Doctors still don’t fully understand why some brains are more sensitive to environmental changes.
What we do know is that people with migraines have especially sensitive nervous systems, and that certain environmental changes – like shifts in air pressure, temperature, humidity and air quality – can activate pathways in the brain that lead to pain.
What’s going on in the brain during migraines? TEDx.
Key ways weather can trigger migraines
Weather triggers can vary from person to person, but there are a few common migraine culprits:
When a storm system moves in, the air pressure drops. Some scientists believe this change may affect the pressure inside your head or how blood vessels in your brain dilate and constrict.
One theory is that changes in barometric pressure may cause a small imbalance in the pressure between the inside of your skull and the outside environment. That might directly stimulate pain-sensitive nerves in the head, triggering inflammation and the start of a migraine.
Others point to inflammation, the way the brain processes sensory input, and changes in serotonin levels – which play a key role in activating migraine.
Bright sunlight can also be especially bothersome, likely due to heightened sensitivity to light and an overactive visual processing system in the brain.
Lightning and strong winds may also be linked to migraine attacks in certain individuals.
In short, weather changes can act as stressors on a brain that’s already wired to be more sensitive. The exact triggers and responses vary from person to person, but the research suggests that the interaction between weather and our biology plays a significant role for a subset of patients with migraines.
Steps you can take to reduce the pain
You can’t change the weather, but you can be proactive. Here are a few tips to help weather-proof your migraine routine:
Track your migraines and watch the forecast: Use a migraine diary or app to track when attacks occur, along with weather conditions. Patterns may emerge, such as attacks a day before rain or during temperature changes, that will allow you to adjust your schedule or medication plan.
Develop healthy eating, sleeping and exercise habits: Dehydration, poor sleep and skipped meals can magnify the effects of weather triggers, so keeping your body on an even keel helps reduce vulnerability. Regular exercise and a healthy diet can also help.
Create a migraine-friendly environment: On days when the sun is harsh or the humidity is high, stay inside. Sunglasses, eye masks or even blue-light glasses can be helpful. Some people find that certain earplugs are able to reduce pressure changes felt in the middle ear.
Try meditation, mindfulness techniques or biofeedback, which teaches people to moderate their physiological responses, such as muscle responses and breathing. These strategies can help your nervous system become less reactive over time, which can be especially helpful when dealing with uncontrollable triggers like weather.
Consider pretreatment: If you know a storm is likely to trigger your migraines, you can keep rescue medications close by or even preemptively treat yourself during weather events.
Look into preventive treatment: If weather triggers frequent migraines, talk to your health care provider about preventive treatments – medications, supplements or neuromodulation devices – which can be used on a regular basis to reduce migraine occurrence.
The bigger picture
It’s important to remember that while weather can be a trigger, it’s rarely the only one. Migraine is usually the result of a perfect storm of factors: genetic susceptibility, hormones, stress, sleep, food and, yes, the weather.
That’s why identifying your personal triggers and building a plan, if necessary, with the support of a medical provider, can make a big difference in managing migraines.
Weather-related migraine can be one of the most frustrating triggers because it feels completely out of your hands. However, with knowledge, tracking and the right treatment strategies, you can take back a sense of control.
Danielle Wilhour 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.
It’s hard work soaking up sunlight to generate clean electricity. After about 25 to 30 years, solar panels wear out. Over the years, heating and cooling cycles stress the materials. Small cracks develop, precipitation corrodes the frame and layers of materials can start to peel apart.
As an electrical engineer who has studied many aspects of renewable energy, recycling solar panels seems like a smart idea, but it’s complicated. Built to withstand years of wind and weather, solar panels are designed for strength and are not easy to break down.
All of these solar panels will need to be disposed of one day – perhaps by being recycled. David McNew/Getty Images
The cost conundrum
Sending a solar panel to a landfill costs between US$1 and $5 in the U.S. But recycling it can cost three to four times as much, around $18. And the valuable materials inside solar panels, such as silver and copper, are in small amounts, so they’re worth about $10 to $12 – which makes recycling a money-losing prospect. Improvements in the recycling process may change the economics.
But for now, it’s even hard to reclaim the glass in solar panels. Many layers are glued together and need to be separated before they can be melted down for reuse. And if the separation is not precise enough, the glass that is recovered won’t be of high enough quality to use in making other solar panels or windows. It will be suitable only for lower-quality uses such as fill material in construction projects.
Other panels, usually older ones, may contain small amounts of toxic metals such as lead or cadmium. It can be difficult to tell whether toxic materials are present, though. Even experts have trouble, in part because current tests, such as the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure, can give inaccurate results. Therefore, many companies that own large numbers of solar panels just assume their panels are hazardous waste, which increases costs for both disposal and recycling. Clearer labels would help people know what a solar panel contains and how to handle it.
If someone wants to recycle a solar panel, and is willing to bear the cost, there aren’t many places in the U.S. that are willing to do it and are equipped to be safe about it.
Future solar panels could also be designed for easier recycling, using different construction methods and materials, and improved processing systems.
Making panels last longer – perhaps as long as 50 years – using more durable materials, weather-resistant components, real-time monitoring of panel performance and predictive maintenance to replace parts before they wear out would reduce waste significantly.
Building solar panels that are more easily disassembled into separate components made of different materials could also speed recycling. Components that fit together like Lego bricks – instead of using glue – or dissolvable sealants and adhesives could be parts of these designs.
Improved recycling methods could also help. Right now, panels are often simply ground up, mixing all of their components’ materials together and requiring a complicated process to separate them out again for reuse. More advanced approaches can extract individual materials with high purity. For example, a process called salt etching can recover over 99% of silver and 98% of silicon, at purity levels that are appropriate for high-end reuse, potentially even in new solar panels, without using toxic acids. That method can also recover significant quantities of copper and lead for use in new products.
Crushing solar panels can make different materials easier to recover from various components. AP Photo/Gregory Bull
A shared journey
Increasing the practice of recycling solar panels has more than just environmental benefits.
Over the long term, recovering and reusing valuable materials may prove more cost-effective than continually buying new raw materials on the open market. That could lower costs for future solar panel installations. If they are fully reused, the value of these recoverable materials could reach over $15 billion globally by 2050.
In addition, recycling panels and components reduces American reliance on materials imported from overseas, making solar power projects less vulnerable to global disruptions.
Recycling also keeps toxic materials out of landfills. That can help ensure a shift to clean energy doesn’t create new or bigger environmental problems. Also, recycling solar panels emits far less carbon dioxide than manufacturing panels from raw materials.
There are already some efforts underway to boost solar panel recycling. The Solar Energy Industries Association trade group is working to collect and share information about companies that recycle solar panels.
Governments can provide tax breaks or other financial incentives for using recycled materials, or ban disposing of solar panels in landfills. California, Washington, New Jersey and North Carolina have enacted laws or are studying ways to manage solar panel waste, with some even requiring recycling or reuse.
These efforts are important steps toward addressing the growing need for solar panel recycling and promoting a more sustainable solar industry.
Anurag Srivastava receives funding from the US Department of Energy and National Science Foundation to work on renewable energy integration into the grid. He is an IEEE Fellow and member of the IEEE Power and Energy Society and CIGRE working groups.
The multitrillion-dollar bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, will change how the U.S. tax code treats charitable donations. It also has several tax provisions that affect some colleges, universities and other nonprofits. The Conversation U.S. asked Daniel Hungerman, an economist who studies charitable activities and public policy, to explain how these tax policies could influence charitable giving and affect nonprofits.
What will change for donors?
The consequences generally vary depending on how much money a donor gives to charity. They also depend on whether a donor claims the standard deduction – as about 90% of U.S. taxpayers have done since the 2017 tax reforms took effect during the first Trump administration – or itemizes their tax returns.
Americans who give a bit more than the typical donor – say, between $5,000 and $20,000 – will see major changes too. In some places, it will become easier for people to deduct more of the amount they pay in state and local taxes from their federal taxes – at least for a few years. Those taxpayers may also deduct their charitable giving from their income when they file their taxes.
But there’s a new catch. People who itemize their taxes can’t claim the charitable deduction unless they give at least the equivalent of 0.5% of their adjusted gross income to charity. For example, someone who earns $100,000 a year would have to donate at least $500 to qualify for this tax break.
Based on my research on tax policies and donations, I don’t expect the $1,000 charitable deduction for taxpayers who take the standard deduction to boost giving. The government has tried this before.
The results were underwhelming both times, for two reasons.
First, the maximum size of those tax breaks was too small in those earlier efforts. Many people were already giving enough to max out this new benefit. When that happens, the government is giving up tax revenue without encouraging people to donate more.
To be fair, there are a couple of reasons that things might be better this time. First, $1,000 in 2025 – or $2,000 for married couples filing jointly – is more money than the $300 deduction in 2020. Also, this time it is permanent. A permanent provision gives charities time to publicize the bill and people time to learn about it.
Another concern with this bill is that Americans who have not given to charity in the past might not begin to open their wallets but will still try to get the new $1,000 charitable deduction anyway by lying about it on their tax returns. There is evidence that a growing number of taxpayers try to game the tax system this way. The only way to stave off that sort of tax evasion would require additional work by the IRS, costing more tax dollars.
This part of the tax law also sends a message that giving is not just for the wealthy, but that everyone can do it and get a tax break for it. That could help halt or reverse a decline in gifts from people who aren’t rich. And it makes me wonder whether a charitable deduction for people who don’t itemize their tax returns will work better this time around.
What’s happening to higher education?
The government will raise its tax on the income earned by the endowments held by some colleges and universities from 1.4% to as much as 8%. The system is complicated and hinges on how large an endowment is per student enrolled. Colleges attended by fewer than 3,000 students don’t have to pay this tax.
Endowments are pooled financial investments that belong to a nonprofit. Those assets usually come from donations, and the income they earn typically flows into the nonprofit’s budget.
Perhaps the most significant change will be a new federal K-12 educational tax credit. Starting in 2027, it will be available to help offset the cost of private K-12 school tuition or other educational expenses, such as homeschooling. If someone makes a $1 gift to a nonprofit scholarship-granting organization – which would then deliver those funds to the school the donor designates – the government will cut their tax bill by $1. This tax credit can be worth up to $1,700 per year.
Many details about how this system would work are yet to be determined.
I believe that this provision could mark another step in the transformation of how private schools are funded in the United States. Beyond that, many private schools are run by churches, and many churches running schools already get large amounts of their funding from vouchers issued by state and local governments. Ultimately, private K-12 education could become an increasing source of revenue for churches.
What about nonprofits that provide social services?
Even if the megabill boosts charitable giving, nonprofits providing social services are likely to find themselves financially squeezed.
That’s because the bill also cuts spending and tightens eligibility restrictions on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps, and Medicaid, the public health insurance program that mainly covers people who are low-income or have disabilities.
I have researched the effects of the welfare reforms President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996. One of my findings was that when the government cut spending on safety net programs by a dollar, charities, including churches, stepped in to provide 25 cents of services or more. But for every extra dollar needed to compensate for lost government spending, donors only gave 5 cents more.
Another concern is that this bill makes permanent increases in the standard deduction – which I’ve found to have historically lowered charitable giving considerably. Perhaps the deduction for people who don’t itemize their tax returns, together with the state-and-local-taxes change, will counteract this trend. But it is certainly possible that Americans will give less to charity starting in 2025 compared with a world where there were no Trump tax reforms at all.
Daniel Hungerman is a professor at the University of Notre Dame, and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
The author did some of her fieldwork at the Algodones Dunes in California.Ryan Ewing
Our two-person team loaded the car with a GPS, a drone, notebooks, sample bags, a trowel and a flat spatula lovingly called a scoopula. Then we drove 30 minutes in our rented truck from Yuma, Arizona, to the Algodones Dunes, a sandy field bordering California, Arizona and Mexico. The day was sunny, with a strong breeze. Turning off the highway, we carefully headed onto a gravelly path that acted as our road.
After making decent – if bumpy – progress, we pulled off onto the sand flats and drove slowly toward the dunes, worried we might get stuck in the sand. Having arrived on the outskirts of the Algodones, we stopped and loaded our backpacks, then set off into the desert on foot.
The coarse- and fine-grained sand at the Algodones Dunes. Lauren Berger
It was November 2022. As a graduate student at Texas A&M University, I was beginning part of my Ph.D. research with my adviser, geology professor Ryan Ewing. We were looking for coarse-grained sand ripples, which are patterned piles of sand shaped by wind. Sand ripples and sand dunes are types of aeolian bedforms, which are wind-created geologic features.
Two sizes of the same bedform, such as small dunes on top of big dunes, are called compound bedforms. I study compound bedforms at two scales – the meter- and centimeter-sized coarse-grained ripples at the dunes here on Earth, and the kilometer- and meter-sized dunes on Mars.
At the Algodones, I measured the height of each large coarse-grained sand ripple and the distance between neighboring ripples. Then we flew our drone low and steady, above the ripples, to create high-resolution images. The drone data allows us to do further measurements on the ripples later, back at my desk.
On that day, I learned an essential rule of fieldwork in the desert: Don’t forget a shovel. Otherwise, if your vehicle gets stuck, as ours did, you’ll have to dig it out by hand. Luckily for us, a dune buggy driver passing by helped us out and we were able to get back to Yuma in time for dinner.
High-resolution drone images of the sand ripples at Algodones. Lauren Berger
My introduction to Mars
I first became interested in aeolian bedforms during my sophomore year of college, when I interned at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. My job was to view surface images of Mars and then map the sand ripples in the regions where Perseverance, the Mars rover, might land. I assessed the areas where ripples could be hazards – places where the rover could get stuck in the sand, the way our rental truck did in the Algodones.
I mapped those sand ripples on Mars for two years. But while I mapped, I became fascinated with the patterns the ripples made.
Now, as a graduate student and aspiring planetary geologist, my time is split between work in the field and at my computer, where I have stitched together the drone’s photographs of the Algodones to create a large image of the entire study area. I then look for compound dunes on the Martian surface in images taken by the Mars reconnaissance orbiter’scontext camera.
Scientists already know about Earth’s weather patterns, sand grain size and wind data. By measuring different parts of bedforms on both planets – such as their height, shape and spacing – I can compare the similarities and differences of the bedforms to find clues to the wind patterns, grains and atmosphere on Mars. Slowly but surely, as I listen to Studio Ghibli soundtracks, I’m creating the first database of compound dunes on Mars.
Two dune fields on Mars, both inside an impact crater. NASA/JPL-Caltech
Developing this database is essential to the proposed human mission to Mars. Dust storms are frequent, and some can encircle the entire planet. Understanding aeolian bedforms will help scientists know where to put bases so they don’t get buried by moving sand.
It is wonderful to spend an afternoon ping-ponging all over a planet that’s 140 million miles from us, seeing gorgeous terrain while I try to answer questions about the compound dunes on Mars. How common are they? Where do they form? How do they compare to those on Earth? I hope to answer these questions as I work toward earning my Ph.D in geology.
Lauren Berger receives funding from NASA FINESST. Lauren Berger would like to acknowledge the help of her mentors Dr. Ryan Ewing (NASA Johnson Space Center), Dr. Marion Nachon (Texas A&M University), and Dr. Julia Reece (Texas A&M University).
The multitrillion-dollar bill that President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, will change how the U.S. tax code treats charitable donations. It also has several tax provisions that affect some colleges, universities and other nonprofits. The Conversation U.S. asked Daniel Hungerman, an economist who studies charitable activities and public policy, to explain how these tax policies could influence charitable giving and affect nonprofits.
What will change for donors?
The consequences generally vary depending on how much money a donor gives to charity. They also depend on whether a donor claims the standard deduction – as about 90% of U.S. taxpayers have done since the 2017 tax reforms took effect during the first Trump administration – or itemizes their tax returns.
Americans who give a bit more than the typical donor – say, between $5,000 and $20,000 – will see major changes too. In some places, it will become easier for people to deduct more of the amount they pay in state and local taxes from their federal taxes – at least for a few years. Those taxpayers may also deduct their charitable giving from their income when they file their taxes.
But there’s a new catch. People who itemize their taxes can’t claim the charitable deduction unless they give at least the equivalent of 0.5% of their adjusted gross income to charity. For example, someone who earns $100,000 a year would have to donate at least $500 to qualify for this tax break.
Based on my research on tax policies and donations, I don’t expect the $1,000 charitable deduction for taxpayers who take the standard deduction to boost giving. The government has tried this before.
The results were underwhelming both times, for two reasons.
First, the maximum size of those tax breaks was too small in those earlier efforts. Many people were already giving enough to max out this new benefit. When that happens, the government is giving up tax revenue without encouraging people to donate more.
To be fair, there are a couple of reasons that things might be better this time. First, $1,000 in 2025 – or $2,000 for married couples filing jointly – is more money than the $300 deduction in 2020. Also, this time it is permanent. A permanent provision gives charities time to publicize the bill and people time to learn about it.
Another concern with this bill is that Americans who have not given to charity in the past might not begin to open their wallets but will still try to get the new $1,000 charitable deduction anyway by lying about it on their tax returns. There is evidence that a growing number of taxpayers try to game the tax system this way. The only way to stave off that sort of tax evasion would require additional work by the IRS, costing more tax dollars.
This part of the tax law also sends a message that giving is not just for the wealthy, but that everyone can do it and get a tax break for it. That could help halt or reverse a decline in gifts from people who aren’t rich. And it makes me wonder whether a charitable deduction for people who don’t itemize their tax returns will work better this time around.
What’s happening to higher education?
The government will raise its tax on the income earned by the endowments held by some colleges and universities from 1.4% to as much as 8%. The system is complicated and hinges on how large an endowment is per student enrolled. Colleges attended by fewer than 3,000 students don’t have to pay this tax.
Endowments are pooled financial investments that belong to a nonprofit. Those assets usually come from donations, and the income they earn typically flows into the nonprofit’s budget.
Perhaps the most significant change will be a new federal K-12 educational tax credit. Starting in 2027, it will be available to help offset the cost of private K-12 school tuition or other educational expenses, such as homeschooling. If someone makes a $1 gift to a nonprofit scholarship-granting organization – which would then deliver those funds to the school the donor designates – the government will cut their tax bill by $1. This tax credit can be worth up to $1,700 per year.
Many details about how this system would work are yet to be determined.
I believe that this provision could mark another step in the transformation of how private schools are funded in the United States. Beyond that, many private schools are run by churches, and many churches running schools already get large amounts of their funding from vouchers issued by state and local governments. Ultimately, private K-12 education could become an increasing source of revenue for churches.
What about nonprofits that provide social services?
Even if the megabill boosts charitable giving, nonprofits providing social services are likely to find themselves financially squeezed.
That’s because the bill also cuts spending and tightens eligibility restrictions on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps, and Medicaid, the public health insurance program that mainly covers people who are low-income or have disabilities.
I have researched the effects of the welfare reforms President Bill Clinton signed into law in 1996. One of my findings was that when the government cut spending on safety net programs by a dollar, charities, including churches, stepped in to provide 25 cents of services or more. But for every extra dollar needed to compensate for lost government spending, donors only gave 5 cents more.
Another concern is that this bill makes permanent increases in the standard deduction – which I’ve found to have historically lowered charitable giving considerably. Perhaps the deduction for people who don’t itemize their tax returns, together with the state-and-local-taxes change, will counteract this trend. But it is certainly possible that Americans will give less to charity starting in 2025 compared with a world where there were no Trump tax reforms at all.
Daniel Hungerman is a professor at the University of Notre Dame, and a Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
The author did some of her fieldwork at the Algodones Dunes in California.Ryan Ewing
Our two-person team loaded the car with a GPS, a drone, notebooks, sample bags, a trowel and a flat spatula lovingly called a scoopula. Then we drove 30 minutes in our rented truck from Yuma, Arizona, to the Algodones Dunes, a sandy field bordering California, Arizona and Mexico. The day was sunny, with a strong breeze. Turning off the highway, we carefully headed onto a gravelly path that acted as our road.
After making decent – if bumpy – progress, we pulled off onto the sand flats and drove slowly toward the dunes, worried we might get stuck in the sand. Having arrived on the outskirts of the Algodones, we stopped and loaded our backpacks, then set off into the desert on foot.
The coarse- and fine-grained sand at the Algodones Dunes. Lauren Berger
It was November 2022. As a graduate student at Texas A&M University, I was beginning part of my Ph.D. research with my adviser, geology professor Ryan Ewing. We were looking for coarse-grained sand ripples, which are patterned piles of sand shaped by wind. Sand ripples and sand dunes are types of aeolian bedforms, which are wind-created geologic features.
Two sizes of the same bedform, such as small dunes on top of big dunes, are called compound bedforms. I study compound bedforms at two scales – the meter- and centimeter-sized coarse-grained ripples at the dunes here on Earth, and the kilometer- and meter-sized dunes on Mars.
At the Algodones, I measured the height of each large coarse-grained sand ripple and the distance between neighboring ripples. Then we flew our drone low and steady, above the ripples, to create high-resolution images. The drone data allows us to do further measurements on the ripples later, back at my desk.
On that day, I learned an essential rule of fieldwork in the desert: Don’t forget a shovel. Otherwise, if your vehicle gets stuck, as ours did, you’ll have to dig it out by hand. Luckily for us, a dune buggy driver passing by helped us out and we were able to get back to Yuma in time for dinner.
High-resolution drone images of the sand ripples at Algodones. Lauren Berger
My introduction to Mars
I first became interested in aeolian bedforms during my sophomore year of college, when I interned at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. My job was to view surface images of Mars and then map the sand ripples in the regions where Perseverance, the Mars rover, might land. I assessed the areas where ripples could be hazards – places where the rover could get stuck in the sand, the way our rental truck did in the Algodones.
I mapped those sand ripples on Mars for two years. But while I mapped, I became fascinated with the patterns the ripples made.
Now, as a graduate student and aspiring planetary geologist, my time is split between work in the field and at my computer, where I have stitched together the drone’s photographs of the Algodones to create a large image of the entire study area. I then look for compound dunes on the Martian surface in images taken by the Mars reconnaissance orbiter’scontext camera.
Scientists already know about Earth’s weather patterns, sand grain size and wind data. By measuring different parts of bedforms on both planets – such as their height, shape and spacing – I can compare the similarities and differences of the bedforms to find clues to the wind patterns, grains and atmosphere on Mars. Slowly but surely, as I listen to Studio Ghibli soundtracks, I’m creating the first database of compound dunes on Mars.
Two dune fields on Mars, both inside an impact crater. NASA/JPL-Caltech
Developing this database is essential to the proposed human mission to Mars. Dust storms are frequent, and some can encircle the entire planet. Understanding aeolian bedforms will help scientists know where to put bases so they don’t get buried by moving sand.
It is wonderful to spend an afternoon ping-ponging all over a planet that’s 140 million miles from us, seeing gorgeous terrain while I try to answer questions about the compound dunes on Mars. How common are they? Where do they form? How do they compare to those on Earth? I hope to answer these questions as I work toward earning my Ph.D in geology.
Lauren Berger receives funding from NASA FINESST. Lauren Berger would like to acknowledge the help of her mentors Dr. Ryan Ewing (NASA Johnson Space Center), Dr. Marion Nachon (Texas A&M University), and Dr. Julia Reece (Texas A&M University).
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Janine Natalya Clark, Professor of Transitional Justice and International Criminal Law, University of Birmingham
The documentary film, Animals in War, tells the story of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine from the point of view of the animals affected by the conflict.Sota Cinema Group
The 2025 Tribeca Film Festival in New York included a world premiere of War Through the Eyes of Animals (also known as Animals in War). The documentary gives an animal-eye view of Russia’s war against Ukraine and features the wartime experiences of several different species, including a cow, a rabbit and a wolf.
Throughout history, animals have been affected by war and exposed to its many dangers. Despite this, war is usually discussed from human-centred perspectives that marginalise animal experiences.
My own work on the Russia-Ukraine war uses sound as a way of thinking about some of the war’s environmental impacts and the experiences of animals. The idea that sound can provide ecological information is not new. Research has shown how the sounds, for example, of plants and animals can tell us a lot about how their environment is changing. What is new is exploring this in the context of war.
Trailer for War Through the Eyes of Animals.
For my research project I interviewed more than 30 Ukrainians, including botanists, ornithologists, herpetologists (who study reptiles and amphibians) and a marine biologist. I also asked them to make short recordings of their local soundscapes.
A scientist working in Tuzlivski Lymany National Park in the Odesa region of southern Ukraine made a recording of Iranian Shahed drones flying over his office and explained that these “abnormal” sounds greatly affect some species of birds.
In 2024, for example, there was a large colony of nesting flamingos in Tuzlivski Lymany. However, noise caused them to abandon their nests, leaving their eggs vulnerable to predators. No chicks were born in the flamingo colony that year. Research in peacetime has found that drones can lead to significant breeding failures among some birds.
A herpetologist, meanwhile, shared his recording of natterjack toads and European tree frogs that he made in the Volyn region of northern Ukraine the year before the start of the full-scale invasion in 2022.
What he wanted to convey was that he may never hear this particular “amphibian chorus” again. The area is close to the border with Belarus, and it is unclear what impact the construction of Ukrainian defensive fortifications has had on local animal and plant life.
I also asked interviewees whether the war has helped nature in any way. In response, they frequently talked about reduced anthropogenic (human-made) pressures on the environment. An example is the ban on hunting, first imposed at the start of the war in eastern Ukraine in 2014.
One interviewee recorded a nighttime summer meadow in Kyiv region and captured the distant sound of a fox calling. The prohibition on hunting has enabled foxes to thrive
Another interviewee made a recording near the Kaniv Nature Reserve in central Ukraine. Alongside birdsong are the barking sounds of roe deer, another species that has benefited from the hunting ban.
Of course, such population increases are not necessarily beneficial to wider ecosystems, as ecologist Aldo Leopold discussed in his classic Thinking like a Mountain (1949). Leopold found that uncontrolled numbers of deer due to the mass killing of wolves in the United States during the first part of the 20th century took a huge toll on the environment. “I have seen every edible bush and seedling browsed”, he wrote”, “first to anaemic desuetude, and then to death”.
The fact that the Russia-Ukraine war has contributed to reducing some anthropogenic pressures does not in any way minimise the enormity of harm done to nature, including forests, soil and marine ecosystems. Yet it is too narrow to think about the environment only in terms of harms done to it.
Nature’s recovery
The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ) created following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 is often cited as an example of nature’s ability to recover. One of the ornithologists whom I interviewed made a recording of birdsong from within the CEZ, in northern Ukraine.
To emphasise the resilience of nature, one of my interviewees made an audio recording from the Yelanets Steppe Nature Reserve in the Mykolaiv region in southern Ukraine. Against the acoustic backdrop of wind gusting through the grasslands are the repeated calls of the common pheasant.
These sounds of the wild steppe awakening in early spring, the interviewee stressed, are also the sounds of nature getting on with life.
Birdsong is clearly audible in a recording made by soldiers near the frontline in Kharkiv region.
Near frontline. Made by Ukrainian soldiers801 KB(download)
Similarly, birds continued to sing over the trenches during the first world war. Some interviewees also pointed out that certain species of birds, including cormorants, herons and white storks, have adapted to the sounds of war, becoming less sensitive to them.
Justice and reparations
I am particularly interested in the significance of nature’s sounds in the context of transitional justice – and especially reparations.
Discourse on environmental reparations focuses on repairing harms done to nature – and sounds can provide useful insights into some of these harms.
But what is missing from existing scholarship on reparations is attention to some of the ways that ecosystems can and do regenerate and recover. Moving forward, therefore, it is essential to think about how reparations can support (and not disturb) these natural ecosystem processes.
Janine Natalya Clark receives funding for this research from the Leverhulme Trust (RF-2024-137)
It’s such a familiar pattern. When a big scandal breaks publicly, governments jump into action, ministers rush out to say they’ll “do something” instantly.
But how come they hadn’t seen problems that had been in plain sight?
Who can forget then-workplace relations minister Tony Burke insisting he’d been unaware, before media revelations, that organised crime was in the CFMEU? After a Nine media expose, a large portion of the notorious union soon ended up in administration.
When a childcare worker was charged with some 70 offences last week, Education Minister Jason Clare immediately declared he’d introduce legislation in the new parliament’s first sitting for the removal of federal funds from errant providers.
After ABC reporter Adele Ferguson had exposed serious safety issues in the system on Four Corners in March, the Albanese government announced it would be “exploring” various measures to strengthen Commonwealth powers “to deal with providers that put profit over quality and child safety at risk”.
In another expose, Ferguson this week revealed substantial problems in the training system for childcare workers.
Federally, childcare comes under the education minister, and there’s also a dedicated minister for early childhood education (Anne Aly last term, now Jess Walsh). Basically, the federal government funds the system while the states and territories regulate it.
Anthony Albanese made major promises for expanding childcare in his 2022 and 2025 election pitches. The government also supported higher wages for workers in the sector. Albanese has nominated “affordable childcare” as the legacy he wants to leave.
It’s all the more surprising, then, that the government didn’t seem to spot a plethora of problems in an area so central to the prime minister’s ambitions.
The government points to the division of responsibility between Commonwealth and states.
But surely that explanation doesn’t wash or, if it does, the relevant federal and state ministers, public servants and the regulators have not been doing their designated jobs effectively.
In various human service policy areas, there are split responsibilities, which differ in specific arrangements.
Politically, this often brings blame-shifting, and arguments over money and accountability.
The federal government attaches conditions, for example, to funding agreements for hospitals and schools, which fall under state responsibility. But in practice, there are slippages.
Split responsibilities, whatever their precise form, can never be “set and forget” – rigorous, constant scrutiny needs to be built in.
Childcare policy has its complications. But, in terms of complexities, it is nothing like, say, running the nation’s defences. There are not unknowns.
The obvious issues within childcare include funding, safety, workforce numbers and training.
The childcare revelations will inevitably lead to new regulations – ironically just as a debate about the desirability of easing excessive regulation in some sectors has become fashionable. In many policy areas, there are tensions between regulation and costs, and no unanimity about where the trade offs should be struck.
The childcare imbroglio highlights the challenges when public policy is substantially delivered by the “for profit” private sector. Social services expert Gabrielle Meagher, professor emerita at Macquarie University, says, “It’s very difficult to regulate across the gaps governments open up when they fund policies that they don’t deliver themselves”.
The childcare issue also invites much wider questions about how “governing” is working. Such as, are ministers too distracted?
Today’s ministers spend more time than ever in the media, and travelling (part of the modern “permanent” election campaign). This takes a large amount of their attention. The prime minister is in the media most days.
One has to wonder how much of this is a diversion for ministers from detailed policy work, especially as they must bone up on “talking points” because, given the 24-hour news cycle, they will be quizzed about issues outside their portfolios. They usually feel obliged to offer an opinion, rather than saying “sorry, that’s not my bag”.
What about the public servants, who are formally responsible for policy advice, implementation and supervising?
We saw with Robodebt shocking behaviour by some bureaucrats. There have been substantial reforms since then and, apart from that, the Albanese government has boosted the numbers and strengthened the capability of the public service.
But is it fit-for-purpose? If it were, wouldn’t the problems in childcare, apparently well-known among many parents, have filtered up through the system to the ears of ministers – even allowing that regulation rests mainly with the states?
Apart from failures by state regulators, one issue is who is telling what to whom about the sector. The federal minister responsible for early childhood education visits dozens of childcare centres. But on those visits, the minister will be talking to managers, who will have their own set of concerns. The minister is less likely at the centres to encounter parents who have had a bad experience.
This goes to a wider problem: in areas of human service delivery, providers of services will usually be organised, while consumers lack the same coherent and forceful voice. Complaining through the media may be only way for families using a service to bring things to light.
But what about the complaints that do flow into government departments, and ministers’ offices? Surely these give a channel for the red flags that point to a policy failure?
Bureaucrats say all this communication amounts to a great deal of “noise”, but the challenge is to identify what it signifies, in terms of substantive problems to be addressed.
When programs are growing very fast, the risk is that corners are cut in delivery. We saw this, disastrously, years ago during the global financial crisis when the Rudd government rolled out the home insulation scheme. A royal commission was damning about the failures of the program, which was marked by several deaths and many household fires. Safety had been compromised in the pursuit of speed and the delivery framework was inadequate.
There are many lessons from the childcare policy failures. A big announcement does not automatically mean a successful policy delivery. Programs can be working on some fronts while flawed on others. All new or expanded policies should come with detailed evaluation arrangements which are then carefully monitored. And while ministers will boast publicly about how well a policy is doing, they should be constantly demanding to know from their bureaucrats where things might be going wrong.
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.
A memorial in the town of Stazzema in Italy, site of a brutal Nazi massacre in 1944. Federico Neri/Shutterstock
Across Europe, far-right movements are gaining ground. From the Netherlands, to Germany and Italy, they’re winning seats in parliaments and sometimes joining ruling coalitions. By normalising nationalist rhetoric and challenging democratic institutions, these parties raise comparisons with former periods of fascism on the continent.
Between 1943 and 1945, when Nazi forces occupied northern Italy, ordinary people in towns and villages across the country took up arms against fascism in one of Europe’s largest resistance movements. Now, 80 years later, in many of these same towns, anti-fascist sentiment remains unusually strong.
In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we speak to political scientist Juan Masullo at Leiden University, who’s been finding out about the enduring legacy of these anti-fascist movements.
The town of Sant’Anna di Stazzema, tucked away in the mountains of Tuscany, is a place haunted by its wartime past. The site of a notorious Nazi massacre during the Italian civil war it’s become a memorial to Italian resistance, and what Massulo describes as a “bastion of anti-fascist, left-wing progressive thinking”.
In 2021, the mayor of Stazzema began collecting signatures from around Italy to a petition calling for a ban on every form of fascist or neo-fascist propaganda. It needed 50,000 signatures to be discussed in parliament, and 240,000 signed it.
Masullo saw this as an opportunity to answer a question about political resistance and its legacy: was there an association between places with a lot of anti-fascist resistance during the war, and places that supported the petition? “We did find out that there was an association,” he told us. And when he began interviewing people in places where the correlation was particularly strong to try and find out why, he said “ these people spend a lot of time memorialising what happened”.
Listen to the full episode of The Conversation Weekly to hear our conversation with Juan Masullo about his research.
This episode of The Conversation Weekly was written and produced by Mend Mariwany with mixing and sound design by Eloise Stevens and theme music by Neeta Sarl. Gemma Ware is the executive producer.
Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here. A transcript of this episode is available on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
Juan Masullo has received funding for this research from UNUWIDER and Leiden University. He is affiliated with the University of Milan.
A memorial in the town of Stazzema in Italy, site of a brutal Nazi massacre in 1944. Federico Neri/Shutterstock
Across Europe, far-right movements are gaining ground. From the Netherlands, to Germany and Italy, they’re winning seats in parliaments and sometimes joining ruling coalitions. By normalising nationalist rhetoric and challenging democratic institutions, these parties raise comparisons with former periods of fascism on the continent.
Between 1943 and 1945, when Nazi forces occupied northern Italy, ordinary people in towns and villages across the country took up arms against fascism in one of Europe’s largest resistance movements. Now, 80 years later, in many of these same towns, anti-fascist sentiment remains unusually strong.
In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we speak to political scientist Juan Masullo at Leiden University, who’s been finding out about the enduring legacy of these anti-fascist movements.
The town of Sant’Anna di Stazzema, tucked away in the mountains of Tuscany, is a place haunted by its wartime past. The site of a notorious Nazi massacre during the Italian civil war it’s become a memorial to Italian resistance, and what Massulo describes as a “bastion of anti-fascist, left-wing progressive thinking”.
In 2021, the mayor of Stazzema began collecting signatures from around Italy to a petition calling for a ban on every form of fascist or neo-fascist propaganda. It needed 50,000 signatures to be discussed in parliament, and 240,000 signed it.
Masullo saw this as an opportunity to answer a question about political resistance and its legacy: was there an association between places with a lot of anti-fascist resistance during the war, and places that supported the petition? “We did find out that there was an association,” he told us. And when he began interviewing people in places where the correlation was particularly strong to try and find out why, he said “ these people spend a lot of time memorialising what happened”.
Listen to the full episode of The Conversation Weekly to hear our conversation with Juan Masullo about his research.
This episode of The Conversation Weekly was written and produced by Mend Mariwany with mixing and sound design by Eloise Stevens and theme music by Neeta Sarl. Gemma Ware is the executive producer.
Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here. A transcript of this episode is available on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
Juan Masullo has received funding for this research from UNUWIDER and Leiden University. He is affiliated with the University of Milan.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nik Georgopoulos, Associate Professor in Cell Biology and Transforming Lives Fellow, Sheffield Hallam University
Hair loss is one of the most feared and traumatic side effects of cancer chemotherapy treatment, both for patients themselves and their loved ones, as it can visibly represent the “face of cancer”.
For most patients, maintaining their hair is not just about vanity – it’s about identity, dignity and control. That’s why scalp cooling caps, or (cold caps), often worn during chemotherapy, have become an increasingly common sight in cancer wards.
Chemotherapy drugs work by killing rapidly dividing cancer cells – unfortunately, they cause collateral toxicity to rapidly dividing healthy cells in our body, like those in the roots of our hair. This leads to hair follicle damage and ultimately, hair loss.
Automated scalp cooling devices are used to chill the scalp just before, during and for a short time after chemotherapy treatment. Our previous research showed that cooling works through several mechanisms. It reduces blood flow to the scalp, meaning less of the drug reaches the hair follicles.
It lowers cell activity and metabolism, which makes hair cells less likely to react to chemotherapy. Also, cooling directly stops drugs from entering follicle cells. But despite its potential, scalp cooling doesn’t work for all patients. Until now, we didn’t really know why.
Our new research shows that temperature precision might be fundamental in the ability of scalp cooling to prevent hair loss. We used human hair follicles grown as “mini organs” in the lab to simulate what happens during chemotherapy.
When we treated hair follicles with chemotherapy drugs, we found that cooling, quite remarkably, can prevent the toxic effects of chemotherapy drugs. However, there is a catch: it only works if hair follicles are cooled to the right level. If not, the protection is not adequate to “rescue” them from the toxicity of chemotherapy.
More specifically, when cooled to an optimal temperature of 18°C, hair follicles were completely protected from chemotherapy drug-induced damage. However, when the temperature was higher – say, 26°C – the protection dropped dramatically. This finding may explain why scalp cooling doesn’t work for all patients. In real-world settings, scalp temperature can vary due to differences in equipment, head shape, blood flow, or hair type. Some patients may not reach the “protective threshold”.
But, here’s the exciting part: if the temperature isn’t cold enough, we have found a way to compensate for this by adding antioxidants, and that makes a huge difference. Together, cooling and antioxidant form a strong protective combination – offering hair follicles a powerful, double layer of defence.
So, how do the antioxidants help? Chemotherapy drugs generate harmful molecules called reactive oxygen species, or ROS, which contribute to cell damage. By adding antioxidants like N-Acetylcysteine or Resveratrol – even at sub-optimal cooling temperatures – we saw a remarkable improvement in protection. In fact, the combined effect of antioxidants and moderate cooling mimicked the protection seen with optimal cooling alone.
Although our study was conducted in the lab, it paves the way for improving the outcomes for patients undergoing chemotherapy. The findings suggest that combining antioxidants with existing scalp cooling could make the treatment more reliable and accessible.
We’re now developing a topical antioxidant treatment designed to reach the vulnerable parts of hair follicles in the scalp. The idea is to apply this lotion during scalp cooling, to boost the follicle’s defenses. Clinical trials are being planned to test this combined approach in patients.
Our new research is a milestone, because with the help of antioxidants, we may now be able to offer effective scalp cooling-based hair protection more widely and more consistently – even when conditions aren’t perfect. The combinatorial approach is based on over a decade of research into how chemotherapy damages hair – and how that damage can be stopped.
Hair loss during chemotherapy is deeply distressing. If we can improve the tools we already have, such as scalp cooling, and make them work better for more people, we can help preserve not just hair, but dignity, normality and quality of life during an incredibly difficult time.
The future of supportive cancer care isn’t just about treating the disease. It’s also about helping people feel like themselves and maintain their dignity while they fight it. This new approach has the potential to “change the face of cancer” for patients worldwide.
Nik Georgopoulos is a member of the scientific advisory board of Paxman Coolers Ltd, but receives no consultancy-related income. He holds a research collaboration with and his laboratory receives funding from Paxman Coolers Ltd.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nik Georgopoulos, Associate Professor in Cell Biology and Transforming Lives Fellow, Sheffield Hallam University
Hair loss is one of the most feared and traumatic side effects of cancer chemotherapy treatment, both for patients themselves and their loved ones, as it can visibly represent the “face of cancer”.
For most patients, maintaining their hair is not just about vanity – it’s about identity, dignity and control. That’s why scalp cooling caps, or (cold caps), often worn during chemotherapy, have become an increasingly common sight in cancer wards.
Chemotherapy drugs work by killing rapidly dividing cancer cells – unfortunately, they cause collateral toxicity to rapidly dividing healthy cells in our body, like those in the roots of our hair. This leads to hair follicle damage and ultimately, hair loss.
Automated scalp cooling devices are used to chill the scalp just before, during and for a short time after chemotherapy treatment. Our previous research showed that cooling works through several mechanisms. It reduces blood flow to the scalp, meaning less of the drug reaches the hair follicles.
It lowers cell activity and metabolism, which makes hair cells less likely to react to chemotherapy. Also, cooling directly stops drugs from entering follicle cells. But despite its potential, scalp cooling doesn’t work for all patients. Until now, we didn’t really know why.
Our new research shows that temperature precision might be fundamental in the ability of scalp cooling to prevent hair loss. We used human hair follicles grown as “mini organs” in the lab to simulate what happens during chemotherapy.
When we treated hair follicles with chemotherapy drugs, we found that cooling, quite remarkably, can prevent the toxic effects of chemotherapy drugs. However, there is a catch: it only works if hair follicles are cooled to the right level. If not, the protection is not adequate to “rescue” them from the toxicity of chemotherapy.
More specifically, when cooled to an optimal temperature of 18°C, hair follicles were completely protected from chemotherapy drug-induced damage. However, when the temperature was higher – say, 26°C – the protection dropped dramatically. This finding may explain why scalp cooling doesn’t work for all patients. In real-world settings, scalp temperature can vary due to differences in equipment, head shape, blood flow, or hair type. Some patients may not reach the “protective threshold”.
But, here’s the exciting part: if the temperature isn’t cold enough, we have found a way to compensate for this by adding antioxidants, and that makes a huge difference. Together, cooling and antioxidant form a strong protective combination – offering hair follicles a powerful, double layer of defence.
So, how do the antioxidants help? Chemotherapy drugs generate harmful molecules called reactive oxygen species, or ROS, which contribute to cell damage. By adding antioxidants like N-Acetylcysteine or Resveratrol – even at sub-optimal cooling temperatures – we saw a remarkable improvement in protection. In fact, the combined effect of antioxidants and moderate cooling mimicked the protection seen with optimal cooling alone.
Although our study was conducted in the lab, it paves the way for improving the outcomes for patients undergoing chemotherapy. The findings suggest that combining antioxidants with existing scalp cooling could make the treatment more reliable and accessible.
We’re now developing a topical antioxidant treatment designed to reach the vulnerable parts of hair follicles in the scalp. The idea is to apply this lotion during scalp cooling, to boost the follicle’s defenses. Clinical trials are being planned to test this combined approach in patients.
Our new research is a milestone, because with the help of antioxidants, we may now be able to offer effective scalp cooling-based hair protection more widely and more consistently – even when conditions aren’t perfect. The combinatorial approach is based on over a decade of research into how chemotherapy damages hair – and how that damage can be stopped.
Hair loss during chemotherapy is deeply distressing. If we can improve the tools we already have, such as scalp cooling, and make them work better for more people, we can help preserve not just hair, but dignity, normality and quality of life during an incredibly difficult time.
The future of supportive cancer care isn’t just about treating the disease. It’s also about helping people feel like themselves and maintain their dignity while they fight it. This new approach has the potential to “change the face of cancer” for patients worldwide.
Nik Georgopoulos is a member of the scientific advisory board of Paxman Coolers Ltd, but receives no consultancy-related income. He holds a research collaboration with and his laboratory receives funding from Paxman Coolers Ltd.
On July 6, an arson attack targeted the East Melbourne Synagogue. It was the latest in a series of antisemitic incidents recorded across Australia since October 7 2023, when Hamas carried out a horrific terrorist attack, killing about 1,200 Israelis. These domestic incidents have escalated in both number and severity.
Australia has not previously experienced antisemitism at this scale. In response, the Albanese government appointed Jillian Segal as the nation’s first special envoy for combating antisemitism, and commissioned a plan with recommendations to address the issue.
1. Preventing violence and crime, including a proposed law enforcement framework to improve coordination between agencies, and new policies aimed at stopping dangerous individuals from entering Australia.
2. Strengthening protections against hate speech, by regulating all forms of hate, including antisemitism, and increasing oversight of platform policies and algorithms.
3. Promoting antisemitism-free media, education and cultural spaces, through journalist training, education programs, and conditions on public funding for organisations that promote or fail to address antisemitism.
The government has said it will consider the recommendations.
These measures are broadly reasonable and make practical sense. Some – such as those aimed at preventing violence and crime – are more straightforward to implement than others. It would also be logical to apply them to all forms of hate, not just antisemitism.
But that needs to be done with caution. We don’t want to create an environment in which any criticism of a community or group is shut down by regulation.
In a democracy, open and robust debate is essential. The challenge lies in the details: how we define hate, and where we draw the threshold for what counts as hate.
The document ignores the elephant in the room: whether the plan could be used to silence legitimate criticism of Israel.
The special envoy’s plan notes antisemitism has risen since October 7, but it does not fully explain the context. Israel’s military response in Gaza, which has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, has prompted a wave of global protest and criticism of Israel, including accusations of genocide.
In this context, the line between antisemitism and criticism of Israel has become more difficult and contested than ever. Some people who attack Israel or Zionism may be expressing antisemitic views. Others may not. Distinguishing between the two is complex, but essential.
The envoy adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which covers both direct attacks on Jewish identity and certain criticisms of Israel, such as comparisons with Nazi Germany.
In my experience as a researcher working on online hate (including antisemitism), even members of the Jewish community adopting this definition often disagree on how to apply it.
The threshold varies – for example when deciding whether an online post or a statement crosses the line into antisemitism.
So where should we draw that line? It’s a crucial question. If the envoy’s recommendations are implemented, decisions about funding, visas, and even criminal charges could depend on it.
There is, of course, broad agreement on some cases. Setting fire to a synagogue is clearly antisemitic – it targets a Jewish place of worship.
Similarly, attacking a Jewish-owned business or damaging property in a Jewish neighbourhood suggests the target was chosen because it was Jewish.
Some people – often those already harbouring anti-Jewish views – treat the entire Jewish community as if it represents the Netanyahu government or the Israel Defense Forces.
This ignores the diversity of views within Jewish communities. That lack of nuance fuels antisemitism.
Few would disagree that antisemitic acts include attacks on Jewish people or property carried out indiscriminately, or when anti-Israel protests attempt to hold the whole Jewish community collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government.
But we also need to be realistic. We are unlikely to eliminate all forms of antisemitic hate or intimidation from public life. Hate can be expressed without breaching laws, and people can intimidate others while staying just within legal boundaries.
Humour, sarcasm and coded language are often used to incite hatred without triggering any formal consequence. That kind of harm is much harder to prevent – and it may be something we have to learn to live with, while continuing to push back against it.
Rebuilding trust
In the long term, the only real solution is building mutual understanding. That’s why personal relationships matter.
Knowing someone who is Jewish is one of the strongest antidotes to antisemitism. When you have a Jewish friend, you’re less likely to believe or spread the myths that circulate online and offline about what Jewish people think, believe or represent.
The same applies to all forms of hate. Direct contact helps break down stereotypes across all communities.
The problem is that the current context is pushing communities apart. Segregation and isolation are increasing. Before October 7, there was meaningful interfaith work happening – Jewish students visiting the Islamic Museum, Muslim students visiting the Holocaust Museum. That work has largelystopped.
Now, people are retreating into fear, distrust and generalisations. All nuance is lost. The “other” becomes a single, threatening enemy.
It will take time to rebuild that trust – and the longer the war continues, the harder it will be.
Matteo Vergani receives funding from the Campbell Collaboration, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, the Department of Home Affairs.
On July 6, an arson attack targeted the East Melbourne Synagogue. It was the latest in a series of antisemitic incidents recorded across Australia since October 7 2023, when Hamas carried out a horrific terrorist attack, killing about 1,200 Israelis. These domestic incidents have escalated in both number and severity.
Australia has not previously experienced antisemitism at this scale. In response, the Albanese government appointed Jillian Segal as the nation’s first special envoy for combating antisemitism, and commissioned a plan with recommendations to address the issue.
1. Preventing violence and crime, including a proposed law enforcement framework to improve coordination between agencies, and new policies aimed at stopping dangerous individuals from entering Australia.
2. Strengthening protections against hate speech, by regulating all forms of hate, including antisemitism, and increasing oversight of platform policies and algorithms.
3. Promoting antisemitism-free media, education and cultural spaces, through journalist training, education programs, and conditions on public funding for organisations that promote or fail to address antisemitism.
The government has said it will consider the recommendations.
These measures are broadly reasonable and make practical sense. Some – such as those aimed at preventing violence and crime – are more straightforward to implement than others. It would also be logical to apply them to all forms of hate, not just antisemitism.
But that needs to be done with caution. We don’t want to create an environment in which any criticism of a community or group is shut down by regulation.
In a democracy, open and robust debate is essential. The challenge lies in the details: how we define hate, and where we draw the threshold for what counts as hate.
The document ignores the elephant in the room: whether the plan could be used to silence legitimate criticism of Israel.
The special envoy’s plan notes antisemitism has risen since October 7, but it does not fully explain the context. Israel’s military response in Gaza, which has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, has prompted a wave of global protest and criticism of Israel, including accusations of genocide.
In this context, the line between antisemitism and criticism of Israel has become more difficult and contested than ever. Some people who attack Israel or Zionism may be expressing antisemitic views. Others may not. Distinguishing between the two is complex, but essential.
The envoy adopts the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which covers both direct attacks on Jewish identity and certain criticisms of Israel, such as comparisons with Nazi Germany.
In my experience as a researcher working on online hate (including antisemitism), even members of the Jewish community adopting this definition often disagree on how to apply it.
The threshold varies – for example when deciding whether an online post or a statement crosses the line into antisemitism.
So where should we draw that line? It’s a crucial question. If the envoy’s recommendations are implemented, decisions about funding, visas, and even criminal charges could depend on it.
There is, of course, broad agreement on some cases. Setting fire to a synagogue is clearly antisemitic – it targets a Jewish place of worship.
Similarly, attacking a Jewish-owned business or damaging property in a Jewish neighbourhood suggests the target was chosen because it was Jewish.
Some people – often those already harbouring anti-Jewish views – treat the entire Jewish community as if it represents the Netanyahu government or the Israel Defense Forces.
This ignores the diversity of views within Jewish communities. That lack of nuance fuels antisemitism.
Few would disagree that antisemitic acts include attacks on Jewish people or property carried out indiscriminately, or when anti-Israel protests attempt to hold the whole Jewish community collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government.
But we also need to be realistic. We are unlikely to eliminate all forms of antisemitic hate or intimidation from public life. Hate can be expressed without breaching laws, and people can intimidate others while staying just within legal boundaries.
Humour, sarcasm and coded language are often used to incite hatred without triggering any formal consequence. That kind of harm is much harder to prevent – and it may be something we have to learn to live with, while continuing to push back against it.
Rebuilding trust
In the long term, the only real solution is building mutual understanding. That’s why personal relationships matter.
Knowing someone who is Jewish is one of the strongest antidotes to antisemitism. When you have a Jewish friend, you’re less likely to believe or spread the myths that circulate online and offline about what Jewish people think, believe or represent.
The same applies to all forms of hate. Direct contact helps break down stereotypes across all communities.
The problem is that the current context is pushing communities apart. Segregation and isolation are increasing. Before October 7, there was meaningful interfaith work happening – Jewish students visiting the Islamic Museum, Muslim students visiting the Holocaust Museum. That work has largelystopped.
Now, people are retreating into fear, distrust and generalisations. All nuance is lost. The “other” becomes a single, threatening enemy.
It will take time to rebuild that trust – and the longer the war continues, the harder it will be.
Matteo Vergani receives funding from the Campbell Collaboration, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, the Department of Home Affairs.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Georgette Leah Burns, Associate Professor, Griffith School of Environment and Science, Griffith University
Luciano Gonzalez/Anadolu via Getty Images
Last weekend, a woman was mauled by a lioness at Darling Downs Zoo in Queensland, and lost her arm. The zoo, which keeps nine lions, has been operating for 20 years and had never experienced an incident such as this.
The victim was a relative of the zoo owner, Steve Robinson, who told the media the lions were not aggressive and the lioness was thought to be “just playing”.
Although attacks like this are extremely rare, they are obviously of great concern. The incident should prompt a rethink of our approach to wild animals in captivity, and whether it’s morally acceptable – or safe – to keep them there at all.
Why do zoos exist?
Zoos, aquariums and other settings where wild animals are kept captive exist for two main reasons: human entertainment and profit-making.
Surveys show zoo visitors have a preference for large mammals such as elephants, primates and big cats.
Some animals are more tolerant of captivity conditions and exposure to humans than others. Fish, for example, seem to respond more neutrally to human presence than most other species.
But a recent study found captive animals generally demonstrate abnormal behaviour more often than non-captive ones.
For most wild animals, captivity deprives them of the ability to engage in natural behaviour, which harms their welfare. For example, free-living dolphins and whales have long-range migration patterns which require vast ocean spaces. They are also highly social and display complex communication behaviour.
Captive dolphins were once common in aquariums and marine parks across Australia. But now only one facility, Sea World in Queensland, still breeds dolphins for entertainment.
Another important welfare question is whether the captive animal has “agency” – that is, whether it can make choices as it would in the wild.
Can it choose, for example, which other animals it has relationships with? Or whether it has privacy? Having control over such decisions enhances the quality of life for the captive animal.
It’s important to note that some zoos can deliver positive outcomes for animals. Many play an important conservation role, such as running captive breeding programs for endangered species.
An example is a long-running program across several Australian zoos and other organisations to recover populations of the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater. The program has released more than 400 zoo-bred birds into the wild.
However, such conservation programs do not necessarily need to involve zoos to succeed.
Weighing up the risks
No matter how domesticated they might seem, some wild animals in captivity will always pose a risk to humans. Their behaviour can be unpredictable and, as the recent Queensland example shows, even a “playing” lioness can cause enormous physical harm to people.
Wild animals are called wild for a reason. To be kept in captivity, most animals require training so they can be safely handled. The Darling Downs Zoo incident shows despite this precaution, things can still go wrong.
But humans will, understandably, always be fascinated by other animals, and want to see them up close. So what are the alternatives to zoos?
Open range-zoos, such as the one to which the Perth elephants were moved, can offer a better option for some animals.
Another option is to recreate the zoo experience using technology. Artificial intelligence, virtual reality and augmented reality can be used to create images of animals that look and seem real.
Questions about animals kept in captivity require us to consider how much risk to human safety we accept, and the extent to which we prioritise human amusement over animal welfare. In searching for answers, we can start by asking whether we need zoos at all.
Georgette Leah Burns 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.
Australia’s drug approval system is under fire, with critics in the United States claiming it is too slow to approve life-saving medicines.
Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration balances speed with a rigorous assessment of safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness.
So does Australia really lag behind the US Food and Drug Administration? And do we need to change how we approve medicines?
The drug development pipeline
Drug development usually begins when something new is discovered about a disease. This usually involves identifying either a change in an important protein or finding a new protein involved in the disease.
When scientists know the shape of the protein, they can design a drug that can block or activate it.
Scientists will then undertake laboratory, petri dish-type, experiments to see if the drug works on the protein in the way they designed. If it passes those tests, they will then move onto animal testing and formulation.
Formulation is the step where scientists decide what form the medicine will take, such as a tablet, injection or patch. There are more than 150 different pharmaceutical dosage forms to choose from.
The final steps are human testing. This requires the completion of three types of clinical trials. Each seeks to answer different specific questions about the drug:
Phase I trials: is the drug safe? What are its side effects?
Phase II trials: does the drug work?
Phase III trials: is the drug better than currently available medicines?
At the end of the trials, a company can apply to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) for approval to market and sell the drug.
Getting a drug to market is time-consuming and costly. It takes around 15 years from the initial concept and design to government approval and costs more than A$3.5 billion.
But the failure rate is high: more than 90% of drugs that undergo development never gain government approval.
How are drugs approved in Australia?
The decision to approve new medicines for sale in Australia is made based on safety and efficacy evidence provided by the sponsoring company.
Listing a medicine on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) is a separate process from approval, and is based on financial considerations and a cost-benefit analysis, rather than safety and efficacy.
The TGA typically takes 240 to 260 working days (around a full calendar year) from receiving a new medicine application to an approval decision. This is longer than it takes the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – 180 to 300 days.
Where there is a pressing need, the approval process can be faster. The first COVID treatment was approved in Australia just two weeks after it was submitted for consideration.
Then why do Americans often get medicines first?
There can be several reasons why a drug approval can be delayed in Australia when it has already been approved overseas.
First, with a population of 27 million out of 8 billion world-wide, Australia is a relatively small market. So it is not always a high priority for companies to apply for approval here. Regions with large populations such as China, India and Europe are a bigger focus for companies. This can therefore delay when they submit to Australia.
Other reasons for delays can be that the TGA requires additional safety or efficacy evidence other regions did not request, or because new information about the drug has come to light since the drug was approved overseas.
What about delays getting drugs onto the PBS?
When a drug is listed on the PBS, Australians can access the medicine for $31.60 (or $7.70 concession) instead of the cost of a private prescription which might be hundreds or even thousands of dollars.
The time it takes for medicines to be approved on the PBS has also been a focus of criticism.
The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), which makes PBS listing recommendations to the Federal Minister of Health, only sits three to six times per year.
US Chamber of Commerce vice president John Murphy claims the PBAC takes, on average, 32 months to make a recommendation about listing a drug after an application has been submitted.
Once a recommendation is made, the minister usually takes a minimum of five months to make a final decision.
To speed up the process, the TGA does allow parallel applications for drug approval and PBS listing.
The time taken to make a PBS listing decision is reasonable, given the scheme’s overall cost. In 2023–24, the total cost of the PBS to the government was $17.7 billion. So a decision to list can’t be made lightly.
So should Australia change how it approves medicines?
Criticising the time it takes to get regulatory approvals appears to be part of a wider plan of attack by the US government. It is putting pressure on Australia to open its market to higher prices for medicines made by US pharmaceutical companies.
Australia has a world-class regulatory agency in the TGA which ensures medicines that are approved are both safe and effective. And the PBS scheme is a key part of our public health care system and the envy of the world.
The Australian government should resist any changes to the regulatory approval processes that come from the US.
Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and was previously a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. He is a member of the Haleon Australia Pty Ltd Pain Advisory Board. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formally nominated United States President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. He says the president is “forging peace as we speak, in one country, in one region after the other”.
Trump, who has craved the award for years, sees himself as a global peacemaker in a raft of conflicts from Israel and Iran, to Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
With the conflict in Gaza still raging, we ask five experts – could Trump be rewarded with the world’s most prestigious peace prize?
Emma Shortis
Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University
Nominating Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize is like entering a hyena in a dog show.
Of course Trump does not deserve it. That we’re being forced to take this question seriously is yet another indication – as if we needed one – of his extraordinary ability to set and reset the terms of our politics.
There is no peace in Gaza. Even if Trump announced another ceasefire tomorrow, it would not last. And it would not build genuine peace and security.
Trump has neither the interest nor the attention span required to build long term peace. His administration is not willing to bear any of the costs or investments that come with genuine, lasting diplomacy. And he is not anti-war.
There is no peace in Iran. Trump’s bombing of Iran simply exacerbates his decision in 2018 to end nuclear negotiations with Tehran. It pushes the world closer to, not further from, nuclear catastrophe.
Under the Trump administration, there will be no peace in the Middle East. Both the US and Israeli governments’ approach to “security” puts the region on a perpetual war footing. This approach assumes it is possible to bomb your way to peace – a “peace” which both Trump and Netanyahu understand as total dominance and violent oppression.
The Trump administration is deliberately undermining the institutions and principles of international and domestic law.
He has deployed the military against American citizens. He is threatening the United States’ traditional allies with trade wars and annexation. His administration’s dismantling of USAID will result, according to one study, in the deaths of 14 million people, including 4.5 million children, by 2030.
Indulging Trump’s embarrassing desire for trophies might appease him for a short time. It would also strip the Nobel Peace Prize of any and all credibility, while endorsing Trump’s trashing of the international rule of law.
What kind of peace is that?
Ali Mamouri
Research Fellow, Middle East Studies, Deakin University
The nomination of Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize by a man who is facing charges of war crimes is an unprecedented and deeply dark irony that cannot be overlooked.
Trump’s role in brokering the Abraham Accords was hailed as a diplomatic breakthrough. It led to the normalisation of relations between Israel and several Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco.
But this achievement came at a significant cost. The accords deliberately sidelined the Palestinian issue, long recognised as the core of regional instability, and disregarded decades of international consensus on a two-state solution.
Israeli soldiers guarding Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. Dom Zaran/Shutterstock
His silence in the face of a growing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza was equally telling. Perhaps most disturbing was the tacit or explicit endorsement of proposals to forcibly relocate Palestinians to neighbouring Arab countries, a position that evokes ethnic cleansing and fundamentally undermines principles of justice, dignity and international law.
In addition, there is Trump’s unconditional support for Israel’s military campaigns across the region, including his authorisation of attacks on Iranian civilian, military and nuclear infrastructure. The strikes lacked any clear legal basis, contributed further to regional instability and, according to Tehran, killed more than a thousand civilians.
His broader disregard for international norms shattered decades of post-second world war diplomatic order and increased the risk of sustained and expanded conflict.
Against this backdrop, any serious consideration of Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize seems fundamentally at odds with its stated mission: to honour efforts that reduce conflict, uphold human rights and promote lasting peace.
Whatever short-term diplomatic gains emerged from Trump’s tenure are eclipsed by the legal, ethical and humanitarian consequences of his actions.
Ian Parmeter
Research Scholar, Middle East Studies, Australian National University
Netanyahu’s nomination of Donald Trump for one of the world’s most coveted awards was clearly aimed at flattering the president.
Trump is clearly angling for the laurel, which his first term predecessor, Barack Obama, won in his first year in office.
Obama was awarded the prize in 2009 for promotion of nuclear non-proliferation and fostering a “new climate” in international relations, particularly in reaching out to the Muslim world.
Given neither of these ambitions have since borne fruit, what claims might Trump reasonably make at this stage of his second term?
Trump has claimed credit for resolving two conflicts this year: the brief India–Pakistan clash that erupted after Pakistani militants killed 25 Indian tourists in Kashmir in May; and the long-running dispute between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi disputes Trump brokered peace. He says the issue was resolved by negotiations between the two countries’ militaries.
With regards to the Rwanda–DRC conflict, the countries signed a peace agreement in the Oval Office in June. But critics argue Qatar played a significant role
which the Trump administration has airbrushed out.
Trump can legitimately argue his pressure on Israel and Iran forced a ceasefire in their 12-day war in June.
But his big test is the Gaza war. For Trump to add this to his Nobel claim, he will need more than a ceasefire.
The Biden administration brokered two ceasefires that enabled the release of significant numbers of hostages, but did not end the conflict.
Trump would have to use his undoubted influence with Netanyahu to achieve more than a temporary pause. He would have to end the war definitively and effect the release of all Israeli hostages.
Beyond that, if Trump could persuade Netanyahu
to take serious steps towards negotiating a two-state solution, that would be a genuine Nobel-worthy achievement.
Trump isn’t there yet.
Jasmine-Kim Westendorf
Associate Professor of Peace and Conflict and Co-Director of the Initiative for Peacebuilding, The University of Melbourne
Although controversial or politicised awards are not new, awardees are generally individuals or groups who’ve made
significant contributions to a range of peace initiatives.
They include reducing armed conflict, enhancing international cooperation, and human rights efforts that contribute to peace.
Inspiring examples include anti-nuclear proliferation organisations and phenomenal women peacemakers. And Nadia Murad and Denis Mukwege, who won in 2011 for their work trying to end the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war.
Trump has declared his “proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier”. But he is neither.
There has been a concerning trend towards using the Nobel Peace Prize to encourage certain political directions, rather than reward achievements.
Barack Obama’s 2008 Prize helped motivate his moves toward diplomacy and cooperation after the presidency of George W. Bush.
Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s 2018 award was for efforts to resolve the 20-year war with Eritrea. The peace prize encouraged Ahmed to fulfill his promise of democratic elections in 2020. Embarrassingly, within a year Ahmed launched a civil war that killed over 600,000 people and displaced 3 million more.
This week’s nomination follows efforts by global leaders to flatter Trump in order – they hope – to secure his goodwill.
These motivations explain why Netanyahu has put forward Trump’s name to the Nobel Committee. It comes at the very moment securing Trump’s ongoing support during ceasefire negotiations is critical for Netanyahu’s political survival.
They will never give me a Nobel Peace Prize […] It’s too bad. I deserve it, but they will never give it to me.
Prizes to genuine peacemakers amplify their work and impact.
1984 winner Desmond Tutu said: “One day no one was listening. The next, I was an oracle.” A Nobel can be a powerful force for peace.
Trump is no peacemaker, he doesn’t deserve one.
Shahram Akbarzadeh
Director, Middle East Studies Forum (MESF), Deakin University
Benjamin Netanyahu would have us believe Donald Trump is a peacemaker.
Nothing could be further from the truth. His record is stained with blood and misery. The fact Trump believes himself to be worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize only attests to his illusions of grandeur in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
The war in Gaza has gone into its 20th month because Trump did not use the levers at his control to bring the senseless war to a close.
Some estimates put the true Gaza death toll at 100,000 people, and counting. They have been killed by American-made bombs Israel is dropping across the densely populated strip; from starvation because Israel has enforced a blockade of the Gaza Strip and prevented UN food delivery with the blessings of America; and from gunshots at food distribution centres, set up with US private security.
All under Trump’s watch.
Trump could do something about this. Israel is the largest recipient of US aid, most of it military support.
This has multiplied since Israel commenced its attack on Gaza in response to Hamas terrorism on October 7 2023. Trump has approved the transfer of US military hardware to Israel, knowing full well it was being used against a trapped and helpless population.
This is not the act of a peacemaker.
Now the Israeli government is planning to “facilitate” population transfer of Gazans to other countries – a euphemism for ethnic cleansing.
This is the textbook definition of genocide: deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of people. Trump legitimised this travesty of decency and international law by promising a Gaza Riviera.
The outlandish extent of Trump’s ideas would be laughable if their consequences were not so devastating.
When Israel attacked Iran in the middle of nuclear talks, Trump had a momentary pause, before jumping to Netanyahu’s aid and bombing Iran. He then claimed his action paved the way for peace.
Trump’s idea of peace is the peace of the graveyard.
Emma Shortis is Director of International and Security Affairs at The Australia Institute, an independent think tank.
Jasmine-Kim Westendorf has received funding from the Australian Research Council.
Shahram Akbarzadeh receives funding from Australia Research Council.
Ali Mamouri and Ian Parmeter 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.
If you watched any of the 2025 Wimbledon womens’ matches, you’ll have noticed many players donning a skort: a garment in which shorts are concealed under a skirt, or a front panel resembling a skirt.
You may even remember skorts from your schooling days, as they’re commonly offered in girls’ uniforms throughout Australia.
The skort (a portmanteau of skirt and shorts) has played a truly unique role in the history of women’s clothing. They were once a progressive item of clothing, as they afforded women the opportunity to partake in activities that would have been difficult in a skirt or dress.
Their role in contemporary society, however, is a bit more complicated.
Rebellious beginnings
The first garments resembling skorts were developed in the 1890s so women could ride bicycles without their skirt getting caught in the chains. While the puffy “bloomers” had already been invented a few decades earlier, women who wore them often faced ridicule.
Skorts were considered revolutionary at a time when men both figuratively and literally wore the pants.
Back then, they were usually a pair of loose pants under a front panel resembling a skirt. The aim was to retain the wearer’s femininity, and not offend those who thought pants were a purely masculine article of clothing.
A drawing from an 1896 patent of a ‘cycling skirt’.
The skort as we know it today, and as is seen across the sporting world, was popularised in the 1960s by American fashion designer Leon Levin.
This skirt was said to offer “the freedom of shorts and soft lines of a skirt”. The underlying message: even as women participate in traditionally “masculine” activities, they should be careful not to look too masculine.
Sport management academic M. Katie Flanagan argues women may be convinced that exercising in a skort achieves an acceptable gender performance. In other words, they are socialised to think they have to “perform” their gender by wearing the “correct” clothing.
Skorts in sport and school
In the sporting world, skorts are deliberately designed to be trendy and attractive, rather than purely functional.
One study on women golfers found they were more satisfied with their uniforms if they were happy with both the comfort and attractiveness, indicating women’s sportswear isn’t just about fit and practicality.
Skorts have historically also had class associations. As recently as ten years ago, sport skorts were an expensive item reserved for those from the middle and upper classes. Women from lower economic classes also tended to not have the time and/or resources to engage in the activities skorts were designed for, namely tennis and golf.
More recently, however, discount stores have made skorts accessible to those on a budget.
School skorts, a topic of my ongoing research, are particularly affordable at discount stores. A generic discount store skort may cost about A$10, compared to A$20–40 for one purchased directly from a school.
Some schools offer skorts to girls as the equivalent of sports shorts or as part of the everyday uniform. Other schools seem to prefer culottes as an alternative to a dress or skirt – shorts that are loose enough to resemble a skirt.
Many schools still don’t offer shorts to girls as part of the everyday uniform. Whether or not girls are allowed to wear the “boys’” shorts comes down to the individual school.
From rebellion to restriction
One 2019 review of school uniform policies in South Australia found 98.6% of public schools included shorts as a uniform option for girls, compared to just 26.4% of private schools.
Researchers Sarah Cohen-Woods and Rachel Laattoe found girls in private schools were often restricted in their choices, having to choose between skorts and culottes as an alternative to a skirt or dress.
Across Australia, all state and territory education policies – most of which came into effect between 2017 and 2019 – mandate public schools must offer girls the option of wearing shorts and pants.
However, the wordings of these policies differ widely. While New South Wales, Victoria and Norther Territory specifically mention shorts and pants must be offered to girls, Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania specify schools must offer unisex or gender neutral items to all students.
South Australia’s and Australian Capital Territory’s policies further state uniform items should be categorised by type of clothing, or in non-gender specific terms.
However, in some states, including New South Wales, schools are free to interpret the policy as they wish, which is why some only offer culottes or skorts to girls. There is generally no oversight or enforcement of policies to force schools to offer actual shorts to girls.
A similar debate is happening in women’s sports. Ireland’s Camogie Association only ended the compulsory skorts policy in May, after years of complaints by players. Dublin captain Aisling Maher said she was “sick of being forced to wear a skort that is uncomfortable and unfit for purpose”.
“In no other facet of my life does someone dictate that I have to wear something resembling a skirt because I am a girl. Why is it happening in my sport?” Maher said.
A camogie team pictured in Waterford, Ireland, 1915. The Irish stick-and-ball team sport is played by women. Wikimedia
A garment for the male gaze
In recent years, many stores have advertised skorts for fashion. Target, for instance, currently sells a tailored skort described as a “must have for any trendsetter looking to stand out in a crowd”.
There are conflicting arguments about whether skorts are progressive or regressive. On one hand, they allow women and girls to move freely during physical activities, without having to worry about their underwear being visible.
On the other, they set a precedent in regards to how women and girls ought to perform their gender, by avoiding looking too “masculine” – which makes them somewhat misogynistic.
The skort is an object of dual meanings: at once a skirt and a pair of shorts – at once progressive and regressive.
Jennifer E. Cheng 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 government’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, Jillian Segal, has recommended universities that fail to properly deal with the issue should have government funding terminated.
In her Plan to Combat Antisemitism, launched Thursday, Segal says she will prepare a report card “assessing each university’s implementation of effective practices and standards”.
This would cover complaints systems and whether the campus and online environment “is conducive to Jewish students and staff participating actively and equally in university life”.
“Should significant problems remain at universities by the start of the 2026 academic year, as assessed by the Envoy’s report card, a dedicated judicial inquiry should be undertaken to address systemic issues,” the Envoy’s report says.
That should include “investigation of foreign sources of funding for antisemitic activities and academics at universities”.
“Universities must embrace cultural change to end their tolerance for anti-semitic conduct,” the Segal report says.
It says the envoy will work with government to enable funding “to be withheld, where possible, from universities, programs or individuals within universities that facilitate, enable or fail to act against antisemitism”.
The envoy also wants public grants to university centres, academics or researchers to be subject to termination if the recipient engages in antisemitic or other hateful speech or actions.
In the wake of the October 2023 Hamas attacks on Israelis, and Israel’s military response in Gaza, a number of Australian universities saw big pro-Palestinian protests, including encampments. At some universities Jewish students and staff felt unsafe going to classes or to their offices.
More generally, antisemitism has been rife since the October attacks, with most recently a spate of incidents in Melbourne in the last week. These included setting fire to the door of a synagogue and protesters rampaging through a restaurant that is part of an Israeli chain.
The envoy’s report was launched at a joint press conference attended by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke, and Segal.
The ambitious plan is broad, also covering security, law enforcement, and online regulation among other areas.
But it is unclear how much of it the government will take up.
Asked whether the government was committed to the plan “in full”, Albanese was noncommittal.
“We welcome the plan, to be very clear. Some of the plan requires a long-term approach, some of it requires action by state governments, some of it requires action by society.
“What we will do is work constructively with the envoy,” he said.
“This isn’t something that is okay on the 10th of July, done, tick, and we move on. This will be a process.”
The plan includes embedding Holocaust and antisemitism education in school curricula.
Research the envoy commissioned found a substantial difference between the attitudes of Australians under 35 and those older. These reflected differences between the generations in media consumption and perceptions younger people have of the Middle East the the Jewish community.
“There also appears to be generational differences in the understanding of the Holocaust and its impacts on society,” the report says.
The envoy flags her intention, with the support of government, to “review, and where appropriate strengthen federal, state and territory legislation addressing antisemitism and other hateful or intimidatory conduct”.
Among the recommendations is the removal of tax deduction status from any charitable institution which promotes speakers or engages in conduct that promotes antisemitism.
The report says that from October 2023 to September 2024 antisemitic incidents increased by 316%, with more than 2,000 cases reported. These included threats, assaults, vandalism and intimidation.
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.
The Greens had a poor election. They lost three of their four lower house seats including that of their leader Adam Bandt. This despite their overall vote remaining mostly steady. But they did retain all their Senate spots – though later they lost a senator through her defection to Labor – and they now effectively have the sole balance of power in the Senate.
The Greens last term played hard ball on various pieces of legislation like the Housing Australia Future Fund (HAFF), wanting to gain more concessions from the government. They prioritised issues such as the difficulties facing renters as well as the war in Gaza.
With the government’s big win at the election, how hard will the Greens push on legislation this term, and how will the party fare under new leadership?
To answer these questions and to tell us about her plans, the greens new leader, Larissa Waters, joins the podcast.
On what drives her Waters says,
I’ve certainly spent my working life trying to empower the community, to protect the planet. And I’m a really proud feminist and I’ve been really excited by the work that I’ve been able to do on gender equality and women’s safety for the last 10 years in that portfolio. But I’m a really strong advocate for a fairer society.
On reforms she wants to get done in parliament, Waters says the focus should be on delivery,
I would like for the parliament to not just spend its time as a kind of peacocking about, talking about ourselves, and actually spend its time delivering for people. I think that’s the least people could expect is that the collective focus of the parliament be about how we can help community members and nature.
We remain willing to work on reforms that will help people and will help the planet. And I think there’s a lot of people who are waiting to see how this parliament works and who are really hoping that with such an overwhelming number of seats […] the Labor Party will use their numbers in the parliament to do good things. And I think there’ll be a lot of broken hearts if they don’t find the courage to do what’s needed.
Asked about the recent antisemitic attacks in Melbourne and the broader issue of pro-Palestine protests, Waters explains where she stands.
Well firstly, can I say that the places of worship should always be off-limits for protest activity and I think that’s not a controversial statement. But can I also say that a lot of people feel really strongly about human rights and Gaza and Palestine and the Greens are really proud that we have always stood to end the genocide. And we think that Australia should play a stronger role in terms of sanctioning [Benjamin Netanyahu’s] war cabinet and that regime and for there to be a lasting peace in that region.
On AUKUS and the US alliance more broadly Water’s isn’t shy with her criticism,
We are wasting A$370 billion on nuclear submarines that actually may never even eventuate and that the US is now reconsidering their provision to us anyway. The whole thing is speculative and a massive waste of money, importantly, that makes us less safe. I think hitching our wagon to the increasingly unstable US administration under particularly the current president, is not how we make ourselves safe. And I certainly don’t think we should be taking any lectures from Donald Trump about how much money we should spending on defence.
We remain of the view, as we have been for decades, that Australia deserves an independent foreign policy, one that shamelessly puts our own interests at heart and front and centre, and is not just when the US says jump we say how high, that doesn’t make the world safer.
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.
This follows the US company’s recreation of a “dire wolf”, which was essentially a genetically engineered grey wolf. But that project was probably easy compared to the latest plan to resurrect the moa.
I think it’s a pipe dream and there are several reasons why.
Firstly, birds are harder to “de-extinct” than placental mammals. One would need a surrogate egg to bring chicks to term, and for many moa species there are no eggs from living birds big enough to house a developing chick. In this case, artificial eggs would need to be developed.
Then there is evolutionary history. From my own work and the research of others, we know the moa is most closely related to the tinamou, a small flying bird in South America.
To get to the common ancestor of the moa and tinamou, you’d have to go back some 60 million years of evolution. That’s a lot of time for mutations to evolve in genes controlling how moa look, that would need to be re-engineered to bring back moa traits.
The evolutionary history of the palaeognath group is even deeper. Formerly known as ratites, this group includes the tinamou and lineages of living flightless birds (emu, kiwi, cassowary, rhea, ostrich) and extinct ones (New Zealand’s moa and Madagascar’s elephant birds).
Genetically engineering a tinamou or any other birds in this group to create a moa hybrid would be challenging given this deep evolutionary timescale – certainly much harder than genetically engineering a grey wolf. And in any case, this would not recreate a moa, but merely something that may look like a moa. As one critic put it, it would not have the mauri (life force) of a moa.
There are no living analogues of moa within the palaeongath group. We don’t know whether birds created through de-extinction methods would function like a moa in the ecosystem.
Moa are unique, even among other flightless birds, in that they had no wings – all other flightless birds still have remnant wings. As a start, any genetic engineering would need to target regions of the genome that control the expression of genes for wing formation. This could have unintended consequences.
Working with moa ethically
I’m involved in an ongoing project to sequence high-quality genomes of several species of moa in New Zealand to study their evolutionary history.
In our conversations with tangata whenua around the country, there has been no support for de-extinction. Iwi (tribes) also want moa bone samples and all DNA extracts and sequence data to stay in New Zealand.
A major question is whether Colossal has undertaken wider engagement. Ngāi Tahu is a very large iwi with lots of individual rūnanga (tribal councils) throughout the South Island.
My research team has engaged with individual rūnanga, and we know they are opposed to de-extinction. I would like Colossal, Canterbury Museum and the Ngāi Tahu Research Center to disclose how widely they consulted across Ngāi Tahu.
The numerous iwi at the top of the South Island are also against the de-extinction of the giant moa (or any moa) which also lived in their rohe (region). De-extinction of a giant moa would really need a South Island-wide or even national consensus before going ahead.
Ecological concerns with de-extinction
Māori have expressed longstanding concerns about not being involved in discussions about genetic engineering and the potential of bone samples or genetic material going offshore.
With this announcement, it’s encouraging to see the Ngāi Tahu Research Centre is driving the project and that there are discussions around the need to restore habitat that would be suitable for moa.
This is a challenge in its own right as there is little left. Parts of the eastern South Island were once covered in mosaics of open forest shrubland that were dominated by kowhai and lancewood, which have no analogue today.
Even if we were to bring back an extinct species and kept individuals in a game reserve, we would need to produce enough (at least 500) to avoid inbreeding and genetic drift (random loss or retention of genes in a population).
The birds would require sufficient funding for their ongoing conservation. This raises worries that money could be pulled from efforts to save living endangered species, pushing them closer to extinction.
It’s undeniable the genetic engineering technology Colossal is developing could have real benefits to the conservation of New Zealand’s endangered species. Let’s say we could genetically engineer a kākāpō so it becomes resistant to a disease. That’s perhaps a project worth doing if there was widespread community support.
Investing the money that goes into this project in the conservation of New Zealand’s currently endangered biodiversity would, in my view, be better than bringing back moa as an ecotourism venture.
Nic Rawlence receives funding from Te Apārangi Royal Society of New Zealand Marsden Fund.
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
I just heard on Radio New Zealand a claim by a British commentator, Hugo Gye (Political Editor of The i Paper), that the United Kingdom (among other countries) has a major public debt crisis, and that if nothing is done about it (such as what Rachel Reeves – Chancellor of the Exchequer – is wanting to do), then in 2070 the public debt to GDP ratio would reach an ‘extreme’ level of 270% of GDP (gross domestic product). He added for good measure that no country in the world has public debt at a level anything like that. (Refer UK: Macron meets the King, RNZ, 10 July 2025.)
So I checked the International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2025, and found the following about Japan, the world’s fourth-largest national economy, looking at years from 2010 to 2024, with respect to government gross debt and general government financial deficit:
minimum debt206% (in 2010)
maximum debt 258% (in 2020)
average debt 234%
current debt 237% (in 2024)
projected debt 232% (in 2030)
minimum deficit 2.3% (in 2023)
maximum deficit 9.1% (in 2010)
average deficit 5.3%
current deficit 2.5% (in 2024)
projected deficit 5.3% (in 2030)
Japan does not have a ‘cost of living crisis’. Below is a list of Japan’s interest (source: tradingeconomics.com) and inflation rates (again the reference period is 2010 to 2024):
minimum interest-0.1% (in 2016-2024)
maximum interest 0.25% (in 2024)
average interest 0.0%
current interest 0.5% (in 2025)
minimum inflation -0.7% (in 2010)
maximum inflation 3.3% (in 2023)
average inflation 0.9%
current inflation 2.4% (in 2025)
projected inflation 2.0% (in 2030)
Japan is a prosperous country, with high life expectancy (85, the highest in the world for large economy nations), a very high ratio of retired people to working-age people, low inflation, and low interest rates. It was able to host the Olympic Games in 2021 without any financial fuss, and is about to host World Expo 2025. It has some of the world’s most sophisticated infrastructure.
Despite its high government debt – actually, to a large extent because of its high government debt – Japan’s is a creditor economy. Japan is not in debt to the rest of the world. Japan’s national debt is non-existent. Japan’s government debt is widely acknowledged, however, to be the world’s highest. Too many commentators – using wilful laziness – conflate national debt with government debt.
Japan’s is the world’s most successful twenty-first century large economy. It operates by Japanese savers lending much of their savings to their government at very low interest rates; those savers prefer to lend to their government rather than to pay high taxes to their government. Prosperous Japanese people are not greedy in the way that many rich westerners are. Their mantra is ‘private wealth, public wealth’; not ‘private wealth, public poverty’. Japan’s is not a zero-sum economy; in a zero-sum economy the prosperity of some comes at the expense of the impoverishment of others.
Hugo Jye was negligently dishonest – a case of wilful blindness or ignorance – in claiming that no countries had anything like 270% of GDP government debt. Western economists and financial commentators are likewise wilfully negligent in failing to alert their countries’ governments that there is an alternative – in plain sight – to our woeful policies of financial suffocation.
Note about three other economies
Within the European Union, it is rare for professional commentators to sing the praises of Spain and Italy. Spain, with 101% public debt, is enjoying a low inflation economic boom. It has a life expectancy of 83, higher than all European Union countries other than Malta and Luxembourg. Spain has had only government budget deficits since the surpluses of the years leading up to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis (a crisis which hit Spain particularly badly). Despite – no, because of – these accumulated deficits, Spain’s public debt (as a percent of GDP) has been falling since 2020; the deficits stimulated GDP. Spain had one year of high inflation (8.3% in 2022; the next highest since 2020 were 3.05% in 2011 and 3.0% in 2021); it recovered very quickly from that one year. Spain’s current interest rate is 2.15%.
Italy had 135% government debt to GDP in 2024. Its people’s life expectancy is high, marginally lower than Spain’s and slightly higher than New Zealand’s; significantly higher than Germany, Netherlands and the United States. Italy’s economy has been growing faster than the European Union average. Its public debt (compared to GDP) has been falling despite government deficits.
Spain and Italy are doing relatively well despite having among the highest older-person to younger-person age ratios in Europe. Spain is pro-actively utilising immigrant labour, whereas Northern Europe is scapegoating immigrants. And Spain, unlike most of Europe, is not looking to its ‘Defence’ budget to boost future growth.
Türkiye’s public debt has fallen from a high (since 2006) of 40% in 2021 to under 30% in 2023. This is despite double-digit inflation since 2016 and an average budget deficit since 2011 of 5.3%. While high inflation has benefitted Türkiye by bringing about negative real interest rates (meaning interest payments effectively flow from richer to poorer, generally benefitting indebted Turkish businesses and households), current interest rate settings look like suffocating for Türkiye for the remainder of the 2020s. (This monetary policy of suffocation is also true for Australia in 2025, with its particularly hawkish Reserve Bank at present.)
Despite challenging geopolitical and climatic circumstances, Türkiye has, at least until 2024, managed to achieve rising living standards for a substantial majority of its people. Unlike the United Kingdom and some northern European countries, Türkiye has not been a crisis economy despite (or because of) a reputation for unsound public finance.
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on July 10, 2025.
How can we stay safe after data breaches? Step 1 is to change the cybersecurity laws Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adam Andreotta, Lecturer, School of Management and Marketing, Curtin University Moor Studio / Getty Images Last week, Australian airline Qantas announced cyber attackers had accessed personal data about some of its customers. The company later confirmed that 5.7 million customer records were involved. The attackers targeted an
Cyber crime and real-world crime are converging in a dangerous new way – here’s how to stay safe Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jongkil Jay Jeong, Senior Fellow, School of Computing and Information System, The University of Melbourne It starts with a call from someone claiming to be your bank. They know your name. They know your bank. They even know your credit card number. There’s been “unusual activity” on
Labor leads in two Victorian state polls, but Premier Jacinta Allan’s approval tanks Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne Labor leads in Victorian state polls by Newspoll and Redbridge, but Premier Jacinta Allan is very unpopular. Two federal polls give Labor big leads and a Tasmanian
Cannabinoid products may reduce total sleep time in adults with insomnia: new study Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Camilla Hoyos, Senior Lecturer in the Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Macquarie University Lysenko Andrii/Shutterstock You might have heard cannabis and cannabinoid products can help people sleep. Data shows one of the top reasons people use cannabis is to help them sleep. But there’s a dearth of
Planning a ‘Euro summer’ or cruise? Why another flu shot might save your holiday Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jack Janetzki, Lecturer in Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of South Australia DavideAngelini/Shutterstock Are you escaping a southern hemisphere winter by heading off for a “Euro summer”? Maybe you’re planning a cruise through the Mediterranean. Or you’re dreaming of a white Christmas overseas later in the year. Maybe
Melting ice will strengthen the monsoon in northern Australia – but cause drier conditions north of the Equator Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Matthew Flinders Professor of Global Ecology and Node Leader in the ARC Centre of Excellence for Indigenous and Environmental Histories and Futures, Flinders University Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images Almost two-thirds of the world’s population is affected by the monsoon – the annual
Earth’s ‘oldest’ impact crater is much younger than previously thought – new study Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aaron J. Cavosie, Senior Lecturer, School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Curtin University Outcrops of shocked rocks from the Miralga impact structure. Aaron Cavosie Ever been late because you misread a clock? Sometimes, the “clocks” geologists use to date events can also be misread. Unravelling Earth’s 4.5-billion-year
Where do giant volcanic eruptions come from? New study finds missing link to ‘blobs’ deep within Earth Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicolas Flament, Associate Professor and ARC Future Fellow, Environmental Futures, School of Science, University of Wollongong Volcanic eruptions at Earth’s surface have significant consequences. Smaller ones can scare tourists on Mount Etna or disrupt air traffic. Giant, large-scale eruptions can have more serious impacts. One such event
Defence spending is like insurance – how will NZ pay the higher premiums? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Hickson, Lecturer in Economics and Director, Business Taught Masters Programme, University of Canterbury Getty Images Defence spending is like insurance – you have to pay for it but you hope you never have to use it. And the higher the risk you face, the higher your
The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives shatters the church’s century-long effort to curate its own image Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brenton Griffin, Casual Lecturer and Tutor in History, Indigenous Studies, and Politics, Flinders University Hulu Reality TV series The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives follows a number of social media influencers from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who rose to prominence through social media,
We interviewed 205 Australians convicted of murder and manslaughter. Alcohol’s role was alarming Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Li Eriksson, Senior Lecturer, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University We’ve long known there’s a link between alcohol and violence, but when it comes to homicide the stories behind the statistics are harder to grasp. Our study sheds rare light on what actually happens when
Thirsty future: Australia’s green hydrogen targets could require vastly more water than the government hopes Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Madoc Sheehan, Adjunct Associate Professor in Chemical Engineering, James Cook University totajla/Shutterstock Green hydrogen is touted by some as the future – a way for Australia to slowly replace its reliance on fossil fuel exports. The energy-dense gas has the potential to reduce emissions in sectors challenging
Israel’s Rafah camp – ‘humanitarian city’ or crime against humanity? Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shannon Bosch, Associate Professor (Law), Edith Cowan University Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz has announced a controversial plan to move up to 600,000 Palestinians in Gaza into a designated “humanitarian area” on the ruins of the southern city of Rafah. Access to the camp would be through
Ice baths are booming in popularity – but they come with health risks Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney Michele Ursi/Getty Images Walk through any trendy suburb and you might find a new “wellness” studio offering ice baths or “contrast therapy” (a sauna and ice bath combo). Scroll social media,
Can’t fill your ADHD script? Here’s why, and what to do while the shortage persists Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jack Janetzki, Lecturer in Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of South Australia Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnoses are rising across Australia. But after finally getting a diagnosis, many people are discovering the medicine they’ve been prescribed isn’t available at the pharmacy. Australia faces a nation-wide shortage of methylphenidate
Medicinal cannabis is big business. But the latest clampdown won’t curb unsafe prescribing Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Carmen Lim, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow, National Centre for Youth Substance Use Research, The University of Queensland Nuva Frames/Shutterstock Australia’s key regulator of health professionals has announced it’s clamping down on unsafe prescribing of medicinal cannabis in the wake of surging patient demand. The Australian Health Practitioner
Are ‘ghost stores’ haunting your social media feed? How to spot and avoid them Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gary Mortimer, Professor of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour, Queensland University of Technology CC BY The offer pops up in your social media feed. The website is professional and the imagery illustrates an Australian coastal region, or chic inner-CBD scene. The brand name indicates this exclusive fashion retailer
NZ Post is the latest company to drop its climate targets – another sign business is struggling to decarbonise Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pii-Tuulia Nikula, Associate Professor, School of Business, Eastern Institute of Technology Getty Images NZ Post committed to cutting its emissions by 32% by 2030 (based on 2018 levels), but recently announced it would abandon its climate target. The company was part of the Science Based Target initiative
Last week, Australian airline Qantas announced cyber attackers had accessed personal data about some of its customers. The company later confirmed that 5.7 million customer records were involved.
The attackers targeted an offshore IT call centre, which enabled them to gain access to a third-party system.
The airline contacted affected customers shortly after the announcement, and sent a follow-up email a week later. The email apologised to customers and informed them attackers had accessed information about customers’ names as well as frequent flyer numbers and tier status.
The email may have felt familiar to Australians impacted by the 2022 Optus Breach or the 2024 Medisecure Hack — a routine apology, an assurance that immediate steps have been taken, and a statement that the company takes seriously the trust placed in it to safeguard personal information.
It’s an adequate response. But it ignores something that might genuinely make customer data safer in the future: stronger cybersecurity laws to prevent these kinds of breaches from happening in the first place.
How should we respond to data breaches?
If your data were involved in the Qantas breach, you might be wondering what to do about it.
The first sensible step might be to find out what personal information was compromised. Next, you might research the potential harm that could come from your name, Qantas Frequent Flyer number, and tier status being accessed.
You may learn about the risks of identity theft, account hijacking, and scams.
After that, you might want to figure out what actions you could take to protect yourself – that is, how to best secure your data. Plenty of websites offer advice along these lines.
If you are a Qantas customer, and received the follow-up email, you may have noticed a section titled “What steps can I take to protect myself?”. This part encourages users to stay alert, use two-factor authentication, stay informed about the latest threats, visit IDCARE’s Learning Centre, and never share passwords or sensitive information (stating that Qantas will never ask for them).
While these are helpful suggestions, they place a significant burden on the customer. They also imply that if our data becomes compromised, we may be partially to blame for not doing more to protect ourselves.
Is this fair or useful? Rather than just trying to protect ourselves after data breaches, we might be better off focusing our attention on why breaches occur and the legislators who make the rules for the companies that hold our data.
Does the law have an unhealthy obsession with data breaches?
It may seem that, to improve cybersecurity laws, we need to pay more attention to Qantas-like data breaches and impose bigger fines on companies when they occur. However, this is not necessarily the best solution.
As US privacy scholars Daniel Solove and Woodrow Hartzog point out in their 2022 book Breached!: “Data privacy law has an obsession with data breaches.”
Ironically, the authors claim, “this obsession has […] been the primary reason why the law has failed to stop the deluge of data breaches. The more obsessed with breaches the law has become, the more the law has failed to deal with them.”
Solove and Hartzog argue that focusing solely on the breaches themselves prevents us from concentrating on prevention.
make recommendations to government and industry about actions that could be taken to prevent, detect, respond to or minimise the impact of, cyber security incidents of a similar nature in the future.
These reforms are an important step in addressing prevention, and the Cyber Incident Review Board will undoubtedly draw many lessons from the Qantas case when it performs its post-incident review – such as identifying potential weaknesses at the offshore IT call centre.
However, we shouldn’t have to wait until an incident occurs to start thinking about how to protect against breaches. There are also concerns about whether the recommendations it offers will be put into law.
Ideally, we need legislation that focuses on prevention, not just post-incident responses. If we had laws that required companies to conduct audits, provide legally binding safety checks applicable to all relevant stakeholders, and impose penalties for non-compliance with these standards, it would genuinely improve prevention.
Revising our flight path
Our response to the Qantas breach will no doubt follow a familiar pattern: first, we panic! Then we get angry at the company. Next, we attempt to follow privacy advice – at least for a short while – changing a password or two before becoming complacent and then lowering our privacy vigilance. And then the cycle repeats the next time a breach occurs.
We don’t need to accept this eternal pattern, however. If we focus our attention on lawmakers, rather than these immediate responses we are all too familiar with, prevention becomes a possibility.
Adam Andreotta 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 (Au and NZ) – By Jongkil Jay Jeong, Senior Fellow, School of Computing and Information System, The University of Melbourne
It starts with a call from someone claiming to be your bank. They know your name. They know your bank. They even know your credit card number. There’s been “unusual activity” on your account, they say – and they just sent you a one-time passcode to verify your identity so they can assist.
You read out the code and feel reassured. Moments later, your funds are gone and the bank refuses reimbursement, citing a breach of terms because you voluntarily shared your passcode.
This is not a niche or isolated scam. It’s part of a growing pattern we’re seeing across Australia and beyond: cyber criminals are merging digital and real-world tactics in ways that make these frauds more convincing, harder to stop, and far more damaging.
It starts with stolen data
These scams don’t begin with a phishing email or fake app. They begin with data – your data – stolen in one of countless breaches, such as the latest Qantas incident that exposed the details of up to 5.7 million customers.
Sometimes the personal data has been sold through third-party data brokers. Names, phone numbers, emails, even card details are routinely leaked and traded online.
Once they have this information, scammers get to work. The phone call mimics a real interaction with a bank, perhaps with a spoofed caller ID. Victims are pressured in urgent language to “verify” their identity, often by reading out a one-time passcode that, unbeknownst to them, is authorising a transaction using their own card details.
We refer to this as a “convergence scam” – where online data leaks, psychological manipulation and weak enforcement come together. It’s a sophisticated hybrid of digital theft and physical-world exploitation, and it’s on the rise.
Devastating and personal
These scams are deeply personal and can be financially devastating. But what makes them even more alarming is the system-wide failure surrounding them.
For starters, many credit card fraud insurance policies contain clauses that exclude coverage when the customer “voluntarily” provides account credentials – including one-time passcodes – even if they did so under duress or deception.
One victim we spoke to lost nearly A$6,000 after a scammer posing as their bank prompted them to read out a passcode over the phone. The transaction was verified using that code, and the bank later refused to reimburse the loss.
In a formal response, the bank stated that by voluntarily sharing the one-time passcode, the customer had breached the epayments code, even though they were manipulated into doing so. As a result, the customer was held liable and ineligible for a chargeback.
Law enforcement may not help
Even when the criminals leave a physical trail, follow-up is rare. Law enforcement rarely investigates. In the cases we’ve seen, reports are acknowledged but not pursued. Officers don’t explicitly say the case is too small or not worth the effort, but their inaction suggests it, especially given how resource-intensive most cyber-crime investigations tend to be.
In many instances, particularly when the total loss isn’t deemed significant, victims are simply told to follow up with their bank, based on the assumption they’ll be reimbursed.
In one case we reviewed, stolen card details were used in-store at major Australian retailers such as Woolworths and Coles – indicating that a cloned card had been physically used. These purchases could, in theory, be tracked back to in-store CCTV footage. But no investigation was launched.
This reluctance to act, even when the evidence is tangible, sends a dangerous message: that scammers can operate with near-impunity.
Meanwhile, banks and regulators are slow to update verification systems. One-time passcodes are still widely used, even though scammers now exploit them routinely. There’s little recourse for victims, and minimal accountability for data brokers whose records fuel these scams.
What can we do to protect ourselves?
For individuals, the first line of defence is simple but vital:
never share a one-time passcode or security code over the phone, even if the caller seems legitimate
if in doubt, hang up and call the bank directly using the number on your card
be cautious about where and how you share your personal information, especially online through websites or social media. Only disclose what personally identifiable information you have to.
The true answer is systemic change
Banks and other institutions need to put into place stronger identity verification systems that don’t rely solely on SMS codes. We need greater transparency and regulation of data brokers.
Crucially, we also need active enforcement of cyber-enabled fraud, especially when there’s physical evidence, such as in-store purchases and CCTV footage.
Banks should also reassess their policies and procedures on how they communicate with customers. If scam calls closely mimic real ones, it’s time to change the script. More proactive education, clearer warnings, and redesigned verification processes can all help prevent harm.
The real danger of these convergence scams isn’t just financial loss. It’s the erosion of trust: in our banks, in our security systems, and in the institutions meant to protect us.
Once that trust is gone, it’s not easily recovered.
Jongkil Jay Jeong has received prior research funding from the Australian Government’s Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DSRI) and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).
Ashish Nanda has received funding from the Australian Government through various research grants, including the Cyber Security CRC and Australia’s Economic Accelerator.
Peter Thomas 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 (Au and NZ) – By Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Matthew Flinders Professor of Global Ecology and Node Leader in the ARC Centre of Excellence for Indigenous and Environmental Histories and Futures, Flinders University
Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images
Almost two-thirds of the world’s population is affected by the monsoon – the annual arrival of intense rains in areas north and south of the Equator. These drenching rains tend to arrive during each hemisphere’s summer.
The East Asian monsoon north of the equator is the best known and best studied, because it affects the largest land area and the most people. But the southern Indo-Australian monsoon is vitally important to northern Australia, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. To date, it has been studied much less.
To help fill this gap in knowledge, we analysed deep sediment from an unusual lagoon near Darwin in northern Australia. We looked at ancient pollen and chemical isotopes (different versions of the same chemical element) to look about 150,000 years back in time and glimpse changes to the monsoon. When types of pollen change, it tells us the monsoon has changed. Drier conditions favour the emergence of grasslands, while wetter climates favour forests.
Our new research suggests as the world gets hotter, the Indo-Australian monsoon will intensify and northern Australia will get wetter. This finding is consistent with research suggesting the East Asian monsoon could weaken, threatening agriculture and nature in heavily populated countries.
Location of Girraween Lagoon in monsoonal north Australia. Insert shows approximate dominant flows of the East Asian and Indo-Australian summer monsoons. Corey Bradshaw/Flinders University, CC BY-NC
The past held in a single lagoon
To examine how monsoons change over time, researchers drill sediment cores to track changes in pollen and chemical isotopes. For example, changes in hydrogen isotopes indicate changes in the intensity of the monsoon rain.
The problem is, these cores have to come from long-undisturbed lake sediments, because such places provide a continuous record of change.
To reconstruct past changes in monsoon patterns, undisturbed sediments have to be sampled carefully by extracting a thin “core” from the bottom sediments. Once researchers have this precious core, they can examine the changing proportions of pollen, chemical isotopes and other properties. The deeper you drill the core, the farther back in time you can look.
These exacting requirements are one reason the Indo-Australian monsoon is not as well understood as its northern cousin.
Fortunately, we have found one place which has kept a detailed environmental record over a long period: Girraween Lagoon on the outskirts of Darwin in the Northern Territory.
This lagoon was created after a sinkhole formed more than 200,000 years ago. It has contained permanent water ever since, and is slowly filling with sediment and pollen blown in from the surrounding landscape.
The 18-metre core from Girraween’s sediments gave us a 150,000-year record of environmental change in Australia’s northern savannahs.
It took hard work to extract the core from Girraween Lagoon.
Dipping into the past
If you walk around Girraween Lagoon today, you’ll see a tall and dense tree canopy with a thick grass understory in the wet season. But it hasn’t always been that way.
During the last ice age 20,000–30,000 years ago, the sea level was much lower and the polar ice caps much larger. As a result, the lagoon was more than 300 kilometres from the coast. At that time, the lagoon was surrounded by an open, grassy savannah with fewer, shorter trees.
A schematic showing the depth of the Girraween core and the associated time periods. Emma Rehn/Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, CC BY-NC
About 115,000 years ago (and again 90,000 years ago), Australia was dotted with gigantic inland “megalakes”. At those times, the lagoon expanded into a large, shallow lake surrounded by lush monsoon forest, with almost no grass.
At times, tree cover changed radically. In fact, over one 3,000-year period, the percentage of tree pollen soared from 15% to 95%. That suggests a sweeping change from grassland to dense forest – meaning a switch from drier to wetter climate at a rate too fast to be explained by changes in Earth’s orbit.
Some of these changes are linked to the shifting distance between coastline and lagoon as well as predictable variation in how much solar energy reaches Earth.
A connection to the North Atlantic
Huge ice sheets covered large areas of the Northern Hemisphere during previous ice ages.
Remarkably, the evidence of their melting at the end of previous ice age was there in the sediment core from Girraween Lagoon.
When glacial ice melts rapidly, huge volumes of fresh water flood into the North Atlantic. These rapid pulses are known as Heinrich events. These pulses can shut down the warm Gulf Stream current up the east coast of North America. As a result, the Northern Hemisphere cools and the Southern Hemisphere warms.
Over the last 150,000 years, there have been 14 of these events. We could see evidence of them in the sediment cores. Every gush of fresh water in the Atlantic triggered higher rainfall over northern Australia because of the buildup of heat in the Southern Hemisphere as the Gulf Stream slowed.
What does this mean for the monsoon?
All this suggests the Indo-Australian monsoon will get more intense as the world gets hotter and more ice melts.
That would mean a wetter northern Australia. It could also bring more rainfall to other Australian regions, and neighbouring countries. At this stage, it’s too uncertain to predict what an intensifying monsoon would do to the southern parts of Australia.
We might already be seeing this shift. Weather records since the 1960s show northern Australia getting steadily wetter, and less rain in Australia’s southeast and southwest.
Trends in total annual rainfall in Australia from 1960 to 2020. Commonwealth of Australia Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY
What would this mean for people? Australia’s tropical north is not densely populated, which would reduce the human impact of an intensifying monsoon.
But while our research suggests the Indo-Australian monsoon strengthens during Heinrich events, earlier research has shown the East Asian and other Northern Hemisphere monsoons will weaken. Without reliable monsoonal rains, food and water supplies for billions of people could be at risk.
Corey J. A. Bradshaw receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Cassandra Rowe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Michael Bird receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Matthew Flinders Professor of Global Ecology and Node Leader in the ARC Centre of Excellence for Indigenous and Environmental Histories and Futures, Flinders University
Sebnem Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images
Almost two-thirds of the world’s population is affected by the monsoon – the annual arrival of intense rains in areas north and south of the Equator. These drenching rains tend to arrive during each hemisphere’s summer.
The East Asian monsoon north of the equator is the best known and best studied, because it affects the largest land area and the most people. But the southern Indo-Australian monsoon is vitally important to northern Australia, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. To date, it has been studied much less.
To help fill this gap in knowledge, we analysed deep sediment from an unusual lagoon near Darwin in northern Australia. We looked at ancient pollen and chemical isotopes (different versions of the same chemical element) to look about 150,000 years back in time and glimpse changes to the monsoon. When types of pollen change, it tells us the monsoon has changed. Drier conditions favour the emergence of grasslands, while wetter climates favour forests.
Our new research suggests as the world gets hotter, the Indo-Australian monsoon will intensify and northern Australia will get wetter. This finding is consistent with research suggesting the East Asian monsoon could weaken, threatening agriculture and nature in heavily populated countries.
Location of Girraween Lagoon in monsoonal north Australia. Insert shows approximate dominant flows of the East Asian and Indo-Australian summer monsoons. Corey Bradshaw/Flinders University, CC BY-NC
The past held in a single lagoon
To examine how monsoons change over time, researchers drill sediment cores to track changes in pollen and chemical isotopes. For example, changes in hydrogen isotopes indicate changes in the intensity of the monsoon rain.
The problem is, these cores have to come from long-undisturbed lake sediments, because such places provide a continuous record of change.
To reconstruct past changes in monsoon patterns, undisturbed sediments have to be sampled carefully by extracting a thin “core” from the bottom sediments. Once researchers have this precious core, they can examine the changing proportions of pollen, chemical isotopes and other properties. The deeper you drill the core, the farther back in time you can look.
These exacting requirements are one reason the Indo-Australian monsoon is not as well understood as its northern cousin.
Fortunately, we have found one place which has kept a detailed environmental record over a long period: Girraween Lagoon on the outskirts of Darwin in the Northern Territory.
This lagoon was created after a sinkhole formed more than 200,000 years ago. It has contained permanent water ever since, and is slowly filling with sediment and pollen blown in from the surrounding landscape.
The 18-metre core from Girraween’s sediments gave us a 150,000-year record of environmental change in Australia’s northern savannahs.
It took hard work to extract the core from Girraween Lagoon.
Dipping into the past
If you walk around Girraween Lagoon today, you’ll see a tall and dense tree canopy with a thick grass understory in the wet season. But it hasn’t always been that way.
During the last ice age 20,000–30,000 years ago, the sea level was much lower and the polar ice caps much larger. As a result, the lagoon was more than 300 kilometres from the coast. At that time, the lagoon was surrounded by an open, grassy savannah with fewer, shorter trees.
A schematic showing the depth of the Girraween core and the associated time periods. Emma Rehn/Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity and Heritage, CC BY-NC
About 115,000 years ago (and again 90,000 years ago), Australia was dotted with gigantic inland “megalakes”. At those times, the lagoon expanded into a large, shallow lake surrounded by lush monsoon forest, with almost no grass.
At times, tree cover changed radically. In fact, over one 3,000-year period, the percentage of tree pollen soared from 15% to 95%. That suggests a sweeping change from grassland to dense forest – meaning a switch from drier to wetter climate at a rate too fast to be explained by changes in Earth’s orbit.
Some of these changes are linked to the shifting distance between coastline and lagoon as well as predictable variation in how much solar energy reaches Earth.
A connection to the North Atlantic
Huge ice sheets covered large areas of the Northern Hemisphere during previous ice ages.
Remarkably, the evidence of their melting at the end of previous ice age was there in the sediment core from Girraween Lagoon.
When glacial ice melts rapidly, huge volumes of fresh water flood into the North Atlantic. These rapid pulses are known as Heinrich events. These pulses can shut down the warm Gulf Stream current up the east coast of North America. As a result, the Northern Hemisphere cools and the Southern Hemisphere warms.
Over the last 150,000 years, there have been 14 of these events. We could see evidence of them in the sediment cores. Every gush of fresh water in the Atlantic triggered higher rainfall over northern Australia because of the buildup of heat in the Southern Hemisphere as the Gulf Stream slowed.
What does this mean for the monsoon?
All this suggests the Indo-Australian monsoon will get more intense as the world gets hotter and more ice melts.
That would mean a wetter northern Australia. It could also bring more rainfall to other Australian regions, and neighbouring countries. At this stage, it’s too uncertain to predict what an intensifying monsoon would do to the southern parts of Australia.
We might already be seeing this shift. Weather records since the 1960s show northern Australia getting steadily wetter, and less rain in Australia’s southeast and southwest.
Trends in total annual rainfall in Australia from 1960 to 2020. Commonwealth of Australia Bureau of Meteorology, CC BY
What would this mean for people? Australia’s tropical north is not densely populated, which would reduce the human impact of an intensifying monsoon.
But while our research suggests the Indo-Australian monsoon strengthens during Heinrich events, earlier research has shown the East Asian and other Northern Hemisphere monsoons will weaken. Without reliable monsoonal rains, food and water supplies for billions of people could be at risk.
Corey J. A. Bradshaw receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Cassandra Rowe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Michael Bird receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Are you escaping a southern hemisphere winter by heading off for a “Euro summer”? Maybe you’re planning a cruise through the Mediterranean. Or you’re dreaming of a white Christmas overseas later in the year.
Maybe you’ve already booked your flights and accommodation, locked in your itinerary, and started planning what to pack.
But there may be one more thing to add to your pre-travel checklist – a flu shot.
For some travellers, this may mean a second flu shot this year – one for Australia’s flu season and another to protect them in the northern hemisphere.
Why do I need another flu shot?
Protection from a flu shot doesn’t last all year; it decreases after three to four months.
So if you had your flu shot in April or May, it may no longer offer enough protection by the time you travel in July or later.
Getting a second shot will provide you with optimal protection against the flu while travelling to the northern hemisphere.
That’s why it is now recommended Australians travelling to the northern hemisphere between October and May consider a second flu shot if they’ve already had one earlier this year.
If it’s been three to four months since your first shot, you can consider a second shot.
A second shot should be at least four weeks after the first shot. Ideally, get your second shot at least two weeks before your departure, so your body has time to build up protection.
If you haven’t had a flu shot at all this year, now’s the time. In the year to July 7, there have been more than 167,000 confirmed cases of the flu in Australia.
Who should consider a second flu shot?
Here are some examples where a second flu shot is worth discussing with your doctor or pharmacist.
Cruises are a prime setting for flu outbreaks. There are hundreds or thousands of people sharing confined spaces, such as restaurants and entertainment facilities, for days or weeks at a time. This creates the perfect environment for the flu virus to spread.
Group tours and large events are also high risk. Bus tours, music festivals and cultural events bring together large crowds, often in indoor spaces or via shared transport. This increases your chance of exposure and catching the virus.
Pilgrimages and religious gatherings such as Hajj, Lunar New Year or Ramadan are also high risk, especially for older travellers or those with health conditions. These events can attract millions of international visitors, often in crowded, shared accommodation, where flu and other respiratory viruses can spread rapidly.
People who are over 65 years of age, have medical conditions, such as severe asthma or diabetes, or are on medications that decrease their immune function, are more likely to become severely ill if they catch the flu. So, if you’re travelling during the northern hemisphere’s flu season, a second shot should be strongly considered.
Which flu shot should I get?
Each year, health authorities around the world develop two different flu shots, one for each hemisphere’s flu season. The flu shots can differ, as flu strains change rapidly and different strains may circulate in different regions.
Australians receive the southern hemisphere version around March to May. And
while it’s ideal to have the northern hemisphere flu shot before heading overseas, it’s not available in Australia.
Instead, you can have two shots of the southern hemisphere flu shot – one earlier in the year and a second shot before your trip.
You could wait until you are overseas to get your second shot. But you wouldn’t be protected for two weeks afterwards, and you’d need to navigate an overseas health system while on holiday.
Where can I get a flu shot? How much does it cost?
You can get a flu shot at your local pharmacy, GP clinic, or sometimes via your workplace. Many pharmacies offer walk-in appointments, and the flu shot usually costs around A$25 (including the price of the vaccine and administering it).
If your GP doesn’t bulk bill, you will be charged an out-of-pocket cost for the consultation, and may need to pay the cost of the shot if you don’t qualify for a free one.
The (first) flu shot is free for people who meet certain criteria, such as being 65 and over, pregnant, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and those with certain medical conditions. But you would have to pay for a second shot if you’re travelling.
Specific flu shots are recommended for each person. So speak to your pharmacist or GP to discuss the best option for you.
Your GP or pharmacist will also discuss what to expect after your flu shot. This may include tiredness, fever, muscle aches, and redness or swelling at the injection site. These usually go away within two days. For most people, these symptoms are mild and well-tolerated.
Why bother?
The flu is more than just a sniffle. It can lead to serious illness, cancelled plans and perhaps a hospital stay in a foreign country. Even if you don’t get sick, you could pass the virus to others more vulnerable than yourself.
So before you finish your pre-travel checklist, make sure your flu shots are up to date.
Not getting the shot could be the difference between sipping Aperol spritz on the Amalfi Coast or spending your trip in bed with a fever.
Jack Janetzki works for the University of South Australia, Pharmaceutical Defence Limited and The Barossa Pharmacist in the Mall (Nuriootpa, South Australia). He is a member of Pharmaceutical Defence Limited, the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association, the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, the South Australian Immunisation Program Advisory Group, the Observational Health Data Science Informatics network and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) Insight Board for pharmacist-led vaccination services.
Wern Chai is employed as a lecturer at the University of South Australia. He is an SME for the Australian Pharmacy Council, a board examiner for the Pharmacy Board of Australia, the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association, Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, the South Australian Immunisation Program Advisory Group and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) Insight Board for pharmacist-led vaccination services.
You might have heard cannabis and cannabinoid products can help people sleep. Data shows one of the top reasons people use cannabis is to help them sleep.
But there’s a dearth of high-quality research on how medicinal cannabis products actually affect sleep.
To find out more, our research team conducted a small pilot study involving 20 people. We wanted to compare how they slept after using a medicinal cannabis product, compared to a placebo.
We found a single oral dose of a cannabinoid product decreased total sleep time and the time spent in REM sleep (rapid eye movement, which is when we tend to dream). We didn’t observe any change in objective alertness the day after the treatment.
Our study is small and only measured the effect of a single dose, so more research is clearly needed.
But overall, our findings suggest cannabinoids may acutely influence sleep, primarily by suppressing REM sleep, without noticeable next-day impairment.
What we did
All 20 people (16 of whom were female) involved in our study had a clinical diagnosis of insomnia disorder.
This means they reported having challenges falling asleep and/or maintaining sleep and that these disturbances impact day-to-day functioning socially, at work, or in other important areas of life.
The average age of our study participants was about 46 years.
At our lab, the study participants were interviewed by a doctor and had their medical history taken. All participants also underwent an overnight diagnostic sleep study. This was done to confirm their sleeplessness was truly insomnia and not other conditions such as sleep apnoea.
Once the participant was able to start the study, they were asked to sleep for two nights at our lab, with at least one week between those two visits.
On one of their visits, they were given a placebo.
On the other, they were given a single oral dose of a medical-grade cannabis oil containing 10 mg THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the compound responsible for the psychoactive effects of cannabis) and 200 mg CBD (cannabidiol, which does not produce a “high”).
Using a product with a precise, known dose ensures the results are relevant to what doctors in Australia are already prescribing.
The order in which participants received either the treatment or the placebo was randomised, so they didn’t know which one they were taking.
After taking either the treatment or the placebo, they slept at our lab while wearing a special cap with 256 monitors on it. This high-density electroencephalogram or EEG allowed us to record the electrical activity of the brain while the person slept.
The next morning, after they either woke or were woken, they performed a driving simulation test around the time of their normal morning commute.
They also underwent a test that assessed their ability to stay awake in a quiet, dimly lit environment. To track their alertness throughout the day, they repeated this test four times while wearing the high-density EEG cap. This was so we could test their alertness the day after either the treatment or the placebo.
What we found
Our results were not what we expected.
We found the THC/CBD treatment decreased total sleep time by an average of 24.5 minutes. This was largely driven by a significant impact on REM sleep (the phase associated with dreaming), which not only decreased by an average of 33.9 minutes but also took significantly longer for participants to enter. The treatment also offered no benefit in helping participants stay asleep throughout the night.
Perhaps most intriguingly, this objective worsening of sleep wasn’t reflected in the participants’ own perceptions; they reported no change in their subjective sleep quality. This disconnect continued into the next day.
While participants noted feeling slightly more sleepy after the treatment, their objective alertness – measured by their ability to stay awake in a quiet, dimly lit room – was reassuringly unchanged, as was their cognitive and simulated driving performance.
This leads to a crucial question: if a single dose produces these changes, what are the cumulative effects on a person’s sleep after weeks, months, or years of nightly use?
We simply don’t have the answers yet, especially with a medical-grade cannabis product.
A growing body of research
Our findings underscore a significant gap between the widespread public perception of cannabis for sleep and the complex scientific reality. As highlighted by a review we published in the journal Current Psychiatry Reports, the evidence base remains thin.
We reviewed 21 recent studies (published between 2021 and 2024) of cannabinoids being used for insomnia, subjective sleep impairment, obstructive sleep apnoea, rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder, and restless legs syndrome.
We found that, despite its widespread use, there’s not enough research yet to support the use of medical cannabis to treat sleep disorders.
This is why this kind of research is so vital. It provides the first pieces of a much larger puzzle.
To give doctors and patients the clear guidance they need, there is an urgent need for adequately funded, well-designed clinical trials with larger sample sizes and longer treatment durations to truly understand the long-term impacts of medicinal cannabis on sleep and daytime functioning.
Camilla Hoyos is a Research Leader within the Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research. The Woolcock sleep group received funding from Lambert Initiative of Cannabinoid Therapeutics (a philanthropic centre based at The University of Sydney) for this study and for another unpublished trial in the same space. Woolcock sleep group also received funding to be a site on an industry-sponsored clinical trial on a cannabinoids medicine in insomnia. Camilla Hoyos is also a board member of the Australasian Sleep Association. This study described in this article was a collaboration between the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research and Lambert Initiative of Cannabinoid Research.
Anastasia has previously received funding from the Lambert Initiative for Cannabinoid Therapeutics, a philanthropically funded research initiative at the Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney. She has received consulting fees from the Medicinal Cannabis Industry Australia for a commissioned review article and Haleon (a consumer health-care subsidiary of GSK) for non-cannabinoid related work. She is a committee member for the Sleep Health Week Working Party and an expert speaker for the Sleep Health Foundation.
You might have heard cannabis and cannabinoid products can help people sleep. Data shows one of the top reasons people use cannabis is to help them sleep.
But there’s a dearth of high-quality research on how medicinal cannabis products actually affect sleep.
To find out more, our research team conducted a small pilot study involving 20 people. We wanted to compare how they slept after using a medicinal cannabis product, compared to a placebo.
We found a single oral dose of a cannabinoid product decreased total sleep time and the time spent in REM sleep (rapid eye movement, which is when we tend to dream). We didn’t observe any change in objective alertness the day after the treatment.
Our study is small and only measured the effect of a single dose, so more research is clearly needed.
But overall, our findings suggest cannabinoids may acutely influence sleep, primarily by suppressing REM sleep, without noticeable next-day impairment.
What we did
All 20 people (16 of whom were female) involved in our study had a clinical diagnosis of insomnia disorder.
This means they reported having challenges falling asleep and/or maintaining sleep and that these disturbances impact day-to-day functioning socially, at work, or in other important areas of life.
The average age of our study participants was about 46 years.
At our lab, the study participants were interviewed by a doctor and had their medical history taken. All participants also underwent an overnight diagnostic sleep study. This was done to confirm their sleeplessness was truly insomnia and not other conditions such as sleep apnoea.
Once the participant was able to start the study, they were asked to sleep for two nights at our lab, with at least one week between those two visits.
On one of their visits, they were given a placebo.
On the other, they were given a single oral dose of a medical-grade cannabis oil containing 10 mg THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the compound responsible for the psychoactive effects of cannabis) and 200 mg CBD (cannabidiol, which does not produce a “high”).
Using a product with a precise, known dose ensures the results are relevant to what doctors in Australia are already prescribing.
The order in which participants received either the treatment or the placebo was randomised, so they didn’t know which one they were taking.
After taking either the treatment or the placebo, they slept at our lab while wearing a special cap with 256 monitors on it. This high-density electroencephalogram or EEG allowed us to record the electrical activity of the brain while the person slept.
The next morning, after they either woke or were woken, they performed a driving simulation test around the time of their normal morning commute.
They also underwent a test that assessed their ability to stay awake in a quiet, dimly lit environment. To track their alertness throughout the day, they repeated this test four times while wearing the high-density EEG cap. This was so we could test their alertness the day after either the treatment or the placebo.
What we found
Our results were not what we expected.
We found the THC/CBD treatment decreased total sleep time by an average of 24.5 minutes. This was largely driven by a significant impact on REM sleep (the phase associated with dreaming), which not only decreased by an average of 33.9 minutes but also took significantly longer for participants to enter. The treatment also offered no benefit in helping participants stay asleep throughout the night.
Perhaps most intriguingly, this objective worsening of sleep wasn’t reflected in the participants’ own perceptions; they reported no change in their subjective sleep quality. This disconnect continued into the next day.
While participants noted feeling slightly more sleepy after the treatment, their objective alertness – measured by their ability to stay awake in a quiet, dimly lit room – was reassuringly unchanged, as was their cognitive and simulated driving performance.
This leads to a crucial question: if a single dose produces these changes, what are the cumulative effects on a person’s sleep after weeks, months, or years of nightly use?
We simply don’t have the answers yet, especially with a medical-grade cannabis product.
A growing body of research
Our findings underscore a significant gap between the widespread public perception of cannabis for sleep and the complex scientific reality. As highlighted by a review we published in the journal Current Psychiatry Reports, the evidence base remains thin.
We reviewed 21 recent studies (published between 2021 and 2024) of cannabinoids being used for insomnia, subjective sleep impairment, obstructive sleep apnoea, rapid eye movement sleep behaviour disorder, and restless legs syndrome.
We found that, despite its widespread use, there’s not enough research yet to support the use of medical cannabis to treat sleep disorders.
This is why this kind of research is so vital. It provides the first pieces of a much larger puzzle.
To give doctors and patients the clear guidance they need, there is an urgent need for adequately funded, well-designed clinical trials with larger sample sizes and longer treatment durations to truly understand the long-term impacts of medicinal cannabis on sleep and daytime functioning.
Camilla Hoyos is a Research Leader within the Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research. The Woolcock sleep group received funding from Lambert Initiative of Cannabinoid Therapeutics (a philanthropic centre based at The University of Sydney) for this study and for another unpublished trial in the same space. Woolcock sleep group also received funding to be a site on an industry-sponsored clinical trial on a cannabinoids medicine in insomnia. Camilla Hoyos is also a board member of the Australasian Sleep Association. This study described in this article was a collaboration between the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research and Lambert Initiative of Cannabinoid Research.
Anastasia has previously received funding from the Lambert Initiative for Cannabinoid Therapeutics, a philanthropically funded research initiative at the Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney. She has received consulting fees from the Medicinal Cannabis Industry Australia for a commissioned review article and Haleon (a consumer health-care subsidiary of GSK) for non-cannabinoid related work. She is a committee member for the Sleep Health Week Working Party and an expert speaker for the Sleep Health Foundation.
