Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Beckett, Senior Lecturer (Food Science and Human Nutrition), School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle

Personal bests, competition wins, new challenges – athletes, and particularly endurance athletes, tend to want to push themselves hard to perform. So it makes sense that there is a big interest in sports supplements, like running gels and protein powders.

We all need macronutrients: carbohydrates, proteins and fats that give us energy and build structures like muscles and other cells in our bodies.

When we are very physically active, like long-distance runners, cyclists or triathletes, our need for both energy and building blocks for muscles and other cells increases because of the extra work our bodies are doing.

So supplements – such as sports gels or protein powders – that contain these macronutrients might make sense. But can they do anything that food can’t?

Read more:
Stop hating on pasta – it actually has a healthy ratio of carbs, protein and fat

What is in sports gels?

Sports gels (also known as energy gels) are essentially carbohydrate supplements. They contain simple sugars like maltodextrin, fructose, and glucose. These sugars don’t need much digestion to be absorbed and used as energy. Sugars are the easiest form of energy for our bodies to use.

During long periods of exercise our stored sources of energy get depleted. Our blood sugar drops and we use the glycogen stored in our muscles. So during long bouts of exercise, athletes like long-distance cyclists and runners as well as players in extended length “stop and start” type sports, such as soccer need to replace these stores.

The research into the benefit of carbohydrate supplementation during exercise isn’t new. It dates back as far back as the 1924 Boston Marathon.

The gel forms are a bit more modern, taking off in the 1980s and 1990s. For some people and sports, they have replaced the sweet drinks used previously. Gels have the advantage of being a more concentrated form than a drink, which means less to carry and less to ingest for the same carbohydrate kick.

What about protein powders?

Protein powders are exactly what the name suggests. They are typically casein or whey (proteins found in milk) but can come in plant-based forms too.

Protein won’t give you the quick energy boost that sugars do, even though protein and carbohydrates have the same energy value (meaning gram for gram they have the same amount of calories).

This is because proteins are more complicated for the body to break down and use. But protein is not just important for energy. It provides important building blocks for most of our body’s structures, including our muscles. This is why protein powders are popular with weight lifters and other power-based athletes.

But can food do the same thing?

Plenty of foods are rich in carbohydrates and proteins. Honey, dried fruits, bananas and even those half-time orange wedges are all potential carbohydrate sources for athletes.

Consuming carbohydrates in these forms has been shown to have the same benefits as gels during exercise.

For protein, milk, eggs and meats are all great sources.

Food sources also have the added benefit of being complex, which means they have other good things in them in addition to the macros, including vitamins and minerals, and bioactive compounds which promote good health.

Foods that are whole (unprocessed) or minimally processed are the most cost-effective means to obtain a mix of nutrients needed for rest and recovery after exercise, as well as during. They might taste a bit better too.

Read more:
Ozempic helps weight loss by making you feel full. But certain foods can do the same thing – without the side-effects

Why supplement then?

But, the supplements do have some benefits. They are highly concentrated, meaning you can get a lot in quickly, with less to carry and less chance of feeling overly full.

So they are but are generally considered by athletes as more convenient and are also linked to less gut discomfort (like cramps and diarrhoea).

The processed and packaged nature also means you know exactly what and how much you are getting, which might be important for some athletes to keep track of.

Any downsides of macro supplements?

Macro supplements can be expensive, and they can use a lot of packaging. The huge variety of products on the market also means products could contain lots of other ingredients (for better and for worse). Some sports gels contain stimulants like caffeine or preservatives like salts. Some protein powders contain added sugar.

And like all supplements, they are not without their risks.

Highly concentrated sports gels can cause stomach upsets and excessive protein supplementation can damage other organs, such as the kidneys.

Macro supplements can also make dehydration worse because the body will need to shift water to deal with these concentrated products.

Blocks and chews and bars can be even more concentrated, but have a more complex composition.

Read more:
Nope, coffee won’t give you extra energy. It’ll just borrow a bit that you’ll pay for later

The science is also a bit sexist

The vast majority of studies on sports gels have used males, and the same benefits may not be seen in females. This is due to sex differences between males and females in how readily carbohydrates are used as energy, with females oxidising more fat and less carbohydrate, compared to males, during endurance exercise.

Ultimately, whether or not supplements or foods are the right choice for you during sports and exercise is going to come down to your preferences, budget, needs and the length and intensity of your exercise or sport.

For casual, short or low intensity sporting pursuits, supplements might be overkill, but for activities of high intensity or long duration, they can have benefits.

Emma Beckett has received funding for research or consulting from Mars Foods, Nutrition Research Australia, NHMRC, ARC, AMP Foundation, Kellogg, and the University of Newcastle. She also works for Nutrition Research Australia. She is a member of committees/working groups related to nutrition or the Australian Academy of Science, the National Health and Medical Research Council and the Nutrition Society of Australia.

Patrice Jones has received funding for research or consulting from the Victorian Government, Nutrition Research Australia, Victoria University, the Australian Academy of Science, NIH Fund, and the University of Newcastle. She is a member of committees related to nutrition/physiology: Nutrition Society of Australia, Australian Physiological Society. She is affiliated with the Institute for Health and Sport, Victoria University and Nutrition Research Australia.

– ref. Running gels and protein powders can be convenient boosts for athletes – but be sure to read the label – https://theconversation.com/running-gels-and-protein-powders-can-be-convenient-boosts-for-athletes-but-be-sure-to-read-the-label-200730

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Hill, Senior Curator (Astronomy), Museums Victoria, and Honorary Fellow, The University of Melbourne

On Thursday 20 April, the Ningaloo region of Western Australia will experience a total solar eclipse. Eclipse chasers from around the world are converging on the town of Exmouth in hopes of experiencing the profound awe of standing in the Moon’s shadow as it quickly races by.

Only a narrow path across Earth, which includes Exmouth and Barrow Island WA, eastern parts of East Timor and also parts of Papua in Indonesia, will experience totality – when the Moon fully blocks the light of the Sun.

Can we see the eclipse in other parts of Australia?

Across the rest of Australia, we will get a partial solar eclipse. Exactly how much of the Sun is covered by the Moon, as well as the timing of the eclipse, depends on your location. The farther away from the path of totality, the shallower the eclipse will be.

Comparing Australian capital cities, Darwin will experience the deepest partial eclipse – with 85% of the Sun’s diameter hidden by the Moon. For Hobart, located at the other end of the country from Ningaloo, just 13% of the Sun’s diameter will disappear behind the Moon.

During a partial eclipse, there is nothing to notice or clue you in that an eclipse might even be happening. Even when 90% or more of the Sun’s diameter is obscured by the Moon (known as the eclipse magnitude) you might only notice a very slight dimming of daylight. More so, the colours and light around you may look a little strange.

The local circumstances for the eclipse across Australian capital cities are provided in the tables below. To find out what’s happening in your location, you can use timeanddate.com
or an online Google map created by French amateur astronomer Xavier Jubier (note that all times will need to be converted from UTC).

What is a ‘hybrid’ eclipse?

Technically, this solar eclipse is a special type, known as a hybrid eclipse. It begins over the Indian Ocean as an annular eclipse, where the Moon is slightly too small to completely block the Sun and a ring of sunlight shines out from around the dark Moon. This happens when the Moon’s antumbral shadow hits Earth (see diagram).

By the time the Moon’s shadow reaches land, it will become a total eclipse – the Moon now appears large enough to completely block the Sun, and it is the Moon’s umbral shadow that falls on Earth.

It’s incredible that such an eclipse occurs, because it means Earth is situated in the sweet spot between the umbral and antumbral shadows. Parts of Earth are in the umbral shadow, while the curvature of the planet is enough to make other places sit slightly farther away, so that the antumbral shadow falls there.

Don’t forget about eye safety!

Most importantly, a solar eclipse requires special precautions to observe it safely. Never look directly at the Sun because it can cause serious and permanent eye damage.

You can observe a solar eclipse safely by protecting your eyes with certified eclipse glasses or view the Sun indirectly by creating a pinhole camera to project a tiny image of the Sun onto a wall, the ground or a piece of paper.

Just remember this is a projection technique – do not look at the Sun through any pinholes.

Observing the totality

For those fortunate to be in Exmouth, the eclipse will begin at 10:04am, and totality will occur at 11:30am, producing an eerie twilight. For just 58 seconds, eclipse observers will be plunged into the Moon’s shadow for an awe-inspiring experience.

What’s most amazing is totality reveals a part of the Sun we don’t normally see. The Sun’s magnificent corona – its outer atmosphere – extends millions of kilometres into space and can be seen dancing and shimmering.

It’s also possible to see planets and bright stars during totality, if you can tear your gaze away from the shimmering corona. There are currently four planets in our daytime sky and all will be revealed – Saturn and Jupiter sitting above the Sun, with faint Mercury and bright Venus below it.

That brief moment of totality, when the Sun is completely covered by the Moon, is the only time to safely watch the eclipse directly. All too quickly, the Moon will move on and it will be time to shield your eyes again.

Australia, get ready for more

Remarkably, this eclipse is the first of five total solar eclipses to occur over the next 15 years in Australia.

What’s more, many of the upcoming eclipses will see totality pass over highly populated areas:

• July 22 2028 – totality will cross from the Kimberley, WA, through the Northern Territory, southwest Queensland, New South Wales, and pass directly over Sydney.

• Nov 25 2030 – totality will occur across South Australia, northwest NSW and southern QLD.

• Jul 13 2037 – totality will cross southern WA, southern NT, western QLD, passing directly over Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

• Dec 26 2038 – totality occurs over central WA, SA, and along the NSW/Victoria border.

For some Australians there will be no need to travel the world to experience totality, when you have the chance to see it from your own backyard.

Tanya Hill ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. A ‘hybrid’ solar eclipse is about to be visible in Australia. Here’s when and where you can see it – https://theconversation.com/a-hybrid-solar-eclipse-is-about-to-be-visible-in-australia-heres-when-and-where-you-can-see-it-203338

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Krishanu Roy, Senior Lecturer in Engineering, University of Waikato

In the wake of Cyclone Gabrielle, New Zealand is again talking about “building back better”. But how do we build back better when we don’t necessarily understand what “better” means? Or how to achieve this across a country with significantly different risk profiles?

At its most basic level, build back better is an opportunity to rebuild homes and other buildings in a way that is responsive to future risks and sustainability needs. To achieve this, we need to address knowledge gaps around building within a circular economy. A circular economy is one that swaps the typical cycle of make, use, dispose in favour of re-using and recycling as much as possible.

A sustainable building in the circular economy model will minimise emissions and its impact on climate and natural resources across its entire life cycle. This life cycle includes the manufacturing of materials and construction, passive lifetime emissions, maintenance, as well as end-of-life requirements (deconstruction).

At the University of Waikato, our research is focused on material choices, both for long-term rebuild as well immediate emergency relief. We approach this from a structural engineering perspective and consider light steel, light timber, fiber reinforced polymers and concrete. We work alongside industry to develop know-how around deconstruction for light steel and timber structures.

The research will contribute to best practice guidelines and circular economy adaptation. Here’s why this is important.

Embracing a circular economy

The construction and demolition industry in New Zealand produces around 50% of all waste. According to the United Nations Environment Programme’s 2022 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction, the sector accounts for more than 34% of energy demand globally and around 37% of energy and process-related carbon dioxide emissions. The report concludes that the building and construction sector are not on track to achieve decarbonisation by 2050 – the international deadline for achieving net zero energy emissions.

The New Zealand government has committed to the circular economy model in its plans to deal with waste.

Read more:
If companies want net-zero carbon offices,
they need to focus on building materials

But building back better isn’t simply about using sustainable materials and construction methods, and incorporating features that enable lower emissions during the “living phase” of a home.

Buildings need end-of-life considerations built into the design and construction, so they can be easily repurposed or deconstructed with minimal energy and then recycled, reused or disposed of in a manner that doesn’t send emissions through the roof.

Presently, we’re building sustainable homes on the premise of being carbon neutral by 2050, but they also need to be built on the premise of being carbon neutral at the end-of-life in 50 years.

We are not even close to achieving that. A report from building research institute BRANZ determined the climate impact of a new-build standalone house exceeds the 1.5℃ climate targets by a factor of 6.7 during its life cycle. This shows the substantial work needed to achieve carbon neutrality of new homes.

Modular buildings and new materials beckon

The solution to this issue may lie in modular homes and the development of new materials.

Quick and easy to make, modular homes provide fast options to house displaced people. They are also valuable for community wellbeing after the trauma of natural disasters. Finally, modular homes offer exciting opportunities for sustainability. They can be easily reconfigured to adapt to changing needs, for example, with the addition or removal of modules.

However, without careful design and know-how, modular homes and the foundations under them will not necessarily provide resilient and sustainable structures into the future.

The most challenging aspect of modular homes is the connection between the structures and their foundations. Therefore, it’s critical for resilient structures that the connections are designed carefully. Throughout the design process, those in charge need to consider the structure’s deconstruction or disassembly at the end of its life.

Read more:
How ‘net-zero’ and ‘passive’ houses can cut carbon emissions — and energy bills

That said, modular homes are also not the cure all for the entire building industry. The global need for sustainable and resilient buildings is a driver for the development of new construction materials, such as the plasterboard substitutes saveBOARD and Neocrete, a low-emission concrete.

These products offer low-emission building options, which use recycled materials in manufacturing and provide an alternative to high-emission materials. But, due to a lack of strict regulations around adopting new materials and a lack of awareness in the industry, adoption has been slow.

Identifying the missing data

In New Zealand, we have different risk profiles across the regions, depending on the likelihood of earthquakes and natural hazards like flooding, landslides, and wildfires – as well as the intensification of those hazards due to climate change.

The location risk profile dictates the best materials, but to utilise new materials, we need local testing data which are very limited as of yet.

Read more:
We can’t afford to just build greener. We must build less

If we’re really committed to building back better, then we need to do the research and incorporate the evidence into the building code, design standards and information for construction practitioners.

This could mean a “passport” for new materials based on local testing. The passport would incorporate details on the potential to recycle and reuse, a disassembly guide and a sustainability record (in essence, an environmental declaration).

The adaptation of the circular economy approach to the “build back better” strategy for buildings will be essential in reducing the risk of future catastrophes, as well as the impacts on climate and natural resources. Setting up a clear guideline for this strategy will be a pivotal early step in helping the industry define and oversee its efforts towards these objectives, which are currently lacking.

Krishanu Roy 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. ‘Build back better’ requires a framework that focuses on the full life of a house – from materials to its end of life – https://theconversation.com/build-back-better-requires-a-framework-that-focuses-on-the-full-life-of-a-house-from-materials-to-its-end-of-life-203325

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Boivin, Professor, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History

It’s not called the Third Pole for nothing. The Tibetan Plateau forms the major portion of a vast upland area of ice and glaciers that covers some 100,000 square kilometres of Earth’s surface.

It is a cold, arid and unforgiving landscape that couldn’t be more different from the warm plains and valleys that gave rise to our species.

Yet, for thousands of years the Tibetan Plateau has been occupied by Homo sapiens. It has seen the establishment of agricultural societies, and the growth of religions, kingdoms and even empire.

How humans managed not just to subsist but to thrive in this high-altitude landscape is a question that has challenged researchers for decades – and one that has captivated us too.

We know part of the answer lies in Tibetan genes, and a unique adaptation that enables people living in the region to use oxygen more efficiently, avoiding the potentially lethal effects of hypoxia (the condition that arises from a lack of oxygen).

But just as important as avoiding hypoxia was finding enough food in the plateau’s unpredictable, freezing and hyper-arid environment.

Our research, published today in Science Advances, set out to look more closely at early Tibetan diets. To do this, we examined ancient dental plaque, a rich source of dietary information.

Our results show one food in particular may have been crucial to sustained human occupation and expansion across the Tibetan Plateau: milk.

The benefits of not brushing

Without dentists, ancient people often accumulated thick layers of plaque – also known as calculus – on their teeth. Using a new method called palaeoproteomics, scientists can investigate the food proteins that became trapped and preserved in ancient people’s dental plaque.

Palaeoproteomics allows us to look at types of food, such as milk, that aren’t visible through traditional archaeological approaches, and to identify specific individuals who were consuming them.

Our study analysed all available human skeletal remains on the plateau: a total of 40 individuals, dating to between 3500 and 1200 years ago, from 15 widely dispersed sites.

Our work yielded fascinating results. Preserved in the teeth of many of these people were fragments of proteins derived from milk products. The protein sequences showed the milk originated from domestic herd animals: sheep, goat and probably yak.

We could see dairy foods were consumed by a wide swathe of Tibetan Plateau society, including adults and children, elites and everyday people. Dairy was even present in the earliest Tibetan Plateau skeletons we looked at.

In fact, we found dairy was being consumed as far back as 3,500 years ago – pushing evidence for dairying on the plateau back 2,000 years earlier than records in historical sources, such as the 8th- and 9th-century Tongdian encyclopedia.

Evidence for dairying now corresponds with the earliest evidence for domesticated herd animals on the Tibetan Plateau, which suggests dairying and pastoralism spread together in this region.

Pushing beyond the cultivation boundary

Our results showed another interesting pattern: all the milk peptides we identified came from ancient individuals in the highest altitude parts of the plateau. These were the most inhospitable areas, where growing crops was difficult.

In the southern-central and southeastern valleys, where farmable land was available, we did not recover any dairy proteins from people’s calculus.

Dairy, it seems, was vital to human occupation of the parts of the plateau that lay beyond the reach of even frost-tolerant crops. This is a vast area, as less than 1% of the Tibetan Plateau supports crop cultivation.

In the lower-lying areas, long-term habitation has been sustained by cultivating plant foods. But across most of the plateau, the primary mode of subsistence has been pastoralism.

Dairy-free? Not an option

While dairy would eventually become central to Tibetan cuisine and culture, our results suggest it was initially adopted out of necessity. It allowed people in the Tibetan Plateau’s most extreme environments to turn the energy locked inside alpine meadow grasses into a protein-rich, nutritional food that was endlessly renewable – because animals weren’t killed to acquire it.

Dairying opened up the Tibetan Plateau to the spread and sustained growth of human populations, which ultimately enabled the emergence of substantial cultural complexity.

In one of Earth’s most inhospitable environments, then, it would appear dairy-free was not an option.

Future work on the plateau will be vital to understanding how the human adoption of pastoralism and dairying reshaped Tibet’s landscapes. And just as critically, it will shed light on what human-induced climate change means for the future of the ecosystems present-day herders rely on.

Read more:
How midnight digs at a holy Tibetan cave opened a window to prehistoric humans living on the roof of the world

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. How milk tamed the Third Pole: research reveals a 3,500-year history of dairy consumption on the Tibetan Plateau – https://theconversation.com/how-milk-tamed-the-third-pole-research-reveals-a-3-500-year-history-of-dairy-consumption-on-the-tibetan-plateau-203586

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Pillar, Research Development Manager, Telethon Kids Institute

Reports have emerged from around Australia of waitlists of up to two years to receive a diagnostic assessment for neurodevelopmental conditions, such as autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Assessment delays can create additional stress for families who are already worrying their child may be developing differently.

These waiting times are a symptom of the significant strain our health systems are under. System reform will take time, and in the meantime, there are many children who require urgent support.

But supporting your child doesn’t need to be put on hold while you wait for assessment.

Read more:
New national autism guideline will finally give families a roadmap for therapy decisions

Why are waitlists so long?

Diagnostic assessments are an important part of the clinical pathway for children developing differently.

Diagnoses can provide parents and carers with a deeper understanding of their child. A diagnosis allows the child, their family and the supporting health professionals to benefit from all the information we have about that diagnosis, to understand how best to support the child going forward.

One reason why our diagnostic systems are currently under so much strain is because of expanding diagnostic boundaries. The criteria for autism and ADHD have changed over time, meaning more children meet criteria for these conditions than before.

Another reason is that our health, disability and education systems often require a formal diagnosis for a child to receive support. This further increases demand for diagnostic assessments.

Often, long waitlists result in children and families not getting timely access to crucial early therapy services. Delays can mean that many of the best opportunities to support children’s development early in life are missed, which can further entrench developmental disability and disadvantage.

However, importantly, there are many beneficial things that families can do in the meantime to pave the way for the future.

Read more:
From deficits to a spectrum, thinking around autism has changed. Now there are calls for a ‘profound autism’ diagnosis

3 things families can do

While a diagnosis may help a child access support services, they are still able to access services without a diagnosis.

If a parent is worried about their child’s development, then it is important they continue to seek out support services while the child is on a diagnostic waitlist.

A GP is typically the best person to consult in the first instance. They can then refer the child and family to public or private therapy services. However, private service options may involve out-of-pocket expenses, which can create inequity in access to services.

Parents can also take steps to:

1. Build connections with their child

A key part of all early supports is nurturing the connection parents have with their child. All children benefit from having frequent, meaningful time set aside to connect with their primary caregivers.

During this special connection time, parents might focus on slowing down, approaching their child with curiosity, being open to following their child’s special interests, and trying a variety of communication strategies (including words, gestures or using pictures) to support communication.

Parents needn’t feel pressure to spend all their time engaging with their child – but any time that can be dedicated to this will be time well spent.

2. Gather information to support diagnosis

Diagnoses of ADHD and autism are based on the observation of certain behaviours. A clinician will be able to observe some of these behaviours in their assessment, but they will also rely on information from parents about how their child usually behaves or interacts in different situations.

Parents can support this process by noting examples of the patterns of behaviours they’ve observed. These might include special interests, repetitive activities, social interactions, emotional regulation, sensory preferences or how their child communicates.

It is important parents don’t only note what a child finds difficult, but also their strengths and interests. Sometimes, the things a child is particularly good at can tell us just as much as their challenges.

3. Prioritise family wellbeing

While parents are often proactive in seeking support for their child, they can sometimes neglect their own need for support. Parents are the most important person in a child’s life, and parental capacity and wellbeing can have a significant influence on their child’s outcomes.

While waiting for a diagnosis, parents should start to plan how they are also going to get the support they need. This can include staying connected within the community and making time for activities that bring them and their family joy.

Read more:
Wondering about ADHD, autism and your child’s development? What to know about getting a neurodevelopmental assessment

Looking beyond diagnosis

When parents seek out a diagnosis for their child, they want help to support their child’s development. But long waits for assessment and diagnosis can present barriers between Australia’s health, education and disability systems and the help families need. The long waiting lists to receive a diagnostic assessment are at odds with what we know about the importance of early intervention.

Recent clinical trials have shown how providing support to babies and parents at the first sign of developmental concern can lead to positive developmental outcomes for children.

This approach prioritises acting quickly over diagnostic clarity, and makes it more likely children and families receive support during critical times in brain development.

As Australia seeks to reform our early childhood development system, the need of families to receive prompt support should be front of mind.

Sarah Pillar works for CliniKids at the Telethon Kids Institute.

Andrew Whitehouse is the Director of CliniKids at the Telethon Kids Institute. He receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council, and the Autism CRC.

– ref. Autism and ADHD assessment waits are up to 2 years’ long. What can families do in the meantime? – https://theconversation.com/autism-and-adhd-assessment-waits-are-up-to-2-years-long-what-can-families-do-in-the-meantime-203232

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Wanglin Ma, Associate Professor of Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

New Zealand is in an unusual position in the developed world when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. About half of all emissions come from agriculture, and almost a quarter can be attributed to biological emissions (nitrous oxide and methane) from the dairy sector.

The latest synthesis report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in March highlights the challenges climate change presents for New Zealand. And it clearly illustrates the benefits of cutting emissions sooner rather than later.

How did we get here?

Dairy farming in New Zealand was traditionally characterised as a pasture-based and low-input system.

However, in recent times, dairy farmers have intensified production, largely by using more fertiliser and supplementary feed (palm kernel expeller, silage and concentrate) to improve farm performance. Dairy farming has also expanded into less naturally suited regions, which has required greater inputs.

This increase in the use of supplementary feed has occurred not only to feed a growing dairy cow population, which has almost doubled since 1990 to 6.4 million, but also to accommodate more intensive farming systems.

Dairy farming is by far the largest consumer of supplementary feed. In 2022, New Zealand used around 5.8 million tonnes of grain and feed. Imports far exceeded domestic production (3.7 million compared with 2.1 million tonnes, respectively).

Dairy cows consumed around 75% of the total grain and feed. In comparison, the poultry sector and people consumed 12% and 9% of the total, respectively.

New Zealand’s capability to import feed from other countries promotes dairy farming intensification, directly contributing to climate change.

Profit versus planet

It may seem that supplementary feed is being used to increase production and profitability within the sector and that what we are faced with is a classic trade-off between financial performance and the environment (emissions to air and water) and other factors such as animal health and welfare.

Our research on New Zealand’s experience with feed-use intensification suggests dairy farmers who use more supplementary feed are more technically efficient than those who use less. This means they are able to produce more output for each unit of input. This contributes to higher production of milk solids (by 6.3% to 14.2%) and revenue (by 6.3% and 15.6%).

Read more:
A new farming proposal to reduce carbon emissions involves a lot of trust – and a lot of uncertainty

There are other benefits associated with supplementary feed which may encourage its use. For example, supplementary feed helps fill feed deficits (periods when there is not sufficient pasture growth) so that milking cows maintain energy intake and production. Supplementary feed can also be used to improve the health of dairy cows and milk quality.

But our further research shows that while feed-use intensification boosts production, costs also rise significantly (by 10.9% to 24.3%). This ultimately leads to a reduced profit margin (by 7.4% to 17.4%).

Significant changes ahead

Dairy farm profitability is jointly determined by the price and output of milk solids and the costs and quantity of production inputs such as feed. As price-takers, dairy farmers can neither directly control the variations in input prices (such as feed prices) nor influence the price of milk.

To increase profitability, farmers must increase the production of milk solids while managing inputs more efficiently. However, other operating expenses increase when systems become more reliant on supplementary feeds. These increases are generally larger than the increases in milk-solids production, thereby reducing profit, on average.

Not all supplementary feeds are equal. Palm kernel expeller (PKE) is widely used as a supplement feed by dairy farmers and it has been shown to embody high emissions (0.51kg CO₂-equivalent per kg of dry matter) compared with other feeds.

New Zealand is the biggest importer of PKE in the world. In 2022, imports were higher than in the previous three years, at more than 2 million tonnes.

Around 54% of PKE used on dairy farms was imported from Indonesia and Malaysia. It is widely claimed that exporting PKE to New Zealand has contributed to deforestation in supplying countries, increasing emissions and risks from climate change. Other concerns have also been raised, for example around PKE’s impacts on animal health.

Read more:
Palm kernel product imported for use on dairy farms may actually be harmful to cows

The dairy industry is well aware of these challenges and much effort has been put into encouraging farmers to adopt practices that can save them money while reducing overall emissions. These often focus on maximising the yield from pasture and using less carbon-intensive feeds such as homegrown feeds or byproducts of food and drink production.

The reason why there hasn’t been more progress may be in part because farmers are “locked in” to the current systems through what economists call path dependency. Investments have been made in both human and physical capital, and for many farms, debts have to be serviced. Therefore it is not a case that simply reducing the level of supplementary feed will reduce emissions and maintain profitability.

Reversing the trends requires significant changes to both management practices and physical infrastructure. High fertiliser prices, stricter regulations and the pricing of emissions may encourage this transition, but it may also be time to rethink the role supplementary feed has in our dairy systems.

Alan Renwick has received funding for projects with MPI, MBIE and DairyNZ

Kathryn Blackman Bicknell and Wanglin Ma 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. Why using more fertiliser and feed does not necessarily raise dairy farm profits but increases climate harm – https://theconversation.com/why-using-more-fertiliser-and-feed-does-not-necessarily-raise-dairy-farm-profits-but-increases-climate-harm-202333

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joelle Gergis, Senior Lecturer in Climate Science, Australian National University

Last month the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Synthesis Report of the Sixth Assessment Report.

It showed global temperatures are now 1.1℃ above pre-industrial levels. This warming has driven widespread and rapid global changes, including more frequent and intense weather extremes that are now impacting people and ecosystems all over the world.

But when an extreme weather event hits, how certain can we be that it was made more likely by climate change? How do we know it wasn’t just a rare, naturally-occuring event that might have happened anyway?

Fear & Wonder is a new podcast from The Conversation that takes you inside the UN’s era-defining climate report via the hearts and minds of the scientists who wrote it.

The show is hosted by Dr Joëlle Gergis – a climate scientist and IPCC lead author – and award-winning journalist Michael Green.

In this episode, we’re delving into one of the major shifts in the public communication of climate change – the attribution of extreme weather events to climate change.

Although in the past we knew climate change was making extreme weather more likely, advances in climate modelling now allow scientists to pinpoint the influence of natural and human-caused factors on individual weather extremes.

We speak to climatologist Dr Friederike Otto about a rapid attribution study of a heatwave in Toulouse, France, as it unfolded in 2019. We also hear from climatologist Professor David Karoly to help us understand how climate models actually work, while Professor Tannecia Stephenson explains how global models are then used to develop regional climate change projections over the Caribbean island of Jamaica.

To listen and subscribe, click here, or click the icon for your favourite podcast app in the graphic above.

Fear and Wonder is sponsored by the Climate Council, an independent, evidence-based organisation working on climate science, impacts and solutions.

Dr Joelle Gergis has received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Government’s Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources in the past. She currently receives funding from the Australian National University.

Michael Green 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. Fear and Wonder podcast: how scientists attribute extreme weather events to climate change – https://theconversation.com/fear-and-wonder-podcast-how-scientists-attribute-extreme-weather-events-to-climate-change-203559

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

After more than five decades, the last operating units of the Liddell coal-fired power station will close this month. The station’s owner, AGL, is Australia’s largest carbon polluter. Liddell’s closure will reduce the company’s emissions by 17%.

Liddell, in the New South Wales Hunter Valley, is Australia’s oldest coal station. It started operations in the early 1970s – about the same time the Datsun 180B was released, and before the Sydney Opera House officially opened!

In the same way a Datsun 180B was a great car in its day, Liddell was the cheapest and most reliable electricity generation technology in the 1970s and 1980s (at least if you ignore the long-term costs of carbon).

But like all coal-fired power stations in Australia, Liddell’s performance declined as it aged. It became unreliable and inefficient. One unit of the station closed last year, leaving three operating.

Governments must act to make sure our electricity grid doesn’t fall short when coal plants close. But the demise of facilities such as Liddell means Australia has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to become a global energy superpower.

Life after Liddell

AGL announced the decision to close Liddell in 2015. Virtually no one in the energy industry argued against the move, but it triggered endless political debate.

Some politicians are still railing against Liddell’s retirement. Federal Nationals leader David Littleproud this week said the closure should be delayed to prevent supply problems, and suggested Australia should have an urgent conversation about building nuclear energy.

But closing Liddell is unlikely to cause the lights to go off in NSW. For now, the state has enough remaining capacity to ensure reliable supply.

In the eight years since the decision to close Liddell, large-scale renewable capacity in NSW has ramped up, as has new rooftop solar.

Plenty of new “firming” capacity is also being developed – that is, flexible energy capacity to be activated if renewables aren’t producing energy or electricity demand suddenly increases. Projects under construction in NSW include the Kurri Kurri and Tallawarra gas-fired power stations, the Waratah “super battery” and the Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro project.

When electricity consumption in NSW is at its highest, about 14,000 MW of power is required. Without Liddell, about 13,500 MW of coal, gas and hydro generation is available.

Add in existing wind and solar capacity, plus energy that can be imported from Victoria and Queensland via transmission lines, and total generation capacity in NSW looks to be more than enough.

However, the reliability of some of this remaining capacity – namely, remaining coal-fired power stations – is becoming less certain. That’s why the energy industry is looking past Liddell, to the closure of the Eraring coal plant in 2025, and others to follow.

Read more:
Global coal use in 2022 is reaching an all-time high, but Australia is bucking the trend

All eyes on Eraring

Modelling by the Australian Energy Market Operator shows the closure of Eraring puts pressure on remaining electricity supply. However, it says the market would still meet the grid “reliabilty standard”, even if no new projects are developed.

Under that standard, expected unserved energy needs (leading to blackouts) should be no more than 0.002% of total energy used in a region. The standard assumes that while the occasional blackout is inconvenient, eliminating them completely is unfeasible because it would require building expensive power stations that are rarely used.

Blackouts could become more common, if extreme weather hits or coal units fail – which happened at Queensland’s Callide C power station in 2021. But blackouts are still far more likely to be the result of a power line problem in your street than a lack of generation capacity.

Over to the Minns government

No electricity supply shortfalls are projected for Australia in the near-term. But to ensure the clean energy transition happens smoothly, we should develop new renewable energy and firming capacity ahead of coal closures.

The earlier-than-expected closure of coal units remains a possibility – as occurred with Victoria’s Hazelwood coal station due to unaffordable repair costs.

We have previously recommended a “waiting room” for capacity that can be brought quickly into the market when required. Batteries and pumped hydro would be developed ahead of coal closures, and brought into the market as soon as coal exits.

The NSW Minns Labor government can also bring forward investment through an existing policy called the NSW Energy Roadmap. This involves asking the Australian Energy Market Operator to enter into long-term contracts to underwrite new renewable energy and firming projects, to help reduce the financial risks proponents face.

One tender round is already under way, but this could be accelerated. Given the global energy crunch, it may be worth commissioning projects now, even if delivery is not required until later. This is a much better way to manage reliability than, for example, the NSW government using taxpayer money to buy Eraring – an option NSW Labor left on the table ahead of last month’s state election.

In the longer term, construction of renewable generation must dramatically scale up to ensure energy reliability and meet emissions reduction targets.

This will be challenging. But we can take heart from news this week that under the federal Albanese government, renewables projects are being approved at twice the rate of previous years.

Read more:
Want an easy $400 a year? Ditch the gas heater in your home for an electric split system

A new era

There’s more work to be done to make sure the electricity grid can withstand coal plant closures.

Many new transmission lines must be built to carry electricity from renewables generators to the grid. And the ongoing development of renewable energy zones – clusters of large-scale renewable energy projects – will make establishing new projects quicker and simpler.

Importantly, local communities and First Nations people must be engaged and consulted throughout the transition.

But while adjusting to the exit of coal brings challenges, nuclear power in Australia is unlikely to be the answer.

Australia has world-class wind and solar resources – enough to eventually produce clean, cheap energy for ourselves and for export. Technologies such as batteries, hydrogen and hydro will fill the gaps when needed.

Producing energy from emerging nuclear technologies in the form of “small modular reactors”, as proposed by Littleproud, will be still be more than twice the cost of Australian renewable energy firmed by batteries or other storage technologies, even under the most ambitious scenarios. This gives Australia a global competitive advantage.

Liddell’s closure is an historic moment in the Australian energy landscape. Now, with tweaks to existing policies, the new NSW government can increase reliability, lower electricity prices and get on the path to net-zero.

Read more:
Batteries won’t cut it – we need solar thermal technology to get us through the night

Joel Gilmore is an Associate Professor at Griffith University and the GM, Policy and Regional Energy at Iberdrola Australia, which develops renewable projects and batteries.

Tim Nelson is an Associate Professor at Griffith University and the EGM, Energy Markets at Iberdrola Australia, which develops renewable projects and batteries. He is also a Climate Councillor.

– ref. Farewell Liddell: what to expect when Australia’s oldest coal plant closes – https://theconversation.com/farewell-liddell-what-to-expect-when-australias-oldest-coal-plant-closes-203548

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Wayland, Associate Professor, University of New England

Death is a part of life, an adage usually reserved for those who physically exist in our lives – family, friends, colleagues, acquaintances. So what happens when a profound death experience happens on the screen? Is that still a legitimate experience of mourning?

This week, the popular TV show Succession had a significant “on screen” death – where even the cast filming the scene spoke as if the response to the trauma had a very real feeling.

In the same way as the cast, social media reactions to the sudden and unexpected death of a person with a complex character, after four seasons of growing to understand them, can feel like the death of someone you actually know.

The research behind this phenomenon can be found as far back as the 1970s when early understandings around the death of a main character on children’s television served to provide real world insight into the irreversibility of death as a universal experience.

Over time, as popular culture and television became more nuanced, the diversity of the ways in which death occurred in fictional programs began to replicate the complexity of “real” loss in our lives. Via television, we get access to catastrophic loss, multiple casualty events, loss after significant illness – as well as seeing how death impacts the people left behind.

In the most recent episode of Succession, we also see what happens when a death occurs involving a person where their character or relationship to others is strained. We see ways in which grief is not always a byproduct of love.

Why does this grief feel real from an armchair perspective?

Death on screen can also act as a trigger or a reminder of the losses we have endured.

When a show realistically portrays grief in its purest form, the emotive or reflective reaction can unlock our own grief. Engaging with the small screen is an overt act of escapism, often for entertainment. We might be switching on a program with the intention of relaxation, only to be met with trauma and sadness.

When a sudden loss is brought into our lounge rooms, or via the devices on our laps, we experience shock, confusion and anger about the abruptness of an event, just like the feelings we can experience when loss happens suddenly in our real lives.

Read more:
Far from the ‘ludicrously capacious’: what the fashion of Succession tells us about the show – and about society

Safe reporting of sudden and traumatic death on fictional TV shows is not covered by media reporting guidelines. Warnings prior to a scene, or consistent information at the end of an episode about seeking additional support, might be minimal.

Recent research identifies multiple contexts related to warnings where TV shows may note that an episode will explore death, however, the complexity of how this might be portrayed is limited.

What is this grief called?

While there is no rulebook for grief, reacting emotionally to a small screen death can bring about concerns that we look silly or that we lack awareness of the distinction between reality and fiction. This form of parasocial grieving, described as having feelings attached to a pseudo-relationship, does feel real, does have consequences and does need space to be managed.

We don’t all watch the same shows, we don’t all respond to the death of a character the same way, we might even struggle to understand why people have the reactions they do when a TV death occurs. I would encourage you to pause for a moment and remember the ones that did get under our skin.

In 1985, Australian viewers lived through the death of Molly from A Country Practice, where the final image of a mother’s end-stage cancer diagnosis played out while watching her daughter fly a kite.

Teens watching Sarah Michelle Gellar stumble across the sudden untimely death of her mother in Buffy the Vampire Slayer shaped many feelings when there is a catastrophic loss without warning.

In the last decade, the sudden death of Patrick from Offspring had people legitimately calling in sick from work the next day.

The global reaction to the Red Wedding scene in Game of Thrones had forums on Reddit unpacking why so many characters were murdered and sharing the impact of the sights and sounds of blood and murder and traumatic grief.

We engage in a social contract when we connect to a TV show. We expect to be removed from our real life and engage in the viewing of other spaces. Death in those spaces – and the reactions to that loss – can feel as if they break that contract.

Sarah Wayland 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. Can death on the screen feel the same as a ‘real’ one? – https://theconversation.com/can-death-on-the-screen-feel-the-same-as-a-real-one-203549

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Conley Tyler, Honorary Fellow, Asia Institute, The University of Melbourne

Over the past two days there’s been controversy over whether Prime Minister Anthony Albanese should accept an invitation to attend the NATO summit in Lithuania in July, with reports suggesting he will not.

Albanese’s office is yet to confirm whether the prime minister, who is currently on leave, will attend the meeting.

But the debate is a reminder that politicians and the public must recognise the value of such opportunities.

Why is the NATO summit a big deal?

NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – is a 31-nation collective defence pact that includes most members of the European Union as well as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Turkey.

Under treaty, an invasion of any NATO member is treated as an invasion of all. This is of great comfort, especially for smaller countries with a threatening neighbour. In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Finland has become a member and Sweden has applied to join.

Read more:
Finland, NATO and the evolving new world order – what small nations know

Why has Albanese been invited?

While Australia isn’t a member of NATO, it has a good relationship with the organisation. Australia is one of NATO’s “partners across the globe”, with permanent observer status.

Australia was a key partner during the long Afghanistan mission, with Australia seen as important in helping NATO meet its goals. Prime ministers Rudd and Gillard both attended NATO summits during this period.

There are currently two factors that make Australia a higher priority for NATO.

First, Australia is viewed as making a significant contribution to efforts to support Ukraine against Russia’s invasion. When I introduced myself to Ukraine’s youngest member of parliament, the first thing he said was thanks for Australia’s contribution of Bushmaster armoured vehicles. Australia is also working with France to manufacture ammunition.

Second, there is greater NATO focus on Indo-Pacific security issues. The 2022 NATO Strategic Concept mentioned issues around the threat from China for the first time. Australia is an obvious partner to NATO in Indo-Pacific security.

Griffith University’s Susan Harris Rimmer saw the invitation for Australia to attend the NATO summit in 2022 as a significant step reflecting NATO’s intent to focus on China and Indo-Pacific security.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg speaks about NATO’s Indo-Pacific partners, including Australia, in very positive terms:

We may be oceans apart. But our security is closely connected. And we share the same values, interests and concerns. This includes supporting Ukraine.

The case for attending

All this means there is a strong case for attending if possible. NATO is an important gathering of world leaders. As ANU’s John Blaxland puts it, the chance to “press the flesh” with world leaders is part of the “process of building relationships with key heads of states of important partner nations”.

For Australia to be taken seriously, it needs to show up. And given Australia’s location, the reality is that Australians are usually the ones who have to do the travelling. If we were to wait for all the NATO leaders to visit Australia, it would literally take decades.

It is clear Albanese recognises this. He attended last year’s NATO summit in Madrid not long after the election, saying “it was important that Australia be represented”.

The danger of negativity

Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs Simon Birmingham has urged Albanese to attend this year’s summit, which he said would “demonstrate Australia’s 100% commitment to the rules-based order, our democratic partners and the defence of Ukraine”.

But it’s worth noting that last year, others had a different response. After Albanese went to the Madrid summit, his travel schedule was criticised by Shadow Treasurer Angus Taylor, Shadow Immigration Minister Dan Tehan and National Party Leader David Littleproud. He faced negative commentary and news outlets keeping track of how many days he had been out of the country.

As he returned from the NATO summit and visiting Ukraine, Albanese was forced to defend his travel. He described criticism comparing this to his predecessor Scott Morrison’s trip to Hawaii during the 2019-20 bushfires as “beyond contempt”.

Supporting our leaders to have international impact

At this point it is not clear whether Albanese will attend the NATO summit. He is currently on leave, and acting prime minister Penny Wong said she would not announce Albanese’s schedule.

If media reports he will not attend turn out to be true, I hope the only reason would be a simple scheduling conflict. Albanese has a range of upcoming travel commitments, including the coronation of Charles III in the UK and the G7 meeting in Japan, both in May. He will host leaders of the “Quad” nations in Australia, and there is speculation about trips to India, the US and China.

For the national interest, it is important that both the public and political opponents support our leaders in engaging internationally as a key part of their role to promote Australia’s interests and represent us on the world stage.

As Albanese said in response to criticism of his travel in 2022, “we can’t separate international events from the impact on Australia and Australians”. This connection needs to be widely understood.

Melissa Conley Tyler is Executive Director of the Asia-Pacific Development, Diplomacy & Defence Dialogue (AP4D) which receives funding from the Australian Civil-Military Centre and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

– ref. Anthony Albanese should attend the NATO summit if he can. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/anthony-albanese-should-attend-the-nato-summit-if-he-can-heres-why-203675

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

Professor Marcia Langton holds the Foundation Chair of Australian Indigenous Studies at the University of Melbourne, and was co-author (with Professor Tom Calma) of the Indigenous Voice Co-design Process report to the Morrison government. She has been a fighter for rights and progress for Indigenous Australians for decades, and she’s one of those at the centre of the yes campaign for the Voice. Her own voice is always forthright and formidable.

Langton admits she isn’t “entirely confident” where the referendum stands at the moment but is more positive as the debate continues. “I’ve been gauging the response of the general public by reading a lot and having a look at the social media, and I think most people can see that this is a very simple and modest proposition and that it will make a difference. And what I’m seeing more and more is most people realising, yes, well, why don’t Indigenous people have a say about policies and the laws that affect them?

“They realise when they think about it that this has gone on for too long, where all of these laws and policies that seem to be universally ineffective in closing the gap, and causing more suffering, have been imposed on us by non-Indigenous people. […] I think most people are still very embarrassed about the Northern Territory intervention initiated by John Howard.”

While Langton admits she doesn’t agree with Julian Leeser’s preference to alter the proposed wording of the constitutional change, she believes Leeser – who has quit the opposition frontbench to campaign for the yes case – has shown “integrity and decency of the kind that most Australians aspire to. You can see from the response that he’s getting from across the political spectrum that he’s now even more respected for his stance.”

One key issue in the debate about the Voice is how extensive will be the issues on which it would be able to make representations.

Langton says a point “widely misunderstood […] is that the voice will be a statutory body. And like any other statutory body, it should be treated according to the standards of non-discrimination. If no other statutory body is restricted on the basis of race or gender or age in making representations to government, then to restrict the Voice in making such representations could be seen as racially discriminatory.”

A key question being asked is how people will be selected to represent their communities. Langton says: “We have to accommodate an already existing Indigenous governance landscape. So across the country we have an enormous number of existing bodies, none of which have any assured way of advising governments. None of them are provided with a formal way to advise governments. I’ll give you two examples.

“One is the Torres Strait Regional Authority. And the other is the ACT Indigenous elected assembly. Now, indeed, both of them can give advice to the state governments, and that’s a good thing. But they don’t sit in an integrated framework. […] We developed a set of principles for the creation of such bodies as the Indigenous voice arrangements.

“Those principles are:

• Empowerment
• inclusive participation
• cultural leadership
• community-led design
• non-duplication and links with existing bodies
• respecting long-term partnerships
• transparency and accountability
• capability driven data
• evidence based decision making.

“Those are the principles, and it was our preference that those principles be legislated so that each body that is created, should we be successful, complies with those principles.”

A major point for debate around The Voice is whether it will deliver practical outcomes. Langton illustrates by example.

“As for the kinds of problems that the Voice would be able to tackle much more effectively than governments, I give you the case of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first people to respond effectively, long before governments did so, were the Indigenous health organisations […] The Indigenous community-controlled health sector leaders had dealt with two epidemics in recent history and one in particular had a very high mortality rate. So in response to that, the Indigenous health sector wrote an epidemic plan, and that was about ten years old, but it was easily revised to become the pandemic plan. So they went straight into action when we began to hear the news from overseas about COVID-19.”

“So who was first to close their borders? Not the states and territories. It was the Aboriginal landowners on advice from the Indigenous health sector that closed their borders to stop travel in and out of Aboriginal lands to keep their populations safe.

“Because the most vulnerable populations to COVID-19 were the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations with pre-existing health burdens such as chronic diseases, diabetes, kidney disease and so on.

“We expected, you know, an enormous death toll in the Indigenous community, we expected at least 3% of the indigenous population to contract the disease. 27,701 cases was the prediction.

“But because the Indigenous health sector rushed to implement the pandemic plan and set up a national taskforce with public health advisories that went out across our media sector, translated into at least 18 languages, we were able to stop the deaths. And so in the first year of the pandemic, I think we had one death as opposed to 27,000. And so we were the most successful group in the world, I would argue, in preventing COVID-19 from taking lives. So up until January 2021, there were only 148 cases of COVID among Indigenous people nationwide, 15% hospitalisations, one case in ICU and no deaths. And there were no deaths in remote communities and no cases associated with the Black Lives Matter marches because of our public health advisories.

“So I think that’s, you know, a very good example, of why Indigenous people in control of their own affairs is much more effective than governments. And we can see the terrible mistakes that governments across the country made, even though they were advised by the very best of our epidemiologists, is because they don’t have the reach into the local population that our Indigenous health sector has.”

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

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Professor Marcia Langton on the Voice’s powers and potential – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-professor-marcia-langton-on-the-voices-powers-and-potential-203672

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

Last week, without warning, the federal government significantly restricted the subsidy for an important and safe asthma medicine for children. A short document explained to prescribers what had changed, but gave no reasons.

The medicine, fluticasone propionate 50mcg, is a metered-dose inhaler, more commonly known by the brand names Flixotide Junior or Axotide Junior. It’s one of the the lowest dose medicines of its type available, and until April 1 the government had subsidised nearly 80,000 of these puffers each year.

However, the new change will make it harder to afford, especially for vulnerable families, who already suffer the greatest burden of asthma.

Read more:
What causes asthma? What we know, don’t know and suspect

The importance of asthma prevention

When a child has asthma, inflammation and sensitivity causes airway narrowing, which makes it hard to breathe.

About one in ten Australian children has long-term asthma. It can cause frightening breathlessness, poor school participation, and sometimes hospitalisation. Rarely, and tragically, children die from asthma.

Children with persistent or severe asthma symptoms need medicines to reduce airway inflammation. “Inhaled steroids” are the safest and most effective treatments. In fact, the World Health Organisation has included them on its List of Essential Medicines for Children.

These medicines reduce the risk of severe flares of symptoms, especially in children with a history of such flares. The aim is to use the lowest effective dose, yet it is the subsidy of low dose fluticasone which the new policy affects.

How medicine subsidy decisions work

To be sold in Australia, all prescription medicines must be registered by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which assesses the safety and efficacy of the medicine.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) is a list of medicines our government helps to pay for. This scheme caps the cost of dispensed medicines at about A$30 for most people, and about A$7 for people with concession cards.

To get a drug on the list, the manufacturer needs to convince the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) the medicine is cost-effective.

Having this sort of process – a single major payer, and well-qualified decision-makers – is a good thing. It’s a reason Australia has much more affordable medicines than the United States. This usually benefits both patients and health authorities.

Read more:
Passive smoking, synthetic bedding and gas heating in homes show the strongest links to asthma

The new rules

Previously, any doctor could prescribe low dose fluticasone for a child with asthma under the PBS. But as of April 1, this is no longer true.

The new PBS rules are complicated.

First, no one over the age of six will get any government subsidy to help with the cost of this medicine.

Second, the PBS will only subsidise it for children under the age of six if a paediatrician or lung specialist has started the medicine, and if the prescriber has first contacted the PBS for approval.

The PBS has not spelled out why this change was made, either on their website or when pressed by journalists.

Generally, if the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and a manufacturer can’t agree on a medicine’s price, the medicine will stay off the PBS, and will remain unsubsidised. Alternatively, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee may place restrictions on the population for whom the medicine is subsidised.

In this case, given no safety or effectiveness concerns have been raised, and the change coincided with a scheduled price-reduction date, the new restrictions may be simply about money – the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and the manufacturer not agreeing on a price.

What does it mean for families?

In children over the age of six, several alternative medicines can be prescribed.

But in children under five, there are no good alternatives, with no other age-appropriate low-dose steroid inhalers approved by the TGA.

In the under-five age group, GPs now have three options if they think their patient needs inhaled steroids:

1. prescribe fluticasone 50mcg on a private script

2. refer to a child or lung specialist

3. prescribe other medicines “off label” (in a way not approved by the TGA), which will often involve higher-dose steroids.

All of these are problematic.

The use of private scripts will mean families need to pay whatever their local pharmacy charges them. At many pharmacies we expect the price to be around $11 to $28 per inhaler, but there are no guarantees all pharmacies will provide the medication at this cost.

The use of private scripts will certainly hurt families who rely on concessions or safety nets, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and those from low socioeconomic backgrounds who are disproportionately affected by asthma.

Requiring referral to a specialist also has many detrimental consequences. There are already bulging waitlists for these services, leading to delays in care. In many parts of Australia there are no bulk-billing specialists, which makes it hard for vulnerable families to access these services.

GPs will feel obliged to refer cases they previously would have been able to manage, which may erode the community’s trust in GPs.

The decision adversely impacts the interests of so many Australian kids, especially those from our most vulnerable populations who already suffer disproportionately from asthma. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and the manufacturer should work together to reconsider it.

Read more:
The price of PBS medicines is coming down. But are we helping the right people?

Brett Montgomery has no relationship with the manufacturer of the medicines discussed in this article (GSK). Brett is a member of the guidelines committee for the Australian Asthma Handbook, which is an unpaid role. The Australian Asthma Handbook is a project of the National Asthma Council Australia. The National Asthma Council Australia has received funding from GSK for some activities, but is not a sponsor of the Handbook. Brett writes here in an individual capacity rather than on behalf of any organisation.

Louisa Owens is affiliated with the National Asthma Council of Australia and Asthma Australia. Louisa has no relationship with the manufacturer of the medicines discussed in this article (GSK). Loiusa is a member of the guidelines committee for the Australian Asthma Handbook, which is an unpaid role. The Australian Asthma Handbook is a project of the National Asthma Council Australia. The National Asthma Council Australia has received funding from GSK for some activities, but is not a sponsor of the Handbook. Louisa is also a member of the Professional Advisory Council for Asthma Australia. Louisa writes here in an individual capacity rather than on behalf of any organisation

Shivanthan Shanthikumar 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. New asthma medicine restrictions will hurt the poorest children the most – https://theconversation.com/new-asthma-medicine-restrictions-will-hurt-the-poorest-children-the-most-203424

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meg Elkins, Senior Lecturer with School of Economics, Finance and Marketing and Behavioural Business Lab Member, RMIT University

TikTok allows video up to 10 minutes, but says surveys show almost half its users are stressed by anything longer than a minute. An Instagram video can be up to 90 seconds, but experts reckon the ideal time to maximise engagement is less than 15 seconds. Twitter doubled the length of tweets in 2017 to 280 characters, but the typical length is more like 33 characters.

It’s easy to get sucked into short and sensational content. But if you’re worried this may be harming your attention span, you should be. There’s solid evidence that so many demands on our attention make us more stressed, and that the endless social comparison makes us feel worse about ourselves.

For better mental health, read a book.

Studies show a range of psychological benefits from book-reading. Reading fiction can increase your capacity for empathy, through the process of seeing the world through a relatable character. Reading has been found to reduce stress as effectively as yoga. It is being prescribed for depression – a treatment known as bibliotherapy.

Book-reading is also a strong marker of curiosity – a quality prized by employers such as Google. Our research shows reading is as strongly associated with curiosity as interest in science, and more strongly than mathematical ability.

And it’s not just that curious minds are more likely to read because of a thirst for knowledge and understanding. That happens too, but our research has specifically been to investigate the role of reading in the development of curious minds.

À lire aussi :
Too many digital distractions are eroding our ability to read deeply, and here’s how we can become aware of what’s happening — podcast

Tracking reading and curiosity

Our findings come from analysing data from the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth, which tracks the progress of young Australians from the age of 15 till 25.

Longitudinal surveys provide valuable insights by surveying the same people – in this case a group of about 10,000 young people. Every year for ten years they are asked about their achievements, aspirations, education, employment and life satisfaction.

There have been five survey cohorts since 1998, the most recent starting in 2016. We analysed three of them – those beginning in 2003, 2006 and 2009, looking at the data up to age 20, at which age most have a job or are looking for one.

The survey data is rich enough to develop proxy measures of reading and curiosity levels. It includes participants’ scores in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment tests for reading, mathematics and science ability. There are survey questions about time spent reading for pleasure, time reading newspapers or magazines, and library use.

To measure curiosity, we used respondents’ answers to questions about their interest in the following:

• learning new things
• thinking about why the world is in the state it is
• finding out more about things you don’t understand
• finding out about a new idea
• finding out how something works.

We used statistical modelling to control for environmental and demographic variables and distinguish the effect of reading activity as a teenager on greater curiosity as a young adult. This modelling gives us confidence that reading is not just correlated with curiosity. Reading books helps build curiosity.

Gloom and doom-scrolling

Does this mean if you’re older that it’s too late to start reading? No. Our results relate to young people because the data was available. No matter what your age, deep reading has benefits over social-media scrolling.

The short-term dopamine rush of scrolling on a device is an elusive promise. It depletes rather than uplifts us. Our limbic brain – the part of the brain associated with our emotional and behavioural responses – remains trapped in a spiral of pleasure-seeking.

Studies show a high correlation between media multitasking and attention problems due to cognitive overload.
The effect is most evident among young people, who have grown up with social media overexposure.

US social psychologist Jonathan Haidt is among the researchers warning that high social media use is a major contributor to declining mental health for teenage girls:

Boys are doing badly too, but their rates of depression and anxiety are not as high, and their increases since 2011 are smaller.

Why this “giant, obvious, international, and gendered cause”? Haidt writes:

Instagram was founded in 2010. The iPhone 4 was released then too — the first smartphone with a front-facing camera. In 2012 Facebook bought Instagram, and that’s the year that its user base exploded. By 2015, it was becoming normal for 12-year-old girls to spend hours each day taking selfies, editing selfies, and posting them for friends, enemies, and strangers to comment on, while also spending hours each day scrolling through photos of other girls and fabulously wealthy female celebrities with (seemingly) vastly superior bodies and lives.

In 2020 Haidt published research showing girls are more vulnerable to “fear of missing out” and the aggression that social media tends to amplify. Since then he’s become even more convinced of the correlation.

Social media, by design, is addictive.

With TikTok, for example, videos start automatically, based on what the algorithm already knows about you. But it doesn’t just validate your preferences and feed you opinions that confirm your biases. It also varies the content so you don’t know what is coming next. This is the same trick that keeps gamblers addicted.

Tips to get back into books

If you are having difficulty choosing between your phone and a book, here’s a simple tip proven by behavioural science. To change behaviour it also helps to change your environment.

Try the following:

• Carry a book at all times, or leave books around the house in convenient places.

• Schedule reading time into your day. 20 minutes is enough. This reinforces the habit and ensures regular immersion in the book world.

• If you’re not enjoying a book, try another. Don’t force yourself.

You’ll feel better for it – and be prepared for a future employer asking you what books you’re reading.

Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.

– ref. Why reading books is good for society, wellbeing and your career – https://theconversation.com/why-reading-books-is-good-for-society-wellbeing-and-your-career-200447

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Poropat, Research associate, Curtin University

In May and June of 2018, Australia’s first near-complete skull of a sauropod – a group of long-tailed, long-necked, small-headed dinosaurs – was found on a sheep station northwest of Winton in Queensland.

I was part of the dig team from the Australian Age of Dinosaurs Museum that made the discovery, and subsequently had the privilege of leading the team that studied the skull. After years of work, our results are published today in Royal Society Open Science.

The skull belonged to a creature we have dubbed “Ann”: a member of the species Diamantinasaurus matildae which shows surprising similarities to fossils found halfway across the world, lending weight to the theory that dinosaurs once roamed between Australia and South America via an Antarctic land connection.

A good skull is hard to find

The sauropod dinosaurs have been a source of lifelong fascination for me, and finding a sauropod skull was one of my childhood dreams. Sadly, the fossil record is biased towards preserving sauropod limbs, vertebrae and ribs, and heavily against skulls.

This makes sense when you consider the processes that act on an organism’s body after it dies, which palaeontologists call taphonomy.

Large, robust limb bones are resistant to decomposition, and if they are buried rapidly they might fossilise quite readily. Vertebrae and ribs comprise a significant proportion of a vertebrate skeleton, increasing their odds of preservation.

By contrast, sauropod skulls were relatively small, made up of many delicate bones that were only loosely held together by soft tissue, and seemingly easily detached from the end of the neck. They might also have been prime targets for carnivorous dinosaurs: the only previously described sauropod braincase from Australia preserves several bite marks from fierce theropods.

The bones of the skull were found around two metres beneath the surface, scattered over an area of about nine square metres. Much of the right side of the face is missing, but most of the left is present. Sadly, many of the bones show signs of distortion (presumably a result of post mortem scavenging or trampling), which makes physical reassembly of the skull a delicate process.

Modern technology recreates an ancient animal

This being the case, we set out to reconstruct the skull digitally. We CT scanned the bones at St Vincent’s Hospital in Melbourne. This enabled the internal features of each bone to be observed on a computer.

Inside one bone in the snout (which we also had scanned at the Australian Synchrotron), we found replacement teeth. It has long been known that sauropods, like crocodiles today, continually replaced their teeth throughout their lives.

We also scanned all of the bones with a surface scanner, enabling detailed 3D models of each bone to be made on a computer. The skull could then be reassembled in a virtual space with no risk of damage to the fossils themselves.

The teeth in the new sauropod skull were very similar to those found at other sites in the Winton area. Comparisons with Australia’s only other fragmentary sauropod skull (also from Winton) revealed additional similarities.

Meet Diamantinasaurus matildae

Our skull belongs to the species Diamantinasaurus matildae. Diamantinasaurus would have been about as long as a tennis court, as tall as basketball ring at the shoulder, and weighed ~25 tonnes – about as much as two fire engines.

Diamantinasaurus occupies a low branch on the family tree of a group of sauropods called titanosaurs. Other members of the titanosaur group (from higher branches on their family tree) include the largest land animals that ever lived, such as Patagotitan and Argentinosaurus, which exceeded 30 metres in length. Titanosaurs were the only sauropods to live right until the end of the Cretaceous Period (66 million years ago), when the age of dinosaurs came to a close.

Read more:
The march of the titanosaurs: the Snake Creek Tracksite unveiled

Diamantinasaurus has a rounded snout, typical of medium- to high-level browsing sauropods. Its teeth are robustly constructed, but those from other sites show little sign of wear by soil or grit, reinforcing the idea Diamantinasaurus preferred to feed some distance above ground level.

Only two replacement teeth are present in each tooth socket, implying that Diamantinasaurus replaced its teeth relatively slowly. And finally, the teeth are restricted to the front of the snout, meaning that Diamantinasaurus, like all other sauropods, did not chew its food.

Family resemblances

We compared our sauropod skull with others from around the world. The most similar skull was that of Sarmientosaurus musacchioi, which lived in southern South America. Diamantinasaurus and Sarmientosaurus lived at around the same time (about 95 million years ago), and at around the same latitude (50°S).

We had previously hypothesised that these two sauropods were close relatives, albeit on the basis of limited evidence. The new skull shores up that idea in a big way: bone for bone, the skulls of Diamantinasaurus and Sarmientosaurus are extremely similar.
This might seem strange, given the great physical distance between South America and Australia today. However, back then each of those continents retained a lingering land connection with Antarctica.

Read more:
A key feature contributed to sauropods getting so enormous, new dino foot study reveals

Sauropods seemingly preferred warmer climates at low to medium latitudes. However, 95 million years ago the climate was extremely warm, even by the warm standards of the Cretaceous. With polar latitudes more amenable for sauropods, these scaly behemoths – and other landlubbing animals – could trundle through lush forests at the bottom of the world between South America and Antarctica.

It is a privilege to be able to finally put a face to the name Diamantinasaurus matildae. Future discoveries will hopefully help cement its status as one of the most completely understood titanosaurs worldwide.

Stephen Poropat 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. First near-complete sauropod dinosaur skull found in Australia hints at ancient links between continents – https://theconversation.com/first-near-complete-sauropod-dinosaur-skull-found-in-australia-hints-at-ancient-links-between-continents-203405

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andreas Zametzer, PhD Candidate at Timescales of Mineral Systems Group, Curtin University

Meteorite impacts can be cataclysmic events in the history of a planet, melting rock, changing atmospheric chemistry, and wreaking general havoc.

However, impacts may also have created Earth’s continents, supported ecological niches that kick-started life, and even developed metal ores.

In a new study published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters, we examined what’s left of the world’s oldest known impact crater: the 2.29 billion-year-old site at Yarrabubba in Western Australia.

We found evidence hot water circulated in fractures in the rock after the impact, possibly because the impact melted some of the ice that covered much of the planet at that time. Hot water in fractured rock may have provided a niche for early life-forms, and its presence also has implications for our understanding of how deposits of metal ore form in Earth’s crust.

Space rocks have been key players in Earth’s history

Meteorite impacts appear to come and go in a 200 million year cycle over the course of Earth’s history.

Across the planet, about 200 major impact sites have been documented. The oldest of these is at Yarrabubba in Western Australia.

More than two billion years ago, a space rock slammed into the continental crust at Yarrabubba. This ancient crust had formed some 2.65 billion years before the present and was intensely changed by the impact.

The result was a crater with an estimated diameter of about 70km, which is nowadays eroded to a mere pimple. The shock of the impact was so great it even melted parts of the surrounding crust, which is made of granite – a common type of rock you might see in fancy kitchen bench tops.

In our new research, we took a close look at what the impact did to the chemistry of the crust. The chemical effects of meteorite impacts are not often explored, but they may be important in understanding the full range of environmental consequences.

CSI: Rock

Geologists forensically study minerals trapped in rocks to investigate what happens inside Earth, in much the same way that crime scene investigators study materials at a scene to determine their origins.

One kind of clue geologists are particularly keen on is isotopes. These are different forms of a particular element.

Different isotopes of an element all behave the same in chemical reactions, but they contain different numbers of neutrons inside the atom. This makes some isotopes unstable: over time, they will radioactively decay into different elements.

Read more:
Scientists have traced Earth’s path through the galaxy via tiny crystals found in the crust

We can make use of this radioactive decay. For example, we can determine the age of the Yarrabubba crater and its surrounding rocks by measuring the ratio of uranium to lead isotopes, which acts like a stopwatch counting the time since a mineral has grown.

This tells us the age because uranium decays into lead over time, and we know the rate at which this decay happens. So measuring the isotopes of both elements in a sample shows us how much decay has happened, allowing us to calculate the mineral’s age.

Another way to use isotopes is in certain minerals where these ratios remain fixed over time and do not change. The isotopic signatures then become a powerful tool to track where material has come from, in much the same way that a person’s surname can give a clue to their family’s origin.

Messengers in a crystal bottle

We analysed the isotopic compositions of lead in mineral grains from the crust surrounding the crater at Yarrabubba.

We looked at crystals of feldspar, typically the pink-coloured grains in our granite bench top example, as these naturally contain lead but no uranium.

This is important as the lead isotopes trapped within this mineral reflect the composition of the liquid from which the mineral originally grew.

We found a wide range of lead isotopic compositions, as well as new uranium-bearing minerals that grew within fractures in the grains at the time of the impact, starting new stopwatches.

Read more:
We found the world’s oldest asteroid strike in Western Australia. It might have triggered a global thaw

The only plausible explanation for these modifications of isotopic signatures is that the impact must have generated networks of circulating hot water that infiltrated damage zones throughout the rock. In the case of Yarrabubba, the water may well have come from the meteor hitting an ice sheet, as ice covered much of the world 2.29 billion years ago.

The impacts of impacts

Our documentation of the circulation of heated water produced by an impact is important from two very different perspectives.

First, hot fluid systems may have nurtured early life. Impacts were much larger and more frequent on the early Earth, and in some ways these violent and disruptive events would have stood in the way of complex life evolving.

Yet researchers have demonstrated that microbial communities can blossom where heat, water and nutrients meet pulverised rock: exactly the conditions impacts can produce. Some have even suggested impacts are a fundamental part of planetary evolution and necessary for creating a habitable planet.

Second, seeing how impact-generated hot water can transport metals can help us understand how ore deposits are created. Some of the first sources of metal for early humans were meteorites, from which they chipped away bits of metal for tools and jewellery.

Yet impact sites can contain larger concentrations of metals than just from the meteorite itself, which is often vaporised. Ore deposits typically form when there is a geological structure, for example a fracture within a rock, into which metals can be moved by fluids.

Impacts clearly shatter the crust, but they also provide circulating hot water. If there is metal present in the target rocks to begin with, this hot water may carry and concentrate these metals into a richer deposit.

Chris Kirkland receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Minerals Research Institute of Western Australia.

Andreas Zametzer 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 the world’s oldest known meteorite impact structure changed the chemistry of Earth’s crust – https://theconversation.com/how-the-worlds-oldest-known-meteorite-impact-structure-changed-the-chemistry-of-earths-crust-201228

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Naeni, PhD candidate at Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University

The on-again, off-again talks between Iran and western powers over Tehran’s nuclear program have stalled yet again due to disagreements between the two sides.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has blamed Iran for “killing an opportunity” to come back to the negotiating table and maintained the talks were no longer a priority for the Biden administration.

Iran, meanwhile, seems to be inching closer to being able to actually build a nuclear weapon.

Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency have said Iran had enriched uranium up to 84%, just short of the 90% required for a bomb.

And General Mark Milley, the US chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress in late March that Iran could have enough fissile material to make a bomb in “less than two weeks” and a nuclear weapon itself within several months.

Given these developments, is there any room left for an agreement?

Tunnel vision on nuclear talks

Over the past two years, both the US and European Union have been resolute in their efforts to revive the nuclear deal that had been scrapped by then-US President Donald Trump in 2018, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

However, Western attempts have yet to bear fruit, reportedly due to the “maximalist demands” made by the Iranians, including removing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from the US list of foreign terror organisations.

Despite this, the EU believes the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action remains “the only way” for addressing Iran’s nuclear program. The US, despite de-prioritising the talks, is also not willing to officially announce the death of the deal.

This tunnel vision, however, seems to ignore the changes that have taken place since 2015, as well as the more general pattern of decision-making in Iran.

Although backers of the deal often argue it has significantly restricted Iran’s nuclear capabilities, Tehran’s nuclear program has actually expanded in just two years. And recently, a news outlet affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards made it clear that Iran cannot “close its doors to the scientific methods of making a bomb for rational reasons”.

Now, the big question is what Iran’s leaders will do next. The CIA director, William Burns, said in February that he believes Iran’s Supreme Leader has not yet made a decision on building nuclear weapons.

So, what is the Iranian leadership thinking? To answer a question like this, the pattern of decision-making in Iran’s history is a critical factor that has widely been ignored.

A history of painstaking deliberations

Since the 1979 revolution, Iranian leaders have exhibited a cautious and slow approach to making major decisions.

This protracted process of decision-making in Iran is rooted in anxiety about the long-term survival of the regime, which has been grappling with a range of internal and external threats over the past four decades.

For instance, it took eight years for the Islamic Republic to accept the ceasefire and peace talks with Iraq following their war in the 1980s.

In addition, Iranian authorities took a decade to be ready for serious negotiations on a nuclear agreement with the US and other global powers, following the disclosure of the country’s nuclear program in 2003.

Moreover, while Iran first suggested a “look to the East” policy in the mid-2000s under then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the country didn’t begin developing major policies in this direction until 2015. This has included military cooperation with Russia in both Syria and now Ukraine and a long-term economic, military and security agreement with China.

However, building nuclear weapons would certainly be the most consequential strategic decision by the Iranian leadership since the 1979 revolution.

Read more:
Iranian protesters are making demands in charters and bills of rights

What the West can do?

So far, the slow process of decision-making in the Iranian leadership has played a significant role in hindering the weaponisation of the nuclear program.

And this limitation of the leadership could provide western powers with an opportunity, given the ongoing protests currently roiling the country.

The months-long protests erupted following the death of a woman in the custody of the morality police last year, hastening the decline of the regime’s legitimacy inside the country and bringing new rounds of sanctions from the international community.

If western countries abandon their obsession over the revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and continue to support the Iranian people in their protests through diplomatic and economic pressure, it will send a powerful signal to Iran’s leaders: the threats to the regime’s existence are not limited to military factors, but also increasingly come from within the country.

Read more:
Are Western sanctions on Iran making a difference?

It is important to note that amid the protests, Iranian officials and hardliner media have frequently stressed the nuclear deal is not dead and negotiations are ongoing, even though most of them had previously opposed any deal with the West.

This indicates the Islamic Republic would not be ready for the risks that the demise of the nuclear talks could bring – namely, even fiercer protests from the public if it caused another economic shock.

Therefore, the longer the balance of power between the Iranian people and government remains unsettled, the more unlikely it is the regime will make a firm decision on nuclear weapons in the near term.

Consequently, this will provide the West with powerful leverage to secure a more robust and effective agreement in the long term.

Amin Naeni 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 Iran purportedly capable of making a nuclear bomb in a matter of months, what will its leaders do next? – https://theconversation.com/with-iran-purportedly-capable-of-making-a-nuclear-bomb-in-a-matter-of-months-what-will-its-leaders-do-next-202234

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catherine Bennett, Chair in Epidemiology, Deakin University

Australia is currently experiencing the longest break between infection peaks since Omicron arrived in late 2021 and community-wide transmission took off.

With winter looming, it’s worth taking stock of where we are with COVID and what we might expect over the colder months – especially in the southern states and territories. The climate and the way our behaviour changes at this time of year increase the transmission potential for all infectious respiratory diseases.

This will be our second winter with Omicron subvariants, but there are signs it might not be as challenging as the last.

Read more:
Haven’t had COVID or a vaccine dose in the past six months? Consider getting a booster

Peaks and troughs

The last time we had national hospital counts above 2,400 was on January 20, some 12 weeks ago. Our dips in the Omicron era have previously been short lived. Variant BA.1 replaced BA.2 quickly this time last year and hospital counts rose above 2,400 within five weeks of the first wave. In November 2022, the hospital counts again climbed above 2,400 with a change in subvariants after only ten weeks of respite.

Will the current break last? Most states are seeing a rise in hospital numbers, but those that started climbing earliest (New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania) might already be seeing hospital numbers levelling out. So there is hope the current surge will not lead to as high rates of severe illness.

And we know, COVID counts recorded for hospitals aren’t all admissions for COVID. Most are incidental infections. Tasmanian data show on average less than one third of COVID positive patients were admitted for COVID illness.

With each wave, a smaller proportion of COVID positive patients are being reported in ICU. The proportion of people on ventilators because of COVID has also reduced to less than 10% from 30% in the initial January 2022 Omicron peak. The deaths associated with each peak have also fallen with each main wave, with the summer wave just passed having about half the daily deaths reported at its peak compared with our previous summer. Antivirals have played an important role, but so too has population immunity, now estimated at 99.6%.

Community immunity

Thankfully, Omicron is less likely to cause severe illness, especially in a population with significant levels of immunity from both vaccine and prior infection. Antivirals also reduces the risk that infections will end up in hospital. But at times of peak infections, even a smaller proportion translates to significant loss of life among those who are vulnerable.

The shift in the dominant Omicron subvariants and their immune escape characteristics allow people to acquire new infections sooner than they might have if only exposed to the same variant they were infected with previously. Add to this the fact we now have a mix of variants in the population at any one time, then reinfections become more common and the overall infection rate will rise. So, while high levels of population immunity reduce the impact of infection, multiple variants circulating means infection rates can still rise.

Surveillance data from NSW shows this time last year there were only two Omicron variants in circulation, BA.1. and BA.2. Now genomic testing is capturing 12 different Omicron variants and the dominant variants keep shifting, with XBB emerging as the most dominant strain alongside XBB1.5.

Getting COVID again … and again

Reinfection is difficult to measure and will be seriously underestimated due to low reporting rates and mild or asymptomatic infections.

Reinfections help fuel infection rates and therefore increase the risk of exposure to people who are at risk of severe disease if infected.

We are still not sure whether having repeat infections might alter the chances of developing long COVID. It seems less likely for Omicron, especially in people who experience mild or no symptoms.

Young adults are still the group where most infections and reinfections occur. They should be conscious of the extra risks in the winter months with more indoor mixing and make sure they’ve have had at least one booster to reduce their long COVID risk.

Read more:
Long COVID puts some people at higher risk of heart disease — they need better long-term monitoring

Who should still get boosted?

Vaccination may still help reduce the risk of passing the virus on, even if you do become infected in the first month or two after a dose. A recent US prison study found the risk of onward transmission was reduced by nearly a quarter, and by 40% in those who were both vaccinated and had a recent infection, but this protection wanes by about 6% per week.

How this applies to a wider community is hard to gauge. People living in very close quarters have higher transmission rates than the general population – so it’s not clear how much of a reduction we would see in the community setting, even among younger adults with higher rates of work place and social mixing.

Younger adults, like everyone else, are only eligible for a booster six months after their previous dose or their last infection – and many may not go six months without infection as they are the ones most likely to be infected during each Omicron peak which have been spaced less than six months apart.

The best protection against onward transmission in the prison study came from a combination of vaccine and recent prior infection. Once young adults have had their first booster, ongoing immunity boosting from subsequent exposures or infections means they – and therefore the population – have less to gain from multiple boosters.

For those who are vulnerable to severe infection, have a weakened immune response, or have been shielding from the community, a booster dose with the latest vaccines is still strongly recommended.

Read more:
We got some key things wrong about long COVID. Here are 5 things we’ve learnt

Protecting ourselves this winter

The tools we used to manage transmission risk with previous variants do not work now. We saw with Delta that even strict lockdown and mask mandates could only just hold transmission in check with high vaccination coverage.

Omicron has some fundamental differences that undermine these measures, including a higher proportion of cases having a very high viral load, which means there is more virus in the aerosols people exhale. This undermines the effectiveness of masks, social distancing and other measures.

Omicron also has a shorter incubation period, which means more secondary cases will be infectious before the index case even knows they themselves are infected.

A reminder

The Australian winter will likely see a rise in cases again. The cycle of subvariants will leave us exposed and hasten the waning of immunity. And we’ll spend more time together indoors.

Being up-to-date with the latest CVOID and flu vaccines is critical for those more vulnerable to waning immunity and serious illness, and may reduce symptoms in any adults who hasn’t yet had their first booster or an infection in recent months.

It would be great if all symptomatic people could stay home. We’d have less respiratory illness all round. But even then exposure to COVID in the community would be inevitable with so many infectious people without symptoms.

Personal protection with well-fitted masks might still reduce the risk that exposure to Omicron variants will lead to infection in high risk settings. But the safest plan is still to stay home if you are unwell, look for well-ventilated areas when out, open windows to ventilate your home before and during visits, and be considerate of those who are wearing masks as they are more than likely vulnerable and anxious.

Read more:
Millions of Australians still haven’t had their COVID boosters. What message could convince them now?

Catherine Bennett has received research funds from the NHMRC, MRFF and VicHealth, and sat on independent scientific advisory groups for ResAPP, AstraZeneca, Impact Biotech Health, Moderna and Novavax.

– ref. Another COVID winter is coming. Is this the calm before another peak? – https://theconversation.com/another-covid-winter-is-coming-is-this-the-calm-before-another-peak-203149

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Bennett, Adjunct Professor in Ecology, La Trobe University

When faced with uncertainty, we often look for predictions by experts: from election result forecasts, to the likely outcomes of medical treatment. In nature conservation, we turn to expert opinion to assess extinction risk, or predict the long-term responses of plant species to fire management.

But how reliable are these predictions? There’s a well known saying, “Prediction is difficult, particularly when it involves the future”.

In our new research, we put this to the test. We asked eight experienced ornithologists to predict how bird species respond when farmland is revegetated – a common conservation practice.

The result? There was a surprising amount of variation among experts. And there were consistent biases, such as favouring birds commonly seen on farms while underestimating small woodland species. However, when we combined their responses, we got better outcomes.

Does this mean we shouldn’t use such expertise? No. Expert knowledge has a vital role in conservation decisions.

But like anything, it has limitations we should recognise. We should treat expert knowledge as a guide, rather than a source of truth.

How do you put experts to the test?

Expert knowledge is commonly used for making decisions in conservation, yet it is seldom tested.

We asked our expert ornithologists to predict which bird species would be found at 20 revegetation sites on farms in western Victoria, which were spread across an area of more than 1,400 square kilometres.

We gave each expert detailed information about the sites, including a map, the size of the revegetation plot and when it was planted, the number of tree species planted, and management at the site.

Our experts then had to make judgements about how likely specific bird species were to be detected there. This was based on a list of more than 100 species for each site, which had been recorded in the surrounding district.

Then we compared their predictions with data from bird surveys of the sites – undertaken by different experienced ornithologists – as well as a random selection of bird species.

Read more:
New research shows planting trees and shrubs brings woodland birds back to farms, from superb fairy wrens to spotted pardalotes

What did we find? A lot of variation between our experts.

Across the eight ornithologists, the average number of species they considered likely to be detected at sites ranged from 15 to 45. The average recorded from bird surveys was 19.

The predicted composition of the bird community at each site also varied between experts. Some were closer in their predictions than others, but all differed significantly from the community of bird species actually observed.

We all have biases – and experts are not immune

You might wonder if there were similarities in what the experts got wrong. There were.

By and large, our experts overestimated how likely common farmland species – like the galah, eastern rosella, willie wagtail and magpie-lark – would be. They also overestimated the likelihood of larger species that can occur in open country with scattered trees, such as the laughing kookaburra and black-faced cuckoo-shrike.

Why might this be? These species are very visible and common in farm landscapes, but they also range widely and are hence less likely to occur at a particular site while it was being surveyed.

By contrast, our experts tended to underestimate the presence of small woodland birds, such as the brown thornbill, superb fairy-wren, silvereye and grey fantail.

When we combined the expertise of our eight ornithologists, we saw less variability. When grouped, our experts performed much better than a random selection of bird species. Even so, their predictions still differed strongly from those actually observed.

Why does this matter? The loss of woodland birds in farmland areas of southern Australia is a major conservation concern. Revegetation helps restore wooded habitats for such species. These biases could lead to conservation managers discounting the benefits of revegetation for conservation.

The task we gave our experts was not easy. To make reliable predictions is complex. For each species, they had to make multiple judgements. How common is the species in this region? Was the revegetated area likely to provide suitable habitat? How might this species be influenced by the age of the planting and the diversity of tree species? Would it be a resident species, or a visitor? Regular or irregular?

Some of the variation we found is likely due to differing levels of familiarity with the birds of western Victoria. Our experts also had different levels of experience in carrying out surveys and studying birds in revegetated habitats.

What does this mean for our reliance on expertise?

Expert knowledge may be the best – or only – source of information for decision making when we need to rely on predictions, where knowledge has to be applied in novel circumstances, or where management involves complex interacting factors.

So how can we improve the accuracy and reliability of expert predictions, given we all have biases and gaps in our knowledge?

Carefully selecting experts based on relevant experience, using a structured protocol to draw out information, and combining knowledge from multiple experts can help.

Where possible, we should seize the opportunity to test expert predictions and identify potential biases. At present, this kind of testing is rare.

Good conservation management benefits from the wealth of knowledge held by experts, but it also depends on evidence from well-designed empirical studies.

Expert predictions are only as good as the data – and the experience – on which their judgements are based.

Read more:
The limits of expert judgment: Lessons from social science forecasting during the pandemic

Andrew Bennett has received funding from the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, and the Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority. He is affiliated with Birdlife Australia, the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, and the International Association for Landscape Ecology.

Angie Haslem is affiliated with the Ecological Society of Australia

Jim Thomson works for the Victorian Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action.

Previously worked for the Victorian Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (Now Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action). Currently working for them as an external research associate.

– ref. We rely on expert predictions to guide conservation. But even experts have biases and blind spots – https://theconversation.com/we-rely-on-expert-predictions-to-guide-conservation-but-even-experts-have-biases-and-blind-spots-202733

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anita Wreford, Professor Applied Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

The recent report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) underscores the urgency of emissions reductions. For Aotearoa New Zealand, where 50% of emissions come from agriculture in the form of methane and nitrous oxide, this means the primary sector must be part of the response.

New Zealand is indeed the first country to investigate introducing a price on agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.

The most recent pricing proposals would require farmers to pay a levy on their agricultural emissions. To begin with, only 5% of emissions would be priced, with proposals to reduce the 95% free allocation gradually over time.

Much of the existing modelling shows emissions could be cut by up to 10% by reducing the intensity of production, often through lowering animal numbers and fertiliser use. This doesn’t necessarily mean lower profitability. With good pasture management, farmers may be able to reduce stocking rates and increase profits.

But Aotearoa is already one of the most efficient producers of meat and dairy products globally. If we reduce emissions here, will that not simply lead to other, less efficient countries picking up the lost production, while our farmers pay the price?

This idea is known as “carbon leakage” and is often used as an argument against any domestic policy that could result in reduced agricultural production. The issue is important as New Zealand depends heavily on agricultural exports. In 2022, of all merchandise trade, 65% were agricultural commodities.

Understanding whether carbon leakage will occur or not is a complex task. Here, we look at what evidence we have and insights from agricultural trade modelling.

Read more:
The Groundswell protest claimed regulation and taxes are unfair to farmers – the economic numbers tell a different story

New Zealand modelling

It’s difficult to know exactly what might happen in agriculture, as emissions pricing on agricultural products has not yet been used elsewhere. There is no historical evidence to draw on.

International modelling studies present a mixed picture of the likelihood of leakage: an OECD study estimated 34% of agricultural emissions would be leaked, mostly to developing countries.

Recent modelling for New Zealand examines a series of scenarios of domestic pricing on its own as well as international pricing. The results show that for the current proposal where only 5% of emissions are priced to begin with, with a 1% increase each year, New Zealand’s production of meat and dairy products could decline by 2050.

The effect on dairy producers would be a loss of returns of under 1%, while meat producers would face a 6% decline. Some of the production would be taken up by other countries, but the overall volume would be lower than in the baseline situation, where no emissions pricing existed.

This shows leakage may occur, with reductions in production of New Zealand dairy products. But global meat and dairy production by 2050 would be considerably lower than without the policy, which would have a positive overall impact on the climate.

As the proportion of emissions that are priced increases, we expect the quantity of meat and dairy produced in New Zealand to decrease. This in turn could increase the volume of leakage. –

More sustainable future diets

It is important to remember that although there is a reduction in meat and dairy production, there is likely to be an increase in the production of other types of food which doesn’t contribute so much to climate change.

A recent study shows how food consumption alone could contribute an additional degree of warming above preindustrial temperatures by 2100. This demonstrates the importance of food choices in addressing climate change.

Read more:
If we perfect cultivated meat, we could hedge against food shortages as climate chaos intensifies

Many of New Zealand’s trading partners are exploring and beginning to implement their own agricultural emissions-reduction goals and targets. Internationally, there is an increasing focus on the role international trade rules can play in addressing climate change, including border carbon adjustment mechanisms and environmental standards for imports.

In a similar scenario as described above, but where New Zealand’s main competitors also take action, New Zealand may actually see a small increase in production by 2050, despite the domestic pricing policy.

The extent of leakage therefore really depends on how other countries tackle their own emissions. Economy-wide net zero emissions targets are in place for Australia, Chile, European Union countries, the US and the UK by 2050, and for China by 2060.

The opportunity for leakage would be significantly reduced through multilateral agreements or through regional or bilateral commitments within trade agreements.

Read more:
What if carbon border taxes applied to all carbon – fossil fuels, too?

New Zealand could decide to be a leader and demonstrate to the rest of the world a commitment to reducing emissions from our highest emitting sector. This may result in some leakage initially, but this would likely decline as other countries take similar action.

Or we can wait until other countries begin to take more serious action on agricultural emissions. But in the meantime, emissions reductions will increasingly be driven through finance and private-sector initiatives, for example through access to processing companies, which are progressively requiring emissions reductions throughout their value chains and through lending and finance, where banks are beginning to offer reduced interest rates for sustainable practices.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. NZ farmers worry about ‘carbon leakage’ if they have to pay for emissions, but they could benefit from playing the long game – https://theconversation.com/nz-farmers-worry-about-carbon-leakage-if-they-have-to-pay-for-emissions-but-they-could-benefit-from-playing-the-long-game-202839

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Griffiths, Deputy Program Director, Grattan Institute

No one likes spending cuts and tax hikes, but on our estimate the government will soon need more of them if they are going to make a dent in looming A$70 billion a year budget deficits.

A new Grattan Institute report, Back in Black? A menu of measures to repair the budget argues the present combination of low unemployment and high inflation makes this a good time to start to put things in order.

The sooner we do, the sooner we will be well-placed to respond to future economic shocks and avoid pushing costs onto future generations.

We were right to spend big when COVID hit

The massive government support unleashed during the 2020 and 2021 lockdowns was essential for supporting households and businesses and helped keep unemployment low and Australia’s 2020 recession mild.

It left us with government debt that, at 23% of GDP, set to climb to almost 32% by the end of the decade, is high by historical standards, but low by international standards.

Our real problem is a structural one of spending growing faster than revenues.
And it was building long before COVID.

Demands on government are set to grow

Costs are inexorably growing for three reasons.

The first is that our expectations are growing as we age and become more wealthy, pushing up spending on healthcare, disability care and aged care.

The second is that many of these services happen to be the hardest to mechanise, meaning there is little we can do to stop them costing more over time.

The third reason is geopolitical and climate developments. The huge AUKUS deal is just the latest manifestation of pressure to ramp up defence spending. Increases in the frequency and severity of natural disasters mean we have no choice but to spend more on emergencies than before.

Combined with higher interest rates that are pushing up the cost of servicing debt, these three forces are set to leave a persistent gap between government revenue and spending of about 2% of GDP according to Treasury calculations. That’s $50 billion per year in today’s dollars, each and every year.

But even that grim forecast looks optimistic.

Grattan Institute estimates suggest the true structural gap exceeds $70 billion per year when extra, largely unavoidable, spending is taken into account – including on AUKUS, overdue wage rises for care workers, more realistic growth in hospital spending, and long-overdue increases in unemployment benefits.

And that’s just the next decade. In the longer term, the budget will come under extra pressure from slower productivity growth, Australia’s ageing population, and climate change.

Higher economic growth and productivity growth would reduce the enormity of the challenge, and Grattan Institute has put forward ideas about how to support this before.

But hoping we will be able to grow our way out of chronic budget deficits is not a prudent approach. While we should try to boost growth, by itself it is unlikely to get the nation’s finances onto a sustainable trajectory.

13 multibillion dollar ideas

The size of the problem, and the political difficulty of budget repair, mean both spending and revenue measures need to be on the table.

Spending cuts have been the focus of budget repair efforts for most of the past decade, so a lot of the low-hanging fruit has already been picked. But there are still savings to be had.

The biggest would come from greater discipline in decisions about what to spend on infrastructure and defence. Better decisions upfront based on economic – rather than political – considerations could save several billion each year.

Buying smaller, more regularly and “off the shelf” would reduce the risks and costs of mega-projects that have a history of massive cost overruns.

Read more:
How can Australia pay $368 billion for new submarines? Some of the money will be created from thin air

Our report identifies a further $15 billion a year of savings measures, including undoing Western Australia’s special GST funding deal, counting more of the family home in the age pension asset test, and improving hospital efficiency and purchasing in health.

But even with substantial spending cuts, tackling Australia’s budget challenge without compromising core services will require more revenue.

The biggest opportunity comes from plugging “leakages” in the income tax system. Tax breaks and minimisation opportunities are growing. Reining in superannuation tax concessions, reducing the capital gains tax discount, limiting negative gearing, and setting a minimum tax on trust distributions could collectively raise more than $20 billion a year.

Read more:
Inheritance taxes, resource taxes and an attack on negative gearing: how top economists would raise $20 billion per year

Reworking the legislated Stage 3 tax cuts so they are less generous at the top end would save another $8 billion per year.

Lifting the age at which people could get access to their super from 60 to 65 and freezing compulsory super contributions at their present level (10.5% of salary) would save at least another $8 billion.

Other options include lifting the rate of goods and services tax (with a compensation package, and the Commonwealth and states sharing the net revenue), winding back fuel tax credits and beefing up the petroleum resource rent tax.

Ordering the whole menu at once would be a recipe for indigestion. But if Treasurer Jim Chalmers chooses just a few items on the menu, we will be well on the way to tackling Australia’s budget problem.

Read more:
Australia needs an honest conversation about tax and budgets – and Jim Chalmers is ready to talk

Kate Griffiths’s employer, Grattan Institute, has been supported in its work by government, corporates, and philanthropic gifts. A full list of supporting organisations is published at www.grattan.edu.au.

Danielle Wood and Iris Chan 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. Treasurer Chalmers has a $70 billion a year budget hole: we’ve found 13 ways to fill it – https://theconversation.com/treasurer-chalmers-has-a-70-billion-a-year-budget-hole-weve-found-13-ways-to-fill-it-203331

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

The decision of Julian Leeser, who has resigned from the opposition frontbench to campaign for a yes vote on the Voice to parliament, is both principled and pragmatic.

Principled because only rarely in politics do we see people make a significant personal sacrifice for their beliefs.

Being shadow minister for Indigenous Australians and shadow attorney-general is well short of being a minister. Still, stepping down to the backbench and going against the overwhelming view of your party on a critical issue takes a good deal of political courage.

Who knows what happens down the track – different circumstances could see Leeser’s political career re-flower. But as of now, he has been willing to deliver a blow to his own chances of future advancement.

His position is pragmatic because, as the saying goes, he hasn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The man who received a copy of the Australian Constitution for his tenth birthday is obsessively finicky about that document. He believes the wording of the Albanese government’s proposed question for the referendum is flawed. Specifically, he thinks the new provision would be vulnerable to legal challenge.

He will try to get it changed. It is currently under examination by a parliamentary committee. But he knows significant alteration is extremely unlikely. That, however, is not going to prevent him from campaigning for a yes vote – because he judges the bigger cause is more important.

As he said on Tuesday:

I believe that through empowering people and by building institutions that shift responsibility and decision-making closer to people, we are more likely to shift the dial on Indigenous health, education, housing, safety and economic opportunity.

Among the various reasons Leeser will be an asset to the “yes” case is that he is personally close to leading Labor figures on the Voice, notably Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney, and Patrick Dodson. He has worked with Dodson (who is currently on indefinite sick leave) in past years on constitutional recognition and a Voice.

Leeser’s personal position is somewhat similar to that of conservative legal academic Greg Craven, who has also been long involved with these issues. Craven doesn’t like the wording either, but says he will vote yes (although not campaign).

Leeser’s joining the yes case is a fillip for Anthony Albanese and a huge blow for Peter Dutton. For the opposition leader, the situation is diabolical.

Various prominent Liberals around the country are already on the “yes” side, and one would expect more to emerge.

Dutton’s parliamentary party is strongly against the Voice (with a few declared exceptions). But a number of frontbenchers won’t want to be campaigning for the “no” case, because that doesn’t represent their real position or because of political caution.

Whether or not they campaign, shadow ministers are bound to the party decision. So how will the shy ones handle invitations to community forums in the run-up to the vote? They can only plead “another engagement” so often.

The most prominent Liberal moderate, Simon Birmingham, who is opposition leader in the Senate, is in a particularly difficult situation.

Meanwhile, Dutton has to fill the positions of shadow attorney-general and shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, which Leeser had held.

He needs someone with a law degree for the shadow attorney-general job. He could split the portfolios, although that would not be ideal, as the “no” campaign will partly rest on legal points. Paul Fletcher has legal qualifications and, like Leeser, is from New South Wales, so could be a possibility for the shadow attorney-general post. But the Indigenous position would not fit Fletcher, a moderate.

Read more:
Grattan on Friday: the high cost of the Liberals’ Voice rejection – for both Peter Dutton and the party

The now-chaotic situation in the Liberal Party comes after the huge rebuff Aston voters delivered in the recent byelection – and there, the Voice wasn’t even on the radar.

In other circumstances, the leader’s position would be in danger. That’s not the case at the moment. The problem is actually more serious.

The messages from Aston, and from Leeser’s stand on the Voice go to something much deeper: how the Liberal party is out of sync, on many fronts, with key parts of the modern Australian electorate, especially people under 40. (This point stands whatever the referendum result.) Getting back in touch requires a massive revamp of the party’s approach and there is little sign it is up to the task.

Leeser on Tuesday succinctly laid out the challenge for the “yes” case on the Voice, saying Australians who remained to be convinced fell into three groups.

The first group are those who are opposed to the Voice – on philosophical and constitutional grounds.

The second group are those who support the Voice in principle – or who want to support it – but who in the vast majority of cases have genuine doubts and questions about the proposal that the government has put forward.

And the third group are yet to engage, but they too have questions and concerns.

Can the “yes” campaign win over enough people from these groups, particularly groups two and three, for the necessary majority of the national vote and majority of states?

Impossible to know at this stage. But some voters will surely be reassured that such a cautious, conservative figure as Leeser, who has demonstrated personal integrity, is giving them permission to vote “yes”, and to not be too fearful of the consequences.

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

– ref. View from The Hill: Julian Leeser shifts his own dial in the Liberal Party – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-julian-leeser-shifts-his-own-dial-in-the-liberal-party-203574

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Altman, VC Fellow LaTrobe University, La Trobe University

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong joined 50,000 people to march in support of queer rights across the Sydney Harbour Bridge for World Pride in early March. A week earlier, Albanese became the first sitting prime minister to march in Sydney’s Mardi Gras, something he’s done over several decades.

And yet at the same time, in another part of the world, Uganda’s parliament passed a string of draconian measures against homosexuality, including possible death sentences for “aggravated homosexuality”. Any “promotion” of homosexuality is also outlawed.

Read more:
Uganda’s new anti-LGBTQ+ law could lead to death penalty for same-sex ‘offences’

Seven years ago, I co-wrote a book with Jonathan Symons called Queer Wars. Back then, we suggested there was a growing gap between countries in which sexual and gender diversity was becoming more acceptable, and those where repression was increasing.

Sadly, that analysis seems even more relevant today.

A growing gap

Some countries have been unwinding criminal sanctions around homosexuality, which are often the legacy of colonialism. This includes, in recent years, former British colonies Singapore and India.

But others have been imposing new and more vicious penalties for any deviation from stereotypical assumptions of heterosexual masculine superiority (what Australian sociologist Raewyn Connell terms “hegemonic masculinity”).

Anti-gay legislation is currently pending in Ghana, which led US Vice President Kamala Harris to express concerns on a recent visit.

These moves echo the deep homophobia of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has bizarrely linked intervention in Ukraine to protecting traditional values against LGBTQ+ infiltration.

Meanwhile, reports from Afghanistan suggest that anyone identified as “LGBT” is in danger of being killed.

Indonesia recently passed legislation penalising all sex outside marriage. This follows years of anti-queer rhetoric from Indonesian leaders and crackdowns in regional areas.

And while the Biden administration is supportive of queer rights globally, the extraordinary hysteria around trans issues in the Republican Party reminds us the West has no inherent claim to moral superiority.

Read more:
What’s going on with the wave of GOP bills about trans teens? Utah provides clues

Where to next?

Speaking at the World Pride Human Rights Conference, both Wong and Attorney General Mark Dreyfus made it clear Australia would press for recognition of sexuality and gender identity as deserving protection, as part of our commitment to human rights.

Wong also announced a new Inclusion and Equality Fund to support queer community organisations within our region.

Australian governments have usually been wary of loud assertions of support for queer rights. This is partly due to a reasonable fear this merely reinforces the perception that such language reflects a sense of Western superiority, unwilling to acknowledge other societies may have very different attitudes towards gender and sexuality.

Australia is part of the Equal Rights Coalition, an intergovernmental body of 42 countries dedicated to the protection of the rights of LGBTQ+ people, and has supported sexual and gender rights in the country reviews undertaken by the United Nations Human Rights Commission.

Australia has a minimal presence in Uganda, and direct representations are unlikely to have much effect. Uganda is a member of the Commonwealth, as are Ghana, Kenya and Zambia, where official homophobia appears to be increasing. But there’s little evidence the Australian government sees this as a significant foreign policy forum, or is prepared to push for sexual rights through its institutions.

As persecution on the basis of sexuality and gender identity increases, more people will seek to flee their countries. Queer refugees face double jeopardy: they’re not safe at home, but they’re often equally unsafe in their diasporic communities, which have inherited the deep prejudices of their homelands.

The UN’s refugee agency reports that most people seeking asylum because of their sexuality are unwilling to disclose this, because of discrimination within their own ethnic communities. This makes it impossible to have accurate numbers. But a clear signal from Australia would be a powerful statement of support – that it understands the situation and welcomes people who need flee because of their sexuality or gender expression.

An official Canadian government document states:

Canada has a proud history of providing protection to and helping to resettle the world’s most vulnerable groups. That includes those in the Two-Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and additional sexually and gender diverse community.

Theirs is a model worth following.

Dennis Altman is Patron of the Pride Foundation, which supports queer refugees and asylum seekers.

– ref. There’s a growing gap between countries advancing LGBTQ+ rights, and those going backwards – https://theconversation.com/theres-a-growing-gap-between-countries-advancing-lgbtq-rights-and-those-going-backwards-203329

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Duckett, Honorary Enterprise Professor, School of Population and Global Health, and Department of General Practice, The University of Melbourne

Australia’s health system is under significant pressure. The Labor government has inherited a system with declining bulk-billing rates for GP visits. These fell from almost 90% of all GP attendances bulk billed in December 2021 to just over 80% a year later.

Significant workforce shortages remain in rural and remote Australia, despite a raft of incentive programs to improve access to health care. In 2021–22, about 3.5% of adults did not see a GP because of cost, with higher rates of missed care outside metropolitan areas.

This means it would be possible to radically alter the Medicare system. One option is to restrict Medicare access to GPs who agree to bulk bill all patients, while allowing those who don’t bulk bill to rely solely on out-of-pocket payments.

A new Medicare agenda should address the problems of fraud, geographical inequity, and bulk-billing decline. This can be done by conceptualising access to Medicare rebates by practitioners as a privilege, not a right.

Read more:
GPs are abandoning bulk billing. What does this mean for affordable family medical care?

Why were policymakers constrained?

Health policy in Australia has been limited for decades by assumed constitutional constraints, which have been talked up by the medical profession to prevent policies they oppose.

After the second world war, the Chifley Labor government began a series of social security reforms. Legislation for one element of the reform – a pharmaceutical benefits scheme – was struck down by the High Court because there was no relevant head of power in the Constitution.

In response, the government proposed amending the Constitution to give it broad social welfare powers. This proposal had bipartisan support and was passed at a referendum in 1946. A new sub-section (xxiiiA) was consequently added to section 51 of the Constitution, giving the Commonwealth power to make laws about:

The provision of maternity allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorise any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances.

The parenthetical civil conscription constraint was included following an amendment from the Liberal Party. This was motivated by a desire to prevent the creation of a scheme like the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, which required all GPs to work under contract to government and hospital specialists to be salaried employees.

The presumed constitutional constraint seemed to shape the Labor Party’s thinking about what might be constitutionally possible when designing Medibank, the precursor to Medicare. Despite some members of caucus supporting a salaried hospital system, this was not pursued.

But in 1980 and 2009, the High Court narrowed the meaning of civil conscription. This meant the subsection no longer constrained government power in the way it once had.

Medical practitioners now work in a diverse range of settings, not all of which rely fully on revenue from Medicare. So the nexus between access to Medicare rebates and the ability to work as a doctor has been broken. The government can now expand the constraints it puts on billing rights without it being considered civil conscription.

Read more:
Labor has a huge health agenda ahead of it. What policies should we expect?

A bold way to restructure Medicare

It is time for a complete rethink of how Medicare payment arrangements are designed and regulated, free from the assumed constitutional constraints.

The recent Independent Review of Medicare Integrity and Compliance highlighted that:

the current state of Medicare, and some of the challenges […] are the result of previous attempts to apply discrete and band-aid solutions to single issues over time and a lack of system thinking and consideration.

The band-aid approach no longer works. A fundamental rethink of Medicare is required, moving away from practitioners’ relatively unconstrained and uncapped access to fee-for-service rebates.

Read more:
6 reasons why it’s so hard to see a GP

Presently, all specialists – including GPs – can apply for a Medicare provider number which enables rebate payments for their services, with few constraints.

Rather than an “all comers” approach, a new basis for Medicare could be one where practices sign up to Medicare and agree to meet Medicare’s contractual conditions such as agreement to bulk bill all patients, participation in training future health professionals and in quality improvement programs, and that practices are multidisciplinary. Again, fair remuneration needs to underpin all this.

Participating practices could be paid on a variety of bases, including number and type of patients enrolled, number of patient attendances (enrolled or not), and other payments.

Payment rates would need to be seen as fair by both government and practices.

A participation basis for Medicare, moving away from an unconstrained approach, coupled with adequate workforce planning, could also be used to encourage new graduates to work in locations and specialties in short supply by limiting access to rebates for specialties in locations of oversupply.

This would also facilitate management of fraud and over servicing through contractual controls, rather than cumbersome administrative law processes.

A “participating provider” approach would transform the patient experience. Most importantly, the bulk-billing lottery would end: practices displaying a Medicare sign would bulk bill all patients, not just some.

There would need to be a new deal for doctors too, with remuneration set fairly – not at the whim of government – ending the political fee freezes suffered under the previous government.

Australia’s Medicare fabric has many holes

Although Medicare has served Australia well, it’s beginning to fray at the edges with reductions in bulk billing and provider satisfaction, and geographical shortages.

The old incentive structures have not addressed these problems and now new approaches, which may previously have been thought impossible in part because of the perceived constitutional constraints, must be considered.

What we have is shown is that the policy agenda is more open than might have hitherto been considered. The time is right for these options to be considered.

Read more:
How do you fix general practice? More GPs won’t be enough. Here’s what to do

This article was co-authored by Emma Campbell, former Grattan Institute intern and current LLB/BPPE student at The Australian National University.

Stephen Duckett was a member of the Strengthening Medicare Task Force.

Fiona McDonald receives funding from the Medical Research Council (UK).

– ref. What if Medicare was restricted to GPs who bulk billed? This kind of reform is possible – https://theconversation.com/what-if-medicare-was-restricted-to-gps-who-bulk-billed-this-kind-of-reform-is-possible-203543

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

So, you think you know why rents climbed.

You probably think was skyrocketing interest rates and a tsunami of migration.

It’s true that interest rates have jumped more over the past year than at any time on record, and it’s true that migration has roared back – in the six months to September 2022 (the latest month for which we’ve official figures) arrivals exceeded departures by 170,000.

But here’s the thing. Advertised rents began climbing sharply in late 2021 – six months before the Reserve Bank began pushing up interest rates, and at a time when it was forecast not to.

And net migration was negative back when rents were taking off – the number of arrivals didn’t even match the number of departures.

It’s supply and demand

Something else made rents move.

As it happens, there’s no particular reason to think interest rates would have quickly affected rents even if they had been climbing. If higher rates force some landlords to sell, and they sell to other landlords, the number of properties for rent won’t change. If those landlords sell to owner occupiers who would otherwise rent, they cut both the number of rental properties and the number of renters.

What matters for rents, as for any price, is the demand for and the supply of the product being priced. More demand (more renters wanting properties) and the price climbs. More supply (more properties available for rent) and the price falls.

Read more:
$1 billion per year (or less) could halve rental housing stress

On the face of it, neither demand nor supply was changing much during COVID as rents started climbing. Australia’s population was growing more slowly than at any time in modern history. And, as best as we can tell, the number of properties available for rent was climbing, albeit weakly.

What did change during COVID, according to the research department of the Reserve Bank, was the average number of people per household.

The change doesn’t sound big – the average fell from a bit above 2.6 residents per household to a bit below 2.55 – but applied to millions of households it meant about 140,000 more houses and apartments were needed than would have been.

Average household size (capital cities)

The sudden change was awfully for hard for the building industry to respond to, especially when it was laid low by COVID.

Why did we suddenly want to live with fewer people?

The head of the Bank’s economic division, Luci Ellis, thinks it was COVID itself, and lockdowns. We suddenly became more precious about sharing space.

‘Love the one you’re with’

Ellis says proportion of Australians living in group houses declined and stayed low. Faced with the choice of living with a large number of housemates and just one other person, perhaps a romantic partner, a lot of renters left group houses and shacked up with each other.

As she put it last year:

On the question of who you would rather be locked down with, at least some Australians have voted with their removalists’ van, by moving out of their share house and in with their partner.

There’s more to it of course, but where the supply and demand for anything are roughly in balance (rents had been increasing by less than 1% per year in the four years before COVID, and fell in the first year of COVID) any sudden change in either supply or demand can move prices quickly.

Advertised rents aren’t typical …

Having said that, for most renters prices are still moving slowly. Advertised capital city rents are up 13% over the past year, and average regional rates up 9%. But average rents (the average of what all renters pay) are up only 4.8%.

The rents charged to ongoing tenants climb much more slowly than the rents charged to new tenants, in part because landlords often like their tenants, and in part because for the first year renters are usually on fixed contracts.

But over time as renters move home, and landlords become less squeamish, more and more renters tend to pay the rents advertised. It makes the increase in advertised rents an unwelcome sign of what’s to come.

… but they’re a sign of rents ahead

And it might get worse. Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe says population growth is set to climb to 2%, – about the peak reached during the resources boom.

We won’t be able to build houses anything like that fast. Lowe says the last time Australia’s population surged it took about five years for housing supply to fully respond to housing demand.

We’ve ways of dealing with it of course. One is to re-embrace group homes, another is to delay moving out of our partents’ homes, or to move back in.

But even if this does happen, Lowe says, with typical understatement, that rent inflation – ultra-low before COVID – is likely to stay “quite high” for some time.

Read more:
Rent crisis? Average rents are increasing less than you might think

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

– ref. What made rents soar? It might have been COVID, and pairing off – https://theconversation.com/what-made-rents-soar-it-might-have-been-covid-and-pairing-off-203542

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dominic Zaal, Director, Australian Solar Thermal Research Institute (ASTRI), CSIRO

Australia’s transition to renewables is gathering speed, but there’s a looming problem with storage. We will need much more long-duration storage to get us through the night, once coal and fossil gas exit the system.

We also need to find new and better ways to create heat for industrial processes. Renewables can supply much of that heat during the day, but energy storage will be required to meet industry’s night-time heat needs.

Solar thermal technology has the potential to provide both long-duration storage and industrial heat, yet it has been largely overlooked in the Australian context. That is about to change.

The CSIRO Energy Storage Roadmap identifies a mix of technologies will be required, across sectors, to meet Australia’s energy storage needs, particularly at night. Solar thermal will be an important part of the mix.

Batteries alone won’t cut it. They’re good for short-duration storage, ranging from mere minutes to an hour or two. But you’d need an awful lot of them, at enormous cost, to cover 8-12 hours. Solar thermal becomes cost-effective for long-duration storage at scale, and brings other benefits too.

Read more:
Australia’s energy market operator is worried about the grid’s reliability. But should it be?

Introducing thermal energy storage

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) identified storage of four to 12 hours’ duration as “the most pressing utility-scale need in the next decade”. That’s what’s required “to manage stronger daily variations in solar and wind output, and to meet consumer demand, also during more extreme days, as coal capacity declines”.

Most people know about lithium-ion battery (chemical) storage and pumped hydro (mechanical) storage. However, thermal energy storage is not well understood or recognised. This is partly due to perceived costs and engineering challenges. However, as concentrated solar thermal plants are built all over the world – 30 are being developed in China alone – the knowledge base is growing.

More than 80% of Australia’s total energy use involves a thermal process:

• combustion of coal and gas for electricity
• combustion of fuels for transport
• combustion of fuels for industrial process heat.

A large proportion of these existing fossil-fuel thermal processes can be met with renewable thermal energy storage.

The CSIRO Roadmap found thermal energy storage was a relatively low-cost solution with multiple applications, including utility-scale power generation, renewable fuel production and industrial process heat.

For utility-scale power generation, the lowest cost technology for eight-hour storage in 2050 is thermal energy storage using concentrated solar thermal power. The cost in 2050 was slightly over A$100/MWh, compared with lithium-ion battery at A$140/MWh and pumped hydro at around A$155/MWh.

For 24-hour storage technologies in 2050, thermal energy storage was again the lowest cost at A$99/MWh, compared with pumped hydro at A$145/MWh or grid-charged electrical (using solar photovoltaics and wind) thermal energy storage at A$150/MWh.

Short-duration storage is likely to remain the domain of lithium-ion battery for at least up to two hours duration, and perhaps as high as four hours.

Here’s how it works

Concentrated solar thermal power uses mirrors to convert sunlight into heat energy. This heat energy is typically stored.

The stored thermal energy can then be used, at any time of day or night, on demand, to produce steam for electricity production, or heat/steam for industrial processes.

The system typically provides for six to 24 hours of operations. What this means is concentrated solar thermal can provide continuous, on demand power and/or process heat 24/7. It can also simultaneously generate power and store heat at the same time.

The stored thermal energy is typically used at night. Concentrated solar thermal systems deployed in China, Spain, the United States, South America, Africa and the Middle East generally have over ten hours of storage, which allows for the overnight generation of renewable power and heat.

Concentrated solar thermal is also a synchronous technology because it uses a traditional spinning turbine (identical to those used in coal-fired power plants). This creates much-needed system-strength and frequency services to the grid. In essence, when coal fired power stations close, concentrated solar thermal is a technology that could continue to provide essential system services.

While more than 100 concentrated solar thermal plants, generating 7GWh of power, have been deployed around the world, the technology has not yet been deployed at scale in Australia. This will soon change with the construction by Vast Solar of a 30MW concentrated solar thermal plant in Port Augusta, supported in part by the federal government. The project will have ten hours of thermal energy storage to generate power for supply to the grid, primarily at night. The project will also provide renewable heat and power to produce more than 7,000 tonnes of green (renewable) methanol each year. (Methanol is an essential chemical building block for hundreds of consumer and industrial products such as paints, carpets, fabrics, building materials and liquid fuels).

Heed the warning

We need to start building long-duration energy storage systems now, so we have secure and reliable power when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. We also need to replace fossil fuels used to create industrial process heat.

Sectors such as mining, industry, transport, agriculture, and households all require secure, reliable, and affordable renewable energy. For many sectors, this need occurs at night, and that necessitates storage.

Read more:
Australia’s 116 new coal, oil and gas projects equate to 215 new coal power stations

Dominic Zaal receives funding from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA), which is a Federal Government funding agency.

– ref. Batteries won’t cut it – we need solar thermal technology to get us through the night – https://theconversation.com/batteries-wont-cut-it-we-need-solar-thermal-technology-to-get-us-through-the-night-203545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eyal Mayroz, Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney

Violence has again erupted in the Middle East during one of the holiest times of year for both Jews and Muslims.

In recent days, militants in southern Lebanon have fired a large number of rockets at Israel in response to an Israeli police raid on the Al-Aqsa mosque compound in Jerusalem.

Israel blamed the Hamas militant group for the attacks and retaliated by launching air strikes at Palestinian militias in Lebanon – the most alarming cross-border violence in 17 years – as well as at the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.

A rare rocket attack then came from Syria, prompting another round of Israeli air strikes against targets there. Clashes also broke out in the West Bank after thousands of Israelis, joined by seven Cabinet ministers, marched to an evacuated settlement there, demanding it be legalised.

The motives behind such provocations include anger, fear, the desire for revenge and frustration. These emotions are driven by the horrors of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories on the one hand, and anger at Palestinian terrorist attacks or unbridled desire for Jewish hegemony on the other.

Extreme interpretations of nationalism or religiosity – and often a combination of both – tend to aggravate these sentiments.

These spasms of violence should be seen as provocations since there is no military solution to the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

Deterrence is what the two main actors, Israel and Hamas, are seeking. Maintaining, achieving or increasing deterrence is key in both sides’ calculations of how to react when violence does break out.

Wedged between provocation, retaliation and deterrence, each side estimates how far it can stretch the line before copping a costly response from the other.

Read more:
Israel is facing twin existential crises – what is Benjamin Netanyahu doing to solve them?

A multitude of calculations

For Hamas, the key calculation is how to escalate attacks against Israel, while still keeping Gaza out of the violence. The aim is to steer the struggle against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories to the West Bank, Jerusalem and into Israel itself.

Recognising this, Israel tries to direct its military responses back to Gaza, as soon as it can establish a link between the provocation and Hamas.

Hezbollah, the militant group in Lebanon that has a growing partnership with Hamas, has a different set of calculations.

These include its long-standing feud with Israel, a desire to settle old scores (including past assassinations of Hezbollah leaders), religious passions (for example, sensitivities in relation to the Al-Aqsa Mosque), and directives from Iran.

Hezbollah is constrained, however, by Israeli military responses and by the need to reconcile its allegiance to Iran with its accountability to the Lebanese people. Many Lebanese already accuse Hezbollah of prioritising Iranian interests over their own. Being held responsible for a costly Israeli retaliation against Lebanese territories would be problematic for the organisation.

Israel, in turn, also fears another war with Hezbollah, which would be extremely costly. The organisation has a huge arsenal of rockets (estimated at more than 100,000), including high-quality and long-range weapons, which it could fire into Israel at will.

The famed Israeli Iron Dome air defence system would not withstand the power and sheer numbers of these weapons.

Israel’s worst fear, however, is of a concurrent escalation on multiple fronts, with Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza in the south, an Intifada-style uprising in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to the west, and Hezbollah in Lebanon to the north.

A fourth front could open up in Israeli cities between Israel’s Palestinians, Jews and security forces. And there’s always a possibility of a fifth front being fought against Iranian forces stationed in Syria.

Israel’s preferred approach to these multiple threats would be to try to isolate the different actors by limiting its retaliations to a single provocation at a time. This, however, would not be easy.

Why both sides have avoided escalation thus far

As we’ve seen recently, the tensions between the various sides tend to originate or are exacerbated by provocations from minor actors – Jewish settlers in the West Bank, Jewish nationalists inside Israel, and Palestinian militants in the occupied territories, inside Israel or in southern Lebanon.

In the past, retaliations to such provocations by Israel, Hamas and other groups were, more often than not, measured. That is, they were aimed to project power and resolve internally to avoid being seen as weak by one’s own people. But a measured response also signals to the other side a wish to avoid escalation.

The targets struck in recent outbreaks of violence illustrate this. On the Hamas side, limiting rocket firing to Jewish towns in southern Israel, as opposed to more central cities, signalled a desire to avoid a major escalation. On Israel’s side, aiming at low-level Palestinian targets, as opposed to primary command posts or key leaders, could mean the same.

However, it is unclear how the new hard-line Israeli government will respond to the evolving violence.

At the moment, Israel seems to prefer avoiding escalation. The latest polls show the new ruling coalition is nose-diving in popularity and would fail to gain a majority of seats in parliament if elections were held today. This may explain why the more vocal nationalists appear to be deferring, at least temporarily, to more cautious voices in government.

However, a significant provocation in Al-Aqsa Mosque, or a significant terrorist attack against Jews, could both alter this mind-set.

Read more:
Israel protests: Netanyahu delays judicial reforms over fears of ‘civil war’ – but deep fault-lines threaten future of democracy

Where to from here?

The international community has a critical role to play by forcing or incentivising the various sides into painful but necessary concessions on the (very) long road to peace.

One could appreciate the value of the de-escalation strategies currently in use. However, if the main purpose is to preserve deterrence, then a more honest dialogue within, as well as between, the camps on the risks of violent provocations could offer perhaps better solutions.

In the endless tit-for-tat violent cycle, there are no winners, only losers.

Eyal Mayroz 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. As tensions escalate in the Middle East, can all-out war be averted? – https://theconversation.com/as-tensions-escalate-in-the-middle-east-can-all-out-war-be-averted-203550

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Leif, Senior Lecturer, Educational Psychology & Inclusive Education, Monash University

A major international report says the “disciplinary climate” in Australian schools is among the “least favourable” in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

On Tuesday, the OECD released a profile on education in Australia.

Its findings follow headlines about student behaviour and a federal parliamentary inquiry into “increasing disruption in Australian school classrooms”.

How severe is the problem and what can we do about it?

What does the OECD report say

The OECD report looks at many aspects of Australia’s education system. And identifies many strengths, such as how Australian students view their teachers positively and teachers have comparatively high levels of job satisfaction.

But it also found the “disciplinary climate” in schools in Australia was among the least favourable in the OECD according to student reports.

This is based on a 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) index, which asked students how often noise and disorder occur in the classroom. Australian classrooms scored -0.2 while the OECD average is 0.04.

It also refers to a 2018 TALIS (OECD teaching and learning) survey, which found 37% of Australian lower-secondary school principals reported intimidation or bullying among students occurred at least weekly. Australian teachers also reported feeling less prepared for, or capable of, managing disruptive classroom behaviour than their OECD peers.

Findings from the survey suggest Australian students perceive their classrooms to be more disruptive than they have in the past. It also suggests one of the reasons teachers are choosing to leave the profession is disruptive behaviour.

In separate studies, researchers have found new teachers find it particularly hard to manage disruptive student behaviour.

Read more:
A new review into how teachers are educated should acknowledge they learn throughout their careers (not just at the start)

Do we have a behaviour crisis?

These are important challenges that must be addressed. Post-COVID, teachers have reported student behaviour appears to be getting worse, with students more distracted and less engaged than before the pandemic began.

However, there is currently little data showing how often disruptive behaviour occurs in Australian classrooms, what these behaviours look like, and how teachers currently work to prevent and respond to these behaviours.

It is possible that behaviour issues are happening more in some areas or in some schools, rather than across the board.

Read more:
If Australian schools want to improve student discipline, they need to address these 5 issues

Why do we see poor behaviour?

The development of disruptive behaviour can be influenced by a range of biological, social, environmental, and educational factors. Here are three key reasons why students might engage in disruptive behaviour at school:

1. Students find the school work too difficult

Students with delayed academic skills are more likely to exhibit disruptive and challenging behaviour, and students who display disruptive behaviour may be more likely to fall behind academically.

This connection has been shown to be strongest between a student’s reading skills and disruptive behaviour. This makes sense, because as students’ progress through primary school, they need to demonstrate increasingly advanced language and literacy skills to participate and succeed academically in all subjects.

2. Students are trying to impress their peers

Students are more likely to display disruptive behaviour in schools and classrooms where this is accepted. Researchers talk about the “classroom climate”. These are the values, beliefs and norms that set the behaviour within a classroom setting.

At school (particularly in high school), peer approval is one of the most important variables that can influence student behaviour.

Being disruptive may seem “cool” in some peer groups, and researchers have found that this can promote a culture of student disruption.

3. Students are copying their parents

Students model and learn the behaviours they see. Telling students how to behave well won’t work when the adults in the room are overwhelmed, stressed, and not in control of their emotions.

Recent research suggest teachers and school leaders are facing increasing threats and hostility from parents. Students may witness these parent-teacher conflicts and behave in similar ways when managing conflict at school.

Read more:
‘They phone you up during lunch and yell at you’ – why teachers say dealing with parents is the worst part of their job

What can we do about it?

While behavioural issues are complex, there are practical things teachers and school leaders can do to reduce disruption.

This begins with looking at what can be done to support positive student behaviour, rather than focusing on what you can do to reduce disruption.

The means approaches for supporting improved student behaviour are educative, not punitive. They also promote a sense of predictability and safety in classrooms. This can include:

Limiting distractions

Teachers can change their classrooms to limit distractions and promote positive behaviour. For example:

• rearranging seating to make it easier for students to see the teacher and pay attention

• putting felt pads under furniture to reduce noise levels

• turning off sounds on mobile devices to limit distractions

• adding environmental cues (such as written instructions and checklists) to remind students about what they should be doing.

Teaching behavioural skills

We can’t assume students know how to behave well at school. School is a complex environment and may have different expectations to home.

So teachers can teach behavioural skills the same way they teach academic skills (and teach them early and often). This means giving students instruction, practice, feedback, and encouragement. Specific behavioural skills to teach might include:

• responding to your name when called

• requesting help with difficult tasks

• entering the classroom quietly and beginning a “getting started” task

• showing kindness and respect to peers and staff.

Teachers should also respond to disruptive behaviour or behavioural errors as if they were learning errors and provide an immediate correction. This includes giving the student a chance to practise (or show you) the appropriate behaviour and the providing positive feedback if warranted.

Allowing time for lots of practice

Researchers have found that for a child to learn something new, it needs to be repeated eight times on average.

For a child to unlearn an old behaviour and replace it with a new behaviour, the new behaviour must be practised on average 28 times.
Providing plenty of praise

Research shows praising students for positive behaviours has a high-impact. It is important to make the praise genuine and attached to a specific behaviour.

Getting students involved

The classroom climate can be improved when students play an active role in setting classroom expectations and holding one another to high standards.

This includes asking students what their classroom norms and expectations should be. It could also include:

• encouraging students to acknowledge each other for doing the right thing – a practice known as “tootling”

• making it safe for students to both make mistakes and succeed. Create a culture where students can openly discuss and learn from their mistakes, as well as share their successes

• modelling calm conflict resolution and support students to work through academic and social challenges.

Read more:
Our new study provides a potential breakthrough on school bullying

Erin Leif currently receives funding from the Victorian Department of Families, Fairness, and Housing, and has received funding from the Victorian Department of Education and the Australian Education Research Organisation. Erin Leif is currently the president of the Association for Behaviour Analysis Australia and is an expert advisor to Behaviour Support Practitioners Australia.

– ref. Australian classrooms are among the ‘least favourable’ for discipline in the OECD. Here’s how to improve student behaviour – https://theconversation.com/australian-classrooms-are-among-the-least-favourable-for-discipline-in-the-oecd-heres-how-to-improve-student-behaviour-202946

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Koplin, Lecturer in Bioethics, Monash University & Honorary fellow, Melbourne Law School, Monash University

Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI, recently invested US$180 million into Retro Biosciences – a company seeking to extend human lifespans by ten healthy years.

One way it plans to achieve this is by “rejuvenating” blood. This idea is based on studies that found old mice showed signs of reversed ageing when given the blood of young mice.

Altman isn’t the only Silicon Valley entrepreneur supporting life extension efforts. PayPal cofounder Peter Thiel, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Google cofounder Larry Page have poured millions into projects that could profoundly affect how we live our lives.

The first question raised is scientific: could these technologies work? On this front the jury is still out, and there are grounds for both optimism and scepticism.

Read more:
Can ageing really be ‘treated’ or ‘cured’? An evolutionary biologist explains

The second question is just as important: even if lifespan extension is feasible, would it be ethical?

We explain why some common ethical arguments against lifespan extension aren’t as solid as they might seem – and put forth another, somewhat overlooked explanation for why trying to live forever might not be worth it.

Is it worth it if you still die anyway?

One might argue lifespan extension merely pushes back the inevitable: that we will die. However, the problem with this view is that any life saved will only be saved temporarily.

A lifespan extension of ten years is akin to saving a drowning swimmer, only for them to die in a traffic accident ten years later. Although we might be sad about their eventual death, we’d still be glad we saved them.

The same is true of conventional medicine. If a doctor cures my pneumonia, I will eventually die of something else, but that doesn’t mean the doctor or I will regret my being saved.

It’s also worth taking a longer view of where lifespan extension research could lead us. In the most optimistic scenarios put forth by experts, even modest short-term gains could help people add centuries to their life, since the benefits of each intervention could cascade. For example, each extra year of life would increase the likelihood of surviving until the next big breakthrough.

Is it worth it if immortality could get boring?

Many have argued against lifespan extension on ethical grounds, saying they wouldn’t use these technologies. Why might somebody be opposed?

One worry is that a very long life might be undesirable. Philosopher Bernard Williams said life is made valuable through the satisfaction of what he calls “categorical desires”: desires that give us reason to want to live.

Williams expects these desires relate to major life projects, such as raising a child, or writing a novel. He worries that, given a long enough life, we will run out of such projects. If so, immortality would become tedious.

It’s unclear whether Williams is right. Some philosophers point out human memories are fallible, and certain desires could resurface as we forget earlier experiences.

Others emphasise that our categorical desires evolve as our life experiences reshape our interests – and might continue to do so over the course of a very long life.

In either case, our categorical desires, and hence our reason for living, would not be exhausted over a very long life.

Even if immortality did get tedious, this wouldn’t count against modest lifespan extensions. Many would argue 80-something years isn’t enough time to explore one’s potential. Personally, we’d welcome another 20 or even 50 years to write a novel, or start a career as a DJ.

Is it worth it if poor people miss out?

Another worry regarding lifespan extension technologies is egalitarian.

These technologies will be expensive; it seems unjust for Silicon Valley billionaires to celebrate their 150th birthdays while the rest of us mostly die in our 70s and 80s.

This objection seems convincing. Most people welcome interventions that promote health equality, which is reflected in broader societal demands for universal healthcare.

But there’s important nuance to consider here. Consider that universal healthcare systems promote equality by improving the situation of those who aren’t well off. On the other hand, preventing the development of lifespan extension technologies will worsen the situation of those who are well off.

The ethical desirability of equality based on “levelling down” is unclear. The poorest Australians are twice as likely to die before age 75 than the richest. Yet few people would argue we should stop developing technologies to improve the health of those aged over 75.

Moreover, the price of lifespan extension technologies would eventually likely come down.

The real problem

However, we think there’s one serious ethical objection that applies to extreme cases of life extension. If humans routinely lived very long lives, this could reduce how adaptable our populations are, and lead to social stagnation.

Even modest increases in life expectancy would radically increase population size. To avoid overpopulation, we’d need to reduce birth rates, which would drastically slow generational turnover.

As one of us (Chris) has explored in previous research, this could be incredibly harmful to societal progress, because it may:

1. increase our vulnerability to extinction threats
2. jeopardise individual wellbeing, and
3. impede moral advancement.

Many fields benefit from a regular influx of young minds coming in and building on the work of predecessors.

Even if the brains of older scientists remained sharp, their “confirmation bias” – a tendency to seek and interpret information in ways that confirm one’s prior beliefs – could slow the uptake of new scientific theories.

Moral beliefs are also prone to confirmation bias. In a world of extended lifespans, individuals whose moral views were set in their youth (perhaps more than 100 years ago) will remain in positions of power.

It seems likely our society’s moral code is badly mistaken in at least some respects. After all, we think past societies were catastrophically mistaken in theirs, such as when they endorsed slavery, or rendered homosexuality illegal.

Slowing generational turnover could delay the point at which we recognise and fix our own moral catastrophes, especially those we can’t yet see.

Read more:
Life extension: the five most promising methods – so far

Julian Koplin receives funding from Ferring Pharmaceuticals.

Christopher Gyngell via his affiliation with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute received funding from the Victorian State Government via the Operational Infrastructure Support Program. He also receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund.

– ref. The rich are pouring millions into life extension research – but does it have any ethical value? – https://theconversation.com/the-rich-are-pouring-millions-into-life-extension-research-but-does-it-have-any-ethical-value-201774