Category: The Conversation – Global Perspectives

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Adrian R. Camilleri, Associate Professor of Marketing, University of Technology Sydney

You’re scrolling through an online retailer, like Amazon, Shein or eBay, and spot a shirt on sale for $40. You add it to your cart, but at checkout, a $10 shipping fee suddenly appears. Frustrated, you close the tab.

But what if that same shirt was priced at $50 with “free” shipping? The likelihood that you would have bought it without a second thought is much higher.

COVID changed the way we shop and accelerated our reliance on e-commerce. But as online sales have grown, so has the expectation of free delivery.

The reality, however, is that shipping physical goods is never actually free. Retailers use subtle marketing strategies and psychological hacks to mask these costs. As a result, consumers are often the ones footing the bill.

The magic of zero

There is something uniquely attractive about the concept “free”. In behavioural economics, zero is not just a lower price; it flips a psychological switch.

When a transaction involves a cost, we instinctively weigh the downside. But when something is entirely free, we experience a positive emotion and perceive the offer as more valuable than it is mathematically.

Retailers no doubt realise that offering free delivery is one of the most effective ways to stop a consumer from abandoning a digital shopping cart.

The minimum spend trap

Perhaps the most common marketing tactic is the free shipping threshold. Sometimes this is phrased as: “Spend $55 to qualify for free shipping.”

If your shopping cart is sitting at $40, you face a dilemma. You can pay $10 for postage, or you can find a $15 item to reach the threshold. Many of us choose the latter, reasoning it is better to get a tangible product, such as a pair of socks, than to “waste” money on shipping.

This tactic uses the “goal gradient effect”, which describes the tendency to put in more effort the closer we get to a goal. It also works incredibly well for the retailer.

Research shows that free shipping increases both purchase frequency and overall order size. Policies with a threshold for free shipping often prompt this exact “topping up” behaviour. The consumer ends up buying things they did not initially want, thus boosting the retailer’s sales.

Baked-in costs and the reality of ‘free’ returns

Another strategy is unconditional free shipping, where the delivery cost is simply baked into the product’s base price. This allows consumers to avoid the “pain of paying” a separate fee at checkout. However, we are still paying for the postage through higher item costs.

For retailers, offering unconditional free shipping without a markup can be difficult to sustain profitably. The bump in sales usually does not offset the lost fee revenue and the costs of fulfilment.

A major reason for this lack of profitability is that free shipping leads to significantly higher product return rates.

Consumers tend to make riskier purchases if the appearance of waived fees lowers the perceived financial risk of the transaction.

For example, you might order the same shirt in two different sizes, knowing you can just send one back for free. Who pays for that added convenience? The retailer, who now has to cover the courier fees twice.

The retailer usually won’t simply absorb this cost, but will have to pass it on in other ways.

The subscription illusion

To combat these unpredictable costs, many businesses are turning to membership, loyalty, or subscription models such as Amazon Prime. Consumers pay an upfront annual fee in exchange for “free” expedited shipping year-round.

Membership-based programs successfully increase customer loyalty and purchase frequency, and allow for better customer segmentation.

But in the long run, they may actually hurt a retailer’s profit margins. While loyalty rises, the operational costs of fulfilling many smaller, free-shipped orders can potentially outweigh the benefits if not strictly managed.

For the consumer, this model manipulates our “mental accounting”. Because we view the upfront fee as money already spent, every additional purchase feels like it comes with a free perk. We end up shopping more frequently on that specific platform just to “get our money’s worth”.

Don’t buy the illusion

The age of limitless free shipping may be coming to an end.

As global supply chain costs remain volatile, we are likely to see retailers raising their minimum spend thresholds, removing offers, or increasing base product prices to compensate.

The next time you are shopping online, resist the urge for instant gratification.

If you are about to add a $15 pair of novelty avocado socks to your cart, just to save $10 on shipping, take a step back. Ask yourself if you truly need that purchase to arrive this week.

Instead of rushing to checkout, let your digital basket fill up naturally over time with items you actually need. You will eventually hit the threshold, but on your own terms.

“Free” delivery is just a clever psychological illusion. The cost is rarely eliminated; it is simply redistributed into higher product prices or reframed as a loyalty perk.

Don’t let the allure of “free” shipping trick you into paying for more than you intended.

Adrian R. Camilleri 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. Does ‘free’ shipping really exist? An expert shares the marketing tricks you need to know – https://theconversation.com/does-free-shipping-really-exist-an-expert-shares-the-marketing-tricks-you-need-to-know-276397

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Alexandra James, Research Fellow, Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University

Among the corsets and chemistry, the latest season of Bridgerton gets one thing right: the taboos around talking about sex and sexual pleasure.

Newlywed Francesca asks in hushed confusion what it means to reach “the pinnacle” (orgasm). As she cannot reach one, she is concerned this may be linked to her inability to fall pregnant.

When Francesca seeks advice from her mother Violet, she’s told:

A pinnacle, it is pleasant … It is a delightful um, closeness, that is um, it’s nearly impossible to describe. It’s like a shared language. And when you speak the same language you are able to feel um [a] magical, special feeling inside.

Confused, Francesca turns to her more experienced sister-in-law Penelope for clearer answers. But she still can’t find what she’s looking for.

Bridgerton may be a Regency-era historical fantasy. But this dynamic mirrors what we see today – young people want information about sex and sexual pleasure, yet parents often feel awkward and ill-equipped to provide it.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.

Some things don’t change

Young people today consistently say they want information about sex and relationships that emphasises emotions and pleasure. But they often learn about it from peers or online.

Meanwhile, many parents share their discomfort when discussing the more intimate dimensions of sexuality.

In our 2025 study of Australian parents and carers, many said they were uncertain about how to initiate or sustain meaningful conversations about sex and relationships. They were unsure what information was age-appropriate, especially where children may already find sexual content online.

Parents and carers were more confident talking about body image, consent and safety, puberty and periods. But they were particularly uncomfortable talking about sexual pleasure, satisfaction and masturbation.

Parents frequently connected their unease to their own upbringing, describing childhood homes where sex was rarely discussed openly. (In Bridgerton, when Francesca’s mother later admits she struggles to talk about sex even with her lover, the parallel is hard to miss.)

Parents who felt more comfortable discussing sex with partners, friends or health professionals were more likely to feel confident talking about it with their children.

Mothers still take the lead

While Francesca searches for information about her own pleasure, a female housekeeper cautions her brother Benedict about power and responsibility when she notices his attraction to Sophie, a housemaid.

This echoes contemporary differences in how sons and daughters are prepared for intimate relationships. Boys are positioned to manage power and consent, often with less space to explore ideas of love and romance.

Significantly, it is also women who most often take on this preparatory work.

In Bridgerton, the roles of Francesca’s mother, her sister-in-law Penelope and the housekeeper reflect a broader pattern of gendered labour in sex education: women continue to be positioned as the default parent responsible for navigating these conversations.

In our study, mothers reported significantly higher confidence than fathers in discussing consent and safety with both daughters and sons, compared with fathers, particularly fathers of sons.

What about pleasure?

When we talk about sex only in terms of risk, focusing on pregnancy, infection and harm, we also narrow the story young people can tell about intimacy.

It can reinforce a familiar binary: boys as potential perpetrators, girls as potential victims, and sex itself as something that “happens” rather than something negotiated.

Leaving pleasure out of conversations between parents and their children doesn’t make conversations safer; it makes them incomplete. Without a language for desire, boundaries and dissatisfaction, young people have fewer tools to recognise coercion, communicate their needs, or imagine sex that is mutual and wanted.

We also cannot expect young people, especially young women, to advocate for their own pleasure if they have never been given the vocabulary to understand what it is and what to expect.

We also know young people ask for clarity about the “mechanics” of sex; how it works, what it feels like, and how to do it.

Parents play an important role in supporting this learning, particularly as sexual pleasure and wellbeing are among the topics less likely to be covered in school-based education, which has tended to focus on reducing harm.

---

Read more:
6 ways to talk to your teens about sex without the cringe

---

But some things have changed

If parents are reluctant to talk to their children about sex and relationships, it’s rarely because they don’t want to. Our study shows they’re not certain what to say, when to say it, and how much detail to provide.

Many parents worried their child would feel uncomfortable, or feared saying the wrong thing. One in three said they had not had any conversations about sex or relationships with their children in the past 12 months.

But unlike in Bridgerton, today’s parents are not confined to metaphor. Resources exist to support more open, direct conversations about bodies, relationships and pleasure, which young people want.

Talking about sex, especially pleasure, can feel uncomfortable. But this is not a reason to stay silent. It is often a sign the conversation matters.

---

Talk soon. Talk often: a guide for parents talking to their kids about sex helps parents judge age-appropriate information and how to talk about it.

Alexandra James received funding from the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.

Andrea Waling receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (AU) and the National Institute for Health and Social Care Research (UK).

– ref. What Bridgerton’s ‘pinnacle’ tells us about sex talk today – https://theconversation.com/what-bridgertons-pinnacle-tells-us-about-sex-talk-today-276504

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Melissa Licari, Senior Research Fellow in Child Disability, The University of Western Australia; The Kids Research Institute

Tourette syndrome campaigner John Davidson has explained he left the British Film and Television Awards (BAFTAs) ceremony early on Monday night, aware his outbursts were causing distress.

Davidson was attending the ceremony to support the film I Swear, which tells the story of his life living with the syndrome. Tourette’s can cause involuntary movements and sounds, including words.

Davidson’s outbursts during the ceremony included a racial slur while actors Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindon, who are Black, were presenting an award.

In a statement, Davidson stressed the words were not intentional and did not “carry any meaning”. He said he was “deeply mortified” that people might have thought otherwise.

There are valid criticisms about how the BAFTAs and the broadcaster handled the situation and failed to properly acknowledge the hurt caused, whether or not it was intended.

But the syndrome Davidson has spent his life educating people about remains sadly misunderstood. So let’s take a look at Tourette’s and the tics it causes.

A neurological disorder

Tourette’s is a neurological disorder characterised by unintentional movements and vocalisations, known as tics.

While the exact cause of Tourette’s is not fully understood, it is likely to be complex and multifactorial.

Various genes have been linked to the condition, and we know it runs in families, so it likely has a strong genetic basis.

We also know that other environmental exposures during key periods of brain development contribute to the onset and course of the condition, such as complications during pregnancy and birth, illnesses and infections, and intense stress.

Tourette syndrome also rarely occurs in isolation, with many diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) and learning disorders.

What are tics?

Tics are thought to be caused by changes in brain circuits involved in impulse control and inhibition.

People with tics often experience uncomfortable physical sensations that build up in the body called premonitory urges. These urges are difficult and often impossible to suppress, and the only way to alleviate the urge is to tic.

It is a bit like when we experience itching on our skin or tingling in our nose, sensations we relieve by scratching or sneezing.

Tics vary between people and fluctuate in frequency, type and intensity, which can be challenging to manage.

Some tics are brief movements and sounds, such as forceful blinking, facial grimacing, head jerking, sniffing, throat clearing and grunting. These are referred to as “simple” tics and are very common, particularly in young children.

Other tics involve more elaborate patterns of movements and sounds – often involving several parts of the body.

These are “complex” tics. They include motor tics like hitting oneself, kicking or dropping to the floor, and vocal tics like repeating words or phrases. This can include socially inappropriate terms such as slurs or swearwords.

It is believed the Tourette’s brain sometimes struggles to control “forbidden” impulses. A person may experience urges to say taboo words and phrases, or make inappropriate actions, when they see or hear certain things within their environment.

How common are tics?

Tics are very common among children, with simple tics occurring in up to one in five children aged between five and six. These normally resolve in a short space of time, with many people unaware they are tics.

For one in 100 children, their tics will persist and become more severe. Having both motor and vocal tics for at least 12 months, meets the diagnostic criteria for Tourette syndrome.

While Tourette’s typically first appears in early childhood, onset can also occur during adolescence and adulthood.

For most children, tics will peak during early puberty, typically between 10–12 years of age, before reducing.

But for about one in four people with Tourette syndrome, their tics will be lifelong. Around 50,000 Australians currently live with a life-long tic disorder.

The use of obscene and socially inappropriate words and phrases, referred to as coprolalia, only occurs in about 15–20% of people with Tourette’s.

Unfortunately, coprolalia is often what gets portrayed in media and entertainment, impacting the public’s understanding of Tourette’s.

Is there a cure?

Tourette syndrome currently has no cure.

Ideally, treatment should include evidence-based behavioural interventions for tics. However these can be difficult to access, with few psychologists trained in these interventions.

Other psychological therapies aim to address the person’s stress and anxiety – which are factors known to increase tics – but not their tics.

Medications are also commonly prescribed if the tics are impacting the person, but these are not effective for everyone and often have side effects.

An exhausting and disabling condition

The frequent urge to tic disrupts attention and concentration, and the tics themselves can impact many aspects of daily living, such as dressing, eating, watching TV, and even relaxing.

Tics can also cause discomfort and injury, such as muscle soreness, cramping, whiplash, dislocations and broken bones. The research I’ve done with colleagues shows two-thirds of people sustain injuries from their tics.

I was involved in a national survey in 2025 involving more than 200 people with Tourette’s and their caregivers. They told us about the challenges they faced including:

• long wait times for diagnosis
• little understanding of tics and the condition from health workers and teachers
• a lack of support and limited treatment options
• a severe negative effect on mental health.

The social stigma, bullying, exclusion and exhaustion of living with this condition often leads to significant mental health struggles.

Our research shows around 70% of people living with Tourette’s struggle with anxiety disorders and one in three experience depression. One in four adults and one in ten children with this disorder have attempted suicide.

People with Tourette’s want to be understood and accepted

Tics are not something they are doing for attention. They increase when a person is stressed, anxious or excited, and trying to hold them in can make them worse.

Not everyone experiences coprolalia but, for those that do, the inability to inhibit taboo language can lead to public scrutiny and cause embarrassment and shame. This leads to many avoiding social situations and a life of isolation.

---

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800.

Melissa Licari is affiliated with the Tourette Syndrome Association of Australia.

– ref. How Tourette’s causes involuntary outbursts – and what people with the condition want you to know – https://theconversation.com/how-tourettes-causes-involuntary-outbursts-and-what-people-with-the-condition-want-you-to-know-276750

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Hugh Roberts, Professor of Languages, Cultures and Visual Studies, University of Exeter

Poetry in Ukraine is playing a vital role in processing trauma and bolstering resistance amid the ongoing war launched by Russia.

According to western intelligence experts – and doubtless Russian forces, too – Kyiv was supposed to fall within days of the full-scale invasion that began on February 24 2022. They had not reckoned with the resilience of a society that has long defended its language and culture, and in which poets have for centuries resisted Russian attempts to erase Ukrainian identity.

To say there has been a renaissance of poetry in Ukraine is an understatement. Not since the first world war has there been anything approaching the quality and quantity of work by poets who are also combatants. Civil society has reciprocated, with packed-out poetry readings in the bomb shelters of frontline cities and initiatives including the Ukrainian Ministry of Culture’s Poetry of the Free portal with more than 43,500 submissions since February 2022.

Ukrainian war poetry does not make for comfortable reading. Indeed, right now it speaks in the most ancient and primal forms of prayer, testimony, rallying cry and curse. Amid the noise of geopolitical news, commentary, disinformation and social media hubbub, it returns insistently to the most important element of all: people.

As the celebrated poet Maksym Kryvtsov wrote in his collection Poems from the Trench (2024): “When people ask me what war is, I will answer without hesitation: names.” Kryvtsov was himself a machine-gunner who had been defending Ukraine since before the full-scale invasion. He was killed by a Russian shell in January 2024, mere days after the publication of his first and last book.

The poets of the resistance

There are too many Ukrainian poets of great significance to name, yet for now two names may stand for the Ukrainian poetic renaissance: Yaryna Chornohuz and Artur Dron’.

Both poets have served their country. Chornohuz is still a drone operator of the Ukrainian Marine Corps in the frontline city of Kherson. Dron’ signed up in February 2022, four years before he reached the age of conscription, and is now a veteran following serious injury. Both have seen their poetry published in English, French and other languages, and have won major literary awards in Ukraine.

Chornohuz’s poetry and life are interwoven with defending Ukraine against the existential threat of Russia. Her writing also offers lament and testimony.

Her poem The Fruits of War draws on her experience as a combat medic dating back to 2019 and beyond. It is a cry not to let lives of immeasurable value lost on the battlefield slip into oblivion, despite everything:

I harvest fruits of war that may grow into myths

but are unlikely ever to blossom in memory into more than one

overlooked flower

at least to my half-useless

witness,

in the end, they’ll always be squeezed into oblivion.

for the fruits of war are losses

unseen and forgotten by all but

a few witnesses.

Dron’ quotes the lines about unseen and forgotten losses in his book of essays, Hemingway Knows Nothing (2025).

The poetry of Dron’, Chornohuz and other Ukrainian war poets offer a powerful form of commemoration that may be all the more universal for being so intensely individual. The 1st Letter to the Corinthians, the final poem of Dron’s collection We Were Here (2024), speaks of the love that animates his choice to defend Ukraine:

Love never fails.

But where there are prophecies, they will cease;

where there are tongues, they will be stilled;

where there is knowledge, it will pass away.

Because sometimes when the shelling ceases,

friends close love’s eyes,

wrap it in sleeping bags

and carry it away.

And then it passes on

to the living.

The young men in Dron’s company all loved an older soldier – their medic, Oleksandr “Doc” Kobernyk, who they saw as their teacher.

In Hemingway Knows Nothing, Dron’ returns repeatedly to a story of the time their position in a strip of forest came under sustained Russian shelling. Disorientated with an internal brain injury, he seeks out Doc only to learn from his commander that he has been killed. Tasked with evacuating his body and lacking a stretcher, he gathers him up on a sleeping bag. While Doc’s body is still warm, the poet experiences a love radiating from his teacher.

The day Doc’s wife Olena learned of his death, she wrote a poem. Reading it unlocked Dron’s own writing, which had been halted at that point by the war.

If we choose to pay attention, Ukrainian war poetry in translation may pass to us at least some of the love and the memory of what truly matters. Poetry, language, culture and identity are essential matters of security for Ukraine. For those in relative safety beyond Ukraine’s borders but nevertheless facing the menace of Russia, the time may have come, like Ukraine, to take inspiration from our poetic traditions.

Even if, as the poet Alfred Tennyson once wrote, “we have been made weak by time and fate”, we may yet still find ourselves “strong in will to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield”.

The poems in this article were translated by Amelia Glaser with Fiona Benson and Hugh Roberts (The Fruits of War), and Yuliya Musakovska (Letter to the Corinthians).

---

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

---

Hugh Roberts receives funding from an Arts and Humanities Research Council Curiosity Award (grant number UKRI3524), a British Academy Talent Development Award (grant reference TDA25250282), and a British Council Connections through Culture grant (grant number 5143).

– ref. Lines from the frontline: the poet soldiers defending Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/lines-from-the-frontline-the-poet-soldiers-defending-ukraine-276676

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Angélica Durán-Martínez, Associate Professor of Political Science, UMass Lowell

The death of a major cartel boss in Mexico has unleashed a violent backlash in which members of the criminal group have paralyzed some cities through blockades and attacks on property and security forces.

At least 73 people have died as a result of the operation to capture Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, or “El Mencho.” The head of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel was seriously wounded during a firefight with authorities on Feb. 22, 2026. He later died in custody.

As an expert in criminal groups and drug trafficking in Latin America who has been studying Mexico’s cartels for two decades, I see the violent aftermath of the operation as part of a pattern in which Mexican governments have opted for high-profile hits that often lead only to more violence without addressing the broader security problems that plague huge swaths of the country.

Who was ‘El Mencho’?

Like many other figures involved in Mexico’s drug trafficking, Oseguera Cervantes started at the bottom and made his way up the ranks. He spent some time in prison in the U.S., where he may have forged alliances with criminal gangs before being deported back to Mexico in 1997. There, he connected with the Milenio Cartel, an organization that first allied, and then fought with, the powerful Sinaloa Cartel.

Most of the information available points to the Jalisco New Generation Cartel forming under El Mencho around 2010, following the killing of Ignacio “Nacho” Coronel Villarreal, a Sinaloa Cartel leader and main link with the Milenio Cartel.

Since 2015, Jalisco New Generation Cartel has been known for its blatant attacks against security forces in Mexico – such as gunning down a helicopter in that year. And it has expanded its presence both across Mexico and internationally.

In Mexico, it is said to have a presence in all states. In some, the cartel has a direct presence and very strong local networks. In others, it has cultivated alliances with other trafficking organizations.

Besides drug trafficking, the Jalisco New Generation Cartel is also engaged in oil theft, people smuggling and extortion. As a result, it has become one of the most powerful cartels in Mexico.

What impact will his death have on the cartel?

There are a few potential scenarios, and a lot will depend on what succession plans Jalisco New Generation had in the event of Oseguera Cervantes’ capture or killing.

In general, these types of operations – in which security forces take out a cartel leader – lead to more violence, for a variety of reasons.

Mexicans have already experienced the immediate aftermath of Oseguera Cervantes’ death: retaliation attacks, blockades and official attempts to prevent civilians from going out. This is similar to what occurred after the capture of drug lord Ovidio Guzmán López in Sinaloa in 2019 and his second capture in 2023.

Violence flares in two ways following such high-profile captures and killings of cartel leaders.

In the short term, there is retaliation. At the moment, members of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel are seeking revenge against Mexico’s security forces and are also trying to assert their regional authority despite El Mencho’s death.

These retaliatory campaigns tend to be violent and flashy. They include blockades as well as attacks against security forces and civilians.

Then there is the longer-term violence associated with any succession. This can take the form of those who are below Oseguera Cervantes in rank fighting for control. But it can also result from rival groups trying to take advantage of any leadership vacuum.

The level and duration of violence depend on a few factors, such as whether there was a succession plan and what kind of alliances are in place with other cartels. But generally, operations in which a cartel boss is removed lead to more violence and fragmentation of criminal groups.

Of course, people like Oseguera Cervantes who have violated laws and engaged in violence need to be captured. But in the long run, that doesn’t do anything to dismantle networks of criminality or reduce the size of their operations.

What is the current state of security in Mexico?

The upsurge in violence after Oseguera Cervantes’ killing occurs as some indicators in Mexico’s security situation seemed to be improving.

For example, homicide rates declined in 2025 – which is an important indicator of security.

But other measures are appalling. Disappearances are still unsettlingly high. The reality that many Mexicans experience on the ground is one where criminal organizations remain powerful and embedded in the local ecosystems that connect state agents, politicians and criminals in complex networks.

Criminal organizations are engaged in what we academics call “criminal governance.” They engage in a wide range of activities and regulate life in communities – sometimes coercively, but sometimes also with some degree of legitimacy from the population.

In some states like Sinaloa, despite the operations to take out cartel’s leaders, the illicit economies are still extensive and profitable. But what’s more important is that levels of violence remain high and the population is still suffering deeply.

The day-to-day reality for people in some of these regions is still one of fear.

And in the greater scheme of things, criminal networks are still very powerful – they are embedded in the country’s economy and politics, and connect to communities in complex ways.

How does the El Mencho operation fit Mexico’s strategy on cartels?

The past two governments vowed to reduce the militarization of security forces. But the power of the military in Mexico has actually expanded.

The government of President Claudia Sheinbaum wanted a big, visible hit at a time when the U.S. is pushing for more militarized policies to counter Mexico’s trafficking organizations.

But this dynamic is not new. Most U.S. and Mexican policy regarding drug trafficking organizations has historically emphasized these high-profile captures – even if it is just for short-term gains.

It’s easier to say “we captured a drug lord” than address broader issues of corruption or impunity. Most of the time when these cartel leaders are captured or killed, there is generally no broader justice. It isn’t accompanied with authorities investigating disappearances, murders, corruption or even necessarily halting the flow of drugs.

Captures and killings of cartel leaders serve a strategic purpose of showing that something is being done, but the effectiveness of such policies in the long run is very limited.

Of course, taking out a drug lord is not a bad thing. But if it does not come with a broader dismantling of criminal networks and an accompanying focus on justice, then the main crimes that these groups commit – homicides, disappearances and extortion – will continue to affect the daily life of people. And the effect on illicit flows is, at best, meager.

Angélica Durán-Martínez has received funding from the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, the Social Science Research Funding and the United States Institute of Peace.

– ref. Violent aftermath of Mexico’s ‘El Mencho’ killing follows pattern of other high-profile cartel hits – https://theconversation.com/violent-aftermath-of-mexicos-el-mencho-killing-follows-pattern-of-other-high-profile-cartel-hits-276728

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Sara Webb, Lecturer, Centre for Astrophysics and Supercomputing, Swinburne University of Technology

One of the largest known stars in the universe underwent a dramatic transformation in 2014, new research shows, and may be preparing to explode.

A study led by Gonzalo Muñoz-Sanchez at the National Observatory of Athens, published in Nature Astronomy today, argues that the enormous star WOH G64 has transitioned from a red supergiant to a rare yellow hypergiant – in what may be evidence of impending supernova.

The evidence suggests we may be witnessing, in real time, a massive star shedding its outer layers, shrinking as it heats up, and moving closer to the end of its short life.

A very special star

WOH G64 was first discovered in the 1970s as as star of interest in the Large Magellanic Cloud, a dwarf galaxy orbiting the Milky Way.

It turned out the star was not only extremely luminous, but also one of the biggest ever discovered: more than 1,500 times the radius of the Sun.

In 2024, WOH G64 was the first star beyond our galaxy ever photographed in detail, thanks to the Very Large Telescope Interferometer. The image showed a clear dusty cocoon around the central giant star, which confirmed it was losing mass as it aged.

From supergiant to hypergiant, big is big

WOH G64 is a young star in the grand scheme of the cosmos, with an estimated age of less than 5 million years old. Unlike our Sun (currently about 4.6 billion years old), WOH G64 is destined to live fast and die young.

WOH G64 was born big, forming from a huge cloud of gas and dust collapsing until the pressure made it ignite. Like our Sun, it would have burned hydrogen in its core by nuclear fusion.

Later it would have expanded and burned helium, becoming what is called a red supergiant.

Not all supergiants become hypergiants. It’s been theorised that hypergiants form when very large stars quickly burn and evolve from burning hydrogen to burning helium.

During this transition, these stars start to shed their outer layers, while their cores begin to shrink inwards. Once a star becomes a hypergiant, it is destined for a quick death in the fiery explosion of a supernova.

What has caused this change seen in WOH G64?

So what happened to WOH G64 in 2014? The new study proposes that a large part of the original supergiant’s surface was ejected away from the star.

This may have been due to interactions with a companion star, which the authors have confirmed exists by looking at the spectrum of light from WOH G64.

Another theory: the star is getting ready to explode. We know stars this big will inevitably go kaboom, but exactly when it will happen can be hard to determine in advance.

One possible scenario is that the transition we’re seeing is due to a pre-supernova “superwind” phase. This is theorised to occur due to strong internal pulsations as the fuel in the core is spent quickly.

Only time will tell

Most stars live for tens of millions or even tens of billions of years. It was never a given we would witness and be able to document so much transformation in a star, let alone one outside our galaxy.

If we are lucky, we will see the death of WOH G64 in our lifetimes – not only providing an incredible intergalactic spectacle but also helping scientists complete the puzzle of this fascinating star.

Sara Webb 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. One of the biggest stars in the universe might be getting ready to explode – https://theconversation.com/one-of-the-biggest-stars-in-the-universe-might-be-getting-ready-to-explode-276519

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By John (Eddie) La Marca, Senior Research Officer, Blood Cells and Blood Cancer, WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research)

If you’re feeling worn out or have suddenly lost some weight, your doctor might send you for a blood test.

Blood tests are a common way health-care professionals detect, diagnose, and monitor a range of medical conditions.

But can they help us detect more serious conditions such as cancer? Let’s dive into the research.

How do blood tests work?

Blood tests are a technique used in the field of pathology, which is the study of the nature and causes of disease.

Blood tests assess what cells, proteins, and molecules are present in the blood. Health-care professionals use them to monitor things like organ health, nutrition levels, immune system function, and the presence of some infections.

To test for anaemia, for example, you would take a blood test and count the number of red blood cells in that blood sample. Another example is blood sugar testing, which is used to measure the glucose levels of a patient with diabetes.

What can blood tests tell us about cancer?

Currently, we can’t reliably diagnose most cancers using a blood test. One major reason is it’s often difficult to distinguish between cancer cells and normal, healthy cells. This is especially true when it comes to early-stage tumours.

But blood test results can give us clues about whether certain cancers are present in the body. So how do they do this?

1. By revealing abnormalities in your blood

Blood cancers will often cause clear changes in the number and types of cells in the bloodstream. We can measure these changes using a complete blood count, also known as a “full blood examination”.

This type of blood test counts all the different types of cells present in the blood: red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and more. Blood cancers arise when your body produces an abnormal amount of any type of blood cell. White blood cells, which fight infection, are the most common example. So a high number of one or more of these cell types may suggest the presence of a blood cancer.

But complete blood counts aren’t enough to make a conclusive diagnosis of blood cancer. We need to perform other tests to confirm whether the problem is a cancer or a different disease. These tests may include a biopsy or imaging techniques such as an MRI, CT scan, or X-ray.

2. By identifying “tumour markers”

We can also use blood tests to detect specific proteins which cancer cells often produce in greater numbers. These proteins are known as “tumour markers”.

One example of a tumour marker is prostate-specific antigen. This antigen is a protein made exclusively by the prostate gland. A healthy male will have only a small amount of prostate-specific antigen in his blood. In contrast, a male with prostate cancer will often produce abnormally high levels of this antigen. In this way, the prostate-specific antigen can serve as a “marker” of prostate cancer.

There are many different tumour markers used to identify different cancers. However, measuring tumour markers is not a foolproof solution. This is because they can be influenced by other factors. For example, an injury to or inflammation of the prostate gland could cause prostate-specific antigen levels to increase. So your doctor may perform additional tests to confirm if a person has cancer.

---

Read more:
Do I have prostate cancer? Why a simple PSA blood test alone won’t give you the answer

---

3. By locating rogue cells

For other types of cancer, blood tests can look for circulating tumour cells. Circulating tumour cells are produced when cancer cells break off from the original tumour and then enter the bloodstream. This usually only happens when a cancer reaches a more advanced stage and is metastatic, meaning it has spread to other parts of the body.

But this type of test is usually prognostic, rather than diagnostic. This means we can only use it to monitor the progression of a cancer which has already been diagnosed. So if a blood test does identify circulating tumour cells, it is best to conduct additional tests before proceeding with treatment.

So, are we close to creating a cancer-detecting blood test?

Unfortunately, we are yet to find a way to detect cancer with a single blood test. It’s a very difficult task, but researchers are making progress.

Circulating tumour DNA is a current topic of interest. These DNA molecules have mutations which distinguish them from healthy cells and can give information about the cancer they came from.

In one 2025 trial, Australian researchers measured the amount of circulating tumour DNA in 441 people with colon cancer to determine which patients would respond to chemotherapy. Another study from 2025 used circulating tumour DNA to monitor how 940 patients with lung cancer responded to different treatments.

One test did claim to successfully use circulating tumour DNA to detect more than 50 types of early-stage cancer. It’s known as the “Galleri test” and was first trialled in the UK in 2021. However, some experts have since raised concerns about the test’s effectiveness.

Researchers are also exploring other ways of using blood tests. In one 2025 study, Australian researchers adapted an existing test to use blood instead of tissue samples to identify known markers of ovarian cancer.

Another Australian study from 2025 investigated whether molecules other than proteins could serve as cancer markers. It found certain fats in blood can indicate if a patient with advanced prostate cancer will respond to treatment.

So, it looks like we’re still a while away from creating a cancer-detecting blood test. But with some time, effort, and robust research, it could be a possibility.

John (Eddie) La Marca receives funding from Cancer Council Victoria. He is affiliated with the Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute and the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research.

Cameron Lewis receives funding from the University of Melbourne as part of a PhD scholarship. He is employed by Austin Health as a clinical haematologist.

Sarah Diepstraten receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Cure Cancer Australia and My Room Children’s Cancer Charity.

– ref. Can blood tests really detect cancer? – https://theconversation.com/can-blood-tests-really-detect-cancer-269906

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Felicity Goodyear-Smith, Professor of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

Primary care – the kind delivered by general practice (GP) clinics – is the backbone of every health system. When it works, we barely notice it.

It keeps people healthy, detects problems early, coordinates care and keeps people out of hospital.

But across many high-income countries, despite very different health systems, primary care is under unprecedented strain.

Our recently published paper presents case studies from the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand.

All show governments are leaning on primary care to solve increasingly complex health needs. At the same time, bureaucracies are demanding more documentation, compliance, performance metrics and administrative work.

However, very little new investment is going into the four parts of primary care that matter most:

• continuity: seeing the same health provider over time, rather than pinballing from one specialist to another

• comprehensiveness: getting the whole family’s physical, mental and social health care from one place

• coordination: ensuring all the different people and services involved in a patient’s care work together smoothly, information is shared and roles are clear, so patients don’t fall through the cracks

• first-contact care: being able to get an appointment with a doctor or nurse you know, when you need it.

Ballooning administrative burdens

These are the core functions of effective primary care, and they are what reduce hospital visits. But across many countries, the GP workforce is shrinking or stagnating just as populations are ageing and multi-morbidity is increasing.

Medical graduates are turning away from general practice, citing high workloads, lower pay relative to other specialities, and the emotional weight of increasingly complex care.

Many GPs who stay in practice are reducing their hours, not because they lack commitment, but because the amount of unpaid work required outside of the consulting room makes full-time practice untenable.

Administrative burdens have ballooned. Electronic health-record systems generate endless inbox tasks. As hospitals push chronic care back into the community, GPs absorb more responsibility without receiving the resources to match.

The result is predictable: practices stop enrolling new patients, waiting times blow out, and people who cannot get timely care turn instead to emergency departments.

These alternatives are often far more expensive, lack continuity, and do not offer the long-term relationships that help detect disease early and manage chronic conditions effectively.

Quick wins, long-term losses

Many of the countries facing these problems spend less than 6% of their total health budget on primary care. For example, the US spends 4%, New Zealand 5.4% and Australia 6%. But how the money is allocated is as important as the amount itself.

Funding models in many countries fail to support team-based care – a collaborative, coordinated model of healthcare delivery in which multiple health professionals work together with patients and their families.

Governments often finance new roles – for example, physician assistants – in isolation, without ensuring practices have the infrastructure to integrate them safely and effectively. This creates inefficiencies and fragmentation.

Poorly designed “pay-for-performance” measures can make things worse. So, when funding is linked to disease-specific indicators rather than the core functions of high-quality primary care, clinicians end up spending more time on documentation and less on patients.

Continuity and comprehensiveness, the strongest predictors of better health outcomes, remain largely unmeasured and unrewarded.

The benefits of primary care investment accumulate slowly – fewer hospital admissions, better management of chronic disease, reduced premature mortality. But political cycles reward quick wins. Governments are tempted to fund initiatives that reduce waiting lists in months, not strengthen foundations for decades.

The result is a proliferation of short-term “solutions” that crowd out the long-term reforms primary care actually needs. The system that prevents downstream costs is neglected because its benefits are not immediately visible.

Toward a sustainable health system

Primary care is relationship-based. That continuity – knowing patients, their histories, their families and the context of their lives – is what allows efficient decision-making and prevents unnecessary interventions.

When investment flows into standalone or narrow services instead of strengthening general practice, care becomes episodic. This can result in poor followup and patients bouncing between providers who are working without shared information.

This fragmentation increases costs while reducing quality, even though each individual initiative may look beneficial in isolation. Once the foundation cracks, the entire system becomes more expensive to maintain but less effective.

The solutions are clear, and are strikingly consistent across countries. A whole-of-system approach is needed to:

• set explicit investment targets for primary care

• align funding, workforce planning and service delivery

• invest in true multidisciplinary teams, not piecemeal roles

• prioritise continuity, comprehensiveness, and first-contact access in funding models

• and create long-term accountability structures that survive election cycles.

Countries that have strong primary care systems will spend less overall on health, have better population health outcomes, and enjoy greater equity. Those that neglect primary care pay for it many times over in hospital pressures, workforce burnout and widening inequities.

Strengthening primary care is not just another reform. It is the only path to a sustainable health system. Countries that fail to recognise this are already seeing the consequences.

Felicity Goodyear-Smith has received funding from the NZ Health Research Council, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, and other NZ research funding bodies.

– ref. We studied primary care in 6 rich countries – it’s under unprecedented strain everywhere – https://theconversation.com/we-studied-primary-care-in-6-rich-countries-its-under-unprecedented-strain-everywhere-276617

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Mark Nielsen, Associate Professor, School of Psychology, The University of Queensland

A baby macaque monkey named Punch has gone viral for his heart-wrenching pursuit of companionship.

After being abandoned by his mother and rejected by the rest of his troop, his zookeepers at Ichikawa City Zoo in Japan provided Punch with an orangutan plushie as a stand-in mother. Videos of the monkey clinging to the toy have gone viral worldwide.

But Punch’s attachment to his inanimate companion is not just the subject of a heartbreaking video. It also harks back to the story of a famous set of psychology experiments conducted in the 1950s by US researcher Harry Harlow.

The findings from his experiments underpin many of the central tenets of attachment theory, which positions the bond between parent and child as crucial in child development.

What were Harlow’s experiments?

Harlow took rhesus monkeys from birth, and removed them from their mothers. These monkeys were raised in an enclosure in which they had access to two surrogate “mothers”.

One was a wire cage shaped into the form of a “mother” monkey, which could provide food and drink via a small feeder.

The other was a monkey-shaped doll wrapped in terry towelling. This doll was soft and comfortable, but it didn’t provide food or drink; it was little more than a furry figure the baby monkey could cling to.

So, we have one option that provides comfort, but no food or drink, and one that’s cold, hard and wiry but which provides dietary sustenance.

These experiments were a response to behaviourism, which was the prevailing theoretical view at the time.

Behaviourists suggested babies form attachments to those who provide them with their biological needs, such as food and shelter.

Harlow challenged this theory by suggesting babies need care, love and kindness to form attachments, rather than just physical nourishment.

A behaviourist would have expected the infant monkeys to spend all their time with the wire “mother” that fed them.

In fact, that’s not what happened. The monkeys spent significantly more time each day clinging to the terry towelling “mother”.

Harlow’s 1950s experiments established the importance of softness, care and kindness as the basis for attachment. Given the opportunity, Harlow showed, babies prefer emotional nourishment over physical nourishment.

How did this influence modern attachment theory?

Harlow’s discovery was significant because it completely reoriented the dominant behaviourist view of the time. This dominant view suggested primates, including humans, function in reward and punishment cycles, and form attachments to whoever fulfils physical needs such as hunger and thirst.

Emotional nourishment was not a part of the behaviourist paradigm. So when Harlow did his experiments, he flipped the prevailing theory on its head.

The monkeys’ preference towards emotional nourishment, in the form of cuddling the furry terry towel-covered surrogate “mother”, formed the foundation for the development of attachment theory.

Attachment theory posits that healthy child development occurs when a child is “securely attached” to its caregiver. This is achieved by the parent or caregiver providing emotional nourishment, care, kindness and attentiveness to the child. Insecure attachment occurs when the parent or caregiver is cold, distant, abusive or neglectful.

Much like the rhesus monkeys, you can feed a human baby all they need, give them all the dietary nourishment they require, but if you don’t provide them with warmth and love, they’re not going to form an attachment to you.

What can we learn from Punch?

The zoo was not conducting an experiment, but Punch’s situation inadvertently reflects the controlled experiment Harlow did. So, the experimental setup was mimicked in a more natural setting, but the outcomes look very similar.

Just as Harlow’s monkeys favoured their terry towelling mother, Punch has formed an attachment to his IKEA plushie companion.

Now, what we don’t have with the zoo situation is the comparison to a harsh, physically nourishing option provided.

But clearly, that’s not what the monkey was looking for. He wanted a comforting and soft safe place, and that’s what the doll provided.

Were Harlow’s experiments ethical?

Most of the world now recognises primates as having rights that are, in some cases, equivalent to human rights.

Today, we would see Harlow’s experiments as a cruel and unkind thing to do. You wouldn’t take a human baby away from its mother and do this experiment, so we shouldn’t do this to primates.

It’s interesting to see people so fascinated by this parallel to an experiment conducted more than 70 years ago.

Punch the monkey is not just the internet’s latest animal celebrity – he’s a reminder of the importance of emotional nourishment.

We all need soft spaces. We all need safe spaces. Love and warmth are far more important for our wellbeing and functioning than physical nourishment alone.

Mark Nielsen receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

– ref. A viral monkey, his plushie, and a 70-year-old experiment: what Punch tells us about attachment theory – https://theconversation.com/a-viral-monkey-his-plushie-and-a-70-year-old-experiment-what-punch-tells-us-about-attachment-theory-276625

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Anne Twomey, Professor Emerita in Constitutional Law, University of Sydney

The place of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, former prince and brother of the king, in the line of succession to the British throne appears to be under threat in the United Kingdom.

Currently, Mountbatten-Windsor is eighth in line (after the families of princes William and Harry) to the Crowns of the United Kingdom and Australia. This makes it extremely unlikely he would ever become monarch, but his removal is more a symbolic act of repudiation.

Is it possible to remove him? The short answer is yes – but it would most likely be a time-consuming process involving many parliaments passing legislation.

Does the same line of succession apply to the British and Australian Crowns?

At the time of Australia’s federation in 1901, the British Crown was described as “one and indivisible”. Queen Victoria exercised constitutional powers over all her colonies, acting on the advice of British ministers.

That changed after the first world war, due to a series of Imperial Conferences, with the self-governing “dominions” (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the Irish Free State and Newfoundland) having separate Crowns by 1930. This meant the Australian prime minister could advise the monarch about the appointment of the governor-general of Australia and other federal (but not state) Australian matters.

However, the rules of succession to these separate Crowns remained the same. They are a hotch-potch of English laws, including common law rules of inheritance and statutes, such as the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701.

These laws became part of Australian law in the 18th century, but for a long time Australian parliaments had no power to alter them. This changed in 1931 with the enactment of the Statute of Westminster. It gave the dominions power to repeal or alter British laws that applied in their country.

However, recognising this could cause havoc in relation to succession to the Crown, a clause was included in the preamble to the statute, making it a convention that “any alteration in the law touching the Succession to the Throne” shall require the assent of the parliaments of all of the dominions and the United Kingdom. Section 4 of the statute continued the power of the UK parliament to legislate for a dominion, but only if it gave its request and consent.

In 1936, when King Edward VIII abdicated, the UK parliament enacted a statute to alter the rules of succession to the throne, to exclude any children he might have. Australia assented to the British parliament extending its law so it applied to Australia too.

That option is no longer available since the enactment of section 1 of the Australia Act 1986. It says that no act of the UK parliament shall extend as part of the law of the Commonwealth, or a state or territory. Any changes made to the operation of the laws of succession to the Crown of Australia must be made in Australia.

How could Australia change the law of succession?

When the Commonwealth Constitution was enacted, the Crown was still “one and indivisible”. This meant no one inserted a section giving the Commonwealth parliament power to make laws about succession to the Crown. However, the framers of the Constitution were clever enough to insert a mechanism to deal with such unanticipated developments.

Section 51(xxxviii) of the Constitution says the Commonwealth parliament may exercise a power, at the request or with the concurrence of all the states directly concerned, which only the UK parliament could have exercised at the time of federation. This means the Commonwealth and state parliaments can cooperate to change the rules of succession to the Crown of Australia.

This issue arose in 2011, when the various realms (being countries that retained Queen Elizabeth II as head of state) agreed to change the rules of succession so that males would no longer be given preference over females, and heirs would no longer be disqualified for marrying a Catholic.

---

Read more:
Power to the princesses: Australia wraps up succession law changes

---

The UK parliament enacted the Succession to the Crown Act 2013 to give legal effect to this change. However, it delayed commencing the act until other realms had enacted their changes too. The British act only made the change with respect to the Crown of the United Kingdom.

Some realms accepted they needed to change the law in relation to their own Crown. Others concluded they didn’t need to act, because their Constitution makes their sovereign the same person who is king or queen of the United Kingdom. Legislation was ultimately enacted in Australia, Barbados, Canada, New Zealand, St Kitts and Nevis, and St Vincent and the Grenadines.

In Australia, each state enacted the Succession to the Crown Act 2015. The Australian process took a long time, due to different legislative priorities and sitting periods, and the intervention of state election periods.

Australia was the last to enact its law, after which the alteration in succession was brought into effect simultaneously across all the realms.

How would the process operate today?

If it were proposed to remove Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession today, the UK government would probably first seek the agreement of all the realms. While not legally necessary, it is important if a shared monarch is to be retained for all realms to be consulted.

The UK parliament would then prepare its own bill, providing a template for other jurisdictions. This means the changes are uniform across the realms. The bill would probably also specify whether Mountbatten-Windsor’s exclusion affects his heirs, princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, and their children. Under the old law, a person who married a Catholic was treated as “dead” for the purposes of succession, so that their exclusion from the succession did not affect the hereditary position of their heirs. The same approach might be taken in relation to the exclusion of Mountbatten-Windsor.

The same parliaments that enacted laws in relation to the last change of succession (apart from Barbados, which is now a republic), would also need to enact an equivalent law, if they wish to maintain symmetry in such rules across the realms. Putting such a bill before a parliament runs the risk that other issues will be raised, opening broader questions concerning the role of the monarchy in different realms.

Could Australia make such a change on its own?

While Australia could unilaterally enact a law to exclude Mountbatten–Windsor from succession to the Crown of Australia, it is unlikely it would do so. There are two reasons for this.

First, it involves a lot of legislative hassle, getting seven parliaments to enact a law that will probably have no substantive effect, given how far Mountbatten-Windsor is down the line of succession.

Second, covering clause 2 of the Commonwealth Constitution says that references to “the Queen” in the Constitution shall “extend to Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom”.

There is considerable disagreement about whether this is just an interpretative provision about updating references, or whether it has a substantive effect.

Keeping Australia’s rules of succession in sync with those of the United Kingdom avoids opening that potential Pandora’s box.

Anne Twomey has received funding from the Australian Research Council and sometimes does consultancy work for governments and inter-governmental bodies. She also has a YouTube channel – The Constitutional Clarion.

– ref. How could Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor be removed from the line of succession to the throne? – https://theconversation.com/how-could-andrew-mountbatten-windsor-be-removed-from-the-line-of-succession-to-the-throne-276604