Category: The Conversation – Global Perspectives

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Francesca Jackson, PhD candidate, Lancaster Law School, Lancaster University

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. The arrest comes after the US government released files that appeared to indicate he had shared official information with financier and convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein while serving as a trade envoy for the UK. But the police have not given details of exactly what they are investigating.

It is important to be clear that the arrest is not related to accusations of sexual assault or misconduct. In 2022, Mountbatten-Windsor reached a settlement with the late Virginia Giuffre for an undisclosed sum that did not include an admission of liability.

Being named in the Epstein files is not an indication of misconduct. Mountbatten-Windsor has previously denied any wrongdoing in his association with Epstein and and has previously rejected any suggestion he used his time as trade envoy to further his own interests.

What was Mountbatten-Windsor’s official role and why did he lose it?

In 2001, Tony Blair’s government made the then-prince the UK’s special representative for trade and investment. According to the government at the time, his remit was to “promote UK business internationally, market the UK to potential inward investors, and build relationships in support of UK business interests”. He did not receive a salary, but he did go on hundreds of trips to promote British businesses.

Members of the royal family are often deployed by the government on international missions to promote trade. When negotiating with other countries, particularly those which are also monarchies, sending a prominent figure like a royal may help seal the deal. Indeed, the then-government claimed that the former Duke of York’s “unique position gives him unrivalled access to members of royal families, heads of state, government ministers and chief executives of companies”.

It is not unusual for members of the royal family to be deployed by the government for diplomatic missions. Royals often host incoming state visits and lead similar visits abroad, and can be deployed to lead delegations on more specific missions.

However, Mountbatten-Windsor had an official role as trade envoy. He stepped down from this role in 2011 following reports about his friendship with Epstein, who was convicted of sex offences in 2011.

---

Read more:
What exactly is misconduct in public office and could Peter Mandelson be convicted?

---

Are royals protected from prosecution?

The monarch is protected by sovereign immunity, a wide-ranging constitutional principle exempting him from all criminal and civil liability. According to the leading 19th century constitutionalist Alfred Dicey, the monarch could not even be prosecuted for “shooting the Prime Minister through the head”. The Prince of Wales also enjoys immunity as Duke of Cornwall, which protects him from punishment for breaking a range of laws.

The State Immunity Act 1978, which confers immunity on the head of state, also extends to “members of the family forming part of the household”. However, this phrase has been interpreted narrowly to apply to a very tight circle of people and does not appear to apply to the monarch’s children in general. For example, in 2002 Princess Anne was prosecuted (though not arrested) for failing to control her dogs in Windsor Great Park after they bit two children.

Nevertheless, there has often been a perception that members of the royal family are held to a different standard when it comes to the law. In 2016 Thames Valley Police were criticised by anti-monarchy groups for not prosecuting the then-prince after newspaper reports alleged he had driven his car through the gates of Windsor Great Park. In 2019 the Crown Prosecution Service declined to prosecute Prince Philip for causing a car crash which injured two people.

The monarch also cannot be compelled to give evidence in court. For example, prosecutors were unable to summon the late queen to give evidence in the trial of Princess Diana’s former butler, who was accused of stealing her jewellery.

In response to Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest, the king said: “What now follows is the full, fair and proper process by which this issue is investigated in the appropriate manner and by the appropriate authorities. In this, as I have said before, they have our full and wholehearted support and co-operation. Let me state clearly: the law must take its course.”

When was the last time a royal was arrested?

You have to go back quite a long way to find the last time that a member of the British royal family was arrested. This was during the English civil war, when Charles I was taken prisoner for treason before being found guilty and ultimately executed in 1649.

A number of royals, including Princess Anne, have committed driving-related offences, including speeding. But this arrest makes Mountbatten-Windsor the first member of the royal family to be arrested in modern times, though it should be noted that he is no longer a royal – he was stripped of all his official titles in October 2025 as his friendship with Epstein came under even more scrutiny.

What limits do police have on investigating royal estates?

Sovereign immunity also prevents police from entering private royal estates to investigate alleged crimes without permission. This can, theoretically, protect members of the royal family from arrest and prosecution. The Cultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Act 2017 also bans police from searching royal estates for stolen or looted artefacts.

In 2007, two hen harriers were illegally shot at Sandringham estate. However, Norfolk Police first needed to ask Sandringham officials for permission to enter the estate, by which time the dead birds’ bodies had been removed. Police questioned Prince Harry, but did not bring charges.

Other incidents have allegedly led to Sandringham being accused of becoming a wildlife crime hotspot, with at least 18 reported cases of suspected wildlife offences taking place between 2003-23 – yet only one resulting in prosecution.

Another longstanding legal precedent is that no one may be arrested in the presence of the monarch or within the precincts of a royal palace. It was thought that this rule could protect other members of the royal family and royal employees. However, Mountbatten-Windsor’s arrest at Sandringham suggests that this antiquated principle may no longer hold true today.

Francesca Jackson 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. Why has Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor been arrested, and what legal protections do the royal family have? – https://theconversation.com/why-has-andrew-mountbatten-windsor-been-arrested-and-what-legal-protections-do-the-royal-family-have-276466

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Lakshini Gunasekera, PhD Candidate in Neurology, Monash University

A migraine attack is not just a “bad headache”.

Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition which can cause nausea, vomiting, and sensitivity to light or sound, in addition to severe headaches.

Migraine affects roughly five million Australians, but few people understand the different stages of a migraine attack.

Knowing the four distinct phases can help you recognise the symptoms and manage pain at each stage.

Phase 1: Premonitory

The first phase of migraine development is the “premonitory” or “prodrome” phase. It functions like a warning period which begins 24 to 48 hours before a migraine attack fully sets in.

The premonitory phase has a lot to do with the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus is the part of the brain which regulates key functions such as body temperature, appetite, mood and sleep.

When a person experiences a migraine attack, their hypothalamus becomes abnormally activated. The hypothalamus is connected to other parts of the brain with different functions, so this abnormal activation can also disrupt how those parts function.

This can lead to symptoms such as poor concentration, food cravings, irritability and insomnia. If you notice these early signs, you’re more likely to “catch” the start of a migraine attack and be able to treat it early.

Phase 2: Aura

The second phase of a migraine attack is called “aura”. Aura refers to various neurological symptoms which affect your vision, speech or ability to feel sensations. Visual auras, which mainly affect your vision, are the most common kind.

Visual aura symptoms can include seeing flashing lights, swirling shapes or blind spots. A sensory aura can lead to numbness or tingling in your face or limbs. In severe cases, people may even have trouble speaking.

Research suggests a process called cortical spreading depression contributes to aura symptoms. During this process, a wave of electrical activity spreads very slowly through the brain and can impact how certain brain regions function.

Only 30% of people experience migraine with aura.

Phase 3: Headache

The third phase of a migraine attack is the headache. This is when people typically experience a throbbing or pulsating headache, alongside other symptoms like nausea and sensitivity to light and sound.

This phase usually lasts between four and 72 hours if untreated.

When different brain networks become activated during a migraine attack, other symptoms can develop in addition to headache.

When the medulla or “vomit centre” of the brain is abnormally activated, it can lead to nausea and vomiting.

The trigeminal nerve, the nerve which allows you to feel sensations on your face, can also become abnormally activated. This causes the release of chemicals which may be perceived by the brain as pain.

One of these chemicals is a protein called calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). Some injectable types of migraine medication block this protein to reduce pain.

Phase 4: Postdrome

The fourth and final phase is the “postdrome”. It is also known as the “migraine hangover”.

During this recovery phase, your brain is working hard to return to its normal functioning. That is why you may feel even more fatigued or have difficulty concentrating after a migraine attack.

So, how can I manage a migraine attack?

It helps to know the symptoms and stages of migraine development.

If you have predictable symptoms, particularly during the premonitory phase, it’s best to carry pain medications or anti-nausea tablets with you. That way you can treat early symptoms as soon as they arise. It can also be a sign to rest, ideally before the headache phase sets in.

In the aura phase, taking migraine-specific pain medications such as triptans, aspirin or anti-inflammatory pain killers may stop the headache phase from starting.

If you have more than four migraine attacks each month, you may also consider taking preventive medications. These are usually daily tablets which help control the baseline level of head pain you experience. Injectable options are also available.

Finally, don’t ignore the postdrome phase. If you push yourself too hard during this recovery period, you may experience overlapping migraine attacks. This is when one migraine attack starts before the last one resolves itself. Overlapping migraine attacks are much harder to treat.

You may also experience other symptoms related to the migraine attack. These can include dizziness, neck pain, or ringing in the ears. If you have any of these additional symptoms, you should consult your neurologist to check they are not caused by a more serious underlying condition.

And if you are a woman who experiences migraine with aura, speak to your doctor before starting hormone-based contraception. This is because you may need different treatment than someone who does not experience aura symptoms.

By understanding the different phases and symptoms of migraine, you will be better equipped to tackle any future attacks that come.

---

Read more:
Why is migraine more common in women than men?

---

Lakshini Gunasekera receives funding from the Victorian government’s Catalyst grant program to investigate hormonal therapies for menstrual migraine, and she has received royalties from Pain Management Today.

– ref. Migraine is more than just a headache. A neurologist explains the 4 stages – https://theconversation.com/migraine-is-more-than-just-a-headache-a-neurologist-explains-the-4-stages-267973

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Timothy Graham, Associate Professor in Digital Media, Queensland University of Technology

A new study published today in Nature has found that X’s algorithm – the hidden system or “recipe” that governs which posts appear in your feed and in which order – shifts users’ political opinions in a more conservative direction.

Led by Germain Gauthier from Bocconi University in Italy, it is a rare, real-world randomised experimental study on a major social media platform. And it builds on a growing body of research that shows how these platforms can shape people’s political attitudes.

Two different algorithms

The researchers randomly assigned 4,965 active US-based X users to one of two groups.

The first group used X’s default “For You” feed. This features an algorithm that selects and ranks posts it thinks users will be more likely to engage with, including posts from accounts that they don’t necessarily follow.

The second group used a chronological feed. This only shows posts from accounts users follow, displayed in the order they were posted. The experiment ran for seven weeks during 2023.

Users who switched from the chronological feed to the “For You” feed were 4.7 percentage points more likely to prioritise policy issues favoured by US Republicans (for example, crime, inflation and immigration). They were also more likely to view the criminal investigation into US President Donald Trump as unacceptable.

They also shifted in a more pro-Russia direction in regards to the war in Ukraine. For example, these users became 7.4 percentage points less likely to view Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy positively, and scored slightly higher on a pro-Russian attitude index overall.

The researchers also examined how the algorithm produced these effects.

They found evidence that the algorithm increased the share of right-leaning content by 2.9 percentage points overall (and 2.5 points among political posts), compared with the chronological feed.

It also significantly demoted the share of posts from traditional news organisations’ accounts while promoting or boosting posts from political activists.

One of the most concerning findings of the study is the longer-term effects of X’s algorithmic feed. The study showed the algorithm nudged users towards following more right-leaning accounts, and that the new following patterns endured even after switching back to the chronological feed.

In other words, turning the algorithm off didn’t simply “reset” what people see. It had a longer-lasting impact beyond its day-to-day effects.

One piece of a much bigger picture

This new study supports findings of similar studies.

For example, a study in 2022, before Elon Musk had bought Twitter and rebranded it as X, found the platform’s algorithmic systems amplified content from the mainstream political right more than the left in six out of the seven countries.

An experimental study from 2025 re-ranked X feeds to reduce exposure to content that expresses antidemocratic attitudes and partisan animosity. They found this shifted feelings towards their political opponents by more than two points on a 0–100 “feeling thermometer”. This is a shift the authors argued would have normally taken about three years to occur organically in the general population.

My own research offers another piece of evidence to this picture of algorithmic bias on X. Along with my colleague Mark Andrejevic, I analysed engagement data (such as likes and reposts) from prominent political accounts during the final stages of the 2024 US election.

Our findings unearthed a sudden and unusual spike in engagement with Musk’s account after his endorsement of Trump on July 13 – the day of the assassination attempt on Trump. Views on Musk’s posts surged by 138%, retweets by 238%, and likes by 186%. This far outstripped increases on other accounts.

After July 13, right-leaning accounts on X gained significantly greater visibility than progressive ones. The “playing field” for attention and engagement on the platform was tilted thereafter towards right-leaning accounts – a trend that continued for the remainder of the time period we analysed in that study.

Not a niche product

This matters because we are not talking about a niche product.

X has more than 400 million users globally. It has become embedded as infrastructure – a key source of political and social communication. And once technical systems become infrastructure, they can become invisible – like background objects that we barely think about, but which shape society at its foundations and can be exploited under our noses.

Think of the overpass bridges Robert Moses designed in New York in the 1930s. These seemed like inert objects. But they were designed to be very low, to exclude people of colour from taking buses to recreation areas in Long Island.

Similar to this, the design and governance of social media platforms also has real consequences.

The point is that X’s algorithms are not neutral tools. They are an editorial force, shaping what people know, whom they pay attention to, who the outgroup is and what “we” should do about or to them – and, as this new study shows, what people come to believe.

The age of taking platform companies at their word about the design and effects of their own algorithms must come to an end. Governments around the world – including in Australia where the eSafety Commissioner has powers to drive “algorithmic transparency and accountability” and require that platforms report on how their algorithms contribute to or reduce harms – need to mandate genuine transparency over how these systems work.

When infrastructure become harmful or unsafe, nobody bats an eye when governments do something to protect us. The same needs to happen urgently for social media infrastructures.

Timothy Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for the Discovery Project, ‘Understanding and Combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘.

– ref. A few weeks of X’s algorithm can make you more right-wing – and it doesn’t wear off quickly – https://theconversation.com/a-few-weeks-of-xs-algorithm-can-make-you-more-right-wing-and-it-doesnt-wear-off-quickly-276153

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ilayaraja Subramanian, Lecturer in Marketing, University of Canterbury

American artificial intelligence (AI) company Anthropic this month attracted applause – and a surge in users – for clever advertisements poking fun at its competition.

In the commercials, an AI assistant awkwardly breaks away mid-conversation to push products such as shoe insoles and dating services. “Ads are coming to AI”, the Super Bowl-tied spots warned, but not to Anthtropic’s own chatbot Claude.

The campaign quickly generated buzz because it played to peoples’ worries that inviting advertising into AI platforms which many of us now rely on – and confide in – risks blurring the line between helpful advice and paid influence.

But that anxiety, while understandable, overlooks how advertising already works across much of the digital world.

In many ways, ads based on our interactions with AI aren’t such a big leap from the kinds of targeted advertising that already dominate search engines, social media feeds and e-commerce platforms.

And if transparent and well-designed, the shift could help people complete tasks faster and keep these tools widely accessible.

AI’s access and equity headache

This month, OpenAI’s ChatGPT began testing adverts with users in the United States. The company assures us any ads will be clearly labelled, kept separate from answers and accompanied by privacy protections and user controls.

The stakes are high: ChatGPT now boasts 800 million weekly users and ranks as the internet’s fifth most visited website. It has operated largely ad-free since its launch three years ago and only about 5% of users pay a subscription.

With room to grow, OpenAI has strong incentives to find a sustainable model that protects trust without undermining what made the service so popular.

If indeed transparent and optional, its advertising could help solve a basic funding problem. In practice, a small paying group cannot carry the full burden forever.

A light, clearly labelled ad model is one way the wider user base could contribute indirectly – much as they already do via television, YouTube, search engines and many news websites.

That matters for access. Around one in six people worldwide already use generative AI, but adoption is uneven and a digital divide is widening between richer and poorer countries.

If wealthier nations move faster, sustainable business models can help spread access by keeping costs down for students, job seekers and small organisations in emerging economies.

The convenience of ‘contextual’ advertising

For everyday ChatGPT users, the main upside of ads is that they can reflect what is needed in the moment, rather than what a tracker infers from past browsing.

Traditional digital ads use cookies and cross-site tracking to guess people’s interests over time. Contextual advertising, by contrast, targets what is happening on the page or in the moment and is often seen as a more privacy-friendly alternative.

OpenAI says ads will be matched to the conversation and may use past chats and ad interactions. Users will be able to dismiss ads, see why they were shown one and delete ad data.

If those controls work as promised, relevance would come from the question being asked, not from tracking across other websites. Imagine asking: “I’m hosting friends. What are two easy Mexican dishes, and what ingredients do I need?”.

ChatGPT could give the recipe guidance first, then show a clearly labelled ad option, such as a local supermarket delivery link for the exact ingredients, or a sponsored meal kit that fits the budget and dietary needs. Instead of jumping between tabs, the user moves straight from decision to action.

For consumers, that is convenience. For advertisers, it is also efficiency, because the ad appears at the moment of genuine intent rather than being sprayed across the internet.

Another benefit is smoother communication. Conversational ads have the potential to function more like a shop assistant than a static banner. Instead of clicking away, opening tabs and filling in forms, follow-up questions can be asked in the same chat and personalised details returned quickly.

OpenAI suggests this could include sponsored listings that users can interact with in the chat. For instance, while planning a trip, a sponsored accommodation option might appear, allowing questions about availability, cancellation, location and total cost for specific dates and group size to be handled in one place.

Done well, this could reduce frustration and curb misleading advertising, because people can challenge vague claims and ask for specifics before spending money.

Trust, transparency and limits

None of this removes the risks. Advertisements should not be allowed to change what a trusted AI tool such as ChatGPT recommends. And because ads are currently being tested with only a small group of users, the full extent of those risks cannot yet be observed or properly assessed.

That is why transparency and separation are not cosmetic. They are safeguards.

For now, it may be tempting to treat “ad-free” as the only ethical position, as Anthropic’s new campaign implies. But the world is still early in this shift. These systems should be judged by what happens in practice – especially on transparency, user control and real protections against manipulation.

If those guardrails hold, it is worth considering the upside too: ads in AI tools could support access, reduce friction and help more people benefit from this powerful technology.

Ilayaraja Subramanian 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. Ads are coming to AI. Does that really have to be such a bad thing? – https://theconversation.com/ads-are-coming-to-ai-does-that-really-have-to-be-such-a-bad-thing-274955

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Marten Risius, Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Psychology, The University of Queensland

Online chat service Discord has announced it will begin testing age verification for some users, joining a growing list of platforms trying to work out who is actually behind the screen.

The move comes as governments around the world push for stronger protections of young people online. The United Kingdom and France have imposed age verification for visitors of adult content pages. Australia now mandates that social media platforms ensure their account holders are older than 16.

Many people feel immediately uneasy about online age or ID checks. Will the log-in process become more time consuming? Will proving how old we are mean giving up anonymity and force us to hand over sensitive documents to private tech firms?

Will mandatory age verification impact our ability to browse, speak and participate online, making us “transparent citizens” tracked by corporations or the government?

These concerns are not unfounded. In fact, research points to even more risks. Sharing identity-related data makes breaches or identity theft more likely. Age verification systems could be abused for surveillance or lead to discrimination, especially for marginalised groups.

However, our research shows it is possible to provide truly anonymous, safe age checks online.

Not all age assurance works the same

Age assurance is the umbrella term for all kinds of methods that can help determine someone’s age online. This includes age verification – proving the user’s age, often with an official ID.

How age assurance is put into practice differs vastly across jurisdictions and platforms. The Australian government demands firms must take “reasonable steps” to prevent kids from making social media accounts, but the age assurance methods can vary.

The government of France provides more guidance, but still leaves implementation of age proofs to third parties. The European Union is actively preparing a reference implementation for an age verification solution, albeit it has not put age restriction policies in place yet.

To keep things simple, platforms are increasingly turning to facial age estimation. Users are asked to scan their face so an algorithm can guess how old they are.

At first, this may sound less intrusive than showing a government-issued ID. In practice, it often requires handing over highly sensitive biometric data to private companies. Unlike a password, your face can’t be changed if the data is stolen. Such age estimation is also prone to errors.

There is a plethora of alternative age assurance tech. These include user behaviour analysis, payment-based verification, document scans (such as government-issued IDs), video-based verification services involving these documents, and electronic attestations – such as the electronic passports familiar from border control at airports.

There’s no need to share sensitive data

One highly secure approach allows users to prove a single fact – such as being over 18 – not only with high certainty, but without revealing their name, address, or even date of birth. It’s based on cryptographic digital attestations.

For example, the German eID exchanges data directly between a microprocessor in a person’s plastic “eID card” and the platform. The microprocessor proves it belongs to a government-issued eID via a cryptographic key, which is shared with 9,999 other eIDs. This means the only thing a platform learns is that one of 10,000 potential people signed up.

When the service sends the current date and minimum age required to the eID, the microprocessor uses the date of birth, computes the current age and simply responds whether the user is old enough.

The EU digital identity and Google wallets are working on a slightly different approach. It doesn’t rely on special microprocessors built into physical cards, but on hardware components common in mobile phones.

This makes the approach more broadly applicable. These solutions involve highly advanced cryptography that communicates to the platform that a person possesses a digital document proving they’re older than 18, but without revealing any further details.

As you can see, age verification systems can be designed with unlinkability at their core. That means neither the government nor the platform can track a user’s activities despite being able to accurately verify their age.

The real issue isn’t age verification – it’s who runs it

If any government is serious about age assurance, the technical design will matter more than the policy itself.

Privacy-friendly age verification is complex and expensive. It will require governments to invest in the technical details, ensuring the age verification is robust while meeting privacy expectations.

And the software code will need to be open-access to allow for peer review. Transparency is the strongest safeguard against false promises made by the government or hidden attacks by cyber criminals trying to steal the data.

Government involvement must also convincingly resist looming threats of “function creep”, where the scope of data capture through an age verification infrastructure can quickly be changed through political decisions. There is no technical safeguard against such abuse – and governments need to earn their citizens’ trust in future legislation.

Indeed, the stakes are high: a single data breach can easily destroy public trust. If citizens don’t trust the age verification tool, they may just circumvent age controls altogether, as has happened in France.

The bigger picture

The internet is entering a new phase. For years, platforms avoided knowing the age of their users. That appears no longer politically or socially sustainable.

The real choice is not between safety and privacy. It is between two very different technical paths. One path normalises biometric (face, fingerprint and similar) checks, expanding the amount of sensitive data handed to private companies.

The alternative uses advanced cryptographic solutions that confirm age while protecting anonymity.

Age verification does not have to end anonymous participation online. Done properly, it could be the technology that protects it.

Marten Risius receives funding through the Distinguished Professorship Program via the Bavarian Hightech Agenda from the Bavarian Ministry of Sciences and Arts. Marten was recipient of the Discovery of Early Career Researchers Award by the Australian Research Council.

Johannes Sedlmeir receives funding from WE BUILD, one of the two second-round large-scale pilot projects on the European Digital Identity Wallets launched by the European Commission. During his PhD and PostDoc, Johannes worked on digital identity-related research projects with Ministries in Germany and Luxembourg.

– ref. Age verification online can be done safely and privately. Here’s how – https://theconversation.com/age-verification-online-can-be-done-safely-and-privately-heres-how-276104

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern Studies, Australian National University; The University of Western Australia; Victoria University

While the world is focused on the fate of a ruined Gaza, Israel has accelerated its creeping annexation of the West Bank.

Israeli legislative moves, security operations, settlement expansion and support of settlers’ violence are forcing the Palestinians out of their lands at an unprecedented rate.

US President Donald Trump has publicly opposed Israel’s annexation of the occupied territory, but he may not be able to stop it – unless he acts now and acts decisively.

Creeping annexation

Last July, the Israeli parliament (Knesset) passed a resolution in support of the annexation of the West Bank. It was non-binding, but clearly signalled where the legislative body stood on the issue.

Then, when US Vice President JD Vance was visiting Israel in October, the Knesset approved two bills calling for the formal annexation of the territory. Vance called the move a “very stupid political stunt” intended to embarrass him.

The bills were aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s avowed opposition to the creation of an independent Palestinian state on his watch.

Then, earlier this month, the Israeli security cabinet approved a series of measures that furthered the de facto annexation of the West Bank.

The measures, pushed by the far-right finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, and Defence Minister Israel Katz, are designed to remove any “legal obstacles” to the expansion of Israeli power across the territory, in violation of international law.

The measures provide more immunity for Israelis – the settlers, in particular – to purchase and own land in the West Bank.

They also give the Israeli state control over some historical and religious sites and limit further the Palestinian Authority’s administrative functions in the zones that are supposed to be under its jurisdiction under the 1993 Oslo Accords.

Netanyahu’s broader ambitions

The moves came at a crucial time in US-Israel relations. In January, the Trump administration announced the start of phase two of the US-brokered ceasefire in Gaza. Immediately after the measures were approved, Netanyahu made his sixth visit to the United States in a year to ensure Trump remains aligned with his course of action.

Netanyahu wants the fate of the Gaza Strip to be shaped according to his vision of Israel’s interests. He has been very vocal about his ambition for a “Greater Israel” stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.

Netanyahu also remains adamant Israel stays the most powerful actor in the region. Israel has already degraded the capabilities of Hamas and Hezbollah, the two main regional proxies of its chief adversary, the Islamic Republic of Iran. It has also widened its military footprint in both Lebanon and Syria.

Now, Netanyahu is determined to see a favourable regime change in Tehran. While Trump wants a deal with Iran over its nuclear program, Netanyahu is significantly less supportive of such an outcome.

He has repeatedly stressed the need for a US-led military campaign to not only dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, but also degrade its missile capability and force it to severe ties with its proxies.

He regards this as the only way to remove the “existential threat” posed by the Iranian regime.

What will Trump do?

The new Israeli measures in the West Bank will no doubt embolden settlers to engage in more violent acts against the Palestinians. The stories coming out of the territory show how Israel is rapidly slicing away the Palestinians’ territorial, social and cultural existence.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) says more than 37,000 Palestinians were displaced in the West Bank in 2025, with record-high levels of violence.

The United Nations and the European Union have strongly condemned the new Israeli measures and settler violence.

However, Netanyahu and his extremist ministers have, as usual, brushed aside international criticisms and ignored the illegality of Israeli occupation under international law.

They have instead accelerated efforts to make the internationally backed two-state solution an impossibility. The recent measures help establish deeper “facts on the ground” that render the annexation of the West Bank a fait accompli. This would give Trump no other option but to go along with it.

Yet, Trump has the power and leverage to restrain Netanyahu. And he can stand firm behind his own stated opposition to West Bank annexation.

As an unpredictable, transactional leader, the president may even go so far as to attack Iran on behalf of Netanyahu in return for Netanyahu holding back from formal annexation of the West Bank.

Trump now faces the biggest tests of his presidency. The first is how he will manage Netanyahu, whom he has praised as a “war hero”. The second is how he will settle the conflict with Iran – whether it will be a deal or yet another devastating war.

Amin Saikal 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. Israel is accelerating its creeping annexation of the West Bank. Can Donald Trump stop it? – https://theconversation.com/israel-is-accelerating-its-creeping-annexation-of-the-west-bank-can-donald-trump-stop-it-276074

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Evelyn Parr, Research Fellow in Exercise Metabolism and Nutrition, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University

Intermittent fasting has become a buzzword in nutrition circles, with many people looking to it as a way to lose weight or improve their health.

But new research from the Cochrane Collaboration shows intermittent fasting is no more effective for weight loss than receiving traditional dietary advice or even doing nothing at all.

In this international review, researchers assessed 22 studies involving 1,995 adults who were classified as overweight (with a body mass index of 25–29.9 kg/m²) or obese (with a BMI of 30 kg/m² or above) to assess the effectiveness of intermittent fasting for up to 12 months.

The authors found, when compared to energy restricted dieting, intermittent fasting doesn’t seem to work for people who are overweight or obese and are trying to lose weight. However they note intermittent fasting may still be a reasonable option for some people.

Remind me, what’s intermittent fasting?

Intermittent fasting is a tool for weight management, which includes three main strategies:

• alternate day fasting, where every second day is reduced to low or no energy intake

• periodic fasting or the 5:2 diet, where one or two days of the week are spent with low or no energy intake

• time-restricted eating or the 16:8 diet, where daily energy intake is reduced to a shorter window, usually between eight and ten waking hours.

What did previous research show?

Previous reviews have found differences between types of intermittent fasting.

Alternate day fasting, for example, resulted in more weight loss when compared to time-restricted eating.

This is because participants who fasted every second day consumed about 20% less energy than those following time-restricted eating.

What did the Cochrane review find?

Cochrane review use gold-standard techniques to give an objective overview of the evidence. This review looked at 22 individual randomised controlled trials published between 2016 and 2024 from North America, Europe, China, Australia and South America.

The trials compared the outcomes of almost 2,000 adults who were classified as being overweight or obese. These participants either:

• received standard dietary advice, such as restricting calories or eating different types of foods

• practised intermittent fasting

• received either regular dietary advice, no intervention or were on a wait list.

The authors found:

1. Intermittent fasting was no better than getting dietary advice

The researchers found intermittent fasting and receiving dietary advice to restrict energy intake led to similar levels of weight loss.

This finding was based on 21 studies involving 1,713 people, with the researchers measuring the change from the participants’ starting weight.

Dietary advice (from registered dietitians or trained researchers) could include an eating plan focused on fruit, vegetables, whole grains and seafood, restricting calories, or any specific dietary advice for weight loss.

The amount of weight the participants lost ranged from a 10% loss to a 1% gain, with either intermittent fasting or dietary advice.

These findings are similar to several recent meta-analyses which found intermittent fasting is no better than dieting.

Previous research has found most of the alternate day fasting and periodic diet studies leads to about 6% to 7% weight loss. This is compared to very low energy “shake” diets (about 10%), GLP-1 medications (15% to 20%) and surgery (above 20%).

The review also found intermittent fasting likely makes little difference to a person’s quality of life, based on only three studies.

2. Intermittent fasting was no better than doing nothing

The researchers found intermittent fasting and no intervention led to similar levels of weight loss. This finding was based on six studies involving 448 people.

In the intermittent fasting studies, participants experienced about 5% weight loss. The “no intervention” or control group lost about 2% of their original weight.

In research, a 3% difference in weight loss is not considered clinically meaningful. That’s why the authors of this review concluded intermittent fasting is no more effective for weight loss than doing nothing at all.

However, the result for the “no intervention” condition could be due to the Hawthorne effect: the tendency for people to behave differently because they know they are being watched, such as in a clinical trial.

What are the review’s limitations?

There were few large, high-quality randomised controlled trials to draw on.

Only six studies were included in the part of the review which compared intermittent fasting and doing nothing. Two of these focused on time-restricted eating, which is arguably the least effective weight-loss strategy. One looked at the effects of fasting for one day per week. The other three were intermittent fasting studies, each with varying control groups, where some received guidance and others did not.

Also, the review only looked at studies where the interventions lasted between six and 12 months. It’s possible intermittent fasting strategies could be a long-term tool for weight maintenance. So we need to do more research, and ideally studies of longer duration.

What about the other health benefits of fasting?

Studies have found intermittent fasting can lower blood pressure, improve fertility, and reduce the incidence of metabolic syndrome which refers to a group of conditions that increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.

In one 2024 study, researchers found intermittent fasting may lead to changes in metabolism and the gut that restrict how cancer develops. Another study from 2025 found intermittent fasting could improve the metabolic health of shift workers.

So if you’re practising or considering intermittent fasting, the current evidence suggests it can be a safe and effective way to manage your weight.

But for any weight loss strategy to work, it needs to align with your personal preferences. And it’s best to consult a health-care professional before starting any new diet, especially if you have any underlying health conditions.

Evelyn Parr received funding from the Australian government’s Medical Research Future Fund and the Diabetes Australia Research Program for work on time-restricted eating.

– ref. Intermittent fasting doesn’t have an edge for weight loss, but might still work for some – https://theconversation.com/intermittent-fasting-doesnt-have-an-edge-for-weight-loss-but-might-still-work-for-some-276057

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jenna Imad Harb, Research Fellow, Australian National University

When Bad Bunny and his dancers scaled power poles during his Super Bowl performance, he wasn’t just entertaining millions. He was spotlighting how Puerto Rico’s chronic power outages are a legacy of its colonisation.

Puerto Rico is far from alone in this struggle – colonialism and geopolitical power imbalances have shaped access to electricity worldwide.

Puerto Rico has long suffered rolling blackouts lasting days and sometimes months. This leaves residents – especially vulnerable populations – without refrigeration, medical equipment, or air conditioning.

This isn’t just poor infrastructure management, though that is certainly an issue. It’s the ongoing legacy of colonial control over energy systems.

Colonial powers built energy systems designed to extract resources and profits for distant corporations and governments, not to serve local communities. As a result, local communities pay high costs for inadequate power. Similar patterns exist globally, from the Caribbean to the Middle East.

Colonial abandonment, not poor management

Puerto Rico’s chronic blackouts stem from what scholars call “energy colonialism”, where powerful countries and companies control the energy resources of less powerful countries or regions.

Puerto Rico became a US territory in 1898 but does not have voting representation in Congress. While under US responsibility, Puerto Ricans are denied the federal support granted to other US states.

After Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico in 2017, it took 11 months to restore the grid – the longest blackout in US history. Yet federal aid was drastically lower than for US states hit by hurricanes around the same period and “tens of billions short of the US$94.4 billion that disaster experts estimated is needed for a full recovery”. As Cecilio Ortiz García, co-founder of the University of Puerto Rico’s National Institute of Energy and Island Sustainability, explains:

the grid has become the poster child of the decay of the colonial system, its institutions and a very vulnerable population. This is colonial abandonment, not poor management.

Unreliable energy feeds hopelessness

Energy colonisation may manifest differently in different colonial contexts. Our research in Lebanon shows several ways colonial dynamics affect energy insecurity.

In Lebanon, energy access has been undermined by Israel’s deliberate targeting of electricity infrastructure in its strikes in southern Lebanon following its invasion of Gaza. It is also undermined by political corruption rooted in colonial governance structures, such as politicians maintaining ties to private diesel generator companies that profit when the public electricity grid fails.

When France colonised Lebanon in the early 1900s, it deliberately designed a political system that divided power along religious lines, a structure still in place today. This system was created to keep Lebanon weak and dependent.

It has fostered political gridlock and corruption, with politicians profiting from failing energy systems rather than fixing them. The state’s dependence on international donors – and donors’ hesitation to subsidise energy infrastructure – has also reinforced energy poverty for residents.

Reliable energy is essential for survival

Colonial energy development dynamics are exemplified by Pacific struggles to access climate finance. Pacific countries divert significant resources to become accredited to key climate funds, in the hope of directly accessing finance. However, both the practice of mobilising finance through intermediaries, and prioritising debt finance – further indebting poor regions – ultimately channels vital resources away from Pacific nations.

As climate disasters intensify, and reliable energy becomes ever more essential for survival, recognising the colonial roots of global energy systems is key. A critical site for recognition, as argued by Puerto Rican energy advocate Juan Rosario is ownership: “the most important thing in this energy revolution is who owns it and who rules”.

Energy justice – grounded in ownership, self‑determination, and equality — must be more nuanced. We need to ask: Who gets to own the energy systems? Who makes the decisions? Who gets the money? Right now, big corporations and governments control energy. Real energy justice means communities run their own power systems and keep the benefits for themselves. Thus, energy justice cannot focus solely on technical fixes. It must also confront the structures of power that shape who benefits from energy systems and who is left vulnerable.

Our research in Lebanon shows how these experiences of energy colonialism are felt – in the wellbeing of communities, and in individual emotions and bodies. In the humanitarian community in Lebanon, people are unable to escape extreme temperature during energy insecurity and blackouts. Feelings of hopelessness and frustration come from persistent energy poverty.

Recognising joy and strength

There are no easy solutions, but we can still take a key lesson from Bad Bunny’s performance. It is vital to call out the structures of power his performance made visible. Bad Bunny’s performance also demonstrated the joy that can be found, even momentarily, from shifting focus from colonial conditions to the strength and resilience of marginalised communities.

Our research showed this strength should be supported and not taken for granted. One participant in Lebanon said:

“Do people have the choice not to be resilient? Like, is there a counterfactual Lebanon where people are not resilient and they suffer more than what they’re suffering now? How do you determine what resilience is versus wanting to live your life? It’s just you waking up and having to find a way.”

Jenna Imad Harb works on a project funded by the Rio Tinto Centre for Future Materials.

Kirsty Anantharajah 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. How Bad Bunny’s power pole dance spotlighted the colonial legacy of energy poverty – https://theconversation.com/how-bad-bunnys-power-pole-dance-spotlighted-the-colonial-legacy-of-energy-poverty-275794

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, Adelaide University

Osteoarthritis is a common degenerative joint disease that causes pain, stiffness and swelling, and reduces your range of motion. It often affects the knees, hips and hands, although it can also occur in other joints throughout the body.

If you’ve been diagnosed with osteoarthritis, your doctor has probably recommended exercise. This has become standard treatment advice in recent years.

However, a new review suggests exercise might not be as beneficial as first thought.

But when you take a closer look at the study, there are reasons to be cautious. So it shouldn’t prompt you to ditch your exercise regimen.

What the review did

The research team conducted an “umbrella review” – an overview of systematic reviews, which collate and analyse the findings from individual studies to answer a specific question. Reviewing previously published systematic reviews provides an even bigger snapshot of a given research topic.

After searching thousands of studies, they included five major systematic reviews (comprised of 100 individual studies, with 8,631 patients) before adding another 28 recent trials (involving another 4,360 patients).

Using this data, they looked at the effect of exercise on knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis, and compared it to several alternatives, including doing nothing, placebo (fake) treatments, education, manual therapy, painkillers, injections and surgery.

---

Read more:
What’s the difference between osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis?

---

What did they find?

Compared to doing nothing and placebos, they found that exercise resulted in small reductions in pain in the hip, knee and hand: between 6 and 12 points on a 100-point scale.

However, exercise did not seem to improve function any more than either of these comparisons.

For knee and hip osteoarthritis, there was evidence that exercise was just as effective at reducing pain and improving function as medicines such as ibuprofen and corticosteroids, which are injected into the joint to reduce inflammation. These also reduced pain by around 5–10%.

The researchers concluded exercise was less effective at improving pain and function than a total joint replacement in people with knee and hip osteoarthritis.

What were the limitations?

First, the authors lumped all types of exercise together. This means strength training, aerobic exercise, stretching, aquatic exercise and tai chi were all considered to be the same.

This is crucial, because we know not all exercise is created equal. Previous reviews have shown, for example, that aerobic exercise might be best for reducing pain and function in people with knee osteoarthritis, while stretching was least effective.

Similarly, the authors didn’t consider the clinical status of the patients. Evidence has shown people with more severe pain and worse function at the start of an intervention see better responses to exercise than those with less pain and good function.

Second, the review treated both supervised and unsupervised exercise the same.

However, research shows supervised training results in much better outcomes than unsupervised – likely because a trainer is there to help push the patient along.

Third, the authors didn’t account for the duration of the exercise, and most study periods were quite short: around 12 weeks.

It’s likely that sticking to an exercise regime over the long term will have better results, leading to a larger scope for improvement than if you just did something for a few weeks.

As such, the results of this review may not accurately reflect the benefits of exercise in people with osteoarthritis who commit to consistent exercise as an ongoing part of their weekly routine (which is often recommended).

Finally, the review didn’t account for the dose of exercise the studies used. Improvements in pain and function seem to increase with total weekly exercise in people with osteoarthritis. One review, for example, found the optimal benefits occurred at around 150 minutes of moderate intensity exercise per week.

These limitations suggest this new review likely undersells the benefits of exercise for osteoarthritis.

Less pain and better physical and mental health

Putting aside the limitations of the review, the small reductions in pain the review reports might still have a positive impact on someone’s life. A 10% reduction in pain could make a meaningful difference to your ability to move around, work, socialise and care for others.

The review also found exercise can reduce pain to the same extent as non-steriodal anti-inflammatory medications and corticosteroids – without the side-effects or the costs.

Exercise can also improve heart health, enhance your mood, help with weight management and reduce the risk of chronic diseases, such as cancer and diabetes.

These factors can have a huge impact on your health and happiness.

What should you do now?

Based on the findings of this new review, you should be confident that any type of exercise will lead to some degree of pain relief.

However, based on prior evidence, it’s likely you can get even greater overall health benefits from exercising if you stick with it.

The best type of exercise is the one that gets done. If you enjoy being outdoors and walking, then this is going to be a great choice as it will improve all aspects of your health as well as reduce pain.

And if pain permits, don’t be afraid to occasionally challenge yourself by upping the intensity to the point where holding a conversation starts to become difficult.

If going to the gym is more your thing, lifting weights will also bring significant overall health benefits – especially if you stick to it long term.

The authors 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. Does exercise really work for osteoarthritis? – https://theconversation.com/does-exercise-really-work-for-osteoarthritis-276058

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ian A. Wright, Associate Professor in Environmental Science, Western Sydney University

There’s little worse as a pool lifeguard than hearing the words “code brown” come through your radio. For swimmers on a hot day, there’s also little worse than being told to immediately get out of the water because there’s poo floating in the pool.

During hot summers, public pools in Australia are often crowded with families and children. The risk of “code brown” incidents at your local pool is probably substantial.

So how is a public pool cleaned after poo or vomit accidentally ends up in the water – and how long before it’s safe to get back in?

The short answer is: it depends. Let’s dive in.

The dangers of poo in the pool

Contaminated swimming pools are hazardous for swimmers. They have been linked to outbreaks of “crypto”, short for cryptosporidiosis. It’s a highly contagious gastric illness and has unpleasant symptoms including diarrhoea, stomach cramps, fever, nausea and vomiting.

New crypto cases are monitored as it’s a notifiable disease in Australia. If multiple cases are traced to a swimming pool, the pool will be closed for extra cleaning and chlorine treatment.

There are other pathogens, such as viruses, that can infect swimmers using pools exposed to poo or vomit incidents. For example, one study in the United States found rapid onset vomiting and diarrhoea (acute gastroenteritis) affect 28% of swimmers who’d used a norovirus-contaminated swimming pool.

Dealing with an ‘aquatic incident’

Responses for a code brown or vomit follow the official health guidelines for public swimming pools under state or territory public health laws.

However, the specific protocol for the staff will also differ depending on the age of the pool, the type of filtration system, chemicals used for disinfecting the water, and … the type of the poo.

Broadly speaking, if a solid stool or vomit is found, the pool is closed and the poo or vomit must be scooped out using a pool scoop or bucket. Then, it should be discarded down the sewer.

When all the particulates have been removed, a pool vacuum is placed in the water for additional cleaning, and the chlorine concentration is raised for an extended period to disinfect the entire pool.

A pool can be reopened once all of the water has been through the pool’s filtration system. This is known as pool “turnover”. How long this takes depends on the age of the pool and its filtration system. Older pools may take eight hours or longer, but newer pools can be as quick as 25 minutes.

Generally, when staff have followed all the proper guidelines, you can assume the water is safe to swim again when the pool is reopened.

Sometimes, you need superchlorination

The protocol changes for loose stool or diarrhoea. The pool is still closed to the public and the particles are scooped out as best as possible.

Then, the chlorine levels are raised and kept at a higher-than-normal level for a bit over a day. This is called shock superchlorination. After this the chlorine levels fall back to safe swimming levels, the other pool chemicals are rebalanced, and the pool reopened.

Chlorine is one of the most common types of disinfectants used in public swimming pools. You might hear lifeguards talk about free chlorine and total chlorine when referring to pool water quality.

Free chlorine is the “active” part of chlorine. Once it makes contact and kills potentially harmful germs (such as bacteria, protozoa or virus), the chlorine is “inactivated” upon reacting with various compounds, and turns into combined chlorine.

In fact, that strong chlorine smell around swimming pools comes from combined chlorine products called chloramines. These are produced when free chlorine reacts with substances such as urine or perspiration in the water.

Lifeguards also monitor pool water quality throughout the day, performing manual checks and keeping an eye on automatic measurements.

On busy days chlorine might be checked every three hours to ensure levels are maintained within specific ranges to maintain optimal pool water quality. This is known as “balancing the water”.

Don’t go to the pool when sick

It’s important to take precautions when visiting a pool to ensure that you and everyone around you stays healthy during and after your visit.

The best way to do this is to not visit the pool if you’re feeling unwell or have had diarrhoea in the past two weeks, or if you have been diagnosed with cryptosporidiosis or infections such as E. coli, shigella or viruses.

Swimming can be fun and exciting for kids who might forget about a bathroom break. Parents should take their babies and toddlers to the toilet every 20–30 minutes to prevent accidents from occurring.

For babies and toddlers, swim nappies are encouraged to prevent accidental code browns. However, the disposable option are usually not effective at containing urine or poo. Reusable swim nappies are a far better option, designed to provide a snug fit.

If you see a poo or vomit at the pool, get out of the water and tell a lifeguard or staff member immediately. Then, follow all directions given by staff members and seek medical attention if you feel unwell in the days following the incident.

Ian A. Wright receives research and consulting funding from industry, local and state government bodies.

Katherine Warwick receives funding from industry, local and state government bodies. Katherine is also a former lifeguard and learn to swim teacher and has personally responded to numerous “code browns” during her time in the industry.

– ref. After ‘code brown’, how long before the pool is safe again? Water quality experts explain – https://theconversation.com/after-code-brown-how-long-before-the-pool-is-safe-again-water-quality-experts-explain-274856