NewzIntel.com

Category: Analysis Assessment

  • MIL-Evening Report: What is rejection sensitive dysphoria in ADHD? And how can you manage it?

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

    Vitalii Khodzinskyi/Unsplash

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

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

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

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

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

    It’s more than just disliking criticism

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

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

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

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

    The ADHD brain and emotional hypersensitivity

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

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

    The amygdala is the brain’s emotional alarm system. The prefrontal cortex regulates emotions.
    chaiyo12/Shutterstock

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

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

    What does the research say?

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

    What helps?

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

    Here are some tools that may help:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZDF not considering recruiting personnel from Pacific nations

    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is not considering recruiting personnel from across the Pacific as talk continues of Australia doing so for its Defence Force (ADF).

    In response to a question from The Australian at the National Press Club in Canberra about Australia’s plans to potentially recruit from the Pacific Islands into the ADF, Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said he “would like to see it happen”.

    “Whether Australia does it or not depends on your own policies. We will not push it.”

    RNZ Pacific asked the NZDF under the Official Information Act (OIA) for all correspondence sent and received regarding any discussion on recruiting from the Pacific, along with other related questions.

    The OIA request was declined as the information did not exist.

    “Defence Recruiting has not and is not considering deliberate recruiting action from across the Pacific,” the response from the NZDF said.

    Australia Defence Association executive director Neil James said citizenship needed to be a prerequisite to Pacific recruitment.

    Australian citizen
    “Even a New Zealander serving in the Australian military has to become an Australian citizen,” James said.

    “They can start off being an Australian resident, but they’ve got to be on the path to citizenship.

    ”They’ve got to be capable of getting permanent residency in Australia and citizenship.

    “And then you’ve got to tackle the moral problem — it’s pretty hard to ask foreigners to fight for your country when your own people won’t do it.”

    James said he thought people might be “jumping at hairs” at Rabuka’s comments.

    Unlike Samoa’s acting prime minister, who has voiced concern over a brain drain, both Papua New Guinea and Fiji have made it clear they have people to spare.

    Ross Thompson, a managing director at People In, the largest approved employer in the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility Scheme, said if the recruitment drive does go ahead, PNG nationals would return home with a wider skill set.

    ‘Brain gain, not drain’
    “This would be a brain gain, rather than be a drain on PNG.”

    He’s spoken with people in PNG who welcome the proposal.

    ”PNG, its population is over 10 million . . . We’re proposing from PNG around 1000 could be recruited every year.”

    Minister Rabuka joked Fiji could plug Australia’s personnel hole on its own.

    “If it’s open [to recruiting Fijians] . . . [we will offer] the whole lot . . . 5000,” he said, while noting that Fiji was able to easily fill its quota under the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme.

    “The villages are emptying out into the cities. What we would like to do is to reduce those who are ending up in settlements in the cities and not working, giving way to crime and becoming first victims to the sale of drugs and AIDS and HIV from frequently used or commonly used needles.”

    Thompson was also a captain in the Queen’s Gurkha Engineers of the British Army and said he was proud to have served alongside Fijians.

    Honour serving
    “I had the honour to serve with a number of Fijians while deployed overseas; they’re fantastic soldiers.

    “This is something that’s been going on since the Second World War and it’s a big part of the British Army.”

    From a recruitment perspective, he said PNG and Fiji would be a good starting point before extending to any other Pacific nations.

    ”PNG has a strong history with the Australian Defence Force. There’s a number of programmes that are currently ongoing, on shared military exercises, there’s PNG officers that are serving in the ADF now, or on secondment to the ADF.

    “So I think those two countries are definitely good to look up from a pilot perspective.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZDF not considering recruiting personnel from Pacific nations

    By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

    The New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) is not considering recruiting personnel from across the Pacific as talk continues of Australia doing so for its Defence Force (ADF).

    In response to a question from The Australian at the National Press Club in Canberra about Australia’s plans to potentially recruit from the Pacific Islands into the ADF, Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said he “would like to see it happen”.

    “Whether Australia does it or not depends on your own policies. We will not push it.”

    RNZ Pacific asked the NZDF under the Official Information Act (OIA) for all correspondence sent and received regarding any discussion on recruiting from the Pacific, along with other related questions.

    The OIA request was declined as the information did not exist.

    “Defence Recruiting has not and is not considering deliberate recruiting action from across the Pacific,” the response from the NZDF said.

    Australia Defence Association executive director Neil James said citizenship needed to be a prerequisite to Pacific recruitment.

    Australian citizen
    “Even a New Zealander serving in the Australian military has to become an Australian citizen,” James said.

    “They can start off being an Australian resident, but they’ve got to be on the path to citizenship.

    ”They’ve got to be capable of getting permanent residency in Australia and citizenship.

    “And then you’ve got to tackle the moral problem — it’s pretty hard to ask foreigners to fight for your country when your own people won’t do it.”

    James said he thought people might be “jumping at hairs” at Rabuka’s comments.

    Unlike Samoa’s acting prime minister, who has voiced concern over a brain drain, both Papua New Guinea and Fiji have made it clear they have people to spare.

    Ross Thompson, a managing director at People In, the largest approved employer in the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility Scheme, said if the recruitment drive does go ahead, PNG nationals would return home with a wider skill set.

    ‘Brain gain, not drain’
    “This would be a brain gain, rather than be a drain on PNG.”

    He’s spoken with people in PNG who welcome the proposal.

    ”PNG, its population is over 10 million . . . We’re proposing from PNG around 1000 could be recruited every year.”

    Minister Rabuka joked Fiji could plug Australia’s personnel hole on its own.

    “If it’s open [to recruiting Fijians] . . . [we will offer] the whole lot . . . 5000,” he said, while noting that Fiji was able to easily fill its quota under the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme.

    “The villages are emptying out into the cities. What we would like to do is to reduce those who are ending up in settlements in the cities and not working, giving way to crime and becoming first victims to the sale of drugs and AIDS and HIV from frequently used or commonly used needles.”

    Thompson was also a captain in the Queen’s Gurkha Engineers of the British Army and said he was proud to have served alongside Fijians.

    Honour serving
    “I had the honour to serve with a number of Fijians while deployed overseas; they’re fantastic soldiers.

    “This is something that’s been going on since the Second World War and it’s a big part of the British Army.”

    From a recruitment perspective, he said PNG and Fiji would be a good starting point before extending to any other Pacific nations.

    ”PNG has a strong history with the Australian Defence Force. There’s a number of programmes that are currently ongoing, on shared military exercises, there’s PNG officers that are serving in the ADF now, or on secondment to the ADF.

    “So I think those two countries are definitely good to look up from a pilot perspective.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for July 7, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 7, 2025.

    The hard questions NZ must ask about the claimed economic benefits of fast-track mining projects
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Glenn Banks, Professor of Geography, School of People, Environment and Planning, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University Getty Images Much of the debate about the fast-track applications by a number of new or extended mining projects has, understandably, focused on their environmental impacts. But the other

    New US directive for visa applicants turns social media feeds into political documents
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney Angel DiBiblio/Shutterstock In recent weeks, the US State Department implemented a policy requiring all university, technical training, or exchange program visa applicants to disclose their social media handles used over the

    Ageing bridges around the world are at risk of collapse. But there’s a simple way to safeguard them
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andy Nguyen, Senior Lecturer in Structural Engineering, University of Southern Queensland The Story Bridge, with its sweeping steel trusses and art deco towers, is a striking sight above the Brisbane River in Queensland. In 2025, it was named the state’s best landmark. But more than an icon,

    Much to celebrate as NAIDOC Week turns 50, but also much to learn
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lynette Riley, Co-chair of the National NAIDOC Committee and Professor in the Sydney School of Education and Social Work; and Chair, Aboriginal Education and Indigenous Studies.original Education & Indigenous Studies., University of Sydney Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names and/or images

    Just $7 extra per person could prevent 300 suicides a year. Here’s exactly where to spend it
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne xinlan/Shutterstock Medicare spending on mental health services varies considerably depending on where in Australia you live, our new study shows. We found areas with lower Medicare spending on out-of-hospital mental health

    A Māori worldview describes the immune system as a guardian – this could improve public health in Aotearoa NZ
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tama Te Puea Braithwaite-Westoby, Tautoro Māori Engagement Advisor, Malaghan Institute of Medical Research Getty Images In biomedical science, the immune system is described as a cellular defence network that identifies and neutralises threats. In te ao Māori (the Māori worldview), it can be seen as a dynamic

    We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne Potato-sized polymetallic nodules from the deep sea could be mined for valuable metals and minerals. Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images Deep-sea mining promises critical minerals for the energy

    ‘The customer is always right’: why some uni teachers give higher grades than students deserve
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ciprian N. Radavoi, Associate Professor in Law, University of Southern Queensland Pixels Effect/ Getty Images Grade inflation happens when teachers knowingly give a student a mark higher than deserved. It can also happen indirectly, when the level of difficulty of a course is deliberately lowered so students

    The Rainbow Warrior saga. Part 2: Nuclear refugees in the Pacific – the evacuation of Rongelap
    COMMENTARY:  By Eugene Doyle On the last voyage of the Rainbow Warrior prior to its sinking by French secret agents in Auckland harbour on 10 July 1985 the ship had evacuated the entire population of 320 from Rongelap in the Marshall Islands. After conducting dozens of above-ground nuclear explosions, the US government had left the

    Legends of a Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific – Octo Mote
    Pacific Media Watch West Papuan independence advocate Octovianus Mote was in Aotearoa New Zealand late last year seeking support for independence for West Papua, which has been ruled by Indonesia for more than six decades. Mote is vice-president of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) and was hosted in New Zealand by the

    ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for July 6, 2025
    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 6, 2025.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The hard questions NZ must ask about the claimed economic benefits of fast-track mining projects

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Glenn Banks, Professor of Geography, School of People, Environment and Planning, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

    Getty Images

    Much of the debate about the fast-track applications by a number of new or extended mining projects has, understandably, focused on their environmental impacts. But the other side of the equation – economic growth and investment, the government’s rationale for new mines – is rarely interrogated.

    In fact, the environmental and economic debates are inseparable. Section 85(3)(b) of the Fast Track Approval Act allows for project applications to be declined if any “adverse impacts are sufficiently significant to be out of proportion to the project’s regional or national benefits”.

    So, the claims of economic benefits from the current round of proposals need to be scrutinised closely. If those benefits don’t stack up, any adverse environmental impacts become harder to justify.

    Having spent more than 35 years researching and consulting on mining projects and mineral policy in the Pacific, I have noted several important economic characteristics of the mining industry.

    First, the capital spend – the setup cost of an operation – is typically largely spent offshore. In the case of Trans-Tasman Resources, currently seeking to fast-track seabed mining off the Taranaki coast, this amounts to 95% of the $1 billion construction estimate. This will largely be spent on the building in China of a huge, sophisticated barge and two 450-tonne seabed crawlers.

    The government’s recent Investment Boost policy will also mean 20% of this investment is an immediate tax deduction for the company – money lost offshore to the foreign investor.

    Second, any estimate of annual revenue, operational costs, taxation and distribution of net profit has to come with a caveat. Annual variations in all these factors are typical across the sector due to commodity price volatility, high rates of depreciation on capital expenditure, unexpected events, and exposure to changing operating costs.

    The same applies to average annual figures for taxes and royalties. Mineral resource companies cannot be regarded as stable sources of government revenue. For example, foreign-owned OceanaGold – the largest gold producer in the country and operator of the MacRaes Flat and Waihi mines – paid no corporate income tax in 2021 or 2023 on gold production worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Essentially, the country can often receive a minimal share of the value of its own natural resources. Unlike forestry, dairy, wine, tourism and other major sectors, with mining we don’t get a second chance: when the resource is gone, it’s really gone.

    If New Zealand does decide to expand mineral resource extraction, however, there are four things that could be done to ensure the country benefits more.

    1. Adopt international best practice

    Over the past 30 years, the international mining sector has developed a range of best-practice guidelines, such as those developed by the International Council on Metals and Mining.

    These have been adopted by leading global mining corporations elsewhere to ensure ethical behaviours, high levels of social and environmental performance, inclusive stakeholder engagement, and conservation of biodiversity.

    International bodies such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative also provide a means for signatory countries and their citizens to track the economic contributions mining (and oil) companies make.

    2. Capture a fair share of resource value

    Aside from being levied a small 2% royalty on the value of the minerals produced (or 10% of net profits, whichever is higher), mining companies are effectively treated like any other sector. But the price of mining commodities and revenues, and the operational costs, are highly volatile.

    A better model might involve a simple calculation made each year to determine the total value of mineral exports from each operation. An agreed, a mandatory proportion – half or two-thirds, perhaps – would then be required to accrue within New Zealand.

    This proportion of the value of the mineral resource exported should take into account local employment, locally sourced operational expenses, taxes and royalties. An additional tax could then be applied that brings the local share of the export value up to the agreed proportion, if needed.

    3. Mandate a return to communities

    Another common mechanism found in many countries is the community-level or regional development agreement. These exist at some New Zealand mine sites now, but they are not mandatory. They return a share of the value of the government’s take from the sector back to the communities or regions where the resource has come from.

    While mining companies often make voluntary “corporate social responsibility” contributions to local communities, these are not community-led programs funded from a share of the mining royalties collected from the region.

    Regional Development Minister Shane Jones has said he is looking at redirecting a greater share of mining royalties to the regions where mining takes place, particularly the west coast of the South Island.

    4. Establish a form of sovereign wealth fund

    Famously, Norway and the US state of Alaska have established hundred-billion-dollar trust funds by putting aside a proportion of mining and oil revenues.

    These funds now support national budgets, lower or eliminate taxes, and provide a mechanism for the intergenerational transfer of mineral resource wealth.

    New Zealand’s current oil, gas and mining sector is not of these magnitudes. But if the country does decide to significantly expand its extractive sector, we should be thinking about a “fair share” in intergenerational terms, too.

    A local sovereign wealth fund might not be huge to begin with. But if it were used effectively, it could grow and deliver ongoing benefits from non-renewable mineral resources.

    Without proper attention to the economic implications of mining, New Zealand risks
    being doubly worse off: few guaranteed long-term economic benefits from its own mineral resource, but still living with the inevitable environmental effects of those mines.

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

    – ref. The hard questions NZ must ask about the claimed economic benefits of fast-track mining projects – https://theconversation.com/the-hard-questions-nz-must-ask-about-the-claimed-economic-benefits-of-fast-track-mining-projects-259779

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: New US directive for visa applicants turns social media feeds into political documents

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

    Angel DiBiblio/Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

    Digital profiling

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

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

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

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

    Political ‘passport’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A free speech issue

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

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

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

    What can you do?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne

    Potato-sized polymetallic nodules from the deep sea could be mined for valuable metals and minerals. Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.

    Managing and monitoring environmental harm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)

    1. Minerals are not scarce

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

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

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

    2. Mining at sea will not replace mining on land

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

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

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

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

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

    Hidden Gem was the world’s first deep-sea mineral production vessel with seabed-to-surface nodule collection and transport systems.
    Photo by Charles M. Vella/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South

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

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

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

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

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

    Australian Gerard Barron is Chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, formerly DeepGreen.
    Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    A wise investment?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    – ref. We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/we-dont-need-deep-sea-mining-or-its-environmental-harms-heres-why-260401

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Justin Alger, Associate Professor / Senior Lecturer in Global Environmental Politics, The University of Melbourne

    Potato-sized polymetallic nodules from the deep sea could be mined for valuable metals and minerals. Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.

    Managing and monitoring environmental harm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)

    1. Minerals are not scarce

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

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

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

    2. Mining at sea will not replace mining on land

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

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

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

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

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

    Hidden Gem was the world’s first deep-sea mineral production vessel with seabed-to-surface nodule collection and transport systems.
    Photo by Charles M. Vella/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South

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

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

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

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

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

    Australian Gerard Barron is Chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, formerly DeepGreen.
    Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    A wise investment?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    – ref. We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/we-dont-need-deep-sea-mining-or-its-environmental-harms-heres-why-260401

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Ageing bridges around the world are at risk of collapse. But there’s a simple way to safeguard them

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Andy Nguyen, Senior Lecturer in Structural Engineering, University of Southern Queensland

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

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

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

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

    A number of collapses

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

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

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

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

    A technology-driven solution

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A model for proactive management

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

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

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

    Opened in 1930, the Jacques Cartier Bridge in Montreal, Canada, shares design similarities with Brisbane’s Story Bridge.
    Pinkcandy/Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

    A way forward for Brisbane – and beyond

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Astronomers have spied an interstellar object zooming through the Solar System

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kirsten Banks, Lecturer, School of Science, Computing and Engineering Technologies, Swinburne University of Technology

    K Ly / Deep Random Survey

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

    First detected by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) on July 1, the cosmic interloper was given the temporary name A11pl3Z. Experts at NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies and the International Astronomical Union (IAU) have confirmed the find, and the object now has an official designation: 3I/ATLAS.

    The orbital path of 3I/ATLAS through the Solar System.
    NASA/JPL-Caltech, CC BY-NC

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

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

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

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

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

    Has anything like this happened before?

    An artist’s impression of the first confirmed interstellar object, 1I/‘Oumuamua.
    ESO/M. Kornmesser, CC BY

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

    The interstellar comet 2I/Borisov, imaged by the Hubble Space Telescope.
    NASA, ESA, and D. Jewitt (UCLA), CC BY-NC

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

    This time, the interstellar origin of 3I/ATLAS has been confirmed in a matter of days.

    How did it get here?

    We have only ever seen three interstellar visitors (including 3I/ATLAS), so it’s hard to know exactly how they made their way here.

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

    Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B, from the triple star system Alpha Centauri.
    ESA/Hubble & NASA, CC BY

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

    Most of this material would have been ejected at relatively low speeds, less than 2km/s, making it more likely to drift into our cosmic neighbourhood over time and not dramatically zoom in and out of the Solar System like 3I/ATLAS appears to be doing. While the chance of one of these objects coming close to the Sun is extremely small, the study suggests a few tiny meteors from Alpha Centauri, likely no bigger than grains of sand, may already hit Earth’s atmosphere every year.

    Why is this interesting?

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

    A swarm of new asteroids discovered by the NSF–DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory.

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

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

    What now?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘The customer is always right’: why some uni teachers give higher grades than students deserve

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

    Pixels Effect/ Getty Images

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

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

    Is it happening in Australia and if so, why?

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

    Increases in grades

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

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

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

    Our study

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

    Our main question was:

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

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

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

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

    Overall opinions

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

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

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

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

    Pressure from university administration

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Complaints generate more work

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

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

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

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

    Is it always a problem?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    An honest discussion is needed

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘The customer is always right’: why some uni teachers give higher grades than students deserve

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

    Pixels Effect/ Getty Images

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

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

    Is it happening in Australia and if so, why?

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

    Increases in grades

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

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

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

    Our study

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

    Our main question was:

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

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

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

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

    Overall opinions

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

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

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

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

    Pressure from university administration

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Complaints generate more work

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

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

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

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

    Is it always a problem?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    An honest discussion is needed

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why

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

    Potato-sized polymetallic nodules from the deep sea could be mined for valuable metals and minerals. Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.

    Managing and monitoring environmental harm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)

    1. Minerals are not scarce

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

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

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

    2. Mining at sea will not replace mining on land

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

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

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

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

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

    Hidden Gem was the world’s first deep-sea mineral production vessel with seabed-to-surface nodule collection and transport systems.
    Photo by Charles M. Vella/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South

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

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

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

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

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

    Australian Gerard Barron is Chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, formerly DeepGreen.
    Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    A wise investment?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    – ref. We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/we-dont-need-deep-sea-mining-or-its-environmental-harms-heres-why-260401

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why

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

    Potato-sized polymetallic nodules from the deep sea could be mined for valuable metals and minerals. Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Metals Company spent six months at sea collecting nodules in 2022, while studying the effects on ecosystems.

    Managing and monitoring environmental harm

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    How does deep-sea mining work? (The Guardian)

    1. Minerals are not scarce

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

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

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

    2. Mining at sea will not replace mining on land

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

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

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

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

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

    Hidden Gem was the world’s first deep-sea mineral production vessel with seabed-to-surface nodule collection and transport systems.
    Photo by Charles M. Vella/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    3. Common heritage of humankind and the Global South

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

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

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

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

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

    Australian Gerard Barron is Chairman and CEO of The Metals Company, formerly DeepGreen.
    Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    A wise investment?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    – ref. We don’t need deep-sea mining, or its environmental harms. Here’s why – https://theconversation.com/we-dont-need-deep-sea-mining-or-its-environmental-harms-heres-why-260401

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A Māori worldview describes the immune system as a guardian – this could improve public health in Aotearoa NZ

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

    Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

    Protecting the land

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

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

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

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

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

    Parallels between immunology and te ao Māori

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Māori culture values time spent in forests, rivers or coastal areas as a source of wellbeing.
    Getty Images

    Beyond the body

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: A Māori worldview describes the immune system as a guardian – this could improve public health in Aotearoa NZ

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

    Getty Images

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

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

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

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

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

    Protecting the land

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

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

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

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

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

    Parallels between immunology and te ao Māori

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Māori culture values time spent in forests, rivers or coastal areas as a source of wellbeing.
    Getty Images

    Beyond the body

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Just $7 extra per person could prevent 300 suicides a year. Here’s exactly where to spend it

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

    xinlan/Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    • 313 fewer suicides (a 10% reduction).

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

    What we did

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

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

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

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

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

    What we found

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

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

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

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

    We mapped access to mental health services

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

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

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

    How can we use our findings?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Much to celebrate as NAIDOC Week turns 50, but also much to learn

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The Aboriginal Day of Mourning was regarded as one of the first major civil rights movements in the world.
    National Museum of Australia, CC BY

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

    Celebrating culture

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

    One week is set aside each July:

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

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

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

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

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

    NAIDOC themes

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

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

    Some examples down the years from the 1970s include:

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

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

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

    Next generation

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

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

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

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

    Look no further than our past NAIDOC Youth winners:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Many Australians have much to learn from NAIDOC Week.

    All of us have much to celebrate.

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ageing bridges around the world are at risk of collapse. But there’s a simple way to safeguard them

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

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

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

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

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

    A number of collapses

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

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

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

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

    A technology-driven solution

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    A model for proactive management

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

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

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

    Opened in 1930, the Jacques Cartier Bridge in Montreal, Canada, shares design similarities with Brisbane’s Story Bridge.
    Pinkcandy/Shutterstock

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

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

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

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

    A way forward for Brisbane – and beyond

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

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

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

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

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

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: The oldest rocks on Earth are more than four billion years old

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hanika Rizo, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

    Earth formed about 4.6 billion years ago, during the geological eon known as the Hadean. The name “Hadean” comes from the Greek god of the underworld, reflecting the extreme heat that likely characterized the planet at the time.

    By 4.35 billion years ago, the Earth might have cooled down enough for the first crust to form and life to emerge.

    However, very little is known about this early chapter in Earth’s history, as rocks and minerals from that time are extremely rare. This lack of preserved geological records makes it difficult to reconstruct what the Earth looked like during the Hadean Eon, leaving many questions about its earliest evolution unanswered.

    We are part of a research team that has confirmed the oldest known rocks on Earth are located in northern Québec. Dating back more than four billion years, these rocks provide a rare and invaluable glimpse into the origins of our planet.

    Geologists Jonathan O’Neil and Chris Sole examine rocks in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    Remains from the Hadean Eon

    The Hadean Eon is the first period in the geological timescale, spanning from Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago and ending around 4.03 billion years ago.

    The oldest terrestrial materials ever dated by scientists are extremely rare zircon minerals that were discovered in western Australia. These zircons were formed as early as 4.4 billion years ago, and while their host rock eroded away, the durability of zircons allowed them to be preserved for a long time.

    Studies of these zircon minerals has given us clues about the Hadean environment, and the formation and evolution of Earth’s oldest crust. The zircons’ chemistry suggests that they formed in magmas produced by the melting of sediments deposited at the bottom of an ancient ocean. This suggests that the zircons are evidence that the Hadean Eon cooled rapidly, and liquid water oceans were formed early on.

    Other research on the Hadean zircons suggests that the Earth’s earliest crust was mafic (rich in magnesium and iron). Until recently, however, the existence of that crust remained to be confirmed.

    In 2008, a study led by one of us — associate professor Jonathan O’Neil (then a McGill University doctoral student) — proposed that rocks of this ancient crust had been preserved in northern Québec and were the only known vestige of the Hadean.

    Since then, the age of those rocks — found in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt — has been controversial and the subject of ongoing scientific debate.

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    ‘Big, old solid rock’

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt is located in the northernmost region of Québec, in the Nunavik region above the 55th parallel. Most of the rocks there are metamorphosed volcanic rocks, rich in magnesium and iron. The most common rocks in the belt are called the Ujaraaluk rocks, meaning “big old solid rock” in Inuktitut.

    The age of 4.3 billion years was proposed after variations in neodymium-142 were detected, an isotope produced exclusively during the Hadean through the radioactive decay of samarium-146. The relationship between samarium and neodymium isotope abundances had been previously used to date meteorites and lunar rocks, but before 2008 had never been applied to Earth rocks.

    This interpretation, however, was challenged by several research groups, some of whom studied zircons within the belt and proposed a younger age of at most 3.78 billion years, placing the rocks in the Archean Eon instead.

    Confirming the Hadean Age

    In the summer of 2017, we returned to the Nuvvuagittuq belt to take a closer look at the ancient rocks. This time, we collected intrusive rocks — called metagabbros — that cut across the Ujaraaluk rock formation, hoping to obtain independent age constraints. The fact that these newly studied metagabbros are in intrusion in the Ujaraaluk rocks implies that the latter must be older.

    The project was led by masters student Chris Sole at the University of Ottawa, who joined us in the field. Back in the laboratory, we collaborated with French geochronologist Jean-Louis Paquette. Additionally, two undergraduate students — David Benn (University of Ottawa) and Joeli Plakholm (Carleton University) participated to the project.

    We combined our field observations with petrology, geochemistry, geochronology and applied two independent samarium-neodymium age dating methods, dating techniques used to assess the absolute ages of magmatic rocks, before they became metamorphic rocks. Both assessments yielded the same result: the intrusive rocks are 4.16 billion years old.

    Sunset at the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    The oldest rocks

    Since these metagabbros cut across the Ujaraaluk formation, the Ujaraaluk rocks must be even older, placing them firmly in the Hadean Eon.

    Studying the Nuvvuagittuq rocks, the only preserved rocks from the Hadean, provides a unique opportunity to learn about the earliest history of our planet. They can help us understand how the first continents formed, and how and when Earth’s environment evolved to become habitable.

    Hanika Rizo receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

    Jonathan O’Neil receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

    – ref. The oldest rocks on Earth are more than four billion years old – https://theconversation.com/the-oldest-rocks-on-earth-are-more-than-four-billion-years-old-259657

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The Rainbow Warrior saga. Part 2: Nuclear refugees in the Pacific – the evacuation of Rongelap

    COMMENTARY:  By Eugene Doyle

    On the last voyage of the Rainbow Warrior prior to its sinking by French secret agents in Auckland harbour on 10 July 1985 the ship had evacuated the entire population of 320 from Rongelap in the Marshall Islands.

    After conducting dozens of above-ground nuclear explosions, the US government had left the population in conditions that suggested the islanders were being used as guinea pigs to gain knowledge of the effects of radiation.

    Cancers, birth defects, and genetic damage ripped through the population; their former fisheries and land are contaminated to this day.

    Denied adequate support from the US – they turned to Greenpeace with an SOS: help us leave our ancestral homeland; it is killing our people. The Rainbow Warrior answered the call.

    Human lab rats or our brothers and sisters?
     Dr Merrill Eisenbud, a physicist in the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) famously said in 1956 of the Marshall Islanders:  “While it is true that these people do not live, I might say, the way Westerners do, civilised people, it is nevertheless also true that they are more like us than the mice.”

    Dr Eisenbud also opined that exposure “would provide valuable information on the effects of radiation on human beings.”  That research continues to this day.

    A half century of testing nuclear bombs
     Within a year of dropping nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the US moved part of its test programme to the central Pacific.  Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands was used for atmospheric explosions from 1946 with scant regard for the indigenous population.

    In 1954, the Castle Bravo test exploded a 15-megaton bomb —  one thousand times more deadly than the one dropped on Hiroshima.  As a result, the population of Rongelap were exposed to 200 roentgens of radiation, considered life-threatening without medical intervention. And it was.

    Part of the Marshall Islands, with Bikini Atoll and Rongelap in the top left. Image: www.solidarity.co.nz

    Total US tests equaled more than 7000 Hiroshimas.  The Clinton administration released the aptly-named Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE), report in January 1994 in which it acknowledged:

    “What followed was a program by the US government — initially the Navy and then the AEC and its successor agencies — to provide medical care for the exposed population, while at the same time trying to learn as much as possible about the long-term biological effects of radiation exposure. The dual purpose of what is now a DOE medical program has led to a view by the Marshallese that they were being used as ‘guinea pigs’ in a ‘radiation experiment’.

    This impression was reinforced by the fact that the islanders were deliberately left in place and then evacuated, having been heavily radiated. Three years later they were told it was “safe to return” despite the lead scientist calling Rongelap “by far the most contaminated place in the world”.

    Significant compensation paid by the US to the Marshall Islands has proven inadequate given the scale of the contamination.  To some degree, the US has also used money to achieve capture of elite interest groups and secure ongoing control of the islands.

    Entrusted to the US, the Marshall Islanders were treated like the civilians of Nagasaki
     The US took the Marshall Islands from Japan in 1944.  The only “right” it has to be there was granted by the United Nations which in 1947 established the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, to be administered by the United States.

    What followed was an abuse of trust worse than rapists at a state care facility.  Using the very powers entrusted to it to protect the Marshallese, the US instead used the islands as a nuclear laboratory — violating both the letter and spirit of international law.

    Fellow white-dominated countries like Australia and New Zealand couldn’t have cared less and let the indigenous people be irradiated for decades.

    The betrayal of trust by the US was comprehensive and remains so to this day:

    Under Article 76 of the UN Charter, all trusteeship agreements carried obligations. The administering power was required to:

    • Promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the people
    • Protect the rights and well-being of the inhabitants
    • Help them advance toward self-government or independence.

    Under Article VI, the United States solemnly pledged to “Protect the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources.”  Very similar to sentiments in New Zealand’s Treaty of Waitangi.  Within a few years the Americans were exploding the biggest nuclear bombs in history over the islands.

    Within a year of the US assuming trusteeship of the islands, another pillar of international law came into effect: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) — which affirms the inherent dignity and equal rights of all humans. Exposing colonised peoples to extreme radiation for weapons testing is a racist affront to this.

    America has a long history of making treaties and fine speeches and then exploiting indigenous peoples.  Last year, I had the sobering experience of reading American military historian Peter Cozzens’ The Earth is Weeping, a history of the “Indian wars” for the American West.

    The past is not dead: the Marshall Islands are a hive of bases, laboratories and missile testing; Americans are also incredibly busy attacking the population in Gaza today.

    Eyes of Fire – the last voyage of the Rainbow Warrior
     Had the French not sunk the Rainbow Warrior after it reached Auckland from the Rongelap evacuation, it would have led a flotilla to protest nuclear testing at Moruroa in French Polynesia.  So the bookends of this article are the abuse of defenceless people in the charge of one nuclear power — the US —  and the abuse of New Zealand and the peoples of French Polynesia by another nuclear power — France.

    Senator Jeton Anjain (left) of Rongelap and Greenpeace campaign coordinator Steve Sawyer on board the Rainbow Warrior . . . challenging the abuse of defenceless people under the charge of one nuclear power. Image: David Robie/Eyes of Fire

    This incredible story, and much more, is the subject of David Robie’s outstanding book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, published by Little Island Press, which has been relaunched to mark the 40th anniversary of the French terrorist attack.

    A new prologue by former prime minister Helen Clark and a preface by Greenpeace’s Bunny McDiarmid, along with an extensive postscript which bring us up to the present day, underline why the past is not dead; it’s with us right now.

    Between them, France and the US have exploded more than 300 nuclear bombs in the Pacific. Few people are told this; few people know this.

    Today, a matrix of issues combine — the ongoing effects of nuclear contamination, sea rise imperilling Pacific nations, colonialism still posing immense challenges to people in the Marshall Islands, Kanaky New Caledonia and in many parts of our region.

    Unsung heroes
     Our media never ceases to share the pronouncements of European leaders and news from the US and Europe but the leaders and issues of the Pacific are seldom heard. The heroes of the antinuclear movement should be household names in Australia and New Zealand.

    Vanuatu’s great leader Father Walter Lini; Oscar Temaru, Mayor, later President of French Polynesia; Senator Jeton Anjain, Darlene Keju-Johnson and so many others.

    Do we know them?  Have we heard their voices?

    Jobod Silk, climate activist, said in a speech welcoming the Rainbow Warrior III to Majuro earlier this year:  “Our crusade for nuclear justice intertwines with our fight against the tides.”

    Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific . . . the Rainbow Warrior taking on board Rongelap islanders ready for their first of four relocation voyages to Mejatto island. Image: David Robie/Eyes of Fire

    Former Tuvalu PM Enele Sapoaga castigated Australia for the AUKUS submarine deal which he said “was crafted in secret by former Prime Minister Scott Morrison with no public discussion.”

    He challenged the bigger regional powers, particularly Australia and New Zealand, to remember that the existential threat faced by Pacific nations comes first from climate change, and reminded New Zealanders of the commitment to keeping the South Pacific nuclear-free.

    Hinamoeura Cross, a Tahitian anti-nuclear activist and politician, said in a 2019 UN speech: “Today, the damage is done. My people are sick. For 30 years we were the mice in France’s laboratory.”

    Until we learn their stories and know their names as well as we know those of Marco Rubio or Keir Starmer, we will remain strangers in our own lands.

    The Pacific owes them, along with the people of Greenpeace, a huge debt.  They put their bodies on the line to stop the aggressors. Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira, killed by the French in 1985, was just one of many victims, one of many heroes.

    A great way to honour the sacrifice of those who stood up for justice, who stood for peace and a nuclear-free Pacific, and who honoured our own national identity would be to buy David Robie’s excellent book.

    You cannot sink a rainbow.

    Greenpeace photographer Fernando Pereira being welcomed to Rongelap Atoll by a villager in May 1985 barely two months before he was killed by French secret agents during the sabotage of the Rainbow Warrior. Image: David Robie/Eyes of Fire

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hanika Rizo, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

    Earth formed about 4.6 billion years ago, during the geological eon known as the Hadean. The name “Hadean” comes from the Greek god of the underworld, reflecting the extreme heat that likely characterized the planet at the time.

    By 4.35 billion years ago, the Earth might have cooled down enough for the first crust to form and life to emerge.

    However, very little is known about this early chapter in Earth’s history, as rocks and minerals from that time are extremely rare. This lack of preserved geological records makes it difficult to reconstruct what the Earth looked like during the Hadean Eon, leaving many questions about its earliest evolution unanswered.

    We are part of a research team that has confirmed the oldest known rocks on Earth are located in northern Québec. Dating back 4.3 billion years, these rocks provide a rare and invaluable glimpse into the origins of our planet.

    Geologists Jonathan O’Neil and Chris Sole examine rocks in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    Remains from the Hadean Eon

    The Hadean Eon is the first period in the geological timescale, spanning from Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago and ending around 4.03 billion years ago.

    The oldest terrestrial materials ever dated by scientists are extremely rare zircon minerals that were discovered in western Australia. These zircons were formed as early as 4.4 billion years ago, and while their host rock eroded away, the durability of zircons allowed them to be preserved for a long time.

    Studies of these zircon minerals has given us clues about the Hadean environment, and the formation and evolution of Earth’s oldest crust. The zircons’ chemistry suggests that they formed in magmas produced by the melting of sediments deposited at the bottom of an ancient ocean. This suggests that the zircons are evidence that the Hadean Eon cooled rapidly, and liquid water oceans were formed early on.

    Other research on the Hadean zircons suggests that the Earth’s earliest crust was mafic (rich in magnesium and iron). Until recently, however, the existence of that crust remained to be confirmed.

    In 2008, a study led by associate professor Jonathan O’Neil (then a McGill University doctoral student) proposed that rocks of this ancient crust had been preserved in northern Québec and were the only known vestige of the Hadean.

    Since then, the age of those rocks — found in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt — has been controversial and the subject of ongoing scientific debate.

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    ‘Big, old solid rock’

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt is located in the northernmost region of Québec, in the Nunavik region above the 55th parallel. Most of the rocks there are metamorphosed volcanic rocks, rich in magnesium and iron. The most common rocks in the belt are called the Ujaraaluk rocks, meaning “big old solid rock” in Inuktitut.

    The age of 4.3 billion years was proposed after variations in neodymium-142 were detected, an isotope produced exclusively during the Hadean through the radioactive decay of samarium-146. The relationship between samarium and neodymium isotope abundances had been previously used to date meteorites and lunar rocks, but before 2008 had never been applied to Earth rocks.

    This interpretation, however, was challenged by several research groups, some of whom studied zircons within the belt and proposed a younger age of at most 3.78 billion years, placing the rocks in the Archean Eon instead.

    Confirming the Hadean Age

    In the summer of 2017, we returned to the Nuvvuagittuq belt to take a closer look at the ancient rocks. This time, we collected intrusive rocks — called metagabbros — that cut across the Ujaraaluk rock formation, hoping to obtain independent age constraints. The fact that these newly studied metagabbros are in intrusion in the Ujaraaluk rocks implies that the latter must be older.

    The project was led by masters student Chris Sole at the University of Ottawa, who joined us in the field. Back in the laboratory, we collaborated with French geochronologist Jean-Louis Paquette. Additionally, two undergraduate students — David Benn (University of Ottawa) and Joeli Plakholm (Carleton University) participated to the project.

    We combined our field observations with petrology, geochemistry, geochronology and applied two independent samarium-neodymium age dating methods, dating techniques used to assess the absolute ages of magmatic rocks, before these become metamorphic rocks. Both assessments yielded the same result: the intrusive rocks are 4.16 billion years old.

    Sunset at the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    The oldest rocks

    Since these metagabbros cut across the Ujaraaluk formation, the Ujaraaluk rocks must be even older, placing them firmly in the Hadean Eon.

    Studying the Nuvvuagittuq rocks, the only preserved rocks from the Hadean, provides a unique opportunity to learn about the earliest history of our planet. They can help us understand how the first continents formed, and how and when Earth’s environment evolved to become habitable.

    Hanika Rizo receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

    Jonathan O’Neil receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

    – ref. The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old – https://theconversation.com/the-oldest-rocks-on-earth-are-4-3-billion-years-old-259657

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hanika Rizo, Associate Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University

    Earth formed about 4.6 billion years ago, during the geological eon known as the Hadean. The name “Hadean” comes from the Greek god of the underworld, reflecting the extreme heat that likely characterized the planet at the time.

    By 4.35 billion years ago, the Earth might have cooled down enough for the first crust to form and life to emerge.

    However, very little is known about this early chapter in Earth’s history, as rocks and minerals from that time are extremely rare. This lack of preserved geological records makes it difficult to reconstruct what the Earth looked like during the Hadean Eon, leaving many questions about its earliest evolution unanswered.

    We are part of a research team that has confirmed the oldest known rocks on Earth are located in northern Québec. Dating back 4.3 billion years, these rocks provide a rare and invaluable glimpse into the origins of our planet.

    Geologists Jonathan O’Neil and Chris Sole examine rocks in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    Remains from the Hadean Eon

    The Hadean Eon is the first period in the geological timescale, spanning from Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago and ending around 4.03 billion years ago.

    The oldest terrestrial materials ever dated by scientists are extremely rare zircon minerals that were discovered in western Australia. These zircons were formed as early as 4.4 billion years ago, and while their host rock eroded away, the durability of zircons allowed them to be preserved for a long time.

    Studies of these zircon minerals has given us clues about the Hadean environment, and the formation and evolution of Earth’s oldest crust. The zircons’ chemistry suggests that they formed in magmas produced by the melting of sediments deposited at the bottom of an ancient ocean. This suggests that the zircons are evidence that the Hadean Eon cooled rapidly, and liquid water oceans were formed early on.

    Other research on the Hadean zircons suggests that the Earth’s earliest crust was mafic (rich in magnesium and iron). Until recently, however, the existence of that crust remained to be confirmed.

    In 2008, a study led by associate professor Jonathan O’Neil (then a McGill University doctoral student) proposed that rocks of this ancient crust had been preserved in northern Québec and were the only known vestige of the Hadean.

    Since then, the age of those rocks — found in the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt — has been controversial and the subject of ongoing scientific debate.

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt in northern Québec.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    ‘Big, old solid rock’

    The Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt is located in the northernmost region of Québec, in the Nunavik region above the 55th parallel. Most of the rocks there are metamorphosed volcanic rocks, rich in magnesium and iron. The most common rocks in the belt are called the Ujaraaluk rocks, meaning “big old solid rock” in Inuktitut.

    The age of 4.3 billion years was proposed after variations in neodymium-142 were detected, an isotope produced exclusively during the Hadean through the radioactive decay of samarium-146. The relationship between samarium and neodymium isotope abundances had been previously used to date meteorites and lunar rocks, but before 2008 had never been applied to Earth rocks.

    This interpretation, however, was challenged by several research groups, some of whom studied zircons within the belt and proposed a younger age of at most 3.78 billion years, placing the rocks in the Archean Eon instead.

    Confirming the Hadean Age

    In the summer of 2017, we returned to the Nuvvuagittuq belt to take a closer look at the ancient rocks. This time, we collected intrusive rocks — called metagabbros — that cut across the Ujaraaluk rock formation, hoping to obtain independent age constraints. The fact that these newly studied metagabbros are in intrusion in the Ujaraaluk rocks implies that the latter must be older.

    The project was led by masters student Chris Sole at the University of Ottawa, who joined us in the field. Back in the laboratory, we collaborated with French geochronologist Jean-Louis Paquette. Additionally, two undergraduate students — David Benn (University of Ottawa) and Joeli Plakholm (Carleton University) participated to the project.

    We combined our field observations with petrology, geochemistry, geochronology and applied two independent samarium-neodymium age dating methods, dating techniques used to assess the absolute ages of magmatic rocks, before these become metamorphic rocks. Both assessments yielded the same result: the intrusive rocks are 4.16 billion years old.

    Sunset at the Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt.
    (H. Rizo), CC BY

    The oldest rocks

    Since these metagabbros cut across the Ujaraaluk formation, the Ujaraaluk rocks must be even older, placing them firmly in the Hadean Eon.

    Studying the Nuvvuagittuq rocks, the only preserved rocks from the Hadean, provides a unique opportunity to learn about the earliest history of our planet. They can help us understand how the first continents formed, and how and when Earth’s environment evolved to become habitable.

    Hanika Rizo receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

    Jonathan O’Neil receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

    – ref. The oldest rocks on Earth are 4.3 billion years old – https://theconversation.com/the-oldest-rocks-on-earth-are-4-3-billion-years-old-259657

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Parental controls on children’s tech devices are out of touch with child’s play

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sara M. Grimes, Wolfe Chair in Scientific and Technological Literacy and Professor, McGill University

    Parenting in the digital age can be stressful and demands a lot from parents.

    The Family Online Safety Institute (FOSI) recently released its annual Online Safety Survey that discovered almost 50 per cent of parents surveyed aren’t using parental controls to manage their children’s devices. These are tools that would ostensibly help parents filter out inappropriate content or unwanted interactions on their children’s devices.

    The FOSI authors conclude the reason parents aren’t using the tools is because they feel “overwhelmed” and recommend parents educate themselves as a good first step toward broader use.

    While overwhelm is a real thing, we suggest a bigger problem with parental controls is how they are designed. This includes how little attention is given to supporting open communication between parents and children.

    Once a year for the past three years, we’ve asked the same 33 children (initially aged six to 12) what they think about content ratings, online safety, game monetization and privacy.
    Our team’s combined expertise in communication, education, policy and game studies analyzed their answers.

    We also asked their parents how they mediated their kids’ gaming. Nearly half of them don’t use parental controls either. They say parental controls don’t always work as promised, offer little context about how settings affect gameplay and force binary choices that don’t align with household rules or with children’s maturity levels.

    The parents we asked said they aren’t avoiding parental controls because they feel overwhelmed by them. It’s that the tools are poorly designed.

    Parent controls can introduce more problems

    At the same time, many of the parents described themselves as highly engaged in their child’s gameplay; talking with their children regularly or encouraging play in shared, supervised spaces. Several said they choose to trust their child rather than set top-down limits.

    Our findings align with previous research on digital parenting. In one British study, parents said they felt some controls were valuable supplements to mediation, while other controls were poorly designed, introducing more problems than solutions.

    The use of parental controls doesn’t necessarily translate to increased child safety. In fact, using parental controls can create a disconnect between parents and children on key safety issues.

    Awareness of risks

    Six children we interviewed were not aware their parents were using controls, and at least two children revealed they didn’t even know why a parent would use parental controls in the first place. In this context, parents’ efforts to protect their children had the unintended side effect of obscuring vital knowledge, leaving the children unaware of some of the key risks associated with playing online. Parental controls can remove opportunities to teach kids about safety if they aren’t part of the conversation.

    We believe that the behind-the-scenes protections enabled by (some) parental controls can be detrimental to parent-child communication about online safety. What are the risks? How can children avoid the riskiest behaviour? What should they do when or if they’ve encountered danger?

    Meanwhile, parents aren’t always familiar with the features and activities they are asked to restrict or allow. Very few parental controls contain information about how gameplay will be impacted by their settings. Many contain terms only someone familiar with the game would understand, while others are hard to navigate.

    All of this can lead to misinterpretations and parent-child conflicts, making the tools even harder to use.

    Power of communication

    Open communication between parents and children on safety topics fosters trust, which increases the likelihood kids will turn to their parents for help when something dangerous happens.

    It enables children to build resiliency, which in turn reduces the risk they’ll be harmed by negative online encounters.

    Research also suggests that parent-child communication may be more effective at helping to avoid harm than embedded restrictions enabled by parental controls.

    The importance of open communication is also emphasized in the FOSI report. In households where conversations about online safety happened regularly (six times or more a year), parents and children were both more likely to view parental controls as a useful and valuable tool for online safety.

    This, the authors conclude, “supports the view of online safety as a collaborative effort as opposed to a priority imposed by parents on their children.”

    On this point, we couldn’t agree more. Families would benefit from making parental controls and safety settings a family affair. Kids and parents have a lot to learn from each other about the digital world, and reviewing these systems together can provide a much-needed opening for crucial conversations about risk, safety and what kids find meaningful about digital play.

    Rethinking safety tools

    Let’s not pretend parental controls are a panacea for child safety.

    Many parental controls contain serious design flaws and limitations. Very few comprehensively address the needs and concerns of either children or their parents.

    Now that lawmakers are starting to make parental controls a mandatory part of new child safety legislation, we urgently need to start taking a closer and more critical look at what they can and can’t do.

    Parental controls can be a useful tool when they are designed well, applied with transparency, and provide families with ample options so they can be tailored to not only fit with but foster household rules and open communication.

    There’s a lot of work to be done before this is the standard. But also a growing impetus for game and other tech companies to make it happen.

    Sara M. Grimes receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada,

    Riley McNair 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. Parental controls on children’s tech devices are out of touch with child’s play – https://theconversation.com/parental-controls-on-childrens-tech-devices-are-out-of-touch-with-childs-play-257874

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Workplaces have embraced mindfulness and self-compassion — but did capitalism hijack their true purpose?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Yasemin Pacaci, Postdoctoral Fellow, Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Ontario

    When practiced with integrity, mindfulness and self-compassion can improve the collective well-being and personal agency of employees. (Shutterstock)

    Mindfulness and self-compassion have become popular tools for improving mental health and well-being in the workplace. Mindfulness involves paying attention to thoughts, emotions and surroundings without judgment, much like watching clouds pass in the sky. This moment-to-moment awareness helps people respond skilfully rather than react automatically.

    Self-compassion builds on mindfulness by encouraging people to meet difficult feelings and experiences with kindness instead of resistance. In other words, mindfulness helps people first recognize their suffering, while self-compassion helps people respond with kindness.

    Both mindfulness and self-compassion can be practised formally through meditations like body scans, breath awareness or loving-kindness meditation, and informally by bringing mindful attention to mind, emotions and everyday activities.

    Both practices have the potential to transform dysfunctional workplaces by improving the collective well-being and personal agency of employees.

    Yet too often, these practices are introduced superficially to boost productivity and performance, rather than used to address the root causes of workplace stress. It’s a pattern I’ve witnessed repeatedly in my years as a mindfulness teacher and researcher.

    This brings into question whether these practices can thrive in capitalist systems that prioritize profit over people. But rather than rejecting mindfulness and self-compassion as incompatible with capitalism, I argue we need a more thoughtful framework that stays true to their essence while tackling common misunderstandings and misuses.

    How capitalism is co-opting mindfulness

    Academic and practitioner critics have raised concerns about how mindfulness and self-compassion practices are being integrated into corporate life.

    Some of these critics argue that companies are incorporating mindfulness and self-compassion practices not to fix systemic problems, but to boost their own productivity and shift the responsibility for stress onto employees.

    In these cases, critics use the term “McMindfulness” to describe a commodified, diluted version of mindfulness that is stripped of its roots in Buddhist philosophy.

    If organizations want to reap the full benefits of mindfulness and self-compassion, they need to take a more deliberate, systemic approach.
    (Unsplash/Redd Francisco)

    Some critics have gone further, claiming that mindfulness encourages contentment with the status quo and may make employees more vulnerable to exploitation.

    While these critiques raise valid concerns, they often create more confusion and resistance than meaningful dialogue or practical solutions for implementing mindfulness and self-compassion in the workplace.

    Empirical research offers a more nuanced perspective. Mindfulness and self-compassion, when practised consistently, can strengthen employees’ sense of agency, improve their self-confidence, support ethical decision-making and action for meaningful change.

    Done right, mindfulness can help workers

    Employees who develop mindfulness and self-compassion skills tend to respond in three main ways, according to research.

    First, they become more aware of dysfunction in the workplace. This awareness can empower them to speak up and advocate for change if it’s within their control and in their own interest. It can also cause them to engage in more ethical practices, especially in toxic work environments.

    Second, they are more likely to leave toxic work environments. When employees realize change is beyond their control, mindfulness and self-compassion can cause them to lose their motivation for work and, indirectly, might prompt them to leave toxic workplaces altogether.

    Third, for employees who end up staying in their roles, they are better able to acknowledge and become less effected by stressors. However, this doesn’t mean they become more productive or blindly enthusiastic about their jobs. Mindfulness enhances motivation that stems from genuine interest, not from pressure or obligation.

    It’s important to note that mindfulness doesn’t mean these employees condone poor conditions or toxic practices. Rather, it helps them see reality more clearly, without denial or avoidance.

    And for employers hoping mindfulness will instantly boost engagement or drive performance, research shows employees may actually become more critical of their work and less willing to perform mundane tasks.

    Towards true workplace transformation

    Mindfulness alone cannot fix a toxic workplace. When organizations introduce mindfulness programs without first addressing the underlying causes of stress or toxicity, they’re unlikely to see the results they expect.

    If organizations want to reap the full benefits of mindfulness and self-compassion, they need to take a more deliberate, structured approach. Psychologist Kurt Lewin’s three-step change management model offers a useful guide:

    Step 1. Unfreeze: Address the root causes of workplace stress

    • Address systemic stressors. Before introducing any well-being initiative, organizations must confront actual sources of stress such as excessive workloads, toxic leadership and job insecurity.
    • Correct misunderstandings. Clarify what mindfulness and self-compassion actually is to reduce scepticism and confusion.
    • Avoid mandatory participation. Giving employees the freedom to opt in fosters authentic engagement and sustains interest.
    Without addressing the systemic causes of stress, mindfulness practices can prove ineffective.
    (Shutterstock)

    Step 2. Change: Implement practices ethically and intentionally

    • Lead by example at the top. Instead of only offering these programs to employees, leaders should engage with mindfulness and self-compassion practices themselves. When senior figures lead by example, these programs gain legitimacy and workplaces foster more ethical, people-centered leadership that goes beyond performance and productivity.
    • Ensure cultural sensitivity. Small cultural adaptations can improve the inclusion of mindfulness and self-compassion sessions. For instance, research has found that in Hispanic communities, using familiar stories or proverbs can make mindfulness sessions more relatable and improve engagement.
    • Preserve ethical foundations. Present mindfulness and self-compassion as universal practices, not tied to any one religion. This preserves their ethical underpinnings while ensuring they remain universal and accessible to all.

    Step 3. Freeze: Embed mindfulness and self-compassion into workplace culture

    • Encourage small, daily practices. Offer simple tools like journaling or mindful breathing breaks that employees can tailor to their own needs and schedules.
    • Provide ongoing support. Create time and space for continued practice, such as guided meditations, mindfulness moments in meetings or gratitude boards so new habits take root.
    • Measure impact holistically. Consider hiring qualified professionals to evaluate program effectiveness, address emerging needs and keep the organization moving forward.

    Moving beyond wellness window-dressing

    Mindfulness and self-compassion are not magic bullets, but they can still be powerful catalysts for change.

    When introduced with a deliberate and thoughtful approach, mindfulness and self-compassion can help workplaces move beyond shallow wellness “hacks” toward truly transformative practices, even in high-pressure, profit-driven environments.

    Far from serving as a quick fix or a mere productivity tool, these practices encourage employees to challenge the status quo, take meaningful action, build healthier relationships and make more ethical decisions. They can help individual employees flourish within and beyond their workplaces.

    The true value of mindfulness and self-compassion practices lies not in short-term outcomes or surface-level improvements, but in helping individuals be more aware of themselves, their surroundings and the choices they make, which is beyond any outcome or context.

    Yasemin Pacaci 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. Workplaces have embraced mindfulness and self-compassion — but did capitalism hijack their true purpose? – https://theconversation.com/workplaces-have-embraced-mindfulness-and-self-compassion-but-did-capitalism-hijack-their-true-purpose-258043

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Workplaces have embraced mindfulness and self-compassion — but did capitalism hijack their true purpose?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Yasemin Pacaci, Postdoctoral Fellow, Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Ontario

    When practiced with integrity, mindfulness and self-compassion can improve the collective well-being and personal agency of employees. (Shutterstock)

    Mindfulness and self-compassion have become popular tools for improving mental health and well-being in the workplace. Mindfulness involves paying attention to thoughts, emotions and surroundings without judgment, much like watching clouds pass in the sky. This moment-to-moment awareness helps people respond skilfully rather than react automatically.

    Self-compassion builds on mindfulness by encouraging people to meet difficult feelings and experiences with kindness instead of resistance. In other words, mindfulness helps people first recognize their suffering, while self-compassion helps people respond with kindness.

    Both mindfulness and self-compassion can be practised formally through meditations like body scans, breath awareness or loving-kindness meditation, and informally by bringing mindful attention to mind, emotions and everyday activities.

    Both practices have the potential to transform dysfunctional workplaces by improving the collective well-being and personal agency of employees.

    Yet too often, these practices are introduced superficially to boost productivity and performance, rather than used to address the root causes of workplace stress. It’s a pattern I’ve witnessed repeatedly in my years as a mindfulness teacher and researcher.

    This brings into question whether these practices can thrive in capitalist systems that prioritize profit over people. But rather than rejecting mindfulness and self-compassion as incompatible with capitalism, I argue we need a more thoughtful framework that stays true to their essence while tackling common misunderstandings and misuses.

    How capitalism is co-opting mindfulness

    Academic and practitioner critics have raised concerns about how mindfulness and self-compassion practices are being integrated into corporate life.

    Some of these critics argue that companies are incorporating mindfulness and self-compassion practices not to fix systemic problems, but to boost their own productivity and shift the responsibility for stress onto employees.

    In these cases, critics use the term “McMindfulness” to describe a commodified, diluted version of mindfulness that is stripped of its roots in Buddhist philosophy.

    If organizations want to reap the full benefits of mindfulness and self-compassion, they need to take a more deliberate, systemic approach.
    (Unsplash/Redd Francisco)

    Some critics have gone further, claiming that mindfulness encourages contentment with the status quo and may make employees more vulnerable to exploitation.

    While these critiques raise valid concerns, they often create more confusion and resistance than meaningful dialogue or practical solutions for implementing mindfulness and self-compassion in the workplace.

    Empirical research offers a more nuanced perspective. Mindfulness and self-compassion, when practised consistently, can strengthen employees’ sense of agency, improve their self-confidence, support ethical decision-making and action for meaningful change.

    Done right, mindfulness can help workers

    Employees who develop mindfulness and self-compassion skills tend to respond in three main ways, according to research.

    First, they become more aware of dysfunction in the workplace. This awareness can empower them to speak up and advocate for change if it’s within their control and in their own interest. It can also cause them to engage in more ethical practices, especially in toxic work environments.

    Second, they are more likely to leave toxic work environments. When employees realize change is beyond their control, mindfulness and self-compassion can cause them to lose their motivation for work and, indirectly, might prompt them to leave toxic workplaces altogether.

    Third, for employees who end up staying in their roles, they are better able to acknowledge and become less effected by stressors. However, this doesn’t mean they become more productive or blindly enthusiastic about their jobs. Mindfulness enhances motivation that stems from genuine interest, not from pressure or obligation.

    It’s important to note that mindfulness doesn’t mean these employees condone poor conditions or toxic practices. Rather, it helps them see reality more clearly, without denial or avoidance.

    And for employers hoping mindfulness will instantly boost engagement or drive performance, research shows employees may actually become more critical of their work and less willing to perform mundane tasks.

    Towards true workplace transformation

    Mindfulness alone cannot fix a toxic workplace. When organizations introduce mindfulness programs without first addressing the underlying causes of stress or toxicity, they’re unlikely to see the results they expect.

    If organizations want to reap the full benefits of mindfulness and self-compassion, they need to take a more deliberate, structured approach. Psychologist Kurt Lewin’s three-step change management model offers a useful guide:

    Step 1. Unfreeze: Address the root causes of workplace stress

    • Address systemic stressors. Before introducing any well-being initiative, organizations must confront actual sources of stress such as excessive workloads, toxic leadership and job insecurity.
    • Correct misunderstandings. Clarify what mindfulness and self-compassion actually is to reduce scepticism and confusion.
    • Avoid mandatory participation. Giving employees the freedom to opt in fosters authentic engagement and sustains interest.
    Without addressing the systemic causes of stress, mindfulness practices can prove ineffective.
    (Shutterstock)

    Step 2. Change: Implement practices ethically and intentionally

    • Lead by example at the top. Instead of only offering these programs to employees, leaders should engage with mindfulness and self-compassion practices themselves. When senior figures lead by example, these programs gain legitimacy and workplaces foster more ethical, people-centered leadership that goes beyond performance and productivity.
    • Ensure cultural sensitivity. Small cultural adaptations can improve the inclusion of mindfulness and self-compassion sessions. For instance, research has found that in Hispanic communities, using familiar stories or proverbs can make mindfulness sessions more relatable and improve engagement.
    • Preserve ethical foundations. Present mindfulness and self-compassion as universal practices, not tied to any one religion. This preserves their ethical underpinnings while ensuring they remain universal and accessible to all.

    Step 3. Freeze: Embed mindfulness and self-compassion into workplace culture

    • Encourage small, daily practices. Offer simple tools like journaling or mindful breathing breaks that employees can tailor to their own needs and schedules.
    • Provide ongoing support. Create time and space for continued practice, such as guided meditations, mindfulness moments in meetings or gratitude boards so new habits take root.
    • Measure impact holistically. Consider hiring qualified professionals to evaluate program effectiveness, address emerging needs and keep the organization moving forward.

    Moving beyond wellness window-dressing

    Mindfulness and self-compassion are not magic bullets, but they can still be powerful catalysts for change.

    When introduced with a deliberate and thoughtful approach, mindfulness and self-compassion can help workplaces move beyond shallow wellness “hacks” toward truly transformative practices, even in high-pressure, profit-driven environments.

    Far from serving as a quick fix or a mere productivity tool, these practices encourage employees to challenge the status quo, take meaningful action, build healthier relationships and make more ethical decisions. They can help individual employees flourish within and beyond their workplaces.

    The true value of mindfulness and self-compassion practices lies not in short-term outcomes or surface-level improvements, but in helping individuals be more aware of themselves, their surroundings and the choices they make, which is beyond any outcome or context.

    Yasemin Pacaci 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. Workplaces have embraced mindfulness and self-compassion — but did capitalism hijack their true purpose? – https://theconversation.com/workplaces-have-embraced-mindfulness-and-self-compassion-but-did-capitalism-hijack-their-true-purpose-258043

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: University leaders have to make sense of massive disruption — 4 ways they do it

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daniel Atlin, Adjunct Professor, Gordon S. Lang School of Business, University of Guelph

    Trying to navigate an environment where massive disruption and unprecedented change is the norm presents a challenge for business leaders everywhere.

    Social-purpose, multi-stakeholder organizations like post-secondary institutions, hospitals, governments and NGOs are particularly affected.

    The practice of “sense-making” — making sense of the situations people find themselves in, in the words of organizational theorist Karl Weick — offers an innovative and timely framework that can help social-purpose leaders address complexity.

    Senior post-secondary leaders study

    Management experts have described sense-making as the key skill needed in an age of disruption. This has been confirmed through my research while completing a master’s degree in change leadership.

    I interviewed more than two dozen senior leaders in complex organizations in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand — the majority of whom were in the post-secondary sector. I found the leaders I interviewed were intuitively using elements from Weick’s organizational sense-making framework.

    As one leader shared:

    “The first thing you need to do is to recognize that it’s your role to help the rest of your community make sense of what’s happening around you. It’s something that I take very seriously.”

    Deborah Ancona, professor of management at MIT, says:

    “Sense-making is most often needed when our understanding of the world becomes unintelligible in some way. This occurs when the environment is changing rapidly, presenting us with surprises for which we are unprepared or confronting us with adaptive, rather than technical problems to solve.”

    Leading in ‘age of outrage’

    Social-purpose organizations face common issues such as a lack of funding, system fragmentation, competing stakeholders, new entrants and the challenges of emerging technologies.

    They are also at the centre of what business and public policy professor Karthik Ramana describes as “the age of outrage,” reflected in heightened polarization. Against this backdrop, it’s increasingly challenging to attract and retain leaders.

    I heard from leaders who felt they didn’t have the proper training for the job or support once they started their roles. In part, this is because few of them, including those involved in their hiring, seem to realize the actual messiness inherent within their organizations.

    This brings to mind the parable that writer David Foster Wallace used in his 2005 convocation speech at Kenyon College, in which two young fish are told by an older fish that they are swimming in water. One of the young fish then turns to the other in surprise and says: “What is water anyway?”

    Lack of agency

    I heard from various leaders who experienced an “aha” moment when they realized they were immersed within a fluid and dynamic organizational environment that they were expected to run like a traditional business. This realization gave them a framework to understand the lack of agency they often experienced.

    The challenge with social-purpose organizations is that they’re complex adaptive systems in which individual interactions form an ever-changing array of networks generating emergent behaviours that are often unpredictable. Complex adaptive systems also tend to revert to the status quo when faced with change.

    So how do social-purpose leaders navigate change and this challenging organizational context? They wrap their efforts around purpose. It’s an anchor point and unifying focus for leaders, teams and all stakeholders.

    4 strategies

    Based on my research, I’ve identified four main sense-making strategies that leaders use:

    Exploration and map-making: These pursuits help leaders extract a steady flow of information and data from their interactions both inside and outside their organizations. This allows them to develop high-level, adaptive frameworks that are constantly in flux — similar to Google Maps, as it generates live snapshots of traffic flows and suggested routes.

    Storytelling and narrative development: Leaders use storytelling and narrative development to project ideas, purposes and visions into the future. This allows them to connect emotionally and inspire people and communities. Recognizing their role as storyteller-in-chief can align disparate parts of an organization into a coherent and engaged whole.

    Invention and improvisation: These are employed by leaders to test assumptions as they learn what works and what doesn’t. This approach allows them to respond in real time to the never-ending flow of new information. Without taking risks, leaders are at risk of being stuck in paralysis.

    Adaptation and collaboration allows leaders to help their organizations remain relevant. Leaders spoke about the need to foster adaptation. They also stressed the need to attract new resources through collaboration across like-minded institutions, governments, funding partners and the private sector.

    Embracing a sense-making mindset

    Thinking that benefits the interests and perspectives of the total enterprise is a critical but challenging task for leaders in social- purpose organizations.

    Time and energy — two scarce resources — are necessary to build aligned and high-performing teams and to break down silos. Team alignment cannot be achieved through the occasional team-building session, but requires an ongoing commitment and a well-articulated plan.

    Social-purpose organizations need practices, frameworks and metrics that are tailored to organizations’ unique needs. Rather than spending resources, time and energy on strategic plans, some leaders are building more flexible strategic frameworks or using strategic foresight to guide an innovative vision for the future.

    Leadership can be lonely

    It’s also important to remember that leadership can be lonely. To survive and thrive, social-purpose leaders must remember to seek out their own coaches and build communities of practice to enhance their lived experience and activities.

    Developing an outer shell to weather criticism also helps. While leaders can’t please everyone, sense-making leaders find strength and build endurance in the recognition that the roles they play are meaningful, satisfying and essential — not only within the organizations they serve but through the collective work their organizations accomplish in the world.

    Leaders (and board members) must realize that hiring the same people with the same profile as the past won’t make an organization ready for change, but instead reinforces the status quo.

    By recognizing the messiness of their organizations and using sense-making skills, leaders in social-purpose organizations have better odds of surviving the perils and challenges of massive disruption and unprecedented change.

    Daniel Atlin 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. University leaders have to make sense of massive disruption — 4 ways they do it – https://theconversation.com/university-leaders-have-to-make-sense-of-massive-disruption-4-ways-they-do-it-257866

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Tracy Roof, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond

    People shop for food in Brooklyn in 2023 at a store that makes sure that its customers know it accepts SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps and EBT.
     Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    The legislative package that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, has several provisions that will shrink the safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, long known as food stamps. SNAP spending will decline by an estimated US$186 billion through 2034 as a result of several changes Congress made to the program that today helps roughly 42 million people buy groceries – an almost 20% reduction.

    In my research on the history of food stamps, I’ve found that the program was meant to be widely available to most low-income people. The SNAP changes break that tradition in two ways.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3 million people are likely to be dropped from the program and lose their benefits. This decline will occur in part because more people will face time limits if they don’t meet work requirements. Even those who meet the requirements may lose benefits because of difficulty submitting the necessary documents.

    And because states will soon have to take on more of the costs of the program, which totaled over $100 billion in 2024, they may eventually further restrict who gets help due to their own budgetary constraints.

    Summing up SNAP’s origins

    Inspired by the plight of unemployed coal miners whom John F. Kennedy met in Appalachia when he campaigned for the presidency in 1960, the early food stamps program was not limited to single parents with children, older people and people with disabilities, like many other safety net programs were at the time. It was supposed to help low-income people afford more and better food, regardless of their circumstances.

    In response to national attention in the late 1960s to widespread hunger and malnutrition in other areas of the country, such as among tenant farmers in the rural South, a limited food stamps program was expanded. It reached every part of the country by 1974.

    From the start, the states administered the program and covered some of its administrative costs and the federal government paid for the benefits in full. This arrangement encouraged states to enroll everyone who needed help without fearing the budgetary consequences.

    Who could qualify and how much help they could get were set by uniform national standards, so that even the residents of the poorest states would be able to afford a budget-conscious but nutritionally adequate diet.

    The federal government’s responsibility for the cost of benefits also allowed spending to automatically grow during economic downturns, when more people need assistance. These federal dollars helped families, retailers and local economies weather tough times.

    The changes to the SNAP program included in the legislative package that Congress approved by narrow margins and Trump signed into law, however, will make it harder for the program to serve its original goals.

    Restricting benefits

    Since the early 1970s, most so-called able-bodied adults who were not caring for a child or an adult with disabilities had to meet a work requirement to get food stamps. Welfare reform legislation in 1996 made that requirement stricter for such adults between the ages of 18 and 50 by imposing a three-month time limit if they didn’t log 20 hours or more of employment or another approved activity, such as verified volunteering.

    Budget legislation passed in 2023 expanded this rule to adults up to age 54. The 2025 law will further expand the time limit to adults up to age 64 and parents of children age 14 or over.

    States can currently get permission from the federal government to waive work requirements in areas with insufficient jobs or unemployment above the national average. This flexibility to waive work requirements will now be significantly limited and available only where at least 1 in 10 workers are unemployed.

    Concerned senators secured an exemption from the work requirements for most Native Americans and Native Alaskans, who are more likely to live in areas with limited job opportunities.

    A 2023 budget deal exempted veterans, the homeless and young adults exiting the foster care system from work requirements because they can experience special challenges getting jobs. The 2025 law does not exempt them.

    The new changes to SNAP policies will also deny benefits to many immigrants with authorization to be in the U.S., such as people granted political asylum or official refugee status. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. will continue to be ineligible for SNAP benefits.

    Tracking ‘error rates’

    Critics of food stamps have long argued that states lack incentives to carefully administer the program because the federal government is on the hook for the cost of benefits.

    In the 1970s, as the number of Americans on the food stamp rolls soared, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, developed a system for assessing if states were accurately determining whether applicants were eligible for benefits and how much they could get.

    A state’s “payment error rate” estimates the share of benefits paid out that were more or less than an applicant was actually eligible for. The error rate was not then and is not today a measure of fraud. Typically, it just indicates the share of families who get a higher – or lower – amount of benefits than they are eligible for because of mistakes or confusion on the part of the applicant or the case worker who handles the application.

    Congress tried to penalize states with error rates over 5% in the 1980s but ultimately suspended the effort under state pressure. After years of political wrangling, the USDA started to consistently enforce financial penalties on states with high error rates in the mid-1990s.

    States responded by increasing their red tape. For example, they asked applicants to submit more documentation and made them go through more bureaucratic hoops, like having more frequent in-person interviews, to get – and continue receiving – SNAP benefits.

    These demands hit low-wage workers hardest because their applications were more prone to mistakes. Low-income workers often don’t have consistent work hours and their pay can vary from week to week and month to month. The number of families getting benefits fell steeply.

    The USDA tried to reverse this decline by offering states options to simplify the process for applying for and continuing to get SNAP benefits over the course of the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Enrollment grew steadily.

    Penalizing high rates

    Since 2008, states with error rates over 6% have had to develop a detailed plan to lower them.

    Despite this requirement, the national average error rate jumped from 7.4% before the pandemic, to a record high of 11.7% in 2023. Rates rose as states struggled with a surge of people applying for benefits, a shortage of staff in state welfare agencies and procedural changes.

    Republican leaders in Congress have responded to that increase by calling for more accountability.

    Making states pay more

    The big legislative package will increase states’ expenses in two ways.

    It will reduce the federal government’s responsibility for half of the cost of administering the program to 25% beginning in the 2027 fiscal year.

    And some states will have to pay a share of benefit costs for the first time in the program’s history, depending on their payment error rates. Beginning in the 2028 fiscal year, states with an error rate between 6-8% would be responsible for 5% of the cost of benefits. Those with an error rate between 8-10% would have to pay 10%, and states with an error rate over 10% would have to pay 15%. The federal government would continue to pay all benefits in states with error rates below 6%.

    Republicans argue the changes will give states more “skin in the game” and ensure better administration of the program.

    While the national payment error rate fell from 11.68% in the 2023 fiscal year to 10.93% a year later, 42 states still had rates in excess of 6% in 2024. Twenty states plus the District of Columbia had rates of 10% or higher.

    At nearly 25%, Alaska has the highest payment error rate in the country. But Alaska won’t be in trouble right away. To ease passage in the Senate, where the vote of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, was in doubt, a provision was added to the bill allowing several states with the highest error rates to avoid cost sharing for up to two years after it begins.

    Democrats argue this may encourage states to actually increase their error rates in the short term.

    The effect of the new law on the amount of help an eligible household gets is expected to be limited.

    About 600,000 individuals and families will lose an average of $100 a month in benefits because of a change in the way utility costs are treated. The law also prevents future administrations from increasing benefits beyond the cost of living, as the Biden Administration did.

    States cannot cut benefits below the national standards set in federal law.

    But the shift of costs to financially strapped states will force them to make tough choices. They will either have to cut back spending on other programs, increase taxes, discourage people from getting SNAP benefits or drop the program altogether.

    The changes will, in the end, make it even harder for Americans who can’t afford the bare necessities to get enough nutritious food to feed their families.

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

    – ref. ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food – https://theconversation.com/big-legislative-package-shifts-more-of-snaps-costs-to-states-saving-federal-dollars-but-causing-fewer-americans-to-get-help-paying-for-food-260166

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Tracy Roof, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond

    People shop for food in Brooklyn in 2023 at a store that makes sure that its customers know it accepts SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps and EBT.
     Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    The legislative package that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, has several provisions that will shrink the safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, long known as food stamps. SNAP spending will decline by an estimated US$186 billion through 2034 as a result of several changes Congress made to the program that today helps roughly 42 million people buy groceries – an almost 20% reduction.

    In my research on the history of food stamps, I’ve found that the program was meant to be widely available to most low-income people. The SNAP changes break that tradition in two ways.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3 million people are likely to be dropped from the program and lose their benefits. This decline will occur in part because more people will face time limits if they don’t meet work requirements. Even those who meet the requirements may lose benefits because of difficulty submitting the necessary documents.

    And because states will soon have to take on more of the costs of the program, which totaled over $100 billion in 2024, they may eventually further restrict who gets help due to their own budgetary constraints.

    Summing up SNAP’s origins

    Inspired by the plight of unemployed coal miners whom John F. Kennedy met in Appalachia when he campaigned for the presidency in 1960, the early food stamps program was not limited to single parents with children, older people and people with disabilities, like many other safety net programs were at the time. It was supposed to help low-income people afford more and better food, regardless of their circumstances.

    In response to national attention in the late 1960s to widespread hunger and malnutrition in other areas of the country, such as among tenant farmers in the rural South, a limited food stamps program was expanded. It reached every part of the country by 1974.

    From the start, the states administered the program and covered some of its administrative costs and the federal government paid for the benefits in full. This arrangement encouraged states to enroll everyone who needed help without fearing the budgetary consequences.

    Who could qualify and how much help they could get were set by uniform national standards, so that even the residents of the poorest states would be able to afford a budget-conscious but nutritionally adequate diet.

    The federal government’s responsibility for the cost of benefits also allowed spending to automatically grow during economic downturns, when more people need assistance. These federal dollars helped families, retailers and local economies weather tough times.

    The changes to the SNAP program included in the legislative package that Congress approved by narrow margins and Trump signed into law, however, will make it harder for the program to serve its original goals.

    Restricting benefits

    Since the early 1970s, most so-called able-bodied adults who were not caring for a child or an adult with disabilities had to meet a work requirement to get food stamps. Welfare reform legislation in 1996 made that requirement stricter for such adults between the ages of 18 and 50 by imposing a three-month time limit if they didn’t log 20 hours or more of employment or another approved activity, such as verified volunteering.

    Budget legislation passed in 2023 expanded this rule to adults up to age 54. The 2025 law will further expand the time limit to adults up to age 64 and parents of children age 14 or over.

    States can currently get permission from the federal government to waive work requirements in areas with insufficient jobs or unemployment above the national average. This flexibility to waive work requirements will now be significantly limited and available only where at least 1 in 10 workers are unemployed.

    Concerned senators secured an exemption from the work requirements for most Native Americans and Native Alaskans, who are more likely to live in areas with limited job opportunities.

    A 2023 budget deal exempted veterans, the homeless and young adults exiting the foster care system from work requirements because they can experience special challenges getting jobs. The 2025 law does not exempt them.

    The new changes to SNAP policies will also deny benefits to many immigrants with authorization to be in the U.S., such as people granted political asylum or official refugee status. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. will continue to be ineligible for SNAP benefits.

    Tracking ‘error rates’

    Critics of food stamps have long argued that states lack incentives to carefully administer the program because the federal government is on the hook for the cost of benefits.

    In the 1970s, as the number of Americans on the food stamp rolls soared, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, developed a system for assessing if states were accurately determining whether applicants were eligible for benefits and how much they could get.

    A state’s “payment error rate” estimates the share of benefits paid out that were more or less than an applicant was actually eligible for. The error rate was not then and is not today a measure of fraud. Typically, it just indicates the share of families who get a higher – or lower – amount of benefits than they are eligible for because of mistakes or confusion on the part of the applicant or the case worker who handles the application.

    Congress tried to penalize states with error rates over 5% in the 1980s but ultimately suspended the effort under state pressure. After years of political wrangling, the USDA started to consistently enforce financial penalties on states with high error rates in the mid-1990s.

    States responded by increasing their red tape. For example, they asked applicants to submit more documentation and made them go through more bureaucratic hoops, like having more frequent in-person interviews, to get – and continue receiving – SNAP benefits.

    These demands hit low-wage workers hardest because their applications were more prone to mistakes. Low-income workers often don’t have consistent work hours and their pay can vary from week to week and month to month. The number of families getting benefits fell steeply.

    The USDA tried to reverse this decline by offering states options to simplify the process for applying for and continuing to get SNAP benefits over the course of the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Enrollment grew steadily.

    Penalizing high rates

    Since 2008, states with error rates over 6% have had to develop a detailed plan to lower them.

    Despite this requirement, the national average error rate jumped from 7.4% before the pandemic, to a record high of 11.7% in 2023. Rates rose as states struggled with a surge of people applying for benefits, a shortage of staff in state welfare agencies and procedural changes.

    Republican leaders in Congress have responded to that increase by calling for more accountability.

    Making states pay more

    The big legislative package will increase states’ expenses in two ways.

    It will reduce the federal government’s responsibility for half of the cost of administering the program to 25% beginning in the 2027 fiscal year.

    And some states will have to pay a share of benefit costs for the first time in the program’s history, depending on their payment error rates. Beginning in the 2028 fiscal year, states with an error rate between 6-8% would be responsible for 5% of the cost of benefits. Those with an error rate between 8-10% would have to pay 10%, and states with an error rate over 10% would have to pay 15%. The federal government would continue to pay all benefits in states with error rates below 6%.

    Republicans argue the changes will give states more “skin in the game” and ensure better administration of the program.

    While the national payment error rate fell from 11.68% in the 2023 fiscal year to 10.93% a year later, 42 states still had rates in excess of 6% in 2024. Twenty states plus the District of Columbia had rates of 10% or higher.

    At nearly 25%, Alaska has the highest payment error rate in the country. But Alaska won’t be in trouble right away. To ease passage in the Senate, where the vote of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, was in doubt, a provision was added to the bill allowing several states with the highest error rates to avoid cost sharing for up to two years after it begins.

    Democrats argue this may encourage states to actually increase their error rates in the short term.

    The effect of the new law on the amount of help an eligible household gets is expected to be limited.

    About 600,000 individuals and families will lose an average of $100 a month in benefits because of a change in the way utility costs are treated. The law also prevents future administrations from increasing benefits beyond the cost of living, as the Biden Administration did.

    States cannot cut benefits below the national standards set in federal law.

    But the shift of costs to financially strapped states will force them to make tough choices. They will either have to cut back spending on other programs, increase taxes, discourage people from getting SNAP benefits or drop the program altogether.

    The changes will, in the end, make it even harder for Americans who can’t afford the bare necessities to get enough nutritious food to feed their families.

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

    – ref. ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food – https://theconversation.com/big-legislative-package-shifts-more-of-snaps-costs-to-states-saving-federal-dollars-but-causing-fewer-americans-to-get-help-paying-for-food-260166

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Tracy Roof, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Richmond

    People shop for food in Brooklyn in 2023 at a store that makes sure that its customers know it accepts SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps and EBT.
     Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    The legislative package that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, has several provisions that will shrink the safety net, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, long known as food stamps. SNAP spending will decline by an estimated US$186 billion through 2034 as a result of several changes Congress made to the program that today helps roughly 42 million people buy groceries – an almost 20% reduction.

    In my research on the history of food stamps, I’ve found that the program was meant to be widely available to most low-income people. The SNAP changes break that tradition in two ways.

    The Congressional Budget Office estimates that about 3 million people are likely to be dropped from the program and lose their benefits. This decline will occur in part because more people will face time limits if they don’t meet work requirements. Even those who meet the requirements may lose benefits because of difficulty submitting the necessary documents.

    And because states will soon have to take on more of the costs of the program, which totaled over $100 billion in 2024, they may eventually further restrict who gets help due to their own budgetary constraints.

    Summing up SNAP’s origins

    Inspired by the plight of unemployed coal miners whom John F. Kennedy met in Appalachia when he campaigned for the presidency in 1960, the early food stamps program was not limited to single parents with children, older people and people with disabilities, like many other safety net programs were at the time. It was supposed to help low-income people afford more and better food, regardless of their circumstances.

    In response to national attention in the late 1960s to widespread hunger and malnutrition in other areas of the country, such as among tenant farmers in the rural South, a limited food stamps program was expanded. It reached every part of the country by 1974.

    From the start, the states administered the program and covered some of its administrative costs and the federal government paid for the benefits in full. This arrangement encouraged states to enroll everyone who needed help without fearing the budgetary consequences.

    Who could qualify and how much help they could get were set by uniform national standards, so that even the residents of the poorest states would be able to afford a budget-conscious but nutritionally adequate diet.

    The federal government’s responsibility for the cost of benefits also allowed spending to automatically grow during economic downturns, when more people need assistance. These federal dollars helped families, retailers and local economies weather tough times.

    The changes to the SNAP program included in the legislative package that Congress approved by narrow margins and Trump signed into law, however, will make it harder for the program to serve its original goals.

    Restricting benefits

    Since the early 1970s, most so-called able-bodied adults who were not caring for a child or an adult with disabilities had to meet a work requirement to get food stamps. Welfare reform legislation in 1996 made that requirement stricter for such adults between the ages of 18 and 50 by imposing a three-month time limit if they didn’t log 20 hours or more of employment or another approved activity, such as verified volunteering.

    Budget legislation passed in 2023 expanded this rule to adults up to age 54. The 2025 law will further expand the time limit to adults up to age 64 and parents of children age 14 or over.

    States can currently get permission from the federal government to waive work requirements in areas with insufficient jobs or unemployment above the national average. This flexibility to waive work requirements will now be significantly limited and available only where at least 1 in 10 workers are unemployed.

    Concerned senators secured an exemption from the work requirements for most Native Americans and Native Alaskans, who are more likely to live in areas with limited job opportunities.

    A 2023 budget deal exempted veterans, the homeless and young adults exiting the foster care system from work requirements because they can experience special challenges getting jobs. The 2025 law does not exempt them.

    The new changes to SNAP policies will also deny benefits to many immigrants with authorization to be in the U.S., such as people granted political asylum or official refugee status. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. will continue to be ineligible for SNAP benefits.

    Tracking ‘error rates’

    Critics of food stamps have long argued that states lack incentives to carefully administer the program because the federal government is on the hook for the cost of benefits.

    In the 1970s, as the number of Americans on the food stamp rolls soared, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the program, developed a system for assessing if states were accurately determining whether applicants were eligible for benefits and how much they could get.

    A state’s “payment error rate” estimates the share of benefits paid out that were more or less than an applicant was actually eligible for. The error rate was not then and is not today a measure of fraud. Typically, it just indicates the share of families who get a higher – or lower – amount of benefits than they are eligible for because of mistakes or confusion on the part of the applicant or the case worker who handles the application.

    Congress tried to penalize states with error rates over 5% in the 1980s but ultimately suspended the effort under state pressure. After years of political wrangling, the USDA started to consistently enforce financial penalties on states with high error rates in the mid-1990s.

    States responded by increasing their red tape. For example, they asked applicants to submit more documentation and made them go through more bureaucratic hoops, like having more frequent in-person interviews, to get – and continue receiving – SNAP benefits.

    These demands hit low-wage workers hardest because their applications were more prone to mistakes. Low-income workers often don’t have consistent work hours and their pay can vary from week to week and month to month. The number of families getting benefits fell steeply.

    The USDA tried to reverse this decline by offering states options to simplify the process for applying for and continuing to get SNAP benefits over the course of the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Enrollment grew steadily.

    Penalizing high rates

    Since 2008, states with error rates over 6% have had to develop a detailed plan to lower them.

    Despite this requirement, the national average error rate jumped from 7.4% before the pandemic, to a record high of 11.7% in 2023. Rates rose as states struggled with a surge of people applying for benefits, a shortage of staff in state welfare agencies and procedural changes.

    Republican leaders in Congress have responded to that increase by calling for more accountability.

    Making states pay more

    The big legislative package will increase states’ expenses in two ways.

    It will reduce the federal government’s responsibility for half of the cost of administering the program to 25% beginning in the 2027 fiscal year.

    And some states will have to pay a share of benefit costs for the first time in the program’s history, depending on their payment error rates. Beginning in the 2028 fiscal year, states with an error rate between 6-8% would be responsible for 5% of the cost of benefits. Those with an error rate between 8-10% would have to pay 10%, and states with an error rate over 10% would have to pay 15%. The federal government would continue to pay all benefits in states with error rates below 6%.

    Republicans argue the changes will give states more “skin in the game” and ensure better administration of the program.

    While the national payment error rate fell from 11.68% in the 2023 fiscal year to 10.93% a year later, 42 states still had rates in excess of 6% in 2024. Twenty states plus the District of Columbia had rates of 10% or higher.

    At nearly 25%, Alaska has the highest payment error rate in the country. But Alaska won’t be in trouble right away. To ease passage in the Senate, where the vote of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, was in doubt, a provision was added to the bill allowing several states with the highest error rates to avoid cost sharing for up to two years after it begins.

    Democrats argue this may encourage states to actually increase their error rates in the short term.

    The effect of the new law on the amount of help an eligible household gets is expected to be limited.

    About 600,000 individuals and families will lose an average of $100 a month in benefits because of a change in the way utility costs are treated. The law also prevents future administrations from increasing benefits beyond the cost of living, as the Biden Administration did.

    States cannot cut benefits below the national standards set in federal law.

    But the shift of costs to financially strapped states will force them to make tough choices. They will either have to cut back spending on other programs, increase taxes, discourage people from getting SNAP benefits or drop the program altogether.

    The changes will, in the end, make it even harder for Americans who can’t afford the bare necessities to get enough nutritious food to feed their families.

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

    – ref. ‘Big’ legislative package shifts more of SNAP’s costs to states, saving federal dollars but causing fewer Americans to get help paying for food – https://theconversation.com/big-legislative-package-shifts-more-of-snaps-costs-to-states-saving-federal-dollars-but-causing-fewer-americans-to-get-help-paying-for-food-260166

    MIL OSI Analysis –