Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Fuller, Professor in Biodiversity and Conservation, The University of Queensland

The two of us can often be found in a patch of scrubby bushland, phone in hand, slowly scanning for plants. Or crouched behind a tree trunk with binoculars, pausing mid-breath to find the source of a bird call. It often feels like a treasure hunt. What will turn up today? And how can we share those observations with the world?

Activities such as these are part of citizen science, where volunteers record observations of the natural world and share them with others.

Science lives far beyond the lab, and it’s not just done by scientists.

In this series, we spotlight the world of citizen science – its benefits, discoveries and how you can participate.

We are both professional ecologists, but our most joyful moments with nature often begin with a simple act: stepping outside and paying attention to it. And our research suggests these experiences may do more than support science. They may also benefit our mental health.

Some days it’s a common species we’ve seen a hundred times before. Other days it’s something unexpected that brings a surge of excitement.

Being outside like this can feel freeing. You focus on the present, move your body and think about where to place your feet, without worrying about your email inbox or endless other demands on your attention. You begin noticing small details you might usually rush past.

That sense of curiosity, connection and shared purpose is something many people recognise when they take part in citizen science.

Supporting mental wellbeing

Citizen science projects invite people to collect data about the natural world.

Platforms such as eBird, iNaturalist, FrogID and Redmap allow anyone armed with curiosity and a smartphone to record wildlife observations and contribute to scientific research. Millions of people around the world now take part in these kinds of projects.

In a recent study of citizen science participants, we examined how taking part in wildlife monitoring projects affects people’s mental wellbeing.

Participants consistently described feeling better after taking part. One volunteer told us:

I come home tired, but it’s a good tired. My head feels clearer, like I’ve pressed reset.

Another explained that learning to identify species changed how they experienced everyday walks:

I don’t just see “green” anymore. Now I notice the differences between plants, their ecological value and the pressures they face.

Part of the explanation is simple: spending time in nature is already known to reduce stress, improve mood and support mental wellbeing.

But citizen science goes a step further.

Rather than simply visiting a park, people actively engage with the environment. They observe closely, record what they see and contribute to something larger than themselves. This sense of purpose can deepen the benefits of being outside.

Citizen science is also inherently social. Many projects bring people together to collect data, share observations or learn from others. These interactions can help reduce social isolation, which is a major risk factor for poor mental health.

For some participants, particularly older adults, citizen science can also be empowering. It provides opportunities to use existing skills, learn new ones and feel that their contributions matter.

Taken together, elements of nature exposure, physical activity, learning and social connection create a powerful mix that supports wellbeing.

How you participate matters

Not all citizen science experiences are the same, and this may influence their health benefits.

In a 2025 study we explored this using a concept borrowed from public health called dose-response – how much participation is needed to produce benefits?

Three ingredients appear particularly important: frequency (how often someone takes part), duration (how long activities last) and intensity, which can include the richness of the environment, the diversity of species encountered or the depth of interaction between participants.

Short, one-off activities can still boost mood and encourage movement. But regular participation is more likely to produce longer-lasting benefits. Like exercise, small amounts done often may be better than one big effort followed by long gaps.

Citizen science can also bring physical health benefits. Many projects involve walking, bending, standing or light hiking. These activities support mobility and cardiovascular health.

For communities at risk of social isolation or physical inactivity, these benefits may be profoundly valuable.

How can citizen science do even more?

Despite this potential, most citizen science projects are not designed with health outcomes in mind. That means opportunities are being missed.

A 2025 study suggests even short nature-based citizen science activities can quickly improve mood and reduce stress.

Longer-term mental health conditions are influenced by many factors and usually require sustained support. Citizen science will not replace medical care. But it can help strengthen the foundations of wellbeing: positive emotions, physical activity, social connection and a sense of purpose.

At a population level, these building blocks matter. They build our ability to cope with challenges and recover from stress.

To maximise these benefits, citizen science projects must be inclusive. People who already feel connected to nature are more likely to take part.

But this is also the group that tends to report better mental and physical health, meaning participation can unintentionally reinforce existing health inequalities.

Field-based projects may unintentionally exclude people with mobility challenges, limited time or poor access to green space. Yet many of these individuals could contribute meaningfully if projects were designed with accessibility in mind.

Recognising citizen science not only as a research tool, but also as a way to support public health opens new opportunities.

When designed thoughtfully, citizen science can benefit both biodiversity and people. And for participants, it offers something simple but powerful: a reason to step outside, pay attention, and reconnect with the living world around them.

– ref. ‘My head feels clearer’: how citizen science can improve people’s health – https://theconversation.com/my-head-feels-clearer-how-citizen-science-can-improve-peoples-health-275426

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Smith, Adjunct Associate Professor in Marine Science, James Cook University

Until recently, the number of citizen scientists in Australia was estimated at between 100,000 and 130,000 people.

But this is a major underestimate. My survey of about 20 key organisations suggests there are likely more than a million in Australia.

There are only a limited number of professional (paid) scientists. But anyone with a smartphone can log observations, and professional scientists increasingly work alongside citizen scientists to collect and analyse valuable conservation data.

Science lives far beyond the lab, and it’s not just done by scientists.

In this series, we spotlight the world of citizen science – its benefits, discoveries and how you can participate.

Citizen science isn’t new. Perhaps the best-known citizen scientist was Charles Darwin, who neglected to finish his medical degree in favour of studying corals. Later, the prolific letter writer built a network of passionate naturalists and collected their observations to gather evidence for his theory of evolution.

But what is new is how easy it is to get involved – and how many people are now lending their time and skills to the cause. It opens up the possibility of science by the people, for the people.

How are citizen scientists contributing?

Melburnians may know the name Ferdinand von Mueller as the first director of the city’s Botanic Gardens. But Mueller started as a passionate botanist who migrated from Germany in 1847, determined to catalogue every plant species in Australia.

After years collecting samples, Mueller realised the task was too big. So he, like Darwin, set about building a network of passionate collectors. Over the next 40 years, more than 1,500 amateur botanists sent him samples. This helped Mueller catalogue hundreds of species new to Western science and produce the first comprehensive surveys of the continent’s vascular plants. Former Chief Scientist Alan Finkel believes Mueller effectively planted citizen science in this country.

Since then, citizen scientists have contributed significantly to science. In 1870, Victorian farmers identified the giant Gippsland earthworm and sent it to professional scientists for confirmation. In 1973, a central Queensland fencing contractor rediscovered the bridled nailtail wallaby (presumed extinct), while a Daintree grazier rediscovered the unique idiot fruit tree – which had not been formally recognised – after its fruit poisoned his cows.

In 1994, bushwalker and amateur botanist David Noble was exploring a remote canyon in the Wollemi National Park west of Sydney when he found the last remaining stand of a tree long thought extinct. The Wollemi pine (Wollemia nobilis) dates back to when dinosaurs roamed Earth.

Even now, passionate citizen scientists are still making new discoveries. In his free time, Jürgen Otto hunts for peacock spiders around Australia. He and his collaborators have named 64 species of the tiny, colourful spiders famed for their courtship displays. This year, Jan Pope and her daughter Sophie Kalkowski-Pope found a huge and unusual coral meadow in the Great Barrier Reef.

So what, exactly, is citizen science?

A good definition is “public participation and collaboration in scientific research with the aim to increase scientific knowledge”.

Key to this are core principles, such as active involvement of citizens in scientific endeavours that generate new knowledge and genuine scientific outcomes.

Earlier generations might have called citizen scientists “amateur naturalists”. The term citizen science became popular for its less binary framing. Some people prefer “community science”.

Another phrase is also gaining momentum. “Indigenous science” has clear overlap with Traditional Ecological Knowledge.

As Jingili man and zoologist Joe Sambono has observed, Indigenous science shouldn’t be set in opposition to Western science, given science is Latin for “to know”:

all groups of humans […] have recognised patterns, verified through repetition, made inferences and predictions and developed branches of knowledge that helped them to make sense of the world around them and their place within it.

Indigenous science is grounded in continuous, trans-generational, place-based observation built over tens of thousands of years. Cultural burning uses weather, fuel and ecological indicators to gently burn Country while supporting biodiversity, while seasonal calendars tied to flowering plants and wildlife movements shaped practical decisions about when to collect bush tucker, travel and care for Country.

In our experience, enduring insights emerge from the overlapping space between Indigenous, citizen and mainstream science.

Getting involved

Citizen science can be as simple as a keen birder posting sightings of a rare orange bellied parrot to eBird or a fisher posting a sighting of a bull shark to iNaturalist where citizen and professional scientists can see it.

But it can also be volunteering to help in large-scale practical projects organised by professional scientists. These include tracking bushfire recovery, reporting weed infestations, monitoring koalas or fishes, assessing microplastic hotspots and tracking water quality.

It took six years (2008–14) for Australian citizen scientists to collectively contribute 10,000 species observations on iNaturalist. Now, more than 10,000 are posted every day.

From a movement of volunteers to a trusted resource

When this flood of data began, some scientists were sceptical. Could it be trusted?

As time has passed, standardised data collection and guidance from professional scientists have built trust in the data.

Citizen science is now recognised for its contributions to health, astronomy, agriculture and – especially – nature conservation. Australia’s Strategy for Nature, Threatened Species Strategy and State of the Environment reports recognise the worth of citizen scientist data.

In an era of misinformation and declining trust in institutions, citizen science offers people a chance to engage directly with evidence and the natural world.

To date, little funding goes towards making the most of what citizen scientists can offer. Nationally, the government will spend A$15 billion on science this fiscal year. Of this, we estimate less than $10 million will go to citizen science.

What could citizen scientists do next?

Much more is possible. The million Australians involved in these projects are active in the world and interested in helping protect nature. These attributes mean they could take a large role in tackling climate change – especially at local and regional scales – by observing changes, working on projects to reduce emissions, and helping communities adapt to climate change.

To paraphrase the famous anthropologist and citizen scientist Margaret Mead: “Never doubt that a small group of citizen (scientists) can change the world – in fact it is the only thing that ever has.”

Stephanie von Gavel and Dr Annie Lane contributed to this article. They are the chair and immediate past chair of the Australian Citizen Science Association.

– ref. There may be 10 times as many citizen scientists in Australia as we thought – and that’s great news for science – https://theconversation.com/there-may-be-10-times-as-many-citizen-scientists-in-australia-as-we-thought-and-thats-great-news-for-science-267870

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Dalton, Associate Professor in the School of Computer Science, Northumbria University, Newcastle

In the early 1970s, the idea of an ordinary person owning a computer sounded absurd. Computers back then were more like aircraft carriers or nuclear power plants than household appliances – vast machines housed in data centres operated by teams of specialists, serving governments, universities and large corporations.

Then came Apple.

Founded on April 1 1976 by “college dropouts” Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak, the Silicon Valley startup did not invent computing. What it did was arguably more important: it helped turn computing into a personal technology.

Before Apple, computers were largely sold in kit form. Jobs saw that people wanted them pre-assembled and ready to run. The earliest Apple I units, featuring handmade koa wooden cases, now sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As an early Apple adopter and app developer, here’s my selection of the company’s (and Jobs’s) most significant technological achievements over the last 50 years.

Apple II – beige yet distinctive

Early personal computers were more curiosities than practical tools. The Apple II, launched in June 1977, introduced something new: style. Even its colour – beige! – was distinctive, contrasting with the black metal boxes common at that time.

The use of colour graphics was both new and exciting, and the keyboard felt satisfying to use. A simple speaker, with only a single-bit output, was ingeniously coaxed into producing tones and even speech-like sounds. The design revolution stretched as far as the packaging: Jerry Manock, Apple’s first in-house designer, placed the machine in a moulded plastic case which looked sleek and professional.

The mouse – a whole new way of interacting

By 1979, the 24-year-old Jobs – sensing that tech giant IBM was catching up with Apple – went looking for the next big thing. The photocopier company Xerox, wanting pre-IPO shares in Apple, offered a visit to its nearby research labs as an inducement. Jobs realised that researchers such as Alan Kay at Xerox’s Palo Alto research centre were creating the next generation of computing interfaces.

Central to this was a device invented by Kay’s mentor, Douglas Engelbart, at Stanford University in the mid-1960s and nicknamed “the mouse”. Engelbart’s vision of computers as machines to augment the human mind inspired Kay and colleagues to create graphical displays in which users interacted with scrollbars, buttons, menus and windows.

Macintosh – dawn of the modern product launch

Jobs thought anyone should be able to use a computer. In January 1984, the first Apple Mac pushed this idea to new extremes. The traditional need for obscure computer commands (and manuals) vanished. Early adopters such as myself felt we just knew how to do everything.

But the Mac’s launch was not just another technological leap for Apple. It also inspired the now-familiar cultural moment of the modern product launch. Following a teasing Super Bowl advert directed by Ridley Scott, Jobs used a 1,500-seat theatre on January 24 to create a stage performance centred on a single charismatic presenter. Jobs let a small, square and still-beige computer (then known as Macintosh) out of its bag – and it began speaking for itself, to rapturous applause.

Pixar – Jobs’s side hustle

In its first decade, Apple grew at an exceptional rate – but it also came close to financial collapse on several occasions. This led to one of the most dramatic moments in Apple’s history when, in May 1985, the company forced Jobs out.

A year later and now in charge of the startup NeXT Inc, Jobs bought a division of George Lucas’s film company which was soon rebranded as Pixar. Its RenderMan software generated images by distributing processing across multiple machines simultaneously.

Pixar, jokingly referred to as Jobs’s “side hustle”, would become one of the world’s most influential (and valuable) animation production companies, having released the first fully computer-animated feature film in Toy Story (1995).

iMac – a meeting of minds

After a failed attempt to develop a new operating system with IBM, Apple eventually bought Jobs’s company NeXT. In September 1997, he returned to Apple as interim CEO with the company “two months from bankruptcy”. The move, though welcomed by many Apple users, terrified some of its employees. Jobs quickly began firing staff and shutting down failed products.

During this restructuring, he visited Apple’s design studio and immediately hit it off with young British designer Jony Ive. Their meeting of minds led to the 1998 candy-coloured translucent iMac. Essentially smaller, cheaper NeXT machines, iMac (the i stood for internet) also kicked off another Apple habit: abandoning ageing technology. The floppy disk drive was ditched in favour of a CD drive – a move heavily criticised at the time, but later widely copied.

iPod – 1,000 songs in your pocket

For Apple, computing was always about more than, well, computing. In 2001, the company began focusing on processing sound and video, not just text and pictures. By November that year, it had released the iPod – a personal music player capable of storing “1,000 songs in your pocket”, compared with a maximum of 20-30 on each cassette tape in a Sony Walkman.

The iPod used an elegant “click wheel” to operate the screen. Music was synced through a new application called iTunes. By 2005, people were using iTunes to manage audio downloaded automatically from the internet using a process called RSS. This in turn put the pod in podcasting.

iPhone – a computer in everyone’s hands

By 2007, many mobile phone companies had approached Apple about merging the iPod with their phones. Instead, on January 9, Jobs unveiled Apple’s most ambitious product yet: a combined phone, music player and Mac computer – all at the size of a handset with no physical keyboard and huge screen.

Most media “experts”, from TechCrunch to the Guardian, predicted the iPhone would bomb. Steve Ballmer, then CEO of Microsoft, mocked the US$500 price tag, saying nobody would buy it. In fact, 1.4 million iPhones were sold by the end of the year – and over 3 billion more since then. This truly put a computer into everyone’s hands – and opened the door to social media as we know it today.

App Store’s software revolution

By mid-2008, the iPhone enabled third-party developers the chance to to create a dizzying range of new applications. At the same time, the App Store – launched on July 10 2008 – addressed one of the most complex problems: how to distribute and commercialise these “apps”. Historically, they were often copied and distributed freely. The App Store changed this, using strong encryption to ensure the copy sold could only be used by that specific user, thus eliminating software piracy.

By establishing the first (eponymous) App Store, Apple changed the way people discover and purchase software. This led to an explosion of apps and a simple but powerful idea: whatever you wanted to do, someone, somewhere, had already built it. Apple captured this shift in a slogan that became part of everyday language: “There’s an app for that”.

Time and again, this extraordinary company has anticipated the value of opening up computing to everyone. Happy birthday, Apple.

– ref. Apple at 50: eight technology leaps that changed our world – https://theconversation.com/apple-at-50-eight-technology-leaps-that-changed-our-world-279541

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ed Macaulay, Lecturer in Physics and Data Science, Queen Mary University of London

The astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch and Jeremy Hansen are preparing to launch into space on a trajectory that will make them the first humans to travel to the Moon in over half a century.

Their 10-day mission, known as Artemis II, loops around the Moon but will not land. It will see them travel 4,700 miles (7,600 kilometres) beyond the lunar far side in Nasa’s Orion spacecraft. As such, the four astronauts will travel further from Earth than any humans before them.

The quarter-of-a-million mile Artemis II expedition is audacious, but it’s the last five minutes of the mission that might be the most cause for concern for the safety of the astronauts.

An uncrewed test of the Orion spacecraft in 2022 first highlighted problems with the heat shield. This is the part of Orion that bears the brunt of the searing heat the capsule experiences during re-entry through Earth’s atmosphere.

When engineers examined the Orion heat shield from 2022’s Artemis I mission, they found large chunks of material had been lost. The worry was that, should this happen again on the crewed Artemis II mission, it could expose the interior of the capsule to dangerously high temperatures.

Since the earliest days of human spaceflight, engineers have protected capsules from the extreme heat of re-entry with so-called “ablative” heat shields, made from material that’s designed to burn away evenly as the capsule scorches its way through the atmosphere.

To meet the demands of the reusable space shuttle, Nasa developed an incredible heat shield system made from ultra-light tiles of glass-coated silica fibres. While this heat shield had extraordinary thermal properties, it was also exceptionally fragile, and required exhaustive maintenance after every shuttle mission.

It was damage to this fragile and exposed protection system that caused the tragic loss of space shuttle Columbia in 2003. For the Artemis programme, Nasa has returned to the concept of an ablative heat shield.

The heat shield for the Orion capsule is composed of a material called Avcoat, based on the material originally developed for the Apollo programme. Although Nasa considered other, newer materials for the Orion heat shield, they ultimately decided on the material that had been proven in flight by the Apollo missions.

However, the structure of Orion’s heat shield differs from those used during Apollo. The Apollo heat shield comprised a singular honeycomb matrix of about 320,000 individually filled hexagonal segments. To make the heat shield for Orion more efficient and reproducible to manufacture, Nasa has opted for a configuration of around 180 individual blocks.

This heat shield was first tested in 2014 when an uncrewed Orion capsule was launched to an apogee of 3,600 miles by a Delta IV rocket. The capsule blazed through the atmosphere on its return at a temperature of about 2,200°C (4,000°F), but the heat shield proved itself capable of withstanding such an inferno.

The next test of the Orion capsule was the Artemis I mission in 2022. This was the first flight of the powerful Space Launch System rocket, and an uncrewed demonstration of the mission planned for Artemis II. Hurtling through Earth’s atmosphere from a far greater distance than the first test, the spacecraft reached temperatures of around 2,800°C (5,000°F). It’s here that the first concerns about the Avcoat heat shield were raised.

Instead of burning away evenly over the whole surface, parts of the Artemis I heat shield were lost unexpectedly in uneven chunks. This uneven ablation makes modelling the thermal loads of re-entry more unpredictable, and raises the possibility that the Orion capsule could be exposed to dangerous levels of heating.

On investigation, the cause of this uneven ablation was found to be irregular releases of gases trapped within the heat shield material, compounded by the “skip re-entry” profile adopted by the mission.

In the skip profile, Orion first grazes the edge of the atmosphere to slow down. It then uses the aerodynamic lift of the capsule to skip back out of the atmosphere, before re-entering for its final descent to Earth. The skip profile is so named because it somewhat resembles a stone skipping across a pond.

Nasa investigators found that, when heating rates decreased during the period between dips into the atmosphere, thermal energy accumulated inside the Avcoat material. This led to the build up of gases and, in turn, the internal pressure – causing cracks and the uneven shedding of material.

Based on the lessons from Artemis I, Nasa has adopted a number of measures to protect the crew of Artemis II. For the first crewed mission of the programme, Nasa has kept the Avcoat heat shield material, but updated the design of the blocks to help the gases to escape during re-entry.

Furthermore, instead of the skip profile, Nasa has now opted for a more direct re-entry mode for the Orion capsule. This reduces the uncertainty in the heating profile and means less time at peak temperatures for trapped gases to damage the heat shield, but also means that the crew will be subjected to increased deceleration on re-entry.

Safety first

At the height of the drama in the film Apollo 13, flight director Gene Kranz famously declares to the team at mission control that “failure is not an option”.

Although the line was in fact the product of the film’s screenwriters, it’s become not just the second-most quotable line from the film, but also somewhat of a mantra at Nasa itself.

Nowhere is this more true than with the heat shield of Artemis II. During the final phase of the Artemis II mission, there’s no backup, no contingency, and no chance of escape. The four astronauts on board will be depending on a few inches of resin-coated silica to shield themselves from temperatures approaching half that of the surface of the Sun.

Human spaceflight has always brought with it calculated risks, but it has also provided a uniquely human perspective on our place in the cosmos. The Artemis II mission will make its crew the first humans in over half a century to observe the blue marble of planet Earth in its entirety with their own eyes.

The crew will carry with them the hopes and aspirations of a whole new generation of explorers. They will be depending on the meticulous work of thousands of scientists and engineers for their safe return, bringing with them a renewed human perspective on not just the Moon, but the planet we all call home.

– ref. Heat shield safety concerns raise stakes for Nasa’s Artemis II Moon mission – https://theconversation.com/heat-shield-safety-concerns-raise-stakes-for-nasas-artemis-ii-moon-mission-275853

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ed Hutchinson, Professor, MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research, University of Glasgow

The first human case of H9N2 influenza virus (bird flu) has been reported in Europe. A human infection was recorded by the Italian Ministry of Health on March 25, 2026.

As an influenza virologist, I can explain what this means and why I am not particularly worried by it – yet.

What do we know about this case?

The patient was infected outside of Europe before travelling to the Lombardy region of northern Italy. Lombardy’s welfare councillor Guido Bertolaso has reported that the patient is a boy with underlying health conditions who was diagnosed after returning from a visit to Africa.

Fortunately, his infection hasn’t made him seriously unwell, but he has been placed in hospital isolation in the San Gerardo hospital in Monza. Italian public health authorities diagnosed H9N2 influenza virus infection using laboratory tests that detect the virus’s genetic material.

What is H9N2 influenza virus?

H9N2 influenza viruses are influenza A viruses. This large group of viruses includes two of the viruses causing human seasonal influenza (H1N1 and H3N2) as well as many other viruses that infect birds.

H9N2 influenza viruses are classified as “low pathogenicity avian influenza viruses”. “Low pathogenicity” refers to their ability to cause disease in poultry (avian influenza is a major threat to poultry farming), but it is unusual for H9N2 to cause anything other than mild illness in humans.

H9N2 is not well suited to infecting humans, and when it does manage to do so it tends to be through direct contact with poultry in heavily contaminated environments. Although this was the first human case in Europe, hundreds of human H9N2 cases have been recorded previously, mainly in China, but also in other countries across Asia and Africa.

What is the level of risk to humans?

Hopefully, the infected patient will make a good recovery. At the moment, the wider risk to humans is very low.

Why is this? Virologists look for multiple factors when assessing if an isolated human infection with an animal virus is likely to cause wider problems – in the worst case a pandemic, which avian influenza viruses have caused repeatedly in the past. This case of H9N2 currently shows no signs of this.

We know that this particular strain of influenza virus would need to acquire mutations in order to become well adapted to growing in humans. As a precaution, Italian public health authorities have traced contacts of the patient to confirm there was no onwards transmission. At the moment, it seems very unlikely that this will go any further.

However, there is a wider picture. There are many influenza viruses out there that are much more unpleasant than H9N2. Most troubling is the ongoing worldwide outbreak of H5N1 avian influenza viruses, which are much more pathogenic and are showing a troubling tendency to infect mammals.

An isolated case of H9N2 influenza in Europe may not be a major problem itself, but it is a reminder that we need to remain vigilant in monitoring the unpredictable behaviour of avian influenza viruses.

– ref. First European case of H9N2 bird flu reported in Italy – what you need to know – https://theconversation.com/first-european-case-of-h9n2-bird-flu-reported-in-italy-what-you-need-to-know-279574

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Murray, Lecturer, The University of Western Australia

George Eliot – the pen name of Victorian novelist Mary Ann Evans – is celebrated today as a writer of realist novels: Adam Bede (1859), The Mill on the Floss (1860), Middlemarch (1871) and Daniel Deronda (1876).

We don’t tend to associate her with science fiction. But in 1859, as she was embarking on her career as a novelist, Eliot published a short science-fiction novel titled The Lifted Veil.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) is often credited as the first “science fiction” novel, but in the mid-1800s the term was rare. It was used to describe literature depicting aspects of current scientific thought. It became popular as a genre term in the late 19th century, when it was applied to the work of speculative writers, such as Jules Verne and H.G. Wells.

The Lifted Veil is science fiction in both senses. It complicates our view of Eliot as a realist writer and provides an insight into the scientific aspects of her later realist work.

The Lifted Veil is a first-person account of the life of a man named Latimer who is writing his story because he knows he is soon to die. Following a severe illness as a young man, his sensitivity has heightened into an ability to access the minds of others and see into the future.

Latimer’s extrasensory abilities are not imagined as scientific advances. Instead, he is forced into a scientific education to remedy his deficiencies (he describes himself as “sensitive and unpractical”), while secretly reading poetry and literature.

Possessing a keenly poetic sensibility without the talent to vent it, Latimer develops what feels to him “like a preternaturally heightened sense of hearing, making audible a roar of sound where others find perfect stillness”.

Sympathy and literature

Essential to Eliot’s realism was the idea of sympathy. As a teenager, she was intensely evangelical. She criticised her older brother for attending the theatre, refused to read novels (except for those of Sir Walter Scott), and once devolved into hysterics at a party after hearing secular music.

In her twenties, however, her relationship with Christianity grew complicated. Eliot ceased believing in the miraculous elements of the Bible. Influenced by new works of German philosophy, which she translated into English, she began to see relationships between human beings as the cornerstone of morality.

To grow morally and intellectually, for Eliot, meant widening our experience beyond our narrow individual lives, entering into the experiences of others very different from us.

She saw literature – particularly the realist novel – as uniquely capable of extending our sympathies, because literature can make us feel as well as think. An important aspect of her realism is her subtle depiction of the inner lives of her characters. She criticised Charles Dickens for what she saw as his “frequently false psychology”.

In Eliot’s masterpiece, Middlemarch, the drama arises from the characters misreading one another. They cannot unveil the mystery of each other’s minds. The narrator famously observes that if we possessed a “keen vision and feeling of all ordinary human life […] we should die of that roar which lies on the other side of silence”.

In one of Middlemarch’s most sophisticated plotlines, a young doctor, Lydgate, falls in love with a beautiful young woman named Rosamond. Lydgate is idealistic and ambitious, but his capacity for sympathy is curtailed because his perception of women has been shaped, in part, by popular literature and poetry. He conflates Rosamond’s exterior beauty with her inner life and so overlooks her egoism and superficiality.

When Lydgate thinks about Rosamond, there is a light touch of satire in the way his thoughts take on the flowery qualities of a romance. The marriage, unsurprisingly, is a disaster. Between Lydgate and Rosamond there is “a total missing of each other’s mental track”.

Read more: George Eliot’s Middlemarch: egoism, moral stupidity, and the complex web of life

Science and evolution

A list of Eliot’s reading over her life shows astonishing breadth. She read – in multiple languages – history, theology, classics, poetry, novels and philosophy. A significant portion of her reading comprised works of geology, physiology, physics and evolutionary theory.

Eliot’s partner George Henry Lewes (to whom she was, scandalously, not married) was part of a new school of physiological psychology, influenced by the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin. Lewes theorised groupings of different neural processes, involving the relations of senses, feelings, mental images and language.

Variations of the phrase “stream of consciousness” are first used in Lewes’ writing, although it is often attributed to later writers. Eliot and Lewes influenced each other in their conceptions of psychology.

Eliot’s realist novels were closely engaged with different strands of 19th-century science. Contemporary readers sometimes criticised her use of language and metaphors drawn from science. A review in the Spectator from 1872 begins:

We all grumble at Middlemarch; we all say that the action is slow, that there is too much parade of scientific and especially physiological knowledge in it.

Such criticism did not deter Eliot. Her writing offers insight into the blended familiarity and strangeness of 19th-century science, as well as its uncanny proximity to fiction. In her final novel, Daniel Deronda, she draws an explicit connection between the speculative work of literature and scientific hypothesising:

Men can do nothing without the make-believe of a beginning. Even science, the strict measurer, is obliged to start with a make-believe unit.

This opening foreshadows the novel’s experimental form, which begins in the middle of the narrative.

Psychology and literature shaped each other

The word “psychology” at this time could suggest different mixtures of philosophical and physiological approaches to the mind and brain. As literary scholar Sally Shuttleworth has shown, literature and psychology shaped one another in the 19th century. Examples from Eliot’s novels were used as case studies in psychological texts.

Articles and lectures in the fields of medicine and physiological psychology addressed problems such as where to locate the soul in the body and whether conscience had its own “special ganglionic centre in the brain”.

Psychiatrists (then called “mental scientists”) were aware of the limits of their physiological knowledge. Addressing the many gaps in empirical enquiry involved speculative work, often influenced by philosophy and theology.

The Lifted Veil envisions the possibility of hearing “that roar on the other side of silence” – that is, fully accessing the minds of others.

Latimer’s foresight initially arises from language: the word “Prague” precipitates a stream of mental images and associations which create his first vision of the future. He experiences the mental process of others as fragmentary “obtrusions” on his mind: “a stream of thought rushed upon me like a ringing in the ears not to be got rid of”.

Rather than spurring human connection, Latimer’s abilities become a source of Gothic melodrama, as there is no longer anything hidden or uncertain in his life. His “superadded consciousness” seems to open “the souls of those who were in a close relation to me”, but this causes him “intense pain and grief”:

the rational talk, the graceful attentions, the wittily-turned phrases, and the kindly deeds, which used to make the web of their characters, were seen as if thrust asunder by a microscopic vision, that showed all the intermediate frivolities, all the suppressed egoism, all the struggling chaos of puerilities, meanness, vague capricious memories, and indolent make-shift thoughts, from which human words and deeds emerge like leaflets covering a fermenting heap.

Latimer becomes obsessed with a woman named Bertha, because she is the only exception. The combined uncertainty and physical attraction that Latimer experiences leads to a deep infatuation:

I could watch the expression of her face, and speculate on its meaning; I could ask for her opinion with the real interest of ignorance; I could listen for her words and watch for her smile with hope and fear.

Yet there is no real affinity between them. She is “keen, sarcastic, unimaginative, prematurely cynical”. She is contemptuous of the literature Latimer loves.

This sole element of mystery dissolves. Latimer eventually sees into Bertha’s inner self, which appears to him as “a blank prosaic wall”. It was perhaps the “negation of her soul” that had arrested his insight for so long. Bertha’s growing suspicion that Latimer has some way of knowing her inner thoughts only intensifies her hatred.

Eliot was writing at a time when “science fiction” was beginning to evolve into a genre exploring possible future advances in science. The Lifted Veil has some qualities of science fiction in this sense. During his time at school, Latimer becomes friends with a youth he calls Charles Meunier, whose intellectual passion is science.

Meunier returns at the end of the novel as a brilliant scientist, specialising in the “psychological relations of disease”. Meunier is present when Bertha’s maid, Mrs Archer, becomes fatally unwell. He asks Latimer’s permission to perform an experiment. Human blood transfusions were a new form of medical treatment in the 1800s. But Meunier wants to wait until after Mrs Archer is dead before he transfuses his own blood into her arteries.

The transfusion momentarily restores Mrs Archer to life – “the eyelids quivered, and the soul seemed to have returned beneath them” – in time to expose Bertha’s concealed intention to poison Latimer. The experience awakens Meunier to the experience of life as more than “a scientific problem”.

Latimer’s motivation for writing his story, we realise, is to win the sympathy of readers after his death, which he failed to obtain from those close to him in life.

– ref. George Eliot is best known for Middlemarch, but she also wrote an early work of science fiction – https://theconversation.com/george-eliot-is-best-known-for-middlemarch-but-she-also-wrote-an-early-work-of-science-fiction-269379

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Leonidas Karagounis, Professor Research Translation & Enterprise, Australian Catholic University

Peptides are widely marketed as a kind of “holy grail” for workout recovery and physical performance.

You may have seen advertisements online claiming these supplements can significantly boost muscle growth, eliminate joint pain, and accelerate recovery times.

As the prevalence of joint-related issues such as osteoarthritis rises, many people are also turning to these “nutraceuticals” in hope of finding a more natural alternative to traditional medications.

But what does the science say about peptides – specifically collagen peptides and whey-derived peptides? Do they really offer a performance edge, or is the polished marketing little more than high-protein hype?

Wait, what are peptides?

Peptides are short chains of amino acids, the fundamental building blocks of protein in our bodies. They are essentially “pre-digested” protein fragments.

Unlike whey protein, which is readily digested and absorbed by the body, collagen protein can’t be easily digested due to its very large and complex structure (much larger than whey protein).

However, as peptides are much smaller molecules and are more easily absorbed, you should only look for collagen supplements that are sold in peptide form.

The production of peptide supplements typically involves a process called enzymatic hydrolysis. During this process, collagen protein obtained from cow hide or fish scales, for example, is treated with specific enzymes called proteases.

These proteases act like biological scissors. They essentially snip the long protein chains into tiny fragments, which are the peptides.

Because of this processing, peptides have a much lower molecular weight (smaller size) than their parent proteins. This allows them to be more easily absorbed in the small intestine, transported through the bloodstream and used wherever there is a need, such as in muscles, tendons and joints.

So, do they work?

Research into peptides for workouts provides a mixed but interesting picture.

When it comes to pure muscle growth (known as hypertrophy), peptides derived from whey protein are generally considered superior to those derived from collagen.

However, in a study published in 2022, the authors concluded that after a ten-week resistance training program in young adults who ingested either whey protein or collagen peptides enriched with an amino acid known as leucine, whey was better in terms of increasing muscle size. But both proteins resulted in similar gains in strength and power.

Collagen peptides also show significant promise in athletic performance improvement when combined with vitamin C. This is because collagen peptides require vitamin C to help them better incorporate into their necessary structure, resulting in stronger collagen formation in tissues.

A 2021 trial involving male athletes found that vitamin C-enriched collagen peptides improved explosive power during squats and jumps, likely by increasing the stiffness and efficiency of the “springs” in our tendons.

Unlike whey peptides, collagen peptides are rich in glycine and proline. These amino acids specifically support tendons, ligaments and cartilage.

Research suggests taking 15 grams of collagen peptides in combination with vitamin C roughly 60 minutes before a workout may stimulate the production of new collagen in these tissues. This potentially protects against injury.

Studies have also demonstrated that ingesting 20g of collagen peptides daily can help reduce muscle soreness. It can also accelerate the recovery of muscle function after strenuous exercise.

Many of these studies, however, are small in scale. Small-scale clinical trials are limiting because the relatively low number of participants reduces the ability to apply the results to the broader population.

These studies also vary in the type of peptide provided, resulting in mixed findings.

This is important because the actual peptide sequences (the order of the specific amino acids found in the peptides) and size of the peptides can vary significantly between brands.

This means the benefits of one product may not apply to another.

It’s also worth remembering that once the peptides are absorbed into our blood stream, our body uses them wherever they are most needed – not necessarily in the skin, joints or other specific areas people may be hoping to target.

What are the risks?

For most of the general population, peptides are considered safe and well-tolerated.

Because they are often derived from food sources, the body processes them much like any other dietary protein.

The primary concern relates to contamination from the source.

For example, in the case of marine-sourced collagen peptides, there might be potentially harmful chemicals present in the fish species from which the collagen has been extracted.

This is not exclusive to collagen. It also applies to other marine-sourced supplements, such as omega 3 fish oils.

Research has also found some marine-sourced collagen products may contain low levels of mercury and arsenic. However, these were within the European Union’s regulatory limits, and average daily doses were consistently below what is defined as tolerable daily intakes.

– ref. Do peptides improve workout performance? A nutrition expert explains the science – https://theconversation.com/do-peptides-improve-workout-performance-a-nutrition-expert-explains-the-science-276965

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gehan Gunasekara, Professor of Commercial Law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Following a series of significant health data breaches, the government released a cyber security strategy and action plan to establish a national framework for responding to escalating cyber threats.

The strategy covers New Zealand’s critical infrastructure, from the electricity grid to transport, financial payment systems and the health sector. The government held consultations with each sector this week.

We argue better regulatory oversight is particularly urgent for the health sector.

Late last year, more than 120,000 New Zealanders had their medical records compromised when the patient data portal Manage My Health was hacked.

Then in February, the prescription app MediMap was taken offline after patient information was found to have been altered in a cyber attack.

These security breaches have damaged trust in New Zealand’s entire health system. They are being investigated as part of a government review and an inquiry by the privacy commissioner.

To stop this from happening again, the government must require all parties holding, transferring or sharing health data to be subject to regulatory oversight and mandatory audits, regardless of whether they are in the private or public sector.

Lack of a single cyber security law

From a public standpoint, the distinction between public healthcare providers and their private IT service providers is immaterial.

This is reinforced by section 11 of the Privacy Act, which says healthcare providers remain responsible for information handled on their behalf, even when using IT service providers.

However, a clause in the Health Information Privacy Code also lists IT providers as “health agencies” which may result in confusion as to which agency is ultimately responsible.

Currently, New Zealand has no single piece of legislation that mandates enforceable minimum cyber security requirements. There are no explicit, binding due-diligence requirements in primary legislation for choosing IT services, beyond general privacy and security obligations.

We argue this needs to change.

Current issues with health data

When patients change doctors, their old records don’t disappear. They can remain on whichever system their previous practice used for many years.

One patient reported their medical files were still uploading to Manage My Health two years after their doctor’s practice stopped using the platform.

While providers are legally required to protect and manage this information, there is limited proactive auditing. Patients may not be notified unless or until a serious incident occurs.

Section 11 of the Privacy Act should be strengthened to require clear auditable contractual commitments between providers and those acting on their behalf to store or process information.

Government agencies face strict rules because New Zealand’s protective security requirements mandate how government departments must handle sensitive information. If data needs protection when held by the government, it needs equal protection when held by contractors.

In the UK, any public or private organisation accessing patient data held by the public health system must complete a mandatory data security and protection toolkit annually. In the US, federal audits of healthcare providers are conducted under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Another example is Finland, which responded swiftly to a 2020 data breach at the private psychotherapy centre Vastaamo, mandating security audits for all healthcare providers, with no exceptions.

Vastaamo’s system, holding records of 33,000 psychotherapy patients, had stored sensitive data without encryption. Investigations found Vastaamo’s patient database was exposed through very weak administrator access controls and inadequate network restrictions, and that the system had not been subject to effective external security audits.

Since Finland strengthened and broadened mandatory external security audits for those handling patient information, no breach on the same scale has been reported. New Zealand should follow a similar approach.

As we await the findings from the inquiry and review on how the breaches occurred, the government should consider the following points:

Data storage and sovereignty

If data is stored on foreign-owned servers, foreign laws may apply regardless of the physical location. This is particularly relevant when we consider the implications for Māori data.

Due diligence and mandatory oversight

Government agencies must follow clear and auditable processes before trusting private vendors with patient data.

All private companies handling sensitive health data are already categorised as health agencies and must comply with the conditions of the Health Information Privacy Code 2020. Clear guidance should be given to doctors and health providers to help them determine whether they should entrust patient data to private companies.

Historic data

At present, rules regarding the retention and deletion of health data are found across multiple legislative codes. The ability to delete data is limited. We need better transparency and supervision across the system.

We argue New Zealand needs mandatory security audits for all healthcare data systems. We hope the government will enforce this.

– ref. Public health providers have to obey strict cyber security rules – so should private contractors – https://theconversation.com/public-health-providers-have-to-obey-strict-cyber-security-rules-so-should-private-contractors-279300

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nina Van Dyke, Associate Professor and Associate Director, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University

When most people think about “healthy eating”, they usually focus on what they eat. That might mean trying to eat more fruit and vegetables or less fast food, or counting calories.

But there’s a lot more to healthy eating than just dietary intake. Behaviours and attitudes around food are also important.

Take, for example, orthorexia nervosa, which is an obsessive preoccupation with consuming only “healthy” foods. If healthy eating only means ingesting healthy foods, then people with orthorexia are super healthy.

But people who live with this eating disorder often struggle with relationships and report poor quality of life, among other issues.

Research suggests that shifting the focus from food itself to our experience of eating can have a range of health benefits. Let’s take a look.

Why are we so obsessed with diet?

Equating “healthy eating” with “healthy diet” may have taken off in the early 1980s with panic over the “obesity epidemic” in Western countries – defined as a rapid rise in the prevalence of people in the population with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or greater.

But causes of obesity are complex and poorly understood, with numerous possible explanations beyond simply what a person eats. And admonishing overweight people to eat “healthier” has done nothing to reduce population rates of obesity.

There is some evidence that this fixation on weight has resulted in increased rates of disordered eating and eating disorders – both of which involve problematic eating behaviours and distorted attitudes towards food, weight, shape and appearance.

Clearly, something needs to change in how we think about healthy eating.

Listening to your body

A growing body of research on intuitive eating has found this approach has an array of health benefits.

Intuitive eating means trusting internal body cues that tell us when, what and how much to eat. For example, tuning into your stomach growling telling you it’s time to eat, or noticing feeling full or satisfied, or that you may crave certain foods because your body wants specific nutrients (such as protein after exercising).

Studies have shown this approach can lead to better physical and mental health as well as better diet quality, and is associated with lower BMIs.

Research also shows eating at regular intervals and eating with other people also lead to better overall health and diet.

But if you find it hard, you’re not alone

Most of us are surrounded by food environments that make healthy eating difficult.

Unhealthy food environments promote overeating and encourage us to override our innate signals of hunger and fullness.

When we’re surrounded by cheap and accessible sugary snacks, fast foods and large portions – and lots of marketing – it can be hard to develop a positive relationship with food.

The issue is particularly acute for people in more disadvantaged communities.

For example, in our research with rural Australians about food and eating, most told us they wanted to eat more healthily, but found it difficult for many reasons, These included busy schedules and the cost of healthier food.

Habits and emotional eating can also make healthy eating difficult.

So, what works?

For most people, healthy behaviours and attitudes to eating mean a balanced, flexible and non-judgmental approach, without fear of “bad” foods. It means paying attention to hunger and fullness cues.

But it also means recognising that food is a source of social and cultural connection. A healthy attitude to food doesn’t ignore nutritional information – it incorporates this knowledge into a broader and more joyous approach to eating.

Here are three suggestions to get you started.

1. Recognising signs of hunger and fullness

These may differ from person to person. Can you hear your stomach start to growl or your energy begin to dip? Is it a while since you ate? And while eating, is there a point where the hunger has gone away and you no longer feel a strong desire to continue eating? Some people find using hunger and fullness scales useful.

2. Reframing “bad” foods

Is there a food you really like but don’t eat because you consider it “bad” or “forbidden”? Try incorporating a small amount into your next meal or snack. You may find that doing so brings greater joy to your eating while simultaneously taking away its power.

3. Eating with people

If you normally eat by yourself or “grab and go”, see if there’s a way to plan more time for meals and include other people – whether this is more family meals or group lunches with coworkers.

But some people have to follow a specific diet

People with medical conditions that require a particular type of diet – such as those with diabetes or coeliac disease – need to follow that advice. But they may still be able to have healthy behaviours and attitudes towards food even within these constraints.

For example, one 2020 study of people with type 2 diabetes found that more intuitive eaters had better control of their blood sugar levels.

The bottom line

So – if you don’t have a medical condition that prevents it – go ahead and have some of that birthday cake. And then listen to your body when it tells you you’ve had enough.

If you feel that you have an unhealthy relationship with food that is interfering with your life, please contact your GP to discuss your options. You may also want to contact the Butterfly Foundation for support.

– ref. Focusing on how and why you eat – not just what – may be the key to healthy eating – https://theconversation.com/focusing-on-how-and-why-you-eat-not-just-what-may-be-the-key-to-healthy-eating-273019