Quantum computers have the potential to solve big scientific problems that are beyond the reach of today’s most powerful supercomputers, such as discovering new antibiotics or developing new materials.
But to achieve these breakthroughs, quantum computers will need to perform better than today’s best classical computers at solving real-world problems. And they’re not quite there yet. So what is still holding quantum computing back from becoming useful?
In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we speak to quantum computing expert Daniel Lidar at the University of Southern California in the US about what problems scientists are still wrestling with when it comes to scaling up quantum computing, and how close they are to overcoming them.
Quantum computers harness the power of quantum mechanics, the laws that govern subatomic particles. Instead of the classical bits of information used by microchips inside traditional computers, which are either a 0 or a 1, the chips in quantum computers use qubits, which can be both 0 and 1 at the same time or anywhere in between. Daniel Lidar explains:
“Put a lot of these qubits together and all of a sudden you have a computer that can simultaneously represent many, many different possibilities … and that is the starting point for the speed up that we can get from quantum computing.”
Faulty qubits
One of the biggest problems scientist face is how to scale up quantum computing power. Qubits are notoriously prone to errors – which means that they can quickly revert to being either a 0 or a 1, and so lose their advantage over classical computers.
Scientists have focused on trying to solve these errors through the concept of redundancy – linking strings of physical qubits together into what’s called a “logical qubit” to try and maximise the number of steps in a computation. And, little by little, they’re getting there.
In December 2024, Google announced that its new quantum chip, Willow, had demonstrated what’s called “beyond breakeven”, when its logical qubits worked better than the constituent parts and even kept on improving as it scaled up.
Lidar says right now the development of this technology is happening very fast:
“For quantum computing to scale and to take off is going to still take some real science breakthroughs, some real engineering breakthroughs, and probably overcoming some yet unforeseen surprises before we get to the point of true quantum utility. With that caution in mind, I think it’s still very fair to say that we are going to see truly functional, practical quantum computers kicking into gear, helping us solve real-life problems, within the next decade or so.”
Listen to Lidar explain more about how quantum computers and quantum error correction works on The Conversation Weekly podcast.
This episode of The Conversation Weekly was written and produced by Gemma Ware with assistance from Katie Flood and Mend Mariwany. Sound design was by Michelle Macklem, and theme music by Neeta Sarl.
Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Alan Hirsch, Research Fellow New South Institute, Emeritus Professor at The Nelson Mandela School of Public Governance, University of Cape Town
Donald Trump, America’s new president, has cut back massively on US commitments to asylum seekers, blocked all asylum processes and started to remove irregular immigrants.
Trump’s new measures are far reaching. They include the suspension of the US refugee admissions programme. Flights booked for refugees to the US have been cancelled. Arrests and deportations have begun.
Strongly anti-immigrant policies were also pursued under the Biden administration, though Trump’s dramatic steps take them much further. Other countries in the global north have also introduced tougher policies. The 2024 EU Pact on Migration and Asylum sets out tougher border controls, quicker assessment of asylum seekers and swifter removal of those who did not qualify. In the UK, Labour prime minister Keir Starmer has promised to bring down the net migration rate and treat people-smugglers like terrorists.
Based on my research into migration over the past 30 years I believe that these measures are unlikely to last. There are two linked trends that make closing the borders of the global north impractical and destined for revision.
The first is that populations in most of the global north are ageing fast (on average) and the fertility rate, or natural population growth rate, has plummeted. There are many more older people as a percentage of the population.
Secondly, with a workforce shrinking and the dependency ratio (the proportion of non-working to working people) rising rapidly, closing borders to potential labourers from other countries, without any other change, would lead to declining living standards in the global north. Economic growth and government revenues would slow or stagnate, undermining infrastructure maintenance and social service provision.
There are several possible strategies that could be alternatives to anti-immigration measures. Some older people could migrate south, robots and AI could do more work, workers in the global south could perform remote work for the north, and arrangements could be made to allow migrants into the north either permanently or as circulating migrants.
All these strategies are already in use, if modestly. Their application would have to expand considerably.
Misplaced panic
The responses of governments in the global north are exaggerated. Governments putting in place tough anti-immigrant measures have done so on the back of a narrative that there’s been a significant rise in the number of migrants worldwide.
This isn’t true. Some countries, such as the US, Germany and Colombia, have seen a spike in refugees and other migrants. But for the rest of the world the picture remains much the same as it has done for decades.
Foreign-born residents (the most widely used definition of migrants) rose as a proportion of residents worldwide from 2.3% in 1970 to 3.6% in 2020. But in 1960 the number was over 3%, and in the late 1800s migrants made up somewhere between 3% and 5% of the global population.
So, 3.6% is nothing new.
As for refugees, in 2023 there were about 38 million, of whom 69% sought refuge in neighbouring countries and 75% in middle- and low-income countries.
In general, therefore, rich countries have not been carrying the greatest burden.
The real reason behind these tougher measures is that living standards have stagnated in many countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The cost and availability of housing have worsened; inequality has grown since the 1980s; the quality and availability of public services have deteriorated since the global financial crisis of 2008 and COVID-19; and the quality of employment has shifted to precarious work and poorly paid service sector occupations.
This has contributed to the rise of populism, including anti-foreigner sentiment and even xenophobia.
Trump’s actions are the most extreme yet. They include an order to block “aliens involved in the invasion” using “appropriate measures” that give the security forces further powers. The prohibition of southern border asylum hearings in the US and the instruction to “remain in Mexico” means that prospective asylum seekers from third countries may not cross the border to make their applications at the port of entry. They must apply remotely.
Trump has also ordered that birthright citizenship must be limited to the children of certain categories of residents, essentially citizens or those with residence rights in the form of a “green card”. This move has been temporarily blocked in some states by judges as unconstitutional.
In addition, the acting head of the Homeland Security Department gave Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials the power to deport migrants admitted temporarily into the US under several programmes of the Biden administration, targeting refugees from Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Haiti, and possibly Afghan and Ukrainian refugees too.
The very first bill to receive final approval from the US Congress under Trump’s second term, the Laken-Riley Act, would require the detention and deportation of migrants who enter the country without authorisation and are charged with certain crimes. This bill was passed with 263 votes and 156 votes against, meaning that 46 House Democrats supported the Republican bill.
In contrast, in the global south, as I have discussed elsewhere, the trend has been in the opposite direction. South American regional communities liberalised migration most extensively in recent decades, but African regional communities have made progress too, as has the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
The way forward
Some alternative strategies are leading the way.
In Canada, the Temporary Foreign Worker programme has expanded steadily since 1973, increasingly including long-term circulating migrating lower-skilled workers for key occupations like catering, care, construction and agriculture. Though it is currently under political scrutiny because of the panic in the north over migration, and because of housing shortages in Canada, it is likely to survive and evolve. Similar systems are emerging across the global north.
In the EU, Talent Partnerships are now encouraged. Germany, for example, has talent partnerships with Kenya and Morocco, where they train health workers and IT technicians in those countries to work and live in Germany. Spain has various partnerships in Latin America and Africa. Prime minister Pedro Sanchez has chosen to be upfront on the choices. In October last year he told the Spanish people:
Spain needs to choose between being an open and prosperous country or a closed off poor country.
The current fashion for population protectionism in the global north is increasingly nasty, but it is unlikely to stand the test of time. Several constructive responses to the rising dependency ratio are feasible, but being open to more migration, possibly in new forms and through new channels. is an inevitable part of the solution.
New formal pathways for working migrants and reasonable systems for asylum seekers, along with full enforcement of rules against irregular migrants, could be the combination that works politically and economically.
Alan Hirsch receives funding from the New South Institute for research and the University of Cape Town for advice and supervision.
Environmentalists and locals have resisted a third runway at London’s Heathrow, Europe’s busiest airport, for more than two decades. Today, their efforts took a major setback.
The UK government has announced it will give the green light to airport expansion. This is not guaranteed to increase growth in the national economy as Chancellor Rachel Reeves hopes. More flights and more emissions are certain, however, at a time when experts are practically screaming at governments to rein them in.
“No airport expansions should proceed” without a UK-wide plan to annually assess and control the sector’s climate impact said the government’s watchdog, the Climate Change Committee, in 2023. Aeroplanes are 8% of UK emissions and 2% of the world’s, but they also release gases that seed heat-trapping clouds in the upper atmosphere, which triples air travel’s greenhouse effect.
While the government’s own advisers have effectively ruled out new runways for the sake of net zero, airport and airline bosses play a different tune. So what does the sector propose to manage its own pollution?
Not enough cooking oil to save us
Aviation is a notoriously difficult sector to decarbonise says Richard Sulley, a senior research fellow in sustainability policy at the University of Sheffield: “If electric or hydrogen-powered planes are possible, it won’t be for many years yet.”
To justify air travel emissions ballooning in the meantime, the aviation sector has promised a mix of “supply-side” measures, like replacing kerosene with so-called “sustainable aviation fuel” (SAF), which Reeves described as “a game changer”, and making planes lighter and more fuel-efficient.
Efficiency, in this context, is a slippery path to decarbonisation. When a high-emitting activity is reformed so that it consumes less energy, the efficiency savings are generally eclipsed by the increasing demand it drives.
“Indeed, the sector’s own plans for growth will outstrip efforts to decarbonise through synthetic fuel, delivering a neutral effect at best,” Sulley says.
“Demand-side” measures like fewer flights, taxes on frequent flying and domestic flight bans (see France) could cut emissions, he notes, but are seldom mentioned.
The UK has set a target for airline fuel to be 10% SAF by 2030. So far we’re at 1.2% – and Sulley reports that the industry has not said how it will scale up in time.
Even if airlines start taking their commitment to SAF seriously very soon, it’s a dubious solution to aviation’s climate impact according to political economists Gareth Dale (Brunel University) and Josh Moos (Leeds Beckett University).
Earlier SAF test flights burned coconut oil – 3 million coconuts to power a journey from London to Amsterdam, as Dale and Moos calculate it. At that rate, they argue Heathrow would exhaust the world’s entire crop in a few weeks (there are 18,000 commercial airports worldwide).
Modern SAF is blended with waste products from farms and kitchens. But the pair argue that the market for used cooking oil is “notoriously unregulated”. SAF may in fact be relabelled palm oil from plantations that are erasing orangutan habitat in the tropics. Again, Dale and Moos argue there is not enough used cooking oil to meet existing, let alone future, demand.
Transport for the rich, by the rich
At least the hype around SAF addresses the main problem, albeit misleadingly. Policy experts David Howarth (University of Essex) and Steven Griggs (De Montfort University) marvel at how often “carbon-neutral airports” in aviation sustainability strategies simply mean terminals powered by renewable energy.
“A terminal’s heating or lighting is, of course, largely irrelevant when its core business is as emissions-intensive as flying,” says Sulley.
Unfortunately for Rachel Reeves, a 2023 report by the New Economics Foundation found that any economic benefits of airport expansion will be largely confined to the airports themselves. Meanwhile, a wealthy subset of UK society can be expected to capture the biggest share of any new flight capacity. Each year, around half of British residents do not fly at all, Sulley points out.
At the stratospheric heights of that subset are the private jet passengers who are served by “more or less dedicated airports” that are more obscure to the general public, says Raymond Woessner, a geographer at Sorbonne Université. A study published in November found that emissions from these flights rose by 46% between 2019 and 2023. The lead author described wealthy passengers using jets “like taxis”.
“Discretion and anonymity” is what one airport nestled in the Oxfordshire countryside promises for “routine celebrity, head of state and royal visits”. Without state direction or regulation, it is these people who are setting the agenda for air travel.
Woessner notes that the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, successfully lobbied to derail a high-speed rail project in California in 2013. Instead of an option that has shown its ability to cut flight demand, the US will be offered intercontinental rocket travel.
Musk’s company SpaceX says that rockets could ferry passengers between New York and Shanghai in under an hour. Rockets would burn “vastly more fuel per trip than conventional aircraft”, says aerospace engineer Angadh Nanjangud of Queen Mary University of London, but this might “drive critical research into carbon-neutral” methane-based rocket fuel.
It would not be the first time an industry seeking to grow has used an as yet fantastical fuel to justify more carbon in Earth’s atmosphere.
When Peter Dutton was asked this week whether a Coalition government would continue to foster trade relations with China, he declared unequivocally that “the relationship with China will be much stronger than it is under the Albanese government”.
Two points stood out: Dutton’s own positive rhetoric, and his apparent confidence about the future of Australia-China relations.
It’s not unusual for opposition leaders to undertake a makeover, to their person or policy, as an election approaches. Anthony Albanese lost weight and acquired new glasses. Earlier, he’d made Labor a small policy target.
Dutton is simultaneously attempting a softening on some fronts – while retaining the “hard man” image on others.
Mid-last year Dutton said: “I’m pro-China and the relationship that we have with them. I want that trading relationship to increase. […] We need to make sure we strengthen the trading relationship because there are many businesses here who rely on it. But we have to be realistic about working to keep peace […] we live in a very uncertain time. The Prime Minister also says that we live in the most precarious period since the Second World War, and he’s right, and we need to work hard at peace as well.”
Contrast Dutton as defence minister in 2021. “Does the Chinese government wish to occupy other countries? Not in my judgement. But they do see us as tributary states. And that surrender of sovereignty and abandonment of any adherence to the international rule of law is what our country has fought against since Federation.”
It’s not that Dutton has changed his views on China. Rather, he’s camouflaged them with a softer tone, and in what he chooses to emphasise. Of course circumstances have changed – Australia now has a much better relationship with China. But significantly, Dutton needs to appeal to the local Chinese-Australian voters.
At the 2022 election, the Liberals took a big hit among voters of Chinese heritage.
The party’s review of its election performance, undertaken by former party director Brian Loughnane and frontbencher Jane Hume, said: “In the top 15 seats by Chinese ancestry the swing against the Party (on a 2PP basis) was 6.6%, compared to 3.7% in other seats. There are more than 1.2 million people of Chinese heritage living in Australia today. Rebuilding the Party’s relationship with the Chinese community must be a priority during this term of Parliament.”
Marginal Labor seats that are targets for the Liberals, where the Chinese vote is significant, include Reid and Bennelong in NSW and Chisholm and Aston in Victoria.
Dutton (and the PM) will attend a Lunar New Year celebration in Box Hill in Melbourne this weekend.
It’s notable that David Coleman, named by Dutton last weekend as the opposition’s new spokesman on foreign affairs, has worked extensively with the Chinese community. One of the contenders for the post was the high-performing James Paterson. There may have been stronger arguments for keeping Paterson in home affairs, but his very hawkish stand on China might have been in the mix.
Talking up the positive side of the Coalition’s record on China, Dutton harked back to the signing of the free trade agreement under the Abbott government, and said “we want there to be mutual respect in the relationship”.
Over its years in government the Coalition’s relationship with China has varied between pragmatic friendship and suspicious negativity. After relatively smooth sailing in the Abbott period, things soured when the Turnbull government called China out over foreign interference, introducing legislation, and banned Huawei from the 5G network. Then relations plunged dramatically when the Morrison government demanded an inquiry into the origins and handling of the outbreak of COVID in Wuhan.
Despite Dutton’s confidence, it’s more than possible that managing the China relationship after the election could be trickier than it has been during this one, no matter who is in power.
The Albanese government can claim the greatly-improved bilateral relationship as one of its major foreign policy achievements. China has brought Australia out of the deep freeze, lifting the $20 billion worth of trade barriers it had imposed. Dialogue and ministerial exchanges have resumed. Anthony Albanese has been welcomed in China.
But this week’s speculation relating to the new Chinese artificial intelligence platform DeepSeek is just the latest reminder of perennial security suspicions about the penetration of Chinese technology.(Incidentally, Dutton has an account on the Chinese-owned TikTok – despite it being banned from official government devices – in part to engage with the local Chinese community, as well as with younger people generally.)
Australia’s minerals industry is potentially vulnerable to Chinese displeasure. The Senate in the next fortnight will consider the government’s Future Made in Australia legislation, that provides a tax incentive for processing critical minerals. The Chinese have a global stranglehold on this processing – and have shown a willingness to weaponise it, for example against Japan. China’s multi-billion dollar funding of nickel processing in Indonesia has had a dire impact on producers here in Australia.
The change of government in Australia certainly facilitated the improvement in the bilateral relationship, but that improvement was also strongly driven by China’s own interests. Similarly, the future of the relationship is more in China’s hands than in Australia’s.
China expert Richard McGregor, from the Lowy Institute, says:“ Relations with China are inherently volatile.
“The day-by-day relationships have returned to a degree of normality. But all of the structural stresses which created antagonism are still there.”
These include China’s “military assertiveness in the region, competition between the US and China, Australia’s concern about foreign interference and hacking, China’s efforts to build their power in the Pacific at the expense of Australia. None of that has gone away,” McGregor says. The single biggest change of recent years “is that “China has become much more powerful and is far more willing to throw its weight around”.
Separate to any hiccups in the bilateral relationship, Australia could find itself caught in the crossfire if there is a serious deterioration in the US-China relationship under Donald Trump – notably if his tariff policy leads to a trade war. Simon Jackman, from the University of Sydney, warns that if US policy hit the (already struggling) Chinese economy, that would affect Australian exporters.
“US tariffs or import bans that slowed China’s economy would cause some short to medium headaches for Australian exporters,” Jackman says. “As in Trump Mark 1 and COVID, Australian export industries would find themselves looking for opportunities elsewhere, if global supply chains had to re-equilibrate in response to an upheaval in the US-China trade relationship.”
Ironically, the earlier search for diversified markets when the Chinese imposed their restrictions on Australian producers would have helped prepare exporters for such a contingency.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – France – By Madlen Sobkowiak, Associate Professor in Social and Environmental Accounting, EDHEC Business School
Could corporate transparency be one of the solutions to climate change? Or, at the very least, could it be a way to hold businesses accountable for their environmental impacts? Not by itself, according to our paper, “Shaping nature outcomes in corporate settings”, recently published by The Royal Society.
Ninety-four percent of investors are doubtful of the validity of corporate sustainability reporting, citing unsupported claims, according to PwC’s Global Investor Survey 2023. And their skepticism is not unfounded.
Indeed, our paper shows that while corporate transparency is a crucial first step toward a more sustainable economy, it alone will not be enough to drive positive corporate nature outcomes. For change to actually happen, three critical steps are needed: linking corporate actions to their environmental impact, embedding nature outcomes into daily operations and aligning financial incentives with ecological goals.
The risk of greenwashing
Even if there is a growing push for nature-related regulation, and especially nature-related disclosures, companies have only started to provide information about their nature-related performance, impacts and risks. This is the essence of the European Union’s Sustainable Finance Disclosures Regulation (SFDR) that came into effect in 2021 and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) that came into effect in 2023. Both initiatives aim to strengthen transparency obligations on environmental, sustainable and governance (ESG) issues within the bloc. This is characteristic of a certain kind of governance, which uses mandated information disclosure as a way of regulating behaviour.
Does it work? Not on its own, as companies still struggle to fully understand their impacts on nature or the impacts of their supply chain. And they often lack the knowledge and expertise to navigate the evolving and complex landscape of national and international sustainability reporting requirements, let alone take meaningful action. This could result in the dilution of the concept of transparency and a rise in greenwashing, the process of making false or misleading environmental claims.
Greenwashing might distort relevant information that investors require to make decisions and, in the end, erode their trust in sustainability-related products and/or practices. A study commissioned by the European Union in 2023 found that 53% of green claims on products and services make vague, misleading or even unfounded claims, and 40% have no supporting evidence. In the United States, 68% of executives admitted to being guilty of greenwashing. In this context, the standardisation of sustainability reporting in the EU is necessary and overdue.
Three key factors for corporate accountability
My co-authors and I identify three conditions for information disclosures to positively impact nature outcomes: linking companies and ecosystems, translating aspiration into operations and shaping financial-system responsiveness.
Our current approach, which uses disclosure requirements to drive company behaviour, may be limited, because providing information does not in itself encourage companies to fully achieve nature-positive impacts.
Linking companies and ecosystems
This first condition means putting in place radical traceability that links company actions to outcomes in particular settings. This would create the potential for companies to be held accountable regardless of whether they publish data, as well as incentives for them to produce their own data rather than having to respond to requirements created by third parties.
One example is Cargill, a supplier for the food sector. In the company’s “South American Soy Sustainability Report”, it traces the soy it produces and purchases through its supply chain with locations in several South American countries. The sites are geospatially located with data on the degree of deforestation in each polygon obtained from satellite images. In this respect, traceability creates the possibility for nature accounts.
Translating aspirations into operations
This approach is about developing routines and tools that translate strategic intent into on-the-ground behaviour: in other words, linking knowledge and action. Even if companies are well informed about their impacts on nature, translating strategies to reduce impacts and restore nature into operational targets might be difficult. In this regard, it might be useful to translate ambitions into specific metrics that, once embedded in companies, create visibilities and routines that focus on making a change.
For example, Holcim Spain, an aggregates and cement producer, has developed a monitoring system to evaluate restoration processes by studying nature assets. It has also studied resources based on field samples by cataloguing flora, identifying vegetation, establishing the distribution of birds and insects, assessing the status of biodiversity in the quarry and developing strategies and action plans. Monitoring of activities has been undertaken using a biodiversity index developed in collaboration with the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)‘s Biodiversity Indicator and Reporting System.
Shaping financial-system responsiveness
The final requirement relates to identifying how financial-system actors can enable company actions. To put it another way, it is about aligning financial incentives with environmental goals.
Company owners and those who fund companies are the most powerful financial actors in this context. Financial stability relies on well-functioning ecosystems; indeed, recent studies have shown that climate change threatens it. Information governance could be used to draw investor attention to nature impacts, mirroring more developed interventions. An example of such a mechanism is the EU’s SFDR, which requires banks, insurers and asset managers to provide information about how they address sustainability risks.
Another example comes from ASN Bank, which specialises in sustainability banking products and has developed a biodiversity footprinting tool for financial institutions to estimate the impacts of an investment portfolio and identify hotspots therein.
Better information, less greenwashing
The more solid, standardised and transparent corporate sustainability information is shared, the better we can combat the greenwashing that undermines the credibility of sustainability efforts. But, while disclosure is key, it is time we take its limits into account. For businesses, this implies adopting governance approaches that shape action and ceasing to rely solely on reporting.
Madlen Sobkowiak ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
In an election pitch last week, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced new incentive payments of $10,000 for eligible apprentices in residential construction.
The federal government has committed to an ambitious target of building 1.2 million new homes over the next five years through the National Housing Accord. That means it urgently needs to boost Australia’s construction workforce.
But a recent strategic review into incentives for Australian apprentices and trainees found cost-of-living pressures were a major barrier to apprenticeship entry and completion.
Only about half of apprentices currently finish their apprenticeships.
The new program has been touted as the federal government’s initial response. It will target 62,690 apprentices and cost $627 million.
But previous attempts to attract new apprentices with cash payments have had mixed results. A similar 2023 scheme to get more tradies into “green jobs” only attracted about 2,200 sign-ups in the first year.
There are also concerns the new scheme may have unintended consequences, such as diverting talent from important sectors of the new economy – including the previous “green jobs” scheme.
From July 1, eligible apprentices in the new Housing Construction Apprenticeship Program will receive five payments of $2,000 each: after six, 12, 24 and 36 months, and upon completion. The payments are staged to encourage apprentices to complete their training.
Cash payments won’t be the only new financial incentive. There’ll also be a boost to the Living Away From Home Allowance to help cover the costs of relocating, while an increase in the Disability Australian Apprentice Wage Support payment provides financial support to employers who hire apprentices with disability.
The government’s previous attempts to address chronic labour shortages through cash incentives have had mixed results.
Introduced in 2023, the New Energy Apprenticeships Program also offers $10,000 in staged payments to apprentices in priority green roles, such as electric vehicle technicians.
Despite 2,200 apprentices joining in the first year, the program was deemed too restrictive by the industry. That was despite employers themselves receiving $15,000 per apprentice (which is also what is proposed for the construction scheme).
As part of the strategic review, the Centre for International Economics was commissioned to conduct an international literature review. It found that financial incentives such as wage or training subsidies and incentives were only “somewhat relevant” to the Australian context, and there was mixed support, at best, for their effectiveness.
A major factor behind the mixed results may be the crowding-out effect in economic theory.
This suggests that increasing public spending (by giving financial incentives) could undermine the intended effect by reducing or even eliminating private-sector investment. And it does not address apprehension among employers, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, about taking on more apprentices.
More than six months after the government expanded eligibility for clean energy work, the green energy sector continues to face significant skills shortages.
While these payments may help in the long run, their staggered nature over three years won’t provide immediate relief.
The plan will likely only contribute to the government’s home-building targets by 2029, if and when more Australians enrol and complete their apprenticeships in the construction sector.
Will this have effects outside the construction industry?
More strategically, by shifting the focus from “new economy” industries outlined in the Future Made in Australia policy, this scheme risks weakening efforts to transform Australia’s economy.
The cash incentive for apprentices in home-building comes at a time when there is intense global competition for skills in “new industries”.
However, despite the many state and federal government initiatives for fee-free TAFE courses since the COVID pandemic, recently released data indicates a continued trend of long-term decline in Vocational Education and Training (VET) enrolments.
Albanese was asked about the government’s commitment to technology and digital innovation, with increasing global competition in artificial intelligence.
He responded by discussing the government’s commitment to the “new economy”.
However, the construction sector has until now not been identified as an essential part of the new economy’s priority industries by the government.
Instead, expanding incentives to construction apprentices marks a shift away from the priorities on green energy and new industries, and towards more traditional trades.
So, despite the lack of evidence that cash incentives work, and the fact they may cause unintended effects, the proposed incentive payments appear to be a pitch addressing cost-of-living/cost-of-building concerns for the upcoming election.
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.
Mike Burgess, head of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, has issued a stark warning following the discovery of explosives in a caravan in northwest Sydney, alongside a note bearing the address of a Sydney synagogue.
We have seen a disturbing escalation in the targeting of Jewish interests, and a disturbing escalation in the severity and recklessness of the targeting.
In response to the recent spate of antisemitic incidents in Sydney – which include a childcare centre being set alight and graffitied – NSW Premier Chris Minns has also pledged to strengthen the state’s hate laws.
Changes to these laws would bring NSW in line with other states. However, they will have limited impact on a serious social problem. Both nationally and in the states, many existing laws can be used to prosecute people for these crimes, including incitement to violence on the basis of religion, race or ethnicity.
Responding quickly to the growing crisis around antisemitic attacks is understandable, but greater long-term investments must also be made to prevent extreme, hateful beliefs from developing in our communities in the first place.
What crimes are being committed?
Different laws can be triggered depending on the nature of a particular offence.
Other hateful acts can be charged as arson, property damage or serious vilification.
For conduct to be treated as terrorism, it must be done for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause.
Extreme right-wing or neo-Nazi beliefs can certainly satisfy this. But whether an individual case will be treated as terrorism depends on whether there is enough evidence of an underlying ideological motive.
Serious vilification offences apply when someone incites others to cause harm on the basis of race, religion, sexuality or gender identity.
Both nationally and in the states, new offences also apply for displaying Nazi symbols. Neo-Nazis who were arrested after a march in Adelaide this month, for example, were charged with various offences, including failing to cease loitering and displaying a Nazi symbol.
The biggest change would be to section 93Z of the NSW Crimes Act.
Section 93Z is a serious vilification offence, but it applies only to the incitement of violence. Equivalent offences in other states are broader because they also include incitement to hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule.
In Queensland, this requires threats or inciting threats of physical harm. In Victoria, changes likely to pass in parliament soon would remove a similar harm requirement.
In NSW, vilification on broader grounds is still unlawful, but it falls under civil law. Complaints can be made to Anti-Discrimination NSW and this may lead to lawsuits and potential compensation – but not criminal prosecution.
It makes sense for NSW to match section 93Z to equivalent laws in other states. But this would go against the very recent recommendations of the NSW Law Reform Commission.
In its report last November, the commission concluded that strengthening laws is not always the best way to address underlying social issues. It said the low prosecution rate for section 93Z could be explained by police preferring other, more serious offences for these types of crimes.
Still, it appears Minns may go ahead with the reforms, saying an antisemitic attack “begins with hateful, racist language”.
If I can stop it at its source with changes to the law, that’s exactly what we’ll do.
Would these changes make a difference?
The proposed changes are quite technical and are unlikely to have a significant impact on the growing threat of antisemitism.
Widening section 93Z could generate some additional prosecutions for hate speech that falls below inciting violence. But in most cases, other, more serious offences are already available to prosecutors.
Ultimately, in addition to the ongoing investigations, there needs to be greater investment in efforts to understand extremism in Australian society. This includes developing clearer answers to these questions:
why extreme, hateful beliefs are thriving in our communities
who is most likely to develop these beliefs and act on them, and
how extremist narratives can best be countered, in our communities and online.
Countering violent extremism programs are improving over time. These include interventions for at-risk youth and broader efforts to educate communities. But investments in these approaches have never kept pace with changes to the criminal law.
Antisemitism has no place in Australian society, and changing the law in NSW will send a quick message that the government is taking the problem seriously. But taking it seriously also means doing whatever else we can as a society to ensure no one experiences hate or violence for who they are or what they believe.
Keiran Hardy receives funding from the Australian Research Council for a Discovery Project on conspiracy-fuelled extremism.
In a fervent appeal to the global community, Prime Minister James Marape of Papua New Guinea has called on US President Donald Trump to “rethink” his decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and current global climate initiatives.
Marape’s plea came during the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting held in Davos, Switzerland, on 23 January 2025.
Expressing deep concern for the impacts of climate change on Papua New Guinea and other vulnerable Pacific Island nations, Marape highlighted the dire consequences these nations face due to rising sea levels and increasingly severe weather patterns.
“The effects of climate change are not just theoretical for us; they have real, devastating impacts on our fragile economies and our way of life,” he said.
The Prime Minister emphasised that while it was within President Trump’s prerogative to prioritise American interests, withdrawing the United States — the second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide– from the Paris Agreement without implementing measures to curtail coal power production was “totally irresponsible”, Marape said.
“As a leader of a major forest and ocean nation in the Pacific region, I urge President Trump to reconsider his decision.”
He went on to point out the contradiction in the US stance.
US not closing coal plants “The United States is not shutting down any of its coal power plants yet has chosen to withdraw from critical climate efforts. This is fundamentally irresponsible.
“The science regarding our warming planet is clear — it does not lie,” he said.
Marape further articulated that as the “Leader of the Free World,” Trump had a moral obligation to engage with global climate issues.
PNG Prime Minister James Marape’s plea to President Trump. Video: PNGTV
“It is morally wrong for President Trump to disregard the pressing challenges of climate change.
He must articulate how he intends to address this critical issue,” he added, stressing that effective global leaders had a responsibility not only to their own nations but also to the planet as a whole.
In a bid to advocate for small island nations that are bearing the brunt of climate impacts, PM Marape announced plans to bring this issue to the upcoming Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).
He hopes to unify the voices of PIF member countries in a collective statement regarding the US withdrawal from climate negotiations.
US revived Pacific relations “The United States has recently revitalised its relations with the Pacific. It is discouraging to see it retreating from climate discussions that significantly affect our region’s efforts to mitigate climate change,” he said.
Prime Minister Marape reminded the international community that while larger nations might have the capacity to withstand extreme weather events such as typhoons, wildfires, and tornadoes, smaller nations like Papua New Guinea could not endure such impacts.
“For us, every storm and rising tide represents a potential crisis. Big nations can afford to navigate these challenges, but for us, the stakes are incredibly high,” he said.
Marape’s appeal underscores the urgent need for collaborative and sustained global action to combat climate change, particularly for nations like Papua New Guinea, which are disproportionately affected by environmental change.
This week the World Health Organization (WHO) released new guidelines recommending people switch the regular salt they use at home for substitutes containing less sodium.
But what exactly are these salt alternatives? And why is the WHO recommending this? Let’s take a look.
A new solution to an old problem
Advice to eat less salt (sodium chloride) is not new. It has been part of international and Australian guidelines for decades. This is because evidence clearly shows the sodium in salt can harm our health when we eat too much of it.
Excess sodium increases the risk of high blood pressure, which affects millions of Australians (around one in three adults). High blood pressure (hypertension) in turn increases the risk of heart disease, stroke and kidney disease, among other conditions.
The WHO estimates 1.9 million deaths globally each year can be attributed to eating too much salt.
The WHO recommends consuming no more than 2g of sodium daily. However people eat on average more than double this, around 4.3g a day.
In 2013, WHO member states committed to reducing population sodium intake by 30% by 2025. But cutting salt intake has proved very hard. Most countries, including Australia, will not meet the WHO’s goal for reducing sodium intake by 2025. They WHO has since set the same target for 2030.
The difficulty is that eating less salt means accepting a less salty taste. It also requires changes to established ways of preparing food. This has proved too much to ask of people making food at home, and too much for the food industry.
The main lower-sodium salt substitute is called potassium-enriched salt. This is salt where some of the sodium chloride has been replaced with potassium chloride.
Potassium is an essential mineral, playing a key role in all the body’s functions. The high potassium content of fresh fruit and vegetables is one of the main reasons they’re so good for you. While people are eating more sodium than they should, many don’t get enough potassium.
The WHO recommends a daily potassium intake of 3.5g, but on the whole, people in most countries consume significantly less than this.
Potassium-enriched salt benefits our health by cutting the amount of sodium we consume, and increasing the amount of potassium in our diets. Both help to lower blood pressure.
Switching regular salt for potassium-enriched salt has been shown to reduce the risk of heart disease, stroke and premature death in large trials around the world.
Modelling studies have projected that population-wide switches to potassium-enriched salt use would prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths from cardiovascular disease (such as heart attack and stroke) each year in China and India alone.
The key advantage of switching rather than cutting salt intake is that potassium-enriched salt can be used as a direct one-for-one swap for regular salt. It looks the same, works for seasoning and in recipes, and most people don’t notice any important difference in taste.
In the largest trial of potassium-enriched salt to date, more than 90% of people were still using the product after five years.
If fully implemented, this could be one of the most consequential pieces of advice the WHO has ever provided.
Millions of strokes and heart attacks could be prevented worldwide each year with a simple switch to the way we prepare foods. But there are some obstacles to overcome before we get to this point.
First, it will be important to balance the benefits and the risks. For example, people with advanced kidney disease don’t handle potassium well and so these products are not suitable for them. This is only a small proportion of the population, but we need to ensure potassium-enriched salt products are labelled with appropriate warnings.
A key challenge will be making potassium-enriched salt more affordable and accessible. Potassium chloride is more expensive to produce than sodium chloride, and at present, potassium-enriched salt is mostly sold as a niche health product at a premium price.
If you’re looking for it, salt substitutes may also be called low-sodium salt, potassium salt, heart salt, mineral salt, or sodium-reduced salt.
A review published in 2021 found low sodium salts were marketed in only 47 countries, mostly high-income ones. Prices ranged from the same as regular salt to almost 15 times higher.
An expanded supply chain that produces much more food-grade potassium chloride will be needed to enable wider availability of the product. And we’ll need to see potassium-enriched salt on the shelves next to regular salt so it’s easy for people to find.
In countries like Australia, about 80% of the salt we eat comes from processed foods. The WHO guideline falls short by not explicitly prioritising a switch for the salt used in food manufacturing.
Stakeholders working with government to encourage food industry uptake will be essential for maximising the health benefits.
Bruce Neal receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and MTP Connect, for research on potassium-enriched salts. All funds are administered by UNSW Sydney and The George Institute for Global Health.
Xiaoyue (Luna) Xu 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.
Dotted across northern Australia are 21 saltwater crocodile farms, home to around 130,000 crocodiles. Their skins are turned into crocodile leather, long sought for use in luxury handbags, belts and other items.
While fur lost favour due to welfare concerns about animals such as mink, chinchillas and arctic foxes raised for their skins, crocodile leather has kept selling. Australia dominates the global market of saltwater crocodile skins, producing almost 60% of all such skins traded internationally.
But the industry now faces real headwinds. Major retailers and fashion events in Australia and internationally are phasing out or banning crocodile and other exotic skins due to growing concerns over animal welfare.
The Northern Territory government’s crocodile farming plan acknowledges shifting consumer demand and increasing scrutiny as the industry’s largest threat.
Early animal rights activists in the 19th century focused on feathers due to concern about the enormous environmental damage done by plume hunters killing ostriches and egrets. Only later did activists turn their focus to fur.
In the early 20th century, countries such as the United States and Britain enacted bans or restrictions on feathers. In this century, sentiment has largely turned against wearing real fur, though faux fur and vintage fur are still popular.
But even as feathers went out of fashion, new animal products were arriving. By 1928, exotic skins such as crocodile, alligator and snake began commercialisation in Europe and the US. By the 1970s, they were widely used in fashion.
That looks to be changing.
By 2026, department store David Jones will phase out all exotic skins, including ostrich, crocodile, alligator, lizard and snake. The move builds on the company’s existing animal welfare policies, which already prohibit the sale of fur, angora rabbit wool and foie gras (duck or goose liver).
The 2025 Melbourne Fashion Festival will also ban exotic leathers, while London Fashion Week will be the first of the “Big Four” fashion weeks to follow suit.
In recent years, the kangaroo leather industry has also come under pressure due to concerns over animal welfare. California banned it altogether, and a full US ban is under consideration.
Feathers are also under increasing scrutiny, with fashion weeks in Copenhagen, Helsinki and Melbourne announcing feather bans starting this year.
These decisions reflect a growing shift toward ethical fashion, driven by consumer demand and rising awareness of animal welfare.
Crocodile leather is described as an “exotic” skin, even though saltwater crocodiles are native to Australia.
Two-thirds of Australia’s skins come from the Northern Territory, while Queensland and Western Australia have smaller industries.
Crocodile farms operate by harvesting eggs from the wild and raising the animals in captivity. In the wild, they are protected from hunting. But in farms, they are legally considered stock or production animals, which means they lose these protections.
When we farm animals, it’s common to think of them as resources waiting to be used for our purposes.
But the fashion backlash suggests another way of thinking is emerging. My research points to a more animal-centric perspective on how animal-derived materials are produced for fashion.
Crocodile farms emerged as a way to protect these reptiles from being hunted to extinction. But the industry is now under increasing scrutiny. RWK007/Shutterstock
From unregulated hunting to farmed crocodiles
Skin hunters nearly drove the saltwater crocodile to extinction in Australia. An estimated 300,000 animals were killed for their skins between 1945 and 1970. Saltie populations fell as low as 3,000 animals before authorities acted.
Freshwater crocodiles, too, were hunted for their skins from 1959. After both species were protected in the 1970s, their populations rebounded.
But this agreement doesn’t rule out uses for fashion. As crocodile experts at the International Union for Conservation of Nature write:
[…] crocodile farming was seen not only as a way to reduce pressure on the wild populations, but also as a means through which commercial incentives for the conservation of crocodilians could be generated.
As the website of one Australian crocodile farm states, crocodiles are a “natural renewable resource with considerable potential for sustainable commercial use”.
By 2018, the crocodile farming industry was worth A$26.7 million to the Northern Territory’s economy. Around 100,000 juvenile crocodiles are raised annually on farms. The NT industry plans to expand in coming years, with a target of 50,000 skins annually.
Trends in fashion heavily influence how crocodiles are farmed. While saltwater crocodiles can live up to 70 years in the wild, it takes three to four years for a crocodile to reach 1.5 metres, at which point their skins can make larger fashion items.
But in recent years, crocodiles have been slaughtered at around two years. Their smaller skins are used for smaller accessories.
Welfare concerns
The crocodile farming industry promotes its sustainability and positive economic impacts on First Nations communities. But this has come under question in recent years, with the release of documentaries featuring ex-crocodile farm workers, while activists from the Farm Transparency Project flew drones over crocodile farms and released footage of slaughtering practices in an effort to increase scrutiny and draw media coverage.
This image of a crocodile in a Northern Territory farm was taken by activists using a drone. Farm Transparency Project, CC BY
Animal welfare organisations such as the RSPCA have long opposed the practice.
In 2023, the federal government announced an update of the code of humane treatment of wild and farmed crocodiles to incorporate new science and techniques, according to Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek. The updated code was expected late last year but has not been released.
In response, NT Crocodile Farmers Association chief Jodi Truman said the industry “supports independent audits to ensure humane treatment”. She added:
[…] animal rights activists have made clear that they are against all farms and the farming of all animals.
This drone image taken by animal activists shows the slaughter of crocodiles at a NT farm. Farm Transparency Project, CC BY
What’s likely to happen?
While commercial operators and governments plan to expand, there are now real barriers to the industry’s growth.
For decades, animal derived products such as fur, feathers and leather have been prized in fashion. But consumers are increasingly less comfortable with how these products are made. That’s the thing about fashion – it changes.
The author has previously been a member and lower-house candidate for the Animal Justice Party in Victoria.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Dahlen, Professor of Midwifery, Associate Dean Research and HDR, Midwifery Discipline Leader, Western Sydney University
A vaginal birth after caesarean (known as a VBAC) is when a woman who has had a caesarean has a vaginal birth down the track.
In Australia, about 12% of women have a vaginal birth for a subsequent baby after a caesarean. A VBAC is much more common in some other countries, including in several Scandinavian ones, where 45-55% of women have one.
So what’s involved? What are the risks? And who’s most likely to give birth vaginally the next time round?
What happens? What are the risks?
When a woman chooses a VBAC she is cared for much like she would during a planned vaginal birth.
However, an induction of labour is avoided as much as possible, due to the slightly increased risk of the caesarean scar opening up (known as uterine rupture). This is because the medication used in inductions can stimulate strong contractions that put a greater strain on the scar.
In fact, one of the main reasons women may be recommended to have a repeat caesarean over a vaginal birth is due to an increased chance of her caesarean scar rupturing.
This is when layers of the uterus (womb) separate and an emergency caesarean is needed to deliver the baby and repair the uterus.
Uterine rupture is rare. It occurs in about 0.2-0.7% of women with a history of a previous caesarean. A uterine rupture can also happen without a previous caesarean, but this is even rarer.
However, uterine rupture is a medical emergency. A large European study found 13% of babies died after a uterine rupture and 10% of women needed to have their uterus removed.
The risk of uterine rupture increases if women have what’s known as
complicated or classical caesarean scars, and for women who have had more than two previous caesareans.
Most care providers recommend you avoid getting pregnant again for around 12 months after a caesarean, to allow full healing of the scar and to reduce the risk of the scar rupturing.
National guidelines recommend women attempt a VBAC in hospital in case emergency care is needed after uterine rupture.
During a VBAC, recommendations are for closer monitoring of the baby’s heart rate and vigilance for abnormal pain that could indicate a rupture is happening.
If labour is not progressing, a caesarean would then usually be advised.
There are also risks with repeat caesareans. These include slower recovery, increased risks of the placenta growing abnormally in subsequent pregnancies (placenta accreta), or low in front of the cervix (placenta praevia), and being readmitted to hospital for infection.
Women reported birth trauma and post-traumatic stress more commonly after a caesarean than a vaginal birth, especially if the caesarean was not planned.
Women who had a traumatic caesarean or disrespectful care in their previous birth may choose a VBAC to prevent re-traumatisation and to try to regain control over their birth.
We looked at what happened to women
The most common reason for a caesarean section in Australia is a repeat caesarean. Our new research looked at what this means for VBAC.
We analysed data about 172,000 low-risk women who gave birth for the first time in New South Wales between 2001 and 2016.
We found women who had an initial spontaneous vaginal birth had a 91.3% chance of having subsequent vaginal births. However, if they had a caesarean, their probability of having a VBAC was 4.6% after an elective caesarean and 9% after an emergency one.
We also confirmed what national data and previous studies have shown – there are lower VBAC rates (meaning higher rates of repeat caesareans) in private hospitals compared to public hospitals.
We found the probability of subsequent elective caesarean births was higher in private hospitals (84.9%) compared to public hospitals (76.9%).
Our study did not specifically address why this might be the case. However, we know that in private hospitals women access private obstetric care and experience higher caesarean rates overall.
What increases the chance of success?
When women plan a VBAC there is a 60-80% chance of having a vaginal birth in the next birth.
The success rates are higher for women who are younger, have a lower body mass index, have had a previous vaginal birth, give birth in a home-like environment or with midwife-led care.
For instance, an Australian study found women who accessed continuity of care with a midwife were more likely to have a successful VBAC compared to having no continuity of care and seeing different care providers each time.
An Australian national survey we conducted found having continuity of care with a midwife when planning a VBAC can increase women’s sense of control and confidence, increase their chance to be upright and active in labour and result in a better relationship with their health-care provider.
With the rise of caesareans globally, including in Australia, it is more important than ever to value vaginal birth and support women to have a VBAC if this is what they choose.
Our research is also a reminder that how a woman gives birth the first time greatly influences how she gives birth after that. For too many women, this can lead to multiple caesareans, not all of them needed.
Hannah Dahlen receives funding from NHMRC, ARC and MRFF.
Hazel Keedle and Lilian Peters 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.
As rising seas lap at its shore, Tuvalu faces an existential threat. In an effort to preserve the tiny island nation in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, its government has been building a “digital twin” of the entire country.
Digital twins are exactly what they sound like – a virtual double or replica of a physical, real-world entity. Scientists have been creating digital twins of everything from molecules, to infrastructure, and even entire planets.
It’s also now possible to construct a digital twin of an individual person. In other words, a “digital doppelganger”.
A doppelganger is someone who looks spookily like you but isn’t. The word originated in German, and literally means a “double walker”. A number of industries are now using digital doppelgangers for a range of reasons. These include enhancing athletic performance, offering more personalised healthcare and improving workplace safety.
But although there are benefits to this technology, there are significant risks associated with its development. Having digital doppelgangers also forces us to reflect on which of our human attributes can’t be digitally replicated.
Modelling complex systems
The development of digital twins has been enabled by advances in environmental sensors, camera vision, augmented reality and virtual reality, as well as machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI).
A digital twin allows us to build and test things in cyberspace – cheaply and without risk – before deploying in the real world.
For example, we can build and stress-test infrastructure such as bridges or water supply pipes under a variety of conditions. Once built, we can use digital models to maintain the infrastructure proactively and prevent disastrous and costly structural breakdowns. This technology is a game-changer for planning and engineering, not only saving billions of dollars, but also supporting sustainability efforts.
Of course, replicating individual humans requires much more complex modelling than when building digital twins of bridges or buildings.
For a start, humans don’t live in a structured world, but rather inhabit complex social and physical environments. We are variable, moody and motivated by any number of factors, from hunger to tiredness, love to anger. We can change our past patterns with conscious thought, as well as act spontaneously and with creativity, challenging the status quo if needed.
Because of this, creating perfect digital twins of humans is incredibly challenging – if not impossible. Nevertheless, digital doppelgangers are still useful for a number of purposes.
The digital patient
Clinicians increasingly use scans to create virtual models of the human body, with which to plan operations or create artificial body parts.
By adding extra biometric information (for example, blood chemistry, biomechanics and physiological responses), digital models can also mirror real-world bodies, live and in real time.
Creating digital patients can optimise treatment responses in a move away from one-size-treats-all healthcare. This means drugs, dosages and rehabilitation plans can be personalised, as well as being thoroughly tested before being applied to real people.
Digital patients can also increase the accessibility of medical expertise to people living in remote locations. And what’s more, using multiple digital humans means some clinical trials can now be performed virtually.
Scaled up further, this technology allows for societal-level simulations with which to better manage public health events, such as air pollution, pandemics or tsunamis.
The digital athlete
Imagine being able to train against a digital replica of an upcoming opponent.
Sports scientists are increasingly working with digital athletes to trial and optimise strength and conditioning regimes, as well as test competitive play. This helps to increase the chances of winning as well as prevent injuries.
Researchers at Griffith University have been pioneers in this space, creating models of real athletes. They have also trialled wearable sensors in patches or smart clothing that can measure a range of biomarkers: blood pressure and chemistry, temperature, and sweat composition.
As well as building virtual replicas of sports people, scientists at CSIRO have also being building virtual simulations of employees in various workplaces, including offices and construction sites.
This is helping them analyse movements, workflows and productivity – with the broader aim of preventing workplace injuries. For example, scientists can use a model of a digital worker to assess how heavy items are lifted in order to better understand how this puts strain on different parts of the body.
With 6.1 million Australians impacted by musculoskeletal conditions, preventing workplace injuries can not only improve lives, but save the economy billions of dollars.
Building a digital doppelgangers requires a lot of very personal data. This can include scans, voice and video recordings, or performance and health data.
The power of this technology is inspiring. But ensuring a future in which we live happily alongside our digital doppelgangers will require governments, technology developers and end-users to think hard about issues of consent, ethical data management and the potential for misuse of this technology.
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.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor (Practice), Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Monash University
In a major setback in the fight against gender-based violence, Argentinian President Javier Milei’s government has announced it will repeal the crime of femicide from the penal code.
In a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, Milei dismissed femicide laws as a product of “woke” culture and called “radical feminism” a distortion of the concept of equality.
Repealing the law could have a ripple effect across the region, encouraging other countries to weaken their legal protections. This would be devastating for women and girls across Latin America.
Efforts to end violence against women and girls must remain a priority — in Argentina and around the world.
In 2023 alone, an estimated 85,000 women and girls were intentionally killed worldwide. Of these, 60% were murdered by an intimate partner or family members.
This equates to one woman or girl killed every ten minutes at the hands of someone they know and likely trusted.
Why femicide laws are important
Femicide is broadly defined as the gender-based killing of women or girls, typically due to misogyny, discrimination or intimate partner violence. It differs from other homicides due to its roots in systemic gender inequality and the intent to exert control or punishment over women.
At least 18 of the 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have adopted femicide laws since 2007.
Before these laws were enacted, the killing of women and girls were treated under the broad category of homicide in many of these countries, with a focus on intent rather than the gendered nature of the crime.
These broader laws fail to recognise how inequality, abuse and power dynamics often fuel violence against women. They often render patterns of abuse invisible.
Femicide laws sought to change that. They explicitly recognise when women are killed because of their gender and acknowledge these crimes as part of a broader pattern of violence rooted in inequality.
These laws have often been introduced in response to public outrage following the killing of women and an acknowledgement of widespread inaction by authorities.
This has been seen a vital step toward justice, particularly in a region where violence against women has long been treated with relative impunity.
What countries have a femicide law?
The laws vary significantly across Latin America.
In Chile, for example, femicide applies to killings by a current or former partner.
In Costa Rica, it is similarly limited to only include killings involving a victim and perpetrator who are married or related by common law.
Ecuador, by contrast, defines femicide more broadly, focusing on power dynamics and the gendered nature of the crime, regardless of the relationship between the victim and perpetrator.
In Argentina, femicide is an aggravated form of homicide, defined as a murder committed by a man against a woman in the context of gender-based violence.
Countries beyond Latin America have been slower to adopt specific femicide laws, despite advocacy efforts for them to follow suit. In recent years, Croatia, Malta and Cyprus have all introduced specific femicide laws.
The effectiveness of femicide laws continues to be the subject of debate. There have been few comprehensive evaluations of their impact.
A 2024 report on Mexico’s femicide law highlighted that legislation alone will not prevent gender-related killings.
The report also noted that, in practice, femicide laws often focus predominantly on killings committed by intimate partners or family members. While this focus is critical, it has inadvertently led to the under-reporting and invisibility of femicides occurring in other contexts.
These include the killing of older women and deaths linked to female genital mutilation and organised crime. The killing of Indigenous women also continues to be unreported and under-investigated.
Such recognised limits do not support the repeal of femicide laws but rather underline the need for more effective implementation and embedding of these laws in society.
The benefit of femicide laws
While challenges remain in implementation and enforcement, femicide laws have brought critical change in countries where violence against women has long been ignored. By explicitly acknowledging gender, power and control as a factor in these killings, the laws send a powerful message this violence requires targeted solutions.
In several countries, for example, the introduction of femicide laws has led to the creation of specialised police units, judicial training programs and harsher penalties for these acts of violence.
Femicide laws have also improved data collection. With these laws in place, governments can better understand the scope of the issue and direct resources towards evidence-based prevention, early intervention and response mechanisms.
Without such laws, these crimes are not tracked or are misclassified.
Beyond the legal and systemic benefits, femicide laws have driven cultural change and public awareness. They have elevated the discourse on gender-related killings and reinforced the urgent need for systemic change to protect women and girls.
A step backward
Repealing Argentina’s femicide law would risk undoing years of progress. It would make these crimes less visible and send a message that tackling the crisis of violence against women and girls is not a priority. This can have a direct impact on dissuading victims from seeking justice and emboldening perpetrators.
Femicide laws represent more than legal protections. They are a commitment to accountability in societies where women’s lives have too often been disregarded.
This is not “woke”. It is a matter of justice, safety and human rights.
Kate has received funding for family violence and femicide-related research from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology, Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety, the Victorian, Queensland and ACT governments, the Commonwealth Department of Social Services and the Victorian Women’s Trust. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her role at Monash University and is wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as chair of Respect Victoria.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicola Gaston, Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau
Billed as the most significant change to the science system in 30 years, last week’s announcement of major structural changes to scientific research institutions was objectively a big deal.
But the devil will be in the details. The proposed reforms are focused on the economic impact of the science sector and are based on the first of two reports from the Science System Advisory Group (SSAG).
Success will depend on how they are implemented and, most of all, on the sector receiving sufficient funding.
The government’s reforms include:
the merger of seven public Crown Research Institutes to create three larger Public Research Organisations (PROs)
the creation of a fourth new PRO focused on “advanced technology” such as artificial intelligence, synthetic biology and potentially cleantech
the disestablishment of Callaghan Innovation and the creation of a new agency called “Invest New Zealand” to target international investment
the creation of a new national intellectual property policy, meaning scientists working in PROs and in the university system are on a level playing field when it comes to commercialisation
the establishment of a Prime Minister’s Science, Innovation and Technology Advisory Council to provide strategic direction and oversight.
As the reforms move forward, the government will have to answer several questions. For example, how will the expertise relating to advanced technologies, much of which currently sits within our university sector, be moved into the new PRO?
And how will the funding model be changed as these new PROs are established?
Long running issues
Overall, the higher level changes are positive. Reforms have been a long time coming and are based on years of discussion within the crown research sector.
But we need to look at the reforms in the context of the science advisory group’s first report.
The report is strongly and deliberately focused on the potential economic impact of science and research. The authors outline how this must be supported by a properly functioning system.
According to the authors, a lack of strategy from the highest level of government is a barrier for the sector.
It is clear the advisory group recommends structural change (such as the PRO model). But it is also explicit that sufficient research funding is a necessary condition for these reforms to work:
The SSAG stands firmly of the view that our parsimonious attitude to research funding is a core reason that New Zealand has become an outlier in performance on productivity growth.
Barriers to progress
The advisory group identified certain cultural attitudes, such as New Zealand’s “number-eight wire” thinking, as a reason the country doesn’t value research as it should. The group also strongly advocated for bipartisan agreement on funding systems and investment levels.
The group had strongly positive things to say about research in the social sciences and mātauranga Māori through the lens of economic growth.
There is no debate that research into Māori culture and knowledge is an obligation of the New Zealand research system and that this should be largely determined by experts in mātauranga Māori. We will be recommending a distinct funding stream in the proposed National Research Foundation.
Unfortunately, this government’s defunding of the social sciences and humanities, announced in December, suggests it has already made its mind up on the value of these disciplines.
Missing the bigger picture
Reading the full report, there is the sense that while the government announcement has taken the most visible recommendations for change, it has missed the bigger picture: the need for sufficient funding to strengthen the sector as a whole and help New Zealand become internationally competitive.
This means we need to benchmark ourselves against other countries and their economic and scientific performance. According to the report:
The international analysis is clear: we are spending significantly less than comparable countries spend from the public purse on [research and development].
The authors emphasise that for countries with low expenditure, improved research and development activity is especially important for GDP growth. New Zealand should take note – it is an outlier both as a low investor and a poor economic performer.
These messages are not new.
Steven Joyce, science minister in the National-led government between 2011 and 2016, advocated for the National Science Challenges as a way to justify increased government investment to the sector. But issues with the implementation costs effectively killed off his promise of increased funding.
Labour’s science minister between 2022 and 2023, Ayesha Verrall, had a similar argument about needing to establish research “priorities” in order to justify increased spending. Again, it never happened.
It is possible the current reforms will be more effective in providing justification for increased investment.
But this time we need to put the horse before the cart by investing money in the system – one that has been underfunded for years and which has only recently seen further funding cuts and job losses.
And this has to happen before the system absorbs the implementation costs of these reforms.
Nicola Gaston receives funding from TEC as Director of the MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology, and from the Marsden fund administered by the Royal Society Te Apārangi.
In an age when home offices, hybrid work arrangements and blurred boundaries between work and personal life are the norm, a recently established narrative is intensifying: the integration of spirituality into business.
This idea involves deliberately incorporating personal values and meaningful purpose into all aspects of organisational life – from individual expression to workplace practices and corporate identity. It’s an approach that seeks to cultivate environments where employees can find deeper meaning in their work while contributing to both economic and social progress, as my past research in the Journal of Business Ethics shows.
Spirituality in business transcends traditional management methods by acknowledging the inner lives of workers, promoting their personal growth and fostering genuine community connections. According to a 2016 interview with Eileen Fisher, the founder and then CEO of a $450-million fashion brand, company meetings opened with the ring of a meditation bell followed by a minute of silence. Fisher said the practice allows employees “to get in touch with what they’re there for and what matters to them and show up a little differently” and has contributed to the company’s recognised leadership in sustainability and women’s advocacy.
But are all corporate efforts like these genuine attempts to foster well-being, or can they instead be strategies to rebrand productivity demands?
Spiritual well-being in business
The incorporation of spirituality into the workplace represents a shift in how businesses approach leadership, employee wellbeing and corporate culture.
Take ice-cream maker Ben & Jerry’s partnership with Greyston Bakery, a leader in social enterprise. Under their “linked prosperity” model, Ben & Jerry’s sources all brownies for its Chocolate Fudge Brownie flavour from Greyston, which operates with an “open hiring” policy that does not require a background check for applicants and provides “help with child care, housing and ESL (English as a second language) classes”. The partnership shows how valuing human dignity and community empowerment can reshape conventional business practices into drivers of social change.
Spiritual integration manifests in plenty of other ways, too. Morning gatherings can become spaces for shared reflection rather than mere status updates. Dedicated quiet rooms can offer sanctuary for contemplation or prayer. Through mentorship relationships and community service initiatives, workplaces can evolve into environments where individuals can explore deeper questions about purpose. US outdoor clothing company Patagonia describes how it offers paid environmental internships and flexible policies that enable employees to align their work lives with how they see their authentic selves. These offerings reflect the idea that while people come to work to earn a living, they stay and thrive when work nourishes their spirit.
The trend of integrating spirituality into the workplace taps into the practical wisdom of spiritual traditions, honed over millennia, to foster attributes like mindfulness, compassion and interconnectedness. But despite its benefits, integration – or lip service to it – risks becoming a convenient excuse for businesses to shift the responsibility for stress and burn-out onto employees instead of addressing systemic issues.
The rise and fall of WeWork illustrates this phenomenon. As documented in both Hulu’s “WeWork: or the Making and Breaking of a $47 Billion Unicorn” and Apple TV+’s dramatic series “WeCrashed”, the workspace company masterfully leveraged spiritual rhetoric to attract young professionals. While the company promoted meditation spaces and wellness initiatives, these benefits masked issues including unsustainable work expectations, questionable management practices and a sexual assault claim. The disconnect between WeWork’s offerings and operational reality demonstrates how companies can appropriate spiritual practices only as a veneer.
When suits start talking spirit
When McKinsey & Company, a US management consulting firm that epitomizes corporate pragmatism, releases a podcast titled “Beyond 9 to 5: The power of spiritual health in the workplace”, it is clear that spirituality in business has moved beyond the fringe.
McKinsey’s global survey of 41,000 respondents, detailed in their May 2024 report “In search of self and something bigger: A spiritual health exploration”, found that spiritual health matters deeply to employees. But does this data reflect a genuine commitment to spirituality, or is it just a reflection of its currency in the corporate world?
After almost half a century of research on spirituality in business, it has become a mature field. The Academy of Management, “an association for management and organizational scholars”, recognised Management, Spirituality, and Religion as a Division, [“reflecting”] a broad range of member interests”. Still, the corporate world’s interest is raising eyebrows: the suspicion remains that spirituality is merely being repackaged as a tool for enhancing productivity. In his 2019 book “McMindfulness: How Mindfulness Became the New Capitalist Spirituality”, Ronald Purser illustrates this concern through Google’s “Search Inside Yourself” programme. While marketed as a path to employee wellness, the initiative exemplifies how meditation and mindfulness can be transformed into performance-enhancement tools, asking workers to develop “resilience” rather than addressing the root causes of workplace stress.
The whole self at work
The concept of bringing one’s “whole self” to work – a cornerstone of the Industry 5.0 concept promoted by the European Commission – emphasises employee authenticity. The idea of spirituality in the workplace intertwines with the idea of authentic self-expression, encompassing the recognition of one’s beliefs, values and quest for deeper meaning. These are dimensions historically excluded from professional settings. The idea is to create an environment where people can align their deepest motivations with their work.
While this ideal is noble in concept, it also raises complex questions about which aspects of our “whole selves” are appropriate to bring into the workplace. In 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of a job applicant whom the clothing company Abercrombie & Fitch refused to hire because her hijab conflicted with its dress code. Delta Airlines’ uniform policy revision last July illuminates the ongoing complexity of the issue. Following a controversy that began when a passenger made a social media post describing two flight attendants’ Palestinian flag pins – which were permitted under existing policy – as “Hamas badges”, the airline banned all national flag pins except US ones.
Juggling multiple selves
The promise of integrating our identities more seamlessly instead of compartmentalizing them features in the Apple TV series Severance. The show presents a dystopian take on work-life balance in which employees surgically separate their work and personal memories, inviting us to reflect on the identities we balance in our professional and personal lives. The character of Mark Scout, whose “innie” (work self) develops genuine connections with colleagues like Helly, demonstrates how even artificially separated selves seek authentic relationships and meaning. However, when these connections begin to flourish, employer Lumon Industries’ harsh punishments and control mechanisms kick in – suggesting that true workplace innovation and collaboration can only emerge when we’re allowed to bring our whole, unsevered selves to work.
By acknowledging and nurturing the various aspects of our personalities, we might attain new levels of connection in the workplace. But could the integration of spirituality and work lead to an environment where employees are perpetually “on”? A risk lies in creating a culture where work infiltrates every aspect of life, leaving no true respite. The very practices meant to nurture the spirit could paradoxically become tools that further blur the boundaries between professional obligations and personal renewal. A constant connection to work erodes personal boundaries, which can lead to stress and dissatisfaction that spills over into personal life. Addressing this “shadow side” is essential if we are to answer the question “Do you believe in life after work?” with a resounding yes.
A balanced approach
The integration of spirituality into business requires genuine commitment. While spiritual practices can bring multiple benefits, they must emerge from authentic values rather than serving as a quick fix for systemic issues.
Since the 1980s, when major corporations first explored Eastern spirituality, workplace spirituality has evolved into a $7.9 billion meditation market. But as companies invest in meditation apps and mindfulness programmes, they often fail to address the root causes of workplace stress and burn-out. Today, well-intentioned apps like CHILL Anywhere risk functioning as band-aids that place the burden of stress management on employees, instead of examining issues like unrealistic workloads, inadequate compensation, toxic leadership or prejudice.
Instrumentalizing spiritual practices into productivity tools fundamentally misses the point: true spirituality in business requires organizations to critically examine and transform the structural conditions that create employee suffering in the first place. Until companies commit to addressing these foundational issues, meditation rooms and mindfulness apps will remain superficial solutions that enable rather than challenge harmful workplace dynamics.
The future workplace should aim to harmonise profit and purpose, recognising that employee well-being is integral to long-term success. Spirituality in business manifests when organisations commit to both business excellence and human flourishing – addressing foundational concerns while nurturing deeper meaning and purpose. Only then can the promise of bringing our whole selves to work become a reality worth believing in.
Raysa Geaquinto Rocha ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.
What does it mean to tell the truth? And how do we, as consumers of media, differentiate truth from fabrication? Optics, a new comedy series from the ABC, asks these questions through the setting of a public relations firm.
The show expertly balances humour with quick-wit, social media vernacular, and a level of marketing wordsmithing that make you question if the news has ever told you a true story.
The show is based in the PR firm Fritz & Randell and opens with the death of its aging CEO Frank Fritz (Peter Carroll), in a men-only board meeting no less.
After Frank’s death, the son of the cofounder, Ian Randell (Charles Firth) makes a bid for top spot. But the owner of the firm, Bobby Bahl (Claude Jabbour) is concerned with “optics”, so he puts two young women in charge instead.
Each episode follows a PR scandal, and we watch as the new heads of the company – Greta Goldman (Vic Zerbst) and Nicole Kidman (Jenna Owen) – grapple with difficult clients and, occasionally, even more difficult coworkers.
Greta and Nicole are put in charge in every way, other than with the official promotion attached.
Their young, spunky attitude and social media prowess is seen as a massive advantage. And it is. But it soon becomes apparent this move is much more than a feminist fresh-take for the firm – and is rather a bid to push some skeletons further back in the closet.
With outrageous lines such as “is there an emoji for miscarriage”, you are guaranteed an entertaining watch.
A familar cast
You will probably recognise the show’s characters, either from your own office experiences, or your friend’s stories: the ageing CEO, people who act like they know more than they actually do, and young people talking about trends who may as well be speaking a different language.
Ian, who wants to appear as if he has all the answers, seems to have no idea how to say a politically correct sentence. Greta and Nicole have such a deep knowledge of social media trends and memes that their quick banter leaves Ian with whiplash.
The PR scandals that form the basis of each episode will feel relatable to a broad Australian audience. These characters – and the bizarre situations they find themselves in – effectively parody Australian contemporary media.
Perfect timing
It should be no surprise Vic Zerbst (playing Greta), Jenna Owen (playing Nicole) and Charles Firth (playing Ian) put on a consistently convincing and funny performance.
The release of the show is also poetically timed with global conversations around online censorship, content moderation, algorithms and reliable news sources.
While focusing on a variety of PR emergencies, Optics takes us on a riveting exploration of marketing and language. For instance, one crisis involving an AFL player who drunkenly punches a priest is flipped into him learning a lesson about toxic masculinity.
We see Greta and Nicole craft apology video scripts and find convenient medical explanations for workplace outbursts.
As a social media researcher and user, their approach to an apology video felt particularity familiar to me. Their redemption strategy is one I have seen used a thousand times by social media stars and celebrities.
Two sides to each story
The show’s writers balance ideas of truth and fabrication in a way that’s not only hilarious, but also very believable. When Greta and Nicole meet with Qualitus, an airline accused of scamming their customers, the Qualitus team presents them with an alternate story of clever marketing.
In the captain’s lounge, surrounding by celebrities and the elite, Greta and Nicole negotiate deals and flip the narrative on Qualitus’ scams, helping the airline evade public scrutiny.
Optics pays homage to the work PR professionals do everyday to save reputations and negotiate what information is shared with the public and what never sees the light of day.
The show will have you questioning the stories you yourself are presented through news outlets. Further still, it will make you wonder how many hands those stories passed through before they hit the papers and screens.
Optics is streaming now on ABC iView.
Edith Jennifer Hill 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.
The start of the school year means some parents will asking a big question: is it time for a child’s first phone?
Safety concerns, particularly around travel to and from school, or being home after school without a parent, often drive this decision. There can also be huge social pressure if many of a child’s friends have a phone.
But it doesn’t have to be inevitable. How can you tell if your child is ready for a smartphone? What are the alternatives? And how do you set achievable, healthy boundaries if your child does get a phone?
Why a phone is a big decision
Many parents will be aware of the concerns about children’s wellbeing around technology, including potential harms to mental health, if they are exposed to inappropriate content, bullying or simply use the phone too much.
Having a phone can pose risks to your child if they are not ready for it. Body Stock/ Shutterstock
How do you know if your child is ready for a phone?
Appropriate phone ownership does not necessarily depend on a child’s age but on a child’s readiness and family circumstances.
Recent studies show children who receive phones based on readiness rather than age show better long-term digital habits. These include managing the constant distraction of phones and good judgement around the content they regularly browse and engage with.
You can look at a child’s child’s readiness for a phone in several ways:
how responsible are they with the technology they already use?
do they follow family guidelines around screen time?
how willing are they to discuss their online experiences with you? Do they come to you if there is a problem or something they don’t understand?
do they have a basic understanding of digital privacy and security?
what’s their decision-making like offline? What are they like with family, friends and other responsibilities?
Non-phone options
If you decide yes, your child is ready, they don’t necessarily have to go straight to a smartphone with all the bells, whistles and apps.
For basic safety requirements, such as travel to school, a smartwatch or basic phone can allow your child to receive and make calls and texts, but without accessing the internet.
If you want to prioritise social connection (so a child isn’t left out with friends), you could might start with a shared family tablet featuring supervised messaging apps. This allows children to maintain friendships within set boundaries.
Instead of a smart phone for your child you could start with a smart watch. NADKI/ Shutterstock
How to manage the transition to a phone
As children demonstrate growing independence and digital maturity, they can progress to restricted smartphones with parental controls, gradually earning more privileges through demonstrated responsibility.
Or your child you have a smartphone with regular “check ins”. Here parents and the child discuss and review common challenges such as managing notifications, apps the child is permitted to use and where the phone can be used.
This approach acknowledges full smartphone access isn’t an immediate necessity but rather the final stage in a thoughtful digital progression.
Research indicates families who implement this graduated approach report fewer conflicts around technology as well as better long-term digital habits in their children.
The key lies in matching technology access to genuine needs rather than perceived social pressure, while maintaining clear boundaries and open communication.
3 vital ‘new phone’ conversations to have
Even though many schools now have phone restrictions during school hours, planning for healthy use outside of school is extremely important.
There are three vital “new phone” conversations to have with your child, to make sure things get off to the right start.
1. Friend requests: these can be over the top and often overwhelm children and parents. You do not have to say yes to all of them. Decide how to manage the continuous stream of requests and how to cull unnecessary contacts.
2. Screen time: there will likely be a “screentime spike” when your child gets their own device. This is exacerbated by the constant temptation to just zone out and browse content. Decide together on workable “no-tech” times and zones in the home. For example, no phones in the car and no phones after 9pm, or restrictions on browsable content such as YouTube or Tiktok. Parents can assist children to use in-built screentime features in the phone that shut down such apps during restriction times.
3. Notifications: because of multiple group chats and new friends, there will be never-ending pings and notifications. This will encourage even more screen time, sometimes well into the night. Go into the phone settings with your child and together decide which notifications to turn off (ideally, most of them). This will mean children have fewer distractions and more sleep, and the entire household will be more peaceful.
Joanne Orlando receives funding from eSafety Commissioner.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darcy Watchorn, Threatened Species Biologist, Wildlife Conservation & Science Department, Zoos Victoria, and Visiting Scholar, School of Life & Environmental Science, Deakin University
Darcy Watchorn
It’s a cold, drizzly night in a forest west of Melbourne. I’m sitting on a damp log, clutching a thermos of lukewarm tea and watching a koala snooze on a branch above me. Suddenly, it lifts its head. I sit up straight, pen poised to record what happens. But the koala simply yawns and resumes the blob position. I sigh and take another sip of tea.
Why am I doing this? To research the social behaviour of koalas and hopefully learn more about what they do at night, when they are most active.
After many nights, and many sips of tea, I witness something truly unexpected: male koalas engaging in affectionate behaviours with each other, such as play and grooming. I was shocked. Adult koalas are normally solitary, so observations such as this are exceedingly rare.
My new research paper presents these findings. It provides the most detailed account of these behaviours to date, and offers a unique glimpse into how social dynamics between koalas may change when they are forced to live in close quarters.
An adult female koala (right) and her very large joey (left) on a tree in Cape Otway, Victoria Darcy Watchorn
Why are these behaviours so surprising?
Most animals exhibit some type of social behaviour. These can include mating, vocalising to communicate, or defending their territory. But some highly social, group-living animals – such as wolves, primates and dolphins – will also display friendly and peaceful acts between individuals, such as grooming each other and playing.
These are known as “affiliative” behaviours, and they are key to social relationships between animals, and to maintaining complex social hierarchies.
Adult koalas, though, are generally solitary (except, obviously, when mating). They are usually widely spread over an area and rarely come face-to-face, instead interacting over long distances by vocalising and leaving their scent.
And when male koalas do physically interact, it is usually a violent affair. More than once, I’ve seen male koalas scratched and bloodied — missing chunks of fur and even a claw — after fighting with a rival male.
That’s why my observations of affection between young male koalas were so surprising.
What I saw after dark
Over three painstaking weeks, I studied a koala population in the woodlands of Cape Otway, southern Victoria. Each night, I went out between 9pm and 2am to track and observe the males. I used a red-light spotlight to avoid disturbing them. If I saw something interesting, I filmed it. You can watch the video below.
After two weeks, I observed three males engaging in unexpected “affiliative” behaviours. They were grooming each other, sniffing each other’s genitals and vocalising to each other in soft, high-pitched calls, similar to the sounds baby koalas make.
They also appeared to be playing. They would gently — but perhaps provocatively — bite one another on the arm and ear, a bit like cheeky puppies do.
These interactions weren’t brief, either. I watched the koalas for two hours before finally giving in to sleep. When I went back at lunchtime the next day, they were still at it.
What’s behind these affectionate behaviours?
This type of social interaction between wild koalas had only been observed once before, more than 30 years ago, in a high-density koala population on French Island off Victoria.
Like that earlier observation, the koalas I recorded were young adult males, roughly aged between three and five years. Hormonal activity can surge at this life stage, leading to an increase in social behaviours such as play and boldness.
But if the affectionate behaviours were solely the result of teenage hormones, you’d expect it to be observed more often in many koalas in this age group. But that’s not the case.
Instead, these behaviours are most likely a result of the large koala populations.
Typically, fewer than two koalas are found per hectare. At Cape Otway, there were 15 koalas per hectare. This number can reach up to 20 in parts of South Australia and Victoria.
This high density means the home ranges of koalas are more likely to overlap and their interactions will be more frequent. It also means competition for food, space and mates can be especially high.
So young males might use affectionate behaviours — such as grooming and playing — to reduce conflict and manage stress. It may help individuals become familiar with their neighbours, establish hierarchies and avoid aggressive encounters.
Genetics may also play a role. Like many high-density koala populations, this population had low genetic diversity, meaning there was a high degree of relatedness among individuals.
The causes of low genetic diversity in high-density koala populations are complex. The species was almost hunted to extinction. This meant a vastly reduced number of koalas could pass on their genes to the next generation. To make matters worse, habitat destruction can prevent koalas from dispersing over a wide area.
Koalas are listed as endangered in New South Wales, Queensland and the ACT. But high-density koala populations, such as the one I observed in Cape Otway, also present major conservation challenges.
Too many koalas feeding in an area puts pressure on preferred tree species. This can result in mass tree death, and habitat loss for koalas and other species. In some cases, koalas can starve.
Unfortunately, there are no quick and easy solutions to this issue. Moving koalas from crowded areas to places where they are endangered often isn’t possible, due to differences in climate and the unique gut bacteria koalas need for their local food trees.
Other interventions, such as fertility control, can be effective. But this takes many years of intensive effort and significant funding, making it vulnerable to budget cuts and shifting priorities.
Some experts say culling could be used to control koala numbers and conserve the surrounding habitat, as it is for kangaroos. However, this is likely to draw widespread public opposition.
These complex challenges offer an unexpected silver lining, however. As my experience shows, high-density koala populations provide unique opportunities to observe rare social behaviours in this iconic species. All you need is curiosity, a big cup of tea, and patience.
Darcy Watchorn works for Zoos Victoria, a not-for-profit zoo-based conservation organisation. He is a member of the Ecological Society of Australia, the Australian Mammal Society, and the Society for Conservation Biology.
A golden bandicoot (_Isoodon auratus_)Colleen Sims/Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, CC BY-SA
Before species go extinct, their populations often shrink and become isolated. Healthy populations tend to have a large gene pool with many genetic variants circulating. But the path to extinction erodes genetic diversity, because a species’ gene pool shrinks as the population declines. Losing genetic diversity limits the ability of populations to adapt to threats such as disease and climate change.
So, what is the state of genetic diversity in animals, plants, fungi and algae worldwide? And how could focusing on this crucial level of biodiversity help build resilience in the face of global change? We explore these questions in our new study, published today in Nature.
Our team of 57 scientists from 20 countries trawled through more than 80,000 scientific articles across three decades to summarise evidence of genetic change in populations in 141 countries.
Alarmingly, we found genetic diversity is being lost globally across many species, especially birds and mammals. This loss was most severe in studies reporting changes in habitat, new diseases, natural disasters, and human activities such as hunting or logging.
But there’s hope. Our study suggests conservation strategies can help maintain or even increase genetic diversity.
Isolated populations of the endangered Scandinavian arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) have become inbred. Jonatan Pie, Unsplash
What is genetic diversity and why does it matter?
At the core of every cell lies a copy of the instruction manual for living things. This is the genetic code, made up of DNA molecules. But its sequence varies enormously, separating a moth from a tree from a bacterium. Even within a species, we see distinct genetic differences between individuals. These genetic differences contribute to differences in their traits, which is why we get individuals who are taller or shorter, faster or slower, bolder or more cautious.
This genetic diversity stems from mutations. Often, these mutations are not helpful. But at times, they can enable populations to adapt to change.
For example, golden kelp (Ecklonia radiata) likes colder water. But in a population, some individuals will have mutations suited for warm water. When a devastating marine heatwave hit the West Australian coast in 2011, individuals with warm-water mutations were more likely to survive and reproduce. This genetic diversity enabled the kelp population to adapt to the warmer conditions.
This is why genetic diversity is so important – it gives species more resilience in a rapidly changing world. This priority has been recognised in Australia’s Strategy for Nature, and in goals and targets discussed at the United Nations biodiversity summit COP16.
How can we safeguard or restore genetic diversity for threatened species?
To answer this question, we used a technique called meta-analysis to look for patterns. From more than 80,000 published articles, we identified 882 studies which measured changes in genetic diversity over time. These studies came from right around the globe and across the entire “tree of life”.
They show there are many ways to conserve genetic diversity. Here are five promising strategies to help keep species resilient.
Scientists from 20 countries came together to read thousands of papers and collect data on genetic diversity during in-person and online workshops. Robyn Shaw
Action 1: Adding individuals
Adding individuals to an existing population is known as supplementation. Our research found supplementation was the only action linked to a significant increase in genetic diversity, especially in birds.
Supplementation can help reduce the harmful effects of inbreeding, which is common in small, isolated populations. For example, conservationists working to safeguard New Zealand’s South Island robins (Petroica australis) moved female birds between isolated islands. The offspring of parents from different islands had stronger immune systems, higher survival rates, and improved reproductive health compared to their inbred counterparts.
Supplementation is key for boosting genetic diversity, improving population health and building resilience.
Action 2: Population control
Doing the opposite – removing individuals – can actually improve outcomes for the population as a whole in some circumstances, by, for instance, reducing competition.
But genetic diversity results varied a lot in studies using population control. So how can this strategy be used effectively?
In one case, conservationists in the United States used population control of coaster brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in a hatchery to prevent any single family from breeding too much. This meant multiple genetic lineages were maintained, increasing genetic diversity.
Action 3: Restoration
Ecosystem restoration can include planting trees, rehabilitating wetlands or restoring natural patterns of fire and water. We found genetic diversity was often maintained over time when ecological restoration was used.
Restoration efforts, alongside supplementation, are important to the survival of the greater prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus cupido), which had lost much habitat. Researchers report restoring and expanding suitable habitat is proving crucial to sustain genetic diversity and achieving long-term recovery.
Found in the US and Canada, greater prairie-chickens are known for their courtship dance. Danita Delimont/Shutterstock
Action 4: Control of other species
Feral, pest or overabundant species can outcompete, eat, or graze on species under threat. Controlling these species was linked to maintenance of genetic diversity in the studies we analysed overall.
For example, control of red fox numbers helped the Arctic fox(Vulpes lagopu) recover in Sweden. The technique reduced competition over resources such as food while new foxes from Norway were added to the wild population. Inbreeding was reduced, and survival improved.
Action 5: Conservation introductions and reintroductions
Establishing new populations at new sites is known as a conservation introduction, while a reintroduction means restoring populations where they previously existed.
We found mixed results for genetic diversity when these actions were reported. So, what factors contribute to success?
In Western Australia, a large number of golden bandicoots (Isoodon auratus) from a robust island population were reintroduced to three sites. After six generations, genetic diversity at these sites remained similar to the original source population. Success came from careful planning to ensure the new populations had a large gene pool to start from.
Overall, our study revealed many cases of genetic diversity loss. But we also found evidence that conservation action – especially supplementation – can improve the genetic health of a species.
Researchers, conservation managers and volunteers helped grow seedlings and establish new populations of the critically endangered feather-leaved banksia near Albany in Western Australia. David Coates
What can you do?
Supporting genetic diversity can be done at home.
If you have a garden, you can plant native species to support habitat connectivity.
Growing heirloom vegetables and rare fruit trees, or breeding heritage chooks can maintain genetic diversity in our food system.
Join community or botanic garden groups, or work with conservation groups to improve habitat or bolster numbers of threatened species.
While enjoying nature, avoid accidentally moving plants, seeds, or soil to new areas to reduce the spread of pests and diseases.
These small actions add up, helping to safeguard biodiversity at all levels – including genetic diversity.
Robyn Shaw was supported during the study by funding from the Australian Research Council. The project workshop was sponsored by the European Cooperation in Science and Technology Action ‘Genomic Biodiversity Knowledge for Resilient Ecosystems’. She is a member of the Coalition for Conservation Genetics and the IUCN Conservation Genetics Specialist Group.
Catherine Grueber’s research into the conservation genetics of threatened species receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the University of Sydney (Robinson Fellowship). She is a member of the Coalition for Conservation Genetics, and the IUCN Conservation Genetics Specialist Group.
Katherine Farquharson was supported during the study by funding from the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Innovations in Peptide and Protein Science. She is affiliated with Koala Conservation Australia.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karin Hammarberg, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Global and Women’s Health, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University
Every now and then we see media reports about celebrities in their mid 40s having surprise pregnancies. Or you might hear stories like these from friends or relatives, or see them on TV.
Menopause signals the end of a woman’s reproductive years and happens naturally between age 45 and 55 (the average is 51). After 12 months with no periods, a woman is considered postmenopausal.
While the chance of pregnancy is very low in the years leading up to menopause – the so called menopausal transition or perimenopause – the chance is not zero.
So, what do we know about the chance of conceiving naturally after age 45? And what are the risks?
Is there a spike in fertility before menopause?
The hormonal changes that accompany perimenopause cause changes to the menstrual cycle pattern, and some have suggested there can be a “surge” in fertility at perimenopause. But there’s no evidence this exists.
In the years leading up to menopause, a woman’s periods often become irregular, and she might have some of the common symptoms of menopause such as hot flushes and night sweats.
This might lead women to think they have hit menopause and can’t get pregnant anymore. But while pregnancy in a woman in her mid 40s is significantly less likely compared to a woman in her 20s or 30s, it’s still possible.
The stats for natural pregnancies after age 45
Although women in their mid- to late 40s sometimes have “miracle babies”, the chance of pregnancy is minimal in the five to ten years leading up to menopause.
The monthly chance of pregnancy in a woman aged 30 is about 20%. By age 40 it’s less than 5% and by age 45 the chance is negligible.
We don’t know exactly how many women become pregnant in their mid to late 40s, as many pregnancies at this age miscarry. The risk of miscarriage increases from 10% in women in their 20s to more than 50% in women aged 45 years or older. Also, for personal or medical reasons some pregnancies are terminated.
According to a review of demographic data on age when women had their final birth across several countries, the median age was 38.6 years. But the range of ages reported for last birth in the reviewed studies showed a small proportion of women give birth after age 45.
Having had many children before seems to increase the odds of giving birth after age 45. A study of 209 women in Israel who had conceived spontaneously and given birth after age 45 found 81% had already had six or more deliveries and almost half had had 11 or more previous deliveries.
There’s no reliable data on how common births after age 45 are in Australia. The most recent report on births in Australia show that about 5% of babies are born to women aged 40 years or older.
However, most of those were likely born to women aged between 40 and 45. Also, the data includes women who conceive with assisted reproductive technologies, including with the use of donor eggs. For women in their 40s, using eggs donated by a younger woman significantly increases their chance of having a baby with IVF.
What to be aware of if you experience a late unexpected pregnancy
A surprise pregnancy late in life often comes as a shock and deciding what to do can be difficult.
Depending on their personal circumstances, some women decide to terminate the pregnancy. Contrary to the stereotype that abortions are most common among very young women, women aged 40–44 are more likely to have an abortion than women aged 15–19.
This may in part be explained by the fact older women are up to ten times more likely to have a fetus with chromosomal abnormalities.
There are some extra risks involved in pregnancy when the mother is older. More than half of pregnancies in women aged 45 and older end in miscarriage and some are terminated if prenatal testing shows the fetus has the wrong number of chromosomes.
This is because at that age, most eggs have chromosomal abnormalities. For example, the risk of having a pregnancy affected by Down syndrome is one in 86 at age 40 compared to one in 1,250 at age 20.
Apart from the increased risk of chromosomal abnormalities, advanced maternal age also increases the risk of stillbirth, fetal growth restriction (when the unborn baby doesn’t grow properly), preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes and caesarean section.
However, it’s important to remember that since the overall risk of all these things is small, even with an increase, the risk is still small and most babies born to older mothers are born healthy.
Multiple births are also more common in older women than in younger women. This is because older women are more likely to release more than one egg if and when they ovulate.
A study of all births in England and Wales found women aged 45 and over were the most likely to have a multiple birth.
The risks of babies being born prematurely and having health complications are higher in twin than singleton pregnancies, and the risks are highest in women of advanced maternal age.
What if you want to become pregnant in your 40s?
If you’re keen to avoid pregnancy during perimenopause, it’s recommended you use contraception.
But if you want to get pregnant in your 40s, there are some things you can do to boost your chance of conceiving and having a healthy baby.
If you get good news, talking to a doctor about what to expect and how to best manage a pregnancy in your 40s can help you be prepared and will allow you to get personalised advice based on your health and circumstances.
Karin Hammarberg 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.
Democracies worldwide are suffering from legitimacy problems. This is reflected in low levels of public trust in key political institutions, the polarisation of politics, and the erosion of public confidence in the capacity of governments to address societal concerns.
According to the 2024 Edelman Trust Barometer, only 50% of people worldwide trust their government, and the tally is even lower in many developed countries such as the United States and United Kingdom. A study by the Pew Research Center found only 20% of Americans trust their national government to do what is right “just about always” or “most of the time”.
Citizens almost everywhere view their elected officials and public institutions with suspicion. They believe decisions are made to serve special interests rather than the common good. This culture of discontentment is leading to reduced civic engagement, increased polarisation, the rise of identity politics, and a general sense of disillusionment with the political process. It has also sparked an upsurge in speculation as to whether democracy is dying, in recession or crisis.
The findings of the New Democratic Audit of Australia have just been published. They provide a timely and comprehensive evaluation of the current state of Australian democratic life.
The audit promises to bridge significant gaps in our understanding of Australia’s democracy.
A team of leading academics from universities in every state and territory deploys an audit approach to assess the democratic performance of federal, state and territory-level political institutions. It then examines how they have enabled or undermined Australian political life.
For instance, the monopoly of Australian governance by Coalition and Labor parties has only just begun to adjust to growing disillusionment with the two-party system.
To date, Australia has successfully avoided both rancorous populist politics (as in the US) and serious governance decline (as in the UK). However, the Voice to Parliament referendum and continued pandering to regressive immigration policies suggests populism could well be on the rise.
So what did the New Democratic Audit find?
Democracy under stress
1. Declining public trust in government. Trust in Australian political institutions is in decline. Only 30% of Australians report trust in government officials, according to the Australian Election Study.
The main concerns driving the decline in trust are lack of transparency in decision-making, perceptions of public sector inefficiency, political corruption, and the disconnection between politicians and citizens. Australians also express concerns about poor communication of policies. Furthermore, they believe governments have failed to deliver solutions to pressing issues such as the cost of living, wage stagnation and climate action.
A significant proportion of the population believes the country has become more divided. Major sources of division are the perception of the rich and powerful as a major dividing force (72%), followed by hostile foreign governments (69%), journalists (51%), and government leaders (49%).
2. Strong public satisfaction with democracy. Despite low trust in government, the 2024 World Values Survey shows that support for democratic values in Australia — such as free and fair elections, the rule of law, and representative democracy — remains strong. There is also a growing emphasis post-pandemic on the need for governments to address long-term challenges such as climate change and income inequality.
3. Australia is viewed internationally as a leading liberal democracy. Despite the challenges, Australia is assessed in most global rankings as one of the leading liberal democracies, with continuous economic growth, a strong federal system, and competitive elections. Its institutions have generally performed well, even in the face of global challenges such as the COVID pandemic. Australia is classed as one of only 24 “full democracies”.
4. The “protective power of democracy” is under pressure. The audit emphasises economist Amartya Sen’s concept of the “protective power of democracy as critical to achieving high quality democratic governance”. This relies on four components: electoral integrity, participatory opportunities, liberal values and good democratic governance.
5. Electoral integrity. Australia’s elections are free and fair, thanks to an independent election commission. However, concerns about government advertising and political donations undermine the fairness of elections, giving incumbent governments an advantage.
6. Public participation. Australia performs poorly in facilitating citizen participation beyond voting. Opportunities for civil society engagement, through localism, citizen juries or assemblies, are limited. Parliaments at various levels are not adequately representative in terms of gender and ethnicity, and regional policy concerns are often ignored.
7. Liberal values. Australia has made improvements in protecting civil rights, especially concerning LGBTQ+ issues and gender equality. But there remain significant gaps in protecting the rights of the most vulnerable groups, including Indigenous communities, differently abled people, and refugees. Australia lacks a comprehensive charter of human rights, and there are ongoing issues with the erosion of civil liberties.
8. Good democratic governance. This component refers to the instrumental importance of governments being responsible and accountable, responsive to the needs of the citizenry in service terms, and free from corruption. This is where the performance or supply of government matters most.
The audit finds Australia’s institutions are generally effective and adaptive, as seen in responses to the bushfires and the COVID pandemic. However, the federal government wields disproportionate power, which undermines traditional checks and balances. Public perception of corruption in politics and the public sector is also a growing public concern.
Reimagining Australian democracy
The audit concludes that Australia remains a full democracy, but faces critical challenges that require reflection and reinvention.
To renew its democracy, Australia must make its system of government more representative, accountable and responsive to the needs of citizens. There is a need for a stronger focus on integrity in politics, ensuring governments act transparently, empathetically and in ways that deliver tangible outcomes for the public. Public dissatisfaction with political corruption, inefficiency and a lack of responsiveness must be addressed to restore trust in political institutions.
While Australia continues to be a leading democracy, it faces pressing challenges that could undermine the sustainability of its democratic institutions if not addressed. The audit calls for a period of democratic reinvention, with an emphasis on improving governance to better serve citizens and maintain public trust in democracy.
The New Democratic Audit is free for download at: https://press.lse.ac.uk/site/books/e/10.31389/lsepress.ada/
Mark Evans has received funding and in-kind support to complete democratic audits in the United Kingdom (Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust) and Australia (Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House, Canberra).
In October 2020, a van-sized robotic spacecraft briefly touched down on the surface of Bennu, a 525-metre-wide asteroid 320 million kilometres from Earth.
As part of NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission, the spacecraft not only spent two years orbiting and imaging the asteroid, it also collected a precious sample of dust and small rocks from Bennu’s rubbly surface.
In September 2023, a capsule containing the pristine asteroid sample returned to Earth, landing in the Utah desert in the United States.
Since then, an international team of scientists – of which we are members – have been busy studying the roughly 120 grams of material collected from Bennu.
Our findings are revealed in two new papers published in Nature and Nature Astronomy today. They indicate that water may have once been present on Bennu’s parent body, and offer new insights into the chemistry of the early Solar System.
Pristine remnants of rocks from deep time
Asteroids are fragmentary remnants of pre-existing parent bodies from early in our Solar System’s history that have since been destroyed by collisions with other objects. They orbit the Sun and come in many different shapes, sizes and chemical compositions.
Asteroid Bennu was targeted for the OSIRIS-REx mission because remote sensing observations from Earth indicated it as a B-type asteroid. These asteroids are rich in carbon and hydrated clay minerals, possibly sharing similarities to the most primitive group of meteorites on Earth, known as carbonaceous chondrites.
Unlike meteorite samples, samples collected from asteroids have not been physically or chemically modified by Earth’s atmosphere and biosphere. This allows us to tackle key questions about the evolution of the early Solar System, planet formation, and the ingredients for life.
Another aim of the OSIRIS-REx mission is to link findings from samples in the laboratory to those from remote sensing techniques. This helps us corroborate astronomical observations of asteroids to improve our surveys of the Solar System.
Curation teams process the sample return capsule from NASA’s OSIRIS-REx mission in a cleanroom. Keegan Barber/NASA
Tiny crystals of salt minerals
To prevent contamination, the sealed capsule containing the sample was stored and handled in a huge glass box when it was returned to Earth. This tank had rubber gloves feeding into it from the side so scientists could handle the samples without directly touching them. It had also been purged with nitrogen to keep out moisture and oxygen from Earth’s atmosphere.
When we analysed the interior of Bennu’s dust particles, we were surprised to find tiny crystals of the salt minerals known as halite and sylvite.
This was a breakthrough discovery.
Halite is extremely rare in meteorites. It has only been found in three out of hundreds of thousands of known meteorites on Earth. We also know that halite is highly soluble. It can degrade quickly when exposed to air or water on Earth.
Other members of the OSIRIS-REx sample analysis team identified a variety of other salt minerals in the Bennu sample. These included sodium carbonates, phosphates, sulphates and fluorides.
These minerals can form by the evaporation of brines – similar to deposits that form in Earth’s salt lakes.
By comparing these results with the chemical makeup of salt lakes on Earth, a picture began to emerge of brines evaporating on the parent body of asteroid Bennu, leaving behind salts as evidence.
Tiny crystals of several minerals including sodium carbonate (pictured here) were found in samples of the asteroid Bennu. Timothy McCoy/Smithsonian
A variety of organic compounds
This discovery provides a new insight into water activity during the earliest times in our Solar System. But the presence of salt minerals is significant for another reason.
On Earth, these minerals are a catalyst for the formation of organic compounds such as nucleobases and nucleosides – the prebiotic building blocks of terrestrial biology.
And indeed, in a separate analysis of the Bennu sample, other colleagues on the OSIRIS-REx mission identified a wide variety of organic compounds present on the carbon- and nitrogen-rich asteroid.
These compounds include 14 of the 20 amino acids we also find in Earth’s biological processes. They also include several amino acids that are absent in known biology, ammonia, and all five nucleobases found in RNA and DNA.
Even though no life was detected on Bennu, the two new studies show that a briny, carbon-rich environment on Bennu’s parent body was suitable for assembling the building blocks of life.
In September 2023, a capsule containing the pristine sample from Bennu returned to Earth, landing in the Utah desert in the United States. Keegan Barber/NASA
Ongoing investigations
The findings from returned samples of asteroid Bennu may provide researchers insight into what happens on distant icy bodies in our Solar System.
Some of these bodies include Saturn’s moon Enceladus and the dwarf planet Ceres in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.
Both Enceladus and Ceres have subsurface brine oceans. Could they possibly harbour life?
We are continuing to investigate Bennu using the pristine samples collected back in 2020. We are currently researching the timing of the Bennu parent body breakup event and looking for evidence of impacts recorded by various minerals in the samples.
The authors of this article acknowledge the contribution of the following people to the research at Curtin University: Fred Jourdan, Steven Reddy, David Saxey, Celia Mayers, and Xiao Sun, as well as the entire OSIRIS-REx team.
William Rickard receives funding from the Australian Research Council, Australia Government
Nick Timms and Phil Bland 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.
During the pandemic, midwives faced what researchers call a “pragmatic paradox” – a situation where contradictory demands are imposed on individuals who can neither refuse nor fulfil the demands.
Midwives needed to care for women and babies despite the risk of infecting them with the virus. Their experiences shed important light on how we can think about no-win situations in the workplace.
In our recently published research, we surveyed 215 New Zealand midwives about their experiences of working through COVID lockdowns and how they coped with what felt at times like a no-win situation.
The absurdity of contradictory demands
Pragmatic paradoxes place workers in absurd, no-win situations. They can occur simply because of leadership issues or glitches in management bureaucracies. They can also happen during unique crises – such as the pandemic.
But many workers are so used to feeling powerless that they may not recognise – much less question – the absurdity of contradictory demands.
When the pandemic struck, midwives’ professional roles suddenly entailed an inherent contradiction they had no opportunity to question.
They were contractually obligated to protect societal wellbeing by providing ongoing maternity services. Yet due to the fast evolving situation and initial shortages of safety equipment, providing those services entailed risking public wellbeing by exposing themselves and their clients to the virus.
As one of our research participants explained:
I felt that I was in a very difficult situation. I was connecting with multiple “bubbles” on a daily basis. I was scared that I could be in a position to pass COVID on to vulnerable people.
As expected, most midwives in our study felt disempowered by the tensions of this situation:
I felt extremely vulnerable. As a lead maternity carer midwife, considered an essential service, I had no control over whether I could just not work.
But surprisingly, a small number of midwives were seemingly motivated by it. As one explained,
[My family] thought I was “brave” and “courageous” to keep working – but this was simply my job! I felt like I had a duty to pregnant women to front up and continue as per normal.
During the pandemic, midwives faced a pragmatic paradox – they were expected to enter multiple people’s homes while also preventing the spread of COVID-19. metamorworks/Shutterstock
Recognised and supported?
Why would some midwives feel motivated by their contractual obligations to fulfil contradictory demands?
The crux, we found, was not whether they were aware of the contradiction inherent in their situation, but whether that awareness was accompanied by a sense of professional recognition and support.
If midwives felt like they were recognised and supported in their ongoing efforts – like valuable members in the “team of five million” – they framed and accepted their contradictory situation as part of a societal duty.
Midwives placed particular importance on recognition and support from the government and the public. As one explained,
I felt the love. Heading out on the motorway I would see the sign thanking essential workers. And the government was always mentioning us and thanking us.
In contrast, if they felt like health system leaders and the public were oblivious to their situation, they interpreted contradictory work demands as stressful and disempowering.
Another midwife said,
I became very angry and felt midwives were like lambs to the slaughter – we had no PPE, we were being told to carry on working, in the media we were invisible. Our professional body seemed to put the women we cared for ahead of our wellbeing.
Managing pragmatic paradoxes
There are two ways to look at the implications of our findings. One is to suggest pragmatic paradoxes are not as bad as they initially seem.
Contradictions abound in contemporary society, so it may be inevitable people face conflicting yet unrefusable demands in their jobs. But if leaders and managers can motivate workers to embrace those demands – or at least recognise the difficulty of the tasks – the outcome can be positive.
An alternative reading is workers who feel motivated by pragmatic paradoxes are casualties of something akin to gaslighting. According to this logic, contradictory demands are imposed by those at the top of their respective organisations and societies, so that’s where the demands ought to be dealt with.
For example, the government could have minimised the risks midwives faced during the pandemic by better access to protective equipment, thereby resolving their contradictory situation. Suggesting contradictory demands should be passed down to lower-level workers is therefore equivalent to accepting a certain level of oppression.
Whichever interpretation resonates more, our research underscores the importance of communication as a means of ensuring workers are not disempowered by pragmatic paradoxes.
Over the course of the pandemic, healthcare workers worldwide eventually improved their contradictory situation by posting on social media and talking to the press. Political leaders and health management recognised the workforce needed greater support to navigate the contradictory demands of risking wellbeing to protect wellbeing.
The broader lesson is when people face contradictory directives, they should be able to discuss and challenge them.
Research suggests that in interpersonal situations, humour may be an effective means of doing so without directly threatening the power or competence of those in charge.
Of course, this brings us to one final paradox: that encouraging humour and employee voice requires fostering the type of environment where pragmatic paradoxes are unlikely to thrive in the first place.
Tago Mharapara receives funding from Auckland University of Technology
James Greenslade-Yeats 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.
While it may be true that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption, are alarmist statements a good motivator for health messaging, or is there danger to using them?(Shutterstock)
The United States surgeon general recently called for a warning of cancer risk on alcohol labels. And I agree. But the discourse that has come out in the media, by health professionals and health influencers, has been alarmist and a disservice to informing the public on the real cancer risks associated with alcohol.
I’m a professor in Health Sciences at Simon Fraser University and I study how behaviours relate to the disease. I also write a blog on the role health behaviours play in your health.
But are these alarmist statements a good motivator for health messaging, or is there danger to using them?
Statistically, your risk for cancer goes up from the very first sip of alcohol. That doesn’t mean you will get cancer from drinking alcohol, it just means your chances increase. And as you drink more alcohol, your chances further increase. It’s like betting in roulette: the more numbers you bet on, the more likely you are to win. Or in this case, lose.
Out of 800 women, one drink per week will result in two additional women getting breast cancer. (Shutterstock)
However, what’s lost in this messaging is how much this risk is. Based on Canada’s Guidance on Alcohol and Health, having one drink per week increases a women’s risk for breast cancer by 1.8 per cent. Approximately one in eight women will develop breast cancer in their life. Therefore, out of 800 women, one drink per week will result in two additional women getting breast cancer. Having one drink per day increases the risk seven-fold. These are real people who might otherwise not get breast cancer if they abstained from alcohol.
While these numbers are much lower than the number of people who die from cancer each year, it would also be accurate to say there is no amount of walking or driving that is safe. Despite this, people will continue to cross the street and people will continue to drive. But this illustrates the challenge in informing the public about risks and changing behaviour.
Fear in public health messaging
The use of fear in public health messaging should only be used if there’s an effective solution. In the case of alcohol, there is: abstinence. (Shutterstock)
During the COVID-19 pandemic, fear was at the forefront of public health efforts to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Indeed, the use of fear in public health messaging seemed to be quite an effective tool in ensuring behavioural compliance in pandemic measures. Community interviews of parents showed fear was at the root of both getting their children vaccinated (fear of the disease) or not (fear of the vaccination).
The use of fear in public health messaging should only be used if there’s an effective solution. In the case of alcohol, there is: abstinence. But the use of fear should also be commensurate with the risk, otherwise it risks having people tune out.
This may be particularly problematic when previous guidelines stated beneficial effects of moderate drinking and current guidelines on alcohol state one to two drinks per day is acceptable. Instead, the public may be best served by communicating the risk in terms the public understands, such as how many more people will get cancer from drinking.
Alcohol should have a warning label on it
Alcohol consumption in Canada is on the decline. In 2022, alcohol consumption decreased by 1.2 per cent compared to 2021. And in 2023, 54 per cent of Canadians reported having no alcohol over the previous week, with younger Canadians drinking less than their older counterparts. These trends are similar in the United States.
More than 40 countries have a warning label on alcohol (although far fewer mention cancer), but Canada and many European countries are not included. They should be. Alcohol is a highly addictive substance that can destroy the lives of those addicted to it and those around them. It impairs judgment and accounts for dozens of deaths per year from drinking and driving.
Warning labels on alcohol are a good step to reduce health risks, as long as they are clear and informative.
Scott Lear receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Hamilton Health Sciences, and has received funding from the Heart and Stroke Foundation, Novo Nordisk, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
It was a bizarre sight watching a huge gay 1970s disco hit being performed at Donald Trump’s 2025 pre-inauguration rally. Many prominent artists from Beyoncé to Bruce Springsteen prohibit Trump from using their music. So why do Village People – a band synonymous with the 1970s gay liberation movement – allow their music to be associated with a political movement that has fixed and repressive ideas about sexual identity and morality?
Village People’s recent incarnation has had a complicated relationship with the “make America great again” movement (Maga). In 2020, their song YMCA began featuring at Maga anti-lockdown rallies and soon became a prominent song in Trump’s re-election campaign.
At the time, the band asked Trump not to use its music and later supported Kamala Harris for the presidency in 2024. Since then Village People have dramatically changed tack.
To be clear, of the group that performed at Trump’s pre-inauguration rally, only one of the original Village People remains. The band, put together by the gay producers Jacques Morali and Henri Belolo in 1978, was named after New York’s Greenwich Village gay scene.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
In the 1970s, the group was mostly gay-fronted except the first recruit, lead singer and co-songwriter Victor Willis (sometimes the policeman, sometimes the admiral figure). Willis took control of the name and the hits in 2017 after an out-of-court settlement with co-owner Henri Belolo.
Willis is now the only member of the original line up still performing under the official band name. Perhaps to ensure mainstream popularity, he has tried to move Village People away from its gay associations – the biography on the band’s website makes no mention of the act’s significance to queer audiences. He recently wrote on Facebook that he will sue every news organisation that suggests “YMCA is somehow a gay anthem”.
Victor Willis, the last remaining original member of Village People in a 1978 video for Just A Gigolo.
But it’s difficult to untangle Village People from queer history as it was the trendsetting gay community of underground disco culture that made them famous. Record companies selected the songs and artists to promote based on how DJs reported their popularity in the hottest clubs. Many of these clubs were gay dominated, and disco itself was tied up with the growing confidence of the gay liberation movement in America and the era of sexual liberalisation that followed the 1960s.
Jacques Morali put together Village People knowing the band could offer influential gay clubbers something they had always been denied: cultural representation, and with it, acknowledgement of their existence.
It worked. One self-proclaimed “disco doll” writing to LGBTQ+ newspaper The Advocate in 1978 recalled first hearing Village People: “The music was very hot … and the words were about us, about our scene. I couldn’t believe it.”
Village People’s innuendos and knowing references to gay culture often went over the heads of many straight listeners. Songs like Macho Man and the group’s hypermasculine image epitomised the “clone” movement in 1970s gay culture.
Queer men, long derided for being effeminate, would bulk up at the gym and dress in leathers like bikers, effectively becoming more of an embodiment of masculinity than straight men. Go West was a reference to San Francisco’s more liberal environment for gay men. The YMCA was a place to “hang out with all the boys”.
But skyrocketing into the mainstream made Village People an awkward fit for gay disco culture. This vibrant community wanted their own scene that was not part of the mainstream. They felt betrayed by a band publicly denying their gayness as they juggled the hardcore homosexual audience that had made them famous alongside a family-friendly audience.
The backlash was fierce. A 1978 letter to gay lib magazine The Body Politic declared: “The commercial exploiters are disguising it to gain the commercially lucrative straight audience”, describing Village People as “traitors of the worst kind”.
But even if they became momentarily unpopular in the hottest gay clubs, for many LGBTQ+ people, Village People’s hits have endured as anthems played at queer nights and Pride events. In their sound, appearance and sheer 1970-ness, they are undeniably camp icons.
Which of course leads many to question why people attending Trump’s rallies – hardly famous for their inclusivity – would embrace their music. One explanation is that Maga audiences simply do not care about past gay associations as the music is simple, catchy and positive.
Another is that just like the 1970s, the queer messaging of Village People’s music still goes over the heads of straight Maga audiences. Perhaps despite its past gay associations, they are consciously trying to culturally repurpose disco for their own movement. Or they’re trying to be ironic.
Most likely, though, the music might have a particular meaning to LGBTQ+ audiences, it has other meanings depending on the context in which it is played. To many, Village People are the epitome of a novelty, apolitical pop group. Their hits are associated with weddings, children’s parties and good-time disco. The prosaic truth may be that Trump fans just enjoy a really catchy tune.
But for Trump’s team, the use of these songs is politically calculated toward their core supporters who have changed the lyrics of YMCA to “MAGA”. And don’t forget Village People were joined at the pre-inauguration rally by WWE wrestling’s Hulk Hogan. Both are nostalgic late 20th-century acts that revel in blatant performances of muscled masculinity.
They seem to be the embodiment of that imagined past of American virility that Trump vaguely refers to when he promises to make the nation “great again”. It’s not difficult to work out what Trump’s message is, especially when he dances along to Macho Man at rallies.
Both these acts are carnivalesque, like Trump himself. They indicate an era of politics as spectacle, but beneath the surface messages, we must carefully pay attention to what is actually being said and done.
William Rees 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.
Whole Foods workers at the Philadelphia flagship store in the city’s Art Museum area voted to unionize on Jan. 27, 2025. They are the first store in the Amazon-owned grocery chain to do so.
Paul Clark, a professor of labor and employment relations at Penn State University, talked to Kate Kilpatrick, The Conversation U.S. Philadelphia editor, about why this is happening – and why in Philly.
Why did the union drive effort succeed now, and in Philly?
In the last five years, there has been a surge in union organizing. There are a number of reasons for this. First is the labor market. Low unemployment emboldens workers to take the risk of organizing a union. If workers feel their employer can’t replace them or that they can easily get a similar job, they are less fearful of angering the employer by trying to organize.
The second reason is that the Biden administration was a labor-friendly administration – perhaps the most in history. The U.S. president appoints a majority of members to the National Labor Relations Board, which interprets and enforces the labor law that governs organizing. Under Biden, the NLRB regularly issued decisions that provided greater protection to workers and held employers accountable when they violated workers’ rights. During Republican administrations, the board’s decisions are generally pro-business and provide less protection to workers. So workers had the wind at their back in that regard.
Also recent polling shows that 70% of Americans approve of unions, compared with less than half of Americans just 15 years ago. The generally favorable view of unions creates a more supportive environment for organizing.
Why Philadelphia? Philadelphia is a relatively strong union town. The percentage of the workforce that is represented by a union is higher in Philadelphia than in most cities and areas of the country. So when workers express interest in organizing in Philadelphia they get a lot of support. Other unions might turn out members for their rallies, pressure the company to not oppose the organizing drive and offer other aid and assistance.
The starting wage at the Philadelphia Whole Foods store is US$16 an hour. Is that considered low when the city’s minimum wage is just $7.25 an hour?
The minimum wage in Philadelphia is $7.25 because that is the federal minimum wage. States can institute a higher minimum wage if they choose to, but Pennsylvania is one of the few Northeast states that hasn’t adopted a minimum wage higher than the federal minimum. The minimum wages in New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts, for example, are $15 or above.
But the minimum wage in Pennsylvania is almost irrelevant because of today’s labor market. Unemployment is low, and many employers have to offer significantly more than the minimum wage to get workers.
And the minimum wage is supposed to be a starting wage for workers with little experience or seniority. What workers want is a living wage. According to the MIT Living Wage Calculator, a single person in Philadelphia needs to earn around $24 per hour to cover the basic costs of living. And Whole Foods is a profitable business. It’s part of Amazon, one of the most profitable, largest companies in the world. I think workers at these companies believe that they play an important role in generating those profits because of the work they do. And they think they should get a fair share of those profits.
How might the Whole Foods workers expect the company to fight back?
When employees win an organizing election as the Whole Food workers have, they have won a battle but not the war. The purpose of forming a union is to improve wages and benefits and working conditions, and you do that by negotiating a contract with the company. That is the next step in the process. But the law only requires employers to bargain with employees – to meet at reasonable times and exchange proposals. It doesn’t compel them to agree to anything.
The typical strategy of companies that aggressively oppose their workers having a union is to drag their feet in bargaining and not sign a contract. That is technically illegal, but labor law in the U.S. is relatively weak, and with good legal advice you can drag out bargaining for a very long time.
We’ve seen this with the Starbucks campaign. The first Starbucks store unionized in 2021. Over 540 stores have organized since then. And Starbucks workers at those stores still do not have a contract.
Could the new Trump administration have any impact on how this plays out in Philly?
The fact that the Trump administration has taken over gives companies more confidence that the standard delay strategy will work.
On Jan. 28, 2025, President Donald Trump fired Jennifer Abruzzo, the general counsel of the NLRB. The general counsel is the official at the board who basically enforces the National Labor Relations Act. Abruzzo was very aggressive in holding employers accountable if they violated the act and in protecting the rights of workers who tried to organize.
Trump’s approach to labor law in his first four years in office was at the other extreme. He appointed as general counsel Peter Robb, who was seen as far less aggressive in protecting workers’ rights and his interpretations of the law were much more pro-business.
Under the Biden administration, if a company was coming to the bargaining table month after month and not agreeing to anything, the NLRB would eventually step in and cite the employer for not bargaining in good faith. The NLRB could find the employer guilty of unfair labor practices and genuinely put pressure on it to bargain a contract.
They can go on strike. But Amazon has the resources to put up with a strike at one Whole Foods store forever.
Other Whole Foods stores may be considering union drives. The more stores that organize, the more momentum the Philadelphia store will have. But for now, these workers in Philly are going to have their work cut out for them.
That said, they won’t be alone. The Whole Foods workers organized with the UFCW Local 1776, which is basically a statewide union that’s been around for decades. It has a lot of resources and experienced and knowledgeable leaders, plus the resources of the national UFCW. So it’s going to lean into this fight, and these workers will also have a lot of support from the rest of the labor community in Philadelphia.
Earlier this month, three Congressional representatives from Pennsylvania wrote a letter to Jason Buechel, the Whole Foods CEO, and to Jeff Bezos, the Amazon founder, that expressed their concerns about efforts to suppress the union drive. Is that support typical?
It’s not unusual. But there is no legal basis for elected officials to intervene in a labor-management dispute. I’d put that under the heading of community support.
Paul F. Clark 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.
The Artemis program has been Nasa’s best chance to get “boots on the Moon” again. But with the new US administration taking guidance from tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, who is focused on Mars colonisation, will they end up abandoning or pushing back lunar missions?
For example, there’s been speculation that returning US president Donald Trump may cancel the Space Launch System rocket, which Nasa intended to use to get from the Moon to Mars. But is this approach likely to help them get to Mars quicker?
The last human presence on the lunar surface was Apollo 17 in 1972. So you may imagine that it should be easy for the US to return. However there have been plans to once again send people there since 2004, which have changed name with each incoming president, until its current incarnation as the Artemis program.
The 2022 Artemis-1 test flight was successful in its mission to send an unmanned satellite around the lunar orbit and return using the new SLS rocket system. But Artemis-2, which will carry crew, is not scheduled for launch until 2026. When we consider private companies and other nations, this is comparatively slow progress.
Artemis mission. Nasa
The first successful landing of a spacecraft on the Moon by the Indian Space Agency, Isro, took place in 2023 with Chaandrayan-3, which was an amazing achievement with a low budget. China landed in 2013 with Chang’e 3, and Chang’e 4 in 2019 on the dark side.
Russia have previously had landers on the Moon. Their more recent attempt at a lunar landing with Luna-25 was unsuccessful though. There are also future lander missions planned by the European Space Agency with Argonaut, a private Israeli company and other private industries. Clearly, there is no shortage of potential competitors which could eventually develop to send humans too.
Implications for Mars
So would turning to Martian exploration be a sensible move instead of heading for the Moon? It would likely mean abandoning the Lunar Gateway project, a space station in orbit around the Moon where astronauts could live. But as this is not planned until 2027 at the earliest, this would seem acceptable.
However the difference between going to the Moon and going to Mars is like the difference between walking to the end of your road compared to walking to another country.
Besides the incredible difference in distance (the distance to travel to Mars is 833 times greater than that of the distance to the Moon), the time taken to get there is far longer as well. The optimal lunar launch conditions repeat once a month. And you could still launch at times that are not ideal.
The optimal fuel route for Mars involves arriving when the two planets are roughly on opposite sides of the Sun. This launch window repeats every 18 months, and the journey time of nine months means any problems onboard will need to be fixed by the crew, with no rescue option. Faster routes can be achieved (roughly six months) but this then becomes very energy intensive.
This is why the lunar gateway would come in handy, allowing astronauts to take off from the Moon, away from the Earth’s immense gravity, and head to Mars from there. Of course the material for the gateway would need to be sent to the lunar gateway first. But by splitting the energy requirements up it means slower but more efficient propulsion methods can be used for part of the Mars journey.
There is no doubt that, with some work, SpaceX will be able to make a landing on Mars. But will they be able to safely take people there and get them back? As a company the idea of profit will be a strong factor, along with astronaut safety. We only have to look at some of the more recent Boeing problems (astronauts have been stuck on the International Space Station for seven months at time of writing) to see that private companies may want to slow down a bit when it comes to transporting people.
This is unlikely to happen though, with the considerable influence of Musk on the White House administration, and the suggestion of fellow billionaire Jared Isaacman (a private astronaut) as the new head of Nasa.
Critical decisions
So two options for Nasa to choose from: either keep going with their Artemis program and abandon the Lunar Gateway, or aim for Mars and be primarily dependent on Musk.
Funding both options will likely mean that neither ever happens. Of course, the Mars mission would be easier if the gateway was already present at the Moon.
The timelines involved here are important. SpaceX states that it will send five uncrewed Starships to Mars next year with an aim to send humans to Mars in 2028. This seems ambitious, particularly as it involves refuelling in orbit, but if additional funds and material are put towards the project it could potentially be sooner than this.
As the lunar gateway would be built at the earliest in 2027, then it’d be unlikely to be operational in 2028 anyway. So prioritising Mars exploration over the lunar gateway may indeed get us to Mars quicker – but it will be risky.
If the US pulls out of plans to explore the Moon, other nations can expand their presence in those areas more easily – with the potential to have an easier route to launch to Mars. These are likely to be on much longer time scales though, but if Musk fails to get humans to Mars in the next few years, these countries may have an edge.
The conditions on Mars are slightly more favourable for human presence, with at least some atmospheric pressure and the potential for mining water. But as many studies have shown, it has no potential for terraforming, the process of altering a planet to make it more habitable for humans.
The increased distance from the Sun also means that solar panels are slightly less effective, and Mars is not rich in deposited solar Helium-3, which can be used as a fuel for nuclear fusion.
Of course the challenge is what excites many people and it may be a risk worth taking. But this decision should be left with the experts in the field, rather than politicians and billionaires.
Ian Whittaker 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.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Taylor, Professor and Director of the Clinical Anatomy Learning Centre, Lancaster University
The human body is composed of over 37 trillion cells, each with a limited lifespan. These cells are continuously replaced to maintain organ and system function. Yet over time, or as a result of damage, the number of functioning cells can decrease to a level that causes symptoms or even organ failure.
Regeneration of organs and systems is a scientific holy grail that relies on stem cells, but due to their limited number and slow division rate, this isn’t a practical route to organ regeneration. It would take many years to repopulate all the cell types needed.
However, some people see organs “reappear”, like Katy Golden who had her tonsils removed for a second time as an adult after they grew back over 40 years.
One reason that tonsils may grow back is that one of the operations to remove them is a partial tonsillectomy. Only removing part of the tonsils leads to a quicker recovery and fewer complications, but around 6% of children may see regrowth, which may require further surgery in later life.
Most people associate organ regrowth and regeneration with the liver. As little as 10% of the liver can regrow into a fully functioning liver. This is also how partial liver transplants allow the donor to “regrow” a normal sized and fully functioning liver.
One organ that has a surprising capacity to regenerate is the spleen and sometimes it can regenerate without people realising.
The spleen is a high-risk organ for injury and is the most commonly injured organ in blunt abdominal trauma during traffic collisions, sporting injuries or trivial activities such as bumping into furniture.
The spleen is at high risk because it has lots of blood vessels and hence lots of blood, but is only surrounded by a thin capsule that can tear in trauma, allowing blood to leak out. This can result in death if not treated promptly.
What may also happen is small pieces of the spleen – sometimes just a few cells – can become free in the abdomen and go on to “grow” where they settle – termed splenosis, going on to have similar functional activity to a mature, normally located spleen. This can be beneficial for those who have to have their spleen removed due to traumatic injury, with some reports suggesting regeneration in up to 66% of patients.
In the last few years, our lungs have also been shown to have regenerative capacity. It is well known that smoking and other pollutants destroy the alveoli (tiny air sacs) where oxygen is passed to the blood. Stopping smoking has been shown to allow cells that have avoided damage from the cancer-causing chemicals in tobacco smoke to help regenerate and repopulate the lining of parts of the airways with healthy cells.
Where a lung has been removed, the remaining lung has to adapt to support the tissues of the body and ensure enough oxygen gets to them. Studies have shown that the remaining lung increases the number of alveoli it has, rather than the remaining alveoli compensating by getting bigger to take up more oxygen.
It isn’t just organs inside that regenerate. One organ that constantly does so on a humongous scale is the skin.
As the largest organ, it has multiple barrier functions to keep things such as water in and germs out. With a surface area of almost 2m², the skin requires a significant amount of regeneration to replenish the 500,000,000 cells that are lost each day – that’s over 2g of skin cells per day.
Tissue regeneration is much more common
One of the most active regenerative tissues is the endometrial lining of the uterus which is shed every 28 days as part of the menstrual cycle and goes through about 450 cycles of this during a woman’s life.
This layer varies between 0.5 and 18mm in thickness depending on the stage of the menstrual cycle, the functional cells that are lost along with the blood from vessels that support a fertilised egg if it implants.
Men’s genitalia can also show regeneration. Vasectomy, which removes a piece of the tube (vas deferens) connecting the testes to the openings in the urethra, is used to reduce the chance of pregnancy by preventing sperm moving from the testes out of the penis.
However, the cut ends of the ducts have shown regenerative capacity and reconnected. Some sections, where up to 5cm has been restricted or removed, have shown regeneration, even through scar tissue. This “recanalisation” can result in unexpected pregnancies.
Bone is another tissue that can regenerate. If you’ve ever broken a bone, you’ll know that it repairs so that (eventually) you will regain function.
This process of repairing the break takes six to eight weeks. But the process of regenerating the bone architecture and strength continues for months and years beyond this date.
Where paired organs exist and one is lost, there is good evidence that the remaining organ can increase its functional ability to help the body cope with maintaining function. For example, when one kidney is removed, the remaining kidney enlarges to handle the extra workload, filtering blood and eliminating waste efficiently.
Although organ regeneration is rare, it does happen and typically takes years to manifest because organs are complex structures. Work continues to try to understand how scientists can develop this knowledge to help with the shortage of donor organs. Thankfully, tissue regeneration happens much more often than many people might suppose, and it is a much-needed part of staying alive.
Adam Taylor 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.
Western diets – high in processed foods and low in fibre – are associated with obesity, diabetes and heart disease. These diets don’t only harm our bodies, they also harm our gut microbiomes, the complex community of bacteria, fungi and viruses found in our intestinal tract that are important for our health.
Scientists, including my colleagues and me, are actively searching for ways to create healthy microbiomes to prevent chronic diseases. And my search has taken me to Papua New Guinea.
I have long been fascinated by this country, with its remote valleys almost untouched by the modern world until 1930, more than 800 languages, an ancient system of sustenance agriculture and entire communities living a non-industrialised lifestyle. This fascination kicked off a thrilling nine-year research project involving researchers from eight countries, which led to a paper published in the scientific journal Cell.
In previous research, my team studied the gut microbiomes of rural Papua New Guineans. We discovered microbiomes that are more diverse than their westernised counterparts, enriched in bacteria that thrive on dietary fibre, and with lower levels of inflammation-causing bacteria that are typically found in people who eat highly processed foods.
This information provided hints on how to perhaps redress the damage caused to our gut microbiomes.
The traditional diet in rural Papua New Guinea is rich in unprocessed plant-based foods that are full of fibre but low in sugar and calories, something I was able to see for myself on a field trip to Papua New Guinea. Determined to create something everyone could use to benefit their health, our team took what we saw in Papua New Guinea and other non-industrialised societies to create a new diet we call the NiMe (non-industrialised microbiome restore) diet.
What sets NiMe apart from other diets is that it is dominated by vegetables (such as leafy greens) and legumes (such as beans) and fruit. It only contains one small serving of animal protein per day (salmon, chicken or pork), and it avoids highly processed foods.
Dairy, beef and wheat were excluded from the human trial because they are not part of the traditional diet in rural Papua New Guinea. The other characteristic distinction of the diet is a substantial dietary fibre content. In our trial, we went for around 45g of fibre a day, which exceeds the recommendations in dietary guidelines.
One of my PhD students got creative in the kitchen designing recipes that would appeal to a person used to typical western dishes. These meals allowed us to develop a meal plan that could be tested in a strictly controlled study in healthy Canadian adults.
Remarkable results
We saw remarkable results including weight loss (although participants didn’t change their regular calorie intake), a drop in bad cholesterol by 17%, decreased blood sugar by 6%, and a 14% reduction in a marker for inflammation and heart disease called C-reactive protein. These benefits were directly linked to improvements in the participants’ gut microbiome, specifically, microbiome features damaged by industrialisation.
On a western diet low in dietary fibre, the gut microbiome degrades the mucus layer in the gut, which leads to inflammation. The NiMe diet prevented this process, which was linked to a reduction in inflammation.
The diet also increased beneficial bacterial metabolites (byproducts) in the gut, such as short-chain fatty acids, and in the blood, such as indole-3-propionic acid – a metabolite that has been shown to protect against type 2 diabetes and nerve damage.
Research also shows that low dietary fibre leads to gut microbes ramping up protein fermentation, which generates harmful byproducts that may contribute to colon cancer.
In fact, there is a worrying trend of increased colon cancer in younger people, which may be caused by recent trends towards high-protein diets or supplements. The NiMe diet increased carbohydrate fermentation at the expense of protein fermentation, and it reduced bacterial molecules in the participants’ blood that are linked to cancer.
The findings from our research show that a dietary intervention targeted towards restoring the gut microbiome can improve health and reduce disease risk. The NiMe diet offers a practical roadmap to achieve this, by providing recipes that were used in our study. It allows anyone interested in healthy eating to improve their diet to feed their human cells and their microbiome.
Jens Walter has received honoraria and/or paid consultancy from PrecisionBiotics/Novonesis A/S. NiMe is a trademark of Anissa M. Armet and Jens Walter.
The research described in this article was supported by the Weston Family Microbiome Initiative, PrecisionBiotics Group Ltd., the “Hundred Talents Program” Research Start-up Fund of Zhejiang University, Alberta Innovates Postgraduate Fellowship, Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Scholarship, the Alberta Innovates Graduate Student Scholarship, the Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarship, the Walter H. Johns Graduate Fellowship, the University of Alberta Doctoral Recruitment Scholarship, the Campus Alberta Innovates Program, the Canada Research Chairs Program, the Science Foundation Ireland Centre grant to APC microbiome Ireland (APC/SFI/12/RC/2273_P2) and a Science Foundation Ireland Professorship (19/RP/6853).
I would like to thank the people of Papua New Guinea whose way of life has been an inspriation for the development of the NiMe diet, and the participants of the human trial. I am deeply indepted to all the collaborators and the scientific institutions that have contributed to the research (please see author list and affiliations on publication). I would like to thank Prof. Andrew Greenhill (Federation University, Australia) and Prof William Pomat (Papua New Guinea Institute of Medical Research) for hosting me in Papua New Guina in 2019. I would further like to thank Jessica Stanisich and Tina Darb from the APC Microbiome Ireland for their help with this article.
A group of MPs has delivered a blistering verdict on the state special educational needs in England. In a new report, the public accounts committee call the system “unaffordable” and warn that the Department for Education (DfE) “risks a lost generation of children leaving school without receiving the help they need”.
Special educational needs support is administered by local authorities, and they are struggling to cope.
There has been a 140% increase in the number of children and young people with education, health and care (EHC) plans since 2015. EHC plans are reserved for those with complex needs.
ECH plans are designed to ensure that children get the support they are entitled to to meet their special educational needs. This may include personal budgets, specialist educational provision, transport or support from specialist staff or teaching assistants.
About 1.9 million children and young people have special educational needs and 576,000 have an EHC plan, which local authorities are required to fund. The rise in the number of children with EHC plans means that despite a rise in government funding, the amount given per plan has fallen.
Most local authorities spend more than their allocated funding for pupils with high needs. This has resulted in financial deficits. Some local authorities are at risk of going bankrupt.
Waiting times for special needs assessments to be carried out are lengthy, and in 2023, only half of children received an EHC plan within the 20-week target time. Parents often appeal when a local authority decides not to offer a child an EHC plan, and most of these appeals are upheld.
Understanding demand
The increase in the number of children with special educational needs in England is seen in other countries. One reason for the increase in numbers is that more people are seeking a diagnosis. In some cases, changing diagnostic criteria has also led to an increase in diagnoses.
The Public Accounts Committee report makes several recommendations. These include the need to improve decision-making at local authority level, and understand more about why demand for special educational needs support is increasing. It recommends improving teacher training and continuing professional development, and improving earlier identification of special educational needs.
Improving decision making in local authorities is an important step in the right direction, but lack of funding to meet demand will mean that local authorities will still need to prioritise how resources are allocated. Improving knowledge about the underlying factors that result in special educational needs will enable the government to focus on systemic interventions that target the root causes of special educational needs and disabilities.
Teachers already working in classrooms will benefit from professional development that helps them to meet the specific needs of the pupils that they are teaching. It is also important to acknowledge that teachers have many competing demands on them, as they balance the needs of some children against those of others.
Adding more special educational needs and disabilities content to the teacher training and early career framework is a reasonable response, but this needs to be done with care. Evidence suggests that 35 hours of professional development is a reasonable time to have an effect. One-off professional development events are likely to have less effect.
More professional development and training for teachers may help, if it is done carefully. Matej Kastelic/Shutterstock
New intensive training and practice opportunities in initial teacher training courses have been introduced to help new teachers put theory into practice. Focusing one or more of these on special educational needs seems to be a reasonable suggestion.
The government also intends to introduce an 18-month professional leadership qualification for schools’ special educational needs coordinators. However, this is replacing a previous qualification, which was taught at universities. This suggests a move to a less intellectually rigorous programme of professional development, which undermines the credibility of the new professional leadership qualification.
In 2024 the DfE committed to investing £21 million to train 400 more educational psychologists. This builds on 200 trainees whose training has already been funded. However, given the current demand, this figure is far too small and will probably result in minimal impact.
Building on existing support
There is no specific reference in the Public Affairs Committee report to the existing, and important, role of the Education Mental Health Practitioner (EMHP).
EMHPs are employed by the NHS and provide vital and timely in-school clinical support for children and young people. They carry out assessments of pupils’ needs and work in schools to support pupils’ mental health. They also help schools to develop a whole school approach to mental health.
However, most schools do not have access to an EMHP. The government has stated that in 2023, just over a third of pupils had access to an EMHP and there are plans to increase this to 50% by April 2025. This is not enough.
Extending this service to all pupils would ensure that all pupils can receive rapid mental health support in their school, thus reducing the likelihood of mental health problems becoming more serious.
What is clear from reading this report is that the current system is broken and has reached crisis point. Additional government funding is needed, but is unlikely to ever be enough to meet the demand.
Collaboration between schools, local authorities, government and education experts is vital in finding solutions so that young people get the support they desperately need.
Jonathan Glazzard 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.
