Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jeff Borland, Professor of Economics, The University of Melbourne

Australia’s labour force statistics for August again make the case for giving up on the rate of unemployment as an indicator of the state of the labour market.

In June the official unemployment rate dropped below 5% for the first time since before the Global Financial Crisis of 2008. In July it dropped again, to 4.6%.

With major lockdowns across Australia since late July, the rate for August was widely expected to go up. Yet the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ figures show that while total hours worked were 5.6% down on their May peak, the jobless rate defied all predictions and fell again, to 4.5%

To understand why this has happened, we just need to follow the COVID-19 trail.

Employment fell

The re-emergence of COVID-19 in Victoria in June and NSW in July had already reduced hours of work. That trend accelerated in August with simultaneous lockdowns in NSW, Victoria, Queensland and the ACT.

Total hours worked in Australia declined by 3.8% in just one month, and are now back below their pre-COVID level in March 2020.

NSW has, unsurprisingly, been hardest hit. Hours worked there have fallen 11.8% since May. This is a more severe downturn than NSW experienced with the onset of COVID-19 in 2020, when hours worked decreased by 9.9%.

Until July, the re-emergence of COVID-19 brought decreases in hours worked but not in the number of people employed. That changed in August. Employment in NSW fell by 173,000, or 4.4%.

Other states in lockdown, Victoria and Queensland, have also gone backwards but to a lesser extent. Victoria in particular appears to have got away lightly in the month to August. Hours worked did fall by 2.8% but there was a slight increase in employment.

ABS payroll data — a different measure to its monthly labour force survey — show much smaller decreases in jobs in Victoria than NSW in August across most industries.

This may reflect that Victoria’s latest lockdown started after NSW; or it may show that Victoria has managed to have its lockdown with less disruption to work. Data on employment for September will tell us more.

Hours worked fell more

Seeing larger falls in hours worked than employment tells us something important about how businesses adjust to needing less labour.

Rather than laying off their staff, at least in the initial stages of lockdown, businesses have chosen to reduce their hours of work.

This can be seen in the rise in the rate of underemployment between July and August, from 8.3% to 9.3%. Since May, the number of workers getting fewer hours than usual due to “no work, not enough work or stood down” rose about 490,000. Of those workers, about an extra 190,000 worked zero hours in the week of the survey.

People gave up looking for work

If employment fell between July and August, you might be thinking, doesn’t that mean more people unemployed, and a higher rate of unemployment?

Normally that’s what we’d expect to happen.

But it only happens if the people who lose their jobs stay in the labour market, looking for work.

In August, however, while employment decreased by 146,000, the number of people wanting to work — who the ABS counts as part of the labour force — declined even more, by 168,000. Thus unemployment fell by 22,000.

Withdrawals from the labour market were almost entirely concentrated in NSW. The state that saw the biggest decrease in hours worked also had the biggest decrease in people wanting to work — 3.8%.

Read more:
New finding: jobseekers subject to obligations take longer to find work

So the lower rate of unemployment in August is not a sign of improving labour market conditions. Instead it shows many potential workers decided it wasn’t worth looking for a job.

Young people and women most affected

Those bearing the brunt of these latest lockdowns are same groups most adversely affected by the initial impact of COVID-19 in 2020.

Youth (aged 15 to 24 years) make up just 15% of the population but accounted for half of the decrease in employment in August. It’s likely this disproportionate impact is again due to younger people being more likely to work in the industries most affected by lockdowns – such as accommodation and food services.

Read more:
JobKeeper and JobMaker have left too many young people on the dole queue

The story from 2020 is also repeating in the labour market impact of lockdowns by gender. From May to August, female employment fell by 90,000, compared with 25,000 for males. Women also withdraw from the labour force in much larger numbers than males, 119,000 to 80,000.

Jeff Borland receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Just 4.5% jobless during lockdowns? The unemployment rate is now meaningless – https://theconversation.com/just-4-5-jobless-during-lockdowns-the-unemployment-rate-is-now-meaningless-167805

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Susan Green, Professor in Indigenous Australian Studies and GCWLCH Co-ordinator, Charles Sturt University

The COVID-19 crisis in Wilcannia demonstrates how entrenched neglect, combined with a global pandemic, have created a perfect storm impacting the most marginalised people in society.

The treatment of the Barkindji people of Wilcannia is appalling by anyone’s standards and should be unacceptable to every Australian. The stories flooding out of Wilcannia of mistreatment of Aboriginal people should make every person stand up and demand immediate action.

The government needs to take immediate action to address the conditions in which the people in Wilcannia are forced to live, and by providing vaccinations immediately to all those who want to be vaccinated.

Read more:
Politics with Michelle Grattan: Pat Turner on COVID – and god botherers – stalking Indigenous communities

Not enough healthcare, too much police involvement

As part of my research, I spoke to community members over the phone to listen to their experiences of this breakout. Here are just a few stories told to me by the people of Wilcannia:

• a young mother who was made to sit outside a hospital on a cold night, before being sent home due to under-resourcing

• a woman who had police arrive on her doorstep to inform her she had tested positive to COVID-19, and they must take her to the isolation unit. There was no phone call from NSW Health, just police arriving to take her to isolation. Her elderly mother, who is on dialysis, was taken to another town

• Aboriginal people with mental illness or disorders, who require regular treatment and medication, being picked up in police vans and taken to the hospital because they “may” have COVID-19. The people of Wilcannia told me they were told this is because police vans are “easier” to clean.

The police or the defence force themselves cannot be blamed. They are doing all they can to assist, much of which NSW Health should be resourced to do. Without the police and the defence force, Wilcannia would be in a much worse situation. However, we need a health and community response, not a law and order response.

Reports have surfaced Aboriginal people in Wilcannia are being fined up to $5,000 for leaving home to get food. Some of the people being fined are already living on meagre incomes and having to pay those fines will cause significant distress and further financial problems, further entrenching disadvantage.

Neglect of Aboriginal people has led us here

Overcrowded and poor-quality housing already results in poor health outcomes. The effects of overcrowded and poor quality housing during a viral pandemic cannot be overstated.

Aboriginal people have been isolating in tents during cold desert nights to try to protect their families. They do not choose to live in overcrowded and poor-quality housing; that is all that is available.

NSW Health have since supplied 30 motor homes for people diagnosed with COVID so they can isolate away from their families.

Read more:
The first Indigenous COVID death reminds us of the outsized risk NSW communities face

The situation in Wilcannia did not just happen overnight, nor was it unforeseen. The neglect of Aboriginal people by current and successive governments has led us to this point.

Furthermore, Aboriginal health services predicted last year that if COVID-19 entered Aboriginal communities, it would be disastrous. Instead of governments taking responsibility for their failures, some have blamed the people suffering the consequences of their failure.

For example, the government demonised the family and community who attended a funeral, making false statements and allegations, despite the funeral occurring before restrictions and lockdowns outside of the Greater Sydney Region. Those who made negative statements about the funeral attendance have expressed regret, but it’s too little too late.

Read more:
The COVID-19 crisis in western NSW Aboriginal communities is a nightmare realised

Aboriginal people were classified as 1B priority for the vaccines, but in many places, the vaccines were simply not available. This was either because services on the ground did not have the capacity to deliver or there just were not enough vaccines. Many Aboriginal people across the state of NSW have reported long waiting lists to get vaccinated.

It must also be noted that those Aboriginal people wary of vaccines have good reason, based in over 200 years of history, not to trust what the government says.

However, we do not need to go back that far to understand this crisis. We only need to look at the government’s failure to secure enough (timely) vaccines for these vulnerable communities.

What has to happen now?

The government firstly must address the immediate needs of the community, by ensuring adequate and appropriate housing for people to isolate in, tents and motor homes are not appropriate in this situation. Vaccinations must be urgently administered and everyone who wants to be vaccinated must be able to do so without a waiting list.

More doctors and nurses need to be sent to regional areas affected by the virus. Social workers must also be sent to ensure people have access to adequate and appropriate health care, food and accommodation as well as programs to allow people to deal with issues worsened by the pandemic and to maintain mental and cultural well-being during times of isolation and lock down.

Susan Green receives funding from ARC research funding. She is affiliated with CSU as an academic, AASW, as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Board member and Visual Dreaming as a board member.

– ref. COVID in Wilcannia: a national disgrace we all saw coming – https://theconversation.com/covid-in-wilcannia-a-national-disgrace-we-all-saw-coming-167348

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By AJ Mitchell, Research fellow, Australian National University

The Australian government has just declared an historic defence agreement with the United States and United Kingdom that will see a new fleet of nuclear-powered submarines patrol our shores and surrounding waters.

Research into nuclear-based propulsion of marine vessels began in the 1940s with the dawn of the “nuclear age”. Since then, only six nations have owned and operated nuclear submarines: China, France, India, Russia, the UK and the US.

Considering Australia has just torn up a A$90 billion contract to construct a new arsenal of conventional submarines, yesterday’s announcement will probably come as a surprise to many.

Read more:
Australia to build nuclear submarines in a new partnership with the US and UK

So what is “nuclear” about a nuclear submarine? The first thing to say is that a nuclear-powered submarine is not a nuclear weapon.

On the surface, they look like any other submarine. The key difference lies in the way they are powered.

In the early days of atomic research, scientists rapidly realised the huge amounts of energy released by “splitting the atom” can be harnessed to generate electricity. Nuclear reactors inside power stations have been powering homes and industry across the world for 70 years. Similarly, each nuclear submarine draws power from its own miniature onboard nuclear reactor.

At the heart of every atom is an atomic nucleus, made of protons and neutrons. The number of protons defines what chemical element that atom belongs to; nuclei with the same number of protons but varying numbers of neutrons are called isotopes of that element.

Some very heavy nuclei are highly susceptible to a process known as nuclear fission, whereby they split into two lighter nuclei with a total mass less than the original nucleus. The remainder is converted to energy.

The amount of energy released is immense, as we can see from Einstein’s famous equation, E = mc², which tells us the energy is equal to the change in mass multiplied by the square of the speed of light!

Reactors in a nuclear-powered submarine are typically fuelled with uranium. Natural uranium mined from the ground consists mainly of an isotope called uranium-238, mixed with small amounts (0.7%) of the key isotope uranium-235.

For the reactor to work, the uranium fuel has to be “enriched” to contain the desired proportion of uranium-235. For submarines, this is typically about 50%. The degree of fuel enrichment is a crucial factor in maintaining a chain reaction that gives a consistent, safe level of energy output.

Inside the reactor, uranium-235 is bombarded with neutrons, causing some of the nuclei to undergo nuclear fission. In turn, more neutrons are released and the process continues in a so-called “nuclear chain reaction”. The energy is given off as heat, which can be used to drive turbines that generate electricity for the submarine.

What are the pros and cons of going nuclear?

One huge advantage of nuclear-powered submarines is they do not require refuelling. When one of them enters into service, it will be commissioned with enough uranium fuel to last more than 30 years.

The high efficiency of nuclear power also enables these submarines to operate at high speed for longer periods than conventional diesel-electric submarines. What’s more, unlike conventional fuel combustion, nuclear reactions do not require air. That means nuclear submarines can stay submerged at deep depths for months at a time, giving them better stealth capabilities and allowing for longer, more remote deployments.

The downside is the eye-watering cost. Each nuclear submarine typically costs several billion dollars to build, and requires a highly skilled workforce with expertise in nuclear science. With its dedicated training programs offered by world-class universities and government agencies, Australia is well situated to meet the increasing demands in this space, and will also benefit from existing UK and US expertise through the new trilateral security pact.

At this stage, details on where the fuel would be sourced are unclear. While Australia has an ample supply of uranium in the ground, it lacks the capacity to enrich or fabricate the reactor fuel, which could be sourced from overseas.

What will happen to the spent fuel? The 2015 Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission found commercial viability for long-term radioactive waste storage and disposal facilities in South Australia. Whether this eventuates will doubtless be subject to deliberations at local and federal government levels for years to come.

Read more:
Why nuclear submarines are a smart military move for Australia — and could deter China further

Popular misconceptions

I’ll say it again. This is not a call by Australia to deploy nuclear weapons in our waters. For uranium to be designated “weapons grade”, it needs to be enriched to upwards of 90% uranium-235 – the fuel for a nuclear-powered submarine doesn’t come close.

In any case, Australia has never produced a nuclear weapon, and it is a party to nuclear nonproliferation treaties and international export control regimes, including the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Initiative.

The tactical advantage of submarines comes from their stealth and ability to pinpoint targets secretly without detection.

Maintaining safety, for both crew and the natural environment, is crucial onboard any sea vessel. Hollywood movies such as K19: The Widowmaker, in which a nuclear submarine malfunctions on its maiden voyage, play on our emotions and our instinctive fear of nuclear radiation.

But advances in modern safety controls and procedures mean reactor accidents in submarines are hopefully now consigned to the past.

The strategic and geopolitical outcomes of this policy decision are yet to be seen. But one thing is already clear: Australia’s latest foreign policy venture is also a firm embrace of nuclear science.

AJ Mitchell works for The Australian National University, Canberra.

– ref. How do nuclear-powered submarines work? A nuclear scientist explains – https://theconversation.com/how-do-nuclear-powered-submarines-work-a-nuclear-scientist-explains-168067

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Hannah, Lecturer in Public Policy, The University of Western Australia

On Friday, US President Joe Biden announced a sweeping new vaccine mandate for employers covering around 100 million adults.

Given the urgent need to increase Australia’s vaccination rate, it may be tempting to think we need our own mass mandates.

That would be a mistake. The US mandate responds to problems which aren’t major barriers to vaccine uptake in Australia.

State and federal governments here should pursue other avenues first.

Why did Biden announce a mandate?

Biden has mandated vaccination for federal workers and contractors, and employees at hospitals and health centres that receive federal government funding. This covers around 17 million people.

Biden will also instruct his Department of Labor to issue an emergency ruling to require vaccination (or weekly testing) for workers at companies that have 100 or more employees. This should cover around 80 million people.

This big step has already courted backlash in Republican-led states. Why was it necessary?

Despite setting a good early pace, the US has fallen behind many other wealthy nations. The country hit 40% of its total population fully vaccinated in May, but is now only at just over 53%. Canada began June with just 6% of its population vaccinated, but is now at almost 70%.

Read more:
Could a France-style vaccine mandate for public spaces work in Australia? Legally, yes, but it’s complicated

The US also faces large regional disparities. In the northeast, some states have vaccination rates comparable to Canada. In the south, rates are much lower. Despite administering more than 380 million vaccine doses, the country is currently recording over 140,000 COVID cases and 1,600 deaths per day.

The causes are complex. However, under-resourced and/or unwilling state governments, a fragmented and inequitable health-care system, a deficit of social trust, and the viral spread of misinformation undoubtedly contribute.

Biden’s announcement arises out of well-known problems with political action in the United States. Passing legislation would require agreement from a Congress already at loggerheads over other key planks of the Democrats’ domestic agenda. Therefore, the mandate will be implemented via Biden’s unilateral powers as president.

It may provoke backlash against vaccination among some people, which could impact existing vaccinations for children, as well as COVID vaccines. However, it’s difficult to see what other options are available.

Australia has other ways to increase uptake

Fortunately, the circumstances are different in Australia. We would therefore advise a more circumspect approach.

Some states have already announced mandates for frontline health-care workers and police, and the Australian Medical Association has backed mandates for all of those who work in a health-care setting.

Companies have introduced their own private mandates for workers, the public, or both, with Crown Resorts this week announcing it’s looking to introduce such a policy. State governments will be adding vaccine passports to their toolkits for venues in New South Wales and Victoria.

Read more:
Vaccine passports are coming to Australia. How will they work and what will you need them for?

But there are additional important pathways to increasing vaccination rates that can foster trust in the health-care system. These have proved difficult in the US, but are available in Australia.

Targeted outreach in the form of clinics and bespoke persuasive communications are needed for poorly reached communities. Culturally and linguistically diverse populations and Aboriginal communities need culturally safe vaccination sites and interventions to address specific concerns.

The Biden administration can do little to work with states with low vaccination rates. Even as cases soar in Kentucky and Tennessee, Republican state governments have been largely unwilling to take additional steps to stop the spread and speed up vaccination.

In Australia, with supply issues soon to dissipate, the states and territories can work together with the federal government on improving communications and addressing access issues. The current significant disagreements in our National Cabinet nevertheless pale in comparison to the ceaseless battlefield of US federalism throughout the pandemic.

While there has been some gnashing of teeth regarding additional supplies of vaccines to NSW, western Sydney has demonstrated how effective targeted local campaigns can be.

As recently as late July, there were concerns raised about hesitancy in western Sydney. Blacktown now has one of the highest vaccination rates in the country: 89.5% of those over 15 years old have had at least a single dose.

A US-style mandate is a blunt instrument. It’s potentially effective if all else fails, but not without costs.

We should continue to build a rollout that strengthens trust in health systems and vaccinations. This will not only help us reach the high vaccination coverage rates we need, but will also prepare us for the next crisis.

Read more:
Vaccinations need to reach 90% of First Nations adults and teens to protect vulnerable communities

Adam Hannah receives funding from the WA Department of Health.

Katie Attwell receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the WA Department of Health. She is currently funded by ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Award DE1901000158. She is a member of a government advisory committee, the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) COVID-19 Working Group 2. She is a specialist advisor to the Therapeutic Goods Administration. All views presented in this article are her own and not representative of any other organisation.

– ref. Biden announces COVID vaccine mandate for 100 million Americans. Australia shouldn’t follow just yet – https://theconversation.com/biden-announces-covid-vaccine-mandate-for-100-million-americans-australia-shouldnt-follow-just-yet-168066

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Narelle Lemon, Associate Professor in Education, Swinburne University of Technology

School holidays are upon us again. In pre-pandemic days, many parents and carers would be busily planning holidays interstate or overseas, booking in play dates, organising day trips or tee-ing up visits to family and friends.

Instead, a significant amount of us are in lockdown (still), living with restrictions and likely working from home.

School holidays may feel like more of the same, and many parents are burned out from trying to work while managing remote learning.

I am an education researcher with a lasting interest in how to blend creativity with educational experiences for children.

If you and the kids are stumped for things to do these holidays, and looking for ways to reconnect after a really trying school term, here are some ideas to try.

Read more:
Kids’ fitness is at risk while they miss sport and hobbies — but mums are getting more physical

Try some conversation starters — you might be surprised what comes out

Think back to your own childhood memories. It’s likely your favourite moments are less about big grand gestures and more about moments of connection with a parent or carer.

Finding fresh ways to cultivate this positive relationship in lockdown might be hard, but it’s not impossible.

One idea is to experiment with “conversation starters” — perhaps while you go on your daily walks, as you throw a ball around, or as you go around the dinner table.

Give your children language to talk about their experiences, to help them develop a sense of self.

You might want to talk about experiences you have had today, recently, since lockdown began or even ever. These sentence starters may help kick things off:

• I enjoyed …

• In future, I’d like to try …

• Wouldn’t it be cool if we could …

• I look forward to …

• When such-and-such happened, I felt …

Give it a try. Perhaps it’ll feel a bit stilted at first. But you might be surprised at what comes up once you and your child start talking.

Find new ways to share positive emotions

Positive emotions are contagious. Look for new ways to share positivity around by, for example:

• each person saying three things they are grateful for over dinner or while on a family walk

• making a list of small joys (like a recent dish you enjoyed or a local garden you like walking past). Keep the list in a visible place, like on the fridge, and add to it over time

• try a random act of kindness. Make a nice card or postcard and deliver it to someone in your neighbourhood. Or write a note of appreciation to a teacher or local business

• celebrate day-to-day achievements. See if you can teach your child a family recipe, form a mini book club by reading the same book together and discussing it, or try to learn something new together.

Remember, though, you don’t have to try to enforce constant positivity. Sadness and stress are normal too, and we must ensure children are given space to share those emotions as well.

Even in the city, we can connect with nature

Connecting with nature helps improve mental well-being, even when that contact is brief.

A visit to the national park might be out of the question but you can still find nature even in the most urban of settings. You could:

• try mindful walking with your child, where you purposefully notice what is around you (so no earphones or devices)

• borrow a trick from meditation practice and name five things you see, four things you hear, three things you feel, two things you smell and one thing you taste. Think of it as a kind of sensory “scavenger hunt” to do while you’re on your walks. You just might notice something new

• if it’s allowed, go on a picnic to your local park. Take your shoes off and feel the grass in your toes

• if you’re subject to a lockdown radius, get out the map and study closely what exactly is in your radius. There may be a park or a street you haven’t visited yet. Finding new streets to walk can be shockingly invigorating

• if you’re lucky enough to have a backyard, make the most of it. Create a sculpture together using found objects, arrange petals in a shape, build a fairy house, fix up a garden bed, cook outside, set up a tent and go camping in the garden

• plant something — herbs, flowers, anything — in balcony pots or a little indoor garden and watch it grow. Take progress photos.

Connect with your child and their interests

Find ways to connect with your children — take an interest in what they’re interested in, even if it’s not something you’d typically do with your leisure time.

You could try:

• a regular board game or card game night (and let your child pick what to play)

• making a favourite food from scratch (pasta is fun for all ages)

• teach your children new ways to connect with pets

• make a time capsule that captures pandemic life

• help your child re-arrange their bedroom

• start a community art installation that brings hope and joy, like the Spoonville craze or the bears in windows movement.

Be gentle with yourself

If reading that list makes you feel exhausted, please be gentle with yourself. You don’t have to do any of those things if you don’t have the time, energy or inclination. Nobody is expecting you to plan every moment of your child’s holidays.

But if a spare pocket of time arises and you’re looking for ways to reinvigorate the same old walks, chores or activities, I hope this list proves useful.

Read more:
What art are you engaging with in lockdown? Australians are mostly watching TV — but music, singing and dancing do more for your mood

Narelle Lemon consults on wellbeing via Explore and Create Co. She is currently funded with a research team for a two year project, funded by the Building Safe Communities grant from the Victorian Department of Justice and Community Safety, supporting Pasifika secondary students to stay and complete school, where wellbeing is one part of the research focus. She volunteers for Action for Happiness Australia. She sits on the board and currently holds the position of Chair.

– ref. Wondering what to do with kids in lockdown school holidays? Ideas from a happiness expert – https://theconversation.com/wondering-what-to-do-with-kids-in-lockdown-school-holidays-ideas-from-a-happiness-expert-167798

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Ravenswood, Associate Professor in Employment Relations, Auckland University of Technology

As Auckland enters it’s fifth week in level 4 lockdown and the rest of New Zealand stays at level 2, spare a thought for the nation’s invisible network of essential community support workers.

They are the people caring for those who, through age or disability, cannot work or leave their homes, cannot independently care for themselves, and who in many cases have underlying mental health and cognitive problems.

While other front-line essential workers are rightly recognised for their service, it’s important we also remember those less obvious workers who put their own health and well-being at risk to care for and support some of our most vulnerable citizens.

Often these community workers receive little support themselves. And while the stress on hospital staff, supermarket workers and even political leaders has been acknowledged, this other essential group has largely gone unnoticed.

As one community worker told us when reflecting on being overlooked as essential workers and the potential impact this could have on their own well-being:

At the start, the government kind of didn’t even really consider us as health workers, did they?

Struggle for pay and PPE

In our ongoing research, we have so far heard from over 75 community support workers nationwide about their well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic.

They are employed mostly by private companies (some not-for-profit) contracted to a variety of government agencies, including the Ministry of Health, ACC and district health boards.

Read more:
Languishing, burnout and stigma are all among the possible psychological impacts as Delta lingers in the community

Our preliminary findings show these workers struggled to gain recognition throughout the first national lockdown in 2020. Furthermore, they struggled to be paid and to receive even the most basic personal protective equipment (PPE) provided by their employers:

Our employers were so slack, not recognising that we needed [PPE]. But they were following Ministry of Health guidelines and so it was government […] it was the World Health Organization — it was everybody.

What was wrong with people to think that we could go out there and do our jobs without PPE? And then why do we have to have such a battle for it? Because it was actually hard enough doing the job without having all of that as well.

This very real struggle underscored a wider battle by community care workers to be appreciated for their work — or even to be “seen”. As one support worker noted:

In comparison with nurses, who are angels, caregivers are just ignored […] it’s like a little underworld where, all over your city, women, mostly in uniforms in little cars, are getting in and out of the cars and going into houses and doing things that nobody has any idea about.

Working in isolation

Despite working with people in the most vulnerable situations, support workers spoke of being turned away or facing public backlash when trying to use essential worker queues at supermarkets.

And yet these support workers are undeniably essential. In many ways they are the “glue” in the health system, as another told us:

One thing I want to make sure that you understand is that we look after [everyone from] medically fragile children to palliative [cases]. We look after all of them — anybody that wants to remain in the community, then has a health issue, we look after them.

Read more:
Low-wage essential workers get less protection against coronavirus – and less information about how it spreads

Even during the best of (non-pandemic) times, these workers operate in isolation. The majority hardly ever see a co-worker, and almost never see a manager in person. Communication is via impersonal emails, phone apps or call centres.

But during lockdowns, support workers are the only people isolated clients see — they step in as communicators and carers. In effect they become like family. They have to deal – alone – with the confusion and anxiety of their clients. Their own well-being and mental health often come second:

I felt unsupported in regards to dealing with these [client] behaviours at the time, because there were no people on the ground. They were all working from home, so they were all on a phone. So, in some cases, my biggest “PPE” would have been having someone there, and it wasn’t there. I had someone on a phone.

Read more:
Historic pay equity settlement for NZ care workers delivers mixed results

‘I would have just loved a phone call’

As with other healthcare workers, coping is a strategy built up over time by community support workers:

It’s like, right, suck it up and just, you know, dry those tears and put on that smile and be your bouncy self again […] I’ve had to learn.

But unlike other healthcare workers, such as those at COVID testing and vaccination stations and hospitals, community support workers don’t have a team around them for support:

We just had days and days where we didn’t hear anything from our employer and we felt really alone and vulnerable. And, of course, when we went into lockdown and everything, we didn’t feel supported at all.

It was very frightening. We had to go out there as essential workers and, oh God, it was stressful.

Asked what might improve their well-being, a common refrain has been that employers and society in general pay attention and care more:

Somehow showing how you’re valued […] It would be nice just to have a “you’re doing well” or something.

I would have just loved a phone call, just to check if I’m coping or not.

This project is funded by the Health Research Council’s ‘Wellbeing of Essential Workers during Covid-19: Community Support Workers’, in partnership with the E tū and PSA Unions. The findings here represent the views of the authors, not the funder and not necessarily the research partners.

Amber Nicholson receives funding from the Health Research Council.

Fiona Hurd receives funding from the Health Research Council.

– ref. Overlooked and undervalued, New Zealand’s community caregivers have become the ‘invisible’ essential workers – https://theconversation.com/overlooked-and-undervalued-new-zealands-community-caregivers-have-become-the-invisible-essential-workers-167632

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jessica Suzanne Dudley, Postdoctoral Fellow, Macquarie University

Supplying oxygen to their growing offspring and removing carbon dioxide is a major challenge for every pregnant animal. Humans deal with this problem by developing a placenta, but in seahorses — where the male, not the female, gestates and gives birth to the young — exactly how it worked hasn’t always been so clear.

Male seahorses incubate their embryos inside a pouch, and until now it was unclear how the embryos “breathe” inside this closed structure. Our new study, published in the journal Placenta, examines how pregnant male seahorses (Hippocampus abdominalis) provide oxygen supply and carbon dioxide removal to their embryos.

We examined male seahorse pouches under the microscope at different stages of pregnancy, and found they develop complex placental structures over time — in similar ways to human pregnancy.

Read more:
Curious Kids: Is it true that male seahorses give birth?

A pregnant dad gestating up to 1,000 babies

Male pregnancy is rare, only occurring in a group of fish that includes seahorses, seadragons, pipehorses and pipefishes.

Pot-bellied seahorse males have a specialised enclosed structure on their tail. This organ is called the brood pouch, in which the embryos develop.

The female deposits eggs into the male’s pouch after a mating dance and pregnancy lasts about 30 days.

While inside the pouch, the male supplies nutrients to his developing embryos, before giving birth to up to 1,000 babies.

Embryonic development requires oxygen, and the oxygen demand increases as the embryo grows. So too does the need to get rid of the resulting carbon dioxide efficiently. This presents a problem for the pregnant male seahorse.

Enter the placenta

In egg-laying animals — such as birds, monotremes, certain reptiles and fishes — the growing embryo accesses oxygen and gets rid of carbon dioxide through pores in the egg shell.

For animals that give birth to live young, a different solution is required. Pregnant humans develop a placenta, a complex organ connecting the mother to her developing baby, which allows an efficient exchange of oxygen and carbon dioxide (it also gets nutrients to the baby, and removes waste, via the bloodstream).

Placentae are filled with many small blood vessels and often there is a thinning of the tissue layers that separate the parent’s and baby’s blood circulations. This improves the efficiency of oxygen and nutrient delivery to the fetus.

Surprisingly, the placenta is not unique to mammals.

Some sharks, like the Australian sharpnose shark (Rhizoprionodon taylori) develop a placenta with an umbilical cord joining the mother to her babies during pregnancy. Many live-bearing lizards form a placenta (including very complex ones) to provide respiratory gases and some nutrients to their developing embryos.

Our previous research identified genes that allow the seahorse father to provide for the developing embryos while inside his pouch.

Our new study shows that during pregnancy the pouch undergoes many changes similar to those seen in mammalian pregnancy. We focused on examining the brood pouch of male seahorses during pregnancy to determine exactly how they provide oxygen to their developing embryos.

What we found

By viewing the seahorse pouch under the microscope at various stages of pregnancy, we found that small blood vessels grow within the pouch, particularly towards the end of pregnancy. This is when the baby seahorses (called fry) require the most oxygen.

The distance between the father’s blood supply and the embryos also decreases dramatically as the pregnancy goes on. These changes improve the efficiency of transport between the father and the embryos.

Interestingly, many of the changes that occur in the seahorse pouch during pregnancy are similar to those that occur in the uterus during mammalian pregnancy.

We have only scratched the surface of understanding the function of the seahorse placenta during pregnancy.

There is still much to learn about how these fathers protect and nourish their babies during pregnancy — but our work shows the morphological changes to seahorse brood pouches have a lot in common with the development of mammalian placentae.

Read more:
The secret sex life and pregnancy of a seahorse dad

Camilla Whittington receives funding from the Australian Research Council and The University of Sydney.

Jessica Suzanne Dudley 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. Pregnant male seahorses support up to 1,000 growing babies by forming a placenta – https://theconversation.com/pregnant-male-seahorses-support-up-to-1-000-growing-babies-by-forming-a-placenta-167534

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Blaxland, Professor, Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University

The Morrison government has decided it’s best for Australia to accelerate the production of a more capable, integrated, nuclear-powered submarine platform with the US and the UK.

This will more tightly enmesh Australia into the US orbit. Technologically and militarily, it means if the US goes into a conflict in the Indo-Pacific region, it would be much more difficult for Australia not to be directly and almost automatically involved.

The other side of argument is this is a good thing because it will at least incrementally add to the deterrence against China.

Chinese strategists and leaders will have to weigh up the risk and presumably be less likely to decide that crossing the threshold of war is something they are prepared to do. The hope is that added deterrence will make the stakes higher for the Chinese and the prospects of success lower.

How do nuclear submarines differ from conventional ones?

In recent years, the Australian government and Department of Defence have been placing greater emphasis on longer-range military capabilities, particularly with the Defence Strategic Update in 2020.

This includes the acquisition of missiles, as well as space and cyber capabilities. Nuclear-powered submarines now leapfrog our existing naval capabilities.

Read more:
Defence update: in an increasingly dangerous neighbourhood, Australia needs a stronger security system

The benefit of nuclear submarines is you don’t have to snorkel: they allow you to stay submerged and be stealthier for longer. The conventionally powered (diesel/electric) submarine does not have the same range without exposing itself to detection by surfacing.

This potentially will transform the ability of the Australian Defence Force to operate at range around Australia and beyond, and operate more closely in an integrated way with the US and UK.

Our previous A$90 billion deal with the French company DCNS to build up to 12 submarines was always less connected with the US and UK.

The French ironically had nuclear propulsion in their Barracuda submarine, and had we gone with that option when we signed the deal in 2016, they could have said, “OK, let’s replicate what we do and give that to you”. Had we done that, we would be well on the way to our first one.

But we said we wanted the propulsion to be conventional. That delayed the French program, so they now have cause to be irritated over this new deal.

The question is how quickly these new submarines will become available, because the French-designed ones were decades away from being operational.

This new deal potentially would see Australia able to lease British and/or American submarines on an interim basis to develop Australian expertise with nuclear propulsion, or at least operate with them and have Australian crew on board to learn the ropes.

But we do not have the capability in Australia at the moment to operate and maintain nuclear submarines. There’s a whole infrastructure that’s missing.

This means we either have to spend an enormous amount of money to develop it, or subcontract it to the UK or US, which makes us beholden to them and subject to their domestic, political dynamics.

Where did things go wrong?

We’ve fumbled the ball in our handling of our future submarine capability over the last decade and a half. We should have made a decision on a new submarine design a long time ago — one that was feasible — and locked it in.

We bypassed a couple of other options, including an upgrade of our current Collins-class submarine — a newer, snazzier, more capable version of what we already know.

Instead, we went for a radical new design that even the French had never built before. Anything with cutting-edge technology is going to incur delays and cost overruns. And that’s exactly what we faced.

In the meantime, the clouds have gotten darker in our region and the need to acquire new, capable submarines has become all the more pressing and important.

The combination of those factors has driven a hard-nosed re-evaluation of our previous half-baked decisions on our future submarine requirements.

Interestingly, in defence industry circles there is emerging a strong sense of approval that Australia is now going with a known quantity — a reliable, technological platform that is more integrated with the US and hopefully can become operational much sooner.

How will this build up Australia’s defence industry?

The details remain sketchy but it appears the initial plan will be to subcontract the development of the submarines to the US or UK.

But if Australia is to be self-reliant, which I believe the government recognises the need for, then much of this technology will have to be transferred to Australia — at least to allow for maintenance.

No doubt, aspects of the fit-out are not directly linked to insider knowledge on nuclear propulsion secrets, so there will be a considerable portion of the work that could be done in Australia. But that will incur delays and additional costs.

Australia’s circumstances are more turbulent and the prospect of the American alliance coming to the rescue is more precarious than ever. The irony is that to be more self-reliant, there’s a need to double down on US technology and US capabilities. They are the world leaders and they have the industrial capacity to quickly provide the technology.

One of the things Defence Minister Peter Dutton went to Washington to do was to persuade the US to share technology. This AUKUS arrangement talks about developing a technology industrial basis and supply lines — this means the US and UK are appear prepared to invest in Australia’s ability to sustain it.

Read more:
China does not want war, at least not yet. It’s playing the long game

How will China likely react?

That’s the million dollar question: does this make us safer? There’s no question we will get strong and sharp-edged criticism from Beijing, where the Chinese government will see it in conspiratorial terms.

But Chinese rhetoric doesn’t need be taken at face value. This is largely for domestic purposes and about influencing and shaping opinion in a way that’s consistent with China’s perceived interests.

In the past few years, China has become more assertive in its rhetoric, matching its military buildup, which most security pundits now say is about seeking to intimidate potential adversaries so they’ll just back down.

So, does a more capable AUKUS coalition, with Australia in the middle, deter or aggravate China?

It’s fair to say there is growing consensus we need to do more to deter Chinese actions in the region. Deterrence requires credible capabilities. This new alliance is consistent with that line of reasoning.

We have put our eggs in the US security basket for the past 70 years — and this new coalition puts more eggs in that basket. The hope is collaborating with the UK and US will improve our ability to defend ourselves. But submarines are only really useful if you find yourself contemplating having to use them.

Short of such circumstances, some deft diplomacy and regional engagement is key. Australia’s Foreign Policy White Paper of 2017 spoke of investing in regional security ties. For this policy change to enhance security, it needs to be coupled with much greater efforts aimed at bolstering security and stability alongside our neighbours in Southeast Asia and the Pacific.

John Blaxland 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. Why nuclear submarines are a smart military move for Australia — and could deter China further – https://theconversation.com/why-nuclear-submarines-are-a-smart-military-move-for-australia-and-could-deter-china-further-168064

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Komesaroff, Professor of Medicine, Monash University

While some Australians are awaiting the nation reopening after lockdowns with hope and optimism, others are approaching it with dread. This is because a blanket lifting of restrictions when the vaccination rate reaches 70% will have devastating effects on Indigenous and other vulnerable populations.

At present, vaccination rates in Indigenous populations are very low. Meanwhile international data show the risk of serious illness and death among First Nations populations from COVID and other diseases is up to four times that of the wider population.

Once restrictions are lifted everyone unvaccinated will be exposed to the virus. The outcomes for Indigenous people may therefore resemble the early effects of British colonialism, when a high proportion of the population died from introduced infections.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults and teenagers need vaccination rates of 90-95% among First Nations people to protect their communities.

Read more:
The COVID-19 crisis in western NSW Aboriginal communities is a nightmare realised

Additional health challenges

As with many other medical conditions, the effects of COVID-19 are worse among people with lower socioeconomic status and especially among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

There are multiple reasons for this, including the greater likelihood of underlying conditions and reduced access to appropriate health care.

We saw a similar situation in 2009, when H1N1 influenza rates among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were more than five times those of other Australians.

Overseas, COVID-19 has been associated with striking racial disparities, with death rates for African Americans more than triple the rates for Caucasians, and more than 4% for Navajo people (compared to 1.6% for the whole population).

Outcomes for other First Nations groups in the United States and elsewhere are similar.

What’s the current vaccination plan?

On September 9, the New South Wales government announced its intention to lift lockdowns and other public health measures when the state reaches a vaccination target of 70% of the adult population. This equates to a little over 50% of the state’s population.

NSW will reach the 70% target in less than a month in NSW and the nation will reach the target by October 30.

Read more:
We can’t rely solely on arbitrary vaccination levels to end lockdowns. Here are 7 ways to fix Sydney’s outbreak

If such a policy were implemented it would have disastrous consequences for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and other vulnerable populations.

Vaccination rates in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are lagging badly behind the remainder of the Australian population. In many places in NSW, Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory fewer than 20% are fully vaccinated.

What should happen instead?

Aboriginal organisations have called on state and federal governments to delay any substantial easing of restrictions until vaccination rates among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations aged 12 years and older reach 90-95%.

The organisations calling for such a target include the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation, the Aboriginal Medical Services of the Northern Territory and the Central Australian Aboriginal Congress.

A 90-95% vaccination rate gives about the same level of population coverage for all ages as the 80% target for the entire population. That’s because Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are younger than the wider population.

Vaccinating 90-95% of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population will better protect children and other unvaccinated people in First Nations communities from infection.

This will require an immediate, well-resourced and determined effort to lift vaccination rates.

Read more:
The first Indigenous COVID death reminds us of the outsized risk NSW communities face

How can this be achieved?

Many Aboriginal community controlled health services are already running urgent vaccination campaigns with existing resources, but more needs to be done.

The Australian government’s announcement this week of A$7.7 million to fast-track vaccinations in 30 priority areas across the country is an important first step.

But the program needs to be expanded to all areas with significant Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations.

Australia’s First Nations vaccination program needs to:

1. guarantee a sufficient and reliable source of vaccines to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities

2. ensure health services have the capacity and the workforce to carry out intensive outreach vaccination programs. This includes culturally knowledgeable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers able to engage with communities, and clinicians

3. address vaccine hesitancy. This should start with the recognition there are many reasons for reluctance to be vaccinated.

What are the reasons for vaccine hesitancy?

For some, there is a historical and understandable distrust of the health system.

Others have been confused or made fearful by misinformation spread on social media or through fringe religious groups.

Many others are not fundamentally opposed to vaccination but are adopting a “wait and see” approach.

To overcome this hesitancy we need urgent government support for financial incentives, in the form of food vouchers or other benefits. This has been done for vulnerable groups in other countries.

Non-financial incentives requiring full vaccination for travel, entering pubs, clubs, restaurants, sporting venues and so on need to be flagged now with a commencement date in the near future.

Effective health education in Aboriginal languages developed by local Aboriginal community controlled health services need to be in the media daily.

Don’t leave vulnerable groups behind

All this is achievable but it requires the combined efforts of government working in partnership with Aboriginal community controlled health services.

Until the 90-95% target is met, rigorous restrictions should remain in place. This is consistent with modelling from the Burnet and Doherty institutes, which inform the NSW and national policies about reopening.

As the Burnet Institute told the authors of this article, Australia:

should not move to Phase B and C until vaccination coverage in each jurisdiction’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities is as high as, or even higher than, the general community.

Similar considerations undoubtedly apply to some other vulnerable groups in the population.

Australia remains burdened by the legacy of centuries of harm and damage to its First Nations people. We are facing the possibility of a renewed assault on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health.

The difference today is the outcomes are foreseeable and we know what needs to be done to avert them.

I am a member of the Australian Labor Party

Donna Ah Chee, Ian Kerridge, and Paul Komesaroff 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. Vaccinations need to reach 90% of First Nations adults and teens to protect vulnerable communities – https://theconversation.com/vaccinations-need-to-reach-90-of-first-nations-adults-and-teens-to-protect-vulnerable-communities-167800

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Monica Thielking, Associate Professor, Chair of the Department of Psychological Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology

If you’re a parent feeling a modicum of dread about the upcoming school holidays, you’re not alone. Many parents will be working from home over the school holidays and wondering, “how am I going to juggle online meetings in the absence of online schooling?”

It’s likely the school holidays will bring a tangle of feelings: stress, guilt, sadness or anger that many of the usual school holiday family activities will be off the table due to lockdowns. Then there’s fear the additional unpaid duties created for working parents (especially women) will be more pronounced. Many feel pressure to find ways to keep the kids occupied.

I’m a psychologist, a former school psychologist and have lived experience of being a working parent with two teenagers in lockdown. My advice to parents is to take the pressure off yourself.

Let your children embrace boredom and don’t try too hard to create the perfect lockdown holiday. Do what you can now to warn your employer your attention might be even more divided than usual over the next few weeks.

Leer más:
We asked over 2,000 Australian parents how they fared in lockdown. Here’s what they said

Embrace the boredom

Home schooling, while challenging, has the advantage of occupying children and teenagers for a good chunk of the day. It can provide structure and routine to the stay-at-home blur.

Without school, locked down children and their parents are left to contemplate whatever will they do in all the waking hours of a two-week holiday at home? Do I hear a small voice saying, “I’m bored”?

Many parents instinctively react by trying to think of things for their child to do but have a go at resisting that urge. When they say, “I’m bored”, you say “Great! Now off you go.”

A growing body of research evidence suggests boredom in children can make them more creative, with one study describing how:

previous research has shown that individuals use daydreaming to regulate boredom-induced tension, thus suggesting that daydreaming is used as a coping strategy for dealing with the unpleasant state of boredom.

Daydreaming is important. The same study notes how US psychologist Jerome Singer described daydreaming

as shifting attention from the external situation or problem to the internal representation of situations, memories, pictures, unresolved things, scenarios, or future goals.

Your children might complain they’re dying of boredom, but they are not. It may even be good for them.

For children, school holidays are a time to refresh and recharge. It offers some time out from the routine and learning expectations of school. Boredom and long periods of unstructured play are part of that refresh.

Leer más:
Books offer a healing retreat for youngsters caught up in a pandemic

A role for employers

A recent study of Australian parents revealed a significant number of parents have increased rates of depression, anxiety, stress and strained family relationships during the pandemic compared to pre-pandemic times.

With school holidays looming, employers should be looking for practical ways to help working parents through the next two weeks. This might include:

• delaying deadlines where possible

• asking whether those long online meetings are really necessary or productive

• giving working parents permission to take leave, even half-days, to allow for a more manageable balance of paid and unpaid work.

For parents, think carefully about how to communicate your needs to your workplace and your family.

If you have older children, set boundaries around your time — talk to them about your work, let them know what you are doing and why.

Most of all, know you are not alone. You are part of an amazing and resilient tribe of locked down working parents all experiencing the same highs and lows of school holidays at home – and during a global pandemic.

It’s not going to be perfect, but it will be OK in the end.

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

Monica Thielking no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

– ref. Parents, take the school holidays pressure off yourself. Let the kids embrace the boredom – https://theconversation.com/parents-take-the-school-holidays-pressure-off-yourself-let-the-kids-embrace-the-boredom-167797

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Teresa Ubide, Senior Lecturer in Igneous Petrology/Volcanology, The University of Queensland

The volcanoes we see on Earth’s surface are just the tip of the iceberg. Beneath the surface, they are fed by a complex network of conduits and reservoirs that bring molten rock, called magma, to the surface.

When the magma erupts, it can generate lava flows that cool down to become volcanic rocks. These rocks hold key clues about volcanoes’ inner workings, and what triggered them to erupt in the past. But decoding these clues is a puzzling task.

Our new research, published in the journal Geology, reveals previously hidden information in the chemistry of erupted lavas. Intriguingly, we discovered that many volcanoes have an internal “filter” that prompts them to erupt.

If we can detect magma at this crucial tipping point inside the volcano, it might even help us detect when an eruption is imminent.

Hotspot volcanoes

Most volcanoes, such as those in the Pacific Ring of Fire and the mid-Atlantic, are at the boundaries between tectonic plates. But some volcanoes, including the ones that created the Hawaiian islands, occur where hot plumes from deep inside Earth reach the surface. These are known as “hotspot” volcanoes.

Australia hosts the longest track of hotspot volcanoes in a continental setting. Over tens of millions of years, volcanoes such as The Glass House Mountains in Queensland, or Wollumbin (Mount Warning) in New South Wales, tracked the movement of the Australian continent over a stationary hotspot.

In the oceans, hotspots build chains of paradise islands such as Hawaii, the Galapagos or the Canary Islands. These ocean island volcanoes were previously thought to have been made of magma that welled up from tens of kilometres beneath the surface, deep in Earth’s mantle.

But our new research suggests ocean island volcanoes may erupt magma that has been filtered and modified at shallower depth.

Crystal-rich, not crystal clear

Volcanic lavas often contain crystals from inside the volcano, that were mixed in with the erupting magma. The crystals tell us a lot about the volcano’s insides, but they can also disguise the chemistry of the lava itself.

Read more:
Volcano crystals could make it easier to predict eruptions

Think of it like rocky road chocolate. If we want to analyse the ingredients of the chocolate itself, we first need to disregard the marshmallows and nuts.

We can do this by analysing rocks made from crystal-free lavas. In our study, we compared crystal-free and crystal-rich magmas from El Hierro volcano in the Canary Islands, which last erupted in 2011.

It turns out that the crystal-free magma from these volcanoes is very similar across millions of years of volcanic activity, and across many ocean island volcanoes around the world, including the Canary Islands and Hawaii. This is how we realised the magma was not pristine and coming directly from great depth, but rather filtered at shallower depths.

And if the magma from hotspot island volcanoes is so similar, the chances are their eruptions are triggered by common mechanisms too.

The ‘secret volcano filter’

When crystals form inside the volcano, this “steals” chemical elements from the magma. In turn, this alters the composition of the leftover magma, almost as if it had been passed through a sieve.

This filtering process makes the magma less dense, and increases its gas content. This gas can then bubble up and propel the magma to the surface, just like the cork popping from a bottle of champagne.

In ocean island volcanoes, the magma can reach this “tipping point” at the base of the Earth’s crust, just a few kilometres beneath the surface, rather than at depth.
This means that if we detect magma at this depth with the help of earthquake monitoring equipment, an eruption might follow. This is exactly what happened when El Hierro erupted in 2011.

Does this make it easier to forecast eruptions?

If we could open a volcano like a doll’s house, we would be able to track the movement of magma towards the surface. It’s a pity we can’t, although we can try to “see” this journey indirectly, by monitoring earthquakes, deformation and gas emissions, all of which can indicate magma rising inside a volcano.

But to assess whether a volcano is likely to erupt, or whether a dormant volcano is reawakening, we also need to compare current observations with information about what triggered eruptions in the past.

This is where our new discovery could prove especially useful. If the eruption triggers happen at similar depths in ocean island volcanoes globally, warning signs from such depths may be particularly important to monitor and consider as the precursory signs of eruption.

Read more:
Australia’s volcanic history is a lot more recent than you think

Teresa Ubide receives funding from The University of Queensland, the Queensland Government and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. There she blows: the internal ‘magma filter’ that prompts ocean island volcanoes to erupt – https://theconversation.com/there-she-blows-the-internal-magma-filter-that-prompts-ocean-island-volcanoes-to-erupt-167358

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Savulescu, Visiting Professor in Biomedical Ethics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Distinguished Visiting Professor in Law, University of Melbourne; Uehiro Chair in Practical Ethics, University of Oxford

The main way to control the pandemic, as we have all painfully found out, has been to restrict the movement of people. This stops people getting infected and infecting others. It is the justified basis for lockdowns, isolation, vaccine passports, and quarantining people who have been in high-risk areas.

It is the foundational ethical principle of any liberal society like Australia that the state should only restrict liberty if people represent a threat of harm to others, as John Stuart Mill famously articulated. This harm can take two forms.

Firstly, it can be direct harm to other people. Imagine you are about to board a plane. Authorities have reason to believe you are carrying a loaded gun. They are entitled to detain you. But they are obliged to investigate whether you actually have a gun and if you do not, they are obliged to free you and allow you to board your plane. To continue to detain you without just cause would be false imprisonment.

Having COVID is like carrying a loaded gun that can accidentally go off at any time. But if vaccines remove the bullets from the gun, the carriers are not a risk to other people and should be free.

In perfect conditions, vaccine passports are therefore a human rights issue under conditions of lockdown like Melbourne and Sydney are experiencing. Perfect conditions mean vaccines reduce transmission to other people sufficiently.

This means it is not discrimination to continue to restrict the liberty of the unvaccinated – it is just like quarantining those who have entered from high-risk countries overseas. Their liberty is restricted because they are a threat to others.

Discrimination occurs when people are treated differently on morally irrelevant grounds. But differential treatment on the basis of differential threat is morally relevant. That is why I can be quarantined if I have come into contact with a positive case: there is a relevant reason to treat me differently.

For example, some countries require travellers must be vaccinated against yellow fever and receive a card as a vaccine passport. No card, no travel. Infected travellers can bring yellow fever to the local mosquito population when they are bitten and thereby start an endemic infection.

Read more:
Vaccine passports are coming to Australia. How will they work and what will you need them for?

Do COVID vaccines fit into the same justification?

Hard to say. They appeared to reduce transmission of the original alpha variant by 50-60%, but it is unclear whether they significantly reduce transmission of delta, particularly over time. Israel’s data suggest those vaccinated in January could have as little as 16% protection against symptomatic disease by July (though still 80-90% protection against hospitalisation and severe disease). Other studies have shown similar viral loads in those infected with delta regardless of vaccination status.

To let the vaccinated roam free and restrict the freedom of movement of the unvaccinated would be discrimination if the vaccine does not significantly reduce transmission.

Some have made colourful analogies: that requiring vaccination is like requiring a surgeon to scrub before an operation. Or an analogy I have used is that vaccination is like wearing a seatbelt – it is good for the wearer and for others in the car, as well as the health system.

But these analogies are flawed in two ways when it comes to COVID. First, vaccination does not reduce the chance of infecting others to the extent of surgical scrub techniques. Second, washing your hands or wearing a seatbelt benefits all concerned; vaccines have side effects, including lethal ones.

It’s true seatbelts can kill you, but overall they are expected to prevent more harm. Vaccination for COVID in low-risk groups such as children and young people is less clearly in their interests, though it is clearly in the interests of older people.

The inherent, unrecognised and unresolved problem in the vaccination and vaccine passport debate is one of proportionality. Vaccines may reduce transmission but do they reduce it enough to warrant mandates, including restricting freedoms of the unvaccinated? If vaccines were risk-free (like washing your hands), then mandating them would be reasonable – but the current vaccines do have rare risks that become more significant for groups at lower risk from COVID, such as children and young people.

Burden on the health system

There is a second way we can harm other people besides directly infecting them. We can use up a scarce resource like intensive care unit (ICU) beds by getting ill. In a public health system, we can indirectly harm others by taking more than our fair share of resources. Though Mill explicitly rejected “harm to self” as a justification for coercion, that was before a public health system with finite resources.

If vaccines significantly reduce the chance of becoming seriously ill in a pandemic, there can be a justification for using coercion to employ them to protect the health system in a public health emergency.

Again, proportionality is key: the strain on the health system must be severe. Otherwise any measure to promote health could be mandated, such as giving up smoking, losing weight, exercising, and so on. Freedom has some value and that includes the freedom to take on some risk.

How much risk we should tolerate and what level of coercion is justified depends on the safety and efficacy of the vaccines, the reduction in transmission, the gravity of the public health problem, the effectiveness of less liberty-restricting measures, the costs of coercion and, ultimately, the value of health and liberty.

Do COVID vaccines satisfy this criterion of reducing serious illness in a public health emergency? The evidence is very strong that they prevent serious illness with delta.

To introduce vaccine passports ethically requires either showing vaccines reduce transmission significantly or that, without them, we would face a health system crisis that is not reasonably sustainable.

Restricting people’s liberty, for example by vaccine passports, can be ethically justified in certain circumstances – but we need good evidence to justify them. Under conditions of lockdown, they can be a human rights issue.

Everything I have said about vaccine passports applies to natural immunity (immunity acquired by infection rather than vaccination), which provides ‘equal or higher protection’ against asymptomatic and symptomatic infection. (Of course, the whole point of the vaccine is to avoid or limit the harm of the first infection and it remains preferable as a strategy).

Read more:
Do vaccination passports take away freedoms? It depends on how you frame the question

What about only some people having to have vaccine passports?

Most people believe that restrictions of liberty, like vaccine passports, have to be universally applied or they are discriminatory. That’s wrong. Selective restriction of liberty can be justified for certain groups. This is what happens when we quarantine travellers because they are at increased risk of infecting others.

Selective restriction of liberty, including selective mandatory vaccination or passports, could be justified for “super spreaders” or those more likely to become ill (particularly the elderly but other also high-risk groups). On the latter approach, vaccine passports are more appropriate for older rather than younger people, as they are the ones most likely to benefit.

Consent

The problem in public health is that the person who makes the sacrifice is often not the one who benefits. By mandating a measure, the government is deciding to impose a burden on one group, sometimes to benefit a different group. The person who suffers the vaccine-related side effect (although very rare) may not have suffered adversely from COVID if they had got infected (even though there is a higher risk of this at the population level).

For this reason, consent is important. Because both being vaccinated and not being vaccinated involve risks, and we do not know on whom the risks will fall, it is preferable to consent to the particular risks for yourself, rather than have others impose them.

Responsibility

If people are choosing which risks they take, it is tempting to hold them accountable for the consequences of their choices. That would imply giving those who become ill after refusing vaccination lower priority if health resources are limited.

This requires that we can attribute responsibility to the individual, rather than their peer group, education, culture or other social factors. It requires that responsibility is treated equally across healthcare: we should not single out COVID-risky behaviour without treating other dangerous lifestyles, such as risky sex and unhealthy habits, in the same way. And it will limit the kinds of lives people can freely lead by making risky alternatives more difficult to pursue. Ultimately, it depends on what price we place on freedom and health.

Road fatalities would be reduced by drastically reducing speed limits. Yet we balance lives lost on the roads (and carbon emissions) with transport efficiency, pleasure and liberty. The same will eventually happen as we learn to live with COVID.

So where does this leave us?

Vaccine passports could be justified in Australia. But whether the burden of proof rests with the government to show the vaccines significantly reduce transmission (which they don’t appear to) or that the health system could not reasonably cope without them, or the burden rests on those who oppose vaccine passports depends on whether we value liberty more than health. Different countries will reasonably differ on this trade-off.

Vaccine passports could be also justified for certain groups of super spreaders or those more likely to become ill. This creates inequality, but we face a trade-off between equality versus maximising public health and liberty.

Ethics is about weighing different values. Decisions about vaccination should be fundamentally ethical, not political or purely medical.

Julian Savulescu receives funding from the Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education, NHMRC, Wellcome Trust, Australian Research Council, and the UK Research and Innovation (Arts and Humanities Research Council) as part of the Ethics Accelerator Award AH/V013947/1, WHO. He is a Partner Investigator on an Australian Research Council Linkage award (LP190100841, Oct 2020-2023) which involves industry partnership from Illumina. He does not personally receive any funds from Illumina.

– ref. Vaccine passports are coming. But are they ethical? – https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-but-are-they-ethical-167693

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gail Matthews, Professor and Program Head, Therapeutic Vaccine and Research Program, Kirby Institute, UNSW

Increasing COVID-19 vaccination rates as quickly as possible is currently a major focus for Australia.

Doing so has clear benefits in reducing new infections and preventing severe disease, hospitalisation and death.

One question which is frequently asked is – does COVID vaccination prevent you from getting long COVID?

Here’s what the science says so far.

How many people get long COVID?

There has been much international debate as to the definition of long COVID, how common it is, and how long it may last.

Studies examining the frequency of long COVID range from anywhere to over 80% in hospitalised patients with severe initial illness, to as low as 2-3% in one large app-based study of largely young healthy people in the United Kingdom.

A recent review of 45 studies and almost 10,000 people suggested almost 75% of them reported at least one persistent symptom at 12 or more weeks after COVID infection.

Many of these studies are highly dependent on the choice of people studied, and whether they required a definite confirmation by positive swab testing.

The Australian ADAPT study (led by myself and other colleagues from St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney), enrolled people who’d had confirmed positive PCR tests, as well as a mix of hospitalised people and those who didn’t go to hospital. It found around one-third of people had persistent symptoms at an average of two to three months after infection.

The most common symptoms were persistent fatigue, shortness of breath and chest tightness, although a variety of other symptoms were also reported. These findings are in keeping with most of the evolving research which documents a wide variety of long COVID symptoms.

One review published in August involving 15 studies and more than 47,000 people detailed up to 55 separate symptoms involving all body systems and organs. The five most common were fatigue, shortness of breath, palpitations, brain fog and loss of smell.

The diverse nature of long COVID symptoms makes a clear definition difficult. The World Health Organization is currently attempting to achieve a consensus agreement from its members. Expect to see further tweaks to this definition as it evolves.

Read more:
The mystery of ‘long COVID’: up to 1 in 3 people who catch the virus suffer for months. Here’s what we know so far

Yes, vaccination does reduce the risk of long COVID

Vaccination doesn’t prevent all COVID infections. “Breakthrough” infections in fully vaccinated people have been estimated to occur in a small proportion of people.

Breakthrough infections are more likely to have few or no symptoms, and are associated with lower levels of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Read more:
Why are we seeing more COVID cases in fully vaccinated people? An expert explains

Is this important in preventing long COVID? The answer is probably yes.

Currently our understanding of what causes or predicts long COVID is limited, not least because it’s probably a “catch all” definition for several different conditions with underlying causes.

In most studies, there were two main predictors of getting long COVID.

One was the severity of the initial illness, and the second being female sex.

The first of these is very likely to be impacted by vaccination and a recent study published in The Lancet medical journal gives weight to this argument. It looked at symptoms reported after vaccination among users of the COVID Symptom Study app in the UK.

More than 1.2 million users of the app reported at least one vaccine dose and around 900,000 had two doses. A small proportion, less than 1%, of each of these groups subsequently developed COVID infection and tracked their symptoms.

The study found vaccinated people had a much-reduced risk of being hospitalised or having multiple symptoms in the first week of infection.

Importantly, the likelihood of having a long duration of symptoms (over 28 days) was approximately halved.

This would clearly be expected to translate into a lesser number of people with long COVID at 12 weeks and beyond, although data confirming this is presently lacking.

So, vaccination has benefit in limiting both severe acute COVID infection and long COVID.

A word of caution though – long COVID appears to have a variety of triggers and many people suffering this condition didn’t have an initial severe illness. Long COVID also appears to be more common in females and this association remains unexplained.

Read more:
Do kids get long COVID? And how often? A paediatrician looks at the data

If the virus does trigger a long-lasting abnormal immune response in some people, it’s too soon to understand whether this can still occur after breakthrough infection post-vaccination.

Further research is urgently needed to understand the reasons for long COVID and direct potential treatments.

In the meantime, the likely effect of vaccination in reducing the risk of long COVID is yet another reason for us to roll up our sleeves.

Gail Matthews is affiliated with The Kirby Institute, UNSW and St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney.
The ADAPT study is supported by funding from The Curran Foundation and the St Vincents Clinic Foundation.
Gail Matthews is a member of the Australian National COVID-19 Evidence Taskforce

– ref. You’re much less likely to get long COVID if you’ve been vaccinated – https://theconversation.com/youre-much-less-likely-to-get-long-covid-if-youve-been-vaccinated-167189

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Schallenberg, Research Fellow, University of Tasmania

In 2019 and 2020, bushfires razed more than 18 million hectares of land in Australia. For weeks, smoke choked major cities, leading to almost 450 deaths, and even circumnavigated the southern hemisphere.

As the aerosols billowed across the oceans many thousands of kilometres away from the fires, microscopic marine algae called phytoplankton had an unexpected windfall: they received a boost of iron.

Our research, published today in Nature, found this caused phytoplankton concentrations to double between New Zealand and South America, until the bloom area became bigger than Australia. And it lasted for four months.

This enormous, unprecedented algal bloom could have profound implications for carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere and for the marine ecosystem. But so far, the impact is still unclear.

Meanwhile, in another paper published alongside ours in Nature today, researchers from The Netherlands found the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the fires that summer was more than double previous estimates.

Absorbing 680 million tonnes of carbon dioxide

Iron fertilises phytoplankton and helps them grow, in the same way nutrients added in soil help vegetables grow. And like plants on land, phytoplankton photosynthesise — they absorb CO₂ as they grow and produce oxygen for fish and other marine creatures.

We used satellite data to estimate that for phytoplankton to grow as much as they did in the Southern Ocean, they would have absorbed 680 million tonnes of CO₂. This means the phytoplankton absorbed roughly the same amount of CO₂ as released by the bushfires, according to the latest estimates released today.

The Dutch researchers found the bushfires released 715 million tonnes of CO₂ (or ranging 517–867 million tonnes) between November 2019 and January 2020. This surpasses Australia’s normal annual fire and fossil fuel emissions by 80%.

To put this into perspective, Australia’s anthropogenic CO₂ emissions in 2019 were much less, at 520 million tonnes.

Phytoplankton can have dramatic effects on climate

But that doesn’t mean the phytoplankton growth absorbed the bushfire’s CO₂ emissions permanently. Whether phytoplankton growth extracts and keeps CO₂ from the atmosphere depends on their fate.

If they sink to the deep ocean, then this represents a carbon sink for decades or even centuries — or even longer if phytoplankton are stored in ocean sediments.

But if they’re mostly eaten and decomposed near the ocean’s surface, then all that CO₂ they consumed comes straight back out, with no net effect on the carbon balance in the atmosphere.

In fact, phytoplankton have very likely played a role on millennial time scales in keeping atmospheric CO₂ concentrations down, and can affect the global climate in the long term.

For example, a 2014 study suggests iron-containing dust billowing over the Southern Ocean caused increased phytoplankton productivity, which contributed to reducing atmospheric CO₂ by about 100 parts per million. And this helped transition the planet to ice ages.

Read more:
Inside the world of tiny phytoplankton – microscopic algae that provide most of our oxygen

Phytoplankton blooms can also have a big impact on the marine ecosystem as they make excellent food for some marine creatures.

For example, more phytoplankton means more food for zooplankton that feed on phytoplankton, with effects up the food chain. It’s also worth noting this huge bloom occurred at a time of year when phytoplankton are usually in decline in this part of the ocean.

But whether there were any long-lasting effects from the bushfire-fuelled phytoplankton on the climate or ecosystem is unclear, because we still don’t know where they ended up.

Using revolutionary data

The link between fire aerosols and the increase in phytoplankton demonstrated in our study is particularly relevant given the intense fire activity around the globe.

Droughts and warming under global climate change are expected to increase the frequency and intensity of wildfires, and the impacts to land-based ecosystems, such as habitat loss and air pollution, will be dramatic. But as we now know, wildfires can also affect marine life thousands of kilometres away from land.

Previous models have predicted the iron-fertilising effect of bushfire aerosols, but this is the first time we’ve observed and demonstrated the connection at a large-scale.

Our study is mainly based on satellite data and observations from robotic floats that roam the oceans and collect data autonomously. These robotic floats are revolutionising our understanding of chemical cycling, oxygen variability and ocean acidification.

During the bushfire period, our smoke tracers reached concentrations at least 300% higher than what had ever been observed in the 22-year satellite record for the region.

Interestingly, you wouldn’t be able to observe the resulting phytoplankton growth in a true-colour satellite image. We instead used more sensitive ocean colour sensors on satellites to estimate phytoplankton concentrations.

Read more:
Tiny plankton drive processes in the ocean that capture twice as much carbon as scientists thought

So what’s next?

Of course, we need more research to determine the fate of the phytoplankton. But we also need more research to better predict when and where aerosol deposition (such as bushfire smoke) will boost phytoplankton growth.

For example, the Tasman Sea — between Australia and New Zealand — showed only mildly higher phytoplankton concentrations during the bushfire period, even though the smoke cloud was strongest there.

Was this because nutrients other than iron were lacking, or because there was less deposition? Or perhaps because the smoke didn’t stick around for as long?

Whatever the reason, it’s clear this is only the beginning of exciting new lines of research that link forests, wildfires, phytoplankton growth and Earth’s climate.

Read more:
Some animals have excellent tricks to evade bushfire. But flames might be reaching more animals naive to the dangers

Christina Schallenberg receives funding from the Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS) and is affiliated with the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership (AAPP). In the past, she received funding from the National Sciences Engineering and Research Council (NSERC) of Canada.

Jakob Weis receives funding from the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes.

Joan Llort receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 – MSCA program.

Peter Strutton receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Australia’s Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), which is enabled by the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS).

Weiyi Tang receives funding from Princeton University and previously received funding from National Science Foundation.

– ref. Smoke from the Black Summer fires created an algal bloom bigger than Australia in the Southern Ocean – https://theconversation.com/smoke-from-the-black-summer-fires-created-an-algal-bloom-bigger-than-australia-in-the-southern-ocean-164564

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tahlia Pollock, PhD candidate, Monash University

Carnivorous animals come in all shapes and sizes, from the 500-gram quoll to the 500-kilogram polar bear. This disparate group of mammals shares a common feature: canine teeth at the front of their jaws.

Canine teeth are long and pointed, with a sharp tip and, in some cases, bladed edges. These fearsome weapons are what make carnivores such effective killers. In fact, our new research out today reveals how evolution has shaped canines into unique forms to suit each predator’s way of life.

We applied state-of-the-art 3D methods to measure the canine teeth of more than 60 predators including lions, cheetahs, grizzly bears, dingoes and Tasmanian devils. The research represents the first comprehensive analysis of canine tooth shape in predatory mammals.

We discovered canine teeth have evolved in special ways to help each species kill and eat their favourite prey – helping to make mammals some of nature’s most successful predators.

Born to kill

When carnivorous mammals snarl, they reveal four long canine teeth at the front of their jaws – two at the top and two at the bottom. These teeth are the first point of contact between predator and prey, and are used to stab, kill and dismember a catch.

Not all carnivores have the same diet. Grizzly bears eat meat, fruit and plants, while meerkats feed mostly on invertebrates like scorpions and beetles. Big cats, like cheetahs, stick to meat.

Carnivores can also kill in myriad ways. Tigers suffocate their prey with a targeted throat bite, while wolves use multiple slashing bites to tear apart their prey. Small canids such as the red fox snap up and violently shake their prey, while wolverines can kill with a single, crushing skull bite.

There’s been little research into the associations between canine tooth shape, function and evolution. Our research sought to determine what canine shapes are best for each predator diet.

Read more:
New research reveals animals are changing their body shapes to cope with climate change

A bite worse than its bark

We scanned and compared the canine teeth of more than 60 carnivores, including tigers, coyotes, polar bears, wolverines, raccoons and even quolls. We then looked at the association between canine shape and function.

We found tooth shape varies depending on the types of food a carnivore regularly bites into – just like we choose different kitchen knives depending on what we want to cut up.

Big cats such as lions, tigers and cheetahs have some of the sharpest canine teeth in the animal kingdom. These long, dagger-like weapons are used to stab – biting down deeply into the throats of prey to bring them down.

Take a 3D look at the canine teeth of a cheetah in the interactive below.

Other species, such as the coyote and red fox, have slender, curved canines. These teeth act as hooks to help hold small prey and prevent it slipping from the mouth when shaking.

Animals that eat a lot of “soft” prey, or those that deliver throat bites, often have sharp, slender canines. The sharp tips make a crack in the prey and as the animal bites down, the long, sharp edges of the tooth help penetrate deeply into the catch.

Species with a tougher or more varied diet have stout, robust teeth that don’t break when crunching bone or other hard foods. These species include scavengers such as the Tasmanian devil, and generalists such as the honey badger.

The bluntest upper canine tips we examined belong to the crab-eating mongoose. As the name suggests, the species feeds on crabs and other hard prey such as reptiles, snails and insects.

We also found canine teeth with blunt tips and edges were found in animals that kill prey with crushing bites to the skull, such as the American martin or wolverine. Blunt tips are better able than sharp tips to withstand the stresses produced by such heavy force.

Something to chew on

The research helps establish new links between tooth shape and ecology that may shed light on the diet and behaviour of extinct species.

For example, the thylacine (or Tasmanian tiger) had curved canines, which suggests it may have snapped up and shaken smaller prey. This supports recent research on thylacine skull shape which found that, contrary to previous theories, the thylacine likely hunted small rather than large prey.

By studying canine teeth up close, we’ve discovered just how well evolution shaped even the smallest animal features to suit the niches they fill in nature.

Read more:
Who would win in a fight between a wedge-tailed eagle and a bald eagle? It’s a close call for two nationally revered birds

Tahlia Pollock receives funding from the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship (RTP stipend), the Monash Graduate Excellence Scholarship (MGE), and the Monash Graduate Research Completion Award (GRCA).

Alistair Evans receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University, and is an Honorary Research Affiliate with Museums Victoria.

David Hocking has received funding from the Australian Research Council and Monash University. He is the Senior Curator of Vertebrate Zoology at the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery and is an adjunct research associate with Monash University.

– ref. Jaws of death: how the canine teeth of carnivorous mammals evolved to make them super-killers – https://theconversation.com/jaws-of-death-how-the-canine-teeth-of-carnivorous-mammals-evolved-to-make-them-super-killers-166029

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Roman, Postdoctoral Researcher, Oceans and Atmosphere, CSIRO

Coastal litter is a big environmental problem. But how does this litter differ around the world, and why? In the first global analysis of its kind, we set out to answer those questions using data collected by thousands of citizen scientists.

Our analysis, released today, discovered litter hotspots on every inhabited continent, including Australia. This finding busts two persistent myths: that most of the world’s plastic pollution comes from just a few major rivers, and that countries in the Global South are largely to blame for the marine plastic problem.

Single-use plastics formed the majority of litter in this study. And in general, litter hotspots were associated with socioeconomic factors such as a concentration of built infrastructure, less national wealth, and a high level of lighting at night.

Our insights reveal the complex patterns driving coastal pollution, and suggest there is no “one size fits all” solution to cleaning up the world’s oceans. In fact, the best solution is to stop the waste problem long before it reaches the sea.

A complex picture

We are scientists from the CSIRO’s Marine Debris Research team. Our study involved working closely with Ocean Conservancy and the PADI AWARE Foundation, which together hold the world’s most comprehensive litter data sets gathered by citizen scientists.

We analysed hundreds of thousands of items from 22,508 clean-ups on land (at beaches and the edge of rivers and lakes) as well as 7,290 seafloor clean-ups. The clean-ups spanned 116 and 118 countries, respectively, and involved participants recording counts for each item collected.

The analysis showed a huge diversity in the location and scale of plastic pollution hotspots. They were not limited to single countries or rivers – instead, the hotspots occurred in all inhabited continents and across many countries. In many places, litter patterns between neighbouring locations were vastly different.

Read more:
For decades, scientists puzzled over the plastic ‘missing’ from our oceans – but now it’s been found

Most litter comprised single-use items: cigarette butts, fishing line, food wrappers, and plastic bottles and bags.

In general, places with more overall litter tended to have:

• more built infrastructure

• less national wealth

• bright lighting at night (which indicated urban density).

Cities and other dense urban areas around the world were linked with hotspots of “convenience” single-use plastic items, such as plastic bags, food wrappers, drink bottles, take-away containers, straws, plastic cutlery and lids. These hotspots are represented in the infographic below.

However, not all litter items followed this pattern. For example, cigarette butts followed a regional pattern and were more common in Southern Europe and North Africa.

Fishing line was most abundant in wealthier countries where recreational fishing is a popular pastime. Hotspots included Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Clusters of hotspots were often associated with partially enclosed bays, seas and lakes. These included areas such as the Mediterranean Sea, the Bay of Bengal, the South China and Philippine seas, the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean Sea, Lake Malawi and the Great Lakes of North America.

Plastic accumulation in these areas is likely due to factors such as high local littering combined with relatively contained bodies of water.

Plastic bottle hotspots were more common in tropical countries such as Costa Rica and Jamaica, among others. Plastic food wrappers were abundant in the island nations of Southeast Asia, particularly around Indonesia and the Philippines.

Read more:
It might be the world’s biggest ocean, but the mighty Pacific is in peril

Cleaning up our coasts

Ultimately, our study reveals the diversity and complexity of the plastic pollution issue. We hope it helps governments make waste policy decisions based on sound scientific evidence.

The findings suggest programs to tackle ocean litter should be rolled out at the grassroots level, or within one part of a country, as well as nationally.

In Australia, for example, Zoos Victoria’s Seal The Loop program aims to tackle localised fishing line waste at locations where the pastime is common. The program includes fishing line bins placed on piers and at boat ramps to encourage responsible waste disposal.

And in Malawi and 15 other countries in southern Africa, national bans on plastic bags target this locally problematic item.

Our analysis shows much non-degradable waste found in the environment comes from pre-packaged food and beverages. So regulations specifically addressing this type of packaging can be useful.

In Australia, for example, Hobart is aiming to become the first Australian city to ban single-use plastic takeaway food packaging, as part of an ambitious goal of zero-waste to landfill by 2030.

Other strategies known to change litter behaviour include recycling incentives such as container deposit schemes, particularly in lower socioeconomic areas where littering is highest, as well as education campaigns. And levies on plastic items could also help stop litter entering the environment.

This Saturday September 18, Ocean Conservancy is holding its annual International Coastal Cleanup – come along if you can and if COVID restrictions allow. You’ll be helping your local environment and collecting data to inform tomorrow’s waste management policies.

The authors would like to acknowledge the tireless volunteers from the International Coastal Cleanup and Dive Against Debris, and collaborators; Ocean Conservancy’s Dr George H. Leonard and Nicholas Mallos, and PADI AWARE Foundation’s Hannah Pragnell-Raasch and Ian Campbell.

Lauren Roman received funding from this work from Ocean Conservancy, PADI AWARE and CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere.

Britta Denise Hardesty receives funding for this work from Ocean Conservancy, PADI Aware, and CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere. She also receives funding from Oak Family Foundation and PM Angell Foundation for related research.

Chris Wilcox receives funding for this work from Ocean Conservancy, PADI Aware, and CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere. He also receives funding from Oak Family Foundation and PM Angell Foundation for related research.

– ref. We analysed data from 29,798 clean-ups around the world to uncover some of the worst litter hotspots – https://theconversation.com/we-analysed-data-from-29-798-clean-ups-around-the-world-to-uncover-some-of-the-worst-litter-hotspots-167280

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evan Smith, Research Fellow in History, Flinders University

Often when historians visit an archive or conduct research, we are not sure what we’ll find. With the help of archivists and librarians, we may know broadly what is contained in an archival record or a database, but we never know what may or may not be useful to us. Approaching our research material with a particular set of questions or analytical framework, what we actually find may leave us surprised, confused or taken aback in another way.

On Twitter, I asked a simple question: Historians, what is the thing that made you go ‘wait, wut?’ in the archives or in your research? The response was overwhelming – over 300 replies and 450 quote tweets at last count.

Historians, archivists and other researchers got in touch with great stories of their archival finds and tales of bizarre research moments. These ranged from the quirky to the disturbing to the profound.

Below I have chosen a handful that fall into each category to give an idea of the wide spectrum of what historians have come across in the field.

The quirky

Many of those who responded told stories of bizarre (and sometimes amusing) finds in the archives. Some were actual objects, such as Robert Cribb finding “17 tubes of processed opium, ready for smoking, in the Dutch archives from 1946 Indonesia”, Daniel McKay coming across “negatives of an early Australian prime minister naked on holiday”, and “300 love letters from woman to woman around 1760, partly written in blood”, located by Susanne Wosnitzka.

Others found interesting correspondence. A.J. Bauer gave the example of transcripts of phone-sex calls in the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, after a politician wrote to Reagan to intervene against “dial-a-porn”. Yasmin Dualeh uncovered a “letter from Prof Phillip Hitti calling out his Princeton colleague Albert Einstein for spreading false rumours about him to students”. Maurice Casey told of a letter written to Soviet leader Josef Stalin by a New York University debating team “seeking help with their upcoming debate on capitalism”.

More strange tales emerged from newspaper reports and transcripts of speeches that historians discovered in their research. Xesc Mainzer mentioned a 1970s story in a Majorcan newspaper of “an elderly Belgian woman loosing [sic] her denture when she bit a policeman’s leg”. In the Gerald Ford Presidential Library and Museum, Dustin Jones “came across a speech given by John Wayne at a charity dinner Ford also attended making absolutely one of the least accurate predictions I saw in my studies”. What was the movie actor’s prediction? That “Watergate will be a footnote” in future history books.

The disturbing

Historians also attested to the disturbing material that astounded them in their research, with the often bureaucratic and sterile nature of archival documents belying the troubling matter unearthed.

Lachlan Clohesy found notes of a talk by British nuclear physicist Sir Ernest Titterton about Australia’s potential nuclear arsenal. This talk “included making the point that if we had nuclear weapons, the cost of killing per man, woman and child would be cheaper than conventional warfare”. Clohesy added that Titterton’s notes included the actual prices.

On a similar topic, Stephen Schwartz found that US Army Lieutenant General James M. Gavin had told Congress in 1957 that to win a nuclear war, the United States would need 151,000 nuclear weapons. Also on the topic of calculating deaths, Pépé Roswaldy came across a Dutch colonial magazine promoting native land resettlement in Indonesia in the 1930s (which resulted in a number of deaths) and reporting an officer as saying: “The death number is just okay, nothing unusual.”

There were also more gruesome discoveries. Gabe Moshenska told of finding a description by famous Egyptologist Sir John Gardner Wilkinson of “his own diseased penis” in the papers of Thomas Pettigrew at Yale. Narrelle Morris mentioned an encounter in the National Archives of Australia with “a rusty razor that a Japanese suspected war criminal tried to commit suicide with”, stating: “I drew it to the archivist’s attention.”

The profound

There were also the surprising finds that were of particular importance to the historians and to our understanding of the past. Becky Erbelding from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum came across the only known photos of Nazi doctor Josef Mengele at Auschwitz-Birkenau, when a photo album was sent to the museum.

Peter Job told of a document that Indonesian intelligence provided to an Australian diplomat in Jakarta in 1975. This document, Job explains, was a list of members of Fretilin, the East Timorese independence group, to be targeted after an Indonesian invasion. Job argues that this “[s]hows level of pre-invasion complicity” by Australia.

For Adam Rothman, it was an 1866 US Senate report on “rumors that newly freed people in the US were being kidnapped and sold into slavery in Cuba and Brazil”. This led to Rothman writing a whole book based on this realisation.

Other historians also revealed that a chance find led them to new research projects. For example, Anna Hájková heard of a story of a forced relationship between a German women’s guard and a young female prisoner during the final year of the second world war. Intrigued by a tale from an oral history recording, Hájková developed this story into a ground-breaking work of queer history.

These are only a few of the many stories that people revealed in reply to my tweet. As we do research into the past, historians are often confronted or surprised by what we come across. Some findings can be amusing titbits on the side of our research. Others greatly shift our knowledge of certain events or people.

Nearly every historian has a story of a research find that made them pause and, via Twitter, we were able to hear of so many.

Evan Smith has in the past received funding from the Australian Academy of the Humanities, the Museum of Australian Democracy and the Australian Research Council.

– ref. I asked historians what find made them go ‘wait, wut?’ Here’s a taste of the hundreds of replies – https://theconversation.com/i-asked-historians-what-find-made-them-go-wait-wut-heres-a-taste-of-the-hundreds-of-replies-167176

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Cantrell, Lecturer in Writing, Editing, and Publishing, University of Southern Queensland

The stage adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory has opened in Brisbane. Charlie, like all of Roald Dahl’s novels for children, celebrates courage, resilience and the creative power of childhood.

Charlie Bucket is literally starving to death by the time he arrives at Willy Wonka’s factory. Yet his steely determination to find the last golden ticket, combined with his strong moral compass, sees him emerge as Wonka’s heir, his family’s hero, and the architect of his fate.

But there is a troubling aspect to this story. In the first edition of Charlie (1964), the Oompa-Loompas are black pygmies who Wonka imports from “the deepest and darkest part of the African jungle” and enslaves in his factory.

In this latest stage production, the Oompa-Loompas are transformed into “humanettes” (living dolls that are part human, part puppet). Their recent manifestation raises a number of questions. What do the Oompa-Loompas represent? And how should they be portrayed in modern-day adaptations?

Read more:
Abused, neglected, abandoned — did Roald Dahl hate children as much as the witches did?

Servitude

In the original novel, the Oompa-Loompas work (in lieu of money) in exchange for cocoa beans, the only currency they understand. Wonka explains,

You only had to mention the word ‘cacao’ to an Oompa-Loompa and they would start dribbling at the mouth.

As a messianic figure, Wonka believes he has “rescued” the Oompa-Loompas from certain death. Saving his tiny “helpers” from near starvation, he offers them shelter from their predators, the Snozzwangers and Whangdoodles.

Their servitude, Wonka insists, is a special privilege, a pro-slavery sentiment that echoes the “positive good” defence of the Atlantic Slave Trade.

The novel reflects cultural anxieties that emerged in the United Kingdom in the 1960s when the labour market opened to New Commonwealth citizens from India and the Caribbean. Grandpa Joe, a former Wonka employee who is laid off, represents the concerns of white British workers who saw immigrants as rivals for what they believed were rightfully white British jobs.

When Wonka’s factory re-opens with a secret workforce, Charlie says to Grandpa Joe, “But there must be people working there”, and Grandpa Joe responds, “Not people, Charlie. Not ordinary people, anyway”.

Read more:
Gobsmacked by Aldi’s Revolting Rhymes ban? Try this instead

Whitewashing

In the late 1960s, under mounting pressure to rewrite the Oompa-Loompas, Dahl agreed, in his words, to “de-Negro” his characters.

Mel Stuart’s 1971 film adaptation, released in the immediate aftermath of the civil rights movement, recast the Oompa-Loompas as little people with green hair and orange skin. Their homeland is now Loompaland rather than Africa, and they are “transported” to Wonka’s factory rather than “imported”.

This transformation is a textual whitewashing that obscures the power dynamic between Wonka as factory owner and the Oompa-Loompas as his exploited workforce.

Before the film’s release, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People in the US threatened to boycott cinemas, while the producers worried if they represented black characters in a derogatory way, they would lose revenue.

Dahl eventually buckled to public criticism. In a revised 1973 edition of the book, he reimagined the Oompa-Loompas as “little fantasy creatures”.

In this new edition, the Oompa-Loompas are hippies. Their skin is rosy white; their unkempt hair is golden brown; they frolick in the factory gardens, picking wildflowers, playing hand drums, and chasing butterflies. They symbolise 1970s counterculture and its rejection of materialism, conservative values, and social and political conflict.

Digital clones

In 2005, Tim Burton produced the second cinematic adaptation of Charlie. In Burton’s revision, the Oompa-Loompas are played by a single actor (Gurdeep Roy) who is digitally cloned to create the illusion of a sizeable workforce.

For the first time, the Oompa-Loompas use information technology to communicate wirelessly, enlisting supercomputers to improve their productivity and profits.

In a 2005 interview, Roy recalled Burton’s confirmation that “the Oompas were strictly programmed like robots — all they do is work, work, work.”

Burton’s adaptation, a commentary on exploited labour in the digital age, shares several thematic concerns with the musical version.

Read more:
Cat in a spat: scrapping Dr Seuss books is not cancel culture

Pulling strings

In the Brisbane season, the Oompa-Loompas form a chorus line of hybrid creatures in red curled wigs and identical suits branded with the “W” of Wonka, a stamp marking them as property rather than people.

Each Oompa-Loompa is part human (head and hands) and part puppet (body and legs). The puppeteer manipulates the body and legs to bring the puppet to life.

The result is a bizarre distortion of proportions, in which the Oompa-Loompas burst onto the stage in choreographed song and dance. The theatrical effect is of a stunted character, suspended in space, able to perform gravity-defying dance moves and circus-like tricks.

While the inventive blend of performers and puppets is clever, the puppetry reinstates the power imbalance: Oompa-Loompas are material objects controlled by others.

In attempting to conceal their exploitation, the show’s producers only draw attention to the controversy they are trying to avoid. The fact Wonka’s privilege is never questioned is evidenced by the fact he always remains the same: white, wealthy, and in control.

Using puppets as a way to obfuscate conversation around race has a problematic history in Western theatre. Some theatre-makers insist puppets are essentially “raceless”, but this claim can erase the subject’s potential humanity. An audience isn’t excepted to see puppets as anything other than figures of entertainment.

The fraught history of the Oompa-Loompas captures the irresolvable tension at the heart of children’s literature and theatre: it is impossible to separate children’s stories from the ideological fabric of our world, the power structures that privilege adults, and the particular historical moment in which stories are produced.

Any re-imagining of this classic tale will always be placed in a precarious position.

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

– ref. From pygmies to puppets: what to do with Roald Dahl’s enslaved Oompa-Loompas in modern adaptations? – https://theconversation.com/from-pygmies-to-puppets-what-to-do-with-roald-dahls-enslaved-oompa-loompas-in-modern-adaptations-166967

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

Christian Porter’s ministerial future is again on the line, with Scott Morrison seeking advice on whether his receiving money for his legal bills from a “blind trust” breaches the ministerial standards code.

Morrison discussed the arrangement, which has attracted a storm of controversy, with Porter on Wednesday.

On Tuesday Porter updated his parliamentary register of interests to reveal a “part contribution” to his legal bills for his (now settled) defamation case against the ABC from “a blind trust known as the Legal Services Trust”.

“As a potential beneficiary I have no access to information about the conduct and funding of the trust,” he said in the update.

The defamation action followed the ABC reporting a historical rape allegation against an unnamed cabinet minister. Porter, attorney-general at the time, later identified himself as the minister and strongly denied the allegation.

He was subsequently moved from attorney-general to the industry ministry.

A spokesperson for Morrison said late Wednesday: “The Prime Minister is taking this matter seriously and has discussed the matter with the minister today.

“The Prime Minister is seeking advice from his department on any implications for the Ministerial Standards and any actions the minister must take to ensure that he meets the Standards.”

The advice will come from the secretary of the Prime Minister’s department, Phil Gaetjens, and Stephanie Foster, deputy secretary for governance.

If Porter is not meeting the ministerial standard one course would be for him to return the money.

Earlier on Wednesday, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull said he was “staggered that Porter thought he could get away with it and I will be even more staggered if the prime minister allows this to stand.

“It is a shocking affront to transparency,” Turnbull told the ABC.

“Basically what Porter is saying is that it is okay for an Australian cabinet minister, a former attorney-general – not just of Australia, but of Western Australia – to take a large donation, a large gift to himself, without disclosing who the donor was and apparently without him knowing who the donor was either. It is so wrong.”

Turnbull said it was “like saying ‘my legal fees were paid by a guy in a mask who dropped off a chaff bag full of cash’”.

Opposition leader Anthony Albanese ridiculed the proposition that Porter didn’t know the identity of his benefactors.

“The idea that he doesn’t know, that just somehow out there random people are discovering this trust, finding out for themselves where to put the money and depositing the money with no knowledge to him, is, quite frankly, just unbelievable and absurd,” Albanese said.

Albanese said this was “yet another reason why we need a national anti-corruption commission.

“If there was a national anti-corruption commission, it’d be up this like a rat up a drainpipe.”

Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said the PM seeking advice was “another farcical ‘inquiry’ by Scott Morrison’s right-hand man” which “follows yet another outrageous scandal in Mr Morrison’s government”.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg defended Porter, telling Sky that he “has disclosed in accordance with the requirements of parliamentarians on their register of interest”.

“The point about Christian Porter’s legal defence is that he did not use taxpayers’ money, and that is very important,” Frydenberg said.

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. Christian Porter’s ministerial future on the line as Morrison seeks advice on ‘blind trust’ – https://theconversation.com/christian-porters-ministerial-future-on-the-line-as-morrison-seeks-advice-on-blind-trust-168011

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter McNeil, Distinguished Professor of Design History, UTS, University of Technology Sydney

Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has ignited both controversy and celebration after wearing a gown to the Met Gala emblazoned in red graffiti text with the statement “Tax the Rich”.

Appearing as a guest of the Metropolitan Museum of Art at the annual fund raiser, (for which tickets cost tens of thousand dollars), the left-wing politician wore a custom gown by fashion brand Brother Vellies, bringing with her the label’s founder, the young Black designer and activist Aurora James.

Using fashion as a tool to address wider social concerns has, in fact, long been a strategy for people seeking to make change — including wearing these clothes in spaces of influence.

From 19th century Suffragettes who pounded the streets in heels, ultra-feminine dress and large “picture” hats to refute claims that they were unwomanly, to patriot textiles in the second world war, to Indigenous Australian street clothes and accessories by a brand such as Dizzy Couture today, dress has historically conveyed political messages, creating “looks” for generations of change agents.

Here are 5 clothing acts as provocations that changed history.

1. George Washington’s suit

The founders of the American Revolution wished to break with the old codes of European aristocracy. Much of the world still had “sumptuary laws”: legal edicts that regulated the types, materials and amounts of cloth, colours, jewellery and accessories permitted to various social groups.

In North America, the formal clothing codes of the old regime were actively resisted: men were not expected to wear the expensive and colourful embroidered silks typically worn to European courts. Their imported fabrics were considered bad for local economies, and their elite air at odds with the idea that all men might now be (relatively) equal.

President elect George Washington was sculpted by Houdon in the late 18th century with a button missing from his waistcoat. This was a deliberate gesture to show his actions were more important than his appearance. He also wore plain, home-spun American woollen cloth for his inauguration instead of the expected silk or velvet. This was a firm demonstration of North American independence and perhaps the first American “business casual”.

2. The Abolitionist handbag

Since the late 18th century, a range of objects from jewellery to printed dishes were produced to critique the Slave Trade.

British Quakers had advocated for Abolition in 1783. The Female Society for Birmingham (originally the Ladies Society for the Relief of Negro Slaves, the first such group) mobilised their anti-slavery followers with handbags printed with images and slogans designed to gain support for the Abolitionist movement.

The silk drawstring bags, made by women in sewing circles, were presented to prominent figures such as George IV and Princess Victoria. The bags contained newspaper articles and tracts supportive of Abolition.

The Slavery Abolition Act, which provided for the immediate abolition of slavery in most of the British Empire was passed ten years later, in 1833. A similar Act was ratified in the USA only in 1865.

3. No feather hats

The ostrich and exotic bird industry was massive in the 19th century: as well as plumes, women wore whole bodies of birds as accessories, such as hummingbird earrings.

The ostrich plume “double fluff” industry was centred on South Africa, where the feathers were worth more than gold. They were exported to rooms in London and New York where exhausted young girls finished and dyed them for retail.

In 1914 a massive “feather crash” saw the raw material become close to worthless. Young women interested in the growing national park and conservation movements objected to the trade on ecological grounds. They simply stopped wearing the fashion, starting a global “anti-plumage” movement.

The women involved with the Massachusetts Audubon Society were so successful that their lobbying led to the first US federal conservation legislation, The Lacey Act (1900). Taxidermied birds, feather boas and birds as earrings became largely unfashionable and were rarely seen again in women’s fashion.

4. The ACT UP T-shirt

The AIDS crisis of the 1980s-90s saw the mobilisation of a unique blend of activism born from the women’s, Hispanic, Black power and 1970s gay movements. ACT UP New York determined that only anger and civil disobedience would focus the attention of government and big pharma on the plight of mainly gay men’s health.

A series of extraordinary “zaps” or site-specific protests, often theatrical, was engineered. ACT UP’s membership included skilled figures from advertising and design who created unified and stylish T-shirts, posters and banners. The designs were clean, slick and looked just like good advertising.

As Sarah Schulman recently demonstrated in her 20 year history of ACT UP, the bold T-shirt designs both created optimum impact for ACT UP’s protests on the TV news and a new pro-gay identity. Worn with Doc Marten shoes, leather jackets, clean and tight jeans or denim shorts, ACT UP established the look of gay urban men for a generation.

Government bodies and large drug companies were shamed by the public protests into adopting better and more rational health messaging, conducting better funded and more equitable drug trials and selling cheaper retrovirals.

5. When Katharine met Maggie

In 1984, designer Katharine Hamnett wore a t-shirt that read, “58% DONT WANT PERSHING” (a reference to nuclear missiles) to a high profile fashion evening attended by conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Hamnett made her T-shirt the night before, recognising the opportunity she had, and hid it under her coat upon entry. Its graphic format owes a debt to both 1970s Punk and ACT UP. She later recalled of the widely photographed encounter with Thatcher:

She looked down and said, “You seem to be wearing a rather strong message on your T-shirt”, then she bent down to read it and let out a squawk, like a chicken.

Social change needs its visual forms. Fashion is one of them. Fashion is a brilliant communicator of new ideas. That we are reading about AOC’s clothing “controversy” shows she fully understands fashion’s power.

Peter McNeil 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. Beyond AOC’s ‘Tax the Rich’ dress: 5 acts of fashion provocation that changed history – https://theconversation.com/beyond-aocs-tax-the-rich-dress-5-acts-of-fashion-provocation-that-changed-history-167974

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mahmoud Elkhodr, Lecturer in Information and Communication Technologies, CQUniversity Australia

As Australia prepares to lift the ban on international travel, the federal government has awarded Irish-based IT multinational Accenture a A$75 million contract to develop a Digital Passenger Declaration (DPD) system.

These new digital passes, announced this week, will replace two current documents: the physical incoming passenger cards filled in by all international arrivals to Australia, and the online COVID-19 Australian Travel Declaration, which details travellers’ COVID vaccination status.

With international travel restrictions set to be lifted for vaccinated Australians once the nation reaches 80% vaccination, it is not yet clear whether unvaccinated foreign travellers will be allowed into Australia once the international border opens, or whether unvaccinated Australians will be allowed to travel overseas and return.

It is also not yet clear how the new system will interact with the COVID “vaccine passports” the government has pledged to make available to Australians from next month, allowing them to prove their vaccination status using either a digital or printed document.

The federal government says the new DPD system will also be able to share details of international travellers’ health and vaccination status with state and territory health authorities.

And Stuart Robert, the federal minister responsible for digital data policy, said the program could be extended in future to cover visas, import permits, licences, registrations and other government-issued documents.

While many of the details remain to be confirmed, the announcement prompts a range of questions about how the new digital passenger declarations will work in practice.

Is the new document a ‘vaccine passport’?

Not really — it’s more than that, because it also replaces the yellow arrival cards that will be familiar to anyone who has travelled to Australia on an international flight in recent years.

Besides this, the system will also allow passengers to digitally upload their COVID vaccination certificate. It’s not yet clear whether this will be the same document as the “vaccine passports” set to be issued by the federal government from next month.

The vaccine passports can be shown to immigration officials in other countries, whereas the information in the DPD is purely for collection by Australian officials. It’s also not clear what documents foreign arrivals will be able to use to declare their COVID vaccination status to Australian authorities via the DPD system.

Read more:
Vaccine passports are coming to Australia. How will they work and what will you need them for?

How will privacy and security concerns be addressed?

Arriving travellers completing an incoming passenger card disclose lots of personal information, such as their full name, passport number, intended address in Australia, and declarations relating to customs and quarantine.

The new proposed DPD system will capture all these details, as well as the traveller’s COVID vaccination status. This raises several questions about how these data will be collected, transmitted, stored, accessed and shared.

A digital-based system comes with increased cybersecurity risks, and cyber criminals will doubtless be on the lookout for any vulnerability. There will also need to be clear policies detailing which federal, state and territory agencies are granted access to the data.

Will it be mandatory for overseas arrivals to declare their vaccination status, and will they be refused entry if they can’t prove they have been vaccinated? We don’t know yet.

Will authorities determine who needs to quarantine based on their vaccination status? Will Australia implement a traffic-light system, similar to other nations such as the United Kingdom, to identify which countries pose their biggest risk from unvaccinated travellers?

It is also unclear whether the system will be offered in languages besides English, and whether alternatives will be provided to those with accessibility needs or who lack access to a digital device.

How will travellers’ vaccination status be verified?

Recently, federal trade minister Dan Tehan told ABC radio the government is working with the International Civil Aviation Organisation on a QR-based system that would allow Australian vaccine certificates to be internationally recognised.

However, it is unclear at this stage whether the new DPD system will use the same system to verify the vaccination status of Australians returning home, and whether it will be able to verify foreign travellers’ vaccination status without further checks.

At the same time, Qantas is investigating ways to integrate yet another system, the IATA Travel Pass, into its own app. This system, developed by the International Air Transport Association and already used by airlines in several countries, allows passengers to securely store and present their COVID vaccination certificate, and to find information on testing and vaccine requirements for their journey.

Why isn’t there a globally unified approach?

European Union residents can already use the EU Digital COVID Certificate app to travel freely between member nations, and to other participating countries such as Norway. The app uses a QR code signed with a digital signature to ensure authenticity without needing to collect extra personal details from the holder.

New York state, meanwhile, has adopted a blockchain-based app called Excelsior Pass, which provides digital proof of COVID vaccination or negative test results. It works by searching the state’s health department records, using special cryptographic signatures to ensure COVID certificates and health data are genuine.

For the time being at least, international passengers will likely need to use several different apps to prove their vaccination status in various parts of the world. There are obvious issues with this beyond simple inconvenience, such as data and privacy protection.

Will the system discriminate unfairly?

My research shows that the absence of a unified approach to COVID-19 contact-tracing apps was the main driver behind their failures worldwide. Similar problems are now arising with the rapid proliferation of national and international COVID certificates, travel passes and vaccine passports.

One issue is compatibility. The Excelsior Pass app, for instance, only works on devices running Apple iOS version 13 or later, or Android version 7 or later.

But more importantly, people should have the right to prove their vaccination status without needing to carry a smart phone. Even in a rich country like Australia, only about 80% of the population owns a smart phone, and the rate is lower in developing nations. A system that relies solely on apps would disproportionately deny freedom of movement to poorer people.

Other issues go beyond the choice of technology involved. Legislation will be needed to ensure people with a valid reason for not having been vaccinated do not face discrimination as Australia and the world gradually open up their borders.

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

– ref. Australia’s yellow international arrival cards are getting a COVID-era digital makeover. Here are 5 key questions – https://theconversation.com/australias-yellow-international-arrival-cards-are-getting-a-covid-era-digital-makeover-here-are-5-key-questions-167898

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wallace, Associate Professor, 50/50 By 2030 Foundation, Faculty of Business Government & Law, University of Canberra

Close elections have been common and landslides rare in the 20 federal elections held in Australia over the past 50 years. Some political parties are acting as though the reverse is true and the outcome of the next election is a foregone conclusion. This week, there have been two unequivocal gifts to Prime Minister Scott Morrison from his opponents.

Known for a literal belief in God-given luck, Morrison likely felt blessed by naked in-fighting in opposition ranks over preselection for the south-western Sydney seat of Fowler. This was followed by the Greens openly touting “shadow ministers” as part of their narrative that Labor will have to rely on them to form government after the next poll.

The ugliness and ill-discipline of the Fowler struggle suggest a dire complacency in Labor about its election prospects. If Labor thought it worthwhile to move one of its hard hitters, Senator Kristina Keneally, to the lower house after being displaced from a winnable spot on the NSW senate ticket, this could and should have been organised with less damaging optics. And that’s leaving aside the extraordinary situation where, so close to the poll, a candidate was not already preselected and running.

Read more:
View from The Hill: Kristina Keneally’s house switch stops one row, starts another

Similarly, the Greens’ cheekiness can only be based on an assumption that Labor is going to win. The alternative explanation is that the Greens don’t mind hurting Labor among Greens-averse blue-collar workers in rural and regional seats in Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania, for whom a Labor-Greens coalition would be anathema.

And that can’t be right, can it? The Greens’ anti-Adani caravan through regional Queensland is one of the reasons Morrison was re-elected with a wafer-thin majority. Surely this has not already been forgotten.

The latest Newspoll showing Labor leading the Morrison government 54-46%, after the distribution of preferences, is the likely reason for these damaging breakouts so close to an election.

Yet that election is far from a foregone conclusion. Opinion poll ratings are merely progress scores in a match that has many more minutes of play left. Further, opinion polls across the board were proven wrong at the last election. It won’t be known until after the next election whether the corrections made have delivered more accurate polling or not.

Labor and the Greens would do well to turn away from the opinion polls, look back on those previous 20 elections and sober up. In one-third of those elections, the government elected won with a single-digit majority of seats or was in minority government.

There were only three unequivocal landslides: the Fraser government in 1975 (55-seat majority) and 1977 (48-seat majority), and the Howard government in 1996 (40-seat majority). The three times Labor wrested power from a Liberal and National coalition government, the majorities ranged from modest to solid: Whitlam in 1972 (9 seats), Hawke in 1983 (25 seats) and Rudd in 2007 (16 seats).

Winning government is hard. Labor has governed nationally for just six of the past 25 years. Current political atmospherics are worryingly similar to those leading up to Labor’s shock 2019 federal election loss, when then-Labor leader Bill Shorten was figuratively measuring up the drapes for The Lodge, and the Greens’ tactics ensured Labor’s failure to get that last seat or two in Queensland that would have seen the Morrison government fall.

Read more:
Albanese’s small-target strategy may give Labor a remarkable victory — or yet more heartbreak

Those who see Morrison as an expired political franchise fail to recall how much he can do with very little in the theatre of a five-week political campaign, even without gifts like those Labor and the Greens gave the government this week.

They also fail to reckon with the historical and recent ruthlessness of the Liberal Party in dispatching leaders they come to believe can’t win. The Coalition has gone to the past three elections with a different prime minister, each having trounced a colleague in bloody circumstances to get there, and has won every time. So while Morrison will likely lead the LNP into the next campaign, Labor shouldn’t assume Albanese will be squaring off Stephen Bradbury-style against an enfeebled prime minister.

The Greens would do well to consider the consequences of destructive rather than constructive competition against Labor. If tactics like its “shadow minister” announcement help re-elect the Morrison government at the coming poll, climate policy will remain stuck for another three years.

It’s unlikely that’s the outcome Greens voters really want.

Chris Wallace has received funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. Labor and the Greens need to sober up. The next election is far from in the bag – https://theconversation.com/labor-and-the-greens-need-to-sober-up-the-next-election-is-far-from-in-the-bag-167972

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julian Koplin, Resarch Fellow in Biomedical Ethics, Melbourne Law School and Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, The University of Melbourne

US startup Colossal Biosciences has announced plans to bring woolly mammoths, or animals like them, back from extinction and into the frosty landscape of the Siberian tundra.

Colossal has received US$15 million in initial funds to support research conducted by Harvard geneticist George Church, among other work. The proposed project is exciting, with laudable ambitions — but whether it is a practical strategy for conservation remains unclear.

Colossal proposes to use CRISPR gene editing technology to modify Asian elephant embryos (the mammoth’s closest living relative) so their genomes resemble those of woolly mammoths.

Read more:
What is CRISPR, the gene editing technology that won the Chemistry Nobel prize?

These embryos could then theoretically develop into elephant-mammoth hybrids (mammophants), with the appearance and behaviour of extinct mammoths. According to Colossal, the ultimate aim is to release herds of these mammophants into the Arctic, where they will fill the ecological niche mammoths once occupied.

When mammoths disappeared from the Arctic some 4,000 years ago, shrubs overtook what was previously grassland. Mammoth-like creatures could help restore this ecosystem by trampling shrubs, knocking over trees, and fertilising grasses with their faeces.

Theoretically, this could help reduce climate change. If the current Siberian permafrost melts, it will release potent greenhouse gases. Compared to tundra, grassland might reflect more light and keep the ground cooler, which Colossal hopes will prevent the permafrost from melting.

While the prospect of reviving extinct species has long been discussed by groups such as Revive and Restore, advances in genome editing have now brought such dreams close to reality. But just because we have the tools to resurrect mammoth-like creatures, does this mean we should?

A cause worth considering

De-extinction is a controversial field. Critics have referred to such practices as “playing god” and accused scientists in favour of de-extinction of hubris.

A common worry is that bringing back extinct species, whose ecological niches may no longer exist, will upset existing ecosystems. But when it comes to mammophants, this critique lacks bite.

Colossal says it aims to recreate the steppe ecosystem (a large, flat grassland) that flourished in Siberia until about 12,000 years ago. It has been estimated the total mass of plants and animals in Siberia’s tundra is now 100-fold less than when it was a steppe.

Simply, this ecosystem is already compromised, and it’s hard to see how reintroducing mammophants would lead to further damage.

Reintroducing species can transform ecosystems for the better. A well-known example is the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park in the 1990s, which started a cascade of positive changes for local flora and fauna. Mammophants may do the same.

Furthermore, climate change is one of the great moral challenges of our time. The melting of the Siberian permafrost is expected to accelerate climate change and exacerbate ecological disaster.

This is such a serious problem that even ambitious projects with a low probability of success can be ethically justified. Often our moral intuitions are clouded when considering new technologies and interventions.

But technologies which originally seemed scary and unnatural can slowly become accepted and valued. One tool that is sometimes used to overcome these tendencies is called the reversal test, which was originally developed by Oxford philosophers Nick Bostrom and Toby Ord as a way to tackle status quo bias.

This test involves assuming the new thing already exists, and the novel proposal is to take it away. Imagine an endangered population of mammophants currently inhabits Siberia, where it plays an important role in maintaining the ecosystem and protecting the permafrost.

Few would argue attempts to save these mammophants are “unethical”. So if we would welcome efforts to save them in this hypothetical scenario, we should also welcome efforts to introduce them in real life.

So according to the reversal test, the key ethical objections to Colossal’s project should not relate to its aims, but rather to its means.

The main ethical concerns

Let’s look at two ethical concerns related to de-extinction. The first is that de-extinction could distract from more cost-effective efforts to protect biodiversity or mitigate climate change. The second relates to the possible moral hazards that may arise if people start believing extinction is not forever.

1. Opportunity costs

Some critics of de-extinction projects hold that while de-extinction may be an admirable goal, in practice it constitutes a waste of resources. Even if newly engineered mammophants contain mammoth DNA, there is no guarantee these hybrids will adopt the behaviours of ancient mammoths.

For instance, we inherit more than just DNA sequences from our parents. We inherit epigenetic changes, wherein the environment around us can affect how those genes are regulated. We also inherit our parents’ microbiome (colonies of gut bacteria), which plays an important role in our behaviours.

Also important are the behaviours animals learn from observing other members of their species. The first mammophants will have no such counterparts to learn from.

And even if de-extinction programs are successful, they will likely cost more than saving existing species from extinction. The programs might be a poor use of resources, especially if they attract funding that could have otherwise gone to more promising projects.

The opportunity costs of de-extinction should be carefully scrutinised. As exciting as it may be to see herds of wild mammophants, we shouldn’t let this vision distract us from more cost-effective projects.

That said, we also shouldn’t rule out de-extinction technologies altogether. The costs will eventually come down. In the meantime, some highly expensive projects might be worth considering.

2. Broader implications for conservation

The second concern is more subtle. Some environmentalists argue once de-extinction becomes possible, the need to protect species from extinction will seem less urgent. Would we still worry about preventing extinctions if we can just reverse them at a later date?

Personally, however, we are not convinced by these concerns. Extinction is currently irreversible, yet humans continue to drive an era of mass extinction that shows no sign of slowing. In other words, moving towards increasing extinctions is the status quo, and this status quo is not worth preserving.

Also, de-extinction is not the only conservation strategy that seeks to undo otherwise irreversible losses. For example, “rewilding” involves reintroducing locally-extinct species into an ecosystem it once inhabited. If we welcome these efforts — and we should — then we should also welcome novel strategies to restore lost species and damaged ecosystems.

Read more:
WHO guidelines on human genome editing: why countries need to follow them

Julian Koplin, via his affiliation with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, received funding from the Victorian State Government via the Operational Infrastructure Support program.

Christopher Gyngell, via his affiliation with the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, received funding from the Victorian State Government via the Operational Infrastructure Support Program

– ref. Bringing woolly mammoths back from extinction might not be such a bad idea — ethicists explain – https://theconversation.com/bringing-woolly-mammoths-back-from-extinction-might-not-be-such-a-bad-idea-ethicists-explain-167892

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sheranne Fairley, Associate professor, The University of Queensland

Queensland’s love of rugby league, and the fact the state isn’t in lockdown, has won it the right to host the 2021 NRL finals series.

But it was economic gains as much as love of the game that Premier Annastacia Pałaszczuk spruiked when announcing Queensland would host all eight finals games plus the grand final at Brisbane’s Suncorp Stadium. Six of those games are being played outside Brisbane — two in Townsville, two in Mackay, and one apiece in Rockhampton and Sunshine Coast.

“It’s a tremendous gesture from the NRL and will provide an economic boost spread over our regional cities,” Pałaszczuk said in a statement. Her minister for sport, Stirling Hinchliffe, was even more effusive. “It will invest millions of dollars into local economies and boost intra-state tourism into regional Queensland cities,” he said.

But will it?

Uncertain gains

Research shows that hosting sport and other events rarely delivers the economic and tourism benefits commonly claimed. In fact, studies around large-scale events often fail to show any positive economic impact at all.

The financial hangover from hosting events such as the Olympics is well-documented. It took Montreal 30 years to pay off the debt incurred from hosting the 1976 Olympic Games. The 2004 Athens and 2016 Rio de Janeiro Games also failed spectacularly to deliver on their promises of economic benefit.

The Olympics, though, is in a league of its own, due to the scale of competition, sheer number of venues required and being a one-off.

Hosting a seasonal sporting event using existing infrastructure should be of greater economic value. The outlays aren’t anywhere near as much, and local hotels, restaurants and other businesses get a boost from the influx of sport tourists.

The problem is that this year’s NRL finals won’t see thousands of footy fans flying from interstate and injecting money into local economies through transport, accommodation, dining and other touristy activities.

So Townsville, Mackay, Rockhampton and Sunshine Coast may benefit from intrastate visitors, but perhaps not to the extent of the promised millions.

Rockhampton Regional Council, for example, has estimated the economic value of the September 12 elimination final between Parramatta Eels and the Newcastle Knights to be $680,000, with about a quarter of the 5,000 spectators from outside the region. That estimate depends on assumptions about those visitors spending money on accommodation, and all spectators spending money on local retail and in hospitality businesses.

Event leveraging

So how does an economic return occur from hosting smaller-scale events like the NRL finals?

The answer is “event leveraging”. It is not enough just to hold an event; organisers must implement strategies to achieve the benefits touted — encouraging visitors to spend more, and using the occasion to promote the host area as a tourism destination.

For example, French towns and regions that attract Tour de France fans use event-themed activities to keep visitors around longer.

Spreading the NRL finals games between Brisbane and four regional centres can also be seen as a leveraging strategy — spreading any economic benefits more evenly throughout the state — particularly to areas hit hard by the loss of international and interstate tourism.

Read more:
Footy crowds: what the AFL and NRL need to turn sport into show business

Media exposure

This also helps what is, given closed borders, the even more important component for Queensland to leverage the NRL finals: media attention that showcases the host region as a future place to visit.

During the Sydney 2000 Olympics, for example, a program encouraged media organisations to cover tourism destinations such as the Blue Mountains and Uluru, by providing visiting journalists with video and other resources

Even with the more modest NRL, media attention isn’t just confined to the hours before, during and after the actual games. There is an intensive industry generating content in the days leading up to game, and in the wash-up.

This occurs through general media coverage and the well-developed communications channels of the NRL and its respective clubs. Now players also cultivate their own audiences through social media. Melbourne Storm star Cameron Munster, for example, has 158,000 followers on Instagram.

The biggest audiences, though, come from game broadcasts. These typically are replete with aerial shots of the ground and other imagery showcasing the host city.

Queensland’s premier and minister for sport must therefore be relieved the NRL has rescheduled the preliminary final (at Suncorp Stadium in Brisbane), originally set to coincide with the AFL grand final on September 25. One of the teams in that preliminary final is Melbourne Storm. The broadcast would have denied the NRL, and Queensland, thousands of television viewers.

Read more:
The NRL’s unrivalled equality means back-to-back premierships are very rare

So the NRL finals should provide some immediate economic benefit to the host cities and towns, though perhaps not as much as the Queensland government would like to think. They also provide a great opportunity to promote regional Queensland as a tourist destination to interstate audiences.

But without the time to implement strategies to really leverage these events, the extent of economic benefits that will flow to Queensland in the longer term is hard to estimate.

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. Can Queensland cash in on the NRL finals? It’s all about ‘event leveraging’ – https://theconversation.com/can-queensland-cash-in-on-the-nrl-finals-its-all-about-event-leveraging-167879

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Jorm, Professor emeritus, The University of Melbourne

Yesterday, Victorian Minister for Mental Health James Merlino announced additional funding of $22 million for mental health support in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The centrepiece of this announcement was $13.3 million for 20 “pop-up community mental health services” with “around 90 dedicated clinicians providing 93,000 additional hours of well-being checks and counselling”.

This announcement is a small step towards overcoming some of the deficiencies in mental health service provision which were identified by the Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System. So it’s not surprising the new funding has been welcomed by mental health advocates.

However, is it likely to make a difference to the effects the pandemic is having on mental health?

Victoria’s mental health has worsened during the pandemic

Early in the pandemic, mental health experts warned there was likely to be a worsening of mental health and perhaps even an increase in suicide.

They called for increased resources for treatment and prevention of mental health problems to reduce this impact. The predictions of worse mental health have proved to be correct.

Fortunately, however, there has been no increase in suicide.

Recent compilations of data by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Australian Bureau of Statistics have shown depression and anxiety symptoms increased in Australia early in the pandemic, but then decreased back towards pre-pandemic levels.

However, in Victoria, which has been the state most affected by lockdowns, the prevalence of a high level of psychological distress remains much greater than in the rest of Australia (27% versus 18%).

Demand for services is also up

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare data also show demand for mental health services has increased substantially.

Victorians have received a much higher rate of mental health services funded under Medicare since the start of the pandemic. Some of this increase was facilitated by the introduction of telehealth services, which weren’t previously available.

There have also been increased calls by Victorians to support services provided by Lifeline (up 37% from 2019 to 2020), Kids Helpline (up 27%) and Beyond Blue (up 65%).

Read more:
Lockdowns don’t get easier the more we have them. Melbourne, here are 6 tips to help you cope

Will the additional services make a difference?

Given Victorians’ increasing demand for mental health support, the additional services will be welcomed by people who are on waiting lists and by hard-pressed clinicians.

However, it’s unlikely they will make an impact on the worsening of mental health seen during the pandemic. The reason for expecting no reduction in prevalence is that in recent decades Australia has had substantial increases in the provision of mental health services, but this has had no measurable impact on people’s mental health.

Rather, prevalence remained stable for the two decades leading up to the pandemic.

Australia isn’t unique in this regard. In other high-income countries where the mental health of the population has been monitored over many years, no reduction in prevalence has been found with increases in treatment.

Why are more services unlikely to have an impact?

One of the reasons increasing services has had no measurable impact is they’re often of poor quality.

In Australia, most people with depression or anxiety disorders who seek help do not receive minimally adequate treatment. In many cases, the treatment isn’t evidence-based and the number of sessions received is too few to be effective.

Providing more funding for services has increased the number of people with milder problems receiving help. But the people with severe and recurring mental illnesses who are most in need are still not getting adequate help.

Another reason services are unlikely to have a measurable impact is they don’t generally deal with the risk factors that underlie the worsening of mental health during the pandemic.

Important risk factors are loneliness due to social isolation, financial stress, and juggling the demands of childcare and homeschooling while working from home.

I have argued previously that income and employment support are more important in addressing the mental health impact of the pandemic than mental health services.

Read more:
The government will spend $48 million to safeguard mental health. Extending JobKeeper would safeguard it even more

While governments can take action to ameliorate these risk factors, the major impact is likely to come with the easing of lockdowns and consequent resumption of social contact, schooling and work.

These benefits require greater vaccination coverage and provide an important motivation for achieving this goal.

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

Anthony Jorm receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council. He is a Chief Investigator on the Centre for Research Excellence on Childhood Adversity and Mental Health. He is Chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee of Prevention United, Member of the Board of Mental Health First Aid International, a member of the Alliance for Prevention of Mental Disorders and a member of the Association for Psychological Science.

– ref. Victoria has announced extra funds for counselling, but it’s unlikely to improve our mental health – https://theconversation.com/victoria-has-announced-extra-funds-for-counselling-but-its-unlikely-to-improve-our-mental-health-167889

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Carroll, Senior Research Fellow, Victorian College of the Arts, The University of Melbourne

Review: SOUL Fury at Bendigo Gallery

From love, bitter becomes sweet … From love, fire becomes light … From love, fury becomes mercy.

So wrote the Sufi poet Rumi 700 years ago. Curator Nur Shkembi has used Rumi’s evocative words to frame her selection of art by 16 women artists who have cultural backgrounds in Islam as SOUL Fury, an exhibition running at Bendigo Art Gallery until October.

It is a telling title. It slips between the transformative power of these works with a reckoning if not of the soul, at least towards a sense of wonder, and the reality of the experience of artists. They live in a world oft-times “resistant”, as artist Cigdem Aydemir says, to their culture.

Read more:
Friday essay: why traditional Persian music should be known to the world

Heart and spirit

The entry to the exhibition is magical: golden circles, made by Shireen Taweel, are perforated with perfectly tuned patterns making arcs of light on the floor. A call to prayer recorded in the Australian outback resonates. Then the room finishes with a poem by Eugenia Flynn, a First Nations (Tiwi Larrakia) Muslim woman, half lit on the wall behind.

The combination does what experiencing art in galleries alone can do: it brings down your heartbeat and raises your spirit at the same time. The clever staging of the whole show reminds us, even subliminally, of the easy slippage between static artworks, video, music, poetry and indeed the space of Islamic sensibility.

Islamic art, put simply, aspires to bring us closer to God. It transcends the trivia of our daily lives, in a process that encourages us to a purer state of mind. You don’t have to be a believer in an Islamic God to understand the power of much of the culture originally from the Middle East, or to appreciate its beauty or be swayed by its rhythms.

Think of Persian miniatures and the Taj Mahal, ghazals spoken and sung as well as the flourishes of calligraphic books, the turquoise and blue tiles of Isfahan and the wondrous spaces of the Haggia Sophia in Istanbul. It’s in the colours floating in the air in the Newport Mosque in Melbourne.

Many of the works in SOUL Fury reflect these traditions. Nusra Latif Qureshi’s precise and luminescent “miniatures” come from that traditional style and technique, but hidden within them is the sting of colonial and present day (often gendered) politics.

Shahzia Sikander’s hypnotic rhythms in her video Singing Suns, of exploding golden orbs, easily transcend our terrestrial humdrum. Bombshell, a video by Cigdem Aydemir, takes its name from the Marilyn Monroe footage of her dress swirling over an air vent. Here equally rhythmically billowing clothing surrounds the figure of an ethereally floating young woman, though her clothing is the heavy veiling frequently seen by those in the West to equate with oppression and restriction.

Read more:
Ancient rhythms: Shirin Neshat and the dream space that contemporary Persian art can unlock

Power and exclusion

SOUL Fury is about the culture that flows around this religion, as it is experienced by women today. Gallery director Jessica Bridgfoot says this exhibition is a “disruption of entrenched powers in public cultural spaces”. The placement of this exhibition in Bendigo, with its recent fragile history of Islamic relations around the building of a new mosque is understandable.

However, the success here is that while the visitor arrives aware of the issues, the overall result is to be inspired by the work and its stories. It’s about facing adversity head-on, if not with defiance but with strength, humour, and a refined sensibility of a greater humanity.

The filigree delicacy accorded Mehwish Iqbal’s personal accoutrements of refugees is an example. Another is the serious humour of Hoda Afshar’s unlikely photography: women in heavy veils sporting a blonde pigtail, or smoking a cigarette and very cool sunglasses. In the end people win, artists win, women win.

Read more:
Iran’s cultural heritage reflects the grandeur and beauty of the golden age of the Persian empire

The height of their powers

Half of the 16 women represented live in Australia, half of those born here. While artists from or living in Bangladesh, Somalia and Cambodia are included as well as those with a Lebanese background, the majority are from the Persian arc of influence: Iran and its cultural partner of Pakistan. Almost all respond to the immensely entrancing traditions of art coming from there, in technique (including miniature painting and intricate carving), style, content — or all three.

The image of women of Pakistan particularly in Western minds is one of subjugation and violence. But the work by many of the Pakistani artists here, including Shahzia Sikander and Nusra Latif Qureshi, comes from institutions in Lahore and more recently in Karachi run by women. Formidable artists-teachers-writers Salima Hashmi and Durriya Kazi have nurtured students there who have since gained enormous international reputations.

Most of the artists are in their 30s and 40s, at the height of their powers and making themselves and their views very clear. These are not artists on the margins of the art world.

Some of them, like Sikander, Qureshi, Hadieh Shafie, Shadi Ghadirian, Naiza Khan and Anida Yoeu Ali, have been included in the major exhibitions and institutions of our time, from the Venice Biennale to the British Museum, to the Queensland Art Gallery’s Asia Pacific Triennial.

Contrary to the stereotype of neglect, these artists are doing very well in the centres of art world power.

This important exhibition is a unique chance to experience webs of sympathetic communication weaving between great works in a specific cultural context. A tour-de-force experience, it really should be seen around the country.

SOUL Fury is at Bendigo Art Gallery until October 24.

Alison Carroll 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. Women at the height of their artistic powers present a powerful reckoning in SOUL Fury – https://theconversation.com/women-at-the-height-of-their-artistic-powers-present-a-powerful-reckoning-in-soul-fury-165315

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sunanda Creagh, Senior Editor

Many Sydneysiders have been heading to beaches in their local areas as the weather warms, leading authorities in certain spots to restrict access last weekend and prompting furious debate online.

The current NSW public health orders allow people to leave home “to undertake exercise or outdoor recreation” under certain strict conditions (which may be different depending on what local government area you live in).

In Victoria, stay at home restrictions allow people in most areas to leave home for exercise, also under certain strict conditions.

So, if it’s allowed under the public health orders for your area, is it OK to go to the beach? We asked five experts.

– ref. During COVID lockdown, is it OK to go to the beach? We asked 5 experts – https://theconversation.com/during-covid-lockdown-is-it-ok-to-go-to-the-beach-we-asked-5-experts-167788

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sarah Wayland, Senior Lecturer Social Work, University of New England

During the pandemic, lots of us, myself included, are struggling to live in the “now”. That “now”, with all its uncertainty, doesn’t look like the life we used to live or the life we imagine we will return to.

That experience has a name — liminality.

Understanding liminality and its origins can provide ways to better understand the foggy, ambiguous space we currently inhabit.

Read more:
Not all doom and gloom: even in a pandemic, mixed emotions are more common than negative ones

What is liminality?

European anthropologist Arnold van Gennep pioneered the study of liminality in the early 20th century. His work on liminal spaces focused on the rites of passage we transition through in life.

Since then, the term liminality has been used to describe the paths we navigate when faced with life events. These are the times when we are in a metaphorical waiting room between one life stage and another.

I’ve been studying liminality throughout my career working with families of missing people.

These families, waiting for missing people to come home, can also experience a sense of liminality. They can be stuck between certainty and uncertainty about knowing what happened to their loved ones and learning to live without answers.

What families of missing people taught me is what helps us survive uncertainty is reflecting on our own capacity to tolerate “not knowing”.

An everyday example might be sitting an exam and waiting for the outcome. You might be unable to plan ahead, and are balancing thoughts of passing or failing, all at the same time.

Read more:
Languishing, burnout and stigma are all among the possible psychological impacts as Delta lingers in the community

What’s this to do with COVID?

During COVID, how we believe our lives “should” work ceases to exist. And we’re left with uncertainty.

We ask ourselves, others or Google “how long will the pandemic last?”, “when will lockdown end” or “when can we safely travel?”.

Liminality shows up in other ways, with the:

• lost life-stage rituals such as the sudden end of the school year, but without the formals or graduation ceremonies

• newfound uncertainty about daily tasks we once took for granted. “I just need to pop to the shops” is now an exercise in decisions and questions about masks, social distancing and what’s essential

• grandparents who haven’t cuddled their first grandchild and made that transition to a new stage of their life. They may live between saying “well at least we are healthy” while quietly lamenting those missed opportunities.

Read more:
Learning to cope with uncertainty during COVID-19

There are real health impacts

The space between the life we had and the life we potentially will be able to live can cause us distress. And no amount of Zoom trivia, Uber Eats delivery or walking around the block can satisfy us.

Liminality during COVID has also impacting our health and well-being in other ways.

People with eating disorders have noted an increase in behaviours, as a coping tool, when faced with uncertainty. Diabetes educators have noted increased isolation and disconnection from usual routines can impact how diabetes is managed.

But the liminal space can also provide breathing room to learn to live with uncertainty and overcome what scares us.

Read more:
It’s OK if you have a little cry in lockdown. You’re grieving

How to cope with uncertainty

To manage uncertainty, individually and collectively, we need to reflect on how we receive information.

A US study found one place we go to for information, for certainty in a pandemic, is science. However, given science changes as research progresses, public health messaging can also change. So this repetitive looking for certainty, in an uncertain world, makes it difficult to learn to live with COVID.

We know long periods of uncertainty can have impacts on our capacity to cope. Without the strong foundation of certainty or “knowns” in our life, the reshaping of the world, from the pandemic, can and will be unsettling.

Read more:
Life is full of uncertainty, we’ve just got to learn to live with it

I’m not suggesting abandoning science, far from it. But those not at the forefront of designing vaccines, studying epidemiological trends or treating COVID patients might like to rethink our relationship with certainty.

Learning to “go with” all the twists and turns that come with rapidly changing science and the resultant uncertainty is what we need. We might enhance our lives by accepting liminality in how we navigate each day, to learn to tolerate ambiguity.

It is not simple to accept the unknown. However in this pandemic, learning to accept public health advice (and the science that underpins it) might change is part of living through a worldwide event.

Not knowing what next week will look like and finding ways to “tolerate ambiguity” is where we’re at right now. We can help ourselves by finding daily routines within our control, small moments of the day where we connect with a person, nature, or an activity that reminds us where we are and who we are.

Read more:
Coronavirus: tiny moments of pleasure really can help us through this stressful time

We also need space to safely grieve the small and big losses COVID has created. We need to accept that, globally, we are in the liminal space between here and there.

Hopefully, “there” is when life returns to somewhat normal and when popping down to the shops means just that.

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

– ref. The shifting sands of COVID and our uncertain future has a name — liminality – https://theconversation.com/the-shifting-sands-of-covid-and-our-uncertain-future-has-a-name-liminality-166903

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Power, Senior Research Fellow, Geography and Urban Studies, Western Sydney University

New South Wales recently became the latest state to end blanket bans on pets in apartments, joining Queensland and the ACT.

Other housing regulations on pets are also shifting nationally, with Victoria last year following the ACT with reforms that prevent landlords from unreasonably restricting pets, and the Northern Territory following suit this year.

But while some laws are changing, there is still too much uncertainty across the housing system. As a result, pets are often the victims when people need to relocate and can’t take their dogs or cats with them.

With close to 2.5 million Australians now living in apartments and a third of Australian households renting their homes — and rising — there is an urgent need for consistent, equitable and pet-supportive housing policies across the country.

Read more:
Can I have a pet and be housed, too? It all depends…

Pets are ‘part of the family’

Australia is a nation of pet owners, with over 60% of households including a pet. In most of those households, pets are part of the family.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, our pets have become even more important. They have helped us adjust to the stresses of lockdown and been vital companions when we cannot get out and see friends and other family.

The benefits of pets within communities are well established. Dogs, in particular, act as ice breakers, helping neighbours to get to know one another and building a sense of community.

Dogs have also been shown to increase average rates of daily exercise across all age groups.

Despite this, pet bans in apartment buildings and the rental sector have been widespread in Australia until recently. As a result, around half of households that live with pets believe their future housing options are limited, and renters who have pets have reported feeling insecure about their housing.

Read more:
Australians love their pets, so why don’t more public places welcome them?

Are the new laws fair?

NSW’s reforms relate to strata title — a form of housing in Australia that enables owners to buy an apartment “lot” in a larger complex (or rent from owners). Until recently, many strata titles included a blanket pet ban.

Compared with other states and territories, NSW has traditionally had the most comprehensive, yet complex, regulations regarding pets and strata title. The new reforms provide insights that can help other states and territories follow suit with their own laws. But do the reforms go far enough?

Broadly speaking, the new rules are bringing strata living in line with community expectations. They give apartment owners greater power to make decisions about what they do in their own homes.

With these rights, however, come responsibilities. The NSW government has said owners corporations can still refuse an apartment owner to keep an animal if there is

repeated damage of the common property, menacing behaviour, persistent noise and odour.

Owners corporations will also have the right to set conditions about how pets are kept, such as requiring they are supervised on common property or while entering and exiting an entrance or lift.

The government says these conditions must be “reasonable”, but there are yet to be guidelines on what this might mean.

In the past, apartment by-laws in Australia have been highly variable. While most banned pets outright, others had perverse rules requiring they be carried through common areas regardless of size, or limiting the size of dogs.

The latter restriction sounds sensible, but in reality, such a rule makes it difficult for apartment residents to have larger dogs, many of whom are quiet and well-suited to apartment life.

A report prepared as part of the NSW legislation review suggests these types of requirements would be unreasonable. However, this is not specified in the law that was passed.

Read more:
Speaking with: Emma Power and Jennifer Kent about why Australian cities and homes aren’t built for pets

Renters — and their pets — are left out

One group is left out of the newly introduced NSW rules. Renters will still require landlord permission to keep pets in strata title apartments — and that can be hard to come by.

These restrictions are exacerbating an animal welfare problem. In our research, we found an unacceptably high number of animals are taken to welfare agencies across Australia every year. And we found that just over half of the households that had to give up pets were renters.

The RSPCA alone reported receiving 112,530 animal relinquishments in 2019–20.

The organisation estimates between 15% and 30% of animal surrenders nationally are from pet owners who could not keep their pets when moving into a new rental property.

A brighter, pet-inclusive future

New strata laws in NSW, Queensland and the ACT show the way toward housing policies that respect the right of households to make their own decisions about how they live – and who they live with.

Yet, these laws are only effective when they are consistent for owners and renters, and across all housing types and every state and territory.

Inconsistent policies are making it difficult for households that include pets to move from one rental home to another or from public housing into the private rental sector. They also make it difficult for households to move between housing types – for instance, from a detached house into an apartment.

Times are changing in Australia. Many people would like to keep pets, but find themselves unable to due to onerous restrictions and out-of-date laws. It is time housing regulations across the country catch up and recognise the benefits and joys that pets can bring to people’s lives.

Emma Power currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) and has previously received funding for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

Wendy Stone receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) and Homes Victoria (HV).

– ref. Australia’s housing laws are changing, but do they go far enough to prevent pet abandonment? – https://theconversation.com/australias-housing-laws-are-changing-but-do-they-go-far-enough-to-prevent-pet-abandonment-167047

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Associate Professor and Principal Research Fellow, Menzies Health Institute, Griffith University

This year my partner and my brother both left academia. They are part of a nation-wide changing of the guard at most universities in Australia and many overseas.

Over 17,000 Australian university jobs disappeared in 2020, Universities Australia estimated. It predicted more to come. By May this year an estimated one in five positions in higher education had been lost, according to an Australia Institute analysis.

Universities have lost billions in revenue during the COVID-19 pandemic. They saw no alternative to reducing the biggest expense on their books: staff salaries.

Read more:
Universities lost 6% of their revenue in 2020 — and the next 2 years are looking worse

Some academics have left with a smile on their face. They are the ones who were able to take advantage of early retirement, voluntary redundancy or voluntary separation schemes backed by enterprise agreements. Universities such as ANU, Monash, UQ, Griffith, USC, UNSW, Macquarie, Canberra and others offered generous payments to entice staff to exit, reducing their total headcount.

Other departures weren’t so voluntary. Several universities, including Melbourne, UWA, La Trobe, QUT, CQU and others, have made staff redundant in specific areas, sometimes through multiple rounds.

Read more: Australia badly needs earth science skills, but universities are cutting the supply

Read more: In a time of COVID and climate change, social sciences are vital, but they’re on university chopping blocks

To minimise disruption, professional staff who hold service or support roles have been prioritised for cuts. This is a tough sell, especially when their expertise is so valuable with the rapid shift to online learning, increases in students’ peripheral support needs, and new processes brought about by organisational restructures.

Other elephants in the room are now looming large, including unmanageable workloads, increasing administrative burdens, deteriorating working conditions, unhealthy work practices during lockdown (and arguably outside lockdown too). It is no wonder many academics are contemplating whether they still want their jobs.

Read more:
Our uni teachers were already among the world’s most stressed. COVID and student feedback have just made things worse

If you’re considering whether you are better off outside academia, the grass may not be greener on the other side. First ask yourself three key questions.

1. Is your role secure?

Alarmingly, up to three-quarters of staff in several universities are on casual or fixed-term contracts. Even before COVID-19, the higher education sector was criticised for mass casualisation of its workforce. In defence, this trend is being seen across Australia as employers increasingly look to manage overheads in pursuit of economic efficiencies.

Unfortunately, casual academics have also been the hardest hit by COVID-related impacts on universities. This includes their unrecognised (and therefore unpaid) hours of work required to set up online courses and support business continuity.

Read more:
Wage theft and casual work are built into university business models

There is hope: there are calls to transfer casual staff to fixed term or continuing positions. Anecdotally, executive staff are hearing these calls. Some universities are investigating their options to recognise the work casuals do through flexible but more secure employment arrangements.

Academics in continuing positions may feel lucky, and let’s not forget their employer-provided superannuation is nearly twice as generous as in most other industries. When considering jobs in other sectors, be aware they may not offer the generous leave provisions for academics. This includes longer-than-typical sick leave, parental leave, recreational leave and long-service leave.

2. Is the flexibility worth the workload?

Ask any academic whether they have enough time to complete the work their role requires of them; the answer will be a firm “No”. Unmanageable workloads pose a serious risk to mental health. However, “success” in an academic career typically requires individuals to defy the odds when it comes to producing high-volume, high-quality work.

Early-career academics usually feel overwhelmed by such an expectation. It can drive them to leave the industry. In response to this challenge, academic workload models now exist in many universities, despite concerns raised overseas about their value in improving working conditions.

Read more:
Early and mid-career scientists face a bleak future in the wake of the pandemic

Flexible working conditions are a great benefit of academic work. COVID-19 has resulted in other industries realising the value of supporting staff to “work from anywhere”. It has meant many academics have continued to earn while in lockdown, a privilege not afforded to all Australians.

But, as with all adults who are increasingly working from home, juggling the load along with housework and schooling from home challenges us all – arguably even more so women.

Read more:
How COVID is widening the academic gender divide

3. Can you still pursue your intellectual passions?

A deep commitment to scholarship draws people to academia. A genuine passion for a discipline, field or topic also lays the foundation for a career dedicated to pursuing new knowledge and having an impact. These rewarding aspects of academia can seem hidden at present, especially when academics need to focus their efforts on other urgent, reactive tasks.

Some academics have opportunistically pivoted into COVID-19 related research. The pandemic has sparked a new-found intellectual pursuit, backed by several COVID-targeted funding opportunities, including from the Medical Research Future Fund.

Universities undeniably benefit a society at its core, particularly their endeavours to address societal challenges and foster positive change. However, they are not without their professional criticisms.

The coming years will bring further changes to the way education is delivered to communities, but must also bring innovative improvements that support and nurture academics to succeed in their work.

Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, RACGP Foundation, VicHealth and Queensland Health.

– ref. Should I stay or should I go? Academics facing this dilemma should ask themselves 3 questions – https://theconversation.com/should-i-stay-or-should-i-go-academics-facing-this-dilemma-should-ask-themselves-3-questions-166750

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Haskell-Dowland, Associate Dean (Computing and Security), Edith Cowan University

What is my IP? It’s an odd question in most people’s minds, yet it’s one of the top ten most-searched questions on Google.

Those who know what an IP address is will already know most of these searches are coming from people who understand what they’re searching for. But for the rest of us a more relevant question might be: what is an IP address?

Across the globe there are billions of computing devices that connect to the internet. To communicate, each device needs an address, just like our homes.

Our home address is typically structured along the lines of “number, street, city, postcode, country”. And our entire postal delivery network is based on this system.

Our digital world is similar, and has an address system that allows network traffic to move around the internet. So, an IP (internet protocol) address — which also has its own implicit structure — is fundamentally a numeric address for an endpoint on the internet.

An online content delivery system

Akin to postal addresses, IP addresses are assigned to each recipient in a worldwide infrastructure. The recipient could be a single device such as a laptop, phone, tablet or even your air-conditioner controller — but could also be a network entry point to a large organisation.

Since its inception, IP was designed with simplicity and efficiency in mind. That’s why it has remained effective at handling internet traffic, starting on a network with four nodes in the late 1960s, to billions of devices today.

An IP address is a number in binary format, which means it has 32 digits (or bits) comprising 1s and 0s. The address is typically grouped as four 8-bit numbers, so each number is eight digits that are either a 1 or 0.

But we usually view IP addresses in a decimal format, wherein the value between 00000000-11111111 becomes a number between 0 and 255. So the complete IP address space ranges from 0.0.0.0 through to 255.255.255.255.

See an example below, using the IP address of one of the servers that hosts theconversation.com.

IP addresses are centrally managed by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, which delegates to one of five regional registries: Africa, America, Asia-Pacific, Latin America and Europe-West/Central Asia.

Not all addresses are available for use by anyone. Many are reserved for specific purposes. For example, three ranges of addresses (10.0.0.0—10.255.255.255, 192.168.0.0—192.168.255.255 and 172.16.0.0—172.31.255.255) are reserved for private networks such as your home.

Other large blocks of addresses are assigned to specific organisations. The US Department of Defense “owns” the “6” prefix (6.x.y.z), as well as 11 others.

IPv6: a new frontier

IPv4 (version 4) is the most widely used version of IP in the world right now. Dating back to the 1980s, it has a capacity of more than four billion unique addresses — which was considered enough back then.

But a combination of wasteful use (such as organisations being allocated larger IP address spaces than they need), and the exponential increase of users, is causing this space to run out.

For now, IPv4 is still here. But its demise has long been predicted and it will eventually no longer be fit for purpose. There are technical solutions, however.

The most useful ones are Network Address Translation (more on this later) and a newer version of IP: version 6. Although IPv6 is newer than IPv4, it isn’t really “new”. It was originally proposed some 25 years ago.

Read more:
Here’s why the internet will always have enough space for all our devices

The shift to IPv6 brings a range of benefits, even if they are basically transparent as far as consumers are concerned. The most significant change with IPv6 is the increase in the size of IP addresses from 32 bits to 128 bits.

Version 6 also boosts the total number of unique IP addresses on offer, up to some 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456. Even with the rapid rise in device usage, this address pool should last us a long time.

Making efficient use of addresses

As mentioned above, private addresses can be used for individual devices inside an organisation (or home). But private addresses can’t be used on the internet, so these devices “hide” behind one public/external IP address.

This public address is capable of supporting up to hundreds of thousands of devices for a large organisation. But a router is needed to connect the network to the internet. The router translates the many internal private addresses which are hiding behind the public IP address (or several of them).

When data is delivered to a private organisation or home network, the router forwards the traffic to a specific internal computer using that computer’s private IP address.

The process of routing many devices through a single IP address is called “nesting” networks. And the technique it uses is referred to as Network Address Translation (NAT).

IP and download speeds

You probably won’t be using IP addresses in your daily life. But in order to access a website our computers need to “look up” the IP address for that site. This all happens in the background.

Once our computer has retrieved the website’s IP address, our browser will connect to the address, request the website data from the server and load the page.

In the image above, you’ll notice four different addresses. This allows the servers delivering the content to distribute the workload between four servers. Some websites go further and use Content Delivery Networks (CDNs).

Read more:
Fastly global internet outage: why did so many sites go down — and what is a CDN, anyway?

CDNs host copies of web content in servers around the globe. This means the content requested can be delivered from a location that is geographically closer to the user trying to access it. This reduces the time it takes to load the page.

The future of IP

IPv6 may be slowly rolling out in ISP networks and large organisations, but home users and smaller companies will still be using IPv4 for the foreseeable future.

The increased number of devices connected to the internet will certainly test our home routers – with predictions of 25 billion devices expected globally within the next decade. Fortunately, even with this predicted explosion, IPv4 at home will be able to cope.

In the meantime, if you want to know your public IP address, simply search “what is my IP address” and Google (as well as several other search engines) will deliver your public IP address. If you want to check your private IP address, this will take a little more effort.

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. ‘What is my IP address?’ Explaining one of the world’s most Googled questions – https://theconversation.com/what-is-my-ip-address-explaining-one-of-the-worlds-most-googled-questions-167316