Search

Elephant tourism often involves cruelty – here are steps toward more humane, animal-friendly excursions

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-szydlowski-1495781">Michelle Szydlowski</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/miami-university-1934">Miami University</a> Suju Kali is a 50-year-old elephant in Nepal who has been carrying tourists for over 30 years. Like many elephants I encounter through my <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2022.2028628">research</a>, Suju Kali exhibits anxiety and can be aggressive toward strangers. She suffers from emotional trauma as a result of prolonged, commercial human contact. Like Suju Kali, many animals are trapped within the tourism industry. Some venues have no oversight and little concern for animal or tourist safety. Between 120,000 and 340,000 animals are used globally in a variety of wildlife tourism attractions, including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138939">endangered species</a> like elephants. Over a quarter of the world’s <a href="https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/7140/45818198">endangered elephants</a> reside in captivity with little oversight. Wildlife tourism – which involves viewing wildlife such as primates or birds in conservation areas, feeding or touching captive or “rehabilitated” wildlife in facilities, and bathing or riding animals like elephants – is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2022.2156523">tricky business</a>. I know this because I am <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=YbweA2MAAAAJ&hl=en">a researcher studying human relationships with elephants</a> in both tourism and conservation settings within Southeast Asia. These types of experiences have long been an <a href="https://kathmandupost.com/money/2021/06/17/tourism-is-nepal-s-fourth-largest-industry-by-employment-study">extremely popular and profitable</a> part of the <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074">tourism market</a>. But now, many travel-related organizations are urging people not to participate in, or <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2018/04/27/animal-welfare-travelers-how-enjoy-wildlife-without-harming/544938002/">calling for an outright ban on, interactive wildlife experiences</a>. Tourism vendors have started marketing more “ethical options” for consumers. Some are attempting to truly improve the health and welfare of wildlife, and some are transitioning captive wildlife into touch-free, non-riding or lower-stress environments. In other places, organizations are attempting to <a href="https://www.fao.org/documents/card/es/c/b2c5dad0-b9b9-5a3d-a720-20bf3b9f0dc2/">implement standards of care</a> or create manuals that outline good practices for animal husbandry. This marketing, academics argue, is often simply “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.11.007">greenwashing</a>,” <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2023.2280704">applying marketing labels to make consumers feel better</a> about their choices without making any real changes. Worse, research shows that some programs marketing themselves as ethical tourism may instead be widening economic gaps and harming both humans and other species that they are meant to protect. <h2>No quick fix</h2> For example, rather than tourist dollars trickling down to local struggling families as intended by local governments, many tourism venues are owned by nonresidents, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/japfcsc.v2i1.26746">meaning the profits do not stay in the area</a>. Likewise, only a small number of residents can afford to own tourism venues, and venues do not provide employment for locals from lower income groups. This economic gap is especially obvious in Nepalese elephant stables: Venue owners continue to make money off elephants, while elephant caregivers continue to work 17 hours a day for about US$21 a month; tourists are led to believe they are “<a href="https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/book/10.1079/9781800624498.0000">promoting sustainability</a>.” Yet, there are no easy answers, especially for elephants working in tourism. Moving them to sanctuaries is difficult because with no governmental or global welfare oversight, elephants may end up in worse conditions. Many kindhearted souls who want to “help” elephants know little about their biology and mental health needs, or what it takes to keep them healthy. Also, feeding large animals like Suju Kali is pricey, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14010171">costing around $19,000 yearly</a>. So without profits from riding or other income, owners – or would-be rescuers – can’t maintain elephants. Releasing captive elephants to the jungle is not a choice – many have never learned to live in the wild, so they cannot survive on their own. <h2>Hurting local people</h2> Part of the problem lies with governments, as many have marketed tourism as a way to fund conservation projects. For example in Nepal, a percentage of ticket sales from elephant rides are given to community groups to use for forest preservation and support for local families. Increasing demand for <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Tourism-and-Animal-Ethics/Fennell/p/book/9781032431826">wildlife-based tourism</a> may increase traffic in the area and thus put pressure on local governments to further limit local people’s access to forest resources. This may also lead to <a href="https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/latest/news/un-world-tourism-organisation-urged-create-better-future-animals/">increased demands on local communities</a>, as was the case in Nepal. In the 1970s, the Nepalese government removed local people from their lands in what is now Chitwan National Park as part of increasing “conservation efforts” and changed the protected area’s boundaries. Indigenous “Tharu,” or people of the forest, were forced to abandon their villages and land. While some were offered access to “buffer zones” in the 1990s, many remain poor and landless today. In addition, more and more desirable land surrounding conservation areas in Nepal is being developed for tourist-based businesses such as hotels, restaurants and shops, <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/japfcsc.v2i1.26746">pushing local poor people farther away</a> from central village areas and the associated tourism income. Some activists would like humans to simply release all wildlife back into the wild, but <a href="https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/book/10.1079/9781800624498.0000">there are multiple issues</a> with that. Elephant habitats throughout Southeast Asia have been transformed into croplands, cities or train tracks for human use. Other problems arise from the fact that tourism elephants have <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315457413">never learned</a> how to be elephants in their natural elements, as they were <a href="https://www.pugetsound.edu/sites/default/files/file/8342_Journal%20of%20Tourism%20%282009%29_0.pdf">separated from their herds</a> at an early age. So tourism may be vital to providing food, care and shelter to captive elephants for the rest of their lives and providing jobs for those who really need them. Because elephants can live beyond 60 years, this can be a large commitment. <h2>How to be an ethical tourist</h2> To protect elephants, tourists should check out reviews and photos from any venue they want to visit, and look for clues that animal welfare might be impacted, such as tourists allowed to feed, hold or ride captive wildlife animals. Look for healthy animals, which means doing research on what “healthy” animals of that species should look like. If a venue lists no-touch demonstrations – “unnatural” behaviors that don’t mimic what an elephant might do of their own accord, such as sitting on a ball or riding a bike, or other performances – remember that the behind-the-scenes training used to achieve these behaviors can be <a href="https://doi.org/10.21832/9781845415051-014">violent, traumatic or coercive</a>. Another way to help people and elephant is to to use small, local companies to book your adventures in your area of interest, rather than paying large, international tourism agencies. Look for locally owned hotels, and wait to book excursions until you arrive so you can use local service providers. Book homestay programs and attend cultural events led by community members; talk to tourists and locals you meet in the target town to get their opinions, and use local guides who provide wildlife viewing opportunities <a href="https://nepaldynamicecotours.com/">while maintaining distance from animals</a>. Or tourists can ask to visit <a href="https://www.americanhumane.org/press-release/global-humane-launches-humane-tourism-certification-program/">venues that are certified</a> by international humane animal organizations and that <a href="https://www.su4e.org/">do not allow contact</a> with wildlife. Or they can opt for guided hikes, canoe or kayak experiences, and other environmentally friendly options. While these suggestions will not guarantee that your excursion is animal-friendly, they will help decrease your impact on wildlife, support local families and encourage venues to stop using elephants as entertainment. Those are good first steps.<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/219792/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-szydlowski-1495781">Michelle Szydlowski</a>, Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Project Dragonfly, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/miami-university-1934">Miami University</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/elephant-tourism-often-involves-cruelty-here-are-steps-toward-more-humane-animal-friendly-excursions-219792">original article</a>. </div>

Travel Tips

"Finally felt like the right time": John Farnham's huge announcement

John Farnham has announced his triumphant return one year on from his cancer surgery, sharing the news of a highly anticipated project. The 74-year-old Aussie music icon is set to tell his story in his own words with the release of his own candid memoir titled The Voice Inside. The autobiography, which will be released on October 30th, is co-written by Poppy Stockwell, who is the award-winning writer and director of the critically acclaimed biopic Finding the Voice. The book documents Farnham's early life and stardom growing up in Melbourne in the 1960s, to his comeback 1986 album Whispering Jack. It will recall the highs and lows of fame, including when his stellar career stalled, record companies turned their backs and he faced financial ruin. The Voice Inside will also detail his shocking diagnosis of mouth cancer in 2022 which turned his life upside down. The book was announced on Farnham's Facebook page, with a statement sharing how he felt it was "the right time" to tell his story. <iframe style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fjohnfarnham%2Fposts%2Fpfbid02tZwog7QbEW6AxDUxNMp3Kn5msAghjd9yUQe56optBdyX8ZL1DQFm4qvpUYsSjo2Rl&show_text=true&width=500" width="500" height="728" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe> "Having been asked many times, it finally felt like the right time to sit down and tell my story," he said. "It is a very strange feeling looking back on my life, on the good and the bad, and now that I have started, it is all rushing back. I hope the book engages and entertains, because that’s what so much of my life has been about." The book will "chart John Farnham’s very personal and public journey, told in his own words and with his inimitable humour, insight, and humility." The post was quickly flooded with comments from fans eager to get their hands on the memoir, while many shared their well wishes as he continues his lengthy recovery from cancer. Image credits: Getty Images

Caring

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/graeme-coulson-1378778">Graeme Coulson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helena-bender-98800">Helena Bender</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> There’s almost no warning. A dark shape appears on the side of the road, then you feel a jolt as something goes under the car. Or worse, the shape rears up, hits the front of your vehicle, then slams into the windscreen. You have just experienced a wildlife-vehicle collision. This gruesome scene plays out <a href="https://www.bbcearth.com/news/australias-road-kill-map">every night across Australia</a>. When these collisions happen, many animals become instant roadkill. An <a href="https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/23121/Thesis%20updated%20for%20library%20submission.pdf?sequence=1">estimated 10 million</a> native mammals, reptiles, birds and other species are killed each year. Others are injured and die away from the road. Some survive with <a href="https://theconversation.com/10-million-animals-are-hit-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-how-you-can-help-them-and-steer-clear-of-them-these-holidays-149733">terrible injuries and have to be euthanised</a>. The lucky ones might <a href="https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/who-should-i-contact-about-injured-wildlife/">be rescued</a> by groups such as <a href="https://wildliferescue.net.au/">Wildlife Rescue</a>, <a href="https://www.wildlifevictoria.org.au/">Wildlife Victoria</a> and <a href="https://www.wires.org.au/">WIRES</a>. Wildlife-vehicle collisions also increase the risk to whole populations of some threatened species, such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1071/WR17143">Lumholtz’s tree-kangaroo</a> on the Atherton Tablelands in Queensland. People are affected, too. Human <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1742-6723.13361">deaths and injuries</a> from these collisions are rising, with motorcyclists at greatest risk. Vehicle repairs are <a href="https://www.mynrma.com.au/-/media/wildlife-road-safety-report--final.pdf">inconvenient and costly</a>. Added to this is the distress for people when dealing with a dead or dying animal on the roadside. How can we reduce the wildlife toll on our roads? Many measures have been tried and proven largely ineffective. However, other evidence-based approaches can help avoid collisions. <h2>Evidence for what works is limited</h2> Many communities are worried about the growing impacts of wildlife-vehicle collisions and are desperate for solutions. Recent reports from <a href="https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1822182/FULLTEXT01.pdf">Europe</a> and <a href="https://westerntransportationinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/4w7576_Huijser_etal_WVC_ConnectivityLiteratureReview_PooledFundStudyFinalReport_2021.pdf">North America</a> review the many methods to reduce such collisions. Do these findings apply to Australia’s unique fauna? Unfortunately, we don’t have a detailed analysis of options for our wildlife, but here’s what we know now. Well-designed fences keep wildlife off our highways but also fragment the landscape. Happily, animals will use crossing structures – overpasses and <a href="https://theconversation.com/good-news-highway-underpasses-for-wildlife-actually-work-187434">underpasses</a> – to get to food and mates on the other side of the road. Fences and crossings do work, but are regarded as too costly over Australia’s vast road network. As for standard wildlife warning signs, drivers <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494358/">ignore most of them</a> after a while, making them ineffective. Signs with graphic images and variable messages get <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ani3041142">more attention</a>, but we need road trials to assess their effect on drivers and collision rates. <h2>Whistling in the dark</h2> Some drivers install cheap, wind-driven, high-pitched wildlife whistles on their vehicles. Tests in the United States 20 years ago found humans and deer <a href="https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1582071">could not hear any whistling sound</a> above the road noise of the test vehicle. Yet these devices are still sold in Australia as kangaroo deterrents. The Shu-Roo, an Australian invention, is an active wildlife whistle. It is fitted to the bumper bar, producing a high-pitched electronic sound, which is claimed to scare wildlife away from the road. Sadly, <a href="https://rest.neptune-prod.its.unimelb.edu.au/server/api/core/bitstreams/3c3154e0-2f48-5b73-a6cd-a7423c2a75ee/content">our tests</a> show the Shu-Roo signal can’t be heard above road noise 50 metres away and has no effect on captive kangaroo behaviour. We also recruited fleets of trucks, buses, vans, utes and cars to field test the Shu-Roo. Nearly 100 vehicles covered more than 4 million kilometres across Australia over 15,500 days. The drivers reported just over one wildlife-vehicle collision per 100,000km travelled, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.7882/AZ.2021.042">there was no difference in the rate</a> for vehicles fitted with a Shu-Roo versus those without one. The virtual fence is the latest attempt to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions. It uses a line of posts spaced along the roadside, each with a unit producing loud sounds and flashing lights aimed away from the road. Vehicle headlights activate the units, which are claimed to alert animals and reduce the risk of collision. Early results from Tasmania were encouraging. A 50% drop in possum and wallaby deaths was reported, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.1071/AM19009">this trial had many design flaws</a>. Recent trials in <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/9/10/752">Tasmania</a>, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/12/10/1323">New South Wales</a> and <a href="https://www.redland.qld.gov.au/downloads/download/292/virtual_fence_to_reduce_vehicle_collisions_with_wallabies_on_heinemann_rd_-_final_report_2020">Queensland</a> show no effect of virtual fencing on collisions with possums, wallabies or wombats. Our concern is that this system is being <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/wildlife-fence-trial-underway-in-queensland-and-phillip-island/12268110">rolled out</a> in <a href="https://www.townsville.qld.gov.au/about-council/news-and-publications/media-releases/2023/june/councils-innovative-trial-helping-keep-local-wildlife-safe">many</a> <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-26/nsw-south-coast-council-first-virtual-fence-to-protect-wildlife/101571600">parts</a> of <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/the-stealth-tech-aiming-to-stop-roos-from-becoming-roadkill-20231222-p5etda.html">Australia</a>. It gives the impression of action to reduce collisions with wildlife, but without an evidence base, solid study design or adequate monitoring. <h2>A very messy problem</h2> The problem has many dimensions. We need to consider all of them to achieve safe travel for people and animals on our roads. At a landscape level, collision hotspots occur where wildlife frequently cross roads, which can help us predict the collision risk for species such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/aec.13465">koalas</a>. But the risk differs between species. For example, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01530">on Phillip Island</a> most wallaby collisions happen on rural roads, while most involving possums and birds are in urban streets. Traffic volume and speed are key factors for many species, including <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2306">kangaroos</a>. Driver training and experience are also important. In the Royal National Park in New South Wales, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/6/6/40">half the drivers surveyed</a> had struck animals, including wallabies and deer. Yet most still <a href="https://theconversation.com/10-million-animals-are-hit-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-how-you-can-help-them-and-steer-clear-of-them-these-holidays-149733">weren’t keen</a> to slow down or avoid driving at dawn and dusk. Road design has a major influence on wildlife-vehicle collions too, but the planning process too often <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.959918">neglects wildlife studies</a>. Smarter cars are <a href="https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1822182/FULLTEXT01.pdf">being developed</a>. One day these will use AI to spot animal hazards, apply automatic emergency braking and alert other drivers of real-time risk. To explore potential technological solutions, Transport for NSW is running a <a href="https://www.eianz.org/events/event/symposium-using-technology-to-reduce-wildlife-vehicle-collisions">symposium</a> at the University of Technology Sydney on May 21. The symposium will cover wildlife ecology and the evidence base for options to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions in Australia. <hr /> If you see an injured animal on the road, call <a href="https://www.wildliferescue.net.au/">Wildlife Rescue Australia</a> on 1300 596 457. for specific state and territory numbers, go to the <a href="https://kb.rspca.org.au/knowledge-base/who-should-i-contact-about-injured-wildlife/">RSPCA injured wildlife site</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/222367/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/graeme-coulson-1378778">Graeme Coulson</a>, Honorary Principal Fellow, School of BioSciences, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/helena-bender-98800">Helena Bender</a>, Senior Lecturer, Environmental Social Sciences, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/10-million-animals-die-on-our-roads-each-year-heres-what-works-and-what-doesnt-to-cut-the-toll-222367">original article</a>.

Domestic Travel

“Was I right?": Pauline Hanson repeats her call for halt on immigration

Pauline Hanson, the controversial leader of One Nation, has once again thrust immigration into the spotlight with her renewed calls to halt migration to Australia. Hanson, known for her divisive rhetoric, has resurrected her infamous claims from nearly three decades ago, asserting that Australia is being "swamped" by Asian immigrants. Hanson's resurgence on this issue coincides with the release of new figures revealing that Australia's migration intake has surged to a record high of 548,800 arrivals in the year leading up to September. These numbers pose a challenge to the government's efforts to manage immigration levels, prompting Hanson to call for a plebiscite to gauge public opinion on the matter. In her address to the Senate, Hanson harked back to her inaugural speech as the Oxley MP in 1996, where she first warned of being "swamped by Asians". “I was called a racist, of course, by the major parties and big media who are in lockstep of a big Australia,” Hanson said on Thursday morning. “But today, seven out of the top 10 source countries for immigration to Australia are in Asia - including four out of the top five - and the numbers are out of control. “Was I right? You’d never admit it. But yes, I am.” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> On behalf of the majority of Australians, I demand a halt on immigration. For many, many years, the Australian people have been telling us to lower immigration. To keep the numbers low. To put the interests of Australians living here before the interests of foreigners who… <a href="https://t.co/VGwdRZGdXT">pic.twitter.com/VGwdRZGdXT</a> — Pauline Hanson 🇦🇺 (@PaulineHansonOz) <a href="https://twitter.com/PaulineHansonOz/status/1770578663437955367?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 20, 2024</a></blockquote> However, Hanson's push to curtail immigration was ultimately defeated, with opposition from other senators and parties. Nevertheless, the debate rages on, fuelled by concerns over housing shortages, strained infrastructure and environmental pressures. Opposition figures, including immigration spokesman Dan Tehan, criticise the government's handling of immigration, arguing that Labor's vision of a "Big Australia" is exacerbating existing challenges. They call for urgent action to address the housing crisis and alleviate the strain on public services. In response, the government has outlined plans to crack down on fraudulent visa applications and tighten regulations on higher education providers. Additionally, measures are being implemented to address loopholes in the visa system, such as the phenomenon of "ghost colleges". The government's migration strategy, unveiled in December, aims to achieve a significant reduction in net overseas migration by 2025. If successful, this would mark the largest decline in migration outside of extraordinary circumstances in Australia's history. As the debate unfolds, the nation grapples with fundamental questions about identity, diversity and sustainability. While politicians spar over policy solutions, the Australian public remains divided on the issue, reflecting broader societal tensions and anxieties about the future. Image: Twitter (X)

Legal

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gemma-horton-1515949">Gemma Horton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sheffield-1147">University of Sheffield</a> From court cases to conspiracy theories, the royal family’s right to privacy is, somewhat ironically, nearly always in the spotlight. The latest focus is Kate Middleton, Princess of Wales, whose whereabouts have been the subject of <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a60008117/kate-middleton-health-speculation-conspiracy-theories-online/">online speculation</a> after it was announced she was undergoing abdominal surgery and would be away from public duties until after Easter. This comes just weeks after King Charles <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68208157">revealed that he is undergoing treatment for cancer</a>, and a legal settlement between Prince Harry and Mirror Group Newspapers over <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68249009">illegal phone hacking</a>. Interest in the personal lives of the royals and other celebrities <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1150193">is a constant</a>, driving newspaper sales and online clicks for decades. You only needs to consider the media frenzy that followed Princess Diana to <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512786.2013.833678">see this</a>, and its potentially devastating consequences. From a legal perspective, the British courts have ruled that everyone – the royal family included – is entitled to a right to privacy. The Human Rights Act incorporates into British law the rights set out by the European Convention on Human Rights. This includes article 8, which focuses on the right to privacy. In the years after the Human Rights Act came into force, courts ruled on a string of cases from celebrities claiming that the press invaded their privacy. Courts had to balance article 8 of the convention against article 10, the right to freedom of expression. Rulings repeatedly stated that, despite being in and sometimes seeking the limelight, celebrities should still be afforded a right to privacy. Some disagree with this position, such as prominent journalist <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/prince-harry-hacking-piers-morgan-b2336442.html">Piers Morgan, who has criticised</a> the Duke and Duchess of Sussex asking for privacy when they have also released a Netflix documentary, a broadcast interview with Oprah Winfrey and published a memoir. But the courts have made the position clear, as in the case concerning Catherine Zeta-Jones and Michael Douglas after Hello! Magazine published unauthorised photographs from their wedding. The <a href="https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/190559/3/Final%20Edited%20Version%20-%20Celebrity%20Privacy%20and%20Celebrity%20Journalism-%20Has%20anything%20changed%20since%20the%20Leveson%20Inquiry_.pdf">court stated</a> that: “To hold that those who have sought any publicity lose all protection would be to repeal article 8’s application to very many of those who are likely to need it.” There is no universal definition of privacy, but scholars have identified key concepts encompassing what privacy can entail. In my own research, I have argued that the <a href="https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/190559/3/Final%20Edited%20Version%20-%20Celebrity%20Privacy%20and%20Celebrity%20Journalism-%20Has%20anything%20changed%20since%20the%20Leveson%20Inquiry_.pdf">notion of choice</a> is one of these. Privacy allows us to control the spread of information about ourselves and disclose information to whom we want. <h2>Privacy and the public interest</h2> There are exceptions to these protections if the person involved had no reasonable expectation of privacy, or if it was in the public interest for this information to be revealed. There is no solid, legal definition of the “public interest”, so this is decided on a case-by-case basis. <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17577632.2021.1889866">In the past</a>, the public interest defence has been applied because a public figure or official has acted hypocritically and the courts have stated there is a right for a publisher to set the record straight. When it comes to medical records and information concerning health, case law and journalistic <a href="https://www.ipso.co.uk/editors-code-of-practice/">editorial codes of conduct</a> are clear that this information is afforded the utmost protection. Model Naomi Campbell was pictured leaving a Narcotics Anonymous meeting and these images were published by the Daily Mirror. The court found that there had been a public interest in revealing the fact she was attending these meetings, as she had previously denied substance abuse. The House of Lords accepted that there was a public interest in the press “setting the record straight”. Nonetheless, the publication of additional, confidential details, and the photographs of her leaving the meeting were a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/may/06/mirror.pressandpublishing1">step too far</a>. The House of Lords highlighted the importance of being able to keep medical records and information private. <h2>Royal health</h2> When it comes to the royals, the history of <a href="https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a23798094/lindo-wing-st-marys-hospital-facts-photos/">publicity</a> around royal births, often posing with the newborn royal baby outside of the hospital, has set a precedent for what the public can expect about the royals’ medical information. When they choose to go against this tradition, it can frustrate both royal-watchers and publishers. King Charles made the choice to openly speak about his enlarged prostate to “assist public understanding”. And, as Prostate Cancer UK noted, this has worked – they noted a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/king-charles-cancer-statement-treatment-b2494190.html">500% increase in people visiting their website</a>. However, he has chosen to not to divulge information about his cancer diagnosis beyond the fact that he is receiving treatment. This is his right. While revealing further information might stop speculation and rumours about his health, it is not the king’s duty to divulge private, medical information. However, if his health begins to impact his ability to act as monarch, the situation could change. It might be that the press finds more information about his health without his knowledge, but unless they have a genuine public interest in publishing this information, privacy should prevail. You would no doubt want your private medical information kept secret, not shared around your workplace and speculated on unless it was absolutely necessary. It is thanks to these laws and court precedent that you don’t have to worry about this. The royal family, regardless of their position, should expect the same standard. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gemma-horton-1515949">Gemma Horton</a>, Impact Fellow for Centre for Freedom of the Media, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sheffield-1147">University of Sheffield</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/does-the-royal-family-have-a-right-to-privacy-what-the-law-says-224881">original article</a>.

Legal

‘Self-love’ might seem selfish. But done right, it’s the opposite of narcissism

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ian-robertson-1372650">Ian Robertson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-wollongong-711">University of Wollongong</a> “To love what you are, the thing that is yourself, is just as if you were embracing a glowing red-hot iron” <a href="https://archive.org/details/jungsseminaronni0000jung">said psychonalyst Carl Jung</a>. Some may argue this social media generation does not seem to struggle with loving themselves. But is the look-at-me-ism so easily found on TikTok and Instagram the kind of self-love we need in order to flourish? The language of <a href="https://theconversation.com/teaching-positive-psychology-skills-at-school-may-be-one-way-to-help-student-mental-health-and-happiness-217173">positive psychology</a> can be – and often is – appropriated for all kinds of self-importance, as well as cynical marketing strategies. Loving yourself, though, psychological experts stress, is not the same as behaving selfishly. There’s a firm line between healthy and appropriate forms of loving yourself, and malignant or <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-types-of-narcissist-are-there-a-psychology-expert-sets-the-record-straight-207610">narcissistic</a> forms. But how do we distinguish between them? In 2023, researchers Eva Henschke and Peter Sedlmeier conducted <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355152846_What_is_self-love_Redefinition_of_a_controversial_construct">a series of interviews</a> with psychotherapists and other experts on what self-love is. They’ve concluded it has three main features: self-care, self-acceptance and self-contact (devoting attention to yourself). But as an increasingly individualistic society, are we already devoting too much attention to ourselves? <h2>Philosophy and self-love</h2> Philosophers and psychology experts alike have considered the ethics of self-love. Psychology researcher Li Ming Xue and her colleagues, <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.585719/full">exploring the notion of self-love in Chinese culture</a>, claim “Western philosophers believe that self-love is a virtue”. But this is a very broad generalisation. In the Christian tradition and in much European philosophy, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10848770.2020.1839209">says philosopher Razvan Ioan</a>, self-love is condemned as a profoundly damaging trait. On the other hand, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2107991">many of the great Christian philosophers</a>, attempting to make sense of the instruction to love one’s neighbour as oneself, admitted certain forms of self-love were virtuous. In order to love your neighbour as yourself, you must, it would seem, love yourself. In the Western philosophical context, claim Xue and her colleagues, self-love is concerned with individual rights – “society as a whole only serves to promote an individual’s happiness”. This individualistic, self-concerned notion of self-love, they suggest, might come from the Ancient Greek philosophers. In particular, Aristotle. But <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/philosophy-stirred-not-shaken/201502/love-yourself-love-your-character">Aristotle thought only the most virtuous</a>, who benefited the society around them, should love themselves. By making this connection, he avoided equating self-love with self-centredness. We should love ourselves not out of vanity, he argued, but in virtue of our capacity for good. Does Aristotle, then, provide principled grounds for distinguishing between proper and improper forms of self-love? <h2>Bar too high?</h2> Aristotle might set the bar too high. If only the most virtuous should try to love themselves, this collides head-on with the idea loving yourself can help us improve and become more virtuous – as <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137383310_6">philosophers Kate Abramson and Adam Leite have argued</a>. Many psychologists claim self-love is important for adopting the kind and compassionate self-perception crucial for overcoming conditions that weaponise self-criticism, like <a href="https://theconversation.com/clinical-perfectionism-when-striving-for-excellence-gets-you-down-43704">clinical perfectionism</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-people-have-eating-disorders-we-dont-really-know-and-thats-a-worry-121938">eating disorders</a>. More broadly, some argue compassion for oneself is necessary to support honest insights into your own behaviour. They believe we need warm and compassionate self-reflection to avoid the defensiveness that comes with the fear of judgement – even if we’re standing as our own judge. For this reason, a compassionate form of self-love is often necessary to follow Socrates’ advice to “know thyself”, says <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9578-4">philosopher Jan Bransen</a>. Positive self-love, by these lights, can help us grow as people. <h2>Self-love ‘misguided and silly’</h2> But not everyone agrees you need self-love to grow. The late philosopher <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/nov/29/guardianobituaries.obituaries">Oswald Hanfling</a> was deeply sceptical of this idea. In fact, he argued the notion of loving oneself was misguided and silly. His ideas are mostly rejected by philosophers of love, but pointing out where they go wrong can be useful. When you love someone, he said, you’re prepared to sacrifice your own interests for those of your beloved. But he thought the idea of sacrificing your own interests made no sense – which shows, he concluded, we can’t love ourselves. <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3751159">He wrote</a>: "I may sacrifice an immediate satisfaction for the sake of my welfare in the future, as in the case of giving up smoking. In this case, however, my motive is not love but self-interest. What I reveal in giving up smoking is not the extent of my love for myself, but an understanding that the long-term benefits of giving it up are likely to exceed the present satisfaction of going on with it." We often have conflicting interests (think of someone who is agonising over two different career paths) – and it’s not at all strange to sacrifice certain interests for the sake of others. This is not just a question of sacrificing short-term desires in favour of a long-term good, but a matter of sacrificing something of value for your ultimate benefit (or, so you hope). <h2>Self-compassion</h2> Hanfling fails to consider the role of compassionate self-love. While we might understand it’s in our interests to do something (for instance, repair bridges with someone we’ve fallen out with), it might take a compassionate and open disposition towards ourselves to recognise what’s in our best interests. We might need this self-compassion, too, in order to admit our failures – so we can overcome our defensiveness and see clearly how we’re failing to fulfil <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9578-4">these interests</a>. Self-acceptance in this context does not mean giving ourselves licence to run roughshod over the interests of those around us, nor to justify our flaws as “valid” rather than work on them. Self-love, as promoted by contemporary psychologists, means standing in a compassionate relationship to ourselves. And there’s nothing contradictory about this idea. Just as we strive to develop a supportive, kind relationship to the people we care about – and just as this doesn’t involve uncritical approval of everything they do – compassionate self-love doesn’t mean abandoning valid self-criticism. In fact, self-compassion has the opposite effect. It promotes comfort with the kind of critical self-assessment that helps us grow – which leads to resilience. It breeds the opposite of narcissistic self-absorption.<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/205938/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ian-robertson-1372650">Ian Robertson</a>, PhD Candidate (Teaching roles at Macquarie & Wollongong), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-wollongong-711">University of Wollongong</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/self-love-might-seem-selfish-but-done-right-its-the-opposite-of-narcissism-205938">original article</a>.

Mind

"The time's right": Neil Mitchell signs off

After 34 years on the air, 3AW radio veteran Neil Mitchell is signing off. Neil Mitchell has been a staple of Australian radio for decades, growing a reputation for being fair, decent, honest and sometimes "a bit grumpy". A Current Affair's Ally Langdon joined the 3AW veteran to reflect on a stellar career that earned him a legion of loyal listeners. "I've always wanted to be a journalist from about age 14," he told Langdon. "But not for a moment did I think that I would end up doing something such as I have, editing a newspaper and doing this." His passion as a radio presenter lies in the "real people" who call in each morning, saying, "You can go from a person laughing and telling you jokes and carrying on to great stories." "And then a couple of calls later there's somebody in tears that you need to help. It is real people." "I regularly shed tears on air ... And if we can make a difference, I shed tears again because we've had success." Over his decades on air, Mitchell clashed with many Aussie politicians, sharing how he took it upon himself to be a spokesperson for everyday Australians. "They've established a system where they don't have to be accountable," he said. "And [if] anybody attempts to make them accountable ... they resented it. Accountability is disappearing I'm afraid." While he is stepping back from his flagship show, he has assured listeners he isn't signing off forever. "I'll still be here. I'll be doing podcasts and all sorts of things. I'm really looking forward to it. It's going to be an interesting change." "I'm going to miss it, stepping away. But the time's right." Image credits: Nine

Music

Think potholes on our roads are getting worse? You’re right – and here’s why

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marion-terrill-169480">Marion Terrill</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natasha-bradshaw-1358801">Natasha Bradshaw</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> If you’re a driver, particularly in the country, you could be forgiven for thinking potholes have become a design feature of Australia’s local roads. You would certainly know they are in a state of disrepair. And you have every reason to be fed up, because bad roads are dangerous, they increase your travel time, and they force you to spend more on fuel and on car maintenance. They are getting worse because we’re not spending enough to maintain them. Three-quarters of our roads are managed by local councils. Every year, those councils spend A$1 billion less on maintenance than is needed to keep those roads in their current condition – let alone improve them. The underspend is largest in regional and remote areas. New <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/potholes-and-pitfalls-how-to-fix-local-roads/">Grattan Institute research</a> finds the typical regional area has a funding shortfall of more 40%. In remote areas, it’s more than 75%. <h2>Federal funding is falling behind</h2> One reason for this underspend is that untied federal government grants to local councils haven’t kept pace with soaring costs. Councils raise most of their own revenue – 80% on average. But in large parts of the country, there are a lot of roads and not enough ratepayers to pay for them. Rural and remote councils have limited ability to raise more revenue from ratepayers. Their ratepayers already pay higher rates than those in cities, despite having lower average incomes. Rate caps in place in New South Wales and Victoria also make it difficult for councils to raise more revenue. <hr /> <hr /> Councils receive top-up grants from the federal and state governments. The primary grants from the federal government, available for councils to spend as they see fit – including on roads – are called <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/territories-regions-cities/local-government/financial-assistance-grant-local-government">Financial Assistance Grants</a>. These are worth about $3 billion a year. But their value has not kept pace with rising costs. If they had kept pace, on our estimates they would be 20% higher, at $3.6 billion per year. <hr /> <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&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/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=303&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/561231/original/file-20231123-27-oa4fn0.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=381&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption><a class="source" href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/potholes-and-pitfalls-how-to-fix-local-roads/">Grattan Institute, 2023</a></figcaption></figure> <hr /> <h2>Road use is growing, but maintenance isn’t</h2> Another reason for the underspend is that even as funding dries up, we’re using roads more. A growing population means both more cars on our roads and more trucks needed to keep our shelves stocked. But despite the extra damage to our roads, spending on maintenance has stalled. <hr /> <hr /> <h2>Councils are spending more on other things</h2> Another reason roads are underfunded is that councils are coming under increasing pressure to fund other services. The legislation governing councils doesn’t clearly define what councils are responsible for, and there is no shortage of services communities want. Spending on transport has fallen from almost half of local government spending in the 1960s to 21% today. Environmental protection was only identified as its own area of spending for councils in 2018, but it now makes up 15% of all council spending. <hr /> <hr /> <h2>Delaying will cost us more</h2> If we don’t act now and start spending more to fix our roads, the pothole plague is going to spread. Australia is getting hotter, with more rain and floods. The Local Government Association expects the cost of repairing flood and rain-damaged roads in the eastern states and South Australia to top <a href="https://alga.com.au/building-better-roads-will-prevent-another-3-8-billion-blowout/">$3.8 billion</a>. Tight budgets make it tempting to delay maintenance. But delaying will only end up costing more in the long run, leaving taxpayers paying more to fix more badly damaged roads. <h2>Finally, a circuit-breaker</h2> Some might argue that now is not the time for more spending on roads, given pressures on the budget. But plenty is being spent on big roads and new roads. Infrastructure Minister Catherine King’s recent announcement of a <a href="https://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/c-king/media-release/significant-boost-road-safety">funding boost</a> of for local roads is a very welcome circuit-breaker. She announced the Roads to Recovery program will increase gradually from $500 million to $1 billion per year, the Black Spot program from $110 million to $150 million per year, and funding for an amalgamated Bridges Renewal and Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity program will climb form $150 million to $200 per year. This decision is important. Not only will councils receive more funding for maintenance, but it will be predictable funding, enabling better stewardship of long-lived assets. The money can’t start flowing soon enough.<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/217784/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/marion-terrill-169480">Marion Terrill</a>, Transport and Cities Program Director, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/natasha-bradshaw-1358801">Natasha Bradshaw</a>, Associate, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/grattan-institute-1168">Grattan Institute</a> Image credits: Shutterstock 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/think-potholes-on-our-roads-are-getting-worse-youre-right-and-heres-why-217784">original article</a>.

Travel Trouble

6 reasons why global temperatures are spiking right now

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-king-103126">Andrew King</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> The world is very warm right now. We’re not only seeing record temperatures, but the records are being broken by record-wide margins. Take the preliminary September global-average temperature anomaly of 1.7°C above pre-industrial levels, for example. It’s an incredible 0.5°C above the previous record. So why is the world so incredibly hot right now? And what does it mean for keeping our Paris Agreement targets? Here are six contributing factors – with climate change the main reason temperatures are so high. <h2>1. El Niño</h2> One reason for the exceptional heat is we are in a <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/#tabs=Pacific-Ocean">significant El Niño</a> that is still strengthening. During El Niño we see warming of the surface ocean over much of the tropical Pacific. This warming, and the effects of El Niño in other parts of the world, raises global average temperatures by <a href="https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2023/01/2022-updates-to-the-temperature-records/">about 0.1 to 0.2°C</a>. Taking into account the fact we’ve just come out of a triple La Niña, which cools global average temperatures slightly, and the fact this is the first major El Niño in eight years, it’s not too surprising we’re seeing unusually high temperatures at the moment. Still, El Niño alone isn’t enough to explain the crazily high temperatures the world is experiencing. <h2>2. Falling pollution</h2> Air pollution from human activities cools the planet and has offset some of the warming caused by humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions. There have been efforts to reduce this pollution – since 2020 there has been an <a href="https://sdg.iisd.org/news/imo-advances-measures-to-reduce-emissions-from-international-shipping/">international agreement</a> to reduce sulphur dioxide emissions from the global shipping industry. It has been speculated this cleaner air has contributed to the recent heat, particularly over the record-warm <a href="https://climate.copernicus.eu/record-breaking-north-atlantic-ocean-temperatures-contribute-extreme-marine-heatwaves">north Atlantic</a> and Pacific regions with high shipping traffic. It’s likely this is contributing to the extreme high global temperatures – but only on the order of hundredths of a degree. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-low-sulphur-shipping-rules-are-affecting-global-warming/">Recent analysis</a> suggests the effect of the 2020 shipping agreement is about an extra 0.05°C warming by 2050. <h2>3. Increasing solar activity</h2> While falling pollution levels mean more of the Sun’s energy reaches Earth’s surface, the amount of the energy the Sun emits is itself variable. There are different solar cycles, but an 11-year cycle is the most relevant one to today’s climate. The Sun is becoming <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2023/07/14/world/solar-maximum-activity-2024-scn/index.html">more active</a> from a minimum in late 2019. This is also contributing a small amount to the spike in global temperatures. Overall, increasing solar activity is contributing only hundredths of a degree at most to the recent global heat. <h2>4. Water vapour from Hunga Tonga eruption</h2> On January 15 2022 the underwater <a href="https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/pia26006-hunga-tonga-hunga-haapai-eruption">Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcano erupted</a> in the South Pacific Ocean, sending large amounts of water vapour high up into the upper atmosphere. Water vapour is a greenhouse gas, so increasing its concentration in the atmosphere in this way does intensify the greenhouse effect. Even though the eruption happened almost two years ago, it’s still having a small warming effect on the planet. However, as with the reduced pollution and increasing solar activity, we’re talking about hundredths of a degree. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6oANPi-SWN0?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>5. Bad luck</h2> We see variability in global temperatures from one year to the next even without factors like El Niño or major changes in pollution. Part of the reason this September was so extreme was likely due to weather systems being in the right place to heat the land surface. When we have persistent high-pressure systems over land regions, as seen recently over places like <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/01/autumn-heat-continues-in-europe-after-record-breaking-september">western Europe</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-19/australia-weather-september-heat-records-tumble/102870294">Australia</a>, we see local temperatures rise and the conditions for unseasonable heat. As water requires more energy to warm and the ocean moves around, we don’t see the same quick response in temperatures over the seas when we have high-pressure systems. The positioning of weather systems warming up many land areas coupled with persistent ocean heat is likely a contributor to the global-average heat too. <h2>6. Climate change</h2> By far the biggest contributor to the overall +1.7°C global temperature anomaly is human-caused climate change. Overall, humanity’s effect on the climate has been a global warming of <a href="https://www.globalwarmingindex.org/">about 1.2°C</a>. The record-high rate of greenhouse gas emissions means we should expect global warming to accelerate too. While humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions explain the trend seen in September temperatures over many decades, they don’t really explain the big difference from last September (when the greenhouse effect was almost as strong as it is today) and September 2023. Much of the difference between this year and last comes back to the switch from La Niña to El Niño, and the right weather systems in the right place at the right time. <h2>The upshot: we need to accelerate climate action</h2> September 2023 shows that with a combination of climate change and other factors aligning we can see alarmingly high temperatures. These anomalies may appear to be above the 1.5°C global warming level referred to in the Paris Agreement, but that’s about keeping <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/briefings/understanding-the-paris-agreements-long-term-temperature-goal/">long-term global warming</a> to low levels and not individual months of heat. But we are seeing the effects of climate change unfolding more and more clearly. The most vulnerable are suffering the biggest impacts as wealthier nations continue to emit the largest proportion of greenhouse gases. Humanity must accelerate the path to net zero to prevent more record-shattering global temperatures and damaging extreme events.<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/215140/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andrew-king-103126">Andrew King</a>, Senior Lecturer in Climate Science, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/6-reasons-why-global-temperatures-are-spiking-right-now-215140">original article</a>.

Travel Trouble

Kids dressing up as older people is harmless fun, right? No, it’s ageist, whatever Bluey says

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lisa-mitchell-1143692">Lisa Mitchell</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> A child once approached me, hunched over, carrying a vacuum cleaner like a walking stick. In a wobbly voice, he asked: "Do you want to play grannies?" The idea came from the children’s TV show Bluey, which <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ABCKidsCommunity/videos/bluey-grannies/468144817266668/">has</a> <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ABCKidsCommunity/videos/new-bluey-episodes-the-grannies-are-back-abc-kids/371436135028190/">episodes</a>, <a href="https://www.bluey.tv/products/grannies-book/">a book</a>, <a href="https://www.discountmags.com/magazine/bluey-september-1-2023-digital">magazine</a> editions and an <a href="https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBlueyTV/videos/grannies-filter-bluey/5728362390510269/">image filter</a> about dressing up as “grannies”. Children are also dressing up as 100-year-olds to mark their first “100 days of school”, an idea <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/old-people-s-home-for-five-year-olds-prep-students-don-senior-citizen-attire-20230801-p5dszb.html">gaining popularity</a> <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/education/cardigans-wigs-and-canes-why-kindy-students-are-dressing-up-as-100-year-olds-20230720-p5dpu8.html">in Australia</a>. Is this all just harmless fun? <h2>How stereotypes take hold</h2> When I look at the older people in my life, or the patients I see as a geriatrician, I cannot imagine how to suck out the individual to formulate a “look”. But Google “older person dress-ups” and you will find <a href="https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/dress-up-like-youre-100-years-old-100thdayofschool--15199717464361356/">Pinterests</a> and <a href="https://www.wikihow.com/Dress-Up-Like-an-Old-Person#:%7E:text=Dress%20in%20comfortable%2C%20loose%2Dfitting,older%20people%20may%20wear%20include%3A&text=Oversized%20sweatshirts">Wikihow pages</a> doing just that. Waistcoats, walking sticks, glasses and hunched backs are the key. If you’re a “granny”, don’t forget a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBlueyTV/videos/games-you-can-play-at-home-grannies-bluey/645964056227345/">shawl and tinned beans</a>. You can buy “old lady” <a href="https://www.spotlightstores.com/party/costumes-and-accessories/costume-accessories/wigs-hair-accessories/wigs/spartys-kids-old-lady-wig-with-curlers/80578132?gclsrc=aw.ds&gclsrc=aw.ds&gclid=Cj0KCQjw0vWnBhC6ARIsAJpJM6emZHoNxO72pUa80Wc8ihYYiq3AohZ_w72jmuWBBDlficdCMy_rsK8aAj47EALw_wcB">wigs</a> or an “old man” <a href="https://www.bigw.com.au/product/facial-hair-set-old-man-3-pieces/p/305026">moustache and bushy eyebrows</a>. This depiction of how older people look and behave is a stereotype. And if dressing up as an older person is an example, such stereotypes are all around us. <h2>What’s the harm?</h2> There is <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/hypa.12170">some debate</a> about whether stereotyping is intrinsically wrong, and if it is, why. But there is plenty of research about the harms of age stereotypes or ageism. That’s harm to current older people and harm to future older people. The World Health Organization <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/ageism#tab=tab_1">defines ageism</a> as: "the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) towards others or ourselves based on age." Ageism <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/ageism#tab=tab_1">contributes to</a> social isolation, reduced health and life expectancy and costs economies <a href="https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/60/1/174/5166947">billions of dollars</a> globally. When it comes to health, the impact of negative stereotypes and beliefs about ageing may be even <a href="https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/60/1/174/5166947">more harmful</a> than the discrimination itself. In laboratory studies, older people perform <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4360754/">worse</a> than expected on tasks such as memory or thinking after being shown negative stereotypes about ageing. This may be due to a “<a href="https://www.simplypsychology.org/stereotype-threat.html">stereotype threat</a>”. This is when a person’s performance is impaired because they are worried about confirming a negative stereotype about the group they belong to. In other words, they perform less well because they’re worried about acting “old”. Another theory is “stereotype embodiment”. This is where people absorb negative stereotypes throughout their life and come to believe decline is an inevitable consequence of ageing. This leads to biological, psychological and physiological changes that <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2927354/">create</a> a self-fulfilling prophecy. I have seen this in my clinic with people who do well, until they realise they’re an older person – a birthday, a fall, a revelation when they look in the mirror. Then, they stop going out, stop exercising, stop seeing their friends. Evidence for “stereotype embodiment” comes from studies that show people with more negative views about ageing are more likely to have higher levels of stress hormones (such as cortisol and C-reactive protein) and are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7182003/">less likely</a> to engage in health behaviours, such as exercising and eating healthy foods. Younger adults with negative views about ageing are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666386/">more likely</a> to have a heart attack up to about 40 years later. People with the most negative attitudes towards ageing have a lower life expectancy by as much as <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12150226/">7.5 years</a>. Children are particularly susceptible to absorbing stereotypes, a process <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-09385-010">that starts</a> in early childhood. <h2>Ageism is all around us</h2> <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/ageism#tab=tab_1">One in two people</a> have ageist views, so tackling ageism is complicated given it is socially acceptable and normalised. Think of all the birthday cards and jokes about ageing or phrases like “geezer” and “old duck”. Assuming a person (including yourself) is “too old” for something. Older people say it is harder to <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-06/senior-job-seekers-struggle-to-get-a-foot-in-the-door/102563144">find work</a> and they face discrimination in <a href="https://www.hcnsw.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Ageism-in-Health-Care_final.pdf">health care</a>. <h2>How can we reduce ageism?</h2> We can reduce ageism through laws, policies and education. But we can also reduce it via <a href="https://www.who.int/health-topics/ageism#tab=tab_1">intergenerational contact</a>, where older people and younger people come together. This helps break down the segregation that allows stereotypes to fester. Think of the TV series <a href="https://iview.abc.net.au/show/old-people-s-home-for-4-year-olds">Old People’s Home for 4 Year Olds</a> or the follow-up <a href="https://iview.abc.net.au/show/old-people-s-home-for-teenagers">Old People’s Home for Teenagers</a>. More simply, children can hang out with their older relatives, neighbours and friends. We can also challenge a negative view of ageing. What if we allowed kids to imagine their lives as grandparents and 100-year-olds as freely as they view their current selves? What would be the harm in that?<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/212607/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lisa-mitchell-1143692">Lisa Mitchell</a>, Geriatrician working in clinical practice. PhD Candidate at The University of Melbourne studying ethics and ageism in health care. Affiliate lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/deakin-university-757">Deakin University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock 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/kids-dressing-up-as-older-people-is-harmless-fun-right-no-its-ageist-whatever-bluey-says-212607">original article</a>.

Retirement Life

Royal family's 175-year-old right to hunt comes to an end

The royal family can no longer hunt at the five-century old Abergeldie Estate that is next door to Balmoral Castle. Abergeldie's new owner, Alastair Storey, has terminated the royal family's sporting rights lease, established by Prince Albert in 1852, which means they can no longer go hunting, deer stalking or fishing at the estate, ending the 175-year-old tradition. Storey reportedly has plans to "transform" buildings on the estate into private accommodation and hunting lodges, according to the Daily Telegraph. Planning documents filed with Aberdeenshire council confirmed this: "For the last 175 years the Royal family have leased the sporting rights at Abergeldie but this has now ceased, and will be actively run by the new Laird. "To facilitate the transformation and to effectively run the estate, new facilities will be required." The documents also stated that the buildings around the farmhouse "facilitate accommodation for the running of the estate and will include a social space for paying visitors to support the sporting activities on the estate". This is a huge change from the original agreements Prince Albert drew up with the Gordon family, who previously owned the estate. This also comes after the late Queen agreed to pay more for the shooting and hunting rights on the sporting estate 25 years ago, after she was asked to increase the nominal rent that was being paid by the royal family for access. The 11,532-acre estate is nestled between the late Queen Elizabeth's former estate and the King's residence, Birkhall. It was sold in 2021 after the death of the 21st Baron of Abergeldie, John Gordon, to Storey who bought the estate for £23 million. Although Storey purchased 34 properties dotted around the vast estate, he has not bought out Abergeldie Castle, which still belongs to the Gordon family. Storey, 70, is a Scottish businessman and chief executive of WSH, and was labelled the "most influential man in the UK hospitality industry" in 2012. He was made an Order of the British Empire (OBE) by Queen Elizabeth in 2017. Images: Getty

Family & Pets

Is it okay to kiss your pet? The risk of animal-borne diseases is small, but real

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-mclean-1351935">Sarah McLean</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/enzo-palombo-249510">Enzo Palombo</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> Our relationship with pets has changed drastically in recent decades. Pet ownership is at an all-time high, with <a href="https://animalmedicinesaustralia.org.au/media-release/more-than-two-thirds-of-australian-households-now-own-a-pet/">a recent survey</a> finding 69% of Australian households have at least one pet. We spend an estimated A$33 billion every year on caring for our fur babies. While owning a pet is linked to numerous <a href="https://www.onehealth.org/blog/10-mental-physical-health-benefits-of-having-pets">mental and physical health benefits</a>, our pets can also harbour infectious diseases that can sometimes be passed on to us. For most people, the risk is low. But some, such as pregnant people and those with weakened immune systems, are at <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/specific-groups/high-risk/index.html">greater risk</a> of getting sick from animals. So, it’s important to know the risks and take necessary precautions to prevent infections. <h2>What diseases can pets carry?</h2> Infectious diseases that move from animals to humans are called zoonotic diseases or <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/onehealth/basics/zoonotic-diseases.html">zoonoses</a>. More than <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3668296/#B18">70 pathogens</a> of companion animals are known to be transmissible to people. Sometimes, a pet that has a zoonotic pathogen may look sick. But often there may be no visible symptoms, making it easier for you to catch it, because you don’t suspect your pet of harbouring germs. Zoonoses can be transmitted directly from pets to humans, such as through contact with saliva, bodily fluids and faeces, or indirectly, such as through contact with contaminated bedding, soil, food or water. Studies suggest <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4500695/">the prevalence of pet-associated zoonoses is low</a>. However, the true number of infections is likely <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/11/3789">underestimated</a> since many zoonoses are not “<a href="https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/notification-of-illness-and-disease">notifiable</a>”, or may have multiple exposure pathways or generic symptoms. Dogs and cats are major reservoirs of zoonotic infections (meaning the pathogens naturally live in their population) caused by viruses, bacteria, fungi and parasites. <a href="https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/topics/rabies">In endemic regions in Africa and Asia</a>, dogs are the main source of rabies which is transmitted through saliva. Dogs also commonly carry Capnocytophaga bacteria <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/capnocytophaga/index.html">in their mouths and saliva</a>, which can be transmitted to people through close contact or bites. The vast majority of people won’t get sick, but these bacteria can occasionally cause infections in people with weakened immune systems, <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/capnocytophaga/signs-symptoms/index.html">resulting</a> in severe illness and sometimes death. Just last week, such a death <a href="https://thewest.com.au/news/wa/tracy-ridout-perth-mum-dies-11-days-after-rare-bacterial-infection-from-minor-dog-bite-c-11748887">was reported in Western Australia</a>. Cat-associated zoonoses include a number of illnesses spread by the faecal-oral route, such as giardiasis, campylobacteriosis, salmonellosis and toxoplasmosis. This means it’s especially important to wash your hands or use gloves whenever handling your cat’s litter tray. Cats can also sometimes transmit infections through bites and scratches, including the aptly named <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/diseases/cat-scratch.html#:%7E:text=Cat%20scratch%20disease%20(CSD)%20is,the%20surface%20of%20the%20skin.">cat scratch disease</a>, which is caused by the bacterium Bartonella henselae. Both dogs and cats are also reservoirs for <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10122942/">methicillin-resistant bacterium Staphylococcus aureus</a> (MRSA), with close contact with pets identified as an important risk factor for zoonotic transmission. <h2>Birds, turtles and fish can also transmit disease</h2> But it’s not just dogs and cats that can spread diseases to humans. Pet birds can occasionally transmit <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/pneumonia/atypical/psittacosis/">psittacosis</a>, a bacterial infection which causes pneumonia. Contact with <a href="https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/animal-health-literacy/pet-turtles-source-germs">pet turtles</a> has been linked to Salmonella infections in humans, particularly in young children. Even pet fish have been linked to a <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/pets/fish.html">range of bacterial infections</a> in humans, including vibriosis, mycobacteriosis and salmonellosis. Close contact with animals – and some behaviours in particular – increase the risk of zoonotic transmission. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19398275/">A study from the Netherlands</a> found half of owners allowed pets to lick their faces, and 18% allowed dogs to share their bed. (Sharing a bed increases the duration of exposure to pathogens carried by pets.) The same study found 45% of cat owners allowed their cat to jump onto the kitchen sink. Kissing pets has also been linked to occasional zoonotic infections in pet owners. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3298380/">In one case</a>, a woman in Japan developed meningitis due to Pasteurella multicoda infection, after regularly kissing her dog’s face. These bacteria are often found in the oral cavities of dogs and cats. Young children are also more likely to engage in behaviours which increase their risk of <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/healthypets/specific-groups/high-risk/children.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fhealthypets%2Fspecific-groups%2Fchildren.html">getting sick</a> from animal-borne diseases – such as putting their hands in their mouth after touching pets. Children are also less likely to wash their hands properly after handling pets. Although anybody who comes into contact with a zoonotic pathogen via their pet can become sick, certain people are more likely to suffer from serious illness. These people include the young, old, pregnant and immunosuppressed. For example, while most people infected with the toxoplasmosis parasite will experience only mild illness, it can be life-threatening or <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/pregnancy/what-are-the-risks-of-toxoplasmosis-during-pregnancy/">cause birth defects in foetuses</a>. <h2>What should I do if I’m worried about catching a disease from my pet?</h2> There are a number of good hygiene and pet husbandry practices that can reduce your risk of becoming sick. These include: <ul> <li>washing your hands after playing with your pet and after handling their bedding, toys, or cleaning up faeces</li> <li>not allowing your pets to lick your face or open wounds</li> <li>supervising young children when they are playing with pets and when washing their hands after playing with pets</li> <li>wearing gloves when changing litter trays or cleaning aquariums</li> <li>wetting bird cage surfaces when cleaning to minimise aerosols</li> <li>keeping pets out of the kitchen (especially cats who can jump onto food preparation surfaces)</li> <li>keeping up to date with preventative veterinary care, including vaccinations and worm and tick treatments</li> <li>seeking veterinary care if you think your pet is unwell.</li> </ul> It is especially important for those who are at a higher risk of illness to take precautions to reduce their exposure to zoonotic pathogens. And if you’re thinking about getting a pet, ask your vet which type of animal would best suit your personal circumstances.<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/210898/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-mclean-1351935">Sarah McLean</a>, Lecturer in environmental health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/enzo-palombo-249510">Enzo Palombo</a>, Professor of Microbiology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/is-it-okay-to-kiss-your-pet-the-risk-of-animal-borne-diseases-is-small-but-real-210898">original article</a>.

Family & Pets

An expert’s top 5 reasons why dogs can be considered exceptional animals

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/melissa-starling-461103">Melissa Starling</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Dogs are important to a lot of humans, but what makes them so? Apart from being warm, soft and capable of inspiring our unconditional love, there are a number of unique characteristics that set dogs apart from other animals. As a dog researcher, animal behaviour consultant and canophile (which means I love dogs), let me share five traits that I think make dogs so special. <h2>Dogs are hypersocial</h2> We all know those golden retriever-type dogs that appear absurdly delighted to meet any new social being. It’s hard not to be taken in by their infectious friendliness. These furry, hypersocial creatures have some key genetic differences even to other domestic dogs. Most fascinatingly, these genetic differences are in the area of the genome <a href="https://www.insidescience.org/news/rare-human-syndrome-may-explain-why-dogs-are-so-friendly">associated</a> with hypersociability in people with a genetic condition called Williams-Beuren syndrome. Although people with this syndrome experience negative health effects, they also tend to be very open, engaging and sociable. Not all dogs fall into this hypersocial category – but even those that don’t are unusually accepting of unfamiliar people and dogs. Unlike other social wild canids such as wolves, domestic dogs can quite happily live in harmony with different species, as well as individuals of their own species that aren’t from their family. This is what makes it so easy to slot dogs into our lives. <h2>Dogs are wired to understand us</h2> Humans have selectively bred dogs for many generations. And in many cases, we’ve bred them to take direction to help us in a wide variety of jobs – including being companions to us. This has led to domestic dogs being born with an interest in humans. From an early age, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982221006023">puppies are attracted</a> to human faces. While dogs are as co-operative as wolves, they tend to be submissive towards humans and follow our directions – whereas wolves are bolder and more likely to lead when <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1709027114">co-operating with humans</a>. Dogs also learn to follow our gaze, and show a left-gaze bias when looking at human faces. This means they spend more time looking at the left side of our faces (which would be the right side from our perspective). This bias emerges in several species when they are processing emotional information, which shows that dogs are <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152393">reading our faces</a> to figure out how we’re feeling. For a while it was also thought dogs were particularly attentive to human gestures such as pointing – but recent research suggests many domestic species and some wild animal species can also <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7555673/">follow pointing</a>. <h2>Dogs come in countless shapes and sizes</h2> No other species comes in such a huge variety of shapes and sizes as domestic dogs. Not even cats or horses display the same diversity. The largest dogs may be close to 25 times the size of the smallest! Beyond that, we have dogs with drop ears and prick ears and everything in between, tails and no tails, or bob tails, short legs and long legs, long noses and short noses – and a huge variety of coat colours, lengths and textures. For dogs, this huge variation might mean they have more to learn than other animals when it comes to understanding their own kind. For example, owners of herding breed dogs may find their dog a bit confused, or even defensive, when meeting a very different short-faced breed such as a bulldog. For us, it means we should appreciate how the size and shape of dogs can influence <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0149403">their behaviour</a> and experiences. For instance, dogs with longer noses have sharper vision, while dogs with a lighter build tend to be more energetic and fearful. <h2>Dogs form deep emotional bonds</h2> Domestic dogs have been shown to form attachment bonds with human caregivers that are very similar to those formed between <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065296">children and parents</a>. This may partly explain why they can read our <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10426098/">emotional signals</a>, why they become distressed (and try to help us) when <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231742">we are distressed</a>, and why MRI studies show dogs are happy when they smell <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376635714000473">their owners</a>. It may also be why they panic when separated from us. Dogs’ attachment to humans goes beyond being hypersocial. To them, we are a lot more than the food we provide and the balls we throw. We are an attachment figure akin to a parent. <h2>Dogs can help us be our best selves</h2> Most dog owners would agree their dog brings out the best in them. They can confide in their dog and love them unconditionally – sometimes more easily than they can another human. Dogs are playing important roles in animal-assisted therapy, where their nonjudgmental presence can be a calming influence and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40489-019-00188-5">facilitate social interactions</a>. They can even help children <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-022-01392-5">learn to read</a> and <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/21/5171">alleviate anxiety</a>. Although assisting humans with their emotional problems can be a difficult task for such an emotionally sensitive species, research suggests the right dogs can rise to the task if their workload is <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558787818302193">managed carefully</a>. Horses are also used in animal-assisted therapy, as are some smaller furry animals. However, dogs are more portable and can remain at ease in stimulating environments such as courtrooms, schools and airports. They are uniquely placed to accompany us wherever we go. <h2>Paws for thought</h2> We might like to think dogs are special for some of the traits we value in humans, such as intelligence, selflessness or a loving nature. But really dogs are exceptional for simply being dogs. They are social acrobats that can find social harmony wherever they go. They have rich emotional lives in which they co-exist with different species and can even forge bonds <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89dCR3VinMM&ab_channel=WCCO-CBSMinnesota">outside of their own species</a>. They are also generally tolerant of our primate ways – and good at receiving our love. And for me that’s enough.<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/211832/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/melissa-starling-461103">Melissa Starling</a>, Postdoctoral Researcher in Veterinary Science, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Shutterstock 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/an-experts-top-5-reasons-why-dogs-can-be-considered-exceptional-animals-211832">original article</a>.

Family & Pets

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucy-nicholas-145660">Lucy Nicholas</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> In the Barbie movie, we open with a picture of a perfect Barbieland where (almost) everyone is happy, diversity and sisterhood are embraced, and Barbies hold all positions of power. The Kens however, reflecting the popularity of the dolls in the real world, play a mainly decorative role. Spoilers for Barbie follow. In the film, we see a disgruntled Ken (played hilariously by Ryan Gosling) follow “Stereotypical” Barbie (Margot Robbie) to the real world where she has to find her human owner. This is all to fix an error that is allowing the real world to seep into Barbie land, with symptoms such as Barbie having an existential crisis. In the real world, Ken discovers the concept of the patriarchy. This sees him take a journey that is clearly influenced by, and pokes fun at, many aspects of contemporary anti-feminist men’s rights culture. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pBk4NYhWNMM?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Barbieland and the matriarchy</h2> It has been proposed that <a href="https://theconversation.com/in-greta-gerwigs-barbie-land-the-matriarchy-can-be-just-as-bad-as-the-patriarchy-209317">Barbieland is a matriarchy</a>, but I would argue that their attitude to Kens is instead indifference. Ken was aggrieved that Barbie didn’t notice him and reciprocate his affections. This is not dissimilar to the grievances of some real-life men under contemporary feminism. Why don’t women’s lives revolve around them? And what can they do to address this perceived injustice? The movie cleverly parallels the emotions, narratives and logics that lead men to extreme antifeminist and misogynistic thinking, and in doing so exposes the flimsiness of their foundations. Having undertaken <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">research</a> on online antifeminist discourses, Ken’s journey from aggrievement to masculine “enlightenment” parallels themes we found in Men’s Rights Activist spaces. Radicalisation into this world is often motivated by a feeling among boys and men of being left behind by a feminist world or system that doesn’t value them. This then leads them to long for an imagined natural order of patriarchy where women are back in their place and men regain their entitlements. These logics underpin <a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-the-incel-community-has-a-sexism-problem-but-we-can-do-something-about-it-207206">incel</a> culture, a movement that is increasingly understood as a terror threat, and has been associated with various acts of terror, such as the 2022 Aotearoa New Zealand <a href="https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/closest-to-an-incel-attack-nz-has-had-experts-concern-after-attempted-murder-of-auckland-schoolgirls/HYPEVZ6F4BFT3CV2O4SXS5FR7U/">Epsom crash case</a>. <h2>The manosphere and MRAS</h2> The “<a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-68360-7_2">manosphere</a>” can be understood as a loose coalition of antifeminist online subcultures. This includes MRAs (<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1097184X15574338">Men’s Rights Activists</a>) who claim reverse discrimination and that feminism has gone too far, and <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1097184X18816118">Redpillers</a> who claim to have swallowed the “red pill” to see the truth about feminism’s dominance. PUAs (<a href="https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/d8971ded-1ec3-4939-8c0a-ab248dad62ba">Pick up Artists</a>) teach men how to manipulate the women they feel they are entitled to, to give them sex; and MGTOWs (<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1751867">Men Going Their Own Way</a>), who are antifeminist separatists (from women). Some of the most well known members of the manosphere are incels (involuntary celibates) a misogynistic community of self identified “beta-males” who want an end to women’s rights which prevent them from getting sex. <h2>Ken’s grievances</h2> Like many MRAs, Ken struggles with a sense of entitlement romantically (rather than sexually in genital-free Barbieland), and in attitudes to power and respect. Ken was being “<a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/friend%20zone">friend-zoned</a>” by Barbie, who despite being “boyfriend and girlfriend” wouldn’t let him stay over at the Dream House, because “every night is girl’s night”. This is coupled with a feeling of not being special, as Ken is essentially interchangeable with any other Ken. He is also “alpha’d” by other Kens: in the language of the manosphere, Barbie is a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-27/incels-inside-their-terrifying-online-world/9700932">“Stacy” and the other Ken is an alpha “Chad”</a> preventing him from getting what he wants. In <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">our data</a> we found women are often described as “overlords”, man-haters, misandrists and “feminazis”. Among other concerns, men perceive economic loss due to women’s participation in the workplace, and crucially a lack of men’s sexual access to women brought about by the gains of feminism such as the awareness raised around consent by the #metoo movement. These men all share a starting point of grievance at women and their perceived indifference towards them. When Ken goes to the real world, he discovers patriarchy and he LOVES it. He has been “redpilled”. Patriarchy explains his aggrievement, and affirms his feelings. He takes patriarchy back to Barbieland and transforms it to Kendom, where the men change it to a society oriented around men and their power (and horses…). <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y1IgAEejvqM?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Redpilled ken</h2> This redpilled Ken is a hilarious parody of the “neomasculinity” of the pick up artist (PUA) movement, that seeks to restore a masculine-centred world. Neomasculinity is about a belief in biological difference, traditional masculinity and heteronormative gender roles. The amusing depiction of the Kens trying to perform traditional <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/hypermasculinity">hypermasculinity</a> and needing their egos stroked – such as in a hilarious scene where the Kens are serenading the Barbies on the beach with an acoustic rendition of Matchbox Twenty’s <a href="https://youtu.be/HAkHqYlqops">Push</a> (“I wanna push you around … I wanna take you for granted”) – brilliantly shows the extent to which toxic masculinity is learned. <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HAkHqYlqops?wmode=transparent&start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> Additionally, the competition among the Kens (that the Barbies ultimately stoke to overturn the Kentriarchy) is the perfect illustration of the damage toxic models of masculinity does to men. As Australian sociologist Raewyn Connell has long argued, almost no men can live up to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/27640853">masculine ideals</a>, resulting in negative outcomes not just for women but also for men themselves. <h2>Finding the real Ken</h2> The movie ends with Barbie, her human (America Ferrera), “Weird Barbie” (Kate McKinnon) and Allan (Michael Cera) deprogramming the brainwashed Barbies and turning the Kens against each other. But what of Just Beach Ken? And what can we learn from this for preventing or managing radicalisation of this feeling of aggrievement in real men or boys? Well, Barbie and Ken reach a middle ground. Barbie encourages Ken to work out who he is outside of his relation to Barbie, and to learn being Just Ken is enough. This isn’t dissimilar to the methods of men’s behaviour change programs and counselling for men who use violence, which use <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10926771.2023.2189043">trauma-informed motivational interviewing</a>, reflect on challenging gender norms and breaking down rigid thought processes, and developing emotional literacy and communication strategies. But it also illustrates that men and boys need alternative narratives to make sense of themselves in the world, and alternative communities for affirmation, before it gets to this stage. In <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2020-12/apo-nid307612.pdf">our report</a>, we recommended: "Providing alternative narratives and considering how far-right [or MRA] groups provide men with emotional support networks, with a view to providing better alternatives." Feminism has consistently been about separating attributes from their gendered associations, breaking down the Barbie/Ken binary. So if there is one thing we can take away from the Barbie movie, it is that hierarchy and rigid gender benefits nobody, and power and social roles have nothing to do with the genitals you are born with.<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/210273/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/lucy-nicholas-145660">Lucy Nicholas</a>, Associate professor Sexualities and Genders / Sociology, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Image credits: Warner Bros. 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/kens-rights-our-research-shows-barbie-is-surprisingly-accurate-on-how-mens-rights-activists-are-radicalised-210273">original article</a>.

Caring

What are your rights as an Airbnb renter in Australia? A law expert answers 6 common questions

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-giancaspro-182268">Mark Giancaspro</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> Airbnb has revolutionised the short-stay industry. Launched in 2008, it now eclipses the world’s biggest hotel chains. In Australia alone there are about <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-15/short-stay-rentals-airbnb-impact-on-australian-property-market/101019726">100,000 listed properties</a>. But in dealing with both a digital platform and a private owner (or “host”, in Airbnb-speak), your legal rights as a renter (or “guest”) can be unclear – at least without reading lengthy terms and conditions. This article answers six very common questions about using Airbnb in Australia. Please note that your legal rights may differ in other countries. Even if Airbnb’s terms and conditions are near identical – and they generally are – there may be differences in consumer laws. <h2>What if an Airbnb property doesn’t match its description?</h2> Airbnb’s <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/2908#6">terms and conditions</a> require the host to provide “complete and accurate information” about their property. Content, including photos, must be “up-to-date and accurate at all times”. Airbnb’s <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/2895/">Host Ground Rules</a> state that listings “should accurately describe the home and reflect the features and amenities that will be available”. If a property does not match its description or photos, <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/d/anz-prohost-resource-centre-support">report this to Airbnb</a>. False advertising will also likely breach the Australian Consumer Law, which prohibits (Section 18) commercial conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive. Report to the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/contact-us/report-a-consumer-issue">Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</a> here. There are no specific provisions to claim a refund or a discount for misleading listings. Your only recourse would seem be to initiate the cancellation policy that applies to your booking. <h2>So when can I get a refund?</h2> If you cancel your booking or leave the property early, your refund rights are determined by your <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/149">cancellation policy</a> (see “show trip details”). There are various <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/475">policies</a> (from which a host selects when listing). Most allow full refunds if you cancel one to five days prior to check-in, while others require up to 30 days’ notice or only provide partial refunds. If the host cancels on you, they <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/990">may be penalised</a> by Airbnb. <h2>Can an Airbnb host impose harsh and unreasonable ‘house rules’?</h2> If an owner wants to make rules against visitors without their permission or how many times you can use the washing machine, they generally can. When you rent a property through Airbnb, you are entering into a private agreement with the owner. Under contract law, they can stipulate whatever terms they like, so long as those rules aren’t illegal. What Australian Consumer Law does prohibit are <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/business/selling-products-and-services/contracts#toc-unfair-terms-in-standard-form-contracts-">unfair terms</a> in standard form “consumer contracts” – which an Airbnb contract likely qualifies as. An unfair term is one that: <ul> <li>causes a significant imbalance in your rights and obligations</li> <li>is not reasonably necessary to protect the host’s interests</li> <li>would cause you detriment (financial or otherwise) if it was enforced.</li> </ul> The problem is that you will need to sue the host (that is, initiate civil litigation) to prove this. Your best option is to carefully review the rules before you confirm your reservation. Once you confirm, you are legally agreeing to all of the host’s terms whether you’ve read and understood them or not. If you disagree with a rule, ask the host to waive or amend it. If they won’t budge, your choice is to book or not. <h2>What are the boundaries for an Airbnb host/owner?</h2> Hosts are <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/3057">required</a> to ensure every property is secure and safe. Airbnb’s Community Policy states properties must be properly lockable and free of hazards, and hosts must be responsive and willing to answer guest queries within a reasonable time. <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/3060?_set_bev_on_new_domain=1691395791_NmY1ZDNmZjQxZjQy">According to Airbnb</a>, a host cannot physically intrude or interfere with your stay. They can only re-enter their property (or a guest’s room in a shared stay) if there is an emergency or with express permission. In a shared stay, the host must not enter the bathrooms or guest bedrooms when the guests are inside. The host is also forbidden from sharing private details, photos, or videos of you without consent. Where your safety is threatened, you should contact law enforcement and notify Airbnb. If you decide to leave, you may be entitled to a partial refund. Your rights depend on the cancellation policy applying to your booking (discussed further below). <h2>If I am injured in or get sick because of an Airbnb property, can I claim compensation?</h2> <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/2908#4.2">Clause 4.2</a> of Airbnb’s terms and conditions states that, by staying at a listed property, you acknowledge and “freely and willfully” accept the risk of “illness, bodily injury, disability, or death”. Further, clause 19 contains a broad disclaimer absolving Airbnb of any liability for “personal or bodily injury or emotional distress” incurred in using its services. Clause 20 also contains an indemnity preventing you from making any claim against Airbnb in relation to your stay. This gives Airbnb legal protection. But you may make a claim against the host. The first step would be to formally write to the host outlining your claim. Airbnb may also assist with any disputes. If this fails, you can sue the host but whether the cost and effort is worth it will depend on the extent of your injury or illness. If you do make any claim against the host, they will likely rely on Airbnb’s insurance. Every Airbnb host is insured up to US$1 million (about A$1.5 million) through Airbnb’s <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/3145">Host Liability Insurance Programme</a>. This covers any bodily injuries incurred by guests (or others) and damage to or theft of any property belonging to a guest (or others). There are some exceptions to what Airbnb’s insurance will cover, such as intentional violence, mould and communicable disease. If you want compensation for something the host is personally liable for, you are more likely to have to take legal action, using a lawyer. Consider the costs carefully. <h2>What’s the maximum cleaning/damages fee an Airbnb host can charge?</h2> Cleaning fees are <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/2812">set by the host</a>. Airbnb provides a <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/help/article/3171">pricing tool</a> to help them calculate a reasonable fee – generally <a href="https://www.igms.com/airbnb-cleaning-fee/">based on size and facilities</a> – but there is no maximum, presumably on the rationale that market forces (and reviews) will deter hosts from charging too much. Nor is there a maximum damages fee. You can formally <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/d/anz-prohost-resource-centre-support">dispute the amount</a> with Airbnb, which will determine if it is reasonable, relying on information provided by both parties. Charging exorbitant prices is not illegal though Australian Consumer Law does prohibit “<a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/business/selling-products-and-services/unfair-business-practices#toc-unconscionable-conduct">unconscionable conduct</a>”. But, again, you need to initiate legal proceedings and have a court agree you deserve compensation. <h2>Where to go for help and advice</h2> You can <a href="https://www.airbnb.com.au/d/anz-prohost-resource-centre-support">contact Airbnb</a> for any account, listing, or reservation-related questions. Online forums can also be useful for advice and support. You can report consumer complaints to the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/contact-us/report-a-consumer-issue">Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</a> but the federal regulator does not resolve individual complaints or provide legal advice on your rights and obligations. For preliminary advice go to the following state and territory consumer advice agencies: <hr /> <iframe id="lhlWv" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/lhlWv/2/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Please note this article does not constitute legal advice. If you need legal advice, consult a lawyer.<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/211026/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-giancaspro-182268">Mark Giancaspro</a>, Senior Lecturer in Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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-are-your-rights-as-an-airbnb-renter-in-australia-a-law-expert-answers-6-common-questions-211026">original article</a>.

Legal

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rico-merkert-90253">Rico Merkert</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-li-1460445">David Li</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Our climate is changing, and airlines are under pressure to reduce emissions from air travel. For many of us, especially in Australia, flying is an essential form of transport, so how can we reduce its environmental impact? Getting to and from the airport is an overlooked aspect of air travel that offers an immediate way to cut total carbon emissions from the trip by a surprisingly large amount. Our newly published <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920923002468">research</a> shows for an average economy passenger flying from Sydney to Melbourne, the carbon emissions from using a fossil-fuelled car to get to and from the airports make up a staggering 13.5% of the total door-to-door emissions. At a global scale, this number reaches 12.1% for long-haul flights and up to 22.8% for short-haul air journeys. For comparison, in the International Air Transport Association’s <a href="https://www.iata.org/en/programs/environment/roadmaps/">2050 net-zero emission roadmap</a>, 13% of global airline decarbonisation will come from electric and hydrogen propulsion. A further 65% is to come from mass adoption of sustainable aviation fuel. This is fuel produced from non-petroleum-based renewable sources such as some municipal solid waste, woody biomass, fats, greases and oils. Each of these big lifters requires a mammoth level of investment and technological breakthroughs, and comes with limitations and risks. Some solutions might make air travel prohibitively expensive. Airlines are moving mountains to decarbonise, but there are increasing concerns their net-zero plans might not stack up. In contrast, a 13.5% emission reduction on a Sydney-Melbourne door-to-door journey today may sound like a dream. Yet our research shows it’s easily achievable if travellers can be persuaded to change how they get to and from the airport. <h2>So how can travellers be convinced to switch?</h2> <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/agricultural-and-resource-economics-review/article/future-of-carbon-labeling-factors-to-consider/FDBC62244F2ACA29A7602886085B4A91">Research</a> has shown carbon “labelling” helps shift consumer behaviour towards greener choices. It’s a bit like how the nutrition label on the back of our cereal box helps us choose healthier options. For instance, when searching for a flight on online travel platform Skyscanner, all flight options are displayed with carbon emissions, so consumers can make a more informed choice. Two <a href="https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5n53672m">recent</a> <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/03611981211046924">studies</a> at the University of California, Davis, suggest showing consumers the emission outcomes of different gate-to-gate flight choices, such as aircraft types and transit stops, can prompt them to choose greener flights, reducing emissions by up to 3.8%. But air journeys don’t start or end at airports. They start at home and end at destinations, or vice versa. Our air-travel carbon emissions are divided into ground and air segments and counted as airport and airline emissions respectively. While airlines focus on gate-to-gate decarbonisation through future technologies, the door-to-door emissions produced by travel to and from airports can be reduced immediately. Let’s look at an example of a Sydney-to-Melbourne trip. Say you travel from North Sydney to Sydney Airport by car, then fly to Melbourne Airport and catch a taxi to the city centre. That trip emits 82 kilograms of CO₂ door-to-door. But if you use a train, bus or electric vehicle (charged from a renewable source) to travel to and from the airport, the emissions from your trip drop to 71kg: a 13.5% fall door-to-door. Although travel platforms are increasingly communicating gate-to-gate emissions to consumers, we’re not aware of any that are including door-to-door emissions. Helping climate-conscious consumers understand the door-to-door carbon impact of airport ground connections could drive them to choose greener options such as public transport and electric vehicles. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&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/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/541364/original/file-20230807-15-mp3dlr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Google Flights chart of air travel options showing emissions and cost" /></a><figcaption>Travel aggregator search platforms are now labelling carbon emissions when offering flight options. Google Flights</figcaption></figure> <h2>Give airlines an incentive to inform passengers</h2> Governments and airports have long collaborated in driving consumers towards greener ground transit options. For instance, Transport for NSW has set a 50% emission-reduction <a href="https://www.future.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-09/Future_Transport_Strategy_2.pdf">target</a> for 2030. However, consumer adoption of these options has remained low. <a href="https://www.ttf.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TTF_Accessing_Sydney_Airport.pdf">Most airport trips</a> in Australia today are still made by conventional car. As consumers, we have relationships with airlines that we don’t have with airports. When it comes to flying, we choose our airline carefully. Yet we rarely think about how we get to the airport. Airlines are experts in customer communication and engagement. They operate some of the largest frequent-flyer programs in the world. Last time we checked, Qantas had <a href="https://www.finder.com.au/frequent-flyer/qantas">15 million</a> program members and Virgin had <a href="https://newsroom.virginaustralia.com/release/velocity-frequent-flyer-soars-11-million-members">11 million</a>. Through these channels, airlines learn about us and how we tick when it comes to making flying choices. This puts them in an ideal position to keep us informed about door-to-door travel and drive the transition towards greener airport ground-connection options. To give them an incentive to do so, their efforts should be recognised through emission accounting. <h2>A cost-effective way to cut emissions</h2> Travellers using the Sydney Airport train station must pay an <a href="https://www.opal.com.au/en/opal-fares/airport_station_access_fee/">access fee</a>, which adds <a href="https://airportlink.com.au/trip-information/price/">A$15.74</a> to the cost of the journey. As our <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920923002468">paper</a> highlights, the average customer using the airport train removes 2.7kg of CO₂. Achieving the same amount of decarbonisation during the flight using more sustainable aviation fuel – which is more expensive – would cost the customer about the same: between $10 and $16. So there is an opportunity for airlines to highlight this decarbonisation outcome as a way to persuade travellers to reconsider driving a car or catching a taxi, and instead take the airport train or bus. Airlines could also consider collaborating with airports to build airport charging facilities for electric vehicles as uptake in Australia approaches a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jul/31/australian-electric-vehicles-ev-sales-rise-increase">double-digit share</a> of new vehicle sales. This overlooked opportunity to cut door-to-door emissions from air travel has a substantial upside. It deserves far more attention from airlines, airports and consumers.<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/211099/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rico-merkert-90253">Rico Merkert</a>, Professor in Transport and Supply Chain Management and Deputy Director, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies (ITLS), University of Sydney Business School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/david-li-1460445">David Li</a>, PhD Candidate, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841">University of Sydney</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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-air-travellers-can-cut-their-door-to-door-emissions-right-now-by-as-much-as-13-on-the-sydney-melbourne-route-211099">original article</a>.

Domestic Travel

10 reasons humans kill animals – and why we can’t avoid it

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/benjamin-allen-100036">Benjamin Allen</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> As long as humans have existed, they’ve killed animals. But the necessity of some types of animal killing are now questioned by many. So can humans ever stop killing animals entirely? And if not, what’s the best way forward? <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723039062">New research</a> I led investigates these questions. My colleagues and I identified the ten main reasons why humans kill animals. We found the need for some types of animal killing is questionable, but several forms are inescapable – a necessary part of humanity’s involvement in a single, functioning, finite global food web. But the debate doesn’t end there. Even if humans must kill animals in some cases, they can modify their behaviours to improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, and to reduce an animal’s suffering when it is killed. Doing so may improve the lives of animals to a greater extent than efforts to eliminate human killing entirely. <h2>Why humans kill animals</h2> Critics of animal-killing come from a variety of perspectives. Some oppose it on <a href="http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0048-9697(23)03906-2/rf0005">moral grounds</a>. Others claim animals should have <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.13494">rights equal</a> to humans, and say animal killing is a criminal act. Many people view any animal killing as <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.13126">cruel</a>, regardless of whether the animal suffers. But as valid and important as these views might be, they largely fail to address why humans kill animals – and why in many cases, it can’t be avoided. Our research sought to shed light on this. We focus our discussion on vertebrate animals which are almost universally recognised as “sentient” (or able to perceive and feel things). We identified ten main reasons humans kill animals: 1. Wild harvest or food acquisition: such as killing wild animals for meat 2. Human health and safety: such as reactively killing an animal when it attacks you 3. Agriculture and aquaculture: such as killing that occurs in the global meat industries, or killing required to produce crops 4. Urbanisation and industrialisation: such as clearing bushland to build homes 5. Wildlife control: such as programs that eradicate introduced animals to stop them killing native ones 6. Threatened species conservation: such as unintentionally killing animals when relocating them 7. Recreation, sport or entertainment: such as trophy hunting or bull fighting, and animal killing required to feed domestic pets 8. Mercy or compassion: such as euthanasing an animal hit by a car 9. Cultural and religious practice: such as animal sacrifice during the Islamic celebration of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/01/sydney-muslims-take-eid-al-adha-livestock-sacrifice-into-their-own-hands">Eid al-Adha</a>, or those associated with the <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/1594756">Yoruba</a> religion of West Africa 10. Research, education and testing: such as the laboratory use of rodents or primates. <h2>Understanding human killing behaviour</h2> So how best should we understand the above types of animal killing? Our research considers them in ecological terms – as behaviours consistent with our predatory and competitive roles in the global food web. Such behaviours are intended to improve human prospects for acquiring food or to protect and enhance life. These are innate life objectives for any sentient animal. Maintenance of all life on Earth requires obtaining, using, disposing of and recycling chemical elements. Ecosystems can be thought of as a “battleground” for these elements. <a href="https://theconversation.com/peter-singers-fresh-take-on-animal-liberation-a-book-that-changed-the-world-but-not-enough-205830">Some people argue</a> that directly killing animals is unacceptable, or that adopting certain lifestyles or diets, such as veganism, can eliminate or greatly reduce animal killing. But in our view, achieving a no-killing lifestyle is a physical and ecological impossibility. For instance, most plant foods come from crops grown on land where animals have been <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/11/5/1225">killed or displaced</a>. And while an animal-free diet for humans might temporarily reduce the number of animals killed, this won’t last forever. As human populations continue to grow, more land will eventually be needed to meet their food requirements. At that point, humans will have to directly or indirectly kill animals again or risk dying themselves. Humans also need space to live, which <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723039062?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=7e2e8f44ae1aaae3#bbb1045">results in</a> animal killing when habitat is razed. Of course, in rare cases an individual human may live without killing animals directly. Perhaps they live in a cave in the forest, and get sustenance from wild berries and mushrooms. But that human still lives inside the food web, and is competing against other animals for finite resources. In these cases, other animals may suffer and die because the human’s use of berries and caves leaves less food and space for them. Even if that human could do no harm at all to any animal, it’s still impossible for societies at large to live in this way. Some forms of animal killing are certainly not essential for human existence. Good examples are recreational hunting, euthanasia or keeping pets (which requires killing animals to feed them). And we certainly do not condone direct human participation in all forms of animal killing. It’s also important to note that in many cases, current levels of animal killing are <a href="https://www.opsociety.org/stop-unsustainable-fishing/">unsustainable</a>. Human populations have increased to the point where animals must be killed on enormous scales to feed, house and protect ourselves. If this continues, animal <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723039062?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=7e2e8f44ae1aaae3#bbb0905">populations</a> will <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723039062?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=7e2e8f44ae1aaae3#bbb0910">crash</a> – and with them, human populations. Nevertheless, we maintain that the overall necessity of animal killing is an unavoidable reality for humanity as a whole. A variety of direct and indirect forms of animal killing will undoubtedly remain an ongoing human endeavour. <h2>Taking responsibility</h2> So what are the implications of all this? We hope our research leads to a constructive dialogue, which starts with accepting that human existence on Earth is dependent on animal killing. It should then focus on the nuances of animal welfare and sustainability. Humans are the only known animals with an ethical or moral conscience. That means we have <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723039062?ref=pdf_download&fr=RR-2&rr=7e2e8f44ae1aaae3#bbb0650">a responsibility</a> to assume a stewardship role over all other animals, to resolve negative interactions between them as best as possible, and to ensure good welfare for as many animals as we can. Directing our attention in this way is likely to improve the lives of animals to a greater extent than trying to prevent humans from killing animals altogether – efforts my colleagues and I believe will ultimately be in vain.<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/209218/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/benjamin-allen-100036">Benjamin Allen</a>, Wildlife ecologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/10-reasons-humans-kill-animals-and-why-we-cant-avoid-it-209218">original article</a>.

Family & Pets

Eggs are so expensive right now. What else can I use?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> The price of eggs <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-14/egg-shortage-high-prices-blamed-on-shift-from-cage-to-free-range/102474282">is rising</a>. So many of us may be looking for cheaper alternatives. First, the bad news. Nothing can replace a boiled, poached or fried egg. Now, the good news. Lots of other ingredients can make foods puff and rise, give your meal a rich taste, or hold together ingredients. So try using some of these egg substitutes and save the real eggs for your breakfast. <h2>Why are eggs so popular?</h2> Eggs are incredibly <a href="https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/science/monitoringnutrients/afcd/pages/default.aspx">nutritious</a>. They’re a <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/11/3/684">rich source</a> of protein, vitamins A and D, pigments called carotenoids, and minerals. Eggs are also versatile. We use them to make a range of savoury and sweet foods, sauces and drinks, not to mention breakfast. Their popularity and versatility lies in the unique characteristics of the two main parts of the egg – the white and yolk. Each contribute <a href="https://www.amazon.com.au/Food-Cooking-Harold-McGee/dp/0684800012">different properties</a> in cooking. <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/11/3/684">Egg yolk</a> is about 55% water, 27% fats, 16% protein (with small amounts of carbohydrate). <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/11/3/684">Egg white</a> is about 10% protein and 90% water, with only traces of fat and carbohydrates. Different types of protein in egg white contribute to them foaming when whisked. <h2>Eggs are versatile</h2> Eggs have a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268005X2200131X?casa_token=1yXlEb1uvwQAAAAA:s3h5KCozwn-hjIn6kLOEoW45An255V6Z0G8TcJAQgTejfLEwV7nKqkS6VPWXiNkNxR4m5Mr2lHc">different role</a> in different types of cooking. 1. Eggs are a raising agent Beaten or whisked eggs act as a raising agent by creating pockets of air in foods, which expand with cooking, making the foods puff and rise. This gives baked products like cakes, biscuits and muffins volume and an airy feel. Using just the egg white leads to a remarkably light and delicate foam, as we see in meringues. In mousse and souffles the whites and the yolk are beaten separately, then mixed together. This leads to a light, airy and smooth texture. 2. Eggs hold together other ingredients Eggs combine ingredients and hold them together during cooking. This gives foods – such as vegetable or meat patties – their structure. 3. Eggs bind other liquids The liquid from eggs binds other liquids from other ingredients in the recipe into a soft, moist and tender mass. We see this in scrambled eggs, omelettes and egg custard. 4. Eggs act as emulsifiers The egg yolk contains different proteins (livetin, phosvitin) and lipoproteins (lecithin). These act as emulsifiers, allowing fat and water to mix together in foods such as mayonnaise and hollandaise sauce. 5. Eggs boost flavour The fat in egg yolks helps carry and release the flavour of some fat-soluble components of food. These foods <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224401000796">may taste differently</a> without the eggs. Eggs also contribute to foods feeling soft in the mouth. As eggs have different roles in cooking, you may need different egg substitutes depending on the outcome you want. Here are some cheaper (and vegan) options. <h2>Aquafaba</h2> Aquafaba is the liquid drained from cans of bean – typically from chickpeas as it has the most neutral flavour. This is the all-round winner, especially as most of us probably throw it away without realising what a gem it is. Aquafaba is <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224421001424?casa_token=P45Z4G2SFdsAAAAA:DRy8adcAU_QHl96LONyWOEhUXvrExVZsJ18xKvc8OiPYeVKHSOkGOKefiixXFPY9UhdscEaHF70">versatile</a>. You can whip it up like egg whites to form a foam that can be used to make meringue (even pavlova), gelato, in baked goods, and for binding ingredients in patties. It also contains emulsifiers and can be used to make mayonnaise. You’ll need different quantities of aquafaba depending on the recipe. Generally, though, you use about two to three tablespoons of aquafaba to replace the volume of fluid from an egg. On the downside, aquafaba can taste a bit beany. So it is best to use it with stronger flavours to overcome this. Nutritionally, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0924224421001424?via%3Dihub">aquafaba</a> has small amounts of carbohydrate (about 2.6g/100 millilitre), and negligible levels of protein (about 1.3g/100 millilitre). You can also freeze aquafaba. <h2>Vinegar and baking soda</h2> Mixing a teaspoon of baking soda with a tablespoon of vinegar can replace an egg in most baked goods. This produces carbon dioxide, which is trapped into air pockets, and makes foods rise. This is a very cheap option, however its success may be limited by how heavy the rest of the ingredients are. This combination also has very little nutritional value. <h2>Commercial egg replacements</h2> These are available at most supermarkets, are very cheap compared with eggs, have a long shelf life, and are easy to use, with instructions on the packaging. Typically, they contain different starches from potato, tapioca and pea protein (which act as leavening agents and form foams), along with raising agents. They are recommended for use in baked goods. However they have very little nutritional value compared to an egg. <h2>Flaxseed meal and chia seeds</h2> Use either a tablespoon of flaxseed meal, or chia seeds, added to about three tablespoons of water. Allow the mixture to sit for a few minutes to form a gel. The gels can be used in baked goods, however this option isn’t as cheap as the others, and has a slight nutty taste. Both these seeds provide nutritional value. They are both rich in the plant-based omega-3 fatty acid called alpha-linolenic acid. We <a href="https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/59/6/1304/4715808">can convert</a> this fatty acid into healthy omega-3 fatty acids, but at a slow rate. These seeds also provide fibre, polyphenols and antioxidants. <h2>Tofu</h2> Tofu, which is made from soybeans, is widely available and fairly cheap. It has the most “eggy” appearance and so makes it ideal as a substitute for scrambled eggs and in quiche. However, you will need to use silken tofu and puree it. Tofu is highly nutritious and provides protein, fat, calcium, polyphenols and anti-oxidants. You could also use soy flour. Add one tablespoon to three tablespoons of water, then use immediately in baking and for binding ingredients together. However, soy flour does not contain calcium, which tofu does. <h2>Mashed fruit</h2> Mashed bananas or applesauce are also used as egg substitutes. These mainly act to bind and hold moisture in the food and help carry the flavours. You also get the nutritional value of the fruit. Due to the natural sugar that in fruit, this will sweeten your baked goods so you will need to drop the sugar by about a tablespoon (or more) for each piece of fruit you add.<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/207837/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/eggs-are-so-expensive-right-now-what-else-can-i-use-207837">original article</a>.

Food & Wine

‘Psychological debriefing’ right after an accident or trauma can do more harm than good – here’s why

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-bryant-161">Richard Bryant</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> The recent <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-18/hunter-valley-wedding-bus-crash-survivors-remain-in-hospital/102487630">tragic bus accident</a> in the New South Wales Hunter Valley has again raised the issue of how we address the potential psychological effects of traumatic events. It is interesting we revisit the same debate after each disaster, and few lessons have apparently been learned after decades of research. After the Hunter Valley accident, immediate psychological counselling was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/15/hunter-valley-bus-crash-company-issued-with-defect-notices-after-police-raid">offered to those affected</a>. While we can’t say what form of counselling was offered, the traditional approach is known as “<a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1118833/">psychological debriefing</a>”. This typically involves counsellors providing trauma survivors with a single counselling intervention within days of the event. Although the content of the intervention can vary, it usually involves education about stress reactions, encouragement to disclose their memories of the experience, some basic stress-coping strategies and possibly referral information. But the evidence shows this approach, however well-meaning, may not help – or worse, do harm. <h2>The belief that feelings must be shared</h2> The encouragement of people to discuss their emotional reactions to a trauma is the result of a long-held notion in psychology (dating back to the classic writings of Sigmund Freud) that disclosure of one’s emotions is invariably beneficial for one’s mental health. Emanating from this perspective, the impetus for psychological debriefing has traditionally been rooted in the notion trauma survivors are vulnerable to psychological disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), if they do not “talk through their trauma” by receiving this very <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1529100610387086">early intervention</a>. The scenario of trauma counsellors appearing in the acute aftermath of traumatic events has been commonplace for decades in Australia and elsewhere. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City in 2001, up to 9,000 counsellors were mobilised and more than <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/22/nyregion/finding-cure-for-hearts-broken-sept-11-is-as-difficult-as-explaining-the-cost.html">US$200 million</a> was projected to meet a surge in mental health needs. But fewer people than expected sought help under this program and $90 million remained <a href="https://theconversation.com/9-11-anniversary-a-watershed-for-psychological-response-to-disasters-2975">unspent</a>. <h2>What do we know about psychological reactions to disasters?</h2> The overwhelming evidence indicates the majority of people will <a href="http://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/journals/pspi/weighing-the-costs-of-disaster.html">adapt</a> to traumatic events without any psychological intervention. Long-term studies indicate approximately 75% of trauma survivors will not experience any long-term distress. Others will experience short-term distress and subsequently adapt. A minority (usually about 10%) will <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100610387086">experience chronic psychological problems</a>. This last group are the ones who require care and attention to reduce their mental health problems. Experts now agree other trauma survivors can rely on their own <a href="https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mental-health/problems-disorders/coping-after-a-traumatic-event">coping resources and social networks</a> to adapt to their traumatic experience. The finding across many studies that most people adapt to traumatic experiences <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100610387086">without formal mental health interventions</a> has been a major impetus for questioning the value of psychological debriefing in the immediate aftermath of disasters. In short, the evidence tells us universal interventions – such as psychological debriefing for everyone involved in a disaster – that attempt to prevent PTSD and other psychological disorders in trauma survivors are not indicated. These attempts <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100610387086#bibr448-1529100610387086">do not prevent</a> the disorder they are targeting. <h2>Not a new conclusion</h2> In the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami, the World Health Organization listed a warning (which <a href="https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/treatment-care/mental-health-gap-action-programme/evidence-centre/other-significant-emotional-and-medical-unexplained-somatic-complaints/psychological-debriefing-in-people-exposed-to-a-recent-traumatic-event">still stands</a>) that people should not be given single-session psychological debriefing because it is <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1529100610387086#bibr448-1529100610387086">not supported</a> by evidence. Worse than merely being ineffective, debriefing can be <a href="https://www.jenonline.org/article/S0099-1767(19)30453-2/fulltext#:%7E:text=It%20is%20for%20these%20reasons,%2C%20anxiety%20or%20depressive%20symptoms.%E2%80%9D">harmful for some people</a> and may increase the risk of PTSD. The group of trauma survivors that are most vulnerable to the toxic effects of debriefing are those who are more distressed in the acute phase right after the trauma. This group of people have worse mental health outcomes if they are provided with early debriefing. This may be because their trauma memories are over-consolidated as a result of the emotional disclosure so shortly after the event, when <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181836/#:%7E:text=Brain%20areas%20implicated%20in%20the,norepinephrine%20responses%20to%20subsequent%20stressors.">stress hormones</a> are still highly active. In normal clinical practice a person would be assessed in terms of their suitability for any psychological intervention. But in the case of universal psychological debriefing there is no prior assessment. Therefore, there’s no assessment of the risks the intervention may pose for the person. <h2>Replacing debriefing</h2> Most international bodies have shifted away from psychological debriefing. Early intervention might now be offered as “<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/psychological-first-aid">psychological first aid</a>”. This newer approach is meant to provide <a href="https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241548205">fundamental support and coping strategies</a> to help the person manage the immediate aftermath of adversity. One of the most important differences between psychological first aid and psychological debriefing is that it does not encourage people to disclose their emotional responses to the trauma. But despite the increasing popularity of psychological first aid, it is difficult to assess its effectiveness as it does not explicitly aim to prevent a disorder, such as PTSD. <h2>Wanting to help</h2> So if there is so much evidence, why do we keep having this debate about the optimal way to assist psychological adaptation after disasters? Perhaps it’s because it’s human nature to want to help. The evidence suggests we should monitor the most vulnerable people and target resources towards them when they need it – usually some weeks or months later when the dust of the trauma has settled. Counsellors might want to promote their activities in the acute phase after disasters, but it may not be in the best interest of the trauma survivors. In short, we need to develop better strategies to ensure we are meeting the needs of the survivors, rather than the counsellors. <hr /> 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/208139/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-bryant-161">Richard Bryant</a>, Professor & Director of Traumatic Stress Clinic, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-sydney-1414">UNSW Sydney</a> Image credits: Getty Images 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/psychological-debriefing-right-after-an-accident-or-trauma-can-do-more-harm-than-good-heres-why-208139">original article</a>.

Caring

Disturbing footage of dingo attacks revealed

Disturbing footage of dingo attacks have been released by rangers following multiple attacks in a popular camping spot that occurred just weeks apart. Tourists have been warned to be wary of the wild animals after shocking footage emerged of a tourist being nipped while sunbathing. The video comes just weeks before a 10-year-old boy was attacked and dragged underwater by a dingo at K’gari Island – formerly known as Fraser Island – on June 16. The boy sustained puncture wounds to his shoulder and bruises to his collarbone because of the accident, which happened in front of a popular camping spot on the island. “The boy’s 12-year-old-sister who was nearby reacted quickly and ran to assist him,” Assistant principal ranger Danielle Mansfield said. “The family treated the boy for puncture wounds to his shoulder and arms and scratches and bruises on his collarbone and arm.” Mansfield also said that rangers were closely monitoring the dingo responsible for the attack, which had blood splatters across its face and paws following the attack, although there are currently no plans to euthanise it. Two months ago, a similar attack occurred where a primary school-aged girl was<a href="https://www.oversixty.com.au/news/news/child-hospitalised-from-dingo-attack" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> hospitalised following a dingo attack</a> while swimming. The girl suffered bites to her head and fingers after the dingo attempted to drag her underwater. Rangers have also released dashcam footage of another dingo chasing a young boy and an adult male, in an area close to where the 10-year-old boy was attacked, just two weeks before the unfortunate incident. The dingo was euthanised for “poor behaviour”. This comes a few weeks after another dingo was euthanised following a string of attacks, including a sunbathing tourist, a seven-year-old boy and a 42-year-old woman. Dingoes are native to K’gari Island, but a few of them fail to show any wariness towards people, and are increasingly brazen as a result of people deliberately or unintentionally feeding them, rangers said. “We have increased patrols in the region to monitor the wongari’s (dingo’s) behaviour and pass on dingo-safe messaging to campers and visitors,” Mansfield said. “These animals are capable of inflicting serious harm, and they have bitten children and adults, and some are quite brazen and are not fleeing when yelled at or when someone brandishes a stick.” “People think it won’t happen to them, but it can happen to anyone and that’s why rangers are providing dingo-safe information to as many people as possible,” she added. “We don’t want any incidents on K’gari, and people must understand that dingoes are wild animals and should never be fed or interacted with.” Images: Queensland Department of Environment and Science / News.com.au

Travel Trouble

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Elephant tourism often involves cruelty – here are steps toward more humane, animal-friendly excursions

"Finally felt like the right time": John Farnham's huge announcement

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

“Was I right?": Pauline Hanson repeats her call for halt on immigration

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

‘Self-love’ might seem selfish. But done right, it’s the opposite of narcissism

"The time's right": Neil Mitchell signs off

Think potholes on our roads are getting worse? You’re right – and here’s why

6 reasons why global temperatures are spiking right now

Kids dressing up as older people is harmless fun, right? No, it’s ageist, whatever Bluey says

Royal family's 175-year-old right to hunt comes to an end

Is it okay to kiss your pet? The risk of animal-borne diseases is small, but real

An expert’s top 5 reasons why dogs can be considered exceptional animals

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

What are your rights as an Airbnb renter in Australia? A law expert answers 6 common questions

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

10 reasons humans kill animals – and why we can’t avoid it

Eggs are so expensive right now. What else can I use?

‘Psychological debriefing’ right after an accident or trauma can do more harm than good – here’s why

Disturbing footage of dingo attacks revealed

Our Partners

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Elephant tourism often involves cruelty – here are steps toward more humane, animal-friendly excursions

"Finally felt like the right time": John Farnham's huge announcement

10 million animals die on our roads each year. Here’s what works (and what doesn’t) to cut the toll

“Was I right?": Pauline Hanson repeats her call for halt on immigration

Does the royal family have a right to privacy? What the law says

‘Self-love’ might seem selfish. But done right, it’s the opposite of narcissism

"The time's right": Neil Mitchell signs off

Think potholes on our roads are getting worse? You’re right – and here’s why

6 reasons why global temperatures are spiking right now

Kids dressing up as older people is harmless fun, right? No, it’s ageist, whatever Bluey says

Royal family's 175-year-old right to hunt comes to an end

Is it okay to kiss your pet? The risk of animal-borne diseases is small, but real

An expert’s top 5 reasons why dogs can be considered exceptional animals

Ken’s rights? Our research shows Barbie is surprisingly accurate on how ‘men’s rights activists’ are radicalised

What are your rights as an Airbnb renter in Australia? A law expert answers 6 common questions

How air travellers can cut their door-to-door emissions right now – by as much as 13% on the Sydney-Melbourne route

10 reasons humans kill animals – and why we can’t avoid it

Eggs are so expensive right now. What else can I use?

‘Psychological debriefing’ right after an accident or trauma can do more harm than good – here’s why

Disturbing footage of dingo attacks revealed

Our Partners

Join Over60