, it should stay for hundreds of years as gas. In some locations, carbon dioxide can react with minerals to form stable carbonates, effectively turning CO₂ into rock.

Carbon capture and storage can be added reasonably easily to existing infrastructure such as fossil fuel power plants, oil and gas fields and gas compression stations, offering a transitional pathway towards clean energy.

Retrofitting existing plants with capture and storage technology can significantly reduce emissions without the need to immediately decommission still-functional power plants.

What if carbon capture is a fig leaf?

Critics of carbon capture argue the technology will likely be used to prolong the use of fossil fuels rather than phase them out as quickly as possible. In this view, carbon capture would be used by fossil fuel plant operators and companies as a way to make coal or gas “green”, and delay the full transition.

This concern is valid. There is a risk leaders in fossil-fuel intensive industries might see capture and storage as a way to continue their operations with less pressure to innovate or reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, just as some have embraced carbon offsets to avoid fundamental change.

But again, this doesn’t mean we should discard the technology. While we now have good options for making electricity without emissions, we don’t yet have many options in tackling industrial emissions. While methods of making steel and cement without fossil fuels are emerging, change is slow and the problem of climate change is urgent.

Authorities from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the International Energy Agency see an unavoidable role for carbon capture and storage.

The European Union’s Green Deal emphasises the role of carbon capture in cutting industrial emissions, while the United States has introduced tax credits and funding to accelerate its adoption.

Australia’s government last year invited companies to explore ten offshore sedimentary basins for possible carbon storage. But not everywhere is suitable – Queensland’s government recently banned the technology anywhere inside the Great Artesian Basin, due to concerns over the impact of the gas on groundwater.

How can we make best use of the technology?

For carbon capture and storage to grow to the size we need, it will need effective policy support such as tax credits, subsidies, and funding for research and development to drive innovation and cut costs.

In my research, I have worked with industry partners to find ways of making carbon capture useful. If a waste product has value, there’s an immediate incentive to capture it. For instance, I’ve worked on converting carbon dioxide into “solar fuels” such as green methane and methanol.

We might think the future of energy will be solar, wind and storage. But it’s not going to be that simple. Fossil fuels will be harder to wean ourselves off than we realise. We’ll need green hydrogen for industrial uses and to make ammonia for green fertilisers. And we’ll have to ramp up carbon capture and storage for industrial emissions.

We might not like the idea of carbon capture and storage, but we will need it if we are going to get serious about net zero. At present, there’s nothing else like it for hard-to-abate sectors. What we must avoid is using it to prop up fossil fuels.

Tianyi Ma receives funding from Australian Research Council (ARC) and Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA).

– ref. Yes, carbon capture and storage is controversial – but it’s going to be crucial – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/230122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Talitha Best, Professor of Psychology, CQUniversity Australia

Last month, Ballarat Clarendon College began a trial to ban water bottles in the classroom for students in Years 5 to 9. According to the school, “early feedback” indicated it had reduced noise and bathroom breaks during class time.

Along with becoming a status symbol and fashion item, water bottles are now considered essential for school.

So how much water do children need in a day? And what impact does it have on their brains?

How much fluid do children and teenagers need?

The amount of fluid children need will depend on the weather and how much physical activity they do. But as a general guide:

• children aged four to eight should have about 1.2 litres per day

• boys nine to 13 should have 1.6 litres

• girls nine to 13 should have 1.4 litres

• boys over 14 should have 1.9 litres

• girls over 14 should have 1.6 litres.

As the Australian Dietary Guidelines stress, it is preferable to meet most fluid needs by drinking plain water. If your child does not like drinking water you could consider adding a squeeze of juice.

Research suggests many school-aged children do not drink enough and arrive at school already dehydrated. A 2017 study involving 6,469 children (aged four to 17) from 13 countries (not including Australia) found 60% of children and 75% of adolescents did not consume enough water from fluids.

How often do they need to drink?

There is no specific advice about how often children and adolescents need to drink. But the main message from research is students need to start drinking from the time they get up.

Having a drink of water first thing in the morning regulates the body and brain to use water well, setting up mental performance for the rest of the day.

Research also tells us children need to keep drinking substantial amounts of water (about 250-300ml) throughout the day, rather than just taking little sips here and there to keep the brain in a hydrated state.

Why is water so important for our brains?

About 75% of all brain mass is water and our brains need water to keep working.

Among other functions, water helps brain cells and tissue to balance hormone levels, maintain proper blood flow and deliver vitamins, minerals and oxygen to your brain.

Even mild levels of dehydration can increase levels of the hormone cortisol, which can lead to feeling nervous, tense and irritable. This can muddle up the brain’s processing of information as well as our energy levels, emotions and behaviour.

So if students are adequately hydrated it sets up their brains to be in an optimal state to concentrate and pay attention at school.

How can water help learning?

Beyond helping our bodies to function, research also shows drinking water can help our brains to learn.

A 2020 study of German children in Year 5 and 6 showed those who had at least 50% of their daily water requirements (about 1 litre) over a four hour period in the morning had better memory performance overall.

The research showed children’s ability to pay attention to visual information was much better after drinking water, compared to no water.

A 2019 US study looked at the the impact of water on young people’s “cognitive flexibility”. This is the capacity to think about multiple concepts at the same time or quickly switch thinking between two concepts.

Over four days, children aged nine to eleven were given different amounts to drink. Those who drank up to 2.5 litres of water over 24 hours (even more than the recommended adequate amount) were better at switching between mental tasks compared to those who drank lesser amounts.

Water as part of children’s routines

Having other regular moments for drinking water can also help create steady routines for children and young people. Routines are an important way to manage attention, emotions and behaviour.

Water breaks don’t necessarily need to be during class time (particularly if schools are finding them disruptive). But they do need to be at predictable times during the day.

So, having a drink of water when kids wake up, at meal times, when kids get to school, at the start or end of classes and when they get home can all provide useful anchor points.

Talitha Best is a clinical psychologist in private practice. She is a member of the Australian Psychological Society and Australian Institute of Company Directors.

– ref. Hydration is really important for learning. How much do kids need to drink? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231485

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Cole, Composer and Lecturer in Screen Composition, Sydney Conservatorium of Music, University of Sydney

In June 1994 the late composer Evangelos Odysseas Papathanassiou – better known as Vangelis – released his soundtrack for the 1982 film Blade Runner. It would go on to become emblematic of his skills, with only a handful of soundtracks reaching a similar level of cult status.

Prior to this, sci-fi film scores tended to be characterised by orchestral sound palettes. For instance, John Williams’ 1991 Star Wars soundtrack leaned on the London Symphony Orchestra to communicate the vastness of a galaxy far, far away.

Vangelis, on the other hand, used an electronic approach to bring a subtlety and complexity that shifted the focus inwards. His ability to communicate deep emotion, alongside expansive philosophical concepts, was perhaps his greatest achievement with Blade Runner.

Missing pieces

Director Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner was adapted from Phillip K. Dick’s 1968 sci-fi novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? – which itself was a thoughtful examination of empathy and what it means to be human. The emotional gravitas of the original story, along with Vangelis’ accompanying timbral exploration, created an aural experience that was new to sci-fi films at the time.

Vangelis began work on the score in 1981. He received edited footage scene-by-scene on VHS tapes and created live takes in his studio with his synthesiser collection.

However, the first official soundtrack was delayed some 12 years after the film’s release, due to what was reportedly an ongoing disagreement with producers.

When it finally was released, purists viewed it as more of an album than a soundtrack. They criticised it for not having much of the music used in the original film, and for including pieces that never appeared in the film, such as Main Titles and Blush Response.

While the 2007 version (a 25th anniversary edition) included some unreleased material, parts of the original soundtrack remain unreleased even today.

A symmetry between newness and nostalgia

By emphasising longer drawn out notes, rather than thick instrumental combinations, Vangelis thoughtfully taps into the atmosphere of Scott’s visual world to create something truly unique.

Early sci-fi movies such as Forbidden Planet (1956) and The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951) often used electronic instruments developed in the early to mid-1900s, such as the theremin and the modular synthesiser. While these instruments helped augment concepts such as aliens, spaceships and robots, they did this somewhat simplistically.

A more sophisticated perspective pervades through Blade Runner, which combines film-noir instrumentation with classical, electronic, jazz and Middle Eastern music genres.

Specifically, Vangelis leverages the different sound qualities of synthesisers – such as bright and airy, thin and cold, or dark and thick – to at once capture emotion and highlight the complex ideas in the film’s narrative. In the final act, expansive synths dominate as the film reaches an intellectual and emotional climax.

While the synthesisers lend an artificial timbre to the score, the musicality simultaneously communicates life and feeling. In this way the foreign and familiar became enmeshed.

The film’s retro costuming and brutalist architecture also set up an expectation for the soundtrack. At times, the score will meaningfully go against this expectation by delving into a more nostalgic sound. The track Love Theme is a perfect example.

Innovative takes

Vangelis’ innovative use of dialogue in the soundtrack also helped to translate the complexities of the human condition. The tracks Main Titles, Blush Response, Wait for Me and Tears in Rain all feature dialogue in a way that makes them feel like a part of the film’s DNA.

The soundtrack’s arrangement was also uncommon for its time, as it mirrored the action narrative sequence. Tracks 1 through 4 are mixed as a single ongoing track. Tracks 5 through 7 are separated by silence, while tracks 8 through to 12 are also combined into a single piece. While this technique is common in electronic composition now, it was unique at the time.

The films dark, fraught and sad dystopian themes are further highlighted through collaborations with Welsh singer Mary Hopkins in Rachel’s Song, and Greek singer Demis Roussos in Tales of the Future.

Today, the Blade Runner soundtrack remains the most beloved of Vangelis’ works by his ardent fans – and it continues to commands its place in the 20th-century electronic music canon.

Alison Cole 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. Blade Runner soundtrack at 30: how Vangelis used electronic music to explore what it means to be human – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/221604

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maria O’Sullivan, Associate Professor of Law, Deakin Law School, Deakin University

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner has dropped its Federal Court case against X relating to tweets distributing the footage of the Wakeley church stabbing.

In response to the decision, X’s owner, billionaire Elon Musk, tweeted “freedom of speech is worth fighting for”.

This case goes to a central question about the operation of Australia’s Online Safety Act and the powers of the regulator to remove harmful content.

It will no doubt be viewed with interest by other online safety regulators across the world who are also grappling with these issues. That is, how can governments control the distribution of harmful online material within a country when the internet is global? Do global takedowns unfairly limit free speech? Does “geo-blocking” strike an acceptable balance between restricting harmful content and free speech?

Read more:
eSafety commissioner drops court effort to force Elon Musk to put international ban on stabbing video

What was the case about?

In April, the eSafety Commissioner issued X with a removal notice instructing it to take “all reasonable steps” to take down videos of the stabbings. A central consideration in issuing the notice was that the New South Wales Commissioner of Police had described the stabbing as a terrorist incident.

X “geo-blocked” (blocking content depending on location) the video for Australian audiences but refused to impose a wider global ban. The eSafety Commissioner viewed this as a failure to abide by its removal notice, and commenced proceedings in the Federal Court.

A central question in the case was whether the geo-blocking of material to stop Australian users accessing the content constitutes the taking of “all reasonable steps” under the legislation when that material is globally available.

In a hearing before the Federal Court in May, the barrister for the Commissioner had stated that in order for X to take “all reasonable steps” there had to be a global ban. They pointed to the ease of buying a VPN (virtual private network) to avoid the domestic takedown.

Why did the eSafety Commissioner drop the case?

The eSafety Commissioner cited the prudent use of public funds as one of the reasons for dropping the case, as it also has other litigation in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Although this is a legitimate consideration, it was also obvious the argument for a global ban on the material was a difficult one to make given that it would operate outside Australia.

While Musk has been calling this a victory, it is only the case for a global ban that has been dropped. The removal notice stands pending X’s review and it may very well be that the geo-blocking will remain. At least in Australia, posting a video of a stabbing may still be treated as beyond accepted community standards.

While the Online Safety Act allows for local authorities to issue an extraterritorial order, whether that extends to issuing a global ban is an open question. Even if a global order can be made under the act, it may not mean much in practice. Countries regulate free speech within their own jurisdictions and take their own position as to what is legitimate free speech and what is harmful content.

A court in another country may take a dim view of a global order and not enforce it in their jurisdiction. But another country may also decide to ban the content under their own laws.

What happens next?

Even though the Federal Court case has been discontinued, the regulation of social media in Australia continues to be a central focus of political and legal debate.

In addition to the litigation between the commissioner and X in other tribunals, there are two major reviews occurring in the next few months: a review of the Online Safety Act and a Parliamentary Inquiry into Social Media. These will examine some of the legal issues that would have been considered by the Federal Court, such as the regulation of harmful content disseminated over social media.

However, it would have been preferable to have a court ruling on these issues, particularly as there is uncertainty about key parts of the Online Safety Act.

Read more:
Investigating social media harm is a good idea, but parliament is about to see how complicated it is to fix

Internationally, online safety is also being tested and debated in other countries. For instance, the UK Online Safety Act has been criticised for unduly limiting free speech. These are therefore matters calling for international cooperation.

Looking ahead, it is becoming increasingly apparent the power of tech companies is affecting the ability of safety regulators to constrain their activities. The Australian eSafety Commissioner described X as “consistently non-compliant”.

Whatever view is taken of the arguments made in the Federal Court case, the power wielded by tech companies and their ability to circumvent Australian law should be a central concern of the Australian government going forward.

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. Elon Musk says he won a battle for free speech in court, but it won’t stop the war for social media regulation – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/228885

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Manisha Caleb, Lecturer, University of Sydney

When astronomers turn our radio telescopes out towards space, we sometimes detect sporadic bursts of radio waves originating from across the vast expanse of the universe. We call them “radio transients”: some erupt only once, never to be seen again, and others flicker on and off in predictable patterns.

We think most radio transients come from rotating neutron stars known as pulsars, which emit regular flashes of radio waves, like cosmic lighthouses. Typically, these neutron stars spin at incredible speeds, taking mere seconds or even a fraction of a second to complete each rotation.

Recently, we discovered a radio transient that isn’t like anything astronomers have seen before. Not only does it have a cycle almost an hour long (the longest ever seen), but over several observations we saw it sometimes emitting long, bright flashes, sometimes fast, weak pulses – and sometimes nothing at all.

We can’t quite explain what’s going on here. It’s most likely a very unusual neutron star, but we can’t rule out other possibilities. Our research is published in Nature Astronomy.

A lucky find

Meet ASKAP J1935+2148 (the numbers in the name point to its location in the sky). This periodic radio transient was discovered using CSIRO’s ASKAP radio telescope on Wajarri Yamaji Country in outback Western Australia.

The telescope has a very wide field of view, which means it can survey large volumes of the universe very quickly. This makes it very well suited for detecting new and exotic phenomena.

Using ASKAP, we were simultaneously monitoring a source of gamma rays and searching for pulses from a fast radio burst, when we spotted ASKAP J1935+2148 slowly flashing in the data. The signal leapt out because it was made up of “circularly polarised” radio waves, which means the direction of the waves corkscrews around as the signal travels through space.

Our eyes cannot differentiate between circularly polarised light and ordinary unpolarised light. However, ASKAP functions like a pair of polaroid sunglasses, filtering out the glare from thousands of ordinary sources.

After the initial detection, we conducted further observations over several months using ASKAP and also the more sensitive MeerKAT radio telescope in South Africa.

The slowest radio transient ever found

ASKAP J1935+2148 belongs to the relatively new class of long-period radio transients. Only two others have ever been found, and ASKAP J1935+2148’s 53.8 minute period is by far the longest.

However, the exceptionally long period is just the beginning. We have seen ASKAP J1935+2148 in three distinct states or modes.

In the first state, we see bright, linearly (rather than circularly) polarised pulses lasting from 10 to 50 seconds. In the second state, there are much weaker, circularly polarised pulses lasting only about 370 milliseconds. The third state is a quiet or quenched state, with no pulses at all.

These different modes, and the switching between them, could result from an interplay of complex magnetic fields and plasma flows from the source itself with strong magnetic fields in the surrounding space.

Similar patterns have been seen in neutron stars, but our current understanding of neutron stars suggests they should not be able to have such a long period.

Neutron stars and white dwarfs

The origin of a signal with such a long period remains a profound mystery, with a slow-spinning neutron star the prime suspect. However, we cannot rule out the possibility the object is a white dwarf – the Earth-sized cinder of a burnt-out star that has exhausted its fuel.

White dwarfs often have slow rotation periods, but we don’t know of any way one could produce the radio signals we are seeing here. What’s more, there are no other highly magnetic white dwarfs nearby, which makes the neutron star explanation more plausible.

One explanation might be that the object is part of a binary system in which a neutron star or white dwarf orbits another unseen star.

This object might prompt us to reconsider our decades-old understanding of neutron stars or white dwarfs, particularly in how they emit radio waves and what their populations are like within our galaxy. Further research is needed to confirm what the object is, but either scenario would provide valuable insights into the physics of these extreme objects.

The search continues

We don’t know how long ASKAP J1935+2148 has been emitting radio signals, as radio astronomy surveys don’t usually search for objects with periods this long. Moreover, radio emissions from this source are only detected for a mere 0.01% to 1.5% of its rotation period, depending on its emission state.

So we were quite fortunate we happened to catch sight of ASKAP J1935+2148. It’s quite likely there are many other objects like it elsewhere in our galaxy, waiting to be discovered.

Manisha Caleb acknowledges support of an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Research Award (project number DE220100819) funded by the Australian Government. Parts of this research were conducted by the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery (OzGrav), project number CE170100004.

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

– ref. A strange intermittent radio signal from space has astronomers puzzled – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231385

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

Most pundits and exit polls predicted a big win for Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India’s massive six-week election that just came to a close.

They were wrong. Instead, many voters in key battleground states cast their ballots for opposition parties, cutting the BJP’s tally of seats in the Lok Sabha, the lower hour of parliament, from 303 to 240.

Together with their coalition partners, the BJP should retain power with a slim majority of 21 seats. Modi will serve a rare third term as India’s prime minister. But for the first time in a decade, both the prime minister and his party no longer look invincible.

So, what went wrong?

It will be a while before detailed post-election surveys are published, with robust data on why Indians voted as they did. But from what we already know, we can identify a few factors that might explain why support for the BJP has waned.

The BJP went into the election campaign claiming great successes in economic management. Under the stewardship of the Modi government, as the party’s manifesto declared, India has emerged as the fastest-growing major economy in the world. It is currently ranked number five and Modi had set the ambitious goal of rising to third by the end of the decade.

The BJP had made other big promises for a third Modi term: to make India more self-reliant and resilient to global shocks, as well as to improve its infrastructure, generate more power and attract more foreign investment in manufacturing.

Yet, what it lacked – and what may have swayed some voters – was a credible plan to boost employment and curb inflation. The BJP’s track record in both areas is not good.

India needs to create jobs for tens of millions of young and ambitious Indians entering the workforce ever year, but it has struggled to do that in recent years. This has led many to move abroad, even to countries in conflict zones.

Moreover, it needs to stabilise prices, which have increased at annual rate of 5–6% in recent years.

Fear and favour

Another issue that likely swayed some voters was the possible fate of positive discrimination schemes for education and public sector employment known as “caste reservations”.

Designed to improve social mobility for historically marginalised caste groups and communities, these schemes have become politically contentious in a society where good schools and good jobs are scarce.

The BJP has long been ideologically sceptical about reservations, arguing – among other things – they are socially divisive, pitting caste against caste and community against community.

Some Hindu nationalists also see these schemes as standing in the way of consolidating all Hindus into one unassailable social and political bloc.

During the election campaign, these arguments were highlighted by opposition parties, which claimed the BJP planned to abolish reservations or even amend India’s Constitution to ban them outright.

And it seems that fear this might have prompted many lower caste Indians to switch their votes to parties pledging to defend reservations, like the Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh.

Modi fatigue

A third factor shaping voter behaviour may well prove to be a loss of enthusiasm for Modi himself.

Modi’s personal popularity has remained very high by both Indian and global standards for more than a decade – and for good reason.

He is a charismatic and effective communicator, but his capacity for reinventing his image has arguably been his greatest asset. At different points in his career, he has been able to project himself as a firebrand, a technocratic moderniser, a humble servant of the people and an adroit diplomat.

Recently, however, Modi has cast himself as a distant, almost priestly and otherworldly figure. In the days before the election results were announced this week, the prime minister withdrew to a beach to meditate for 45 hours. In interviews, he has spoken of being chosen by god for his role.

These actions led at least one opposition leader to comment that Modi was saying “all kinds of things that made no sense”. Some voters may have shared that view.

Modi’s broader Hindu project in doubt

For ten years, the BJP has also worked hard to establish a dominant position in India’s political system. To win over voters, it has improved infrastructure in the cities and extended India’s rudimentary welfare state to improve the lives of women and the rural poor.

Ultimately, however, the BJP aims not just to develop India, but to ensure all aspects of Indian society reflect what it sees as the values of the Hindu majority.

To do that, the Modi government has tried to unite all Hindu voters – around 80% of the population – with high-profile religious and cultural appeals, like the construction of a much-vaunted new Ram temple at the holy city of Ayodhya.

The result of this election suggests this project has not – so far, at least – succeeded. In a striking development, the BJP failed to hold the parliamentary seat (Faizabad) where Ayodhya is located.

It is not yet clear what lessons Modi and the BJP will take from this election. Tethered to coalition partners with more leverage than before, the incoming government will be more constrained than its predecessors. As the dust settles, one thing is clear: this election has transformed India’s political landscape.

Ian Hall receives funding from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. He is an honorary fellow of the Australia India Institute.

– ref. Has the tide finally turned for Narendra Modi after his party’s disappointing election result in India? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/229890

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gary Edmond, Professor of Law, UNSW Sydney

The conviction of Robert Farquharson for the murder of his three sons on Father’s Day 2005 is being questioned in the media, with doubts raised about the reliability of prosecution’s medical, traffic reconstruction and sinking vehicle evidence.

This case has echoes of Henry Keogh, David Eastman and Lindy Chamberlain. Their murder convictions were overturned when scientific and medical testimony from their trials was eventually found to be unreliable.

The handling of expert opinion evidence by Australian courts is in a crisis. Curiously, our courts appear oblivious. They use forensic science evidence without regard for the best scientific advice.

Australian courts ignore criteria recommended by peak scientific organisations such as the United States National Academy of Sciences and the Australian Academy of Sciences (AAS). The chief executive of the AAS, Anna-Maria Arabia, has warned that our courts are susceptible to “junk science”. Why is this happening and what can we do?

A lack of formal validation

Unlike most witnesses who can only testify as to facts, experts are allowed to express opinions based on “specialised knowledge” that would otherwise be unavailable to the court. Prosecutions frequently rely on expert evidence such as DNA profiles, fingerprint comparisons and post-mortem reports.

Problematically, courts fail to insist on formal validation of the experts’ methods before their opinions are admitted. In 2009 the US National Academy of Sciences concluded that, apart from DNA,

no forensic method has been rigorously shown to […] consistently, and with a high degree of certainty, demonstrate a connection between evidence and a specific individual or source.

The academy expressed concerns about the accuracy of expert comparisons of fingerprints, ballistics, hairs, handwriting, bite marks, explosives, paints and blood stains.

Scientists have been working hard to enhance forensic sciences in the aftermath of the report. While there have been validation studies and practical improvements in some areas, subsequent independent reports have typically remained critical in their evaluations.

For example, fingerprint examiners were shown to be accurate but not infallible, as was claimed historically. Their error rate is roughly 1 in 400.

Other comparison procedures fared less well. For example, despite formal qualifications in dentistry and forensic experience, forensic dentists can’t reliably link a bite mark on human skin with specific teeth. Indeed, they can’t even determine whether marks on skin are bite marks.

Bad science in the courtroom

Australian courts don’t have rules, procedures and personnel that can effectively regulate the admission of these types of evidence.

Forensic scientists can implicate defendants without reference to validation studies and without appropriate caveats. Courts are often shielded from error rates and scientific criticism. Little account is taken of the risk evidence is biased by examiners’ exposure to information implicating the suspect, and examiners’ close relations with prosecutors.

Australian courts have also ignored recent scientific reports and academic demands that we need to tighten the rules for what evidence is admitted in court.

Rules require expert opinion to be substantially based on “specialised knowledge”, but this doesn’t involve the reliability of that knowledge.

Australian courts tend to rely on proxies for specialised knowledge. These can be general qualifications, job titles, experience, previous appearances in court and the plausibility of the expert’s interpretation.

No one in court – neither prosecutors, expert witnesses, nor trial and appellate judges – addresses the all-important questions: can the expert do it? How well? And how do we know? As a consequence, “junk science” is routinely admitted, leading to incurable unfairness and even wrongful convictions.

Defence counsel are also at fault. Australia’s leading advocates are rarely effective in cross-examining forensic scientists about the validity and accuracy of their opinions.

American legal scholar John Henry Wigmore said cross examination is “the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth”. But it consistently fails, as have other adversarial mechanisms, such as opposing witnesses and judicial directions.

Expert evidence of dubious reliability is regularly admitted and left to the jury to somehow evaluate.

Ignorance isn’t an excuse

Perhaps the criminal justice system’s scientific ignorance shouldn’t be surprising. This ignorance is the very reason we need expert evidence.

But lawyers and judges can become complacent toward their critical abilities and the effectiveness of traditional legal rules, procedures and safeguards. (This complacency contributed to the failure of the 2019 inquiry to correct Kathleen Folbigg’s wrongful conviction.)

The very reason for holding a trial is that we don’t know if the defendant is guilty. But this unknown and the finality of a jury verdict means we don’t tend to get meaningful feedback on the system’s effectiveness (or lack thereof).

Evidence-based reform is urgently needed. We should impose an explicit reliability standard on all expert opinion evidence. Courts need to understand the limitations of forensic science and medicine evidence. Their proud legal traditions should not insulate them from the chorus of advice from peak scientific bodies.

The federal government should create an independent multidisciplinary panel to provide scientific assistance on controversial subjects such as CCTV and voice identification, or whether there are reliable means of identifying abusive infant head trauma.

Finally, Australian governments should also establish an independent Criminal Cases Review Commission to uncover and refer potential wrongful convictions back for further appeal.

Such a body, operating outside the traditional adversarial system, may help persuade complacent criminal courts that seemingly damning “expert” evidence should not always be taken at face value.

Gary Edmond receives funding from ARC.

David Hamer 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. ‘Junk science’ is being used in Australian courtrooms, and wrongful convictions are at stake – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231480

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

The eSafety Commissioner has abandoned the legal case to try to force X – formerly Twitter – to remove footage of the April stabbing attack on a Sydney bishop from the platform worldwide.

This follows a federal court ruling in May rejecting eSafety’s argument for a ban globally. The judge ruled such a ban would not be a “reasonable” step because it would likely “be ignored or disparaged in other countries”, and took issue with the attempt to regulate the global internet.

Elon Musk’s X blocked the video for Australian audiences as a result of the commissioner’s order but refused to impose a wider ban.

In a statement on Wednesday the commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, said she had decided to discontinue the federal court proceedings and instead welcomed the opportunity for an independent review by the Administrative Appeal Tribunal of her decision to issue a removal notice.

“Our sole goal and focus in issuing our removal notice was to prevent this extremely violent footage from going viral, potentially inciting further violence and inflicting more harm on the Australian community. I stand by my investigators and the decisions eSafety made.

“Most Australians accept this kind of graphic material should not be on broadcast television, which begs an obvious question of why it should be allowed to be distributed freely and accessible online 24/7 to anyone, including children,” she said.

Inman Grant said a key concern for her had been “the ease by which children were able to access this extremely violent stabbing video on X.

“As the national online safety regulator, I expect responsible companies to be taking action in relation to this type of content.”

Her announcement came as News Corp Australasia Executive Chairman Michael Miller strongly attacked big tech companies and said they should made to pay “a social licence.”

“This social license would be a package of laws and requirements that Tech monopolies would need to meet if they want access to Australian consumers,” he said.

“Under this license, the Australian government would be able to make the platforms liable for all content that is amplified, curated, and controlled by their algorithms or recommender engines – no hiding behind Section 230 in Australia.

“The licence should require that each platform has an effective consumer complaints handling system, including call centres contactable by telephone with expert staff in Australia.”

Miller said the licence should also include a contribution to the money being spent on mental health problems and a requirement to honour the media bargaining code for compensating publishers and media companies for using their content.

He said penalties should include crime sanctions for companies and executives that agreed to the licence but then broke the rules.

They should also include “the power to ultimately block access to our country and our people if they refuse to play by our rules,” Miller told the National Press Club.

“Companies wanting to do business here also have to meet our standards and sign up to our rules, laws and expectations. But the global tech monopolies that have changed our lives and our nation choose not to meet those standards.

“They refuse to play by our rules. These Tech giants – especially social media networks such as Meta, TikTok and X – operate outside our legal system.

“We know the collective damage they cause – to our young and elderly,
businesses, big and small, to our democracy, and to our economy.

“How long will Australia allow them to operate as a protected species? It’s been long enough.”

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

– ref. eSafety commissioner drops court effort to force Elon Musk to put international ban on stabbing video – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231701

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Diepstraten, Senior Research Officer, Blood Cells and Blood Cancer Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute

More than 16,000 Australians will be diagnosed with melanoma each year. Most of these will be caught early, and can be cured by surgery.

However, for patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma, which has spread from the skin to other organs, the outlook was bleak until the advent of targeted therapies (that attack specific cancer traits) and immune therapies (that leverage the immune system). Over the past decade, these treatments have seen a significant climb in the number of advanced melanoma patients surviving for at least five years after diagnosis, from less than 10% in 2011 to around 50% in 2021.

While this is great news, there are still many melanoma patients who cannot be treated effectively with current therapies. Researchers have developed two exciting new therapies that are being evaluated in clinical trials for advanced melanoma patients. Both involve the use of immunotherapy at different times and in different ways.

The first results from these trials are now being shared publicly, offering insight into the future of melanoma treatment.

Immunotherapy before surgery

Immunotherapy works by boosting the power of a patient’s immune system to help kill cancer cells. One type of immunotherapy uses something called “immune checkpoint inhibitors”.

Immune cells carry “immune checkpoint” proteins, which control their activity. Cancer cells can interact with these checkpoints to turn off immune cells and hide from the immune system. Immune checkpoint inhibitors block this interaction and help keep the immune system activated to fight the cancer.

Results from an ongoing phase 3 trial using immune checkpoint inhibitors were recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

This trial used two types of immune checkpoint inhibitors: nivolumab, which blocks an immune checkpoint called PD-1, and ipilimumab, which blocks CTLA-4.

Some 423 patients (including many from Australia) were enrolled in the trial, and participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups.

The first group had surgery to remove their melanoma, and were then given immunotherapy (nivolumab) to help kill any remaining cancer cells. Giving a systemic (whole body) therapy such as immunotherapy after surgery is a standard way of treating melanoma. The second group received immunotherapy first (nivolumab plus ipilimumab) and then underwent surgery. This is a new approach to treating these cancers.

Based on previous observations, the researchers had predicted that giving patients immunotherapy while the whole tumour was still present would activate the tumour-fighting abilities of the patient’s immune system much better than giving it once the tumour had been removed.

Sure enough, 12 months after starting therapy, 83.7% of patients who received immunotherapy before surgery remained cancer-free, compared to 57.2% in the control group who received immunotherapy after surgery.

Based on these results, Australian of the year Georgina Long – who co-led the trial with Christian Blank from The Netherlands Cancer Institute – has suggested this method of immunotherapy before surgery should be considered a new standard of treatment for higher risk stage 3 melanoma. She also said a similar strategy should be evaluated for other cancers.

The promising results of this phase 3 trial suggest we might see this combination treatment being used in Australian hospitals within the next few years.

mRNA vaccines

Another emerging form of melanoma therapy is the post-surgery combination of a different checkpoint inhibitor (pembrolizumab, which blocks PD-1), with a messenger RNA vaccine (mRNA-4157).

While checkpoint inhibitors like pembrolizumab have been around for more than a decade, mRNA vaccines like mRNA-4157 are a newer phenomenon. You might be familiar with mRNA vaccines though, as the biotechnology companies Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna released COVID vaccines based on mRNA technology.

mRNA-4157 works basically the same way – the mRNA is injected into the patient and produces antigens, which are small proteins that train the body’s immune system to attack a disease (in this case, cancer, and for COVID, the virus).

However, mRNA-4157 is unique – literally. It’s a type of personalised medicine, where the mRNA is created specifically to match a patient’s cancer. First, the patient’s tumour is genetically sequenced to figure out what antigens will best help the immune system to recognise their cancer. Then a patient-specific version of mRNA-4157 is created that produces those antigens.

The latest results of a three-year, phase 2 clinical trial which combined pembrolizumab and mRNA-4157 were announced this past week. Overall, 2.5 years after starting the trial, 74.8% of patients treated with immunotherapy combined with mRNA-4157 post-surgery remained cancer-free, compared to 55.6% of those treated with immunotherapy alone. These were patients who were suffering from high-risk, late-stage forms of melanoma, who generally have poor outcomes.

It’s worth noting these results have not yet been published in peer-reviewed journals. They’re available as company announcements, and were also presented at some cancer conferences in the United States.

Based on the results of this trial, the combination of pembrolizumab and the vaccine progressed to a phase 3 trial in 2023, with the first patients being enrolled in Australia. But the final results of this trial are not expected until 2029.

It is hoped this mRNA-based anti-cancer vaccine will blaze a trail for vaccines targeting other types of cancer, not just melanoma, particularly in combination with checkpoint inhibitors to help stimulate the immune system.

Despite these ongoing advances in melanoma treatment, the best way to fight cancer is still prevention which, in the case of melanoma, means protecting yourself from UV exposure wherever possible.

Read more:
What are these ‘cancer vaccines’ I’m hearing about? And what similarities do they share with COVID vaccines?

Sarah Diepstraten receives funding from the Victorian Cancer Agency.

John (Eddie) La Marca is also affiliated with the Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute. He has previously received funding from the CASS Foundation.

– ref. From immunotherapy to mRNA vaccines – the latest science on melanoma treatment explained – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231595

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Freya Higgins-Desbiolles, Adjunct Senior Lecturer in Tourism Management/ Adjunct Associate Professor, University of South Australia

Miami-based cruise operator Carnival Corporation has announced it will retire its P&O Cruises Australia brand in March 2025.

The decision marks the end of the line for an iconic cruise brand in Australia and the Pacific, after nearly a century of operations.

Parent company Carnival has been on a campaign of international growth through acquisitions and mergers since at least 1989. P&O Cruises Australia was bought by the company in 2003.

Many Australians might remember the brand’s iconic television advertisements from the 1980s and ‘90s that encouraged them to escape the rat race.

But the reality of cruising’s international consolidation leaves little room for such nostalgia and national brand attachment.

Still, cruising is a big part of Australia’s tourism sector, and cruises are a large source of inbound visitors. The Australian Cruise Association estimates the industry’s total economic contribution is as high as $5.63 billion.

Australians are hungry for cruise ship experiences. They make up the fourth largest source market for passengers, at 1.25 million last year.

Australia is a tough place to make a profit

A recent report by Cruise Lines International Association painted a picture of a thriving industry. New, bigger ships are being rolled out to meet a growing market of both new and loyal cruise enthusiasts.

So why are operators struggling here? P&O hasn’t been the only brand facing difficulties down under.

P&O’s sister line Cunard recently announced it will stop basing itself in Australia from 2026, and Virgin Voyages’ Resilient Lady has cancelled plans for a second sailing season here next summer.

Carnival said its decision on P&O Australia came down to the region’s “significantly higher operating and regulatory costs” and small population. The company said it had been forced to change its operating approach to achieve “efficiencies”.

The cruise sector was hit hard by the pandemic. In early 2020, Carnival reported a staggering single quarter net loss of $4.4 billion. The company also suffered reputational damage following a high-profile COVID outbreak on its Ruby Princess cruise ship.

The international cruise market is heavily concentrated. Almost 80% of the passenger market is shared by three big companies: Carnival, Royal Caribbean International and Norwegian cruise lines.

Australia’s high operating costs and relatively small market make it tough for big cruise companies to achieve the profitability they expect. Carnival’s Cunard Line attributed its decision to move out of Melbourne to a 15% hike in port fees.

As these companies have sought to strengthen their competitive advantage, acquiring smaller players has been a popular strategy.

This mass tourism model can deliver relatively cheap holidays for passengers. But it often also sacrifices well-loved smaller cruise operations that are more connected to local histories and cultures.

There is also the tyranny of distance for Australia, and increasing geopolitical risks affecting cruising.

The Australasian region faces stiff competition as a cruise destination from alternatives such as the Caribbean and the Mediterranean, which are close to large markets. Virgin Voyages said its cancellation of the 2024–25 sailing schedule was due to major safety concerns in the Red Sea.

What does its future hold?

Reassuringly, customers with P&O bookings for the remainder of 2024 will not be affected. Next year, the brand’s Pacific Encounter and Pacific Adventure ships will continue to sail, but under new branding for Carnival Cruise Line. Pacific Explorer will be retired from service.

In Australia, the mass tourism model of the big cruise operators is no doubt here to stay. But there could be further cuts to the range of destination ports offered as the industry prioritises profits.

In the longer term, however, a crucial question concerns the future of ports around Australia that have been enticed into engaging with the cruise industry. Many government tourism authorities have been keen to expand the sector.

As a result, access to some smaller ports has been negotiated and there has been a push to build new facilities in New South Wales, the biggest market.

This has received pushback from some parts of the community who argue the economic benefits don’t outweigh the cultural and ecological cost.

In the future, there could be a more sustainable solution for Australian cruising in smaller expedition-like formats. These have been particularly successful in locations such as the Kimberley in Western Australia.

Local communities at small-ship destinations may find this model of cruising more acceptable, given its lower passenger numbers and smaller environmental impact.

Freya Higgins-Desbiolles 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. End of the line for P&O: why is Australia such a tough market for the cruise ship industry? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231607

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra

The Australian economy came close to a standstill in the first three months of this year. March-quarter economic growth sank to just 0.1%, meaning that, when adjusted for inflation, there was hardly any more income, spending or production than the quarter before.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the figures “laid bare” the weakness of the Australian economy, adding:

All of these people who were advising us to cut much harder in the budget or to provide no cost-of-living relief to people, they have been proven to be dead wrong.

The government’s decision to spend more rather than cut further in the May budget had been proved to be “exactly right”.

Australia’s annual rate of economic growth – 1.1% – is the worst outside of the pandemic since the early 1990s “recession we had to have”.

Reserve Bank forecasts released last month predict a gradual improvement without a recession.

The figures show Australia in the middle of a prolonged per-capita recession with real gross domestic product per capita falling for the fifth quarter in a row.

This is the longest decline in this measure of living standards in 40 years – since the early 1980s.

Households tighten belts further

Households have continued to tighten their belts. Household spending per capita contracted for the fifth quarter in a row.

Adjusted for inflation, Australian households spent hardly any more on goods and services that weren’t essential than they did a year before.

But there was a jump of 0.3% in so-called discretionary expenditure in the March quarter. The Bureau of Statistics attributes this increase in part to sold-out concerts by Taylor Swift and Pink and the formula 1 grand prix being held in the March quarter for the first time since 2019.

With household incomes, on average, no higher than before the pandemic, households have been saving less.

The proportion of income saved, the so-called household saving ratio, remains close to zero at 0.9%. During the COVID lockdowns the ratio peaked at 24%.

Over the longer term, income per person will reflect labour productivity, which the bureau defines as gross domestic product per hour worked.

It has fallen since early 2022 and has recovered only modestly in recent quarters. It is still no higher than it was before the pandemic.

The bureau reports that building of new homes, and renovations to existing homes, fell again in the quarter. The slump reflects weak household incomes, higher interest rates and increased building costs.

Low dwelling approvals suggest home building will not recover for some time.

Businesses investing less

Business investment fell for the first time since the June quarter of 2020. A winding back of work on oil and gas projects drove down investment. One area of strength was equipment for data centres.

Exports grew by much less than imports. Coal and iron ore exports slumped, as did cotton (on the back of low harvests) and education (in line with cuts to international student numbers).

Most types of imports climbed in the quarter, in particular fertilisers after an interruption to domestic supplies.

(Somewhat) better times from July

Consumer surveys, weak dwelling approvals and weak retail trade all suggest the June quarter is likely to be similarly weak.

There was a large build-up of inventories (unsold goods) in the March quarter. It is unlikely to have flowed from firms deliberately building up stocks in anticipation of a surge in demand. More likely it suggests disappointing sales, which could bring weaker production in the June quarter.

Things should get better in the September quarter (the three months from July) when every taxpayer receives a Stage 3 tax cut and a range of other government supports. These include a $75-per-quarter rebate on electricity bills and a 3.75% wage increase for Australians on awards.

Whether Australians decide to save or spend these supports is an open question. A Westpac survey found consumers plan to save 80 cents in every dollar in tax relief, which would be a weak response by historical standards.

No rate cuts yet

Inflation is falling back towards the Reserve Bank’s target zone.

But the bank’s governor, Michele Bullock, told a Senate committee on Wednesday morning the bank would nonetheless “not hesitate” to lift rates again if inflation didn’t come down as quickly as expected.

In determining what was happening to inflation, the bank would try to “look through” things that are one-off and are going to be reversed. This means it won’t take full account of budget measures such as the electricity rebate whose downward effect on measured inflation will be reversed when they end.

She said the economy was “very weak” and the best thing she could do to help households was to bring inflation down.

John Hawkins was formerly a senior economic analyst and forecaster with the Reserve Bank and the Australian Treasury,

– ref. 7 graphs that show economic growth near zero as Australia waits for a budget boost – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231173

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Enzo Palombo, Professor of Microbiology, Swinburne University of Technology

Recent outbreaks of bird flu – in US dairy herds, poultry farms in Australia and elsewhere, and isolated cases in humans – have raised the issue of food safety.

So can the virus transfer from infected farm animals to contaminate milk, meat or eggs? How likely is this?

And what do we need to think about to minimise our risk when shopping for or preparing food?

How safe is milk?

Bird flu (or avian influenza) is a bird disease caused by specific types of influenza virus. But the virus can also infect cows. In the US, for instance, to date more than 80 dairy herds in at least nine states have been infected with the H5N1 version of the virus.

Investigations are under way to confirm how this happened. But we do know infected birds can shed the virus in their saliva, nasal secretions and faeces. So bird flu can potentially contaminate animal-derived food products during processing and manufacturing.

Indeed, fragments of bird flu genetic material (RNA) were found in cow’s milk from the dairy herds associated with infected US farmers.

However, the spread of bird flu among cattle, and possibly to humans, is likely to have been caused through contact with contaminated milking equipment, not the milk itself.

The test used to detect the virus in milk – which uses similar PCR technology to lab-based COVID tests – is also highly sensitive. This means it can detect very low levels of the bird flu RNA. But the test does not distinguish between live or inactivated virus, just that the RNA is present. So from this test alone, we cannot tell if the virus found in milk is infectious (and capable of infecting humans).

Does that mean milk is safe to drink and won’t transmit bird flu? Yes and no.

In Australia, where bird flu has not been reported in dairy cattle, the answer is yes. It is safe to drink milk and milk products made from Australian milk.

In the US, the answer depends on whether the milk is pasteurised. We know pasteurisation is a common and reliable method of destroying concerning microbes, including influenza virus. Like most viruses, influenza virus (including bird flu virus) is inactivated by heat.

Although there is little direct research on whether pasteurisation inactivates H5N1 in milk, we can extrapolate from what we know about heat inactivation of H5N1 in chicken and eggs.

So we can be confident there is no risk of bird flu transmission via pasteurised milk or milk products.

However, it’s another matter for unpasteurised or “raw” US milk or milk products. A recent study showed mice fed raw milk contaminated with bird flu developed signs of illness. So to be on the safe side, it would be advisable to avoid raw milk products.

How about chicken?

Bird flu has caused sporadic outbreaks in wild birds and domestic poultry worldwide, including in Australia. In recent weeks, there have been three reported outbreaks in Victorian poultry farms (two with H7N3 bird flu, one with H7N9). There has been one reported outbreak in Western Australia (H9N2).

The strains of bird flu identified in the Victorian and Western Australia outbreaks can cause human infection, although these are rare and typically result from close contact with infected live birds or contaminated environments.

Therefore, the chance of bird flu transmission in chicken meat is remote.

Nonetheless, it is timely to remind people to handle chicken meat with caution as many dangerous pathogens, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter, can be found on chicken carcasses.

Always handle chicken meat carefully when shopping, transporting it home and storing it in the kitchen. For instance, make sure no meat juices cross-contaminate other items, consider using a cool bag when transporting meat, and refrigerate or freeze the meat within two hours.

Avoid washing your chicken before cooking to prevent the spread of disease-causing microbes around the kitchen.

Finally, cook chicken thoroughly as viruses (including bird flu) cannot survive cooking temperatures.

Are eggs safe?

The recent Australian outbreaks have occurred in egg-laying or mixed poultry flocks, so concerns have been raised about bird flu transmission via contaminated chicken eggs.

Can flu viruses contaminate chicken eggs and potentially spread bird flu? It appears so. A report from 2007 said it was feasible for influenza viruses to enter through the eggshell. This is because influenza virus particles are smaller (100 nanometres) than the pores in eggshells (at least 200 nm).

So viruses could enter eggs and be protected from cleaning procedures designed to remove microbes from the egg surface.

Therefore, like the advice about milk and meat, cooking eggs is best.

The US Food and Drug Administration recommends cooking poultry, eggs and other animal products to the proper temperature and preventing cross-contamination between raw and cooked food.

In a nutshell

If you consume pasteurised milk products and thoroughly cook your chicken and eggs, there is nothing to worry about as bird flu is inactivated by heat.

The real fear is that the virus will evolve into highly pathogenic versions that can be transmitted from human to human.

That scenario is much more frightening than any potential spread though food.

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

– ref. With all this bird flu around, how safe are eggs, chicken or milk? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231280

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sigi Goode, Professor of Information Systems, Australian National University

In recent days, both Ticketek Australia and Ticketmaster have experienced breaches which have exposed customer details to hackers. They join a growing list of high-profile data breaches that have put the privacy of millions at risk.

For example, in 2022, Optus disclosed a breach of 9.8 million records. In 2023, Latitude, the Australian financial services firm, experienced a data breach of more than 14 million records.

My own university, the Australian National University, experienced a data breach of 200,000 records in 2018. Dan Murphy’s, Football Australia, Microsoft, Nissan, Dell, Roku, Suncorp and Shell have all experienced breaches so far in 2024.

Despite advancements in technology and increased awareness of cybersecurity threats, companies continue to fall victim to breach attacks.

It may feel like these breaches are becoming more frequent, and that seemingly any firm is a data breach target waiting to happen. But the situation is not quite so clear-cut.

What happens in a data breach?

A data breach is an unauthorised access or disclosure of sensitive, confidential or private information: customer identities, payment methods, account details, purchase histories and so on.

Breaches can happen when cyber criminals exploit vulnerabilities in computer systems, networks, applications or physical security to gain unauthorised access to protected data. They can also access data when it’s accidentally made available outside the organisation, perhaps by an incorrectly addressed email or a lost USB memory stick.

Australia has actually seen a fairly steady rate of notifiable data breaches since 2020 – around 450 every six months, according to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner.

While these figures are higher than when the notifiable data breach program began in 2018, it’s important to understand this is partly a consequence of requiring organisations to disclose breaches: the more you look for something, the more you’re going to find it.

Even if the number of data breaches is not increasing significantly, the average cost and severity of these breaches has risen substantially. According to IBM, the average cost of a data breach was US$4.45 million (A$6.69 million), an increase of 15% over three years. So what’s driving these increases?

The value of your personal data is going up

Increased demand for targeted advertising and the growing importance of data-driven decision making have fuelled the need for richer customer data.

Many organisations – not just legitimate ones – want to know more about you, and at a much more granular level than before. The more comprehensive and accurate the data, the more valuable it becomes.

Increasingly stringent privacy regulations, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Australia’s Privacy Act have driven organisations to improve their data management practices and security measures to protect user information and avoid costly fines.

This has made it harder, not easier, for cyber criminals to acquire user data in bulk.

Meanwhile, markets for illicit customer data are becoming more popular as anonymising networks and tools become more user friendly. Tools for selling on the dark web have also become more advanced, allowing cyber criminals to collaborate and share information about in-demand data, potential targets and new attack modes.

Once a cyber criminal has obtained some data, finding a buyer is much easier than it was even a few years ago.

However, large firms are investing more in protecting and storing data. According to consulting firm Gartner, 87% of chief information officers in Australia and New Zealand will be increasing their cybersecurity budgets this year.

As a result, data and cybersecurity practices are becoming more complex, increasing the skill needed for a bad actor to make a successful attack.

How do I protect my data with so many breaches happening?

While our personal data continues to have value, there will be a market for it. Make sure you practice good cybersecurity habits.

Regularly review and delete inactive accounts, and monitor your accounts for strange activity.

Enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on your accounts and devices, so that you’ll receive a prompt on your phone when someone logs into your account, or transfers money out of it. Don’t believe cold callers who want you to deactivate or give them your two-factor responses.

Read more:
What is multi-factor authentication, and how should I be using it?

Be very selective about the personal info you share online, particularly information such as birthdays, when and where you were born, and the names of pets and family members. This information can be used to defuse account recovery questions.

Don’t click on suspicious email links, regardless of how innocuous they might appear.

Never provide sensitive information to unknown or unverifiable sources, especially cold callers who claim you have a virus, or are due for a refund. Authentic callers will be happy for you to call them back on an official number.

The best way to think about the data breach problem is not to think about how our data can be breached, but to think about how organisations get your data in the first place. The best way to protect yourself online – whether it’s data breaches or an account compromise – is to guard your data jealously.

You only have one identity: don’t give it away easily.

Sigi Goode has received funding from the Department of Defence, AustCyber and the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN).

– ref. Are data breaches the new normal? Should we just assume our data isn’t safe? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231396

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Bean, Research Fellow, School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, The University of Queensland

The gender gap in urban cycling worldwide is staggering. Most cyclists are young to middle-aged men – hence phenomena such as “lycra cyclists” or “mamils”.

In Anglo countries, including Australia, only one in four commuter cyclists and one in three recreational cyclists are women. This is not healthy. While cycling is good for everyone, women stand to gain more because they typically exercise less than men.

Women are also at higher risk of osteoporosis, arthritis, anxiety, depression and various autoimmune diseases. So they need more of the type of exercise like cycling that builds bone density, strengthens muscles, helps manage weight and improves mood.

So what’s stopping women from cycling? Our new research analysed more than 200 million bike-sharing trips in ten cities worldwide, including Brisbane, over a period of 14 years. We found that slopes, darkness and bad weather affect numbers of female cyclists more than male cyclists.

The expectations of female users of bike-sharing schemes are probably similar to the expectations of female cyclists in general. Our findings point to a number of solutions to close the gender gap in cycling.

Women face specific barriers to cycling

Gender-specific barriers to cycling range from lower confidence to lower strength (on average). Sprawling cities, which create long distances between destinations, and a lack of high-quality cycling infrastructure are known to deter women from cycling.

However, some barriers are due to the natural environment.

For example, women may avoid cycling or choose to cycle only in the daytime. When it’s dark, they fear assaults or victimisation. This is a problem in cities such as Brisbane and Sydney where it gets dark by 5pm in winter, so women are reluctant to cycle home after work.

Many workplaces have dress codes and some expect women to wear skirts, heels and makeup. As a result, these employees may avoid commuting by bike in rainy, cold or humid weather, especially where end-of-ride facilities, such as showers, are missing at work.

Cycling infrastructure is often located on floodplains, such as along rivers. In flood-prone areas, such as much of eastern Australia, women may avoid cycling in wet weather due to fear of slippery, flooded roads and paths.

Sun exposure along uncovered paths can be a deterrent too. Women are more health-conscious and bear more responsibility for their family’s heath and wellbeing.

Finally, women tend to prefer moderate-intensity exercise and less vigorous travel. This may lead them to avoid cycling in hilly areas.

Climate change may increase or decrease some of these natural barriers to cycling depending on location.

How big is the gender impact of natural barriers?

So far, studies linking gender and cycling have been sparse. Partly this is because transport surveys and observations are difficult and costly.

In our study, we took a different approach: we used data harvested from digital bike-sharing systems. Trip and gender data were matched with weather, slope and sunset/sunrise data from various public agencies. Then, we built statistical models for ridership.

In most cities, we found rain and wind deterred female riders more than male riders.

For example, in New York, an extra 1 millimetre of rain per hour reduced the number of male riders by 35% and female riders by 39% (all else being equal). Similarly, for every 1 metre per second increase in wind speed, male riders reduced by 5.4% and female riders by 5.8%.

Where slopes were more than 1%, we found a significant difference between male and female rider counts in most cities.

Finally, male ridership was higher in the dark (before sunrise or after sunset) in all cities.

How can bicycles become a girl’s best friend?

Women tend to prefer cycling that is safe, non-strenuous and seamlessly incorporated into their daily routines. Providing maximum separation from cars along main streets and in street junctions and applying traffic-calming devices in neighbourhood streets can help improve safety. So would creating off-road cycling tracks, such as through parks.

We also offer some recommendations to help eliminate natural barriers.

Electric bikes offer much potential here. They require much less effort to ride than conventional bicycles. Thus, they enable longer trips, greater comfort in hilly and windy places, and faster trips in the dark or rain.

Therefore, cities could consider full or partial electrification of bike-share fleets.

Another strategy is to minimise the exposure of bike paths. Paths can be covered by manufactured shelters or tree canopies, and even artificially cooled by fans. This would reduce the effects of heat, sun, wind and rain.

Some good examples and ideas come from tropical or desert climes, such as Singapore and Dubai, rather than from temperate places.

To deal with safety and security concerns in the dark, whether actual or perceived, cities need to provide better lighting along cycling routes.

More broadly, easily cyclable urban areas should become the goal of urban planning.

Dorina Pojani has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Urban Research Infrastructure Network, and the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads. She cycles recreationally and was a member of the now-defunct CityCycle scheme in Brisbane.

Jonathan Corcoran has received funding from the Australian Research Council, the Australian Urban Research Infrastructure Network, and the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads.

Richard Bean 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. Bad weather, hills and the dark deter cyclists, particularly women. So what can we do about it? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/230306

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriel C Rau, Lecturer in Hydrogeology, School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle

Under your feet lies the world’s biggest reservoir. Groundwater makes up a whopping 97% of all usable freshwater. Where is it? In the voids between grains and cracks within rocks. We see it when it rises to the surface in springs, in caves, or when we pump it up for use.

While groundwater is often hidden, it underpins ecosystems around the world and is a vital resource for people.

You might think groundwater would be protected from climate change, given it’s underground. But this is no longer the case. As the atmosphere continues to heat up, more and more heat is penetrating underground. There is already considerable evidence that the subsurface is warming. The heat shows up in temperature measurements taken in boreholes around the world.

Our team of international scientists have combined our knowledge to model how groundwater will heat up in the future. Under a realistic middle of the road greenhouse gas emission scenario, with a projected mean global atmospheric temperature rise of 2.7°C, groundwater will warm by an average of 2.1°C by 2100, compared to 2000.

This warming varies by region and is delayed by decades compared to the surface, because it takes time to heat up the underground mass. Our results can be accessed by everyone globally.

Why does it matter?

You might wonder what the consequences of hotter groundwater will be.

First, the good news. Warming beneath the land’s surface is trapping 25 times less energy than the ocean, but it is still significant. This heat is stored in layers down to tens of metres deep, making it easier to access. We could use this extra heat to sustainably warm our homes by tapping into it just a few meters below the surface.

The heat can be extracted using heat pumps, powered by electricity from renewable energies. Geothermal heat pumps are surging in popularity for space heating across Europe.

Unfortunately, the bad news is likely to far outweigh the good. Warmer groundwater is harmful for the rich array of life found underground – and for the many plants and animals who depend on groundwater for their survival. Any changes in temperature can seriously disrupt the niche they have adapted to.

To date, the highest groundwater temperature increases are in parts of Russia, where surface temperatures have risen by more than 1.5°C since 2000. In Australia, significant variations in groundwater temperatures are expected within the shallowest layers.

Groundwater regularly flows out to feed lakes and rivers around the world, as well as the ocean, supporting a range of groundwater dependent ecosystems.

If warmer groundwater flows into your favourite river or lake, it will add to the extra heat from the sun. This could mean fish and other species will find it too warm to survive. Warm waters also hold less oxygen. Lack of oxygen in rivers and lakes have already become a major cause of mass fish deaths, as we’ve seen recently in Australia’s Murray-Darling Basin.

Cold water species such as Atlantic salmon have adapted to a water temperature window provided by continuous cool groundwater discharge. As these thermal refuges heat up, it will upend their breeding cycle.

Groundwater is vital

In many parts of the world, people rely on groundwater as their main source of drinking water. But groundwater warming can worsen the quality of the water we drink. Temperature influences everything from chemical reactions to microbial activity. Warmer water could, for instance, trigger more harmful reactions, where metals leach out into the water. This is especially concerning in areas where access to clean drinking water is already limited.

Industries such as farming, manufacturing and energy production often rely on groundwater for their operations. If the groundwater they depend on becomes too warm or more contaminated, it can disrupt their activities.

Our study is global, but we have to find out more about how groundwater is warming and what impact this could have locally. By studying how groundwater temperatures are changing over time and across different regions, we can better predict future trends and find strategies to adapt or reduce the effects.

Global groundwater warming is a hidden but very significant consequence of climate change. While the impacts will be delayed, they stretch far and wide. They will affect ecosystems, drinking water supplies and industries around the world.

Gabriel Rau receives funding from the German Research Council (DFG) for research on subsurface heat transport, though not related to this article.

Barret Kurylyk receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Canada Research Chairs Program for research related to this article.

Dylan Irvine receives funding from the Australian Research Council, The National Environmental Science Program and the Cooperative Research Centre for Developing Northern Australia, although the research in the research discussed here is independent of these research programs.

Susanne Benz was supported through a Banting postdoctoral fellowship, administered by the Government of Canada and since October 2022 as a Freigeist Fellow of the Volkswagen foundation

– ref. Groundwater is heating up, threatening life below and above the surface – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/229177

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stuart Murray, Bond University

Writing of the unique place of sport in Australian society, the celebrated US travel writer Bill Bryson once wrote “truly, never has there been a more sporting nation … it is a wonder in such a vigorous and active society that there is anyone left to form an audience”.

Sport is a vital part of who we are, how others see us, and – these days – a low-risk, low-cost and high-profile diplomatic tool in an increasingly divisive geopolitical landscape.

Countries such as China, Saudi Arabia and Russia are investing in the sports diplomacy game and, arguably, Australia’s edge in this niche area of international relations has dulled a little.

Earlier this week, however, Australia’s foreign and sports ministers announced it was time to sharpen that edge, freshen up the team and make Australia stronger and more influential through sport.

Why Australia needs a new strategy

In response to the first periodic review of the Sports Diplomacy 2030 Strategy, the Albanese government announced it will update the strategy, form a new Sports Diplomacy Consultative Group – coordinated by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) – and hold an annual round-table discussion that brings the worlds of sport and diplomacy together.

These initiatives provide a forum to discuss strategic and economic opportunities, risks in international sport, upcoming sports events in Australia and offshore, and ways in which government and the sport sector can work together to advance shared priorities.

Team Australia, in other words, has a new game plan, a bigger squad and an annual strategic retreat.

The announcement is timely. Arguably, Australia is slipping behind while other countries forge ahead.

For example, China spent A$74 million on a new stadium in the Solomon Islands for last year’s Pacific Games and also invited Pacific athletes to train in China.

China has also poached high-profile “diplomats in tracksuits” such as Eileen Gu – a brilliant Chinese-American downhill skier brought up in California who chose to represent China at the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

While most sports fans can list assets and teams bought by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund – such as the 2021 takeover of English Premier League team Newcastle United and the controversial LIV Golf Tour set up to rival the PGA Tour – they would know less about Riyadh’s training in sports diplomacy.

In February 2024, The United Nations Institute for Training and Research ran a five-day executive diploma in sports diplomacy program for participants from the Ministry of Sport of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi Olympic and Paralympic Committee in Geneva.

Russia has also weaponised sport, from using mega events to deflect attention from its invasion of other countries to Gazprom – the state-owned multinational energy corporation – proposing a Russian version of the Champions League.

What does sports diplomacy offer?

Sport, when allied to diplomacy, offers western liberal democracies like Australia an authentic, comparative and meaningful advantage over our rivals.

In addition to a bulging trophy cabinet, Australia possesses world class facilities, infrastructure, expertise and sports people.

Programs like PacificAus Sports – responsible for the men’s and women’s Fijian Drua Super Rugby teams, and the PNG Hunters Rugby League teams – are world class.

Australians value integrity, fair play and equality in sport. Some of our current and former athletes such as Curtis McGrath, Sam Kerr, David Pocock, Adam Goodes, Kim Brennan and Marissa Williamson-Pohlman (who will be the first Indigenous woman to represent Australia in boxing at the Olympics this year) are as powerful, genuine and effective off the pitch as they are on it.

Sports diplomacy, when done well, can break down stereotypes, transcend acrimony and bring people closer together via a shared affinity for physical pursuits.

Meetings between, for example, sports administrators, government officials, and business people on the sidelines of a game create informal relationships that complement formal diplomatic initiatives, such as Australia’s desire to better engage Southeast Asia via a new $2 billion push.

International sport generates public diplomacy opportunities, builds relationships and can amplify a state’s message, culture and values.

Raising the game

The Albanese government’s new approach to sports diplomacy provides a chance to challenge our rivals but only if we think like our sportspeople. We need to work and train hard, innovate and try even harder.

Let’s hope other government agencies continue to get behind DFAT as the ongoing team captain, too. The Australian Federal Police, Australian Defence Force, Sports Integrity Australia and many other government agencies are also now using sports diplomacy.

Finally, there’s also no point investing in the practice of sports diplomacy if it isn’t analysed, measured, studied and researched by the next generation of academics and universities.

While countries like Israel, Hungary and Saudi Arabia are developing research centres and university courses on sports diplomacy, the same cannot be said of Australia.

Diplomatic practice, it should be remembered, is only as good as the theory it is built upon.

Bill Bryson was right. For a relatively small population, there are few countries that are as good, or as addicted, to sport as Australia.

Games, sport and physical pursuits play a massive role in our culture, society and identity. These things deserve to be front and centre of our diplomacy.

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

– ref. Why ‘Team Australia’ needs a new sports diplomacy game plan as other countries gain an edge – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231494

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Haslam, Professor of Psychology, The University of Melbourne

We talk about mental health more than ever, but the language we should use remains a vexed issue.

Should we call people who seek help patients, clients or consumers? Should we use “person-first” expressions such as person with autism or “identity-first” expressions like autistic person? Should we apply or avoid diagnostic labels?

These questions often stir up strong feelings. Some people feel that patient implies being passive and subordinate. Others think consumer is too transactional, as if seeking help is like buying a new refrigerator.

Advocates of person-first language argue people shouldn’t be defined by their conditions. Proponents of identity-first language counter that these conditions can be sources of meaning and belonging.

Avid users of diagnostic terms see them as useful descriptors. Critics worry that diagnostic labels can box people in and misrepresent their problems as pathologies.

Underlying many of these disagreements are concerns about stigma and the medicalisation of suffering. Ideally the language we use should not cast people who experience distress as defective or shameful, or frame everyday problems of living in psychiatric terms.

Our new research, published in the journal PLOS Mental Health, examines how the language of distress has evolved over nearly 80 years. Here’s what we found.

Generic terms for the class of conditions

Generic terms – such as mental illness, psychiatric disorder or psychological problem – have largely escaped attention in debates about the language of mental ill health. These terms refer to mental health conditions as a class.

Many terms are currently in circulation, each an adjective followed by a noun. Popular adjectives include mental, mental health, psychiatric and psychological, and common nouns include condition, disease, disorder, disturbance, illness, and problem. Readers can encounter every combination.

These terms and their components differ in their connotations. Disease and illness sound the most medical, whereas condition, disturbance and problem need not relate to health. Mental implies a direct contrast with physical, whereas psychiatric implicates a medical specialty.

Mental health problem, a recently emerging term, is arguably the least pathologising. It implies that something is to be solved rather than treated, makes no direct reference to medicine, and carries the positive connotations of health rather than the negative connotation of illness or disease.

Arguably, this development points to what cognitive scientist Steven Pinker calls the “euphemism treadmill”, the tendency for language to evolve new terms to escape (at least temporarily) the offensive connotations of those they replace.

English linguist Hazel Price argues that mental health has increasingly come to replace mental illness to avoid the stigma associated with that term.

How has usage changed over time?

In the PLOS Mental Health paper, we examine historical changes in the popularity of 24 generic terms: every combination of the nouns and adjectives listed above.

We explore the frequency with which each term appears from 1940 to 2019 in two massive text data sets representing books in English and diverse American English sources, respectively. The findings are very similar in both data sets.

The figure presents the relative popularity of the top ten terms in the larger data set (Google Books). The 14 least popular terms are combined into the remainder.

Several trends appear. Mental has consistently been the most popular adjective component of the generic terms. Mental health has become more popular in recent years but is still rarely used.

Among nouns, disease has become less widely used while illness has become dominant. Although disorder is the official term in psychiatric classifications, it has not been broadly adopted in public discourse.

Since 1940, mental illness has clearly become the preferred generic term. Although an assortment of alternatives have emerged, it has steadily risen in popularity.

Does it matter?

Our study documents striking shifts in the popularity of generic terms, but do these changes matter? The answer may be: not much.

One study found people think mental disorder, mental illness and mental health problem refer to essentially identical phenomena.

Other studies indicate that labelling a person as having a mental disease, mental disorder, mental health problem, mental illness or psychological disorder makes no difference to people’s attitudes toward them.

We don’t yet know if there are other implications of using different generic terms, but the evidence to date suggests they are minimal.

Is ‘distress’ any better?

Recently, some writers have promoted distress as an alternative to traditional generic terms. It lacks medical connotations and emphasises the person’s subjective experience rather than whether they fit an official diagnosis.

Distress appears 65 times in the 2022 Victorian Mental Health and Wellbeing Act, usually in the expression “mental illness or psychological distress”. By implication, distress is a broad concept akin to but not synonymous with mental ill health.

But is distress destigmatising, as it was intended to be? Apparently not. According to one study, it was more stigmatising than its alternatives. The term may turn us away from other people’s suffering by amplifying it.

So what should we call it?

Mental illness is easily the most popular generic term and its popularity has been rising. Research indicates different terms have little or no effect on stigma and some terms intended to destigmatise may backfire.

We suggest that mental illness should be embraced and the proliferation of alternative terms such as mental health problem, which breed confusion, should end.

Critics might argue mental illness imposes a medical frame. Philosopher Zsuzsanna Chappell disagrees. Illness, she argues, refers to subjective first-person experience, not to an objective, third-person pathology, like disease.

Properly understood, the concept of illness centres the individual and their connections. “When I identify my suffering as illness-like,” Chappell writes, “I wish to lay claim to a caring interpersonal relationship.”

As generic terms go, mental illness is a healthy option.

Nick Haslam receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Naomi Baes receives funding from the Australian Government (Research Training Program Scholarship).

– ref. Mental illness, psychiatric disorder or psychological problem. What should we call mental distress? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/226748

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Bradley, Professor Emeritus (Psychology), Charles Sturt University

When parents are starting their babies in daycare, a common concern is whether it is good for little ones to be away from their primary carers for long periods of time.

But as our recent book Babies in Groups shows, babies as young as six months respond to and enjoy being in groups with other babies.

This can reassure parents their child will gain something at daycare they are mostly missing at home: opportunities to enjoy supervised time in small groups of their peers – eating, learning and playing together.

Our prehistoric ancestors lived, foraged, hunted, defended themselves, and brought up their young in groups. So, it makes sense today’s babies are born with a capacity to enjoy spending time together.

Previous research

Nearly all previous research about babies’ social and emotional development focuses on their relations with adults (typically their mothers) and almost always studied in pairs.

But as we explain in our book, this is because researchers’ assumptions mostly reflect ideas entrenched in Western cultures that make the stay-at-home mother the be-all and end-all for a baby’s healthy development.

Anyone who watches how babies act in larger families, playgrounds, or parent groups, soon sees how attuned they are to group dynamics, especially when around infants like themselves.

Our research

For 25 years we have been researching whether babies are born already adapted to life in groups. Or whether this capacity only develops after they form their first infant-to-adult bond (as existing theory predicts).

Over several studies included in our book, we invited 51 six- to nine-month-olds – previously unknown to each other – into our recording studios. Here we arranged stationary baby chairs into triangles for groups of three or squares for groups of four.

Once parents had fastened their babies into a chair, all adults left the studio and the cameras rolled.

In previous research psychologists found strapping a babies of this age into a chair in a sterile recording studio with just their mum to talk to usually produced a frustrated baby within a minute or two – unless mum entertained her baby with games or toys.

But we found if you introduce babies to two or three other unfamiliar babies the group can run happily for anything up to 25 minutes, even though there are no toys to play with.

Our films show how babies in these groups use many types of communication at once: touching, vocalising, gesturing, changing postures, imitating each other, looking both directly at one another or out of the corners of their eyes, sharing rhythms vocally or by making noises with their hands, plus making a great variety of facial expressions.

This means babies can communicate with several other babies simultaneously. An eight-month-old may start a tentative game of footsie with one while looking at another and banging on the table in time with a third.

Over several minutes quite complex interactions develop. Babies invent games and create forms of music together. If two babies are getting friendly, a third may butt in by making a loud noise to distract them from linking with each other.

Alternatively, if a baby cries, its fellow group-members will likely try to comfort her or him, often successfully – by looking and vocalising, or waving towards, or leaning over and reaching towards, or touching the distressed baby.

This shows us babies have a competence in groups well before they have worked out how to maintain one-to-one attachments to adults. These first appear around eight months of age and continue to develop throughout the second year of life.

What does this mean for daycare centres?

This finding has important implications for babies going to daycare and other early childhood services.

We have seen how centres which organise babies into groups can be less stressful for infants – and educators – than when the top priority is to forge one-to-one bonds between infants and educators.

For example, when several babies are lined up to be fed one-to-one by an educator, mealtimes soon end in tears. Put highchairs in small circles and mealtimes last for up to forty minutes of conversation, imitation and laughter.

So, for parents thinking about how to develop and care for their young child, look for centres which acknowledge and promote babies’ normal interest, pleasure and capacity to engage with others of their own age.

And don’t be worried that you are doing something “bad” for your baby by sending them to be with other children of the same age.

And for all those raising babies at home, the more infants involved in your baby’s life – whether they be cousins or friends made in playgroups – the better for your baby and the better for you.

Ben Bradley has received funding from Charles Sturt University, The British Academy, Centre Support and the Australian Research Council.

Jane Margot Selby receives funding from Charles Sturt University, Centre Support, The British Academy and the Australian Reseach Council.

– ref. Worried about sending your baby to daycare? Our research shows they like being in groups – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/220658

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

Many people today worry about how to find time to keep fit and healthy in the midst of their busy lives. Believe it or not, but this was also a problem in ancient times.

So, how did ancient people deal with it?

A universal problem

The physician Galen, who lived from around 129 to 216 AD, dealt with thousands of patients in the city of Rome.

He used to complain some people didn’t devote enough time to keeping fit. In his treatise, Hygiene, Galen wrote one of his patients, a philosopher called Premigenes, was such a workaholic he stayed inside all the time writing books. Because of this bad lifestyle, Premigenes got sick.

Galen said Premigenes needed to work less, and devote more time to getting exercise and some sun.

Some 2,000 years later, most of us will be able to relate to this. The World Health Organization has a number of recommendations for the amount of exercise one should do each week. But it can be difficult to balance work and other commitments with our health and fitness.

The trade-offs of a busy life

People in the Greco-Roman period recognised that being busy has an effect on health.

The writer Lucian of Samosata, from the 2nd century AD, talks in his essay On Salaried Posts in Great Houses about how certain jobs offered workers no time to maintain their health. A bad diet, endless labour and a lack of sleep all contributed to making them unhealthy:

the sleeplessness, the sweating, and the weariness gradually undermine you, giving rise to consumption, pneumonia, indigestion, or that noble complaint, the gout. You stick it out, however, and often you ought to be in bed, but this is not permitted. They think illness a pretext, and a way of shirking your duties. The general consequences are that you are always pale and look as if you were going to die any minute.

The doctors of the time also noticed this problem. Galen said, in his opinion, one of the determinants of whether we are able to be healthy or not is the amount of free time we have.

He recognised some people had no choice but to be “bound up with the circumstances of their activities” – such as those taken into slavery – but noted others seemed to have

chosen a life caught up in the circumstances of their activities, either through ambition or whatever kind of desire, so they are least able to spend time on the care of their bodies.

Galen was also affected by this problem. As a doctor he had little free time, and his normal routine was often interrupted by patients’ problems. Nonetheless, he explains how, in his 20s, he started adhering to a daily health routine:

after I reached the age of 28, having persuaded myself that there is an art of hygiene, I followed its precepts for the whole of my subsequent life, and was never sick with any disease apart from the occasional ephemeral fever in some degree.

This routine involved eating one full meal each evening, and doing some sort of exercise every day. One of these exercises may have been wrestling, as he also mentions dislocating his shoulder while wrestling at the gym at the age of 35.

One advantage of Galen’s routine was its flexibility. He just had to find some time each day to eat a meal and move his body.

He said many other doctors of his time didn’t keep healthy. They overworked, ate and drank too much, and didn’t exercise enough.

Galen wasn’t saying everyone should take up his routine, however. He noted everyone has a different nature, and people should take up routines that best suit their bodies.

How the ancients kept fit

One wealthy Athenian citizen named Ischomachus, who lived in the 5th century BC, used to keep fit by exercising on his daily commute.

When he had to go into the city, he would run or walk, or alternate between the two. He’d do the same when visiting his farm. Even the famous philosopher Socrates praised Ischomachus for keeping healthy in this efficient way, in spite of always being busy with commitments.

Galen recommended all people should play ball games involving running and throwing to keep fit. Ball games, he thought, were a good option because they exercised the whole body and didn’t require much money or equipment.

For his overweight patients, he would recommend a routine of fast running and a slimming diet – one meal a day, comprised of foods that would fill the patient, but which were “poorly nourishing”.

One doctor from the 7th century AD, Paul of Aegina, also identified how some people let their busy schedules get in the way of their health.

He describes the sort of person who used to have a healthy routine, but no longer follows it due to being busy:

He who spends his time in business ought to consider whether, in the former period of life, he had been in the habit of taking exercise, or whether, though not taking exercise, he bears that habit well, and escapes from diseases by having free perspiration.

Paul recommended busy people lighten their commitments and resume as much of their old routine as possible. If they can’t exercise as they did before, then at least they could eat healthily, he said. The worst thing would be to abandon both healthy eating and exercise.

Developing healthy habits

The philosopher Aristotle said health is partly a matter of personal responsibility. If someone lives an unhealthy lifestyle and doesn’t follow the advice of doctors, it’s no surprise, Aristotle thought, if he or she ends up unhealthy.

Generally speaking, the ancients seem to have believed it is up to each person to find flexible habits that can help them stay fit. And while this can be difficult, they thought it was imperative to a life well-lived – much as we do today.

It seems some things about being human don’t change.

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

– ref. How can busy people also keep fit and healthy? Here’s what the ancient Greeks and Romans did – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/230005

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Brook, Associate Professor of Applied Geology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

When Resources Minister Shane Jones recently unveiled his draft strategy for mineral mining, it was quickly criticised by the Labour opposition as “taking New Zealand backwards”. One environmental group even called it a “love letter to mining companies”.

But the government’s ambition to double the sector’s export value to NZ$2 billion by 2035, with flow-on effects for local employment and regional economies, deserves a broader debate.

In particular, New Zealanders opposed to mineral mining must ask whether it is ethically fair and reasonable to effectively outsource the risks of mining to other countries, while benefiting from the modern technologies those minerals make possible.

The government’s mining strategy aims to produce a list of “critical minerals” for exploration. The International Energy Agency identifies minerals such as copper, lithium, nickel, cobalt and rare earth elements as essential components in many of today’s rapidly growing clean energy technologies – from wind turbines and electricity networks to electric vehicles.

Indeed, according to the United Nations Environment Programme, these critical minerals are increasingly necessary for decarbonising energy systems. One of the three pillars of the draft minerals strategy is the delivery of minerals “for a clean energy transition”. How we source those minerals is an important question.

Environmental impacts of mining

New Zealand has a rich mining history, with a wide variety of resources still extracted from underground and opencast mines. There is also a long history of opposition to mining, especially in national parks and on conservation land, as well as on privately owned hill country.

And there are legitimate concerns about the environmental, social and governance implications of mining. First, it can have devastating environmental effects, especially the extraction of high-value critical minerals that often require enormous “strip ratios” and generate huge volumes of waste rock tailings that must be stored.

Put simply, the strip ratio represents the amount of waste material (also known as overburden) that must be moved to extract a given amount of ore. For example, an overburden thickness of 100 metres and an ore thickness of 50 metres would yield a strip ratio of 2:1.

The actual concentration (known as the “grade”) of the target metal within the ore is the other factor to consider. For example, copper ore usually contains about 0.5% to 2% copper. A high-grade ore may be extracted from a mine with a high strip ratio, potentially generating enormous volumes of waste rock.

The waste is crushed, liquidised into slurry and pumped behind tailings dams, where it desiccates over time. Tailings dams are constructed to grow in height over decades as the mine progresses.

Effective management is integral to the safety of a mine and any downstream population. Tailings dam failures can lead to high-velocity flood disasters. But the well managed and stable tailings storage facility at OceanaGold’s Martha mine at Waihi shows what can be achieved with sufficient engineering and environmental regulation.

Offshoring our environmental footprint

Second, mineral extraction has caused and fuelled decades of unrest and civil war in some countries. The minerals most associated with funding conflict – the “three Ts” of tin, tungsten and tantalum – are present in many everyday products such as smartphones and laptops. Tantalum in particular is listed as a “conflict mineral” by the European Union.

According to the US Geological Survey, the source of tantalum has dramatically changed in recent years. In 2000, Australia produced 45% of global tantalum concentrates, but by 2014 this had dropped to 4%, offset by extraction in the mineral-rich but war-torn Katanga province of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

New Zealand is hardly in the same category. But the country’s mineral deposits are often found in mountainous areas, formed by the heat and pressure associated with tectonic processes over millions of years. Often these upland areas are beautiful national parks.

At the same time, New Zealand will need to use extracted minerals – either from its own mining operations or those of other countries – to make the transition to green energy and maintain present standards of living.

By not exploring the mineral mining potential in its own backyard, while simultaneously consuming those minerals from other sources, New Zealand is conveniently offshoring its own environmental footprint.

To assume foreign landscapes and environments are more expendable raises serious ethical and moral questions that need to be addressed within the current debate over the government’s draft mining strategy.

Reciprocity and obligation

One response might be for New Zealand, where it can, to look at extracting and exporting minerals within its own strict safety and environmental regulations. This would help share the global environmental burden of mineral extraction in a more sustainable way.

Such an approach (which might also be applied to the countries from which we source minerals) also fits with the Māori ethic of reciprocity, tauutuutu. This has been applied to modern economic and environmental thinking, and defined as:

an indigenous concept that places an ethical obligation on communities and enterprises to emphasise balance, reciprocity, and symbiosis in their social and environmental relationships.

Behavioural economics has shown that reciprocal behaviour builds trust, which is crucial for long-term relationships. Countries that embrace reciprocity are better positioned to navigate complex global challenges, achieve UN sustainable development goals, build resilient supply chains, and work toward a green future that energy transition will allow.

In anticipation of the critical minerals list the government has requested, New Zealand needs to consider how it can meet the demands of a new economy, practically as well as morally and ethically.

Martin Brook receives funding from MBIE.

– ref. By not mining vital minerals, NZ is ‘offshoring its own environmental footprint’ – is that fair? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231166

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By C Raina MacIntyre, Professor of Global Biosecurity, NHMRC L3 Research Fellow, Head, Biosecurity Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW Sydney

Australia appears to be experiencing a re-emergence of the infectious disease mpox, formerly called monkeypox.

Some 40 cases have been recorded so far in 2024, already surpassing the total number recorded for 2023 (26). Victoria has reported 24 cases this year, while Queensland saw ten cases reported in May.

There was previously a significant mpox outbreak in 2022, with a total of 144 cases across Australia. All cases since 2022 have been in males, most commonly those aged 30 to 39. Mpox cases are on the rise elsewhere, too.

So what is mpox? And is there a vaccine available? Here’s what to know about this virus.

What is mpox?

Mpox belongs to the orthopoxvirus family, which is also responsible for smallpox.

Symptoms include fever and rash, typically starting on the hands, feet and face. The genitals may also be affected. The rash is infectious until the lesions have scabbed over.

There are two clades, or varieties, of mpox: clade I and clade II. Up to 10% of people infected with clade I may die, compared to 1% or less of those infected with clade II.

Traditionally, both clades of mpox have been endemic in countries in central and western Africa, where it transmits from animals to humans, and has occasionally caused human outbreaks.

Mpox outbreaks began occurring outside Africa in 2018, with cases detected in the United Kingdom, Israel and Singapore in people travelling from Nigeria, which began experiencing outbreaks in 2017.

The 2022 epidemic spread to non-endemic regions such as Europe, the Americas, and Australia, with more than 97,000 cases confirmed globally to date.

These outbreaks were caused by clade IIb, a variant of clade II, with case fatality below 1%. Clade IIb is also behind the current cases in Australia.

How does mpox spread?

Recent research indicates both clades of mpox are undergoing rapid mutations, with genetic changes in clade I that may enhance its transmissibility among humans.

These mutations suggest a shift from its historical zoonotic transmission patterns toward sustained human-to-human spread.

Mpox spreads between people primarily through close contact with infected lesions or bodily fluids. Sexual transmission accounts for most of clade IIb’s spread, especially among high-risk groups like gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.

The pattern of spread appears different for the two clades. Like smallpox, mpox is a respiratory virus and has been found in ambient air, so respiratory transmission is possible.

Clade I is causing large epidemics in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), with more than 20,000 suspected cases since 2023.

The estimated fatality rate in DRC is 4.6%, with 70% of cases and close to 90% of deaths in children under 15.

This suggests respiratory and close-contact transmission are the primary modes of spread in DRC. However, sexual transmission of clade I has also been reported.

Vaccination is our best bet

The primary strategy for preventing further outbreaks of mpox in Australia is vaccination. The recommended shot is the JYNNEOS vaccine, which was developed as a smallpox vaccine.

Older smallpox vaccines are made from a live virus called vaccinia, a related orthopoxvirus that protects against smallpox and mpox. The older vaccines have fully replicating vaccinia virus in them, which can be risky for people with weakened immune systems. The JYNNEOS vaccine is modified so the vaccinia virus doesn’t replicate in the body and is safer for people with conditions such as HIV.

For full protection, two doses are required at least 28 days apart. Two doses given before exposure to the virus is 84% effective in preventing mpox and protection is believed to last for at least a couple of years.

Cases may still occur in people who are vaccinated, but these infections are typically milder.

The vaccine is also effective after exposure to the virus, but less so than if it’s given beforehand.

Who should get vaccinated?

Australian guidelines recommend vaccination in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. They also recommend vaccination for sex workers, and people with HIV who may be at risk of exposure to mpox.

Health-care workers who treat or are likely to treat patients with mpox are advised to consider having the vaccine.

Post-exposure vaccination is recommended for people who public health authorities classify as having had a high-risk mpox contact in the previous 14 days.

Australia’s approach to the 2022 mpox outbreak involved ensuring early access to vaccination and working closely with LGBTQ+ community and health organisations. These organisations raised awareness of mpox symptoms, modes of transmission, and vaccination.

In 2023, 48% of gay and bisexual men in Sydney and Melbourne reported having received at least one dose of mpox vaccine. Rapid uptake of vaccines may have contributed to low rates of mpox in Australia.

Future focus

It appears mpox has become established as a sexually transmitted infection in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men. Achieving and maintaining high rates of vaccination in this group will be crucial in long-term prevention efforts.

Ongoing surveillance is also important, while contact tracing will help minimise the size of any clusters, facilitating post-exposure vaccination where warranted. In Australia, state and territory health departments have extensive experience in contact tracing and work with affected communities.

Australia has so far been successful in avoiding a major epidemic, including in early 2023 when Sydney WorldPride brought thousands of gay men from around the world to Sydney.

In the next few years, unequal access to vaccination around the world will likely mean continued introductions of mpox from settings with lower vaccination rates. Ensuring equitable vaccine access is vital to global and local disease control.

A global approach to controlling mpox is essential, as infections in one country can spread rapidly internationally, as the 2022 epidemic showed.

C Raina MacIntyre receives funding from NHMRC and MRFF. She has been on advisory boards for Bavarian Nordic and received funding for a smallpox workshop she conducted in 2019 from Emergent Biosolutions, Bavarian Nordic, Siga technologies and Meridien Medical. She is on the WHO SAGE Smallpox and Monkey Pox Ad Hoc Advisory Group.

Andrew Grulich and Mo Hammoud 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. Mpox is on the rise in Australia. Here’s what to know about the virus – and who should get vaccinated – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231289

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samara McPhedran, Principal Research Fellow, Griffith University

After last week’s tragic double murder suicide in the Perth suburb of Floreat, questions have been raised about why police did not remove the killer’s legally owned firearms. Allegedly, his daughter alerted police multiple times that she and her mother believed they were at imminent risk of harm, but no action was taken.

Under current firearms laws, Western Australia’s police have very broad powers to seize firearms if they believe there is a risk of harm being suffered by any person. We do not know why those powers were not used.

However, the WA government has announced it is going to change the law to make it mandatory for police to remove firearms from anyone who is the subject of a domestic violence complaint.

Will this really protect domestic violence victims, or is it just a political ploy to deflect attention from how police respond to domestic violence incidents in the state?

How do police assess risk in domestic violence cases?

There are many different ways for police to deal with domestic violence incidents. This includes, for example, issuing a protection order, taking a perpetrator into custody, or referring the victim to other services.

Risk-assessment processes help police decide what type of response is most appropriate. Generally, when police conduct risk assessments they use a combination of interviews with the victim (and sometimes the perpetrator), professional judgement, and structured “tick box” tools.

These tools consider indicators such as whether:

• the victim is fearful
• the perpetrator has ever threatened to kill them
• the perpetrator has ever physically assaulted them
• the perpetrator has ever threatened them with a weapon of any kind.

Whether the perpetrator has access to firearms is included as part of the risk assessment.

Risk assessment is imperfect and not always able to detect “subtle” or “hidden” forms of abuse. How accurate risk assessment is also depends on things like the experience of the police officer and what information is disclosed to them.

How police respond to domestic violence can also be affected by their perceptions of the victim and/or perpetrator, as well as by their own beliefs and knowledge about domestic violence.

Is domestic abuse with firearms common?

Homicide statistics are held by different agencies and it is difficult to get exact breakdowns of method by homicide type.

According to the most recent figures from the Australian government’s National Homicide Monitoring Program, in 2022–23, there were 75 female homicide victims nationally. Of those, eight were killed by a gunshot wound.

We do not know how many of those firearm deaths were domestic and family violence related, but a different source, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, says in 2022 (the most recent data) there were 71 female domestic and family violence related homicide victims nationwide, none of whom were killed with a firearm.

Australian Bureau of Statistics data also shows Western Australia has very few domestic and family violence related homicide deaths involving firearms.

Will mandatory gun removal make a practical difference?

It is hard to say whether mandatory firearm removal will make a difference to domestic and family violence homicides. On the surface, it looks like it should, but domestic violence is complex.

WA has so few firearm-related domestic and family violence fatalities that it is unlikely we will ever be able to determine whether anything has changed. We also do not know how many homicides may occur in cases where firearms have been removed using existing police powers, but where another method was used.

Moving past the numbers, there is a concern the proposed laws may create a false sense of security for victims, as well as lead to police complacency. Just because guns have been removed does not mean a victim is safe.

What should the next steps be?

Sadly, we see many cases where victims of lethal domestic and family violence tried repeatedly to get help in the lead up to their deaths. Too often, the systems that are meant to protect them did not listen and did not hold the perpetrator accountable.

Lawyers, advocates and families in WA are coming forward and saying things need to change. Yet the government has been silent on how it plans to better protect domestic and family violence victims where there is no firearm present.

In Queensland, after a series of high-profile domestic and family violence related deaths, the government convened an independent commission of inquiry into Queensland police service responses to domestic and family violence. That inquiry revealed a need for better risk assessment practices, improved police training and education, and system-wide reforms so that victims are taken seriously.

If the WA government genuinely wants to protect people from domestic and family violence, it must stop trying to sweep difficult questions under the rug. The reality is that headline-grabbing laws cannot fix systemic problems.

Dr Samara McPhedran does not does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that might benefit from this article. She has been appointed to a number of firearms advisory panels and committees, most recently as a member of the Queensland Ministerial Advisory Panel on Firearms, and as a previous member of the Commonwealth Firearms Advisory Council. She does not receive any financial remuneration or other reward for these activities. She has held past memberships with/volunteered for a range of not-for-profit firearm-related organisations, women’s advocacy groups, and victim support charities. She is not, and has never been, a member of any political party. The views expressed are those of the author alone.

– ref. New laws in WA would take guns away from people accused of domestic violence. Will they protect women? – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231476

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dylan McConnell, Senior Research Associate, Renewable Energy & Energy Systems Analyst, UNSW Sydney

In Australia’s electricity system, more and more energy from sunlight and wind is being “spilled” – or not converted to electricity.

In the last year, the amount of renewable energy spilled was roughly equivalent to the annual consumption of 750,000 typical households, or three months of consumption for the state of South Australia. Some have attributed these dynamics as being driven by a “solar power glut”.

At face value, this seems like a terrible waste of renewable energy, even more so in the face of a slump in rate of renewable energy growth and the pressing need to reduce emissions.

But the story is more complex. Such spillage, also known as curtailment, is also an expected and efficient feature of renewable energy systems.

What is ‘spilled energy’?

The energy market operator defines spilled energy as “energy from variable renewable energy resources that could be generated but is unable to be delivered”.

It represents energy that could have been converted to electricity, but wasn’t. The unconverted energy simply remains in the environment.

It is typically broken down into two categories, based on the cause of the spillage. Firstly, there is curtailment based on the operation of the transmission network. Power generation can be constrained due to operation limits or congestion in the network, resulting in spilled energy. This can occur when there are too many generators in the same area, trying to send power through the same transmission line. Secondly, a generator may reduce output due to low market prices, which the operator calls “economic spill” also known as “economic curtailment”.

The amount of this curtailment has been growing in recent years. In the last 12 months this curtailed energy represents more than 8.5% of the total potential. This varies considerably by region, with as much 12% spilled in Victoria in the last year.

Why is spillage efficient?

It doesn’t make economic sense to try and utilise every renewable electron. The cost to store, transmit and utilise every single watt of power from a renewable energy source would be exorbitant.

For example, we don’t build additional highway lanes to accommodate traffic for the busiest single hour on an Easter weekend. In a similar way, it doesn’t make sense to build transmission to ensure every single watt is transferred. This would be expensive and result in severely underused infrastucture. For the more common weather conditions – when it isn’t blowing a gale or in the middle of a sunny day – the network would be considerably oversized.

Studies that model energy systems primarily powered by renewables commonly find it is more economically efficient to build additional renewable capacity, and spill some generation when there is an abundance of supply above demand.

The Integrated System Plan, a roadmap for the electricity system prepared by Australia’s energy market operator, projects an increase of renewable energy curtailment in the best case scenario. Approximately 20% of renewable generation is expected to be spilled by 2050. This is roughly equivalent to the current consumption of the state of New South Wales.

On one level, this shouldn’t be surprising.

Households often buy larger solar PV system relative to their consumption.

And it’s now common practice to install solar panels in excess of the capacity of the inverter to convert the power and send it to the home or grid. This is usually done to maximise use of the inverter and exports across a limited connection.

These two examples are broadly analogous to what happens on the grid, with economic curtailment and transmission-based curtailment.

Are current levels efficient?

At a system-wide level, current levels of spillage are above what was expected. The integrated system plan suggests curtailment rates of around 5% might be considered appropriate for today’s penetration of renewable energy, compared with the today’s level of around 8.5%. This difference relates to how things are working in the real world, including how rules around accessing transmission capacity currently work.

A recent discussion paper from the Australian Energy Market Commission highlights this mismatch, and suggest that “in the absence of reform, actual levels of curtailment are likely to exceed the levels forecast in the ISP”, pointing to issues with the current arrangements for generators accessing transmission capacity.

They imply the current system is resulting in higher than expected congestion, leading to increased costs for consumers and potentially unnecessary transmission builds. Managing transmission access remains a challenge for developers building new renewables projects.

Australia’s fleet of coal-fired power generators is another key driver of economic curtailment. While coal generators are more flexible than commonly understood, they have their limits. Specifically, they can only reduce operation down so far, to so-called minimum generation levels. Below these levels, they have to turn off completely, which is a costly exercise.

Coal generators therefore prefer to continue to generate, even at negative prices, rather than completely shut down. As a consequence, and to avoid paying to generate, renewable energy is spilled, rather than coal shutdown. In the context of the energy transition and the need to reduce emissions we actually have a glut of coal, rather than renewables.

Where to next?

The curtailment story is complex. On the one hand it is an expected phenomenon, and one we should get used to as we transition more toward a renewable-dominated electricity system. We should, however, be encouraging consumers to make use of this abundance of renewable generation where possible, such as by shifting their useage to the middle of the day.

On the other hand, some of these levels of curtailment are beyond what is expected. That’s in part because we still have an excess of coal power. We separately need to ensure grid congestion is properly managed, and access arrangements are reformed, to prevent unnecessary costs to consumers and renewable developers alike.

Dylan McConnell’s current position is supported by the ‘Race for 2030’ Cooperative Research Centre.

– ref. Should we worry about wasting renewable energy? Here’s why ‘spilling’ excess power is expected – and efficient – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/229489

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maria Vieira, Lecturer, University of South Australia

Last week, Science and Industry Minister Ed Husic announced with little fanfare that the position of Australia’s Women in STEM Ambassador would be discontinued, effective three days later.

The role was created in October 2018 “to encourage girls and women to study and work in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields”. Astrophysicist Lisa Harvey-Smith held the job for its entire existence.

Was the ambassador a success? It’s hard to quantify exactly, but Department of Industry figures show the number of women in STEM-qualified occupations increased by 38% during the ambassador’s tenure, compared with a 10% rise for men. University enrolments for women in STEM courses also grew by 18%, compared with a 9% increase for men.

So does that mean the end of the ambassador position is a setback for gender equity in Australia? Well, not necessarily.

Reasons for discontinuing

The decision came a few months after the publication of a major independent report on diversity in STEM commissioned by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources.

The report indicates more effort is needed to remove cultural and systemic barriers that hinder individuals from diverse backgrounds from entering and sustaining careers in STEM. It also calls for specific changes to the government’s Women in STEM programs, including that “the current Women in STEM Ambassador program should not be extended”.

So the government’s decision is based on considered, independent advice.

What was the reason for this advice? Over the past decade, Australia has had hundreds of disconnected STEM activities that have not been very effective in addressing gender equity issues.

Although the statistics shared by the ambassador appear promising at first glance, a deeper analysis reveals a less encouraging reality. For instance, the most recent data shows that, between 2021 and 2022, the number of women in STEM-qualified occupations only increased by the same percentage as men (4%).

Also, even though university enrolments for women in STEM courses have increased, this growth is not reflected in completion rates. For example, only 15% of women who had completed their studies by 2016 graduated in STEM fields, compared to 33% of men, indicating issues with retaining women in these courses.

Additionally, this statistic does not account for the significant disparities between different STEM fields. While women make up over half of the student enrolments and completions in fields such as agriculture, natural and environmental sciences, they remain significantly underrepresented in engineering (18% of completions) and technology (23% of completions). These initiatives lacked a strong research background and effective evaluation, failing to analyse each STEM field with its unique characteristics.

The report found “a need for a centralised approach to drive ambitious progress on diversity in STEM across all sectors”.

What it means for the future of equity

If this decision is any guide, the government is likely to implement more of the report’s suggested changes. So what can we anticipate?

One expected change is a broader perspective on equity in STEM. We are likely to see more attention to other kinds of diversity beyond gender, and also recognition of non-binary approaches to gender. This approach may address equity more systematically. Including intersectional factors such as disabilities, race, Indigenous status and socioeconomic background may benefit more disadvantaged communities.

Additionally, equity programs may have a stronger basis in evidence and long-term orientation. The report emphasises the importance of greater coordination across programs to avoid duplication, lack of connection, and missed opportunities.

While the overall approach may have more centralised coordination, the functions now carried out by the ambassador are likely to be split up among multiple people from diverse backgrounds. This would place less weight on a single individual and also broaden the scope of the program’s advice, which is again a positive change.

Monitoring and evaluation too should receive more attention, becoming more focused with clear indicators of success or failure.

We can also expect more reporting of what has been learned from past programs, so that funders and organisations can make future efforts more effective.

Potential drawbacks

While the changes proposed in the report are positive overall, they could also have drawbacks.

One example is the risk that national centralisation may make states and regions less able to address their own specific needs. In primary and secondary education, for instance, each state operates independently, which might affect the effectiveness of national initiatives.

Another concern is that a long-term orientation and more stringent requirements for data and record-keeping may make for more bureaucracy. This could be time-consuming and affect innovation.

The report also calls for other action to promote diversity via migration, education, grant allocation and workplace changes. However, not everything can be a high priority.

The success of efforts to increased diversity in STEM will depend on the government’s ability to demonstrate a strong commitment and maintain transparency. This involves setting clear priorities and focusing on key areas that can create the most significant impact.

Maria Vieira 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. Australia’s key program for gender equity in STEM was scrapped last week. This could actually be good news – tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/231321

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julia J Rucklidge, Professor of Psychology, University of Canterbury

Antenatal depression affects 15% to 21% of pregnant women worldwide. It can influence birth outcomes and children’s development, as well as increase the risk of post-natal depression.

Current treatments like therapy can be inaccessible and antidepressants can carry risks for developing infants.

Over the past two decades, research has highlighted that poor nutrition is a contributing risk factor to mental health challenges. Most pregnant women in New Zealand aren’t adhering to nutritional guidelines, according to a longitudinal study. Only 3% met the recommendations for all food groups.

Another cohort study carried out in Brazil shows that ultra-processed foods (UPF) accounted for at least 30% of daily dietary energy during pregnancy, displacing healthier options.

UPFs are chemically manufactured and contain additives to improve shelf life, as well as added sugar and salt. Importantly, they are low in essential micronutrients (vitamins and minerals).

The consumption of these foods is concerning because a nutrient-poor diet during pregnancy has been linked to poorer mental health outcomes in children. This includes depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, and inattention.

Increasing nutrients in maternal diets and reducing consumption of UPFs could improve the mental health of the mother and the next generation. Good nutrition can have lifelong benefits for the offspring.

However, there are multiple factors that mean diet change alone may not in itself be sufficient to address mental health challenges. Supplementing with additional nutrients may also be important to address nutritional needs during pregnancy.

Micronutrients as treatment for depression

Our earlier research suggests micronutrient supplements for depression have benefits outside pregnancy.

But until now there have been no published randomised controlled trials specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of broad-spectrum micronutrients on antenatal depression and overall functioning.

The NUTRIMUM trial, which ran between 2017 and 2022, recruited 88 women in their second trimester of pregnancy who reported moderate depressive symptoms. They were randomly allocated to receive either 12 capsules (four pills, three times a day) of a broad-spectrum micronutrient supplement or an active placebo containing iodine and riboflavin for a 12-week period.

Micronutrient doses were generally between the recommended dietary allowance and the tolerable upper level.

Based on clinician ratings, micronutrients significantly improved overall psychological functioning compared to the placebo. The findings took into account all noted changes based on self-assessment and clinician observations. This includes sleep, mood regulation, coping, anxiety and side effects.

Both groups reported similar reductions in symptoms of depression. More than three quarters of participants were in remission at the end of the trial. But 69% of participants in the micronutrient group rated themselves as “much” or “very much” improved, compared to 39% in the placebo group.

Participants taking the micronutrients also experienced significantly greater improvements in sleep and overall day-to-day functioning, compared to participants taking the placebo. There were no group differences on measures of stress, anxiety and quality of life.

Importantly, there were no group differences in reported side effects, and reports of suicidal thoughts dropped over the course of the study for both groups. Blood tests confirmed increased vitamin levels (vitamin C, D, B12) and fewer deficiencies in the micronutrient group.

Micronutrients were particularly helpful for women with chronic mental health challenges and those who had taken psychiatric medications in the past. Those with milder symptoms improved with or without the micronutrients, suggesting general care and monitoring might suffice for some women.

The benefits of micronutrients were comparable to psychotherapy but with less contact. There are no randomised controlled trials of antidepressant medication to compare these results.

Retention in the study was good (81%) and compliance excellent (90%).

Beyond maternal mental health

We followed the infants of mothers enrolled in the NUTRIMUM trial (who were therefore exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy) for 12 months, alongside infants from the general population of Aotearoa New Zealand.

This second group of infants from the general population contained a smaller sub-group who were exposed to antidepressant medication for the treatment of antenatal depression.

We assessed the neuro-behavioural development of each infant within the first four weeks of life, and temperament up to one year after birth.

These observational follow-ups showed positive effects of micronutrients on the infants’ ability to regulate their behaviour. These results were on par with or better than typical pregnancies, and better than treatments with antidepressants.

Infants exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy were significantly better at attending to external stimuli. They were also better able to block out external stimuli during sleep. They showed fewer signs of stress and had better muscle tone compared to infants not exposed to micronutrients.

They also displayed greater ability to interact with their environment. They were better at regulating their emotional state and had fewer abnormal muscle reflexes than infants exposed to antidepressant medication in pregnancy.

Reassuringly, micronutrients had no negative impact on infant temperament.

These findings highlight the potential of micronutrients as a safe and effective alternative to traditional medication treatments for antenatal depression.

The prenatal environment sets the foundation for a child’s future. Further investigation into the benefits of micronutrient supplementation would gives us more confidence in their use for other perinatal (from the start of pregnancy to a year after birth) mental health issues. This could provide future generations with a better start to life.

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Dr Hayley Bradley to this research project.

Julia J Rucklidge receives or has received funding from Health Research Council of NZ, University of Canterbury Foundation, Waterloo Foundation, GAMA Foundation, Foundation for Excellence in Mental Health Care, and Canterbury Medical Research Foundation.

Elena Moltchanova, Roger Mulder, and Siobhan A Campbell 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. For women with antenatal depression, micronutrients might help them and their babies – new study – https://theconversation.com/for-women-with-antenatal-depression-micronutrients-might-help-them-and-their-babies-new-study-228097

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Falconer, Lecturer, T.C. Beirne School of Law, The University of Queensland

In recent weeks, Southern Cryonics – the southern hemisphere’s only cryopreservation facility, located in rural New South Wales – announced it had successfully cryopreserved its first patient.

There are only a handful of cryopreservation facilities across the globe – two in the United States, and one each in Russia, China, Australia and Switzerland. If the claims made on their websites and in the press are accurate, these facilities likely have no more than 600 patients in cryonic storage in total.

Media reports however suggest interest in cryopreservation has risen since the onset of the COVID pandemic, and thousands of people around the world have signed up to be cryopreserved after their death.

So, what is cryopreservation and what are its legal ramifications?

What is cryopreservation?

Cryopreservation is the process of using extreme cold to preserve biological material (such as semen, blood and tissue samples) for an extended time. The first living thing to be cryopreserved was a fowl sperm in the 1940s; the first person was cryopreserved in 1967.

To cryopreserve a person, the most important step is a process called “vitrification”. First, the blood is pumped out of the body. It is replaced with a chemical protectant designed to partially replace the water in the body’s cells with a chemical mixture that prevents the formation of ice (not unlike the antifreeze found in car engines).

The body of the “patient” is then placed in something akin to a sleeping bag and sealed in a dewar – a large vat of liquid nitrogen – and maintained at a temperature of -196°C until the time for resurrection comes.

The ultimate aim is for the cryopreserved patient to be reanimated at a future time when medical science has advanced sufficiently to cure them of whatever caused their initial “death”. However, there’s no evidence to suggest it will ever happen in the future.

A possible legal minefield

While its proponents describe cryopreservation as “a second chance at life”, scientists are quick to point out the chances of a successful reanimation are slim.

A person has to be declared legally dead before their body can be cryopreserved, meaning a successful reanimation would truly be a second (legal) life for the revived patient.

It could also be a legal minefield.

Questions that arise include:

• are you the same person in your second life as you were in your first, or are you a new legal person entirely?

• what happens to the legal obligations you undertook in your first life when you reawaken in your second?

• are you still bound by the phone contract you entered into?

• do you have to restart your mortgage repayments, and is your property even still your property?

The answer to the last question is likely to be “no”. A dead person cannot own property so when they die, their estate – their money and material possessions – is distributed to others according to their will (or, if they die without a will in place, according to the rules of intestacy).

This means, short of radically rewriting our succession laws, if someone is successfully reanimated, none of the wealth or belongings they previously enjoyed will be available to them.

This creates the possibility of “cryonic refugees” – people who wake from cryopreservation in a future time with no social or community ties to rely on and no funds to live off.

In the US, one cryonics facility has attempted to get around this issue by encouraging patients to place their assets in long-term trusts.

A trust is a legal structure whereby Person A becomes the legal owner of a property, but can only use it for the benefit of Person B. There are particular rules about who Person B can be – they have to be legally identifiable, for example, and must be able to claim the trust property within a set time period (80 years in many Australian jurisdictions).

In the case of the cryonics trust, Person B is the reanimated patient – someone of uncertain legal identity (remember, we don’t know if the reanimated patient is the same legal person across their two lives or not) with no guarantee of claiming the trust property within the necessary time period.

These are certainly reasons for lawyers to be sceptical. And of course, even if the trusts are upheld, there is no guarantee the assets they contain will retain their value in an unknown future world.

Other legal grey areas

Even prior to reanimation, however, a cryopreserved patient’s finances can present legal difficulties.

While the upfront costs of the initial cryopreservation procedure – which can come in at more than A$150,000 – are often covered by life insurance policies or a one-off payment in a will, the fact that cryonic storage is intended to last for the very long term raises questions about how ongoing bills will be paid far into the future.

There are even historic examples of cryonics facilities threatening to remove patients from suspension unless outstanding storage bills are paid.

Would such an action constitute murder? Can you kill someone who is already dead?

To reach an answer, the law will likely require a test case.

Kate Falconer 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. You can now be frozen after death in Australia. If you get revived in the future, will you still legally be the same person? – https://theconversation.com/you-can-now-be-frozen-after-death-in-australia-if-you-get-revived-in-the-future-will-you-still-legally-be-the-same-person-230876

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Smart, Lecturer and Researcher (Speech Pathology) – School of Allied Health, Curtin University

There is increasing media interest about surgical procedures on new babies for tongue tie. Some hail it as a miracle cure, others view it as barbaric treatment, though adverse outcomes are rare.

Tongue tie occurs when the tissue under the tongue is attached to the lower gum or floor of the mouth in a way that can restrict the movement or range of the tongue. This can impact early breastfeeding in babies. It affects an estimated 8% of children under one year of age.

While there has been an increase in tongue tie releases (also called division or frenotomy), it’s important to keep this in perspective relative to the increase in breastfeeding rates.

The World Health Organization recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life, with breastfeeding recommended into the second year of life and beyond for the health of mother and baby as well as optimal growth. Global rates of breastfeeding infants for the first six months have increased from 38% to 48% over the past decade. So, it is not surprising there is also an increase in the number of babies being referred globally with breastfeeding challenges and potential tongue tie.

An Australian study published in 2023 showed that despite a 25% increase in referrals for tongue tie division between 2014 and 2018, there was no increase in the number of tongue tie divisions performed. Tongue tie surgery rates increased in Australia in the decade from 2006 to 2016 (from 1.22 per 1,000 population to 6.35) for 0 to 4 year olds. There is no data on surgery rates in Australia over the last eight years.

Tongue tie division isn’t always appropriate but it can make a big difference to the babies who need it. More referrals doesn’t necessarily mean more procedures are performed.

How tongue tie can affect babies

When tongue tie (ankyloglossia) restricts the movement of the tongue, it can make it more difficult for a baby to latch onto the mother’s breast and painlessly breastfeed.

Earlier this month, the International Consortium of Oral Ankylofrenula Professionals released a tongue tie position statement and practice guideline. Written by a range of health professionals, the guidelines define tongue tie as a functional diagnosis that can impact breastfeeding, eating, drinking and speech. The guidelines provide health professionals and families with information on the assessment and management of tongue tie.

Tongue tie release has been shown to improve latch during breastfeeding, reduce nipple pain and improve breast and bottle feeding. Early assessment and treatment are important to help mothers breastfeed for longer and address any potential functional problems.

Where to get advice

If feeding isn’t going well, it may cause pain for the mother or there may be signs the baby isn’t attaching properly to the breast or not getting enough milk. Parents can seek skilled help and assessment from a certified lactation consultant or International Board-Certified Lactation Consultant who can be found via online registry.

Alternatively, a health professional with training and skills in tongue tie assessment and division can assist families. This may include a doctor, midwife, speech pathologist or dentist with extended skills, training and experience in treating babies with tongue tie.

When access to advice or treatment is delayed, it can lead to unnecessary supplementation with bottle feeds, early weaning from breastfeeding and increased parental anxiety.

Getting a tongue tie assessment

During assessment, a qualified health professional will collect a thorough case history, including pregnancy and birth details, do a structural and functional assessment, and conduct a comprehensive breastfeeding or feeding assessment.

They will view and thoroughly examine the mouth, including the tongue’s movement and lift. The appearance of where the tissue attaches to the underside of the tongue, the ability of the tongue to move and how the baby can suck also needs to be properly assessed.

Treatment decisions should focus on the concerns of the mother and baby and the impact of current feeding issues. Tongue tie division as a baby is not recommended for the sole purpose of avoiding speech problems in later life if there are no feeding concerns for the baby.

Treatment options

The Australian Dental Association’s 2020 guidelines provide a management pathway for babies diagnosed with tongue tie.

Once feeding issues are identified and if a tongue tie is diagnosed, non-surgical management to optimise positioning, latch and education for parents should be the first-line approach.

If feeding issues persist during follow-up assessment after non-surgical management, a tongue tie division may be considered. Tongue tie release may be one option to address functional challenges associated with breastfeeding problems in babies.

There are risks associated with any procedure, including tongue tie release, such as bleeding. These risks should be discussed with the treating practitioner before conducting any laser, scissor or scalpel tongue tie procedure.

Post-release support by a certified lactation consultant or feeding specialist is necessary after a tongue tie division. A post-release treatment plan should be developed by a team of health professionals including advice and support for breastfeeding to address both the mother and baby’s individual needs.

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Raymond J. Tseng in the writing of this article.

Sharon Smart is Vice Chair for the International Consortium of oral Ankylofrenula Professionals and Treasurer for the Australasian Society of Tethered Oral Tissues. These are volunteer roles.

David Todd is chair for the Australasian Society for Tethered Oral Tissue. This is a voluntary role.

Monica J Hogan has a small private practice where she sees mothers and babies for tongue tie assessment, treatment and review.

– ref. Debate over tongue tie procedures in babies continues. Here’s why it can be beneficial for some infants – https://theconversation.com/debate-over-tongue-tie-procedures-in-babies-continues-heres-why-it-can-be-beneficial-for-some-infants-230008

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachael Sharman, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, University of the Sunshine Coast

Family meetings are often touted as an effective way to resolve conflicts, work out some shared goals and bring the family together.

They seem to wax and wane in popularity. But as Google Trends shows, there has been a steady growth in people searching for information about family meetings over the past decade, with a spike during 2021, at the height of the pandemic.

I’m a psychology researcher interested family dynamics and how they affect children’s development. Here are some of the potential benefits – and risks – of holding regular family meetings.

Do you need family meetings?

Well, it depends.

People sometimes question the difference between a family meeting and, say, dinner.

If you all get together at mealtimes and engage constructively with plenty of conversation, it may well be redundant (and a waste of your kids’ valuable play time) to throw in an extra meeting just for the sake of it.

However, some families (including situations where parents are shift workers or FIFO workers) may find getting everyone together around the table on a regular basis quite challenging.

How to hold a productive family meeting

Regular family meetings certainly can have some value – especially if everyone gets a voice, feels heard and feels they can speak freely.

These type of meetings could be framed as an opportunity to:

• catch up with what everyone is doing and feeling

• inform each other about upcoming events or challenges

• genuinely canvass different opinions on how best to move forward.

A positive family meeting ensures everyone (even the quiet kid) is asked their opinion, and can speak their mind without interruption or criticism.

Consider the children’s ages and what issues are actually not up for them to decide. Children don’t get to vote on having ice cream every night for dinner.

At the end of the day, families are not pure democracies. While a child’s brain is still developing, they aren’t ready to forecast outcomes or hypothesise solutions. They rely on their parents to help them do that.

Meetings at different stages of family life

The pre-adolescent child lives in the here and now. What is right in front of them is what they can understand.

The idea of moving house, for example, may seem catastrophic; they might feel they’re being taken away from their school, sports and friends. Using a family meeting to hear their concerns or fears and work together on solutions or compromises might prove useful.

Teenagers are typically quite capable, but it’s developmentally normal for them to feel their emotions very keenly. Their reactions may appear, to adult eyes, a little overwhelming in the moment. Give them time at family meetings to think and process, and articulate their position.

While there are few peer-reviewed studies on family meetings, research does show they can work where there are serious issues to discuss.

For example, family meetings involving adult siblings in the case of elder care or palliative care have been trialled with moderate success.

In general, keeping lines of communication open and ensuring even the family wallflower has a regular contribution sounds positive. But there’s also a wrong way to hold family meetings.

What not to do

There’s a notable lack of actual research around family meetings involving children, even though they are prominently recommended in pop psychology.

Given the paucity of research in this field, I had a quick trawl through some threads on Quora and Reddit, where adults discussed whether their family meetings as children were useful. Many responses revealed some less-than-helpful experiences.

Some described family meetings as being dominated – usually by one parent – to dictate to everyone else in the family what was happening (from their point of view only).

A dictator parent might, for example, use a family meeting to issue orders about what they expected of everyone else (without allowing any feedback on their own performance).

People spoke about:

• having chores assigned to them (with no negotiation)

• parental decisions (such as moving house or schools) being imposed with zero input or feedback allowed from those affected

• a sense that not everyone could speak freely or safely.

Research tells us authoritarian parenting (where communication goes one way only, parents are inflexible and don’t listen) leads to a range of negative impacts on children. These can include anxiety, poor self esteem and feelings of failure.

A weaponised family meeting from the family dictator may well prove extremely detrimental.

It may even go as far as inducing learned helplessness. This is where people “learn” their voice is unimportant, and just give up even trying to have a say.

Others remembered a family meeting was only ever called when divorce or death was about to ensue.

This associates family meetings with a sense of impending doom. Unsurprisingly, this left some adults with a very strong aversion to the idea.

All in all, it seems the concept of a family meeting is a reasonable one. But like most things in life, the devil is in the detail.

As one US study put it:

Just holding meetings does not matter, but inclusiveness of those meetings does matter.

Rachael Sharman 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. Could family meetings help you get on better with your kids? Yes – but they can also go horribly wrong – https://theconversation.com/could-family-meetings-help-you-get-on-better-with-your-kids-yes-but-they-can-also-go-horribly-wrong-231274