Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rick Sarre, Emeritus Professor in Law and Criminal Justice, University of South Australia

After seven weeks of evidence, six days of summing up, and six and a half days of jury deliberation in the Victorian Supreme Court sitting in Morwell, Victoria, the verdict is finally in. Erin Patterson murdered her estranged husband’s parents, Don and Gail Patterson, along with Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson.

She was also found guilty of attempting to murder Heather’s husband Ian: the only guest to survive the beef wellington lunch served in July 2023 at her home in Leongatha.

In delivering the guilty verdict, the jury was satisfied Erin Patterson had complete control over the ingredients that went into the meal portions served to her guests – portions that included death cap mushrooms.

There would not be too many observers surprised with the outcome, given the strength of the prosecution case presented by Nanette Rogers.

There were no procedural surprises in this case. The prosecution presented its case, followed by the defence and ultimately, a jury verdict.

But this much-publicised case raises a number of legal issues that contributed to the length of the trial and its outcome. Let’s unpack them.

Motive doesn’t matter

The first is the question of motive. Defence counsel Colin Mandy made much of his assertion that there was no apparent reason for the accused to kill her guests.

It is, however, a mistake to think there needs to be a motive in order to convict. In cases of murder and attempted murder, all that’s required is for a jury to find a “culpable state of mind”.

In the case of the three deceased, the jury needed to be satisfied, beyond any reasonable doubt, that there was an intention to kill, or to do serious bodily harm.

In other words, it did not matter why Patterson killed her victims, only that she intended to do so, or to inflict serious harm with death resulting. In the case of the surviving guest, the jury was satisfied that there had been an intention to kill.

Establishing a motive is a useful tool that prosecution counsel may deploy to add fuel to the fire in the courtroom, but it was not necessary for Rogers to locate a motive in order for the jury to reach guilty verdicts.

Circumstantial, but substantial

Another oft-repeated fallacy is that guilty verdicts require more than “mere” circumstantial evidence.

In fact, most evidence in criminal cases is circumstantial, because direct evidence (such as an eyewitness or a visual or voice recording) is usually unavailable.

The circumstantial evidence in this case, according to the prosecution, included the attempted hiding of a tainted dehydrator, the doubt cast over whether an Asian grocer was the source of the poisonous mushrooms, and the fact that Erin Patterson’s meal portion was free of the deadly ingredient.

Placed together, this circumstantial evidence was strong enough for the 12 men and women to return guilty verdicts.

Indeed, taking into consideration the strength of this evidence, it is perhaps surprising that Patterson did not plead guilty to murder, given the discount on sentence she may have received. She chose to take her chances with a jury. Ultimately, she failed.

Days of summing up

Another interesting aspect of the case is that the summing up by the two lead barristers, and then the judge, took more than six days. A generation ago, these addresses would have typically taken considerably less time than that.

The change, which has occurred slowly over the last two decades, has been necessitated by appeal judgements following guilty verdicts in long trials. In some of these, defence counsel successfully argued the defence case was not sufficiently covered in the judge’s summing up.

That being the case, the prosecution summary now needs to preempt every aspect of the defence case, knowing the defence counsel summary that follows will attend to every last point that the prosecution has raised.

Then the judge needs to give chapter and verse (in this case, over four days) in relation to everything again, paying particular attention to the defence case.

The process is now laborious and time-consuming. One might pity the jurors hearing everything over and over again.

Indeed, we believe there is little evidence this very expensive change has raised the quality of verdicts.

But one cannot doubt the way that the criminal process now goes to extraordinary lengths to ensure that an accused receives a fair trial. We will never know why the jury took over six days to reach its verdict (in Australia they are duty bound not to reveal anything of their deliberations), but it does indicate the seriousness with which they treat their role in this process.

The trust that is placed in the hands of jurors, even with the high profile media frenzy that this case elicited, remains firm.

On the other hand, with such drawn-out procedures, it’s perhaps not surprising that court backlogs continue to grow, and ever-increasing numbers of people (currently 42% of the Australian prison population) are sitting in prison on remand, awaiting trial.

What now?

The maximum sentence for murder in Victoria is life imprisonment. This does not necessarily mean life in prison, for the minimum non-parole period is 30 years, unless a court considers it not in the interests of justice to set such a term.

Erin Patterson will likely receive a life sentence, with a non-parole period that is in keeping with the number of victims.

The head sentence and non-parole period will be set by Justice Christopher Beale after sentencing submissions in the days and weeks to come.

The so-called “mushroom case” still has another chapter to run.

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. Erin Patterson has been found guilty in the mushroom murder trial. Legal experts explain why – https://theconversation.com/erin-patterson-has-been-found-guilty-in-the-mushroom-murder-trial-legal-experts-explain-why-230294

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erica Kuligowski, Vice-Chancellor’s Senior Research Fellow, School of Engineering, RMIT University

Harrowing stories are emerging in the wake of catastrophic and sudden flooding over the fourth of July weekend in Texas – where many people were camping, and children were at riverside summer camp.

More than 80 people are confirmed dead (28 of whom were children) and 12 people are still missing. Parents have described finding children’s bodies while picking through flood debris searching for their own missing kids.

In Texas, the floodwaters rose very rapidly and in the middle of the night. Authorities had issued flood warnings but many people were still caught off-guard.

Sudden floods can also happen in Australia, as seen recently in New South Wales around Taree and Lismore, in the wake of ex-Cyclone Alfred.

As climate change makes severe weather events more frequent, it’s worth asking: how ready is Australia for its next sudden flood? And what could help to encourage people to leave while there’s still time?

It’s hard to appreciate how suddenly floods happen

Decades of research shows disasters can emerge and change very quickly. Hazards at night are especially difficult, because much can change while people are sleeping.

Even when flood warnings are issued, authorities can struggle to convince people the problem will affect them.

People often base their risk assessments on what’s happened in the past. So, if they live in an area that has experienced minor flooding before, they may think the current flood will be similarly minor.

Research also shows people often wait for extra evidence to confirm the initial warnings from officials. They might look to see if people around them are preparing to leave, or look for cues from the environment such as a sudden burst of loud rain.

Unfortunately, waiting can mean you miss the opportunity to leave. A road may close, or services may be overwhelmed and evacuation may no longer be an option. Escape options can narrow incredibly quickly, especially when people are asleep.

What about early warning systems?

The Albanese government announced in 2023 it would spend A$236 million over a decade to establish a national flood warning network. This will involve buying and upgrading flood gauges across Australia and trying to repair what the government has called “patchwork flood gauge network”.

That’s important, and it’s also positive to see other research on ways we can use existing technology infrastructure such as mobile phone towers to get early warnings on rising floodwaters.

But technology is only one part of the bigger picture. As growing body of research shows, many people do not evacuate even when warned about floods or fire.

Communicating risk in a disaster

Authorities must find ways to communicate disaster risk in a way that people will respond to.

Research shows getting the message out through as many channels as possible is crucial. People need to hear about the warnings on TV and on radio and online through various platforms and via local groups as well as national authorities.

The evidence also suggests people are more likely to trust messages coming from others in their community.

So, emergency agencies should work through community “champions” to help spread the word about an impending flood threat. It could be the principal of a school, a trusted source in a non-English speaking community, local emergency services volunteers or the manager of a local neighbourhood centre.

Emergency and government agencies need to identify trusted sources in communities, and build connections with them, before the crisis arrives to ensure information is disseminated smoothly in an emergency.

Tailoring information is key

Many people hear warnings and believe a flood is coming, but may think the worst impacts won’t happen in their area. This is a very common misconception.

That’s why information should be tailored so people understand the risk at their particular location.

Helping people understand the consequences of not evacuating is also vital. This might mean messaging such as “if you don’t leave now, the floods will be over your roof and we may not be able to come and rescue you or your children or pet”.

Residents may not understand how fast floodwaters can move, that conditions may be very choppy and windy, or that large and dangerous debris will be coming at them and their children in a flood. This should also be communicated clearly.

Education prior to the crisis event can help people understand what flood waters can do at their location. This community awareness should be conducted in flood-prone areas at regular intervals.

Localised, tailored information can help people understand what will happen to them and their families if they don’t leave early enough – hopefully preventing devastating death tolls of the kind Texas is now grappling with.

Erica Kuligowski has received funding from the Australian Research Council and from Natural Hazards Research Australia.

– ref. In Texas, parents search flood debris for missing kids. Are Australians ready for our own sudden floods? – https://theconversation.com/in-texas-parents-search-flood-debris-for-missing-kids-are-australians-ready-for-our-own-sudden-floods-260581

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Victoria Barclay-Timmis, Adjunct Lecturer in Psychology, University of Southern Queensland

Imagine your friend hasn’t replied to a message in a few hours. Most people might think, “they are probably just busy”.

But someone with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) might spiral into a flood of thoughts like, “they must hate me!” or “I’ve ruined the friendship!”

These intense emotional reactions to real or imagined rejection are part of what’s called rejection sensitive dysphoria.

The term isn’t a formal diagnosis, but it’s gaining traction in both research and clinical work, especially among adults seeking to understand themselves better.

So, what is rejection sensitive dysphoria, how does it relate to ADHD, and how can we handle it with more compassion?

It’s more than just disliking criticism

Everyone feels hurt when they’re criticised or left out. But rejection sensitivity dysphoria isn’t just about “not liking” feedback. The word dysphoria refers to intense emotional distress.

People with rejection sensitivity dysphoria describe overwhelming reactions to perceived rejection, even if no one actually said or did anything cruel.

A passing comment such as “I thought you were going to do it this way” can trigger feelings of shame, embarrassment or self-doubt.

The emotional pain often feels immediate and consuming, leading some people to withdraw, over-apologise or lash out to protect themselves.

The ADHD brain and emotional hypersensitivity

ADHD is often associated with attention or impulsivity, but one major (and often overlooked) component is emotional dysregulation: difficulty managing and recovering from strong emotional responses.

This isn’t a character flaw; it’s a neurological difference. Brain imaging studies show people with ADHD tend to have differences in how their amygdala (the brain’s emotional alarm system) and prefrontal cortex (which regulates impulses and emotions) work together.

The result? Emotional experiences hit harder and take longer to settle.

A 2018 study highlights this imbalance in emotional control circuits in people with ADHD, explaining why intense feelings can seem to “take over” before logical thinking kicks in.

What does the research say?

Recent research from 2024 reports a strong link between ADHD symptoms and rejection sensitivity. It found students with higher ADHD symptom levels also reported significantly more rejection sensitivity, including a heightened fear of being negatively evaluated or criticised.

Further evidence comes from a 2018 study which showed adolescents with ADHD symptoms were far more sensitive to peer feedback than their peers. Their brain activity revealed they were more emotionally reactive to both praise and criticism, suggesting they may perceive neutral social cues as emotionally charged.

This reflects what I see daily in my clinic. One 13-year-old boy I work with is creative, empathetic and full of potential, yet social anxiety tied to a deep fear of rejection often holds him back. He once told me, “if I say no, they won’t like me anymore”. That fear drives him to go along with things he later regrets, simply to keep the peace and avoid losing connection.

This constant social hypervigilance is mentally draining. Without support, it can spiral into shame, low confidence and ongoing mental health struggles.

Read more:
Parents are increasingly saying their child is ‘dysregulated’. What does that actually mean?

Adults with ADHD aren’t immune either. A 2022 study explored how adults with ADHD experience criticism and found many linked it to persistent feelings of failure, low self-worth and emotional reactivity – even when the criticism was constructive or mild.

One client I support – a high-achieving professional diagnosed in her 50s – described learning about rejection sensitive dysphoria as “finding the missing piece of the puzzle”.

Despite consistently excelling in every role, she had long felt anxious about how she was perceived by colleagues. When she received a minor, formal complaint at work, she spiralled into intense self-doubt and shame.

Instead of brushing it off, she thought: “I’m too much”. This belief
had been silently reinforced for years by her emotional sensitivity to feedback.

What helps?

If you experience rejection sensitivity dysphoria, you’re not alone, and you’re not broken.

Here are some tools that may help:

• name it. Saying to yourself, “This feels like rejection sensitivity,” can give you distance from the emotional flood

• pause before reacting. Taking slow breaths, counting backwards, or stepping outside are simple grounding strategies that help calm the body’s stress response and restore balance to your nervous system. Research shows slowing your breath and grounding your senses can help shift your body out of fight-or-flight mode, supporting clearer thinking and emotional regulation

• challenge the story. Ask yourself, “What else could be true?” or “How would I speak to a friend feeling this way?”

• consider therapy. Working with a psychologist who understands ADHD and rejection sensitivity dysphoria can help untangle these reactions and develop healthy, self-compassionate responses. The Australian Psychological Society has a Find a Psychologist service: you can search by location, areas of expertise (such as anxiety, ADHD, trauma) and the type of therapy you’re interested in

• start early with kids. Helping children with ADHD learn emotional language, boundary-setting and resilience can prevent rejection sensitivity from becoming overwhelming. For parents, resources such as Raising Children Network and books like The Whole-Brain Child by Daniel Siegel and Tina Payne Bryson offer practical ways to teach these skills at home

• communicate gently. If you work or live with someone who has ADHD, try to give feedback clearly and kindly. Avoid sarcasm or vague phrasing. A little extra clarity can go a long way.

Rejection sensitivity dysphoria isn’t about being fragile or “weak”. It’s about how the ADHD brain processes emotional and social cues. With insight, tools and support, these experiences can become manageable.

Victoria Barclay-Timmis is a clinical psychologist and works in private practice.

– ref. What is rejection sensitive dysphoria in ADHD? And how can you manage it? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-rejection-sensitive-dysphoria-in-adhd-and-how-can-you-manage-it-259995

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

In recent weeks, the US State Department implemented a policy requiring all university, technical training, or exchange program visa applicants to disclose their social media handles used over the past five years. The policy also requires these applicants to set their profiles to public.

This move is an example of governments treating a person’s digital persona as their political identity. In doing so, they risk punishing lawful expression, targeting minority voices, and redefining who gets to cross borders based on how they behave online.

Anyone seeking one of these visas will have their social media searched for “indications of hostility” towards the citizens, culture or founding principles of the United States. This enhanced vetting is supposed to ensure the US does not admit anyone who may be deemed a threat.

However, this policy changes how a person’s online presence is evaluated in visa applications and raises many ethical concerns. These include concerns around privacy, freedom of expression, and the politicisation of digital identities.

Digital profiling

The Trump administration has previously taken aim at higher education with the goal of changing the ideological slant of these institutions, including making changes to international student enrolment and the role of foreign nationals in US research institutions.

Digital rights advocates have expressed concerns this new requirement could lead to self-censorship and hinder freedom of expression.

It is unknown exactly which specific online actions will trigger a visa refusal, as the US government hasn’t disclosed detailed criteria. However, guidance to consular officers indicates that digital behaviour suggesting “hostility” toward the US or its values may be grounds for concern.

Internal advice suggests officers are trained to look for social media content that may reflect extremist views, criminal associations or ideological opposition to the US.

Political ‘passport’

In a sense, this policy turns a visa applicant’s online presence into a kind of political passport. It allows for scrutiny not just of past behaviour but also of ideological views.

Digital identity is not just a technical construct. It carries legal, philosophical and historical weight. It can influence access to rights, recognition and legitimacy, both online and offline.

Once this identity is interpreted by state institutions, it can become a tool for control shaped by institutional whims. Governments justify digital surveillance as a way to spot threats. But research consistently shows it leads to overreach.

A recent report found that US social media monitoring programs have frequently flagged activists and religious minorities. It also found the programs lacked transparency and oversight.

Digital freedom nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation has warned these tools risk punishing people for lawful expression or for simply being connected to certain communities.

The US is not alone in integrating digital surveillance into border security. China has implemented social credit systems. And the United Kingdom is exploring digital ID systems for immigration control. There are even calls for Australia to use artificial intelligence to facilitate digital border checks.

The United Nations has raised concerns about the global trend toward digital vetting at borders, especially when used without judicial oversight or transparency.

A free speech issue

These new checks could have a chilling effect on self-expression. This is particularly true for those with views that don’t align with governments or who are from minority backgrounds.

We’ve seen this previously. After whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed widespread use of data gathering by US intelligence agencies, people stopped visiting politically sensitive Wikipedia articles. Not because they were told to, but because they feared being watched.

This policy won’t just affect visa applicants. It could shift how people use social media in general. That’s because there is no clear rulebook for what counts as “acceptable”. And when no one knows where the line is, people self-censor more than is necessary.

What can you do?

If you think you might apply for an affected visa in the future, here are some tips.

1. Audit your social media history now. Old posts, “likes” or follows from years ago may be reviewed and judged out of context. Review your public posts on platforms such as Instagram, Facebook and X. Delete or archive anything that might be misconstrued.

2. Separate personal and professional online identities. Consider keeping distinct accounts for private and public engagement. Use pseudonyms for creative or informal content. Immigration authorities are far less likely to misinterpret context when your online presence is clearly tied to your educational or professional goals.

3. Understand your online visibility and history. Even if you have privacy settings enabled, tagged content, public “likes”, comments and follows can still be seen. Algorithms expose content based on associations, not just what you post. Don’t assume your visibility is limited to your followers.

4. Keep records of any deleted or misinterpreted posts. If you think something might be questioned or if you delete posts ahead of an application, keep a backup. Consular officials may request clarification or evidence. It’s better to be prepared than to be caught off-guard without explanation.

Your social media is no longer a personal space. It may be used by governments to determine whether you fit in.

Samuel Cornell receives funding from an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Linkage Project ‘Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media’. He is a Chief Investigator with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is an affiliate with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

– ref. New US directive for visa applicants turns social media feeds into political documents – https://theconversation.com/new-us-directive-for-visa-applicants-turns-social-media-feeds-into-political-documents-260201

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andy Nguyen, Senior Lecturer in Structural Engineering, University of Southern Queensland

The Story Bridge, with its sweeping steel trusses and art deco towers, is a striking sight above the Brisbane River in Queensland. In 2025, it was named the state’s best landmark. But more than an icon, it serves as one of the vital arteries of the state capital, carrying more than 100,000 vehicles daily.

But a recent report revealed serious structural issues in the 85-year-old bridge. These included the deterioration of concrete, corrosion and overloading on pedestrian footpaths.

The findings prompted an urgent closure of the footpath for safety reasons. They also highlighted the urgency of Brisbane City Council’s planned bridge restoration project.

But this example – and far more tragic ones from around the world in recent years – have also sparked a broader conversation about the safety of ageing bridges and other urban infrastructure. A simple, proactive step known as structural health monitoring can help.

A number of collapses

In January 2022, the Fern Hollow Bridge in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in the United States collapsed and injured several people. This collapse was caused by extensive corrosion and the fracturing of a vital steel component. It stemmed from poor maintenance and failure to act on repeated inspection recommendations. These problems were compounded by inadequate inspections and oversight.

Three years earlier, Taiwan’s Nanfang’ao Bridge collapsed. Exposure to damp, salty sea air had severely weakened its suspension cables. Six people beneath the bridge died.

In August 2018, Italy’s Morandi Bridge fell, killing 43 people. The collapse was due to corrosion in pre-stressed concrete and steel tendons. These factors were worsened by inspection and maintenance challenges.

In August 2007, a bridge in the US city of Minneapolis collapsed, killing 13 people and injuring 145. This collapse was primarily due to previously unnoticed problems with the design of the bridge. But it also demonstrated how ageing infrastructure, coupled with increasing loads and ineffective routine visual inspections, can exacerbate inherent weaknesses.

A technology-driven solution

Structural health monitoring is a technology-driven approach to assessing the condition of infrastructure. It can provide near real-time information and enable timely decision-making. This is crucial when it comes to managing ageing structures.

The approach doesn’t rely solely on occasional periodic inspections. Instead it uses sensors, data loggers and analytics platforms to continuously monitor stress, vibration, displacement, temperature and corrosion on critical components.

This approach can significantly improve our understanding of bridge performance compared to traditional assessment models. In one case, it updated a bridge’s estimated fatigue life – the remaining life of the structure before fatigue-induced failure is predicted to occur– from just five years to more than 52 years. This ultimately avoided unnecessary and costly restoration.

Good structural health-monitoring systems can last several decades. They can be integrated with artificial intelligence techniques and bridge information modelling to develop digital twin-based monitoring platforms.

The cost of structural health monitoring systems varies by bridge size and the extent of monitoring required. Some simple systems can cost just a few thousand dollars, while more advanced ones can cost more than A$300,000.

These systems require ongoing operational support – typically 10% to 20% of the installation cost annually – for data management, system maintenance, and informed decision-making.

Additionally, while advanced systems can be costly, scalable structural health monitoring solutions allow authorities to start small and expand over time.

A model for proactive management

The design of structural health monitoring systems has been incorporated into new large-scale bridge designs, such as Sutong Bridge in China and Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge in the US.

But perhaps the most compelling example of these systems in action is the Jacques Cartier Bridge in Montreal, Canada.

Opened in 1930, it shares design similarities with Brisbane’s Story Bridge. And, like many ageing structures, it faces its own challenges.

However, authorities managing the Jacques Cartier Bridge have embraced a proactive approach through comprehensive structural health monitoring systems. The bridge has been outfitted with more than 300 sensors.

Acoustic emission monitoring enables early detection of micro-cracking activity, while long-term instrumentation tracks structural deformation and dynamic behaviour across key spans.

Satellite-based radar imagery adds a remote, non-intrusive layer of deformation monitoring, and advanced data analysis ensures that the vast amounts of sensor data are translated into timely, actionable insights.

Together, these technologies demonstrate how a well-integrated structural-health monitoring system can support proactive maintenance, extend the life of ageing infrastructure – and ultimately improve public safety.

A way forward for Brisbane – and beyond

The Story Bridge’s current challenges are serious, but they also present an opportunity.

By investing in the right structural health monitoring system, Brisbane can lead the way in modern infrastructure management – protecting lives, restoring public confidence, preserving heritage and setting a precedent for cities around the world.

As climate change, urban growth, and ageing assets put increasing pressure on our transport networks, smart monitoring is no longer a luxury – it’s a necessity.

Andy Nguyen receives funding from the Queensland government, through the Advance Queensland fellowship. He is on the executive committee of Australian Network of Structural Health Monitoring.

– ref. Ageing bridges around the world are at risk of collapse. But there’s a simple way to safeguard them – https://theconversation.com/ageing-bridges-around-the-world-are-at-risk-of-collapse-but-theres-a-simple-way-to-safeguard-them-260005

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lynette Riley, Co-chair of the National NAIDOC Committee and Professor in the Sydney School of Education and Social Work; and Chair, Aboriginal Education and Indigenous Studies.original Education & Indigenous Studies., University of Sydney

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and/or images of deceased people.

In 1938, when Australia celebrated the sesquicentenary – 150 years since Captain Phillip and the First Fleet landed in Sydney Cove – the organisers wanted Aboriginal people to be involved in a re-enactment.

More than 25 Aboriginal men were rounded up from Menindee in western New South Wales. They were told if they did not perform the role of running up the beach away from the British, their families would starve.

Ngiyaampaa elder Beryl (Yunghadhu) Philp Carmichael, who was three at the time, recollected years later that all she could remember was the crying:

All the women were crying. Whether they were taking them away to be massacred, no one knew.

The re-enactment was of course a fallacy of what really happened on January 26 1788 – it was a “white-washing” of history.

The mistreatment of the Menindee men illustrates the anger that was simmering over the status and treatment of fellow Aboriginal kin.

Protests against Australia Day, which had been growing since the 1920s, led to the Aboriginal Day of Mourning, the first national gathering of Indigenous people speaking up against discrimination and dispossession.

The emergence of Aboriginal protest groups nearly a century ago gave birth in the 1970s to what eventually came to be known as the National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee (NAIDOC), which this year celebrates its 50th anniversary.

Celebrating culture

NAIDOC’s role is to encompass all Indigenous/First Nations peoples in Australia.

One week is set aside each July:

to celebrate and recognise the history, culture and achievements of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

NAIDOC Week is essentially a celebration of the oldest, continuous living cultures on earth. Numerous events are held across the country – performances, art and photographic exhibitions, smoking ceremonies and the popular National NAIDOC Awards.

They present a crucial opportunity to increase awareness in the wider community of Indigenous history and excellence, while acknowledging the challenges that remain.

It is distinct from Reconciliation Week, which focuses on relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.

As a current co-chair of the NAIDOC Committee, I recognise the ongoing need, as initially established by our Elders as the founders of NAIDOC Week, to highlight the continuing issues for us as Indigenous peoples in Australia.

NAIDOC themes

We do this by setting a theme each year focused on a specific challenge.

The themes are determined through deep consideration of the significant issues facing Indigenous peoples. They have evolved through political protests, social change, recognition, respect and appreciation of Indigenous rights.

Some examples down the years from the 1970s include:

• Advance Australia Where? (1972)
• Self Determination (1974)
• White Australia has a Black History (1987)
• Understanding It Takes the Two of Us (1985)
• Justice not Tolerance (1995)
• Gurindji, Mabo, Wik – Three Strikes for Justice (1997)
• Bringing Them Home (1998)
• Advance Australia Fair? (2008)
• Our Languages Matter (2017)
• Voice. Treaty. Truth. (2019)
• Always Was, Always Will Be (2020).

NAIDOC Week helps promote to the wider community the importance of truth-telling and learning of societal issues, the heritage of culture and languages, and the history of interactions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.

Ask yourself: what do you know about the themes? Why are they relevant and what impact do they have on Indigenous peoples across Australia?

Next generation

The theme for 2025 is “The Next Generation: Strength, Vision and Legacy”.

It was selected following the committee’s distress at the way in which our youth are often demeaned in the media and presented as social pariahs and potential risks to the wider community’s safety.

To us, our youth are our cultural and social strength, and the continuity for our communities.

We therefore celebrate our youth. We wish to highlight these amazing young people in our communities, as our vision and legacy for our future.

Look no further than our past NAIDOC Youth winners:

• Dante Rodrigues 2024: a professional martial arts and kickboxer who runs health and wellbeing programs for young Indigenous people

• Courtney Burns 2023: a marine biologist who is deeply passionate about the connection between ocean, Country and our Mob

• Elijah Manis 20022: Young islander working in the fields of social justice issues and the effects of climate change on the Torres Strait.

In NAIDOC and the ABC’s educational resource Culture Is Life, three young people speak of the kind of ancestor they would like to be to inspire future generations.

Visual artist Irwin Lewis said he would want to be known for his conservation of cultural knowledge, stories and language.

Foster care worker Shaylem Wilson nominated never turning away from hard truths, and working with young people who continue to be taken away from their families and Country, as well as maintaining and strengthening their family and cultural ties.

Youth advocate Manny Williams noted he wanted to seek deeper connection to Country to help guide the next generations of young people:

I want to be an ancestor who always nurtured everything
from people to Country — guiding those who seek a deeper
connection; sharing wisdom and knowledge to those who listen. An ancestor who is there to remind our people of the light we all have within ourselves.

The future is in the hands of these remarkable Indigenous youth as they grapple with the human rights, political and societal issues facing their communities.

Many Australians have much to learn from NAIDOC Week.

All of us have much to celebrate.

Lynette Riley is the co-chair of the National NAIDOC Committee

– ref. Much to celebrate as NAIDOC Week turns 50, but also much to learn – https://theconversation.com/much-to-celebrate-as-naidoc-week-turns-50-but-also-much-to-learn-259900

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne

Medicare spending on mental health services varies considerably depending on where in Australia you live, our new study shows.

We found areas with lower Medicare spending on out-of-hospital mental health services had poorer mental health outcomes, including more suicides.

This variation across the country was mostly related to factors such as a shortage of mental health providers and GPs, rather than people in some regions being in poorer mental health in the first place.

We also looked at how much extra government funding in today’s money would make a difference to people’s mental health across the population, using the latest data.

We worked out increasing government spending on out-of-hospital mental health services by A$153 million a year – about $7.30 per adult per year – could lead to:

• 28,151 fewer mental health emergency department visits (a 10% reduction)

• 1,954 fewer hospitalisations due to self-harm (a 20% reduction)

• 313 fewer suicides (a 10% reduction).

Here’s where our research suggests it’s best to target this extra funding.

What we did

We looked at Medicare-funded out-of-hospital mental health services, such as GP mental health visits, as well as visits to psychologists and psychiatrists. For the purposes of this article, we’ll call these Medicare-funded mental health services.

We also looked at mental health prescriptions (such as for depression or anxiety).

We looked at these services and prescriptions for the entire Australian population from 2011 to 2019.

We followed adults as they moved between regions to see how their use of mental health services and prescriptions changed after the move. This meant we could account for underlying individual factors, such as someone’s mental health needs.

Our study allowed us to assess how differences in the availability of mental health care across regions impacted how much the government spends on mental health services and prescriptions, and how this links to people’s mental health outcomes.

What we found

We found that only 28% of variation in spending on mental health services across regions was driven by patient-related factors, such as their need for mental health care. The rest was due to geographical reasons, such as availability of mental health providers and GPs.

But about 81% of the regional variation in spending on mental health scripts was due to patient factors.

In other words, when people experience mental health distress, accessing mental health medications, largely provided by a GP, is much easier than accessing care from a psychiatrist or a psychologist.

Areas with lower spending on out-of-hospital mental health services had higher rates of mental health-related emergency department visits, hospitalisations for self-harm, and suicides.

We mapped access to mental health services

We also compared funding for people with the same “need” for mental health services across different regions. This was from the best access (the most funding) at 100% down to 0% (no access).

After controlling for factors such as socioeconomic background and underlying mental health-care need, the region with the best access was the Gold Coast, with the highest Medicare spending on out-of-hospital mental health services.

The regions with the worst access were western Queensland and the Northern Territory. Here, a person with similar mental health-care needs would receive about 50% less in mental health service spending compared to someone on the Gold Coast.

How can we use our findings?

Recent analyses suggest government mental health expenditure has barely changed in 30 years. It now sits at about 7.4% of the total health budget.

Our results suggest there is unmet need for mental health services across the board. But some regions are more affected than others.

So we should target extra funding to rural and low-income regions – particularly when considering expanding access to psychologists and psychiatrists.

Recent policy initiatives have tried to improve access to GPs. This includes creating financial incentives for providers to bulk bill and to practise in underserved regions.

However, these policies have had little or modest effects on boosting access to GPs. There has also been much less focus on attracting more specialty mental health providers, such as psychologists or psychiatrists, to underserved areas.

To address the disparities and unmet needs in mental health care, we recommend:

• expanding the mental health workforce: implementing targeted incentives to attract and retain psychologists, psychiatrists, and mental health-trained GPs in underserved areas

• reforming funding models: adjusting funding allocations and incentives to target regions where there is significant unmet need. Our map shows which regions should be targeted first

• improving access to digital mental health services: using technology to provide accessible mental health support, particularly in areas with limited in-person services, while ensuring digital solutions are integrated with traditional care pathways.

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

Karinna Saxby receives funding from the University of Melbourne McKenzie Fellowship.

Dennis Petrie receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF), Australian Research Council (ARC), Transport Accident Commission (TAC), National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA), Department of Health, Disability and Aged Care, Department of Social Services (DSS), Breast Cancer Trials and WISE (Employment Service Provider).

Sonja de New receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).

– ref. Just $7 extra per person could prevent 300 suicides a year. Here’s exactly where to spend it – https://theconversation.com/just-7-extra-per-person-could-prevent-300-suicides-a-year-heres-exactly-where-to-spend-it-259890

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tama Te Puea Braithwaite-Westoby, Tautoro Māori Engagement Advisor, Malaghan Institute of Medical Research

In biomedical science, the immune system is described as a cellular defence network that identifies and neutralises threats. In te ao Māori (the Māori worldview), it can be seen as a dynamic system of guardianship, known as te pūnaha awhikiri.

For Māori, wellbeing is relational and interconnected. It encompasses physical, mental, spiritual and environmental health. Within this understanding, we can think about the immune system as a living guardian that protects and regulates an individual’s internal balance and connection to the wider world.

Te pūnaha (system) awhikiri (immunity) expresses how the immune system functions through the lens of mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge), including through concepts such as kaitiakitanga (guardianship), whakapapa (genealogy) and tautika (balance).

The image of a guardian that embraces and protects, and invites empathy and identity, may engage better with people who traditionally have been left out of science and health system discussions.

Framing the immune system through this cultural perspective offers an opportunity to engage Māori communities and to better support public health in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Protecting the land

The immune system is a complex network of cells, tissues and signalling pathways designed to detect and eliminate pathogens. In te ao Māori, this function can be likened to that of a kaitiaki, or guardian, who acts to preserve and protect whenua – which means both land and placenta – and everything in it.

To understand this perspective, it is worth considering several key ideas around the mythological origin, significance and guardianship of land.

In te ao Māori, the universe was formed from Te Kore, a place of potential without form or shape (like the formless void of Greek mythology). From this space, the two major deities of Māori mythology – Ranginui the Sky Father and Papatūānuku the Earth Mother – emerged tightly bound to one another.

Then came Te Pō, a place of darkness in which the deities’ children came into being; foremost among them was Tāne Mahuta who eventually forced his parents apart to reveal Te Ao Mārama, the world of light.

Hence the intermingling of placenta and land, referring to Papatūānuku having begot all life. Land itself becomes a living entity from whence all things come. From Tāne Māhuta we get the first person, Hine-ahu-one, forged from sacred red earth, giving rise to tangata whenua or people of the Earth.

Parallels between immunology and te ao Māori

Taken as a starting point for understanding te ao Māori, te pūnaha awhikiri guards the integrity of the body and its essential life force (mauri). It is imbued with intelligence, memory and purpose, constantly working to sustain balance (tautika) within the body.

There are numerous ways in which we can overlay ideas from mātauranga Māori with the scientific understanding of te pūnaha awhikiri. At its core, the immune system detects foreign agents entering the body, mobilises immune cells to respond appropriately, regulates the strength of response and creates memory of the incursion. These functions map onto concepts in te ao Māori.

Detecting foreign agents is akin to the idea of tauhou, which describes a foreign entity to the body (in terms of a culture or society, a landmass or a person). This term brings to mind the experience of colonisation to Māori people and is associated with the notion of cultural and social institutions displacing tribal authority.

Mobilisation of immune cells reflects the call to action embodied by kaitiaki, people who respond when the need arises to protect their whenua and whānau (family). Often this response may begin with an individual, but that individual can promote an entire whānau, hapū or even iwi to mobilise.

Immunological memory mirrors the ways in which tūpuna (ancestors) pass on inter-generational knowledge to their whānau. This knowledge transfer means people learn lessons from the past, which helps formulate responses for future events or fighting pathogens.

Signal regulation is conceptually similar to how tapu (sacred) and noa (ordinary) regulate the spiritual, social and physical order of things. In te ao Māori, someone may enter a state of tapu (sacredness or spiritual potency) for many reasons, such as to learn sacred knowledge or go to war. However, it is not sustainable to remain in this state for too long and rituals are used to return that person to a state of noa. These rituals are ordained by particular individuals imbued with the correct teachings.

Beyond the body

Mātauranga Māori recognises that wellbeing is not just a condition of the body but a state of balance across a network of relationships – between people, land, spirit and ancestors. When these bonds are intact, the system operates with integrity. But when disconnection or trauma occurs, the life force can be diminished, leaving the body and spirit more vulnerable to imbalance and illness.

Te taiao (the natural world) plays a key role for maintaining balance. Time spent in forests, rivers or coastal areas, especially those of ancestral significance, has long been understood in Māori culture to nourish wellbeing. Contemporary science now supports this, showing that immersion in nature can reduce inflammation, lower stress hormones and strengthen immune function.

For Māori, the value is not just physiological; it is spiritual and genealogical. The land is not an external environment. It is kin.

Just as inflammation or infection signals imbalance in Western medicine, in te ao Māori it may indicate a deeper disharmony – one that cannot be resolved without restoring the relationships that sustain life.

Te pūnaha awhikiri responds not only to pathogens or physical threats, but to disconnection, breach of tapu and the lingering effects of cultural trauma. Healing, therefore, is not just a return to physical wellness but a return to relationships. It is an embrace of the people, places and practices that keep us whole.

Te pūnaha awhikiri offers a cultural narrative that unifies numerous strands of mātauranga Māori with science. These ideas affirm Māori ways of knowing, using concepts that reflect inter-connectedness and ancestral insight. They invite understanding of health not as mechanistic, but as a dynamic state of tautika between multiple dimensions.

This opens space for blending Indigenous knowledge and science, supporting inclusive dialogue about different ways of reaching Te Ao Mārama – enlightenment.

Tama Te Puea Braithwaite-Westoby works for the Malaghan Institute of Medical Research. Tama has also recently become an affiliate investigator for the Maurice Wilkins Centre.

– ref. A Māori worldview describes the immune system as a guardian – this could improve public health in Aotearoa NZ – https://theconversation.com/a-maori-worldview-describes-the-immune-system-as-a-guardian-this-could-improve-public-health-in-aotearoa-nz-259025

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne

Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy transition without the problems of mining on land. It also promises to bring wealth to developing nations. But the evidence suggests these promises are false, and mining would harm the environment.

The practice involves scooping up rock-like nodules from vast areas of the sea floor. These potato-sized lumps contain metals and minerals such as zinc, manganese, molybdenum, nickel and rare earth elements.

Technology to mine the deep sea exists, but commercial mining of the deep sea is not happening anywhere in the world. That could soon change. Nations are meeting this month in Kingston, Jamaica, to agree to a mining code. Such a code would make way for mining to begin within the next few years.

On Thursday, Australia’s national science agency, CSIRO, released research into the environmental impacts of deep-sea mining. It aims to promote better environmental management of deep-sea mining, should it proceed.

We have previously challenged the rationale for deep-sea mining, drawing on our expertise in international politics and environmental management. We argue mining the deep sea is harmful and the economic benefits have been overstated. What’s more, the metals and minerals to be mined are not scarce.

The best course of action is a ban on international seabed mining, building on the coalition for a moratorium.

Managing and monitoring environmental harm

Recent advances in technology have made deep-sea mining more feasible. But removing the nodules – which also requires pumping water around – has been shown to damage the seabed and endanger marine life.

CSIRO has developed the first environmental management and monitoring frameworks to protect deep sea ecosystems from mining. It aims to provide “trusted, science-based tools to evaluate the environmental risks and viability of deep-sea mining”.

Scientists from Griffith University, Museums Victoria, the University of the Sunshine Coast, and Earth Sciences New Zealand were also involved in the work.

The Metals Company Australia, a local subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining exploration company, commissioned the research. It involved analysing data from test mining the company carried out in the Pacific Ocean in 2022.

The company has led efforts to expedite deep-sea mining. This includes pushing for the mining code, and exploring commercial mining of the international seabed through approval from the US government.

In a media briefing this week, CSIRO Senior Principal Research Scientist Piers Dunstan said the mining activity substantially affected the sea floor. Some marine life, especially that attached to the nodules, had very little hope of recovery. He said if mining were to go ahead, monitoring would be crucial.

We are sceptical that ecological impacts can be managed even with this new framework. Little is known about life in these deep-water ecosystems. But research shows nodule mining would cause extensive habitat loss and damage.

Do we really need to open the ocean frontier to mining? We argue the answer is no, on three counts.

1. Minerals are not scarce

The minerals required for the energy transition are abundant on land. Known global terrestrial reserves of cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and nickel are enough to meet current production levels for decades – even with growing demand.

There is no compelling reason to extract deep-sea minerals, given the economics of both deep-sea and land-based mining. Deep-sea mining is speculative and inevitably too expensive given such remote, deep operations.

Claims about mineral scarcity are being used to justify attempting to legitimise a new extractive frontier in the deep sea. Opportunistic investors can make money through speculation and attracting government subsidies.

2. Mining at sea will not replace mining on land

Proponents claim deep-sea mining can replace some mining on land. Mining on land has led to social issues including infringing on indigenous and community rights. It also damages the environment.

But deep-sea mining will not necessarily displace, replace or change mining on land. Land-based mining contracts span decades and the companies involved will not abandon ongoing or planned projects. Their activities will continue, even if deep-sea mining begins.

Deep-sea mining also faces many of the same challenges as mining on land, while introducing new problems. The social problems that arise during transport, processing and distribution remain the same.

And sea-based industries are already rife with modern slavery and labour violations, partly because they are notoriously difficult to monitor.

Deep-sea mining does not solve social problems with land-based mining, and adds more challenges.

3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the international seabed is the common heritage of humankind. This means the proceeds of deep-sea mining should be distributed fairly among all countries.

Deep-sea mining commercial partnerships between developing countries in the Global South and firms from the North have yet to pay off for the former. There is little indication this pattern will change.

For example, when Canadian company Nautilus went bankrupt in 2019, it saddled Papua New Guinea with millions in debt from a failed domestic deep-sea mining venture.

The Metals Company has partnerships with Nauru and Tonga but the latest deal with the US creates uncertainty about whether their agreements will be honoured.

European investors took control of Blue Minerals Jamaica, originally a Jamaican-owned company, shortly after orchestrating its start up. Any profits would therefore go offshore.

A wise investment?

It is unclear whether deep-sea mining will ever be a good investment.

Multiple large corporate investors have pulled out of the industry, or gone bankrupt. And The Metals Company has received delisting notices from the Nasdaq stock exchange due to poor financial performance.

Given the threat of environmental harm, the evidence suggests deep-sea mining is not worth the risk.

Justin Alger receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

D.G. Webster receives funding from the National Science Foundation in the United States and various internal funding sources at Dartmouth University.

Jessica Green receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Kate J Neville receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Stacy D VanDeveer and Susan M Park 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. We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/we-dont-need-deep-sea-mining-or-its-environmental-harms-heres-why-260401

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ciprian N. Radavoi, Associate Professor in Law, University of Southern Queensland

Grade inflation happens when teachers knowingly give a student a mark higher than deserved. It can also happen indirectly, when the level of difficulty of a course is deliberately lowered so students achieve higher grades.

The practice threatens to undermine the quality of a university degree and the prestige of higher education.

Is it happening in Australia and if so, why?

To better understand grade inflation, we sought the opinions of those closest to the phenomenon: university teachers. The findings of our survey were recently published in the Journal of Academic Ethics.

Increases in grades

Over the past 50 years, many countries have reported an increase in higher university grades. This includes the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Australia.

For example, a 2024 Australian report found a 234% increase in the number of distinction grades awarded to students at the University of Sydney between 2011 and 2021.

But are grades improving due to changes in teaching and student performance, or rather is marking generally more lenient to keep students happy?

Our study

To investigate the causes of grade inflation in Australian universities, we surveyed lecturers and tutors who have direct contact with students, teaching them and marking their work.

Our main question was:

[What is] your opinion regarding grade inflation? Does it occur, and if yes, why, and how does it impact the student, profession, institutional reputation, society, and yourself?

In July 2024, we sent the survey to the deans (heads) of research at all Australian universities, asking them to distribute it to their academics. Academics then had two months to answer the questions.

In total, we had 110 respondents, of which 88 answered all the questions of the survey. The majority were aged 31-55 (55%), women (56%), born in Australia (about 70%), with more than five years in academia (more than 80%). There were more respondents from regional Australia (44%) than from urban locations (24.5%). About 30% had experience in both types of locations.

The disciplines most represented were legal studies (37%), education (21%), science, nursing and psychology (each around 7%).

Overall opinions

The majority (73%) said they had seen grade inflation in their universities.

Academics’ dominant feelings about grade inflation were frustration (50% of respondents), powerlessness (44%) and dissatisfaction (31%).

Of those surveyed, about 11% were indifferent and 7% were satisfied with the situation they experienced around grade inflation.

The fact that many academics surveyed felt frustrated and powerlessness indicates they do not inflate grades willingly. Previous studies have suggested university management encourages grade inflation as students are seen as clients and they want to keep the client happy.

Pressure from university administration

Our respondents supported this idea. Most said grade inflation was due to student evaluations – and the role they play in management decisions about staff.

Student evaluations are anonymous questionnaires completed by students after the course about their teachers’ performance. Studies, including those in Australia, have shown the results can be insulting and even abusive, often a “punishment” of unpopular teachers. These studies also question students’ capacity to objectively assess the quality of their educators.

Because students evaluations are commonly used in promotion and retention decisions, this means teachers may inflate grades to get positive evaluations. One respondent to our survey explained the link between these evaluations and grade inflation:

there is a lot of pressure […] as students will often provide strong negative feedback in [student evaluations].

Other academics similarly lamented how the quality of their teaching was assessed “based on student surveys”. Or as another academic told us:

Everyone I know who admits to grade inflation cites student evaluations, promotion, and workload as drivers.

Complaints generate more work

On top of this, if a student complains about their grade, there is automatically more work for an academic who needs to review it and potentially respond to seniors or others in university management. As one academic admitted:

I have inflated grades slightly for students who have failed the course by less than two marks. This saves hundreds of hours of work time.

In this climate, university teachers told us they do not feel supported if a student challenges their grades. They reported it was “very hard” to fail a student and described a “fear” of students’ reactions.

The customer is always right and if they are not happy, you are asked to grade again.

Is it always a problem?

Some respondents justified grade inflation as an acceptable trade-off when done to a limited extent, or as something morally neutral. As one noted, higher grades are the result of more people studying at university:

It is simply a corollary of shifting from tertiary education for the elites to tertiary education for the masses. It is no big deal.

Another said if the increase was small – depending on the context – it would not make a big difference.

1–5 marks do not make a significant difference on professional competence for some course content.

Only three respondents presented grade inflation in a positive light, as an act of social justice or compassion. As one noted:

Students experience many competing demands and many experience mental health issues. Teachers need to be compassionate to students’ situation.

An honest discussion is needed

While countless studies debate grade inflation, ours was the first to invite academics to express their feelings. Despite the relatively small sample, the survey suggests a worrying picture of a frustrated and at times, fearful academic workforce.

Meanwhile, the extent of grade inflation reported raises questions about the quality of some degrees, and more generally about the culture of learning in Australian universities.

To maintain the quality and reputation of higher education in Australia, we need to have an open and honest discussion about grade inflation in our universities.

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. ‘The customer is always right’: why some uni teachers give higher grades than students deserve – https://theconversation.com/the-customer-is-always-right-why-some-uni-teachers-give-higher-grades-than-students-deserve-258923

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vinod Balasubramaniam, Associate Professor (Molecular Virology), Monash University

A man in his 50s has died from lyssavirus in New South Wales after being bitten by a bat several months ago.

This is Australia’s fourth human case of bat lyssavirus and the first confirmed case in NSW since the virus was first identified in 1996 in a black flying fox in Queensland.

So what is lyssavirus? And how can you protect yourself if you come into contact with a bat?

A close relative of rabies

Australian bat lyssavirus belongs to the Rhabdoviridae family, the same group of viruses that causes rabies.

It primarily infects bats. Active monitoring suggests fewer than 1% of healthy bats carry the virus, though prevalence rises to 5–10% in sick or injured bats.

In bats, the virus often causes no obvious symptoms, though some show neurological signs such as disorientation, aggression, muscle spasms and paralysis. Some will die.

The virus has been confirmed in all four mainland flying fox species (Pteropus alecto, P. poliocephalus, P. scapulatus and P. conspicillatus) as well as the yellow-bellied sheathtail bat (Saccolaimus flaviventris), a species of microbat.

However, serological evidence – where scientists test for antibodies in bats’ blood – suggests other microbats could be susceptible too. So we should be cautious with all Australian bat species when it comes to lyssavirus.

Rare, but potentially deadly

Unlike rabies, which causes roughly 59,000 human deaths annually, predominantly in Africa and Asia, human infection with bat lyssavirus is extremely rare.

Australian bat lyssavirus, as the name suggests, is unique to Australia. But other bat lyssaviruses, such as European bat lyssavirus, have similarly caused rare human infections.

Human infection with bat lyssavirus occurs through direct contact with infected bat saliva via bites, scratches or open skin. It can also occur if our mucous membranes (eyes, nose, mouth) are exposed to bat saliva.

There’s no risk associated with bat faeces, urine, blood, or casual proximity to roosts.

If someone has been exposed, there’s an incubation period which can range from weeks to more than two years. During this time the virus slowly moves through the body’s nerves to the brain, staying hidden and symptom-free.

Treating the virus during the incubation period can prevent the illness. But if it’s not treated, symptoms are serious and it’s invariably fatal.

The nature of the illness in humans mirrors rabies, beginning with flu-like symptoms (fever, headache, fatigue), then quickly progressing to severe neurological disease, including paralysis, delirium, convulsions, and loss of consciousness. Death generally occurs within 1–2 weeks of symptom onset.

All four recorded human cases in Australia – three in Queensland (in 1996, 1998 and 2013) and the recent NSW case – have been fatal.

There’s no effective treatment once symptoms develop

If someone is potentially exposed to bat lyssavirus and seeks medical attention, they can be treated with post-exposure prophylaxis, consisting of rabies antibodies and the rabies vaccine.

This intervention is highly effective if initiated promptly – preferably within 48 hours, and no later than seven days post-exposure – before the virus enters the central nervous system.

But no effective treatment exists for Australian bat lyssavirus once symptoms develop. Emerging research on monoclonal antibodies offers potential future therapies, however these are not yet available.

So what’s the best protection? And what if a bat bites you?

Pre-exposure rabies vaccination, involving three doses over one month, is recommended for high-risk groups. This includes veterinarians, animal handlers, wildlife rehabilitators, and laboratory workers handling lyssaviruses.

It’s important for members of the public to avoid all direct contact with bats. Only vaccinated, trained professionals, such as wildlife carers or veterinarians, should handle bats.

Public education campaigns are essential to reduce risky interactions, especially in bat-populated areas.

If you get bitten or scratched by a bat, it’s vital to act immediately. Wash the wound thoroughly with soap and water for at least 15 minutes, apply an antiseptic (such as betadine), and seek urgent medical attention.

This tragic case in NSW underscores that while extremely rare, bat lyssavirus is an important public health threat. We need to see enhanced public awareness and ensure vaccination for high-risk groups, alongside ongoing bat monitoring and research into new treatments.

Vinod Balasubramaniam 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. Lyssavirus is rare, but deadly. What should you do if a bat bites you? – https://theconversation.com/lyssavirus-is-rare-but-deadly-what-should-you-do-if-a-bat-bites-you-260495

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Clift, Lecturer in Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney

The demise of one of Hong Kong’s last major pro-democracy parties, the League of Social Democrats, is the latest blow to the city’s crumbling democratic credentials.

The league is the third major opposition party to disband this year. The announcement coincides with the fifth anniversary this week of the national security law, which was imposed by Beijing to suppress pro-democracy activity.

The loss of this grassroots party, historically populated by bold and colourful characters, vividly illustrates the dying of the light in once-sparkling Hong Kong.

The city is now greyed and labouring under a repressive internal security regime that has crushed civil society’s freedoms and democratic ambitions.

Authoritarian crackdown

The world witnessed Hong Kong at its brightest during the 2014 Umbrella Movement, when hundreds of thousands of pro-democracy protesters camped out on city streets for several months.

We also saw the brutal sequel in 2019, when paramilitarised police sought to put down further civil unrest and protesters fought back.

Since then, “lawfare” has been the preferred strategy of China’s national government and its Hong Kong satellite. The new approach has included a vast security apparatus and aggressive prosecutions.

When Beijing intervened in July 2020, it was nominally about national security. In reality, the new law was designed and used to bring Hongkongers to heel.

Civil freedoms were further curtailed by a home-grown security law, introduced last year to fill the gaps.

International standards such as the Johannesburg Principles, endorsed by the United Nations, require national security laws to be compatible with democratic principles, not to be used to eliminate democratic activity.

Prison or exile

The League of Social Democrats occupied the populist left of the pro-democracy spectrum. It stood apart from contemporaries such as the Democratic Party and the Civic Party, which were dominated by professionals and elites, and have since been disbanded.

The League was most notably represented by the likes of “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung– known for his Che Guevara t-shirts and banana-throwing – and broadcaster and journalism academic Raymond Wong Yuk-man, also known as “Mad Dog”.

Despite their rambunctious styles, these men had real political credentials and were repeatedly elected to legislative office. But Leung is now imprisoned for subversion, while Wong has left for Taiwan.

Party leaders such as Jimmy Sham Tsz-kit and Figo Chan Ho-wun were also prominent within the Civil Human Rights Front. It was responsible for the annual July 1 protest march that attracted hundreds of thousands of people every year. The front is yet another pro-democracy organisation that has dissolved.

Sham and Chan have been jailed for subversion and unlawful assembly under the colonial-era Public Order Ordinance, which has been used to prosecute hundreds of activists.

Zero tolerance

The demise of these diverse organisations are not natural occurrences, but the result of a deliberate authoritarian programme.

Under China, Hong Kong’s political system has been half democratic at best. But it now resembles something from the darkest days of colonialism, with pre-approved candidates, appointed legislators and zero tolerance for critical voices.

The effort to eliminate opposition has seen the pro-independence National Party formally banned and scores of pro-democracy figures jailed after mass trials.

Activists and watchdogs are stymied by the national security law. It criminalises – among other things – engagement and lobbying with international organisations and foreign governments.

Distinctive voices such as law professor Benny Tai Yiu-ting, media mogul Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and firebrand politician Edward Leung Tin-kei have been jailed and silenced, as have many moderates and lesser-known figures.

Shattered dreams

Then there are the millions of ordinary Hongkongers whose dreams of a liberal and self-governing region under mainland China’s umbrella – as promised in the lead up to the 1997 handover – have been shattered.

Some activists have fled overseas. The more outspoken are the subjects of Hong Kong arrest warrants.

But countless ex-protesters remain in the city, where it is impermissible to speak critically of power, and where mandatory patriotic education may ensure new generations will never even think to speak up.

Much blame lies with the British, who failed to institute democratic elections until the last gasp of their rule in Hong Kong. This was despite the colony tolerating liberalism and habit-forming democratic activity over a longer period.

Now China, after almost three decades in charge, has responded to democratic challenges by defaulting to authoritarian control. Hong Kong can only be grateful it has been spared a Tiananmen-style incident. Nor has it experienced the full genocidal extent of the so-called “peripheries playbook” Beijing has used in Tibet and Xinjiang.

Turmoil and authoritarian swings in the United States and elsewhere give China an opportunity to present as a voice of reason on the international stage.

But we should not forget its commitment to repressive politics at home, nor what its support of belligerent regimes such as Putin’s Russia might mean for Taiwan, the region and the world.

Above all, we should not forget the people, in Hong Kong and elsewhere, who made it their life’s work to achieve democracy only to be rewarded with prison or exile.

Brendan Clift 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. Hong Kong’s light fades as another pro-democracy party folds – https://theconversation.com/hong-kongs-light-fades-as-another-pro-democracy-party-folds-260186

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kirsten Banks, Lecturer, School of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology

This week, astronomers spotted the third known interstellar visitor to our Solar System.

First detected by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) on July 1, the cosmic interloper was given the temporary name A11pl3Z. Experts at NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies and the International Astronomical Union (IAU) have confirmed the find, and the object now has an official designation: I3/ATLAS.

There are a few strong clues that suggest 3I/ATLAS came from outside the Solar System.

First, it’s moving really fast. Current observations show it speeding through space at around 245,000km per hour. That’s more than enough to escape the Sun’s gravity.

An object near Earth’s orbit would only need to be travelling at just over 150,000km/h to break free from the Solar System.

Second, 3I/ATLAS has a wildly eccentric orbit around the Sun. Eccentricity measures how “stretched” an orbit is: 0 eccentricity is a perfect circle, and anything up to 1 is an increasingly strung-out ellipse. Above 1 is an orbit that is not bound to the Sun.

3I/ATLAS has an estimated eccentricity of 6.3, by far the highest ever recorded for any object in the Solar System.

Has anything like this happened before?

The first interstellar object spotted in our Solar System was the cigar-shaped ‘Oumuamua, discovered in 2017 by the Pan-STARRS1 telescope in Hawaii. Scientists tracked it for 80 days before eventually confirming it came from interstellar space.

The second interstellar visitor, comet 2I/Borisov, was discovered two years later by amateur astronomer Gennadiy Borisov. This time it only took astronomers a few weeks to confirm it came from outside the Solar System.

This time, the interstellar origin of I3/ATLAS has been confirmed in a matter of days.

How did it get here?

We have only ever seen three interstellar visitors (including I3/ATLAS), so it’s hard to know exactly how they made their way here.

However, recent research published in The Planetary Science Journal suggests these objects might be more common than we once thought. In particular, they may come from relatively nearby star systems such as Alpha Centauri (our nearest interstellar neighbour, a mere 4.4 light years away).

Alpha Centauri is slowly moving closer to us, with its closest approach expected in about 28,000 years. If it flings out material in the same way our Solar System does, scientists estimate around a million objects from Alpha Centauri larger than 100 metres in diameter could already be in the outer reaches of our Solar System. That number could increase tenfold as Alpha Centauri gets closer.

Most of this material would have been ejected at relatively low speeds, less than 2km/s, making it more likely to drift into our cosmic neighbourhood over time and not dramatically zoom in and out of the Solar System like I3/ATLAS appears to be doing. While the chance of one of these objects coming close to the Sun is extremely small, the study suggests a few tiny meteors from Alpha Centauri, likely no bigger than grains of sand, may already hit Earth’s atmosphere every year.

Why is this interesting?

Discovering new interstellar visitors like 3I/ATLAS is thrilling, not just because they’re rare, but because each one offers a unique glimpse into the wider galaxy. Every confirmed interstellar object expands our catalogue and helps scientists better understand the nature of these visitors, how they travel through space, and where they might have come from.

Thanks to powerful new observatories such as the NSF–DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, our ability to detect these elusive objects is rapidly improving. In fact, during its first 10 hours of test imaging, Rubin revealed 2,104 previously unknown asteroids.

This is an astonishing preview of what’s to come. With its wide field of view and constant sky coverage, Rubin is expected to revolutionise our search for interstellar objects, potentially turning rare discoveries into routine ones.

What now?

There’s still plenty left to uncover about 3I/ATLAS. Right now, it’s officially classified as a comet by the IAU Minor Planet Center.

But some scientists argue it might actually be an asteroid, roughly 20km across, based on the lack of typical comet-like features such as a glowing coma or a tail. More observations will be needed to confirm its nature.

Currently, 3I/ATLAS is inbound, just inside Jupiter’s orbit. It’s expected to reach its closest point to the Sun, slightly closer than the planet Mars, on October 29. After that, it will swing back out towards deep space, making its closest approach to Earth in December. (It will pose no threat to our planet.)

Whether it’s a comet or an asteroid, 3I/ATLAS is a messenger from another star system. For now, these sightings are rare – though as next-generation observatories such as Rubin swing into operation, we may discover interstellar companions all around.

Kirsten Banks 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. Astronomers have spied an interstellar object zooming through the Solar System – https://theconversation.com/astronomers-have-spied-an-interstellar-object-zooming-through-the-solar-system-260422

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Konstantine Panegyres, Lecturer in Classics and Ancient History, The University of Western Australia

To love and be loved is something most people want in their lives.

In the modern world, we often see stories about the difficulties of finding love and the trials of dating and marriage. Sometimes, the person we love doesn’t love us. Sometimes, we don’t love the person who loves us.

Ancient Greeks and Romans also had a lot to say about this subject. In fact, most of the issues people face today in their search for love are already mentioned in ancient Greek and Roman literature.

So, what did they say? And is the advice they put forward still relevant for modern people?

Advice for finding a lover

The Roman poet Ovid (43BCE–17CE) wrote a poem called The Art of Love (Ars Amatoria). In it, he offered advice for those who are still single.

First, Ovid says, you should make an effort to find someone you’re interested in. Your lover “will not come floating down to you through the tenuous air, she must be sought”.

As suitable places to find a lover, Ovid recommends walking in porticos and gardens, attending the theatre, or (surprisingly enough) lingering near law courts.

You need to catch someone’s eye and then invent an excuse to talk with them, he says.

Seek your lover in the daytime, says Ovid. Be careful of the night. You won’t choose the right person if you’re drunk. And you can’t see their face properly if it’s too dark – they might be uglier than you think.

Second, Ovid says you need to look presentable. Make sure your clothes are clean and you have a good haircut. Moreover, keep yourself groomed properly at all times:

Do not let your nails project, and let them be free of dirt; nor let any hair be in the hollow of your nostrils. Let not the breath of your mouth be sour and unpleasing.

Ovid’s The Art of Love may be regarded as a kind of love manual. But aside from making personal efforts to find a lover, people could also use matchmakers.

However, matchmaking was a difficult process. Sometimes matchmakers didn’t tell the truth about the situations of the parties involved. So the Athenian writer Xenophon (430–353 BCE) says people were sometimes “victims of deception” in the matchmaking process.

What if you’re not in love?

The ancients recognised that not being in love can be a problem. They thought it bad for your mental and physical health, but also for society more broadly.

For example, the Roman writer Claudius Aelian (2nd–3rd century CE) in his Historical Miscellany says soldiers who are in love will fight better than soldiers who are not in love:

In the heat of battle when war brings men into combat, a man who is not in love could not match one who is. The man untouched by love avoids and runs away from the man who loves, as if he were an outsider uninitiated into the god’s rites, and his bravery depends on his character and physical strength.

According to Aelian, the Spartans had a punishment for men who did not fall in love:

Any man of good appearance and character who did not fall in love with someone well-bred was also fined, because despite his excellence he did not love anyone […] lovers’ affection for their beloved has a remarkable power of stimulating the virtues.

So, when two people are in love, they can inspire each other and bring out the best in one another. Being in love can help a person become better and achieve more.

Fighting for and keeping a lover

If we are lucky, the person we love will also love us back, and we won’t have any love rivals.

But what happens when the person we love is also loved by someone else? We may need to put in more effort to win the affection of that person, but sometimes this brings us into conflicts.

For example, the Roman orator and politician Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE), in his On the Orator, tells how Gaius Memmius, Roman tribune of the year 111 BCE, apparently took a bite out of his love rival’s arm, “when he had a quarrel with him at Tarracina over a girlfriend”.

Some ways to keep one’s lover interested that are mentioned in ancient sources include showing off one’s wealth.

For example, in one of the plays of the poet Alexis (375–275 BCE) a young man who is in love puts on a large banquet to impress his girlfriend with a display of wealth. Engagements were at that time sometimes cancelled if it turned out the husband was too poor.

Of course, things did not always work out, and people had grievances against former lovers. One particularly famous invective was from the poet Martial (38–104 CE) to a woman called Manneia:

Manneia, your little dog licks your face and lips. Small wonder that a dog likes eating dung!

Timeless concerns

Today, we often see debates about whether it’s better to stay single or get into a relationship.

The same goes for antiquity. In the 4th-century BCE play Arrephoros or The Pipe Girl by poet Menander, one character says:

If you’ve got any sense, you won’t get married […] I’m married myself – which is why I’m advising you not to do it.

Others lamented that they missed their opportunity for love. So the poet Pindar (6th–5th century BCE) wrote a poem regretting that he could not make the much younger Theoxenus his boyfriend:

You should have picked love’s flowers at the right time, my heart, when you were young. But as for the sparkling rays from Theoxenus’ eyes, whoever looks on them and is not roiled with longing has a black heart forged with cold fire out of steel or iron.

Clearly, finding a lover was as difficult then as it is now.

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

– ref. Avoid bad breath, don’t pick partners when drunk: ancient dating tips to find modern love – https://theconversation.com/avoid-bad-breath-dont-pick-partners-when-drunk-ancient-dating-tips-to-find-modern-love-250792

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Hunter, Senior Lecturer in Art and Performance, Deakin University

Back to Back Theatre is one of Australia’s national treasures. Over 30 years this dynamic Geelong-based company – an ensemble of actors who are perceived to have intellectual disabilities – has built a dynamic body of innovative work renowned for its formal experimentation.

Led by director Bruce Gladwin, the company is internationally acclaimed, including winning the International Ibsen Award in 2022 and the Venice Biennale Golden Lion for Lifetime Achievement in Theatre in 2024.

Commissioned by ACMI, Back to Back’s latest offering is a screen project that reenacts a section of Shakespeare’s Henry V: the battle of Agincourt.

Back to Back’s Agincourt draws from iconic film performances such as Laurence Olivier’s Henry V, but places the action in a factory in North Geelong. This industrial re-imagining is replete with hi-viz vests, concrete floors, and a very idiosyncratic costume design consisting of coats of armour made entirely out of cardboard.

Agincourt begins with the desperate English monarch Henry V (Sarah Mainwaring) calling to his exhausted troops to take up arms against the marauding French, who are marching determinedly down the suburban street towards them.

The English prepare for war, fortifying the factory space and gathering themselves for an inevitable onslaught, and a heinous confrontation ensues.

Language and time

More than 100 community members contributed to this work. A key aim was to ensure North Geelong residents and factory workers were given the opportunity to work as an artist, either in front of the camera or behind the scenes. The audition process included the proviso that every person made their own costume.

Gladwin works closely with cinematographer/editor Rhian Hinkley and the actors to employ the elements of language and time in very specific ways.

The performers’ natural speech patterns bring a real spaciousness in the vocal delivery to Shakespeare’s lines. There are also subtitles throughout the work.

At times a split screen is used which repeats action at slightly differing angles, often in extreme closeup.

These elements crystallise the audience’s focus, bringing a particular attention to the rich language of Shakespeare. We slow down, we read, we listen. We have time to let the words land, and to see the actors in their own unguarded, vulnerable moments.

The performances are strong. In particular, Mainwaring as a set-upon Prince Hal is compelling. Her laser stare is juxtaposed with a slightly wavering physicality which brings the first soliloquy into monumental, rousing proportion as she rallies the troops with the ominous pronouncement “We shall be remembered”.

Do-it-yourself aesthetic

Design and sound are front and centre in this 23-minute film. The actors worked with local company Boxwars to make their costumes and props, and Agincourt’s factory setting provides the background for the do-it-yourself aesthetic which features an impressive array of ornately decorated cardboard costumes.

Props are also made from cardboard and we see swirling maces, pointed lances, bows and arrows, and fearfully brandished swords. The detail is brilliant.

It is hard to describe the satisfaction of viewing a violent battle staged with cardboard – an inherently theatrical material which has the capacity to be firm and resilient but also to disintegrate spectacularly over time.

(If you aren’t aware of the delightful cardboard community that is Boxwars, I highly recommend checking out their numerous YouTube videos: you won’t be disappointed.)

A mythic, epic conflict

The idea of staging an epic conflict in such a playful way seems outrageous, but there is a mythic quality to the work – the call to arms, the messy scrabbling, the physicality – that transcends the silliness. In the end, there is a kind of gravitas to the action.

Over the course of the film, Agincourt moves from a grand and heroic sensibility to a sweaty, bloody depiction of war.

Helmeted riders on horses (made from old mattresses) are pushed into the fray amid forklifts, trolleys and pallets of yarn. Beautiful woven fabrics play backdrop to regal pronouncements as the bricked walls of this industrial space are transformed into a chaotic battlefield.

Gladwin uses his cast of thousands (and stunt directors) to great effect, creating phalanxes of archers raising bows in unison, or lines of soldiers in rows, swords at the ready.

These orderly patterns are juxtaposed with fight scenes which become more and more volatile as soldiers wade through pulped paper-mud and drag bodies across the concrete floor.

The sound design is suitably battle worn, accompanying the slow motion death scenes and bloodied faces with war cries, horses galloping and whinnying and the squelch of bodily disembowelment.

Towards the end of the film, the factory becomes, once again, a work space.

As the workers in this supported employment service go about their tasks – stripping mattresses, recycling materials, packaging kindling, objects deconstructed and re-purposed – a discussion ensues about how the workers want to be treated: as individuals … or as soldiers.

Agincourt can be read as a contemporary comment on the viciousness and futility of war. But it is also a charge to action for those whose influence has been underestimated.

Agincourt is at ACMI, Melbourne, until February 1 2026.

Kate Hunter 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. Back to Back Theatre tackles an epic Shakespearian conflict – set in a factory, with cardboard props – https://theconversation.com/back-to-back-theatre-tackles-an-epic-shakespearian-conflict-set-in-a-factory-with-cardboard-props-257545

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Rattenbury, Associate Professor in Physics, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

This week’s announcement of the loss of a methane-detecting satellite, just days before New Zealand was meant to take over mission control, is a blow to the country’s space research sector.

New Zealand invested NZ$29 million in the MethaneSat mission, built and operated by the US nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund, with a goal of growing the nation’s space industry.

This would have been accomplished through gaining experience in operating a satellite at the University of Auckland’s Te Pūnaha Ātea Space Institute, and through research led by a team at Earth Sciences New Zealand to use the satellite to measure agricultural sources of methane.

But on June 20, the satellite lost power and contact with the ground, and appears to be irrecoverable. This is disappointing for everyone on the mission development and operations teams.

Having been in that position personally when my team lost a miniature satellite after a successful launch, I sympathise. But the benefits New Zealand hoped to gain from the MethaneSat mission will now be limited, at best, and questions need to be asked to learn from the failure.

Early issues and delays

The MethaneSat satellite launched in March 2024. New Zealand was meant to take over mission control by the end of last year, but problems with the satellite’s thrusters meant this was delayed to June this year.

The satellite’s main mission was to detect methane leaks from oil and gas production, but it was also used to track methane sources from agriculture.

New Zealand was not likely involved in the chain of events leading to the under-performance and delays, nor the eventual loss of the satellite. But as investors in the project, we are entitled to an explanation.

That a spacecraft fails in orbit is not surprising. The space environment is unforgiving. But there is a question about whether New Zealand should have taken a closer look “under the hood” before investing in MethaneSat.

The principle of caveat emptor (buyer beware) applies to spacecraft as much as to purchasing a car. While we were not involved in the MethaneSat mission design, satellite construction and testing, we were certainly entitled to relevant information to make a fully informed decision on whether or not to invest.

Questions remain. During the MethaneSat post-mortem, one could reasonably ask to what extent experts were consulted during the decision-making process to invest in the satellite mission, and who was applying due diligence on behalf of New Zealand taxpayers.

When earlier issues emerged, to what extent should New Zealand taxpayers, as investors, have been happy with explanations veiled in reported obligations of confidentiality or commercial sensitivity?

Lessons for future space missions

New Zealand has scientists and engineers working at publicly-funded universities who can contribute to future decision-making processes for the next taxpayer-funded space mission.

New Zealand scientists working in the space sector do so knowing full well that the nation’s capacity to fund space missions is limited. Apart from being hard, frustrating, rewarding and unforgiving, working in space is expensive – and there are often delays and setbacks.

Some of us working in New Zealand space research have been trying to work through how best to advise government on where to spend limited public funding. This will not be an easy task.

The Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) is an international organisation established in 1958 to promote global cooperation in space research. It provides a forum for the exchange of scientific results, sets standards for space data sharing, and advises on space policy and planetary protection.

New Zealand participates in COSPAR as a national member and its committee comprises space science researchers from across the country. As chair of the New Zealand COSPAR committee, I sent a letter to Minister of Space Judith Collins last year offering our services:

I believe closer collaboration between COSPAR’s initiatives and New Zealand’s aerospace goals would enhance our mutual objectives and strengthen our contribution to the global aerospace community. Specifically, we are uniquely placed to advise on the range of scientific endeavours currently underway […] that could be at the heart of a national space mission.

Close scrutiny needed

New Zealand has more talent and good research ideas than funding to support them. So there has to be a way of choosing between competing ideas.

Crucially, that selection process has to be fully transparent so the investors – New Zealand taxpayers – can have confidence their investment is being safely bestowed.

My vision is for a funding process for future space missions that addresses scientific goals relevant to New Zealand and takes advantage of the talent we have.
There will be applicants who miss out, as there always are in any competitive process. But I would like to see support given to unsuccessful applicants to improve their chances in subsequent attempts.

I work towards fostering the New Zealand space sector, especially in the areas where we can push back the boundaries of human knowledge via the safe, peaceful and sustainable use of space. This is the excitement I see reflected in the students I teach.

For a nation with ambitions to utilise space for science, technological development and commercial gain, we also have to acknowledge that failure is a part of that journey. To make the best use of our very limited resources, we must examine our processes in the fullest light of disclosure – regardless of whether the failure was technological or in our decision-making processes.

Nicholas James Rattenbury works for The University of Auckland. He has received funding from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and Royal Society Te Apārangi. He is affiliated with Te Pūnaha Ātea Space Institute. He is the current Chair of the New Zealand Committee of COSPAR.

None of the viewpoints expressed in this article necessarily reflect those held by any of the abovementioned organisations or any other organisation or entity mentioned in the article.

– ref. Lost in space: MethaneSat failed just as NZ was to take over mission control – here’s what we need to know now – https://theconversation.com/lost-in-space-methanesat-failed-just-as-nz-was-to-take-over-mission-control-heres-what-we-need-to-know-now-260407

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

Political and news cycles often work in a certain and predictable way. Issues flare like bushfires, then rage for weeks or even months, until they are finally extinguished by action or fade by being overtaken by the next big thing.

On two very different fronts this week, we’re reminded how these cycles work.

During the last term, the opposition constantly hammered the government over its handling of the former immigration detainees released after the High Court found they couldn’t be held indefinitely. These included people who had committed murder, child sex offences and violent assaults.

On Sunday, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke admitted in a television interview that the legislation the government passed to re-detain some of these people was, in effect, impossible to use. Burke’s comments attracted only limited attention.

The other reminder of an old story came when the Federal Court ordered a militant Muslim preacher to remove inflammatory lectures from the internet. He had lost a case brought by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry under Section 18C for the Racial Discrimination Act. More than a decade ago, political passions ran high in conservative circles about the alleged evils of 18C.

First to the Burke admission. Burke told Sky he had “a lot of resources” dedicated to trying to get applications to court for preventative detention orders. But “no one has come close to reaching the threshold that is in that legislation”. Burke insisted he was “not giving up”, but there is little reason to believe things will change. The opposition has suggested amending the preventative detention legislation, but Burke says that would hit a constitutional obstacle.

For a long time, the government had kept saying it was working up cases to put to the court (and given the impression action was close). But, realising the difficulty, it also passed legislation facilitating the deportation of these people to third countries. There are now three former detainees due to be deported to Nauru, following a financial agreement with that country. But there’s a hitch: their deportations are tied up in court appeals. (They are, however, able to be held in detention while the cases proceed.)

The challenge still presented by the former detainees in the community is no small matter, despite the political storm having calmed and the media interest dissipating.

In evidence in Senate estimates in March, the Department of Home Affairs said 300 people had been released from immigration detention as at the end of February. Of these, 104 had offended since release, and 30 were incarcerated (including on remand). Some 83 had only a state or territory criminal charge; seven only a Migration Act charge; 14 people had both a Migration Act charge and a state or territory charge. In recent weeks, one former detainee is alleged to have murdered a photographer in Melbourne.

The political context can be very relevant to whether the embers of an old issue re-spark into something major.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s decision last year to put Burke into home affairs was something of a political masterstroke. If Clare O’Neil and Andrew Giles had still been in their former respective portfolios of home affairs and immigration, the present failure to deal more successfully with the former detainees would have been a much bigger issue. Burke is skilled at throwing a blanket over contentious areas.

On the other side of politics, James Paterson was moved out of home affairs to become shadow finance minister in Sussan Ley’s reshuffle. Paterson pursued the former immigration detainees relentlessly. The new spokesmen, Andrew Hastie (home affairs) and Paul Scarr (immigration) haven’t hit their strides yet, and what they have said on the issue hasn’t grabbed much attention.

The government would have been under more pressure on the issue if parliament were sitting. But the new parliament doesn’t meet until July 22.

When it does, one of the new arrivals will be a former face, Liberal MP Tim Wilson. Way back when, Wilson was a player in the story of 18C. For him, the way 18C resurfaced this week contains more than a little irony.

In February 2014, Wilson took up his post of Human Rights Commissioner, appointed by the Abbott government with the special brief of promoting freedom of speech. (He was even dubbed the “freedom commissioner”.)

The Abbott government was strongly opposed to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which made it unlawful to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” a person or group because of their race or ethnicity.

The assault on 18C ran into vigorous opposition from ethnic and other groups, including the Executive Council of Australian Jewry. In the end, then prime minister Tony Abbott retreated. Wilson was disappointed, tweeting: “Disturbed to hear the government has backed down on 18c and will keep offensive speech illegal. Very disturbed.”

In his 2025 bid for election, Wilson – who had been member for Goldstein from 2016-2022 – was helped by the Jewish vote, after the rise of antisemitism.

The debate about free speech has moved on a great deal since the days of the Abbott government, when conservatives were particularly agitated about 18C following a court judgement against journalist Andrew Bolt relating what he has written about some fair-skinned Indigenous people.

Today’s debate is in the context of “hate speech” associated with the Middle East conflict. Hate-crime laws have provoked another fierce round of controversy about the appropriate limits to put on “free speech”.

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry brought its case under the 18C civil law against preacher William Haddad, from Western Sydney, after no action was taken by the authorities under the criminal law.

Haddad described Jews as “a treacherous people, a vile people”, among other offensive remarks, that included saying: “The majority of banks are owned by the Jews, who are happy to give people loans, knowing that it’s almost impossible to pay it back”. Haddad argued in his defence his lectures drew on religious writings, relating them to contemporary events, and were delivered for educational purposes.

Finding against Haddad, Judge Angus Stewart said the lectures conveyed “disparaging imputations about Jewish people and that in all the circumstances were reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate and intimidate Jews in Australia”.

Reflecting on this week’s decision, George Brandis – who was attorney-general during the 18C furore – says, “My view hasn’t changed. It should not in a free country be either criminally or civilly actionable to say something that merely offends. However, in this case the conduct went far beyond mere offence, to intimidation. It did not require 18C to get the redress that was sought in the case.”

Wilson does not wish to re-enter the debate. The new opposition industrial relations spokesman says his focus is “my portfolio responsibilities”.

It’s likely many of those who fought 18C years ago hold to their original view, while having to applaud the judgement made under it this week. That’s another irony.

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. Grattan on Friday: how two once hot-button issues this week barely sparked media and political interest – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-how-two-once-hot-button-issues-this-week-barely-sparked-media-and-political-interest-259686

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Harper, Lecturer, School of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney

This week, a Melbourne childcare worker was charged over alleged sexual abuse of young children in his care. Families are justifiably appalled and furious – with 1,200 children urged to be tested for a sexually transmitted infection.

This is the latest in a string of serious safety concerns this year alone, exposing systemic issues in our early childhood sector.

Recent investigations have exposed reports of neglect, with inadequate food, unhygienic nappy changes, and physical and sexual abuse at daycare services.

Unfortunately, there are too many incidents to be seen as “one-offs”.

But how widespread are unsafe or abusive practices in Australian childcare centres? The short answer is, we don’t actually know.

The number of ‘serious incidents’ in childcare

The national childcare quality authority reports on the number of “serious incidents” in childcare services.

This includes the death of a child, and serious injury, illness, or trauma requiring urgent medical attention. It also includes a child going missing or unknowingly being locked in or out of the service. But it doesn’t technically include child abuse. Unless, for example, the abuse resulted in a situation where the child required urgent medical attention.

The national childcare quality authority’s data shows there has been a slow but steady increase in the rate of serious incidents in the eight years to 2023–24.

For example, the rate of reported serious incidents in 2023–24 was 148 per 100 approved services. This is higher than the 139 reported in 2022–23, and 124 in 2021–22.

Higher-quality services have been found to have higher rates of reporting for serious incidents. This may be because they have clearer processes, more experienced or qualified educators, or higher ratios of educators to children. We also know larger services tend to report more serious incidents than smaller ones.

For-profit services have been found to have higher breach rates than not-for-profits. A breach is any instance where a regulation or law was not followed.

What about under-reporting?

Some incidents may not even be reported in the first place. Under-reporting could occur unintentionally. For example, the service is unaware of an incident, or educators do not recognise what constitutes a reportable incident, or they are not sure how to report the different kinds of reportable incidents.

But unfortunately, under-reporting may happen intentionally. When a service reports an incident to their state or territory regulatory authority, they may be subject to an investigation and/or heightened scrutiny in future. This could be a deterrent for some services to report incidents.

What about child abuse?

At the moment, if physical or sexual abuse of a child is suspected at a service, incidents and allegations should be reported through a national online portal within seven days.

The federal government has just announced from September 1 this year, the window will come down to 24 hours.

The portal is provided by the national childcare quality authority, but it can be accessed by state and territory regulatory authorities.

But childcare services are also subject to state and territory child protection legislation. The definitions and reporting requirements for different child abuse situations vary across states and territories.

This makes the data messy and difficult to track.

There are other reporting requirements

Services also need to lodge other kinds of notifications relating to children’s health and safety. Examples might include incidents of broken glass in a centre, a severe infection outbreak, a damaged fence, or the presence of someone who was not authorised to be there.

Again, some of these incidents go through a national online portal, whereas others might go to state or territory child protection authorities, departments of education, or departments of health.

As the national quality authority noted in its 2023 report into childcare safety, this means different organisations are collecting information and may not always use the same terminology or reporting timeframes. They don’t necessarily share the information they have.

This lack of coordination also means we do not have consistent national data collection on child abuse and other aspects of child welfare in daycare centres.

What now?

We need a national, consistent approach to collecting and sharing data about safety in all childcare services. This would require a committed collaboration between state and federal agencies.

At the moment, crucial information about what is happening in services is not shared between jurisdictions. Just as we do not have good information about high-risk potential employees (in part, due to issues with the working with children checks system).

Read more:
What are working with children checks? Why aren’t they keeping kids safe at daycare?

But on top of fixing how data is collected and shared, we also need to look at how it is reported in the first place.

All early childhood educators should have child protection training, to increase understanding across the sector. We also need simpler and nationally consistent procedures for services, so it is easier for educators to recognise and report child safety incidents.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, you can call 1800 Respect on 1800 737 732, Lifeline on 131 114, Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800, or Bravehearts (counselling and support for survivors of child sexual abuse) on 1800 272 831.

Erin Harper 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 many serious incidents are happening in Australian childcare centres? We don’t really know – https://theconversation.com/how-many-serious-incidents-are-happening-in-australian-childcare-centres-we-dont-really-know-260410

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nial Wheate, Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University

Side effects from taking too much vitamin B6 – including nerve damage – may be more widespread than we think, Australia’s medicines regulator says.

In an ABC report earlier this week, a spokesperson for the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) says it may have underestimated the extent of the side effects from vitamin B6 supplements.

However, there are proposals to limit sales of high-dose versions due to safety concerns.

A pathologist who runs a clinic that tests vitamin B6 in blood samples from across Australia also appeared on the program. He told the ABC that data from May suggests 4.5% of samples tested had returned results “very likely” indicating nerve damage.

So what are vitamin B6 supplements? How can they be toxic? And which symptoms do you need to watch out for?

What is vitamin B6?

Vitamin B6, also known as pyridoxine, plays an important role in keeping the body healthy. It is involved in the metabolism of proteins, carbohydrates and fats in food. It is also important for the production of neurotransmitters – chemical messengers in the brain that maintain its function and regulate your mood.

Vitamin B6 also supports the immune system by helping to make antibodies, which fight off infections. And it is needed to produce haemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen around the body.

Some women take a vitamin B6 supplement when pregnant. It is thought this helps reduce the nausea associated with the early stages of pregnancy. Some women also take it to help with premenstrual syndrome.

However, most people don’t need, and won’t benefit from, a vitamin B6 supplement. That’s because you get enough vitamin B6 from your diet through meat, breakfast cereal, fruit and vegetables.

You don’t need much. A dose of 1.3–1.7 milligrams a day is enough for most adults.

Currently, vitamin B6 supplements with a daily dose of 5–200mg can be sold over the counter at health food stores, supermarkets and pharmacies.

Because of safety concerns, the TGA is proposing limiting their sale to pharmacies, and only after consultation with a pharmacist.

Daily doses higher than 200mg already need a doctor’s prescription. So under the proposal that would stay the same.

What happens if you take too much?

If you take too much vitamin B6, in most cases the excess will be excreted in your urine and most people won’t experience side effects. But there is a growing concern about long-time, high-dose use.

A side effect the medical community is worried about is peripheral neuropathy – where there is damage to the nerves outside the brain and spinal cord. This results in pain, numbness or weakness, usually in your hands and feet. We don’t yet know exactly how this happens.

In most reported cases, these symptoms disappear once you stop taking the supplement. But for some people it may take three months to two years before they feel completely better.

There is growing, but sometimes contradictory, evidence that high doses (more than 50mg a day) for extended periods can result in serious side effects.

A study from the 1990s followed 70 patients for five years who took a dose of 100 to 150mg a day. There were no reported cases of neuropathy.

But more recent studies show high rates of side effects.

A 2023 case report provides details of a man who was taking multiple supplements. This resulted in a daily combined 95mg dose of vitamin B6, and he experienced neuropathy.

Another report describes seven cases of neuropathy linked to drinking energy drinks containing vitamin B6.

Reports to the TGA’s database of adverse events notifications (a record of reported side effects) shows 174 cases of neuropathy linked with vitamin B6 use since 2023.

What should I do if I take vitamin B6?

The current advice is that someone who takes a dose of 50mg a day or more, for more than six months, should be monitored by a health-care professional. So if you regularly take vitamin B6 supplements you should discuss continued use with your doctor or pharmacist.

There are three side effects to watch out for, the first two related to neuropathy:

1. numbness or pain in the feet and hands

2. difficulty with balance and coordination as a result of muscle weakness

3. heartburn and nausea.

If you have worrying side effects after taking vitamin B6 supplements, contact your state’s poison information centre on 13 11 26 for advice.

Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and was previously a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. He is a member of the Haleon Australia Pty Ltd Pain Advisory Board. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing.

Slade Matthews provides scientific evaluations to the Therapeutic Goods Administration as a member of the Therapeutic Goods Assessment and Advisory Panel. Slade serves on the NSW Poisons Advisory Committee for NSW Health as the minister-nominated pharmacologist appointed by the Governor of NSW.

– ref. Too much vitamin B6 can be toxic. 3 symptoms to watch out for – https://theconversation.com/too-much-vitamin-b6-can-be-toxic-3-symptoms-to-watch-out-for-260400