Academic Analysis – Page 803 – MIL Submissions Engine

December 8, 2025

What’s the difference between a tumour and cancer?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sarah Sasson, Scientia Senior Lecturer in Medicine (Immunology), UNSW Sydney

The terms tumour and cancer can refer to different types of lumps and bumps. But the terms are often confused and misused – by the general public and even health professionals.

For instance, doctors can use euphemisms such as tumour, mass, lesion or spot when they really mean cancer.

So what’s the difference between a tumour and cancer? And why is it important to use the right terms?

What’s a tumour?

The Oxford dictionary defines a tumour as “any abnormal swelling in or on a part of the body”. They develop in nearly any part, including fat, muscle, bone, nerves and glands.

But not all tumours are cancer, and not all cancers are tumours.

Tumours can be “benign” (not cancer) or “malignant” (cancer).

Some benign tumours are harmless and don’t need treatment. These include lipomas (deposits of fat cells under the skin) or haemangiomas (an overgrowth of blood vessels often looking like reddish-purple birthmarks).

Other benign tumours can cause problems due to their location. These include uterine fibroids, which can cause heavy menstrual bleeding, and benign pituitary adenomas, which can over-produce hormones. Even though these tumours are not cancer, they can be dangerous and doctors sometimes advise surgery to remove them.

What’s cancer?

Cancer develops when normal cells acquire genetic changes, called mutations, that allow them to escape the body’s normal “checks and balances”.

Several hallmarks of cancer were defined more than 25 years ago and include uncontrolled growth and avoiding immune destruction.

Importantly, cancer cells can invade surrounding structures (known as invasion) and spread to other sites (metastasis). These are the key features that distinguish malignant tumours (cancer) from benign ones (not cancer).

Cancers in solid organs – such as the breast, skin or lung – are sometimes called malignant tumours because they form masses. But not all cancers form masses. Blood cancers, such as leukaemia, usually do not.

How are they detected?

Both tumours and cancers can cause lumps and bumps, either detected by the patient (Doc, what’s this lump?) or during investigation for a symptom (Doc, I can’t swallow).

Symptoms differ depending on where the tumour (both benign and malignant) is and what types of cells it is made of. For example, tumours in the gastrointestinal tract (oesophagus, stomach, bowel) can cause symptoms because the mass starts to obstruct the digestive tract.

Imaging such as ultrasound, CT or MRI might be needed to investigate further. The tissue may also be sampled (via a needle or surgery) then a pathologist can look at the sample under the microscope to determine the cell type to determine whether it’s benign or malignant.

How are they managed?

Management can be similar, such as cutting out a benign meningioma (brain tumour) or a malignant basal cell carcinoma (skin cancer).

Management can also be very different. Malignant tumours (cancer) have the potential to spread, and at advanced stages are associated with increased risk of death. So managing cancer is often more time-sensitive and complex.

Treatment for some malignant tumours involves a combination of surgery, radiotherapy and/or systemic treatment, such as chemotherapy, which affects the whole body.

Why it’s important to get the words right

Misusing the words cancer and tumour can be confusing and misleading. This may be because the word “cancer” carries a stigma of sickness and death, even though many cancers have a good outlook.

When talking to patients, it’s important for doctors to “get it right”. Less than half of patients understand that a doctor means cancer if they use euphemisms such as tumour, mass, lesion or spot.

In fact, any type of ambiguous language doctors use when communicating with patients about cancer can increase confusion.

In a nutshell

The terms tumour and cancer are not interchangeable. Solid cancers are tumours and malignant tumours are cancers.

But not all tumours are malignant, and not all cancers are solid.

Megan Barnet receives funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and government-funded grants including the NHMRC.

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

– ref. What’s the difference between a tumour and cancer? – https://theconversation.com/whats-the-difference-between-a-tumour-and-cancer-266363

December 8, 2025

More women are using steroids – and many don’t know the risks

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Samuel Cornell, PhD Candidate in Public Health & Community Medicine, School of Population Health, UNSW Sydney

When people think of gym goers using steroids, the picture that comes to mind is often of a man pumping iron, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, or modern day shirtless masculinity influencers like “the Liver King”.

But the image is changing. Women now represent a growing share of people who use steroids. And so harm minimisation efforts, currently targeted at men, will need to change too.

It’s not just men

Research shows women are increasingly represented among steroid-using communities, even though precise long-term trend data are limited.

A 2024 systematic review of international studies found about 4% of adult women had used anabolic steroids at least once, up from 1.6% in 2014.

Among women bodybuilders, nearly 17% – around one in six – report using steroids, and rates among women in strength sports or recreational lifting communities are also markedly higher than in the general woman population.

This emerging evidence suggests the gender profile of steroid use is shifting, even if precise historical rates are not available to confirm the exact scale of the increase.

While we don’t have robust national statistics for Australia, data show the weight of steroids seized nationally increased 1,372% between 2011-12 and 2020-21 (from 33.7 kilograms to 496.8kg).

This trend almost certainly mirrors what’s happening overseas: continued, escalating growth of the bodybuilding and fitness communities, including among women in amateur strength sports.

The boom in women’s strength training and weightlifting since 2021 will benefit the physical and mental health of most who partake in it.

But the simultaneous increase in steroid use may be cause for concern without effective harm reduction via education, health promotion and health services engagement.

3 reasons more women are using them

The reasons are complex but three stand out.

First, the rise of strength sports. Women’s participation in powerlifting, weightlifting and bodybuilding has grown rapidly in Australia since the early 2020s.

These sports have opened up new spaces for women to feel strong, confident and physically capable. But they also expose women to online communities where performance-enhancing drugs are normalised.

Second, the influence of social media. Platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and YouTube are filled with “fitfluencers” showcasing dramatic transformations. Many of these women are seeking the “perfect body”.

Some openly promote steroid cycles and other chemical shortcuts. Women who follow these influencers – often for training or nutrition advice – can end up in online spaces where performance-enhancing drugs are normal.

Third, many women are being encouraged or “brought into” performance-enhancing drugs use by others.

Qualitative research from Australia and Scandinavia shows women often start using steroids through male friends, partners or coaches, who may position these drugs as necessary for progress or competition.

Of course, taking any performance- or image-enhancing drug is not without risks.

The dangers are real

While steroids carry risks for everyone, women may face unique and irreversible side effects.

These include:

facial and body hair growth
deepening of the voice
menstrual changes or infertility
breast tissue reduction
acne and hair loss
clitoral enlargement
severe mood changes, including anxiety and irritability, among other symptoms.

And beyond these risks, emerging Australian research shows another danger: many underground steroid products contain toxic contaminants such as lead, arsenic and cadmium – substances linked to cancer, organ damage and cardiovascular disease.

The biggest long-term risks are the ones people rarely talk about: heart disease, stroke, liver damage and mental health problems.

Interviews with women who use steroids show many are less informed than men about these dangers, often because the research has historically focused on male use.

There is also the issue of stigma. Women report being judged more harshly than men when seeking medical help and some avoid health services entirely.

That leaves them more vulnerable to complications.

How do we turn this trend around?

Policing steroid use in isolation won’t work. Nor will repeating the old message that women should simply “just say no.”

The evidence suggests three promising approaches.

1. Better health promotion education that actually speaks to women. Most steroid information online is written for men, by men. Health agencies need to produce clear, accessible, women’s resources that explain risks honestly and without shame.

2. Meeting women where they are. Social media is where many women learn about these drugs, so it should also be where they see accurate information. This may include partnering with credible fitness influencers – especially women – who can explain risks, promote safer training practices and counter misinformation.

3. Reducing stigma in healthcare. Women who use steroids may avoid doctors because they fear judgement. Training clinicians to respond without moralising – the same way we approach other drug-related issues – would make it easier for women to seek support early.

Sonya Weith, a peer educator at Queensland Injectors Voice for Advocacy and Action, provided an expert review of this article.

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

Timothy Piatkowski is affiliated with Queensland Injectors Voice for Advocacy and Action (Vice President & Research Lead) and The Loop Australia (Research Lead QLD),

– ref. More women are using steroids – and many don’t know the risks – https://theconversation.com/more-women-are-using-steroids-and-many-dont-know-the-risks-271183

December 8, 2025

What our missing ocean float revealed about Antarctica’s melting glaciers

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steve Rintoul, CSIRO Fellow, CSIRO

Sometimes, we get lucky in science. In this case, an oceanographic float we deployed to do one job ended up drifting away and doing something else entirely.

Equipped with temperature and salinity sensors, our Argo ocean float was supposed to be surveying the ocean around the Totten Glacier, in eastern Antarctica. To our initial disappointment, it rapidly drifted away from this region. But it soon reappeared further west, near ice shelves where no ocean measurements had ever been made.

Drifting in remote and wild seas for two-and-a-half years, the float spent about nine months beneath the massive Denman and Shackleton ice shelves. It survived to send back new data from parts of the ocean that are usually difficult to sample.

Measurements of the ocean beneath ice shelves are crucial to determine how much, and how quickly, Antarctica will contribute to sea-level rise.

Argo floats are autonomous floats used in an international program to measure ocean conditions like temperature and salinity.
Peter Harmsen, CC BY-ND

What are Argo ocean floats?

Argo floats are free-floating robotic oceanographic instruments. As they drift, they rise and fall through the ocean to depths of up to 2 kilometres, collecting profiles of temperature and salinity. Every ten days or so they rise to the surface to transmit data to satellites.

These floats have become a mainstay of our global ocean observing system. Given that 90% of the extra heat stored by the planet over the past 50 years is found in the ocean, these measurements provide the best thermometer we have to track Earth’s warming.

Little buoy lost

We deployed the float to measure how much ocean heat was reaching the rapidly changing Totten Glacier, which holds a volume of ice equivalent to 3.5 metres of global sea-level rise. Our previous work had shown enough warm water was reaching the base of the ice shelf to drive the rapid melting.

To our disappointment, the float soon drifted away from Totten. But it reappeared near another ice shelf also currently losing ice mass and potentially at risk of melting further: the Denman Glacier. This holds ice equivalent to 1.5m of global sea-level rise.

The configuration of the Denman Glacier means it could be potentially unstable. But its vulnerability was difficult to assess because few ocean measurements had been made. The data from the float showed that, like Totten Glacier, warm water could reach the cavity beneath the Denman ice shelf.

Our float then disappeared under ice and we feared the worst. But nine months later it surfaced again, having spent that time drifting in the freezing ocean beneath the Denman and Shackleton ice shelves. And it had collected data from places never measured before.

The Denman Glacier in east Antarctica.
Pete Harmsen, CC BY-ND

Why measure under ice?

As glaciers flow from the Antarctic continent to the sea, they start to float and form ice shelves. These shelves act like buttresses, resisting the flow of ice from Antarctica to the ocean. But if the giant ice shelves weaken or collapse, more grounded ice flows into the ocean. This causes sea level to rise.

What controls the fate of the Antarctic ice sheet – and therefore the rate of sea-level rise – is how much ocean heat reaches the base of the floating ice shelves. But the processes that cause melting in ice-shelf cavities are very challenging to observe.

Ice shelves can be hundreds or thousands of metres thick. We can drill a hole through the ice and lower oceanographic sensors. But this is expensive and rarely done, so few measurements have been made in ice-shelf cavities.

The Denman and Shackleton glaciers.
NASA, CC BY-ND

What the float found

During its nine-month drift beneath the ice shelves, the float collected profiles of temperature and salinity from the seafloor to the base of the shelf every five days. This is the first line of oceanographic measurements beneath an ice shelf in East Antarctica.

There was only one problem: because the float was unable to surface and communicate with the satellite for a GPS fix, we didn’t know where the measurements were made. However, it returned data that provided an important clue. Each time it bumped its head on the ice, we got a measurement of the depth of the ice shelf base. We could compare the float data to satellite measurements to work out the likely path of the float beneath the ice.

These measurements showed the Shackleton ice shelf (the most northerly in East Antarctica) is, for now, not exposed to warm water capable of melting it from below, and therefore less vulnerable.

However, the Denman Glacier is exposed to warm water flowing in beneath the ice shelf and causing the ice to melt. The float showed the Denman is delicately poised: a small increase in the thickness of the layer of warm water would cause even greater melting.

What does this mean?

These new observations confirm the two most significant glaciers (Denman and Totten) draining ice from this part of East Antarctica are both vulnerable to melt caused by warm water reaching the base of the ice shelves.

Between them, these two glaciers hold a huge volume of ice, equivalent to five metres of global sea level rise. The West Antarctic ice sheet is at greater risk of imminent melting, but East Antarctica holds a much larger volume of ice. This means the loss of ice from East Antarctica is crucial to estimating sea level rise.

Both the Denman and Totten glaciers are stabilised in their present position by the slope of the bedrock on which they sit. But if the ice retreated further, they would be in an unstable configuration where further melt was irreversible. Once this process of unstable retreat begins, we are committed. It may take centuries for the full sea-level rise to be realised, but there’s no going back.

In the future, we need an array of floats spanning the entire Antarctic continental shelf to transform our understanding of how ice shelves react to changes in the ocean. This would give us greater certainty in estimating future sea-level rise.

Steve Rintoul receives funding from the Australian Government as part of the Antarctic Science Collaboration Initiative, through
the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership.

Esmee van Wijk receives funding from the Australian Government as part of the Antarctic Science Collaboration Initiative, through the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership.

Laura Herraiz Borreguero receives funding from the Australian Government as part of the Antarctic Science collaboration initiative, through the Australian Antarctic Program Partnership.

Madelaine Gamble Rosevear receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. What our missing ocean float revealed about Antarctica’s melting glaciers – https://theconversation.com/what-our-missing-ocean-float-revealed-about-antarcticas-melting-glaciers-271201

December 8, 2025

Storms in the Southern Ocean are producing more rain – and the consequences could be global

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Steven Siems, Professor in Cloud Microphysics, Monash University

If you ever find yourself on Macquarie Island – a narrow, wind-lashed ridge halfway between Tasmania and Antarctica – the first thing you’ll notice is the wildlife. Elephant seals sprawl across dark beaches. King penguins march up mossy slopes. Albatrosses circle over vast, treeless uplands.

But look more closely and the island is changing. Slopes are becoming boggier. Iconic megaherbs such as Pleurophyllum and Stilbocarpa are retreating.

For years, scientists suspected the culprit was increasing rainfall. Our new research, published in Weather and Climate Dynamics, confirms this – and shows the story goes far beyond one remote UNESCO World Heritage site.

A major – but little observed – climate player

The Southern Ocean plays an enormous role in the global climate system.

It absorbs much of the excess heat trapped by greenhouse gases and a large share of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity.

Storms in the Southern Ocean also influence weather patterns across Australia, New Zealand and the globe.

Yet it is also one of the least observed places on Earth.

With almost no land masses, only a handful of weather stations, and ubiquitous cloud cover, satellites and simulations struggle to capture what is actually happening there.

That makes Macquarie Island’s climate record from the Bureau of Meteorology and the Australian Antarctic Division exceptionally valuable, providing one of the very few long-term “ground truth” records anywhere in the Southern Ocean.

These high-quality records of the observed daily rainfall and meteorology date back more than 75 years and are commonly used to validate satellite products and numerical simulations.

Rising rainfall

Earlier work has found rainfall at Macquarie Island had risen sharply over recent decades, and ecologists documented waterlogging that harms native vegetation.

But no one has explained how the island’s weather patterns are changing, or directly compared the field observations to our best reconstructions of past weather to assess Southern Ocean climate trends.

To fill this gap, we analysed 45 years (1979–2023) of daily rainfall observations and compared them to a widely used reconstruction of earlier weather, known as the ERA5 reanalysis.

We wanted to understand the meteorology behind the increase in rainfall – that is, whether it was caused by more storms or more intense rainfall during storms. To do this we placed each day in the dataset into one of five synoptic regimes based on pressure, humidity, winds and temperature.

These regimes included low pressure systems, cold-air outbreaks and warm-air advection (the warm air that moves poleward ahead of a cold front).

Storms are producing more rain

Our analysis showed that annual rainfall on Macquarie Island has increased 28% since 1979 – around 260 millimetres per year.

The ERA5 reanalysis, in contrast, shows only an 8% increase — missing most of this change.

The storm track’s gradual move toward Antarctica is well established, and our results show how this larger change is shaping Macquarie Island’s weather today.

Crucially, we found that these changes are not causing the increase in rainfall, as one wet regime (warm air advection) was largely replacing another (low pressure).

Instead, storms now produce more rain when they occur.

A bunch of seals lying in green grass. — Elephant seals on Macquarie Island.
Kita Williams

Why does this matter beyond one island?

If the rainfall intensification we see at Macquarie Island reflects conditions across the Southern Ocean storm belt – as multiple lines of evidence indicate — the consequences are profound.

A wetter storm track means more fresh water entering the upper ocean. This strengthens the different layers in the oceans and reduces the amount of mixing that occurs. In turn, this alters the strength of ocean currents.

Our estimate suggests that in 2023 this additional precipitation equates to roughly 2,300 gigatonnes of additional freshwater per year across the high-latitude Southern Ocean – an order of magnitude greater than recent Antarctic meltwater contributions. And this difference continues to grow.

More rainfall will also affect the salinity of water on the ocean’s surface, which influences the movement of nutrients and carbon. As a result, this could change the productivity and chemistry of the Southern Ocean – one of the world’s most important carbon sinks – in still-uncertain ways.

This increase in rainfall requires a matching increase in evaporation, which cools the ocean, just like our bodies cool when our sweat evaporates. Over the cloudy Southern Ocean, this evaporation is the primary means of cooling the ocean.

Our analysis indicates the Southern Ocean may be cooling itself by 10–15% more than it did in 1979 – simply through the energy cost of evaporation that fuels the extra rainfall. This evaporation is spread over the broader Southern Ocean.

In effect, the Southern Ocean may be “sweating” more in response to climate change.

The next challenge

Macquarie Island is just one tiny speck of land in Earth’s stormiest ocean.

But its long-term rainfall record suggests the Southern Ocean – the engine room of global heat and carbon uptake – is changing faster and more dramatically than we thought.

The next challenge is to determine how far this signal extends across the storm track, and what it means for the climate system we all depend on.

The authors would like the acknowledge Andrew Prata, Yi Huang, Ariaan Purish and Peter May for their contribution to the research and this article.

Steven Siems receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

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

– ref. Storms in the Southern Ocean are producing more rain – and the consequences could be global – https://theconversation.com/storms-in-the-southern-ocean-are-producing-more-rain-and-the-consequences-could-be-global-270880

December 7, 2025

Frank Gehry, the architect of the unconventional, the accidental, and the inspiring, has died at 96

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Michael J. Ostwald, Professor of Architectural Analytics, UNSW Sydney

Architect Frank Gehry poses with miniatures of his designs in Los Angeles in 1989.
Bonnie Schiffman/Getty Images

In April 2005, The Simpsons featured an episode where Marge, embarrassed by her hometown’s reputation for being uneducated and uncultured, invites a world-famous architect to design a new concert hall for the city.

The episode cuts to the architect, Frank Gehry (playing himself), outside his house in Santa Monica, receiving Marge’s letter. He is frustrated by the request and crumples the letter, throwing it to the ground. Looking down, the creased and ragged paper inspires him, and the episode cuts to a model of his concert hall for Springfield, which copies the shape of the crumpled letter.

By building Gehry’s design, the people of Springfield hoped to send a signal to the world that a new era of culture had arrived. As it often did, this episode of The Simpsons references a real-life phenomenon, which Gehry was credited with triggering, the “Bilbao effect”.

In 1991, the city of Bilbao in northern Spain sought to enhance its economic and cultural standing by establishing a major arts centre. Gehry was commissioned to design the Bilbao Guggenheim, proposing a 57-metre-high building, a spiralling vortex of titanium and glass, along the banks of the Nervión River.

Mist rises off the river in front of a brilliant glass and metal building. — Guggenheim Museum, Avenida Abandoibarra, Bilbao, Spain.
Elizabeth Hanchett/Unsplash

Using software developed for aerospace industries, Gehry designed a striking, photogenic building, sharply contrasting with the city’s traditional stone and masonry streetscapes.

Finished in 1997, the response to Gehry’s building was overwhelming. Bilbao was transformed into an international tourist destination, revitalising the city and boosting its cultural credentials and economic prospects. As a result, many cities tried to reproduce the so-called “Bilbao effect” by combining iconic architecture and the arts to encourage a cultural renaissance.

Gehry, who has died at 96, leaves a powerful legacy, visible in many major cities, in the media, in galleries and in popular culture.

An architect’s life

Gehry was born Frank Owen Goldberg in Toronto, Canada, in 1929 and emigrated to Los Angeles in the late 1940s, where he changed his surname to Gehry. He studied architecture and urban planning and established a successful commercial practice in 1962.

It wasn’t until the late 1970s, when he began experimenting with alterations and additions to his own house, that he began to develop his signature approach to architecture. An approach that was both visionary and confronting.

The house looks like a work-in-progress. — Gehry and his son, Alejandro, in the yard in front of his self-designed home, Santa Monica, California, January 1980.
Susan Wood/Getty Images

In 1977, Gehry purchased a colonial bungalow on a typical suburban street in Santa Monica. Soon after, he began peeling back its cladding and exposing its structural frame. He added a jumble of plywood panels, corrugated metal walls, and chain-link fencing, giving the impression of a house in a perpetual state of demolition or reconstruction.

Its fragmented, unfinished expression offended the neighbours but also led to his being exhibited in the landmark 1988 Museum of Modern Art’s Deconstructivist Architecture show.

At this event, Gehry’s house was featured alongside a range of subversive, anti-establishment works, catapulting him to international fame.

The Walt Disney Concert Hall, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Tim Cheung/Unsplash

Unlike other architects featured in the exhibition – such as Coop Himmelblau, Rem Koolhaas and Daniel Libeskind – Gehry was not driven by a political or philosophical stance. Instead, he was interested in how people would react to the experience of architecture.

It was only after the Bilbao Guggenheim was completed that the world could see this vision.

Throughout the 2000s, Gehry completed a range of significant buildings, led by the Walt Disney Concert Hall (2003) in Los Angeles, which has a similar style to the Bilbao Guggenheim.

Gehry’s Museum of Pop Culture (2000) in Seattle is a composition of anodised purple, gold, silver and sky-blue forms, resembling the remnants of a smashed electric guitar.

A silver, pink and blue building. — Museum of Pop Culture, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Getty Images

The Marqués de Riscal Vineyard Hotel (2006) in Elciego, Spain, features steel ribbons in Burgundy-pink and Verdelho-gold. The Louis Vuitton Foundation (2014) in Paris has 12 large glass sails, swirling around an “iceberg” of concrete panels.

Gehry only completed one building in Australia, the Dr Chau Chak Wing Building (2014) in Sydney. Its design, an undulating form clad in custom-made bricks, was inspired by a crumpled brown paper bag. Marge Simpson would have approved.

Recognition and reflection

The highest global honour an architect can receive is the Pritzker Prize, often called the “Nobel prize for architecture”. Gehry was awarded this prize in 1989, with the jury praising his “controversial, but always arresting body of work” which was “iconoclastic, rambunctious and impermanent”.

While the Pritzker Prize is often regarded as a capstone for a career, most of Gehry’s major works were completed after the award.

A building of metalic ribbons. — Tempranillo vines surround the hotel at Marqués de Riscal winery, Elciego, Spain.
David Silverman/Getty Images

Gehry revelled in experimentation, taking artistic inspiration from complex natural forms and constructing them using advanced technology. Over the last three decades, his firm continued to produce architecture that was both strikingly sculptural and playfully whimsical.

He ultimately regretted appearing on The Simpsons, feeling it devalued the complex process he followed. His architecture was not random; an artist’s eye guided it, and a sculptor’s hand created it. It was not just any crumpled form, but the perfect one for each site and client.

He sometimes joked about completing his home in Santa Monica, even humorously ending his acceptance speech for the Pritzker Prize by saying he might use his prize money to do this. Today, on the corner of 22nd Street and Washington Avenue, partly shielded by trees, Gehry’s house remains forever a work in progress. Its uncompromising yet joyful presence has endured for almost 50 years.

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

– ref. Frank Gehry, the architect of the unconventional, the accidental, and the inspiring, has died at 96 – https://theconversation.com/frank-gehry-the-architect-of-the-unconventional-the-accidental-and-the-inspiring-has-died-at-96-266250

December 7, 2025

Possible ancient artifacts are found in a B.C. thrift shop — and archeology scholars are on the case

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Cara Tremain, Assistant Professor, Archaeology, Simon Fraser University

An unusual email arrived in the inbox of a faculty member at the department of archeology at Simon Fraser University in the spring of 2024.

This email was from a thrift shop, Thrifty Boutique in Chilliwack, B.C. — unlike the many queries archeologists receive every year to authenticate objects that people have in their possession.

The shop wanted to determine whether items donated to the store (and initially put up for sale) were, in fact, ancient artifacts with historical significance. Shop employees relayed that a customer, who did not leave their name, stated the 11 rings and two medallions (though one may be a belt buckle) in the display case with a price tag of $30 were potentially ancient.

Thrifty Boutique wasn’t looking for a valuation of the objects, but rather guidance on their authenticity.

Eclectic collection

As archeology faculty, we analyzed these objects with Babara Hilden, director of Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Simon Fraser University, after the store arranged to bring the items to the museum.

Our initial visual analysis of the objects led us to suspect that, based on their shapes, designs and construction, they were ancient artifacts most likely from somewhere within the boundaries of what was once the Roman Empire. They may date to late antiquity (roughly the third to sixth or seventh century) and/or the medieval period.

The initial dating was based largely on the decorative motifs that adorn these objects. The smaller medallion appears to bear a Chi Rho (Christogram), which was popular in the late antiquity period. The larger medallion (or belt buckle) resembles comparable items from the Byzantine Period.

The disparities between the two objects, suggesting different time periods, make it unlikely they’re from the same hoard. We expect they were assembled into an eclectic collection by the unknown person (as of yet) who acquired them prior to their donation to Thrifty Boutique.

With the exciting revelation that the objects may be authentic ancient artifacts, the thrift store offered to donate them to SFU’s archeology museum. The museum had to carefully consider whether it had the capacity and expertise to care for these objects in perpetuity, and ultimately decided to commit to their care and stewardship because of the potential for student learning.

Officially accepting and officially transferring these objects to the museum took more than a year. We grappled with the ethical implications of acquiring a collection without known provenance (history of ownership) and balanced this against the learning opportunities that it might offer our students.

Ethical and legal questions

Learning to investigate the journey of the donated objects is akin to the process of provenance research in museums.

In accepting items without known provenance, museums must consider the ethical implications of doing so. The Canadian Museums Association Ethics Guidelines state that “museums must guard against any direct or indirect participation in the illicit traffic in cultural and natural objects.”

When archeological artifacts have no clear provenance, it is difficult — if not impossible — to determine where they originally came from. It is possible such artifacts were illegally acquired through looting, even though the Canadian Property Import and Export Act exists to restrict the importation and exportation of such objects.

We are keenly aware of the responsibility museums have to not entertain donations of illicitly acquired materials. However, in this situation, there is no clear information — as yet — about where these items came from and whether they are ancient artifacts or modern forgeries. Without knowing this, we cannot notify authorities nor facilitate returning them to their original source.

With a long history of ethical engagement with communities, including repatriation, the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology is committed to continuing such work. This donation would be no different if we’re able to confirm our suspicions about their authenticity.

Archeological forgeries

Archeological forgeries, while not widely publicized, are perhaps more common than most realize — and they plague museum collections around the world.

Well-known examples of the archeological record being affected by inauthentic artifacts are the 1920s Glozel hoax in France and the fossil forgery known as Piltdown Man.

Other examples of the falsification of ancient remains include the Cardiff Giant and crystal skulls, popularized in one of the Indiana Jones movies.

Various scientific techniques can help determine authenticity, but it can sometimes prove impossible to be 100 per cent certain because of the level of skill involved in creating convincing forgeries.

Copies of ancient artefacts

Other copies of ancient artifacts exist for honest purposes, such as those created for the tourist market or even for artistic purposes. Museums full of replicas still attract visitors, because they are another means of engaging with the past, and we are confident that the donation therefore has a place within the museum whether the objects are authentic or not.

By working closely with the objects, students will learn how to become archeological detectives and engage with the process of museum research from start to finish. The information gathered from this process will help to determine where the objects may have been originally uncovered or manufactured, how old they might be and what their original significance may have been.

Object-based learning using museum collections demonstrates the value of hands-on engagement in an age of increasing concern about the impact of artificial intelligence on education.

New course designed to examine items

The new archeology course we have designed, which will run at SFU in September 2026, will also focus heavily on questions of ethics and provenance, including what the process would look like if the objects — if determined to be authentic — could one day be returned to their country of origin.

The students will also benefit from the wide-ranging expertise of our colleagues in the department of archeology at SFU, including access to various technologies and avenues of archeological science that might help us learn more about the objects.

This will involve techniques such as X-ray fluorescence, which can be used to investigate elemental compositions of materials and using 3D scanners and printers to create resources for further study and outreach.

Mentoring with museum professionals

Local museum professionals have also agreed to help mentor the students in exhibition development and public engagement, a bonus for many of our students who aspire to have careers in museums or cultural heritage.

Overall, the course will afford our students a rare opportunity to work with objects from a regional context not currently represented in the museum while simultaneously piecing together the story of these items far from their probable original home across the Atlantic.

We are excited to be part of their new emerging story at Simon Fraser, and can’t wait to learn more about their mysterious past.

Cara Tremain receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

Sabrina C. Higgins receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Possible ancient artifacts are found in a B.C. thrift shop — and archeology scholars are on the case – https://theconversation.com/possible-ancient-artifacts-are-found-in-a-b-c-thrift-shop-and-archeology-scholars-are-on-the-case-267064

December 7, 2025

Donald Trump’s Ukraine peace deal would leave the country vulnerable to future Russian attacks

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University

United States President Donald Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, and a key adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Kirill Dmitriev, recently agreed to a 28-point peace plan to end the war in Ukraine.

Such an agreement, on the surface, would be cause for good news. The human toll of the conflict, although shrouded in secrecy by both Russia and Ukraine, is high.

Just one problem: the U.S. and Russia did not include Ukraine in the deliberations. Not only is that patronizing, no matter how the Trump administration has sought to spin it, but it means the agreement reflects Russian demands and goals for the war.

As such, not only is the deal a non-starter, but it also puts Ukraine in the unenviable position of saying no to a mercurial American president.

The search for peace

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, there have been several initiatives seeking peace.

One of the earliest efforts took place in Turkey soon after the invasion. Despite Russia’s efforts to portray Ukraine’s withdrawal from the talks as being American-led, what ultimately scuttled the peace process were revelations of Russian atrocities in the Kyiv suburb of Bucha.

In the aftermath of this failure, both Russia and Ukraine reverted to pursuing their own goals for the conflict. For Ukraine, this meant the complete restoration of its territory from Russian occupation. Ukraine’s failed summer 2023 counter-offensive, however, dashed hopes for a quick victory.

Since this failure, both Ukraine and Russia have accepted that a war of out-manoeuvring one another for a rapid victory is unlikely. Instead, the war in Ukraine is now a protracted, attrition-based conflict.

In such a scenario, the role of outside support is critical. Ukraine has advocated for American participation in peace negotiations, but the talks leading to the 28-point peace plan signalled the Americans were siding with Russia and acceding to Russian demands.

Ukrainian officials have since met with both European and American officials to chart another path forward.

The peace plan’s many problems

Ukraine’s supporters have rightfully argued that the 28-point peace plan heavily favours Russia. The plan’s bias was so evident that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reportedly told senators it represented a Russian “wish list,” although he later denied saying that.

There are multiple provisions that make the deal unworkable from a Ukrainian perspective.

The first is that under the plan, Ukraine must cede all of Donetsk and Luhansk in the eastern reaches of the country to Russia. While Russia has seized Luhansk in its entirety, key portions of Donetsk remain under Ukrainian control.

Ukraine’s control of these parts of Donetsk goes beyond symbolic value. These areas consist of terrain and fortifications that are ideal for defensive operations. If Ukraine surrendered this territory to Russia, central Ukraine would be left vulnerable to rapid Russian assaults in the future.

Accepting a bad deal?

Ukrainian officials have struck a delicate balance since Trump announced his peace plan. If Ukrainian officials outright reject it, Trump will probably abandon Ukraine at a moment of need. If Ukraine fully acquiesces, it will be left vulnerable to future aggression. It’s also doubtful any officials who sign the Russia-friendly agreement will survive politically.

Ukrainian officials have consequently cultivated their ties with European officials while playing for time on the more contentious issues in the plan. Specifically, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said that the territorial aspects of the proposed agreement are the most troublesome.

Realistically, Ukraine isn’t likely to recover areas like Crimea. But Trump asking Ukrainian officials to surrender territory they have not yet lost in Donetsk is a bridge too far.

Unfortunately, Trump appears desperate to reach an agreement, regardless of the cost, judging by the people he has placed in charge of negotiating with Russia — Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.

Witkoff and Kushner are most notably involved when Trump wants results, regardless of the consequence.

Since entering politics in Trump’s first term, Witkoff has been an apologist for Russia and its actions. This stance has not changed in Trump’s second term. In fact, it appears Witkoff coached Russia on how to ingratiate itself to Trump, seemingly placing Russian interests above American.

Kushner’s past diplomacy efforts appear to have enriched him personally, something that does not bode well for the required neutral stance in Russia-Ukraine talks.

A lost moment

Unfortunately for Ukraine, these peace plan complications could not come at a worse time for their war efforts. While Russia pummels Ukrainian cities and is claiming it’s seized the city of Pokrovsk in eastern Ukraine, Ukrainians are simultaneously making sustained attacks on the Russian energy industry.

Direct disruption of Russian energy is perhaps the one area where Ukrainian pressure could affect Putin’s war efforts.

Trump’s attempts to achieve a peace deal at any cost, however, could scuttle any Ukrainian breakthroughs.

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

– ref. Donald Trump’s Ukraine peace deal would leave the country vulnerable to future Russian attacks – https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-ukraine-peace-deal-would-leave-the-country-vulnerable-to-future-russian-attacks-270556

December 7, 2025

Ontario’s Bill 5 erodes good governance in the province

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kristen Lowitt, Associate Professor, Environmental Studies, Queen’s University, Ontario

Ontario passed Bill 5, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, in June 2025. The omnibus bill amended environmental laws and proposes “special economic zones” where the government can decide what laws will or won’t apply.

The bill eliminates key environmental protections and grants the provincial government sweeping powers to fast-track development with little to no oversight. This risks undermining the rights of Indigenous communities, the public and nature.

As stated by Michel Koostachin, founder of the Indigenous grassroots group the Friends of the Attawapiskat River: “The government is using the ‘tariff war’ as an excuse for greed, to advance personal and private gain.”

Bill 5 is an affront to Indigenous rights and natural law because it authorizes the government to potentially cause irreparable harm to lands and waters without the free, prior and informed consent of affected First Nations and community members.

Despite widespread opposition from First Nations, the public, municipalities, environmental organizations and labour groups across the province, the government continues to advance the policies, amendments and regulations that could further entrench the regressive legal reforms ushered in by Bill 5.

3 concerning proposals

A series of proposed regulations, amendments and policies were posted on the Environmental Registry of Ontario for public comment for 45 days, with the comment periods closing in mid-November. The government now has to consider these comments before deciding whether to approve the proposals.

We highlight three proposals of particular concern:

Special Economic Zones criteria

This proposed regulation sets out criteria to designate special economic zones. No objective or measurable criteria are provided. Rather, the regulation grants the government discretionary power to decide where, and to whom, legal safeguards that are key to protecting Indigenous rights, nature and the public interest will or won’t apply.

Archeological assessment exemption

This proposed regulation will exempt sites that the government deems economically significant from undergoing archeological assessment. Allowing projects to go ahead without considering the archeological value of a site threatens the protection of cultural heritage and jeopardizes Indigenous cultural sovereignty. It allows government to evade their constitutional duty to consult, as it is often these assessments that trigger that duty when a sacred site or artifact is found.

Species Conservation Act

Proposed regulations, amendments and policies under this new legislation would further weaken the protection of species at risk and their habitats. It would remove the public’s right under Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights to have a say in decisions that could have serious ecological impacts.

Undermining good governance

Processes like environmental assessments and opportunities for the public to participate in decision-making are in place for a reason. They are essential safeguards for public health, safety and the environment. Allowing governments to disregard them sets a dangerous precedent for decisions to be made without transparency and accountability.

With allied individuals and organizations, Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence (LAND), a non-profit environmental law organization, has been calling on elected officials to uphold Indigenous rights, treaty promises and environmental justice in the wake of Bill 5. LAND represents and works directly with Indigenous land protectors from Treaty 9 — the very lands where the Ring of Fire mining project is proposed and where the government wants to establish the first special economic zone.

The Ring of Fire is the name given by mining companies to a mineral-rich area in the Hudson-James Bay lowlands. The proposed Ring of Fire project has implications for all of us.

The Hudson-James Bay lowlands in Treaty 9 territory is a region of profound cultural and ecological significance that has been declared protected by Indigenous organizers under their laws.

This region is a refuge for wildlife, an immense carbon sink and the homeland for thousands of Omushkego people who have relied on it since time immemorial. Its protection is needed if Indigenous communities are to continue practising their inherent and treaty rights to live, hunt, fish and protect their lands and waters — and for the government to do their part in combating climate change and biodiversity loss.

Significantly, the impacts of Bill 5 and special economic zones aren’t limited to the North. There is no assurance that the Ontario government won’t set up more special economic zones in the future if it decides it’s “strategically important to Ontario’s economy.”

Overriding human rights and environmental health to advance economic interests is unacceptable. We must continue to urge our elected officials to repeal Bill 5.

Kanisha Acharya-Patel, a staff lawyer with Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence (LAND), co-authored this article.

Kristen Lowitt receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Ontario’s Bill 5 erodes good governance in the province – https://theconversation.com/ontarios-bill-5-erodes-good-governance-in-the-province-270424

December 7, 2025

AI is perpetuating unrealistic body ideals, objectification and a lack of diversity — especially for athletes

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Delaney Thibodeau, Post-doctoral researcher, Faculty of Kinesiology & Physical Education, University of Toronto

What does it look like to have an “athletic body?” What does artificial intelligence think it looks like to have one?

A recent study we conducted at the University of Toronto analyzed appearance-related traits of AI-generated images of male and female athletes and non-athletes. We found that we’re being fed exaggerated — and likely impossible — body standards.

Even before AI, athletes have been pressured to look a certain way: thin, muscular and attractive. Coaches, opponents, spectators and the media shape how athletes think about their bodies.

But these pressures and body ideals have little to do with performance; they’re associated with the objectification of the body. And this phenomenon, unfortunately, is related to a negative body image, poor mental health and reduced sport-related performance.

Given the growing use of AI on social media, understanding just how AI depicts athlete and non-athlete bodies has become critical. What it shows, or doesn’t, as “normal” is widely viewed and may soon be normalized.

Lean, young, muscular — and mostly male

As researchers with expertise in body image, sport psychology and social media, we grounded our study in objectification and social media theories. We generated 300 images using different AI platforms to explore how male and female athlete and non-athlete bodies are depicted.

We documented demographics, levels of body fat and muscularity. We assessed clothing fit and type, facial attractiveness like having neat and shiny hair, symmetrical features or clear skin and body exposure in each image. Indicators of visible disabilities, like mobility devices, were also noted. We compared the characteristics of male versus female images as well as the characteristics of athlete and non-athlete images.

The AI-generated male images were frequently young (93.3 per cent), lean (68.4 per cent) and muscular (54.2 per cent). The images of females depicted youth (100 per cent), thinness (87.5 per cent) and revealing clothing (87.5 per cent).

The AI-generated images of athletes were lean (98.4 per cent), muscular (93.4 per cent) and dressed in tight (92.5 per cent) and revealing (100 per cent) exercise gear.

Non-athletes were shown wearing looser clothing and displaying more diversity of body sizes. Even when we asked for an image of just “an athlete,” 90 per cent of the generated images were male. No images showed visible disabilities, larger bodies, wrinkles or baldness.

These results reveal that generative AI perpetuates stereotypes of athletes, depicting them as only fitting into a narrow set of traits — lacking impairment, attractive, thin, muscular, exposed.

The findings of this research illustrate the ways in which three commonly used generative AI platforms — DALL-E, MidJourney and Stable Diffusion — reinforce problematic appearance ideals for all genders, athletes and non-athletes alike.

The real costs of distorted body ideals

Why is this a problem?

More than 4.6 billion people use social media and 71 per cent of social media images are generated by AI. That’s a lot of people repeatedly viewing images that foster self-objectification and the internalization of unrealistic body ideals.

They may then feel compelled to diet and over-exercise because they feel bad about themselves — their body does not look like AI-fabricated images. Alternatively, they may also do less physical activity or drop out of sports altogether.

Negative body image not only affects academic performance for young people but also sport-related performance. While staying active can promote a better body image, negative body image does the exact opposite. It exacerbates dropout and avoidance.

Given that approximately 27 per cent of Canadians over the age of 15 have at least one disability, the fact that none of the generated images included someone with a visible disability is also striking. In addition to not showing disabilities when it generates images, AI has also been reported to erase disabilities on images of real people.

People with body fat, wrinkles or baldness were also largely absent.

Addressing bias in the next generation of AI

These patterns reveal that AI isn’t realistic or creative in its representations. Instead, it pulls from the massive database of media available online, where the same harmful appearance ideals dominate. It’s recycling our prejudices and forms of discrimination and offering them back to us.

AI learns body ideals from the same biased society that has long fuelled body image pressure. This leads to a lack of diversity and a vortex of unreachable standards. AI-generated images present exaggerated, idealized bodies that ultimately limit the diversity of humans and the lowered body image satisfaction that ensues is related greater loneliness.

And so, as original creators of the visual content that trains AI systems, society has a responsibility to ensure these technologies do not perpetuate ableism, racism, fatphobia and ageism. Users of generative AI must be intentional in how image prompts are written, and critical in how they are interpreted.

We need to limit the sort of body standards we internalize through AI. As AI-generated images continue to populate our media landscape, we must be conscious of our exposure to it. Because at the end of the day, if we want AI to reflect reality rather than distort it, we have to insist on seeing, and valuing, every kind of body.

Catherine Sabiston receives funding from the Canada Research Chairs program

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

– ref. AI is perpetuating unrealistic body ideals, objectification and a lack of diversity — especially for athletes – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-perpetuating-unrealistic-body-ideals-objectification-and-a-lack-of-diversity-especially-for-athletes-268735

December 7, 2025

Apparent ancient artifacts are found in a B.C. thrift shop — and archeology faculty are on the case

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Cara Tremain, Assistant Professor, Archaeology, Simon Fraser University

An unusual email arrived in the inbox of a faculty member at the department of archeology at Simon Fraser University in the spring of 2024.

This email was from a thrift shop, Thrifty Boutique in Chilliwack, B.C. — unlike the many queries archeologists receive every year to authenticate objects that people have in their possession.

Thrifty Boutique wasn’t looking for a valuation of the objects, but rather guidance on their authenticity.

Eclectic collection

Ethical and legal questions

Learning to investigate the journey of the donated objects is akin to the process of provenance research in museums.

Archeological forgeries

Archeological forgeries, while not widely publicized, are perhaps more common than most realize — and they plague museum collections around the world.

Well-known examples of the archeological record being affected by inauthentic artifacts are the 1920s Glozel hoax in France and the fossil forgery known as Piltdown Man.

Other examples of the falsification of ancient remains include the Cardiff Giant and crystal skulls, popularized in one of the Indiana Jones movies.

Copies of ancient artefacts

Object-based learning using museum collections demonstrates the value of hands-on engagement in an age of increasing concern about the impact of artificial intelligence on education.

New course designed to examine items

Mentoring with museum professionals

We are excited to be part of their new emerging story at Simon Fraser, and can’t wait to learn more about their mysterious past.

Cara Tremain receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

Sabrina C. Higgins receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Apparent ancient artifacts are found in a B.C. thrift shop — and archeology faculty are on the case – https://theconversation.com/apparent-ancient-artifacts-are-found-in-a-b-c-thrift-shop-and-archeology-faculty-are-on-the-case-267064