Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Norberg, Associate Professor in Psychology, Macquarie University

As COVID-19 quarantines and lockdowns drive up psychological distress, many people have increased their screen time, including online shopping, to cope.

Like alcohol use — or overeating, watching TV or surfing the internet — online shopping doesn’t pose a problem when used as an occasional treat.

For some people, however, these behaviours can turn into habits that are hard to break.

Here’s how to know when online shopping becomes a problem and what to do if it does.

Read more: When possessions are poor substitutes for people: hoarding disorder and loneliness

How to know if it’s a problem

A behaviour becomes an addiction when at least three criteria are met:

• the behaviour is clearly excessive given its context
• it causes significant distress or impairment for the person or important people in their lives
• it persists despite not resulting in reward.

Shopping online for your weekly groceries would not usually be considered a behavioural addiction. Neither would making COVID-19 related online purchases of exercise equipment, office supplies, or masks.

However, online shopping might be considered addiction-like if you find yourself doing the following:

• spending a great deal of time shopping
• buying a lot more than you need
• finding it hard to stop shopping even though you rarely seem to enjoy the stuff you buy.

Relationship issues and financial hardship are other key clues your online shopping has become a problem.

Some people may experience online shopping problems without even spending a lot of money; just spending excessive amounts of time browsing products may be enough to warrant reflection and possibly intervention.

Read more: Psychology can explain why coronavirus drives us to panic buy. It also provides tips on how to stop

What does the research say about online shopping and addiction?

For many people, shopping can be a social or leisurely activity. It can feel good, and desires to feel good (and not bad) can get wrapped up with the desire to buy and own material possessions.

In fact, research from my (Melissa Norberg) lab suggests compulsive shopping can be associated with a feeling of being unable to deal with distress.

Problematic shopping also may occur when people attempt to compensate for an unmet psychological need, such as a need to feel competent, in control, or connected to others.

People sometimes turn to comfort products when they feel unsupported by significant others. They may buy compulsively when they feel ambivalent or confused about their sense of self.

So it’s not surprising that during the pandemic, many people report turning to online shopping to cope with significant changes to their social, work and family lives.

Australia experienced a surge in online shopping in March and April and online spending now remains well above what it was a year ago.

What to do if you want to cut back

If online shopping or browsing is interfering with your life, there are several strategies you can try.

The first is to determine what triggers your online shopping. Are you trying to feel better about yourself or relieve negative emotions such as boredom, stress or anxiety? Are you experiencing poor sleep or unhealthy eating? (If so, upsetting events might be more difficult to manage).

Is the online shopping occurring mostly at a certain time of day or in certain circumstances (after a glass or two of wine, after scrolling social media or when you’re lying in bed at the end of a long day, for example?)

Next, try to figure out if there are other, more effective ways you can respond to whatever is triggering your excessive shopping.

If you tend to react impulsively to situations, practise identifying your urge to respond and then sitting with that discomfort so that you can choose a less impulsive and more productive or fulfilling response. Being able to tolerate negative emotions and respond flexibly to stressful situations is associated with healthier outcomes.

Chatting on the phone (or by text) with a friend, doing a peaceful activity (taking a bath, reading a book), exercising, or practising a hobby can help you to feel supported, relaxed, and talented. These activities also can lessen anxiety and depression.

Once you determine what you can do instead of shopping, develop a daily schedule. Having a schedule will help you feel more in control of your life and reduce the time available to shop online.

Try to set goals and monitor your shopping behaviour.

You can also try to:

• make shopping lists (and stick to them) when buying groceries and other essential items
• set a timer to limit how long you browse
• set constraints on how much you spend
• if possible, use debit cards instead of credit cards so you can only spend money you have
• steer clear of “buy now, pay later” services such as Afterpay
• if you have multiple credit cards, consider closing them to limit your ability to spend money you don’t have.

And don’t forget to reward yourself (with something other than shopping) when you meet your goals.

Research has found these strategies can help people reduce their compulsive shopping.

If you have trouble reducing your shopping behaviour on your own, seek help from a professional. If you visit your GP, they can refer you to a specialist and provide you with a mental health care plan, which entitles you to Medicare rebates for up to 10 individual and 10 group appointments with some mental health services in a year.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

– ref. How to know if your online shopping habit is a problem — and what to do if it is – https://theconversation.com/how-to-know-if-your-online-shopping-habit-is-a-problem-and-what-to-do-if-it-is-143969

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giselle Bastin, Associate Professor of English, Flinders University

A new book about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is generating sensational headlines about their private life, defiance of Queen Elizabeth and how Prince William “behaved like a snob” to his future sister-in-law.

It is also the latest foray of British royals into the minefield that is royal biography.

Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family, by royal reporters Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand, promises stories about how the royal couple has struggled with “the many rumours and misconceptions that [have] plagued” them since their 2017 engagement.

According to numerous reports, this also includes tales of their clashes with palace officials and members of their own families, as well as their courtship and ill-treatment by the British press.

A spokesperson for the couple has firmly said they “did not contribute to ‘Finding Freedom’”. But there is widespread speculation Harry and Meghan were nevertheless involved, given the level of detail in the book.

According to the publishers, HarperCollins, the biography has been produced with “unique access and written with the participation of those closest to the couple”.

‘Never explain, never complain’

We’ve seen this before, and it is a tale that seldom ends happily or well. In 1976, John Wheeler-Bennett, official biographer of George VI, observed royal biography is

not to be entered into advisedly or lightly; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly and in the fear of God.

Wheeler-Bennett was here referring to the role of the royal biographer, but could just as easily have been referring to the royals themselves.

The royals are not supposed to go on the record and speak of private matters. The dictum ruling the House of Windsor for the best part of the 19th and 20th centuries was they should “never explain, never complain”.

In 1947, when hearing of a former servant’s plans to write about her time in royal service, the Queen Mother summed up the royal family’s strong expectations when she said:

people in positions of confidence with us must be utterly oyster.

Subsequently, the royal family was dismayed when the Duke of Windsor fed his story to a ghostwriter in 1951’s A King’s Story, outlining his own version of the abdication crisis. Prince Philip also disapproved strongly of Prince Charles’s candid revelations in Jonathan Dimbleby’s 1994 book Prince of Wales: A Biography and subsequent interview.

Diana’s experience

Prince Harry could also have learned some valuable lessons from his own mother, who flouted the “utterly oyster” rule.

Diana, Princess of Wales, was behind the most famous royal biography of all time when she commissioned Andrew Morton to “ghost” her tale of marital woe and royal suffering with the 1992 tell-all Diana: Her True Story.

Her True Story was a huge commercial success – having sold more than ten million copies as of 2017. But after the book’s publication, Buckingham Palace and conservative media outlets went after Morton, expressing disbelief a royal princess would talk to a tabloid journalist with no official royal biographer status.

After publicly eviscerating Morton, and the airing of Diana’s explosive 1995 Panorama interview, the palace and establishment then went after Diana. Conservative MP and close friend of Prince Charles, Nicholas Soames, claimed she must have been “in the advanced stages of paranoia” to have been disclosing the types of things she had.

Read more: Diana revived the monarchy – and airing old tapes won’t change a thing

‘Her True Story’ backfires

Diana thought Her True Story would act as a passport to freedom. She hoped it would help her separate from the royals, while keeping her privileges intact. As journalist Tina Brown wrote in her 2007 book, The Diana Chronicles, the princess thought she would get to keep all

the good bits of being a princess and doing her own global thing without Charles around to cramp her style. She did not factor in the power of royal disapproval and its consequences.

Nor did she factor in “the risk of … the Palace ‘going nuclear’ and continuing until there [is] nothing left”.

Critically, Diana had thought the revelations in Her True Story would invite her estranged royal relations’ sympathy. As Brown also notes,

she had been so long in her private panic room she thought this deafening public scream would solve the matter once and for all.

Brown records how Diana quickly regretted the book, telling her friend David Puttnam shortly before the book’s release in 1992,

I’ve done a really stupid thing. I have allowed a book to be written. I felt it was a good idea, a way of clearing the air, but now I think it was a very stupid thing that will cause all kinds of terrible trouble.

Diana was right. The biography and the Panorama interview hastened Diana’s exit from the royal enclosure. This gave her a short spell of relief and exultation. But this was followed by unhappiness that she had to live, in effect, in exile.

A long-running soap

With release of another sensational royal biography – that very much gives one side of the story – the parallels between Diana and her son are uncanny.

Harry and Meghan obviously already have a rocky relationship with the palace, given their split with the royal family in March.

Their latest public pronouncement about their “true story” (albeit via interlocutors) is the latest salvo being fired in the long-running soap opera known as “The Windsors”. It has obviously been made to try to win a public relations war. Indeed, public relations is what the royals do. They don’t have “jobs” as such, but merely have to be “seen to be”.

Finding Freedom might have felt like a good idea to the Sussexes — an opportunity to set the record straight – but as Diana’s experience suggests, they may well come to regret the opening of their particular oyster of royal rage.

Their contribution of yet another chapter to the Windsor soap is one that will likely prove unstoppable, insatiable even. And one thing is almost certain: Harry and Meghan will very probably lose any editorial control they thought they had over their own story.

Read more: The Crown series 3 review: Olivia Colman shines as an older, frumpier Elizabeth

– ref. ‘Finding Freedom’: the new Harry and Meghan book is the latest, risky move in a royal PR war – https://theconversation.com/finding-freedom-the-new-harry-and-meghan-book-is-the-latest-risky-move-in-a-royal-pr-war-144090

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bryan Cranston, Academic Teacher, Swinburne University of Technology

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has announced Kamala Harris as his running mate for the 2020 election — the first woman of colour to appear on a major party ticket.

On the 100th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment of the US constitution, which granted women the right to vote, Harris also becomes the third woman to be selected as a major party vice presidential candidate after Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Sarah Palin in 2008.

With less than 90 days until the election, Harris’s selection is bound to excite many Democratic voters and bring intense scrutiny from President Donald Trump and his Republican supporters. Here’s what she can bring to the Biden campaign and where it goes from here.

Who is Kamala Harris?

The 55-year-old Harris is the middle-class daughter of an Indian-born endocrinologist and a Jamaican-born economics professor. She was raised in Berkeley, California, and Montreal, Canada.

As she described during the Democratic presidential primary debates, Harris was part of the Civil Rights-era school bussing program as a child, which involved African American students being driven long distances to a previously segregated school.

This was a point of attack she used during the debates against Biden, whom she said opposed bussing when he was a senator in the 1970s.

In 2003, Harris was elected district attorney of San Francisco, and after adopting a tough-on-crime approach that saw the rate of felony convictions rise from 50% to 76%, she was re-elected unopposed four years later.

In 2010, Harris won her first statewide election as attorney-general of California and after being re-elected in 2014, she won a landslide election to the US Senate in 2016.

Harris is married to attorney Douglas Emhoff and is step-mother to his two children.

Harris brings several credentials to the campaign. As the first woman and first African American ever elected as San Francisco district attorney and California attorney-general — as well as the first African American elected to the US Senate from the state — Harris has been a trailblazer for both women and African Americans.

She also has first-hand experience with government policy aimed at addressing racial inequality in education.

She will almost certainly be called the “law and order” candidate, and as has been seen in the Senate, her courtroom experience makes her a formidable public speaker.

What does Harris bring to the campaign?

There are two groups of voters that Biden needs to win over: whites and non-voters.

During the 2016 presidential election, the PEW Research Centre found that 54% of female voters voted for Hillary Clinton, compared to 38% who voted for Trump.

A look at the deeper demographic data shows 98% of black women and 81% of black men voted for Clinton, as did 66% of Hispanics.

What this means is that without a black or Hispanic candidate on the 2016 ticket, the Democrats still overwhelmingly won those voters. The campaign needs to win over more white voters and non-voters.

Just 39% of whites voted for Clinton overall in 2016, with white men choosing Trump by a wide margin (62-32%). Clinton fared slightly better among white women, but more still voted for Trump (47-45%)

In May, Biden pledged to name a woman as his running mate, and following the nationwide protests sparked by the police killing of George Floyd, he came under immense pressure to choose a Black woman.

Read more: With Harris pick, Biden reaches out to young Black Americans

Faced with a diametric decision, Biden’s selection of Harris tells us his campaign has decided to focus on winning over non-voters. Non-voters are generally less white, younger and more likely to be women and favourable to Democrats.

Biden may bring in more white voters than Clinton anyway, given his background. Part of his appeal has long been his image as a “regular Joe” from a working-class upbringing. Where Barack Obama was sometimes viewed as aloof, Biden, his vice president, was seen by many as a link to the Democratic Party’s blue-collar roots.

Choosing which group of voters to target is always a gamble, however, because as we saw in 2016, Trump does not need to secure the most votes to win the election. The New York Times has suggested he could lose the popular vote by an even bigger margin in 2020 and still win.

Where does the campaign go from here?

By having a woman on its last two presidential tickets, the Democratic party is continuing its progressive political shift from the domain of white men — in contrast with Republicans.

Vice presidential candidates have traditionally assumed the attack role in campaigns, allowing the presidential candidate to stay above the political fray, but Trump changed that.

This campaign will be all about Trump, and much of Harris’s focus — and her prosecutorial combativeness — will be aimed at him.

This could prove challenging for the campaign, because as a woman, Harris will be held to a different standard than Trump, Biden and Vice President Mike Pence. Her greatest challenge could be to overcome any backlash that comes from being too aggressive in her attacks against Trump — similar to what Clinton faced in 2016 — as well as the inevitable sexist media coverage about her clothes, appearance and demeanour.

Read more: Joe Biden has a long list of qualified female VP candidates. So, who will he pick?

Perhaps Harris’s greatest attribute — and her biggest contribution to the ticket — is her experience. The biggest criticism of John McCain’s selection of Palin as his running mate in 2008 was that she was not ready to assume the presidency if needed.

Few people will doubt Harris’s capacity to do that should the need arise. And with 77-year-old Biden himself suggesting he may only serve a single term, his vice president could very well become the Democratic front-runner in 2024.

Trump supporters are unwavering, though. Those who will vote for him on election day decided that a long time ago.

Harris will be tasked with endearing herself to voters who usually vote Republican but do not support Trump, encouraging them to vote for her party rather than stay home on election day.

Harris is arguably the most formidable vice presidential nominee Biden could have chosen, and is undoubtedly the most experienced woman ever chosen for a vice presidential nominee.

Despite the initial excitement around their selections, Ferraro and Palin were regarded as significant factors in the losses by the Democrats in 1984 and the Republicans in 2008, respectively.

Now, Biden has to hope his pick proves to be a winning one.

Read more: Before Kamala Harris became Biden’s running mate, Shirley Chisholm and other Black women aimed for the White House

– ref. Who is Kamala Harris, Joe Biden’s pick for vice president? – https://theconversation.com/who-is-kamala-harris-joe-bidens-pick-for-vice-president-144122

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jason Weismueller, Doctoral Researcher, University of Western Australia

In February, major social media platforms attended a meeting hosted by the World Health Organisation to address coronavirus misinformation. The aim was to catalyse the fight against what the United Nations has called an “infodemic”.

Usually, misinformation is focused on specific regions and topics. But COVID-19 is different. For what seems like the first time, both misinformation and fact-checking behaviours are coordinated around a common set of narratives the world over.

In our research, we identified the key trends in both coronavirus misinformation and fact-checking efforts. Using Google’s Fact Check Explorer computing interface we tracked fact-check posts from January to July – with the first checks appearing as early as January 22.

A uniform rate of growth

Our research found the volume of fact-checks on coronavirus misinformation increased steadily in the early stages of the virus’s spread (January and February) and then increased sharply in March and April – when the virus started to spread globally.

Interestingly, we found the same pattern of gradual and then sudden increase even after dividing fact-checks into Spanish, Hindi, Indonesian and Portuguese.

Thus, misinformation and subsequent fact-checking efforts trended in a similar way right across the globe. This is a unique feature of COVID-19.

According to our analysis, there has been no equivalent global trend for other issues such as elections, terrorism, police activity or immigration.

Different nations, different misconceptions

On March 16, the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project, in collaboration with Microsoft Research, began cataloguing COVID-19 misinformation.

It did this by collating news articles with reporting by a wide range of local fact-checking networks and global groups such as Agence France-Presse and NewsGuard.

We analysed this data set to explore the evolution of specific COVID-19 narratives, with “narrative” referring to the type of story a piece of misinformation pushes.

For instance, one misinformation narrative concerns the “origin of the virus”. This includes the false claim the virus jumped to humans as a result of someone eating bat soup.

Read more: The Conversation’s FactCheck granted accreditation by International Fact-Checking Network at Poynter

We found the most common narrative worldwide was related to “emergency responses”. These stories reported false information about government or political responses to fighting the virus’s outbreak.

This may be because, unlike narratives surrounding the “nature of the virus”, it is easy to speculate on (and hard to prove) whether people in power have good or ill intent.

Notably, this was also the most common narrative in the US, with an early example being a false rumour the New York Police Department would immediately lock down New York City.

What’s more, a major motivation for spreading misinformation on social media is politics. The US is a polarised political environment, so this might help explain the trend towards political misinformation.

We also found China has more misinformation narratives than any other country. This may be because China is the world’s most populous country.

However, it’s worth noting the main fact-checking website used by the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project for misinformation coming out of China is run by the Chinese Communist Party.

When fighting misinformation, it is important to have as wide a range of independent and transparent fact-checkers as possible. This reduces the potential for bias.

Hydroxychloroquine and other (non) ‘cures’

Another set of misinformation narratives was focused on “false cures” or “false preventative measures”. This was among the most common themes in both China and Australia.

One example was a video that went viral on social media suggesting hydroxychloroquine is an effective coronavirus treatment. This is despite experts stating it is not a proven COVID-19 treatment, and can actually have harmful side effects.

Myths about the “nature of the virus” were also common. These referred to specific characteristics of the virus – such as that it can’t spread on surfaces. We know this isn’t true.

Read more: We know how long coronavirus survives on surfaces. Here’s what it means for handling money, food and more

Narratives reflect world events

Our analysis found different narratives peaked at different stages of the virus’s spread.

Misinformation about the nature of the virus was prevalent during the outbreak’s early stages, probably spurred by an initial lack of scientific research regarding the nature of the virus.

In contrast, theories relating to emergency responses surfaced later and remain even now, as governments continue to implement measures to fight COVID-19’s spread.

A wide variety of fact-checkers

We also identified greater diversity in websites fact-checking COVID-19 misinformation, compared to those investigating other topics.

Since January, only 25% of 6,000 fact-check posts or articles were published by the top five fact-checking websites (ranked by number of posts). In comparison, 68% of 3,000 climate change fact-checks were published by the top five websites.

Read more: 5 ways to help stop the ‘infodemic,’ the increasing misinformation about coronavirus

It seems resources previously devoted to a wide range of topics are now honing in on coronavirus misinformation. Nonetheless, it’s impossible to know the total volume of this content online.

For now, the best defence is for governments and online platforms to increase awareness about false claims and build on the robust fact-checking infrastructures at our disposal.

– ref. Coronavirus misinformation is a global issue, but which myth you fall for likely depends on where you live – https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-misinformation-is-a-global-issue-but-which-myth-you-fall-for-likely-depends-on-where-you-live-143352

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Salisbury, Research Associate, School of Political Science & International Studies, The University of Queensland

Government responses to COVID-19 in Australia have received, by and large, bipartisan support. An exception, it seems, is the imposition of restrictions on interstate movement. State borders have become a lightning rod for political friction and feverish commentary. With elections in the frame, this has escalated into apparent “border wars”.

Going hard on borders

The latest salvos follow alarming coronavirus outbreaks in Victoria and, in lesser numbers, Greater Sydney.

After partially reopening Queensland’s borders mere weeks ago, Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk surprised some by reimposing a “hard” border closure effective from the weekend. As case numbers ballooned in Melbourne and instances occurred of infected returning travellers “breaching” quarantine measures, many Queenslanders anticipated toughened restrictions – and indeed welcomed them.

Read more: Naming and shaming two young women shows the only ‘enemies of the state’ are the media

It should be remembered that the Queensland government’s generally successful handling of the pandemic crisis, including its readiness to close borders, enjoys broad approval. Some wondered why this latest border closure extended to the ACT as well, where there are no active cases.

But a hard line on borders to effectively “put Queenslanders’ health first” is a popular move. Support for the closures even came from a possibly unexpected source in Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate. Amid heightened anxiety, residents here will take comfort from the seeming security of “fortress Queensland”.

Election fever in the air

In Queensland, pandemic conditions currently favour the incumbent premier – in stark comparison to Daniel Andrews’s situation in Victoria. With community transmission largely under control, Palaszczuk has played a steady hand in easing lockdown restrictions, informed by her chief health officer’s advice.

While impacts on the state’s economy and unemployment levels remain worrying – and potentially politically damaging – everything is viewed through the prism of the government’s ability to manage the crisis. These circumstances seemingly lend themselves to taking an “abundance” of caution.

Read more: View from The Hill: With an abundance of caution, Palaszczuk puts out the unwelcome mat to Sydneysiders

This has in turn invited criticism from some business quarters, but it’s an approach that suits both the times and the premier’s style.

A recent coronavirus outbreak in Brisbane’s south tested the premier’s leadership and her government’s responsiveness, providing a reminder of the disease’s unpredictability. Subsequently, taking a resolute stance on border measures, in defiance especially of naysayers from southern states and Canberra, will only boost Palaszczuk’s standing in her (often parochial) home state. With an election less than 12 weeks away, there are, variously, more rewards than risks in unapologetically prioritising the protection of Queenslanders’ health.

But as that election nears, both the premier and her LNP counterpart, Deb Frecklington, will look to turn circumstances more clearly to their political advantage. Opinion polls show the LNP holding a slim two-party-preferred lead – yet, perhaps significantly, Palaszczuk has a distinct lead as voters’ preferred premier.

The premier adopting a position of ‘strength’

Many in Queensland see Palaszczuk as personable and a “safe pair of hands”. This reassuring attribute might be well suited to these uncertain times.

With Palaszczuk’s leadership stocks running high, Queensland voters can anticipate a presidential-style election campaign come October. Messaging has already surfaced singling out Palaszczuk as a “strong premier”, suggesting she’s the leader to make “strong decisions”. But Labor may well tread this path warily, remembering what befell Campbell Newman, the last Queensland premier who campaigned relentlessly on “strong” characteristics.

Read more: Coalition maintains Newspoll lead federally and in Queensland; Biden’s lead over Trump narrows

Admittedly, accentuating “strength” counters claims of being indecisive or too cautious, critiques that have dogged Palaszczuk’s leadership until now. This approach could work well politically, so long as events – or potentially the federal government – don’t turn against the premier’s handling of the pandemic. If there’s a heightened element to the crisis in coming weeks, the situation could reverse quickly for Palaszczuk’s government, leaving the premier wearing much of the blow-back.

Even Anna Bligh’s much-lauded leadership during the destructive 2010-11 cyclones and floods in Queensland didn’t translate to a long-term boost in support. But the looming state election is a more short-term prospect. The pandemic will remain front and centre, with Palaszczuk’s crisis management still very much in the spotlight.

When to oppose in opposition?

The spread of COVID-19 has presented a political challenge for the opposition in Queensland.

The LNP’s past criticism of the Palaszczuk government over the state’s border closure has come back to bite it. Echoing their leader, throughout June several LNP MPs (supported by the prime minister no less) called repeatedly for the border’s reopening. Events since, understandably, have forced an about-face from LNP figures. They’re now advocating “tougher” border measures at the risk of appearing inconsistent.

Regardless, the opposition finds itself – ironically – having to be cautious about the limits of striking a point of difference. This much is obvious in Frecklington’s newly struck tone of resigned consensus with the government’s border position. This is a bind opposition parties are experiencing nationwide, a hard reality especially in states and territories with elections nearing.

The LNP, having gambled on criticising the government’s border restrictions, now wears the fallout. Labor has pounced on the opportunity, in early signs of a de facto election campaign. Social media posts have highlighted how Frecklington – who’s had to endure her own party’s turmoil of late – called for Queensland’s borders to be opened “early” on dozens of occasions.

Queenslanders can expect to be reminded of this “rashness” from now until the election. The LNP, meanwhile, must identify issues not necessarily coronavirus-related – such as law and order or water security in regional Queensland – to provide it some campaign cut-through.

Palaszczuk in the driver’s seat

Notably, for ten of the past 13 years, a woman has been premier of Queensland. Whichever major party wins October’s election, a woman will be leader for (likely) a further four years. With Palaszczuk emphasising – in the face of LNP criticisms – that “the lady’s not for turning” from her border stance, she gives herself every chance to remain that leader.

– ref. Did someone say ‘election’?: how politics met pandemic to create ‘fortress Queensland’ – https://theconversation.com/did-someone-say-election-how-politics-met-pandemic-to-create-fortress-queensland-144067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robert Hoffmann, Professor of Economics and Chair of Behavioural Business Lab, RMIT University

Fingers have been pointing all over the place as the country searches for answers to the stubbornly high coronavirus cases and rising death rates in Victoria.

While Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has been fronting an increasingly hostile media — as well as a parliamentary inquiry looking into the state’s handling of the pandemic — the federal government has been under fire for its neglect of the aged care sector.

At the same time, Andrews has frequently chastised the Victorian public for not following the rules of social distancing and mask wearing.

Amid all the rancour, it’s worth asking, why are we so quick to assign blame during a crisis, particularly to those in positions of power? And could doing so be counterproductive if the government starts to lose credibility in the public’s eye?

Scapegoating has a long history

As the folklorist Jon D. Lee explains in his book, An Epidemic of Rumors, blame is a normal reaction to epidemics or other calamities. Fear activates powerful psychological mechanisms that allow us to cope. And blaming others is a common coping strategy.

It is not just those in authority who bear the brunt of scapegoating. Foreign powers, unseen conspiracies and minorities have all become targets in the past. During the bubonic plague in the 14th century, Jews faced persecution as the supposed carriers. More recently, older women in Tanzania were accused of witchcraft during a period of extreme drought.

Read more: Tensions rise on coronavirus handling as the media take control of the accountability narrative

In the current COVID-19 crisis, our own marginalised groups have been targeted. The temporary contract workers employed as security guards in the hotel quarantine program and young Queensland women who dodged mandatory quarantine are recent examples of this kind of scapegoating. Asian Australians have also been taunted, threatened and spat on.

But in Victoria, the government has become the main villain. COVID-19 has come at a time when trust in government has never been lower. As a result, compared to other countries and other times in our history, government has become an easy target.

Why do we feel the need to point the finger?

Some of the reasons are entirely justified and well-intentioned. Freedom of expression, for example, is an essential part of functioning democracies. Our institutions can only remain strong and effective as long as people stay engaged in public life — and hold the powerful to account.

The World Bank has also listed “voice and accountability” as one of six dimensions it examines as part of its worldwide governance index. The index looks at the perception of citizen engagement in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, association and media.

The management of the pandemic has highlighted weak and strong governance systems around the world. Norway and New Zealand rank at the top of the “voice and accountability” index, so it’s no surprise they have received high praise for their COVID-19 responses. Australia is also very high, in 10th position.

Other countries that have not done so well on the pandemic are further down the list. The US is 37th and Brazil is 74th.

When done in the right way, casting blame also has an important social function. Holding perceived transgressors, including those in positions of power, to account for their failures and mistakes reinforces society’s rules and acts as a deterrent against those who would flout them.

Blame can alleviate stress, grief and guilt

Blaming is also a normal psychological process that allows individuals to manage stress and fear when faced with life-threatening upheavals.

One of the most powerful human needs is to feel we have some sense of control over our environment – and COVID-19 has undermined this in spectacular fashion.

Control includes the ability to explain why things happen. And pointing fingers at an easy scapegoat, such as the government, can sometimes provide the answers we need to regain control.

Read more: Can Victorians stick to the stage 4 rules? Our perception of what others are doing might be the key

Loss of control is also frequently accompanied by grief. In psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’ famous “five stages of grief” from the 1960s, anger is identified as one of the emotions people need to confront in the grieving process. And anger is often associated with finger pointing.

As Kübler-Ross’s collaborator, David Kessler, said this year, people are grieving in a completely new way due to the coronavirus, and part of this is manifested through anger at authority figures, as in, “you’re making me stay home and taking away my activities”.

This is a normal emotion, but one that people need to get past:

You can also think about how to let go of what you can’t control. What your neighbour is doing is out of your control. What is in your control is staying six feet away from them and washing your hands.

Some people may also feel partly responsible for Australia’s inability to contain COVID-19, yet unable to personally make a difference.

Blame helps reconcile these feelings. If someone else is at fault for the pandemic spiralling out of control — for instance, our leaders — that absolves the rest of us from blame and the burden of responsibility.

When blame strips the government of credibility

Rallying around a common cause, even an innocent scapegoat, can bring people together. But this should never be a reason to participate in a witch hunt. Generations of wrongly blamed minorities are a powerful reminder of how social injustice can become entrenched.

More important is to hold those in power to account through social activism, as epidemiologist Jonathan Quick argues in the End of Epidemics. Bureaucracies can suffer from inertia, he argues, and ignore the long-term strategies needed to make us better prepared in the future.

But a government that has lost credibility because of unjustified finger-pointing will struggle to marshal the collective resources needed to effectively fight the pandemic.

Research shows credibility is hugely important when it comes to the power of persuasion — and this is the main lever the government has right now to get people to behave the right way.

Previous pandemics have seen riots and civil unrest. In his book The Psychology of Pandemics, Steven Taylor describes how health professionals and local officials were attacked when visiting communities in Africa and Asia during the Ebola and SARS outbreaks. He argues civil disobedience happens when people share a belief that the authorities are to blame in some way.

We have not yet reached that stage in Victoria, despite the public outrage over the government’s missteps.

The reasons for the pandemic are complex and evolving. No simple scapegoating narrative can change that. But if we hold onto anger and continue to point fingers, it could prevent society from doing what is necessary to win the fight.

– ref. Playing the COVID-19 blame game may feel good, but it could come at a cost — the government’s credibility – https://theconversation.com/playing-the-covid-19-blame-game-may-feel-good-but-it-could-come-at-a-cost-the-governments-credibility-144120

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Lakhani, Senior Lecturer in Public Health, La Trobe University

Under the stage 4 restrictions enforced throughout metropolitan Melbourne, residents can exercise for one hour each day, within five kilometres of their home.

While such restrictions are necessary to reduce the spread of COVID-19, they can potentially harm people’s physical and mental well-being.

Parks are great for exercising, getting fresh air, and getting close to nature, all of which boost our physical and mental health.

Unfortunately, some Melburnians have little or no access to parkland within their permitted 5km radius, meaning they are likely to miss out on these benefits.

Space to breathe

Our map analysis looked at mesh blocks, the smallest geographical area defined by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, typically containing 30-60 homes.

For each mesh block zoned as residential, we tallied up the total area zoned as parkland within a 5-kilometre radius. The results are shown in the interactive map below, in which darker greens indicate a larger area of available parkland (very light green: 0-4.5 sq km; light green: 4.5-9.2 sq km; mid-green: 9.2-13.2 sq km; dark green: 13.2-19 sq km; very dark green: more than 19 sq km).

Of the 42,199 residential mesh blocks currently under stage 4 restrictions, 3,496 have between 0 and 4.5 square kilometres of parkland within 5km. This equates to about 135,000 homes or 340,000 people with little or no access to parks within their permitted area for exercising.

On average, residents in Cardinia, Mornington Peninsula and Melton have the least parkland within a 5km radius, whereas those in Knox, Yarra and Banuyle have the most.

Haves and have-nots

Our findings confirm that some Melburnians are more fortunate than others in their ability to access urban green space during stage 4 lockdown.

For those less fortunate, the state government should consider replacing the blanket 5km rule with a special provision that allows people to travel outside this radius if they would otherwise be unable to access a park.

Read more: Increasing tree cover may be like a ‘superfood’ for community mental health

Bespoke rules could also help others, such as residents with a disability or older Melburnians who use a mobility aid. While many members of these groups might have plentiful parks within their 5km radius, they may have problems accessing them. Issues can include uneven pavements, kerbs without ramps, or steeply sloped paths.

The state government could help these people by auditing public spaces to establish where structural barriers exist, and then work to remedy them. Alternatively, once again, the blanket 5km rule could be amended with a special provision that allows older Melburnians, or those with a disability, to travel outside their 5km radius to get to the most suitable nearby park.

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wilkins, Associate Professor of illegal drug research, Massey University

The referendum on legalising recreational cannabis use is just over a month away. Campaigns for and against the change are well under way.

We’ve had expert reports from the Helen Clark Foundation, the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research and meetings around the country to discuss the likely effects of the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill (CLCB).

So, what can be learned from other countries that have already legalised cannabis or reformed their laws? And how does New Zealand’s proposed law stack up against the overseas evidence?

What other countries have done

We recently collaborated with an international group of drug policy experts on a book looking at a range of cannabis law reforms around the world over recent decades. These include:

• cannabis coffee shops in the Netherlands

• cannabis decriminalisation in Australia

• cannabis social clubs, which began in Spain and are government-registered, non-profit organisations producing cannabis exclusively for members’ personal consumption

• full cannabis legalisation in 11 states of the US, with Colorado and Washington implementing fully commercial, alcohol-style reforms

• Canada, which allowed its provinces and territories to decide the model of legal cannabis distribution, ranging from government stores in Quebec to private retail outlets in Alberta

• the often overlooked reforms in Uruguay, where cannabis is legally available via home cultivation, social clubs and from pharmacies, with government control of production.

Evidence from profit-driven markets

There are significant time lags between law change, establishing legal cannabis markets and apparent impacts on use, dependency and mental illness. For that reason, researchers have concluded it may take ten years to fully understand the outcomes of legalisation.

However, preliminary evaluations of commercial cannabis legalisation suggest it has led to fewer arrests and significant taxes earned from sales.

At the same time, there is emerging evidence of increasing adult use and dependency, and industry influence over regulatory development.

Read more: Teen use of cannabis has dropped in New Zealand, but legalisation could make access easier

The evidence on whether legalisation has increased youth use is mixed. More research is also needed to understand the impacts on drug driving, emergency hospital admissions and treatment demand.

One of the main rationales for legalisation is that it will eliminate illegal markets and provide products of known purity and potency.

The experience in the legal cannabis states of the US, however, clearly demonstrates the challenges of developing regulatory controls of pesticides, fertilisers and product potency.

Early experience suggests legalisation can substantially reduce, but not eliminate, the black market. Legal production and competition also drive down the price of legal cannabis and therefore price-linked tax earnings.

Industry targets daily cannabis users as they are responsible for the majority of sales. Many of these users may be at risk of dependence and other harms.

On the other hand, legalisation provides opportunities to address social equity issues related to cannabis enforcement, including discrimination against minorities and disproportionate penalties.

This can even extend to expunging previous convictions and supporting cannabis business and employment in affected communities.

Finding a middle ground

It’s important not to view the legal cannabis debate as a competition between extremes – strict prohibition on the one hand and profit-driven markets on the other. Drug policy experts point to a number of middle-ground policy options that have received a lot less media and research attention.

For example, non-commercial methods of legal cannabis supply, such as home cultivation and cannabis social clubs, have proved popular in Uruguay and Spain. But there are questions about whether these will be attractive to all types of consumers.

Similarly, community trusts in New Zealand offer an alternative approach to reduce commercialisation and provide funding to local community services. Rules would be needed, though, to prevent cannabis companies from using community funding to enhance their public image and political influence.

Read more: Reforming cannabis laws is a complex challenge, but New Zealand’s history of drug reform holds important lessons

Finally, many of the key lessons from regulatory responses to alcohol and tobacco harm are highly relevant to the regulation of legal cannabis. This includes minimum pricing, limits on the density of retail outlets, plain packaging, smoke-free policies and restrictions on advertising.

State or not-for-profit monopolies for alcohol have been effective at achieving public health objectives and could be considered for legal cannabis sales.

How does the New Zealand bill stack up?

While there is much we still don’t know about the full consequences of cannabis legalisation, there is a strong case for a conservative regulatory approach that seeks to limit the adverse impacts of the new market and curtails industry power.

This makes more sense than allowing profit-driven commercialisation and then struggling to roll back the consequences, as happened with tobacco.

Much of the CLCB is broadly consistent with this restrictive approach to cannabis legalisation. It provides for government licensing of production, no advertising, plain packaging, outlet controls, excise tax based on weight and potency, and provisions for community partnerships and not-for-profit retail outlets.

Read more: Tweets about cannabis’ health benefits are full of mistruths

However, the CLCB could be strengthened with a lower potency cap, formal minimum pricing, a commitment to a high excise tax, and provisions to allow cannabis social clubs.

The recent attempt to regulate the harmful “legal high” market in New Zealand highlighted the importance of adequately resourcing regulatory agencies and enforcement, engaging with key health stakeholders and communicating policy aims to the public.

If the referendum passes, then, careful attention will be needed during implementation to ensure the law realises its harm-minimisation goals.

– ref. It could take 10 years to measure the impact of legalising weed – should New Zealand’s proposed law be even stronger? – https://theconversation.com/it-could-take-10-years-to-measure-the-impact-of-legalising-weed-should-new-zealands-proposed-law-be-even-stronger-144271

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fernanda Alves, PhD student, Australian National University

Saving endangered species from extinction is a challenging job. It requires creative, affordable and effective interventions. In a rare good news story for conservation, we came up with one such method.

We want to save the forty-spotted pardalote – an extremely rare Tasmanian bird about the size of a ping pong ball. The few remaining individuals are at risk from an unusually harmful threat: blood-sucking fly larvae.

These parasitic flies search out the nests of pardalotes to feed on their defenceless young. The moment a pardalote chick hatches from its egg, the fly maggots burrow into its skin to drink its blood, usually killing it.

We needed a way to ward off the parasites. As our new research shows, we made one – using chicken feathers and everyday items you’d find in any hardware store. The results show that with a bit of creative thinking and expert knowledge, vulnerable species can be protected.

An imperilled songbird

Forty-spotted pardalotes are olive-green songbirds with two rows of white dots along their wings. Deforestation has caused their local extinction across much of mainland Tasmania. The birds survive mostly on islands off the east coast in numbers that vary according to habitat quality.

They forage predominantly in the foliage of white gums (Eucalyptus viminalis) for manna, a sweet crystallised form of tree sap. Many Australian birds feed on manna, but forty-spotted pardalotes are unique because they “farm” it – using their beaks to make tiny nicks in leaves and stems to stimulate manna production.

But parasitic flies are threatening the survival of these remarkable little birds. The maggots of these flies, known formally as Passeromyia longicornis, bore into exposed skin of featherless chicks and feed on their blood. Unsurprisingly, as the maggots grow fat, the chicks suffer and usually die. Small birds are killed quickly when infested with large numbers of blood-sucking maggots.

A novel solution

We wanted to find an effective way to help protect pardalotes from fly-strike. The solution also needed to be cheap, to improve the odds that land managers can help pardalotes over large areas in the long term.

Using creative thinking and our detailed knowledge of pardalotes, we devised a plan.

Read more: Birdwatching increased tenfold last lockdown. Don’t stop, it’s a huge help for bushfire recovery

Pardalotes love to make a soft, warm nest lined with stray feathers of other birds they find on the forest floor. But finding feathers is hard, time-consuming work. We decided to supply those feathers, but with an added bonus.

We took sterilised chicken feathers (available in pet stores for canaries to build their nests) and laced them with a bird-safe insecticide that would ward off the parasites. Using scrap wire, duct tape and round plastic trays (the kind used under pot plants), we built “self-service” feather dispensers and deployed them in the forests where pardalotes were building nests.

It didn’t take the pardalotes long to find this bonanza of free building materials – our dispensers were as busy as the toilet paper aisle during a pandemic! Some birds built their nests mostly out of our medicated feathers.

And now for the best part: the survival of chicks dramatically improved in the nests built with insecticide-treated feathers. On average, 95% of chicks from these birds survived, compared with only 8% of birds that used feathers without insecticide.

This more than tenfold increase in nest survival came with very little effort on our part. We just provided the feather dispensers, and the pardalotes did the rest.

Understanding the species

Parasites can become an existential threat when the populations of their hosts become very small. But it’s important to note that parasites are a natural part of the ecosystem and have their own intrinsic value. Eliminating them entirely can create unexpected new problems – and that is not our aim.

Read more: What ‘The Birdman of Wahroonga’ and other historic birdwatchers can teach us about cherishing wildlife

Passeromyia maggots have been recorded in other small birds in our study area. This means there are plenty of other more abundant host birds for the flies to feed on, without adding to the problems that endangered forty-spotted pardalotes already face.

Our work has shown that by understanding how species live, it’s possible to exploit their natural behaviour to provide targeted protection from threats such as parasites.

Combining good ecological data with clever problem-solving is a crucial skill for natural resource managers. Managing the global extinction crisis will require more innovative solutions like this.

– ref. Scientists devised a cheap, ingenious trick to save this bird from a blood-sucking maggot – and it works brilliantly – https://theconversation.com/scientists-devised-a-cheap-ingenious-trick-to-save-this-bird-from-a-blood-sucking-maggot-and-it-works-brilliantly-143900

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Krumdieck, Professor and Director, Advanced Energy and Material Systems Lab, University of Canterbury

Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.

If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz

Geothermal electricity produces emissions but is categorised with wind and solar power as a renewable source of power. Why? Can we reduce the emissions geothermal plants produce?

Geothermal resources occur where magma has come up through the Earth’s crust at some point in the distant past and created large reservoirs of hot rock and water.

In New Zealand, the Taupo Volacanic Zone has 23 known geothermal reservoirs. Seven of these are currently used to generate more than 15% of New Zealand’s electricity supply.

Continuous but finite energy source

The geothermal reservoirs are vast in both size and stored energy. For example, the Ngatamariki reservoir extends over seven square kilometres and is more than a kilometre thick.

The geothermal resource is more consistent than hydro, solar and wind, as it doesn’t depend on the weather, but the geothermal heat in a reservoir is finite. Environment Waikato estimates that if the thermal energy in New Zealand were extracted to generate 420MW of electricity, the resource would likely last for 300 years. The current generation is more than twice this rate, so the reservoirs will last about half as long.

Geothermal energy is extracted by drilling up to 3km down into these hot zones of mineral-laden brine at 180-350℃. The engineering involves drilling a number of wells for extraction and re-injection of the brine, and the big pipes that connect the wells to the power plant.

The power plant converts the thermal energy into electricity using steam turbines. These plants generate nearly continuously and can last for more than 50 years.

Read more: New Zealand wants to build a 100% renewable electricity grid, but massive infrastructure is not the best option

Greenhouse gas emissions

The brine contains dissolved gases and minerals, depending on the minerals in the rocks the water was exposed to. Some of these are harmless, like silica which is basically sand. But some are toxic like stibnite, which is antimony and sulphur.

Some gases like carbon dioxide and methane are not poisonous, but are greenhouse gases. But some are toxic. For example, hydrogen sulfide gives geothermal features their distinctive smell. The carbon dioxide dissolved in geothermal brine normally comes from limestone, which is fossilised shells of sea creatures that lived millions of years ago.

The amount of greenhouse gas produced per kWh of electricity generated varies, depending on the reservoir characteristics. It is not well known until the wells are in production.

The New Zealand Geothermal Association reports the greenhouse gas emissions for power generation range from 21 grams CO₂ equivalent per kWh to 341gCO₂(equiv)/kWh. The average is 76gCO₂(equiv)/kWh. For comparison, fossil fuel generation emissions range from 970 to 390gCO₂(equiv)/kWh for coal and gas combined cycle plants.

The gases have to be removed from the brine to use it in the plant, so they are released to the atmosphere. The toxic gases are either diluted and released into the atmosphere, or scrubbed with other substances for disposal. The Mokai power plant supplies carbon dioxide to commercial growers who use it in glasshouses to increase the growth rate of vegetables.

Read more: Climate explained: could the world stop using fossil fuels today?

Finding ways to use less energy

All energy-conversion systems can be made better by employing engineering expertise, investing in research and enforcing regulations, and through due diligence in the management of the waste products. All energy-conversion technology has costs and consequences. No energy resource should be thought of as unlimited or free unless we use very small quantities.

New Zealand is in a period of energy transition, with a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. The production and use of coal is already in decline globally and oil and gas are expected follow.

We tend to think about energy transition in terms of technologies to substitute “bad” energy with “green” energy. But the transition of how energy is produced and consumed will require a massively complex re-engineering of nearly everything.

The installed capacity for wind and solar has been growing over the past decade. In 2018, however, New Zealand consumption of electricity generated by wind and solar was 7.72PJ, while oil, diesel and LPG consumption was 283PJ and geothermal electricity was 27PJ. Another consideration is lifetime; wind turbines and solar panels need to be replaced at least three times during the lifetime of a geothermal power plant.

A successful energy transition will require much more R&D and due diligence on products, buildings and lifestyles that need only about 10% of the energy we use today. An energy transition to build sustainable future systems is not only possible, it is the only option.

– ref. Climate explained: why does geothermal electricity count as renewable? – https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-does-geothermal-electricity-count-as-renewable-143433

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erika Martino, Research Fellow In Healthy Housing, University of Melbourne

There is a crisis within crisis accommodation. Homelessness providers struggle to meet women’s requests for accommodation under usual circumstances. During COVID-19 lockdowns the dramatic increase in domestic abuse has put an already stretched system under greater pressure.

Crisis accommodation providers were interviewed for an ongoing research project. One of them reported a six-fold increase in demand for their homelessness services from a wider range of people, “people who would not normally access the system”. Another said: “Adding the lens of COVID-19 has exacerbated this as a public health issue.”

Read more: What governments can do about the increase in family violence due to coronavirus

Many crisis accommodation providers have turned to low-end motels, but these have proven to be expensive, unhygienic, unsafe and harmful for women’s health. Women stuck in this substandard crisis accommodation are often unable to find long-term, stable and affordable housing due to lack of supply. This compromises their ability to recover from trauma and increases their risk of returning to perpetrators.

We can do better.

Opportunities in a crisis

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to distinct shifts in the supply of short-term accommodation in our cities. The number of vacant properties has increased, particularly in Australia’s two largest housing markets, Sydney and Melbourne, while rents have fallen. This has been attributed to drops in demand from international students and from travellers in the short-term Airbnb rental market.

These demand and supply trends, taken together, offer an opportunity. The two short-term housing tenures might provide an alternative to poor quality and unsafe motels and better meet the housing, social and emotional needs of women seeking crisis accommodation.

Read more: 400,000 women over 45 are at risk of homelessness in Australia

The use of vacant land and buildings for temporary housing in Australia is increasingly being tested. There are projects using government land and commercial or institutional buildings for pop-up shelters for temporary housing. It follows that crisis accommodation and community housing services might broker a marriage of convenience, taking advantage of increasing vacancies in the short-term rental market.

Potential and pitfalls

Some of the interviews with crisis accommodation and community housing providers highlighted the potential to use short-term rental housing for their service users. One interviewee observed:

[…] the benefit is that it is a home. It has a kitchen, facilities and people have independence, which can help facilitate them finding something more permanent.

In the face of COVID-19, the relationship between commercial accommodation services and community housing providers has already began to shift.

All lot of these [commercial] providers have never been open to us as homeless services […] Some of the hotels prior to COVID-19 would never have taken our money […] now we are their main source of survival”.

Anecdotally, Airbnb is already providing an informal stopgap for people in need of emergency accommodation. Some community housing providers reported Airbnb property owners contacting them about leasing their properties short-term for crisis accommodation.

Read more: As coronavirus hits holiday lettings, a shift to longer rentals could help many of us

Frustratingly, the moratorium on evictions was a complication. One provider noted:

We can’t take it because we can’t serve a notice to vacate. Even if it’s a three-month lease you’ve still got to serve a notice to vacate. How do we get the tenants out for somebody new to come? I can’t guarantee that you’re going to get your property back. Especially when it’s crisis accommodation.

Housing providers who are able to offer property management services have cited benefits for landlords such as a guaranteed income, no management fees, and maintenance services.

In turn, providers could offer better quality accommodation that can realistically support a longer stay – with wrap-around services depending on need – while they try to find more stable affordable housing in a scarce market.

One interviewee mused:

Thinking about coercive control and thinking about not just housing women and children because they’re in immediate risk of death or serious harm, it’s because they need a break from being trapped. Can you imagine six weeks in a place where they get a chance, literally, from a trauma reform perspective?

While crisis accommodation could be expanded in this way, providers need to carefully consider some real and perceived risks. Above all, they must ensure women remained safe. One provider said:

I’ve got a reservation about using [short-term rentals] for crisis accommodation. I think that’s hard. It’s possible but it’s hard because crisis accommodation is the most difficult to manage because people are at their most vulnerable.

A need to ‘reframe’ how we see housing

In anticipation of increased demand, the Victorian government announced a A$40.2 million emergency funding package for crisis accommodation. This will not be enough in the longer term.

There needs to be greater focus on the role housing can play, both in reducing COVID-19 transmission and as a broader social cure for the ills that are soon to follow. Subsidies to help crisis accommodation providers access new markets and a dramatic increase in social housing, as most housing services advocate, seem the most reasonable steps to take.

As one crisis accommodation frontline worker lamented, the current crisis system needed to be more agile to support COVID-19 adaptation and social entrepreneurship:

It’s just about doing a reframe. What’s the reframe here for people to see that this [existing infrastructure] is all transferable?

Gender-based housing inequality is hidden from view in Australia. That’s partly due to policy and practices that continue to partition family violence from broader discussions on housing affordability.

Read more: How do we keep family violence perpetrators ‘in view’ during the COVID-19 lockdown?

In the face of a projected need to house many more older, marginalised women, Australia needs to increase the available housing options. It could be through crisis accommodation or more ideally through increased long-term affordable and social housing.

These approaches not only make economic sense, but are critical to giving support agencies a much-needed lever to help make sure women are as “safe as houses”.

If you or anyone you know is experiencing domestic or family violence, call 1800 RESPECT for help at any time. If you are in immediate danger, call 000.

– ref. As demand for crisis housing soars, surely we can tap into COVID-19 vacancies – https://theconversation.com/as-demand-for-crisis-housing-soars-surely-we-can-tap-into-covid-19-vacancies-143815

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Barry Oliver, Associate Professor, The University of Queensland

Insider trading comes in two main forms: arguably legal and clearly illegal.

But, as with drugs in sport, it’s hard to tell when arguably legal ends and clearly illegal begins.

It is generally accepted that it is wrong to buy shares in the company you run when you know something about it that the market does not.

It’s especially wrong to buy shares when you are telling the market that things are much worse for the company than you know them to be.

But what about suddenly sharing everything – an avalanche of information – in the lead-up to a share purchase in order to muddy the waters and create enough uncertainty to lower the price?

Chief executives have enormous discretion over the tone and timing of the news they release, generally answering to no one.

A linguistic analysis of twelve years worth of news releases by 6764 US chief executives just published by myself and two University of Queensland colleagues in the Journal of Banking and Finance suggests they are using this discretion strategically.

Not clearly illegal (how can oversharing be illegal?) their behaviour can have the same effect as talking down their share price while buying, something that is clearly illegal.

Spreads matter, as well as signs

Earlier analyses of insider trading have looked at only the “sign” of the information released to to the share market. On balance was the tone of one month’s news releases positive or negative?

We have looked at the “spread”, the range from positive to negative as well as the net result.

It doesn’t make sense to treat as identical a month’s worth of releases which are all neutral tone in tone (sending no message) and a month’s worth of releases of which half are strongly positive and half are strongly negative (stoking uncertainty).

Our sample of discretionary (non-required) news releases is drawn from those lodged with Thomson Reuters News Analytics between January 2003 to December 2015. It includes firms listed on the New York Stock Exchange, the AMEX American Stock Exchange and the NASDAQ technology-heavy exchange.

The archive scores the tone of each release as positive, negative or neutral.

We used the Thomson Reuters Insiders Filing Database to obtain information on chief executive buying, limiting our inquiries to significant purchases of at least 100 shares.

Strategic uncertainty

About 70% of the chief executives proved to be opportunistic traders in the sense that they bought with no particular pattern, rather than at the same time every year.

We found that news releases by these chief executives increased information uncertainty by 5.8% and 3.6% in the months before they bought and in the month they bought.

In the months following their purchases, the positive to negative spread of their news releases returned to the average for non-purchase months.

The unmistakable conclusion is that their behaviour is strategic.

Read more: Insider trading is greedy, not glamorous, and it hurts us all

We obtained similar results when we used other measures of buying and the tone of news releases.

Our results provide no evidence to support the contention that chief executives behave in this strategic way when selling shares. This is consistent with other findings suggesting that the timing of sales is often out of the hands of the sellers.

Previous studies have found only weak links between executive share purchases and the news they release to the market. This might be because those studies have looked for more easily detected (and more clearly problematic) negative news releases.

Read more: To protect markets we need strict penalties for insider trading

But that’s an old and (with the advent of linguistic analysis) increasingly risky approach.

Our research suggests that by saying many things at once chief executives can achieve much the same thing.

– ref. Insider trading has become more subtle – https://theconversation.com/insider-trading-has-become-more-subtle-142981

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frances Di Lauro, Senior Lecturer, Department of Writing Studies, University of Sydney

In the year then of our Lord 1348, there happened at Florence, the finest city in all Italy, a most terrible plague…

Giovanni Boccaccio introduces his acclaimed collection of novellas, the Decameron, with a reference to the most terrifying existential crisis of his time: the decimating effects of the bubonic plague in the 1348 outbreak known as the Black Death.

Boccaccio’s book, written between 1348 and 1353, has been acclaimed as an exemplar of vernacular literary prose, and a commentary on the “peste” that swept through Europe that year.

A classic of medieval plague literature, it continues to be cited by physicians and epidemiologists to this day for its vivid depiction of a disease that held a city under siege.

In the introduction to his book, Boccaccio estimates that more than 100,000 people – over half of the city’s inhabitants – died within the walls of Florence between March 1348 and the following July.

He vividly describes physical, social and psychological sufferings, writing of people dying in the street, rotting corpses, plague boils, swollen glands known as “buboes” – some the size of eggs, others as large as apples – bruises and the blackening skin that foreshadowed death.

Boccaccio’s introduction is followed by ten sections containing short stories. Each of the book’s ten storytellers tells a story a day for ten days. Derived from Greek, the word decameron means ten days and is an allusion to Saint Ambrose’s Hexameron, a poetic account of the creation story, Genesis, told over six days.

Read more: Guide to the Classics: Albert Camus’ The Plague

The Decameron is a tale of renewal and recreation in defiance of a decimating pandemic. Boccaccio attributes the cause of this terrible plague to either malignant celestial influences or divine punishment for the iniquity of Florentine society.

Social distancing and fragrant nose coverings

Unlike the plague of 1340 – which killed an estimated 15,000 Florentines – that of 1348 was, according to Boccaccio, far more contagious, spreading with greater vigour and speed.

It was extraordinary, in his view, that the disease did not merely spread from human to human but crossed species too. He saw two pigs dying within moments of biting infected clothing in the street.

Florentine officials removed household waste and contaminants from the city in attempts to eradicate the deadly pestilence, and banned infected people from entering.

They issued public pleas and advised residents on measures that would minimise risk of contagion, such as social distancing and increased personal hygiene.

Boccaccio, in the same introduction, takes aim at those who fled the sick to protect their own health and in doing so degraded the social fabric.

Extreme interpretations of social distancing led to people shunning neighbours and members of their extended and immediate families. In some cases, he writes, parents even deserted their children.

Read more: Guide to the Classics: how Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations can help us in a time of pandemic

While some took conservative measures – self-isolating indoors in small numbers, eating and drinking moderately and shutting out contact from the outside – others, he writes, roamed freely, gratifying their senses and meeting their desires for food, fun and sex:

…satisfying their every yearning, laughing and mocking at every mournful accident; and so they vowed to spend day and night, for they would go to one tavern, then to another, living without any rule or measure…

Others still consumed only what their bodies needed and excluded contact with the infected. But they wandered wherever they wished, carrying bunches of fragrant flowers, herbs, or spices, or wearing them across their noses in a bid to repel the infection and the offensive odour of death.

Boccaccio’s unfavourable account, lamenting moral degradation and the enormous human suffering, is interrupted by a ray of light in the form of seven young noblewomen and three young gentlemen who appear in the Church of Santa Maria Novella on a Tuesday morning.

They become the storytellers of the Decameron. Collected as a brigade (brigata), they exhibit civility, gentility, strength and a commitment to duty.

Boccaccio presents them as decorous and untarnished, having each cared for their loved ones while within the city walls. He gives each a name that suits their personal qualities, choosing monikers from his own and other literary works. They are: Pampinea, Filomena, Neifile, Filostrato, Fiammetta, Elissa, Dioneo, Lauretta, Emilia and Panfilo.

Refuge through story

At the suggestion of the eldest noblewoman, Pampinea, the brigata leave the terrible pestilence and their devastated, plague-ridden city to take refuge in a rural villa in the nearby hills.

They are not abandoning others, she assures the group, as their relatives have either died or fled. The ten pass time by partaking in banquets, playing games, dancing, singing and telling stories.

Each member of the group narrates one story every day across the following ten days, under the supervision of the elected king or queen for the day. The proceedings close with singing and a dance.

Over those ten days, the brigata tell 100 stories. In them, they name real people – historical, contemporaries and near contemporaries – who would have been recognisable to readers of the Decameron in Boccaccio’s lifetime.

This gives a semblance of reality to the stories told inside an otherwise imaginary scene. The stories reflect Boccaccio’s accounts of moral decay in Florence at the time. Corruption and debauchery abound.

Read more: Guide to the Classics: Dante’s Divine Comedy

How then do the pastimes of the brigata bring about renewal and recreation?

The Decameron situates vices within fiction and serves as a guide for preserving the mind during physical isolation. Retreating from a stricken city to live a simple life in a communal isolation, the brigata entertain each other and by following disciplined, structured rituals, recover some of the predictability and certainty that, according to Boccaccio, had been lost.

Contemporary resonances

The Decameron was the first prose masterpiece to be written in the Tuscan vernacular, making it more accessible to readers who could not read Latin. It was first distributed in manuscript form in the 1370’s and almost 200 copies were printed over the following two centuries.

The work was censured in 1564 by the Council of Trent and a “corrected” version, expunging all references to clerics, monasteries and churches, was released in 1573.

Boccaccio’s introduction to the Decameron is a frame-story – a narrative that frames another story or a collection of stories.

This form became a popular literary model for enveloping collections of short stories that blend oral storytelling and literature. Variations and borrowings are seen in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales and Shakespeare’s All’s Well That Ends Well.

The most well-known film adaptation of the Decameron is the first of a trio of masterpieces in Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1971 Trilogy of Life. Showcasing ten of the 100 stories in the Decameron, it remains one of Italy’s most popular films.

The Decameron will resonate with modern readers as we grapple with the horror of our own current pandemic. The book is a prescription for psychological survival, a way of mentally distancing from terrible visions, death counts and grim economic forecasts.

Although its framing events took place over 600 years ago, the Decameron’s modern readers, like Boccaccio’s brigata, will find comfort in company and optimism and a sense of certainty in the programmed rituals it describes.

Through its 100 stories, readers can vicariously experience situations that are out of their reach. They can be entertained, find lots to laugh about, and ultimately celebrate the joy and restorative powers of storytelling itself.

– ref. Guide to the Classics: Boccaccio’s Decameron, a masterpiece of plague and resilience – https://theconversation.com/guide-to-the-classics-boccaccios-decameron-a-masterpiece-of-plague-and-resilience-143437

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

The Nationals are demanding major changes to the government’s controversial new higher education fee plan, declaring it would disadvantage regional communities and students as it stands.

The Nationals party room on Monday discussed the JobReady Graduates Package draft legislation – which has now been released – and agreed to press for it to be altered.

The party wants social work, behavioural science and mental health disciplines taken out of the humanities funding cluster and realigned with allied health studies.

The Nationals Minister for Decentralisation and Regional Education, Andrew Gee, who has driven the push, said given what country Australia had been through with bushfires, floods, drought and the pandemic “it is critical that regional communities have easy access to mental health services and support”, and the proposed classification would work against this.

The Nationals revolt, an embarrassment for Education Minister Dan Tehan, is another example of the minor Coalition partner asserting itself, and follows its recent win when it prevented a government appeal against a key court judgement relating to the Gillard government’s suspension of live cattle exports.

Labor’s education spokeswoman Tanya Plibersek told the ABC: “I’m gobsmacked by the fact that two ministers who share a department can’t get the legislation right before they release an exposure draft. I mean, these are two parties that are in coalition.”

The government package reduces student fees for courses in areas the government identifies as potentially job-rich and increases them for the humanities and certain other courses. It has received wide criticism.

Gee outlined the Nationals demands in a statement, thus upping the ante for the government.

He said they followed roundtables he had initiated with country universities and other stakeholders.

The party wants the grandfathering for students enrolled before January 1 next year to be indefinite, rather than only until January 1 2024.

“The Nationals have agreed that this change will ensure that part-time and online students, many of whom take over three years to complete their studies due to balancing work and family commitments, will not be disadvantaged. Many of these students reside in country areas,” Gee said.

Arguing for the removal of key courses from the humanities list, Gee said the currently proposed listing would put a number of social work, behavioural science and mental health disciplines in the most expensive cluster for students.

“We believe this would only serve to further to increase the maldistribution of mental health workers in country Australia. It also has the potential to impact women and mature students looking to upskill and move into higher paid jobs,” he said.

Regional university roundtables “revealed this to be a glaring and potentially detrimental design flaw”.

“2019 Graduate Outcomes data shows that demand for mental health support, such as social work is 10% higher in regional and remote communities – we need more country graduates to meet this demand. Country people deserve the same access to mental health support as those in the cities.

“It’s a fundamental issue of equality. That is why The Nationals believe that social work, behavioural science and mental health disciplines should be removed from the humanities funding cluster and be realigned with allied health studies,” Gee said.

“The Nationals will be seeking a change to the current Job-Ready Graduates Package funding clusters. We intend to fix this design deficiency.”

The party also wants changes to the Tertiary Access Payment (TAP). This is a planned $5000 payment for regional students who relocate to study.

Gee said there was concern its current design “will encourage country kids to leave their communities and move to the cities to study. This could result in a loss of enrolments for country universities which are already operating in thin and lean markets.”

Gee said he looked forward to working with Coalition colleagues “to ensure that all of the measures agreed to by The Nationals are incorporated into the legislation”.

– ref. Nationals revolt over the government’s proposed university fee changes – https://theconversation.com/nationals-revolt-over-the-governments-proposed-university-fee-changes-144306

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

The federal government has clashed with the Royal Commission into Aged Care, strongly rejecting the claim by senior counsel assisting the inquiry Peter Rozen that it had no specific COVID-19 plan for the sector.

Aged Care Minister Richard Colbeck told a news conference: “We have had a plan to deal with COVID-19 in residential aged care, going right back to the beginnings of our preparations.

“We’ve been engaged with the sector since late January, and continuously working with the sector to ensure they have all the information they require and the support that they need in the circumstance that they might have an outbreak of COVID-19.”

Acting chief medical officer Paul Kelly said: “We have been planning for our aged population as a vulnerable group since the beginning of our planning in relation to COVID-19”. And there had been “very strong communication with the sector throughout,” he said.

Rozen, in a Monday statement at the opening of this week’s hearings on COVID in the aged care sector, said while much was done to prepare the health sector more generally for the pandemic, “neither the Commonwealth Department of Health nor the aged care regulator developed a COVID-19 plan specifically for the aged care sector”.

The sector had been underprepared, he said.

Asked whether the government’s plan had failed, Colbeck admitted there had been “some circumstances where things haven’t gone as we would like”, saying “the circumstance at St Basil’s [in Melbourne] is one, where we didn’t get it all right”.

On Wednesday the commission will take evidence from Janet Anderson, head of the Commonwealth regulator, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission, which Rozen said “did not have an appropriate aged care sector COVID-19 response plan”.

The government has left Anderson out to dry, after it was belatedly discovered her body was told of an outbreak at St Basil’s two days after a staffer was diagnosed, but it failed to pass on the information.

Quizzed about this, Colbeck said under the protocols, “the Commonwealth should have been advised of the outbreak on 9 July by either the Victorian health department or St Basil’s management or both. Instead it was formally informed on July 14.”

But he was also critical of the Quality and Safety Commission which was informed of the outbreak when it was speaking to the home as part of a survey about preparedness and infection control.

“The disappointing thing, from my perspective, is that the information that was gleaned … about a positive outbreak wasn’t passed on to anyone else,” Colbeck said.

“There was an assumption made … that information had already been passed on. It wasn’t.

“The gap in the supply chain, or the information chain, has now been closed. … There should not have been a hole in our systems. That’s been rectified appropriately, as it should have been.”

– ref. Government rejects Royal Commission’s claim of no aged care plan, as commission set to grill regulator – https://theconversation.com/government-rejects-royal-commissions-claim-of-no-aged-care-plan-as-commission-set-to-grill-regulator-144301

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

The government and the Australian Defence Force are bracing for reputational damage to the military from damning findings in an imminent report on Australian Special Forces’ behaviour in Afghanistan.

The report, expected within a month, is from a long-running inquiry by Justice Paul Brereton. Earlier this year the inspector-general of the ADF noted the inquiry was examining 55 separate incidents or issues.

They include allegations of killings of unarmed civilians and insurgents who had surrendered. Some such alleged atrocities have been aired publicly by the ABC, including helmet-camera footage taken at the time.

The government and the ADF will argue action has been taken to address the culture and circumstances behind the various incidents examined by Brereton, which mostly took place between 2007-13.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison gives the military a special status on public occasions – when he makes speeches, he pays tribute to them after he acknowledges the local Indigenous people.

Last week, Defence Minister Linda Reynolds was blunt about what the Brereton inquiry would find, although she said she hadn’t seen the report.

“I think that will make some very significant findings – ones that I’m certain will make many Australians uncomfortable and also dismayed.

“So I think we do need to prepare ourselves for that,” she said.

But she went on to say that since the alleged incidents, the army and particularly the Special Forces had engaged in “self reflection” about the conduct of soldiers in Afghanistan and what was needed to prevent any repetition.

Read more: It’s time for Australia’s SAS to stop its culture of cover-up and take accountability for possible war crimes

She also stressed the past behaviour “in no way reflects on our current serving men and women both here and overseas who are doing an extraordinary job for our nation.”

Chief of Defence Force Angus Campbell has now appointed Tom Frame, a UNSW professor and former former Anglican Bishop to the Defence Force in 2001-07, to write an “independent academic study of Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan”.

The Defence department said the book would “aim to provide an understanding of Australia’s Special Forces, including consideration of the ethical standards and command culture of Special Operations Command and its people on operations from 1999 until the present day, with a focus on service in Afghanistan”.

“It is expected that the publication will be used as an academic reference to guide our leaders in the years ahead and contribute to the professional development of the Australian Defence Force today and into the future,” the department said.

“The study is not a historical record of Australia’s Special Forces or operations in Afghanistan, and is separate to the Australian Government Official History of Australian Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan project.”

Frame’s book will be published in 2022.

As the Brereton inquiry has progressed, the alleged Afghanistan incidents have become a highly charged public debate.

One of those interviewed by the inquiry was VC recipient Ben Roberts-Smith, who has brought defamation action after allegations reported in the media – which he denied – concerning his behaviour in Afghanistan.

Neil James, executive director of the lobby group the Australia Defence Association, wrote last year in an article about Special Forces:

“The war in Afghanistan was fought under particularly difficult operational, legal and environmental conditions.”

“High operational tempo fostered both worthy and risky elements of elite-unit culture.

“As did regular tax-free pay and allowances when deployed, protected-identity status and public curiosity about personnel and their necessarily high-security operations. Individual and collective recognition of these risks became obscured.”

– ref. Government bracing for damning report on alleged Special Forces’ incidents in Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/government-bracing-for-damning-report-on-alleged-special-forces-incidents-in-afghanistan-144284

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

The government and the Australian Defence Force are bracing for reputational damage to the military from damning findings in an imminent report on Australian Special Forces’ behaviour in Afghanistan.

The report, expected within a month, is from a long-running inquiry by Justice Paul Brereton. Earlier this year the inspector-general of the ADF noted the inquiry was examining 55 separate incidents or issues.

They include allegations of killings of unarmed civilians and insurgents who had surrendered. Some such alleged atrocities have been aired publicly by the ABC, including helmet-camera footage taken at the time.

The government and the ADF will argue action has been taken to address the culture and circumstances behind the various incidents examined by Brereton, which mostly took place between 2007-13.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison gives the military a special status on public occasions – when he makes speeches, he pays tribute to them after he acknowledges the local Indigenous people.

Last week, Defence Minister Linda Reynolds was blunt about what the Brereton inquiry would find, although she said she hadn’t seen the report.

“I think that will make some very significant findings – ones that I’m certain will make many Australians uncomfortable and also dismayed.

“So I think we do need to prepare ourselves for that,” she said.

But she went on to say that since the incidents, the army and particularly the Special Forces had engaged in “self reflection” about how such incidents could have happened and what was needed to prevent any repetition.

She also stressed the past behaviour “in no way reflects on our current serving men and women both here and overseas who are doing an extraordinary job for our nation.”

Chief of Defence Force Angus Campbell has now appointed Tom Frame, a UNSW professor and former former Anglican Bishop to the Defence Force in 2001-07, to write an “independent academic study of Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan”.

The Defence department said the book would “aim to provide an understanding of Australia’s Special Forces, including consideration of the ethical standards and command culture of Special Operations Command and its people on operations from 1999 until the present day, with a focus on service in Afghanistan”.

“It is expected that the publication will be used as an academic reference to guide our leaders in the years ahead and contribute to the professional development of the Australian Defence Force today and into the future,” the department said.

“The study is not a historical record of Australia’s Special Forces or operations in Afghanistan, and is separate to the Australian Government Official History of Australian Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan project.”

Frame’s book will be published in 2022.

As the Brereton inquiry has progressed, the Afghanistan incidents have become a highly charged public debate.

One of those interviewed by the inquiry was VC recipient Ben Roberts-Smith, who has brought defamation action after allegations reported in the media – which he denied – concerning his behaviour in Afghanistan.

Neil James, executive director of the lobby group the Australia Defence Association, wrote last year in an article about Special Forces:

“The war in Afghanistan was fought under particularly difficult operational, legal and environmental conditions.”

“High operational tempo fostered both worthy and risky elements of elite-unit culture.

“As did regular tax-free pay and allowances when deployed, protected-identity status and public curiosity about personnel and their necessarily high-security operations. Individual and collective recognition of these risks became obscured.”

– ref. Government bracing for damning report on Special Forces’ incidents in Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/government-bracing-for-damning-report-on-special-forces-incidents-in-afghanistan-144284

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Zachariah Wylde, Postdoctoral Researcher in Evolutionary Biology, UNSW

As time passes, our fertility declines and our bodies start to fail. These natural changes are what we call ageing.

In recent decades, we’ve come leaps and bounds in treating and preventing some of the world’s leading age-related diseases, such as coronary heart disease, dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

But some research takes an entirely unique view on the role of science in easing the burden of ageing, focusing instead on trying to prevent it, or drastically slow it down.

This may seem like an idea best left to cranks and science fiction writers, but it’s not.

The futurist’s quest

There have been myriad scientific research efforts focused on stopping or slowing the effects of ageing.

Last year, scientists studying the nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans (a common model organism for ageing-related research) managed to manipulate its biochemical pathways. The resulting worms lived five times longer than their typical lifespan of 20 days.

The length of the telomere has also received a lot of interest. This is a tiny structure within a cell that protects chromosomes from deterioration. One study found a faster rate of telomere shortening resulted in a shorter lifespan in many species, including humans.

This suggests that if we can protect these structures, we could greatly increase our lifespan. However, telomere maintenance is complex and telomeres can vary in how quickly they shorten, depending on where they are in the body.

The drug metformin, usually prescribed to manage type 2 diabetes, has also been touted as a way to delay the onset of a range of age-related diseases, thus increasing “health-span” (how long we remain healthy).

Nir Barzilai, director of the Institute for Ageing Research at Yeshiva University’s Albert Einstein College of Medicine, is seeking approval from the US Food and Drug Administration for the first clinical trial of metformin to “treat” ageing.

But other researchers are concerned, as metformin intake has an association with a higher risk of B vitamin deficiencies. Some studies suggest this can result in cognitive dysfunction.

One 2018 study also found metformin can reduce aerobic capacity and quash the benefits of excercise – something we know helps fight the effects of old age.

Metformin also seems to show mixed results in its effects on ageing depending on which model organism is used, such as rats, flies or worms. This raises doubts about whether its supposed benefits would apply to humans.

Another compound of interest is nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD). This naturally occurring substance is vital to energy metabolism in most animals including humans, plants, bacteria and even yeast. In mice and humans, NAD levels appear to decline as we age.

NAD and compounds like resveratrol (a chemical isolated from wine) have been shown to work together to maintain the function of our mitochondria – the structures that produce energy inside our cells – and thus fight off ageing in mice. But this research lacks much-needed human trials.

The immortal jellyfish

Evolutionary biologists know ageing is a highly “plastic” process that can be influenced by many factors including diet, climate, genetics and even the age at which our grandparents conceived our parents. But we don’t know why some species age more slowly than others.

Research has shown that several species appear not to age. For example, the “immortal” jellyfish Turritopsis dohrnii can revert to a juvenile stage of life and seemingly escape the process of ageing.

To figure out why some species age better than humans, we have to understand so-called “epigenetic changes” which alter our DNA expression throughout the ageing process.

Read more: Ageing: how our ‘epigenetic clocks’ slow down as we get older

Epigenetic changes are mechanisms that can determine which genes are turned on or off in offspring. These mechanisms have a huge influence on the course of a species evolution.

Understanding them could also help us understand why humans and other animals evolved to age in the first place.

The culture of DIY biology

When it comes to research on ageing, immense interest from the public and large companies has created an environment where it’s difficult to separate unfounded claims from science. In this grey area, biohackers emerge.

“Biohacking” is a term used to describe actions that supposedly let you “hack” your brain and body to optimise their performance, without traditional medicine.

Its proponents often peddle claims exaggerated by cherry-picked evidence.

One example is alkaline water, claimed to slow ageing by reducing oxidative stress.

Two studies highlight alkaline water’s positive effects for acid-base balance in the bloodstream, or increasing hydration status during exercise. But both of these studies were funded by companies selling alkaline water.

A systematic review of the literature shows there is no research to support or disprove beliefs about alkaline water being a biohack.

There are also bogus “young blood transfusions”, in which an older person is injected with a younger person’s blood to “cure” ageing. This is a very real and exploitative part of the anti-ageing industry.

Even if we could, should we?

The concept of fighting ageing has long been woven into the human narrative.

But forcefully extending the human lifespan by even one decade would present difficult social realities, and we have little insight into what this would mean for us.

Would a “cure” for ageing be abused by the wealthy? Would knowing we had longer to live decrease our motivation in life? Perhaps it’s a good thing we won’t be diving into the fountain of youth any time soon – if ever.

Read more: Want to live longer? Consider the ethics

– ref. Can ageing really be ‘treated’ or ‘cured’? An evolutionary biologist explains – https://theconversation.com/can-ageing-really-be-treated-or-cured-an-evolutionary-biologist-explains-143255

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janneke Berecki-Gisolf, Associate Professor, Accident Research Centre, Monash University

COVID-19 restrictions in Victoria have had a marked effect on how and where we spend our time. For many people, home has become the workplace, and for most school-aged children, home is also the classroom.

We compared Victorian emergency department presentations in May 2020 to those in May 2019 and found this extra time at home has affected the rates at which people are presenting to hospital with injuries — and the types of injuries they’re presenting with.

Importantly, overall presentations to the emergency department were down. But some categories saw notable increases, including the number of “unintentional home injuries”, which grew by 21%, and the number of injuries caused by “assault in the home”, which was 48% greater than the same time last year.

Although motor vehicle related injuries decreased, there was an increase in bicycle injuries, particularly among children.

What we did

At Monash University’s Victorian Injury Surveillance Unit, we’ve been tracking injury rates throughout the pandemic.

We get our data from the Victorian Emergency Minimum Dataset, which holds deidentified clinical records of presentations at Victorian public hospitals with 24-hour emergency departments (currently 38 hospitals).

We’re also tracking emergency department presentations overall, to determine how much more common different types of injuries are becoming as a proportion of usual emergency department presentations. We call this measure “relative to emergency department caseload”.

So for example, in our most recent bulletin, we took the total emergency department presentations during May 2020. But because we’re looking for the proportion of usual emergency department presentations — that is, outside a pandemic — we excluded presentations directly or indirectly related to the pandemic from the total.

To calculate “relative to emergency department caseload”, we worked out the injuries as a proportion of this total.

Illness

Emergency presentations in Victoria were 24% lower in May 2020 than in May 2019 (118,793 versus 156,708 respectively). This decrease should be considered in the context of steady growth in emergency department presentations in Victoria in recent years. It’s difficult to deny the COVID-19 pandemic is deterring people from presenting to hospital.

Respiratory illness-related presentations (such as asthma or pneumonia) in particular saw a steep reduction. Some 4,748 people presented to Victorian emergency departments with respiratory issues in May — 63% fewer than in May last year, when there were 12,847 such presentations.

Even people with potentially life-threatening conditions were less likely to present to hospital. Heart attack presentations were down 15% compared with the same period one year prior (721 versus 613), and stroke presentations were down 19% (858 versus 693).

Read more: Even in a pandemic, continue with routine health care and don’t ignore a medical emergency

Injuries

The overall number of injury presentations to Victorian emergency departments was actually 26% lower in May 2020 than in May 2019 (26,991 versus 36,293).

But breaking this down by the place where the injury occurred shows a marked reduction in injuries that took place in sporting venues and schools, and an increase in injuries that occurred in the home and on farms.

Unintentional home injuries, including DIY injuries, increased from 10,105 to 12,265 (21%) from May 2019 to May 2020. Relative to emergency department caseload, this was a 56% increase. At both timepoints, falls were the most common cause of unintentional home injuries.

Self-harm injuries did not increase in May 2020 versus May 2019 in terms of the raw numbers (719 versus 773). But relative to emergency department caseload, self-harm injury presentations increased by 20%.

This can be taken with more recent data outside of our research which showed a 9.5% rise in the number of overall Victorian hospital admissions for self-harm in the past six weeks.

Read more: It’s not only teenage girls, and it’s rarely attention-seeking: debunking the myths around self-injury

According to our data, assault in the home increased from 118 presentations in May 2019 to 175 in May 2020: a 48% increase in frequency and a 91% increase relative to emergency department caseload.

Finally, transport injuries overall were not much different in May 2020 compared to May 2019 (1,669 versus 1,766). This was, however, a 22% increase when considered relative to emergency department caseload. While motor vehicle injuries decreased by 30% (833 to 581), bicycle injuries increased 55% from 371 to 576.

For children under 15 years, the rate of transport-related injury presentations to emergency departments increased 78% from May 2019 to May 2020.

Staying safe at home

The bulletins we previously released for March and April, and the data we’re now collating for June, reflect similar trends in the rates and types of emergency department presentations, as compared to the same time points last year.

Our findings have a few different implications.

First, we should encourage people who are sick and need hospital care to present to hospital — not to stay home for fear of contracting COVID-19.

Second, alongside the messaging we’re receiving to “stay home” and “stay safe” from coronavirus, public health messaging should include advice on staying safe at home.

With reduced face-to-face contact with health practitioners, some injury prevention messaging, such as the information provided through child-maternal health services, general practitioners and nurses, should be made available through other channels. These could include social media, radio, television, and telephone consultations.

Improving awareness of cycling safety, including messaging around cycling road rules, would also be pertinent at this time.

Read more: There are ways to reduce injuries in kids that don’t involve wrapping them in cotton wool

Finally, trends in self-harm and assault in the home need to be closely monitored, particularly during stage 4 restrictions in Victoria.

The stricter lockdown conditions may result in further increases in violence in the home and compound the effects on mental health, and we need to provide support accordingly.

– ref. Victorian emergency departments during COVID-19: overall presentations down but assault, DIY injuries up – https://theconversation.com/victorian-emergency-departments-during-covid-19-overall-presentations-down-but-assault-diy-injuries-up-144071

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachel Wilson, Associate Professor in Education, University of Sydney

To fix inequality in Australian education, governments should fully fund all non-government primary schools, according to former former NSW Education Minister and now head of the UNSW Gonski Institute, Adrian Piccoli.

In an opinion piece published in the Sydney Morning Herald, Piccoli suggests government funding be dependent on non-government schools no longer collecting fees from parents and agreeing to abide by the same enrolment and accountability rules as public schools.

The fully-funded non-government primary private schools would still be run by the same organisations as before, and abide by the same educational philosophy. But no student would be turned away.

Fully funding primary schools would enable parents to access neighbourhood non-government schools at no cost. It would provide welcome relief for parents who now send their children to non-government primary schools, but who are facing difficulties paying fees due to the COVID-19 recession.

We are co-authors on a report documenting the rising inequality in Australian education, with Adrian Piccoli and educational consultant Chris Bonnor. The report will be released by the Gonski Institute in coming days.

Read more: Explaining Australia’s school funding debate: what’s at stake

Our previous analysis of the MySchool website found many non-government schools cost the government almost as much money as government schools. Having them abide by the same rules as do public schools would go some way towards decreasing inequality in Australian education.

How it might work in Australia

Fully-funding all Australian primary schools is a relatively straightforward proposition. But attached to it must be a renegotiated set of mutual obligations between schools and those who fund them — that is, elected governments. This must have the explicit goal of improving equitable outcomes for all communities, not just those which are already advantaged.

The additional cost of full recurrent public funding of all non-government primary schools is estimated to be about A$500 million a year across Australia. Given Australian governments spend almost $60 billion a year on school education this equates to a relatively small investment.

Our earlier report has shown many non-government schools are nearly fully-funded to the levels established by the Gonski reviews and some fall short. Yet, remarkably, some remain in excess of their calculated entitlement — a quirk of a decision to not disadvantage over-funded schools.

By fully funding primary schools these disparities can be addressed and more equitable funding provided.

Removing fees will likely create additional demand for some schools. Parents who value a particular model (Montessori, Steiner, religious) but who do not have the resources to pay might increase enrolment interest.

Read more: Yes, some Australian private schools are overfunded – here’s why

Funding would flow with the student. This means the schools would be resourced to cater for their enrolment. Exclusion would not be permitted, as is currently the case in fully-funded government schools.

More radically, non-government schools could partner more closely with other local government schools, perhaps even relocating students through local proximity.

Other countries do it already

While the suggestion to fully fund primary private schools might appear radical to many Australians, a variety of models already exist outside Australia.

The UK government funds state schools in which a foundation or trust (usually a religious organisation), contributes to building costs and has a substantial influence in the running of the school. In most cases the foundation or trust owns the buildings. These are called voluntary-aided schools.

New Zealand has state-integrated schools. These allow for collaboration between the government and a private proprietor in a way that preserves the special character of the proprietor and the school — such as having Montessori and Steiner approaches.

Read more: The UK Labour Party wants to abolish private schools – could we do that in Australia?

In Canada, provision of faith-based schooling derives from the founding Constitution. Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan, for instance, provide students with fully funded Catholic schools.

We aren’t necessarily advocating for any of these particular models in Australia. On the contrary, we are calling for a redesign that will reflect our contextual governance, history and culture, and that must also include better outcomes for our First Nations Peoples.

Given the financial difficulties now facing many families, and schools, now is the time to act. Redressing the growing and accelerating segregation and inequity in Australian schools is critical to the future of Australia’s youth and our economy.

– ref. Australian primary private schools should be fully funded by governments — but banned from charging fees – https://theconversation.com/australian-primary-private-schools-should-be-fully-funded-by-governments-but-banned-from-charging-fees-131753

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ilana Finefter-Rosenbluh, Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Monash University

Over the weekend, Victorian Education Minister, James Merlino, announced the individual impact of COVID-19 will be taken into account for every Year 12 student in the state when calculating their VCE score and ATAR.

Under usual circumstances, individual students are assessed for special consideration on a case by case basis. But this year, the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) will introduce a “Consideration of Educational Disadvantage” process to recalculate VCE scores for every student, individually.

The authority may consider, alongside a range of formal data such as exam results, a student’s General Achievement Test (GAT), their expected achievement levels before the impact of coronavirus, and school assessments completed prior to remote and flexible learning.

At the heart of these announcements is an acknowledgement of individual differences. The premier’s website says it may also include

assessing the individual impact of coronavirus on each student, including school closures, direct impacts on the health of a student, students dealing with substantial extra family responsibilities, ongoing issues with remote learning and mental health challenges.

This kind of individual assessment is what educational advocates have been calling on for decades.

How COVID-19 has affected students

Victoria’s decision is intended to support worried students and soften the blow of the graduation implications complicated by the pandemic. Its social, emotional and psychological effects are being recognised alongside academic pressures.

Teachers and school leaders have put forth their best efforts to ensure all students have transitioned to online learning effectively. But the unexpected change may have led already vulnerable students, such as from lower socio-economic backgrounds who may not have reliable access to internet, towards further disadvantage.

Students already disengaged from school may have become more disengaged during remote learning. Teachers who completed a survey in Australia during the last remote learning period said many of their students were not logging in to remote classes or completing their school work. Teacher participants in another survey said student disengagement and equity were a key concern.

Teachers have also expressed concern about the emotional toll of remote learning on students.

Read more: Students in Melbourne will go back to remote schooling. Here’s what we learnt last time and how to make it better

Not all students have experienced adversity as a result of COVID-19. There are many who have thrived in home learning environments. Students who would typically experience social or separation anxiety resulting in school refusal, for instance, have found the online way of learning works better.

The initiatives taken by governments, such as the latest Victorian announcement, acknowledge the necessity to go beyond dry numbers and to account for individual differences — a step towards a more inclusive education.

It’s a human right

The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals establish the core underpinnings of quality education. Specifically, goal number four is to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all”.

Read more: Victoria’s Year 12 students are learning remotely. But they won’t necessarily fall behind

Inclusive education is where all students of all capabilities have the opportunity to learn and express their abilities. Inclusion takes into account student circumstances, such as individual learning needs and health. These include well-being and behavioural challenges.

The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) committee has noted:

education has to be flexible so it can adapt to the needs of changing societies and communities and respond to the needs of students within their diverse social and cultural settings.

How can we do this?

Studies show teachers see school assessment as isolated, offering a limited understanding of the teaching and learning environment. Including as many aspects as possible in assessment processes seems to be more important now than ever. This might involve harnessing student perspectives or inviting parents into the conversation regarding their child’s progress.

Policymakers will assure student equity by providing clear grading guidelines. These can include acknowledgement of the need for special examination arrangements not only during a pandemic. They could enable the support of a health-care worker during a test, for instance.

Universities could also work with secondary schools and agree to consider entrance exams or portfolios that are relevant to the courses students are applying for.

Read more: Students are more than a number: why a learner profile makes more sense than the ATAR

Some people may be concerned the government proposal will not result in fair outcomes across the board. But for assessment to be truly fair, each student must receive the individual level of support they need.

The unfolding developments of the pandemic have opened a door for a more inclusive assessment in schools. Perhaps it is time to reconsider this practice beyond the special circumstances of an outbreak and beyond VCE students, to include all year 12 students this year, and every year.

– ref. Every Victorian Year 12 student will have COVID-19 factored into their grade — we should do it for all Australian students – https://theconversation.com/every-victorian-year-12-student-will-have-covid-19-factored-into-their-grade-we-should-do-it-for-all-australian-students-144192

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Clift, Teaching Fellow and PhD candidate, University of Melbourne

The arrest this week of pro-democracy media tycoon Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong reveals the repressive reality of the city’s new made-in-China national security law.

It also sends a sharp signal to the remaining independent media in the territory: watch your step, or you could be next.

Lai, his two sons and four top executives of the Next Digital media group were all arrested under the new law. On the same day, police raided the offices of Next’s flagship publication, Apple Daily, deploying over 200 officers to search the premises for almost nine hours.

China imposed the national security law in June, bypassing the local legislature and breaching the principle of non-interference in the city’s governance.

The new law established a comprehensive PRC-style national security regime overriding aspects of Hong Kong’s common law legal system.

The national security law is designed to make dissent all but impossible in Hong Kong, including in the city’s once-freewheeling but gradually diminished independent media.

What the new law means for journalists

Lai and the others were arrested under article 29 of the new law, which criminalises collusion with a foreign country or external elements to endanger national security.

Banned acts include collaborating with a foreign entity to impose sanctions on Hong Kong or China, seriously disrupting the making of laws or policies, or provoking hatred of the government among Hong Kong residents.

Although Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement is a grassroots, homegrown affair, Beijing has sought to portray it as the result of foreign meddling. Hong Kong’s last two leaders, Carrie Lam and CY Leung, both alleged foreign forces were behind the protests that took place during their terms.

Read more: Hong Kong activists now face a choice: stay silent, or flee the city. The world must give them a path to safety

Beijing has already signalled that collusion will be broadly interpreted under the law.

Police have not disclosed the specifics of Lai’s offences, but his July meeting with US Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is likely to be under the microscope, as is an opinion piece he wrote for The New York Times in May.

Lai’s status as an influential media owner and prominent pro-democracy activist has positioned him in Beijing’s crosshairs. He has been the target of extraordinary vitriol from mainland state media and was arrested by Hong Kong police in February and April on charges of participating in an illegal assembly.

Lai’s case is undoubtedly intended to serve as a warning — “killing the chicken to scare the monkey,“ to borrow a Chinese saying — and an inducement for the city’s journalists to self-censor, lest they fall foul of the new law.

For instance, an editorial calling for Hong Kong’s constitutionally guaranteed autonomy to be preserved could be interpreted by a zealous prosecutor as inciting secession under articles 20 and 21 of the law.

An uncertain future for independent media

Although self-censorship has long been a concern, Hong Kong has traditionally enjoyed a vibrant free press. In 2002, Reporters Without Borders ranked it 18th in its inaugural World Press Freedom Index.

However, by 2020, the city had plunged to 80th. (China, meanwhile, ranked 177th of 180 countries.) The application of the national security law in Hong Kong will no doubt see the territory’s ranking tumble even further.

Apple Daily’s days appear to be numbered. Similar fates could befall other outspoken independent media, like the crowd-funded Hong Kong Free Press, which launched in 2015 amid rising concerns over declining press freedoms in the city. This was around the same time the South China Morning Post, Hong Kong’s venerable English-language daily, was acquired by the mainland conglomerate Alibaba.

Read more: China is taking a risk by getting tough on Hong Kong. Now, the US must decide how to respond

Over the years, much of Hong Kong’s media has been bought up by China-owned or -affiliated entities, some of which are ultimately controlled Beijing’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong. More than half of Hong Kong’s media owners are now members of political bodies on the mainland.

The public broadcaster Radio Television Hong Kong has remained editorially independent, but it is under review again, having recently fallen foul of the local regulator for criticising the police handling of pro-democracy protests in a manner that was

irresponsible, and could be regarded as a hate speech with the effect of inciting hatred against the police.

International media still operate in Hong Kong relatively unrestrained, but visa refusals for foreign journalists suggest this is changing.

In recent years, Financial Times editor Victor Mallet’s visa renewal was denied after he chaired a discussion with a pro-independence politician, and New York Times reporter Chris Buckley’s Hong Kong work permit was denied, without any specific reason, months after he was also kicked out of China.

The Times has moved some of its former China- and Hong Kong-based reporters to South Korea and Taiwan in response. However, foreign journalists who engage in critical reporting on China and Hong Kong could be in breach of the national security law regardless of where they are based, as the law applies extraterritorially and to non-Chinese citizens as well as nationals.

Speaking for the party’s will

China’s constitution purports to preserve freedom of expression. It has never met the promise of its terms. In 2016, President Xi Jinping told the country’s press,

all news media run by the party must work to speak for the party’s will and its propositions and protect the party’s authority and unity.

The guarantees of free speech and a free press under Hong Kong’s Basic Law are now on the same trajectory.

It is unlikely the media in Hong Hong will be nationalised to the extent it is on the mainland. Instead, Beijing is deploying a combination of acquisition, co-optation and intimidation to obtain its compliant silence.

– ref. ‘Killing the chicken to scare the monkey’: what Jimmy Lai’s arrest means for Hong Kong’s independent media – https://theconversation.com/killing-the-chicken-to-scare-the-monkey-what-jimmy-lais-arrest-means-for-hong-kongs-independent-media-144206

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Caroline Gargett, NHMRC Leadership Fellow and Head of Women’s Health Theme, The Ritchie Centre, Hudson Institute of Medical Research, Hudson Institute

Endometriosis is a debilitating, chronic condition that affects 1 in 10 women worldwide. It occurs when tissue which has similar properties to the womb lining, ends up in the body and attaches to organs, forming a patch of tissue called a lesion.

The condition can cause chronic pelvic pain, bowel and bladder dysfunction, and pain during sex. Painful symptoms can often make it hard for women to work or study, which has long-term socioeconomic impacts.

Unfortunately, women with endometriosis can wait up to 10 years for a diagnosis. But why does it take so long?

Diagnosis is difficult

Endometriosis can only be diagnosed through surgery, and in Australian public hospitals it is common to have to wait up to a year for this procedure. This is partly because surgery for endometriosis is classified as category 3 – the lowest-priority elective surgery in Australia.

To diagnose the condition, lesions need to be surgically removed and analysed by a pathologist. The operation is performed by keyhole surgery, but it can have significant financial and health impact on sufferers.

Read more: Endometriosis costs women and society $30,000 a year for every sufferer

Surgery costs are covered in public hospitals, but long wait times mean women who can afford it are more likely to use private hospitals for endometriosis surgery than for other diseases.

Then, to have a pathologist analyse the lesions removed during surgery and provide a diagnosis can cost A$5,546 with only a fraction covered by Medicare, leaving patients out of pocket.

Non-invasive imaging by ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can often detect lesions on the ovary (endometrioma), and deep lesions that invade the bowel or bladder. But while this indicates endometriosis, lesions analysed by a pathologist are still considered the gold standard for a formal diagnosis.

Ultrasounds and MRIs also can’t detect lesions that are on the surface of organs (superficial) and are thought to be an early stage of the disease.

Read more: 1 in 10 women with endometriosis report using cannabis to ease their pain

A prior lack of endometriosis research funding in Australia has hampered progress towards developing non-invasive screening tests. But newly developed tests may incorporate emerging evidence that endometriosis has several distinct subtypes, each with a specific diagnostic and treatment profile. Recognition of distinct subtypes has improved and informed the treatment of breast cancer, and this might also be true for endometriosis.

Until such tests are developed, some clinicians are advocating for a diagnosis based on symptoms instead of lesions, but this hasn’t been standardised or validated yet.

“It just comes with being a woman…”

Normalisation of period pain means women often wait two to three years from the onset of symptoms before seeking medical help. And public awareness of endometriosis and its symptoms are low. This explains why only 38% of women with suspected endometriosis present to their GP each year.

Even if a woman does present to her GP with symptoms, a lack of education in GPs and general gynaecologists can result in late referral and misdiagnosis. This can add more than two years to a diagnosis journey. While Australian data is lacking, European women with suspected endometriosis have very low rates of GP referral for diagnostic testing (12%) or to a gynaecologist (44%).

Read more: Sex and women’s diseases: it’s common and important to include men’s perspectives

Biases come into play

In the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis gender, race and socioeconomic biases come into play.

If a man reported to his general practitioner (GP) with severe pelvic pain, he would likely be sent for tests immediately. This is because there probably isn’t a “normal” underlying reason for his pain. But in cases of endometriosis, pelvic pain can be confused with menstrual cramps, resulting in delays for further tests.

A woman’s annual salary may impact her diagnosis time too. Those who can afford private healthcare can access specialist gynaecologists quickly, and can avoid the long waiting lists for diagnostic surgery.

In fact,65% of endometriosis hospitalisations in Australia are either self-funded or funded by private healthcare. But even with private healthcare, women with endometriosis pay, on average, $3,670 a year in out-of-pocket expenses for tests, treatments and surgeries.

Read more: Research Check: have scientists found the cause of endometriosis?

Despite a having a similar disease incidence, women of colour are less likely to be diagnosed than Caucasians. In fact, Australian Indigenous women are 1.6 times less likely to be admitted to hospital for endometriosis. This may be due to difficulty accessing health care, the costs associated with treatment, and cultural differences in health-seeking behaviour.

Hope for the future

The Australian government’s National Action Plan for Endometriosis outlines a roadmap to overcome many of these diagnostic hurdles.

It was developed in consultation with the Australian Coalition for Endometriosis and includes public health campaigns and educational resources for both the general public and GPs. It also supports research into the innovation of new diagnostic tools and the development of centres of excellence for diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis. These centres will enable early access to specialised care and appropriate screening and diagnosis.

The Action Plan was accompanied by the greatest investment to date in Australian endometriosis research by Australian and international funding bodies.

The current research investment (totalling A$14.55 million) for Australian endometriosis research is only 0.2% of the annual cost of endometriosis in Australia (A$7.4 billion). But it is an important start to transform endometriosis patient outcomes.

Read more: Considering surgery for endometriosis? Here’s what you need to know

Steps to take if you think you have endometriosis

1. Know the many and varied symptoms of endometriosis. Period pain that cannot be relieved by over-the-counter anti-inflammatories such as naprogesic is not normal. Nor is painful sex

2. document your menstrual cycle and symptoms – several apps are available, but a diary also works

3. ask your GP for a referral to a specialist endometriosis gynaecologist

4. if a pelvic ultrasound is needed, ensure it is done by a sonographer who specialises in detecting deep infiltrating endometriosis

5. if your concerns are not addressed, seek a second (or third) opinion.

Transmen and non-binary people can also be affected by endometriosis. This community already experiences delays to healthcare, often exacerbated when they seek help for conditions not matching their outward gender.

– ref. 1 in 10 women are affected by endometriosis. So why does it take so long to diagnose? – https://theconversation.com/1-in-10-women-are-affected-by-endometriosis-so-why-does-it-take-so-long-to-diagnose-141803

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meagan Tyler, Senior lecturer, RMIT University

The COVID-19 crisis has thrown up an array of new habits and coping mechanisms. But the fetishisation, and even sexualisation, of prominent health officials is one of our more unexpected pandemic pastimes. Is this trend equality in action, or an extension of harmful objectification?

In Australia, a lot of attention has been focused on Victoria’s Chief Health Officer, Professor Brett Sutton. You can buy a Brett Sutton bedspread, join in with the Sutton stans on Twitter, or become a “Suttonette” and like the Brett Sutton is HOT Facebook page (along with more than 8000 other people).

To put things in a global context, Sutton’s iconic status is not particularly unusual. Examples from India, to France, to New Zealand show various medical experts and administrators have become like rock stars; worshipped, even deified.

Much of the appeal seems to lie in their competence and confidence, offering a point of public reassurance in turbulent times.

The sexualisation of Sutton offers another dimension. He’s been dubbed a “silver fox” and a photo of him as a young man has been doing the rounds on social media with much accompanying commentary on his physical appearance.

If the professor had been a woman, this kind of treatment would have been acknowledged as unacceptable and we’d likely see a huge backlash against it. So why is this different?

Read more: How highly sexualised imagery is shaping ‘influence’ on Instagram – and harassment is rife

A different rule for men

There are several reasons why the sexualisation of men in public roles plays out quite differently to that of women.

Firstly, as a man, Sutton is not being reduced to his physical attractiveness through a prism of sexual inequality.

The concept of objectification – essentially the reduction of a girl or woman to her sexual body parts or functions – emerges from a broader context of sexual inequality between men and women. This can be anything from staring and catcalling in the street to violent sexual assault.

Any attempt by women to sexualise men doesn’t occur against a corresponding background of widespread sexual intimidation and abuse.

Read more: Sexually objectifying women leads women to objectify themselves, and harms emotional well-being

Fixating on a heterosexual man’s appearance therefore doesn’t have the same effect as it does for a woman. This is, in part, because it doesn’t have the equivalent cultural weight.

Comments about women’s attractiveness are both a cause and consequence of stereotypes about men’s sexual entitlement to women’s bodies. There are no analogous, longstanding stereotypes about men for women’s sexually-charged comments to feed on.

Sutton’s perceived attractiveness is also less harmful in terms of his status because it’s not seen as at odds with his competence. If anything, he is seen as more trustworthy or suitable for the role as a result of the “silver fox” tag.

This tallies with various studies suggesting men’s attractiveness has a more positive effect on their assumed intelligence, compared to women.

Good for the gander?

It’s difficult to imagine a similarly aged, grey-haired female professor being publicly praised and sexualised in the same way, let alone afforded as much assumed competence.

British historian Professor Mary Beard’s experience – the acclaimed expert was advised she “should be kept away from cameras altogether” by critic A. A. Gill – provides an instructive comparison.

But mass sexualisation of public figures shouldn’t really be the goal, either. So it’s slightly bizarre to see feminist commentators describing Sutton as a “CHOttie”.

Read more: Hey, sexy: objectifying catcalls occur more frequently than you might think

While such observations don’t diminish or reduce Sutton in the way they would for a woman in his position, the ultimate aim of feminism isn’t for everyone to be equally sexualised.

A feminist understanding of objectification is, at its heart, a critique of inequality. And it provides the groundwork for imagining a sexuality free from eroticised power difference.

The end game of liberation from patriarchy isn’t trying to recreate power dynamics that might enable some kind of shared objectification, it’s about abolishing those very dynamics.

Should we be worried about the current fixation with Brett Sutton’s looks? It’s hardly the most pressing problem in the middle of a global pandemic.

But it does provide an opportunity to reflect on how far we still have to go in terms of understanding the contours of sexism that women face in public roles, and the kind of steps we need to take in order to truly address sexual inequality.

– ref. Calling Brett Sutton a ‘CHOttie’ is not objectification – but it’s not feminism either – https://theconversation.com/calling-brett-sutton-a-chottie-is-not-objectification-but-its-not-feminism-either-144134

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Bradfield, Research Fellow in Behavioural Neuroscience, University of Technology Sydney

As COVID-19 lockdowns were introduced, we all suddenly had to find new ways of doing things. Schooling shifted online, meetings moved to Zoom, workplaces brought in new measures and even social events have changed to minimise physical interactions.

Many of us have found it hard to adapt to these transformations in our lives. Our research into memory, learning, and decision-making suggests part of the reason is that, for our brains, the change didn’t simply involve transferring existing skills to a new environment.

More often, our brains are in effect learning entirely new skills, such as how to conduct a meeting while your cat walks across your computer keyboard, or how to work while filtering out the sound of kids yelling in the garden.

However, our research may also offer some reassurance that in time we will come to terms with a new way of life.

Read more: How memories are formed and retrieved by the brain revealed in a new study

How rats learn

Our new research, published in Nature Neuroscience, offers some suggestions about why doing new things can initially be so difficult, especially in a new or changing environment, but gets easier over time. Our findings indicate our surroundings have a changing influence on our choices and actions over time, and our brains process them differently as well.

We taught rats how to perform new actions, such as pressing a lever for food, in one place. Next, we moved them to another room with different wallpaper, flooring, and odours.

We then “asked” them to perform the same actions to receive a reward, but they were no longer able to do so. It was as if the rats needed to recall all the details of the memory of learning the task to perform it correctly, including the seemingly irrelevant ones.

Things were different when we tested the rats again a week later. By this time they could make accurate choices in either environment.

We also found that if we inactivated the hippocampus, the part of the brain that encodes detailed memories of the environment, rats could no longer perform a task they had just learned. However, they could still accurately perform tasks they had learned some time ago.

What this means for people

Our findings suggest that with experience and time, there’s a change in both the psychological mechanisms and the brain mechanisms of learning how to do new things and make choices.

While the hippocampus appears to be crucial for a brief period, it becomes less important as time goes on.

If even details that ultimately prove irrelevant are necessary for us to remember a new skill in the early stages of learning, this may help to explain why new behaviours can be so difficult to learn when our circumstances change. For our brains, working from home may be like learning a whole new job — not just doing the same job in a new place.

But the good news is it gets easier. In the same way rats eventually adapt to a new environment, we humans can learn to work with Zoom calls and interrupting pets.

Read more: Depression damages parts of the brain, research concludes

These findings may also help us understand conditions in which the hippocampus is damaged, such as Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative disorders, as well as psychiatric disorders such as depression and substance abuse. In time, better understanding could lead to insight into how people with such diseases might regain some functionality.

The implications for humans do come with caveats, of course: our study was done in rats, not people. But if you have struggled to adapt to a new way of doing things during this pandemic, we hope that it is of some comfort to know you are not alone. Rats, too, struggle to learn how to do new things in new places — but it does get easier over time.

– ref. Slow to adjust to the pandemic’s ‘new normal’? Don’t worry, your brain’s just learning new skills – https://theconversation.com/slow-to-adjust-to-the-pandemics-new-normal-dont-worry-your-brains-just-learning-new-skills-144198

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, University of Melbourne

Media coverage of disasters follows a broadly similar trajectory, even though the disasters themselves might take very different forms.

The COVID-19 crisis in Victoria is no exception.

Although it is unfolding over a long time instead of in a single dramatic episode, it is possible to see familiar patterns emerging, and events over the past three weeks indicate that a notable shift has taken place.

From impact and response – which constitute the first two phases of disaster coverage – the focus has broadened to include the blame phase. From a media perspective, this can be called the accountability phase.

This shift can be explained to some extent by a change in political rhetoric. The theme of unity across levels of government and party lines has begun to fracture, particularly with remarks by the federal treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, directed at the Victorian government.

On August 7 he said Victorians deserved answers about “serious failures with deadly consequences” in the state’s coronavirus hotel quarantine system.

However, Frydenberg was only echoing what the media had already started to investigate, and journalists with trusted sources had begun getting leaks.

In mid-July, The Age drew on leaked emails to reveal that a senior bureaucrat in the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions raised the alarm on March 28. Senior people in the Department of Health and Human Services and Emergency Management Victoria were urged to ask Victoria Police to deploy officers to the quarantine hotels.

According to the newspaper, the police were not asked, so no police were sent.

Two months later, the first case was logged of a security guard at Rydges on Swanston testing positive for coronavirus. This cluster grew rapidly to six cases.

Even though this startling information was now in the public domain, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews remained focused on impact and response.

When asked what went wrong with hotel quarantine, he would say only that he was ultimately responsible and that retired judge Jennifer Coate’s inquiry would provide the answers. Meantime, he would not be running a commentary on it.

Victorian Health Minister Jenny Mikakos took the same line in state parliament on August 4. She later tweeted, though, that she was “deeply sorry” if her efforts had not been enough.

“Let the cards fall where they may”, she said, referring to the inquiry.

Principled though this is, it shows the government has not sufficiently appreciated that the trajectory of the coverage has undergone that important shift, from impact and response to accountability.

Coate has herself licensed public debate about these matters.

In failing to respond to repeated questions both in parliament and at the premier’s daily media briefings, the government has lost control of the accountability narrative.

A report in The Age and Sydney Morning Herald on August 8 rammed home this point.

It stated that the executive director of employment in the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions had been removed from their role over the quarantine bungle.

It went on to describe a well-intentioned, if misguided, decision to engage a company called Unified Security in the hotel quarantine operation. Unified was reported to have satisfied the criteria for receiving contracts under the government’s social inclusion procurement policy.

Moreover, the government’s international trade agency, Global Victoria, with no obvious experience in security or public health, reportedly also had a role in establishing the quarantine arrangements.

Even before these revelations, frustration was building among reporters at the government’s refusal to engage on the issue of accountability.

At Andrews’ daily briefing on August 6, a reporter from The Australian, Rachel Baxendale, pressed the premier for answers.

The upshot was that Baxendale, who was only doing her job, became the completely undeserving target of a stream of online hatred, including death threats.

This response suggests several things.

First, some people have a sociopathic problem with strong women in the media who try to hold powerful men to account. We saw it recently with a similar attack on the ABC’s Leigh Sales after she had interviewed the prime minister on the 7.30 program.

Read more: Leigh Sales showed us the abuse women cop online. When are we going to stop tolerating misogyny?

Second, Daniel Andrews may retain considerable support in the wider community for fronting up every day to tell unwelcome truths.

It stands in sharp contrast to the crass name-calling indulged in by Liberal MP Tim Smith, which has undermined the efforts of his leader, Michael O’Brien, to offer constructive proposals for economic recovery.

Third, the public may still be very much absorbed in the impact and response phases of the disaster and not ready to move on to the accountability phase.

This is sometimes difficult for the media to judge.

In the aftermath of the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires, the Victorian media were noticeably slower to get into the accountability phase than were the national and interstate media.

Victoria-based journalists and editors said that, in covering a disaster close to home, it was important not to get into the blame game while the community to whom they were publishing was still acutely anxious and grieving.

With an ongoing disaster, this judgment becomes even more delicate.

However, a second line of inquiry in pursuit of accountability that might be more in tune with community sentiment is open to the media: what went wrong in privately run nursing homes, for which the federal government is responsible?

Minister for Aged Care Richard Colbeck has not been giving daily briefings. Some close questioning of him might be in order, with less risk of public blow-back.

– ref. Tensions rise on coronavirus handling as the media take control of the accountability narrative – https://theconversation.com/tensions-rise-on-coronavirus-handling-as-the-media-take-control-of-the-accountability-narrative-144195

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

New South Wales planning authorities relied on flawed evidence when backing a highly controversial coal seam gas project that may endanger critical water supplies, farmland and threatened species, our analysis has found.

Early next month, the Independent Planning Commission NSW (IPC) is due to announce its decision on the future of the A$3.6 billion Narrabri Gas Project. The commission will presumably give substantial weight to an assessment report by the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE), which recommended the proposal be approved.

However, we contend DPIE has failed to substantiate its claims that the Narrabri Gas Project:

• will improve gas security for NSW
• does not pose a significant risk to important water resources
• will not cause significant impacts to people or the environment.

Some 23,000 submissions were made on the Narrabri Gas Project, 98% of which opposed it. They include Australia’s former chief scientist Penny Sackett, who says the project is at odds with the nation’s Paris climate commitments.

The pending decision comes at a critical time for Australia’s gas industry. The Morrison government has flagged a gas-led economic recovery from COVID-19, and on Monday there were reports the October federal budget will contain support for the industry.

The experience of the Narrabri Gas Project so far shows government decisions on such proposals must be evidence-based and take full account of risks to the environment, people and the economy.

What is the Narrabri Gas Project?

The Narrabri Gas Project aims to produce “unconventional” or coal seam gas, by sinking 850 wells in the Pilliga region near Narrabri in northwest NSW.

State authorities have spent four years assessing the project, and a decision by the IPC is due by September 4.

Read more: A single mega-project exposes the Morrison government’s gas plan as staggering folly

Some 60% of the project is located in the Pilliga forest – the largest forest and woodlands in western NSW and home to threatened species including the koala. The remaining 40% of the project is next to prime farmland. It is also located on the traditional lands of the Gomeroi people.

As assessment by DPIE recommended the proposal be approved. We believe the evidence upon which the department based its decision was flawed. Here are three big problems we identified:

1. Gas security

DPIE says the Narrabri Gas Project is in the public interest because it will contribute to gas security for NSW. This assertion is based on a scenario in which Santos commits to providing all gas from the project solely to NSW, rather than the wider East Coast Gas Market.

Yet, DPIE’s recommended conditions for approval make no mention of Santos promising, or being legally compelled, to reserve gas for NSW consumers if the project is approved.

2. Water risks

The assessment fails to provide evidence showing the project does not pose significant risk to high-quality groundwater in a region and ecosystem highly dependent on it.

The project will drill extensively below the Great Artesian Basin, potentially contaminating groundwater, land and surface water. Despite Santos and the department’s assumptions that risks will be minimal, recent research shows methane contamination of groundwater occurs due to changes in pressures during water and gas extraction.

This risks human health and safety, and compromises water quality. Wastewater has already leaked in the proposed project area during pilot exploration and production, demonstrating the high risks involved.

Read more: Scott Morrison’s gas transition plan is a dangerous road to nowhere

The department’s assessment of threats to the water table and management of waste brine is not robust. For example, the government’s own independent Water Expert Panel recommends brine be disposed of at landfill facilities. But brine and salt generated by the project would be highly soluble in comparison to standard landfill waste, and require robust storage management to prevent leaching and migration, according to our colleague and co-author of our assessment, Matthew Currell.

The department’s recommendation of an “adaptive management” approach – essentially “learning by doing” – is risky, given the highly complex potential impacts which are almost impossible to guard against.

3. Effect on people

DPIE’s assessment does not provide robust evidence that people will not be significantly harmed by the project.

Santos commissioned a social impact assessment, and the department engaged University of Queensland professor Deanna Kemp to review it. DPIE took the view that this review constitutes support for the project and states “overall, the negative social impacts of the project can be appropriately managed”.

However in correspondence with our colleague and co-author of our assessment Rebecca Lawrence, Professor Kemp expressed concern the department “misconstrued” her advice and misinterpreted it as giving the project a “green light”. Professor Kemp stated that her advice in no way constitutes a recommendation of approval of the project.

Read more: Nice try Mr Taylor, but Australia’s gas exports don’t help solve climate change

We believe Professor Kemp was not commissioned by DPIE to comprehensively assess the social impact merits of the project, nor did she do so.

In a response to The Conversation, Professor Kemp said she did not contest the claims made by the authors of this article, and said “any suggestion that my review constitutes an approval of the project would be incorrect”.

There is sufficient evidence to suggest the social impacts in the short and long term will be unmanageable. These include social conflicts over the proposed gas project, loss of rural livelihoods from contamination of both groundwater and surface water, and effects on Aboriginal people and the broader Narrabri community – which is already socially disadvantaged and vulnerable.

A big decision

The Narrabri Gas Project presents considerable and significantly underestimated risks to the environment, sensitive water resources and communities.

The department’s argument that Narrabri gas will increase NSW’s energy security is highly unlikely and at present there’s nothing to suggest such a condition would be legally enforced. And its assertion the project would not harm people or the environment is not backed by evidence.

On this basis, we believe the Narrabri Gas Project is unsustainable, unviable and not in the public interest.

Comment was sought from the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment and Santos. A response had not been received at the time of publication.

– ref. A contentious NSW gas project is weeks away from approval. Here are 3 reasons it should be rejected – https://theconversation.com/a-contentious-nsw-gas-project-is-weeks-away-from-approval-here-are-3-reasons-it-should-be-rejected-144201

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Noetel, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Australian Catholic University

In response to COVID-19, almost every university has scrambled to move its teaching online.

To do this, academics have been choosing between two approaches: live videoconferencing using tools such as Zoom, or pre-recording videos and posting to platforms such as YouTube.

Previous reviews have shown videoconferences are an okay substitute for classes, but what about videos?

What do students say?

Previous reviews have looked at student preferences for online learning as opposed to face-to-face lectures and they do not find any differences. Even when teachers make monumental efforts to create flipped classrooms, where they provide online videos before interactive workshops, there are no differences in student satisfaction.

Read more: Lab experiments in the pandemic moved online or mailed home to uni students

So students don’t mind whether they learn online or face-to-face. We academics care about satisfying students, but we also want to make sure students learn new things.

Student learning is totally unrelated to student satisfaction. Student satisfaction is more closely related to their teacher’s physical attractiveness. So we wanted to see whether videos increased or decreased student learning for mugs like us.

Videos improve learning

We did a systematic review to see what happens when videos replace classes. We searched for every best-practice study that measured learning after university students were given videos.

To make sure we were looking at real learning differences, not just student preferences, we excluded studies that only asked for opinions and those that were not randomised.

We found more than 100 studies. A quarter gave videos in addition to existing content. As you’d expect, students who got extra content learned more.

This means teachers giving face-to-face lectures can significantly improve student learning by also offering videos (before or after class). When videos accompanied existing methods, there were huge benefits for student learning.

But what about when we swapped existing face-to-face learning for videos, as many teachers are now having to do?

We found 83 studies that replaced some type of teaching with videos. About 75% of the time students learned more when given a video instead of a class.

On average, the effects are small (about +2 marks) but consistently favour videos. Effects are much larger when videos replace books (+7 marks), or when videos are used to teach skills (+6 marks) instead of knowledge.

It didn’t matter if the videos were swapped for lectures or tutorials. It didn’t matter if the videos were used for one lesson or a whole semester. And it didn’t matter if the exam was right after the video or at the end of the semester.

We found videos were consistently good for learning. There are several reasons for this and they can help us give better face-to-face classes too. Here are a few video tips from what we discovered.

Tip 1: videos use multiple forms of media

Students have two main channels for learning: what they see and what they hear. This is why videos worked much better than books, websites or podcasts, because these only use one channel whereas video uses both.

On video, teachers can edit themselves to best use both channels, by showing useful visuals that are perfectly timed to the spoken explanation. Great teachers do this in lectures as well, but it’s harder when you can’t edit out your mistakes.

Tip 2: videos give students control

Videos allow for students to control how fast they learn. They can speed us up, slow us down, stop to take notes or have a break for a coffee.

This lets students master content without getting overwhelmed (good lecturers do this too).

Mastery learning – where students progress at their own pace once competent – has been around for a long time and been shown to improve learning in higher education.

Tip 3: videos make learning authentic

Videos can show things more authentically than lectures can. In person, lectures can make learning authentic through role playing and simulation. Lectures can be authentic by bringing in guest speakers: for example, we used to bring in clients who had Parkinson’s to talk to students.

But videos help achieve even this kind of authenticity. Instead of burdening clients every year, we recorded interviews with clients so students could learn from them for years to come.

On video lecturers can also show real situations not possible in class, such as CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation), surgery or construction. Making learning authentic helps motivate students and stimulates learning.

Tip 4: videos make learning interactive

Interactivity is also critical for learning. Lecturers can make classes interactive through open-ended questions, pop quizzes and small-group discussions.

But we found video is usually as interactive, or more interactive, than most lectures. That’s because most lectures aren’t that interactive. There are many technologies (try EdPuzzle or H5P) that let staff easily embed questions and feedback in videos.

Read more: Universities need to train lecturers in online delivery, or they risk students dropping out

When things get back to normal (whatever that is)

Academics shouldn’t feel like they’re wasting their time by making lots of videos this year. Students are probably learning more, and when face-to-face classes get back to normal, the videos will be a great asset for years to come.

We don’t want to be replaced by a YouTube playlist, but parts of our teaching are probably better that way.

– ref. Videos won’t kill the uni lecture, but they will improve student learning and their marks – https://theconversation.com/videos-wont-kill-the-uni-lecture-but-they-will-improve-student-learning-and-their-marks-142282

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Doran, Associate professor/Deputy head of school, UNSW

The stock market is not the economy.

This old and playful maxim is typically not true: often the stock market is a good proxy for the economy and a very good indication of what will happen to it.

But it aptly captures the current divergence between stock markets and the worst economic crisis in a century.

In the United States the NASDAQ (which include tech stocks such as Amazon, Apple, eBay, Microsoft and Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc) is now 10% higher than before COVID-19 fears crashed global markets between late February and late March.

The benchmark S&P 500 index is now on the verge of an all-time high. Last week it closed at 3,349 points, just 1% lower than its February 19 high of 3,386.

Compare this reversal of fotune to the S&P 500’s trajectory after the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-8. Then it took about five years for the index to claw back its losses.

And this despite the US economy now being in a much worse position than during the GFC, with an unemployment rate of more than 10%, a muddled federal government response and Congress unable to agree on a new economic stimulus package.

Read more: Will the GOP let Congress send money to states and cities reeling from the pandemic? 4 essential reads on the economic crisis

Other national stock markets have had similar if less exuberant rebounds. From their pre-COVID highs, Britain’s FTSE 100 is still down about 20%, Japan’s Nikkei 225 about 6.5% and Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 index about 15%. Nonetheless their recoveries are still remarkable.

The least worst best

Normally stock markets tell us a lot about the economy. Buying and selling shares is a near-instant response to new information. The aggregation of those best guesses is generally an accurate indicator of the way things are going.

This time there might be a structural reason why the markets appear divorced from reality.

Investors could be bidding up stock prices because they have to put their money somewhere, and stocks are the least worst bet.

Read more: Blue-chip, volatile, high-risk: retail investors are buying while professionals are selling

Broadly speaking, investors can put money to work in five places: stocks; property; commodities; bonds or money in the bank.

Property investment has become extremely risky. Values remain high due to temporary support schemes, and significant falls are likely.

Commodities are generic tradeable items such as oil, wheat and coffee beans.

Like all tradeable items, their prices rise and fall, and the pandemic has been driving them down. In April the World Bank’s Commodity Markets Outlook warned the risks to forecasts were “large in both directions”.

Bonds are paying less and less

What about bonds – the ultrasafe investment offered by governments?

Their attractiveness depends on the interest they pay, and that depends on expectations about interest rates and inflation.

Both were going downhill before the pandemic, and COVID-19 has pushed them down further. In March the US Federal Reserve cut its interest-rate target range to 0-0.25%. The Reserve Bank of Australia cut its target to 0.25% but has in practice been prepared to accept a cash rate closer to zero.

Read more: The government has just sold $15 billion of 31-year bonds. But what actually is a bond?

The interest rates that influence bonds also affect returns on bank deposits.

That leaves stocks.

A notable feature of the stock market’s buoyancy has been the influx of retail (at the expense of professional or institutional) investors.

Since the market peaked in late February they have become net buyers of stocks, while professional institutional investors have become net sellers.

Cumulative net buying (A$ billion)

Researchers Carole Comerton-Forde and Zhou Zhong suggest this might be due to people having fewer other spending opportunities, and more time on their hands – the so-called boredom markets hypothesis.

Governments have helped with programs to prop up businesses, among them the US$659 billion Paycheck Protection Program and Australia’s A$86 bllion JobKeeper and A$40 billion Coronavirus Small and Medium Enterprises Guarantee programs.

In April and May this year Australian government spending jumped 11% on the same months last year. In April, May and June US government spending more than doubled. It’s likely some of that money has flowed thorough to people who have used it to play the stock market.

Detached from reality

In the past the stock markets have fallen just before unemployment rose, heralding what was to come.

This happened in the US recession at the start of the 2000s and the Great Recession during in the Global Financial Crisis, as the following graph shows.

US unemployment rate and S&P 500

What’s notable is that the stock market didn’t fall just before unemployment rate climbed this time.

Now, more than ever before, the stock market tells us little about where the economy is heading.

– ref. The S&P 500 nears its all-time high. Here’s why stock markets are defying economic reality – https://theconversation.com/the-sandp-500-nears-its-all-time-high-heres-why-stock-markets-are-defying-economic-reality-142707