Search

Catch of the day: bride hauls in shark at her wedding!

Most brides on their big day are content with a nice bouquet, a slice of cake and a husband who hasn’t locked his knees and fainted at the altar. But Miccala Toms of Darwin had slightly more ambitious ideas – and they involved beer, fishing and a decent-sized aquatic predator. After saying “I do” to her now-husband Brodie, the couple did what any sensible Territorians would do in the sweltering heat: they swung by the Dundee Tavern for a couple of cold ones and some casual wedding photos. You know – veil, vows and VB. But while some brides might be focused on getting the perfect shot with golden sunlight and maybe a well-behaved Labradoodle, Miccala spotted a local teen fishing off the rocks and thought, “Now that’s a vibe.” “It was a hot day,” Miccala explained on the Today show. “So we thought we’d have a few drinks and take some photos at the front.” The vibe was clearly: bridal glam meets bush telly. The helpful teen handed over his fishing rod – probably assuming she’d hook a little barra or, at worst, a mildly confused crab. But Darwin had other plans. Cue dramatic Jaws music. What Miccala thought would be a cute “bride-with-fish” moment turned into a full-on marine wrestling match when something large, scaly and very toothy yanked on the line. “It was a shark and I’m like, ‘Oh my god, it’s a shark!’” she recalled, possibly while her wedding photographer simultaneously reconsidered their life choices. In true Northern Territory fashion, this bride did not flinch. In fact, she dug in her heels (or possibly bare feet, unclear), while Brodie jumped in to help haul in the unexpected guest star of their wedding album. And because true love is built on mutual support, Brodie did what any man witnessing his wife dragging a shark in her wedding dress would do: picked the beast up by the tail so they could pose together, glowing with wedded bliss and mild concern for their fingers. The shark, possibly the only one more confused than the couple, was photographed before being safely released back into the water, no doubt with a wild story to tell its shark mates. As for Brodie? He knows he’s punched above his weight. “To be honest, I wouldn’t be here without her, that’s for damn sure,” he said. “She’s given me three lovely children and made me the happiest I’ve ever been, so can’t let it go now.” And why would he? When you marry a woman who’ll fish in full bridal gear and take a spill while catching a shark with a beer buzz and a grin... well, you know you’ve found The One. Moral of the story? In Darwin, love is real, the beer is cold and the brides are tougher than the wildlife. Images: The Today show

Relationships

A simple, science-backed way to sharpen thinking and improve memory – and it's not what you think

<div class="theconversation-article-body">Many of us turn to Sudoku, Wordle or brain-training apps to sharpen our minds. But research is increasingly showing one of the best ways to boost memory, focus and brain health is exercise. Our <a href="https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2025/03/06/bjsports-2024-108589">new research</a> reviewed data from more than 250,000 participants across 2,700 studies. We found exercise helps boost brain function – whether it’s walking, cycling, yoga, dancing, or even playing active video games such as Pokémon GO. Moving your body improves how we think, make decisions, remember things and stay focused – no matter your age. <h2>What the science says</h2> Our review adds to a growing body of research that shows regular physical activity <a href="https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2025/03/06/bjsports-2024-108589">improves</a> three key areas of brain function: <ul> <li> cognition, which is your overall ability to think clearly, learn and make decisions </li> <li> memory, especially short-term memory and the ability to remember personal experiences </li> <li> executive function, which includes focus, planning, problem-solving and managing emotions. </li> </ul> We conducted an umbrella review, which means we looked at the results of more than 130 high-quality research reviews that had already combined findings from many exercise studies. These studies usually involved people starting a new, structured exercise program, not just tracking the exercise they were already doing. To assess the effects on cognition, memory and executive function, the original studies used a range of brain function tests. These included things like remembering word lists, solving puzzles, or quickly switching between tasks – simple activities designed to reliably measure how well the brain is working. The improvements were small to moderate. On average, exercise led to a noticeable boost in cognition, with slightly smaller but still meaningful gains in memory and executive function. The benefits showed up across all age groups, though children and teens saw major gains in memory. People with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) showed greater improvements in executive function after physical activity than other population groups. The brain started responding fairly quickly – many people experienced improvements after just 12 weeks of starting regular exercise. Generally, the greatest benefits were seen in those doing at least 30 minutes of exercise on most days of the week, aiming for a total of about 150 minutes per week. <h2>What’s happening in the brain?</h2> Activities such as walking or cycling can <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1015950108">increase the size of the hippocampus</a>, the part of the brain responsible for memory and learning. In <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1015950108">one study</a>, older adults who did aerobic exercise for a year grew their hippocampus by 2%, effectively reversing one to two years of age-related brain shrinkage. More intense workouts, such as running or high-intensity interval training, can further <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1155/2017/8305287">boost neuroplasticity</a> – the brain’s ability to adapt and rewire itself. This helps you learn more quickly, think more clearly and stay mentally sharp with age. <h2>Another reason to get moving</h2> The world’s population is ageing. By 2030, <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health">one in six of people will be aged over 60</a>. With that comes a rising risk of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline. At the same time, many adults aren’t moving enough. One in three adults <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/physical-activity">aren’t meeting the recommended levels</a> of physical activity. Adults <a href="https://www.who.int/initiatives/behealthy/physical-activity">should aim for</a> at least 150 of moderate exercise – such as brisk walking – each week, or at least 75 minutes of more vigorous activity, like running. It’s also important to incorporate muscle-strengthening exercises, such as lifting weights, into workouts at least twice a week. <h2>Everyday movement counts</h2> You don’t need to run marathons or lift heavy weights to benefit. Our study showed lower-intensity activities such as yoga, tai chi and “exergames” (active video games) can be just as effective – sometimes even more so. These activities engage both the brain and body. Tai chi, for instance, requires focus, coordination and memorising sequences. Exergames often include real-time decision-making and rapid response to cues. This trains attention and memory. Importantly, these forms of movement are inclusive. They can be done at home, outdoors, or with friends, making them a great option for people of all fitness levels or those with limited mobility. Although you may already be doing a lot through daily life – like walking instead of driving or carrying shopping bags home – it’s still important to find time for structured exercise, such as lifting weights at the gym or doing a regular yoga class, to get the full benefits for your brain and body. <h2>Real-life applications</h2> If you’re a grandparent, consider playing Wii Sports virtual tennis or bowling with your grandchild. If you’re a teenager with signs of ADHD, try a dance class, and see if it impacts your concentration in class. If you’re a busy parent, you might be more clear-headed if you can squeeze a 20-minute yoga video session between meetings. In each of these cases, you’re not just being active, you’re giving your brain a valuable tune-up. And unlike most brain-training apps or supplements, exercise delivers far reaching benefits, including improved <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389945721002914?casa_token=pXaOJcQJ7d0AAAAA:0i4BjaxqJ21AQ2bGXI4DfQ6twKNybrg7c2f0_Xs7t-hWyDOH0SuKGTfruy-JlC_rMokUM3iWdlSQ">sleep</a> and <a href="https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/57/18/1203">mental health</a>. Workplaces and schools are starting to take note. <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smi.2654">Short movement breaks</a> are being introduced during the workday to improve employee focus. Schools that incorporate <a href="https://ijbnpa.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12966-017-0569-9">physical activity</a> into the classroom are seeing improvements in students’ attention and academic performance. Exercise is one of the most powerful and accessible tools we have for supporting brain health. Best of all, it’s free, widely available and it’s never too late to start.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253751/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ben-singh-1297213">Ben Singh</a>, Research Fellow, Allied Health & Human Performance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ashleigh-e-smith-201327">Ashleigh E. Smith</a>, Associate Professor, Healthy Ageing, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-a-simple-science-backed-way-to-sharpen-your-thinking-and-improve-your-memory-253751">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Mind

Does technology cause ‘digital dementia’ in older people?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> In the 21st century, digital technology has changed many aspects of our lives. Generative artificial intelligence (AI) is the latest newcomer, with chatbots and other AI tools changing <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1181712/full">how we learn</a> and creating considerable <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.240197">philosophical and legal challenges</a> regarding what it means to “outsource thinking”. But the emergence of technology that changes the way we live is not a new issue. The change from analogue to digital technology began around the 1960s and this “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/digital-revolution#:%7E:text=Explained%20by%20the%20online%20encyclopedia,and%20proliferation%20of%20digital%20computers">digital revolution</a>” is what brought us the internet. An entire generation of people who lived and worked through this evolution are now entering their early 80s. So what can we learn from them about the impact of technology on the ageing brain? A comprehensive <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02159-9">new study</a> from researchers at the University of Texas and Baylor University in the United States provides important answers. <figure class="align-right zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=818&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=818&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=818&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1028&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1028&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/661531/original/file-20250414-62-3gqh9i.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1028&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A man wearing a suit speaking into a microphone." /></a><figcaption>Manfred Spitzer first introduced the ‘digital dementia’ hypothesis in 2012. <a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MJK62574_Marc_Reichwein_und_Manfred_Spitzer_(Frankfurter_Buchmesse_2018)-A.jpg">Marc Reichwein/Wikipedia</a></figcaption></figure> Published today in Nature Human Behaviour, it found no supporting evidence for the “digital dementia” hypothesis. In fact, it found the use of computers, smartphones and the internet among people over 50 might actually be associated with lower rates of cognitive decline. <h2>What is ‘digital dementia’?</h2> Much has been written about the potential <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/memory-mind-and-media/article/media-technology-and-the-sins-of-memory/4F169E671DFA95639E971B43B5E4D57A">negative impact from technology on the human brain</a>. According to the <a href="https://www.imrpress.com/journal/jin/21/1/10.31083/j.jin2101028">“digital dementia” hypothesis</a> introduced by German neuroscientist and psychiatrist <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/dp/3426276038?ref_=mr_referred_us_au_au">Manfred Spitzer</a> in 2012, increased use of digital devices has resulted in an over-reliance on technology. In turn, this has weakened our overall cognitive ability. Three areas of concern regarding the use of technology have previously been noted: <ol> <li> An increase in <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/education/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.600687/full">passive screen time</a>. This refers to technology use which does not require significant thought or participation, such as watching TV or scrolling social media. </li> <li> <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/17470218211008060">Offloading cognitive abilities</a> to technology, such as no longer memorising phone numbers because they are kept in our contact list. </li> <li> Increased <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-36256-4">susceptibility to distraction</a>. </li> </ol> <h2>Why is this new study important?</h2> We know technology can impact how our brain <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/hbm.24286?casa_token=982zQ5d6qNoAAAAA%3ALwtDMOIwyaXWJVj-NuiT9_JVhXbWtytWOu5saKJE9xsbPzlisGxdE7-gLnWcvQthoHQvXZX_NbINyE8">develops</a>. But the effect of technology on how our brain ages is less understood. This new study by <a href="https://psychology.org.au/psychology/about-psychology/types-of-psychologists/clinical-neuropsychologists">neuropsychologists</a> Jared Benge and Michael Scullin is important because it examines the impact of technology on older people who have experienced significant changes in the way they use technology across their life. The new study performed what is known as a <a href="https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-10">meta-analysis</a> where the results of many previous studies are combined. The authors searched for studies examining technology use in people aged over 50 and examined the association with cognitive decline or dementia. They found 57 studies which included data from more than 411,000 adults. The included studies measured cognitive decline based on lower performance on cognitive tests or a diagnosis of dementia. <h2>A reduced risk of cognitive decline</h2> Overall, the study found greater use of technology was associated with a reduced risk of cognitive decline. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK431098/">Statistical tests</a> were used to determine the “odds” of having cognitive decline based on exposure to technology. An odds ratio under 1 indicates a reduced risk from exposure and the combined odds ratio in this study was 0.42. This means higher use of technology was associated with a 58% risk reduction for cognitive decline. This benefit was found even when the effect of <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01296-0/abstract">other things</a> known to contribute to cognitive decline, such as socioeconomic status and other health factors, were accounted for. Interestingly, the magnitude of the effect of technology use on brain function found in this study was similar or stronger than other known protective factors, such as physical activity (approximately a 35% risk reduction), or maintaining a healthy blood pressure (approximately a 13% risk reduction). However, it is important to understand that there are <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01296-0/abstract">far more studies</a> conducted over many years examining the benefits of managing <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neurology/articles/10.3389/fneur.2022.821135/full">blood pressure</a> and increasing <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10828294/">physical activty</a>, and the mechanisms through which they help protect our brains are far more understood. It is also a lot easier to measure blood pressure than it is use of technology. A strength of this study is that it considered these difficulties by focusing on certain aspects of technology use but excluded others such as brain training games. These findings are encouraging. But we still can’t say technology use causes better cognitive function. More research is needed to see if these findings are replicated in different groups of people (especially those from <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(20)30062-0/fulltext">low and middle income countries</a>) who were underrepresented in this study, and to understand why this relationship might occur. <h2>A question of ‘how’ we use technology</h2> In reality, it’s simply not feasible to live in the world today without using some form of technology. Everything from paying bills to booking our next holiday is now almost completely done online. Maybe we should instead be thinking about how we use technology. <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30284-X/fulltext">Cognitively stimulating activities</a> such as reading, learning a new language and playing music – particularly in early adulthood – can help protect our brains as we age. Greater engagement with technology across our lifespan may be a form of stimulating our memory and thinking, as we adapt to new software updates or learn how to use a new smartphone. It has been suggested this “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167494322002643?casa_token=-z-X7mF4Ar0AAAAA:X2UXk92rbfa8uXdJFltbUhBonZqRl4b2dTaJyZdKogQiPXR9b6maghPnZll5VQwoVVL6_3uW#bib0032">technological reserve</a>” may be good for our brains. Technology may also help us to stay <a href="https://aging.jmir.org/2022/4/e40125/">socially connected</a>, and help us stay <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40985-020-00143-4">independent for longer</a>. <h2>A rapidly changing digital world</h2> While findings from this study show it’s unlikely all digital technology is bad for us, the way we interact and rely on it is rapidly changing The impact of AI on the ageing brain will only become evident in future decades. However, our ability to adapt to historical technological innovations, and the potential for this to support cognitive function, suggests the future may not be all bad. For example, advances in <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3425/11/1/43">brain-computer interfaces</a> offer new hope for those experiencing the impact of neurological disease or disability. However, the potential downsides of technology are real, particularly for younger people, including <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s44159-024-00307-y">poor mental health</a>. Future research will help determine how we can capture the benefits of technology while limiting the potential for harm.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/254392/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nikki-anne-wilson-342631">Nikki-Anne Wilson</a>, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-study-finds-no-evidence-technology-causes-digital-dementia-in-older-people-254392">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Mind

"Dumb and Dumber": Karl levels brutal accusation

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has dismissed accusations that Australia’s major political parties are recklessly splurging on big-ticket promises to win votes, defending Labor’s fiscal strategy during a heated exchange with Today host Karl Stefanovic. Stefanovic didn’t hold back on Monday morning, opening the interview with a blunt comparison, saying watching the major parties was like "watching Dumb and Dumber, you guys recklessly buying our votes". Chalmers swiftly pushed back, insisting there is "a really important difference" between responsible budgeting and empty spending. “What we've shown as a Labor government is we’ve been able to maintain a focus on the cost of living,” Chalmers said. “At the same time, we’ve got the budget in much better nick, and that’s meant that we could make room for the sorts of commitments that we have been making in a really responsible way." Chalmers pointed to the government’s fiscal achievements, highlighting a significantly stronger budget position. “The budget’s more than $200 billion stronger than when we came to office. We’ve got the Liberal debt down,” he said. “We’ve delivered those two surpluses, and that’s meant we’ve been able to help with the cost of living. Ongoing tax relief, helping with medicines and energy, bill rebates and the like.” The debate comes as both Labor and the Coalition unveil costly housing policies, which economists warn could further inflate housing prices by injecting more money into an already overheated market. Chalmers criticised the Coalition’s approach, claiming it lacks lasting impact. “What Peter Dutton did yesterday was to borrow and burn another $10 billion and still provide no ongoing cost of living help for people who are doing it tough," he argued. “And then he’ll claw that back with permanently higher income taxes, lower wages and secret cuts to pay for his nuclear reactors.” As the election campaign heats up, both sides are under increasing scrutiny over their spending pledges and their real impact on Australians facing mounting cost-of-living pressures. Images: Today show

What would – and should – happen to the ABC under the next federal government?

<div class="theconversation-article-body">Who could possibly argue with the idea that the ABC should be efficiently run and produce excellent programs? No one, you would think. So why, then, has there been immediate resistance to Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/dutton-tells-abc-to-show-excellence-or-face-funding-razor-gang-20250402-p5lofu.html">statement</a> that, if elected next month, a Coalition government would “reward excellence” and “keep funding in place” if the ABC is “being run efficiently”? The fact that Coalition governments – and Dutton himself – have historically been deeply hostile to the public broadcaster is part of it. Many have picked up on the implicit threat that if his government did not find “excellence”, its funding would be cut. But there’s more than that. For example, who defines “excellence” and “efficiency”? Second, the ABC is set up by statute to be run independent of government. Third, the ABC has been subjected to a slew of efficiency reviews, in 1988, 1997, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2006-03-15/abc-efficient-under-funded-kpmg-report/8183700">2006</a>, <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/ABC_and_SBS_efficiency_report_Redacted.pdf?acsf_files%20_redirect">2014</a> and <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-national-broadcasters-efficiency-review-redacted.pdf">2018</a>. Overwhelmingly, they found the ABC does more with fewer resources than its counterparts in the commercial media. For example, in 2006, at the behest of the Coalition government led by John Howard, KPMG found the ABC was a “broadly efficient organisation” providing a “high volume of outputs and quality relative to the level of funding it receives”. Let’s translate the consulting-speak. The ABC’s annual budget of $1.2 billion costs $43 per person in Australia. The cheapest subscription to Netflix costs more than twice that amount - $95.88 – and of course the ABC provides much more than a single streaming service. Fourth, Coalition governments’ record of antipathy towards the ABC is most obvious in how they fund it. <hr /> <iframe id="WOgDZ" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/WOgDZ/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> As ABC chair Kim Williams said <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/about/media-centre/speeches-and-articles/abc-chair-kim-williams-am-address-to-the-melbourne-press-club/105132866">last week</a>, in real terms the ABC’s funding is $150 million less than it was in 2013 when the coalition last came to power. This is notwithstanding the current Labor government’s restoring of at least some lost funding. Add to this the fear that Dutton is seeking to emulate Donald Trump. Amid the tempest of economic and social measures the US president has brought in since his inauguration in January, his attacks on public and international broadcasting have passed unnoticed by many. By executive order, Trump has <a href="https://mailchi.mp/poynter/president-trumps-latest-press-target-voice-of-america?e=1e851c3327">abolished Voice of America </a>(VOA), which began during the second world war. VOA has provided news to nearly 50 countries, including those that did not have press freedom. Its broadcasts are by statute meant to be accurate and objective. It has been an arm of soft power diplomacy for the US. Trump has also threatened to defund the public broadcasters, National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), labelling them “radical left monsters”. The difference between public broadcasting in the US and Australia is that for the former, the government provides only a small percentage of its funding. Most of it comes from donations from citizens, grants from foundations and corporate sponsorship, according to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2025/03/27/will-trump-defund-npr-and-pbs-heres-what-we-know-as-president-attacks-the-broadcasters/">a recent report</a> in Forbes. PBS and NPR occupy a smaller part of the overall US media landscape than the ABC and SBS in Australia, but NPR’s reporters in particular have been actively, if dispassionately, reporting on the Trump Mark II administration’s tumultuous first few months. Like the VOA, the ABC’s international broadcasting arm is largely invisible to audiences in its host country. This means any cuts could well pass unnoticed, unlike, say, if the ABC said it could no longer afford to air the children’s TV series, Bluey. Through radio, TV, and now online, the ABC has broadcast to Australia’s neighbours since the second world war, initially as an agent to spread democratic value, but in more recent decades to model effective public interest journalism. The ABC, like the BBC, has a charter of independence. The ABC’s work in the international arena, through Radio Australia and ABC Australia, is vital, not only to bolster national security by providing trusted news and information about Australia and its allies, but by working alongside and supporting local Indo-Pacific news organisations. The Albanese Labor government appears to have understood this threat, providing some extra funding for the international services mostly in response to China’s increased presence in the region, as Alexandra Wake argued in her <a href="https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-47571-9">2024 book</a> Transnational Broadcasting in the Indo-Pacific. Labor’s funding boost remains inadequate, though, to properly broadcast an Australian voice to the region because, she argued, of increasingly fraught relations between nations, and a complex political and media environment. One of the most pressing priorities now is to extend the Labor government’s Pacific Security and Engagement Initiatives (the original $8 million per year) which is due to end in June 2026. Without this, the ABC will have transmission to the region, but next to no appropriate content. Australia needed to rectify past mistakes by increasing international broadcast funding and protecting that funding from future government cuts. Australia also needed to adopt the long-term thinking that China displayed if it was to counteract China’s strategic ambitions for the region. By closing VOA, Trump and his government efficiency wrecking ball, Elon Musk, have actually left open an opportunity for Australia to lean into the unique strategic advantage granted by Australia’s economic and geographical place in the region. The move to cut US aid supporting journalism extends to smaller outfits such as Benar News Pacific, which recently <a href="https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/philippine/letter-from-editors-benarnews-pauses-operations-04022025104657.html">told its audience</a> it was “pausing operations”. For the past decade, Benar News (and its parent Radio Free Asia) has been reporting across the region on security, politics and human rights. “The US administration has withheld the funding that we rely on to bring our readers and viewers the news from Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Bangladesh, the Philippines and island-states and territories in the Pacific,” it said in a letter from the editors. Such local news services may be small but are a vital bulwark in the multi-polar world Trump seeks to shape.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/248117/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/matthew-ricketson-3616">Matthew Ricketson</a>, Professor of Communication, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alexandra-wake-7472">Alexandra Wake</a>, Associate Professor, Journalism, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-ward-421548">Michael Ward</a>, PhD candidate in media and communications, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-would-and-should-happen-to-the-abc-under-the-next-federal-government-248117">original article</a>. Image: Instagram </div>

Big changes are planned for aged care in 2025

<div class="theconversation-article-body">There has been little new in pre-election promises for Australia’s aged-care workers, providers or the <a href="https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/topics/people-using-aged-care#agedcareuseinaustralia">1.3 million people</a> who use aged care. In March, Labor announced <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-anika-wells-mp/media/extra-26-billion-to-deliver-another-pay-rise-for-aged-care-nurses">A$2.6 billion</a> for another pay rise for aged-care nurses in addition to previous <a href="https://theconversation.com/aged-care-workers-have-won-a-huge-pay-rise-what-about-the-cleaners-cooks-and-admin-staff-who-support-them-226236">pay increases</a>. There’s been <a href="https://stories.theconversation.com/policy-tracker/">nothing substantial on aged care</a> from Labor or the Opposition since. Major changes are scheduled for the sector later this year, four years after the damning <a href="https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/aged-care/final-report">Royal Commission report into aged care</a>. Yet no additional funding has been announced. Estimates suggest funding is short <a href="https://www.stewartbrown.com.au/images/documents/StewartBrown_-_Taskforce_Funding_Reforms_Analysis_September_2024.pdf">around $5 billion</a> to address losses by residential care providers or the shortfall in <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/hcp/about">Home Care Packages</a>. <h2>What can we expect this year?</h2> A <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/aged-care-act">new Aged Care Act</a> will come into force on July 1 with a much greater emphasis on the rights of older people to get the care that suits their needs. This will mean: <ul> <li> a new system to regulate aged care </li> <li> a new independent complaints commissioner </li> <li> a new <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/support-at-home">Support at Home</a> program for older people who want to live at home, and in the community </li> <li> changes to fees for residential aged care. </li> </ul> But a number of problems remain and it is not clear the reforms being introduced this year will fix them. <h2>Access is still an issue</h2> Access to aged care <a href="https://www.igac.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-08/2024-progress-report-on-the-implementation-of-the-recommendations-of-the-royal-commission-into-aged-care-quality-and-safety.pdf">continues to be a problem</a>, particularly in rural and remote areas. The system is difficult to navigate for often vulnerable and confused consumers and their families. The government relies heavily on the <a href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/">My Aged Care website</a> to inform older people and their families about aged care options. But this provides only basic information and it is difficult to get individualised support. There is also a “digital divide” for a significant group who are unfamiliar with, and lack confidence in, using online services. So we need a much greater emphasis on providing local “one stop shops” for personalised support and advice, particularly when people first enter the aged-care system. These services could be provided through Centrelink or new regional aged-care offices. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=288&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=288&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=288&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660643/original/file-20250409-56-a7c9ej.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Screenshot of My Aged Care website" /></a><figcaption>Not everyone can navigate websites to get information about the care they need. <a class="source" href="https://www.myagedcare.gov.au/">Screenshot/My Aged Care</a></figcaption></figure> About <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/disability/disability-ageing-and-carers-australia-summary-findings/latest-release">one-third of older people</a> say they need help to live at home. But to get assistance you need an aged-care assessment and that process too needs improving. <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2024/data-downloads/rogs-2024-partf-overview-and-sections.pdf">Waiting times for assessment</a> have blown out, with reported delays of up to <a href="https://www.theweeklysource.com.au/home-care/older-australians-are-increasingly-dying-waiting-for-home-care-packages-to-be-assigned">five months</a>. <h2>Older people prefer to stay at home</h2> There are some concerns the number of new aged-care beds is <a href="https://www.theweeklysource.com.au/aged-care/the-repercussions-of-a-need-for-6600-new-aged-care-beds-in-fy24-colliers">not increasing fast enough</a>. For instance, there are shortages of residential aged care in particular areas such as <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-02-13/act-government-shuts-burrangiri-aged-care-respite-facility/104927780">Canberra</a>. But admission times to residential aged care generally <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2024/data-downloads/rogs-2024-partf-overview-and-sections.pdf">have not increased</a> and occupancy rates are <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2024/data-downloads/rogs-2024-partf-overview-and-sections.pdf">declining</a>. This suggests older people <a href="https://www.australianageingagenda.com.au/royal-commission/most-want-home-based-aged-care/#:%7E:text=A%20survey%20of%20more%20than,to%20live%20in%20a%20facility.">would prefer home</a> to residential care. Yet increased demand for home-care packages is <a href="https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/getmedia/c2339cbc-3e13-4893-9d03-9ca43ecdc55f/Home-Care-Packages-Program-Data-Report-2nd-Qtr-2024-2025">not being met</a>. For those who need more intensive services at home, <a href="https://www.gen-agedcaredata.gov.au/getmedia/c2339cbc-3e13-4893-9d03-9ca43ecdc55f/Home-Care-Packages-Program-Data-Report-2nd-Qtr-2024-2025">waiting times</a> remain stubbornly and unacceptably long because there aren’t enough home care packages. Despite years of complaints, there are still more than <a href="https://www.theweeklysource.com.au/government-policy/home-care-wait-list-climbs-to-over-81000-with-six-month-delays-at-all-levels">80,000 people</a> on the waiting list for care at home. The new <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/support-at-home/about">Support at Home program</a> will introduce an eight-level system of support. The highest level of home-care funding will <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/support-at-home/features#key-elements-of-the-new-program">increase to $78,000</a> to bridge the gap between funding for home and residential care. But many more intensive care packages for home care will be needed to reduce waiting times. The Support at Home program also introduces significantly higher out-of-pocket costs for older people. Such costs for everyday services – such as meals, cleaning and gardening – currently funded through the Commonwealth Home Support Program will <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/support-at-home-program-handbook.pdf">increase significantly</a>. Most controversially, there will also be <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/support-at-home-program-handbook.pdf">greater out-of-pocket costs</a> for “independence” services including personal care, social support, respite care and therapy. <h2>Staff shortages still a concern</h2> For aged-care providers, <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-have-too-few-aged-care-workers-to-care-for-older-australians-why-and-what-can-we-do-about-it-232707">chronic workforce shortages</a> are still the biggest problem. Recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/aged-care-workers-have-won-a-huge-pay-rise-what-about-the-cleaners-cooks-and-admin-staff-who-support-them-226236">increases in wages</a> for aged-care workers, including nurses, are a step in the right direction. But wages are still low. It remains hard to attract staff, staff turnover is high and staff are under-trained, risking the quality of care. Shortages are particularly acute in rural areas. The <a href="https://ageingaustralia.asn.au/media-releases/ageing-australia-calls-on-all-parties-to-make-aged-care-an-election-priority/">aged-care industry is calling for</a> streamlined migration, better training and incentives for regional workers to make up the shortfall. But so far no new election announcements have been made. <h2>No real reform</h2> Despite changes we’ll see from July, the organisation and financing of aged care remains fundamentally unchanged. Overall, Australia’s aged-care system is still heavily privatised and fragmented. In <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-08/financial-report-on-the-australian-aged-care-sector-2022-23.pdf">2022-23</a> there were 923 home-care providers, 764 residential-care providers and 1,334 home-support providers, nearly all in the private and not-for-profit sectors. The Commonwealth continues to manage the sector through a cumbersome combination of highly centralised regulation and prescriptive funding contracts. It has not put into place an effective, regional management structure to plan, organise and govern the sector to drive quality, innovation, equity, responsiveness and efficiency. Nor has the Commonwealth been willing to adequately finance the system either through a levy, a social insurance scheme or via increased taxation. Instead, it’s upping the reliance on user fees to meet the cost of providing services.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253727/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hal-swerissen-9722">Hal Swerissen</a>, Emeritus Professor of Public Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/la-trobe-university-842">La Trobe University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/big-changes-are-planned-for-aged-care-in-2025-but-youd-never-know-from-the-major-parties-253727">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Caring

Our ancestors didn’t eat 3 meals a day. So why do we?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Pop quiz: name the world’s most famous trio? If you’re a foodie, then your answer might have been breakfast, lunch and dinner. It’s an almost universally accepted trinity – particularly in the Western world. But how did it come about? <h2>The first meals</h2> <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-did-we-become-fully-human-what-fossils-and-dna-tell-us-about-the-evolution-of-modern-intelligence-143717#:%7E:text=Fossils%20and%20DNA%20suggest%20people,%3A%2050%2C000%2D65%2C000%20years%20ago">Early humans</a> were nomadic. Forming small communities, they would travel with the seasons, following local food sources. While we can only guess what daily mealtimes rhythms looked like, evidence dating back <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/feast-9780199209019?cc=nz&lang=en&">30,000 years</a> from the South Moravia region, Czech Republic, shows people visited specific settlements time and again. They gathered around hearths, cooking and sharing food: the first signs of human “commensality”, the practice of eating together. One of the best-preserved hunter-gatherer sites we’ve found is <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/feast-9780199209019?cc=nz&lang=en&">Ohalo II</a> – located on the shores of the modern-day Sea of Galilee (also called Lake Tiberias or Lake Kinneret) in Israel, and dating back some 23,000 years. In addition to several small dwellings with hearths, it provides evidence of diverse food sources, including more than 140 types of seeds and nuts, and various birds, fish and mammals. The development of <a href="https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/development-agriculture/">agricultural knowledge</a> some 12,000 years ago gave rise to permanent settlements. The earliest were in the Levant region (across modern-day Iraq, southwestern Iran and eastern Turkey), in an area called the “Fertile Crescent”. Permanent agriculture led to the production of a <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/evolution-of-diet/">surplus of food</a>. The ability to stay in one place with food on-hand meant the time it took to cook no longer mattered as much. It quickly became common to eat one <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/history-of-the-world-in-6-glasses-9780802718594/">light meal</a> early in the day, followed by a larger <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/feast-9780199209019?cc=nz&lang=en&">hearth-prepared meal</a> later on. The specific timings would have varied between groups. <h2>Eating together as a rule</h2> The communal nature of foraging and hunting, and later farming, meant humans almost always ate their meals in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2009.9.3.42">company of others</a>. In the ancient city-state of Sparta, in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/293895">4th century BCE</a>, these practices were codified as common main meals called <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2017.17.2.51">syssitia</a> (meaning “eating together”). These meals were consumed at the end of the day in communal dining halls. Food was served by young boys to tables of 15 or so men who lived together and fought in the same <a href="https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0063%3Aalphabetic+letter%3DS%3Aentry+group%3D5%3Aentry%3Dsyssitia-cn">military division</a>. The men gradually shared generational knowledge with the young boys, who themselves would join the tables by age 20. In the 5th century BCE, Greek historian Herodotus <a href="https://www.penguin.co.nz/books/the-histories-9780140455397">wrote about</a> how syssitia evolved from a Spartan military practice to having deep political meaning in society. Similarly, <a href="https://www.penguin.co.nz/books/the-republic-9780140455113">Plato</a> <a href="https://www.penguin.co.nz/books/the-laws-9780140449846">wrote</a> common meals were an integral component of civil society, and that missing a meal without good reason was a civic offence. By dining in <a href="https://doi.org/10.2307/293895">full view</a> of the rest of society, citizens were compelled to maintain self-discipline. Mealtime was also an opportunity for social linkage, and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2017.17.2.51">important discussions</a> ranging from business deals to politics. The eating habits of Spartan women are missing in the texts, although it is implied they <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2017.17.2.51">ate at home</a>. <h2>Bunches of lunches</h2> Counter to the tough Spartan way of life, the Romans enjoyed their main meal, <a href="https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/1550/everyday-life-ancient-rome?srsltid=AfmBOooVPsJL24HR9woTdVNQwEG1uCU7q0k7r2beD-KD13m0KX-l1dSY">cena</a>, earlier in the day, followed by a lighter meal just before bed. The northern European tribes tended towards two larger meals per day, as more <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23071">sustenance</a> is required in colder climes. To the Vikings, these meals were known as <a href="https://www.historyonthenet.com/what-did-vikings-eat">dagmal and nattmal</a>, or day meal and night meal. Nattmal was the cooked evening meal, while dagmal usually consisted of leftover nattmal with the addition of bread and beer or mead. In Australia, evidence suggests Aboriginal peoples tended toward a <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03122417.2022.2089395">daily single meal</a>, which aligns with the predominant method of cookery: slow-cooking with hot coals or rocks in an <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2022.2089395">earth oven</a>. This underground oven, used by Aboriginal and also Torres Strait Islander communities, was referred to as a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=745326709638881&t=0">kup murri</a> or <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/food/the-cook-up-with-adam-liaw/recipe/slow-cooker-kap-mauri/lfza7eqs4">kap mauri</a> by some groups. This is similar to other Indigenous preparations throughout the Pacific, such as the New Zealand Māori <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/15528014.2024.2381305">hāngī</a>, Hawaiian <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/20707103?seq=1">imu</a>, Fijian <a href="https://www.proquest.com/docview/1021389307?accountid=8440&parentSessionId=605Pt1iTclBEC77VSlZvrnxxY%2Bdc7e%2Bx9pT4MgRLPqQ%3D&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses">lovo</a>, and even the Mayan <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12231-012-9207-2">píib</a>. The once-daily meal would have been supplemented with snacks throughout the day. <h2>Three’s the magic number</h2> The timing of meals was heavily influenced by class structure, local climate and people’s <a href="https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Cuisine+and+Culture%3A+A+History+of+Food+and+People%2C+3rd+Edition-p-9780470403716">daily activities</a>. Practicality also played a part. Without reliable lighting, meals had to be prepared and eaten before dark. In settled parts of Northern Europe, this could be as early as 3pm. So how did we go from one or two main meals, to three? The answer may lie with the British Royal Navy. Since its inception in the 16th century, the navy served <a href="https://www.historyhit.com/what-did-sailors-in-the-georgian-royal-navy-eat/">three regular meals</a> to align with the shipboard routine. This included a simple breakfast of ship’s biscuits, lunch as the main meal, and dinner as more of a light supper. Some sources suggest the term “<a href="https://www.grammar-monster.com/sayings_proverbs/square_meal.htm">square meal</a>” may have come from the square wooden trays meals were served in. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=572&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=572&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/660040/original/file-20250407-56-xgt2pm.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=572&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption>Initially, sailors recieved a daily gallon of beer with meals. This was later changed to watered-down rum, the infamous ‘grog’, which is being handed out in this 1940 photo taken aboard HMS King George V. <a class="source" href="https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205185139">Imperial War Museums</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></figcaption></figure> The <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20243692">Industrial Revolution</a>, which started around 1760, arguably also played a role in formalising the concept of three specific mealtimes across the Western world. The cadence of breakfast, lunch and dinner matched the routine of the longer, standardised workdays. Workers ate breakfast and dinner at home, before and after work, while lunch was eaten with coworkers at a set time. With minimal breaks, and no time for snacking, three substantial meals became necessary. <h2>The fall of the holy trinity</h2> Today, many factors impact the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2015.09.005">time and frequency</a> of our meals, from long work commutes to juggling hobbies and social obligations. The COVID pandemic also impacted how and what we eat, leading us to eat larger amounts of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2022.102641">higher calorie foods</a>. The rapid growth of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980020000701">delivery services</a> also means a meal is no more than a few minutes away from most people. All of this has resulted in mealtimes becoming less rigid, with social meals such as <a href="https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781442229433/Brunch-A-History">brunch</a>, <a href="https://www.harpercollins.co.nz/9780261102354/the-fellowship-of-the-ring/">elevenses</a> and <a href="https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781442271029/Afternoon-Tea-A-History">afternoon teas</a> expanding how we <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18126235">connect over food</a>. And mealtimes will continue to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/gfc.2013.13.3.32">evolve</a> as our schedules become ever more complicated.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/250773/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rob-richardson-2328981">Rob Richardson</a>, Senior Lecturer in Culinary Arts & Gastronomy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/auckland-university-of-technology-1137">Auckland University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dianne-ma-2331997">Dianne Ma</a>, Lecturer in Culinary Arts & Gastronomy, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/auckland-university-of-technology-1137">Auckland University of Technology</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-ancestors-didnt-eat-3-meals-a-day-so-why-do-we-250773">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Food & Wine

Good news for beach lovers

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Picture this: you’re lounging on a beautiful beach, soaking up the sun and listening to the soothing sound of the waves. You run your hands through the warm sand, only to find a cigarette butt. Gross, right? This disturbing scene is typical of coastal pollution in Australia. But fortunately <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X25003261">our new research</a> shows the problem is getting better, not worse. Over the past ten years, the amount of waste across Australian coastal cities has reduced by almost 40%. We’re also finding more places with no rubbish at all. We surveyed for debris in and around six Australian urban areas between 2022 and 2024. Then we compared our results to previous surveys carried out a decade ago. We found less coastal pollution overall and reset a new baseline for further research. Our study shows efforts to clean up Australia’s beaches have been working. These policies, practices and outreach campaigns have reduced the extent of pollution in coastal habitats near urban centres. But we can’t become complacent. There’s plenty of work still to be done. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658227/original/file-20250328-62-jmuk08.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A beautiful sandy beach, as seen from the cliff top." /></a><figcaption>One of the many beaches surveyed by CSIRO. TJ Lawson</figcaption></figure> <h2>What we did</h2> In Australia, three-quarters of the rubbish on our coasts is <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/fee.1447">plastic</a>. Even cigarette butts are mainly made of plastic. To tackle the pollution effectively, we need to understand where the waste is coming from and how it gets into the environment. Research has shown much of the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/srep44479">coastal debris</a> comes from local inland areas. Poor waste management practices can result in debris eventually making its way <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15611">through rivers</a> to the coast and <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1260352">out to sea</a>. We focused on urban areas because high population density and industrial activity contributes to waste in the environment. We examined six areas across Australia: <ul> <li>Perth in Western Australia</li> <li>Port Augusta in South Australia</li> <li>Hobart in Tasmania</li> <li>Newcastle in New South Wales</li> <li>Sunshine Coast in Queensland</li> <li>Alice Springs in the Northern Territory.</li> </ul> These places represent a starting point for the national baseline. At each location we studied sites on the coast, along rivers and inland, within a 100 kilometre radius. We inspected strips of land 2m wide. This involved two trained scientists standing in an upright position looking downward, slowly walking along a line surveying for debris items. Together they captured information about every piece of debris they came across, including the type of material and what it was originally used for (where possible). <h2>What we found</h2> On average, we found 0.15 items of debris per square metre of land surveyed. That’s roughly one piece of rubbish every five steps. Plastic was the most common type of waste. But in many cases it was unclear what the item was originally used for. For example, fragments of hard plastic of unknown origin were found in a quarter of all surveyed areas. Polystyrene fragments were the most common item overall (24% of all debris fragments). Other frequently encountered items included food wrappers or labels, cigarette butts, and hard plastic bottle caps or lids. We found more waste near farms, industry and disadvantaged areas. The types of waste varied among cities. For example, cigarette butts were the most prevalent items in Newcastle, Perth and the Sunshine Coast. But food wrappers and beverage cans were more prevalent in Port Augusta and Alice Springs, respectively. Hobart had the highest occurrence of beverage bottles and bottle fragments. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/659486/original/file-20250403-56-enmjio.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=533&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Map of Australia showing the cities surveyed and their most prevalent waste item." /></a><figcaption>The most common type of waste varied among cities. CSIRO</figcaption></figure> <h2>Targeting problem items</h2> Identifying the different types of litter in the environment can help policymakers and waste managers target specific items and improve waste recovery. Research has shown container deposit legislation, which enables people to take eligible beverage containers to a collection point for a refund, has reduced the number of beverage containers in the coastal environment by <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X17305377">40%</a>. Hobart did not have a container deposit scheme in place at the time of our survey. Plastic bag bans can reduce <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31109543/">bag litter</a>. Now polystyrene food service items are becoming increasingly targeted by <a href="https://digital.detritusjournal.com/articles/policy-instruments-to-reduce-consumption-of-expanded-polystyrene-food-service-ware-in-the-usa/284">policymakers</a>. <figure class="align-right zoomable"></figure> <h2>Making progress</h2> When we compared our results to the <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/fee.1447">previous survey</a> from 2011-14 we found a 39% decrease in coastal debris. We also found 16% more areas where no debris was present. Our results <a href="https://theconversation.com/local-efforts-have-cut-plastic-waste-on-australias-beaches-by-almost-30-in-6-years-184243">support previous research</a> that found an ongoing trend towards less waste on Australian beaches. We think our research demonstrates the effectiveness of improved waste management policies, campaigns such as the “Five R’s – Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Repurpose, then Recycle” – as well as clean-up efforts. It’s likely that increased awareness is making a big dent in the problem. But reducing the production of plastic, and invoking changes further up the supply chain, would likely further help reduce mismanaged waste in the environment. <h2>Implications for the future</h2> Measuring and monitoring litter can inform policymaking and waste management. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X25003261">Our research</a> serves as a benchmark for evaluating and informing future efforts to reduce plastic waste. We are heartened by the findings. But continued effort is needed from people across government, industry and Australian communities. Everyone needs to address how we produce, use and dispose of plastic for a cleaner and healthier planet. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253221/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/stephanie-brodie-1492706">Stephanie Brodie</a>, Research Scientist in Marine Ecology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/csiro-1035">CSIRO</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/britta-denise-hardesty-2907">Britta Denise Hardesty</a>, Senior Principal Research Scientist, Environment, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/csiro-1035">CSIRO</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/good-news-beach-lovers-our-research-found-39-less-plastic-waste-around-australian-coastal-cities-than-a-decade-ago-253221">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Domestic Travel

Despite some key milestones since 2000, Australia still has a long way to go on gender equality

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Australia has a gender problem. Despite social, economic and political reform aimed at improving opportunities for women, gender gaps are increasing and Australia is falling behind other countries. The World Economic Forum currently places Australia 24th among 146 countries, down from 15th in 2006. At the current rate of change, the forum suggests it will take <a href="https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-gender-gap-report-2024/">more than 130 years</a> to achieve gender equality globally. Australia has taken important steps forward in some areas, while progress in other areas remains painfully slow. So how far have we come since 2000, and how much further do we have to go? <h2>The good stuff</h2> There are now more women in <a href="https://www.aigroup.com.au/resourcecentre/research-economics/factsheets/factsheet-gender-and-the-australian-labour-market/#:%7E:text=Female%20labour%20market%20participation%20was,gender%20participation%20gap%20of%208%25.">the labour market</a>, in <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/measuring-what-matters/measuring-what-matters-themes-and-indicators/cohesive/representation-parliament">parliament</a>, and leading <a href="https://www.forbes.com.au/lists/people/women-of-the-asx/">large companies</a> than at any other time. Over the past 25 years, there have been major social and political milestones that indicate progress. These include the appointment of Australia’s first female governor-general in 2008 and prime minister in 2010, the introduction of universal paid parental leave in 2011, a high-profile inquiry into workplace sexual harassment in 2020, and new legislation requiring the public reporting of gender pay gaps in 2023. <h2>Timeline of equality milestones</h2> <ul id="timelineList"> <li> <h2>2000</h2> Child Care Benefit introduced, subsidising cost of children for eligible families </li> <li> <h2>2008</h2> First female Governor-General (Dame Quentin Bryce) </li> <li> <h2>2010</h2> First female Prime Minister elected (Julia Gillard) First Aboriginal woman from Australia elected to UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (Megan Davis) Australia’s first national paid parental leave scheme </li> <li> <h2>2012</h2> Julia Gillard misogyny speech Workplace Gender Equality Act becomes law, Workplace Gender Equality Agency established </li> <li> <h2>2013</h2> Dad or Partner Pay Leave commenced </li> <li> <h2>2016</h2> First Indigenous woman elected to House of Representatives (Linda Burney) </li> <li> <h2>2017</h2> Launch of Women’s Australian Football League #metoo movement spreads globally to draw attention to sexual harassment and assault </li> <li> <h2>2020</h2> Respect@Work National Inquiry into sexual harassment in the Australian workplace chaired by Kate Jenkins released. </li> <li> <h2>2021</h2> Grace Tame named Australian of the Year for her advocacy in sexual violence/harassment campaigns Independent review into Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces launched </li> <li> <h2>2022</h2> National plan to end violence against women is finalised </li> <li> <h2>2023</h2> Closing the Gender Pay Gap Bill passes parliament </li> <li> <h2>2024</h2> Superannuation on government-funded paid parental leave from July 1, 2025 Parental leave to be increased to 26 weeks from July 2026. </li> </ul> There are, however, other areas where progress is agonisingly slow. <h2>Violence and financial insecurity</h2> Women are <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/newsroom/wgea-bcec-gender-equity-insights-2024-report">more likely</a> to be in casual and part-time employment than men. This is part of the reason women retire with <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-21/carer-credits-proposal-aims-to-reduce-superannuation-gap/10826246">about half</a> the superannuation savings of men. This is also linked to financial insecurity later in life. Older women are among the <a href="https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/age-discrimination/projects/risk-homelessness-older-women">fastest-growing groups</a> of people experiencing homelessness. The situation for First Nations women is even more severe. The <a href="https://www.niaa.gov.au/news-and-media/closing-gap-report-released">most recent</a> Closing the Gap report indicates First Nations women and children are 33 times more likely to be hospitalised due to violence compared with non-Indigenous women. They are also <a href="https://theconversation.com/indigenous-women-are-dying-violent-preventable-deaths-endless-inquiries-wont-help-unless-we-act-244815">seven times more likely</a> to die from family violence. Improving outcomes for Indigenous women and children requires tackling the long-term effects of colonisation, removal from Country, the Stolen Generations, incarceration and intergenerational trauma. This means challenging not only gender inequality but also racism, discrimination and violence. At work, <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/publications/employer-gender-pay-gaps-report">the latest data</a> from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency suggests the gender pay gap is narrowing, with 56% of organisations reporting improvements. On average, though, the pay gap is still substantial at 21.8% with women earning only 78 cents for every $1 earned by men. This totals an average yearly shortfall of $28,425. There are also some notable organisations where the gender pay gap has widened. <h2>The burden of unpaid work</h2> Another measure of inequality that has proved stubbornly slow to change is women’s unequal responsibilities for unpaid domestic and care work. Without real change in gender divisions of time spent on unpaid housework and care, our capacity to move towards equality in pay gaps and employment is very limited. Australian women undertake almost 70% of unpaid household labour. The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/people-and-communities/how-australians-use-their-time/latest-release">time use data</a> show that of those who participate in domestic labour, women spend an average of 4.13 hours per day on unpaid domestic and care work, compared with men’s 2.14 hours. This gap equates to more than a third of a full-time job. If we add up all work (domestic, care and paid), mothers have the longest working week by about 10 hours. This has changed very little over time. These charts, based on analyses of data from the Households, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) study, show what drives this gap. Women respond to increased demand for care and domestic work by doing more, while men do not. Parenthood significantly increases the time women spend on unpaid care and housework, while also reducing their time in employment. <hr /> <iframe id="115GU" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: 0;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/115GU/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe> <hr /> Men increase their time in unpaid care after a birth, but the jump is minor compared with women, and there is no change to men’s employment hours. Not surprisingly given these patterns, parenthood is associated with substantial declines in women’s <a href="https://aifs.gov.au/research/research-reports/employment-patterns-and-trends-families-children">employment hours</a>, earnings, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/14/4/275">career progression</a>, and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jomf.12531">mental health and wellbeing</a>. <h2>The way forward</h2> Current policy priorities primarily incentivise women to remain in employment, while continuing to undertake a disproportionate share of unpaid family work, through moving to part-time employment or making use of other forms of workplace flexibility. This approach focuses on “fixing” women rather than on the <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-032620-030938">structural roots of the problem</a>. There is limited financial or cultural encouragement for men to step out of employment for care work, or reduce their hours, despite the introduction of a two-week Dad and Partner Pay scheme <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/parental-leave">in 2013</a> and more recent changes to expand support and access. Fathers who wish to be more actively involved in care and family life face significant financial barriers, with current schemes only covering a basic wage. If one member of the family has to take time out or reduce their hours, it usually makes financial sense for this to be a woman, given the gender earning gap. The benefits of enabling men to share care work will not only be improvements for women, but will also improve family relationships and outcomes for children. <a href="https://theconversation.com/roses-are-red-violets-are-blue-ill-stay-forever-if-you-scrub-out-the-loo-72793">Research shows</a> relationship conflict declines when men do more at home. Time spent with fathers has been found to be especially beneficial for children’s <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-48232-001">cognitive development</a>. Fixing the gender problem is not just about helping women. It’s good for everyone. Gender inequality costs the Australian economy <a href="https://womensagenda.com.au/business/the-us225-billion-a-year-australia-could-benefit-from-with-a-focus-on-women/">$225 billion annually</a>, or 12% of gross domestic product. Globally, the World Bank <a href="https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/fd676a12-7ee4-5c6a-ab2b-83365ed25bf1/content">estimates</a> gender inequality costs US$160.2 trillion. We can’t afford to slip further behind or to take more than a century to fix the problem. <hr /> This piece is part of a series on how Australia has changed since the year 2000. You can read other pieces in the series <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/first-quarter-of-the-century-series-172070">here</a>.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/250250/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/janeen-baxter-611570">Janeen Baxter</a>, Director, ARC Life Course Centre and ARC Kathleen Fitzpatrick Laureate Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/despite-some-key-milestones-since-2000-australia-still-has-a-long-way-to-go-on-gender-equality-250250">original article</a>. Image: </div>

Legal

Do stem cell injections for knee osteoarthritis actually work?

<div class="theconversation-article-body">More than 500 million people around the world <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanrhe/article/PIIS2665-9913(23)00163-7/fulltext">live with osteoarthritis</a>. The knee is affected more often than any other joint, with symptoms (such as pain, stiffness and reduced movement) affecting work, sleep, sport and <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/chronic-musculoskeletal-conditions/osteoarthritis">daily activities</a>. Knee osteoarthritis is often thought of as thinning of the protective layer of cartilage within the joint. But we now understand it affects all the structures of the joint, including the bones, muscles and nerve endings. While there are things that <a href="https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/standards/clinical-care-standards/osteoarthritis-knee-clinical-care-standard/information-consumers-osteoarthritis-knee-clinical-care-standard">can be done to manage</a> the symptoms of knee osteoarthritis, there is no cure, and many people experience persistent pain. As a result, an opportunity exists for <a href="https://www.rheuma.com.au/stem-cell-therapy-good-bad-ugly/174">as yet unproven treatments</a> to enter the market, often before regulatory safeguards can be put in place. Stem cell injections are one such treatment. A <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD013342.pub2">new review</a> my colleagues and I published this week finds that evidence of their benefits and harms remains elusive. <h2>Stem cell treatments</h2> Stem cells are already established as treatments for some diseases – <a href="https://www.lymphoma.org.au/lymphoma/treatments/stem-cell-transplants/autologous-stem-cell-transplant/">mostly disorders of the blood</a>, bone marrow or immune system – which has led to suggestions they could be used for a much wider array of conditions. Stem cells have been touted as promising treatments for osteoarthritis because they have special properties which allow them to replicate and develop into the mature healthy cells that make up our body’s organs and other tissues, including cartilage. Stem cell treatments for osteoarthritis generally involve <a href="https://www.aboutstemcells.org/treatments">taking a sample of tissue</a> from a site that is rich in stem cells (such as bone marrow or fat), treating it to increase the number of stem cells, then injecting it into the joint. The hope is that if the right type of stem cells can be introduced into an osteoarthritic joint in the right way and at the right time, they may help to repair damaged structures in the joint, or have other effects such as reducing inflammation. But no matter how convincing the theory, we need good evidence for effectiveness and safety before a new therapy is adopted into practice. Stem cell injections have not been approved by Australia’s <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/news/news/stem-cell-treatments-and-regulation-quick-guide-consumers#:%7E:text=Does%20the%20TGA%20regulate%20stem,does%20not%20regulate%20medical%20practice">Therapeutic Goods Administration</a> for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Nonetheless, some clinics in Australia and around the world still offer them. Because of the regulatory restrictions, we don’t have reliable numbers on how many procedures are being done. They’re not covered by Medicare, so the procedure can cost the consumer thousands of dollars. And, as with any invasive procedure, both the <a href="https://coroners.nsw.gov.au/documents/findings/2016/Findings%20Drysdale.pdf">harvest of stem cells</a> and the joint injection procedure may carry the potential for harm, such as infection. <h2>What we found</h2> Our <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD013342.pub2">new review</a>, published by the independent, international group the Cochrane Collaboration, looks at all 25 randomised trials of stem cell injections for knee osteoarthritis that have been conducted worldwide to date. Collectively, these studies involved 1,341 participants. We found stem cell injections may slightly improve pain and function compared with a placebo injection, but the size of the improvement may be too small for the patient to notice. The evidence isn’t strong enough to determine whether there is any improvement in quality of life following a stem cell injection, whether cartilage regrows, or to estimate the risk of harm. This means we can’t confidently say yet whether any improvement that might follow a stem cell injection is worth the risk (or the cost). <h2>Hope or hype?</h2> It’s not surprising we invest hope in finding a transformative treatment for such a common and disabling condition. Belief in the benefits of stem cells is widespread – more than <a href="https://www.arthroscopyjournal.org/article/S0749-8063(21)00571-5/abstract">three-quarters of Americans</a> believe stem cells can relieve arthritis pain and more than half believe this treatment to be curative. But what happens if a new treatment is introduced to practice before it has been clearly proven to be safe and effective? The use of an unproven, invasive therapy is not just associated with the risks of the intervention itself. Even if the treatment were harmless, there is the risk of unnecessary cost, inconvenience, and a missed opportunity for the patient to use existing therapies that are known to be effective. What’s more, if we need to play catch-up to try to establish an evidence base for a treatment that’s already in practice, we risk diverting scarce research resources towards a therapy that may not prove to be effective, simply because the genie is out of the bottle. <h2>Working towards a clearer answer</h2> Several more large <a href="https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12620000870954">clinical trials</a> are currently underway, and should increase our understanding of whether stem cell injections are safe and effective for knee osteoarthritis. Our review incorporates “<a href="https://www.cochrane.org/news/cochranes-pioneering-role-living-evidence">living evidence</a>”. This means we will continue to add the results of new trials as soon as they’re published, so the review is always up to date, and offers a comprehensive and trustworthy summary to help people with osteoarthritis and their health-care providers to make informed decisions. In the meantime, there are a number of <a href="https://www.racgp.org.au/clinical-resources/clinical-guidelines/key-racgp-guidelines/view-all-racgp-guidelines/knee-and-hip-osteoarthritis/summary-plain-language">evidence-based treatment options</a>. Non-drug treatments such as physiotherapy, regular exercise, maintaining a healthy weight, and cognitive behavioural therapy can be more effective than you think. Anti-inflammatory and pain medications can also play a supporting role. Importantly, it’s not inevitable that osteoarthritic joints get worse with time. So, even though <a href="https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/background">joint replacement surgery</a> is often highly effective, it’s the last resort and fortunately, many people never need to take this step.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253404/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/samuel-whittle-2357927">Samuel Whittle</a>, ANZMUSC Practitioner Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/monash-university-1065">Monash University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-are-getting-costly-stem-cell-injections-for-knee-osteoarthritis-but-we-dont-know-if-they-work-253404">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Body

‘Behind every claim is a grieving family’. Death benefits inquiry update

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> When Lisa’s husband passed away unexpectedly, she assumed accessing his superannuation <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/super-for-individuals-and-families/super/withdrawing-and-using-your-super/superannuation-death-benefits">death benefit</a> would be straightforward. Instead, she spent months navigating a bureaucratic maze. She repeatedly sent documents, waited weeks for callbacks and struggled to get answers from his fund. Her experience is far from unique. A damning <a href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-806-taking-ownership-of-death-benefits-how-trustees-can-deliver-outcomes-australians-deserve/">new report</a> reveals systemic failure by Australia’s <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/super-stats/#:%7E:text=Total%20superannuation%20assets%20were%20%244.2,with%20more%20than%20six%20members.">A$4 trillion</a> superannuation industry in handling members’ death benefits. <h2>A system in disarray</h2> The Australian Security and Investments Commission’s landmark review of ten major super trustees, managing 38% of super assets, exposes an industry that is not serving its members. Grieving families routinely face excessive delays, insensitive treatment and unnecessary hurdles when trying to access death benefits. It found they sometimes waited over a year for payments to which they were legally entitled. The central problem was a fundamental breakdown in claims processing, with five critical failures exacerbating inefficiency and distress. 1. Poor oversight No trustee monitored end-to-end claims handling times, leaving boards unaware of how long families were waiting. While the fastest trustee resolved 48% of claims within 90 days, the slowest managed just 8%. In one case, a widow waited nearly a year despite her husband having a valid binding nomination. ASIC found 78% of delays stemmed from processing inefficiencies entirely within trustees’ control. 2. Misleading and inadequate information Many funds misled on processing times and masked extreme delays. Boards often received reports only on insured claims, despite most death benefits not involving insurance. This meant boards were unable to fix systemic problems. 3. Process over people Risk-averse procedures often overrode common sense. Many funds imposed claim-staking – delaying payments for objections – even for straightforward cases, adding a median 95 day delay. Communication failures further compounded delays, with claimants receiving inconsistent advice and few or no status updates. 4. Outsourcing without accountability Claims handled in-house were processed significantly faster than those managed by external administrators. Only 15% of outsourced claims were resolved within 90 days, compared to 36% of in-house claims. The securities commission is calling for stronger oversight. External administrators significantly slow down responses, so some funds may need to bring claims processing back in-house to ensure efficiency. 5. Lack of transparency Many funds failed to provide clear timelines or explanations for delays and had no accountability mechanisms. The ten funds investigated include the Australian Retirement Trust, Avanteos (Colonial First State), Brighter Super, Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation, HESTA, Hostplus, NM Super (AMP), Nulis (MLC), Rest and UniSuper. Two others, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-12/asic-sues-australian-super-death-processing-benefit-claims-delay/105040450">Australian Super and Cbus</a>, are being sued separately by ASIC for either failing to pay out or delaying payments to thousands of eligible beneficiaries. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/658866/original/file-20250401-56-jrqwbg.png?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A list of key findings from the ASIC Taking ownership of death benefits report" /></a><figcaption><a class="source" href="https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/find-a-document/reports/rep-806-taking-ownership-of-death-benefits-how-trustees-can-deliver-outcomes-australians-deserve/">Taking ownership of death benefits: How trustees can deliver outcomes Australians deserve, ASIC, March 2025</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></figcaption></figure> <h2>Will ASIC’s fixes work?</h2> ASIC has made 34 recommendations to improve death benefit processing. This will require real change, not box ticking. Changes should include setting performance objectives and empowering frontline staff to cut unnecessary steps. There should be consequences for failure. Unlike the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/browse/benefits/bereavement">United Kingdom</a>, which fines pension providers for missing statutory deadlines, ASIC’s recommendations lack penalties. Without consequences, some funds may continue prioritising administrative convenience over members receiving their entitlements. <h2>What needs to happen now?</h2> ASIC’s report is a wake-up call, but real reform requires strong action. Super funds must be held to clear, binding processing timelines, with meaningful penalties for non-compliance. Standardising requirements across the industry would eliminate unnecessary hurdles, ensuring all beneficiaries are treated fairly. Beyond regulation, funds must improve communication and accountability. Bereaved families deserve clear, plain language guidance on what to expect, not bureaucratic roadblocks or sudden document requests. Technological upgrades should focus on reducing delays, not just internal efficiencies. And to better support families, an independent claims advocate could help navigate the process, ensuring no one is left to struggle alone. <h2>Has ASIC gone far enough?</h2> While ASIC’s review is a step in the right direction, it does not fundamentally overhaul flawed claims-handling practices. The recommendations lack enforceability, relying on voluntary compliance. Also, the role of insurers within super remains largely unaddressed, despite death benefits being tied to life insurance policies. This often causes further complications and delays. Ensuring insurers adopt and apply ASIC’s recommendations will be critical for meaningful change. Most importantly, super funds must remember that behind every claim is a grieving family. No one should have to fight for what they are owed during one of the most stressful times in their life.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253419/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natalie-peng-1369555">Natalie Peng</a>, Lecturer in Accounting, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-queensland-805">The University of Queensland</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/behind-every-claim-is-a-grieving-family-death-benefits-inquiry-demands-change-but-lacks-penalties-253419">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Legal

Do any non-drug treatments help back pain? Here’s what the evidence says

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Jason, a 42-year-old father of two, has been battling back pain for weeks. Scrolling through his phone, he sees ad after ad promising relief: chiropractic alignments, acupuncture, back braces, vibrating massage guns and herbal patches. His GP told him to “stay active”, but what does that even mean when every movement hurts? Jason wants to avoid strong painkillers and surgery, but with so many options (and opinions), it’s hard to know what works and what’s just marketing hype. If Jason’s experience sounds familiar, you’re not alone. Back pain is one of the most common reasons people visit a doctor. It can be challenging to manage, mainly due to widespread <a href="https://theconversation.com/having-good-posture-doesnt-prevent-back-pain-and-bad-posture-doesnt-cause-it-183732">misunderstandings</a> and the <a href="https://ebm.bmj.com/content/early/2025/03/02/bmjebm-2024-112974">overwhelming number</a> of ineffective and uncertain treatments promoted. We assessed the best available evidence of non-drug and non-surgical treatments to alleviate low back pain. <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD014691.pub2/full">Our review</a> – published today by the independent, international group the Cochrane Collaboration – includes 31 Cochrane systematic reviews, covering 97,000 people with back pain. It <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD014691.pub2/full">shows</a> bed rest doesn’t work for back pain. Some of the treatments that do work can depend on how long you’ve been in pain. <h2>Is back pain likely to be serious?</h2> There are different types of low back pain. It can: <ul> <li>be short-lived, lasting less than six weeks (acute back pain)</li> <li>linger for a bit longer, for six to twelve weeks (sub-acute)</li> <li>stick around for months and even years (chronic, defined as more than 12 weeks).</li> </ul> In <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(16)30970-9/abstract">most cases</a> (90-95%), back pain is non-specific and cannot be reliably linked to a specific cause or underlying disease. This includes common structural changes seen in x-rays and MRIs of the spine. For this reason, imaging of the back is <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(09)60172-0/abstract">only</a> recommended in rare situations – typically when there’s a clear suspicion of serious back issues, such as after physical trauma or when there is numbness or loss of sensation in the groin or legs. Many people expect to receive <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD013815.pub2/full">painkillers</a> for their back pain or even surgery, but these are no longer the front-line treatment options due to limited benefits and the high risk of harm. International <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)30489-6/fulltext">clinical guidelines</a> recommend people choose non-drug and non-surgical treatments to relieve their pain, improve function and reduce the distress commonly associated with back pain. So what works for different types of pain? Here’s what <a href="https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD014691.pub2/full">our review found</a> when researchers compared these treatments with standard care (the typical treatment patients usually receive) or no treatment. <h2>What helps for short-term back pain</h2> 1. Stay active – don’t rest in bed If your back pain is new, the best advice is also one of the simplest: keep moving despite the pain. Changing the way you move and use your body to protect it, or resting in bed, can seem like to right way to respond to pain – and may have even been recommended in the past. But we know know this excessive protective behaviour can make it harder to return to meaningful activities. This doesn’t mean pushing through pain or hitting the gym, but instead, trying to maintain your usual routines as much as possible. Evidence suggests that doing so won’t make your pain worse, and may improve it. 2. Multidisciplinary care, if pain lingers For pain lasting six to 12 weeks, multidisciplinary treatment is likely to reduce pain compared to standard care. This involves a coordinated team of doctors, physiotherapists and psychologists working together to address the many factors contributing to your back pain persisting: <ul> <li> neurophysiological influences refer to how your nervous system is currently processing pain. It can make you more sensitive to signals from movements, thoughts, feelings and environment </li> <li> psychological factors include how your thoughts, feelings and behaviours affect your pain system and, ultimately, the experience of pain you have </li> <li> occupational factors include the physical demands of your job and how well you can manage them, as well as aspects like low job satisfaction, all of which can contribute to ongoing pain. </li> </ul> <h2>What works for chronic back pain</h2> Once pain has been around for more than 12 weeks, it can become more difficult to treat. But relief is still possible. Exercise therapy Exercise – especially programs tailored to your needs and preferences – is likely to reduce pain and help you move better. This could include aerobic activity, strength training or Pilates-based movements. It doesn’t seem to matter what type of exercise you do – it matters more that you are consistent and have the right level of supervision, especially early on. Multidisciplinary treatment As with short-term pain, coordinated care involving a mix of physical, occupational and psychological approaches likely works better than usual care alone. Psychological therapies Psychological therapies for chronic pain include approaches to help people change thinking, feelings, behaviours and reactions that might sustain persistent pain. These approaches are likely to reduce pain, though they may not be as effective in improving physical function. Acupuncture Acupuncture probably reduces pain and improves how well you can function compared to placebo or no treatment. While some debate remains about how it works, the evidence suggests potential benefits for some people with chronic back pain. <h2>What doesn’t work or still raises uncertainty?</h2> The review found that many commonly advertised treatments still have uncertain benefits or probably do not benefit people with back pain. Spinal manipulation, for example, has uncertain benefits in acute and chronic back pain, and it likely does not improve how well you function if you have acute back pain. Traction, which involves stretching the spine using weights or pulleys, probably doesn’t help with chronic back pain. Despite its popularity in some circles, there’s little evidence that it works. There isn’t enough reliable data to determine whether advertised treatments – such back braces, vibrating massage guns and herbal patches – are effective. <h2>How can you use the findings?</h2> If you have back pain, start by considering how long you’ve had it. Then explore treatment options that research supports and discuss them with your GP, psychologist or physiotherapist. Your health provider should reassure you about the importance of gradually increasing your activity to resume meaningful work, social and life activities. They should also support you in making informed decisions about which treatments are most appropriate for you at this stage. <img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/253122/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rodrigo-rossi-nogueira-rizzo-1544189">Rodrigo Rossi Nogueira Rizzo</a>, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/neuroscience-research-australia-976">Neuroscience Research Australia</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/aidan-cashin-2355450">Aidan Cashin</a>, NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/neuroscience-research-australia-976">Neuroscience Research Australia</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-any-non-drug-treatments-help-back-pain-heres-what-the-evidence-says-253122">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Body

5 mistakes people make setting financial goals

In discussions around money and goal setting, people talk a lot about financial freedom. What does that mean to you, though? We might redefine money as ‘a unit of choice’, because the more money you make, the more choices you have. Everyone’s aspirations are different, which is one reason why there’s no one-size-fits- all approach to wealth. It’s time to begin to understand what financial freedom means to you, because how on earth are you going to get there, if you don’t know where there is? How will you craft a strategic wealth-building plan when you don’t know what your target is? How will you know if you are making the right decisions in the right areas, decisions that are intentionally and systematically advancing you towards your outcomes. Here are some of the big mistakes I see people make when setting financial goals. <h2>Mistake #1: They have none!</h2> Without a goal, how will you know what to steer towards? You are left just ‘hoping’ that one day things will work out. With no clear direction to head towards, any actions you take are more or less random. You’re often left sitting idle and going nowhere fast, just swept along by whatever current comes your way. <h2>Mistake #2: They make them too big</h2> This might seem counterintuitive, especially since the typical conversation about personal development emphasises aiming for big, ambitious goals. And while these can be valuable, helping to elevate your thinking and giving you something inspiring to work towards, the problem arises when they are your only focus. Without smaller, achievable milestones to serve as stepping stones, the gap between where you are now and your ultimate goal can feel overwhelming. This can make it hard for your subconscious mind to fully commit, leading to procrastination or self-sabotage due to fear of not knowing how to get there. <h2>Mistake #3: They make them too small</h2> While small goals may seem manageable, they can lack the power to ignite your motivation or emotional drive or to be the catalyst that pulls you towards something greater than who and where you are in life right now. Small, uninspiring goals can make it easy to remain complacent. Without a purpose or vision that stretches you, there’s no real incentive to pursue them with passion. They don’t create the emotional connection that’s essential for driving sustained effort and overcoming obstacles. As a result, you may never fully commit to these goals, and they end up being more like tasks to check off a list than meaningful milestones on your path to success. <h2>Mistake #4: They are vague and wishy-washy</h2> When your goals are unclear and lack focus, they are difficult to achieve. Goals like ‘I want to be rich’ of ‘I want more money’ are too broad to provide any real direction. Without concrete details – such as specific numbers, deadlines or actionable steps – you don’t have a clear path to follow. Vague goals make it hard to measure progress or stay motivated, because there’s nothing tangible to work towards. As a result, your efforts can become inconsistent, and it’s easy to lose focus. Without clarity, you can’t point your actions in a specific direction, which makes it unlikely you’ll make any meaningful progress. A well-defined goal, on the other hand, creates a roadmap and keeps you accountable along the way. <h2>Mistake #5: They have no plan to make it real</h2> Setting a clear goal is undeniably important but it’s only part of the process. Just because someone says they want a specific outcome does not mean they will achieve it. Yet many people fixate solely on the goal itself, or they try to manifest wealth and happiness through the ‘law of attraction’ alone. Most people spend 95 per cent of their time focusing on setting the goal and only 5 per cent on the actions needed to achieve it. Do you see the flaw in that approach? Instead, reverse the focus. Spend 5 per cent of your time defining the goal, and 95 per cent of your time working towards making it a reality. This is where having the right system becomes crucial. How do we break free from impotent goal setting and instead craft a set of financial goals that are not only big, beautiful and inspiring, but achievable. By setting targets that are tangible and tactical and are going to set you up to win, you become more than who you are right now. In the end, a goal without a plan is just an idea. A plan without a goal is simply directionless effort. It may keep you busy, but it won’t lead you anywhere meaningful. Both the goal and the plan must work together – one providing the destination, the other offering the roadmap. I always tell my clients they will never out-earn themselves. If you want to level up your results in life, you have to first level up as a person and raise the standards in how you choose to play the game. This is an edited extract from Escape the Middle (Wiley $32.95) by Todd Polke. Todd is an investor, entrepreneur and international educator in investing and wealth creation. For over two decades, he has guided thousands of individuals in growing and scaling their wealth to achieve financial independence. Find out more at <a href="https://www.portfoliowealth.com%20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.portfoliowealth.com </a> Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Aussie TV star wins $9.2m on game show – the largest in history

In an electrifying moment that will surely go down in television history, Australian reality TV star David Genat has claimed a jaw-dropping AUD$9.2 million prize on US television, securing the largest single cash payout ever seen on American TV. The 44-year-old, widely recognised by Aussie audiences from Survivor Australia, Celebrity Apprentice, Rush and Getaway, delivered a masterclass in risk-taking and intuition in NBC’s Deal or No Deal Island. Genat, dubbed the “Survivor golden god” after his 2020 Survivor Australia: All Stars victory, knew he had the upper hand early in the final showdown. But the real twist came when the show’s notorious banker was revealed as none other than Chrissy Teigen. Faced with 26 cases – one containing the life-changing sum of AUD$12.2 million – Genat navigated a nail-biting elimination round, fuelled by his father’s memory and a razor-sharp strategy. Rejecting a staggering seven offers, including multiple million-dollar deals, he played with nerves of steel until just two cases remained. Then came the final offer: a mind-blowing $US5.8 million ($AUD9.2 million). With tension at an all-time high, Genat made the call – he took the deal. It was a decision that paid off in monumental fashion. When his chosen case was opened, it contained just $75. Had he gambled one step further, he would have walked away with next to nothing. Instead, he etched his name into television history with the record-breaking win. “It was surreal,” Genat later shared with USA Today. “The offer came in at US$5.8 million and I started thinking about it, and that is just so much money. I was having a spiritual experience, man. I just knew where that money was. I knew which cases to open. I was looking for signs from my father, who passed away a couple of years ago. I felt his presence there, and he was just guiding me on what cases to open.” That deep connection gave him the clarity to seize the moment and walk away with a life-altering fortune. “My frequency is on another level,” he added. “I fully feel like I’m floating.” With his newfound millions, Genat already has a few indulgences in mind, including a new motorcycle, a luxury watch and some sleek new cars for his four kids. But the adventure might not stop here. Rumours are swirling that Genat could be gearing up for another reality TV showdown on the upcoming Survivor: Australia vs. the World, set to air later this year. Images: Instagram

Money & Banking

Population panic: how demography is used for political gain

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Population is far from the seemingly innocuous and bland topic of “people”. We’re not just talking people. We’re talking the very foundation of society, culture, and economy … and it’s deeply fraught. It’s also an effective political point scorer. Population scrutiny waxes and wanes in Australian populist and political discourse, much like many nations across the globe. <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-behind-the-dramatic-shift-in-canadian-public-opinion-about-immigration-levels-219193">Canada</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-defends-immigration-policy-during-state-of-the-union-blaming-republicans-in-congress-for-refusing-to-act-225158">the United States</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-far-right-political-group-is-gaining-popularity-in-germany-but-so-too-are-protests-against-it-223151">Germany</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-demand-but-disempowered-why-low-skilled-migrant-workers-face-even-worse-exploitation-under-nzs-new-rules-227993">New Zealand</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-taking-back-control-of-its-borders-risks-rolling-back-human-rights-protections-230044">the United Kingdom</a> are all grappling with population issues. But when we talk population, it’s pretty safe to read immigration. It’s immigration that has most of the world talking, because growth for many is dominated by international movements, not local growth. Population growth due to immigration has fed growing fears from some quarters about a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/religion/five-years-terror-christchurch-mosque-danger-muslim-women/103593682">replacement of the majority dominance</a> – in other words, that white people will no longer be the majority in Australia. Contemporary population debate has been largely ill-informed, lacking nuance and is often detrimental. Rooted in a long history of the way we talk about population, contemporary debate is best understood in context, and with facts. <h2>Population dynamics and change</h2> Population is most simply a <a href="https://population.gov.au/population-topics/topic-population-measurement">bunch of individuals</a> living in a specific place. Sounds boring, I know, but the reality is something much greater. When we start talking about what underpins population – composition, characteristics and change – it becomes clear why population is so political. Populations are comprised of varying characteristics – think age, sex, and geography. Characteristics like the age structure of a population have a direct impact on the workforce and economic wellbeing of a nation. A younger population means more expenditure invested in the young to ensure a strong workforce in the future. This is known as the <a href="https://www.prb.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/prb-demographic-dividend-evidence-1.pdf">demographic dividend</a>. An older population age structure, on the other hand, sees more spending on the upper end of the life course – senior people – and pressures on the workforce meeting the economic needs of the nation. This is <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/2f762f95845417aeca25706c00834efa/851dece969d9182cca2570ec000a2501!OpenDocument">structural ageing</a>. Australia’s population, like most of the world, is structurally ageing. We’re living longer and <a href="https://blog.id.com.au/2023/population/population-trends/australias-birth-rate-falls-in-2022#:%7E:text=Australia's%20birth%20rate%20has%20been,level">not replacing ourselves</a> through births. Living longer is a mark of technological success and ingenuity, and the same could be said about below-replacement births. But our success has some downsides. <blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/DBP0rqgSCm5/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"> </div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;"> <div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: 8px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"> </div> </div> <div style="margin-left: auto;"> <div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"> </div> <div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"> </div> </div> </div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"> </div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"> </div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DBP0rqgSCm5/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Australian Bureau of Statistics (@absstats)</a> </div> </blockquote> The trouble with below-level births and an ageing population is that the local age structure is not sufficient to meet the <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/intergenerational-report">needs of the workforce</a>. Simply, the local Australian population cannot meet the economic needs of the nation, and this has the potential to see living standards go backwards. Immigration helps offset the adverse consequences of an ageing population. Population change occurs due to births, deaths and migration. Commonly known as the population balancing equation, population growth is expressed as: births minus deaths plus migration. Immigration makes up the majority of population growth in Australia and has done so consistently since <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/profile-of-australias-population">around 2005</a>, with the exception of international border closures during COVID. Natural increase – the balance of births minus deaths – also contributes to population growth in Australia. However, increasing deaths and declining births means the country is expected to see <a href="https://theconversation.com/eight-charts-on-how-australias-population-is-growing-and-changing-227153">natural decline by 2054</a>. <h2>Population problem</h2> In Australia, there has been a preoccupation with the <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-health/profile-of-australias-population">drivers of population change</a> since colonisation. Is the nation’s population <a href="https://digital-classroom.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/postwar-immigration-drive">growing too slowly</a>? <a href="https://www.themandarin.com.au/237985-australia-population-27-million-milestone/">Too fast</a>? Why are women having <a href="https://theconversation.com/women-in-rich-countries-are-having-fewer-kids-or-none-at-all-whats-going-on-229185#:%7E:text=Simply%2C%20women%20are%20often%20not,and%20buying%20a%20first%20home.">too few children</a>? Are the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/abbott-calls-for-middle-class-women-to-have-more-children-20200128-p53vkx.html">wrong kind of women</a> having too many children? Will migrants <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-15/migrant-movement-in-australia-covid/100536114">want to come</a> to the country? Are there <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/21/migration-numbers-australia-2023-rise">too many migrants</a> coming to Australia? Australia is rarely not in a state of <a href="https://theconversation.com/solving-the-population-problem-through-policy-110970">population panic</a>. Population panic once stemmed from being a small population in a big country vulnerable to external military attack. Now population panic is about the pace of growth being too great, due to immigration. And it doesn’t take much to stoke <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/oct/18/global-population-growth-8-billion-unfdp-united-nations-warning-alarmism">population fear</a>. Population is charged and offers an easy trigger point to leverage voters. Politicians on all sides of the ideological landscape know this and use population discourse effectively for political gain. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/h5CubF42DGI?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> Since the <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/41110698">early 1900s</a>, Australia’s history has been dotted with inquiries into growth and birth rates. In fact, at the time of colonisation, the male-dominated imbalance in the colony sparked calls for more women from Britain – <a href="https://unsw.press/books/the-future-of-us/">of suitable status</a> – to help arrest high rates of hooliganism, drunkenness, and sexually transmitted infections. Women of standing were believed to help socialise the nation and provide essential children for nation building. Nothing much has changed really, with the Treasurer Jim Chalmers saying in the lead up to the 2024 federal budget: “<a href="https://youtu.be/JLzp53D6thg?si=p8YheMdF0-ndO9DB">It would be better if birth rates were higher</a>”. <h2>So why aren’t women having babies?</h2> Australian federal treasurers have expressed concerns about birth rates over many years, across different governments. Chalmers wasn’t the first and he won’t be the last bemoaning below-replacement births. In 2004, then-treasurer Peter Costello <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/peter-costello-1996/transcripts/doorstop-interview-treasury-place-melbourne-16">famously said</a>: “have one for mum, one for dad and one for the country”. <a href="https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2020/07/25/baby-bonus-frydenberg-costello">Josh Frydenberg, while treasurer, stated</a>: <blockquote> I won’t go as far as to say, like Peter Costello, “one for the mother, one for the father and one for the country”. But [what] I can say is that people should feel encouraged about the future and the more children that we have across the country, together with our migration, we will build our population growth and that will be good for the economy.“ </blockquote> In the 1940s, Australia held an inquiry into falling birth rates, and following the second world war Australians were called on to populate or perish. During the 1940s inquiry, <a href="https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/catalog/1786445">women were invited to make submissions</a> reflecting how difficult motherhood was and how unsupported they were: "You men in easy chairs say ‘populate or perish’. Well, I have populated and I have perished – with no blankets.” Many Australians now won’t achieve their desired family size because contemporary life is simply not conducive to having children. Having no or fewer children is now a forced outcome for a growing number of Australians. The barriers to having a child are now insurmountable for far too many. Housing affordability, gender inequality, financial insecurity and climate change make for an unstable and uncertain future. Young Australians are carrying the burden of the nation’s future and the burden is simply too much. They have seen the generational bargain crumble and are being denied a future because of the failings of politics past. <h2>Permanent versus net overseas migration</h2> Among the many nuances missing from the population debate is the difference in the terminology used to refer to immigration. From a planning point of view, permanent migration is discussed; from a population perspective, net overseas migration applies. The difference between the two is stark and used in a smoke and mirrors way to hide reality or harm an opponent. Government has much control over permanent migration, little control over net overseas migration. Permanent migration refers to the cap of permanent visas granted. The permanent migration program is reviewed annually by the <a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/migration-program-planning-levels">Department of Home Affairs</a> with input from select experts, peak bodies, and government. Permanent migration <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/Budget/reviews/2023-24/Immigration">has fluctuated over the past ten years</a>, reflecting political point scoring. Under Tony Abbott’s government in 2014-15, permanent migration was just under 190,000. The permanent migration remained in the 180,000s until declining to over 160,000 in 2017-18 under Scott Morrison. Morrison also reduced permanent migration further to around 144,000 in 2021-22. In its final year, the Morrison government flagged increasing the planning level for <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-06/p2021-182464.pdf">permanent migration to 190,000</a>. Planning levels under the Anthony Albanese government were 195,000 and 190,000 in 2022-23 and 2023-24 respectively. The permanent migration program ceiling is set to decline by 5,000 places to 185,000 in 2024-25 under Albanese. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has also announced his party would reduce permanent numbers to 140,000, seemingly linking <a href="https://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2024/05/16/leader-oppositions-budget-address-reply">housing affordability to permanent migration</a>. Dutton has also said his party would cut net overseas migration (NOM) but has since <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-08/dutton-walks-back-promise-to-cut-net-migration/10469921">backtracked on his plan</a>, possibly because he realised it couldn’t be done. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Explaining the 2024 Migration Surge A recent surge in net migration has become a hot topic, with politicians & media linking it to housing pressures. But what is Net Migration? And do we really have unusually high volumes of migration? <a href="https://t.co/TjzwbtGqsF">https://t.co/TjzwbtGqsF</a> <a href="https://t.co/aFHXIeC4ay">pic.twitter.com/aFHXIeC4ay</a> — Alan Gamlen (@alangamlen) <a href="https://twitter.com/alangamlen/status/1795721881699664286?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 29, 2024</a></blockquote> Net overseas migration feeds into population estimates and is the balance of incoming minus outgoing migration. <a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/migration-program-planning-levels?fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAaZPBEWLyQJhkvB8_SaqYBSgRdV_rx4Kjy86bbkugYRsOO2cukAoD2wd5dM_aem_AcfxCup1XXR8DP4ZaRfFTFaXggVYw8b8TyNLWsw-3fIenPm_wsx7xM0zfsZHmQ2OjYi0H-YUQdLxUjQUcT47Feij#:%7E:text=Net%20overseas%20migration%20%E2%80%93%20relationship%20with,New%20Zealanders%20and%20Humanitarian%20migrants">NOM is comprised</a> of temporary and permanent migration and includes refugees, students, working holiday makers, and even Australian and New Zealand citizens. A cut to the permanent migration program is unlikely to affect net overseas migration numbers. NOM is set to return to <a href="https://budget.gov.au/content/bp3/download/bp3_14_appendix_a.pdf">recent historical average</a> even without reduced permanent numbers. Most people granted permanency are <a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/migration-program-planning-levels?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1aJLdjyJotVfICnc2Ge8vcrJ6DMCaPC4XfDOST9owl1qS4YfBYCKYPkBw_aem_AcegFZW0_vafT8J90jDFyG8aVhMd2f0Ab_9EqE1Y38Q5vuVT5NExZi5Um2BrkpHg0odl0odbI0pDfnUE7A34PRhi">already in the country</a>. What will occur with a reduced migration program is increased temporariness. Increased temporariness has the potential to erode social cohesion, harming migrants and Australian society overall. Just like births, populist tactics are used when talking immigration for quick political point scoring. It works, but is it good for people? <h2>Turning on ourselves</h2> Demography is often used against the population in a peculiar ploy to win political points. Take gender. Fewer birth means less expenditure on paid parental leave and superannuation for those receiving parental leave. Announcing <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-14/federal-budget-pledges-superannuation-into-paid-parental-leave/103846312">increased</a> paid parental leave benefits and superannuation while knowing births are set to be fewer is political genius. Chalmers announced exactly this in the 2024 budget. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> BREAKING: Parliament has just passed our bill to expand Paid Parental Leave to 26 weeks. On top of that, we've announced a plan to pay super on PPL from 1 July 2025 - all part of our efforts to ensure women earn more, keep more of what they earn & retire with more as well <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/auspol?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#auspol</a> <a href="https://t.co/p3p4ib6sed">pic.twitter.com/p3p4ib6sed</a> — Jim Chalmers MP (@JEChalmers) <a href="https://twitter.com/JEChalmers/status/1769541268739080507?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 18, 2024</a></blockquote> The government says it’s doing more for women and mothers, but what it’s actually doing is a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-20/paid-parental-leave-payments-saving-millions-fertility-rate/103866506">whole lot of nothing</a>. There is no substantive examination of why women are saying no to motherhood. Demographic insights have enabled an effective political sleight of hand to give the illusion of doing something when actually not doing much at all. Blaming population growth for the housing crisis is another stroke of political mastery. Talking tough on population (immigration) while promoting and relying on immigration is a tale as old as Australia’s ageing population. When in opposition the talk is tough; when in government, actions speak louder than words. Governments and oppositions, no matter the political leaning, make promises and then realise immigration is the economic safety raft keep the economy afloat. <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/speeches/budget-speech-2024-25">Chalmers talked tough</a> on immigration in his 2024 budget speech, pointing the finger of blame towards immigration for all manner of things, <blockquote> […] we’re addressing the pressures caused by population growth, with net overseas migration next year now expected to be half what it was last year. </blockquote> But the government can’t take the credit for lowering NOM – nothing they did lowered the artificially high rates of NOM Australia saw post COVID border reopening. Yes, the Albanese government has introduced changes to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-tightens-student-visa-rules-migration-hits-record-high-2024-03-21/">build integrity</a> into the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-raises-minimum-savings-student-visa-warns-fake-recruitment-2024-05-08/">migration system</a>, but NOM figures were set to decline anyway. It comes down to the way it is calculated. Border closures in Australia saw NOM fall to <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/overseas-migration/2022-23-financial-year">-88,000 in 2020-21</a>. That’s negative nearly 90,000 people. <hr /> <iframe id="datawrapper-chart-9amUU" style="border: none;" title="Overseas migration in Australia from 2014 to 2024" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/9amUU/1/" width="100%" height="426" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" aria-label="Interactive line chart" data-external="1"></iframe> <hr /> This was the first such decline outside wartime in Australia’s recorded history. A big deal. Temporary migrants, including students, left Australia prematurely at the onset and peak of COVID-related measures. Morrison, prime minister at the time, told international students and temporary visa holders to “go home”, while saying those with critical skills <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-03/coronavirus-pm-tells-international-students-time-to-go-to-home/12119568">could stay and contribute</a>: “For those backpackers in Australia who are nurses or doctors, or have other critical skills that can really help us during this crisis, then there will be opportunities for them”. Expendability of migrants echoed in this statement. What happened with the NOM during COVID closed borders was essentially a calculation reset. Higher than expected numbers of people left Australia prematurely. Students, especially, left Australia prior to their studies finishing. This resulted in greater outgoings of NOM than the recent average. NOM restarted the moment borders reopened, but because so many brought forward their exit the number of incomers weren’t balanced by the usual outflow of people. Taking a longer view of NOM prior to and since COVID-related measures shows smoother growth than popular media suggests. But nuance is hard to articulate in small soundbites, especially when the language of otherness is so enticing. <h2>Creating the ‘other’</h2> <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14705958231216936">The language of otherness</a> is used extensively in the population (immigration) narrative. Dutton played population bingo with his use of the word “foreign” in his 2024 budget reply speech referring to students, ending investment, and interference. Dutton also blamed migrants for road congestion and pressure on local services. His speech was a populist symphony. When in opposition, members of the now government also made disparaging comments about migrants. For example, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/do-we-want-migrants-to-return-in-the-same-numbers-the-answer-is-no-20200501-p54p2q.html">Kristina Keneally</a> wrote an opinion piece suggesting migrants were taking jobs from locals. Fear about population is easily manufactured, and once created enables a fix the playmaker can resolve. Much like a David Copperfield magic special. The trouble with these tactics is in the enormous <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/australias-population-country-birth/latest-release">diversity in Australia</a> – we risk turning on ourselves and eroding already fraying social cohesion. <h2>Shaping Australia</h2> Our preoccupation with population largely reflects the central place people and demography hold in the economy and very function of the nation. But we appear to have lost our heads, instead problematising the very heart of what makes us Australian: the people. Demography is a slow-moving train, and based on past and current trends population science can somewhat predict the future. The populist playbook results in population (namely immigration) used for political point scoring, to the detriment of the people, particularly the young. Australia is by no means perfect. There is much work to be done to fix the multiple crises the nation is confronted with – housing affordability, financial insecurity, gender inequality, and climate change. A sensible approach to population and immigration is needed to ensure living standards don’t go backwards. Migrants help us weather the demographic headwinds. Rather than use population for political gain, we need instead to harness the power of demography to solve our way out of the gigantic mess we’re in. The key is ensuring young people have a future worth living. <hr /> This is an edited extract from <a href="https://thamesandhudson.com.au/product/how-australian-democracy-works-and-why-we-need-it-more-than-ever/">How Australian Democracy Works</a>, a new collection of essays from The Conversation on all aspects of the country’s political landscape.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/230409/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/liz-allen-10193">Liz Allen</a>, Demographer, POLIS Centre for Social Policy Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/population-panic-how-demography-is-used-for-political-gain-230409">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Money & Banking

How long will you live? New evidence says it’s much more about your choices than your genes

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> One of the most enduring questions humans have is how long we’re going to live. With this comes the question of how much of our lifespan is shaped by our environment and choices, and how much is predetermined by our genes. A study recently published in the prestigious journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-03483-9">Nature Medicine</a> has attempted for the first time to quantify the relative contributions of our environment and lifestyle versus our genetics in how we age and how long we live. The findings were striking, suggesting our environment and lifestyle play a much greater role than our genes in determining our longevity. <h2>What the researchers did</h2> This study used data from the <a href="https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/">UK Biobank</a>, a large database in the United Kingdom that contains in-depth health and lifestyle data from roughly 500,000 people. The data available include genetic information, medical records, imaging and information about lifestyle. A separate part of the study used data from a subset of more than 45,000 participants whose blood samples underwent something called “<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-022-00511-7">proteomic profiling</a>”. Proteomic profiling is a relatively new technique that looks at how proteins in the body change over time to identify a person’s age at a molecular level. By using this method researchers were able to estimate how quickly an individual’s body was actually ageing. This is called their biological age, as opposed to their chronological age (or years lived). The researchers assessed 164 environmental exposures as well as participants’ genetic markers for disease. Environmental exposures included lifestyle choices (for example, smoking, physical activity), social factors (for example, living conditions, household income, employment status) and early life factors, such as body weight in childhood. They then looked for associations between genetics and environment and 22 major age-related diseases (such as coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes), mortality and biological ageing (as determined by the proteomic profiling). These analyses allowed the researchers to estimate the relative contributions of environmental factors and genetics to ageing and dying prematurely. <h2>What did they find?</h2> When it came to disease-related mortality, as we would expect, age and sex explained a significant amount (about half) of the variation in how long people lived. The key finding, however, was environmental factors collectively accounted for around 17% of the variation in lifespan, while genetic factors contributed less than 2%. This finding comes down very clearly on the nurture side in the “nature versus nurture” debate. It suggests environmental factors influence health and longevity to a far greater extent than genetics. Not unexpectedly, the study showed a different mix of environmental and genetic influences for different diseases. Environmental factors had the greatest impact on lung, heart and liver disease, while genetics played the biggest role in determining a person’s risk of breast, ovarian and prostate cancers, and dementia. The environmental factors that had the most influence on earlier death and biological ageing included smoking, socioeconomic status, physical activity levels and living conditions. Interestingly, being taller at age ten was found to be associated with a shorter lifespan. Although this may seem surprising, and the reasons are not entirely clear, this aligns with <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140509110756.htm">previous research</a> finding taller people are more likely to die earlier. Carrying more weight at age ten and maternal smoking (if your mother smoked in late pregnancy or when you were a newborn) were also found to shorten lifespan. Probably the most surprising finding in this study was a lack of association between diet and markers of biological ageing, as determined by the proteomic profiling. This flies in the face of the extensive body of evidence showing the crucial role of <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-023-00868-w">dietary patterns</a> in chronic disease risk and longevity. But there are a number of plausible explanations for this. The first could be a lack of statistical power in the part of the study looking at biological ageing. That is, the number of people studied may have been too small to allow the researchers to see the true impact of diet on ageing. Second, the dietary data in this study, which was self-reported and only measured at one time point, is likely to have been of relatively poor quality, limiting the researchers’ ability to see associations. And third, as the relationship between diet and longevity is likely to be complex, disentangling dietary effects from other lifestyle factors may be difficult. So despite this finding, it’s still safe to say the food we eat is one of the most important pillars of health and longevity. <h2>What other limitations do we need to consider?</h2> Key exposures (such as diet) in this study were only measured at a single point in time, and not tracked over time, introducing potential errors into the results. Also, as this was an observational study, we can’t assume associations found represent causal relationships. For example, just because living with a partner correlated with a longer lifespan, it doesn’t mean this caused a person to live longer. There may be other factors which explain this association. Finally, it’s possible this study may have underestimated the role of genetics in longevity. It’s important to recognise genetics and environment don’t operate in isolation. Rather, health outcomes are shaped by their interplay, and this study may not have fully captured the complexity of these interactions. <h2>The future is (largely) in your hands</h2> It’s worth noting there were a number of factors such as household income, home ownership and employment status associated with diseases of ageing in this study that are not necessarily within a person’s control. This highlights the crucial role of addressing the social determinants of health to ensure everyone has the best possible chance of living a long and healthy life. At the same time, the results offer an empowering message that longevity is largely shaped by the choices we make. This is great news, unless you have good genes and were hoping they would do the heavy lifting. Ultimately, the results of this study reinforce the notion that while we may inherit certain genetic risks, how we eat, move and engage with the world seems to be more important in determining how healthy we are and how long we live.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/251054/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hassan-vally-202904">Hassan Vally</a>, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-long-will-you-live-new-evidence-says-its-much-more-about-your-choices-than-your-genes-251054">original article</a>. Image: Shutterstock </div>

Caring

Why do I grieve my childhood home so much now we’ve sold it?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> Grief can hit us in powerful and unanticipated ways. You might expect to grieve a person, a pet or even a former version of yourself – but many people are surprised by the depth of sad yearning they can feel after selling the childhood home. In fact, it is <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10615-018-0682-5">normal to grieve a place</a>. And this grief can be especially profound if it coincides with a parent dying or moving into residential aged care, leading to the sale of their house. Grief is the response to the loss of anything to which we have an emotional connection. A <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10615-018-0682-5">growing body</a> of <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203860731/counting-losses-darcy-harris">research</a> is looking at how grief can extend to “non-person” losses such as infertility, loss of religion and, yes, the loss of a former home. <h2>Why would someone grieve a house?</h2> The childhood home can be an important place for many of us. It literally housed our formative development, family bonds, and core memories. Hopefully, the childhood home is where we learned about safety, security and love. It was likely surrounded by our neighbourhood, and close to important places such as school, playgrounds and friends’ houses. It is no wonder we grieve it when it’s gone. It’s normal to <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315126197-20/grieving-lost-home-marc-fried">grieve things we can’t see and touch</a> but are real and valued. Just as a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.70031">serious diagnosis might trigger</a> grief for an imagined future for yourself, or an <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732314538550">identity</a> you once cherished, loss of a childhood home can hit us harder than we think. When you sell a once-beloved home, you don’t just lose the physical space. You also lose all of what that space might represent, such as birthday celebrations, Christmas lunches, sleepovers with friends or many happy hours playing in the garden. The childhood home often is a symbol of family connection and an anchor in the storm of life. Thinking of the home and all it represents can elicit nostalgia. In fact, the word “nostalgia” <a href="https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/nostalgia-cowbells-meaning-life">derives from the Greek</a> words nostos (return) and algos (pain). The word is rooted in the pain we often feel being away from home. And just as siblings are unique – each with different memories of and connections to their childhood home – their responses to its sale can differ markedly. It is normal if your sister or brother grieves the home in a different way to you – or maybe doesn’t even seem to grieve its loss at all. <h2>A complicated grief</h2> When a childhood home is sold because of the death of parents, the feelings of loss about the home are closely linked. The home being sold can be a type of secondary loss that sits in the periphery to the primary loss of parents. Grieving the deaths might, at first, take precedence over the loss of the home. It might only be later that the loss of the home and all it represents becomes apparent. Because the home provides a connection to the deceased person, the loss of the home might add another layer of grief about your parents. Perhaps you find that whenever you recall memories of mum or dad, they seem always to be at the house. It’s also normal if you feel immense <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10615-018-0682-5">guilt</a> about grieving the home. People might chastise themselves for worrying about “silly things” and not grieving “enough” about the person who died. <a href="https://www.agingcare.com/questions/how-do-i-deal-with-the-guilt-of-selling-moms-house-481550.htm">Guilt about selling the home</a> can also be common. Not everyone has positive memories of their childhood home. Difficult family dynamics, maltreatment and abuse can complicate the emotional connection to childhood spaces and the grief response to their loss. In such cases, the loss of the childhood home can elicit grief about the loss of the childhood that could have – and should have – been. The loss of a home that was the site of discord can be even more challenging than for people with more idyllic childhood experiences. <h2>How can I cope with this loss?</h2> Grief from the loss of a childhood home is <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10615-018-0682-5">real and valid</a>. We should recognise this and be kind to ourselves and others experiencing it. We shouldn’t minimise the loss or make fun of it. Usually, the loss is anticipated, and this allows you to take photos, furniture or mementos from the home or garden before you leave or sell. Grief researchers call these “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X20300031">transitional</a> <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13576270412331329812">objects</a>”. They may help you maintain a connection to what is lost, while still grieving the place. <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10615-018-0682-5">Social support</a> while grieving is important. Some people share memories and photos of the home with their siblings, or derive comfort from driving by the home. Just be prepared for the possibility it will likely change as the new owners adapt it to their needs. You might feel affronted, but hopefully can eventually accept the property now belongs to someone else. Chat to your doctor if the loss is particularly difficult, and your grief doesn’t change and subside over time. They might be able to recommend a psychologist who specialises in grief. If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/251058/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lauren-breen-1142446">Lauren Breen</a>, Professor of Psychology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-grieve-my-childhood-home-so-much-now-weve-sold-it-and-what-can-i-do-about-it-251058">original article</a>. Image: RDNE Stock project/Pexels </div>

Home & Garden

Amid claims of abuse, neglect and poor standards, what is going wrong with childcare in Australia?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> On Monday, an ABC’s Four Corners <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-17/betrayal-of-trust/105063150">investigation</a> reported shocking cases of abuse and neglect in Australian childcare centres. This included examples of children being sexually abused, restrained for hours in high chairs, and fed nutritionally substandard meals such as pasta with ketchup. While acknowledging there are high-quality services operating in the community, the program also showed how centre-based childcare is big business, dominated by for-profit providers, who may not be meeting regulatory standards. What is going wrong with childcare in Australia? <h2>Differing levels of quality</h2> Data from Australia’s childcare regulator <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-02/NQF%20Snapshot%20Q4%202024%20FINAL.pdf">consistently shows</a> for-profit childcare services are, on average, rated as <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/NQFSnapshot_Q4_2020.pdf">lower quality</a> than not-for-profit services. Of those rated by regulators, 11% of for-profit long daycare centres are not meeting national minimum quality standards (they are just “working towards”). This compares with 7% of not-for-profit centres not meeting minimum standards. There are 13% of for-profit centres exceeding the standards, compared to 28% of not-for-profits. Inquiries suggest this divergence is due to staffing levels, qualifications and pay. In 2023, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/inquiries-and-consultations/childcare-inquiry-2023/december-2023-final-report">found</a> large for-profit providers spend significantly less on staffing than not-for-profit providers. Large for-profit providers <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/inquiries-and-consultations/childcare-inquiry-2023/september-2023-interim-report">have a higher proportion of part-time and casual staff</a> than not-for-profits. They also employ less experienced early childhood teachers. On top of this, they are more likely to use award rates of pay, which are typically lower than enterprise agreement rates. Lower pay and less job security is related to higher turnover of staff, which makes it <a href="https://theconversation.com/covid-chaos-has-shed-light-on-many-issues-in-the-australian-childcare-sector-here-are-4-of-them-174404">difficult for educators to establish and maintain</a> the trusting relationships with children and families that underpin high quality. Despite this, the federal government continues to support for-profit services through <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/early-childhood/providers/child-care-subsidy">childcare subsidies</a>. These subsidies are designed to help families with the costs of childcare. But they do not stop some providers increasing their fees. The ACCC <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/changes-proposed-to-make-childcare-affordable-and-accessible-for-all-families">found a consistent pattern</a> of increased government subsidies leading to higher out-of-pocket expenses for families, due to subsequent fee increases. <h2>It hasn’t always been like this</h2> Childcare subsidies haven’t always worked in this way. “Operational subsidies” were introduced in 1972 through the historic <a href="https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cca197275/">Child Care Act</a>, which set the precedent for Australian governments to fund childcare. This aimed to support women’s workforce participation through an expanded, high-quality childcare sector. Subsidies at the time were only available to not-for-profit services and required the employment of qualified staff, including teachers. In these ways, Commonwealth funding positioned childcare as a public good, like school education. Then, in 1991, federal government subsidies were extended to for-profit providers. This prompted dramatic changes in the childcare landscape, leading to a dominance of for-profit centres. Today, more than 70% of all long day-care centres are <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume1-report.pdf">operated by private providers</a>. Between <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume2-supporting.pdf">2013 and 2023</a>, the number of for-profit long daycare services jumped by 60%, while not-for-profits only grew by 4%. <h2>Quality concerns</h2> There are <a href="https://www.startingblocks.gov.au/large-providers">25 large long daycare providers</a> in Australia and of these, 21 are run for profit. Large for-profit providers impact sector quality in several ways. Many have disproportionately high numbers of staffing waivers, granted by regulators, permitting them to operate centres without the required number of qualified staff. According to unpublished research by Gabrielle Meagher, as of October 2024, 11 large for-profit providers held waivers for a quarter or more of their services and five held waivers for more than a third. This compares to 15% of the sector overall. Large for-profit providers also serve investors as well as families. So there are extra <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/112/4/1127/1911721">incentives to cut costs</a> and maximise profits. The dominance of for-profit providers also makes them <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-politics/article/abs/institutional-sources-of-business-power/E9D9D945CB59843C4DF8CE4835350602">powerful players</a> in policy-making circles, as governments depend on them to provide an essential service. <h2>Why isn’t the system working?</h2> Given Australia has a <a href="https://www.acecqa.gov.au/national-quality-framework">regulatory and quality assurance system</a> for childcare services, why do we have these quality issues? As the Productivity Commission <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/childhood/report/childhood-volume2-supporting.pdf">found</a>, regulators are under-resourced, and inspections are infrequent. Services that repeatedly fail to meet the minimum standards are still allowed to operate, sometimes for more than a decade. Services are notified about upcoming inspections, potentially giving them time to give a false impression of their quality and safety standards. As Four Corners highlighted, poor-quality services, with bad pay and working conditions are driving good educators away from the sector. <h2>What next?</h2> The Albanese government recently passed legislation to “guarantee” eligible families <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/newsroom/articles/3day-guarantee-legislation-passed#:%7E:text=The%203-day%20guarantee%20will,each%20week%20for%20each%20child">three days of subsidised childcare</a> per week from January 2026. But families need more than access. They also require a guarantee this childcare will be high-quality and keep children safe. Even without the extra spending on the three-day guarantee, government spending on childcare subsidies <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20Childcare%20Inquiry-final%20report%20December%202023.pdf?ref=0&download=y">is due to reach nearly A$15 billion</a> by 2026–27. Thus there is also a corresponding duty to taxpayers to ensure these funds are going to high-quality providers. In the wake of the Four Corners report, the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/worldtoday/childcare-wrap/105066270">Greens are calling</a> for a royal commission into childcare. But we do not need this level of inquiry to tell us the current system needs fundamental change. Stronger regulatory powers, while important, will not be enough on their own. High-quality services need well-educated and well-supported staff. They also need governance and leadership that value educators’ expertise and enable consistently high standards.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/252493/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gabrielle-meagher-594155">Gabrielle Meagher</a>, Professor Emerita, School of Society, Communication and Culture, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/macquarie-university-1174">Macquarie University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marianne-fenech-228936">Marianne Fenech</a>, Professor, Early Childhood Governance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/amid-claims-of-abuse-neglect-and-poor-standards-what-is-going-wrong-with-childcare-in-australia-252493">original article</a>. Image: ABC </div>

After a century of Monday to Friday, could the 4-day week finally be coming to Australia?

<div class="theconversation-article-body">The reality of shorter working hours could be one step closer for many Australians, pending the outcome of the federal election. The Greens, who could control crucial cross bench votes in a hung parliament, have announced plans for a <a href="https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/greens-launch-4-day-work-week-election-policy">four-day</a> working week, with no loss of pay. They say the policy would alleviate stress and burn out, and increase women’s participation in the workforce. Earning the same money for fewer hours would appeal to most workers. But is it too good to be true? Could it really be rolled out cost free to all workplaces, especially to “client facing” companies and service providers? Or does research suggest the Greens could be onto something? <h2>The Greens’ plan</h2> The Greens’ policy would involve a new National Institute for the Four Day Work Week and a test case through the Fair Work Commission. A series of national trials would be set up in a number of different industries, whereby workers would work 80% of their normal hours, while maintaining 100% of their pay. According to Greens Senator Barbara Pocock, it’s a win-win for everyone: <blockquote> It can increase productivity, reduce absenteeism, improve recruitment and retention and give employees more time to manage their home life. This change will allow workers to create a working week that works for them. </blockquote> <h2>The 100:80:100 model</h2> The four-day work week being proposed in this instance is commonly regarded as the 100:80:100 model. It delivers 100% of the pay, for 80% of the hours, in <a href="https://www.4dayweek.com/news-posts/100-80-100-rule">return</a> for maintaining 100% of productivity. This is unlike other forms of shorter working weeks, which compress five days’ worth of work into four longer days. This obviously disadvantages some employees. Recent <a href="https://figshare.swinburne.edu.au/articles/report/Emerging_Four_Day_Work_Week_Trends_in_Australia_New_insights_based_on_interviews_with_Australian_firms_who_have_already_adopted_4DWW_arrangements_Preview_report_/26282311?file=47647063">research</a> conducted by Swinburne University of Technology involved interviews with ten Australian firms that have already adopted the 100:80:100 model. They were a mixture of small and medium sized private sector businesses, including management consulting firms, a shipping and logistics company, and recruitment and marketing agencies. The research underlined the potential for a range of positive outcomes for both employers and employees. Workers reported having better work-life balance, more time to complete “life administration” tasks, and more time to invest in hobbies, exercise, wellness and self-care. Bosses cited productivity gains, reduced sick days, and significant improvements in recruitment and retention rates. However, the 100:80:100 model is viewed with scepticism in some quarters. There is still doubt that productivity and output would be maintained, or in some cases improved, when workers are working one day fewer per week. Also, there could be costs associated with the implementation of this work model for front-line roles, such as retail, schools, hospitals and nursing homes. Additional workers may need to be hired, at extra expense, to cover the hours dropped by the existing workforce. <h2>100 years of working 5 days a week</h2> The year 2026 will mark the 100th anniversary of the five-day work week. It was car maker Henry Ford who <a href="https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/henry-fords-five-day-week/">reduced</a> the working week in the United States from six days to five. Other sectors and countries followed suit. This was at a time when the average life expectancy of Australian workers was just 55 and households typically only had one bread-winner. Despite the time saved by the many technological breakthroughs in the past 100 years – from the photocopier, desktop computer and fax machine, to the internet, mobile phones and AI – the average Australian is now <a href="https://futurework.org.au/report/taking-up-the-right-to-disconnect-unsatisfactory-working-hours-and-unpaid-overtime/">working longer hours</a> in paid and unpaid labour than ever before. The Greens point out Australian society is changing. More women and carers are either in the workforce or would be encouraged into the workforce by more flexible arrangements: <blockquote> yet we are constrained by archaic labour laws that see the fruits of our efforts swallowed up in profits for bosses and shareholders. </blockquote> The role of generative AI technologies in the workplace may also deliver benefits to workers. Separate Swinburne <a href="https://figshare.swinburne.edu.au/articles/report/Generative_AI_at_work_Empowering_employee_mental_wellbeing/27252948">research</a> has revealed an increasing expectation among workers that they will receive a share in the time saved by future technologies in the form of improved work-life balance and wellbeing gains. <h2>Time to enter the 21st century</h2> Earlier this year, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/jan/27/two-hundred-uk-companies-sign-up-for-permanent-four-day-working-week">200 UK companies</a> signed up to the 100:80:100 model, as part of a campaign to “reinvent Britain’s working week”. Large scale trials are also underway in <a href="https://4dayweek.io/country/canada">Canada</a> and several <a href="https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/02/02/the-four-day-week-which-countries-have-embraced-it-and-how-s-it-going-so-far">European</a> countries. The global interest in a shorter working week is not surprising, and has likely been fuelled by the COVID pandemic, which has caused workers and employers to re-imagine their working lives. If the Greens are in a position to leverage any balance of power after the coming election, it could be Australia’s turn to recognise the conventional five-day working week is no longer fit for purpose.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/252379/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> By <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-l-hopkins-255434">John L. Hopkins</a>, Associate Professor of Management, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-a-century-of-monday-to-friday-could-the-4-day-week-finally-be-coming-to-australia-252379">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

"Frankly, it's pathetic": The Project hosts lash out at wombat snatcher

The hosts of The Project have lashed out at US hunting influencer Sam Jones after she pulled out of a scheduled interview at the last minute. Jones, <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/legal/wombatgate-explodes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">who sparked outrage</a> by snatching a baby wombat from its mother and sharing a video of the incident with her 92,000 Instagram followers, has faced further condemnation for her recent actions. Jones was set to appear on The Project on Sunday night to answer tough questions from the panel but instead opted to provide a pre-recorded video statement. The decision did not sit well with host Hamish Macdonald, who described it as "pathetic". <a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/lifestyle/family-pets/outrage-should-not-be-selective-wombat-snatcher-speaks-out" target="_blank" rel="noopener">In her video message</a>, Jones apologised for her actions but also took aim at the Australian government for allowing farmers to kill wombats. "It was an incredible mistake, and there hasn't been a moment I haven't regretted it," she stated. However, she then shifted the blame, saying, "The same government that is calling for my head is the one that spends millions of your tax dollars to mass slaughter native Australian animals." Jones later posted a statement on Instagram about the controversy. Addressing the audience, Hamish Macdonald said, "I think we probably just need to be totally straight and honest with you at home, we were all here earlier this afternoon to do an interview with her and ask her questions, but she pulled out of that and instead provided that video statement. I think, frankly, it's pathetic, given what's happened." He continued, "Obviously, no one condones violence or threats of violence or any of the things that have been thrown her way, but honestly, to say you're 'genuinely sorry' but not be willing to explain yourself, and then point the finger at the Australian government – I think it's pretty lousy." Co-host Sarah Harris then chimed in, saying, "I think the infuriating stuff came in her apology afterwards, where she said, 'Oh you know, the Australian government allows the slaughter of wombats.' It's just not true. We know that wombats are protected here." Harris pointed out that offenders harming a wombat could face fines of up to $40,000 and two years in prison. Macdonald then doubled down on his criticism, calling Jones' statement "riddled with misinformation". He added, "This is typical of influencers. They only want to make their own statements to the world, with no responsibility or accountability. The reality is, there's been a strong public response because Australians are proud of their wildlife and the incredible nature that we have." Following Jones' decision to cancel her interview, viewers of The Project quickly took to social media to voice their disapproval. One Facebook user wrote, "Sounds like, 'Sorry, not sorry'." Another commented, "She is only sorry she got caught," while a third remarked, "Typical American turning this whole wombat episode into an Australian political error. She needs to get her FACTS straight." Jones has yet to respond to the fresh wave of criticism, but the backlash against her actions and response shows no signs of dying down. Images: Instagram / The Project

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Catch of the day: bride hauls in shark at her wedding!

A simple, science-backed way to sharpen thinking and improve memory – and it's not what you think

Does technology cause ‘digital dementia’ in older people?

"Dumb and Dumber": Karl levels brutal accusation

What would – and should – happen to the ABC under the next federal government?

Big changes are planned for aged care in 2025

Our ancestors didn’t eat 3 meals a day. So why do we?

Good news for beach lovers

Despite some key milestones since 2000, Australia still has a long way to go on gender equality

Do stem cell injections for knee osteoarthritis actually work?

‘Behind every claim is a grieving family’. Death benefits inquiry update

Do any non-drug treatments help back pain? Here’s what the evidence says

5 mistakes people make setting financial goals

Aussie TV star wins $9.2m on game show – the largest in history

Population panic: how demography is used for political gain

How long will you live? New evidence says it’s much more about your choices than your genes

Why do I grieve my childhood home so much now we’ve sold it?

Amid claims of abuse, neglect and poor standards, what is going wrong with childcare in Australia?

After a century of Monday to Friday, could the 4-day week finally be coming to Australia?

"Frankly, it's pathetic": The Project hosts lash out at wombat snatcher

Our Partners