Trust Me, I'm An Expert

DAVID CROSLING/AAPCaptain James Cook arrived in the Pacific 250 years ago, triggering British colonisation of the region. We’re asking researchers to reflect on what happened and how it shapes us today. You can see other stories in the series here and an interactive here. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander listeners should be aware the podcast accompanying this story contains the names of people who are deceased. It’s 250 years since Captain James Cook set foot in Australia, and there’s a growing push to fully acknowledge the violence of Australia’s colonial past. On today’s episode of the podcast, historian Kate Darian-Smith of the University of Tasmania explains that the way Australia has commemorated Cook’s arrival has changed over time – from military displays in 1870 to waning interest in Cook in the 1950s, followed by the fever-pitch celebrations of 1970. Now, though, a more nuanced debate is required, she says, adding that it’s time to discuss the violence that Cook’s crew meted out to Indigenous people after stepping ashore at Botany Bay. “I think discussing those violent moments is quite confronting for many Australians, but also sits within wider discussions about Aboriginal rights and equality in today’s Australia,” Darian-Smith told The Conversation’s Phoebe Roth. In her companion essay here, co-authored with Katrina Schlunke, Darian-Smith argues many of the popular “re-enactments” of national “foundation moments” in Australia’s past have elements of fantasy, compressing time and history into palatable narratives for mainstream Australia. New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Podcast episode recorded by Phoebe Roth and edited by Sophia Morris. Tasfilm report on the 1970 commemorations of Cook’s arrival. 1970 news report of protest. Lead image David Crosling/AAP Read more: As we celebrate the rediscovery of the Endeavour let's acknowledge its complicated legacy

Uncle Fred Deeral as little old man in the film The Message, by Zakpage, to be shown at the National Museum of Australia in April. Nik Lachajczak of Zakpage, Author provided (No reuse)Captain James Cook arrived in the Pacific 250 years ago, triggering British colonisation of the region. We’re asking researchers to reflect on what happened and how it shapes us today. You can see other stories in the series here and an interactive here. Editor’s note: This is an edited transcript of an interview with John Maynard for our podcast Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains names of deceased people. There are a multitude of Aboriginal oral memories about Captain James Cook, right across the continent. As the research from Deborah Bird Rose shows, many Aboriginal people in remote locations are certainly under the impression that Cook came there as well, shooting people in a kind of Cook-led invasion of Australia. Many of these communities, of course, never met James Cook; the man never even went there. But the deep impact of James Cook that spread across the country and he came to represent the bogeyman for Aboriginal Australia. Even back in the Protection and Welfare Board days, a government car would turn up and Aboriginal people would be running around screaming, “Lookie, lookie, here comes Cookie!” I wrote about Uncle Ray Rose, sadly recently departed, who’d had a stroke. Someone said, “How do you feel?” And he said, “No good. I’m Captain Cooked.” Cook, wherever he went up the coast, was giving names where names already existed. Yuin oral memory in the south coast of NSW gives the example of what they called Gulaga and Cook called “Mount Dromedary”: […] that name can be seen as the first of the changes that come for our people […] Cook’s maps were very good, but they did not show our names for places. He didn’t ask us. Cook has been incorporated into songs, jokes, stories and Aboriginal oral histories right across the country. Why? I think it’s an Aboriginal response to the way we’ve been taught about our history. Read more: Captain Cook wanted to introduce British justice to Indigenous people. Instead, he became increasingly cruel and violent Myth-making persists but a shift is underway I came through a school system of the 50s and 60s, and we weren’t weren’t even mentioned in the history books except as a people belonging to the Stone Age or as a dying race. It was all about discoverers, explorers, settlers and Phar Lap or Don Bradman. But us Aboriginal people? Not there. We had this high exposure of the public celebration of Cook, the statues of Cook, the reenactments of Cook – it was really in your face. For Aboriginal people, how do we make sense of all of this, faced with the reality of our experience and the catastrophic impact? We’ve got to make sense of it the best way we can, and I think that’s why Cook turns up in so many oral histories. I think wider Australia is moving towards a more balanced understanding of our history. Lots of people now recognise the richest cultural treasure the country possesses is 65,000 years of Aboriginal cultural connection to this continent. That’s unlike anywhere else in the world. I mean no disrespect, but 250 years is a drop in a lake compared to 65,000 years. From our perspective, in fact, we’ve always been here. Our people came out of the Dreamtime of the creative ancestors and lived and kept the Earth as it was in the very first day. With global warming, rising sea levels, rising temperatures and catastrophic storms, Aboriginal people did keep the Earth as it was in the very first day to ensure that it was passed to each surviving generation. There was going to be a (now-cancelled) circumnavigation of Australia in the official proceedings this year, which the prime minister supported. But James Cook didn’t circumnavigate Australia. He only sailed up the east coast. So that’s creating more myths again, which is a senseless way to go. A painting of Captain Cook and the Endeavour journal on display at the National Library of Australia. AAP/ALAN PORRITT ‘With the consent of the Natives to take possession’ Personally, I have high regard for James Cook as a navigator, as a cartographer, and certainly as an inspiring captain of his crew. He encouraged incredible loyalty among those that sailed with him on those three voyages. And that has to be recognised. But against that, of course, is the reality that he was given secret instructions by the Navy to: With the consent of the Natives to take possession of the convenient situations in the country in the name of the king of Great Britain. Well, consent was never given. When they went ashore at Botany Bay, two Aboriginal men brandished spears and made it quite clear they didn’t want him there. Those men were wounded and Cook was one of those firing a musket. There was no gaining any consent when he sailed on to Possession Island and planted that flag down. Totally the opposite, in fact. And the most insightful viewpoint is from Cook himself, who wrote that: all they seem’d to want was for us to be gone. Cook’s background gave him insight James Cook wasn’t your normal British naval officer of that time period. To get into such a position, you normally had to be born into the right family, to come from money and privilege. James Cook was none of those things. He came from a poor family. His father was a labourer. Cook got to where he was by skill, endeavour, and, unquestionably, because he was a very smart man and brilliant at sea. But it’s also from that background that he’s able to offer insight. There’s an incredible quotation of Cook’s where he says of Aboriginal people: They live in a Tranquillity which is not disturb’d by the Inequality of Condition… they live in a warm and fine Climate and enjoy a very wholsome Air. Now, Cook is comparing what he is seeing in Australia with life back Britain, where there is an incredible amount of inequality. London, at the time, was filthy. Sewerage pouring through the streets. Disease was rife. Underprivilege is everywhere. In Australia, though, Cook sees what to him looks like this incredible egalitarian society and it makes an impact on him because of where he comes from. But deeper misunderstandings persisted. In what’s now called Cooktown there are, at first, amicable relationships with the Guugu Yimithirr people, but when they come aboard the Endeavour they see this incredible profusion of turtles that the crew has captured. They’re probably thinking, “these are our turtles.” They would quite happily share some of those turtles but the Bristish response is: you get none. So the Guugu Yimithirr people go off the ship and set the grass on fire. Eventually, there’s a kind of peace settlement but the incident reveals a complete blindness on the part of the British to the idea of reciprocity in Aboriginal society. Read more: 'They are all dead': for Indigenous people, Cook's voyage of 'discovery' was a ghostly visitation A collision of catastrophic proportions The impact of 1770 has never eased for Aboriginal people. It was a collision of catastrophic proportions. The whole impact of 1788 – of invasion, dispossession, cultural destruction, occupation onto assimilation, segregation – all of these things that came after 1770. Anything you want to measure – Aboriginal health, education, employment, housing, youth suicide, incarceration – we have the worst stats. That has been a continuation, a reality of the failure of government to recognise what has happened in the past and actually do something about it in the present to fix it for the future. We’ve had decades and decades of governments saying to us, “We know what’s best for you.” But the fact is that when it comes to Aboriginal well being, the only people to listen to are Aboriginal people and we’ve never been put in the position. We’ve been raising our voices for a long time now, but some people see that as a threat and are not prepared to listen. An honest reckoning of the reality of Cook and what came after won’t heal things overnight. But it’s a starting point, from which we can join hands and walk together toward a shared future. A balanced understanding of the past will help us build a future – it is of critical importance. New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Marimba On the Loose by Daniel Birch, from Free Music Archive. Podcast episode recorded and edited by Sunanda Creagh. Lead image Uncle Fred Deeral as little old man in the film The Message, a film by Zakpage, to be shown at the National Museum of Australia in April. Nik Lachajczak of Zakpage.

ShutterstockIn today’s episode, Clare Collins, a Professor in Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Newcastle, explains how our diets might need to change depending on what stage of life we’re in. The Conversation’s Phoebe Roth started by asking: what should kids be eating and how much should parents worry about children eating vegetables? An edited transcript is below. New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Podcast episode recorded by Phoebe Roth and edited by Sophia Morris. Lead image Shutterstock Edited transcript Clare Collins: Parents worry so much about what children eat. But the rule of thumb is if they’re growing well, then you don’t need to worry. They are eating enough food. And the way you know if they’re growing well is: if you take their baby book or you have a growth chart on your wall and you plot their height and weight regularly, you’ll be able to see if they’re following one of the lines on the growth chart. And that’s the best indicator. The other thing that’s worth remembering is that a well child won’t starve themselves. But for children, their appetite is more variable than an adult. With us, we go, “Well, 12 o'clock, better eat lunch,” or “Oh, I’m awake, better have breakfast now because I’m going to be busy at work later.” But for children, they’re much more responsive to their internal cues. And the younger the child, the more variable their appetite. So a typical thing is, a two or three year old might eat a massive breakfast and tomorrow they don’t eat any. At daycare, they might eat a huge lunch or none at all. And then the same thing happens at dinner. So if your child’s in daycare, you might want to look in the book or ask the staff, did they eat afternoon tea and lunch today? And that’ll give you a little bit of a guide as to whether you should be encouraging them to eat a little bit more dinner or just go, well, they had just had a massive afternoon tea, so they’re not really going to be hungry. The other thing with children around the evening meal is that they often run out of steam by the end of the day. So having the evening meal as early as is practical. And for a young child, that may mean they’re having their dinner at five o'clock. And then what they eat at the family meal time is an optional extra. Because if you make them wait till 6 or 7pm, they’re over it and dinner becomes a nightmare. The other thing that we know about kids, in terms of should we worry about them not eating vegetables, is we’ve actually done some research on this. And we found for kids around the age of three, the biggest predictor of their vegetable intake was not what mum had eaten in pregnancy. It was actually what the parents were eating now. So if you really want your children to eat heaps of veggies, it’s monkey-see-monkey-do, then that means we’ve got to look at how much we love our broccoli, mum and dad. And then that will make a big difference. The other factor that comes into vegetable intake is genetics. And about 25% of people are what are called “super tasters”. That means they have got extra taste buds. And I wrote an article about this on The Conversation, actually. And so they taste things like the brassicas family – so Brussels sprouts, cauliflower – they taste it as more bitter than people who were either, not super tasters or, you know, have less taste buds. But more good news: even if you’re a super taster, if you don’t give up and you have repeated exposure, you even overcome that. So there’s no excuse for not liking your cauliflower. Read more: How much food should my child be eating? And how can I get them to eat more healthily? Phoebe Roth: That’s really interesting. I had no idea about a lot of that. So you started to touch on my next question, but I wonder if there are any other tips you’ve got. I was going to ask, what does the evidence say works for developing healthy eating habits during childhood or for kids if you’re worried perhaps they’re not eating as well as they should be. Clare Collins: The key thing for developing healthy eating habits in childhood is not giving up and trying not to stress. So really accepting there is variability. Studies have been done on toddler intake and shown that over 24 hours they pretty much eat about the same total energy intake. But if you look meal to meal, hugely variable, like I mentioned. The other key time when I think parents, you know, the food wars can start around 18 months and then people go, you know, “the terrible twos, they just never eat anything!” Well, if you want to avoid the food wars, then around 18 months, just step back a little bit and observe how much food is your child usually eating, because up until 18 months, babies have tripled their birth weight. So, you know, born around, say you’re around three kilos, well around six months you’ll be six kilos and around 18 months you’ll be nine kilos. Now, if in the next 18 months you tripled your birth weight again, what would that be? Nine, 18, 36 kilos. Around that. So around 18 months, depending on a child’s activity, they can actually go through a period of time where their energy needs are relatively less and you are going “No, last month they’d eat a whole punnet of blueberries!” and then you may start trying to force feed them. That’s where the beginnings of the food wars can start. So, trusting, like I said, that a well child will not starve themselves. It can be different if the child has medical requirements and need for a therapeutic diet. That’s a whole separate kettle of fish and you’d be needing to talk to your GP, maybe be referred to a dietitian for specific problems or if there’s actual feeding problems, a speech pathologist. So for the average child, it is about exposure, letting them feed themselves, not force feeding them and rewarding the behaviour that you want to see. So picture this: dinner time at the table. One child chasing those veggies around the plate with a fork and the other child eating up the foods that they’re really hungry for. If you focus on the child doing the “right thing” – you know, “I love the way, Jodi, you’re eating that broccoli and carrots,” rather than, “hey, Sammy, you’re going to sit there til every pea has disappeared off your plate” – well, then you’re reinforcing that vegetables are disgusting. So if you focus on the behaviours you want to see, then the other children start to recognise that, “oh, I only get attention if I’m doing the ‘right thing’. ” So reward the behaviour you want to see. Most of the dinner is consumed in 20 minutes. So don’t make the meals drawn out. And for kids with a smaller appetite, having healthy snacks will make up for what’s not eaten within 20 minutes. Read more: Five things parents can do to improve their children's eating patterns Phoebe Roth: Okay, great. And today we’re discussing, obviously, the Australian Dietary Guidelines and sort of adapting diet at each stage of life. And so I wanted to know at which of life’s different stages might our dietary needs change? We’ve now talked about kids, but what about, say, for pregnant women, women going through menopause and any others? Clare Collins: Okay. For boys and girls, their dietary needs stay about the same until adolescence. And then that’s the first time the next alarm bells ring. Once girls start menstruating then their iron requirements are much, much greater. Boys, if they’re super active and they have a big increase in lean body mass – so it’s kind of like, you know, if you go from a little car to a big car, you need a lot more fuel – so for boys, all of a sudden they’re eating a lot more food. And meeting those nutritional requirements of adolescence is important because adolescence is also the time when teenagers typically experiment with different types of diets, you know, so they might be on a vegetarian diet or a vegan diet. So just keeping an eye on that. The key nutrients are iron – and you can get that from vegetarian foods and great articles on The Conversation about that, by the way. And there’s also articles on The Conversation about adolescents and another typical issue that arises at adolescence, where parents are going “I wonder if this is a dietary problem” is diet and acne. And I’ve actually written on that for The Conversation. And your nutrient needs for women change again during pregnancy and breastfeeding. The growing baby is a pretty good sponge. So it’s really the mum’s nutritional status that’s most at risk and the baby will be doing its best to grow with whatever fuel’s available. But to optimise the baby’s growth and development, you do want to have a nutritious dietary pattern. But you don’t need as much extra food and nutrients as you think. Basically, it’s equivalent to an extra tub of yoghurt and a salad sandwich to meet your extra requirements. But some diet-related problems do kick off in pregnancy like heartburn or developing constipation. And, you know, pregnant women and this happened to me as well, during pregnancy, go, hey, how come this is happening? Well, during pregnancy, there are hormonal changes to essentially slow down your transit time in your gut to give your body the best chance of getting any nutrients out of the food so to support the pregnancy. And so eating healthily in pregnancy is really important, but you may need a boost in your dietary fibre intake. And one of the articles I’ve written for The Conversation is on how to manage constipation. And there’s a whole hierarchy of nutrition things you can do. And beyond that, then you really do need to mention it to your obstetrician or your GP in case you need some other type of like medicinal help. And then it’s got to make sure it’s something that’s safe for pregnancy. And you do need to talk to them about that. Read more: Health Check: what to eat and avoid during pregnancy Phoebe Roth: Sure. Are there any other life stages where you might need to think about changing your diet? What if, say, you develop a particular health condition? Clare Collins: If you develop a particular health condition, then absolutely. The most common diet-related health conditions in Australia is type 2 diabetes. And some people are now being diagnosed with pre-diabetes, which is like an alarm bell and gives you a chance to change your dietary patterns and your lifestyle behaviours like physical activity so that you don’t go on to develop type 2 diabetes. And then the other one is heart disease. Both of those have dietary components. So for type 2 diabetes, you’re likely to moderate the type and amount of carbohydrate. And for heart disease, there’s a whole range of bioactive foods that you can boost your intake of – whole grains, vegetables and fruit, reducing your saturated fat intake. And, you know, you can find articles about all of those things on The Conversation. But if you read those and you go, oh, wow, it’s way more complex than I thought or I really would like some personalised advice, then ask your GP to refer you to an Accredited Practising Dietitian and get a personalised plan. Phoebe Roth: Yeah, absolutely. And the other one is menopause. I know you’re writing an article for us coming up on menopause and whether there are specific things you need to keep in mind regarding your diet. Clare Collins: Menopause is really unfair because one of my colleagues, Lauren Williams, who’s co-authoring the article and she’s from Griffith University up there on the Gold Coast, is her whole PhD research was on this topic and she studied the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women’s Health and followed the women as they transitioned through menopause. And the average weight gain is about two and a half kilos. But even that is not the most unfair aspect of menopause. What she discovered is that there’s no discount, if you like, on gaining weight, if you lived a healthy lifestyle already, that all women are prone to weight gain during menopause. And it’s a combination of the hormonal changes amplified by life changes. And some of those life changes are that for most women, the physical work actually reduces at that time. You know, the house might be less people living in your house and you don’t have to do as much housework. For many women, you have more disposable income. So you actually can go out a little bit more, spend more money on eating out. And the other thing is it’s a life stage where alcohol intake increases in women. You know, the perfect storm. You know, you had this lovely, healthy lifestyle and then you gained weight. But what she also found, which is the important message, is that during that menopausal transition, women who changed something, they went, “Right. I’m going to beat this weight gain.” And they decided to eat more vegetables or develop new, healthier recipes or walk a lot more. They did not gain that average two point, 2.5-ish kilos. As much as I really think that sucks that we gain weight during menopause, I’m really pleased to know that it’s not inevitable, but it’s kind of like, you know, it’s like having to do a spring clean on your life stage patterns, on your dietary patterns and on your physical activity. And you can get through menopause in a healthy weight and with a healthy lifestyle and be healthier. But we have to be on guard. So unfair. Read more: Health Check: six tips for losing weight without fad diets Phoebe Roth: So in the healthy eating side of things, would that just be sort of following the Australian Dietary Guidelines? Clare Collins: Well, yes, but we need to make a little note of caution about the Dietary Guidelines. And that is not many people eat like the Australian Dietary Guidelines. In fact, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare modelled what would happen if people did eat five serves of vegetables and two serves of fruit and had their whole grains and used reduced fat dairy and, you know, chose the leanest forms of protein. They model that if everyone in Australia tomorrow started eating like the recommendations found in the Australian Dietary Guidelines, that heart disease rates would drop by 62% and that diabetes rates would drop by – type 2 diabetes rates, I should say – would drop by around 40%. That’s not going to happen. People aren’t going to do that. And we know that only 3 out of 100 Australians eat five serves of vegetables a day. So, yes, definitely eat more like the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating and the Australian Dietary Guidelines, but a good place you can start is the Healthy Eating Quiz. This is a short quiz that takes less than 10 minutes to do. It’s free and it’s online. It rates your dietary patterns compared to recommendations in the Australian Dietary Guidelines. And that now links to a really fun website – we think it’s fun anyway because we invented it – called No Money, No Time. It’s got recipe recommendations to match with your Healthy Eating Quiz report. We’ve set up some fun filters on there. So if you’ve only got a basic kitchen and you’ve got a microwave and just one pot, you can filter it for recipes matching your kitchen equipment. And we also added this other filter that allows you to say what your healthy lifestyle goals are. And we’ve catered for all ages on that. Some people told us their goal was to have glowing skin. And some people said, I want to do better in my sport. And some people have said I want to manage my weight. So you can further tailor the recipes for that. So No Money, No Time and the Healthy Eating Quiz. And that’s our way of trying to help Australians eat a little bit more healthy and feel better and have their health improve as well. Read more: Got pre-diabetes? Here's five things to eat or avoid to prevent type 2 diabetes Phoebe Roth: I am already keen to jump on that straight after this and give it a try. Great. So the Dietary Guidelines, would you say they’re a really good resource and reference point, but possibly not a one size fits all approach? Clare Collins: Absolutely. And there are some resources on the government websites called Eat for Health, and there are some resources on that. And they are designed for the predominantly healthy Australian population while recognising that overweight and obesity are relatively common and that people are commonly seeking extra advice for things like type 2 diabetes and heart disease. There’s certainly a good first place to stop. But as I mentioned, you may need extra specialised help if you have some of those common chronic diseases. And a good place to start to find out is with a health check up with your general practitioner who can do a heart health check and check your blood pressure. And you know, if you don’t have scales at home, they can do a check on your weight. But more important than that is checking on your blood to see what your cholesterol level is and whether your blood sugar levels are high, indicating you’re at a higher risk for type 2 diabetes. Phoebe Roth: So what do people need to consider to ensure they’re following the right diet for their individual circumstances or for their stage of life? Clare Collins: I think the key thing, when it comes to diet-related health or nutrition-related health is knowing what your risk factors are for these chronic conditions. And really to know those, you do need to check in with a health professional, with your general practitioner. You might be a lucky person who has the genes that mean you have wonderful blood sugar levels and you have wonderful cholesterol levels and your blood pressure’s great. Then that would essentially mean that you’re doing the right things for your genes and for your body. But a check-up with your GP is usually a chance to see, you know, what does need to be tweaked in my diet? One of the things about high blood pressure is that it’s really common, but there’s absolutely no signs or symptoms. So until you get it checked by your GP, you wouldn’t even know. Phoebe Roth: What about for older people? What sort of things do they need to consider about diet? Clare Collins: Once you start approaching 75 and above, then it’s interesting that your nutrition requirements and your dietary requirements start to shift a little bit. Once you get older, the focus moves to trying not to lose your muscle tissue. There’s a word for that malnutrition of older age and it’s called sarcopenia. And it’s really important. And so as you age to protect your body from sarcopenia, your protein requirements actually start to go up. And people have this image of, “Oh, you know older people. They just need a cup of tea and a piece of toast.” Well, they actually don’t. They might need their coffee made on milk or they might need a nutritional supplement if their appetite’s really poor. And this is another time where you may need specialised nutrition advice. If there’s any underlying medical conditions or if the older people in your family are in a nursing home, you may need to talk to the nursing home staff about whether they’re meeting their nutritional requirements or not. As you age physical activity and because your muscle mass decreases, your total energy intake reduces. And it’s a little bit like going from the big car down to the smaller car. You still need the same amounts of vitamins and minerals and things we call phytonutrients. You know, they’re not a vitamin or they’re not a mineral, but they help your body run better. You still need the same amount of them, but you need them in less energy. So there’s like less room for error. So the tea and toast isn’t adequate, you know, for grandma or granddad, for the older person. They’re having nutritious and nutrient dense foods. So, you know, vegetable soup, so to put all the vegetables in, in the right texture that looks appealing is really important. The other thing as you get older is that your taste buds change. You can have less. Some of your taste buds start to decline. And so flavouring food more and to the way, you know, Nanna or Grandpa like it rather than the way you like it is really important. So it can be a life stage where for people, if they think, “Gee, food just doesn’t taste as good anymore, then trying out what herbs, spices and flavourings they like and using those to replace salt. Because as you age you’re more prone to high blood pressure and you’re also more prone to developing diabetes. So nutrition remains important right through your life. And it’s a really important part of our social lives. So I think, you know, if I had one final message, it’s: no matter what you do or how busy you are, still finding that time to cook, prepare and eat with other people is a really important way of preserving your own family’s food culture and looking after the nutrition-related health and the social well-being of everyone in your family. Read more: The muscle-wasting condition 'sarcopenia' is now a recognised disease. But we can all protect ourselves Phoebe Roth: And the last question I have, I wonder if – it goes into all ages, for anyone that’s trying to eat healthy and follow a healthy diet – where do superfoods fit in? I know that there may not be one answer to fit all, but I think that that’s kind of a question people grapple with it when the next fad is right in front of them. And you know, what do they do? Should they eat this? Should they go out and buy it? Clare Collins: Fad diets are just so ongoing and regular that we often write articles for The Conversation about them. But you know, my thing about superfoods is that there are super foods, there’s heaps of them and they’re actually all in the supermarket. And when you walk in the supermarket – this is one way supermarket design does try and help us eat healthy – you walk smack bang into the super food section and they’re right there. They don’t have packages. They don’t have labels. But it’s that wide variety of vegetables and fruit. And I think if there was one important thing to remember, when you go to the supermarket every week when you went to the supermarket or you enter a market, look at those vegetable and fruits and which one has not been in your trolley, you know, in the last couple of weeks? And invite them in. Some of the research that we’ve done shows that the variety of vegetables and fruit, but particularly the variety of vegetables, predicts your long term health care costs. And we’ve shown that in a research study over 15 years on the Australian Longitudinal study on Women’s Health. And lots of the research we’ve been doing is showing that the variety of those foods that belong to the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating in the Australian Dietary Guidelines, that it’s actually those nutrient-rich foods that predict your nutrient intake and then decide whether you’re on a path for health or you’re not on a path for health. You’re on a path for poor health. So going for variety in your whole grains, your vegetables, your fruits, your sources of protein, which includes meat, poultry, fish and then all the wonderful vegetarian sources and whole grains. Collectively, those things make up a healthy diet pattern. They make up you when you eat them. And then that determines whether you’re going to be healthy or less healthy. Read more: Had pre-eclampsia in pregnancy? These 5 things will lower your risk of heart disease Phoebe Roth: Is there anything else you want to talk about that we didn’t touch on? Clare Collins: The only thing is I hope people don’t feel alone when it comes to nutrition. Go and have a look at No Money, No Time. Not only have we loaded that website up with lots of recipes, we’ve also loaded up with lots of information, hacks and myths. We’ve linked a lot of The Conversation articles to it. And then the other place to go for good information is go to The Conversation and type in nutrition in the search bar. And you’ll see lots of the articles that myself, my team and lots of other academics from other universities around Australia have written on food and nutrition. Phoebe Roth: Thank you so much, Clare, for joining us on Trust Me, I’m An Expert today. It’s been great talking to you again. Clare Collins: Thank you. It’s my absolute pleasure.

AAP/EPA/ANDY RAINWhat does the COVID-19 pandemic sound like? For this episode, Dallas Rogers – a senior lecturer in the School of Architecture, Design and Planning at the University of Sydney – asked academic colleagues from all over the world to open up the voice recorder on their phones and record a two minute report from the field about their city. Many of those who responded to the call are struggling, just like us, to make sense of their experience in the COVID-19 city. The resulting stories reflect on hygiene, disease, quarantine, social control and the urban environment from cities around the world. If you want to hear all the stories in full, you can find them here, and read more about the project here. Contributors Roger Keil (@rkeil), Professor at York University Jason Byrne (@CityByrne), Professor at the University of Tasmania Kurt Iveson (@kurtiveson), Associate Professor at the University of Sydney Tanja Dreher (@TanjaDreher), Associate Professor at the University of NSW Carolyn Whitzman (@CWhitzman), Professor and Bank of Montreal Women’s Studies Scholar at the University of Ottawa Tooran Alizadeh (@DrTooran), Associate Professor at the University of Sydney Eugene McCann (@EJMcCann), Professor at Simon Fraser University Beth Watts (@BethWatts494), a Senior Research Fellow at Heriot-Watt University Amanda Kass (@Amanda_Kass), PhD candidate at the University of Illinois at Chicago Elle Davidson, Aboriginal Planning Lecturer at the University of Sydney Creighton Connolly (@Creighton88), Senior Lecturer at the University of Lincoln Kelly Dombroski (@DombroskiKelly), Senior Lecturer at the University of Canterbury Kate Murray (@katiemelbourne), Connected Cities Lab at the University of Melbourne Em Dale (@carnivoresetal), at Oxford University Matt Novacevski (@places_calling), PhD candidate at the University of Melbourne Mirjam Büdenbender (@MBuedenbender), advisor to the chair of the social-democratic parliamentary group in Berlin Natalie Osborne (@DrNatOsborne), Lecturer at Griffith University Ash Alam (@urbanmargin), Lecturer at University of Otago Cameron Murray (@DrCameronMurray), Post-doctoral fellow at the University of Sydney Deepti Prasad (@Deepti_Prasad_), PhD candidate at the University of Sydney Madeleine Pill (@pillmad), Senior Lecturer at the University of Sheffield Matt Wade, (@geminidluxe), Post-doctoral Fellow at the National University of Singapore is with Renae Johnson, an independent artist, in Singapore Susan Caldis (@SusanCaldis), PhD candidate at Macquarie University Paul Maginn (@Planographer), Associate Professor at the University of Western Australia Music Credits Crop circles by Craft Case, Inspri8ion by Pulsed, The city below by Marten Moses, Someone else’s memories by So Vea. https://www.epidemicsound.com/ Theme beats by Unkle Ho from Elefant Traks. Production credits Project coordinated by Dallas Rogers. Audio edited by Miles P. Herbert, with additional audio editing by Wes Mountain. Lead image AAP/EPA/ANDY RAIN Read more: Coronavirus is stressful. Here are some ways to cope with the anxiety

What do you need to know about COVID-19 and coronavirus? We asked our readers for their top questions and sought answers from two of Australia’s leading virus and vaccine experts. Today’s podcast episode features Professor Michael Wallach and Dr Lisa Sedger – both from the School of Life Sciences at the University of Technology, Sydney – answering questions from you, our readers. An edited transcript is below. And if you have any questions yourself, please add them to the comments below. New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Transcript Sunanda Creagh: Hi, I’m Sunanda Creagh. I’m the Digital Storytelling editor at The Conversation, and I’m here today with two of Australia’s leading researchers on viruses and vaccines. Lisa Sedger: Hi, my name’s Lisa Sedger. I’m an academic virologist at the University of Technology Sydney. And I do research on novel anti-viral agents and teach virology. Michael Wallach: I’m Professor Michael Wallach, the Associate Head of School for the School of Life Science (at the University of Technology Sydney) and my expertise in the area of development of vaccines. Sunanda Creagh: And today, we’re asking these researchers to answer questions about coronavirus and COVID-19 from you guys, our readers and our audience. We’re going to kick it off with Dr. Sedger. Adam would like to know: how long can this virus survive in various temperatures on a surface, say, a door handle or a counter at a public place? Lisa Sedger: Oh, well, that’s an interesting question, because we hear a variety of answers. Some people say that these types of envelope viruses can exist for two to three days, but it really depends on the amount of moisture and humidity and what happens on that surface afterwards, whether it’s wiped off or something. So potentially for longer than that, potentially up to a week. But with cleaning and disinfectants, etc, not very long. Sunanda Creagh: And what’s an envelope virus? Lisa Sedger: Well, viruses are basically nucleic acid. So DNA like is in all of the cells in our body or RNA. And then they have a protein coat and then outside of that they have an envelope that’s made of lipids. So it’s just an outer layer of the virus. And if it’s made of lipids, you can imagine any kind of detergent like when you’re doing your dishes, disrupts all the lipids in the fat. That’s how you get all the grease off your plates. Right? So any detergent like that will disrupt the envelope of the virus and make it non-infective. So cleaning surfaces is a good way to try and eliminate an infective virus particle from, for example, door handles, surfaces, et cetera. Sunanda Creagh: And Professor Wallach, Paul would like to know: should people cancel travel plans given that this virus is already here? Does travelling make the spread worse? And that’s international travel or domestic travel. Michael Wallach: So this question has come up to many different governments from around the world who’ve reacted very differently. Australia’s been very strategic in banning travel to certain places. And of course, those places you would not want to travel to at the time when there’s an outbreak like China, Italy, Iran, etc.. I was also asked the question on ABC Tasmania: should the Tasmanians restrict domestic travel to Tasmania? At the time, they had a single case. And I said to them, if you have one case, you most likely have more. You will not prevent the entry of the virus into Tasmania. But what restricting travel can do is restrict the number of people who are seeding that area with virus and make it more manageable. So it’s a question of timing. As I was saying to you earlier, the cost-benefit of closing off travel has to be weighed very carefully because the economic impacts are very great. So I think it’s a case by case basis. Ultimately, the planet is now seeded. And we’re moving into the stage of exponential growth and that it will affect travel very severely, where in all likelihood, travel will be very much curtailed now. Sunanda Creagh: And this question’s from our reader, David. He wants to know: with the flu killing more people each year than coronavirus and mostly the same demographic, why is this outbreak receiving so much attention? Can’t we just catch the flu just as easily without cancelling events and travel plans? Lisa Sedger: Yes, and I understand the question. Flu exists. We get it seasonally every year and then we get pandemic flu. And yes, people do die from influenza. I think it was 16,000 people in the US died last US winter. But the issue with this virus is that we don’t yet know how to treat it particularly well. We’re trialling anti-viral drugs in China at the very moment. There’s clinical trials on experimental drugs. There’s drugs that doctors are using. But until that data comes in and we actually know what regime of anti-viral drugs (are best) to use, then we don’t really yet know how to treat it with anti-viral drugs. The other thing is with flu, we have a vaccine. People can take the vaccine. Somebody gets sick in their family, the other family members can take the vaccine and prevent the spread of the virus. So the difference is with flu, we have ways to control it. We know about the disease. We know how it presents. This virus, we’re still understanding the clinical presentation and in different cohorts. So different age groups, different countries, different situations, we’re still understanding the symptoms. And we don’t yet fully know how to control it by antivirals. And we don’t have a vaccine yet. Michael Wallach: Can I just add to that a bit? I think one of the reasons we’re being so careful is when it broke and Wuhan, at the beginning the mortality rate was extremely high. And with related viruses like SARS, and MERS that went as high as 35%, whereas flu mortality rates is usually around 0.1%. So it was that very high mortality rate that gave a real shock. Had it continued, it would have been devastating. We’re very fortunate that now we see it dropping down to the 2 to 3% level and some say much lower. Lisa Sedger: And we also know now that some people get COVID, have very minimal symptoms and almost don’t even know that they’ve been sick. So I think that fear and anxiety, in that sense, is lowering. Sunanda Creagh: And Molly wants to know: how far off is a vaccine? Michael Wallach: So, we are working on vaccines in Australia. The group in Melbourne was the first to be able to isolate and grow the virus. And I’ve been in touch with them, in fact, this morning. We’re working collaboratively nationally as well as internationally, collaborating with people at Stanford Medical School who through Stanford, in collaborations we have with them, we have worldwide about 15 vaccine projects going, plus all sorts of industry companies are aiming to make vaccines. In fact, one company in Israel early on announced that they believe that they can get to a vaccine within a few weeks. The problem with the vaccine is you may produce it even quickly, but it’s testing it and making sure that it’s actually going to help. There’s a fear, with COVID-19, that if it is not formulated correctly, to make a long story short, it can actually exacerbate the disease. So everyone has to take it slowly and carefully so that we don’t actually cause more problems than we currently have. But I’m optimistic and believe that we’ll get there. The WHO declared it would take 18 months. I would like to present a more optimistic view, not based on anything that substantial, but I think we can do better than that. And it is a great learning curve for the next time this happens. Lisa Sedger: Can I make a comment on that, too? Recently, we’ve just seen Africa experience a very significant outbreak of Ebola virus, and there’s been an experimental vaccine that’s been administered that has largely controlled that outbreak. I think the people working in vaccines and the people who do the safety and efficacy studies, we’ve learnt a lot from how to administer vaccines, how to get the data we need to show safety more quickly than we might have in the past. So in the sense we’ve learnt, we’re learning lessons constantly from viral outbreaks. It might not be the same virus, might not be the same country, even the same continent. But we’re learning how to do these things more efficiently and more quickly. And always the issue is weighing up safety versus the ethics of the need to administer all get it, get the drug out there as quickly as possible. Sunanda Creagh: This reader asks: isn’t lining up at fever clinics for tests just going to spread it even more? Michael Wallach: So for sure, the way in which people are processed at clinics is crucial and the minimal distance you should keep from a person who’s infected is, according again to the WHO, is one metre. So the clinics have to ensure that spread is minimised, not only spread between people waiting in line, but to the health workers themselves. We’ve had real problems for health workers in China. Several died. And we face that problem here. One of the things we have to do is ensure that we protect our health workers because otherwise they’re not going to want to go in and actually see the patients. Unfortunately, masks alone do not work. We can’t rely on them. So it’s a problem. In Israel, for example, testing for COVID-19, takes place in one’s home. An ambulance pulls up and takes the swab and then takes it to the lab. That actually would be the ideal approach. True, the ambulance services in Israel now are swamped and having great difficulty in coping. But as much as we can keep people separated from each other when they’re infected, it’s crucial for the success of any campaign. Sunanda Creagh: And these questions from Jake. He wants to know for people like myself living in Victoria. How likely is it that we can catch the virus and is hand-washing really the only thing we can be doing to protect ourselves? Lisa Sedger: I think we now know that the virus is definitely in Australia. If you go to the New South Wales or Victorian Health government websites, you can see them update the statistics daily, even less than a day so that the truth is it’s here and it’s probably in more people than we realise because we haven’t tested as many people and we now realise some people are asymptomatic or don’t show classic flu like symptoms. So it’s here and you can’t say that you’re not going to get sick. Alright? That’s the first thing to say. The second thing is, though, we can minimise what we do. Okay. So we can wash our hands constantly. We can try not to touch our face, our eyes, our ears, our nose. We’ve learned, for example, even how do you dispose of a tissue when you sneeze or cough or, you know, sneeze into your elbow? So it’s just about common sense. This is what I think. It’s no different really than protecting yourself from any respiratory virus infection. So seasonal flu or even a pandemic flu. Sunanda Creagh: And how do you dispose of a tissue safely? Lisa Sedger: Well, I guess you fold it in and then you put - you don’t touch it, you don’t put it up your sleeve, OK? - you put it in the garbage bin and wash your hands afterwards. Sunanda Creagh: Michael would like to know: what can we learn from other countries that are handling this well? He says basically South Korea, as far as I can tell. Michael Wallach: So the country that handled this outbreak the best so far has been Taiwan. The Taiwanese have been amazing in the sense that after the pandemic commenced in China, many Taiwanese returned to Taiwan. And you would have expected they’d seed that island very strongly and it would be a major outbreak. They were ready before the pandemic commenced. And that was largely because they went through a SARS outbreak. Previously, they had in place all the testing, all the people. They have the best health system in the world. And they kept the numbers down to 45 cases during a period when in China it was going into the tens of thousands. And they should be commended on that. It’s quite amazing the way they did that. The issue now in Taiwan, which concerns them, is in the end, that’s a great start. But their population now is unexposed and susceptible. So how do you release them from this sort of quarantine situation? That is the next phase. And that’s what we’re looking to see how that works, because same in Wuhan. The minute you put everyone back out to work and in the street, will there be a second wave? Most virologists, I think, would expect there will be a major second wave, third wave and maybe continued into the future. So we have to continue with our preparedness and with the hope that the vaccine will come into effect sooner rather than later. And then bringing the quarantine approach, enabling that peak of viral infection to occur when the vaccine is available. That would be the goal. Lisa Sedger: If I could just add one point there. When you look at the number of cases on a per day basis in Wuhan, it was escalating very quickly. And then they brought in their very strict quarantine and self-isolation. But the cases continued to increase until a point where it started to look like it was under control and going down. And that was after two weeks. So quarantine only works until after the quarantine period, because only after that will you see the effect. So I would argue there’s two factors for why isolation worked in Wuhan: One was you limited the spread through the self-isolation and imposed quarantine, but at the same time, the number of people who are infected and asymptomatic were building their own immunity. The number of people who were infected and sick but who survived, one would imagine, have a robust immune response to that virus. So at the same time as limiting spread, you have also slowly built or actually quite quickly built a community with much higher levels of what we call herd immunity. So this second outbreak may come, but it may be considerably less significant. Michael Wallach: In fact, that the areas where there are the major outbreaks maybe have better herd immunity than places where you keep it down to nothing. So it works both ways. Sunanda Creagh: And Jane would like to know: when do we stop testing for this disease and basically just assume that everybody with the sniffles has it? Michael Wallach: So first of all, the major symptoms are not sniffles, they are fever and coughing and shortness of breath. It’s the sniffles, though, that causes it to be spreadable more easily. That’s a good question: what the health authorities will decide to do at various stages of this pandemic. We’re now at what I would consider the early seeding phase. The world is now seeded with virus and different countries were going through exponential phases like described in Wuhan at different times. And how do they handle that will be a crucial question. I’ve seen all the different approaches from US, Israel, Iran. I think that a mixture of very strategic quarantine with travel restrictions, with bringing in other types of… certainly health authorities will need to control the number of beds that are being occupied. For example, again, in Israel, they just went over their bed limits, so patients are starting to be treated at home. So at some point, I think depending on how the epidemic goes, if we can keep it under control, we can keep the testing going. We can keep control. If the exponential rise is too fast, we will lose control and the testing will become meaningless. So the hope is that things will be sorted and I think Australia has the opportunity to do really well and big decisions have to be made now. Lisa Sedger: There’s already a paper just this week published in The Lancet that profiles survivors versus those who have succumbed from the infection. And we’re starting to learn what some of those factors are. So as as clinicians can better predict who are likely to be the more seriously ill people, they can better predict who should go to hospital for treatment, and as Michael has said, who are better actually just treated at home. Sunanda Creagh: And Dr. Sedger, Kardia would like to know: how does this virus respond to cold or warm temperatures? Is it like the flu, which thrives in cold weather? Lisa Sedger: I have heard so many different things about this. I will be completely honest and say I’m not certain that we really know. What we know is when this high humidity viruses can exist for longer because they don’t dry out. So that envelope we talked about is less likely to be dried out. And once that’s dried out, the virus is less infective. It’s not actually infective at all if it’s disrupted that envelope. But whether it likes cold temperatures, high temperatures, we think it’s not a warm temperature virus. We think it’s more a cold temperature virus. China’s just been going through their winter. Maybe one of the reasons it’s been big in Italy is they’ve just had winter. We also think the coexistence of seasonal flu in Italy at the same time is probably one of the factors that’s made it more severe. So, yeah, look, different circumstances in different countries, different climates. It’s not just about climate, though. It’s about susceptibility of various populations. Therefore, it’s a hard question to answer (at the moment). Michael Wallach: Look, I would say in working in infectious diseases for many years, it’s a very difficult thing to predict. Remember with, it doesn’t matter which disease I was working on, everyone said it can’t transmit in dry climates. And it transmitted beautifully in the desert. And you think everything’s totally dry and it still transmits and vice versa. Lisa Sedger: Well, you’ve got MERS is another coronavirus, which is your Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome, and that’s in the desert climates. So that’s why I wanted to hedge my bets on my answer. Sunanda Creagh: And Professor Wallach, this reader wants to know: once you’ve recovered from coronavirus, can you just go back to your normal, non-isolating life? Michael Wallach: So the current understanding, according to colleagues also in the U.S., is if you go through one infection, you’re probably rendered immune against re-infection. There have been reports of cases of people getting re-infected. But the opinion that I heard so far is that it’s probably recurrence of the same infection that probably went down in terms of clinical symptoms. But the virus remained that just came back up. It happens with the flu all the time. The question is, what should be your behaviour after you go through a bout? I guess I would still be careful, which Lisa can maybe add to, it could be that the virus will continue to mutate. Although again, I fortunately heard this morning that they’re not that worried about this virus mutating at the rate that flu does. And we’re hopeful that we will develop herd immunity. People have gone through it then will be fairly safe unless, you have some immune disorder. And then it will become part of our environment just like flu is. Sunanda Creagh: And here’s a question from me. It seems like there’s two camps. There’s the people who genuinely really concerned, quite worried about the situation. We see that in the panic buying. And then there’s the other camp of people who are saying it’s all been blown up. It’s all hype. We don’t really need to worry about it. It’s too early to panic. And I just wondered, how do you reconcile those two views out there in the community? Michael Wallach: So early on in this outbreak, when I was interviewed also on the ABC and speaking to other groups, I took a very low panic view, maybe because I’ve been thinking about a pandemic for many years. And for me, it was always not a question of if, but when. I actually look at this, in a way, in a positive sense. We’re facing a pandemic that, yeah, as terrible as it is, is nothing in comparison to what could be if it’s a pandemic flu. For example, we experienced the Spanish flu in 1918, which killed somewhere between 20 to 50 million people. So the order of magnitude of mortality right now is extremely low compared to other potential pandemics. If you take China out of the equation, we’re at about 1500 people who died worldwide. That’s not to say we shouldn’t show great respect for the value of their lives. It’s mainly very elderly people with complicating illnesses and probably would have had the same effect if they were infected by flu. So my take on this whole thing is we all have to stay calm. We all have to accept the fact that this is part of nature. These viruses are out there all the time. We know them. I can detect now flu viruses in wildlife, birds that are coming into this country now, that can mutate and start affecting humans. So we have to be prepared. We have to face up to them, together in a collaborative way, in a scientific and professional way. And we could win. If we panic and react the way the market is, for example, of course, that’s that’s an improper way to react. Rather, this is part of being, of our biology. Viruses exist that can hurt us and they will always exist. Lisa Sedger: Yeah. Look, I think there are a few factors that we can really learn from. So one is to work out where these viruses come from. And a lot of these RNA viruses exist in bats. They seem to be transmitted into wild animals through bat droppings. And I think one of the lessons we, the world all over, might need to learn is how we deal with the marketing and selling of wild animals that are then used for foods. That may then prevent these viruses from getting into the human population. So I think there are lessons to be learned, number one. But Michael, I would disagree with you in one sense “that it is maybe not as bad as pandemic flu”, on the other hand: we do have vaccines for flu, we do have anti-virals. And we have a whole world that has various levels of immunity to flu and different strains of flu. Whereas this virus is entering into a naive (non)-immune population. And that’s what’s so significant to start with. It may be that as our immunity at a population level increases, as a disease this will become far less significant. But the first outbreak of it in a naive, (non)-immune, (and a) “naive population” will always have the highest level of morbidity and mortality. And that’s where we have learned from other diseases like Ebola. As I mentioned, what we already know about flu, how we already control flu and the development of new and novel antiviral agents will be just as effective and important, I believe, as will the development of vaccines. So I think there’s a lot to learn to prevent this or limit, I should say, to limit these the severity of the outbreak and maybe even prevent it from happening again. As I say, if we stop trapping wild animals and eating them, we might prevent the outbreak of some of these type of RNA viruses. Michael Wallach: So I certainly agree with that. And China is now putting into law a restriction on the sale of wildlife in their markets. What I’m trying to do, and I hope we both agree, is that in proportion to, for example, influenza, even seasonal flu that killed in one year I think up to 600,000 people worldwide, I’m just trying to put things into proportion. To prevent people from panicking. To understand that, yes, this is affecting the elderly. And anyone who is elderly, suffering from heart or respiratory conditions would certainly isolate themselves. So where my wife’s parents live, where they live in a retirement village, they made a decision to close off the entire village. Nobody’s allowed in, as a means of preventing - because they’re an elderly population - people bringing in COVID-19 and infecting that area. And I certainly agree with that sort of strategy. Sunanda Creagh: And John would like to know: are the death rates likely to be lower in a country like Australia with lower rates of smoking than places such as China, Iran and Indonesia? Lisa Sedger: Again, I think this is a little bit we have to watch and just wait and see. It’s very hard to predict these things. It was intriguing that some of the highest death rates in China appeared to be men as well as just the elderly. And that might be because there’s a high rate of long term smoking. So almost like an endemic lung pathology within that community that somehow exacerbated the disease. In Australia, we may find that there are different populations that are the most at risk. So we know, for example, the virus uses a receptor to get inside of cells that is a protein present on cardiac tissue. So people with known cardiac conditions may turn out to be at higher risk. And in a non-smoking type country, maybe people with existing heart conditions will turn out to be the most at risk. In America, we might find something quite different. What we might find is it’s more socio-economic. Maybe people without health insurance. Maybe people who are homeless and live on the streets will turn out to be the most affected because they have limited resources to be able to get treatment and they can’t afford treatment. So I think each country will be different. We mentioned earlier Italy has one of the highest fatality rates at the moment. That may be because they actually have a large number of people within their population that are over 65. So it might actually be not that surprising given that demographic. It might also be that they’ve had an outbreak of seasonal flu at the same time. We don’t know whether one type of virus limits the other. It’s quite possible you can get co-infections and that’s where people get the most sick. I think it’s going to pan out in different countries slightly differently. I think it’s a case of watch this space. Michael Wallach: The other thing, just on the rate of transmission. What they go according to is the people who show up to the clinic. And the results from a study done in China indicate that they may have only picked up 5% of the people that have COVID-19. So it’s about 20-fold more than actually recorded because it’s mild and very little symptoms. The other thing that’s becoming a little disconcerting for scientists is there may be two strains of the virus. And the initial outbreak, as I said, the mortality rate was very high. It could be the virus, in order to transmit, went through a mutation that aided its transmission. And I would hope that would probably occur in pandemic flu. Maybe a little less pathogenic than the original strain was. I was surprised to see at the beginning such high mortality and then how it dropped down. That’s the results also put online by the CDC. And we’re looking and following that. Lisa Sedger: Yes, viral evolution is a really key topic at the moment. We think RNA viruses and the rate that they mutate is much higher than DNA viruses. And it’s really a factor of how quickly the virus mutates and how quickly a person’s immune response is able to effectively control the virus replication. So the viruses that sometimes persist longer in a community are not necessarily the most virulent. So what we might also be seeing is a population, a group within the population who get a less severe disease, maybe even asymptomatic, but that may, long term, prove to be the bigger - how could I put this? - the bigger population of viruses that exist within that community. Sunanda Creagh: And Michael would like to know: if I could shrink myself down to microscopic size and watch a virus invade a cell, what would I see? Lisa Sedger: Well, a virus is not like a bacteria. A bacteria is a entity all of its own, and it can replicate and make another copy of itself and grow on a nutrient source. A virus, however, is sometimes called a non-living entity because outside of a human cell, it can’t replicate. It just exists as an entity. A virus is essentially just a piece of DNA, which is, you know, in the nucleus of every cell. It’s what our chromosomes are made of. So it’s either DNA or RNA surrounded by a protein coat and sometimes it’s also a lipid-based envelope outside of that, again. The virus will somehow encounter a cell. And for respiratory viruses, it’s largely by us inhaling water vapour droplets. They may contain hundreds of viruses. Those viruses then will attach or be exposed to our respiratory epithelium. If the virus can actually bind to the respiratory epithelium cell, then it might get inside. Once inside, it may or may not have the capacity to actually undergo replication, but it has to uncoat from that protein shell. Then the nucleic acid, the DNA or RNA has to make another copy of itself. Then all the genes that are in the virus have to get expressed as proteins. They then reassemble into a new viral particle and then the virus will get out of the cell. Sometimes it lyses (breaks) the cell, sometimes it will just buds out from the cell and leave the cell intact. And that’s what a virus is. That’s why we, some people call them living or non-living because they can only replicate in inside a cell, a host cell. Michael Wallach: And it’s not like viruses have a will. So if they want to do this, it’s just part of evolution. Lisa Sedger: Yes, I’m never a favour of the argument you sometimes see people say “it’s warfare, it’s the virus vs. immune system!” But there’s no will involved, it’s just capacity of life to replicate itself. Sunanda Creagh: And Deidre writes in to say, I heard on the radio today that half the population is likely to get this. And with, say, a 1% death rate, the body count will add up. And I wondered what you thought of that. Michael Wallach: So there was an announcement actually by Angela Merkel preparing Germany for 70% of the population being infected. Lisa may say the number is lower, I don’t know, until we build up herd immunity. The question of the mortality rate, as I alluded to before, I think based on what again, CDC and WHO are writing, is probably overestimated. Some estimate the mortality rate as being much lower. That’s not to say… every death is a family and has to be looked at and be concerned about. So again, I think and would like to hope that as we develop new vaccines, as we develop drugs, as we develop approaches to quarantine people, test them, keep them at home, isolate them, we’ll get the mortality rate under control. And I’m going to express an optimistic view. This world has amazing capabilities of doing amazing science. And if we apply it and work together, I think we can control this problem. Lisa Sedger: Yes, absolutely. I would endorse that. And I’d say that the mortality rates at the moment simply reflect who is being tested. And it’s primarily people who are turning up with symptoms. But we’re now beginning to appreciate that there is a large number of people who could be quite asymptomatic, who are never tested. This virus will certainly have infected many more people than will be tested. And if we did have surveillance of every single person being tested, then there’s two questions here: Are you testing for the presence of the virus? If they’ve had virtually no symptoms and not a big illness, you might not find the virus. But if we test for the presence of an immune response to the virus, we would truly know how many people have been infected. And then we could get a true estimate or at least a much closer estimate of what the mortality rate really is. So at the moment, there’s hyperbole. Sunanda Creagh: And Catherine asks, what is the likelihood of transmission through using a public swimming pool? Lisa Sedger: I would think quite small because a) the virus would be quite diluted in a swimming pool. Secondly, swimming pools are all treated with chlorine, for example, and chlorine is a very effective anti-viral agent. You’d have to drink a lot of swimming pool water to get the virus. Michael Wallach: I agree with that. Sunanda Creagh: Candy would like to know: there are conflicting symptoms lists circulating on Facebook. One says it starts with a dry cough and if your nose is running, it is not COVID-19, which I suspect is incorrect. Can we please have an accurate list? Michael Wallach: So, again, the major symptoms are, in fact, the cough and shortness of breath and fever. But, it’s not to say it’s not possible that you’ll have also upper respiratory effects. The virus goes into the lung and attaches to the alveolar cells or to the cells that make up our air sacs and that help our breathing. And it has to get there to really cause this disease. So if there’s upper respiratory involvement, which includes sneezing and runny nose, et cetera, it’s probably not the main effect of the virus. Again, I would say if you see that somebody is sneezing and wheezing and and that’s it, it’s probably an allergy, but it does frighten people. I was on the train this morning, and I know if I, God forbid, sneezed the whole train would empty out pretty quickly. Lisa Sedger: You know, we’re just coming into winter. And actually, it’s a really good question because at the moment, what’s building is a sense of fear. But we must keep in perspective that there will also still be the normal seasonal cases of flu. So just because somebody sneezes or has a sore throat does not mean that they’ve got COVID-19. And we need to make sure, I think it’s really important that we don’t stigmatise people who have symptoms because it may not even be COVID. And we’re all at risk from any respiratory tract infections and already have been for years. That’s not a new thing. We just need to keep things in perspective. Sunanda Creagh: A question from Karen: can you catch it twice? Lisa Sedger: Normally, I would have said no, because we imagine that there’s a good immune response that will then provide you protection from re-infection. That’s what our immune system does. But this is a new virus. We don’t yet fully understand how our immune system clears it. We don’t know whether virus can remain for a longer period of time. I would would say, though, that there are only a few cases of people who have been treated, appear to have recovered, they’ve gone home, they’ve then had another relapse. There’s only a very few number of cases that have been like that. So for all intents and purposes, I don’t think that’s something we should fear and it’s not something we’ve seen with the previous SARS outbreak in 2003. Sunanda Creagh: And Tim would like to know: how will quarantine work in a family? Lisa Sedger: Yeah, it’s interesting, isn’t it? We think of quarantine as being away from work or away from public places. But really, if you have been infected, then the people in your family are as at risk as your work colleagues would be at work. Again, I think it’s about just common sense. Don’t share food utensils, wash your hands, don’t keep touching your face and your mouth and your nose. Get rid of tissues in a nice sort of clean manner. It’s about minimising transmission. Michael Wallach: Let me just add to that, that all the data indicates that children likely will only get very mild symptoms, if at all. So if you’re a family member and you’re worried about your children, this is one time that you can be happy about this. All the results so far indicate that children aged zero to nine, there’s not been a single death. Lisa Sedger: Whereas what we do know is the elderly appear to be more susceptible to a more severe disease. So that’s where if I’m sick, it’s better not to go and visit my grandparents or something like that. That’s where quarantine within the family works in a practical sense. Sunanda Creagh: And just to finish up, is there anything else that you’d like to add? Lisa Sedger: Yeah, I think I’d just want to finish with a really positive note. I mean, we live in an amazing era of medical research and science. Within within a very, very short period of time, parts of the virus had been sequenced. We now track the virus in its entire sequence. We know, we have clinical trials for the drugs. We have people working on vaccines. We have epidemiologists better understanding the disease susceptibility within a population. I mean, we learn a lot from other existing outbreaks of infectious diseases. And I remain positive that, you know, the medical and scientific community working together will be able to solve this. I’m quite confident that there’s a really strong response. That’s not to diminish that people have died and it’s been tragic. But we live in an era where we’re exposed to infectious agents and we are getting better and better at controlling most of those infections. Michael Wallach: So I’ll just add and put in a plug for a program I’m very much involved with called Spark working with people at Stanford. We established a program for exactly this time, when there’s sudden outbreaks. And the program now involves 23 countries and around 70 institutions, all working together for outbreaks of Zika, Ebola and now coronavirus. It gives me great hope that, apart from what you said, we’re now working together collaboratively like never before. We’re putting our egos outside and we’re saying we have social responsibility to do better. Certainly, in the case of a pandemic. And we’re doing it. And we’re very proud to be able to say we have 15 projects going on now collaboratively that we just formed over the past two weeks, together with our colleagues all over the world. I also believe in a very bright future. Production credits Recording by postgraduate.futures at the University of Technology Sydney. Audio editing by Sunanda Creagh. Theme beats by Unkle Ho from Elefant Traks. Read more: Coronavirus is stressful. Here are some ways to cope with the anxiety

ShutterstockAre we alone in the Universe? The expert opinion on that, it turns out, is surprisingly consistent. “Is there other life in the Universe? I would say: probably,” Daniel Zucker, Associate Professor of astronomy at Macquarie University, tells astrophysics student and The Conversation’s editorial intern Antonio Tarquinio on today’s podcast episode. “I think that we will discover life outside of Earth in my lifetime. If not that, then in your lifetime,” says his fellow Macquarie University colleague, Professor Orsola De Marco. And Lee Spitler, a Senior Lecturer and astronomy researcher at the same institution, was similarly optimistic: “I think there’s a high likelihood that we are not alone in the Universe.” The big question, however, is what that life might look like. Read more: The Dish in Parkes is scanning the southern Milky Way, searching for alien signals We’re also hearing from Danny C Price, project scientist for the Breakthrough Listen project scanning the southern skies for unusual patterns, on what the search for alien intelligence looks like in real life - and what it’s yielded so far. The Parkes radio telescope is scanning the southern skies, searching for signals from intelligent alien life. AAP/MICK TSIKAS Read more: 'The size, the grandeur, the peacefulness of being in the dark': what it's like to study space at Siding Spring Observatory New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Lucky Stars by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Illumination by Kai Engel, from Free Music Archive Podcast episode recorded and edited by Antonio Tarquinio. Lead image Shutterstock

ShutterstockYou’ve heard of dark matter. You’ve probably heard there’s a fair bit of it out there in space, and that astronomers don’t know for sure what it is. But, strange as dark matter is, there’s an even more mysterious thing out there in the Universe – and quite a lot of it. Dark energy, believed to be responsible for the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe, makes up the vast majority of space. Today, editorial intern and astrophysics student Cameron Furlong, dives into what we know about dark energy and what it means for our place in the Universe. Read more: The Dish in Parkes is scanning the southern Milky Way, searching for alien signals New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Pulsars by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Podcast episode recorded and edited by Cameron Furlong. Lead image Shutterstock Read more: 'The size, the grandeur, the peacefulness of being in the dark': what it's like to study space at Siding Spring Observatory

When we are imagining this time, next year, are we limiting our thinking to how we avoid the conditions we faced in this summer? Or are there bigger questions we can ask? ShutterstockEditor’s note: Today, on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we hear from Clare Cooper, design lecturer at the University of Sydney, on how futuring techniques can help us think collectively about life under a drastically hotter climate. Her accompanying essay is below. Australians, no matter where we are, are coming to acknowledge that our summers – and our autumns, winters and springs – are forever changed. We are, bit by bit, reviewing our assumptions. Whether we need to radically rethink our calendars, or question where and how we rebuild homes and towns, we face a choice: collective, creative adaptation or increased devastation. How might this time next year feel - anxious, hot and sticky? How might it smell - like bushfire smoke? How might it taste - would seafood and berries still be on the menu in future summers as our climate changes? (One of my favourite placards at a recent climate rally was “shit climate = shit wine”). When we think about this time next year, are we freaking out, or are we futuring? How might the Australian summer of the future look, taste, smell? Shutterstock Read more: Why we should make time for remembering the future Collaborative futuring in a climate crisis “Futuring” is sometimes called futures studies, futurology, scenario design or foresight thinking. It has been used in the business world for decades. Futuring means thinking systematically about the future, drawing on scientific data, analysing trends, imagining scenarios (both plausible and unlikely) and thinking creatively. A crucial part of the process is thinking hard about the kind of future we might want to avoid and the steps needed to work toward a certain desired future. But futurists aren’t magical people who sweep in and solve problems for you. They facilitate discussions and collaboration but the answers ultimately come from communities themselves. Artists and writers have been creatively imagining the future for millennia. Futuring is a crucial part of design and culture-building. My research looks at how futuring can help communities work toward a just and fair transition to a drastically warmer world and greater weather extremes. Collaborative futuring invites audiences to respond to probable, possible, plausible and preposterous future scenarios as the climate crisis sets in. This process can reveal assumptions, biases and possible courses of action. Cars lie damaged after a surprise hailstorm hit Canberra in January. Extreme weather events are predicted to worsen as the climate changes. AAP Image/Mick Tsikas Read more: How we forecast future technologies Getting creative Futuring is not predicting futures. It’s a way of mixing informed projections with imaginative critical design to invite us to think differently about our current predicaments. That can help us step back from the moment of panic and instead proactively design steps to change things for the better – not 20 years from now, but from today. If you peeked into a futuring workshop with adults, you might see a lot of lively conversations and a bunch of post-it notes. For kids, you might see them making collages, or creating cardboard prototypes of emerging technology. You might have done some futuring today, talking with friends and family about changes you might make as it becomes obvious our summers will grow only hotter. I’ve seen futuring occur at my daughter’s school, where children are invited to imagine being on the other side of a difficult problem, and then work out the steps needed to get there. 13-year-old protester Izzy Raj-Seppings poses for a photograph outside of Kirribilli House in Sydney late last year. AAP Image/Steven Saphore Read more: 'This situation brings me to despair': two reef scientists share their climate grief Futuring a just transition to a warmer world When we are imagining this time next year, are we limiting our (mostly city-dwelling) thinking to how we avoid the conditions we faced in this summer? For example, are we thinking about staying away from bushfire-prone areas, or buying air purifiers and face masks? For those who can afford it, are we thinking about booking extended overseas holidays? Or are we challenging each other to think beyond such avoidance strategies: to imagine a post-Murdoch press and a post-fossil fuel lobby future? Can we imagine ways to respond to extreme weather beyond individual prepping? Including a diverse range of voices, especially Indigenous community members, is crucial to a just transition to a warmer world. We can’t allow a changed climate to mean comfortable adaptation for a wealthy elite while everyone else suffers. Many of us have joined climate protests in recent months and years. But more work needs to be done and bigger questions asked. What steps are needed to meet demands for public ownership of a renewable energy system: more support for those battling and displaced by bushfires? How do we work toward First Nations justice, including funding for Indigenous-led land management, jobs on Country, and land and water rights? It is not enough to pin an image of our future to a wall and pray we get there. Short term fixes in the form of drought or emergency relief won’t address the fact that extreme weather events are not going away. Responsible, useful futuring mixes equal parts of imagination and informed projections. It’s not wild speculation. Futuring practitioners draw on scientific and social data, and weave it with the stories, concerns and desires of those present to find new ways into a problem. Short term fixes in the form of drought or emergency relief won’t address the fact that extreme weather events are not going away. Shutterstock Read more: What would a fair energy transition look like? Speaking of catastrophe to avoid it Former Labor prime minister Paul Keating last year criticised the Morrison government for what he saw as a lack of vision: If you look, there is no panorama. There’s no vista. There’s no shape. There’s no talk about where Australia fits in the world. Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s performance during the unfolding bushfire horrors – widely perceived as lacklustre – suggests growing thirst for bolder vision on dealing with “the new normal.” In their book Design and the Question of History, design scholars Tony Fry, Clive Dilnot and Susan Stewart argue that we should speak of catastrophe “in order to avoid it”. Polish-born sociologist Zygmunt Bauman wrote prophesying the advent of that catastrophe as passionately and vociferously as we can manage is the sole chance of making the unavoidable avoidable — and perhaps even the inevitable impossible to happen. We owe it to those worst affected by the climate crisis – and to ourselves – to dedicate time to collaborative futuring as we rethink life in an increasingly hostile climate. The next time you’re having a chat about this time, next year, are you collectively fretting or collaboratively futuring? New to podcasts? Everything you need to know about how to listen to a podcast is here. Additional audio credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Not Much by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Above Us by David Szesztay, from Free Music Archive Pshaw by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Podcast episode recorded and edited by Sunanda Creagh. Lead image Shutterstock Clare M. Cooper has an ongoing residential subsidy from Inner West Council for Frontyard Projects, a community research space. She is a member of the NTEU and Workers for Climate Action.

The Parkes radio telescope can detect extremely weak signals coming from the most distant parts of the Universe. ShutterstockFor John Sarkissian, operations scientist at the CSIRO Parkes radio telescope, astronomy has been his life’s passion – starting from the age of six. “When I was six years old, I watched Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walk on the Moon,” he says of the radio telescope made famous in the film The Dish. “In fact, on the cover of my year nine mathematics textbook was a painting of the Parkes radio telescope. I remember sitting in the class staring at the painting and daydreaming working there one day. And so here I am now, 40 some years later.” Today, on Trust Me I’m An Expert, editorial intern Antonio Tarquinio speaks to Sarkissian about the research underway at one of Australia’s most famous astronomical research facilities including: the role Parkes is playing right now in the search for extra-terrestrial intelligence how the telescope detects extremely weak signals coming from the most distant parts of the Universe why even a light breeze can imperil the dish unless it’s in the right position how the explosion of phones, wi-fi and radio frequency interference is affecting research in the once-deserted Parkes location. And Sarkissian’s own take on whether Parkes will help find alien life? “Well, as of today, the only place we know of the entire Universe that there is definitely life is right here on Earth,” he says. “And what does that say? It says that we should appreciate our place in the Universe a little more.” Read more: 'The size, the grandeur, the peacefulness of being in the dark': what it's like to study space at Siding Spring Observatory New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: what science says about how to lose weight and whether you really need to Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Extra Dimension by Kri Tik, from Free Music Archive Images Shutterstock Read more: Darkness is disappearing and that's bad news for astronomy

Today we hear about some of the fascinating space research underway at Siding Spring Observatory – and how, despite gruelling hours and endless paperwork, astronomers retain their sense of wonder for the night sky. ShutterstockHow did our galaxy form? How do galaxies evolve over time? Where did the Sun’s lost siblings end up? Three hours north-east of Parkes lies a remote astronomical research facility, unpolluted by city lights, where researchers are collecting vast amounts of data in an effort to unlock some of the biggest questions about our Universe. Siding Spring Observatory, or SSO, is one of Australia’s top sites for astronomical research. You’ve probably heard of the Parkes telescope, made famous by the movie The Dish, but SSO is also a key character in Australia’s space research story. In this episode, astrophysics student and Conversation intern Cameron Furlong goes to SSO to check out the huge Anglo Australian Telescope (AAT), the largest optical telescope in Australia. Siding Spring Observatory, north east of Parkes. Shutterstock Read more: Darkness is disappearing and that's bad news for astronomy And we hear about Huntsman, a new specialised telescope that uses off-the-shelf Canon camera lenses – a bit like those you see sports photographers using at the cricket or the footy – to study very faint regions of space around other galaxies. Students use telescopes to observe the night sky near Coonabarabran, not far from SSO. Cameron Furlong Listen in to hear more about some of the most fascinating space research underway in Australia – and how, despite gruelling hours and endless paperwork, astronomers retain their sense of wonder for the night sky. “For me, it means remembering how small I am in this enormous Universe. I think it’s very easy to forget, when you go about your daily life,” said Richard McDermid, an ARC Future Fellow and astronomer at Macquarie University. “It’s nice to get back into it to a dark place and having a clear sky. And then you get to remember all the interesting and fascinating things, the size, the grandeur and the peacefulness of being in the dark.” New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: what science says about how to lose weight and whether you really need to Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Lucky Stars by Podington Bear from Free Music Archive. Slimheart by Blue Dot Sessions from Free Music Archive. Illumination by Kai Engel from Free Music Archive. Phase 2 by Xylo-Ziko from Free Music Archive. Extra Dimensions by Kri Tik from Free Music Archive. Pure Water by Meydän, from Free Music Archive. Images Shutterstock Cameron Furlong Read more: Antibiotic resistant superbugs kill 32 plane-loads of people a week. We can all help fight back

Antibiotics can be a wonder for treating bacterial infections – but we need to be cautious in how we use them. From shutterstock.comYou might think antibiotic resistance is something to worry about in the distant future. But it’s already having a deadly impact today. The number of people dying globally every week from antibiotic resistant infections is equivalent to 32 Boeing 747s full of people. And if that sounds scary, the projections for the future are even scarier. On today’s episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert we ask you to imagine a future where more and more antibiotics don’t work any more – and hear from researchers about how you can help scientists fight back. Read more: 'This is going to affect how we determine time since death': how studying body donors in the bush is changing forensic science New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: what science says about how to lose weight and whether you really need to Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Airliner by Podington Bear from Free Music Archive. Images Shutterstock

Lithium ion batteries revolutionised the way we use, manufacture and charge our devices. They’re used to power mobile phones, laptops and even electric cars. ShutterstockBritish-born scientist M. Stanley Whittingham, of Binghamton University, was one of three scientists who won the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their work developing lithium-ion batteries. L-R: John Goodenough; Stanley Whittingham; Akira Yoshino, the three scientists who won the Nobel Prize for Chemistry this year for their work developing lithium-ion batteries. Niklas Elmehed/Royal Swedish Acad. Sci. Maybe you know exactly what a lithium-ion battery is but even if you don’t, chances are you’re carrying one right now. They’re the batteries used to power mobile phones, laptops and even electric cars. When it comes to energy storage, they’re vastly more powerful than conventional batteries and you can recharge them many more times. Their widespread use is driving global demand for the metal lithium – demand that Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese this week said Australia should do more to meet. The University of Queensland’s Mark Blaskovich, who trained in chemistry and penned this article about Whittingham’s selection for the chemistry Nobel Prize, sat down with the award-winner this week. They discussed what the future of battery science may hold and how we might address some of the environmental and fire risks around lithium-ion batteries. He began by asking M. Stanley Whittingham how lithium batteries differ from conventional, lead-acid batteries, like the kind you might find in your car. Read more: 'Highly charged story': chemistry Nobel goes to inventors of lithium-ion batteries New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: what science says about how to lose weight and whether you really need to Additional credits Recording and production assistance by Thea Blaskovich Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Announcement of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2019 Images Shutterstock

Maggots are a major part of the puzzle when it comes to collecting forensic evidence. ShutterstockA few episodes ago, we heard from forensic scientists at the Australian Facility for Taphonomic Experimental Research (AFTER) – that’s the official name for what, in books and movies, they would call a body farm. It’s there, at a secret bushland site, researchers are making some surprising discoveries about how donated human bodies decompose in Australian conditions. One of the researchers there is Professor James Wallman, Head of the School of Life Sciences at the University of Technology Sydney, and one of the nation’s few forensic entomologists. It’s his job to unpack little clues left behind by insects – including the much maligned blowfly – that can help police solve crimes when a body is found. Today, James Wallman explains how and why insects have a really profound influence on decomposition. We’re also re-broadcasting a clip from Maiken Ueland, the interim director of the AFTER facility, on how research underway there is changing what we thought we knew about determining time since death. And if you’re interested in finding out more about how to donate your body for such research, you can start here. Read more: 'This is going to affect how we determine time since death': how studying body donors in the bush is changing forensic science New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: what science says about how to lose weight and whether you really need to Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Backyard by David Szesztay from Free Music Archive Images Shutterstock

Have you been told by your doctor to consider dropping a few kilos? The good news is that often even a small amount of weight loss can improve your health outlook. shutterstockEverywhere you turn these days, there’s a diet ad, or family member or friend raving about some new diet that apparently works wonders. But what does the research actually say about how to lose weight - and if you even need to lose it in the first place? To find out, The Conversation’s Alexandra Hansen interviewed Clare Collins, a professor in nutrition and dietetics at the University of Newcastle. Professor Collins, who recently wrote an article titled The science behind diet trends like mono, charcoal detox, Noom and Fast800, also designed a free online course called The science of weight loss – dispelling diet myths. Alexandra began by asking Clare Collins how a person would know if they needed to change their diet. Read more: The science behind diet trends like mono, charcoal detox, Noom and Fast800 New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Health Check: what's the best diet for weight loss? Additional reading: The Australian Guide to Healthy Eating Credits: Recording and editing by Wes Mountain and Chynthia Wijaya, additional editing by Sunanda Creagh. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. CNN report. BBC report. Images Shutterstock

Are southern-born politicians talking about a state they essentially don't understand? ShutterstockThe dust has well and truly settled on Scott Morrison’s surprise victory in this year’s federal election but opinion is still divided on exactly what happened in Queensland. Why did Labor perform so poorly in the Sunshine State? Is Queensland an inherently conservative part of Australia? During the campaign, were southern-born politicians talking about a state they essentially didn’t understand? And – #Quexit jokes aside – is it time to redraw state lines in Australia, or even add new states? Today on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we bring you a discussion organised by The Conversation, recorded at Avid Reader bookshop in Brisbane and broadcast by Big Ideas on the ABC’s RN. In this chat, political scientist Anne Tiernan from Griffith University speaks with the University of Southern Queensland’s John Cole, who has research expertise in the history of Australian federation, regional development and regional communities. Host Paul Barclay began by asking them to name the biggest misconceptions floating around about Queensland. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Credits: Recording and editing by RN’s Big Ideas, additional editing by Sunanda Creagh. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. CNN report. BBC report. Images Shutterstock

Protesters holding umbrellas amid heavy rain march in an anti-government rally in Wan Chai, Hong Kong. AAP/EPA/VIVEK PRAKASHLast weekend, hundreds of thousands of people again took to the streets in Hong Kong to protest against the government – the 11th straight weekend of demonstrations that began in June over a proposed extradition bill. But after more than two months of increasingly violent clashes between demonstrators and the police, this protest was peaceful. No tear gas was fired. China expert Graeme Smith, one of the hosts of The Little Red Podcast, devoted this week’s episode to the Hong Kong protest movement, with his co-host, Louisa Lim, on the ground in Hong Kong talking to people about their perseverance in the face of a potentially severe military crackdown from Beijing. In this episode of Trust Me, Smith discusses where the protests go from here, whether there’s any chance for dialogue between the two sides, and the impact of the increasingly nationalist vitriol aimed at protesters on social media – and on the streets of Hong Kong. Read more: Beijing is moving to stamp out the Hong Kong protests – but it may have already lost the city for good Smith believes the protests aren’t going to stop until Chief Executive Carrie Lam definitively withdraws the contentious extradition bill and launches an inquiry into police violence against the protesters. And this is unlikely so long as Lam – and her backers in Beijing – continue to stand firm in their positions and refuse to negotiate. So, no one knows how this might end, Smith says. A lot of the protesters, especially those in their 20s, feel they basically have nothing to lose and they’re going to dig in for the long haul. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Credits: Recording and editing by Graeme Smith, Justin Bergman and Sunanda Creagh. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. CNN report BBC report The Little Red Podcast Images AAP/EPA/VIVEK PRAKASH

Today, we're asking two astrophysicists and a planetary scientist: what's the likelihood we'll be living on Mars or the Moon in future? Pixabay/WikiImages, CC BYYou’ve probably heard that this week marks 50 years since humans first set foot on the Moon – a feat that still boggles the mind given the limitations of technology at the time and the global effort required to pull it off. If you’re as fascinated as we are about the history and future of space exploration, check out The Conversation podcast, To the moon and beyond, a five-part podcast series from The Conversation. We’ve featured a little taste of it on Trust Me today. Through interviews with academic experts around the world – from space scientists to historians, lawyers, futurists and a former astronaut – science journalist Miriam Frankel and space scientist Martin Archer look at the past 50 years of space exploration and what the 50 years ahead have in store. Episode two features Australia’s own space archaeologist, Alice Gorman, in conversation with Sarah Keenihan about why Apollo 11 landing spots could become heritage sites for future generations of visitors to the Moon. Read more: To the moon and beyond 2: how humanity reacted to the moon landing and why it led to conspiracy theories But today, The Conversation’s Molly Glassey sits down with a panel of astrophysicists to ask the big questions about space, like: what’s the next big thing that’s happening in space research, the thing that will blow us away or bring us together the way the Moon landing did back in 1969? And what’s the likelihood we’ll be living on Mars or the Moon in future? Today, Molly chats to astrophysicists Jonti Horner and Belinda Nicholson from the University of Southern Queensland and planetary scientist Katarina Miljkovic from Curtin University. You can find all the episodes of To the moon and beyond on your podcast app, or on our site here. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Credits: To the moon and beyond is produced by Gemma Ware and Annabel Bligh. Sound editing by Siva Thangarajah. Thank you to City, University of London’s Department of Journalism for allowing use of their studios for To the moon and beyond, and to . Music: Even when we fall by Philipp Weigl, via Free Music Archive Fallen Stars by Ketsa, via Free Music Archive Apollo 11 and 17 audio from NASA Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Images Pixabay/WikiImages

Research underway at the University of Technology, Sydney's AFTER facility is yielding some surprising new findings about how bodies decompose in the Australian bush. Supplied by UTS, Author provided (No reuse)On the outskirts of Sydney, in a secret bushland location, lies what’s officially known as the Australian Facility for Taphonomic Experimental Research (AFTER). In books and movies, it’d be called a body farm. Maiken Ueland at the AFTER facility run by UTS. Supplied by UTS, Author provided Taphonomy is the study of how an organism breaks down after death. Research underway at the University of Technology Sydney’s AFTER facility is yielding some surprising new findings about how bodies decompose in the Australian bush. And here’s an astonishing detail: until AFTER opened in Sydney in 2016, there was no facility like it in the southern hemisphere. Most of the world’s taphonomic research came from the US, meaning we were missing vital clues relating to how Australian weather, bugs and climate conditions affect the way a human body decomposes in the bush. Today on our podcast, Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we take you on a journey to AFTER. The facility’s interim director, Maiken Ueland, and PhD student Samara Garrett-Rickman share with us: some of the unexpected findings emerging from AFTER on determining time since death; why AFTER researchers prefer not to use the term “body farm”; how the stages of decomposition work a process of “mummification” that research suggests may be unique to Australian bushland conditions; what the TV shows get wrong about forensic science; why it’s harder to bury a body than most people think; what investigators look for to spot a clandestine grave; And if you’re interested in finding out more about how to donate your body for such research, you can start here. Looking for odours at the AFTER facility, run by UTS. Anna Zhu, Author provided (No reuse) New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Backyard by David Szesztay from Free Music Archive Images UTS/Anna Zhu

Older private renters are far more likely to experience loneliness than their counterparts in social housing and that loneliness can be acute. ShutterstockA growing number of older Australians don’t own their homes. And whether they are private renters or live in social housing can make a big difference to their risk of loneliness and anxiety. That’s the key finding of research led by Alan Morris, a professor at the UTS Institute for Public Policy and Governance, who interviewed older Australians about how their housing situation may relate to the loneliness they experience. On today’s episode, Professor Morris shares some of the deeply moving stories he heard. Read more: 'I really have thought this can’t go on': loneliness looms for rising numbers of older private renters New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks. Image Shutterstock

Indian general elections begin April 11. vepar5/shutterstockHere’s an astonishingly large number. Around 900 million Indians are heading to the polls to decide if they want to reelect the current government of Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). India Tomorrow is a seven-part podcast series by The Anthill (produced by The Conversation UK), exploring some of the major issues facing India – identity politics, the rise of Hindu nationalism, Kashmir, the role of caste and gender in shaping Indian society, and how women and young people experience these phenomena. Part one, an episode on India’s information wars and how fake news fuels violence, launched on April 9. You can sign up to The Anthill newsletter to stay up to date and send questions via podcast@theconversation.com or via Twitter @AnthillPod. The producers will be putting your questions to academics. Read more: Why Australia should engage with the unemployment crisis affecting Indian youth Today on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we’re hearing from an academic featured on India Tomorrow. Craig Jeffrey is the director and CEO of the Australia India Institute and Professor of Development Geography at the University of Melbourne. He explains what issues are front of mind for India’s millions of first-time voters delivering their verdict on the performance of the BJP government, led by Narendra Modi. “Two things are really crucial. One is jobs. Young people across India and particularly in parts of India where the economy’s been less successful at creating jobs - so some of the northern states, for example, are going to be really concerned with the capacity of the government to provide better employment opportunities,” Professor Jeffrey told The Conversation’s editorial intern Bageshri Savyasachi. “The second issue, I think, that they’ll be very concerned about is education. So they’ll be looking to see which political parties and politicians are promising to improve higher education […] Because for a lot of young people who aren’t part of the elite in India, there is a mismatch, often, between the educational opportunities they obtain in school or university and then the employment markets and the demands of key private sector firms.” “A third area that’s perhaps less obvious is the issue of health care and public health. And my own observations, as an anthropologist and human geographer working in mainly Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand over the past 25 years on social change, is that young people are often demanding access to health services that are poorly provisioned in provincial India, particularly in relation to issues like sexual health, mental health, reproductive health and that’s an area where I think young people are looking to government for more action.” Join us as Professor Jeffrey explains what implications this enormous election will have for the world’s second most populous nation, and for the rest of the globe as well. Read more: India Tomorrow: a podcast series from The Anthill – episode guide New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Transcript Craig Jeffrey: Those numbers are astonishing, aren’t they? And it’s very difficult, I think, for pundits to predict what precisely they’ll do in terms of the elections. What’s slightly easier to say, though, I think, is what’s in the minds of those voters. And I think two things are really crucial, one is jobs. So young people across India and particularly in parts of India where the economy’s been less successful at creating jobs - so some of the northern states, for example - are going to be really concerned with the capacity of the government to provide better employment opportunities. The second issue, I think, that they’ll be very concerned about is education. So they’ll be looking to see which political parties and politicians are promising to improve higher education, tertiary education more generally, the skills environment and school education. Because for a lot of young people who aren’t part of the elite in India, there is a mismatch, often, between the educational opportunities they obtain in school or university and then the employment market and the demands of key private sector firms. So I think jobs and education are going to be at the top of young people’s minds as they go into the polling booths. What are parties and politicians promising in those areas? A third area that’s perhaps less obvious is the issue of health care and public health. And my own observations, as an anthropologist and human geographer working in mainly Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand over the past 25 years on social change, is that young people are often demanding access to health services that are poorly provisioned in provincial India particularly in relation to issues like sexual health, mental health, reproductive health and that’s an area where I think young people are looking to government for more action. And I think that will also be in young people’s minds in the lead up to the elections. Read more: India Tomorrow part 1 podcast transcript: Fake news and the battle for information Bageshri Savyasachi: What jobs are available to young people and do they want to do those jobs? Craig Jeffrey: Well, I think one of the stories of Indian economic growth since 1990 is its failure to create a large number of what might be regarded as white collar or middle class jobs for the increasing numbers of young people who are getting high school matriculation certificates or degrees in India. Now, India’s not especially unusual in that regard. Particularly since the global financial crisis in the late 2000s, economies around the world have often found it difficult to create secure employment opportunities for people. Of course, automation, mechanisation is changing the nature of work throughout the world. So this isn’t specific to India but India is an almost very condensed or intense example of the failure of economic growth to create lots of good quality jobs, that long predates 2014 and the coming to power of the BJP. It’s a structural feature of the Indian economy since 1990 and especially since the mid-2000s period. So to get to your question of what jobs actually exist, in many cases what we’re seeing in India is people having to realign their expectations of what work they’re going to do in that five to 10 year period after they graduate from high school or university. This is not new. Ronald Dore wrote in his book The Diploma Disease in 1970 that India was the country of the BA bus conductor. So that sense of having to downplay your expectations in light of circumstances is quite old in India. But now, I would argue, that a lot of people with bachelors degrees in India would be very keen to have a job on state roadways as a bus conductor, so intense and cut-throat has the employment market become. So you’re seeing people with masters degrees, with PhDs having to do very small scale entrepreneurial business work, you’re seeing them especially having to go back into agriculture – not as large-scale agricultural innovators making large amounts of money and employing other people but rather working on quite small plots of land in an environment where they didn’t imagine that they would go back into farming. So one of the alarming statistics, I think, is that while in most of the period between 2000 and 2010 the number of young people in agriculture was declining, as you would expect in a country that’s undergoing a structural transformation from agriculture into manufacturing and services, in the 2010s and particularly since 2014 there has been an increase in young people in agriculture. Now that is quite worrying for India and reflects the point that jobs in the modern economy are not becoming available quickly enough, young people are not finding the infrastructural and institutional environment conducive to moving into successful medium-scale entrepreneurship where they employ other people and find an outlet for their talents. Bageshri Savyasachi: How crucial has mobilising young people been to the electoral successes of the ruling party, the BJP? Craig Jeffrey: That’s an easy question to answer because of the demographic structure of India and the figures for voting in 2014 in particular show that of course the BJP has been very successful at mobilising people generally in India to vote for them and that includes young people. It’s done so through making a series of important statements about its approach to social and economic change. And it has done so also through tapping into, I think, a sense of national identity that’s important to young people. So the BJP has been pretty successful. Not just the BJP but also various organisations connected to the party at the grassroots level. Bageshri Savyasachi: Is young people’s support for Modi on the wane? A lot of young people supported him when he was first running for prime minister but now a lot of young people are feeling disappointed. What do you think? Craig Jeffrey: I should do that classic academic thing of saying that I’m not an expert on the contemporary views of young people in India. Where I’ve done most of my research has been in particular pockets of India, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand and the bulk of that research was done in the period between 1995 and 2010. Since 2010, my work has been mainly in a village in quite a remote part of Uttarakhand, in Chamoli district, and I’ve written quite a lot about the social and political attitudes of young people in that village. Now, those are quite particular to one part of India. Like you and like lots of people, I read the newspapers, I talk to friends in different parts of India, I try to pick up on the streets a sense of the mood. But in that regard, I’m an armchair or amateur interpreter of young people’s political views at the moment. With those caveats in mind, my sense is that young people may not support Modi as much as they did five years ago but that doesn’t mean that they won’t vote for him. So one needs to maybe distinguish between support and how people will actually behave in the ballot booth. I think lots of people that I speak to recognise that given the high pitch to which Modi raised people’s aspirations in 2014 there was always going to be a sense of disappointment, that skilling hundreds of millions of people quickly was going to be a very tough ask. And that the vision of New India, while attractive in certain respects, is not borne out in social reality for those outside of the elite and particularly in provincial parts of India, in small town and rural India. So people see on the social and economic side a kind of mismatch between promise and actuality. And I think that’s undermined a certain enthusiasm for the ruling BJP government. I’m really not in a position to be able to adjudicate on the extent to which people have sort of fallen out of love with a particular vision of the nation as primarily Hindu or driven by a Hindu civilisational push. That’s, I think, more difficult to ascertain. It’s tricky. The question, I suppose, is: is 2019 to be like 2004, where there was a bit of a surprise that actually the Indian population, including the young population, did move away from the BJP? And it was partly because they didn’t feel that they were sharing in the social gains associated with economic growth. And it was partly, as you just observed, that some of the aspects of the sort of rhetoric of Hindu nationalism were not anymore particularly attractive. So it is possible that the same kind of cocktail will still exist in 2019, of sort of a sense of social and economic exclusion and a sense of being a little bit tired of the same message coming out from the government. But it’s very very difficult to tell. As I said, one has to distinguish between support and enthusiasm on the one hand and the actual decision to vote on the other. Because one thing you see again and again in elections in India is people putting their votes in for politicians or parties that they don’t actually very much like but they feel like they ought to. Ultimately, it’s the least bad choice that they want to make, which is of course it’s not distinctly Indian, it’s an aspect of how people vote across the world. Read more: India Tomorrow podcast series from The Anthill – trailer Bageshri Savyasachi: We’ll just have to wait and watch. What is the state of youth unemployment in India? My impression is that for young people, it’s hard to get a job if you don’t have a masters or a bachelor’s degree. And even then you may not get a job in your chosen field. Craig Jeffrey: Oh, that’s absolutely right. The recent NSSO figures show that youth unemployment in India is something around 16 or 17%. Now those figures are contested but my view is that they are fairly robust. And, of course, beyond that problem of outright unemployment, there’s a very large problem of underemployment where people are working in part-time insecure work that doesn’t reflect their skills, ambitions and credentials. So both outright unemployment and underemployment are becoming increasing problems in India. In 2010, I wrote a book called Timepass which drew attention to this problem based on fieldwork work in Western Uttar Pradesh. I talked about the emergence of a generation of young people who described themselves as people with nothing to do. Who were doing nothing but also in some sense saw themselves as being nothing. A very intense form of social suffering associated with a prolonged period of unemployment or underemployment. When I talk to young people in the same area now they say that actually that book is more relevant in 2019 than it was in 2010. Someone told me when I visited India two weeks ago “I felt like it had been written yesterday” and this reflects the way this problem of unemployment and underemployment to young people has intensified over the past nine years rather than dissipated. Bageshri Savyasachi: In her recent book, Dreamers: how young Indians are changing the world, the prominent Indian journalist Snigdha Poonam writes, “the world’s future depends on young Indians meeting their aspirations but it’s a pipe dream at this point”. How big of a problem is this disconnect between young Indians’ aspirations and their reality? Craig Jeffrey: Well, I think it’s a huge problem and I think that the book Dreamers is very successful in setting that out. It’s worth again going back to the point about demographics. One in eight people in the world is an Indian under the age of 30. It’s worth repeating that: one in eight people in the world is an Indian young person, someone under the age of 30. Now, that’s an extraordinary statistic and it gives a sense of the importance of that demographic for the future of Asia and of the world. Now unlike the same generation 25 years ago, that set of young people are very well aware of events in other parts of the world which are streamed to them via their mobile phones or on the internet. They are increasingly in secondary school, including young women, and in school they’re learning to obviously dream big. And the government is also encouraging those young people to see themselves as part of a new India that’s modern, in which people are based often in urban areas doing what historically has been described as sort of middle class work, service work. And now where you’ve got that situation of both demographic growth and the rapid sort of revolution of rising aspirations, you need an outlet for young people so that they feel as they move into their 20s and 30s that they’re achieving the goals that they desire. And that’s not happening. And the question then is, how much of a problem is that? Well, obviously for the young people concerned it’s a big problem for their families. Young people are not passive in that situation, they actively and creatively seek ways to make do. That may be entering into fallback work in agriculture. It may be finding jobs that perhaps they weren’t aspiring to originally but which provide a means for establishing a family and getting by, in areas like sales and marketing. But there is also a lot of just disappointment, I think, and a sense of stuckedness and limbo that, again, I wrote about in detail in my book Timepass. What’s surprising, perhaps, is that that sense of social suffering hasn’t led to more unrest in India and I think there are several reasons for that. I think partly because India is a democracy people have an outlet for frustration through the political system, through voting, through demonstrating on the streets. I think a second reason why there hasn’t been more political mobilisation is that people often perceive this as a personal failure rather than a failure of government or of society or as a structural failure, as social scientists would put it. They see it as “Well, I didn’t try hard enough” or “I wasn’t successful enough in that examination”. So it’s quite a lot of this failure I think often is personalised rather than seen as a reflection of the structural features of the Indian economy and the wider institutional environment in which people may be trying to start businesses. There’s a whole history of commentators on India talking about the country as being poised to sort of fall into unrest. I’m not going to do that. I think India, it holds together and as I said people are, young people are actively finding ways to make do. But I do think it’s a major social issue at the moment, the lack of capacity for young people to realise their aspirations and it should be and will remain an absolutely critical issue for government in India. Bageshri Savyasachi: How has national politics played out in Indian universities under Modi? Craig Jeffrey: Well, the information that leaks out on this issue tends to come from a small number of the very well-known universities in India. So universities like Jawaharlal Nehru University, Hyderabad University, Delhi University and that there has been, over the past few years as you’ll be well aware, a series of controversies over the government’s treatment of student protesters in those universities and of the ideological, the role of government in shaping how universities operate ideologically through, for example, the appointment of particular vice-chancellors with particular views on politics that then shape those institutions. Now, that’s a very important debate and it’s one that people can follow through a whole series of articles in magazines and newspapers in India. What interests me more is what’s happening outside of those well known central universities. What is happening actually in universities like the one that I worked in quite a bit 15 years ago. Chaudhary Charan Singh University which is the sixth largest university in the world if one excludes universities that provide distance education. And is actually, according to some sources, the second largest university in India after Indira Gandhi National Open University, which of course is largely a distance university, distance education university. So what’s happening in those big state universities that are affiliating other colleges. And that’s an area which desperately requires consideration. I think it would repay close social research. You’re seeing the emergence of different types of student politics to that which existed 15 years ago and some of those forms of student politics are linked to a Hindu nationalist agenda. Some are not. There’s a great deal of foment in those sort of more provincial universities that operates under the radar on which commentators and social scientists know very little about but which is really important in terms of shaping the environment in which the vast majority of students in India study, which is in colleges, not actually in universities. It’s in colleges affiliated to universities like Chaudhary Charan Singh University. I’d be really interested in hearing from anyone who’s listening to this podcast about their views or experiences of the curricular, of student action in India’s colleges where most people study. Bageshri Savyasachi: Do you think there is a growing shift towards illiberalism among India’s youth? Craig Jeffrey: Well, I think that’s a really interesting question. First, one has to think about, well, what is liberalism? And if we define that relatively narrowly in terms of a commitment to formal equality and individual freedoms then I think there’s evidence both ways. There’s evidence of young people contesting those visions of formal equality and individual freedom, for example through their views on areas like sexuality. So there was a recent Centre for the Study of Developing Societies survey that showed that the majority of young Indians didn’t approve of homosexuality. So there’s some evidence there of a certain kind of “illiberalism”. There’s evidence of young people’s involvement in societies or organisations that are policing people’s right to eat certain foods, again which would suggest the rise of a certain form of illiberalism. But there’s also of course a great deal of evidence the other way, that young people are very active in nongovernmental organisations that are seeking to protect people’s formal equality, protect people’s freedoms. The number of youth NGOs in India is growing very, very quickly. There’s also, I think, a very interesting debate about the relationship between the individual and liberalism in India. So an argument that’s been made by several people is that actually liberalism in India is organised around a sense of group rights rather than around individual rights. So it’s perfectly possible to be part of a caste organisation or a religious organisation that’s about equality and freedom but nevertheless is articulating those notions of equality and freedom through reference to caste and religion. So that would be an argument that I think lots of Hindu nationalists would make, is that even though Hindus are the majority and even though that they’re making an argument in Hindu terms, it’s an argument about tolerance and about liberalism rather than about violence or exclusion or limiting people’s freedoms. So it’s a very complicated question. There’s evidence both ways. There’s also a tangled set of debates about whether you could have a kind of liberalism based on a sense of group rights and whether so-called Western visions of liberalism can really be applied to a place like India, where notions of religion and caste and family are so strong. That might be a more detailed answer than you wanted but it’s one that really interests, this is a question that really interests me. Bageshri Savyasachi: What do young people think now in 2019 that their parents or grandparents may not have thought at the same age? Craig Jeffrey: Well, I think one of the effects of more young people studying in secondary school is that they’ve often absorbed notions of citizenship and good government that are communicated in school textbooks. So in one of the villages where I work, I was sitting working with a young person who was doing an English lesson recently and one of the English exercises was to write a letter to the local district magistrate in English complaining about the state of the drains in their neighbourhood. And this was obviously an attempt not only to learn English but to inculcate a particular vision of the citizen and of the state. And I think the effect of having large numbers of young people in school, being exposed to these narratives is actually that many more people have accepted and appreciate that kind of vision of rights and citizenship than in the 1990s when I started doing fieldwork in north India. So you see that’s reflected, for example, in young people’s support for anti-corruption movements. You see it in terms of young people’s questioning of forms of malpractice that exist in certain bureaucracies in India. Another point I’d really like to stress is the revolution that’s been happening in India with reference to women’s and especially young women’s rights and capacities. And that’s, I think, really a major success story in the last 20 years in India or 30 years, is that women and young women have achieved a much greater degree of autonomy and voice at all levels of society and in cities as well as in villages. Now, that comes, of course with all sorts of caveats about the continued problems of gender violence, of disparities in terms of pay and access to schooling and social goods. Nevertheless, I think that is a really important point to stress about the achievements of India in the period since 2000. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Image: Shutterstock

A scene at the Aquarius Festival, Nimbin, 1973. Flickr/Harry Watson Smith, CC BY-SA, CC BY-SAToday, Trust Me, I’m An Expert brings you a special episode carried across from another Conversation podcast, Essays On Air. In the north-east corner of Australia’s most populous state of New South Wales is a small former dairying and banana farming community. Today, however, that village is unrecognisable. Nimbin is now widely acknowledged as Australia’s counter-cultural capital, a sister city to both Woodstock in New York State and Freetown Christiania in Denmark. Among Nimbin’s tourist attractions today are its Hemp Embassy and the annual Mardi Grass festival in early May, which argues for the legislation of marijuana for personal and medicinal use. The village’s transformation from a rural farming community to its present form can be traced to 1973, when Nimbin became the unlikely host of the Aquarius Festival – a counter-culture arts and music gathering presented by the radical Australian Union of Students. A scene from the Aquarius Festival in Nimbin, 1973. Flickr/harryws20/Harry Watson Smith, CC BY Why is Nimbin the way it is? These social and political origins of the commodified hippie culture on display today in Nimbin have become less apparent to visitors and more recent migrants to the region. Visitors, especially those arriving on bus tours, tend to shop, buy coffee and leave again. To counter this, the Nimbin Tourism Office commissioned me in 2016 to produce an app-based audio walk to promote a deeper engagement for tourists with the town and help answer the question: why is Nimbin the way it is? Here’s a snippet: Local voices on how the 1973 Aquarius Festival changed Nimbin forever. Jeanti St Clair, CC BY2.44 MB (download) The audio walk, an adapted version of which features on today’s episode of Essays On Air, was published onto the GPS-enabled mobile phone app Soundtrails. Soundtrails is owned by The Story Project, an Australian organisation focusing on oral history-based audio walks and they’ve published more than a dozen such walks in regional Australia. A scene from the Aquarius Festival in Nimbin, 1973. Flickr/Harry Watson Smith/harryws20, CC BY Anyone with a smartphone can access it by downloading the app and the Nimbin audio walk and following the route through the village’s streets and parklands. Headphones provide the best experience. The stories I share with you today are excerpts from the Nimbin Soundtrail and are drawn from consultations and interviews with more than 60 Nimbin residents, Aquarius Festival participants and Indigenous elders. Here, I’ve tried to reconnect the past and the present to make clear how Nimbin became the counter-cultural capital that it is. And the caveat is that many of the events in this documentary walk happened more than 40 years ago. I’ve recognised that memories have merged with other retellings that evolved over the years and the definitive truth is perhaps unavailable. Any version of Nimbin’s counter-culture will be an incomplete history. The nine months it took me to gather these stories and make some sense of how they fitted together were rewarding. And while there are some who might dispute the accounts of what happened in these stories, others agree that it’s a fair record of Nimbin contemporary history. The full Nimbin soundtrack can be heard by downloading the Soundtrails app and listening here. And if you are ever in the area, I invite you to take a day out, visit and listen to the stories in town. A crowd at the Nimbin Hotel during the Aquarius Festival, Nimbin, 1973. Flickr/Harry Watson Smith, CC BY New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Essays On Air on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on PlayerFM or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Essays On Air. Additional audio Recording and editing by Jeanti St Clair from Southern Cross University. This podcast contains excerpts from the Nimbin Soundtrail, used with grateful permission from The Story Project/Soundtrails. See the app for the walk’s full credit list. Selections of original music from the Nimbin Soundtrail by Neil Pike. Excerpt from Deke Naptar’s Culture, Culture from Necroscopix (1970-1981), Free Music Archive Fair Use Excerpts: Nimbin Mardi Grass 2018 parade ABC, Vietnam Lottery, 1965 Pathé Australians Against War 1966 ABC, This Day Tonight, anti-Vietnam War Moratoriam, 1970 Gough Whitlam policy speech, 1972 It’s Time, ALP campaign song, 1972 Snow by David Szesztay Jeanti St Clair would like to again thank Lismore City Council and Nimbin Tourism for commissioning the Nimbin Soundtrail, and all the many contributors to the audio walk. Additional reading/listening Nimbin Soundtrail Image Lead image from Flickr/harryws20/Harry Watson Smith/, published under Creative Commons. Correction: An earlier version of this article included a caption that described the 1973 Aquarius Festival as the “first”. In fact, it was the first Aquarius Festival in Nimbin, and followed other Aquarius festivals that had taken place on university campuses. Jeanti St Clair has consulted in the past for Soundtrails as an associate producer. She was paid by Lismore City Council to produce the audio walk. She does not have any ongoing financial benefit from Soundtrails or Lismore City Council.

Political scientist Andy Marks says: ‘I’d suggest the momentum is with Labor and it hasn’t substantially shifted’. AAP Image/NIC ELLISWe are but a few weeks from a federal election, and the way the wind is blowing may depend on what state you’re in. Trust Me, I’m An Expert – along with Politics with Michelle Grattan – is bringing you state-focused podcast episodes as polling day approaches. To catch up on all the political drama unfolding in NSW, I spoke to political scientist (and self-described political tragic) Andy Marks, who predicted a Labor victory on May 18. “Labor will win this election. I think that’s virtually unquestionable. We’re just not seeing enough movement, even in the polls at this point, in the primary vote level, to say the Libs or the Coalition will hang on. I think this is going to be a Labor victory,” he said. Read more: The myth of 'the Queensland voter', Australia's trust deficit, and the path to Indigenous recognition Take this week’s Newspoll – which appeared to show the gap between the two major parties – with a grain of salt, he said. “Early in April, we saw exactly the same primary vote polling as we saw on the weekend. So, there hasn’t really been a discernible shift. You need to see a gap open up to the degree of around about five or six points, for the Coalition to even look like hanging on. It will stay tight, I think until polling day, but I’d suggest the momentum is with Labor and it hasn’t substantially shifted.” You can read the full transcript below, and hear The Conversation’s chief political correspondent Michelle Grattan talk with experts on the seats and issues to watch in WA and Victoria on the Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast. Production assistance by Tilly Gwinner. Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Caroline Fisher on the spin machines of #AusVotes19 New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks SBS news report ABC news report Image AAP Image/NIC ELLIS Transcript: Andy Marks: I’m Andy Marks, I’m a political scientist and Assistant Vice-Chancellor at Western Sydney University. Sunanda Creagh: So Andy, let’s just catch up on where things are up to in New South Wales. What do you see as the key issues in voters’ minds in New South Wales as polling day approaches? Andy Marks: New South Wales is a strange case. It’s the usual suspects in terms of issues but not in the usual way. So we’re seeing the economy feature but we’re not hearing too much in the way of big ticket reform. We are hearing some of that from Labor of course and it’s not about fiscal performance. That’s not winning votes anymore. It’s about issues like cost of living, it’s about issues like wage stagnation. At the other end, you have issues around negative gearing reform and franking credits which are more at the investment end. So a very unusual take on the economy in terms of elections. The other issues that feature, of course, Labor have made it about health in terms of cancer care and the package they have there. Alternatively, the Libs have sought to bring it back towards security and issues around border protection, of course, that we saw with John Howard coming into the campaign on the weekend. The big sleeper is climate and it’s a sleeper in the sense that it’s coming to the fore from a number of angles. We’re seeing the issue of energy reform come up from industry who are madly seeking coherent energy policy from both sides of the parliament. We’re seeing the issue of the environment played out with issues like Adani, and water, of course, is the big one in terms of agriculture and rural electorates across the country. So there’s three different lenses being applied but they all come up in terms of how both sides address the issue of climate. Sunanda Creagh: You mentioned negative gearing there. Sydney, being the centre of the property boom in Australia, people here seem to be mortgaged up to their eyeballs. Lots of people negatively gearing properties. Do you think that issue might be a decider for some Sydney voters who do take advantage of that policy? Andy Marks: Negative gearing will factor on the minds of many voters, but not in the seats that are pressure cookers, so they’re not going to swing seats. I think, for example, certainly among the retirement community those issues, particularly around the franking credits matter, are of importance. The housing market in Sydney and across the eastern states more broadly is softening anyway ahead of this measure. It’s hard to tie a definitive link to that and the coming reforms, should Labor win government. It’s not an issue that’s going to turn swinging seats, but it will factor into some more rusted-on voters. Sunanda Creagh: And speaking of seats, what do you see as the key seats to watch? Andy Marks: Across New South Wales, I reckon there’s about five that are up for a change. At the outset, I have to say this election won’t be won or lost in New South Wales. It’s most likely Queensland where you have up to eight seats and margins of 4% or less that will decide it. In Victoria, there’ll be some significant movement as well. There’s about five that I’m looking at in New South Wales in terms of potential change. Wentworth, of course, is the big one with the contest between Kerryn Phelps and Dave Sharma. Lindsay, where Emma Husar has been moved aside through misconduct allegations, and you have a contest there and out at Western Sydney. Banks, the immigration minister faces a challenge there on a 1.4% margin. Then we, move into some coastal regional seats. Gilmore, where former ALP president Warren Mundine is running against Labor’s Fiona Phillips. Robertson on the Central Coast which is held by just 1.1% by the Libs, so they’re the ones where I think you can see some movement. Now the exciting stuff, in terms of drama, Warringah, of course, where former PM Tony Abbott is facing a challenge. In Reid, Turnbull-backer Craig Laundy turned that razor thin margin into almost a moderately safe seat for the Libs, and that’s up in play again as well. Sunanda Creagh: You mentioned Gilmore, that’s an area that takes in places like Shoalhaven, Jervis Bay, and some of those Batemans Bay type areas. Tell us, what are some of the issues that will be in voters minds in that area? Andy Marks: Look that’s a difficult one to pick. It’s really a four-way contest. You have a candidate in Warren Mundine who was essentially parachuted in by Morrison. The controversy there, of course, being his former role with Labor. You also have Katrina Hodgkinson, who was a former Nationals New South Wales minister and really reputable individual running against the Labor candidate Fiona Phillips. And Grant Schulz, the Lib turned independent who was passed over by Mundine. So, it’s interesting in the sense that the way the vote splits over the course of the election will be something to watch. It’s really one that’s very uncertain for all of the players. Sunanda Creagh: You mentioned Reid, which takes in Canada Bay, Burwood, Strathfield and is currently held by Craig Laundy for the Liberals. He’s been somewhat of a comparatively moderate voice. What do you think will be the issues there? Andy Marks: Reid is an interesting one. Laundy was an incredibly strong local member and he stood up against his own party’s attempted reforms of the anti-discrimination act. That area was lost to Labor in the recent New South Wales election, due to comments made by the Labor opposition leader around Asians taking jobs. Really retrograde comments on his part. So the momentum probably was with Labor, whether the voters have forgiven the foibles of the state party though will remain to be seen. But, that’s a big loss to the Libs in Craig Laundy moving on. Sunanda Creagh: I wanted to ask you about the seat of Farrer. That’s a regional seat, it takes in places like Hay, Murrumbidgee. Some of those areas around the Murray Darling, the Central Darling. With the seat of Farrer, what do you think of some of the issues there? Andy Marks: Look Farrer is an interesting one - you wouldn’t be talking about an electorate with a 20% plus margin as being one that’s up for grabs, but it is. We saw swings in the state election against the coalition of up to 26% in Murray, 19% in Barwon, and around 37% in Orange. So these rural electorates are very volatile and the issue of water management, of course, is the dominant thread across a seat like Farrer. But it’s a diverse seat. So you have areas like Albury, where unemployment is very high, educational attainment is quite low, economic activity has been suppressed through the drought. So the issues across that electorate are incredibly diverse and equally you don’t have in the New South Wales case we had the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party running against the Nationals quite successfully in three seats. They’re not a consolidated force at the federal level. Really, Farrer’s in play because of the Albury Mayor Kevin Mack, who is running the strongest challenge against Sussan Ley. She’s held onto that seat since 2001 and that’s Tim Fischer’s old seat. So, it should be a sure bet for them. This is suddenly a seat that’s in play. Sunanda Creagh: So you mentioned water being an issue in the seat of Farrer, and certainly that’s shaping up to be an issue across the board. If you believe what you read on social media, suddenly everybody’s talking about water buybacks and we’ve had the big story breaking around the water buybacks issue that involved Barnaby Joyce. I’m interested to know what you think on how that issue may influence voters in the lead up to polling day. Andy Marks: Look, there’s already a bit of disaffection towards the Nationals. I think their own internal troubles around leadership, and the other controversies they’ve had around Andrew Broad and other figures have given weight to the perception that their mind is not on the game. They’ve taken their eye off the ball in terms of the concerns of rural voters. So, that’s why we are seeing such a pronounced reaction against them in some seats. Whether that anger was spent, at the New South Wales election and the earlier Victorian poll remains to be seen. I can’t see a repeat of the swings we saw in the state election here in NSW. But certainly, some very generous margins will be really damaged, I think. Sunanda Creagh: So let’s talk about Warringah where Tony Abbott is facing that strong challenge from independent Zali Steggall, who’s been supported by GetUp! in her campaign. That’s also become a point of contention and a point of attack for her political foes. How do you see things playing out? Andy Marks: Look, there’s no doubt it’s going to be a contest. Zali Steggall will take it down to the wire. People need to be aware though that Tony Abbott loves a fight, shifting him on that margin of over 11% is going to be incredibly difficult. It’s not like Bennelong, for example, where we saw John Howard go as a result of demographic shifts and other factors. And it’s not like Wentworth where, of course, Turnbull stepped aside. A former PM, even one that’s controversial, still attracts some traction among voters. Zali Steggall has done well in opening the debate up into issues that challenge the principles that Tony Abbott’s put forward. So, forcing him to for example to talk more about climate, to talk more about issues where he’s clearly a little uncomfortable, has been a good tactic on her part. Obviously, the work of groups like GetUp! will influence things as well. I just can’t see it shifting. I think Tony Abbott is far too an experienced player to go down without a fight, and this is the guy that loves to be backed into a corner. I might be proven wrong, but I think he’ll just hang on in Warringah. Sunanda Creagh: And you mentioned former PMs, speaking of which, let’s talk about Wentworth. Do you think voters will punish the Coalition for turfing out Malcolm Turnbull? We saw Turnbull’s son, Alex Turnbull actively encouraging people not to vote for the Liberal candidate Dave Sharma. And as it turned out Kerryn Phelps did win that seat. So how will things play out there? Andy Marks: Wentworth is an interesting one. I like to call it the contest for the soul of the Liberal Party. Because really, it’s about whether the party will choose to push forward in a progressive way, or revert more to those hard right tendencies that we’ve seen in recent times. The thing to watch at Wentworth will be whether Phelps has managed to translate in a really short timeframe that protest vote into a base. And that would mean Phelps has to have really strong points of differentiation on issues like climate, immigration and border protection. Which she’s, to a very large extent, done on the latter issue. Whether that’s enough to shift people across for good remains to be seen. That’s one that’s too hard to call. Sunanda Creagh: So, Andy Marks what’s your prediction? Who do you think is going to win this federal election? Andy Marks: Look, Labor will win this election. I think that’s virtually unquestionable. We’re just not seeing enough movement, even in the polls at this point in the primary vote level to see the Libs or the Coalition hang on. I think this is going to be a Labor victory. Sunanda Creagh: Even with Newspoll saying it’s tightening as voting day draws closer? Andy Marks: You have to look again at that primary vote figure. Early in April, we saw exactly the same primary vote polling as we saw on the weekend. So, there hasn’t really been a discernible shift. You need to see a gap open up to the degree of around about five or six points, for the Coalition to even look like hanging on. It will stay tight, I think until polling day, but I’d suggest the momentum is with Labor and it hasn’t substantially shifted. So with the Coalition on 38% and Labor on 37%, I don’t see it shifting sufficiently for there to be a change in the momentum. Sunanda Creagh: Let’s talk about the upper house. What do you see as the issues to watch there? Andy Marks: Look, that’s an interesting one from the New South Wales point of view. Jim Molan, arguably their highest profile senator, finds himself in an unwinnable spot on their ticket. This is largely due to reforms that he instigated, internal party reform. So it’s a big ask therefore for somebody to get up. You know, you’re going to require a quota in excess of 14% of the vote to get a spot. Brian Burston’s the other interesting one. He’s a former One Nation representative, now with Clive Palmer’s outfit, and he’s their parliamentary leader in the house. It’s a very interesting contest there. There’s Doug Cameron, a long-standing senator for Labor, retiring, and Tony Sheldon, the former Transport Workers Union secretary coming in on his spot. Sunanda Creagh: And just lastly, what do you want to say about preferences? Do you think preferences will make a big difference in this election? Andy Marks: Look, there’s no doubt that the question around where the United Australia Party’s preferences flow has been a dominant issue in Queensland. I don’t see it being of sufficient weight to shift the momentum, which again in those marginal electorates, up to eight of them, is all with Labor at the moment. So, it will make things a little trickier to call earlier. But, I still see things going Labor’s way in those key seats. Sunanda Creagh: Any final comments? Andy Marks: Look, this is a contest where New South Wales will provide plenty of action. But it’s not going to be the place where it’s won or lost. But it’s certainly going to be the place of high drama. Sunanda Creagh: Andy Marks, thank you so much for your time. Andy Marks: Thank you.

Today we're asking: what Queensland seats are the ones to watch on election night? How to give Indigenous Australians a true voice in politics? And how can we improve trust in the political system? ShutterstockToday we’re bringing you a special discussion about the federal election that took place at the launch of a book of Conversation essays, Advancing Australia: Ideas for a Better Country. Recorded at Avid Reader bookshop in Brisbane on April 17, the discussion featured Indigenous academic lawyer Eddie Synot from Griffith University and Griffith’s Dean of Engagement, Professor Anne Tiernan. Eddie Synot is currently completing his PhD, taking a hard look at the liberal rights discourse of Indigenous recognition, and has also taught Indigenous Studies. And political scientist Anne Tiernan has worked in and advised Australian governments at all levels, so she knows politics from the inside out. Together with Liz Minchin, the Executive Editor of The Conversation Australia & New Zealand, the panel covered topics including the Queensland seats to watch on election night, how to give Indigenous Australians a true voice in politics, and how to improve trust in the political system. Today’s episode was recorded by Michael Adams from Griffith University. Read more: Our Advancing Australia series is about starting a conversation about what really matters New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Recording and editing by Michael Adams from Griffith University Additional reading Buy Advancing Australia: Ideas for a Better Country Griffith University’s special election coverage, including interactive maps of Queensland’s 30 federal electorates The Uluru statement showed how to give First Nations people a real voice – now it’s time for action by Griffith University’s Eddie Synot The 14 Indigenous words for money on our new 50 cent coin by the University of Queensland’s Felicity Meakins Explainer: the significance of the Treaty of Waitangi by the University of Waikato’s Sandra Morrison and Ingrid L M Huygens The end of uncertainty? How the 2019 federal election might bring stability at last to Australian politics by University of Canberra’s Michelle Grattan Image Shutterstock

Mukurtu is a Warumungu word meaning “dilly bag” or a safe keeping place for sacred materials. Nina Maile Gordon/The Conversation CC-NY-BDReader advice: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised that this article may contain images of people who have died. A few years ago, the State Library of NSW was working with Moree’s Dhiiyaan Centre to pull together archival photographs of the 1965 Freedom Rides, an Aboriginal-led protest against racist segregationist policies in NSW. Moree – where Aboriginal people were once banned from swimming in the public pool – was an important site in the history of protest against official segregation in Australia, and a key stop on the Freedom Rides route. Demonstrating outside the Council Chambers at Moree, February 1965 Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation. Digital ID: 5606003. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation, Author provided (No reuse) Kirsten Thorpe - a Worimi woman, professional archivist and now a researcher at UTS – was then at the State Library, working with Mitchell Librarian Richard Neville to dig out old protest photos to share with the Moree community in the lead up to an exhibition. But in practice, collecting, sharing and storing such digital archives in perpetuity is no simple matter. Surveying at Bowraville, February 1965. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation. Digital ID: 5606019. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation., Author provided (No reuse) How to ensure the material is stored safely, so the whole process doesn’t need to be repeated in a few years time? How to capture the outpouring of memories and stories that such an exhibition evokes? What if the exhibition inspires more people to come forward with important historical material or accounts – where does that material end up? And how to ensure Indigenous people are empowered to tell their own stories and have a say over how digital archives are managed? Enter Mukurtu. Moree residents look on as the students protest outside the Moree Council Chambers, February 1965. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation. Digital ID: 5606004. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation., Author provided (No reuse) Mukurtu (pronounced MOOK-oo-too) is an online system that aims to help Indigenous communities conserve stories, videos, photographs, songs, word lists and other digital archives. Mukurtu is a Warumungu word meaning “dilly bag” or a safe keeping place for sacred materials. It’s a free, mobile, and open source platform built with Indigenous communities in mind to manage and share digital cultural heritage. Kirsten Thorpe says it’s the kind of thing that would have been really useful back when she was collating Freedom Rides material for the Moree community. Conserving Indigenous archives for future generations Mukurtu is/are already being used by Native American communities to store and preserve digital archives, and Kirsten Thorpe – now a senior researcher at the Jumbunna Institute for Indigenous Education and Research at UTS – is involved in making Mukurtu more widely accessible in Australia. She works with other key players, such as Professor Kimberly Christen at the Centre for Digital Curation and Scholarship in the US and Richard Neville at the State Library of NSW, to ensure the Mukurtu Project has the institutional support it needs to help Indigenous communities protect their cultural heritage for generations to come. On today’s episode of the podcast, Kirsten Thorpe and Richard Neville explain why Mukurtu is needed, how it’s being used and what’s at stake if we don’t find better ways to empower Indigenous people with the skills and tech to conserve and manage digital archives. Freedom rider Charles Perkins (right) surveying members of the Moree community about living conditions, February 1965. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation. Digital ID: 5605027. Photo from the Tribune archive, State Library of NSW. Courtesy the SEARCH Foundation., Author provided (No reuse) New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks ABC News 1965 intro music. Lee Rosevere, Betrayal. Lead image: Nina Maile Gordon

Today on Trust Me I'm An Expert, we're bringing you a special episode carried across from The Conversation podcast Politics with Michelle Grattan. Mick Tsikas(AAP)/The Conversation/ShutterstockToday’s federal budget, as predicted, was chock full of sweeteners designed to woo voters on the eve of what promises to be a bitterly fought election. We’ve got loads of analysis and at-a-glance graphics over here but if you’re just looking for the short, sharp version – what was announced, who’s affected, what it all means as polling day approaches – you’re in the right place. Today on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we’re bringing you a special episode carried across from The Conversation’s Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast (you can subscribe to it over here). Chief political correspondent Michelle Grattan, Business and Economics Editor Peter Martin and political and economic journalist Tim Colebatch have all just emerged from the budget lockup. Here’s their take on all the news that’s just broken. Transcript Michelle Grattan: We’re here in the budget lockup and, as we all expected, this document is very much pitched at the imminent election. Here to discuss the politics and the economics, I have today Peter Martin, the economics editor of The Conversation and Tim Colebatch, a writer for Inside Story. Peter, can I start with you? What are the standout features of this budget as far as the ordinary voter is concerned? Peter Martin: A tax cut that goes back in time, Michelle, which is a pretty tricky thing to do. But people are going to get a bigger tax cut at the end of the financial year that’s about to end than they expected when it began. They’re going to get a rebate of about A$1000 instead of the $500 that was promised. Now, you might say that that’s electoral in focus because that’s money that will be going into people’s pockets in a matter of weeks, depending how soon they get their tax returns in. But it’s probably also economic-based as well, in that in the budget we see that, frankly, the domestic economy – yeah, yeah we’ve got money coming in from mining – but the domestic economy, in terms of consumer spending and so on, isn’t flash. It’s interesting to note the size of this bonus that’s going to people, that’s doubled, will be about $1000 for a lot of people in the middle income range. That $1000 – 500 now doubled to roughly 1000 – is more than the Rudd government’s first cash splash during the GFC of $800. Michelle Grattan: So, Tim, do you think that in this budget, the government has sacrificed the economic for the political? Tim Colebatch: No, I think it’s actually a fairly modest budget. It’s really, given that we’re heading right into the election after this week, into the election campaign, it’s really quite modest in what it gives. As Peter says, it’s given another $500 to people in the near term. But then to wait for a bigger tax cut, you’re going to have to wait till 22-23. Well down the track. And the new spending, likewise, is really fairly restrained. It amounts, in net terms, to $2-3 billion a year in a budget of $500 billion a year, so we are not talking big bikkies. Michelle Grattan: Now just in terms of the economic outlook. There seem to be two messages: that the economy is fundamentally sound but there are all sorts of clouds around the place. Tim Colebatch: Well I think governments always say the economy is fundamentally sound. I think they were saying that in 1990, and… Michelle Grattan: Before the recession we had to have. Tim Colebatch: That’s right. Yes, as we were going into recession, they were saying: the ship is on course. And no, I think what Peter said is quite right. The economy is not flash, as consumer spending is not flash, and there’s reasons to think that the decline in house prices will have an impact on consumer spending. Indeed, Treasury admits that itself in the economic analysis. And so there’s good reason for the government to be giving a bit of stimulus to the economy, and what is in its electoral interests and what is in the economy’s interests are very nicely in coincidence. Michelle Grattan: Now, Peter, what about the wages story? We’ve heard so much about wages recently. Peter Martin: What the government has done in this budget is what it’s done in the previous budget – and the budget before that and the budget before that – which is to assume that wages are going to take off. They going to increase. The rate at the moment is 2.3%. After a while it’s going to go up to 3%. But as they’ve done for, I think, about five budgets in a row now, they’ve just pushed out the start date of that improvement. Now we are seeing a little bit of improvement. Wage growth is slightly higher than it has been, but the future of that is uncertain. Not uncertain if you, as Tim said, not uncertain if you look at the perennially “things are okay” sort of budget rhetoric. But with the hit to incomes of housing prices, if businesses start thinking that consumer spending is not going to hold up then, you’re looking at a situation where suddenly workers won’t have whatever bargaining power they’ve got and wage growth will, in fact, weaken or won’t get any stronger. So it’s the forecasts, as always really, forecast that the good times are just around the corner but there’s been scarcely any sign of them. Now, I’m not really blaming the Treasury for forecasting good times around the corner because in the long run, they say, they have a model: wage growth has got to… Tim Colebatch: They assume that things work in the long run. Peter Martin: And they assume the long run will happen eventually, right? That wage growth has got to equal inflation, which is around 2%, plus productivity growth, which is around 1%. That’ll give you 3%. The fact that that hasn’t happened hasn’t stopped them from believing it will. Tim Colebatch: Well, can I just register a slight disagreement of tone? Peter does see things in black and white and I’m more of a grey person. I mean it is – wage growth is rising very slowly. It is rising and I think the forecasts this year are more reasonable than in previous years. They’re not forecasting it to go back to 3.5% or 3 and ¾%. It’s a pretty modest – I think it’s only another quarter of a percent up. They are expecting to get to two and a half this year, which may be heroic, this financial year… Peter Martin: But it ends up at three as it has always ended up at three. Tim Colebatch: No, it was 3.75 at one stage. Peter Martin: The other thing which is good in what they’ve done is, in their forecasts, there’s been realism in the forecast whether that’s come from the Treasury, most probably, or the Treasurer. They could have factored in – the convention would have allowed them to factor in – these high iron ore prices we’ve got. The convention is that you take the previous four weeks iron ore price and assume it will continue for four years. They haven’t done that. They’ve assumed, in line with their advice and common sense, that this iron ore price is going to come down as Chinese demand goes away. Now, that’s cost the government money in the budget. It didn’t need to do that. So I think you would be a brave person to say that the forecasts in totality are anything other than reasonable. You’ve always got to give them some slack. It’s their job, and I don’t think you can say they’ve done it wrong. Michelle Grattan: Now, Tim, what are the vulnerabilities of this budget that Labor can home in on? Tim Colebatch: At first sight, I can’t see anything that I would think provides an obvious lever for Labor to hone in on. And, as I said, to me it’s a modest budget. I think what’s particularly interesting about that, Michelle, is that they have not spent all this money. They have programmed in for a budget surplus next year of $7 billion. And, as Peter says, on reasonably conservative and sensible assumptions. For a government in a state, electoral state, that this government is in, that I think shows a fair bit of restraint and it recognises that the debate has shifted. And people are less likely to be bought by big spending and more likely to be bought by the impression of fiscal reticence and control and delivering a budget surplus. And I think what is particularly interesting is that Labor, remember, took a lot of flak in 2016 because it came out with the budget. Its budget was going to be… Peter Martin: Spending the benefits of the boom! Tim Colebatch: They were going to have bigger deficits in the short term than the Coalition and this went against their message that in the long term they were better managers. So, I wouldn’t be surprised if Labor actually targets a higher budget surplus in the next year than this one. Michelle Grattan: And just finally, Peter, do you think that this will change the conversation for the government? Peter Martin: Will it change the conversation for the government? I think it gives Labor an advantage and Labor has always had that advantage. Ever since it announced its action against negative gearing and capital gains tax, ever since it announced its changes to dividend imputation policy. Labor has more money than the government. I don’t think it will want to disagree with anything in the budget, but it still has an advantage over the government. Now, there is nothing that government could do to take this away. But what Josh Frydenberg has done is brought down a budget, his first, about which he is unlikely to be embarrassed in the future. Look at Peter Costello’s last budget. He gave away money in ways that turned out to be unsustainable, to seniors and all sorts of people. Seniors got cheques just for being old and so on. Josh Frydenberg hasn’t done that. He has begun to build a legacy that Peter Costello began to throw away. Michelle Grattan: Tim Colebatch, Peter Martin, thank you very much. That’s all for our budget lockup podcast. Thank you to my producer Eliza Berlage. We will be back with more interviews later in the week. Goodbye for now. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Shorten to announce Labor's 'living wage' plan but without an amount or timing Additional audio and production Today’s episode was recorded and edited by Eliza Berlage. Theme beats: Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Image Mick Tsikas(AAP)/The Conversation/Shutterstock

In Tuesday night's budget we can expect a last ditch attempt to woo voters ahead of the election in May. AAP Image/Mick TsikasNext Tuesday night is budget night, and it’s happening on the eve of a federal election where the Coalition is in for the fight of its life to hold onto government. The Conversation’s team of editors and experts will be in the budget lockup at parliament house next Tuesday, where they’ll have early access to what the government plans to do with our money this year. Read more: Expect tax cuts and an emptying of the cupboards in a budget cleanout as the billions roll in On the night, we’ll bring you Chief Political Correspondent Michelle Grattan’s analysis of what’s set to be a last ditch attempt to woo voters ahead of the election next month. And veteran economics correspondent Peter Martin will look in detail at where the money is going - and what the mooted tax cuts look like. Economist Richard Holden will examine the government’s strategy, and former Chief Economist of the ANZ bank, Warren Hogan, now with UTS, will bring us the economic outlook. And if you’re a podcast person, check your podcast app on Tuesday night for a fresh episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert and Politics with Michelle Grattan (subscribe now, if you haven’t already). There, Peter Martin and Michelle Grattan will be speaking with political and economic journalist Tim Colebatch about this election-year budget. We’ll also bring you some nifty graphics that will explain at-a-glance the big announcements from the budget papers. And as always, our experts will be on hand to respond to any big announcements in health, education, energy and infrastructure. Keep an eye out for our special budget newsletter on the night (you can subscribe here), and on our Facebook and Twitter at @ConversationEDU. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Read more: Shorten to announce Labor's 'living wage' plan but without an amount or timing Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Sky News report. Sky News report. Image: AAP/Mick Tsikas

It's a fight for a rapidly vanishing centre, which will make passing bills difficult for whoever wins. Chris Pavlich/Dean Lewins(AAP)We are but weeks away from an election in New South Wales – polling day is on March 23 – and it will be eagerly watched. Not just for the outcome but for the implications for the looming federal election. That’s according to Dr Andy Marks, a political scientist from Western Sydney University, who tells us on the podcast today that this state election outcome may give us some clues on how some global political themes are playing out here in Australia. “It’s not just about state politics. Increasingly the Australian electoral cycles, federally and at the state level, are subject to changes in political dynamics internationally. We’re seeing the erosion of centrist politics around the world […] and that even affects humble New South Wales.” He predicts a weakened Nationals Party will be facing a strong challenge from the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party and that One Nation’s Mark Latham is almost a sure bet to win a spot in the NSW upper house. “I do think you’ll see a minority Coalition government returned but the really interesting play is what happens in the upper house. Currently, the Coalition have to deal with two to three independents or minor parties to get stuff over the line,” said Dr Marks. “I think what we’ll see in the coming parliament is that that the ranks of cross-benchers will expand quite dramatically, up to seven to nine cross-benchers. So that makes negotiations pretty fraught. "This is really going to be new territory,” he said. “We’ve got One Nation returning to the fold. Mark Latham, their number one ticket holder in the upper house, will get in. But potentially they’ll get two seats in the upper house. You’ll have an emboldened Shooters and Fishers Party. "So you really have a really broad field and it’s going to mean negotiating the passage of bills will be pretty difficult.” We also talked about: why East Hills (which takes in suburbs like Panania, Condell Park, the Bankstown aerodrome, Padstow, Revesby and others) is the most marginal seat in NSW how a plan to demolish and rebuild two stadiums turned into a political headache for NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian why Michael Daley, who took over from Luke Foley as NSW Labor leader late last year, is only now just making his mark how local issues in rural seats may end up deciding the fate of the state what it all means as we head into the May federal election. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks ABC news report on 2GB interview 2GB interview clip. Image: Chris Pavlich/Dean Lewins(AAP)

Shutterstock/AAP/The ConversartionWhen Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced this week that a “sophisticated state actor” had targeted the big Australian political parties in a major cyber attack, the revelation threw up more questions than answers. Who did it and how? What data did they get their hands on? How vulnerable is our data – and our democracy? Read more: We've been hacked – so will the data be weaponised to influence election 2019? Here’s what to look for To make sense of it all, we’re hearing today from Nigel Phair, the director of UNSW Canberra Cyber and an expert on the intersection of crime, technology and society. He said that while hacks like these should be seen as “the new normal” there was good reason to be concerned. “Just merely having a breach is quite a big deal. Secondly, you look at the information that they hold. Political parties have information on donors – who they are and how much they give and what they want for it. They have information on the electorate, they have information on their own party politics and tactics for Senate Estimates for Question Time, those sorts of things,” he said. “So that’s a lot of rich data that you could then use as a nation state to infiltrate other areas to perhaps change voter outcomes.” The hackers may have used social engineering techniques such as phishing to gain access to the data, he said. “They are quite unsophisticated attacks. It’s often spoofing an organisation or a person and getting someone, an end user, to reveal login credentials. And because we share passwords across multiple logins, that’s how you gain access to a trophy asset,” he said, adding that the hack served as a reminder to use a password manager and ensure all passwords are long and strong. “I think we should be very concerned. We’ve got a great case study from the US. We’re very allied to the US and when you look at how nation states have disrupted that election I think it’s a given that there are many out there that’ll disrupt ours.” You can read an edited transcript of the interview below. Read more: A state actor has targeted Australian political parties – but that shouldn't surprise us New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio editing by Wes Mountain, production assistance from Bageshri Savyasachi. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks ABC news report Image: AAP (Various)/Shutterstock/The Conversation Transcript SUNANDA CREAGH: And so what’s the main concern? Why was everybody so worried about this, particularly earlier this week? NIGEL PHAIR: I think when you look at the history with the attack in the US on the DNC (Democratic National Committee), and a lot that’s been reported in the US about nation states trying to infiltrate the election process over there and change people’s voting habits and we’re some weeks/months from an election here – it strikes at the heart of what could be our dear beloved democracy, when you have nation state actors trying to influence voting outcomes. SUNANDA CREAGH: And what do you think this week’s events tell us about the cyber security weaknesses here in Australia? NIGEL PHAIR: It tells us that no organisation is immune. It tells us that cyber is another vector for people trying to win the hearts and minds of people. SUNANDA CREAGH: If I was a sophisticated nation state using this as a strategy to achieve that goal, how might this sort of hack help me achieve that goal? What do you think they were actually trying to do here? NIGEL PHAIR: There’s a number of things that they’ve achieved. Firstly, is the goal of doing the hack. When we look at parliament house, we look at the political parties, when we think about it, they’re revered from a democratic perspective. Just merely having a breach is quite a big deal. Secondly, you look at the information that they hold. Political parties have information on donors – who they are and how much they give and what they want for it. They have information on the electorate, they have information on their own party politics and tactics for Senate Estimates for Question Time, those sorts of things. So a lot of rich data that you could then use as a nation state to infiltrate other areas to perhaps change voter outcomes. SUNANDA CREAGH: China has strongly denied that it was involved but a lot of speculation has focused on that country, as opposed to Russia or another state actor that’s been linked to this kind of behaviour in other contexts. In Australia, why do you think speculation has focused on China as a potential perpetrator? NIGEL PHAIR: Basically because they’re a near neighbour to ours, they’re in our arc of instability. They’re well known for their theft of intellectual property online. They’re well known for not adhering to the international norms of cyberspace. Add that all up and that’s why people keep pointing the finger at them. SUNANDA CREAGH: And I believe there’s news reports that China was linked to other previous hacks of universities and parliament and other key pieces of computer infrastructure around Australia. Is that right? NIGEL PHAIR: That’s right. They’ve been well known to do a range of cyber attacks on a range of different organisations – government, non-government, commercial etc. SUNANDA CREAGH: So in the context of concerns that Australians have about the government’s capacity to keep our personal information safe – and I’m thinking here about the talk around My Health Record, the census – what does this hack tell us, if anything, about how capable the government and people in power are at guarding our private details? NIGEL PHAIR: I think we need to go back a couple of steps before we start to think about this. Government, what they haven’t done is take the citizenry of Australia on a journey. They haven’t explained to them what it means to participate in a digital economy. What it means to be a good online citizen and transact with government and social media, commercially, e-commerce. If we had that narrative from the outset then people could understand that the internet is just another public place where they act ethically and lawfully and responsibly to what they do in the real world, then I think we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Because people would be able to have an informed decision about what it means to participate with My Health Record, or participate in an online census or other government instruments. But at the moment we just never had that background and people don’t have the certainty and because of that they make knee-jerk reactions. SUNANDA CREAGH: Where do you land on this issue, do you think the government is capable of keeping that data safe? NIGEL PHAIR: I think the government is capable of keeping it safe. The systems around My Health Record for example are really quite secure and there’s a lot of technologies, a lot of process and a lot of policy to ensure. But the reality is if there is going to be a breach of my health record, it’ll probably happen at a doctor’s surgery where there’s an unpatched or unprotected computer, or a user not using a good password, or accidentally emailing the wrong patient records to someone. It will be the end user compromise which we’ll see will be the failure. And that’s what the government isn’t investing in. It’s great to say they have a great secure system themselves but again we need to wind the clock back several years and start telling people this is what it means. SUNANDA CREAGH: Just on this hack, how might it have been actually perpetrated? Can you just explain that to me in really basic terms? NIGEL PHAIR: We don’t know yet until the forensic examination is done about how it occurred. Invariably, it was most probably some sort of social engineering attack against someone on the network. Most probably a phishing attack or something similar, where a person is targeted rather than the network itself is targeted. But again, until we know the forensics, we’re just speculating. SUNANDA CREAGH: And those phishing and social engineering attacks, am I right in thinking they mainly focus on trying to get somebody to reveal their password or their login details to another person who is perhaps impersonating somebody else or impersonating an official password reset type email. Is that the sort of thing you mean there about the social engineering? NIGEL PHAIR: Invariably, they are quite unsophisticated attacks. It’s spoofing an organisation or a person. Getting someone, an end user, to reveal login credentials and because we share passwords across multiple logins, that’s how you gain access to a trophy asset. SUNANDA CREAGH: So the lesson there for all of us really is never reuse your password details and get a password manager. Am I right? NIGEL PHAIR: You are right. SUNANDA CREAGH: We’ve heard some commentators saying that this is the new normal, that this type of attack really should be expected in this day and age. What do you think about that? NIGEL PHAIR: It’s been the new normal for quite some time. The reality is, most organisations get hacked just don’t know they’ve been hacked. This is all of a sudden a trophy matter, it’s come at the time where parliament is sitting, so it’s really got some attention in society, which is a great thing. And added to that the government that’s come out and actually said this is what’s happened and that is a completely different policy shift, whereas before it was swept under the carpet. SUNANDA CREAGH: Do you think that’s a positive policy shift? NIGEL PHAIR: There’s a great positive. We need to start having a conversation about what it means to be online and what it means to participate. And the fact is there’s countries out there, there’s actors out there trying to do us harm and Australians need to be brought into that confidence. SUNANDA CREAGH: There was a lot of talk about this at the start of this week, but it really has sort of shifted off the news headlines toward the end of the week and some people are now saying that was a lot of noise over what? And I’ve seen some media commentators saying that this was an announcement that fed into a narrative of fear as election day draws closer. And that is a criticism that’s been directed at the government in the past in their rhetoric around border control and security in more general terms. To what extent do you see this announcement as about safety and awareness and how much of it is politics? NIGEL PHAIR: I couldn’t put a percentage on either way but I focus purely on the safety and awareness side of it. I just think that’s the value of the message – is the safety and awareness. SUNANDA CREAGH: It’s an important message to get out to make people aware of those risks. And, as you say, bring them into that conversation around online security and online participation in an active globally networked world, is that right? NIGEL PHAIR: That’s right. SUNANDA CREAGH: So what needs to be done? What should governments do to reduce risks and educate people? NIGEL PHAIR: So the first thing for their internal networks, they need to do a proper risk management exercise. They need to identify the key target assets they hold and work out how sensitive that information is and put appropriate controls around where that data sits. Whether it’s a technology stack, whether it’s internal, cloud-based, those sort of decisions. And secondly, who has access to it, why they have access to it and how they access it. And once you start doing some simple things like that, you’ll find the cyber security posture of parliament house or a political party or anyone else in corporate Australia can really change the way that they’re viewed from a cyber security perspective. SUNANDA CREAGH: And if, and I know this is speculation, but if the source of the problem was somebody sharing their login credentials or being victim to a phishing scam or victim to some social engineering then it sounds like it’s possible that some education is needed around that issue and what to be aware of and how not to get tricked online. NIGEL PHAIR: Well, that’s a tough one. There aren’t sufficient technical controls to protect our data and ourselves online. In fact, we should’ve looked for any technical silver bullet. Likewise, we know education doesn’t work either. But education is all we have. So all we can keep doing is reinforce the message, particularly amongst young people as they grow up and participate in the online economy, and hopefully as time goes on we’ll be better protected for it. SUNANDA CREAGH: In other words, not forgetting to address the capacity for human error in our effort to cover off and protect ourselves from technical error. NIGEL PHAIR: Human error, but also the use of third parties and outlying people that you might not have specific command and control over. SUNANDA CREAGH: And going back to this week’s hack, if I am an individual who has given my details as a donor or as a supporter to a political party, what does this hack tell us about what we as individuals might do in future to protect our data? NIGEL PHAIR: Well, if you think you’ve (experienced) a loss of your data through this process, the first thing to do – contact the party that you’ve made say the donation or whatever it might be to. Secondly would be to start thinking about how that data or information that’s been stolen might be used against you - whether it’s identity theft or takeover, for example. So you need to start monitoring your bank accounts, you need to start thinking about consumer credit that might be done in your name. So you should be probably doing a credit reference check. SUNANDA CREAGH: What advice do you give to people who want to use best practice in keeping their details safe online? NIGEL PHAIR: Best thing you can do is use strong and long passwords. More stealthy it is, the harder it will be to guess by anyone else. Second, don’t replay the same password across multiple logins. Thirdly, be really wary when online and navigating around social media and e-commerce and other places. Really think about where you put your personal information in and why you’re placing it into a particular website or a portal. SUNANDA CREAGH: Now, in the US we’ve heard about state actors really appearing to have an influence on election outcomes. How concerned do you think Australians should be about that happening here? NIGEL PHAIR: I think we should be very concerned, we’ve got a great case study from the US. We’re very allied to the US and when you look at nation states that have disrupted that election I think it’s a given that there’s many out there that’ll disrupt ours. SUNANDA CREAGH: So what can we do about that? NIGEL PHAIR: It’s a tough one. We need to start working with all the players involved. And this is where the social media companies come into it. Your Googles, your Facebooks, your Twitters, your Instagrams etc. Because that’s the place of choice that nation states will use to send out any bespoke messaging. SUNANDA CREAGH: Should we be changing any progression we’re making in Australia towards electronic voting? NIGEL PHAIR: We have zero progression towards electronic voting, unfortunately, and I think it’s a great thing. But because we had the census failure, because we had the robo-debt issues, because we had the My Health Record issues, as a population there’s no way in my generation that we will see electronic voting. We just won’t countenance it because of the perceived risks. I’m a pro-online guy. We doom and gloom everything online too much and I’m guilty for doing that. But we want people to participate online. We are great and early adopters of mobile smart devices and we love being online itself, so it makes sense for service delivery to be online, it makes sense to order your food online, to do social media, participate in everything, there’s a lot of good benefit. But because we hear this messaging all the time about the government can’t deal with online issues, there’s already this level of distrust and dissatisfaction out there that voting will just be another one of those things. And the facts just don’t support that. SUNANDA CREAGH: Would there be anything that you’d change about the way political parties collect or are allowed to collect data on people given that they seem to be a perfect target or a growing target? NIGEL PHAIR: Oh, there’s lots I’d change. Primary to that is the Privacy Act and adherence to the privacy principles of which political parties don’t need to. SUNANDA CREAGH: In what way? What change would you make? NIGEL PHAIR: Well, I’d ensure that political parties have to adhere to the privacy principles when it comes to the collection, the storage, retention and dissemination of personally identifying information. SUNANDA CREAGH: And what are the privacy principles? NIGEL PHAIR: Well the privacy principles, there’s 13 of them, inform organisations in Australia where they have a turnover of more than A$3 million about how they should collect data, how they should store that data, how they should disseminate it and how they should destroy it. There’s some simple advice that’s provided by the Australian Office of the Information Commissioner. And they’re quite easy to adhere to, but unfortunately political parties are exempt from that and I see that as being a bad thing. SUNANDA CREAGH: So we’re at a point where I guess you’d have to assume that basically anybody could be a target for a hack and any organisation could be. So what options are there for organisations like political parties that don’t have My Health Record level of security set ups or government scale security set ups? NIGEL PHAIR: Well, the first thing they have to do is acknowledge that they’re are a target. Then they have to go through a risked-based process to understand what their information assets are, what their technology stack is, and who has access to it and make sound investment decisions around that. We can no longer, as a society, just say “it’s not us that gets hacked, it’s always someone else”. I mean, there is a cost of participating online. SUNANDA CREAGH: Nigel Phair, thank you so much for talking to us. NIGEL PHAIR: Pleasure.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and other Coalition MPs described Labor as weak on borders after the opposition and the crossbench voted to pass a bill allowing medical transfers from Manus and Nauru. AAP/Mick TsikasToday, we’re bringing you a special episode of our podcast Trust Me, I’m An Expert for anyone wondering: what the hell happened this week? A sitting government lost a vote on the floor of parliament (which hasn’t happened in decades) over a bill that aims to facilitate medical transfers from Manus and Nauru. (You can hear the MP Kerryn Phelps, who set the ball rolling for that legislation, give her account on Michelle Grattan’s politics podcast over here). Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Kerryn Phelps on medical transfer numbers A day after a bloc of cross-benchers and the opposition won the vote, Prime Minister Scott Morrison signalled the government may re-open the Christmas Island detention facility and the Coalition was accusing Labor of being weak on borders. In other words, a federal election campaign centred on border security has well and truly begun. To help us understand the broader context, we’re hearing today from Dr Daniel Ghezelbash, a refugee law expert from Macquarie University. In our discussion, he busted several myths about how the asylum seeker “medevac” bill would work, and described as “reckless” political rhetoric that the new legislation represents a destruction of Australia’s border security. Read more: Explainer: how will the 'medevac' bill actually affect ill asylum seekers? This week, many Australians cheered the release of refugee footballer Hakeem Al-Araibi, and reports emerged showing airport arrivals of asylum seekers has soared, but much of the political discussion centred on boat arrivals. The focus on boat arrivals in the lead-up to an election should be familiar to any student of Australian political history, he said – but this time it may be different. Join us on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, as Dr Daniel Ghezelbash explains a policy alternative to our current system of offshore processing that he says wouldn’t involve compromising security or shirking our international legal obligations. Read more: We don't know how many asylum seekers are turned away at Australian airports New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Guardian News video. Sky News report. RN Breakfast report. Image: AAP Image/Mick Tsikas

Today, experts reveal the tips and tricks spin doctors use to shape the political messages you’re hearing every day - especially during election campaigns. AAP Image/Mick TsikasIt’s February, the holidays seem like a distant memory and here we are barrelling toward a federal election, which the government has indicated will be in May. Remember in the olden days – as in, a few elections ago – we used to have a fairly set election campaign period of usually about six weeks? Now, of course, politicians seem to always be in campaign mode. They’re not doing that all by themselves, of course. There’s a small army of spin doctors, social media strategists, political campaign advisers and press secretaries behind the scenes, finessing every utterance so it fits with the overall campaign strategy. And that’s what we are talking about on the podcast today – the art of political spin. Read more: It's reputation that matters when spin doctors go back to the newsroom We’ll hear from Caroline Fisher, political communication and journalism researcher from the University of Canberra. She began her career as a journalist with the ABC, but went on to work as a media adviser for Labor’s Anna Bligh, a former Queensland premier. Today, she’s talking to Michelle Grattan, political journalist and Professorial Fellow at the University of Canberra about the tips and tricks spin doctors use to shape the political messages you’re hearing every day. And you can read Caroline Fisher’s article on the spin tactics over here. Read more: The vomit principle, the dead bat, the freeze: how political spin doctors' tactics aim to shape the news All year round and especially during election season, you’re going to hear a lot of competing claims about the state of the economy. Has school funding been cut or is it at a record high? Do tax cuts make the economy better or worse? Why are the government and the opposition saying seemingly contradictory things about debt and deficits? To find out, Lucinda Beaman – who was our FactCheck editor but has just moved to the ABC – spoke to Fabrizio Carmignagni, a professor of economics at the Griffith Business School, Griffith University. He’s authored many FactCheck articles for The Conversation, where he tests statements by key public figures against the evidence and his special super power is pulling back the curtain to reveal why certain claims you hear about the economy don’t stand up to scrutiny. Today, Professor Carmignani reveals why you should be suspicious when you hear a politician claim their government has created jobs, how to spot a bit of causation vs correlation spin doctoring, and other political porkies that make economists’ skin crawl. Read more: FactCheck: have the Trump tax cuts led to lower unemployment and higher wages? Trust Me, I’m An Expert is a podcast where we ask academics to surprise, delight and inform us with their research. You can download previous episodes here. And please, do check out other podcasts from The Conversation - you can find them all over here. The segments in today’s podcast were recorded and edited by Sunanda Creagh, with additional recording and editing by Dilpreet Kaur and Eliza Berlage. Read more: Pencils ready: it's time for Politics 2019 Bingo! New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Minister for Finance Mathias Cormann, RN Breakfast Channel 9 news report. Bill Shorten’s 2018 Budget reply speech. Sky News report. Today Show segment. ABC news report. Labor Facebook video. Nick Xenophon SA Best ad. The Greens ad. Podington Bear, Pshaw, from Free Music Archive. Bloomberg news report. Image: AAP Image/Mick Tsikas

Ready for all the research-backed tips and tricks for setting a goal and meeting it? www.shutterstock.com, CC BYIt’s that time of year when we all start to make promises to ourselves about how this year it’ll be different. This is the year I’ll get my health in order, exercise more, save money, cut that bad habit, do more of this, less of that, and just be better. But the fact is, change is hard. Most of us need help. So, we found some. Today, experts who have researched this terrain will be sharing with us insights into how to make a change – big or small – using evidence from the world of academic research. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: the science of sleep and the economics of sleeplessness We’ll hear from Amanda Salis, a professor of obesity research at the University of Sydney’s Boden Institute of Obesity, Nutrition, Exercise and Eating Disorders in the Charles Perkins Centre. She explains exactly is happening inside your body when you get that feeling you’ve eaten too much this silly season, that it’s time to step away from the festive feasts, put down the bubbly beverages and do a bit of exercise: CC BY1.25 MB (download) If you’re interested in participating in one of Amanda Salis’ weight loss trials, please contact her. Also on the podcast episode Lisa Williams, a social psychologist from UNSW, shares with us all the research-backed tips and tricks for setting a goal and meeting it: Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: Competition We’ll also hear from Amy, our case study, on how she stuck to her goals and made some big changes in her life: Trust Me, I’m An Expert is a podcast where we ask academics to surprise, delight and inform us with their research. You can download previous episodes here. And please, do check out other podcasts from The Conversation – including The Conversation US’ Heat and Light, about 1968 in the US, and The Anthill from The Conversation UK, as well as Media Files, a podcast all about the media. You can find all our podcasts over here. The segments in today’s podcast were recorded and edited by Sunanda Creagh, with additional editing by Dilpreet Kaur Taggar. New to podcasts? Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click here to listen to Trust Me, I’m An Expert on Pocket Casts). You can also hear us on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Trust Me, I’m An Expert. Additional audio and credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Refraction by Podington Bear, Free Music Archive Gruyere by Podington Bear, Free Music Archive

You know you're not supposed to do this -- but you do. ShutterstockHow did you sleep last night? If you had anything other than eight interrupted hours of peaceful, restful sleep then guess what? It’s not that bad – it’s actually pretty normal. We recently asked five sleep researchers if everyone needs eight hours of sleep a night and they all said no, you don’t. Read more: Does everyone need eight hours of sleep? We asked five experts In fact, only about one quarter of us report getting eight or more hours of sleep. That’s according to the huge annual Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey which now tracks more than 17,500 people in 9500 households. We’ll hear today from Roger Wilkins, who runs the HILDA survey at University of Melbourne, on what exactly the survey found about how much and how well Australians sleep. But first, you’ll hear from sleep expert Melinda Jackson, Senior Research Fellow in the School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, about what the evidence shows about how we used to sleep in pre-industrial times, and what promising research is on the horizon. Here’s a taste: Listen. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is a podcast where we ask academics to surprise, delight and inform us with their research. You can download previous episodes here. And please, do check out other podcasts from The Conversation – including The Conversation US’ Heat and Light, about 1968 in the US, and The Anthill from The Conversation UK, as well as Media Files, a podcast all about the media. You can find all our podcasts over here. The two segments in today’s podcast were recorded and edited by Dilpreet Kaur Taggar. Additional editing by Sunanda Creagh. Read more: I can't sleep. What drugs can I (safely) take? Additional audio and credits Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Morning Two by David Szesztay, Free Music Archive.

What is in these products? And if additives don't affect your health, would you care? ShutterstockWhat have you eaten today? And how much do you know about how it was produced, what was added to it along the way, and how it made its way to your plate? Even as most of us grow increasingly removed from actual food production, many consumers still take food fraud and perceptions of food purity incredibly seriously. Scandals around “meat glue” or milk and honey contamination, and the skyrocketing global interest in organic foods, underscore the fact that many of us still care quite deeply about the foods we eat and how they’re produced – and that’s affecting food labelling, regulation and consumer behaviour. One person who’s studied that terrain closely is Dr Andrew Ventimiglia, a Research Fellow at The University of Queensland, who researches food fraud and how it relates to science, culture, trademark law and food regulation. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: Cyclone season approacheth, but this year there's a twist He sat down with The Conversation’s deputy politics and society editor Justin Bergman to talk about the weird history of food adulteration and certification – everything from 19th century dairy farmers adding sheep brains to skim milk to make it look frothier, to centuries-old oil and wine adulteration scandals. Dr Ventimiglia said types of food fraud laws have been recorded as early as the 13th century, but the issue really came into focus in the 1800s. Adulterated milk was one of the first issues that got national attention, and this was roughly in the mid 1800s to late 1800s, both particularly in the UK and the US. And the earliest form of adulterated milk that was really concerning to regulators was actually simply skim milk. Producers who were making skim milk were adding flour or starch, sometimes carrots for sweetness, but they were also adding things that did pose a public health risk. So, for instance, chalk was added to increase the whiteness of milk, as well as often sheep or calf brains to froth the milk […] those posed really legitimate health risks that were recognised by early analytic chemists and that really initiated some early food regulations. And while food scandals persist today, food standards are increasingly more concerned with fraudulent claims on packaging and innovations in food production. For instance, is yoghurt made with coconut milk still considered yoghurt? What to do about foods that claim to be “all natural?” Special thanks to our multimedia intern, Dilpreet Kaur Taggar, for editing this segment together. Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: How augmented reality may one day make music a visual, interactive experience From food adulteration to food poisoning We also hear from Associate Professor Shauna Murray from the UTS Plant Functional Biology and Climate Change Cluster, about her research into ciguatera fish poisoning. It’s a non-bacterial illness associated with fish consumption and symptoms in humans may include gastrointestinal, neurological and even sometimes cardiovascular problems. Editorial intern Jordan Fermanis spoke to Dr Murray about why this tropical disease is showing up further south, and how recreational fishermen are helping researchers unlock the mysteries of ciguatera. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is a podcast where we ask academics to surprise, delight and inform us with their research. You can download previous episodes here. And please, do check out other podcasts from The Conversation – including The Conversation US’ Heat and Light, about 1968 in the US, and The Anthill from The Conversation UK, as well as Media Files, a brand new podcast all about the media. You can find all our podcasts over here. Additional audio and credits Additional editing by Dilpreet Kaur Taggar Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Free Music Archive: Podington Bear, Clouds, Rain, Sun Demand increases for organic produce, 23 ABC News. Is your honey real honey or just “sugar syrup”? ABC News Australia. Fake honey: Study finds disturbing results, ABC News Australia. Meat glue secret, Today Tonight. Chinese milk report, CNN. Missouri Wine History, MissouriWine. Pure. Fresh. Milk. 1991 Promo. Australian milk ad. Sad Marimba Planet by Lee Rosevere from Free Music Archive

The Bureau of Meteorology's tropical cyclone outlook is out today. AAP Image/Bureau of Meteorology, Japan Meteorological AgencyAustralia has just had its driest September on record, and the second driest month ever: the only drier month was April 1902. The Bureau of Meteorology’s tropical cyclone outlook is out today. It’s predicting a weaker-than-normal tropical cyclone season this year but if one hits – and it’s likely one will – it’ll bring water to rain-starved soil that will soak it up and reduce the flooding risk. Read more: Lessons not learned: Darwin's paying the price after Cyclone Marcus Wes Mountain speaks to forecaster Andrew Watkins, who explains how the forecast works, why a cyclone could help some farms, and how to keep safe this cyclone season. We’ve never gone through a tropical cyclone season without at least one hitting our coast, but Australia’s past may no longer be a reliable guide to our future. In her book Sunburnt Country: the history and future of climate change in Australia, scientist Joelle Gergis maps Australia’s climate over thousands of years. While we’ve always been a land of extremes, rapid warming since 1950 is starting to alter our weather patterns. Read more: Australia's 2017 environment scorecard: like a broken record, high temperatures further stress our ecosystems Dr Gergis told Madeleine De Gabriele about creating the most comprehensive history of Australia’s climate ever, and why she still has hope for the future. Credits Free Music Archive: Podington Bear, Clouds, Rain, Sun ABC: Morrison talks drought relief on first day as PM Free Music Archive: Blue Dot Sessions - El Tajo Free Music Archive: Blue Dot Sessions - Arizona Moon

Australia's cyclone season lies ahead. NASA / ESRSU / Seán Doran, CC BY-NC-SAIt’s easy to write off Australia’s extreme weather as business as usual. We deal with floods, droughts, cyclones and other wild events every year. But as climate change raises global temperatures, are the droughts happening more often? Are the floods getting worse? The October episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert looks back through colonial evidence and prehistoric records, and forward to the Bureau of Meteorology’s Cyclone Weather Outlook for the year ahead. The full episode will be released on October 8, but today you can catch a little of our interview with the Bureau of Meteorology’s Andrew Watkins. Keep an eye out for the full episode, where we ask: are we in uncharted territory, or is this life as usual on a changeable continent? Read more: Trust Me, I'm an Expert: Risk Trust Me I’m An Expert is a monthly podcast from The Conversation, where we bring you stories, ideas and insights from the world of academic research. You can download previous episodes of Trust Me here. And please do check out other podcasts from The Conversation – including The Conversation US’ Heat and Light, about 1968 in the US, and The Anthill from The Conversation UK, as well as Media Files, a brand new podcast all about the media. You can find all our podcasts over here. Music: SensualMusic4You – “By Your Side” (Youtube) Read more: Trust Me, I'm An Expert: How augmented reality may one day make music a visual, interactive experience

Could music one day be something we experience through augmented reality, responding to the way we move through the world? Sound supplemented with colours and shapes? Mavis Wong/The Conversation NY-BD-CC, CC BY-SAYou probably heard your first strains of music when you were in utero. From then on it’s helped you learn, helped you relax, hyped you up, helped you work, helped you exercise, helped you celebrate and helped you grieve. Music is ingrained in so many aspect of our lives, but it’s also the subject of a significant body of academic work. Today’s episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert is all about research on music. We’ll be hearing from Dr Ben Swift, a digital artist and computer science lecturer from the Australian National University on how technology is changing the way we interact with music. Could it one day be something we experience through augmented reality, responding to the way we move through the world? Sound supplemented with colours and shapes? And Conversation intern Juliana Yu spoke with Dr Clint Bracknell, a researcher at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music about how he’s investigating the power of song to help address the national and global crisis of Indigenous language-loss. He’s working on this research with Wirlomin Noongar Language and Stories Inc. And we’ll hear from researcher Dr Hollis Taylor, most recently at Macquarie University, who has been studying, recording, and transcribing pied butcherbird song for 12 years. Taylor produces what she calls “re(compositions)” – musical arrangements that mimic and complement pied butcherbird song. Trust Me I’m An Expert is a podcast from The Conversation, where we bring you stories, ideas and insights from the world of academic research. Special thanks today to Shelley Hepworth and Juliana Yu, as well as academics Hollis Taylor, Ben Swift and Clint Bracknell. You can download previous episodes of Trust Me here. And please do check out other podcasts from The Conversation – including The Conversation US’ Heat and Light, about 1968 in the US, and The Anthill from The Conversation UK, as well as Media Files, a brand new podcast all about the media. You can find all our podcasts over here. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Svefn-g-englar by Sigur Ros Green Lake, Victoria for soprano recorder and field recording by Hollis Taylor, Genevieve Lacey, recorder Owen Springs Reserve 2014 for vibraphone and field recording by Hollis Taylor/Jon Rose, Claire Edwardes, vibraphone Field recordings by Hollis Taylor 2 Adagio (Fantasia in C minor K 475 by W. A. Mozart) by NoLogic, from Free Music Archive Procession by The Marian Circle Drum Brigade, from Free Music Archive Svela Tal by Blue Dot Sessions, from Free Music Archive Critters creeping Lee Rosevere Shimmering Still Water – Free Sound Archive Asmodeus Redux by Ben Swift Elder Brother by Ben Swift The Illiac Suite by Hiller and Isaacson Wirlomin members practicing old Noongar songs with the guidance of Henry Dabb, Gaye Roberts and the Wirlomin Elders Reference Group

The enormous Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey tells the stories of the same group of Australians over the course of their lives. Mavis Wong/The Conversation NY-BD-CC, CC BY-SAOn today’s episode of the podcast, we’re talking about what one of Australia’s biggest longitudinal surveys and richest data sets, released today, says about how the nation is changing. And some of the trends may surprise you. The Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey tells the stories of the same group of Australians over the course of their lives. Starting in 2001, the survey now tracks more than 17,500 people in 9,500 households, asking about their economic well-being, health and family life. So what does this year’s report tell us about the country Australia has become? Here to break it all down for us today is Roger Wilkins from the University of Melbourne, lead author of the report. Read more: HILDA Survey reveals striking gender and age divide in financial literacy. Test yourself with this quiz Wilkins said he was surprised by what this huge survey showed about Australians’ financial literacy, our energy use, how many of us are putting off getting a driver’s licence, how our economy is changing, and how our attitudes toward marriage and family life are shifting. The report reveals some insights into where we perhaps need to concentrate our public policy efforts to boost Australia’s economic well-being. What does it all mean for you and me? Listening to Roger Wilkins explain it all may just inspire you to rethink your own financial future. Roger Wilkins spoke to The Conversation’s deputy politics and society editor Justin Bergman. We’ve included an edited transcript below. What is HILDA and why does it matter? Justin Bergman: Roger, in a nutshell I’d love to start out by just hearing what the HILDA survey is and why this matters to people. Roger Wilkins: The HILDA survey is Australia’s nationally representative longitudinal study of Australians. It started in 2001 and it’s a bit like the ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) cross-sectional surveys we’re familiar with, where we get information on people’s employment, their family life, their incomes, their health and well-being. But what distinguishes HILDA is that we’re following the same people year in, year out. So we are getting a moving picture of people’s lives rather than the cross-sectional snapshot or photograph that the ABS surveys give us. So that’s really what’s unique about HILDA. We’re now entering our 18th year. So we’re getting a really rich picture of how people’s lives evolve over time, and it allows us to answer all sorts of questions that we couldn’t do with cross-sectional data. Things like: if someone is poor in one year, how likely are they to be poor the next year? You can’t answer that with cross-sectional data but with our data you can see how long, whether it’s the same people who are poor year in, year out, or whether it tends to be a temporary affair. And moreover, you can look at: well, who are the people who managed to get themselves out of poverty? And who are the people who don’t? This gives us incredibly useful information for policymakers about who are the people who are persistently struggling, for example, and therefore we should be thinking more about from a policy perspective. And that’s just one example of many in terms of the value of the HILDA Survey. Some of the findings in this year’s HILDA report. Energy spending is falling Justin Bergman: I realise it’s probably a great deal of data to pore through and lots of interesting findings we’re going to get into in this podcast. Were there any that you found particularly surprising or interesting, just off the top? Roger Wilkins: Well, we have been tracking people’s household expenditure since 2005 and that includes their expenditure on home energy. Things like electricity and gas. So, we thought, well, there’s been a lot of attention recently to rising prices for electricity and gas. So we thought, well let’s have a look at what’s been happening to household expenditure. That’s different to the price because your expenditure depends on not only the price but how much of the energy you use. And one thing that surprised me was that the HILDA data is showing that people’s expenditure actually peaked in around 2014. So since then people have actually been decreasing their expenditure, in real terms at least, adjusting for inflation. So that was something that I wasn’t expecting because there’s been a lot of recent media about prices continuing to rise since 2014 and yet expenditure hasn’t been rising since 2014. What it seems is that people are have been adapting to these higher prices and doing things like buying energy-efficient appliances, insulating their homes, installing solar panels, perhaps heating fewer rooms in the house in winter. That sort of thing seems to have been going on. So, as I said, the total expenditure on home energy has actually declined slightly since 2014. Cognitive ability and decline Justin Bergman: Great. And one of the interesting chapters that we thought was quite surprising was the one about measuring cognitive ability. And I wanted to ask you, starting off, what are the factors that you looked at in this chapter, when it comes to what contributes to cognitive decline? Roger Wilkins: Yes, so we have now in two years - in 2012 and 2016 - administered these tests which are called “cognitive ability tasks”. They ask the respondents to perform various activities which allow us to produce measures of their cognitive functioning or their cognitive ability. And because we have, as I said before, we’re following the same people year in, year out, we can actually look at how these measures of cognitive ability changed between 2012 and 2016. And we do indeed find that, particularly at the older end of the age spectrum, that there is considerable cognitive decline; that people’s performance on these tests does decline, particularly once you sort of get over the age of 70 - 75. That’s when we really start to see that decline becoming quite sizeable. So one of the things that we did in this year’s report is looked at whether there were things other than age that were predictive of cognitive decline. And we were particularly interested in whether there were various cognitive activities or other activities that you might engage in that could protect against cognitive decline. So we looked at things like how often you do puzzles, things like crosswords, how often you read, how often you write, whether you use a computer regularly, whether you do any volunteering, whether you are actually doing any paid employment, how often you look after grandchildren. These sorts of activities, the basis that perhaps the more stimulated you are cognitively, the less decline you’d experience. And the overriding result we found is that very little seems to protect against cognitive decline. We find some evidence in favour of doing puzzles regularly, things like crosswords, where on one of the measures of cognitive ability it did seem to reduce the extent of decline. But broadly speaking, most of these cognitive activities didn’t seem to impact on the extent of decline. Justin Bergman: But doing puzzles was one that you saw that did have an impact. Any idea why that might have been? Roger Wilkins: Well, I mean, the logic is that it’s sort of the “use it or lose it” argument; that if you’re using your brain, in the same way as if you were exercising a muscle, it keeps it in better condition. That’s sort of the logic. But for some reason we don’t, for example, find that with writing regularly. That probably is suggestive that doing your crosswords or Sudoku or the like is perhaps not a bad idea, particularly if you enjoy doing them, because it might be having this beneficial side effect. We also looked at perhaps what you think of as behaviours that might be adverse to cognitive functioning. So, in particular, things like smoking and drinking. And there is some evidence that heavy consumption of alcohol does accelerate cognitive decline but we don’t find any effects of smoking. Justin Bergman: Very interesting. So do your puzzles and try to avoid alcohol as much as possible. Roger Wilkins: Sounds like common sense, doesn’t it? More young people are delaying getting a driver’s license Justin Bergman: So, going to the chapter about people driving in Australia, what did you notice about the data on driver’s licences? Roger Wilkins: Yes, well, I mean, people would not be surprised to learn that most people do have a driver’s licence. Although a surprising - well, for me, at least - quite a surprisingly high proportion of young people in the 18-24 range don’t have a driver’s licence. So while most people — over 90% — eventually get their licence, for many of them it’s not until their late 20s or even their 30s when they do get their licence. So, for example, in the 18-19 range, over a third of people in that age range don’t have a driver’s licence. And something that we see in just the four-year period between 2012 and 2016: when we asked people whether they have a driver’s licence, even over that short period, we have seen a decline in the proportion of people who have a driver’s licence in that age range. So whether that’s because the requirements in order to pass the test have been tending to ramp up in most states, I’m not sure. Certainly, there obviously have always been significant costs for obtaining a licence which might be a barrier for young people but I’m not sure that, you know, the extent to which those costs have increased. For example, requiring logbooks with a certain number of hours of driving, I’m not sure exactly the timing of when those increases in requirements have occurred. But certainly this data is showing an increasing proportion of young people without a licence. Many men hang on to their driver’s licence until later in life Justin Bergman: Right, and on the opposite end of the spectrum, we also noticed that a large number of people in the older generations have driver’s licences. But specifically, you found 74.6% of men born in the 1920s still held a licence in 2016. So what does the data tell us about older people with driving? Roger Wilkins: I think certainly we see that loss of licence - whether it’s relinquished or having it cancelled - is very much concentrated amongst older people. Although surprisingly, for me at least, a surprisingly high proportion of young people do seem to lose their licence over a four-year period. So, you know, at least sort of 2-3% of people in their 20s and 30s reported that they had a licence in 2012 and they didn’t in 2016. The extent to which that is because they had traffic violations that resulted in suspension or cancellation, I’m not sure. We didn’t ask why they didn’t have a licence but that did surprise me. Certainly, the rates of loss of licence are much higher amongst the older age groups. But, as you said, nearly three-quarters of men born in the 1920s - so they’re all, I guess, at least 86 years old in 2016 - so at least three-quarters or nearly three-quarters of men aged 86 and over still held a driver’s licence. And that does certainly seem quite high and it’s certainly a lot higher than amongst women. So it does seem that men hang on to their licences a lot longer. Now, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re driving. You can have a licence without driving but it’s probably strongly correlated with driving. So it does suggest that, you know, particularly men are able to hang on to their licence longer than or are willing to hold on to them longer than women. The share of workers who describe themselves as ‘self-employed’ is falling Justin Bergman: Moving on, can you tell us a little bit about what the data showed us about self-employed workers that you found interesting or surprising in the survey? Roger Wilkins: Yes, certainly what is interesting is that self-employment has been declining this century. So at least the proportion of people in the labour market who describe themselves as self-employed has been declining for the last 16 plus years. And that’s especially concentrated on people who employ others, so we’re really talking here about a decline in small business. And this is, I guess, rather at odds with a lot of the rhetoric we see amongst politicians about how small business is the engine of the economy and where growth in jobs comes from. And the evidence is quite to the contrary: that in fact our employment growth has really not come from small business or from self-employment. It’s really been coming from larger employers, be they medium or large businesses. And I think given what we’re observing in the trends, I think that’s something that over coming years will continue. That it is probably, to my view, a bit wrong-headed to think that that stimulating employment in small business is the way to generate jobs in the community more broadly. I think the changing structure of the economy is actually moving us further away from that than towards it. And in that context it’s also interesting that for all the talk about the rise of the gig economy, these are these jobs that are I guess facilitated by apps on phones and things like Uber and Deliveroo and things like that. We don’t see evidence in the data of much growth in employment of this kind. So as I said, self-employment has actually been declining. You might think well, maybe many of these gig-type jobs are secondary jobs. So that while people in their main job are employed, perhaps in a second job they’re a gig worker doing some Uber driving on the side. But we haven’t seen a growth in multiple job-holding either. So it seems so far that most of these gig jobs have really been about transforming jobs that already existed, so taxi drivers have always tended to be self-employed. Uber drivers are self-employed. We’ve got sort of a compositional change, a bit of a shift away from traditional taxis towards these Uber drivers. It’s the same with, I guess, food delivery. Casual observation would suggest that there has been a rise in these gig-type jobs but I think it’s easy for us to overestimate how significant a phenomenon this is. On marriage and housework, our attitudes are changing faster than our behaviour Justin Bergman: It is really interesting, actually. We were also quite surprised by some of the things you see in the attitudes towards marriage and family changing. And I was curious what you’re seeing in terms of attitudes in Australian society becoming more progressive on this front. Roger Wilkins: Well, you’ve essentially summed up what we find. For a long time now, we’ve been tracking people’s attitudes to marriage and family and to parenting and paid work. This allows us to produce measures of the extent to which people have what we might call “progressive views”, which, in very loose terms, is the extent to which people are in favour of men taking a more active role in raising children and women taking a greater role in bringing in the household income, so being more engaged in the labour market. There are other dimensions to these measures of traditional views versus progressive views. But that’s probably the most important dimension and we’re certainly seeing that views are becoming considerably more progressive. There’s been quite substantial change over the course of this century. What, to me, was interesting is that when you actually look then at how behaviour is changing then it seems that these changes in attitudes aren’t really translating so far into much change in how people behave. This is very much connected to the arrival of children. So before children arrive, men and women have quite similar-looking division of their labour – the amount of time they spend in employment, the amount of time they spend on housework and so forth is quite similar. But once the first child arrives, and this is probably not news to anyone who has had kids out there, but there’s a sharp divide that opens up between men and women. Women withdraw, to a large extent, from the labour market and men, to a large extent, withdraw from the home production - if you like, from the housework and the care. And what’s really interesting is how this persists. So even once the children age and move through school and even beyond, we still see this division persisting. So the arrival of the child precipitates a change, so even when the care requirements of the children diminish and so forth, we still see this divide between men and women persist. So, I think there are good economic explanations for this but I also think that there are reasons, from a public policy point of view, for us to be concerned about this. And really, it relates to the fact that we know probably around one in three marriages will end in divorce - maybe more, maybe a bit less going forward. That, therefore, means that women are much more vulnerable in that post-divorce world than men because they’ve put their careers on hold, their income-earning potential is considerably lower than men’s. And so therefore their economic well-being is likely to be lower than men’s post-divorce. And then that has flow on effects into their retirement living standard because their superannuation contributions will be lower. So I think while it might make economic sense for men and women to specialise in this way, it is having this undesirable longer-term consequence for women’s well-being and that’s why we do see higher rates of poverty amongst single women, particularly single parent women and elderly single women, than we see for men. Justin Bergman: Interesting. I don’t know if you’ve tracked these data for same-sex couples as well. Have you noticed any divisions in terms of attitudes toward housework and the divide in other types of marriages? Roger Wilkins: No, so we haven’t looked at that this year. One of the problems in doing so is that the HILDA survey is a sample survey, so while we have 17,500 people from right across Australia, which gives us a lot of potential to produce reliable estimates on what is happening in the community, when you look at particular demographic subgroups it becomes more difficult to make reliable statements about overall trends. So while same-sex couples are a significant minority in the community, they are still quite a small part of the HILDA survey sample. So it becomes a bit more difficult to be confident in estimates based on small demographic groups. Australia has its problems, but society still functions well for most Justin Bergman: Just wrapping up, looking at the data as a whole, I’m curious what story you think it’s telling about how Australia’s going, how it’s changing, where it’s going at the moment? Roger Wilkins: Well, I mean for all its problems - and there are, of course, many - the clear picture from HILDA Survey that Australia is a well-functioning society in which most people feel able to pursue fulfilling lives, pursue their aspirations and live the life, or a form of the life, that they aspire to. So while, of course, there is much to do to make our society work better, I think we risk making some big mistakes, moving forward, if we aren’t cognisant of how much is already working quite well. I think that’s something that probably gets lost a bit in a lot of public discussion and media. We tend to focus on the negative and that creates, I think, an impression of much greater dysfunction in our society than is actually the case. Now, you have always got to very quickly follow up such a statement with the caveat that of course there are problems and HILDA certainly identifies many of these problems and concerns that we should be addressing. But I guess there’s always the risk of of overreacting and therefore damaging things that are good about our community in seeking to solve some other problems. So, that said, what sort of trends come out of the data that would be of concern? I think decline in home ownership is a very big concern that has a very strong link to growing evidence of intergenerational inequality, so particularly younger people in the age range up to around 40, compared with older people, the baby boomer generation. There’s been a growth in inequality across the generations and it’s very much tied to home ownership. We also we have this persistent disadvantage among many single parents and I think that’s a continuing priority for policy, in my view. And the other persistent trend that remains a concern is that household incomes are quite stagnant and that’s very much related to the stagnation in wages. It’s one thing to be concerned about it but it’s less obvious what you do to address it. Justin Bergman: Roger, thank you so much, very illuminating. We really appreciate you breaking it down for us and taking the time to be with us. Thank you. Roger Wilkins: Thank you. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks The Anthill podcast, episode 27: Confidence, from The Conversation UK.

Alvaro Mendoza/Unsplash, CC BY-SAEven if you’re no great sports fan, you may have noticed a lot of it around lately. There were the Winter Olympics and the Commonwealth Games, and now we’re halfway through the 2018 FIFA World Cup. What isn’t always so obvious is the money and the diplomatic power plays lingering just below the surface of every big sporting meet. But a growing body of academic research is examining those elements and their complex interplay. So today we’re talking about sports: its dollar value, who gets to participate in it, and why countries spend billions of dollars to strut their stuff on the international stage. Here’s a taste of what’s in today’s episode: Sports diplomacy Barbara Keys, sports historian from the University of Melbourne, explains the lofty moral claims of international sporting events, and how they often contrast with the muddy realities of global politics. Read more: One likely winner of the World Cup? Putin World Cup branding Every four years, companies get a massive opportunity to sponsor the FIFA World Cup and reach billions of consumers around the world. Recent scandals at football’s governing body, FIFA, however, have tarnished its brand and caused some Western companies to distance themselves from the world’s most popular sporting event. Marketing professors Con Stavros at RMIT and Andrew Hughes at Australian National University discuss how brands are taking a different approach at this year’s World Cup, and why there’s so much Chinese signage visible in Russia’s stadiums. Come on, you girl barrackers! And finally, let’s take a moment to appreciate loud, passionate women in Australia’s sporting scene. Women’s AFL is not an aberration of a male-centred sport, but an extension of women’s long participation as enthusiastic supporters. Matthew Klugman, a sports historian from Victoria University, told The Conversation that men haven’t created a space in footy for women – women have always been there. Read more: Why stereotypes of sexy women fans persist at the World Cup Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Stages Of Awakening by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive You Wasted My Time When I Was Timewasting by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Kid Is Frangin by Podington Bear, from Free Music Archive Josimar by Eaters, from Free Music Archive Zaire ‘54 by Eaters, from Free Music Archive Pine Apple Rag by Scott Joplin, from Free Music Archive

After this episode, you'll be able to explain how quantum mechanics affects everything from the way your jeans are cut to the headphones you use. Cindy Zhi/The Conversation NY-BD-CC, CC BY-SAToday on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we’re bringing you the explainer episode - where we ask researchers to unpack some truly tricky topics. The University of Queensland’s James Sherlock explains what psychology can reveal about why people like pimple popping and ingrown hair removal videos. They’re more popular online than you may realise, as a quick YouTube search for words like “pimple” or “blackhead” will attest - but be careful, they’re not for the faint of heart. And by the time you’ve finished this episode, you’ll be able to explain quantum mechanics in a nutshell - how it affects everything from the way your jeans are cut to the headphones you’re using to hear this podcast. Andrew White, a professor in physics at the University of Queensland, gives us a great little primer on how far quantum mechanics has come, why the research hit a wall, and what exciting breakthroughs might be just around the corner. But first, we’ll hear from Raffaello Pantucci, a King’s College London expert on lone actor terrorism. He talks about what the research says about this troubling phenomenon, and why police never use the phrase “lone wolf” to describe it. Trust Me, I’m An Expert, out at the start of every month, is a podcast from The Conversation, where we bring you stories, ideas and insights from the world of academic research. Find us and subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. And lastly, if you like this podcast and want to help keep it on air, please consider making a contribution during our two-week donations campaign. Additional audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Hip Horns With Drums by (none given), from Free Music Archive Somnolence by Kai Engel, from Free Music Archive Heaven Beyond the Trees by Squire Tuck, Free Music Archive La tapa del domingo by Circus Marcus, from Free Music Archive PIMPLE/BLACKHEAD POPPING: REACTION WARNING, Day with James, YouTube. CNN - The challenges of lone-wolf terrorists Vignesh Ram - World mourns following Norway tragedy BBC - Broadcast from Westminster terror attack ABC News - Sept 20, 2001 - Bush declares war on terror ABC News (via Fairfax) - Malcolm Turnbull press conference on the threat of lone-actor terror

Dr Simon Rosenbaum in Gaziantep, Turkey, with participants in an exercise program for Syrian refugees. Simon Rosenbaum , Author provided (No reuse)A growing body of research is drawing a link between mental and physical health – and the connection is much stronger than you might realise. Simon Rosenbaum, a senior research fellow in school psychiatry at UNSW, had been researching the role of exercise in mental health treatment for years when he teamed up with a colleague, Ruth Wells. Wells is a PhD candidate in clinical psychology at the University of Sydney and a research fellow at the school of psychiatry at UNSW, and her research expertise focuses on the mental health of refugees. Late last year, the pair flew to Gaziantep in southern Turkey, where about one in four people are Syrian refugees. They wanted to explore what role exercise might play in improving the mental health of Syrian refugees. Full concentration – mindful bicep curls. Simon Rosenbaum, Author provided (No reuse) Today on Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we hear from Simon Rosenbaum and Ruth Wells on what they found when they got there; how exercise might fit with existing treatments for refugees with PTSD and other conditions; and how exercise can help people anywhere who are trying to improve their mental health. We’d love you to listen to the whole episode, but we’ve included a few snippets below to get you started. What does the science say on exercise and mental health? The science linking exercise and mental health. Simon demonstrates bicep curls. Simon Rosenbaum, Author provided (No reuse) Simon Rosenbaum teaches the Syrian refugee women how to do a push-up. Simon teaches female participants how to do a push-up. The work Ruth Wells and Simon Rosebaum have been doing in Gaziantep has come out of years of collaboration with their partners in the field, including Rania Said Yousef and Raiya Al Said. So a special thanks goes out to them, as well as Omar Said Yousef, Dr Ammar Beetar and the organisation Syria Bright Future. Raiya tells us that music, exercise and dance can help depression. Raiya explaining the importance of dance and exercise. Some opportunities for designing local exercise programs identified by the group. Simon Rosenbaum, Author provided (No reuse) For support, call Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636, Lifeline on 13 11 14 or visit Headspace, which has information for schools, young people, and family and friends. If you’re interested in more information about, or donating to, the women’s gym that Simon and Ruth are working with, you can find their contact details here and here. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. Additional audio Kindergarten, Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Free Music Archive, Gushe Cheman by Turku, Nomads of the Silk Road Free Music Archive, Muhabet by Turku, Nomads of the Silk Road Free Music Archive, Drum Solo by Turku, Nomads of the Silk Road Free Music Archive, Penceresi Yola Karsi by Turku, Nomads of the Silk Road

Evidence isn't always as straightforward as it might first seem. Mai Lam/The Conversation NY-BD-CC, CC BY-SAYou’ve had an x-ray before but have you had an n-ray? Of course not, because they’re not real. But people used to think they were. Scientists had shown they were. And the weird history of n-rays, explored in today’s episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert, tells us a lot about people’s willingness to believe wrong information – but also how well-designed studies can debunk myths, reveal important truths and bring good evidence to the surface. Today, we’re bringing you stories on the theme of evidence. We’d love you to listen to the whole thing, but here are a few snippets to get you started. What would a digital forensics expert find in your phone’s photo reel? Richard Matthews, an expert on forensic identification, was given photos from the phones of two Conversation editors. It was unsettling how much information he was able to unearth from the metadata hidden in these photos. Why would someone be a guinea pig in a science experiment? We talk with a woman who was part of a randomised controlled trial on how a new treatment called transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) might affect people with depression. And Laurent Billot, a biostatistician and an expert on study design, explains how everyone can benefit when people volunteer to participate in a randomised trial. Sham surgery, double-blinding and scurvy Andrew Leigh, the federal member for Fenner and Labor’s shadow assistant treasurer, was a professor of economics in a previous life. Today he’s talking with Fiona Fidler, an expert on the history of science and the replication crisis, about some of the ideas he explores in his new book Randomistas: How radical researchers changed our world. The weird history of n-rays Conversation editor Madeleine De Gabriele tells us about a form of radiation “discovered” in 1903: n-rays. Later debunked as myth, the n-rays case tells us a lot about how much people are influenced by what they believe to be true. She spoke to Will Grant, who researches public awareness of science. What the studies show about treating depression with a gentle electric current to the head We’re ending today’s show with Professor Colleen Loo, who shares with us some of the promising results from the transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) study we mentioned earlier: For support, call Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636, Lifeline on 13 11 14 or visit Headspace, which has information for schools, young people, and family and friends. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. Additional audio Kindergarten, Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Free Music Archive, Ghost Science by Teeth Mountain Free Music Archive, Wisteria by Blue Dot Sessions

Pain lets us know when there is something wrong, but sometimes our brains can trick us. Mai Lam/The Conversation NY-BD-CC, CC BY-SAAs many as one in five Australians suffer from chronic and recurring pain. But despite its prevalence, it’s not always easy to find the help you need to manage it. “When I went through medical school, we had about one hour on acute pain. And the whole concept of chronic pain and how it’s so very different from acute pain was not something that was ever on our horizon,” pain expert Professor Fiona Blyth says in the latest episode of The Conversation podcast Trust Me, I’m An Expert. On Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we ask researchers to take us behind the headlines and walk us through the research on issues making news. Our latest episode takes a deep dive into the science of pain: what it is and what the evidence really says about how to manage it. Today, we’re talking about: What exactly is pain? Professor Lorimer Moseley explains to Deputy Health Editor Sasha Petrova what really happens in your body when you experience pain. Pain is meant to keep us safe, he says, but unfortunately your brain can play tricks on you, making you feel pain even when there’s no real need for it. Bioplasticity – the body and brain’s ability to train and change itself – could hold the key, he says. Here’s a taste: Professor Lorimer Moseley on bioplasticity. After the codeine crackdown, what now? We asked student Sabine Hamad, who has thus far managed her chronic and recurring pain with occasional codeine use, to join us in the studio with pain experts Professor Michael Nicholas and Professor Fiona Blyth, to talk about the recent ban on over the counter sales of codeine – and the alternatives. Professor Michael Nicholas on making sense of someone’s pain. Australia’s opioid issues Ben Ansell spoke to Dr Suzanne Nielsen, a lead researcher from the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, about growing concern around opioid addiction in Australia. Dr Suzanne Nielsen on addiction. Talking about suicide and self-harm in schools can save lives Our last story is about a different kind of pain. Education editor Sophie Heizer spoke to Dr Sarah Stanford, whose research focuses on self-harm in schools, churches, and other community settings. Dr Stanford said there are helpful – and harmful – ways for schools to talk about suicide: Dr Sarah Stanford on suicide and self-harm prevention strategies. For support, call Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636, Lifeline on 13 11 14 or visit Headspace, which has information for schools, young people, and family and friends. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. Additional audio David Szesztay, Backward, Free Music Archive Kindergarten, Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Poddington Bear, Storm Passing from Free Music Archive Poddington Bear, Paper Boat, from Free Music Archive Poddington Bear, Waves, from Free Music Archive Letmeknowyouanatole, Free Music Archive Komiku, Resolution, Free Music Archive Kosta T, Free Music Archive Audiobinger, Stress, Free Music Archive. Blue Dot Sessions, Paper Feather A Life in Pictures by David Hilowitz

There are ways we can stay cool in a heat wave without blasting air con at peak times. AAP Image/TRACEY NEARMYIt’s been hot – and it’s going to get hotter. Australia has experienced some record hot days in recent weeks and scientists say Sydney and Melbourne need to prepare for 50℃ days by the end of the century, or sooner. In today’s episode of Trust Me I’m An Expert, we’re unpacking the research on why some of the most disadvantaged parts of our cities cop the worst of a heatwave. And Chris Dunstan, an expert on energy policy, explains why February is the month when energy ministers and energy operators really get worried there won’t be enough electricity to go around – and how you can do your bit to curb blackout risk. Join us as we ask academic experts to explain the issues making news in Australia. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. Further reading Beyond Coal: Alternatives to extending the life of Liddell power station, by the Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS. Explainer: power station ‘trips’ are normal, but blackouts are not Additional music and audio Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong, Summertime. YACHT: Summer Song (Instrumental) from Free Music Archive Broke For Free: Summer Spliffs from Free Music Archive Unheard Music Concepts: Hot Summer Day from Free Music Archive Ketsa: Summer from Free Music Archive RT: Sizzling Up: Australian policeman fries egg on car hood in 46°C weather via YouTube Lateline: Cities need adapt to deadly heatwaves from ABC News ABC news report ABC news Seven News, January 8, 2018

A time of change is upon us. How do you balance risk and reward? REUTERS/Laurent DubruleAh, the new year. A time for throwing off your shackles, following your bliss, quitting your job and abandoning your family to finally start the artisinal yak-butter-sculpture studio of your dreams. But big choices come with big risks. In this episode of Trust Me, I’m an Expert, Hassan Vally, an expert in epidemiology from La Trobe University, talks about “microlives”, which measure how much your life span is increased or decreased by particular activities. We all make trade-offs between risk and reward, Vally explains on the podcast and in an article on The Conversation today. Every hour of television on the couch, for example, knocks 15 minutes off your life expectancy, on average. On the other hand, a daily serve of vegetables will increase your life expectancy by a couple of hours, and three coffees will add half an hour to your tally. Even medical procedures can cost us “microlives”, as detailed in a table Vally put together for us. “Having a mammogram costs you four hours off your life span, but if that diagnoses a cancer that’s going to save you maybe 20 years on your life. You’ve got to be really careful about understanding the costs and benefits,” Vally says. Also in this episode, Michelle Lim, a lecturer in clinical psychology at Swinburne University of Technology, discusses one of the biggest risks we face as social animals: loneliness. Loneliness and isolation seem to be on the rise, but Lim explores the ways we can understand – and overcome – loneliness, without being afraid of it. And finally, we ask the big question: have you stuck with your cocktail, liquor or tipple of choice over the holiday season? Alex Russell, a wine expert at CQ University, asks why we’re so reluctant step outside our gastronomic comfort zones, and how we can expand our horizons. As an encounter with “spit-bucket gin” proves, it’s not a totally risk-free endeavour, but Russell says that with awareness and intention we can open up a whole new world of flavour. Lastly, we wanted to pay a quick tribute to Jesse Cox, a friend and audio producer who recently died from a brain tumour. He was a giant in the podcasting world. He worked on programs like Trace, This Is About and Long Story Short, and helped influence many of the podcasters working in Australia today, including some of us here at The Conversation. We’ve included in this episode a montage of Jesse’s work that was first broadcast on RN Breakfast here, and check out his incredible back catalogue here. Music in this episode of Trust Me, I’m an Expert Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Gears Spinning by Podington Bear Pour Me Another by Cletus Got Shot: Free music archive Wine Wine Wine by Stompin Riff Raffs: Free music archive Smells like Timperley Spirit by Ergo Phizmiz: Free music archive Crawfish and Beer by Guitar Lightnin Lee and His Thunder Band: Free music archive Muscadine Wine by Waylon Thornton: Free music archive Glass of Wine by The Blue Onesies: Free music archive Drink Beer (Till The Day That I Die) by Dazie Mae: Free music archive Easy Life by Lee Rosevere: Free music archive Blue Highway by Podington Bear: Free music archive Ofelia’s dream: Bensound Additional sound WH.GOV Game of Thrones theme music Jaws theme music Pouring Whiskey, Albertofrog: freesound.org Small crowd pre-concert talking party bar walla talking, JohnsonBrandEditing: freesound.org Pouring beer into short glass, megashroom: freesound.org Champagne cork pop and pour, ultradust: freesound.org New Years Eve Sydney, MrRobAU: YouTube

John and Helen Haynes on their wedding day in 1962. John, a Protestant, was cut out of three wills after marrying Helen, a Catholic. Siobhan McHugh, Author providedThese days, when Australians of Irish Catholic descent have occupied the highest positions in the land, it may seem hollow to talk of them as marginalised. But right up to the 1970s the Catholic-Protestant divide was deeply entrenched – with painful and often lasting social consequences for those who dared to marry across it. Siobhan McHugh, a journalism academic and oral historian, captured some of those experiences in interviews we’re showcasing on this month’s episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert – a podcast where academic experts surprise, delight and inform us with their research. Here’s a teaser: Some of the 50 oral histories collected by Siobhan McHugh. Siobhan McHugh, Author provided1.99 MB (download) Among the stories McHugh collected was the tale of Susan Timmins. Her parents, Julia and Errol, married despite their different religious backgrounds. After Julia died in childbirth, neither side of the family helped Errol and he subsequently put Susan and her brother into an orphanage. Julia O'Brien and Errol White, who were in a ‘mixed marriage’. Susan Timmins, Author provided In this episode, McHugh explains what drove her to unearth these stories and how they fit into broader debates about race, class and sectarianism in Australian society. “It’s actually a myth that there was once this sort of polite and white Australia before the multicultural kind of Australia that we have now. Actually, this period is misrepresented by the term Anglo-Celtic, which suggests there was a cosy community of British and Irish at the time,” she said. “That is actually absolutely the opposite of what the truth was. The truth was that there was this over 70% Protestant majority and about 23% Catholic minority – and the minority of Irish Catholics were deliberately kept as an underclass.” Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in iTunes, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. You can read more about what the podcast is all about here, and find our previous episodes here. Music in Episode 3 of Trust Me, I’m An Expert: Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Lee Rosevere: Thoughtful, from Free Music Archive Music in Siobhan McHugh’s segments by Thomas Fitzgerald, with vocals by Kavisha Mazella. Additional audio sources: CNN Radio Documentary Series, Marrying Out: 2 x 50 minutes Part One: Not in Front of the Altar: audio documentary and transcript Part Two: Between Two Worlds Additional material: History Australia journal article by Siobhan McHugh on mixed marriages National Library of Australia: Sectarianism and Mixed Marriage Oral History Collection by Siobhan McHugh (indexed) https://siobhanmchugh.org/marrying-out/

Sibling competition may have played a bigger role in human evolution than you thought. Flickr/Dmitry Boyarin, CC BY-SADid you fight with a brother or sister when you were little? Do you still? According to Rob Brooks, professor of evolutionary ecology at UNSW, sibling competition has played a more important role in human evolution than many of us realise. “Siblings compete with one another for the love and affection of their parents but even more importantly for the investment of their parents. And that’s been a really big force in the evolution of our species,” he says in the latest episode of Trust Me, I’m An Expert, a podcast from The Conversation about the most fascinating stories from Australia’s academic experts. Our November episode is all about research on competition, including the often fierce rivalry between siblings. “There’s the notion that if that other child gets something that I don’t get or gets to it first – even if it’s the Weet-Bix packet and there are more than enough Weet-Bix in there – then I am going to be denied,” Brooks says on the podcast. “I think we have deep psychological affinity for this knowledge.” In the same episode, Victoria University sports historian Rob Hess discusses some of the long forgotten categories of the Olympic Games and its precursor the Wenlock Olympian Games – including penny-farthing races and even a town planning competition. And we hear from Seng Loke, a professor in computing science at Deakin University about how driverless cars may one day end up colluding with each other and competing against rival cars. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in iTunes, Pocket Casts or wherever you get your podcasts. You can read more about what the podcast is all about here, and find our previous episodes here. And if you like Trust Me, you’ll love The Anthill, a podcast from our colleagues at The Conversation UK that draws out the best stories and brightest minds from the UK academic community. Their latest episode is all about the 1917 Russian Revolution, with stories from historians, music experts and even descendants of key players in the story. Here’s a taste, featuring Jan Plamper, professor of history at Goldsmiths, University of London: The Anthill. The Anthill519 KB (download) Music in Episode 2 of Trust Me, I’m An Expert: Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Podington Bear: Pulsars, from Free Music Archive. Podington Bear: Vibe Drive, from Free Music Archive Survivor: Eye of the Tiger Additional audio: CNN BBC broadcasts of the 2012 London Olympics and the 1936 Berlin Olympics. The Olympic Channel

Our first episode of Trust Me, I'm An Expert tackles the debate unfolding as Australia contemplates changing the Marriage Act to allow same-sex couple to marry. Axel Heimken/dpaWhere should the line fall between protecting people’s right to hold religious beliefs and the right to be free from discrimination? It’s a question that’s emerged several times as the same-sex marriage debate has unfolded in Australia. “Freedom of religion is not absolute. And neither is anti-discrimination law. Both are rights, absolutely, but both have limitations - particularly where they impinge upon the rights of others,” University of Western Australia law lecturer Renae Barker says in an interview on The Conversation’s new half-hour podcast, Trust Me I’m An Expert. On Trust Me, I’m An Expert, we ask academics to share their expertise with us, unpack the issues making headlines and explain the research in a way we can all understand. In a world of endless opinions and hot takes, we’re aiming to bring you informed analysis and the research evidence from the world of academia. Our first episode tackles the debate underway as Australia contemplates changing the Marriage Act to allow same-sex couple to marry. Dr Barker, an expert on the relationship between religion and the state, explains what the law really says on secularism, religion and discrimination in the context of same-sex marriage. And she outlines some of complex legal issues that may emerge if it is legalised in Australia. Here’s a snippet of the interview: Video produced by the University of Western Australia. Listen to the full interview with Renae Barker on episode one of The Conversation’s new podcast, Trust Me, I’m An Expert. “Should someone be permitted to refuse to provide a service where they don’t agree with the beliefs of the person they are providing the service to? That’s a conversation we have to have as a society. It’s going to need to be carefully discussed and debated and we need to be prepared for whatever the consequences of that may be,” she says in the full interview, featured on episode one of Trust Me, I’m An Expert. “That’s going to need a mature, reasoned, polite, political debate – and I’m not sure we are having that just yet.” In this episode of the podcast, we also asked University of Divinity biblical scholar Robyn J. Whitaker to detail what the Bible really says about human sexuality, in a historically grounded analysis informed by disciplines such as archaeology, history and social science. And Jennifer Power, a La Trobe University researcher who has reviewed the major studies on outcomes for children raised by same-sex parents, fact-checks the oft-repeated claim that kids do best when they are raised by a mother and a father. Trust Me, I’m An Expert is out at the start of every month. Find us and subscribe in iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts. You can read more about what the podcast is all about, and listen to our teaser episode, here. Music: Kindergarten by Unkle Ho, from Elefant Traks Blue Dot Sessions: When in the West, from Free Music Archive. Podington Bear: Bass Rider, from Free Music Archive Scott Gratton: Electro Lab from Free Music Archive. Additional audio: Q&A on ABC TV, The Misinformation Ecosystem. CNN WH.GOV SkyNews BBC Radio 5 Additional recording by Rhys Woolf.

On this podcast, academic experts separate the signal from the noise, the data from the anecdotes, explain the science, look at the peer-reviewed evidence and ignore the media hype. The Conversation, CC BY-NDTrust Me, I’m An Expert is a new monthly podcast from The Conversation, where we bring you the most fascinating, surprising stories from the academic world. On this show, we ask the experts to bust the myths, explain the science and put the news headlines into context – and to do it in a way we can understand and enjoy. Listen to our teaser episode, above, to get a taste of the amazing stories ahead: experts explaining the dark history of Australia’s Catholic-Protestant divide or what the research can tell us about sibling rivalry or same-sex parenting. On our first full-length 30 minute episode, out next week, we’re tackling the same-sex marriage debate with experts on the law and on health, and talking to a Bible scholar on what the Bible really says on this issue. Find us and subscribe, on iTunes or wherever you get your podcasts. Additional audio Q&A on ABC TV, The Misinformation Ecosystem. CNN WH.GOV SkyNews Music Kindergarten, by Unkle Ho, Elefant Traks. Free Music Archive: Podington Bear - Light Touch.