Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Dahlen, Professor of Midwifery, Associate Dean Research and HDR, Midwifery Discipline Leader, Western Sydney University

Pregnant women in Australia are increasingly having their labours induced rather than giving birth spontaneously – and some without good reason.

A large proportion of first time mothers (41.6%) were induced in 2018, when the latest national data were published, compared with 30.6% in 2010.

Our study, published today in BMJ Open, found the induction rates tripled for women who were 37 and 39 weeks pregnant in New South Wales in the 16 years to 2016. And 15% of new mothers were induced without a medical reason listed.

Induction of labour can be life-saving in some situations. But when it’s not medically indicated, it could put women and babies at unnecessary increased risk of complications.

Remind me, what is induction?

Induction of labour is where labour is started medically. This can be with hormones, by using a balloon-shaped catheter placed in the woman’s cervix to open it up, or by breaking the bag of water around the baby.

Induction is often recommended when:

• pregnancy has gone over 41 weeks to reduce the risk of stillbirth
• the mother has high blood pressure or diabetes
• there is another significant issue threatening the health of the mother or baby.

Our research found sometimes inductions are done where there is no identified medical reason. As previous research has shown, this is especially the case in private hospitals.

Sometimes women are told their baby is bigger or smaller than normal. Bigger babies may lead to more complications with the birth, and smaller babies may not be growing well. However, ultrasound can be very inaccurate, and babies thought to be small or large are often a very average size at birth.

Sometimes women are sick of being pregnant and are (understandably) uncomfortable and request an induction or are offered it by doctors.

Read more:
Birth intervention – and harm – more likely in private hospitals

Greater intervention

Our BMJ Open study tracked almost 475,000 births in NSW between 2001 and 2016.

Of these, 69,397 (15%) had an induction of labour with no medical reason given. These women were aged 20 to 35 years, had a healthy pregnancy, and didn’t smoke or have high blood pressure or diabetes.

Compared to first-time mothers who went into labour themselves, those who were induced were more likely to have:

• an instrumental birth with forceps or vacuum (28% for women who were induced vs 24% for women who gave birth spontanesously)
• a caesarean section (29% vs 14%)
• an epidural (71% vs 41%)
• an episiotomy, which is a surgical cut to the perineum, the area between the vaginal opening and the skin leading towards the anus (41% vs 30%).

In one area there were benefits for mothers who were induced: severe perineal tears were slightly lower for first time mothers (4.2% vs 4.9%) and those who had given birth previously (0.7% vs 1.2%).

Mothers having subsequent babies did not have the same high intervention rates that first time mothers did.

Another recently published study had similar findings of increased caesarean section rates for first time mothers.

Earlier inductions

We found a big rise in NSW babies being induced at what we call “early term” (37 and 38 weeks) over the 16 year period.

The number of babies born at 37 weeks’ gestation tripled, while the number born at 38 weeks doubled.

Yet those last couple of weeks of being in their mother’s uterus are important for the development of the child’s brain and other body systems such as the lungs, and the ability to control blood sugar and body temperature.

Long-term outcomes

Previous research has suggested inducing healthy pregnant mothers after 41 weeks of pregnancy reduces stillbirth and this is what the World Health Organization recommends (we previously recommended induction after 42 weeks).

While our research did not look at stillbirth, as all our mothers and babies were healthy when labour started, we found no difference in the rates of neonatal, infant and child death between the two groups.

Our study is one of the first to look at long-term outcomes associated with induction of labour.

Following induction of labour, babies had more trauma during birth, and were more likely to need resuscitation. This is probably partly due to being born early and/or having more surgical intervention.

Babies born after induction were more likely to be admitted to hospital with breathing difficulties and infections (ear, nose, throat, respiratory, sepsis) at a range of ages, up to 16 years.

We could only look at hospital admissions which occur when there are more serious health issues, so this does not represent visits to a GP or other community services.

Loss of control

Most women prefer to start labour spontaneously, finding induction more painful (hence more epidurals), and feeling they have less control during labour.

Women who are induced can’t move around as easily due to the baby needing to be continuously monitored to pick up any signs of distress. The drugs used for induction can make the contractions very strong, reducing oxygen to the baby. Most women have intravenous fluids running, further restricting movement.

This lack of control can lead to women feeling disappointed with their birth and some may even be traumatised.

A recent review of the evidence found decisions about induction were largely made by clinicians rather than women, whose expectations and preferences were often unmet.

Time for change

There is widespread variation in clinical practice guidelines about when women should be induced.

The World Health Organization has advised against induction of labour without medical indication before 41 weeks gestation.

And this month the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom released its draft guidance for consultation, also recommending women be offered induction at 41 weeks but opening the discussion on induction up for debate.

There is no doubt induction of labour can save lives if used judiciously. But it’s a major medical intervention and so should not be offered routinely before 41 weeks without discussing the risks and the potential increase in other interventions women may not anticipate.

This discussion should also include not yet knowing all the potential longer-term effects of inductions.

Most important of all, women need to be aware they can decline or accept any intervention or treatment offered or recommended by health providers and the information provided to them must be balanced, evidence based and without coercion.

Read more:
So your birth didn’t go according to plan? Don’t blame yourself

Hannah Dahlen has received funding from NHMRC and ARC in the past.

Soo Downe is currently funded for research projects by the UK NIHR (ESRC), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and WHO

Ank de Jonge and Lilian Peters 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. Too many healthy women are having their labour induced for no identified medical reason, our study shows – https://theconversation.com/too-many-healthy-women-are-having-their-labour-induced-for-no-identified-medical-reason-our-study-shows-161281

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Terry, Professor of Psychology, University of Southern Queensland

Japanese tennis star Naomi Osaka took a stand this week that called attention to the mental health of professional athletes. She refused to conduct interviews with the media after her matches at the French Open, citing concerns over her own mental well-being. And, in return, the tennis authorities fined her and threatened her with further action.

There are two sides to this story. On the one hand, this is part of the contract, it’s part of the deal. Tennis players get paid millions of dollars and in return they have to do media interviews whether they win or lose.

The issue is when you have somebody like Osaka, who is by her own admission an introverted person with high social anxiety. She essentially hates doing this stuff but knows she has to.

If there was ever a public cry for help, this is it. She’s talked about suffering bouts of depression since she won the US Open in 2018, how she wears headphones to try to cope with her social anxiety to stay in her own little bubble.

She knew that if she lost at the French Open again, there would be a forensic examination of her inability to win on clay that would just reinforce her own self-doubt. So, she decided not put herself through that.

I find it disappointing that the sport has adopted the stance it has. The authorities have basically taken a hard line with her — you’re contracted to do this, and you have to do it or risk further fines and possible disqualification.

Tennis has been here before

During the 11 years in which I worked in professional tennis, I was asked to be on a commission that looked at the potential threat to the well-being and mental health of players from turning professional at too young an age.

This was in the era when 13 and 14 years olds like Jennifer Capriati and Tracey Austin were playing in Grand Slams and struggling to cope with the pressures.

And the tennis authorities took the mental health of these players so seriously, they established the age eligibility commission with experts from all around the world to meet at Wimbledon for four days to discuss what could be done.

Read more:
Women in sports: double standards a double fault

They made very fundamental changes to the rules — dictating how many tournaments a player can enter at a certain age — and it proved to be to the enduring benefit of the players.

Osaka is asking for a very simple thing in comparison: can we just review the rules around the interviews that players are contracted to do?

Players who have just come off the court after often crushing and demoralising defeats are required within 30 minutes to front up to the media. There’s a sense of voyeurism around how it presently works; perhaps some want to see athletes crumble and break down into tears, having put them on a pedestal.

Some athletes are viewed by the public as spoiled and overpaid, but this is an unfair assessment of Osaka. She is a young, introverted, anxious person. We should by now understand that sports stars are not super human, that they have the same doubts and mental health issues as everyone else.

But given the reaction Osaka has received from some quarters, this appears not to be the case.

Dealing with depression in the spotlight

As Serena Williams has expressed today, not everyone relishes the attention of being famous:

Not everyone is the same. I’m thick. Other people are thin […] You just have to let her handle it the way she wants to.

When it comes to the media, some players just don’t think so well on their feet. They’re used to hitting a ball very well, they’re not necessarily great wordsmiths.

Some players get very frustrated being asked the same question they’ve already answered many times before. Or questions that are sufficiently intrusive about their own mental approach to the game to challenge their self-confidence.

When your natural personality type is such that you’re an introvert and prone to anxiety, it’s an additional challenge when you reach a high point very early in your career. It involves a massive learning curve.

For Osaka, there is also the greater issue of struggling with depression, which she alluded to in her statement.

The last thing you want when you’re dealing with depression is to be in the spotlight. You want to be with the people who love you unconditionally and with whom you can share your feelings and not be judged. You may need professional support.

The media don’t meet those criteria. So trying to deal with serious mental health issues in the glare of publicity is next to impossible.

All of this is heaping more and more demands on Osaka. There are considerable forces pushing her toward even greater levels of anxiety. Could you imagine the level of expectations on her at the Tokyo Olympics?

We are talking more about the mental health of young athletes more now than we used to. It’s true, sports stars are privileged elites, but the prevalence of mental health issues in sports, especially anxiety, is approximately the same as it is in society. And across their careers, between a quarter and a third will have some mental health issue, whether it becomes public or not.

We should understand that we can’t treat young vulnerable people as commodities, telling them to just follow the rules and not to express their concerns.

What Osaka wants is a dialogue around a small change to how tennis players interact with the media. The tennis authorities will likely agree to that now she has taken a stand, but sadly, it may have come at an enormous cost to her.

Read more:
Athletes won’t stay silent on politics anymore. But will leagues support their protests if it costs them real money?

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

– ref. When Naomi Osaka talks, we should listen. Athletes are not commodities, nor are they super human – https://theconversation.com/when-naomi-osaka-talks-we-should-listen-athletes-are-not-commodities-nor-are-they-super-human-161893

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tamara Agnew, Researcher, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University

The number of Australian PhD graduates reached around 10,000 a year in 2019, twice as many as in 2005. However, the number of PhDs has been exceeding the available academic positions since as early as the mid-1990s. In 2020, universities purged around 10% of their workforce due to the pandemic, and many university careers are still vulnerable.

Given these statistics, you might wonder if doing a PhD is still a good idea. Based on our discussions with PhD holders, there are still plenty of very good reasons, which is good news in 2021.

Read more: 2021 is the year Australia’s international student crisis really bites

In June 2020 we interviewed 12 PhD holders from multiple disciplines for our podcast Career Sessions to investigate the question: why do a PhD?

Why do a PhD?

The PhD is a mechanism for developing high-level research skills, learning about rigours of science or the development of theory. It sets you up with project management, problem-solving and analytical skills that are meaningful within and beyond academia.

“It just taught me all those transferable skills, project management, and also now starting businesses. I’m amazed at how close starting a business is to doing a science project.” – Dr Andy Stapleton

For our interviewees, the PhD is an opportunity to dive deeply into a topic they are passionate about. They also considered contributing new knowledge to be a privilege. The process taught them to be better thinkers, critical thinkers, and to view the world through new eyes.

“The mental fitness to work at a high level, to be able to think at a high level, to be able to write it […] The topic is less important.” – Dr Gareth Furber

The PhD is a voyage of discovery to a better understanding of how things work. It gives them a credible platform from which their voice can be heard and respected, and they can contribute to change.

“I think it’s definitely like a springboard or something. It launches you into a whole other place and it gives you […] more of a voice. It’s a political act for me. It’s about making change.” – Dr Elizabeth Newnham

The PhD is a tough and sometimes painful journey, but ultimately rewarding. The extraordinary was tempered by frustration, and the experience shaped their lives, increasing self-confidence and leading to new self-awareness.

Read more: PhD completion: an evidence-based guide for students, supervisors and universities

When asked whether they would they do it again, no-one hesitated in saying “yes”.

“You will never stretch your brain in a way that a PhD forces you to.” – Professor Kate Douglas.

The PhD is not necessarily a golden ticket to an academic career, but the experience and skills you develop will be meaningful for your future.

“What I’d done in my PhD gave me a lot broader sense than just my own personal experience. There were a lot of people that have heard me speak and a lot of that’s been informed by the PhD. So it might not be direct, but it’s informed who I am.” – Dr Susan Close

Advice from our guests

Keep both your eyes and your mind open. Pick a topic you are passionate about. Speak to people both within and outside academia to find out where this could lead. Think about whether you actually need a PhD to get to where you want to be.

You’ll have to make some judgement calls about how a PhD can fit into your life.

And find the right supervisor! They are the most important relationship you will have throughout your candidature, and they are a solid reference for what comes next. Finding the right supervisor will always enhance your PhD experience.

Read more: Ten types of PhD supervisor relationships – which is yours?

A PhD isn’t right for everyone. Ask yourself, is it the right time for you and your research interests? Are you resilient? Mental health among PhD students is poor

Our podcast guests have witnessed PhD students’ struggles. The pathway of a PhD candidate is not linear. There are many ups and downs. You will meander in many unplanned directions and often take wrong turns.

When you have completed your PhD, the hard work is really just starting. It is a gateway, but there are a lot of PhDs out there. It is what comes next that really counts.

“It’s a gateway. You’re learning how to do research. But if you really want to be successful afterwards, you need to apply that, and be diligent about that as well, and have a good work ethic.” – Dr Mark Krstic

Read more: 1 in 5 PhD students could drop out. Here are some tips for how to keep going

A PhD in any field is an achievement. Even the most niche topics will contribute knowledge to a field that is important for many people. The reward is intrinsic and only you can identify how doing a PhD will contribute to your life. It gives you a great toolkit to identify the doors that are appropriate for you.

“The first paper was the most exciting thing. […] at that time I thought of papers as like a version of immortality. My name is on something that will last forever. I think this is my legacy.” – Dr Cameron Shearer

– ref. Is it a good time to be getting a PhD? We asked those who’ve done it – https://theconversation.com/is-it-a-good-time-to-be-getting-a-phd-we-asked-those-whove-done-it-159326

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

So you think it’s the right time to dive in and buy a home.

I can’t tell you you’re wrong. I can tell you it would have been better to do it before prices began soaring, and that if they keep soaring it will get worse still.

When the year began, the typical Sydney price was $872,000. Five months later at the start of June it is $970,000.

That’s a jump of almost $100,000 in a matter of months — an awfully big price for procrastinating.

In Melbourne the typical price has climbed from $682,000 to $740,500. In Perth it has climbed from $471,000 to $521,500, and so on.

And banks are beginning to withdraw the cheapest of their still-very-cheap mortgage rates, at this stage mainly the fixed four-year rates which had been below 2%.

So why on earth wouldn’t you dive in, wind your living expenses back to the bare minimum and try and buy a home while it’s the least bit possible?

One (slight) reason to relax is mortgage rates. Despite the increases in fixed four-year rates, three-year rates have barely moved. That’s because the Reserve Bank has promised to hold the three-year bond rate constant at 0.1%.

Buying has become a bigger commitment

The three-year bond rate determines the cost to banks of their three-year fixed rate mortgages.

The Reserve Bank has said it does not expect to lift its 0.1% cash rate until “2024 at the earliest”. Movements in the cash rate determine movements in variable mortgage rates.

But there is another reason for proceeding with caution and taking stock.

Read more: Home prices are climbing alright, but not for the reason you might think

For our parents, buying a home was an exceptionally good deal, not only because homes were cheaper — until the end of the 1990s homes typically cost between two and three times household after-tax income, they now cost closer to five times after-tax income — but also because over time the loan became easier to pay off.

Housing prices as proportion of household disposable income

That isn’t because mortgage rates were coming down — at times they were going up — it’s because during our parents’ times wages (and prices) were climbing.

It meant that even if someone of our parents’ generation just squeaked through one of the bank’s tests about their ability to make payments on a mortgage, a few years and lots of inflation and several big wage rises down the track those mortgage payments shrank compared to everything else.

Once, wage rises took care of repayments

Many of our parents paid off their mortgages early.

One way to look at this is that the bank’s ability-to-repay calculators were set too harshly. They failed to account for future hefty wage rises and inflation.

It’s probably also true that they were set more generously than they might have been in an implicit acknowledgement of what the assistant governor in charge of the Reserve Bank’s economic branch Luci Ellis calls “mortgage tilt”.

The former governor, Glenn Stevens, used another term, “front-end loading”.

Mortgages were ‘front-end loaded’

When inflation was high, and as a consequence interest rates were high, wages that climbed rapidly with high inflation made the servicing burden “most acute in the very early phase of a loan, falling over time”.

On a graph (and the former governor presented a graph) the line showing payments as a portion of income tilts down over time.

In a world of lower inflation and interest rates, the tilt becomes flatter.

By now (Stevens published the graph in 1997) the line must be near horizontal.

If wage growth remains near the record lows the treasury is forecasting it will become scarcely any easier to make payments on a home loan over time.

Yet the banks are still handing out loans using the sort of formulas they used to.

If you get a loan you’ll be assessed as being able to (just) make the payments as always, but you’ll be denied the near certainty of being able to more easily meet the payments as time goes on.

Now, we retire mortgaged

This is a different from the risk you’ll also run of today’s ultra-low mortgage rates climbing (which banks do take into account in deciding whether to give you a loan).

The proportion of homeowners reaching retirement age while still paying off their mortgage has doubled in 20 years. Which might be why some banks ask for details of your super before granting you a loan. It isn’t an idle inquiry.

Might things get better? Maybe, if we can get wages moving again.

Evidence given to Tuesday’s post-budget Senate estimate hearing provides cause for hope, and despair.

Super hikes will make things worse

The budget forecasts for wage growth over the next four financial years are incredibly low — 1.5%, 2.25%, 2.5% and 2.75%

On Tuesday Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy revealed that each would have been higher — 0.4 points higher — had the government not persisted with the five scheduled annual increases in compulsory superannuation contributions of 0.5% of salary starting in July.

The treasury believes each increase will slice 0.4 percentage points from wage growth, on the basis that employers, who are legally required to pay the contributions, will have to find the money somewhere.

It’s the same conclusion reached by the government’s retirement incomes review.

It’s cause for hope because it means that when those five increases stop (in mid-2026, or sooner if the government stops them mid-track) wages might be able to grow more strongly.

It’s cause for despair because if the treasury is right, we are denying ourselves wage rises we could use in return for super we will increasingly use to pay down our mortgages.

– ref. Paying off a home loan used to be easier than it looked. It’s now harder. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/paying-off-a-home-loan-used-to-be-easier-than-it-looked-its-now-harder-heres-why-161873

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul M. Garrett, Post Doctoral Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

The COVIDSafe app was pretty popular upon its release, with around 70% of surveyed Australians saying they supported the idea. And it was a good idea at the time. Now? Not so much.

Actual uptake was never high. By May last year, only 44% of those surveyed had actually downloaded it. Plenty on social media are now saying they’ve all but abandoned COVIDSafe in favour of the QR code check-ins done via, for example, the Victorian government app or the Service NSW app.

And when Victoria’s health minister Martin Foley was asked this week whether the COVIDSafe app had been used in responding to the latest outbreak, he said:

No. Not to my knowledge, and I’m sure in such a rare event it would have been brought to my attention.

For now, it seems the benefits to Australia’s public health may be better served by other technology, such as QR code check-ins. And the public cost of maintaining the COVIDSafe app may not be in our collective interest.

Was COVIDSafe a failure?

COVIDSafe was supposed to work by using Bluetooth technology to create an anonymous registry of close contacts (other app users). If one of your close contacts self-identified as having COVID-19 through the app, government contact tracers would be alerted and notify you to get tested and isolate, before starting manual contact tracing efforts.

It’s clear COVIDSafe didn’t live up to the hype, but understanding why may be more difficult than you might think.

Australia may be a victim of its own success in keeping the outbreak at bay. Having successfully suppressed the spread of COVID-19, the benefits of using COVIDSafe may not outweigh data privacy and security concerns many people had about it.

Even in places around the world where case numbers have been relatively high, this never guaranteed that a COVIDSafe-style contact tracing app would be widely used.

For example, Germany showed similar levels of app approval to Australia, but had similarly poor uptake of their CORONA-Warn App, even when their case numbers exceeded 30,000 per day.

Read more: 70% of people surveyed said they’d download a coronavirus app. Only 44% did. Why the gap?

And a large part of why QR scanning technology works is because we are reminded to use it when we enter a shop, restaurant or school. But there are no public reminders about COVIDSafe, and no consequences to not using it (whereas some — although by no means all — venues won’t let you in unless you can show you’ve checked in via a QR code scan).

Finally, there is no incentive to use COVIDSafe without public compliance. Without widespread support, COVIDSafe fails as a technology (it only works if others are using it in your proximity) and as a socially desirable behaviour (we often act and do things so as to fit in with our peers). This “social license” is necessary for any voluntary measure to be effective, and right now COVIDSafe doesn’t have it.

QR code scan tech and Google location services

Human memories are prone to making errors, with people wrong about where they were about a third of the time. The cost of a memory error is high during a pandemic and misremembering which shopping centre you visited could have dire consequences.

This is why the QR code scan system works well. They are a reliable way to track where you have been, you’re constantly reminded to use it and you get notifications if you visited an exposure site.

There are, of course, gaps. Not all venues or places require QR codes because it is impractical, and the use of QR check-ins is not uniformly enforced.

If, like many people, you keep your phone’s location services on, that provides a back-up plan. You can easily download your location history and take a digital walk through your past week, month or year, identifying where you were down to the minute. And there are services like unforgettable.me that provide more detailed information from multiple sources, combining your location data with messages, emails, and weather forecasts.

So, does Australia still need COVIDSafe?

Well, we need some sort of help to prevent memory errors that put others at risk. Overwhelmingly, people are more concerned about the health of others than themselves. What’s important is to remind others to use these technology aids, and highlight the public benefit of using them.

For now, it seems QR code check-ins are providing more benefit than COVIDSafe.

So if you are not using COVIDSafe, rest assured you’re not the only one. But there is still technology that helps you remember where you’ve been and when. That helps keep you and your loved ones safe and well.

Read more: By persisting with COVIDSafe, Australia risks missing out on globally trusted contact tracing

– ref. Australia has all but abandoned the COVIDSafe app in favour of QR codes (so make sure you check in) – https://theconversation.com/australia-has-all-but-abandoned-the-covidsafe-app-in-favour-of-qr-codes-so-make-sure-you-check-in-161880

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Steve Turton, Adjunct Professor of Environmental Geography, CQUniversity Australia

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

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

What is Arctic amplification? Do we know what is causing this phenomenon? What effects is it having, both in the region and for the world? Is Antarctica experiencing the same thing?

Human civilisation and agriculture first emerged about 12,000 years ago in the early Holocene. Our ancestors benefited from a remarkably stable climate during this time as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere remained near 280ppm until the beginning of the industrial revolution in the 1800s.

Prior to the 1800s, the balance between incoming and outgoing energy (radiation) at the top of the atmosphere (the greenhouse effect) maintained global average temperatures for many centuries. Only small changes in solar output and occasional volcanic eruptions caused periods of relative warming and cooling. For example, the Little Ice Age was a cooler period between 1300 and 1870.

Today carbon dioxide levels are near 420ppm and all greenhouse gases are rising rapidly due to the burning of fossil fuels, industrial processes, tropical forest destruction, landfills and agriculture. The global average temperature has increased by a little more than 1℃ since 1900.

This figure seems small, but the Arctic region has warmed by about 2℃ in this time — twice as fast.

This warming differential between the poles and the tropics is known as Arctic (or polar) amplification.

It occurs whenever there is any change in the net radiation balance of Earth, and this produces a larger change in temperature near the poles than the global average. It is typically measured as the ratio of polar warming to tropical warming.

Melting ice

So how is climate change and associated global heating driving Arctic amplification? This amplification is primarily caused by melting ice — a process that is increasing in the Arctic at a rate of 13% per decade.

Ice is more reflective and less absorbent of sunlight than land or the surface of an ocean. When ice melts, it typically reveals darker areas of land or sea, and this results in increased sunlight absorption and associated warming.

Polar amplification is much stronger in the Arctic than in Antarctica. This difference is because the Arctic is an ocean covered by sea ice, while Antarctica is an elevated continent covered in more permanent ice and snow.

In fact, the Antarctic continent has not warmed in the past seven decades, despite a steady increase in the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.

The exception is the Antarctic peninsula, which juts out further north into the Southern Ocean and has been warming faster than any other terrestrial environment in the southern hemisphere during the latter half of the 20th century.

Read more: If warming exceeds 2°C, Antarctica’s melting ice sheets could raise seas 20 metres in coming centuries

Satellite data also show that between 2002 and 2020, Antarctica lost an average of 149 billion metric tonnes of ice per year, partly because the oceans around the continent are warming.

Effects of Arctic warming

One of the most significant effects of Arctic amplification is the weakening of west-to-east jet streams in the northern hemisphere. As the Arctic warms at a faster rate than the tropics, this results in a weaker atmospheric pressure gradient and hence lower wind speeds.

The links between Arctic amplification, slowing (or meandering) jet streams, blocking highs and extreme weather events in the mid to high latitudes of the northern hemisphere is controversial. One view is that the link is strong and the major driver behind recent severe summer heat waves and winter cold waves. But more recent research questions the validity of these links for the mid latitudes.

Here we look at the larger body of evidence that supports the relationship between Arctic warming and slowing jet streams.

Read more: Siberia heatwave: why the Arctic is warming so much faster than the rest of the world

The Arctic is warming much faster than the rest of the planet and the loss of reflective ice contributes somewhere between 30-50% of Earth’s global heating. This rapid loss of ice affects the polar jet stream, a concentrated pathway of air in the upper atmosphere which drives the weather patterns across the northern hemisphere.

The weakened jet stream meanders and brings the polar vortex further south, which results in extreme weather events in North America, Europe and Asia.

So what are the future prospects for Australia and Aotearoa/New Zealand? Global climate models project stronger surface warming in the Arctic than the Antarctic under climate change. Given that temperatures above the Antarctic continent have remained stable for over 70 years despite the rise in greenhouse gases, we might expect little change for our region — just normal climatic variability due to other climate drivers like the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, the Southern Annular Mode, and the Indian Ocean Dipole.

But as the tropics continue to warm and expand, we may expect an increase in the pressure gradient between the tropics and Antarctica that will lead to increased circumpolar westerlies winds.

The recent intensification and more poleward location of the southern hemisphere belt of westerly winds have been linked to continental droughts and wildfires, including those in Australia. We can also expect strengthening westerlies to affect mixing in the Southern Ocean, which could reduce its capacity to take up carbon dioxide and enhance the ocean-driven melting of ice shelves fringing the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.

These changes in turn have far-reaching implications for global ocean circulation and sea level rise.

– ref. Climate explained: why is the Arctic warming faster than other parts of the world? – https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-why-is-the-arctic-warming-faster-than-other-parts-of-the-world-160614

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McInerney, Research scientist, CSIRO

Climate change will make Australia hotter and drier in future, and we’re starting to see the dangerous consequences of this in our rivers, lakes and streams.

As waters warm and flow patterns alter, the animals who call these waterways home may struggle to survive. Many are ectotherms — meaning that unlike humans, these animals can’t regulate their body temperature, putting them at the mercy of ambient water temperature. And for animals that have evolved in cold water, such as some native crayfish, increased water temperatures can be lethal.

Our new research paper calls for a (possibly controversial) solution: take advantage of willow trees growing along the banks. They can create cool, shady refuges in these warming waterways.

Willows are not native and, in many places, are an invasive weed. But for temperature-sensitive animals, their dense, leafy canopy may make willows the lesser of two evils in a warming climate.

The lesser evil

Willows belong to the genus Salix, and are natives of the northern hemisphere. They were introduced to Australia in the 19th century first as ornamental plants, then later planted to help stabilise river banks to combat erosion.

Today, they’re considered noxious weeds in Australia, South America and southern Africa, are highly invasive and have spread along waterways throughout temperate Australia.

The harms willows inflict on aquatic ecosystems are well documented. For example, they alter energy dynamics in streams by dropping all their leaves into the water at once, which can reduce water quality and the amount of food for animals.

Dense shading in summer reduces the amount of algae (an important food source) growing on surfaces in streams. Willows also out-shade and use more water than native plants, stopping them from re-colonising.

These reasons are why governments invest in removing willows from our waterways. But what if willows offer some benefits to their invaded ecosystems, too?

Freshwater wildlife in peril

As far as we know, the presence of willows hasn’t caused any extinctions. But in coming years, we can expect to see more animal extinctions due to temperature increases from climate change.

To deal with climate change, temperature-sensitive animals are left with two options: either migrate upstream to cooler water or adapt to warmer water. Both alternatives are problematic.

Some animals, such as two-spined blackfish, aren’t well suited to (or potentially even capable of) long distance travel to cooler water. And many of our rivers have barriers, such as dams, weirs and waterfalls, making migration impossible.

If animals stay put, Australia’s climate is now warming at such a fast rate, some may struggle to adapt quickly enough. The critically endangered barred galaxias is another cool water adapted fish unlikely to successfully migrate to other habitats to escape warming climate, but remains at risk if it doesn’t.

Read more: Attack of the alien invaders: pest plants and animals leave a frightening $1.7 trillion bill

To give wildlife a fighting chance at survival, we need to consider a patchwork of new and alternative approaches to stream management, such as creating “climatic refugia”. These are places where local climate is cooler than the regional climate, providing areas animals can escape to when temperatures get extreme.

Trees and shrubs growing along the edges of streams (riparian vegetation) do this when they shade the water surface, helping to mediate water temperature.

This could make willows a useful tool for natural resource managers as we see increases in extreme heat days.

Happy Valley Creek

For our research paper, we use a case study from north-east Victoria to illustrate how dense willow invasions can reduce stream water temperature and create climatic refugia.

Read more: Why there’s a lot more to love about jacarandas than just their purple flowers

We logged water temperature in Happy Valley Creek at three locations: at an upstream native forested site, a midstream site with no vegetation, and a downstream site that was heavily shaded by invasive willows.

We expected water temperature to increase with distance downstream as it moves from cool upland areas to warmer lowland areas. Instead, we found the water temperature at the willow shaded site could be a few degrees cooler than the midstream site, particularly during periods of extreme heat.

Many streams are fringed by native vegetation that provide comparable heat protection to animals as willows, and we should protect these from willow invasion.

But in locations where willow removal activities are unlikely to be successful in the long-term, it may be better to prioritise willow removal elsewhere. For example, if willows can’t be removed from upstream catchments, they’ll continue to recolonise downstream. And if there’s no funding for follow-up activities, willows may re-establish following removal.

Where willows are rampant, they may already be protecting populations of heat-sensitive animals from temperature extremes. Removing them could have unintended consequences for such animals.

What’s the end goal?

It’s important to clarify we’re not suggesting willow removal activities should stop to prevent further widespread invasion. But as our climate changes, we need to objectively consider what ecosystems will be sustainable in the future, and prioritise our restoration efforts accordingly.

We need to decide what state we’re trying to manage our ecosystems to — the likely endpoint.

Read more: Pulling out weeds is the best thing you can do to help nature recover from the fires

Given current river regulations, land-use and changing climate, restoring all ecosystems to a pre–European state may not be sustainable or even possible at this point.

For willow-dominated, degraded catchments, there may be more value in promoting willows as refuges from the temperature extremes of climate change, rather than pursuing an ideal that may not even be possible.

– ref. Willow trees are notorious pests. But for freshwater animals, they could be unlikely climate heroes – https://theconversation.com/willow-trees-are-notorious-pests-but-for-freshwater-animals-they-could-be-unlikely-climate-heroes-152609

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Research Associate, Cultural Studies, The University of Melbourne

Last week, reports emerged that North Korea was banning skinny jeans over concerns regarding their symbolic relationship with the “exotic and decadent lifestyle” of capitalism. The crackdown on “anti-socialist behaviour” also reportedly bans mullet, spiky or dyed hairstyles and piercings.

Although an official statement on the ban hasn’t been identified, policing of personal style in North Korea is not new.

Political leaders have long been aware of the representational power of fashion. In her book Fashion and Politics, fashion scholar Djurdja Bartlett notes that “as early as the 1920s, the Bolsheviks frowned on western fashion and its Art Deco opulence”.

The role of dress in promoting allegiance to the nation state can come in the form of a uniform or via the rejection of garments seen to symbolise religious, ideological or political beliefs.

Whether banning Western fashion in the Soviet Union or the burqa in France, political control over what we wear has always been controversial. But what is it about skinny jeans that apparently inspires denunciation by North Korea today?

The skinny on skinny jeans

Slim or tight-fitted trousers are a direct descendant of tight men’s breeches worn in the 1800s.

Their denim offspring emerged in the 1950s as part of the counter-cultural movement. Most often worn in a dark wash with a cuffed hem, the jeans, favoured by the likes of Elvis Presley and Marlon Brando, were a gender-neutral representation of alternative lifestyles in the wake of the second world war.

In the 1960s, jeans in the “drainpipe” style — black and ultra-skinny — became synonymous with rock and roll.

Through the 1970s and 80s, the UK embraced the punk look – pioneered by designer Vivienne Westwood and the Sex Pistols, which saw tight jeans ripped, stained and safety pinned.

The 1990s brought baggy styles for rave dancing, bootlegs and retro flares. But skinny jeans didn’t stay gone for long. The 2000s saw them taken up, again by subcultures — emos and goths, who wore them super tight and low on the hips.

By the 2010s they seemed destined to stick around after being championed by Kate Moss, the Duchess of Cambridge and Michelle Obama.

Death by TikTok

Rumblings of change in the denim market were first heard in the late 2010s, when fashion journalists including Sarah Spellings claimed we could begin counting down to the return of low-rise jeans. The rise of 90s nostalgia fashion, popularised by models such as Bella Hadid, bought a return of wide-legged fits and exposed midriffs.

By 2019, skinny jeans were reportedly being usurped by so-called “mom jeans”. And that was before 2020 forced everyone indoors, where comfort trumped more fitted styles.

Gen Z “Zoomer” TikTokers finally rang the death knell for skinny jeans — adding a beat and some dance moves, of course. In early 2021, TikTok videos mocking Millennials for their side parted hair and tight denim-clad legs went viral.

So, if they’re no longer cool, why might North Korea want to ban them?

Read more: Dressed for success – as workers return to the office, men might finally shed their suits and ties

Trouser power

What we wear on our legs has long been a subject of particular political significance, especially in terms of class and gender differentiation.

During the French Revolution, full length trousers became synonymous with the ideals of liberté, égalité, fraternité — but only for men. Women remained bound by the Ancien Régime, excluded from wearing trousers and from the social freedoms they allowed.

It followed that in the fight for suffrage, trousers became a symbolic garment in the emancipation of women as political subjects.

In the 1960s, meanwhile, blue denim became a symbol of the US civil rights movement and in 1978, Levi Strauss & Co began large-scale shipments of jeans behind the Iron Curtain.

Analysis today shows specific denim brands are aligned with political preferences: American Democrat voters tend to wear Levis, while Republican voters are more likely to prefer Wrangler jeans. Brands may also seek to align themselves with consumers by voicing support for specific issues.

Most recently, a chief minister within India’s Bharatiya Janata Party government faced condemnation after he tweeted that women were immoral for wearing jeans that exposed their knees.

Across India women took to social media to voice their exasperation, posting photographs of themselves wearing torn denim with the hashtag #RippedJeans.

Read more: How women in India reclaimed the protest power of ripped jeans

Jeans are still provoking the powerful. Still, if the reports from North Korea are correct, railing against this symbolic garment may have given those willing to rebel a clearer sense of what to wear.

– ref. Denim jeans have long been political: now skinny jeans are in the firing line – https://theconversation.com/denim-jeans-have-long-been-political-now-skinny-jeans-are-in-the-firing-line-161665

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nick Kelly, Senior Lecturer in Interaction Design, Queensland University of Technology

Most of us benefit every day from the fact computers can now “understand” us when we speak or write. Yet few of us have paused to consider the potentially damaging ways this same technology may be shaping our culture.

Human language is full of ambiguity and double meanings. For instance, consider the potential meaning of this phrase: “I went to project class”. Without context, it’s an ambiguous statement.

Computer scientists and linguists have spent decades trying to program computers to understand the nuances of human language. And in certain ways, computers are fast approaching humans’ ability to understand and generate text.

Through the very act of suggesting some words and not others, the predictive text and auto-complete features in our devices change the way we think. Through these subtle, everyday interactions, machine learning is influencing our culture. Are we ready for that?

I created an online interactive work for the Kyogle Writers Festival that lets you explore this technology in a harmless way.

What is natural language processing?

The field concerned with using everyday language to interact with computers is called “natural language processing”. We encounter it when we speak to Siri or Alexa, or type words into a browser and have the rest of our sentence predicted.

This is only possible due to vast improvements in natural language processing over the past decade — achieved through sophisticated machine-learning algorithms trained on enormous datasets (usually billions of words).

Last year, this technology’s potential became clear when the Generative Pre-trained Transformer 3 (GPT-3) was released. It set a new benchmark in what computers can do with language.

Read more: Can robots write? Machine learning produces dazzling results, but some assembly is still required

GPT-3 can take just a few words or phrases and generate whole documents of “meaningful” language, by capturing the contextual relationships between words in a sentence. It does this by building on machine-learning models, including two widely adopted models called “BERT” and “ELMO”.

How is this technology affecting culture?

However, there is a key issue with any language model produced by machine learning: they generally learn everything they know from data sources such as Wikipedia and Twitter.

In effect, machine learning takes data from the past, “learns” from it to produce a model, and uses this model to carry out tasks in the future. But during this process, a model may absorb a distorted or problematic worldview from its training data.

If the training data was biased, this bias will be codified and reinforced in the model, rather than being challenged. For example, a model may end up associating certain identity groups or races with positive words, and others with negative words.

This can lead to serious exclusion and inequality, as detailed in the recent documentary Coded Bias.

Everything you ever said

The interactive work I created allows people to playfully gain an intuition for how computers understand language. It is called Everything You Ever Said (EYES), in reference to the way natural language models draw on all kinds of data sources for training.

EYES allows you to take any piece of writing (less than 2000 characters) and “subtract” one concept and “add” another. In other words, it lets you use a computer to change the meaning of a piece of text. You can try it yourself.

Here’s an example of the Australian national anthem subjected to some automated revision. I subtracted the concept of “empire” and added the concept of “koala” to get:

Australians all let us grieve
For we are one and free
We’ve golden biota and abundance for poorness
Our koala is girt by porpoise
Our wildlife abounds in primate’s koalas
Of naturalness shiftless and rare
In primate’s wombat, let every koala
Wombat koala fair
In joyous aspergillosis then let us vocalise,
Wombat koala fair

What is going on here? At its core, EYES uses a model of the English language developed by researchers from Stanford University in the United States, called GLoVe (Global Vectors for Word Representation).

EYES uses GLoVe to change the text by making a series of analogies, wherein an “analogy” is a comparison between one thing and another. For instance, if I ask you: “man is to king what woman is to?” — you might answer “queen”. That’s an easy one.

But I could ask a more challenging question such as: “rose is to thorn what love is to?” There are several possible answers here, depending on your interpretation of the language. When asked about these analogies, GLoVe will produce the responses “queen” and “betrayal”, respectively.

GLoVe has every word in the English language represented as a vector in a multi-dimensional space (of around 300 dimensions). A such, it can perform calculations with words, adding and subtracting words as if they were numbers.

Cyborg culture is already here

The trouble with machine learning is that the associations being made between certain concepts remain hidden inside a black box; we can’t see or touch them. Approaches to making machine learning models more transparent are a focus of much current research.

The purpose of EYES is to let you experiment with these associations in a more playful way, so you can develop an intuition for how machine learning models view the world.

Some analogies will surprise you with their poignancy, while others may well leave you bewildered. Yet, every association was inferred from a huge corpus of a few billion words written by ordinary people.

Models such as GPT-3, which have learned from similar data sources, are already influencing how we use language. Having entire news feeds populated by machine-written text is no longer the stuff of science fiction. This technology is already here.

And the cultural footprint of machine-learning models seems to only be growing.

Read more: GPT-3: new AI can write like a human but don’t mistake that for thinking – neuroscientist

– ref. Machine learning is changing our culture. Try this text-altering tool to see how – https://theconversation.com/machine-learning-is-changing-our-culture-try-this-text-altering-tool-to-see-how-159430

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Wark, Conjoint Professor, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle

While the focus has been largely on vaccines, you might have also heard Pfizer is trialling a pill to treat COVID-19.

It almost sounds too good to be true. Indeed, the results are very preliminary — but it’s a promising approach.

Where most antiviral agents we’ve tried to treat COVID-19 target the inflammatory and immune response resulting from infection, Pfizer’s pill directly targets SARS-CoV-2 — the virus itself.

Mounting our defence against the virus

Much of the illness associated with COVID-19 is due to the intense inflammatory and immune response that can occur with an infection. The most successful treatments so far have targeted this overzealous immune response.

Taken early in the disease, the inhaled corticosteroid budesonide has been shown to reduce the development of more severe disease.

In people hospitalised with COVID-19 requiring oxygen, the oral corticosteroid dexamethasone reduces the likelihood of death.

In the most severe cases — COVID patients admitted to ICU — the anti-inflammatory tocilizumab administered intravenously gives a person a better chance of survival.

But these treatments don’t target SARS-CoV-2 itself; just the consequences of infection. Directly targeting the virus has proven to be more difficult.

Read more: Have Australian researchers developed an effective COVID-19 treatment? Potentially, but we need to wait for human trials

Targeting SARS-CoV-2

A virus like SARS-CoV-2 must enter a host cell to reproduce. It does this using its spike protein (a protein on the virus’ surface) to attach to the cell, and then it uses the cell’s own proteins to gain entry.

Once inside the cell, SARS-CoV-2 removes its outer coat and releases its viral RNA (ribonucleic acid, a type of genetic material). This acts as a template, allowing the virus to replicate, and then infect other cells. At any point of this life cycle the virus could be vulnerable to an intervention.

SARS-CoV-2 carries an enzyme, 3C-like protease (3CLpro), which plays a crucial role in the replication process. This protease is almost identical to the protease used by the SARS-CoV-1 (SARS) virus, and similar to the protease used by the Middle Eastern Respiratory Virus (MERS).

So a drug that could effectively target 3CLpro and prevent virus replication could be beneficial against multiple known coronaviruses, and possibly any that emerge in the future.

Protease inhibitors have been successfully used to treat other viral infections, especially chronic infections such as HIV and hepatitis C.

They were put forward early in the pandemic as a possible treatment for COVID-19. But the HIV drug lopinavir-ritonavir was shown in two clinical trials to be ineffective, with drug levels probably too low to work against SARS-CoV-2. While a higher dose might be effective, it would also likely produce more side effects.

Scientists also proposed a repurposed antiviral drug, remdesevir, originally developed to treat Ebola. Remdesivir delays the ability of the virus to replicate its RNA.

Initial case reports appeared promising and saw the US Food and Drugs Administration approve the drug for emergency use. But the results of randomised controlled trials in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19 were disappointing.

Although there was a reduction in duration of illness for patients who survived, it didn’t significantly reduce a person’s chance of dying.

Read more: Ivermectin is still not a miracle cure for COVID-19, despite what you may have read

Of course, neither of these agents were designed specifically to target SARS-CoV-2. But in 2020, Pfizer/BioNtech identified a small molecule — PF-00835231 — that blocks the SARS-CoV-2 3CLpro protease. It was originally designed against SARS-CoV-1, but the enzyme in the two viruses is almost identical.

PF-00835231, both alone and in conjunction with remdesevir, appears to reduce the replication of a range of coronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2 in cells in the lab. It also reduced viral replication in a number of animal models, with no adverse safety signals. But it’s important to note this research hasn’t yet been peer reviewed.

What now?

Pfizer/BioNtech are taking two drugs to clinical trials for COVID-19: PF-07304814, an intravenous injection for use in patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19 and PF-07321332, an oral agent, or pill, that could potentially be used earlier in the disease. Both are formulations of a 3CLpro inhibitor.

These phase 1 trials, which began in March, represent the earliest stage of drug development. These trials select healthy volunteers and use different doses of the drugs to establish their safety. They also look at whether the drugs elicit sufficient responses in the body to indicate they could be effective against SARS-CoV-2.

The next step would be phase 2 or 3 trials to see if they improve outcomes in COVID-19. Usually this process takes years, but as the pandemic continues to rage globally, Pfizer says it will do this in a matter of months, if phase 1 trials are successful.

Read more: How the Pfizer COVID vaccine gets from the freezer into your arm

The application of antiviral agents in acute COVID-19 has been difficult and unrewarding. Though results are at this stage preliminary, these agents by Pfizer/BioNtech are promising. They could be used early in disease, especially in people poorly protected by vaccination or in those who haven’t been vaccinated.

They could also be used as a means of prevention, to contain outbreaks in exposed people. They should be effective against all the SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, as well as against other known and possibly emergent coronaviruses.

The Pfizer CEO’s recent suggestion the pill could be available by the end of the year is probably a long shot. But the pandemic has shown us what’s possible in the realm of swift scientific advances, and we’ll watch this space with interest.

– ref. Could a simple pill beat COVID-19? Pfizer is giving it a go – https://theconversation.com/could-a-simple-pill-beat-covid-19-pfizer-is-giving-it-a-go-160988

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vanessa Adams, Senior Lecturer, Discipline of Geography and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania

Two years ago, emergency workers rescued a hiker in Cradle Mountain-Lake St Clair National Park. He had spent nine days in his tent in freezing weather with dangerous blizzards, trying to keep dry from infiltrating snow and rain.

Because he was an experienced and prepared hiker, he had the skills and gear needed to keep himself safe and relatively warm until rescuers could find him. His preparedness ultimately led to his survival.

Such experiences, however, don’t always have happy endings.

Of the hikers, trekkers and bushwalkers who need rescuing from Australia’s harsh wilderness each year, a small proportion never make it back alive. And as we head into winter, the likelihood of accidents increases, especially in places like Tasmania.

Our recent research on hikers in Tasmania shows just how important preparedness is to prevent injuries and deaths. So let’s look at what it means to be prepared for a hike and who’s most at risk.

Slips, drops, hypothermia

Tasmania is quickly becoming known worldwide as a hiking destination, with Cradle Mountain National Park the crown jewel, from short two-hour walks to the multi-day Overland track.

In 2017-18, an estimated 280,000 people visited Cradle Mountain, and 9,000 hikers completed the Overland track between October and May.

But in winter, Tasmania’s weather conditions can change rapidly, particularly in alpine areas that draw people in with the promise of snow-capped mountains. One hour it can be clear and sunny. The next, bad weather can worsen into a blizzard.

The island’s sometimes severe weather means risks are amplified. These can include getting lost, running out of food or water while sheltering, and having an accident such as falling from steep and slippery terrain.

Read more: Photos from the field: capturing the grandeur and heartbreak of Tasmania’s giant trees

Across Tasmania, bushwalker rescues fluctuate substantially by year, from lows of six (2018) to highs of 44 (2019).

Of the recent hiker deaths in Tasmania, some have been due to falls from great heights, while others are attributed to a lack of preparation and appropriate gear causing hypothermia.

For park management agencies, rescuing injured hikers or recovering the deceased can be dangerous and expensive. Estimated rescue costs range from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars per incident.

At times, bad weather conditions means rescue agencies can’t access sites. They have to make the challenging decision not to respond to rescue calls, to protect the lives of volunteers and rescue staff.

What is preparedness and why does it matter?

Preparedness is about providing yourself with the necessary resources to safely tackle unexpected issues that may arise.

How prepared you are can be the difference between severe injury or death, and survival. We define preparedness as the process of:

• packing essential clothing and equipment

• conducting pre-planning and familiarisation with a destination (what are the weather conditions, or trail conditions like?)

• self-assessment of capabilities (what’s your fitness level, and what are your wilderness knowledge and skills like?)

• notifying others about your travel intentions.

Some hikers are better prepared than others

Our research surveyed overnight hikers in Tasmania. And we found a lack of preparedness is related to people’s backgrounds (such as age and sex) and behavioural traits (such as risk taking).

Young men, for example, appear more likely to take risks, overestimating their skills and experience. Some tourist groups, who are unfamiliar with local weather conditions and landscapes, are also at higher risk.

In many accidents, inadequate clothing or footwear is a culprit, such as lack of woollen base layers, hats and gloves, and waterproof outer layers. This can result in hypothermia, frostbite, falls and other major problems.

Read more: We accidentally found a whole new genus of Australian daisies. You’ve probably seen them on your bushwalks

We were surprised by what many hikers didn’t carry, including maps, compasses, whistles, and first aid kits — essential items for all hikers. Some told us they didn’t own that equipment, others thought it was unnecessary.

People in a tour group were less likely to carry food, a first aid kit and safety items, believing their guide would carry it for them. But if group members become separated, the consequences can be fatal.

Our research also suggests hikers out for day trips or shorter walks, appear to feel there’s less risk and seem less prepared than if they were doing a longer trip.

They’re unlikely to take an emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB) or personal locator beacon (PLB), which can send a distress signal and alert rescuers to your location in places with no phone reception. They may also wear sport shoes instead of hiking boots, and some don’t carry essential items for winter walking, such as a waterproof jacket or tent.

Being prepared with the right gear and experience is important regardless of how long you plan on being out. The reality is weather conditions can change suddenly, even if you’re not out for very long.

So how can you be better prepared?

In response to past hiker deaths, coronial inquests have identified better education, improved visitor management and safety measures as possible solutions.

But we’ve also identified a simple, but likely effective solution that could supplement a continued lack of appropriate gear: the use of a “gear library”.

A gear library would be set up at visitor centres where you’re usually expected to start hikes and would allow people to hire speciality gear items, such as personal safety devices (EPIRB, PLB). These can usually cost more than $200, but would be substantially cheaper in a gear library, ensuring rescue workers are notified and can find you after an accident.

Read more: Stick to the path, and stay alive in national parks this summer

It’s also important to keep a checklist to pack essential items. Some key items include:

• adequate supply of food and water, including contingency items for unexpected additional days hiking because of bad weather

• warm clothes, such as a waterproof jacket with hood and storm front, waterproof over-trousers, sturdy walking boots and warm clothing (a fleece or woollen jumper, thermal base layers, hat and gloves)

• appropriate footwear, such as hiking boots

• a tent for overnight hikes

• a first aid kit

• a torch.

There are plenty of resources for people seeking information about how best to prepare for their bushwalk, including national park visitor centres, Westpac Rescue Tas and the Parks and Wildlife Tasmania website. These websites provide essential bushwalking guides on what to pack and how to prepare for bushwalking.

Anyone can safely enjoy a good day out in the Tasmanian wilderness — it’s beautiful, but can also be deadly. You can never be too prepared.

Read more: Good signage in national parks can save lives. Here’s how to do it right

– ref. If you’re planning to hike this winter, invest in the right gear. Being unprepared for Australia’s harsh terrain can be deadly – https://theconversation.com/if-youre-planning-to-hike-this-winter-invest-in-the-right-gear-being-unprepared-for-australias-harsh-terrain-can-be-deadly-161509

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Kang, Adjunct associate professor, University of Technology Sydney

Young people have a lot of questions about sex. I answered hundreds of them over 23 years for the Dolly Doctor magazine column, until the magazine closed at the end of 2016.

Many questions from girls suggested they needed information about desire and experiences of sexual pleasure. Those discovering sexual arousal and masturbation often seemed ecstatic (pun intended), although, even from a young age, these desires were often seen as problems and silenced.

Somewhere between the delights of sexual self-discovery during early puberty and becoming sexually involved with a partner later in adolescence, I had a sense young women fell into a chasm of sexual repression, objectification and instruments for male pleasure.

Read more: ‘She’s a slut’: sexual bullying among girls contributes to cultural misogyny. We need to take it seriously

Is it ‘normal’ to like sex?

In my analysis of Dolly Doctor questions, I found girls asking about masturbation regularly made up 5-10% of questions about sexuality. For instance, here is a question from the 1990s:

I have a problem; I masturbate ALL the time! Even when I’m in class I ask the teacher if I can go to the toilet and when I get there I finger myself. Can you tell me if there is something wrong with me and how can I stop!?

The concerns expressed about whether this is normal could, of course, signify typical developmental preoccupations with peer comparison: asking whether an observation or experience is “normal” was common regardless of the topic.

Read more: ‘Is it normal for girls to masturbate?’

But concerns could also emerge because adolescent girls received no information about female sexual desire, so their curiosity was mixed with alarm about the intensity and power of their urges.

Here is another question from the 2000s:

I always get horny! Everytime I see something about sex I get horny! But it feels good! Is this common or am I just not normal?

My view is that together with a lack of relevant information, these girls had absorbed messages of gendered shaming. Here is a question from from the 2010s:

Ok I need some help, I started getting interested in watching pornography and I used to touch myself while I watch it I knew it was wrong but my body craved it and it was pleasure like I was a magical feeling I cant explain it but I cant talk to my family and I cant talk to my friends. is this normal?? Dolly doctor please help me.

The shaming of girls’ and young women’s sexuality has been found in studies about diverse topics, such as sexting, sexually transmitted infections, seeking contraception and sexual violence.

Philosopher, Bonnie Mann, writes gendered shame may be “the mechanism … […] subordination of women across class and race (occurs)”.

Early adolescence marks a critical juncture in young people’s lives, powered by the intensity of puberty which marks the transition from childhood to adolescent sexuality.

Expressions of partnered interactions (such as kissing, sexting, oral sex and intercourse) in adolescence are similar to the way sex is experienced in adulthood and throughout life for most people.

This makes sex education that empowers young women with the appropriate knowledge about pleasure all the more important.

Is it normal to feel nothing?

The questions to Dolly Doctor from young women about sex with a partner were fewer in number — most Dolly readers were quite young adolescents.

A small proportion of these questions were concerned with lack of pleasure or orgasm. Such as this one from the 1990s

Dear Melissa, I am 17 […] and […] been sexually active since last year and every time I have had sex with my boyfriend I have never had an orgasm and I feel like he is getting all the fun and I get none.

Here is another one from the 2000s

i have had sex with my boyfriend a number of times but it seems to give me no pleasure. All my friends talk about how good it feels and i dont know this great feeling […] i have talked to my boyfriend and he feels it why dont i?

And another from the 2010s

[…] recently with my boyfriend we went to seconds but when he fingered me I didn’t feel anything at all. I have tried doing i myself but I dont feel any pleasure. Is there something wrong with me? What can I do to fix it? Thanks

Other questions included experiences of painful intercourse (with a male) or fear of pain despite a wish to begin a sexual relationship.

How can I better please him?

Questions about oral sex suggested adolescent women were keen to please. For instance:

I am wanting to give my boyfriend oral sex. I was wondering how to do it and for some techniques that he would enjoy and so my boyfriend is pleased.

and

How do you give a better blow job? Please help me.

Questions about receiving oral sex (by the young women) were very few in number and were often about girl-on-girl sex that was pleasurable, “She […] gave me oral sex, I liked it and I didn’t stop her”.

There is more analysis that could be done on Dolly Doctor questions that speak to constructions of female sexuality. But the analysis so far has provided me with unique insights about how young women respond to messages about their roles in heterosexual encounters.

Teachers must be supported to talk about sex

Good school-based sex education means providing teachers with the training and support they need without fear of backlash. In the first Australian study among health teachers about sex education, less than half had received sex education training during their undergraduate degree and 15.5% had received no training.

The topic areas where teachers felt they needed most assistance related to discussions about behaviour, emotions and feelings. And yet, teaching consent in sexual encounters needs to include truthful discussion on these exact topics.

Read more: Sexuality education can counter what kids learn from porn, but some teachers fear backlash when tackling ‘risky’ topics

Parents, teachers and young people need to find the right language and create safe spaces to allow teaching and learning about sexual consent, which by definition means talking about sex and pleasure in its various forms. This includes the normality, right and importance of female pleasure.

– ref. ‘I always get horny … am I not normal?’: teenage girls often feel shame about pleasure. Sex education needs to address this – https://theconversation.com/i-always-get-horny-am-i-not-normal-teenage-girls-often-feel-shame-about-pleasure-sex-education-needs-to-address-this-159543

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Siminski, Professor of Economics, University of Technology Sydney

A lot of us are pessimistic about our children’s future. According to the most recent data from the Pew Global Attitudes Survey (in 2019), just 29% of Australians believe today’s children will be better off financially than their parents.

Such pessimism is common in many developed nations. In Japan, just 13% believe children will be better off, in France 16%, in Britain 22%. Australians are still marginally less optimistic than Canadians (30%) and Americans (31%), and significantly less optimistic than Swedes (40%) and Germans (48%).

Our research shows things aren’t as bad as many fear, with 68% of millennials (those born between 1981 and 1987 for our research) earning more income than their parents did at the same age. This is close to the highest percentage among countries for which estimates are available. The experience of gen-Xers (born from the early 1960s to late 1970s) has been similar.

But it’s not all good news. That percentage is lower than the upward mobility enjoyed by baby boomers (born from 1946 to the early 1960s). For those born around 1950, 84% earned more at age 30-34 than their own parents did at the same age.

There are two prime reasons for this decline in absolute mobility since the 1980s. Lower economic growth leading to average incomes growing more slowly; and growing income inequality.

How we did our research

The share of people whose income is higher than their parents at the same age is known as “absolute income mobility”. It is an appealing indicator of economic progress because it captures aspirations for our children. It reflects economic growth, inequality and opportunity.

Estimating absolute mobility, though, is quite hard. The data we need to measure it directly – information about what people earned at a particular age compared to their own parents – does not exist for Australia.

To do this exercise, therefore, we’ve applied new statistical methods that have been developed in recent years to estimate absolute mobility without linked parent-child data. These methods, using separate generational data on income distribution, have been verified in research published in 2018 and in 2020.

Our own approach closely follows leading international studies. We used sources of data including the Melbourne Institute’s Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey, data from Australian Bureau of Statistics surveys and income tax records.

What our research shows

The main results are below. Of people born in 1950, 84% had higher household incomes than their parents. This fell to about 68% for those born since the early 1960s. It has stayed roughly constant for gen-Xers and millennials.

The main driver of this change is slower economic growth. Boomers’ incomes were much higher than their parents particularly due to decades of uninterrupted economic growth from World War II to the mid-1970s.

The other driver has been rising income inequality over the past 40 years, after falling in earlier decades, as the next chart shows. The relationship between inequality and mobility is complicated, because high inequality for either generation lowers the rate of mobility.

Absolute mobility would be higher if income was adjusted for family size – 78% for millennials, because the younger generation have smaller families than their parents did at the same age.

Read more: What income inequality looks like across Australia

Complicating factors

Our results are for income earned in a single year (at about age 32). We have also found similar results when looking at income at around age 37.

Ideally, we’d like to calculate absolute mobility of lifetime income. But methods to do this have not yet been developed. So we don’t know what mobility in lifetime income is. The same could be said for indicators of income inequality, which mostly use single-year income measures as well.

You also might be wondering about how the cost of housing fits in – an important issue given the escalating cost of a home compared to the median wage.

In all the results shown, income is adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. Housing is a big part of the index though costs such as the price of land and mortgage interest payments are not included.

The ABS does factor mortgage debts into its “Selected Living Cost Indices”, but these only go back to 1998, so couldn’t be used in these calculations. However, the changes in the CPI and the SLCI over the past 20 years are similar, which gives us some assurance our estimates account for the cost of housing. Further work could explore this in more detail.

Read more: For the first time in a long time, we’re setting up a generation to be worse off than the one before it

Valid concerns

Australia has achieved high levels of absolute income mobility for all generations since at least the 1950s. This is still the case. But the pessimism about our children’s financial future is rooted in some valid concerns.

Wage growth has been slow for years. Income inequality has been increasing for decades. So has the gap between young and old.

So there are clear threats for the prosperity of today’s children – even without factoring in concerns such as climate change.

– ref. 68% of millennials earn more than their parents, but boomers had it better – https://theconversation.com/68-of-millennials-earn-more-than-their-parents-but-boomers-had-it-better-161647

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paige Gleeson, PhD Candidate, University of Tasmania

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

Every contemporary Australian has likely seen Gwoja Tjungurrayi’s image. Tjungurrayi, a stockman, traditional lawman, and survivor of the brutal 1928 Coniston massacre, is the Warlpiri-Anmatyerr Aboriginal man engraved on our two dollar coin.

Tjungurrayi (whose name is sometimes spelled Gwoya Tjungurrayi, Gwoya Jungarai or Gwoya Djungarai) first rose to unlikely fame not on currency, but on the face of a postage stamp. In 1950 he became the first living Australian — settler or Aboriginal — to be featured on a stamp.

From 1950 to 1966, 99 million stamps featuring Tjungurrayi’s portrait were sold, and he became known to Australia and the world as “One Pound Jimmy”.

Now, fresh research has revealed the 1950 stamp was, in fact, not the first to feature Tjungurrayi. The discovery is the latest twist in a life story told in images.

The face of Geelong

In 1938, a postage stamp was released to mark the centenary of the Victorian town Geelong. It has no decimal mark as it was not issued by the Post-Master General’s Department. Hence it could not be used to send mail but was produced by the city as a collector’s item.

While researching images of Aboriginal people on stamps, in an online stamp collecting forum, I realised the man on the Geelong stamp was unmistakably Tjungurrayi, pictured 12 years before the “One Pound Jimmy” stamp. It’s the first time the image has been formally identified as Tjungurrayi.

Both stamps are based on a Roy Dunstan photograph of Tjungurrayi that first appeared in the Australian National Travel Association magazine Walkabout in 1936. Tjungurrayi had encountered Dunstan and magazine editor Charles Holmes east of Alice Springs, allowing Dunstan to take his photograph.

This chance encounter had a lasting impact on Tjungurrayi’s life, transforming him into an enduring public figure.

A remarkable life

Tjungurrayi was born around 1895 in the Tanami Desert north-west of Alice Springs. He was a survivor of the 1928 Coniston massacre in which up to 70 people were brutally murdered.

One son described Tjungurrayi “worm[ing] his way out from among the dead and dying”. Another son said he was captured and chained to a tree, but freed himself. He fled to the Arltunga region.

Tjungurrayi was a stockman and station hand by trade. But he was also a traditional lawman, land custodian, cultural intermediary and guide for visiting anthropologists, and family man. He took his responsibility as a father and law custodian very seriously, and was dedicated to ensuring traditional law and knowledge of country was passed down to future generations.

Tjungurrayi died in March 1965, having lived many years in the Tanami region. Obituaries to him appeared in Northern Territory News and on the Centralian Advocate’s front page.

Between Federation in 1901 and the 1930s, Aboriginal people were conspicuously absent in visual representations of Australian nationhood, which centred on native flora and fauna.

The use of Aboriginal motifs on stamps prior to Tjungurrayi’s image in 1950 was rare. The first stamps to feature Aboriginal themes were released between 1934 and 1950 — but there were only four designs and they didn’t portray real people.

Still, the use of images like that of Tjungurrayi exemplify what academic Jillian E. Barnes calls the “pioneer tourist gaze”, presenting him as an adversarial “other”.

Australian modernist artists and writers at this time such as Margaret Preston and the Jindyworobak literary movement became interested in Aboriginal designs and mythology, often appropriating these in their work.

“Aboriginalia” souvenirs and bric-a-brac depicting Aboriginal people according to racial stereotypes were displayed in suburban homes. Aboriginal people’s creative works and performances meanwhile, were still commonly classified as “ethnography”, not art, thus they were not afforded the opportunity to represent themselves and their own culture.

The 1938 stamp shows an apparently “authentic” Aboriginal presence in Australia, but relegates it to a distant and ancient time. In doing so it suggests the contemporary presence of Aboriginal people was anachronistic.

Read more: Friday essay: the politics of Aboriginal kitsch

A new generation

The Geelong centenary stamp may have drawn inspiration from a 1934 Victorian centenary stamp. In both, a standing Indigenous figure is used to contrast the supposed “stasis” of Aboriginal pre-history with the “progress” and modernity of the Australian settler colony.

But as Tjungurrayi’s own life story demonstrates, Aboriginal people continued to survive and thrive, often against the odds. Tjungurrayi’s three sons became leaders in the Western Desert art movement in the 1970s.

One son, Clifford Possum Tjapaltjarri, became one of Australia’s best known and well regarded Aboriginal artists.

In 1988, a new chapter in legacy of the family’s engagement with the postage stamp began.

The painting Ancestor Dreaming (1977) by Tjungurrayi’s son Tim Leura Tjapaltjarri was featured on an Australia Post stamp as a part of a series celebrating Western Desert art.

Unlike his father’s designation as “Aborigine” in 1950, or his anonymity on the 1938 stamp, Tim was showcased as a significant artist.

In 2019, the Northern Territory electorate formerly named Stuart was renamed Gwoja in honour of Tjungurrayi.

Contemporary Australia is finally willing and able to remember and celebrate Tjungurrayi as an Elder, lawman and survivor.

Read more: A stamp of approval for legendary sports commentators – but only the male ones

– ref. Elder, lawman, survivor: new stamp discovery is the latest chapter in Gwoja Tjungurrayi’s remarkable life in pictures – https://theconversation.com/elder-lawman-survivor-new-stamp-discovery-is-the-latest-chapter-in-gwoja-tjungurrayis-remarkable-life-in-pictures-161437

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

National cabinet on Friday is expected to consider whether COVID vaccinations should be made mandatory for workers in aged care.

Health Minister Greg Hunt on Monday said Scott Morrison and he had asked the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) to reconsider the matter.

The AHPPC looked at the question early in the year and did not advise compulsion for medical reasons.

While there would be considerable support in principle, compulsion could raise more complex issues in practice, such as creating staff shortages if some workers refused to take the jab.

The review comes as the Victorian COVID outbreak has affected two nursing homes in Melbourne and once again exposed weaknesses in the Commonwealth-controlled sector.

Two aged care workers from Arcare in Maidstone have tested positive, as well as the son of one of them. One worker had received a first vaccine, while the other was not vaccinated.

One of the carers was also working at BlueCross Western Gardens in Sunshine.

One Arcare resident has been infected – a 99-year-old woman who has been moved out of the facility. The woman had received one vaccination shot.

All facilities in Victoria have now received their vaccinations, but most residents only have had the first dose.

The arrangements for aged care workers are haphazard. If they were present when the nursing home was being done, and there were vaccines left over, they could get their jabs. Otherwise they have needed to access them from their doctor or the vaccination centres.

The federal government is also under criticism for failing to ban carers from working in more than one facility.

It has now reactivated its program to subsidise workers to keep them to one facility, but this is not compulsory.

The subsidy program is turned on and off according to when there are COVID cases in the community. Providers in hotspots become eligible for the subsidy. It has been activated four times in Victoria, most recently last Thursday.

Hunt said that in the greater Melbourne region only about 4.7% of staff had worked across different sites.

Victoria’s Chief Health Officer Brett Sutton said it was a risk to have carers working across sites.

The state government confines workers to single sites in the very small number of nursing homes it controls.

Acting Premier James Merlino told reporters that working across sites “is not happening in the public system, and as for [Commonwealth-controlled] private aged care, you should raise those questions with the federal government”.

Sutton said of the fight against the Victorian outbreak generally, “we are neck and neck with this virus and it is an absolute beast”. Merlino warned things could get worse before they got better.

There are now more than 50 active cases in Victoria.

– ref. Government asks health experts for advice on mandatory vaccination for aged care workers – https://theconversation.com/government-asks-health-experts-for-advice-on-mandatory-vaccination-for-aged-care-workers-161854

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

When he launched his defamation action against the ABC over an article reporting a claim of historical rape against him, Christian Porter boldly indicated he looked forward to going into the witness box to clear his name.

His lawyers said: “Mr Porter will have and will exercise the opportunity to give evidence denying these false allegations on oath”.

In the event, he never got near the witness box.

On Monday Porter settled for an ABC acknowledgement it hadn’t intended to suggest he was guilty, regretted some had read its article that way, and did not contend the accusations against him could be substantiated to a legal standard.

Both the ABC and Porter claimed vindication.

There were no damages and the ABC said the only costs (apart from its own) the ABC would be paying were the “mediation and related costs”.

The action centred on the ABC’s report of a February 2021 letter sent, together with accompanying material, to senior politicians, including Scott Morrison, detailing the allegation by “Kate” – who had committed suicide in 2020 – that Porter, as a 17 year old, had raped her when she was 16. Kate’s friends sent the anonymous letter.

While the ABC article referred only to a senior cabinet minister, Porter later identified himself, and strongly denied the accusation.

The fallout of the controversy that followed led Porter to lose his position as attorney-general and minister for industrial relations. He now holds the industry portfolio.

Porter could never clear his name via the legal system because the woman is dead. Also, she’d told police the day before she died she did not want to proceed with a complaint against him.

Both Porter and Morrison rejected the proposal advanced by many that the matter should go to an independent inquiry.

The action against the ABC seemed to Porter the obvious course. A win would be taken as some sort of clearance.

His decision to settle through mediation is pragmatic if surprising.

Yes, he has extracted some statements of concession from the ABC. But a court victory would have yielded much more.

One might suppose he judged the case increasingly risky. Certainly it was becoming horrendously expensive. Last week he suffered a severe blow when the federal court ruled top lawyer Sue Chrysanthou could not appear for him because of a conflict of interest.

With plenty of legal experience behind him, Porter presumably decided it was better to spin a settlement than play for more and possibly lose everything.

For its part, the ABC did its own spinning.

It was out of the blocks first, with a statement that Porter had decided to discontinue his defamation action (which was against reporter Louise Milligan as well as the public broadcaster).

The statement said it “regretted” some readers had “misinterpreted” the Milligan article as “an accusation of guilt” against Porter, which it hadn’t intended.

The ABC stood by the importance of its article, which remains online, saying it “reported on matters of significant public interest”. It also stood by Milligan, whom it described as “one of Australia’s foremost and most awarded investigative journalists”.

The editor’s note now posted with the story says: “The ABC did not intend to suggest that Mr Porter had committed the criminal offences alleged.

“The ABC did not contend that the serious accusations could be substantiated to the applicable legal standard – criminal or civil.

“However, both parties accept that some readers misinterpreted the article as an accusation of guilt against Mr Porter. That reading, which was not intended by the ABC, is regretted”.

Speaking outside the court, Porter cast his legal action not only as an exercise in protecting himself, but others more generally.

He condemned the article as “sensationalist, it was one-sided, it was unfair and[…] the sort of reporting that any Australian can be subject to unless people stand up to it.

“So I brought an action to stand up to that sort of reporting.”

“And the ABC said now, they regret the article. That rarely ever happens in those matters.”

“Had they not been challenged, had the ABC not been forced to acknowledge regret at the outcome of the article, had they been not forced to acknowledge publicly that the accusations could not be proved to any civil or criminal standard, then publishing accusations in a deliberately sensationalist way that leads ordinary readers to presume guilt, would have become the new and terrible standard in Australia.”

Porter said he hadn’t thought the ABC would settle.

“I never thought that they would concede that the accusations that were put in the article could never be proven […]

“I did not think, frankly, there was any chance of them making those types of statements to settle this matter,” he said.

“The whole point about bringing in an action like this and getting the ABC to say they regret the reporting is that ordinary readers will think again about the nature of the article.”

Porter’s comments fired up the ABC which issued a further statement, denying ever saying it regretted the article and insisting it “has never and still does not accept that the article suggested guilt on the part of Mr Porter”. Nor was the article “senationalist”, it said, among much else.

Porter said if the matter had gone to trial he would have said what he said now – that the alleged rape “simply didn’t happen”.

He also said he was not seeking the return his old portfolio (now in Michaelia Cash’s hands). Not that he would have got it.

More unexpected, he declared he will definitely stand at the election. There has been much speculation he might not recontest.

It remains to be seen whether the end of the legal action will still the voices of Kate’s friends. But they have achieved part of their objectives.

One of them, Jo Dyer, told the federal court last week Kate had said to her last year that “given how difficult it would be for her to pursue this case, a measure of success for her endeavours would be if Christian Porter did not become prime minister”.

To the extent that was Kate’s aim, she succeeded. Porter will never return to the list of future contenders for Liberal leadership.

– ref. View from The Hill: Porter decides it’s time to ‘fold em’ in ABC defamation case – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-porter-decides-its-time-to-fold-em-in-abc-defamation-case-161844

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University

Scott Morrison can feel well satisfied after travelling to New Zealand for the final two days of May. Talks there with his prime ministerial counterpart, Jacinda Ardern, could have been uneasy. Instead, the warmth of the face-to-face meeting – a rarity in these pandemic times – underscored the geographic and cultural closesness of the two nations, the primacy of the bilateral relationship above individual irritants, and their uncommon success in keeping COVID under control.

As late as last week, before the current Melbourne lockdown, the two nations could lay claim to have functionally eliminated the virus. Both have had virtually zero community transmission in recent months.

For Morrison, the bilateral visit marked the first, and potentially simplest, of a series of international meetings this year, if only because of the exclusive travel bubble between the two ANZUS partners.

G7 talks in Britain later in June and a high-profile, high-expectation UN climate conference in Glasgow in November present Australia’s climate-intransigent PM with far pricklier problems.

Read more: Spot the difference: as world leaders rose to the occasion at the Biden climate summit, Morrison faltered

Pressure is mounting on Morrison to demonstrate material progress on emissions abatement, rather than a mere continuation of Australian special pleading and the usual raft of glib slogans such as “technology not taxes”.

But, for all the apparent closeness of the trans-Tasman relationship, some frictions inevitably framed the lead-up to the talks. China, with its growing influence and insensitivity to regional concerns, was principal among these.

The Australian government has been privately nonplussed that Wellington had been seen to adopt a more conciliatory tone towards Beijing, despite the latter’s aggressive trade penalties on Australia. This particularly pertains to barley, where claims of Australian dumping have seen punitive 80% tariffs applied.

In April, NZ Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta signalled New Zealand’s preference for restricting the Five Eyes alliance to its original remit of intelligence sharing between the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Read more: Twin challenges of China and trans-Tasman migration loom over Scott Morrison’s New Zealand visit

Her comments came just weeks after a first-ever leaders’ level virtual meeting of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (“Quad”), made up of the US, Japan, Australia and India. It was one of several examples where Ardern’s Labour government has given vent to that country’s historically more non-aligned tendencies.

Beijing viewed the Quad meeting as a provocative escalation of a US-led and Australian-supported China containment strategy.

Mahuta’s comments – which tended to overshadow a speech more specifically critical of Beijing – were read in this light: evidence of a widening gap between the approaches to Beijing by the trans-Tasman countries.

New Zealand Trade Minister Damien O’Connor had previously gone as far as to chide Australia for a lack of sophistication in its dealings with Beijing. While announcing an upgraded free trade agreement, he said:

If [Australia] were to follow us and show respect, I guess a little more diplomacy from time to time and be cautious with wording, they too could hopefully be in a similar situation [with China].

But, in clear statement of support, New Zealand announced shortly before the talks that it would back Australia’s case on barley tariffs before the World Trade Organisation.

Paragraph 37 of the joint communique was the official, if somewhat Delphic, expression of this:

The Prime Ministers affirmed their strong support for open rules-based trade that is based on market principles. They expressed concern over harmful economic coercion and agreed to work with partners to tackle security and economic challenges.

There were also clearly stated objections to human rights abuses in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, concerns over China’s actions in the South China Sea, and a pledge to “uphold sovereignty” in the Indo-Pacific.

The two leaders also committed to jointly work to counter foreign interference in “education, infrastructure, research, electoral processes, media, and communities”.

The other main matter of trans-Tasman friction derives from Australia’s practice of deporting New Zealand-born long-term Australian residents when they are convicted of a serious crime. This happens irrespective of whether they have any association or family ties to New Zealand.

Ardern has made no secret of her disappointment with Australian intransigence on the issue and has vowed to continue pressing it. Yet, speaking to TVNZ, there was a tone of resignation also in her words, as if she knew the smaller country would not get the larger one to cede ground.

I’ve raised this through the entire time that I’ve been in this role and not necessarily with an expectation that we’ll see a dramatic change in policy because Australia has been consistent in the fact that they don’t intend to change their policy on things like deportation […] so it’s something that I’ll continue to raise”.

But if these matters presented risk to the talks, their management appears to have been deftly handled in the broader interests of the relationship.

China’s response to New Zealand will be interesting, in the unlikely event that it expresses one.

– ref. As Morrison and Ardern meet, differences of opinion give way to the enduring close relationship – https://theconversation.com/as-morrison-and-ardern-meet-differences-of-opinion-give-way-to-the-enduring-close-relationship-161580

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christian Moro, Associate Professor of Science & Medicine, Bond University

As we head into the colder weather, many of us might be afflicted with the irritating ailment of dry and chapped lips.

People have been trying to figure out how to fix dry lips for centuries. Using beeswax, olive oil and other natural ingredients have been reported as early as Cleopatra’s time, around 40 B.C.

In 1833, there were even reports of human earwax being recommended as a successful remedy for dry, cracked lips. Not long after, the first commercial lip balms hit the market.

So what causes dry lips, and which lip balms actually help? The key is to avoid lip balms that contain certain additives which might worsen the problem.

They need to be soft but resilient

Our lips are constantly exposed to the elements, such as sunlight, wind, dry air, and cold weather. They have to withstand our daily lifestyle, including contact with food, cosmetics, biting, picking, rubbing against clothes, kissing and more.

So, although they look soft and fleshy, our lips need to be resilient and tough.

Read more: Curious Kids: why do our toes and fingers get wrinkly in the bath?

Lips sit at the junction where our outside facial skin transitions into the tissue layers lining the mouth. As such, the lips are structured similar to mucous membranes, but with the addition of a protective outside layer of skin. Lips don’t have hair follicles, or sweat, saliva and oil glands.

This unique structure means they’re particularly prone to dryness as they have a much lower ability to hold water than the rest of the face’s skin.

What causes dry lips?

Many of us get dry lips at certain times of the year. This can occur naturally, or be brought on by many different factors, including:

• inflamed lips, known as cheilitis. This can be due to a skin condition, or an infection such as herpes or cold sores

• allergies

• medications which impact the salivary glands, the mouth’s surrounding muscles, or sensations throughout the lip area

• tongue injuries, teeth that rub against the lips, or other dental issues

• poor oral health. This can be brought on by general neglect, eating disorders, or bad oral hygiene habits

• burns, such as eating food that’s too hot, or sunburn. Burns can result in the lips swelling, scarring and blistering, and it may take a long time for the pain to alleviate

• some diseases or disorders, such as Sjögren’s syndrome

• dehydration, heat stroke, fever, or excessive heat

• nasal congestion, which leads to chronic mouth-breathing. This can sometimes be a result of illness, such as when you have a common cold

• cold weather or cold wind that runs along the lips and removes moisture

• persistent licking, which can create a wet-dry cycle that excessively dries out your lips.

The dryness can also lead to pain, itching or stinging.

If dry lips start causing serious issues, it may be helpful to discuss this with a medical professional.

How can you treat dry lips?

It is important to identify what’s causing dry lips. If it’s due to lip licking, then you need to make habitual changes to stop the practice. If it’s due to cold, windy or dry weather, then certain balms and ointments can help protect the lips.

Drinking adequate amounts of water can assist, because this helps prevent dry skin in general.

If this isn’t enough, bland, non-irritating, unflavoured lip balms can help, as they act as a film covering the lip surface, keeping moisture in.

In many cases these use petroleum jelly as a base (although it’s not required), along with refined mineral oils to remove any hazardous compounds, and other ingredients that can assist in retaining and maintaining a barrier function.

In the race to appeal to consumers, cosmetic manufacturers have trialled a number of new ingredients in their lip balms. Popular lip balms often contain additives which can make the balm smell or taste nice, or soften the feel when it rubs against the lips.

Some of these extra ingredients can help. For example, if you’re out in the sun a lot, lip balm with included sunscreen is a great addition.

Products to avoid

In many cases, these compounds provide the feeling of immediate relief on the lips but don’t actually help with the barrier function. And in some cases, they can become irritants and even worsen the dryness.

When choosing a lip balm, try to avoid products containing these ingredients:

• fragrances

• flavours, such as mint, citrus, vanilla, and cinnamon

• shiny glosses, which can intensify damage from the sun’s rays

• colours, which can cause irritation and do nothing to assist the barrier function

• menthol, phenol or salicylic acid, which can actually make your lips drier

• additional, unnecessary ingredients such as camphor, lanolin, octinoxate, oxybenzone or propyl gallate.

And be sure to stop biting, picking or excessively licking your lips.

Staying hydrated and applying a bland lip balm should be a routine incorporated into your every day lifestyle for healthy, protected, and moisturised lips.

– ref. What causes dry lips, and how can you treat them? Does lip balm actually help? – https://theconversation.com/what-causes-dry-lips-and-how-can-you-treat-them-does-lip-balm-actually-help-161264

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Micaela Sahhar, Lecturer, History of Ideas, Trinity College, The University of Melbourne

When videos of George Floyd’s killing in the US went viral last year, something world-changing happened: a movement fighting against structural injustice became internationally visible.

While statistics in America and Australia have long shown disproportionate numbers of Black deaths in police custody, too often these numbers have been obscured through institutional counter-claims.

But on May 25 2020, nine minutes and 29 seconds of footage transformed the rules about what makes news news. Floyd’s killing convinced journalists that a story can tackle the root causes of a violent action, and doing so is crucial to understanding the broader framework of violence in which such actions occur.

Those few minutes made it impossible for others to re-write the history of Floyd’s death: his murder as a product of systemic violence was unambiguous.

Read more: Pain of police killings ripples outward to traumatize Black people and communities across US

When #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) began, it insisted on a conversation that reached into America’s racist past to explain atrocities in the present.

Its power lies in this deeper engagement with systemic issues, amplified through the capacity of social media to reach wider audiences. One example is citizen support for actions defacing public statues of slave traders and colonisers, which have been recognised as symbols of exclusionary and violent national cultures.

BLM highlights Palestinian rights

Now, the tenets of BLM are amplifying the struggles of Palestinians and making them more visible and understandable to a global audience.

Just as BLM is forcing a reckoning with systemic racism, there is new attention being paid to the origins of the Palestinians’ struggles: settler-colonialism, asymmetric power relations and racial discrimination.

This is central to explaining why public opinion and the media’s reporting on Palestine have shifted profoundly in recent weeks.

This shift can be seen with the #SaveSheikhJarrah campaign on social media, which aimed to bring greater attention to the attempted expulsions of Palestinians from their homes in a neighbourhood in occupied East Jerusalem, Sheikh Jarrah.

The campaign created new awareness of the context behind these actions, in part triggered by a widely shared video on social media depicting a Jewish settler telling a Palestinian resident, “If I don’t steal your home someone else will steal it”.

This repudiates Israel’s insistence the broader conflict between Israel and the Palestinians be relegated to the past. The context around the expulsions has become inseparable from the violence itself, making history central to the present crisis.

Read more: Israel-Palestinian violence: why East Jerusalem has become a flashpoint in a decades-old conflict

This new style of messaging has also elevated the voices of people like writer Mohammed El-Kurd, one of the spokespeople for the campaign, who has appeared on major American news outlets describing the issue in terms of settler-colonialism and apartheid. After interviews on CNN and MSBNC, he was detained by Israeli security forces.

El-Kurd previously told his story in the 2012 documentary about Sheikh Jarrah, My Neighbourhood, at the age of 11. His articulate explanations and poise in interviews have resonated with audiences, bringing new clarity to millions about the situation Palestinians face.

Recognition of Palestinian Struggle

Through all of this, Israel’s claim of self-defence to explain its actions in Gaza is being challenged by a wider recognition of the government’s violations of international law.

Just as BLM has garnered increasing public support beyond the African American community in the past year, a broader alliance of prominent voices is rallying behind the Palestinian cause, as well.

The Black Lives Movement itself has tweeted its support for “Palestinian liberation” and ending settler colonialism in all forms.

And Palestinians are finding support from a wide spectrum of political figures, celebrities, athletes and other prominent individuals, wising up to the contradiction of progressive politics that exclude Palestine.

The alt-rock band Garbage, who rejected calls to cancel shows in Israel in 2016, have now used Instagram to support the Palestinians. Another band, Rage Against the Machine, has dismissed criticism from some fans to express its solidarity with Palestinians.

Many prominent figures have avoided wading into politics in the past because they can face a backlash when they do and don’t speak out on issues. But there’s a greater willingness among some to be more vocal on these issues now, a choice that parallels the ethical questions raised by BLM.

In a recent Instagram Live post with El-Kurd, actor and model Indya Moore, for instance, talked about the importance of solidarity between African Americans, Palestinians and Indigenous peoples in their mutual struggles against settler-colonialism and systemic racism.

In the UK, soccer players from Manchester United and Leicester City displayed Palestinian flags on the field after matches and [faced not disciplinary action but applause].

This is striking because not long ago, athletes were threatened with punishments for taking political stands such as kneeling during the national anthem before football games in the US. BLM has changed this — it allowed those with a public platform to advocate on behalf of others without fear of recriminations.

After the ceasefire

The latest ceasefire between Israel and Hamas seems to be holding. But there is a growing recognition ceasefires and calm are not the end of the story in a situation that has dragged on for decades.

The calls for change are continuing. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said after the ceasefire it’s time for the “root causes” of the conflict to be addressed. And Palestinian solidarity rallies have seen huge turnouts since the ceasefire went into effect.

Read more: As the Palestinian minority takes to the streets, Israel is having its own Black Lives Matter moment

All these changes owe a debt to the impact BLM has had on public understanding, combined with the success of First Nations people’s “nothing about us without us” campaign on representation. This has forced the issue in Australia, highlighting the systemic bias of media coverage that ignores Palestinian voices.

However, change will not only require the sustained efforts by Palestinian people themselves, but also through the deep-rooted solidarity they have forged with other marginalised communities. That work continues.

– ref. How Black Lives Matter is changing the conversation on Palestine – https://theconversation.com/how-black-lives-matter-is-changing-the-conversation-on-palestine-161429

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meryl Larkin, PhD Candidate, Southern Cross University

When we think of Australia’s threatened corals, the Great Barrier Reef probably springs to mind. But elsewhere, coral species are also struggling – including a rare type known as “cauliflower soft coral” which is, sadly, on the brink of extinction.

This species, Dendronephthya australis, looks like a purple cauliflower due to its pink-lilac stems and branches, crowned with white polyps.

The coral primarily occurs at only a few sites in Port Stephens, New South Wales, and is a magnet for divers and underwater photographers. But sand movements, boating and fishing have reduced the species’ population dramatically.

Recent flooding in NSW compounded the problem – in fact, it may have reduced the remaining coral population by 90%. Our recent research found cauliflower soft coral may become extinct in the next decade unless we urgently protect and restore it.

Lilac underwater gardens

Cauliflower soft corals are predominantly found in estuarine environments on sandy seabeds with high current flow. They rely on tidal currents to transport plankton on which they feed.

The species is most commonly found in the Port Stephens estuary, about 200 kilometres north of Sydney. It’s also found in the Brisbane Water estuary in NSW, and has been found sporadically in other locations south to Jervis Bay.

The coral colonies form aggregations or “gardens”. At Port Stephens, these gardens are the preferred habitat for the endangered White’s seahorse and protected species of pipefish. They also support juvenile Australasian snapper, an important species for commercial and recreational fishers.

In recent months, the cauliflower soft coral has been listed as endangered in NSW and nationally.

Read more: Marine life is fleeing the equator to cooler waters. History tells us this could trigger a mass extinction event

An alarming decline

Scientists first mapped the distribution of the cauliflower soft coral in 2011. They found none of the biggest colonies in the Port Stephens estuary were protected by “no take” zones – areas where fishing and other extractive activities are banned.

In research in 2016, we found a sharp decline in the extent and distribution of cauliflower soft coral.

Our recent study examined the problem in more detail. It involved mapping the southern shoreline of Port Stephens, using an underwater camera towed by a vessel.

We found the cauliflower soft coral in the Port Stephens estuary has declined by almost 70% over just eight years. It now occurs over 9,300 square metres – down from 28,600 square metres in 2011.

Our subsequent modelling sought to identify what was driving the corals’ decline. We found a correlation between coral loss and sand movements over the last decade.

Human changes to shorelines, such as marina developments, have changed the dynamic of currents across the estuary. For example, previous research found a large influx of sand from the western end of Shoal Bay smothered cauliflower soft coral colonies at two nearby locations. As of 2018, those colonies had disappeared completely.

While diving as part of the project, we identified other causes of damage to the coral. Dropped boat anchors and the installation of moorings had damaged some colonies. Others were injured after becoming entangled in fishing line.

It is possible that disease, and pollution or other water quality issues, may also be contributing to the species’ decline.

Then the floods hit

Some 18 months after our most recent mapping, cauliflower soft corals suffered yet another blow. Major flooding in NSW in March this year caused a massive amount of fresh water to discharge from the Karuah River into the Port Stephens estuary, where sea water is dominant. Fresh water can kill cauliflower soft corals.

Following the floods, we conducted exploratory dives at locations where the cauliflower soft corals had been thriving at Port Stephens. We found much of the coral had disintegrated and disappeared. In fact, we estimated as much as 90% of the remaining cauliflower soft coral population was gone.

We plan to remap the estuary in the coming weeks, and feel confident our initial estimates will be close to the mark. If so, this means less than 5% of the species area mapped in 2011 now remains.

The floods also devastated kelp forests and other canopy-forming habitats in the estuary. Further work by scientists at the NSW Department of Primary Industries is underway to quantify these losses and monitor the recovery.

Read more: Sydney’s disastrous flood wasn’t unprecedented: we’re about to enter a 50-year period of frequent, major floods

Urgent work required

The cauliflower soft coral urgently needs protecting. This will require ongoing, coordinated research and management.

Clearly, action must be taken to reduce threats such as anchoring, fishing, and development that may magnify sand movement.

Best-practice rehabilitation is also needed. This may involve rearing the coral off-site and transplanting it into suitable habitat. Such trials at Port Stephens have shown promising signs.

Human activities are causing species loss at an alarming rate. We must do everything in our power to prevent the extinction of the cauliflower soft coral, and other threatened species, to preserve the balance of nature and its ecosystems.

Read more: Australia’s threatened species plan sends in the ambulances but ignores glaring dangers

– ref. Beautiful, rare ‘purple cauliflower’ coral off NSW coast may be extinct within 10 years – https://theconversation.com/beautiful-rare-purple-cauliflower-coral-off-nsw-coast-may-be-extinct-within-10-years-160184

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meryl Larkin, PhD Candidate, Southern Cross University

When we think of Australia’s threatened corals, the Great Barrier Reef probably springs to mind. But elsewhere, coral species are also struggling – including a rare type known as “cauliflower soft coral” which is, sadly, on the brink of extinction.

This species, Dendronephthya australis, looks like a purple cauliflower due to its pink-lilac stems and branches, crowned with white polyps.

The coral primarily occurs at only a few sites in Port Stephens, New South Wales, and is a magnet for divers and underwater photographers. But sand movements, boating and fishing have reduced the species’ population dramatically.

Recent flooding in NSW compounded the problem – in fact, it may have reduced the remaining coral population by 90%. Our recent research found cauliflower soft coral may become extinct in the next decade unless we urgently protect and restore it.

Lilac underwater gardens

Cauliflower soft corals are predominantly found in estuarine environments on sandy seabeds with high current flow. They rely on tidal currents to transport plankton on which they feed.

The species is most commonly found in the Port Stephens estuary, about 200 kilometres north of Sydney. It’s also found in the Brisbane Water estuary in NSW, and has been found sporadically in other locations south to Jervis Bay.

The coral colonies form aggregations or “gardens”. At Port Stephens, these gardens are the preferred habitat for the endangered White’s seahorse and protected species of pipefish. They also support juvenile Australasian snapper, an important species for commercial and recreational fishers.

In recent months, the cauliflower soft coral has been listed as endangered in NSW and nationally.

Read more: Marine life is fleeing the equator to cooler waters. History tells us this could trigger a mass extinction event

An alarming decline

Scientists first mapped the distribution of the cauliflower soft coral in 2011. They found none of the biggest colonies in the Port Stephens estuary were protected by “no take” zones – areas where fishing and other extractive activities are banned.

In research in 2016, we found a sharp decline in the extent and distribution of cauliflower soft coral.

Our recent study examined the problem in more detail. It involved mapping the southern shoreline of Port Stephens, using an underwater camera towed by a vessel.

We found the cauliflower soft coral in the Port Stephens estuary has declined by almost 70% over just eight years. It now occurs over 9,300 square metres – down from 28,600 square metres in 2011.

Our subsequent modelling sought to identify what was driving the corals’ decline. We found a correlation between coral loss and sand movements over the last decade.

Human changes to shorelines, such as marina developments, have changed the dynamic of currents across the estuary. For example, previous research found a large influx of sand from the western end of Shoal Bay smothered cauliflower soft coral colonies at two nearby locations. As of 2018, those colonies had disappeared completely.

While diving as part of the project, we identified other causes of damage to the coral. Dropped boat anchors and the installation of moorings had damaged some colonies. Others were injured after becoming entangled in fishing line.

It is possible that disease, and pollution or other water quality issues, may also be contributing to the species’ decline.

Then the floods hit

Some 18 months after our most recent mapping, cauliflower soft corals suffered yet another blow. Major flooding in NSW in March this year caused a massive amount of fresh water to discharge from the Karuah River into the Port Stephens estuary, where sea water is dominant. Fresh water can kill cauliflower soft corals.

Following the floods, we conducted exploratory dives at locations where the cauliflower soft corals had been thriving at Port Stephens. We found much of the coral had disintegrated and disappeared. In fact, we estimated as much as 90% of the remaining cauliflower soft coral population was gone.

We plan to remap the estuary in the coming weeks, and feel confident our initial estimates will be close to the mark. If so, this means less than 5% of the species area mapped in 2011 now remains.

The floods also devastated kelp forests and other canopy-forming habitats in the estuary. Further work by scientists at the NSW Department of Primary Industries is underway to quantify these losses and monitor the recovery.

Read more: Sydney’s disastrous flood wasn’t unprecedented: we’re about to enter a 50-year period of frequent, major floods

Urgent work required

The cauliflower soft coral urgently needs protecting. This will require ongoing, coordinated research and management.

Clearly, action must be taken to reduce threats such as anchoring, fishing, and development that may magnify sand movement.

Best-practice rehabilitation is also needed. This may involve rearing the coral off-site and transplanting it into suitable habitat. Such trials at Port Stephens have shown promising signs.

Human activities are causing species loss at an alarming rate. We must do everything in our power to prevent the extinction of the cauliflower soft coral, and other threatened species, to preserve the balance of nature and its ecosystems.

Read more: Australia’s threatened species plan sends in the ambulances but ignores glaring dangers

– ref. Beautiful, rare ‘purple cauliflower’ coral off NSW may be extinct within 10 years – https://theconversation.com/beautiful-rare-purple-cauliflower-coral-off-nsw-may-be-extinct-within-10-years-160184

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christina Lee, Senior Lecturer in Literary and Cultural Studies, Curtin University

Last week, the trailer dropped for what will be the 26th movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe franchise: Eternals, directed by Chloé Zhao. Opening with a dreamy, misty shoreline, we hear Skeeter Davis’s The End of the World. An ominous spaceship appears over the ocean, and the Eternals begin to prepare for the impending battle.

This year, Zhao was only the second woman (and first woman of colour) to win Best Director at the Academy Awards: a reminder of Hollywood’s entrenched gender and race biases. The cinematic world of Marvel, which began with Iron Man in 2008, has been similarly male and white.

Of the 23 Marvel films released so far, just one has been directed by a woman (Anna Boden, who co-directed Captain Marvel with Ryan Fleck) and two by people of colour (Ryan Coogler for Black Panther, and Taika Waititi for Thor: Ragnarok).

But things are changing.

In July, Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) — one of the original Avengers — will finally get her own film in Black Widow, directed by Australian Cate Shortland.

In September, Destin Daniel Cretton’s Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings will showcase a predominantly Asian cast, where superhero Shang-Chi (Simu Liu in the character’s film debut) encounters the terrorist group Ten Rings.

Read more: Oscar winners: how the pandemic led to a record-breaking year of diversity

Zhao’s Eternals, to be released in November, will see an immortal alien race forced out of hiding after thousands of years in a quest to save humanity. Starring a multicultural, ensemble cast including Gemma Chan, Salma Hayek and Angelina Jolie, Eternals will feature Marvel’s first openly queer superhero — Phastos (Brian Tyree Henry) — and deaf superhero — Makkari (Lauren Ridloff).

Asian American Cretton has said:

Growing up, I didn’t have a superhero that looked like me and it’s really exciting to give a new generation something I did not have.

Owned by Disney, Marvel Studios is an entertainment giant, which has grossed over US$22.5 billion (A$29 billion) at the global box office. Its investment in more diverse stories, characters and directors is clever marketing. But it is also an indication of the dynamic relationship between one of the world’s biggest film franchises and its fan base, and how they both sit within the broader culture.

Marvel, like all film studios, has found itself creating popular culture during a period of great social and political upheaval. Global movements such as #MeToo, #BlackLivesMatter and #StopAsianHate have been a clarion call for social justice.

These movements have exposed and challenged discrimination and violence against marginalised groups, including exclusion from representation on screen and behind the scenes.

Pressure from #MeToo activists has seen Hollywood hire more female filmmakers since 2018. In the wake of #BlackLivesMatter’s growth in 2014 came #OscarsSoWhite in 2015, a movement which led to a remarkable change in the diversity of filmmakers — and the recognition they received.

Knowing their audience

2018’s Black Panther broke new ground with its all Black lead cast and Coogler as the franchise’s first African American director. Making US$1.34 billion (A$1.72 billion) at the box office, it is the second highest grossing Marvel film in the US.

Read more: How I marvelled at Black Panther’s reimagining of Africa

2019’s Captain Marvel, the franchise’s first standalone female superhero film, with its first female director, made US$1.13 billion (A$1.45 billion) at the box office.

This year we had a Black Captain America for the first time in the Disney+ spin-off series The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. Directed by Kari Skogland, the series was the streaming service’s most watched premiere ever.

This casting, and the story the series told about race, resonated with viewers who were frustrated and angry at the criminalisation and disempowerment of Black men playing out time and again in the news media.

This is not to suggest Marvel is radically undoing the biases of society and the film industry, smashing stereotypes shored up by centuries of patriarchal or colonial domination. That would be an insurmountable challenge even for the Avengers.

Rather, Marvel’s increasingly liberal steps stem from an understanding of the power of the people. The franchise’s continued success depends on remaining culturally relevant and, crucially, not underestimating what its audiences want — and who its audiences are.

Familiar tropes of Asian-ness will appear in Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (Shang-Chi’s powers are, of course, martial arts skills). But by handing over the keys to Cretton and his culturally diverse creative team, we can expect Marvel’s first standalone Asian superhero film to be a nuanced, multifaceted depiction of Asian cultures and identities not seen before in the genre.

As an immigrant female director and Marvel enthusiast, Zhao perhaps epitomises the future — and logical endpoint — of Marvel’s quest for inclusion and diversity.

“I’m not just making [Eternals] as a director,” she said. “I’m making the film as a fan.”

– ref. ‘I didn’t have a superhero that looked like me’: Marvel’s new female, culturally diverse and queer protagonists mirror our times – https://theconversation.com/i-didnt-have-a-superhero-that-looked-like-me-marvels-new-female-culturally-diverse-and-queer-protagonists-mirror-our-times-160917

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Bean, Research Fellow, The University of Queensland

The United States National Security Agency — the country’s premier signals intelligence organisation — recently declassified a Cold War-era document about code-breaking.

The 1977 book, written by cryptologist Lambros Callimahos, is the last in a trilogy called Military Cryptanalytics. It’s significant in the history of cryptography, as it explains how to break all types of codes, including military codes, or puzzles — which are created solely for the purpose of a challenge.

The first two parts of the trilogy were published publicly in the 1980s and covered solving well-known types of classical cipher.

But in 1992, the US Justice Department claimed releasing the third book could harm national security by revealing the NSA’s “code-breaking prowess”. It was finally released in December last year.

Lessons for code-breakers

A key part of Callimahos’s book is a chapter titled Principles of Cryptodiagnosis, which describes a systematic three-step approach to solving a message encrypted using an unknown method.

An intelligence agency might intercept thousands of messages made in a target country’s ciphers, in which case they already know the method. But if they encounter something new, they must first and foremost figure out the encryption method, or risk wasting time.

As Callimahos details in his chapter, the code-breaker must begin with all the necessary data. This includes the ciphertext (the enciphered text hiding the real message), any known underlying plaintext (text from before the encryption was applied), as well as important contextual information.

Read more: Cryptology from the crypt: how I cracked a 70-year-old coded message from beyond the grave

For puzzles, part of the plaintext may be given to help the solver. With confidential military messages, the solver may suspect certain words have been encoded into the ciphertext, based on past knowledge. For example, there may be key terms such as “message begins”, “message ends” or “secret”, or specific names, places or addresses.

The code-breaker then arranges and rearranges the data to find non-random characteristics. After this, they can recognise and explain these characteristics. In other words, they’ve found the cipher method.

Applying these steps is an example of “Bayesian inference”. The code-breaker considers the weight of evidence and guesses the likely cause of an observed effect.

The Zodiac and Kryptos ciphers

Last year, the famous 1969 Zodiac killer cipher, known as Z340, was solved by an international team of code-breakers after 51 years. The team carefully and systematically developed a list of observations over many years.

Using a process called Monte Carlo sampling, they tested whether the patterns observed in the ciphertext were random or not. Together with a detailed knowledge of the context of the cipher and a solution for a previous cipher by the Zodiac killer, they correctly guessed the encryption method used.

One of the Zodiac cipher solvers, David Oranchak, said in his opinion it was “at about a seven or eight out of ten in difficulty to decipher”.

Similarly, US artist Jim Sanborn’s famous Kryptos sculpture, located at the Central Intelligence Agency, has long confounded attempts to unlock its code. It contains four encrypted passages to challenge the agency’s employees. The final passage, known as K4, remains unsolved after 30 years.

When Kryptos’s code designer Ed Scheidt was asked to rate the cipher’s difficulty, he estimated it as being around a nine out of ten on the same scale. He said his intention was for it to be solved in five, seven or maybe ten years.

So what has made K4 so difficult? For one, with only 97 letters the passage is very short, meaning less data and fewer clues. The enciphering method used to create it is unknown, and there’s little context as to how it may have been enciphered.

One classic book on mathematical problem solving, How to Solve It by George Pólya, suggests a general principle for solving any problem is to refer to a similar problem that has already been solved. This principle applies in the historical puzzle world, too.

However, Scheidt also noted there was a “change in the methodology” as the Kryptos message progressed — done intentionally to make it increasingly difficult.

It could also be that Sanborn accidentally introduced an error in K4 during the construction of the Kryptos sculpture, which would mean solvers are wasting their time. Making a mistake during enciphering can render a puzzle impossible to solve. In such cases, the creator should admit this to prospective code-breakers.

Lessons for code-makers

Looking at a puzzle from the code-maker’s perspective is important. A skilled code-maker should leave at least some non-random patterns in the cipher, so as to not make their puzzle impossible.

Imagine you’ve created a puzzle, but after many years your intended audience has failed to solve it. If you still want it solved, you have to start releasing clues. Some puzzles, such as the 1979 book Masquerade and the Decipher Puzzles, were only solved after clues were released.

However, if nobody has solved your puzzle even after you release many clues, then the code is simply too tough to crack.

Cryptographer Helen Fouché Gaines wrote about this in her 1939 book. The creator of such a puzzle, she said, “fails to submit material in proportion to the amount of complication he has introduced”.

This means you may have to eventually reveal the method you used. One example is a complex algorithm known as Chaocipher. While Chaocipher messages were designed to be highly difficult, they’re virtually impossible to decipher without knowing the method.

A 2007 NSA presentation about Kryptos mentions how “dozens” of agency staff have failed to solve K4. But as more historical texts become declassified and our computational, storage and networking capacity grows, perhaps one day an amateur code-breaker will crack the elusive passage — and not an agent of the NSA.

Read more: How hard is it to scramble Rubik’s Cube?

– ref. Declassified Cold War code-breaking manual has lessons for solving ‘impossible’ puzzles – https://theconversation.com/declassified-cold-war-code-breaking-manual-has-lessons-for-solving-impossible-puzzles-161595

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jack Anderson, Professor of Sports Law, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is adamant the Tokyo Olympics will begin as scheduled on July 23, followed by the Paralympic Games on August 24. Polls indicate the Japanese public is equally adamant that neither event should go ahead.

Public sentiment against the games has recently been accompanied by disquiet from local sponsors. A research institute has also argued that while the cancelling the games would cost Japan ¥1.81 trillion (A$21.3 billion), the economic loss would still be smaller than the costs associated with a nationwide post-Olympics state of emergency.

And Naoto Ueyama, the head of the Japan Doctors Union, has even suggested the Olympics might prompt the mutation of a new COVID variant.

These medical and economic concerns are speculative, but they are nonetheless real.

A number of prefectures in Japan, including those in which Olympics events will take place, remain in a state of emergency, extended now to June 20. And Japan’s vaccination rate is one of the lowest in the developed world, at less than 5%.

Both of the above factors support the wider public’s concern that the risks of hosting the games in July appear too high to continue.

The IOC’s extraordinary powers

And yet, Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga has said the decision to cancel the games lies ultimately and unilaterally with the IOC.

It seems extraordinary that a private entity such as the IOC can wield such influence in a sovereign state faced with a severe public health challenge.

Suga’s comments have been explained by both political rigidity and national pride. But they are also reflective of the language and obligations in the host city contract signed between the IOC and Tokyo in 2013.

Read more: Olympic athletes speak up: current COVID plans aren’t enough to keep them safe

This is an extraordinary document. An example of the nature of the power granted to the IOC can be seen in clause 72.

If, over the next few weeks, the Japanese government seeks to pass a law or even a public health regulation, which has adverse consequences for the hosting of the games (and thus adverse commercial consequences for the IOC), this could be considered a breach of contract. And this would justify termination of the contract by the IOC.

Clause 66 contains the full range of powers the IOC has to terminate the contract. If Japan decides in the next few weeks it simply cannot deliver the games, this clause permits the IOC at its sole discretion to simply walk away from the contract.

Under either scenario, Tokyo would not only bear the costs for the preparations to date, but would also remain obliged to indemnify the IOC from any third-party claims, actions or judgements.

Even if the organisers were to invoke the clause in the contract that may allow for a cancellation for unforeseen events or undue hardship — a force majeure-type clause — the IOC is not obliged to consider such a request.

Significantly, the powers granted to the IOC apply not only to a cancellation before the games, but also at any time during the games.

If, for example, the IOC has grounds to believe the safety of participants would be seriously threatened or jeopardised by say, a sudden COVID spike, it can terminate the contract at its sole discretion. Again, the associated costs would largely have to be absorbed by the organisers.

Read more: The Tokyo Olympics are going ahead, but they will be a much compromised and watered-down event

While the games organisers have insured themselves against possible cancellation of the games (as has the IOC), the nature of the losses, insurable or otherwise, must be put in some context.

The budget for Tokyo 2020 was set at A$16.3 billion, but it has since blown out to A$19.9 billion officially, a record for a Summer Olympics. There is some speculation the final spend will be double the original budget.

If the games were to be cancelled, the insurance industry is braced for the largest global event claim in history, estimated at between A$2.5-3.8 billion.

And even with a claim, Tokyo would still stand to be out millions of dollars in capital costs for infrastructure built for the games.

Liability for athletes’ health

As the IOC moves into delivery mode now, there are other risks and legal obligations to deliver a safe event and avoid the nightmare of a “superspreader” scenario.

By pressing ahead, the IOC assumes more of the logistical and legal responsibility — or a duty of care — for its safe delivery.

According to the World Players Association, the IOC must do much more to ensure the safety of the athletes. The group’s executive director said,

The IOC and all others responsible for the games have a fundamental duty of care to protect public and athlete health from harm, which means that no expense can be spared. Reports that up to three athletes will be sharing small rooms in poorly ventilated facilities are simply unacceptable.

Harm to athlete and public health must not be collateral damage in staging the world’s largest mega-sporting event.

The IOC, led by its vice president, John Coates, has argued vociferously that its playbook, endorsed by the World Health Organisation, is an operationally, medically and legally sound basis on which to proceed.

The lack of specific logistical details in the playbook, however, has been met with some criticism. Some observers argue there is a risk assessment gap between what the playbook aspires to achieve in advance of games and what can actually be done.

In addition, IOC President Thomas Bach has been asked to provide more specific details on his claim that 80% of athletes will be vaccinated before arriving in Tokyo.

Read more: Why haven’t the Olympics been cancelled from coronavirus? That’s the A$20bn question

Then there are the matter of the waivers athletes are being asked to sign, which prevent the IOC and Tokyo organisers from being held responsible should an athlete become ill.

The IOC’s playbook says that while every effort will be taken to mitigate the risks involved in participating in the games,

risks and impacts may not be fully eliminated, and therefore you [the athlete] agree to attend the Olympic and Paralympic Games at your own risk.

The IOC has reassured athletes such as clause is “standard practice” for major sports events. That is true, as is generally the case with any waiver or disclaimer that is signed before undertaking an obviously risky sporting activity.

However, it’s important to note that a disclaimer like this has no effect if the reason an athlete becomes ill is due to negligence. The IOC still has a “duty of care” to all athletes taking part in the games.

Put simply, if the IOC does not reasonably comply with the protocols in its own playbook and this causes harm to an athlete, a claim of negligence could follow.

Will Japan rally behind the games?

The IOC is of the view that once the games begin, the event will achieve its own momentum and provide a welcome diversion for the Japanese public and the wider world.

And yet, the diversion of medical and logistical resources the games will entail — and the continued opposition of the Japanese public — may yet be the IOC’s greatest opponent. An unwanted games is no games at all.

– ref. Can the Olympics still be cancelled? Yes, but the legal and financial fallout would be staggering – https://theconversation.com/can-the-olympics-still-be-cancelled-yes-but-the-legal-and-financial-fallout-would-be-staggering-161739

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Russell, Senior Principal Research Fellow; paediatrician; infectious diseases epidemiologist, The University of Melbourne

In the face of changing eligibility for the AstraZeneca vaccine, new variants of the coronavirus and supply constraints, many people are wondering whether they can “mix and match” COVID-19 vaccines.

This means, for example, having the AstraZeneca vaccine as the first dose, followed by a different vaccine such as Pfizer as the second dose, and boosters with other vaccines later on.

While many studies are ongoing, data has recently been released from mix and match trials in Spain and the United Kingdom.

This data is very promising, and suggests mix and match schedules may give higher antibody levels than two doses of a single vaccine.

While Australia’s drug regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), hasn’t yet approved a mix and match COVID-19 vaccination schedule, some countries are already doing this.

So how does this work, and why might it be a good idea?

What’s the benefit of mixing and matching?

If the COVID-19 vaccine rollout can mix and match vaccines, this will greatly increase flexibility.

Having a flexible immunisation program allows us to be nimble in the face of global supply constraints. If there’s a shortage of one vaccine, instead of halting the entire program to wait for supply, the program can continue with a different vaccine, regardless of which one has been given as a first dose.

If one vaccine is less effective than another against a certain variant, mix and match schedules could ensure people who’ve already received one dose of a vaccine with lower effectiveness could get a booster with a vaccine that’s more effective against the variant.

Some countries are already using mix and match vaccine schedules following changing recommendations regarding the AstraZeneca vaccine because of a very rare side effect of a blood clotting/bleeding condition.

Read more: What is thrombocytopenia, the rare blood condition possibly linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine?

Several countries in Europe are now advising younger people previously given this vaccine as a first dose should receive an alternative vaccine as their second dose, most commonly mRNA vaccines such as Pfizer’s.

Germany, France, Sweden, Norway and Denmark are among those advising mixed vaccination schedules due to this reason.

Is it safe?

In a UK mix and match study published in the Lancet in May, 830 adults over 50 were randomised to get either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccines first, then the other vaccine later.

It found people who received mixed doses were more likely to develop mild to moderate symptoms from the second dose of the vaccine including chills, fatigue, fever, headache, joint pain, malaise, muscle ache and pain at the injection site, compared to those on the standard non-mixed schedule.

However, these reactions were short-lived and there were no other safety concerns. The researchers have now adapted this study to see whether early and regular use of paracetamol reduces the frequency of these reactions.

Another similar study (not-peer reviewed) in Spain found most side effects were mild or moderate and short-lived (two to three days), and were similar to the side effects from getting two doses of the same vaccine.

Is it effective?

The Spanish study found people had a vastly higher antibody response 14 days after receiving the Pfizer booster, following an initial dose of AstraZeneca.

These antibodies were able to recognise and inactivate the coronavirus in lab tests.

This response to the Pfizer boost seems to be stronger than the response after receiving two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, according to earlier trial data. The immune response of getting Pfizer followed by AstraZeneca isn’t known yet, but the UK will have results available soon.

There’s no data yet on how effective mix and match schedules are in preventing COVID-19. But they’re likely to work well as the immune response is similar, or even better, compared with studies using the same vaccine as the first and second dose. This indicates they will work well in preventing disease.

Might this be one way to help resolve Australia’s slow rollout?

In Australia, we’ve seen many people wanting to “wait for Pfizer” and not have the AstraZeneca vaccine. This is despite the UK’s recent real-world findings that, following two doses, both vaccines are similarly effective against the variants circulating in the UK.

Delays in vaccine uptake have also been due to concerns regarding the very rare but serious blood clotting/bleeding syndrome after the first dose of AstraZeneca, as well as changing age restrictions in terms of who can receive this vaccine.

This caused widespread uncertainty and meant some younger people in some countries in Europe who had already received a first dose were excluded from getting a second dose.

The results from these mix and match studies support the possibility of vaccinating people who have received the first dose from AstraZeneca, with a different booster, if the need arises.

Further studies are underway to evaluate mix and match schedules with Moderna and Novavax vaccines, both of which Australia has supply deals with.

Don’t delay getting vaccinated

As Victoria tackles its current outbreak, many other countries in our region are experiencing a surge in cases too. These include Fiji, Taiwan and Singapore, countries previously hailed as excellent examples of how to manage COVID-19.

These examples highlight the difficulty of sustained suppression in the absence of high vaccination coverage. This will be further exacerbated by the new, more transmissible variants.

The current cases in Victoria are caused by the B.1.617.1 (“Indian”) variant. Both vaccines are effective against the closely related B.1.617.2 variant (albeit a bit lower than against B.1.1.7) and we would expect similar effectiveness against B.1.617.1.

Read more: COVID is surging in unvaccinated Taiwan. Australia should take heed

It’s not clear what kind of evidence regulatory authorities, like Australia’s TGA, would require for a mixed schedule to be approved for use.

While we are waiting, it’s critical eligible people don’t delay getting vaccinated with the vaccine that’s offered to them now. Vaccination is an essential part of the pandemic exit strategy.

It’s likely the vaccination schedule will be modified in the future as boosters may be needed. This is normal for vaccination programs — we already do this each year with the influenza vaccine. This shouldn’t be seen as a policy failure, but instead an evidence-based response to new information.

– ref. Can I get AstraZeneca now and Pfizer later? Why mixing and matching COVID vaccines could help solve many rollout problems – https://theconversation.com/can-i-get-astrazeneca-now-and-pfizer-later-why-mixing-and-matching-covid-vaccines-could-help-solve-many-rollout-problems-161404

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Peel, Professor of Environmental and Climate Law, The University of Melbourne

Three global fossil fuel giants have just suffered embarrassing rebukes over their inadequate action on climate change. Collectively, the developments show how courts, and frustrated investors, are increasingly willing to force companies to reduce their carbon dioxide pollution quickly.

A Dutch court ordered Royal Dutch Shell to slash its greenhouse emissions, and 61% of Chevron shareholders backed a resolution to force that company to do the same. And in an upset at Exxon Mobil, an activist hedge fund won two seats on the company’s board.

The string of wins was followed in Australia on Thursday by a court ruling that the federal environment minister, when deciding whether or not to approve a new coal mine, owes a duty of care to young people to avoid causing them personal injury from climate change.

The court rulings are particularly significant. Courts have often been reluctant to interfere in what is viewed as an issue best left to policymakers. These recent judgements, and others, suggest courts are more prepared to scrutinise emissions reduction by businesses and – in the case of the Dutch court – order them to do more.

Court warns of ‘irreversible consequences’

In a world-first ruling, a Hague court ordered oil and gas giant Shell to reduce CO₂ emissions by 45% by 2030, relative to 2019 levels. The court noted Shell had no emissions-reduction targets to 2030, and its policies to 2050 were “rather intangible, undefined and non-binding”.

The case was brought by climate activist and human rights groups. The court found climate change due to CO₂ emissions “has serious and irreversible consequences” and threatened the human “right to life”. It also found Shell was responsible for so-called “Scope 3” emissions generated by its customers and suppliers.

The Chevron upset involved an investor revolt. Some 61% of shareholders supported a resolution calling for Chevron to substantially reduce Scope 3 emissions generated by the use of its oil and gas.

And last week, shareholders of ExxonMobil, one of the world’s biggest corporate greenhouse gas emitters, forced a dramatic management shakeup. An activist hedge fund, Engine No. 1, won two, and potentially three, places on the company’s 12-person board.

Engine No. 1 explicitly links Exxon’s patchy economic performance to a failure to invest in low-carbon technologies.

Read more: In a landmark judgment, the Federal Court found the environment minister has a duty of care to young people

Climate-savvy shareholders unite

As human activity causes Earth’s atmosphere to warm, large fossil fuel companies are under increasing pressure to act.

A mere 20 companies have contributed 493 billion tonnes of CO₂ and methane to the atmosphere, primarily from the burning of their oil, coal and gas. This equates to 35% of all global greenhouse gas emissions since 1965.

Shareholders – many concerned by the financial risks of climate change – are leading the corporate accountability push. The Climate Action 100+ initiative is a leading example.

It involves more than 400 investors with more than A$35 trillion in assets under management, who work with companies to reduce emissions, and improve governance and climate-related financial disclosures. Similar movements are emerging worldwide.

Shareholders in Australia are also stepping up engagement with companies over climate change.

Last year, shareholder resolutions on climate change were put to Santos and Woodside. While neither resolution achieved the 75% support needed to pass, both received unprecedented levels of support – 43.39% and 50.16% of the vote, respectively.

And in May 2021, Rio Tinto became the first Australian board to publicly back shareholder resolutions on climate change, which subsequently passed with 99% support.

Read more: Wondering if your energy company takes climate change seriously? A new report reveals the answer

The litigation trend

To date, the question of whether corporate polluters can be legally forced to reduce greenhouse emissions has remained unanswered. While fossil fuel companies have faced a string of climate lawsuits in the United States and Europe, courts have often dismissed the claims on procedural grounds.

Cases brought against governments have been more successful. In 2019, for example, the Dutch Supreme Court affirmed the government has a legal duty to prevent dangerous climate change.

The decision against Shell is significant, and sends a clear signal that corporations can be held legally responsible for greenhouse pollution.

Shell has previously argued it can only reduce its absolute emissions by shrinking its business. The recent case highlights how such companies may have to quickly find new forms of revenue, or face legal liability.

It’s unlikely we’ll see identical litigation in Australia, because our laws are different to those in the Netherlands. But the Shell case is emblematic of a broader trend of climate litigation being brought to challenge corporate polluters.

This includes the case decided on Thursday involving young people opposed to a company’s coal mine expansion, and Australian cases arguing for greater disclosure of climate risk by corporations, banks and super funds.

Read more: Climate change will cost a young Australian up to $245,000 over their lifetime, court case reveals

Change is nigh

Oil and gas companies often argue Scope 3 emissions are not their responsibility, because they don’t control how customers use their products. The Shell finding and shareholder action against Chevron suggest this claim may hold little sway with courts or shareholders in future.

The Shell case may also set off a global avalanche of copycat litigation. In Australia, legal experts have noted the turning tide, and warned is it’s only a matter of time before directors who fail to act on climate change face litigation.

Clearly, a seismic shift is looming, in which corporations will be forced to take greater responsibility for climate harms. These recent developments should act as a wake-up call for oil, gas and coal companies, in Australia and around the world.

– ref. Four seismic climate wins show Big Oil, Gas and Coal are running out of places to hide – https://theconversation.com/four-seismic-climate-wins-show-big-oil-gas-and-coal-are-running-out-of-places-to-hide-161741

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Silvia Griselda, Postdoctoral research fellow, The University of Melbourne

Boys perform better than girls in tests made up of multiple-choice questions.

Multiple-choice questions are considered objective and easy to mark. But my research shows they give an advantage to males.

I compared around 500,000 test results of boys and girls who sat the same international test, but whose exam papers differed by detail (although not difficulty). The difference included a varied proportion of multiple-choice questions as opposed to open-ended questions.

I found the gender gap in math scores widened with the share of multiple-choice questions in the exam — advantaging males.

This shows the generally better performance of males in maths exams has to do more with the format of the test than their maths knowledge.

How I conducted my research

Standardised exams are widely used to test students and screen job candidates. Australians take several standardised tests throughout their education — such as the NAPLAN, High School Certificate (HSC) and the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).

Such exams, especially when maths is involved, regularly include multiple-choice questions.

For example, more than 70% of NAPLAN’s 2016 numeracy section was made up of multiple-choice questions. Every year, the maths HSC tests include a section with multiple-choice questions.

These prompt students to identify the correct response from a set of possible answers.

I analysed data from PISA 2012 and 2015. PISA is the largest international standardised test in maths, reading and science. Every three years, more than 500,000 students aged 15, from more than 60 countries, including Australia, take the test.

Read more: The PISA world education test results are about to drop. Is Australia getting worse?

Each student taking the PISA receives a different set of questions which are of similar context and difficulty. But there is a random variation in the proportion of multiple-choice questions each student gets in their test booklet.

For instance, in 2015, some students received an exam mostly made up of multiple-choice questions (70%), while other students’ exam papers contained only 30% multiple-choice questions.

I exploited this random variation in the proportion of multiple-choice questions to investigate how gender differences in maths performance vary.

What I found

Females performed worse than males on multiple-choice questions — this was especially the case when they received an exam booklet with 60% or more multiple-choice questions.

An increase in the share of multiple-choice questions by ten percetage points (such as from 50% to 60%) increased the gender gap in maths scores by 50% in favour of boys.

Why is this happening?

I also analysed how students approached the answers by tracking the time it took them to respond to a question, as well as the number of questions each student skipped.

PISA data allows me to identify students who answer questions too fast (say in under three seconds, which does not allow for careful reading of the question).

Answering questions too fast or skipping them entirely can be seen as a sign of low effort or inattentiveness.

I found a gender difference in the approach students took to answering questions.

Overall, boys were less engaged in the test than girls. They answered questions faster and skipped more of them. However, this difference started to reverse the more multiple-choice questions there were in the test.

Girls who received an exam with more multiple-choice questions were more likely to show a lack of effort than when there were more open-ended questions.

Previous research supports the idea girls can be less engaged with multiple-choice questions. Girls tend to prefer questions that require more analysis and varied solutions while boys are more likely to just state their answers.

Confidence matters too

A student’s confidence in their maths knowledge can also play a part in their performance. For example, a higher level of confidence affects how fast students can rule out an incorrect responses.

PISA 2015 didn’t provide a measure of students’ levels of confidence.

However, previous research has shown girls with mothers working in science, technology, engineering or maths (STEM) occupations are more confident in maths and less likely to believe the stereotypes boys are better than girls.

Read more: Girls score the same in maths and science as boys, but higher in arts – this may be why they are less likely to pick STEM careers

So, I used maternal occupation as a measure of girls’ level of confidence and beliefs in their maths abilities. I found the negative effect of multiple-choice questions on girls’ performance actually disappeared in girls whose mothers worked in STEM-related occupations.

These findings suggest multiple-choice exams may not be the most appropriate tools to measure students’ levels of knowledge.

– ref. Multiple-choice exams favour boys over girls, worsening the maths gender gap – https://theconversation.com/multiple-choice-exams-favour-boys-over-girls-worsening-the-maths-gender-gap-160724

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brendan Coates, Program Director, Economic Policy, Grattan Institute

Australia should not target skills shortages when it selects workers for permanent residency.

That’s the firm conclusion from our new Grattan Institute report released this morning entitled Rethinking permanent skilled migration after the pandemic.

At present, the government allocates employer-sponsored and points-tested visas only to occupations deemed to be in short supply in “the medium term”.

With government officials lacking timely data on changes to wages and employment for each of the one thousand or so six-digit occupation codes, industry and other groups have considerable input into selecting those occupations in a process described by experts as a “black box”.

As a senior official from the department of jobs and small business described the process,

a lot of the time we will have submissions and other views put forward by stakeholders, but there’s not necessarily evidence or a dataset

Even if the list is compiled well, there is no particular reason to think that temporary or even “medium term” skill shortages are the best criteria for selecting permanent migrants who will live and work in Australia for decades to come.

Most skill shortages are temporary.

Australia’s demand-driven education and training systems are designed to fill shortages over time. Where they don’t, wages for workers with those skills will stay high.

Shortages ought to be temporary

But our “skilled shortage” lists include many low-skill low-wage occupations.

The chart below shows each occupation by its size, an average “competency” score as derived from the Australian Skills Classification, and the share of workers in the occupation earning more than $80,000 a year – about the median full-time wage.

It shows that the main list for permanent skilled workers, the medium and long-term strategic skills list (MLTSSL), excludes some high-skill, high-wage occupations, but includes many low-skill and low-wage occupations.

In part this is because targeting permanent skilled visas on the basis of occupations ignores the fact that jobs and wages vary within occupations.

As an example, there were 40,000 full-time solicitors at the 2016 Census. While half had salaries above $120,000 a year, a quarter had incomes below $80,000.

Jobs tell us more than occupations

Jobs, and the wages they offer, are a better guide to skills than occupations.

The chart below breaks occupations into their jobs.

It shows how poorly the MLTSSL targets high-wage jobs.

There is a better way.

Rather than drawing up occupation lists, the government should assess which migrants bring valuable skills simply by looking at the wages their jobs attract.

Wages tell us the most of all

Employer sponsorship should be available for workers in all occupations, provided they earn above the median full-time wage of $80,000 a year, as illustrated in the chart below.

Existing safeguards to prevent fraud and underpayment would remain.

Employers would still be required to offer a wage above the relevant annual market salary rate, and wages would require verification via a certified employment contract.

This change would not alter the total number of jobs eligible for sponsorship in the labour market, but it would shift the pool of jobs eligible for employee-sponsorship away from often arbitrarily-selected occupations to workers with valuable skills that attract high salaries.

We believe the change could boost the lifetime taxes paid by each annual intake of permanent skilled migrants by at least A$9 billion.

Points-tested visas should be reexamined

The same points apply to the occupation lists used to prioritise applicants for the separate system of points-tested visas.

Applicants ought to be assessed on whether they are likely to succeed in the Australian economy long term.

Age, experience and education are strong predictors of future success. But the current points test is bloated, offering points for characteristics (like regional study) that don’t predict long-term success.

The extra state-nominated and regional points-tested streams produce poorer outcomes still in terms of the skills and incomes of selected migrants.

They need to be reviewed.

– ref. Selecting what matters: skill shortages are no basis for picking permanent migrants – https://theconversation.com/selecting-what-matters-skill-shortages-are-no-basis-for-picking-permanent-migrants-161579

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

Rebel federal backbencher Joel Fitzgibbon says Labor should scrap the rank and file’s role in electing the leader, returning all the power to the caucus.

Fitzgibbon, speaking on Sky, said introducing the system that divides power in electing the leader between the caucus and the party membership on a 50-50 basis had been “a mistake”.

The change from having caucus alone elect the leader was driven by Kevin Rudd, as part of reforms to prevent coups like the one against him in 2010.

The more democratic system is to the potential advantage of the left, because the rank and file is left leaning.

Fitzgibbon, who is waging a battle to push federal Labor policy to the right – especially on coal and gas, and in its general pitch to working class aspirational voters – said there was no doubt the party was becoming more progressive and the “excessive progressives” were gaining increasing power within it.

“The country is becoming more progressive,” he said.

“But it is also true that who I call the ‘excessive progressives’ are on the march within the party.

“What’s happening in the branches is that in the regions people are either literally dying, or losing interest in the party because it’s become so progressive.

“And of course, in the capital cities, they’re flowing off the university campus into the city branches.

“Now, Kevin Rudd gave all those rank and file members a vote in the leadership. So if you want to be the leader of the Labor Party, you have to constantly be thinking about those people.”

Fitzgibbon argues those in caucus are best placed to judged leadership contenders, and “you don’t want a populist”.

At a state level, the rank and file input means NSW Labor faces the prospect of a long delay in replacing Jodi McKay, who resigned on Friday in the wake of the Upper Hunter byelection, if there is a contest.

Former leader Michael Daley has announced he will run and Chris Minns, who resigned from the frontbench last week, is regarded as a likely candidate.

Fitzgibbon denied he wanted Anthony Albanese replaced, although he said they did have “some fairly significant disagreements about policy”.

“I think there’s an opportunity for us to all meet halfway,” he said, adding that he had “not insignificant support” in caucus and the community about Labor’s “disconnect” with its traditional base.

“If we can get some middle ground there, get the party back to the centre, I still think Anthony Albanese can win.”

Fitzgibbon also said Labor would be “crazy” not to support the government’s stage three tax cuts, which are already legislated and due to take effect in 2024. These favour higher income earners and Labor is still debating internally whether in government it would leave them as they are or try to rework them.

Fitzgibbon said the reforms of the Hawke-Keating era “gave birth to a whole generation of aspirational voters”.

“And they’re not unsympathetic to those who want a hand up, or who need a hand up – not unsympathetic. And the Labor Party is still the best party to provide for those people who need a bit of a helping hand.

“But you have got to win. And you can’t be taking tax cuts, legislated tax cuts, off those aspirational voters.”

Fitzgibbon said he had not yet decided whether he would run again for his seat of Hunter. He said he didn’t think he could lose the seat, despite the disastrously low Labor vote at the Upper Hunter byelection.

“The reality is, I might be stuck there regardless[…] I might be the only one that is capable of holding it.”

– ref. Joel Fitzgibbon says rank and file ballots for Labor leader should be scrapped – https://theconversation.com/joel-fitzgibbon-says-rank-and-file-ballots-for-labor-leader-should-be-scrapped-161790