Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa M. Katerina Asher, Retail Academic Researcher, PhD Candidate & Sessional Academic, University of Sydney

New Zealand’s concentrated supermarket sector is back in the spotlight after Finance Minister Nicola Willis said she was open to offering “VIP treatment” to a third international player willing to create competition.

However, New Zealanders hoping for a foreign hero to break up the current supermarket concentration will be waiting a long time.

It could take five years or more for an international brand such as Aldi to enter New Zealand and establish a nationwide chain. It is a risky bet. So far, no foreign operator has expressed interest publicly in setting up shop here on a national scale.

To create more competition in the supermarket sector, the New Zealand government needs go back to where the issues began: allowing multiple companies to merge until there were few alternatives for shoppers.

Breaking up two of the major entities in the sector would be a relatively quick way to reintroduce competition and improve affordability for everyone.

The rise in concentration

The current state of New Zealand’s supermarket sector – dominated by Woolworths (formerly Countdown), Foodstuffs North Island and Foodstuffs South Island – is a result of successive mergers and acquisitions along two tracks.

The first was Progressive Enterprises’ (owner of Foodtown, Countdown and Five Guys banners) purchase of Woolworths New Zealand (which also owned Big Fresh and Price Chopper) in 2001.

Progressive Enterprises was sold to Woolworths Australia, its’ current owner, in 2005. In less than 25 years, six brands owned by multiple companies were whittled down to a single brand, Woolworths.

The second was the concentration of the “Foodstuffs cooperatives” network. This network once included four regional cooperatives and multiple banners including Mark’n Pak and Cut Price, as well as New World, PAK’nSave and Four Square.

The decision of the four legally separate cooperatives to include “Foodstuffs” in their company name blurred the lines between them. The companies looked similar but remained legally separate.

As a result of mergers, these four separate companies have now become Foodstuffs North Island – franchise limited share company, operating according to “cooperative principlies” and Foodstuffs South Island, a legal cooperative.

In a recent failed application to merge into one company, Foodstuffs North Island and Foodstuffs South Island admitted to sharing information between the two legally separate companies. They are also not meaningfully competing with each other as they operate in regions which do not overlap.

Breaking up the current players to compete

While the Commerce Commission declined the clearance for Foodstuffs North Island Limited and Foodstuffs South Island to merge into one single national grocery entity, more can be done to drive competition in the supermarket sector.

The fastest option would be to break up the “Foodstuffs” companies into smaller entities, with the breakaway and re-branding of PAK’nSave across both islands.

But to do this the government would need to update legislation to allow parliament to force divestiture, consistent with the United Kingdom and the United States.

This would allow New Zealand to go from three supermarket companies to five or more in a short period of time.

Reducing the power dependency of suppliers and customers on the current companies would also reduce barriers to entry for overseas brands.

Global players will take too long

Breaking up the local dominant supermarket players is simply faster, and more straightforward, than waiting for a foreign company to enter New Zealand. It takes time and is expensive to build scale with stores. It can also be risky, as recent history in Australia shows.

Aldi Australia, a favourite of New Zealand consumers hoping for a global alternative, took 20 years to reach scale as a third major player in that country. Originally from Germany, Aldi entered Australia as a declining brand – Franklins – left the market.

In 2017, another German company, Kaufland, announced ambitious plans to enter the Australian market, starting with 20 stores. It purchased its first site in 2018 and hired 200 staff. However, the company abandoned launch plans in 2020 and divested completely from the market.

Additionally, it took US-based bulk retail store Costco three years – and NZ$100 million – to go from announcing its plans for one New Zealand store to open. The retailer has hinted at opening a second location but this has not yet happened.

In the end, the solution to New Zealand’s concentrated supermarket sector needs to come from within. Breaking up the power held by the dominant supermarket companies will allow prices to come down more quickly than waiting for a foreign supermarket to arrive.

The government allowed the market to become concentrated, so it can now fix it. An international brand is not the hero – local, New Zealand-owned competition is.

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

– ref. Stop waiting for a foreign hero: NZ’s supermarket sector needs competition from within – https://theconversation.com/stop-waiting-for-a-foreign-hero-nzs-supermarket-sector-needs-competition-from-within-251910

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

Imagine a world where bacteria, typically feared for causing disease, are turned into powerful weapons against cancer. That’s exactly what some scientists are working on. And they are beginning to unravel the mechanisms for doing so, using genetically engineered bacteria to target and destroy cancer cells.

Using bacteria to fight cancer dates back to the 1860s when William B. Coley, often called the father of immunotherapy, injected bacteria called streptococci into a young patient with inoperable bone cancer. Surprisingly, this unconventional approach led to the tumour shrinking, marking one of the first examples of immunotherapy.

Over the next few decades, as head of the Bone Tumour Service at Memorial Hospital in New York, Coley injected over 1,000 cancer patients with bacteria or bacterial products. These products became known as Coley’s toxins.

Despite this early promise, progress in bacteria-based cancer therapies has been slow. The development of radiation therapy and chemotherapy overshadowed Coley’s work, and his approach faced scepticism from the medical community.

However, modern immunology has vindicated many of Coley’s principles, showing that some cancers are indeed very sensitive to an enhanced immune system, an approach we can often capture to treat patients.

How bacteria-based cancer therapies work

These therapies take advantage of the unique ability of certain bacteria to proliferate inside tumours. The low oxygen, acidic and dead tissue in the area around the cancer – the tumour “microenvironment” (an area I am especially interested in) – create an ideal niche for some bacteria to thrive. Once there, bacteria can, in theory, directly kill tumour cells or activate the body’s immune responses against the cancer. However, several difficulties have hindered the widespread adoption of this approach.

Safety concerns are paramount because introducing live bacteria into a patient’s body can cause harm. Researchers have had to carefully attenuate (weaken) bacterial strains to ensure they don’t damage healthy tissue. Additionally, controlling the bacteria’s behaviour within the tumour and preventing them from spreading to other parts of the body has been difficult.

Bacteria live inside us, known as the microbiome, and treatments, disease and, of course, new bacteria that are introduced can interfere with this natural environment. Another significant hurdle has been our incomplete understanding of how bacteria interact with the complex tumour microenvironment and the immune system.

Questions remain about how to optimise bacterial strains for maximum anti-tumour effects while minimising side-effects. We’re also not sure of the dose – and some approaches give one bacteria and others entire colonies and multiple bug species together.

Recent advances

Despite these challenges, recent advances in scientific fields, such as synthetic biology and genetic engineering, have breathed new life into the field. Scientists can now program bacteria with sophisticated functions, such as producing and delivering specific anti-cancer agents directly within tumours.

This targeted approach could overcome some limitations of traditional cancer treatments, including side-effects and the inability to reach deeper tumour tissues.

Emerging research suggests that bacteria-based therapies could be particularly promising for certain types of cancer. Solid tumours, especially those that have a poor blood supply and are resistant to conventional therapies, might benefit most from this approach.

Colon cancer, ovarian cancer and metastatic breast cancer are among the high-mortality cancers that researchers are targeting with these innovative therapies.
One area we have the best evidence for is that “bug drugs” may help the body fight cancer by interacting with routinely used immunotherapy drugs.

Recent studies have shown encouraging results. For instance, researchers have engineered strains of E coli bacteria to deliver small tumour protein fragments to immune cells, effectively training them to recognise and attack cancer cells. In lab animals, this approach has led to tumour shrinkage and, sometimes, complete elimination.

By exploiting these mechanisms, bacterial therapies can selectively colonise tumours while largely sparing healthy tissues, potentially overcoming limitations of conventional cancer treatments.

Ultimately, we need human trials to give us the answer about whether this works, by controlling or eradicating cancer and, of course, if there are side-effects, its toxicity.

In one study I worked on, we showed that part of a bacterial cell wall, when injected into patients, could safely help control melanoma – the most deadly form of skin cancer.

While we’re still in the early stages, the potential of bacteria-based cancer therapies is becoming increasingly clear. As our understanding of tumour biology and bacterial engineering improves, we may be on the cusp of a new era in cancer treatment.

Bacterial-based cancer therapies take advantage of several unique mechanisms to specifically target tumour cells. As a result, these therapies could offer a powerful new tool in our arsenal against cancer, working in synergy with existing treatments like immunotherapy and chemotherapy. And, as we look to the future, bacteria-based cancer therapies represent a fascinating convergence of historical insight and groundbreaking science.

While challenges remain, the progress in this field offers hope for more effective, targeted treatments that could significantly improve outcomes for cancer patients.

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

– ref. Bug drugs: bacteria-based cancer therapies are finally overcoming barriers – https://theconversation.com/bug-drugs-bacteria-based-cancer-therapies-are-finally-overcoming-barriers-251278

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gary K. Waite, Professor Emeritus, Early Modern European History, University of New Brunswick

Far-right politics and Christian nationalism are on the rise in North America and Europe, leading to growing concerns about what it means for human rights and democracy.

As an historian of the demonizing language of the 16th century, I have been watching current events, around QAnon and Christian nationalist support for United States President Donald Trump with considerable trepidation.

Why? Because we’ve seen before what happens when religious groups use government to force their beliefs and morality upon society.

Religion scholar Bradley Onishi writes that the Christian nationalist movement known as the “New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) is one of the most influential and dangerous Christian nationalist movements in the United States” and has become “a global phenomenon.”

Read more:
New Apostolic Reformation evangelicals see Trump as God’s warrior in their battle to win America from satanic forces and Christianize it

This movement has reshaped its theology in ways eerily reminiscent of the prophets of the Anabaptist kingdom of Münster of the 1530s in present-day Germany. As my scholarship has examined, those religious dissenters faced polemical demonizing by religious authorities and faced violent oppression, via torture and execution.

Today’s Christian nationalists, however, have faced no such maltreatment. Yet, like persecuted dissenters of the 1530s, they claim divine authority to remake society.

The Anabaptists of Münster

The 16th-century Reformation had originally broken down the religious state of medieval Europe. However, Protestant leaders like Martin Luther and John Calvin quickly saw the advantage of having civic governments force conformity to their reforms, and punish dissent.

Among those targeted were the small groups of dissenters whose Biblical interpretation, congruent with the life and teaching of Jesus, led them to follow the Gospel’s command to preach and baptize “on confession of faith” and a person’s commitment to discipleship.“ By contrast, reformers, and the church they sought to reform, “practised and required infant baptism for the entire population (usually required by law).”

Derisively called Anabaptists, the small group of dissenters also refused to participate in government. For these practices they were persecuted, with hundreds horrifically tortured and executed.

Driven to desperation, some Anabaptists in northwestern Europe and northern Germany looked for hope to the Westphalian city of Münster in present-day Germany.

Here the city’s major preacher, Bernhard Rothmann, was moving the city into the Reformed Protestant camp, rather than that of their Lutheran neighbours. When large numbers of Anabaptist refugees arrived in 1533, they won the civic election and Münster became an Anabaptist city.

The Catholic bishop of Münster had other ideas. Hiring Catholic and Lutheran troops, he laid siege to the city and things became desperate. Enraged by persecution, the Münsterite Anabaptists changed their image of Jesus from the peacemaker of the Gospels to the apocalyptic Jesus of Revelation.

The Jesus of Anabaptist Münster

Rothmann’s original theology was like what Calvin would develop for Geneva. What made the two cities distinct was the charismatic leadership of the Dutch Anabaptist prophet Jan Matthijs, who predicted that Christ would return on Easter Day, 1534, adding both urgency and confidence in applying God’s directives.

Now besieged, Matthijs and Rothmann took their reform movement in a more “dominionist” direction, meaning they believed their movement should take moral, spiritual and religious control over society. They expelled anyone who refused to co-operate.

When Christ did not return on Easter 1534 and Matthijs was killed by the besiegers, his successor, Jan van Leiden, simply postponed Christ’s return to the following Easter and declared himself a semi-divine king.

He also abandoned the message of the Jesus of the Sermon on the Mount in favour of the vengeful Jesus of the Book of Revelation. Rothmann justified this in a tract which I translated as:

“It was … the intention of our hearts in our baptism, that we would suffer for Christ, whatever men did to us. But it has pleased the Lord … that now we and all Christians at this time may not only ward off the violence of the godless with the sword, but also, that he has put the sword into our hands to avenge all injustice and evil over the entire world.”

King van Leiden sent people out to spread this revolutionary message and take over other cities. This led to several militant episodes, including in Amsterdam, where in February 1535, 11 Anabaptists paraded naked through the streets proclaiming the “naked truth” of God’s anger.

Others delivered the message while waving swords. Finally, in May, 1535 about 40 Anabaptists captured Amsterdam’s city hall. All were arrested and executed. These were the actions of desperate people inspired by their prophets’ assurances of divine authority. When, however, Münster fell at the end of June 1535, the result was massive disillusionment, a return to non-violence and increased persecution.

Divine authority to remake society?

This transformation of the Münster Anabaptists into vengeful militants reminds me of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). As Matthew D. Taylor has revealed, this movement sees itself as fighting a “spiritual battle” against the demonic forces opposing Trump; some participated (non-violently) in the Jan. 6, 2020 riot.

Taylor concludes with a warning that the NAR act as “spiritual warmongers, constantly expanding the arena of spiritual warfare, mapping it onto geographical territory and divisive politics in a deeply destabilizing and antidemocratic manner.” It is as if we are listening to Rothmann’s fiery sermons again.

One difference, of course, is that the NAR folk are not under persecution, despite what they might claim. Taylor describes this as “the Evangelical Persecution Neurosis.”

Three of the NAR’s principle components are:

1. A charismatic approach to Christian life that affirms God speaks directly to them. They see themselves as biblical prophets who speak God’s commands which must be implemented regardless of social impact.

2. The Evangelical Christian belief of living in the end-times on the eve of Jesus Christ’s return for judgment. NAR preachers proclaim that while Jesus in the Gospels taught to “turn the other cheek,” they now follow the judgmental Jesus of the apocalyptical Book of Revelation and mobilize a struggle with Satan to rely on scapegoat ideology.

3. Derived from a group of Reformed or Calvinist theologians called “Christian Reconstructionists,” and building on Calvin’s theology of the “godly city,” they pursue a broader “dominionist” rationale to take over all of society for Christ. Believing one is living in the end-times means that society must be taken over and cleansed immediately, adding to urgency.

Read more:
I went to CPAC as an anthropologist to see how Trump supporters are feeling − for them, a ‘golden age’ has begun

Believers, drawing on these three beliefs, derive an assurance they speak with God’s voice. This was the case for the Münster Anabaptists, and now similarly, for the NAR. As the example of the Münster Anabaptists suggests, we’ve seen this many times before throughout history, and it doesn’t end well.

There have been many more recent episodes of Christian groups claiming divine authority to remake society. Like Jan van Leiden, those in the NAR or who concur with its theology have recast the Jesus of the Gospels, and U.S. President Donald Trump, in apocalyptic terms.

U.S. congresswoman Lauren Boebert, for example, who has been described as a Christian nationalist and is a strong gun advocate, is among those who say God anointed Trump to the presidency.

This gives a gloss of divine approval for Trump’s autocratic goals. As authoritarianism and Christian nationalism rises, the fusion of charismatic authority with Reformed Protestant certitude and end-times fervour continues to attract followers.

Gary K. Waite has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Christian nationalism in the U.S. is eerily reminiscent of ‘dominionist’ reformers in history – https://theconversation.com/christian-nationalism-in-the-u-s-is-eerily-reminiscent-of-dominionist-reformers-in-history-250600

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Allyn Dale, Director of the MA in Climate and Society program at the Columbia Climate School, Columbia University

After the devastating 1994 genocide, Rwandans returning from the violence established homes and began farming where they could find land.

Since then, the Rwandan government has aimed to bring people scattered across rural parts of the country into grouped settlements which they have called “model villages”. These are intended to provide extra support for highly vulnerable residents, such as the homeless and those who are living in “high risk zones” – areas prone to floods, drought and mudslides, and which are likely to be affected by climate change in the future.

Rwanda has a population of 14.5 million. An estimated 62,000 rural families have been resettled into 14,815 villages, of which 253 are considered “model villages”. Some of them are considered “green”, because they use solar power and biofuels as energy sources. Rainwater harvesting, tree planting, and terraced vegetable plots are other features of the green, environmentally friendly model villages.

We conducted a study to understand the impact of relocating rural communities from high risk zones where they face threats from a changing climate, such as erratic rainfall, drought, floods and landslides. We looked at two lake island communities who were experiencing floods. They also suffered a lack of health and education services and security problems from being too close to an unguarded border.

We used the Rweru Model Green Village as a case study. Based on our interviews with families who were moved there, we found that relocating people can be double-edged. On the positive side, resettlement increased access to modern facilities and social services. On the downside, people found it hard to earn a living. They lacked access to natural and financial capital and had to adapt to a different climate.

The resettlement programme overall is now understood to be part of the government of Rwanda’s approach to climate change adaptation. However, our findings suggest that this should be done with care, considering factors like community expectations and government development plans.

Why people were moved

The Rweru Model Green Village was set up in 2016 to house residents from two nearby islands on Lake Rweru, Sharita and Mazane. Located along the southern border with Burundi, these islands were home to generations of Rwandans. But they lived in relative isolation without access to services like education, healthcare or markets.

We interviewed and surveyed people from 64 households in the Rweru village. At the time of our research, 1,777 people had been moved in, all from Sharita and Mazane islands.

Read more:
Rising risks of climate disasters mean some communities will need to move – we need a national conversation about relocation now

Participants said fishing had been a way of life on the islands, providing them with a consistent source of protein. Beans, potatoes, cassava and sorghum grew successfully. Even relatively impoverished households said they had enough food to live on: 55% said the productivity of the land was high.

However, 84% of respondents also described an isolated life without services. As one put it:

we were cut off from the rest of the world.

Many mentioned the lack of drinking water, roads and electricity as a major drawback to living on the islands. While primary school was available, older children could only get to a secondary school by a two hour boat ride. Some dropped out of school.

Healthcare was absent, and respondents described harrowing journeys to find medical attention. As one woman said:

When we were still there in Sharita, a woman could want to deliver a baby but getting a boat it takes a long time, a woman can even lose her life waiting.

The boat rides were dangerous because of hippos in the lake, malaria-carrying mosquitoes, and the risk of drowning.

Others said that people from Burundi could access the islands easily and sometimes assaulted or killed the island residents. About 76% of the people we interviewed described their lives before relocation as dangerous. Residents had been asking to be resettled for some time because of these problems.

One of the driving forces for organising rural life into model villages is to enhance the capacity of residents to adapt to changes, including climate impacts such as the increased risks of flooding, drought or landslides. In that way, the model green village programme is also understood to have climate change adaptation elements.

The pros and cons after resettlement

After resettlement, most respondents described improvements in their overall quality of life. They were less exposed to floods, which they’d experienced on the islands. They had improved access to healthcare, social services and quality housing.

Many (66%) described the housing they received as the most important advantage of their new lives:

Above all, the nicest thing I was given was the house.

They also described clean water (26%), markets (50%), healthcare (55%), schools (50%) and electricity (24%) as benefits of living in the new model village. It was the first time they’d been able to manage livestock, having only had chickens on the islands. Their children were benefiting from having milk.

Read more:
Climate change will force up to 113m people to relocate within Africa by 2050

Some residents appreciated having a mattress for the first time; 50% indicated furniture and kitchen equipment as advantages. About 34% of respondents were pleased that they no longer needed to travel by boat.

They also felt safer. But despite these positive outcomes, they said they were poorer and had less food. Unlike the islands, the micro-climate inland was very hot, with little rain and increasing drought.

Most people we interviewed (55%) said their new, smaller plots of land were “infertile”, “unproductive” or “barren”. They couldn’t fish or grow enough fruit or vegetables. One person said many of the elderly people who were moved only ate one meal a day in the village “and others are starving completely”.

Increased hunger caused children to miss school:

Sometimes I cannot put food on the table, my son sleeps with an empty stomach and he cannot go to school the next day.

The future of model green villages

The Rwandan government plans to continue setting up model villages, and wants these to be sustainable for many years.

More research is needed to determine whether living in a model village provides young people with a better quality of life. The government will also need to address the economic challenges, food insecurity and welfare needs of residents in the new villages.

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

– ref. Rwanda has moved people into model ‘green’ villages: is life better there? – https://theconversation.com/rwanda-has-moved-people-into-model-green-villages-is-life-better-there-250975

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Latham, Professor of Political Science, Macalester College

The phrase “international rules-based order” has long been a fixture in global politics.

Western leaders often use it to describe a framework of rules, norms and institutions designed to guide state behavior. Advocates argue that this framework has provided the foundation for decades of stability and prosperity, while critics question its fairness and relevance in today’s multipolar world.

But what exactly is the international rules-based order, when did it come about, and why do people increasingly hear about challenges to it today?

The birth of a universal vision

The rules-based international order, initially known as the “liberal international order,” emerged from the devastation of World War II. The vision was ambitious and universal: to create a global system based on liberal democratic values, market capitalism and multilateral cooperation.

At its core, however, this project was driven by the United States, which saw itself as the unmatched leader of the new order.

The idea was to replace the chaos of great power politics and shifting alliances with a predictable world governed by shared rules and norms.

Central to this vision was the establishment of institutions such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. These institutions, alongside widely accepted norms and formalized rules, aimed to promote political cooperation, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and economic recovery for countries damaged by war.

However, the vision of a truly universal liberal international order quickly unraveled. As the Cold War set in, the world split into two competing blocs. The Western bloc, led by the United States, adhered to the principles of the liberal international order.

Meanwhile, the Soviet-led communist bloc established a parallel system with its own norms, rules and institutions. The Warsaw Pact provided military alignment, while the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance managed economic cooperation. The communist bloc emphasized state-led economic planning and single-party rule, rejecting the liberal order’s emphasis on democracy and free markets.

Emerging cracks

When the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s, the liberal international order appeared to have triumphed. The United States became the world’s sole superpower, and many former communist states integrated into Western institutions. For a brief period, the order’s universal vision seemed within reach.

By the 1990s and early 2000s, however, new cracks began to appear.

NATO expansion, the creation of the World Trade Organization and greater emphasis on human rights through institutions such as the International Criminal Court all closely aligned with Western liberal values. The spread of these norms and the institutions enforcing them appeared, to many outside the West, as Western ideology dressed up as universal principles.

In response to mounting criticism, Western leaders began using the term rules-based international order instead of liberal international order. This shift aimed to emphasize procedural fairness – rules that all states, in theory, had agreed upon – rather than a system explicitly rooted in liberal ideological commitments. The focus moved from promoting specific liberal norms to maintaining stability and predictability.

New challenges to the status quo

China’s rise has brought these tensions into sharp relief. While China participates in many institutions underpinning the rules-based international order, it also seeks to reshape them.

The Belt and Road Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank illustrate Beijing’s efforts to establish alternative frameworks more aligned with its interests. These initiatives challenge existing rules and norms by offering new institutional pathways for economic and political influence.

Meanwhile, Russia’s actions in Ukraine – especially the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the 2022 invasion – challenge the order’s core principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Western inconsistencies have long undermined the credibility of the rules-based order. The 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, widely criticized for bypassing international norms and institutions, exemplified a selective application of the rules. This double standard extends toward Washington’s selective engagement with international legal bodies and its inconsistent approach to sovereignty and intervention.

An uncertain future

Supporters argue that the rules-based order remains vital for addressing global challenges such as climate change, pandemics and nuclear proliferation.

However, ambiguity surrounds what these “rules” actually entail, which norms are genuinely universal, and who enforces them.

This lack of clarity, coupled with shifting global power dynamics, complicates efforts to sustain the system.

The future of the rules-based international order is uncertain. The shift from “liberal” to “rules-based” reflected an ongoing struggle to adapt a complex web of rules, norms and institutions to a rapidly changing international environment.

Whether it evolves further, splinters or endures as is will depend on how well it balances fairness, inclusivity and stability in an increasingly multipolar world.

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

– ref. What is the rules-based order? How this global system has shifted from ‘liberal’ origins − and where it could be heading next – https://theconversation.com/what-is-the-rules-based-order-how-this-global-system-has-shifted-from-liberal-origins-and-where-it-could-be-heading-next-250978

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Themiya Nanayakkara, Lead Astronomer at the James Webb Australian Data Centre, Swinburne University of Technology

Deep observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have revealed an exceptionally large galaxy in the early universe. It’s a cosmic giant whose light has travelled over 12 billion years to reach us. We’ve dubbed it the Big Wheel, with our findings published today in Nature Astronomy.

This giant disk galaxy existed within the first two billion years after the Big Bang, meaning it formed when the universe was just 15% of its current age. It challenges what we know about how galaxies form.

What is a disk galaxy?

Picture a galaxy like our own Milky Way: a flat, rotating structure made up of stars, gas and dust, often surrounded by an extensive halo of unseen dark matter.

Disk galaxies typically have clear spiral arms extending outward from a dense central region. Our Milky Way itself is a disk galaxy, characterised by beautiful spiral arms that wrap around its centre.

Studying disk galaxies, like the Milky Way and the newly discovered Big Wheel, helps us uncover how galaxies form, grow and evolve across billions of years.

These studies are especially significant, as understanding galaxies similar to our own can provide deeper insights into the cosmic history of our galactic home.

A giant surprise

We previously thought galaxy disks form gradually over a long period: either through gas smoothly flowing into galaxies from surrounding space, or by merging with smaller galaxies.

Usually, rapid mergers between galaxies would disrupt the delicate spiral structures, turning them into more chaotic shapes. However, the Big Wheel managed to quickly grow to a surprisingly large size without losing its distinctive spiral form. This challenges long-held ideas about the growth of giant galaxies.

Our detailed JWST observations show that the Big Wheel is comparable in size and rotational speed to the largest “super-spiral” galaxies in today’s universe. It is three times as big in size as comparable galaxies at that epoch and is one of the most massive galaxies observed in the early cosmos.

In fact, its rotation speed places it among galaxies at the high end of what’s called the Tully-Fisher relation, a well-known link between a galaxy’s stellar mass and how fast it spins.

Remarkably, even though it’s unusually large, the Big Wheel is actively growing at a rate similar to other galaxies at the same cosmic age.

Unusually crowded part of space

What makes this even more fascinating is the environment in which the Big Wheel formed.

It’s located in an unusually crowded region of space, where galaxies are packed closely together, ten times denser than typical areas of the universe. This dense environment likely provided ideal conditions for the galaxy to grow quickly. It probably experienced mergers that were gentle enough to let the galaxy maintain its spiral disk shape.

Additionally, the gas flowing into the galaxy must have aligned well with its rotation, allowing the disk to grow quickly without being disrupted. So, a perfect combination.

A fortunate finding

Discovering a galaxy like the Big Wheel was incredibly unlikely. We had less than a 2% chance to find this in our survey, according to current galaxy formation models.

So, our finding was fortunate, probably because we observed it within an exceptionally dense region, quite different from typical cosmic environments.

Besides its mysterious formation, the ultimate fate of the Big Wheel is another intriguing question. Given the dense environment, future mergers might significantly alter its structure, potentially transforming it into a galaxy comparable in mass to the largest ones observed in nearby clusters, such as Virgo.

The Big Wheel’s discovery has revealed yet another mystery of the early universe, showing that our current models of galaxy evolution still need refinement.

With more observations and discoveries of massive, early galaxies like the Big Wheel, astronomers will be able to unlock more secrets about how the universe built the structures we see today.

Read more:
From dead galaxies to mysterious red dots, here’s what the James Webb telescope has found in just 3 years

Themiya Nanayakkara receives funding from Australian Research Council.

– ref. You’ve heard of the Big Bang. Now astronomers have discovered the Big Wheel – here’s why it’s significant – https://theconversation.com/youve-heard-of-the-big-bang-now-astronomers-have-discovered-the-big-wheel-heres-why-its-significant-252170

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Associate Professor and Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney

A second man has died from Japanese encephalitis virus in New South Wales on March 6, the state’s health authorities confirmed on Friday. Aged in his 70s, the man was infected while holidaying in the Murrumbidgee region.

This follows the death of another man in his 70s in Sydney last month, after holidaying in the same region in January.

Japanese encephalitis virus has also been detected for the first time in mosquitoes collected in Brisbane’s eastern suburbs, Queensland health authorities confirmed on Saturday.

With mosquito activity expected to increase thanks to flooding rains brought by Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred, it’s important to protect yourself from mosquito bites.

What is Japanese encephalitis virus?

Japanese encephalitis is one of the most serious diseases that spreads via mosquitoes, with around 68,000 cases annually across Southeast Asia and Western Pacific regions.

The virus is thought to be maintained in a cycle between mosquitoes and waterbirds. Mosquitoes are infected when they feed from an infected waterbird. They then pass the virus to other waterbirds. Sometimes other animals, and people, can be infected.

Pigs are also a host, and the virus has spread through commercial piggeries in Victoria, NSW and Queensland. (But it poses no food safety risk.)

Feral pigs and other animals can also play a role in transmission cycles.

What are the symptoms?

Most people infected show no symptoms.

People with mild cases may have a fever, headache and vomiting.

In more serious cases – about one in 250 people infected – people may have neck stiffness, disorientation, drowsiness and seizures. Serious illness can have life-long neurological complications and, in some cases, the infection can be life-threatening.

There’s no specific treatment for the disease.

When did Japanese encephalitis get to Australia and why is it in Brisbane?

Outbreaks of Japanese encephalitis had occurred in the Torres Strait during the 1990s. The virus was also detected in the Cape York Peninsula in 1998.

There had been no evidence of activity on the mainland since 2004 but everything changed in the summer of 2021–22. Japanese encephalitis virus was detected in commercial piggeries in southeastern Australia during that summer.

This prompted the declaration of a Communicable Disease Incident of National Significance. At the time, flooding accompanying the La Niña-dominated weather patterns and a resulting boom in mosquito numbers, and waterbird populations, was thought responsible.

The virus has spread in subsequent years and has been detected in the mosquito and arbovirus surveillance programs as well as detection in feral pigs and commercial piggeries in most states and territories. Only Tasmania has remained free of Japanese encephalitis virus.

Human cases of infection have also been reported. There were more than 50 cases of disease and seven deaths in 2022.

Cases of Japanese encephalitis have already been reported from Queensland in 2025.

Due to concern about Japanese encephalitis virus and other mosquito-borne pathogens, health authorities around Australia have expanded and enhanced their surveillance programs.

In Queensland, this includes mosquito monitoring at a number of locations, including urban areas of southeast Queensland. Mosquitoes collected in this monitoring program tested positive for Japanese encephalitis virus, promoting the current health warnings.

Why is its detection in Brisbane important?

Up to now, scientists have thought the risk of Japanese encephalitis was likely greatest following seasons of above-average rainfall or flooding. This provides ideal conditions for waterbirds and mosquitoes.

But the activity of Japanese encephalitis virus over the summer of 2024–25 has taken many scientists by surprise. Before Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred arrived, there had been somewhat dry conditions with less waterbird activity and low mosquito numbers in many regions of eastern Australia.

However there has still been widespread Japanese encephalitis virus activity in Victoria, NSW and Queensland.

To date, Japanese encephalitis virus activity hasn’t extended to the coastal regions of southeast Queensland. The detection of the virus in suburban Brisbane may require authorities to rethink exactly where the virus may turn up next. Authorities are ramping up their surveillance to see just how widespread the virus is in the region.

Health authorities and scientists are also trying to understand how the virus moved from western areas of the state to the coast and what drives virus transmission in different regions.

There is currently no evidence the virus is active in coastal regions of northern NSW.

What can people do to protect themselves?

Avoiding mosquito bites is the best way to reduce the risk of Japanese encephalitis virus.

Cover up with long-sleeved shirts and long pants for a physical barrier against mosquito bites.

Use topical insect repellents containing DEET, picaridin, or oil of lemon eucalyptus. Be sure to apply an even coat on all exposed areas of skin for the longest-lasting protection.

Ensure any insect screens on houses, tents and caravans are in good repair and reduce the amount of standing water in the backyard. The more water there is around your home, the more opportunities for mosquitoes there are.

A safe and effective vaccine is available against Japanese encephalitis. Each state and territory health authority (for example Queensland, NSW, Victoria) have specific recommendations about access to vaccinations.

It may take many weeks following vaccination to achieve sufficient protection, so prioritise reducing your exposure to bites in the meantime.

Cameron Webb and the Department of Medical Entomology, NSW Health Pathology and University of Sydney, have been engaged by a wide range of insect repellent and insecticide manufacturers to provide testing of products and provide expert advice on medically important arthropods, including mosquitoes. Cameron has also received funding from local, state and federal agencies to undertake research into various aspects of management of various medically important arthropods.

Andrew van den Hurk has received funding from local, state and federal agencies to study the ecology of mosquito-borne pathogens, and their surveillance and control. He is an employee of the Department of Health, Queensland government.

– ref. Japanese encephalitis has claimed a second life in NSW and been detected in Brisbane. What is it? – https://theconversation.com/japanese-encephalitis-has-claimed-a-second-life-in-nsw-and-been-detected-in-brisbane-what-is-it-252373

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

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has announced a Coalition government would introduce legislation, based on an American law used to pursue the Mafia, to enable police to target the “kingpins” of criminal organisations such as outlaw motorcycle gangs.

This follows new allegations by Nine newspapers and 60 Minutes about the rogue union the CFMEU. The allegations include “the employment of ‘baseball-twirling violent people’ on the [Victorian government’s] Big Build, where women have been bashed and then black-banned after they complained”.

The Nine investigation further alleged that “gangland and bikie-linked figures are receiving large payments from companies on publicly funded projects looking to gain favour with union insiders, leaving state and federal taxpayers in effect underwriting payments to the underworld.”

The Coalition said Monday the proposed new offences would “be based on the highly effective Mafia takedown laws in the US”. Dutton and shadow ministers Michaelia Cash and James Paterson said in a statement:

By targeting groups that engage in a pattern of criminal behaviour, these offences will put police in the position where they can target the criminal organisation and its leadership.

This  means the bosses and kingpins of groups such as outlaw motorcycle gangs can be jailed even if they distance themselves from the crimes their organisations commit.

Dutton described the CFMEU as “a modern-day mafia operation”. He added:

The culture of criminality and corruption is so entrenched, and it will never change – especially under the weak and incompetent Albanese Labor government.

Dutton claimed the CFMEU affair was the “biggest corruption scandal in our country’s history”.

The opposition said it would also set up an Australian Federal Police-led taskforce that would bring together federal law enforcement agencies and state and territory police forces to target criminal behaviour.

After the latest revelation surfaced in Nine media at the weekend, Workplace Relations Minister Murray Watt said on social media he would refer the allegations to the police.

On Monday, Watt condemned Dutton’s proposal for a new law.

We don’t need to import an American racketeering law – we already have our own laws to go after ‘kingpins’, such as section 390.6 of the Criminal Code, which already deals with directing criminal organisation.

He also condemned the opposition’s long-standing policy to deregister the union, saying this would mean there was no regulation.

Peter Dutton’s reckless desire for a headline puts at risk the investigations and crime-fighting that the Coalition never bothered to commence in their decade in office.

Victoria police is undertaking an investigation into the fresh allegations.

The US Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations (RICO) Act, dating from 1970, enables prosecutors to take down whole mob-related organisations rather than having only the power to deal with figures individually. It is intended to deal with mob bosses who could not be directly connected to the crimes.

Its use, however, has extended well beyond mob prosecutions to a range of targets, from street gangs to politicians.

US President Donald Trump was charged under Georgia’s RICO act for “knowingly and willfully joining a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the [2020] election”.

The construction and general division of the CFMEU has been in administration since last August.

The union’s national secretary, Zach Smith, said on Facebook: “We cannot  let our union or our industry be a safe haven for criminality of corruption”.

He also said that “violence against women is completely unacceptable to our union”.

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

– ref. Coalition promises Australian version of United States’ RICO act to target CFMEU – https://theconversation.com/coalition-promises-australian-version-of-united-states-rico-act-to-target-cfmeu-252172

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paula McDonald, Professor of Work and Organisation, Queensland University of Technology

Australian workers have to overcome some significant barriers in navigating their careers.

Some may lack the training or work experience opportunities needed to make themselves stand out and take the next step. Others may be extensively qualified, but face limited new job or promotional opportunities relevant to their skill set.

But there’s another common barrier that’s often overlooked: post-employment restraints. Among the most well-known are non-compete clauses, but these aren’t the only kind.

These tools are designed to protect employer interests. But their widespread use has far-reaching consequences for job mobility, wages and innovation across Australia.

Our new research, which was commissioned by the Department of Treasury and conducted by researchers at Queensland University of Technology, set out to examine how these agreements are impacting Australia’s workforce.

We zeroed in on two very different occupational groups – hairdressers and IT professionals. Our findings point to an urgent need for regulatory reform in Australia. But we also offer solutions that could better balance business needs with worker rights.

What are post-employment restraints?

Post-employment restraints are contractual clauses that restrict what workers can do after leaving their jobs.

One common type are non-compete clauses, which prevent workers from joining competitors or starting their own businesses, usually (though not always) in the same industry.

There are also non-solicitation agreements, which restrict them from approaching former clients or colleagues.

And non-disclosure obligations can limit the use of confidential information concerning the employer’s business – even when created by workers themselves.

Businesses argue these clauses help them safeguard their proprietary interests, such as hard-won client relationships, trade secrets and intellectual property.

However, their application is not limited to high-level executives or sensitive roles. Such restraints are more common than many realise.

Data cited in our report from businesses with 200 employees or less confirms previous Australian research: at least one in five businesses use non-compete, non-solicitation of clients and non-solicitation of co-workers clauses. The number is even higher if non-disclosure agreements are included in the list of restraints.

Overall, half of all Australian workers are reported to have post-employment restraints – including many in low-paid jobs.

As former Fair Work Commission President Iain Ross has pointed out, this raises critical questions about fairness and the broader impacts on the labour market.

A tangle of restrictions in hairdressing

Hairdressing is a predominantly female, low-wage profession. Our interviews with hairdressers reveal the outsized impact that post-employment restraints can have on vulnerable workers.

Restrictions typically include bans on working within a certain radius of their former salon, taking clients to a new employer, or starting their own business.

Many interviewees only learned about these restrictions after accepting a position or deciding to leave. Some reported being barred from telling clients of their departure or facing demands to pay penalties if clients followed them to a new salon.

The personal relationships hairdressers form with their clients are central to their work and professional identity. However, these relationships often become battlegrounds when employment ends.

Hairdressers explained the difficulties that often arose from becoming “friends” with clients. As one put it:

As soon as you leave, it’s almost harder than a breakup.

Chained to the chair

Financially, these restrictions exacerbate the already precarious conditions in the hairdressing industry.

With limited opportunities for wage growth, many hairdressers establish their own businesses or rent chairs in salons for greater independence.

Yet, non-compete clauses often delay these plans. Hairdressers are then forced to accept lower-paying positions or leave the profession entirely.

Social media has added a whole new layer of complexity. Hairdressers are often required to use their personal social media accounts to promote their employer’s business, only to have their posts deleted or accounts locked when they leave. This can erase years of professional work and connections.

Many young hairdressers we spoke to expressed particular frustration that their social media presence, cultivated under the salon’s brand, could not be carried forward to new roles.

Holding back innovation

Our study found while hairdressers face restrictions on their mobility and client relationships, IT professionals face obstacles that limit their ability to innovate.

IT professionals often develop new technologies, software or processes, sometimes in their own time. However, contracts often claim ownership of these innovations for the employer.

We found non-disclosure agreements, non-compete clauses and intellectual property ownership terms are all common in the industry.

This environment discourages entrepreneurial ventures and independent projects, even as the industry demands agility and creativity.

As one participant explained:

It’s made me pause multiple times, made me think about not developing a code that you’re interested in just for your own development.

Professionals reported feeling “locked in” to roles, unable to pursue side projects or start their own businesses without risking legal action.

Non-compete clauses in IT contracts also restrict job mobility when professionals cannot join competitor companies or use their expertise in new roles.

This impacts not only individual workers but also the broader industry, as firms struggle to recruit skilled talent.

Paradoxically, some employers actively poach talent from competitors while enforcing non-compete clauses against their own staff.

The way forward

By limiting job mobility, post-employment restraints contribute to wage stagnation and reduce workers’ bargaining power.

Australia’s regulatory approach to this issue lags behind other countries. There are no formal limits on the length or breadth of restraints, just a vague test of “reasonableness” that makes it hard to know what is permissible, without costly litigation.

In the United States, California has banned non-compete clauses outright, fostering a thriving tech industry. In Europe, companies like Germany impose strict limits on the duration of restraints and require employers to compensate workers during the restricted period.

These models demonstrate that balancing employer interests with worker rights is possible and can yield positive outcomes.

One option for policymakers in Australia would be to impose new restrictions on the scope and duration of restraints to ensure they serve legitimate business interests without unduly restricting workers.

Employers could be required to provide plain-language explanations around these restrictions at the time of hiring and compensate workers for the duration of any restraint, as seen in some European models.

Post-employment restraints are a double-edged sword. While they may protect legitimate business interests, their overuse undermines job mobility, innovation and worker wellbeing.

Read more:
Would a mandatory five-day working week solve construction’s work-life balance woes?

Paula McDonald receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Commonwealth Department of Treasury.

Andrew Stewart receives funding from Commonwealth Department of Treasury.

– ref. Non-compete agreements and other restraints can end up hurting Australian workers – and all of us pay the price – https://theconversation.com/non-compete-agreements-and-other-restraints-can-end-up-hurting-australian-workers-and-all-of-us-pay-the-price-247449

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Milad Haghani, Associate Professor & Principal Fellow in Urban Risk & Resilience, The University of Melbourne

A fire at a nightclub in North Macedonia has killed at least 59 people and injured more than 150. The blaze broke out at the Pulse nightclub in Kočani, where around 500 people were attending a concert.

Witnesses reported that pyrotechnics used during the performance ignited the ceiling, causing flames to spread rapidly.

Authorities have arrested 20 people so far, including the club’s manager. Investigations continue. The North Macedonian government has declared a seven-day mourning period.

While building fires are not limited to nightclubs, many of the most devastating building fires in history have happened in nightclubs around the world. So why are nightclubs such a risky place for deadly fires?

A long history of nightclub fires

A look at past nightclub fires shows just how common and deadly they’ve been in the past 100 years. We identified at least 24 nightclub fires where ten or more people died since 1940.

Collectively, these 24 incidents account for at least 2,800 deaths, with nearly 1,300 in the 21st century alone.

The Cocoanut Grove fire (Boston, 1942) remains the deadliest on record, killing 492 people. The club’s flammable decorations and locked exits turned what should have been an ordinary night out into one of the worst fire disasters in history.

In Argentina, the República Cromañón fire killed 194 people in 2004, caused by pyrotechnics igniting flammable materials inside the club.

The Kiss nightclub fire in Brazil in 2013 was even deadlier, claiming 242 lives.

More recently, Thailand’s Mountain B nightclub fire killed 23 people in 2022.

And in 2023, 13 people died in a fire at the Fonda Milagros nightclub in Spain.

Now, North Macedonia’s Pulse nightclub joins this long list.

Why are nightclubs so risky for fires?

A review of past nightclub fires we’ve collated in our database reveals common patterns. Two key factors have contributed to the frequency and severity of these fire disasters.

1. Pyrotechnics, fireworks and flammable materials

One of the most common causes of nightclub fires has been the use of pyrotechnics in enclosed spaces. Pyrotechnics are controlled chemical reactions designed to produce flames, smoke, or light effects.

They have been involved in at least six of the deadliest nightclub fires, including the recent Pulse nightclub fire in North Macedonia, as well as The Station (United States, 2003), Kiss (Brazil, 2013), Colectiv (Romania, 2015), Lame Horse (Russia, 2009) and República Cromañón (Argentina, 2004).

When used indoors, pyrotechnics can easily ignite flammable ceiling materials, acoustic foam, or decorations.

In some cases, fireworks – which are different from stage pyrotechnics and sometimes illegally used indoors – have played a role. The Lame Horse nightclub fire, which killed 156 people in Russia in 2009, was caused by a spark from fireworks igniting a low ceiling covered in flammable plastic decorations.

Even when fires don’t start from pyrotechnics or fireworks, the materials used in nightclub interiors can rapidly turn a small fire into a major disaster.

Foam insulation, wooden panelling, plastic decorations and carpeted walls have all been key factors in past nightclub fires. In Cocoanut Grove (Boston, 1942), artificial palm trees and other flammable decorations accelerated the blaze.

2. Overcrowding and blocked or insufficient exits

Evacuation failures have been a factor in nearly every major nightclub fire.

In some instances, crowds may not immediately recognise the severity of the situation, especially if they mistake alarms for false alarms or special effects (for example, smoke machines, loud music).

Further, patrons could be intoxicated due alcohol or other drugs. Intoxication combined with potential disorientation due to dim lighting can further reduce judgement during an evacuation.

Clearly, the best way to protect patrons is to prevent a fire from breaking out in the first place. But in settings where fire risks are inherently high, the ability to evacuate people swiftly is crucial.

Nightclubs, however, have a poor track record when it comes to evacuation safety measures.

Nightclubs are among the most crowded indoor spaces. While crowd density is part of a nightclub’s design and atmosphere, overcrowding beyond legal capacity is common.

A crowd that has gradually gathered over several hours must suddenly evacuate in seconds or minutes to survive a fire. This is made more difficult by narrow hallways and limited exits, which quickly become bottlenecks when hundreds of people attempt to escape at once.

What’s more, not all exits are always accessible during a fire. In several past nightclub disasters, locked or obstructed emergency exits have significantly worsened the death toll.

Minimising the risks

Nightclubs are uniquely vulnerable to fires due to a combination of structural risks, unsafe materials, overcrowding and regulatory failures.

While human behaviour plays a role in how fires unfold in confined spaces such as nightclubs, people should be able to go for a night out and expect to come home safely.

Regulatory oversight must ensure strict compliance with fire codes. Venues should have fire suppression systems (such as sprinklers, fire extinguishers and smoke detectors) to control or contain fires before they spread, and adequate exits.

Nightclubs should ban indoor pyrotechnics and fireworks, as history has repeatedly shown their deadly consequences.

Capacity limits must be enforced, and emergency exits should always be accessible.

Australia has strict fire safety regulations for nightclubs, with venues required to have fire suppression systems, emergency exits and trained staff to manage fire risks.

Public awareness is also key. Patrons need to understand the real risk of fires in nightclubs, and be prepared to evacuate swiftly but calmly if danger arises.

Ruggiero Lovreglio receives funding from Royal Society Te Apārangi (NZ) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA).

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

– ref. Many of history’s deadliest building fires have been in nightclubs. Here’s why they’re so dangerous – https://theconversation.com/many-of-historys-deadliest-building-fires-have-been-in-nightclubs-heres-why-theyre-so-dangerous-252372

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Walker-Munro, Senior Lecturer (Law), Southern Cross University

Shortly after taking office, US President Donald Trump issued executive orders banning federal funding on so-called “woke” research.

This is part of his broader ban on all diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, grants and programs in the US government.

These orders are massive in scope, impacting studies as varied as stroke recovery, computing and ancient languages.

The impact in the United States so far has been dramatic. Some universities are already cutting student admissions and looking at ways to shed academic staff and researchers.

Now the ban has impacted Australian researchers who have links to US government-funded projects. The Trump Administration is asking for information on how their research fits in with US foreign and domestic policy.

What has happened?

The US government has sent a 36-point questionnaire to some Australian researchers who are working on joint projects with US colleagues.

ABC Radio National reports at least eight Australian universities are involved. Their research areas include foreign aid, medicine, vaccines and defence. The New York Times reports a similar document has also been sent to other overseas organisations with US funding links.

The questions are wide-ranging and cover academics’ links to China as well as their projects’ focus on topics such as diversity, inclusion and gender identity, as well as climate change.

Some of the specific questions include:

Can you confirm that your organisation has not received ANY funding from PRC People’s Republic of China, Russia, Cuba or Iran?

Can you confirm that this is no DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] project or DEI elements of the project? [sic]

Does this project take appropriate measures to protect women and to defend against gender ideology as defined in the below Executive Order?

Can you confirm this is not a climate or “environmental justice” project or include such elements?

The survey also covers issues such as secure borders with Mexico, ending government waste, terrorism, the war on opioids, and “eradicating anti-Christian bias”.

Concern and anger

In response, the Group of Eight (which represents Australia’s top research universities) and Australian Academy of Science have separately raised concerns with the Australian government about the survey and its impact on Australian research.

The Group of Eight says the US has already suspended or terminated research grants with six of its eight member universities.

The National Tertiary Education Union also labelled the survey “blatant foreign interference”.

A spokesperson for Education Minister Jason Clare says Australia is
“engaging with the US government to understand what these measures mean for future funding and collaboration”.

Are Trump’s orders legal?

Trump’s executive orders are currently the subject of numerous lawsuits in the US. Plaintiffs say Trump’s orders violate the First and Fifth Amendments – those dealing with protection of free speech, equal protection and “due process of law” when depriving a citizen of property.

Whether Trump’s orders are legal or not is a tricky question, and will likely come down the judges hearing each case.

In the meantime, US government agencies are withholding funding anyway. Reports also suggests Trump has instructed his administration to ignore court orders – hardly surprising, given Trump’s history of contempt of US courts.

What does this mean for Australia?

US involvement in Australian research is significant. According to the Academy of Science, US government research funding involving Australian research organisations was $A386 million in 2024.

It is arguable Trump’s orders infringe Australian sovereignty. But the US has always had the capacity to interfere in Australian university research – it just hasn’t actually done it until now.

Research contracts signed between universities and funding bodies can contain all kinds of requirements, so US law can end up applying to Australian researchers. When the AUKUS deal was announced in 2021, a huge question was how universities would comply with notoriously harsh US export control laws.

The survey indicates it was issued by the US Office of Management and Budget and appears to be supported by the US CHIPS and Science Act (which authorises certain research investments) and National Science Foundation policies. So, while Australian researchers could potentially ignore these questionnaires, that would legally give a US funding body grounds to cancel the funding contract.

Our foreign interference laws also weren’t designed for situations like this. Even if they did, Trump is the current head of the US government, and is likely to be immune from prosecution

Statutory tests for foreign interference – including criteria that such acts are covert, and/or involve threats of harm – simply don’t apply to a US president like Trump.

So legally, it doesn’t look like there is much Australia can do about Trump’s orders.

What can Australia do?

Some newly unemployed researchers are now poised to leave the US, taking their research with them. This poses a potential security risk, with countries such as China and Russia both keen to capitalise on Trump’s decisions.

But other nations are also aware of the possibilities. The European Union has already offered displaced US scientists a more “sympathetic place to work”. South Korea and Canada are also marketing themselves as attractive options. Australia could follow suit.

The federal government is currently doing a strategic review of Australia’s research and development system. This could make diversifying our research partners a national priority.

This could include revisiting a 2023 decision, not to join Horizon Europe – the European Union’s key research fund.

Either way, given such radical changes in the US, Australia needs to seriously reconsider how it is funding and structuring research.

Brendan Walker-Munro has consulted for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) and the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, and is also an Adjunct Expert Associate of the National Security College. He has received funding from the Social Cyber Institute and Active Cyber Defence Alliance.

– ref. Trump is surveying Australian academics about gender diversity and China – what does this mean for unis and their research? – https://theconversation.com/trump-is-surveying-australian-academics-about-gender-diversity-and-china-what-does-this-mean-for-unis-and-their-research-252282

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dominic Redfern, Associate Professor, School of Art, RMIT University

Virtuosic digital artistry is on show in Serwah Attafuah’s installation The Darkness Between the Stars, currently showing at ACMI.

The work fiercely challenges stereotypes of black femininity and draws upon the history and culture of the Ashanti people of modern-day Ghana, one of the countries most affected by the Atlantic slave trade and the site of remembrance and pilgrimage for many descendants of the people trafficked as slaves.

Serewah is part of a generation of video artists like Melbourne’s Xanthe Dobbie, British artist Rachel Maclean, and Paris based, French Guianese artist Tabita Rezaire. These artists all channel the moving image culture of gaming and the internet, rather than the cinematic or televisual references of their forebears.

Each of these artists uses exuberant humour and a tough-minded politic to challenge the reductive construction of female and queer identities.

As we pass through the arch at the entry to the gallery, we are greeted by a 3D animation of an ocean reflecting a sky that cycles from starlit to slowly emerging dawn. We are told the arch references the entry to the Elmina castle built by the Portuguese: one of two major points from which enslaved African people were cast into the hell of the Atlantic passage and life in bonds.

African warriors

Beyond the entrance we are faced by a series of five screens in portrait format. Each shows short loops of African warriors, suggesting the idealised – and, here, heroic – forms of game avatars a la Fortnite.

Each of the images is framed in gold e-waste. This brings to mind Congolese street art costumes, similarly made of waste which blend cultural traditions and an Afrofuturist resistance that dares to imagine a better future.

The first portrait is a furred, horn helmeted, and neck ringed warrior woman. Armed with a laser and an automatic pistol, she has further weapons adorning her back ready to be deployed.

Behind and around her are malfunctioning computer screens. One scrolls through an online dating text exchange which evokes the idealised and reductive self-curation of the online profile. This chat is between Jenny and Mark, a FIFO worker on an offshore oil rig in Western Australia. This ties to the images of oil rigs found elsewhere in the show, evoking the plundering of African resources: human and otherwise; historical and ongoing.

The second screen pictures an armoured woman (or cyborg?) atop a rearing tiger. The tiger is an intriguing choice given it is an Asian animal but potentially points to a pan exoticism rooted in the confusion of cultures.

She wields a curved blade amid a savannah populated with umbrella thorn acacia and what appear to be comfortingly homely (and amusing) ground-hugging waratahs in the foreground.

Complicating fetishes

Moving around the room, floating robots accompany another warrior who props against a sword supported by a fragmented classical column.

She stands beneath an oversized moon, evoking an off-world setting, a reading compounded by her protective headwear.

Alongside a writhing snake, we catch sight of her Betty Davis (no, the Black one) super heels: a clear link to the under-remembered pioneer of Afrofuturism.

Continuing this play of sexual provocation and power is the addition of a techno tutu which further accentuates her already thrusting buttocks.

The problematisation of sexualised imagery is one of the exhibition’s central themes. Attafuah toys with the Western fetishisation and fear of Black women’s sexuality.

Occasionally borrowing cliches from the gaming and pornographic worlds, Attafuah forcefully complicates such fetishes by arming four of her five warriors to the teeth. They take aim at us, challenging their construction as passive objects for our visual consumption.

A further figure, singularly unarmed apart from her thorny armbands, appears in the next frame. She runs through a series of coquettish modelling poses in her mesh bodysuit as she stands amid buzzing screens and computer detritus.

In yet another confusingly (and amusingly) stereotyped African landscape she is pictured among palm trees and sand, in what I took to be an evocation of a North African environment complete with desert fortress, oil rig and passing container ship.

In the final of the five portraits a young, braided, and fantastically eyelashed woman takes aim at us with a pistol straight from Star Wars (Rebel Alliance issue, naturally).

She stands hip deep in a lagoon of water lilies and floating CDs. A futuristic city fills the background with a slowly turning wind turbine that sports yellow and black radiation colouring – yet another paradoxical meeting in an exhibition characterised by mixed messages that contradict easy readings.

In The Darkness Between the Stars, Attafuah proves herself to be a powerful, uncompromising and most welcome voice in contemporary Australian art. She proves herself capable of generating sophisticated, nuanced and playful reflections on complex problems that we carry from past to present.

Serwah Attafuah: The Darkness Between the Stars is at ACMI, Melbourne, until June 1.

Dominic Redfern works at RMIT with, and previously taught, Xanthe Dobbie.

– ref. Serwah Attafuah: a powerful and most welcome voice in contemporary Australian art – https://theconversation.com/serwah-attafuah-a-powerful-and-most-welcome-voice-in-contemporary-australian-art-250154

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Catie Gressier, Adjunct Research Fellow in Agriculture and Environment, The University of Western Australia

It took thousands of years to develop the world’s extraordinary range of domesticated farm animals – an estimated 8,800 livestock breeds across 38 farmed species.

But this diversity is dwindling fast. Advances in selective breeding and artificial insemination have fuelled the global spread of a small number of profitable livestock types. Their popularity has left ever more heritage breeds at risk of extinction.

Why does this matter? Each breed represents vital genetic diversity for the livestock species on which we rely, known as agrobiodiversity. As the number of breeds shrink, we lose their genetics forever.

There are bright spots amid the decline. Hundreds of passionate farmers are working hard to keep heritage breeds alive around Australia. As my new book shows, they do it primarily for love.

Which livestock breeds are disappearing – and why?

Cattle have experienced the highest number of extinctions, with at least 184 breeds lost globally.

Of all chicken breeds, one in ten is now extinct, and a further 30% are endangered.

Sheep are also rapidly losing diversity, with 160 breeds now extinct. The rise of synthetic materials has endangered the remaining breeds producing carpet wool in New Zealand and Australia, including the unique Tasmanian Elliottdale.

Pigs fare little better. Australia’s 2.5 million pigs are predominantly Large White, Landrace and Duroc crossbreeds, while none of the eight remaining purebred pig breeds in Australia currently has more than 100 sows registered with the Rare Breeds Trust. While not all sows are registered, we know breeds such as Tamworths are at dangerously low numbers.

How did this happen? Over the past century, the goal of animal husbandry has shifted from breeding hardy, multipurpose animals to increasing performance for economic gain. For livestock, performance means more of what humans value, such as pigs with extra ribs, prolific egg-laying hens and sheep with finer wool.

Huge sums have been spent on selective breeding and artificial insemination technologies. This, in turn, has made it possible for a small number of profitable livestock types to be farmed globally.

For instance, when you buy a roast chicken, it will likely be one of just two types of fast-growing broilers (meat chickens), the Ross or the Cobb. Their genetics are developed and trademarked by two multinational agribusinesses who dominate the global broiler market.

It’s hard to overstate how big the increases in production have been from reproductive technologies. In the dairy industry, for instance, milk yield per cow has doubled in the past 40 years. These volumes are around six times greater now than a century ago.

Holsteins, the top dairy breed, have become globally dominant. Almost 1.4 million of Australia’s 1.65 million dairy cows are Holsteins. But as Holstein numbers soar, other breeds dwindle. Many farmers have simply stopped rearing other breeds, leading to many becoming endangered or extinct.

For Holsteins themselves, this has come with a cost. Selective breeding for high milk volume has meant Holsteins suffer more medical issues such as metabolic diseases and frequent mastitis. They also have reduced fertility and longevity.

Researchers have found 99% of Holstein bulls produced by artificial insemination in the United States are descended from just two sires. This wide dissemination of limited bloodlines has led to the spread of genetic defects.

What is at stake?

Our food systems face growing threats. Genetic diversity provides a safeguard for livestock species against lethal animal diseases such as H5N1 bird flu and African swine fever.

If we rely on just a few breeds, we risk a wipe out. The Irish potato famine is a catastrophic example. In the 1800s, Irish farmers took up the “lumper” variety of potatoes to feed a growing population. But when fungal rot struck in the 1840s, it turned most of the crop to mush – and led to mass starvation.

Some breeds have very useful traits, such as resistance to particular pests and diseases.

Chickens and other birds die in swathes if infected by Newcastle disease, one of the most serious bird viruses. But breeds such as the hardy Egyptian Fayoumi survive better, while the European Leghorn – whose genetics are used in commercial egg-laying breeds – is highly susceptible.

Local breeds can also have better resistance to endemic pests. The Indian zebu humped cattle breed, for example, is less prone to tick infestation than crossbreeds.

Climate change is also making life harder for livestock, and some breeds are better adapted to heat than others.

For different cultural groups, local heritage breeds also have unique symbolic and culinary value.

While it’s well-known eating less meat would benefit ecosystems, animal welfare and human health, eating meat remains entrenched in our diets and the economy. Pursuing more sustainable and higher-welfare approaches to livestock production is crucial.

Some Aussie farmers love heritage breeds

A cohort of Australian farmers is working hard to conserve dozens of endangered livestock breeds such as Large Black pigs, Shropshire sheep and Belted Galloway cattle.

But these farmers are hampered by our reluctance as consumers to pay more to cover the cost of raising slower-growing breeds in free-range environments. Not only that, but meat processors are increasingly closing their doors to small-scale producers.

Why persevere? For four years, I’ve conducted ethnographic research with Australia’s heritage breed farmers. I found they were motivated by one of the most powerful conservation tools we have: love.

Of his endangered English Leicester sheep, one farmer told me:

I consider them to be family; they have been our family for over 150 years. I talk to them, and the rams in particular talk to me. Sorry if I sound like a silly old man, but you must talk to them. I gave myself a 60th birthday present by commissioning a large portrait of an English Leicester head, which hangs in our kitchen (I do not have a painting of my wife).

Love doesn’t often feature in agricultural research. But it is an important force. We know from wildlife conservation that humans will act to save what they love. This holds for livestock, too.

What can you do? If you eat meat or work with wool, seek out rare breeds and join organisations such as the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia and the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance who back farmers supporting breed diversity.

Catie Gressier receives funding from the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Project scheme as well as the European Research Council. She is affiliated with the Rare Breeds Trust of Australia and the Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance.

– ref. Hundreds of livestock breeds have gone extinct – but some Australian farmers are keeping endangered breeds alive – https://theconversation.com/hundreds-of-livestock-breeds-have-gone-extinct-but-some-australian-farmers-are-keeping-endangered-breeds-alive-250393

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Olga Boichak, Senior Lecturer in Digital Cultures, Australian Research Council DECRA fellow, University of Sydney

More than three years after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a 30-day ceasefire between the two warring countries may be imminent. But much more needs to happen before a just and lasting peace is achieved.

The Russian-Ukraine war is one of the most visible, analysed and documented wars in human history. Since the night of February 24 2022, millions of Ukrainian citizens, military personnel, journalists, officials and civil society activists have shared first-hand eyewitness accounts, updates, commentaries and opinions on the war.

Around the world, many online communities have also sprung into action to counter Russian propaganda and raise awareness of what is happening inside Ukraine.

We have been studying these communities for the past three years, conducting hours of interviews with members and observing their activity on social media. To conduct much of this research and connect with members, we had to join some of these communities – a common requirement for researchers working in online settings.

Our work reveals a range of skills and strategies activists use in the online fight against Russia. More broadly, it shows how social media users can mobilise during times of war and other international crises and have a material impact offline.

Russian war of disinformation

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was accompanied by online disinformation and propaganda campaigns. The aims of these campaigns are to sow discord, distrust and dismay among both Ukrainian and international audiences by, for example, depicting Ukraine as a failed state ruled by Nazis.

Ukraine responded by launching its own information operations to counter Russian propaganda, appeal for help from the world and maintain the security of its defensive operations.

In some cases, social media platforms have aided the Russian cause. At the same time, they have suppressed evidence of war crimes.

For example, in the first year of the Russian invasion, independent investigative journalism organisations such as Disclose documented thousands of war crimes committed by Russian soldiers against Ukrainian civilians. These crimes included murder, torture, physical and sexual violence, forced relocation, looting, and damage to civilian infrastructure such as schools and hospitals.

Much of this content included graphic imagery, violence and offensive language. As a result, it was permanently removed from platforms such as Instagram and YouTube.

On the other hand, content containing disinformation evaded moderation. For example, a 2023 investigation by the BBC revealed thousands of fake TikTok accounts created as part of a Russian propaganda campaign spreading lies about Ukrainian officials.

This often led to a distorted information environment online. Russian disinformation was visible, while the true extent of Russian violence against Ukrainians was hidden.

Boosting Ukrainian voices

In this context, thousands of internet users formed online communities to creatively support Ukraine without attracting the attention of content moderators.

This isn’t new or unique to the war in Ukraine. For example, in 2019, US TikToker Feroza Aziz shared a makeup tutorial in which she subtly raised awareness of China’s treatment of the Uyghurs – a topic that is often suppressed on the Chinese-owned platform.

One of the most prominent and well-known online communities that emerged following Russia’s invasion was the North Atlantic Fella Organisation.

It started in May 2022 when a young man with the online name Kama mashed up a Reddit meme of a Shiba Inu dog nicknamed Cheems and a picture of a dilapidated Russian tank. This was a celebration of a Ukrainian battlefront victory. It was only intended to mock Russia.

But as Kama changed his profile picture to the meme, the trend started spreading quickly to his followers on X (formerly Twitter). They quickly grew into an online collective dedicated to fighting Russia online. Members – or “fellas”, as they are known – from many regions around the world were brought together by its rituals using internet and popular culture memes.

Calls to action

In many similar posts across Facebook, X and TikTok, users share selfies or other images to achieve high visibility while calling followers to action. In most cases, this involves raising funds for urgent military or humanitarian efforts to benefit Ukraine.

Another common strategy is storytelling. Some users share amusing or ridiculous anecdotes from their lives before closing with a donation request.

These requests often have a clear target and beneficiary. They are also often time-sensitive. For example, they may be aimed at purchasing a particular model of a drone for a particular brigade of Ukraine’s armed forces that will be delivered to the battlefront within days.

Through collaborations with Ukraine’s official fundraising platform, the North Atlantic Fella Organisation has collected more than US$700,000 towards Ukraine’s defence.

Combatting propaganda

Members of the North Atlantic Fella Organisation also try to combat Russian propaganda and disinformation.

Instead of arguing in good faith with highly visible disinformation-spreading accounts (often controlled by the Russian government), members try to derail the disinformation campaigns. They highlight their ridiculousness by responding with memes and jokes. They call this practice “shitposting”.

People spreading Russian disinformation often find themselves annoyed by the swarms of “meme dogs” in their replies. This has led some to respond aggressively. In turn, this has allowed North Atlantic Fella Organisation members to report them for violation of X’s terms of service and have their accounts suspended, as our forthcoming research documents.

However, from late 2022 onward, North Atlantic Fella Organisation members we interviewed as a part of our research reported decreased effectiveness of X’s response to problematic user conduct. This was soon after tech billionaire Elon Musk bought the social media platform.

Despite this, members continue to support each other and develop playful tactics to ensure they remain visible on the platform.

It seems war will continue online for as long as Russia wages its war on Ukraine’s territory.

Olga Boichak has received funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a director of the Ukrainian Studies Foundation in Australia and an executive committee member of the Ukrainian Studies Association of Australia and New Zealand. She has been a member of the North Atlantic Fella Organisation since 2022 for research purposes.

Kateryna Kasianenko has been a member of the North Atlantic Fella Organisation since 2022 for research purposes.

– ref. Three years after Russia’s invasion, a global online army is still fighting for Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/three-years-after-russias-invasion-a-global-online-army-is-still-fighting-for-ukraine-251480

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shamit Saggar, Executive Director, Australian Centre for Student Equity and Success and Professor of Public Policy, Curtin University

Two months out from an Australian federal election, the polling is pointing to a very tight race between the two major parties. This means, if the polls are correct, neither party will likely win enough seats to command a parliamentary working majority.

Australia’s most recent experience of a hung parliament was the Gillard-Rudd government of 2010–13. Many still see that as an unhappy era, with internal division within Labor’s party room in Canberra, and yet another leadership coup, as the lasting, bitter memory.

So, it is time to reassess whether – or how well – Australia might be governed in similar circumstances.

Building a stable coalition

The answer depends on us being open to the meaning of a stable, inter-party coalition. This is particularly tricky in Australia for three reasons. First, although the political parties themselves are coalitions of philosophies and factions, this is often masked by high levels of party discipline. With very few exceptions, MPs elected through the major parties pretty much do as they are told when they go to Canberra.

Second, the popular vote share that goes to the two major parties has been in long-term decline, from about 90% 40 years ago, to about 70% of late. The drift hasn’t just gone towards populist insurgents and protests, but increasingly to the benefit of the Greens and, more recently, the Teals. The national preferential voting system pushes candidates to compete in the traditional left-right middle ground. But this overlooks the fact that some voters’ sympathies lie in single-issue campaigns.

Third, and most importantly, our model of minority government is conspicuously one-dimensional. For instance, party leaders and managers think purely in terms of confidence and supply agreements. These are important, of course, but they provide artificial stability by limiting disagreement in parliament that might bring down a government.

One eye-catching proposition for stable minority government involves Labor and the Coalition coming together to agree not to topple the other for an arbitrary period of half a parliamentary term.

There are several better options. The UK’s Conservatives and Liberal Democrats ran a joint government from 2010–15, with some distinction. A big party and small party formed a coalition, and once they had agreed to disagree, they ringfenced specific policy areas as belonging to one party and the other party signed up to it as a policy priority of the whole government. This resulted in the full implementation of their respectively most prized policies.

And just two months ago, Ireland’s centre-right Fianna Fáil and Fine Gail parties, working with unaligned independents and a more formal Independent Ireland, came up with similar coalition agreement.

The inference is that stable multi-party government involves a mature negotiation on the issues, priorities and policies that can unite across party lines. It also requires a readiness to prioritise policy issues within parties.

Of course, this is an indirect way of asking if the Teals can and wish to operate as a de facto party. And while the Greens are a political party to begin with, the extent of their party discipline has not been tested to the full.

Meanwhile, there is evidence of pressure to keep both the Teals and Greens at a distance from any such agreement, with reports that lobby groups for the hospitality and coal sectors respectively will fund major party candidates to help defeat hostile crossbenchers.

As politicians mull these challenges, we should consider the likely “safe” issues – as against the “tricky” ones – in the coming parliament that a stable minority government or coalition would face. Their appetite to govern will be affected accordingly.

‘Safe’ and ‘tricky’ issues in a minority government

From Labor’s perspective, the nucleus is around a disparate set of economic and social modernisation policies. Since many of these have begun in this parliament, the focus in the next will be on pursuing them to full implementation.

For the Coalition, reshaping tax and spending, increasing housing affordability checking workplace employee rights and a bold nuclear power proposal sit at the core. This is accompanied by wariness of immigration and identity politics. Survey research points to its broad appeal certainly but less is known about the depth of this support.

Finding a middle path on these issues that would satisfy enough crossbenchers to help one of the major parties form government will be the challenge. It is not necessarily a bad outcome for the nation. But it means all MPs will have to take into account the greatly enhanced premium on stable government before any serious horse-trading happens.

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

– ref. Australia’s next government may well be in minority. Here’s how that can be a good outcome for the country – https://theconversation.com/australias-next-government-may-well-be-in-minority-heres-how-that-can-be-a-good-outcome-for-the-country-252162

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

One of the most enduring questions humans have is how long we’re going to live. With this comes the question of how much of our lifespan is shaped by our environment and choices, and how much is predetermined by our genes.

A study recently published in the prestigious journal Nature Medicine has attempted for the first time to quantify the relative contributions of our environment and lifestyle versus our genetics in how we age and how long we live.

The findings were striking, suggesting our environment and lifestyle play a much greater role than our genes in determining our longevity.

What the researchers did

This study used data from the UK Biobank, a large database in the United Kingdom that contains in-depth health and lifestyle data from roughly 500,000 people. The data available include genetic information, medical records, imaging and information about lifestyle.

A separate part of the study used data from a subset of more than 45,000 participants whose blood samples underwent something called “proteomic profiling”.

Proteomic profiling is a relatively new technique that looks at how proteins in the body change over time to identify a person’s age at a molecular level. By using this method researchers were able to estimate how quickly an individual’s body was actually ageing. This is called their biological age, as opposed to their chronological age (or years lived).

The researchers assessed 164 environmental exposures as well as participants’ genetic markers for disease. Environmental exposures included lifestyle choices (for example, smoking, physical activity), social factors (for example, living conditions, household income, employment status) and early life factors, such as body weight in childhood.

They then looked for associations between genetics and environment and 22 major age-related diseases (such as coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes), mortality and biological ageing (as determined by the proteomic profiling).

These analyses allowed the researchers to estimate the relative contributions of environmental factors and genetics to ageing and dying prematurely.

What did they find?

When it came to disease-related mortality, as we would expect, age and sex explained a significant amount (about half) of the variation in how long people lived. The key finding, however, was environmental factors collectively accounted for around 17% of the variation in lifespan, while genetic factors contributed less than 2%.

This finding comes down very clearly on the nurture side in the “nature versus nurture” debate. It suggests environmental factors influence health and longevity to a far greater extent than genetics.

Not unexpectedly, the study showed a different mix of environmental and genetic influences for different diseases. Environmental factors had the greatest impact on lung, heart and liver disease, while genetics played the biggest role in determining a person’s risk of breast, ovarian and prostate cancers, and dementia.

The environmental factors that had the most influence on earlier death and biological ageing included smoking, socioeconomic status, physical activity levels and living conditions.

Interestingly, being taller at age ten was found to be associated with a shorter lifespan. Although this may seem surprising, and the reasons are not entirely clear, this aligns with previous research finding taller people are more likely to die earlier.

Carrying more weight at age ten and maternal smoking (if your mother smoked in late pregnancy or when you were a newborn) were also found to shorten lifespan.

Probably the most surprising finding in this study was a lack of association between diet and markers of biological ageing, as determined by the proteomic profiling. This flies in the face of the extensive body of evidence showing the crucial role of dietary patterns in chronic disease risk and longevity.

But there are a number of plausible explanations for this. The first could be a lack of statistical power in the part of the study looking at biological ageing. That is, the number of people studied may have been too small to allow the researchers to see the true impact of diet on ageing.

Second, the dietary data in this study, which was self-reported and only measured at one time point, is likely to have been of relatively poor quality, limiting the researchers’ ability to see associations. And third, as the relationship between diet and longevity is likely to be complex, disentangling dietary effects from other lifestyle factors may be difficult.

So despite this finding, it’s still safe to say the food we eat is one of the most important pillars of health and longevity.

What other limitations do we need to consider?

Key exposures (such as diet) in this study were only measured at a single point in time, and not tracked over time, introducing potential errors into the results.

Also, as this was an observational study, we can’t assume associations found represent causal relationships. For example, just because living with a partner correlated with a longer lifespan, it doesn’t mean this caused a person to live longer. There may be other factors which explain this association.

Finally, it’s possible this study may have underestimated the role of genetics in longevity. It’s important to recognise genetics and environment don’t operate in isolation. Rather, health outcomes are shaped by their interplay, and this study may not have fully captured the complexity of these interactions.

The future is (largely) in your hands

It’s worth noting there were a number of factors such as household income, home ownership and employment status associated with diseases of ageing in this study that are not necessarily within a person’s control. This highlights the crucial role of addressing the social determinants of health to ensure everyone has the best possible chance of living a long and healthy life.

At the same time, the results offer an empowering message that longevity is largely shaped by the choices we make. This is great news, unless you have good genes and were hoping they would do the heavy lifting.

Ultimately, the results of this study reinforce the notion that while we may inherit certain genetic risks, how we eat, move and engage with the world seems to be more important in determining how healthy we are and how long we live.

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

– ref. How long will you live? New evidence says its much more about your choices than your genes – https://theconversation.com/how-long-will-you-live-new-evidence-says-its-much-more-about-your-choices-than-your-genes-251054

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

Casino operator Star Entertainment has been under financial pressure for some time. The company’s share price has tanked, and the business, with its three casino properties, has been bleeding money.

Last year’s opening of a new riverside casino in Queen’s Wharf, Brisbane, was seen as a way to revitalise the business. But Star has swung from one lifeline to another.

Just as it was set to run out of cash on Friday March 7, Star announced a last-minute rescue package. This centred on selling its 50% stake in the Queens Wharf casino to Hong-Kong-based joint venture partners for $53 million.

Star has also started documentation for a $250 million bridging loan but still needs to finalise a proposal for long-term refinancing.

All of this remains subject to details being finalised, and regulatory approvals. An alternative $250 million takeover offer from US casino operator Bally’s currently isn’t Star’s preference because it is considered too low.

But Star is far from out of the woods yet. Whatever happens to it and its casino assets, there are bigger questions about whether the age of unfettered gambling revenue for casinos may have already ended.

Elsewhere, gambling is booming

If Australian casinos are struggling, it’s not because punters are giving up gambling. Whereas most of the gambling market recovered rapidly after the end of pandemic restrictions, casinos floundered.

Between 2018–19 and 2022–23, before and after pandemic restrictions were in place, total Australian gambling expenditure (in other words, gamblers’ losses) grew by 6.8% in real terms (adjusted for inflation).

Real wagering losses grew by 45%. This segment has clearly emerged as the second-biggest gambling market in the country, with gambling expenditure of $8.4 billion.

But over the same period, expenditure at casinos declined by more than 35% nationally, and by 42% in New South Wales.

Read more:
The rate of sports betting has surged more than 57% – and younger people are betting more

Do casinos have a viable business model?

Both Star and Australia’s other major casino operator, Crown, have emerged from a range of high-profile scandals in recent years.

Media reporting, inquiries, and royal commissions into Crown, and then Star, give some insight into how the casino business used to be run in Australia.

Star’s (and Crown’s) business model appears to have previously relied on two major revenue streams: benefiting from the proceeds of crime (by operating as a cash laundry for organised criminal gangs), and exploiting every vulnerable person who walked onto their premises.

Both casinos facilitated money laundering, particularly via junket operators, organisers of casino visits by high rollers. Unfortunately, many of these people had strong links to organised crime gangs keen to launder their illegally acquired money.

Former Star executives and board members are now facing Federal Court proceedings brought by ASIC, with two already having been fined.

Read more:
‘Multiple red flags’: ASIC’s court case against Star executives shows the risks of complacency

Star and Crown preyed on addiction

Both Star and Crown were also found to have encouraged significant expenditure by addicted gamblers.

This wasn’t just high rollers. Ordinary people were also encouraged to use poker machines for hours without any attempt at encouraging a break, as mandated by “responsible gambling” codes.

The Victorian Royal Commissioner, investigating Crown, regarded its “responsible gambling” failures as particularly heinous.

The result was the turnover of the board and management, hundreds of millions of dollars in fines, and increased regulatory oversight.

Although neither casino chain closed its doors, regulatory breaches led to appointment of special managers to oversee the business and hold the licences. Further change included beefing up regulators’ powers and resources.

Turning a page

Without significant funds from the proceeds of crime, or exploitation of the vulnerable, casinos are clearly struggling.

In NSW and Victoria, the casinos have been required to introduce “cashless gaming” systems.

This takes cash out of the system, deterring money launderers. Gamblers must also set a limit on their gambling spend, and adhere to it. The system is in the process of being introduced in Queensland.

Certainly, overcapitalisation of new developments has played a part in casinos’ struggles. Crown Melbourne was effectively sold to Kerry Packer in 1998 on the back of its own financial issues. Overcapitalisation of the business was seen as an issue then.

Stronger competition

Competition from online wagering and pokie venues may also be playing a part. These businesses are not currently regulated as effectively as casinos.

Precommitment systems for online wagering would be relatively easy to introduce. They would require punters to set a limit on deposits or bets, or indeed the time they spend gambling, and enforce these technically.

Getting these in place, however, may be as formidable a task as getting gambling ads banned from sporting broadcasts, if not more so.

The gambling industry understandably opposes this. After all, these measures would reduce the amount that people lose. From a public health perspective, however, they provide an effective system to prevent harm in the first place, rather than simply picking up the pieces.

Without effective reform of local gambling venues and online wagering, casinos may try to mount an argument for less effective regulation. That would be an admission that their “tourism” attractiveness has waned. It’s also a powerful argument to speed up the transition of effective regulation to all gambling operators.

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

– ref. Whatever happens to Star, the age of unfettered gambling revenue for casinos may have ended – https://theconversation.com/whatever-happens-to-star-the-age-of-unfettered-gambling-revenue-for-casinos-may-have-ended-251248

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Janet Davey, PhD Candidate, Australian Centre on China in the World, Australian National University

Including pronouns in introductions, your email signature or your social media bio may seem like a minor detail. Pronouns are just small words we use in place of names all the time. But, like names, pronouns have personal significance. They say something about who we are.

Trans, nonbinary and gender-diverse people face many issues more pressing than pronouns, including health and educational disparities and disproportionately higher rates of abuse, violence and discrimination. Getting pronouns right is a simple thing everyone can do to show respect.

Linguistic shifts towards gender inclusivity are occurring worldwide, and the use of gender-neutral or inclusive pronouns is not a new nor exclusively Western phenomenon.

Chinese, one of the world’s oldest languages and spoken by more than one billion people, illustrates how languages adapt to reflect shifting understanding of gender. Its pronoun system may be on the cusp of significant change.

Developing pronouns

In my newly published research, I’ve explored what is happening with Chinese third-person pronouns.

The modern Chinese pronoun system is fascinating for two reasons.

First, gendered pronouns have only been part of the Chinese language for 100 years: the feminine pronoun 她 (she) was only adopted in the 1920s.

Second, although there are now distinct Chinese characters for “he”, 他, and “she”, 她, these are both pronounced tā in Mandarin. You can have a whole conversation about someone without revealing their gender.

The lack of gender-distinct pronouns in spoken Mandarin has prompted calls for written Chinese to follow suit. Queer Chinese speakers have proposed several gender-inclusive pronouns that would be pronounced tā, just like 他 (he) and 她 (she).

These include the romanised form “TA” and new Chinese characters 「⿰无也」 and 「⿰㐅也」. These new characters might look strange: they are written like this to clarify that they should be read as one Chinese character. Currently, they take up the space of two Chinese characters because they are not yet in Unicode and cannot be typed properly.

Other people hope to see the now-masculine 他 regain its original function as an ungendered pronoun.

What pronouns do queer Chinese speakers use?

To understand how Chinese pronouns are changing, I surveyed more than 100 queer Chinese speakers across 12 countries. I asked survey respondents, a third of whom were nonbinary or otherwise gender-diverse, about their pronoun preferences and perceptions. I also analysed how pronouns are used in a large database of contemporary Chinese texts.

My research found gender-inclusive pronouns accounted for about a quarter of first-choice pronouns, and nearly half of all pronouns used by survey respondents. TA was overwhelmingly preferred by gender-diverse individuals (70%), with the English “they” (20%) the next most popular option.

While cisgender and transgender men almost exclusively used masculine pronouns, cis and trans women showed significant openness to using gender-inclusive pronouns alongside feminine ones. After 她 (she), TA was the second most common pronoun for women (40%) and second most common overall (17%).

Notably, 他 (he) was not used by any women or gender-diverse people, except one who considered it gender-neutral. This suggests reviving its original ungendered usage may be difficult.

TA emerged as the most recognised gender-inclusive pronoun, with nearly all respondents (97%) familiar with it regardless of their age, gender, region or language background. In contrast, fewer than 8% had encountered the new character-based pronouns 「⿰无也」 or「⿰㐅也」 and no one reported using them.

What makes TA so popular?

Survey participants were overwhelmingly positive about TA, with 63% expressing favourable views. As one respondent explained:

The look and feel is good, it suits people’s everyday pronunciation habits, and doesn’t create issues with having to specify someone’s gender.

TA functions similarly to English singular “they”. It works in two ways: as a gender-neutral pronoun when gender is unknown (like saying “someone left their umbrella”), and as a gender-inclusive pronoun specifically including gender-diverse people.

Many survey respondents called TA “respectful” and “inclusive” but also simply “convenient”.

However, some respondents were concerned TA is “untraditional” and “pollutes the Chinese language”.

Practical considerations for using emerging Chinese pronouns also extend to the technical challenges of typing new Chinese characters. Before a new character can be typed on computers or phones, it needs to be officially encoded in Unicode, the global standard for digital text.

My research shows this requirement is strongly influencing which emerging Chinese pronouns can gain traction.

While some survey respondents hoped to see a gender-inclusive Chinese character adopted, they weren’t optimistic about 「⿰无也」or 「⿰㐅也」 becoming mainstream.

As one noted:

「⿰无也」is good, but it’s hard to type and it takes a long time to explain.

User-friendly and easily understandable

TA is currently the most popular emerging Chinese gender-inclusive pronoun, crucially because it mimics how people use tā in spoken Mandarin.

It is already part of people’s vocabulary, and already used (at least as a gender-neutral pronoun) by mainstream Chinese media and on online platforms.

Unlike other recently proposed pronouns, TA is versatile, user-friendly and easily understandable for queer and non-queer Chinese speakers alike. This makes TA a strong contender for widespread adoption into contemporary Chinese.

Like the introduction of a Chinese feminine pronoun 她 (she) in the 1920s, the emergence of TA as a gender-inclusive pronoun in the 2020s is about recognising a wider spectrum of identities.

Pronouns are not a political statement, just a personal statement. When you use someone’s correct pronouns, you’re saying, “I see you, and I respect who you are”. That’s something worth talking about, in any language.

Janet Davey is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.

– ref. Chinese only introduced a feminine pronoun in the 1920s. Now, it might adopt a gender-inclusive one – https://theconversation.com/chinese-only-introduced-a-feminine-pronoun-in-the-1920s-now-it-might-adopt-a-gender-inclusive-one-221013

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Greenslade-Yeats, Research Fellow in Management, Auckland University of Technology

When two junior employees bump into each other in the corridor and start chatting about their manager’s overbearing manner, it’s typically considered gossip. But what about when two managers have an off-record catch-up to discuss an under-performing employee?

Both scenarios meet traditional definitions of gossip – the information being shared is about other people, the people it’s about are absent, the information is shared in a way that casts judgement on those people, and it’s informal. Yet the two situations are viewed very differently.

What counts as gossip is much more slippery than we might think. I reviewed 184 academic articles to understand what really constitutes workplace gossip.

The key, I found, is not any set of objective criteria, but rather people’s shared agreement that a situation counts as gossip.

This understanding of gossip helps us make sense of the “workplace gossip paradox” – the idea that gossip can be considered both a reliable source of social information (“the inside word”) and an unreliable information source (“just gossip”).

My work also provides insights into how businesses can manage gossip before it becomes a scandal.

Knowledge is power – but power controls knowledge

How does recognising the slipperiness of gossip help us understand the workplace paradox? The answer has to do with the role of power in legitimising information.

Leaders and managers need information to justify action. If a manager is going to investigate a sexual harassment claim, they can’t do so based solely on a hunch. They need to hear about from it someone.

If the victim of sexual harassment complains directly to their manager, an investigation is automatically justified. But what if the manager hears about harassment indirectly and unofficially (for example, through “gossip”), with the added complication that the alleged perpetrator is another manager?

If the manager does something about what they’ve heard and the source turns out to be unreliable, they could face negative consequences for acting on what was essentially “just gossip.” But if they don’t act, and the information turns out to be credible, they could face repercussions for ignoring the “inside word.”

There is evidence that such paradoxical situations play out quite frequently in real-world workplaces. For example, inside information about negligence towards patient safety in healthcare settings has, in the past, been dismissed as “just gossip” until it provoked a public scandal.

The same thing happened in a university where gossip shared through a “whisper network” was eventually corroborated by an independent inquiry. In this case, the inquiry also found official complaints had been ignored.

One case study from the United States found managers tended to keep an ear out for information passing through the grapevine and selectively use it to further their own interests.

If gossip threatened their power, they repressed it as “just gossip”. But if gossip provided “useful” information – ammunition against a subversive employee, for example – management legitimised gossip as “official information”.

How to manage the workplace gossip paradox

To avoid scandals stemming from when gossip is ignored, managers might consider “co-opting” gossip, bringing it into official communication channels.

But there’s a problem with this approach. Gossip gains its credibility as the inside word because it takes place outside official communication channels. Therefore, if managers try to co-opt gossip into formal management processes, it’s likely to have the unintended consequence of discrediting the shared information.

Instead, “managing gossip” requires a better understanding of its functions and motivations.

One function is to reduce uncertainty. Research suggests gossip often arises to fill information gaps. For example, people might speculate about a manager’s salary by gossiping about their expensive car or holiday.

Such gossip is likely to be exaggerated and counterproductive. However, it could be managed simply by being transparent about staff salaries, filling the information gap before gossip does.

Another key function of gossip is to warn against antisocial behaviours like bullying. But if employees feel comfortable speaking up about such behaviour — even when it’s perpetrated by those with official power – managers will not face the dilemma of whether to act on information that could turn out to be “just gossip.”

Gossip is a slippery and paradoxical form of communication. Some would say it’s unmanageable. But what can be managed are the workplace behaviours and hierarchical relationships that gossip loves to sink its teeth into.

The author would like to acknowledge Trish Corner, Helena Cooper-Thomas and Rachel Morrison for their contributions to developing this research.

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

– ref. When is workplace chat ‘just gossip’ and when is it ‘sharing information’? It depends who’s doing it – https://theconversation.com/when-is-workplace-chat-just-gossip-and-when-is-it-sharing-information-it-depends-whos-doing-it-251242

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carolina Quintero Rodriguez, Senior Lecturer and Program Manager, Bachelor of Fashion (Enterprise) program, RMIT University

When you come home from a run or a sweaty gym session, do you immediately fling your clothes into the washing machine for a hot cycle? Or do you leave them on a chair (or the floordrobe) so you can wear them again tomorrow?

Earlier this year, the French government caused a stir with advice about how often you should wash your clothes. For sports clothes, it recommends up to three wears before you wash them.

This stems from legitimate environmental concerns – each laundry cycle consumes significant water and energy. Frequent washing can also degrade fabrics more quickly, contributing to textile waste.

But what about our health? If the thought of rewearing your stinky t-shirt or damp sports bra makes you squeamish, here’s what you need to know.

Sports clothes and sweat

In the past, exercise clothing was usually made from natural fibres (mainly cotton). Now, it’s mostly made of high-performance synthetic fabrics. These are designed to manage moisture, regulate temperature, improve breathability and control odour.

However research has shown this kind of exercise clothing, particularly synthetic fabrics, can harbour significant amounts of bacteria after just one use.

Polyester traps moisture, creating the warm, humid micro-environments bacteria prefer.

When clothing is damp, including from sweat, bacteria multiplies substantially much faster. There is a direct correlation between how much bacteria is present and how intense the smell is.

However, research shows innovations in textiles, such as the integration of silver nanoparticles in fibres, essential oil-based treatments, long-lasting antimicrobial treatments and structural fibre innovations are are making garments more durable and better at controlling bacteria.

So, is it safe to rewear gym clothes?

This depends on several factors:

Fabric type

Natural fibres such as cotton multiply fewer odour-causing bacteria than synthetics. So if you wear these fabrics to exercise in, they may last a few wears before needing a wash.

Exercise intensity and sweat level

Low-intensity activities that generate minimal or low sweat (including gentle yoga or walking), may allow for more re-wears than high-intensity workouts, as bacterial proliferation correlates directly with moisture levels in fabrics.

(In fact, the French government advice acknowledges how often you wash your sports clothes depends on how much you sweat.)

Season

Climate (temperature, humidity and airflow) significantly affects how much bacteria grows on fabrics. So it may be more reasonable to wash your clothes less in cooler months, when you sweat less.

Personal health

Some people should exercise greater caution rewearing gym clothes. For example, people with skin conditions, compromised immune systems and those prone to skin infections.

So, if you’re wearing a cotton t-shirt and shorts do something light – such as a walk in the cool morning air – you might get away with wearing them again once or twice (especially if you air them properly between use).

But synthetic performance wear, or any clothes you wear to do moderate or intense workouts, should be washed after each use (a cold wash cycle is fine). This is particularly important for garments in contact with high-bacteria areas such as underarms, groin or feet.

Tips for clothes between wears:

1. Turn garments inside-out (this exposes the bacteria to the air) and hang them up immediately after exercise

2. Ensure items are completely dry before storing

3. Store in well-ventilated areas, never in closed containers such as a washing hamper or bag

4. When possible, hang clothes in the sun – brief UV exposure provides natural antimicrobial benefits

5. Keep items you’ve worn away from clean clothes.

The bottom line

In the end, it’s up to personal choice – each of us has to weigh up the environmental benefits with potential health concerns and exercise habits.

But some items should always be washed after each use: sports bras and underwear, socks, anything visibly soiled or smelly, and any clothing worn during high-intensity workouts or in hot weather.

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

– ref. How often should I wash my exercise clothes? – https://theconversation.com/how-often-should-i-wash-my-exercise-clothes-250796

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexis Vassiley, Lecturer, School of Business and Law, Edith Cowan University

A battle is underway on the mine sites in Western Australia’s remote Pilbara region. Unions are keen to get back into the iron ore industry after decades on the outer. Mining companies are desperate to keep them out.

At Rio Tinto site Paraburdoo, where both residential and fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) workers are employed, the Western Mine Workers Alliance announced on Thursday it had the signatures necessary to demonstrate majority support for enterprise bargaining. Over 400 workers had signed on.

Once ratified by the Fair Work Commission, the company will be obliged to negotiate an enterprise agreement with the union.

This is huge news, as enterprise agreements have been rare in the industry for many decades. Workers are generally on individual common law contracts which pay higher than the award but lack transparency and have no guaranteed yearly pay rise.

Many workers are FIFO, working 12-hour work shifts. The two weeks on, one week off roster is known colloquially as the “divorce roster”.

Unions are campaigning at Paraburdoo, as well as other Rio Tinto and BHP sites, for the option of “even time” rosters of one week on, one week off. These rosters have lower pay, however, due to working fewer hours per week on average.

Workers want better conditions

Long hours, extended periods away from home and a lack of autonomy can be a poisonous cocktail.

According to a study prepared for the WA government, about 30% of WA mining workers have “high or very high levels of psychological distress”.

Another study of FIFO workers mainly from WA found the likelihood of workers experiencing high or very high levels of mental distress was increased by a factor of four when they felt “very or extremely stressed by their immediate supervisors”.

The problem with insecure work

Job insecurity affects a significant proportion of the workforce. Sexual harassment plagues the industry and in some cases is linked to insecure work.

Haul truck driver Astacia Stevens testified to a parliamentary inquiry that her supervisor told her “if you want your shirt [a permanent position], you have to get on your knees first”.

She refused and was later sacked. What Stevens characterised as an anti-union culture had made her “reluctant to join” her union.

There is now an historic class action against BHP and Rio Tinto, alleging “widespread and systemic sexual harassment and gender discrimination over the past two decades” nationwide.

Unionists are also campaigning on pay, saying recent pay rises haven’t kept up with inflation.

The rise and fall of union power in the Pilbara mines

The Pilbara iron ore industry today has few union members, but used to be a bastion of militant unionism. In its periods of strength and subsequent decline, from the 1970s to the 1990s, the story of Pilbara iron ore unionism mirrors that of Australian unionism more broadly, but in an exaggerated and time-compressed way.

Unions improved work in the 1970s. Low pay, long hours, and “soggy” food were the norm when the Pilbara iron ore industry started in the 1960s. Union pressure changed this. Shifts were reduced to eight hours and workers gained a say over the work process.

Across Australia, the union movement was confident and militant in the 1970s. Yet the Pilbara was particularly so.

While the average Western Australian worker in 1973 went on strike for a quarter of a day, the average Pilbara iron ore worker struck for just over 11 days in that year.

One union delegate, interviewed as part of my PhD research, recounted:

We had industrial muscle and we used it. There was no fear.

Workers’ meetings on site would decide what issues to take up, when to strike and for how long. Often, union officials would only be told afterwards.

While strikes often provoked the ire of management and politicians, they dramatically improved workers’ lives. Unionists campaigned on community issues and even set up a cooperative during the 1979 Hamersley Iron strike.

Workers lived in towns near mine sites, and socialised together after hours, some playing sport every night of the week.

The unions were pushed out

In 1986, Robe River (now owned by Rio Tinto) broke with the other iron ore companies and launched a full-frontal attack on unions. In spite of expectations, unions did not adopt a strike strategy to defend themselves and lost out.

Two years later, amid industrial action and a divided management, Mount Newman Mining (now part of BHP) tried and failed to do the same thing. That company did not de-unionise until 1999.

During the mining boom of the 2000s, the Pilbara mines were a union wasteland, despite rebuilding efforts.

What could a renewed union presence mean?

Just last year, BHP train drivers showed how a renewed union presence might address these issues. They are a rare example of unionisation in the industry today, as I write in my book.

On Monday February 12 2024, workers voted for a 24-hour strike on the Friday if their demands weren’t met. At 11am on the Thursday, BHP came to the table to avert the strike. Pay was increased by an initial 4%, and then 4% a year over the following four years.

Rosters are now the even time (two weeks on, two weeks off) roster the workers fought for. The agreement is based on an average 42-hour week, not the 56-hour average work week (for lower pay) that is standard for many across the industry.

This is the context in which hundreds of Pilbara workers are joining their unions and fighting for enterprise agreements.

Alexis Vassiley is the author of Striking Ore: The Rise and Fall of Union Power in the Pilbara, to be published by Monash University Publishing on April 1.

Alexis is a National Councillor for the National Tertiary Education Union and a member of Socialist Alternative.

– ref. After 30 years on the outer, unions could soon return to the Pilbara. Here’s why that’s a big deal – https://theconversation.com/after-30-years-on-the-outer-unions-could-soon-return-to-the-pilbara-heres-why-thats-a-big-deal-252187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Laura Nicole Driessen, Postdoctoral Researcher in Radio Astronomy, University of Sydney

Earlier this week, Saturn gained a whopping 128 new official moons, as the International Astronomical Union recognised discoveries from a team of astronomers led by Edward Ashton at the Academia Sinica in Taiwan. The sixth planet from the Sun now has a grand total of 274 moons, the most of any planet in the Solar System.

The discovery has raised a lot of questions. How do you spot moons, and why hadn’t anybody seen these ones already? Doesn’t Jupiter have the most moons? What are they going to call all these moons? Are there more out there? And what exactly makes something a moon, anyway?

Counting moons

These new discoveries cement Saturn’s place as the winner of the Solar System’s moon competition, with more confirmed moons than all of the other planets combined. But it hasn’t always been this way.

Jupiter’s four largest moons – Io, Europa, Ganymede and Callisto – were the first ever discovered orbiting another planet. They were spotted by Galileo Galilei more than 400 years ago, in 1610. Saturn’s first known moon, Titan, was discovered by Dutch astronomer Christiaan Huygens 45 years later.

The new batch of 128 moons was discovered by stacking images from the Canada France Hawaii telescope. Some of Saturn’s other moons were discovered by space voyages, and some during what are called “ring-plane crossings”.

When the Voyager 1 spacecraft passed by Saturn, it took images that were used to discover the moon Atlas. The Cassini Mission later discovered seven new Saturnian moons.

A ring-crossing is where Saturn’s rings seem to disappear from our point of view here on Earth. This is when Saturn is at just the right angle so we’re looking at the rings exactly side-on (that is, when we can only see the edge of the rings).

Titan was discovered during a ring-plane crossing, and so were 12 other moons. Saturn’s rings will be edge-on twice in 2025, in March and November.

The moon race

From 2019 to 2023, Jupiter and Saturn were fighting for first place in the moon race.

In 2019, Saturn surpassed Jupiter with the discovery of 20 new moons. This took the count to 82 for Saturn and 79 for Jupiter.

Just a few years later, in February 2023, Jupiter took the lead with 12 new moons, beating Saturn’s 83 moons at the time. Only a short time later, still in 2023, the same astronomers who discovered the recent 128 moons discovered 62 moons orbiting Saturn. This placed the ringed planet firmly in the lead.

Elsewhere in the Solar System, Earth has one moon, Mars has two, Jupiter has 95, Uranus has 28 and Neptune has 16, for a total of 142 moons. We only need to discover ten more moons around Saturn to give it double the number of all the other planets combined.

Regular or irregular?

The newly discovered moons are all small. Each one is only a few kilometres across. If something that small can be a moon, what really counts as a moon?

NASA tells us “naturally formed bodies that orbit planets are called moons”, but even asteroids can have moons. We crashed a spacecraft into an asteroid’s moon in 2022. Earth has had a few mini-moons, some only a couple of metres in size. The line of what is and isn’t a moon is a bit hazy.

Moons orbiting planets in the Solar System can be either “regular” or “irregular”. The new moons are all irregular.

Regular moons are formed around a planet at the same time as the planet itself forms. Irregular moons are thought to be small planets (planetesimals) that are captured by a planet as it finishes forming. They are then broken into pieces by collisions.

Regular moons tend to orbit their planets in nice, circular orbits around the equator. Irregular moons typically orbit in big ovals further away from planets, and at a range of angles. Saturn has 24 regular moons and 250 irregular moons.

Studying these moons can tell us about how moons form, and reveal clues about how the Solar System formed and evolved.

Saturn’s rings are made of small chunks of ice and rock. Astronomers think they formed out of pieces of comets, asteroids and moons that were torn apart by Saturn’s gravity.

So for Saturn in particular, irregular moons can tell us more about the formation of its beautiful rings.

What’s in a name?

Names of astronomical objects are governed by the International Astronomical Union (IAU). Originally, all moons in the Solar System were given names from Greco-Roman mythology.

But the large number of moons, particularly of Saturn and Jupiter, means the IAU has expanded to giants and gods from other mythology. And it’s all about the details. If binary moons are discovered, they are required to be given names of twins or siblings.

Saturn’s first seven moons were given numbers instead of names. In 1847, John Herschel named them after the Greek Titans. After they ran out of titans and Greek mythological giants, they expanded the naming system to include Inuit and Gallic gods and Norse giants.

Discoverers get to suggest names for moons, and the names they suggest are given priority by the IAU. In the past, there have been competitions to name new moons of Jupiter and Saturn.

With 128 new moons for Saturn, it might take a while to come up with names that follow the IAU rules. Maybe we’ll even see the addition of different mythologies. We’ll have to wait and see. Until then, each moon has a name made of a string of numbers and letters, such as “S/2020 S 27”.

Will we find more moons?

Without a solid definition of what a moon is, it’s hard to say when (or if) we will ever finish finding them. Everyone agrees we shouldn’t call every single chunk of rock in Saturn’s rings a moon, but exactly where to draw the line isn’t clear.

That said, there is probably a limit to the number of moon-like objects astronomers are likely to want to add to the list. Edward Ashton, who led the discovery of the new moons, doesn’t think we’ll be finding too many new moons until our technology improves.

Laura Nicole Driessen is an ambassador for the Orbit Centre of Imagination at the Rise and Shine Kindergarten, in Sydney’s Inner West.

– ref. Saturn now has 274 moons – but exactly what makes something a moon remains unclear – https://theconversation.com/saturn-now-has-274-moons-but-exactly-what-makes-something-a-moon-remains-unclear-252033

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pat McConville, Lecturer in Ethics, Law, and Professionalism, School of Medicine, Deakin University

This week, doctors announced that an Australian man with severe heart failure had left hospital with an artificial heart that had kept him alive until he could receive a donor heart.

The patient, a man from New South Wales in his 40s, was not the world’s first person to receive this type of artificial heart. However, he is said to be the first with one to be discharged from hospital to wait for a heart transplant, which he’s since had.

I am a philosopher and bioethicist. I completed my PhD on artificial hearts – particularly how these implants can change people’s lives in profound ways.

Here’s what patients and their families need to consider.

What is an artificial heart?

Artificial hearts began to be developed in the 1960s, sponsored by the United States government and funded in a similar way to space and military programs.

In 1982, a man named Barney Clark received the Jarvik-7 total artificial heart. Doctors removed his failing biological heart and replaced it with a plastic and metal device to circulate blood to his lungs and around his body. He lived for 112 days before dying from multi-organ failure. He never left hospital.

In the 1980s and 1990s, medical device companies began to develop alternatives to total artificial hearts. These partial artificial hearts, known as ventricular assist devices, help out a biological heart by supplementing or replacing one of its two pumping chambers.

These are more straightforward and versatile than total artificial hearts, and can be used for earlier stages of heart failure.

Not all artificial hearts generate a pulse.

Artificial hearts with a pulse generally mimic the biological heart. They pump blood in the same way the heart beats, by filling with blood and squeezing to circulate blood in waves or pulses.

But some devices continuously push blood around the body instead of pulsing. So with these continuous-flow devices neither the patient nor their health team can detect a pulse.

In the US between 2014 and 2024, almost 30,000 patients received continuous-flow ventricular assist devices. In the same period, more than 310 total artificial hearts were implanted.

The total artificial hearts commercially available today are licensed exclusively as bridging therapies – to keep people alive until a donor heart becomes available – rather than permanent implants.

How about the device making news this week?

The device in the news – the BiVACOR Total Artificial Heart – was developed by a US-Australian collaboration. This device is innovative, mainly because it is the first continuous-flow device designed to replace the whole heart. Designers are also aiming for it to be the first total artificial heart suitable as a permanent transplant (known as destination therapy).

A reliable, durable and responsive total artificial heart is, in the words of Paul Jansz, the surgeon who implanted the device, “the Holy Grail”.

The BiVACOR’s clinical success so far gives us reason to be optimistic about an alternative to scarce donor hearts for responding to severe heart failure.

Transplants can change lives

However, patients do not just resume their old lives when they leave hospital with an artificial heart.

While the pumping component is inside their chest, there are also external components to manage and monitor. A thick tube perforates their abdomen and connects to an external controller unit and power supply, which the patient carries around in a bag. Controllers must be closely monitored, and batteries must be regularly recharged.

My research showed that even a perfectly safe and reliable total artificial heart could transform patients’ lives in at least three major areas.

1. Is it part of me? Do I trust it?

Patients must trust, tolerate and receive sensory feedback about how the device is working for it to feel like part of them. In the case of an artificial heart, this might mean the device feels responsive to exercise and the body’s needs.

But it may be difficult for artificial hearts to meet these criteria, especially for devices that do not generate a pulse.

Patients may also question whether their heart is located in their body, or in the controller unit. They may wonder if they even have a heart, particularly if they can’t feel a pulse.

2. Beeps and alarms

An artificial heart also changes how patients live their lives and navigate the world.

Interruptions from loud device alarms distract patients from their normal activities. And patients must switch between mains power and batteries when they wake in the night and need to visit the toilet.

3. Marking time

Our hearts may be our natural metronomes, marking time. So removing someone’s heart rhythm can confuse their sense of time.

The need for batteries to be recharged periodically can also reshape patients’ days.

Waiting around for a transplant heart, or the latest software update, may change patients’ perspectives on what months and years feel like.

We need to give patients the whole picture

Artificial hearts are remarkable devices with great promise. But patients and families also deserve to know how these extraordinary treatments might change how they feel about themselves and the world.

They need to know this before they sign up for them. Artificial hearts don’t just save lives – they also change them.

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

– ref. An artificial heart may save your life. But it can also change you in surprising ways – https://theconversation.com/an-artificial-heart-may-save-your-life-but-it-can-also-change-you-in-surprising-ways-252165

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tanya Latty, Associate Professor, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney

About 90% of flowering plants rely on animals to transfer their pollen and optimise reproduction, making pollination one of nature’s most important processes.

Bees are usually the first insects to come to mind when people think of pollinators. But many other insects – including beetles, flies, moths and butterflies – also visit flowers to feed on nectar and pollen.

In doing so, they can play an essential role in pollinating plants.

Let’s take a closer look at some of nature’s unsung insect pollinators.

Fabulous flies

An estimated 30,000 species of fly (Diptera) call Australia home, making them the second largest group of insects after the beetles.

Flies have a huge variety of feeding habits including flower-visiting groups such as:

• blow flies (Calliphoridae)
• bee flies (Bombyliidae)
• hover flies (Syrphidae)
• noseflies (Rhinidae) and
• march flies (Tabanidae).

Blow flies often get a bad rap for their tendency to cluster on faeces and dead animals. But these amazing (and often beautiful!) animals can be important pollinators, especially in alpine regions such as the Australian Alps.

Named for their distinctive hovering flight, stripey yellow-and-black hover flies (Syrphidae) are often mistaken for bees. Hover flies are potential pollinators of several native plants.

The larvae of many common hover fly species prey on pest insects such as aphids, and so play an important role in controlling pest populations.

Another group in the hover fly family, known as drone flies, have larvae that live in stagnant water.

These larvae have a long, slender breathing tube, or “snorkel” that allows them to access air from the surface, earning them the rather unflattering name “rat-tailed maggots”.

Then there are the bee flies. As the name suggests, many species of bee fly (Bombyliidae) have fuzzy, bee-like bodies. Australia boasts around 400 species of bee fly.

Bee flies feed on the nectar or pollen of many native flowering plants and so may act as pollinators.

The larvae of most bee fly species lay their eggs in or on other insects, particularly wasps and solitary bees. The larvae then feed on the insect host, usually killing it.

Being both pollinators and natural regulators of insect populations, bee flies play an important yet often overlooked role in Australia’s ecosystems.

Don’t forget frit flies and march flies

Despite being relatively common, you’ve probably never noticed tiny frit flies (Chloropidae). No, that’s not a typo; frit flies are different to fruit flies (although they are often around the same size).

There are 322 described species of frit fly in Australia, although the actual number is probably much higher as these diminutive flies are understudied.

Frit flies and their relatives, the jackal flies (Milichiidae), are believed to be the pollinators of midge orchids (Genoplesium spp), many of which are rare or threatened in Australia.

Exactly how midge orchids are attracting these tiny flies is not clear, but at least some Genoplesium species may be mimicking the smell of wounded insects.

Biting flies can be annoying, but some are also pollinators. March flies, also known as horse flies (Tabanidae), are often disliked for their painful bites, but these large flies can act as pollinators when they visit flowers to feed on nectar and pollen. In fact, it’s only the females that eat blood to support egg development.

One species, the flower-feeding march fly (Scaptia auriflua), has abandoned blood meals altogether, feeding exclusively on nectar and pollen.

March fly larvae, which develop underground, are formidable predators. Equipped with venomous fangs, they actively hunt and subdue prey.

Friendly flower chafer beetles

Many beetle species visit flowers to feed on nectar and pollen, including the flower chafers (subfamily Cetoniinae). The flower chafer group includes beautiful beetles such as:

• green (and occasionally yellow) and black fiddler beetles (Eupoecila australasiae)
• big buzzy cowboy beetles (Chondropyga dorsalis), and
• the delightfully spotty punctuate flower chafers (Neorrhina punctatum).

Adult flower chafers feed on the nectar and pollen of many flowering plants, especially natives such as eucalyptus and angophoras.

Their larvae live underground, feeding on decaying organic matter. So don’t panic if you find curl grubs in your garden – they might be baby flower chafers.

Nectar scarabs (Phyllotocus spp) are another beetle frequently seen foraging on native flowers.
There are about 28 species in Australia.

Most are smaller and less conspicuous than flower chafers, although some species form large swarms on flowering trees such as Angophora, Eucalyptus and Leptospermum.

The larvae of nectar scarabs feed on decaying organic matter and grass roots in soils.

Even wasps help pollinate

Unlike bees, which mostly get their protein from pollen, wasps are primarily predators, although they may act as pollinators when they visit flowers for a sip of sugary nectar.

Some Australian orchids have evolved a remarkable strategy for attracting their wasp pollinators: they deceive unsuspecting males by mimicking the scent (and sometimes shape) of female wasps. Male wasps attempt to mate with the flower, unwittingly transferring pollen in the process.

Next time you’re outside, say a silent thanks for the many unsung insect pollinators helping to keep our ecosystems healthy.

Tanya Latty co-founded and volunteers for conservation organisation Invertebrates Australia, is former president of the Australasian Society for the Study of Animal Behaviour and is on the Education committee for the Australian Entomological Society. She receives funding from the Australian Research Council, NSW Saving our Species, and Agrifutures Australia

– ref. Not just bees and butterflies: beetles and other brilliant bugs are nature’s unsung pollinators – https://theconversation.com/not-just-bees-and-butterflies-beetles-and-other-brilliant-bugs-are-natures-unsung-pollinators-246484

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato

Nearly 30 years before the Christchurch terror attacks of March 15 2019, New Zealand had to grapple with the horrors of another mass shooting. The Aramoana massacre on November 13 1990 left 13 people dead and a nation reeling.

But the firearms law changes made in the aftermath were inadequate, and the failure to tighten regulations arguably left the door open for the Christchurch atrocity – committed by a licensed firearms owner.

By contrast, after the Port Arthur massacre that killed 35 people on April 28 1996, Australia adopted fundamental changes to its firearms laws and banned semiautomatic rifles.

Later analysis suggests those reforms helped avoid a statistically likely 16 mass shootings. New Zealand didn’t match the Australian example, and it wasn’t until the Christchurch attacks that vast improvements to firearms laws were enacted.

But New Zealand still differs in significant ways from Australian federal and state models. With our Arms Act under review, and with a major rewrite due probably later this year, there are six key areas where we might learn from our nearest neighbour.

1. Genuine reasons to own a firearm

Australia and New Zealand both treat the possession of a firearm as a legal privilege, not a right as it is in the United States. But Australia differs in that a licence applicant must show a genuine reason to possess the firearms.

This is typically associated with other requirements, such as membership of a gun club or proof of other reasons to own a firearm (such as occupational or recreational needs).

Australia also has a 28-day “cooling off” period between an applicant being granted a licence and their ability to buy a firearm.

Licensed gun owners can only buy ammunition suited to the specifically licensed firearm. Australia,
like Canada, also sets a maximum magazine capacity of ten cartridges for most handguns.

Currently, New Zealand gun laws do not carry any of these restrictions.

2. The right character referees

Like Australia, New Zealand requires firearms owners to be “fit and proper” people. But none of the eight Australian state or territorial jurisdictions accept self-nominated character referees.

Instead, they apply a more investigative approach, during which police may talk to a wider range of people to assess the suitability of applicants. Each step of the process is laid out in greater detail, such as when health risk assessments may be required.

3. A more robust firearms register

Australia has taken firearms registration – and the traceability of every gun – very seriously since the shooting of two police officers and a member of the public in an ambush attack in rural Queensland in 2022. A lack of real-time available information about the offenders was identified as a contributing factor in the tragedy.

A national firearms register, hosted by the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, is under construction. This will provide front-line officers with information on owners, firearms and parts, linked to other relevant police and government data.

Unlike in New Zealand, Australian authorities do not accept sales or transfers between individual firearms owners. These must go through registered dealers, who act as brokers for the transfer, adding an extra layer of security.

But the key lesson from Australia is that to be effective, firearms registries should sit within the police, not civilian bureaucracies.

4. A gradual licence system for young people

In New Zealand, an applicant for a firearms licence must be at least 16 years old. But there is no minimum age requirement for handling a firearm, only the rule that a young person must be under the “immediate supervision” of someone with a firearms licence.

There have been suggestions of adapted firearms licence safety courses in schools, which would see year 11 to 13 pupils receive initial vetting and a certificate as a stepping stone towards a full licence.

It’s a promising idea, but given the known risks of young people and violent extremism, and international experience of school shootings, this would need to be managed carefully.

An alternative might be the Australian approach, where young people are more formally brought into the licensing system with a “minor’s permit”. These are similar to a learner driver’s licence, with the aim of easing young people into responsible firearms ownership.

5. Limits on how many firearms can be owned

Large caches of fully operable firearms (unlike vintage collections, which are permanently inoperable) can attract criminal attention, for obvious reasons.

Western Australia is the first state to impose a limit on the number of firearms an individual can hold, modelled on a number of European systems. A licensed competition shooter can own ten, and a licensed hunter five.

New Zealand has no limits on how many firearms a licensed holder may possess.

6. Strong firearms prohibition orders

The New Zealand government came late to firearms prohibition orders, only realising their benefit in 2022.

These legal orders seek to prevent high-risk people from using, accessing or being around firearms. Although they have recently been augmented with greater search powers, only about 120 orders have been issued.

By comparison, since its own law was created in 1996, New South Wales has issued thousands of orders. In other words, it requires decades of work to mitigate risks to public safety.

The much needed rewrite of the Arms Act is a chance to learn from best practice around the world. Closest to home, Australia has laws, practices and proven results that should prompt us to ask, why not here?

The author thanks Clementine Annabell for assisting with the research for this article.

Alexander Gillespie is a recipient of a Borrin Foundation Justice Fellowship to research comparative best practice in the regulation of firearms. He is also a member of the Ministerial Arms Advisory Group. The views expressed here are his own and not to be attributed to either of these organisations.

– ref. Australia has learned valuable lessons from its own shooting tragedies: 6 ideas NZ can borrow – https://theconversation.com/australia-has-learned-valuable-lessons-from-its-own-shooting-tragedies-6-ideas-nz-can-borrow-252178