Search

An unbroken night’s sleep is a myth. Here’s what good sleep looks like

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amy-reynolds-424346">Amy Reynolds</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/claire-dunbar-1651340">Claire Dunbar</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gorica-micic-187159">Gorica Micic</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hannah-scott-424633">Hannah Scott</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicole-lovato-60684">Nicole Lovato</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a> What do you imagine a good night’s sleep to be? Often when people come into our sleep clinic seeking treatment, they share ideas about healthy sleep. Many think when their head hits the pillow, they should fall into a deep and restorative sleep, and emerge after about eight hours feeling refreshed. They’re in good company – many Australians hold <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.09.011">the same belief</a>. In reality, healthy sleep is cyclic across the night, as you move in and out of the different stages of sleep, often waking up several times. Some people remember one or more of these awakenings, others do not. Let’s consider what a healthy night’s sleep looks like. <h2>Sleep cycles are a roller-coaster</h2> As an adult, our sleep moves through <a href="https://www.sleepfoundation.org/stages-of-sleep">different cycles</a> and brief awakenings during the night. Sleep cycles last roughly 90 minutes each. We typically start the night with lighter sleep, before moving into deeper sleep stages, and rising again into rapid eye movement (REM) sleep – the stage of sleep often linked to vivid dreaming. If sleeping well, we get most of our deep sleep in the first half of the night, with <a href="https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/sleep/stages-of-sleep#:%7E:text=During%20REM%20sleep%2C%20your%20eyes,from%20acting%20out%20your%20dreams">REM sleep</a> more common in the second half of the night. Adults usually move through five or six sleep cycles in a night, and it is entirely <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2014.09.011">normal</a> to wake up briefly at the end of each one. That means we might be waking up five times during the night. This can increase with older age and still be healthy. If you’re not remembering these awakenings that’s OK – they can be quite brief. <h2>What does getting a ‘good’ sleep actually mean?</h2> You’ll often hear that adults <a href="https://www.sleephealthfoundation.org.au/sleep-topics/how-much-sleep-do-you-really-need#:%7E:text=Sleep%20requirements%20stabilise%20in%20early,their%20best%20the%20next%20day">need between seven and nine hours</a> of sleep per night. But good sleep is about more than the number of hours – it’s also about the quality. For most people, sleeping well means being able to fall asleep soon after getting into bed (within around 30 minutes), sleeping without waking up for long periods, and waking feeling rested and ready for the day. You shouldn’t be feeling excessively sleepy during the day, especially if you’re regularly getting at least seven hours of refreshing sleep a night (this is a rough rule of thumb). But are you noticing you’re feeling physically tired, needing to nap regularly and still not feeling refreshed? It may be worthwhile touching base with your general practitioner, as there a range of possible reasons. <h2>Common issues</h2> Sleep disorders are common. Up to <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35478719/">25% of adults</a> have insomnia, a sleep disorder where it may be hard to fall or stay asleep, or you may wake earlier in the morning than you’d like. Rates of common sleep disorders such as insomnia and <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/sleep-apnea/symptoms-causes/syc-20377631">sleep apnoea</a> – where your breathing can partially or completely stop many times during the night – also increase with age, affecting <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32280974/">20% of early adults</a> and 40% of people in <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35082023/">middle age</a>. There are effective treatments, so asking for help is important. Beyond sleep disorders, our sleep can also be disrupted by chronic health conditions – such as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0012369218311139">pain</a> – and by <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsr.13075">certain medications</a>. There can also be other reasons we’re not sleeping well. Some of us are woken by children, pets or traffic noise during the night. These “<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07420528.2021.2003375">forced awakenings</a>” mean we may find it harder to get up in the morning, take longer to leave bed and feel less satisfied with our sleep. For some people, night awakenings may have no clear cause. A good way to tell if these awakenings are a problem for you is by thinking about how they affect you. When they cause feelings of frustration or worry, or are impacting how we feel and function during the day, it might be a sign to seek some help. We also may struggle to get up in the morning. This could be for a range of reasons, including not sleeping long enough, going to bed or waking up at irregular times – or even your own <a href="https://www.sleephealthfoundation.org.au/sleep-categories/circadian-rhythm-disorders#:%7E:text=The%20circadian%20rhythms%20throughout%20the,regulation%20of%20our%20sleeping%20patterns">internal clock</a>, which can influence the time your body prefers to sleep. If you’re regularly struggling to get up for work or family needs, it can be an indication you may need to seek help. Some of these factors can be explored with a sleep psychologist if they are causing concern. <h2>Can my smart watch help?</h2> It is important to remember sleep-tracking devices can <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-024-01016-9">vary in accuracy</a> for looking at the different sleep stages. While they can give a rough estimate, they are not a perfect measure. In-laboratory <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31277862/">polysomnography</a>, or PSG, is the best standard measure to examine your sleep stages. A PSG examines breathing, oxygen saturation, brain waves and heart rate during sleep. Rather than closely examining nightly data (including sleep stages) from a sleep tracker, it may be more helpful to look at the patterns of your sleep (bed and wake times) over time. <a href="https://jcsm.aasm.org/doi/10.5664/jcsm.8356">Understanding your sleep patterns</a> may help identify and adjust behaviours that negatively impact your sleep, such as your bedtime routine and sleeping environment. And if you find viewing your sleep data is making you feel worried about your sleep, this may not be useful for you. Most importantly, if you are concerned it is important to discuss it with your GP who can refer you to the appropriate specialist sleep health provider.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/238069/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amy-reynolds-424346">Amy Reynolds</a>, Associate Professor in Clinical Sleep Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/claire-dunbar-1651340">Claire Dunbar</a>, Research Associate, Sleep Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gorica-micic-187159">Gorica Micic</a>, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Clinical Psychologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hannah-scott-424633">Hannah Scott</a>, Research Fellow in Sleep Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicole-lovato-60684">Nicole Lovato</a>, Associate Professor, Adelaide Institute for Sleep Health, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/flinders-university-972">Flinders University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-unbroken-nights-sleep-is-a-myth-heres-what-good-sleep-looks-like-238069">original article</a>. </div>

Body

MSG is back. Is the idea it’s bad for us just a myth or food science?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> MSG is making a comeback. The internet’s favourite cucumber salad recipe includes fish sauce, cucumber, garlic and – as the video’s creator Logan tells us with a generous sprinkle from the bag – “MSG, obviously”. But for many of us, it’s not obvious. Do you have a vague sense MSG is unhealthy but you’re not sure why? Here is the science behind monosodium glutamate, how it got a bad rap, and whether you should add it to your cooking. <h2>What is MSG?</h2> Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a sodium salt of glutamic acid, one of the amino acids that make up proteins. It occurs naturally in <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10942912.2017.1295260#d1e167">foods</a> such as mature cheeses, fish, beef, mushrooms, tomatoes, onion and garlic. It provides their savoury and “meaty” flavour, known as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022316622140186">umami</a>. MSG has been used to season food for <a href="https://wjpsonline.com/index.php/wjps/article/view/effects-monosodium-glutamate-human-health-review">more than 100 years</a>. Traditionally it <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/ed081p347?ref=article_openPDF">was extracted</a> from seaweed broth, but now it’s made by fermenting starch in sugar beets, sugar cane and molasses. Today it’s widely used as a flavour enhancer in many dishes and pre-packaged goods, including soups, condiments and processed meats. There is no chemical difference between the MSG found in food and the additive. <h2>Is it safe?</h2> For most people, yes. MSG is a safe and authorised additive, according to the Australian agency that regulates food. This corresponds with food standards in the <a href="https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/questions-and-answers-monosodium-glutamate-msg">United States</a>, <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02008R1333-20201223#tocId3">European Union and United Kingdom</a>. Two major <a href="https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/sites/default/files/consumer/additives/msg/Documents/MSG%20Technical%20Report.pdf">safety reviews</a> have been conducted: one in 1987 by a United Nations expert committee and another 1995 by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. Both concluded MSG was safe for the general population. In 2017 the <a href="https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4910">European Food Safety Authority</a> updated its stance and set a recommended limit based on body weight, aimed to prevent headaches and increased blood pressure. That limit is still higher than most people consume. The authority says an 80kg person should not have more than 2.4g of added MSG per day. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/1602526">For reference</a>, Europeans average less than a gram per day (0.3-1 gram), while in Asia intake is somewhere between 1.2-1.7 grams a day. Food Standards Australia New Zealand says the European update does not raise any new safety concerns not already assessed. <h2>Isn’t it bad for me?</h2> Despite the evidence, the idea MSG is dangerous persists. Its notorious reputation can be traced back to a <a href="https://news.colgate.edu/magazine/2019/02/06/the-strange-case-of-dr-ho-man-kwok/">hoax letter</a> published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196805162782014">New England Journal of Medicine</a> in 1968. A doctor claiming to have experienced palpitations, numbness and fatigue after eating at a Chinese restaurant suggested MSG could be to blame. With a follow-up article in the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1968/05/19/archives/-chinese-restaurant-syndrome-puzzles-doctors.html">New York Times</a>, the idea of “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome” took off. Eating MSG was associated with a range of symptoms, including headache, hives, throat swelling, itching and belly pain. However an <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/027869159390012N?via%3Dihub">early randomised control trial</a> showed no difference in these symptoms between people who were given MSG versus a placebo. This has since been confirmed in a <a href="https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1541-4337.12448">review of many studies</a>. <h2>Can MSG cause reactions?</h2> A very small percentage of people may have hypersensitivities to MSG. The reported reaction is now known as MSG symptom complex, rather than so-called Chinese restaurant syndrome, with its <a href="https://www.jandonline.org/article/S2212-2672(21)00068-X/abstract#:%7E:text=A%20New%20York%20Times%20piece,connecting%20MSG%20to%20health%20outcomes.">problematic</a> racial connotations. Symptoms are usually mild, short-term and don’t need treatment. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091674999703714">One study</a> looked at 100 people with asthma, 30 of whom believed they had hypersensitivities to MSG. However when participants were blinded to whether they were consuming MSG, not one reported a reaction. If you believe you do react to added MSG, it’s relatively easy to avoid. In Australia, it is <a href="https://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/additives/msg">listed</a> in ingredients as either monosodium glutamate or flavour enhancer 621. <h2>Is it better than table salt?</h2> Using MSG instead of regular salt may help <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6893472/">reduce</a> your overall sodium intake, as MSG <a href="https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/msg-what-the-science-says-about-its-safety#Uses-of-MSG">contains</a> about one third the amount of sodium. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21372742/">One study</a> found people who ate soup seasoned with MSG rather than salt actually liked it more. They still found it salty to taste, but their sodium intake was reduced by 18%. MSG still contains sodium, so high use is associated with increased <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21372742/">blood pressure</a>. If you’re using MSG as a substitute and you have high blood pressure, you should closely monitor it (just as you would with other salt products). <h2>Should I use MSG in my cooking?</h2> If you want to – yes. Unless you are one of the rare people with hypersensitivities, enhancing the flavour of your dish with a sprinkle of MSG will not cause any health problems. It could even help reduce how much salt you use. If you’re <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25765299.2020.1807084#d1e199">vegetarian or vegan</a>, cooking with MSG could help add the umami flavour you may miss from animal products such as meat, fish sauce and cheese. But buying foods with added MSG? Be aware, many of them will also be <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/public-health-nutrition/article/un-decade-of-nutrition-the-nova-food-classification-and-the-trouble-with-ultraprocessing/2A9776922A28F8F757BDA32C3266AC2A">ultra-processed</a> and it’s that – not the MSG – that’s associated with poor physical and mental <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/14/1/174">health outcomes</a>.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/237871/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/evangeline-mantzioris-153250">Evangeline Mantzioris</a>, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-south-australia-1180">University of South Australia</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/msg-is-back-is-the-idea-its-bad-for-us-just-a-myth-or-food-science-237871">original article</a>. </div>

Food & Wine

Two-up, Gallipoli and the ‘fair go’: why illegal gambling is at the heart of the Anzac myth

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bruce-moore-291912">Bruce Moore</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Two-up is an Australian gambling game in which two coins are placed on a small piece of wood called a “kip” and tossed into the air. Bets are laid as to whether both coins will fall with heads or tails uppermost. It is one of the core activities of Anzac Day celebrations - and a beloved tradition. The word <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/ANZAC">ANZAC</a> was created in 1915 as an acronym from Australian and New Zealand Army Corps. By 1916 it was being used emblematically to reflect the traditional view of the virtues displayed by those in the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Gallipoli-Campaign">Gallipoli campaign</a>, especially as these are seen as national characteristics. This cluster of national characteristics includes mateship, larrikin daredevilry, anti-authoritarianism, and egalitarianism. The game of two-up became indicative of these qualities. Mateship was evident in the way the game brought together people of disparate backgrounds. Larrikinism was evident in the defiant rejection of authority and convention. Two-up was always illegal, because the game is an unregulated form of gambling (although from the 1980s it became legal in most Australian states on Anzac Day). But in spite of the illegality, it was widely regarded as the fairest of gambling games, and at the time of the First World War the verbal command for the coins to be spun was not “come in spinner” (as it is now) but “fair go”. Indeed, the important Australian concept of the “fair go” was in part cemented by its role in the game. Two-up was the common pastime of the urban working-class man, and it feeds into the elements of egalitarianism and anti-authoritarianism that are central to both the Anzac myth and the Australian myth. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=466&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458543/original/file-20220419-17-6mgarp.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=585&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="" /></a><figcaption>Two original 1915 Australian pennies in a kip from which they are tossed. Roland Scheicher/ Wikimedia</figcaption></figure> <h2>Two-up and wartime life</h2> From the very early period of the First World War, two-up assumed great importance among the Australian troops. Soldiers reported that two-up was played on the battlefield during the Gallipoli campaign, even when under shellfire. As the war dragged on, numerous stories were told about Australian soldiers’ obsession with playing it. In 1918 the <a href="https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/P10676229">war correspondent Charles Bean</a> studied the daily life of a company of Australian soldiers stationed at a brewery in Querrieu in northern France. He places great emphasis on two-up, writing in his diary in 1918: "Two-up’ is the universal pastime of the men. … It is a game which starts in any quarter of an hour’s interval or lasts the whole afternoon. The side road outside becomes every evening a perfect country fair with groups playing these games in it - a big crowd of 70 or 80 at the bottom the street, in the middle of the road; a smaller crowd of perhaps twenty on a doorstep further up. … The game is supposed to be illegal, I think; but at any rate in this company they wink at it." Two-up was important not just in taking soldiers’ minds off the realities of the war, but also in creating a strong sense of community. Photographs from the war that show the men playing two-up reveal how it brought them together physically in a communal activity. This helps explains why men, who in civilian life may have had little or no interest in gambling, joined in the camaraderie and fun of the two-up fair, and by so doing blotted out the boredom, isolation, and loneliness of much wartime experience. <h2>Anzac Day and tradition</h2> Playing two-up became an integral part of the diggers’ memories of the experience of war, especially when commemorated on Anzac Day. By the 1930s the playing of two-up outdoors after the Anzac Day march had become an entrenched tradition. As the ranks of diggers from the two world wars declined, so the structure of Anzac Day changed in emphasis. In recent years the Dawn Service has increased greatly in popularity, while the Anzac Day march has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-07/concern-over-australias-dwindling-number-of-world-war-veterans/10911602">suffered from dwindling numbers</a> of veterans. The streets of Sydney and similar cities are no longer dotted with two-up games in the afternoon. The games have shifted to pubs and clubs, and they are largely played by people with no experience of war. Those people who play the game on this day do so not for any deep-seated gambling impulse or because they would love to play the game on every other day of the year. They play two-up because it has become part of the meaning of Anzac Day. Anzac Day has always combined solemnity and festivity. The Dawn Service commemorates the landing at Gallipoli, and the sacrifices that ensued. Its mood is solemn. In the past, returned soldiers reminisced, told war yarns, drank, and played two-up. The soldiers have passed on, but their larrikinism survives in the tradition of the game they have bequeathed to their descendants. We should not underestimate the significance of rituals of this kind—the playing of two-up is a way in which Australians can become not just observers of, but participants in, their history and their myths. Two-up is a ritual that links the present with the past on this one day of the year.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181337/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bruce-moore-291912">Bruce Moore</a>, Honorary Associate Professor in the School of Literature, Languages, and Linguistics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877">Australian National University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/two-up-gallipoli-and-the-fair-go-why-illegal-gambling-is-at-the-heart-of-the-anzac-myth-181337">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Do parolees really ‘walk free’? Busting common myths about parole

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/monique-moffa-1380936">Monique Moffa</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alyssa-sigamoney-1375881">Alyssa Sigamoney</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-stratton-161122">Greg Stratton</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jarryd-bartle-441602">Jarryd Bartle</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michele-ruyters-18446">Michele Ruyters</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Parole is a hot topic in politics and in the media at the moment, fuelled by several high-profile parole applications. Recently, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/no-parole-for-convicted-baby-killer-keli-lane/xoykrtvxe?cid=testtwitter">Keli Lane’s</a> attempt to be released on parole after years in jail for the murder of her baby daughter was unsuccessful. <a href="https://www.heraldsun.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-victoria/how-frankston-serial-killer-paul-denyer-will-apply-for-bail/news-story/4613d1b3fced1f4aeaa9c4e08e8b81e0">Paul Denyer</a>, known as the “Frankston Serial Killer” for murdering three women in the 90s was also denied parole. Meanwhile, Snowtown accomplice <a href="https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-sa/bodies-in-the-barrels-helper-mark-haydon-released-on-parole/news-story/fdfbbbe7b59267d8009c6910249de585">Mark Haydon</a> was granted parole with strict conditions, but is <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-01/snowtown-accomplice-mark-haydon-still-in-custody-after-parole/103653934">yet to be</a> released. Some media coverage of such well-known cases is littered with myths about what parole is, how it’s granted and what it looks like. Here’s what the evidence says about three of the most common misconceptions. <h2>Myth 1: people on parole walk free</h2> Parole is the conditional release of an incarcerated person (parolee) by a parole board authority, after they have served their non-parole period (minimum sentence) in jail. This isn’t always reflected in headlines. <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/snowtown-murders-bodies-in-barrels-murders-mark-haydon-release-south-australia/f4b62a72-ec3d-4238-94d2-64697fbcdef3">Some coverage</a> suggests people on parole are released early and “walk free” without conditions. This is not true. According to the <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/what-parole/purpose-and-benefits">Adult Parole Board of Victoria</a>: "Parole provides incarcerated people with a structured, supported and supervised transition so that they can adjust from prison back into the community, rather than returning straight to the community at the end of their sentence without supervision or support." Parole comes with strict conditions and requirements, such as curfews, drug and alcohol testing, electronic monitoring, program participation, to name a few. People with experience of parole highlight its punitivism and continued extension of surveillance. <h2>Myth 2: most parolees reoffend</h2> Another myth is that the likelihood all parolees reoffend is high. Research over a number of years has consistently found parole reduces reoffending. For example, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0004865815585393?journalCode=anja">a 2016 study in New South Wales</a> found at the 12 month mark, a group of parolees reoffended 22% less than an unsupervised cohort. A <a href="https://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Publications/CJB/2022-Report-Effect-of-parole-supervision-on-recidivism-CJB245.pdf">2022 study</a> by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research found parole was especially successful in reducing serious recidivism rates among incarcerated people considered to be at a high risk of reoffending. More recently in Victoria, <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/system/files/inline-files/Adult%20Parole%20Board%20Annual%20Report%202022-23_0.pdf">the Adult Parole Board</a> found over 2022–23, no parolees were convicted of committing serious offences while on parole. In contrast, unstructured and unconditional release increases the risk of returning to prison. <h2>Myth 3: parole is easy to get</h2> While the number of parolees reoffending has dropped, so too has the total number of people who are exiting prison on parole. Over a decade ago, Victoria underwent significant parole reforms, largely prompted by high-profile incidents and campaigns. In just five years following Jill Meagher’s tragic death in 2012, the Victorian government passed <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10345329.2018.1556285">13 laws reshaping parole</a>. The result is the number of people on parole in Victoria has halved since 2012, despite incarceration numbers remaining steady. <iframe id="maNRy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/maNRy/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> These reforms have made it more difficult for people convicted of serious offences to get parole, as well as preventing individuals or specific groups from being eligible for parole (such as police killers, <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-body-no-parole-laws-could-be-disastrous-for-the-wrongfully-convicted-191083">“no body, no parole” prisoners</a>, and certain high-profile murderers). Similar laws can be found in other states. For example, no body, no parole was introduced in all other Australian states and territories, except for Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. As a consequence, more people are being released at the end of their full sentence. This can be detrimental not only for the incarcerated person but the wider community, because they are not receiving the reintegration support parole provides. Aside from restricted access due to political intervention, parole is facing a new crisis, which has nothing to do with eligibility or suitability. Last year, 40% of Victorian parole applications were denied, often due to reasons <a href="https://www.adultparoleboard.vic.gov.au/system/files/inline-files/Adult%20Parole%20Board%20Annual%20Report%202022-23_0.pdf">unrelated to suitability</a>. Housing scarcity played a significant role, with 59% of rejections (or 235 applications) citing a lack of suitable accommodation as one of the reasons parole was denied. This is playing out <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-11/women-on-bail-parole-increased-risk-of-homelessness-qld/102717002">across the country</a>. Parole is vulnerable to community and media hype, and political knee-jerk reactions in response to high profile incidents involving a person on parole. Because of the actions of a few, parole as a process has been restricted for many. While the wider community are active in advocacy efforts to restrict parole from certain people or groups (for example, this petition for <a href="https://www.change.org/p/lyns-law-no-body-no-parole">Lyn’s Law in NSW</a>), public efforts to restrict parole seem at odds with its purposes. Despite this, research suggests when the public are educated about the purposes and intent of parole, they are more likely to be <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3125829">supportive of it</a>. The susceptibility of parole to media and community influence results in frequent, impactful changes affecting individuals inside and outside prisons. Headlines such as “walking free” have the potential to mislead the public on the purpose and structure of parole. Coverage should portray parole beyond mere early termination of a sentence by accurately reflecting its purpose and impact.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226607/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/monique-moffa-1380936">Monique Moffa</a>, Lecturer, Criminology & Justice, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alyssa-sigamoney-1375881">Alyssa Sigamoney</a>, Associate Lecturer in Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/greg-stratton-161122">Greg Stratton</a>, Lecturer - Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jarryd-bartle-441602">Jarryd Bartle</a>, Associate Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michele-ruyters-18446">Michele Ruyters</a>, Associate Dean, Criminology and Justice Studies, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/rmit-university-1063">RMIT University</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-parolees-really-walk-free-busting-common-myths-about-parole-226607">original article</a>.

Legal

3 cholesterol myths debunked

For years, cholesterol has been seen as the villain in your diet – responsible for many of the health woes people experience daily. But many of the “facts” about cholesterol are actually just misconceptions. So let’s clear up some of these myths now. As with everything to do with your diet, any major changes should be made in consultation with your healthcare professional or a nutritionist to make sure it’s right for you. Cholesterol is bad for you Just like cake, cholesterol should be enjoyed in moderation. Interestingly, it actually performs many important functions. It helps produce cell membranes, vitamin D, hormones, and helps with digestion. It also plays a role in helping to form memories. And, believe it or not, cholesterol is naturally created by your body. So most of the cholesterol in your bloodstream is not there because of your diet. Eggs are the enemy People with high cholesterol levels used to be advised to avoid eating too many eggs, but they’ve recently been put back on the “safe list.” Research at Yale University actually showed that even people with coronary heart disease could eat two eggs each day for six weeks without any effect on their cholesterol levels. Low-fat diets are the best While saturated fats do increase the “bad” cholesterol (LDL), it also increases the levels of “good” cholesterol (HDL). A study published in Annals of Internal Medicine showed no link between the consumption of saturated fats and an increased risk of heart attacks. Foods that are high or low in saturated fat can have a positive, negative, or neutral effect on your body – it all depends on the type of food. A diet that is low in carbohydrates is more effective at raising the levels of “good” cholesterol in your system. Image credits: Getty Images

Body

Princess Di's relative lays to rest longstanding burial myth

Princess Diana's relative has corrected a longstanding myth about where the late Princess of Wales is actually buried. Countess Karen Spencer, who is married to Diana's brother Charles, responded to a fan on her Instagram account to address the claim. Since Princess Diana's death in 1997, there have been many rumours about where she was actually laid to rest. After a large funeral in Westminster Abbey, Diana's casket was returned to her family home for burial. She was buried within a mausoleum on the Oval Lake, on an island in the middle of the Althorp estate, where she grew up. Lady Diana spent her childhood and teenage years at Althorp House, a 90-room stately home located in Northamptonshire, prior to marrying the Prince of Wales in 1981. There is no public access to the island where Diana is buried, with a seperate memorial laying elsewhere on the Althorp grounds for members of the public to pay their respects. Since the Princess's death, she believe she is not buried at Althorp at all. Instead, it's claimed the late Princess of Wales was laid to rest alongside her late father John, who died in 1992, in the Spencer family vault at St Mary's Church in Great Brington. But the countess has now publicly denied such claims. Sharing an innocent photo of the Oval Lake to Instagram, one person asked the countess about the rumour. They said, "I saw online that she may have been buried in the family crypt with her father in a church which was used by the Spencer family". Karen commented below, "The law in the UK is that she would have needed to be creamated [sic] in order to go in the crypt and that was not what she wanted, so that wasn't possible." Another person added to the conversation, "Thank you for publicly addressing this longstanding myth. A statement from the family has been the missing piece in 26 years of speculation." While another comment said, "Agreed this is the first public statement from the family. A bit bizarre it's in the Instagram comments section but at least it's now been addressed!" Image credits: Getty Images

Caring

5 myths about bedbugs

Just about everyone fears these nasty critters turning up in their hotel bed or home. Let’s separate the myths from the facts. Myth 1: Bedbugs mean you have poor hygiene Bedbugs can spring up anywhere, from the cleanest penthouse bedroom to the most questionable hostel bunk bed. Dirt has really nothing to do with attracting bedbugs – they are only interested in having human bodies nearby for a food source. It can help to reduce clutter as it gives them fewer places to hide, but don’t feel that they are a reflection on your housekeeping skills. Myth 2: Bedbugs only live in beds The name bedbug is a misnomer – these little biters will happily live pretty much anywhere. Think lounges, cushions, carpet, chairs, railings, even the walls. So once you brush against something, the bugs will transfer to you and you’ll carry them along with you. Myth 3: Any bug in my bed is a bedbug Probably not! A recent review found that fewer than 10% of the bugs that were reported actually turned out to be bedbugs. People have become very aware of bedbugs due to news reports and hotel horror stories, so they are more inclined to jump to conclusions. Don’t panic and have the situation property assessed before you assume the worst. Myth 4: Bedbugs spread disease They will give you itchy and unsightly bites, but that’s about all you have to worry about. There have been no reported cases of bedbugs ever spreading any kind of disease. Keep in mind however that the bugs have been found to harbour human pathogens, like viruses and bacteria, but they do not multiply within the bug’s body. Myth 5: You can kill bedbugs with insect spray Sorry – you’re going to need to invest in more than a can of Mortein to evict these houseguests. Most bedbugs are resistant to over the counter sprays and you could end up doing harm to yourself by coating your bed in chemicals. You’ll need to get a quote from a professional exterminator who can offer fumigation or heat-based treatments. But beware, these won't come cheap. Image credits: Getty Images

Home & Garden

Four myths about the financial side of divorce

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emma-hitchings-388514">Emma Hitchings</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-bristol-1211">University of Bristol</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gillian-douglas-1428314">Gillian Douglas</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/kings-college-london-1196">King's College London</a> It’s no wonder many people think divorce involves going to court, huge legal fees and decades of spousal payments, considering these are the cases that dominate our headlines. However, the kinds of divorce cases reported in the news involve the very rich, and are far removed from the reality for most couples. The Law Commission of England and Wales, the body responsible for law reform, <a href="https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/financial-remedies-on-divorce/">recently announced a review</a> of the law of finances on divorce, with a scoping report due in September 2024. Review of this law is much needed, given the legislation governing how couples in England and Wales sort out their financial affairs upon marriage breakdown mainly dates back to the 1970s (the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/18">Matrimonial Causes Act 1973</a>). The problem is that key politicians <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2023-03-08/debates/3AB3D708-24E5-4FF2-8481-05EFA27E2593/DivorceFinancialProvision">who have been calling for change</a> still rely on the issues raised in these <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2018-05-11/debates/89A33706-7DCD-4FA0-AE0D-B06E11FAF264/Divorce(FinancialProvision)Bill(HL)">exceptional, “big money” divorce cases</a>. We need to correct the misleading narrative about divorce if reform is to address the needs of the 110,000 couples <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2022">who get divorced in England and Wales each year</a>. Although there is limited research about this issue, we do know enough to challenge the following myths. <h2>1. Spouses are often forced to fund costly legal battles</h2> Family courts grant divorces and the fee is currently £593. However, it is not mandatory for a divorcing couple to get an additional order regarding their finances, and there is no need for expensive court hearings. In fact, <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2022">fewer than 40%</a> of those divorcing each year do so. While there is no authoritative data on average legal costs incurred in these cases, it seems that, for many couples, the costs of sorting out their financial arrangements need not be high because the courts are not involved. And even those couples who do use the courts for their financial matters overwhelmingly settle rather than fight their case, which limits their legal costs. Only <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2022">13% of financial orders</a> made in a divorce are actually decided by a judge after contested litigation. The rest are consent orders: orders finalised by the judge on terms that have already been agreed by the divorcing couple. <h2>2. Everything is split 50/50</h2> The law does not lay down a principle of equal sharing of the marital assets on divorce. However, the courts <a href="https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/miller-v-miller-mcfarlane-v-mcfarlane.php">do accept this is a desirable goal</a> if this can be done while meeting both parties’ needs – and those of their children. Research suggests that, rather than rigidly applying a 50/50 split, couples focus on their needs first and <a href="https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/financial-remedies-on-divorce-the-need-for-evidence-based-reform">particularly those of their children</a>. This can result in an unequal split of the value of the main asset most couples have – the former marital home. <h2>3. Men have to pay lifelong maintenance</h2> Some news media object to the current law as they claim it allows an ex-wife to be supported <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5965629/Surveyor-marriage-ended-16-years-ago-WINS-Supreme-Court-battle.html">for the rest of her life</a> by her former husband (or vice versa). The argument is that this casts ex-wives as dependants who cannot look after themselves, and prevents husbands from moving on after their divorce. In reality, lifelong maintenance is rare, and even limited ongoing financial support is uncommon. The most recent data found that only 16% of court orders involved any kind of ongoing spousal support – of which, two-thirds were for a fixed term. Nearly all such orders involved <a href="http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/briefing%20paper%20Jun%202018%20FINAL.pdf">dependant children</a>, with the order terminating when the youngest child reaches a certain age or stage of education. <h2>4. London is the divorce capital of the world</h2> Some news media <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2015/feb/24/divorce-rich-husband-london-english-law">report</a> that the courts’ endorsement of the principle of equal sharing has led to some wives, married to oligarchs, sheikhs and tycoons, seeking divorce through an English court due to its “generous” treatment of them. For example in 2021, a High Court judge ordered Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the emir of Dubai, to pay a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/why-london-divorce-capital-world-for-mega-rich-2019-7?r=US&IR=T">£554 million divorce settlement</a> to his former wife, Princess Haya. By their nature, these cases are atypical – that’s why they make headlines. But why should the fact that English law takes spousal equality seriously be a matter for regret? The 1970s legislation aimed to ensure the non-financial contributions of spouses, such as home-making and caring, should be recognised. Judges have been clear <a href="https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/3-503-7596?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true">it is discriminatory to assume</a> the breadwinner spouse is making a greater contribution to the relationship and should keep a larger part of the wealth than the other who takes on the role of carer. Surely this is an enlightened position. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t update the law, though. Working patterns have changed but women still earn, on average, <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/bulletins/genderpaygapintheuk/2022#:%7E:text=Image%20.csv%20.xls-,The%20gender%20pay%20gap%20has%20been%20declining%20slowly%20over%20time,up%20from%207.7%25%20in%202021.">less than men</a>. They are still more likely to assume the bulk of <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/familiesandthelabourmarketengland/2021">child care</a>, <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/familiesandthelabourmarketengland/2021">work part-time </a>, and, in consequence, have <a href="https://adviser.scottishwidows.co.uk/assets/literature/docs/women-retirement-report-2022-press-release.pdf">smaller pensions compared with men</a>. The result is that, far from being treated generously, women still come out of divorce <a href="https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/handle/2123/26207/Fisher_2018_AJFL_Final.pdf?sequence=1">financially worse off than men</a>. But there is still so much we don’t know about how divorced couples divide their assets. Since the norm is for couples to stay out of the courts, there is no official record of how the majority of the divorcing population arranges their finances. That’s why <a href="https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/persons/emma-hitchings">one of us</a> (Emma) is leading the Fair Shares Study, expected to publish in autumn 2023. This will provide the <a href="https://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/fair-shares-project/">first nationally representative picture</a> of couples’ finances on divorce. We need a law that meets the needs of all divorcing couples rather than the few wealthy exceptions, and a major corrective to the myths that abound in this area of family law.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202975/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emma-hitchings-388514">Emma Hitchings</a>, Professor of Family Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-bristol-1211">University of Bristol</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gillian-douglas-1428314">Gillian Douglas</a>, Professor Emerita of Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/kings-college-london-1196">King's College London</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/four-myths-about-the-financial-side-of-divorce-202975">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Doctor debunks air fryer myth

Air fryers have become somewhat of a commodity in many kitchens worldwide, with them rising in popularity over the past few years, so news that they could be damaging to our health may cause quite a stir. However, similar to how uncredited information seems to circle the internet, a doctor has told viewers not to take the latest warnings over “toxic” air fryers too seriously. One online user posted a TikTok claiming they had found out "air fryers were toxic because of the material used”, so UK doctor Karan Raj decided to weigh in on the matter. "The biggest worry from fear mongers centres around the non-stick materials used, also known as forever chemicals,” he said in a clip that’s since raked in over a million views. "Forever chemicals” earned the name because they don’t break down in the environment or in our bodies. Also known as PFAS, they are resistant to water, grease, and heat and are found in a number of everyday products such as food packaging, cosmetics, clothing and toilet paper. "Fun fact, every time you sit down to eat microplastics fall from the air and land in your food, or are already part of your food," he explained. The issue of “toxic” chemicals leeching into your food from cooking in an air fryer "is only really an issue if the air fryer is damaged,” Dr Raj added. It is recommended to minimise how much damage and scratching there is to the non-stick coating of the fryer so the chemicals don’t get into your food. "Clean it safely, avoid using abrasive scrubbing tools, use wood or silicone utensils and use liners," he said. "And if you're really worried about the non-stick coating, you can use a ceramic or stainless steel air fryer.” People in the comments thanked him for the explanation. " Some people will trust anyone EXCEPT actual Doctors,” one user teased. Dr Raj went on to ask his followers what their favourite meal to cook in an air fryer was, adding, "Air fried chips just taste special". Image credit: TikTok

Body

Busting a king-sized myth: why Australia and NZ could become republics – and still stay in the Commonwealth

The imminent coronation of King Charles III is an ideal time for Australia and New Zealand to take stock of the British monarchy and its role in national life – including certain myths about what becoming a republic might mean. In particular, there is a common assumption that both nations must remain monarchies to retain membership of the Commonwealth of Nations. It might sound logical, but it’s entirely wrong. There is no basis for it in the rules of the Commonwealth or the practice of its members. Australia could ditch the monarchy and stay in the club, and New Zealand can too, whether it has a king or a Kiwi as head of state. Yet this peculiar myth persists at home and abroad. Students often ask me about it when I’m teaching the structure of government. And just this week a French TV station interpreted the New Zealand prime minister’s opinion that his country would one day <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/01/new-zealand-will-ideally-become-a-republic-one-day-says-chris-hipkins">ideally become a republic</a> to mean he would <a href="https://www.bfmtv.com/international/oceanie/nouvelle-zelande/nouvelle-zelande-le-nouveau-premier-ministre-souhaite-que-son-pays-quitte-le-commonwealth_AN-202305010328.html">like to see</a> it leave the Commonwealth. <h2>What does ‘Commonwealth’ mean?</h2> The implication that breaking from the Commonwealth would be a precursor to, or consequence of, becoming a republic relies on a faulty premise which joins two entirely separate things: the way we pick our head of state, and our membership of the Commonwealth. It would make just as much sense to ask whether Australia or New Zealand should leave the International Cricket Council and become a republic. The confusion may derive from the fact that the 15 countries that continue to have the British sovereign as their head of state are known as “Commonwealth Realms”. What we usually refer to as the Commonwealth, on the other hand, is the organisation founded in 1926 as the British Commonwealth of Nations. This is the body whose membership determines the competing nations of the <a href="https://www.commonwealthsport.com/">Commonwealth Games</a>, the highest-profile aspect of the Commonwealth’s work. King Charles III is the head of state of the 15 Commonwealth Realms and the head of the international governmental organisation that is the Commonwealth of Nations. The Commonwealth has 56 members – but only 15 of them continue to have the king as head of state. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins said Monday he personally favors his country becoming a republic, though it’s not a change he intends to push for as leader. <a href="https://t.co/1XEiFFtqPT">https://t.co/1XEiFFtqPT</a> <a href="https://t.co/aftsZ0hHmV">pic.twitter.com/aftsZ0hHmV</a> — The Diplomat (@Diplomat_APAC) <a href="https://twitter.com/Diplomat_APAC/status/1653406552693395457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 2, 2023</a></blockquote> <h2>Joining the Commonwealth club</h2> To be fair, confusion over who heads the Commonwealth is nothing new. A <a href="https://www.royalcwsociety.org/_files/ugd/e578ea_5642f282aad345faa0b39c9eebd465e5.pdf">2010 poll</a> conducted by the Royal Commonwealth Society found that, of the respondents in seven countries, only half knew the then queen was the head of the Commonwealth. A quarter of Jamaicans believed the organisation was led by the then US president, Barack Obama. One in ten Indians and South Africans thought it was run by former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan. Given the king’s overlapping leadership roles and the different use of the word in the contexts of Commonwealth Realms and the Commonwealth of Nations, these broad misunderstandings are perhaps understandable. In fact, it was this ambiguity that allowed for the development of an inclusive Commonwealth during the postwar years of decolonisation. However the confusion arose, it is also very simple to correct. The Commonwealth relaxed its membership rules regarding republics when India became one in 1950. According to Philip Murphy, the historian and former director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies, this decision was based on the erroneous idea that India’s huge standing army would underwrite Britain’s great-power status in the postwar world. From that point on the Commonwealth of Nations no longer comprised only members who admitted to the supremacy of one sovereign. To make the change palatable, a piece of conceptual chicanery was needed. Each country did not need a king, but theking was to be head of the organisation comprising equal members. <h2>Monarchy optional</h2> Since then, the number of Commonwealth members has steadily increased to the 56 we have today. As early as 1995, membership was extended to countries with no ties to the former British Empire. With the support of Nelson Mandela, Mozambique became a member, joining the six Commonwealth members with which it shared a border. Rwanda, a former German and then Belgian colony, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/oukwd-uk-commonwealth-rwanda-idAFTRE5AS1C520091129">joined in 2009</a>. It became an enthusiastic member and hosted the biennial meeting of states known as CHOGM (Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting). The most recent countries to take up Commonwealth membership are the <a href="https://thecommonwealth.org/news/gabon-and-togo-join-commonwealth">former French colonies of Togo and Gabon</a>. According to the <a href="http://www.thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/GFSR.asp?NodeID=174532">Commonwealth’s own rules</a>, membership is based on a variety of things, including commitment to democratic processes, human rights and good governance. Being a monarchy is entirely optional. The new king offers the chance for a broader debate on the advantages of monarchy. But let’s do so knowing Commonwealth membership is entirely unaffected by the question of whether or not the country is a republic. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/busting-a-king-sized-myth-why-australia-and-nz-could-become-republics-and-still-stay-in-the-commonwealth-204750" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Legal

6 travel myths that aren’t true

There are many myths out there regarding travel.And while some are grounded in truth, that doesn’t mean they’re completely factual.We’re going to take a look at six travel myths that simply aren’t true. If you haven’t been away for a while, this might just be your prompt to do so. 1. Myth – Travel has to be expensive Nothing in the world is free, but travelling doesn’t have to be prohibitively expensive. Budget travel alternatives are becoming increasingly popular and there are plenty of ways you can get out there and experience the world without having to break the bank. 2. Myth – Booking well in advance will save me money and is the best way to go While this is rooted in truth and some attractions are best booked before you leave, there is something to be said for the flexibility of booking on the fly. While you may have to pay a little more in some instances, it’s worth it to be able to be impulsive. 3. Myth – Haggling is expected in most countries In many tourist locations you can expect the initial asking price to be as much as four times what something is worth. But when you’re travelling through an impoverished country, sometimes you have to ask yourself whether haggling is really worth it. 4. Myth – Tours don’t make for an authentic travel experience Some people may look down on their nose at your for booking a tour, but there’s something to be said for having an expert guide to take you around an area and point out little things that you may have missed otherwise if you’re directing yourself. 5. Myth – People more or less understand English While English is becoming increasingly popular and the global economy is dominated by English-speaking nations, it’s a travel myth to believe that everyone speaks. Many places in the world that retain a strong national identity and refuse to speak in English. 6. Myth – There’ll be plenty of time to see anything Unfortunately this is not true. With threats like global warming, civil unrest and overcrowding, many amazing tourist locations are becoming more difficult to visit. Related links: <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/travel/travel-tips/2016/02/tips-for-handling-flight-delays/">5 tips for dealing with flight delays</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/travel/travel-tips/2016/02/photo-shows-german-shepherd-enjoying-flight/">German Shepherd really enjoys plane ride</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/travel/travel-tips/2016/02/tips-for-travelling-with-people-that-get-on-your-nerves/">Tips for travelling with people that get on your nerves</a> Image credit: Shutterstock

Travel Tips

Kochie silences Boomer housing myth

Sunrise’s David Koch has set the facts straight for Baby Boomers across Australia, putting an end to the popular notion that it’s laziness and greed preventing younger generations from getting their foot in the housing market. In a bid to prove his point, the TV host analysed each contributing factor, and broke down the various obstacles between buying a house in the late 1980s and buying one in 2023. “Back in my day,” Kochie began his segment, imitating a popular line utilised by Boomers when launching their arguments, “I was paying 17 per cent on my home loan. Now that was tough.” “Alright, hands up who has said that or been told that at a family get together recently,” he continued. “So, is that grumpy oldie right or wrong? These are the facts.” From there, he went on to explain that at a surface level, the answer seems obvious, and in favour of the older generations. Home loan rates reached 17% in 1989, while a variable loan is just 6% in 2023. However, a deeper dive into the matter soon revealed the concerning truth. While the average cost of a house was $70,000 in the 1980s, that number had multiplied by 10 in 2023, coming in at $700,000. “A 20% deposit has gone from $14,000 to $140,000,” Kochie added, before explaining that the issues kept coming from there, as “wages have not kept pace. 40 years ago, the average person was earning $19,000, now it’s closer to $90,000.” And, as news.com.au had previously reported, Australian wages basically had not budged in the decade leading up to 2023. “So, in the ‘80s, the price of a house was four times the average person’s income,” Kochie surmised. “In 2023, it’s 8 times the average Aussie salary. “The bottom line is that today’s 6% mortgage rate is causing the same financial pain as that grumpy old oldie’s 17% in the 1980s, and with rates set to go higher, it has never been tougher to meet a mortgage. So hopefully, that puts that myth aside.” <div class="media embed-iframe" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: flex; flex-direction: column; align-items: center; width: 705.2px; margin-bottom: 24px; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', HelveticaNeue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18px;"> <blockquote id="v86519172471096370" class="tiktok-embed" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 18px auto; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.15; font-family: proxima-regular, PingFangSC, sans-serif; font-optical-sizing: inherit; font-kerning: inherit; font-feature-settings: inherit; font-variation-settings: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; position: relative; width: 605px; overflow: hidden; text-size-adjust: 100%; max-width: 605px; min-width: 325px;" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@sunriseon7/video/7214279116877516034" data-video-id="7214279116877516034" data-embed-from="oembed"><iframe style="box-sizing: inherit; border-width: initial; border-style: none; width: 605px; height: 740px; display: block; visibility: unset; max-height: 740px;" src="https://www.tiktok.com/embed/v2/7214279116877516034?lang=en-GB&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.news.com.au%2Fentertainment%2Ftv%2Fmorning-shows%2Fkochie-smashes-baby-boomer-housing-myth%2Fnews-story%2F60ad99c43bdc36ec5bb287d8de71f95f&embedFrom=oembed" name="__tt_embed__v86519172471096370" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-scripts allow-top-navigation allow-same-origin"></iframe></blockquote> </div> And while many were glad to see someone finally telling it as it was, others believed that the situation may actually still be worse than Kochie had outlined. As one TikTok user put it, “if they use[d] the real average wage of $60,000 and not $90,000 it just gets even worse.” “Either I’m not getting paid enough or the average is closer to $60k pa,” one agreed. “Don’t forget they also had 20% interest on their savings accounts,” a digital marketer contributed. “Finally Kochie did something right,” another user wrote, “and broke it down in layman’s terms for the Boomers.” And as another said, “thanks for doing the research! I’m saving this video for EVERY CHANCE I CAN GET when someone tells me ‘it was harder in my day’.” Images: Sunrise / Seven

Real Estate

Movie myths meet movie maths

Some moments on the screen stay with us forever, but not always for the right reasons. For some avid film and TV fans, there are certain scenes that have left us scratching our heads, inspecting from every angle, and making frame-by-frame comparisons to try and come up with an answer that tells us what we want to hear. After all, we’ve all had our say over that infamous door and those two fated souls in the middle of the ocean, haven’t we? Luckily, those in the know - mathematicians - have put their brains to the task of solving it for us, sharing their findings as they debunk some of the screen world’s more memorable moments. <ol> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> The door, Titanic (1997) </li> </ol> Could Jack have fit on the door too? Could Rose have saved him? Such questions have sat with fans of the blockbuster film Titanic since its release, when the end of the film saw Rose and Jack trying to save themselves with a scrap of the ship’s debris - a door - in the middle of the freezing North Atlantic Sea. As anyone who’s seen the film could tell you, Jack gave up his spot so that Rose might survive, but many have refused to accept that this was necessary. They believe, instead, that Jack could have fit there with her, ultimately saving them both from further tragedy. And a group of girls at school in Adelaide believe they know exactly how it could have been done. The solution? Sliding their life jackets beneath the door. “We looked at how buoyant the door would have been, and how that would have changed if there were people on top of that,” 15-year-old Abigail explained to The Daily Telegraph, adding that “there was a lot of exploring and testing, and we had to fiddle with different buoyancies and look at what materials were realistic for that time.” <ol start="2"> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> The jump, Speed (1994) </li> </ol> From start to finish, Speed is a wild ride. And while many questions about the logistics of the high-speed action bus ride have arisen since the film’s release, one tops the list more often than not - could Jack really have made that jump? At one point in the film, Jack and his runaway bus - which he must keep travelling at a speed of just over 80km/h to prevent the entire thing from exploding - are faced with an incomplete road, and he is forced to make the jump over the gap to give himself and his passengers any hope of survival. While the film’s characters succeed, and make it out of there alright, the people at ZME Science were not quite so eager to leave it at that. Instead, they have studied the scene, and put the likelihood of survival in such a situation to the test. With a few handy equations and crucial bits of info - the gap was 15m, their speed 108km/h - they came to the conclusion that the bus more than likely would have fallen into the gap, rather than landing safely on the other side. This, of course, means that the detonation would have occurred, and the outcome would have been drastically different to what transpired on the screen. <ol start="3"> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> The bullet, The Matrix (1999) </li> </ol> While The Matrix is held in high regard by many cinema enthusiasts, from its concept alone to its iconic fight scenes, there are those who’ve come out of the films with a few more questions than what its creators ever intended. Namely, questions over how exactly Neo managed to dodge that bullet. While attempting to save Morhepus from Agent Smith, Neo goes head-to-head against agents in a rooftop fight. A shot is made at Neo, and he deftly dodges the potentially fatal wound by bending all the way back, with the bullet clearing the air above him, leaving him unscathed. It’s a scene that wowed audiences worldwide with its slow motion approach, and its attention to detail, but for one mathematician, it was exactly this that drew her curiosity. Could Neo actually have pulled that off? According to Kerry Cue, the answer is no. After working out the distance between Neo and the agent (roughly 12m), the logistics of the weapon, and the speed at which it was moving, Kerry worked her way to her conclusion. The bullet itself would take 0.04 seconds to get to Neo. And as a human’s average reaction time is 0.25 seconds, it’s impossible that Neo would have been able to make that impressive save in the real world. <ol start="4"> <li dir="ltr" aria-level="1"> The sofa, Friends (1994-2004) </li> </ol> Would pivoting really have helped Ross, Rachel, and Chandler get that unfortunate sofa up the stairwell of their New York apartment building? In the heat of the moment, Ross certainly seemed to think so, but as fans of the sitcom know, their efforts were in vain. Unable to complete their mission, the friends opted to cut it up instead. Some weren’t satisfied with this ‘easy’ way out, and one mathematician put her brain to the test trying to prove that it would have been a possible feat to accomplish. And it was - if only the trio had bothered to take measurements. Caroline Zunckel - a data science consultant - ran approximately 10,000 different simulations using various measurements for both the stairs and the couch, all to prove her point. Luckily for her, she discovered that she was right, and that the furniture only required some tilting upwards to get around that problem corner. Images: Shutterstock

Movies

Common retinol myth debunked by experts

Soaking up some Vitamin D (while protecting your skin with an SPF, of course) can often bring upon a change in our daily skincare routine. As our skincare shelves undergo their spring clean, one thing will become clear: many of us will have fallen prey to a common misconception about a widely loved skincare ingredient - Retinol. The myth? You can't use Retinol in summer or when in the sun. While this is false, there are a few facts to keep in mind when stepping out into the sunshine. Retinol does make our skin more sensitive to the sun, and thus more susceptible to sun damage. But that doesn't mean we have to move it to the back of our shelf for the next 6 months, as No7 Beauty Company's Head of Science Research, Dr Mike Bell, explains. “Generally, retinol should only be used at night time and followed by a night time moisturiser and an SPF day cream in the morning, even if it is a retinol-free night.” He then goes on to explain how we can carefully choose skincare ingredients to help us in using retinol in summer. “Excellent complementary ingredients can either work alongside retinol in enhancing the rejuvenating benefits, or by supporting skin's tolerance to retinol in the form of calming ingredients, or barrier strengthening ingredients.” Some of the key ingredients Dr. Mike Bell references include Vitamin C, Bisabol, Niacinamide and Ceramides. He also explains that when using retinol, at any time of the year, you should avoid using physical and chemical exfoliants. No7 has developed a top-tier range of Retinol products to help you continue on your Retinol journey in summer, to keep your skin looking youthful and rejuvenated. The <a href="https://www.priceline.com.au/no7-pure-retinol-0-3-night-concentrate-30-ml">No7 Pure Retinol 0.3% Night Concentrate</a> is a perfect everyday product for the warmer months, while <a href="https://www.priceline.com.au/no7-1-pure-retinol-night-concentrate-30-ml">No7 1% Pure Retinol Night Concentrate</a> is a stronger working retinol product, best for restoring radiance of retinol-using pros. Lastly, the <a href="https://www.priceline.com.au/no7-pure-retinol-post-retinol-soother-50-ml">No7 Pure Retinol Post Retinol Soother</a> is a game-changing necessity for summer months, containing Niacinamide, Bisabolol and Ceramides to leave your skin feeling nourished and calm. The entire No7 range is available exclusively at <a href="https://www.priceline.com.au/brand/no7">Priceline</a>. Image credits: Getty Images

Beauty & Style

Do hypoallergenic cats even exist? 3 myths dispelled about cat allergies

Cats are great companions, but for some people their company comes at a cost. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091674921000038?casa_token=8de37wAiw_0AAAAA:nwC8PN6RhwxD6qJZYGby_3s35dK00fLeiIKplQwvyi7iUSnI7Pcpp8v7CSfj6TB-YfEOU2pMbWQ">Up to 1 in 5 people</a> have an allergic response to cats, and this figure is increasing. There are many myths about allergies to cats, but what is fact and what is fiction? And can you still have a cat if you’re allergic? Myth #1: People are allergic to cat hair There is an element of truth to this myth. However, rather than the hair itself, substances on the hair are the source of the allergy. Most people allergic to cats react to a protein called Fel d 1. This main cat allergen is produced in the glands of the cat, including the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/sebaceous-gland">sebaceous</a> (oil-producing skin glands) and salivary glands. While Fel d1 is the main culprit, domestic cats have <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1098612X211013016">eight different potential allergens</a>. The second most common is Fel d 4, also produced in salivary glands. Another type, Fel d 2, is similar to a protein found in other animals, and the reason a person might be allergic, for example, to both cats and horses. This similarity can also result in a child with milk allergy having an increased risk of being allergic to animals like cats. When cats groom themselves, they deposit the allergen in their saliva onto their hair. Sebaceous glands are close to the skin and can secrete onto the hair follicles. When you pet a cat’s fur, a reaction is set off, especially if you then rub your nose or eyes. But you don’t need to pet a cat to have an allergic reaction to them. Simply being around dander can be enough. Dander might sound like a dating app for pets, but it’s actually more akin to animal dandruff, and contains tiny scales from hair or skin. As dander particles are so small, they float in the air and we often breathe them in. <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491005/original/file-20221021-21-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A grey cat licking its paw" /><figcaption>When cats groom themselves, the allergen is transferred from their saliva onto their fur. <a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/Hd7vwFzZpH0">Eric Han/Unsplash</a></figcaption></figure> Myth #2: There are hypoallergenic cats There is no evidence that specific cat breeds do not cause allergies. However, if some breeds have less hair, or shed less hair, this may reduce exposure to allergens in the environment. For example, Sphynx cats are hairless, although they <a href="https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/tfg/2022/264236/TFG_amartinmore_poster.pdf">still produce Fel d 1</a>. In this way <a href="https://www.pumpkin.care/blog/hypoallergenic-cat-breeds/">some breeds might be considered “hypoallergenic”</a>, or cause fewer allergic reactions. However, there are no scientific studies to confirm this is the case. All cats produce Fel d 1, but the levels can differ by as much as <a href="https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/crispr.2021.0101">100-fold between individual cats</a>. This may explain why people with cat allergies notice they react more to some cats than others. <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491006/original/file-20221021-24-dnas7u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A sphynx cat sitting on a green blanket" /><figcaption>Sphynx cats have little to no hair, but they still produce allergens. Jesus Vivas Alacid/Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> Myth #3: You have to re-home your cat if you have an allergy If you have a life-threatening allergy to cats, your only alternative might be to find them a new home. However, most people have less severe reactions and can manage symptoms successfully. Some things you can do to limit reactions include: <ul> <li> always wash your hands and avoid touching your face and eyes after handling your cat </li> <li> regularly clean surfaces and change litter to reduce dander </li> <li> wash your cat weekly with a pet-specific shampoo, if <a href="https://www.drmartybecker.com/wp-content/cache/wp-rocket/drmartybecker.com/fear-free/10-low-stress-tips-for-bathing-and-grooming-a-cat/index-https.html_gzip">your cat likes being bathed</a> </li> </ul> <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491004/original/file-20221021-17-z42jq1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A tabby cat being washed" /><figcaption>If the cat is amenable to baths, it can be a good method to reduce the level of allergens. Matyas Rehak/Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> <ul> <li> restrict cats’ access to rooms you want to keep allergy-free, such as the bedroom </li> <li> get a vacuum specifically designed for reducing allergens, such as ones with a HEPA filter </li> <li> use air purifiers with HEPA filters. </li> </ul> Adopting a cat when allergic If you’re allergic and want to adopt a cat, make sure to spend some time with them first to assess your reaction. Ideally, pick a cat that doesn’t make you sneeze. If cats need to be re-homed, this does negatively affect their welfare. A <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4810051/">large study of RSPCA shelters in Australia</a> reported allergy as the reason for relinquishment in roughly 3% of cats out of 61,755 total relinquished between 2006 and 2010. <figure class="align-center "><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/491007/original/file-20221021-21-fanr5e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="A tabby cat sleeping in the sun on a windowsill" /><figcaption>Adopting a cat is a serious commitment. <a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/oA6zqMdnhjE">Roberto Huczek/Unsplash</a></figcaption></figure> You can also see your doctor about options for managing symptoms such as over-the-counter medications (such as antihistamines) and longer term solutions. For those with allergies who want to have their cat and their ability to breathe too, <a href="https://journals.lww.com/co-allergy/fulltext/2018/08000/does_evidence_support_the_use_of_cat_allergen.11.aspx?casa_token=Y7rh9GwOUjcAAAAA:VoRFLInOZf_E_oDk2uX0ZrkfrMDNklzrvx1Tl7PsS2MFoaTEu4bR-n7JCG0IjgiPYCImKnpzYVjX9SmnFxmlTuRyt2VvXg">another option is immunotherapy</a>, although there is limited evidence to support this treatment for cat allergies. Immunotherapy involves first identifying which specific allergen is causing the reactions, and then systematically delivering increasing levels of this allergen over several months in an effort to retrain the immune system to tolerate the allergen without a reaction. This may be especially beneficial for those with moderate to severe reactions. There is evidence <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/cea.12380?casa_token=aZ0yxtcV_2MAAAAA:zfNPJau3PSSvTr7I5HXWgISCZ8NZm_5Bnrh9eVdZyoeU8V4e_jESrdXMy3Aw4kdtHHBZBSeVA3sJb4LS">exposure to dogs and cats early in life can reduce at least some forms of allergy</a>. Evidence is still conflicting, though, and probably depends on genetics and other environmental factors. What we do know is that pet cats provide companionship and joy to many, and understanding the causes and treatment of pet allergy can only help both cats and humans. Writen by Susan Hazel. Republished with permission from <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-hypoallergenic-cats-even-exist-3-myths-dispelled-about-cat-allergies-191662" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image:<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/191662/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> Getty Images

Family & Pets

5 common food myths busted

At a certain point, you can hear something so often that it is assumed to be true. But how many common food “truisms” are actually myths? We explore some of the most frequently believed below. Coffee makes you dehydrated False: As coffee is largely water, for those who have their caffeine fix daily, you’re unlikely to see dehydration as a result. However, large amounts of caffeine (over 500mg per day) can act as a diuretic, making your body produce increased amounts of urine, though this won’t result from moderate amounts of caffeine ingestion. An apple a day still keeps the doctor away False: Today’s apples aren’t nearly as nutritious as those found in the 40s, containing three time less iron as they once did, due to reused soil resulting from a lack of sufficient crop rotation. Onions stored in the fridge won’t make you cry True: When you store onions in the fridge, they produce less propanthial S-oxide, the irritant that causes the eye to water. Gum stays in your stomach for years False: Most gum leaves the body fairly quickly as do other foods, though it does so mostly undigested. The only time you have to worry is if your gum swallowing is plentiful, prolonged, and habitual, at which point there have been documented cases of gum building up in one’s stomach over many years, causing stomach pain. You can save mouldy cheese True: It is generally not a safety hazard to cut mould off of harder cheese in order to save the remains due to its density and relative lack of moisture. However, foods such as bread, fruit, and softer cheeses should be thrown out at the first sign of mould. Image: Shutterstock

Food & Wine

“No it’s not haunted”: Property listing tackles local myths

Old homes are often believed to be haunted, and the listing for a historic NSW home has taken this into account to reassure superstitious buyers. The advertising for the five-bedroom property in Smithtown, on the Macleay River, takes the time to debunk local rumours that it’s haunted. “The land was first selected in 1868, the building came in 1902 and has since served as a home, a General Store, Cash Emporium, Fish and Chip shop, Boarding House and some think a haunted house because it was all boarded up for years – but no, it’s not haunted it’s amazing, oh to sit on those big wrap-around verandahs for dinner and drinks would be amazing,” <a href="https://www.kellyflanaganrealestate.com.au/listings/residential_sale-3360870-smithtown/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the listing reads</a>. “This majestic, big, hardwood building could become once again a glistening jewel.” The listing also claims that if you don’t know the building, located “round the bend for the pub”, you’re not a local, describing it as one of the icons of the Lower Macleay Valley. Despite its age, the home seems to be in great shape thanks to work done to renew the structure 20 years ago. “The magic big building just needs the make-up and fit-out however you want it to look like – or don’t do much and love it like the previous owner has done for 30 or so past years,” the listing suggests. The two-storey home also boasts several verandahs from which you can enjoy stunning river views, as well as flexible zoning options that allow it to be transformed into more than a home. With a listed price between $550-$600,000 and the assurance it’s ghoul-free, this is a home that’s sure to become someone’s favourite haunt. Images: Kelly Flanagan Real Estate

Real Estate

Have you fallen for the myth of ‘I can’t draw’? Do it anyway – and reap the reward

Drawing is a powerful tool of communication. It helps build self-understanding and can <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0276237420923290">boost</a> mental health. But our current focus on productivity, outcomes and “talent” has us thinking about it the wrong way. Too many believe the <a href="http://www.visuallanguagelab.com/P/NC_drawingdevelopment.pdf">myth</a>of “I can’t draw”, when in fact it’s a skill built through practice. Dedicated practice is hard, however, if you’re constantly asking yourself: “What’s the point of drawing?” As I argue in a new <a href="https://www.closure.uni-kiel.de/closure8/fisher">paper</a> in <a href="https://www.closure.uni-kiel.de/start_en">Closure E-Journal for Comic Studies</a>, we need to reframe our concept of what it means to draw, and why we should do it – especially if you think you can’t. Devoting a little time to drawing each day may make you happier, more employable and sustainably productive. <h2>The many benefits of drawing</h2> I’m a keen doodler who turned a hobby into a PhD and then a career. I’ve taught all ages at universities, in library workshops and online. In that time, I’ve noticed many people do not recognise their own potential as a visual artist; self-imposed limitations are common. That’s partly because, over time, drawing as a skill set has been devalued. <a href="https://mili.eu/insights/sunday-times-essential-workers-poll-response">A 2020 poll</a> ranked artist as the top non-essential job. But new jobs are emerging all the time for visual thinkers who can translate complex information into easily understood visuals. Big companies <a href="https://inkfactorystudio.com/">hire</a> comic creators to document corporate meetings visually, so participants can track the flow of ideas in real time. Cartoonists are paid to draft <a href="https://australiacouncil.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Graphic-Storytellers-at-Work-GSAW-Report-Case-Study-One.pdf">innovative, visual contracts</a> for law firms. Perhaps you were told as a child to stop doodling and get back to work. While drawing is often quiet and introspective, it’s certainly not a “waste of time”. On the contrary, it has significant mental health benefits and should be cultivated in children and adults alike. How we feel influences <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261661107_An_Introduction_to_the_Diagnostic_Drawing_Series_A_Standardized_Tool_for_Diagnostic_and_Clinical_Use">how we draw</a>. Likewise, engaging with drawing affects how we feel; it can help us understand and process our inner world. Art-making can <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0276237420923290">reduce anxiety</a>, <a href="https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ722383">elevate mood</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6124538/">improve quality of life</a> and <a href="https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8bq69315">promote general creativity</a>. Art therapy has even been <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16288447/">linked to</a> reduced symptoms of distress and higher quality of life for cancer patients. And it can help you enter a “flow state”, where self-consciousness disappears, focus sharpens, work comes easily to you and mental blockages seem to evaporate. <h2>Cultivating a drawing habit</h2> Cultivating a drawing habit means letting go of biases against drawing and against copying others to learn technique. Resisting the urge to critically compare your work to others’ is also important. Most children don’t care about what’s considered “essential” to a functioning society. They draw instinctively and freely. Part of the reason drawing rates are thought to be <a href="http://mtoku.yourweb.csuchico.edu/vc/Articles/toku/Toku_what%20is%20manga_.html">higher in Japan</a>is their immersion in Manga (Japanese comics), a broadly popular and culturally important medium. Another is an emphasis on diligent practice. Children copy and practise the Manga style, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/20716077">providing a critical stepping stone</a> from free scribbling to controlled representation. Copying is not seen as a no-no; it’s integral to building skill. As researcher and artist Neil Cohn <a href="http://www.visuallanguagelab.com/P/NC_drawingdevelopment.pdf">argues</a>, learning to draw is similar to (and as crucial as) learning language, a skill built through exposure and practice, "Yet, unlike language, we consider it normal for people not to learn to draw, and consider those who do to be exceptional […] Without sufficient practice and exposure to an external system, a basic system persists despite arguably impoverished developmental conditions." So choose an art style you love and copy it. Encourage children to while away hours drawing. Don’t worry about how it turns out. Prioritise the conscious experience of drawing over the result. With regular practice, you may find yourself occasionally melting into states of “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)">flow</a>”, becoming wholly absorbed. A small, regular pocket of time to temporarily escape the busy world and enter a flow state via drawing may help you in other parts of your life. <h2>How to get started</h2> Use simple tools that you’re comfortable with, whether it’s a ballpoint pen on post-it notes, pencil on paper, a dirty window, or a foggy mirror. Times you’d typically be aimlessly scrolling on your phone are prime candidates for a quick sketch. Doodle when you’re on the phone, watching a movie, bored in a waiting room. Together with mindful doodling, drawing from observation and memory form a holy trinity of sustainable proficiency. Drawing from life strengthens your understanding of space and form. Copying other styles gives you a shortcut to new “visual libraries”. Drawing from memory merges the free play of doodling with the mental libraries developed through observation, bringing imagined worlds to life. With time and persistence, you may find yourself producing drawings you’re proud of. At that point, you can ask yourself: what other self-limiting beliefs are holding me back? Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/have-you-fallen-for-the-myth-of-i-cant-draw-do-it-anyway-and-reap-the-rewards-172623" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Art

Five myths about Shakespeare’s contribution to the English language

Shakespeare’s language is widely considered to represent the pinnacle of English. But that status is underpinned by multiple myths – ideas about language that have departed from reality (or what is even plausible). Those myths send us down rabbit holes and make us lose sight of what is truly impressive about Shakespeare – what he did with his words. The <a href="http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/shakespearelang/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Encyclopedia of Shakespeare’s Language</a> project at Lancaster University, deploying large-scale computer analyses, has been transforming what we know about Shakespeare’s language. Here, incorporating some of its findings, we revisit five things that you probably thought you knew about Shakespeare but are actually untrue. <h2>1. Shakespeare coined a vast number of words</h2> Well, he did, but not as many as people think – even reputable sources assume more than 1,000. The Shakespeare Birthplace Trust puts it at <a href="https://www.shakespeare.org.uk/explore-shakespeare/shakespedia/shakespeares-words/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1,700</a>, but carefully add that this number concerns words whose earliest appearance is in Shakespeare’s works. The word “hobnail” first appears in a text attributed to Shakespeare, but it’s difficult to imagine it arose from a creative poetic act. More likely, it was around in the spoken language of the time and Shakespeare’s use is the earliest recording of it. Estimates of just how many words Shakespeare supposedly coined do not usually distinguish between what was creatively coined by him and what was first recorded in a written document attributed to him. Even if you don’t make that distinction and include all words that appear first in a work attributed to Shakespeare, whether coined or recorded, numbers are grossly inflated. Working with the literature and linguistics academics <a href="https://english.asu.edu/content/jonathan-hope-professor-literature" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jonathan Hope</a> and <a href="https://slt-cdt.sheffield.ac.uk/students" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sam Hollands</a>, we’ve been using computers to search millions of words in texts pre-dating Shakespeare. With this method, we have found that only around 500 words do seem to first appear in Shakespeare. Of course, 500 is still huge and most writers neither coin a new word nor produce a first recording. <h2>2. Shakespeare IS the English language</h2> The myth that Shakespeare coined loads of words has partly fuelled the myth that Shakespeare’s language constitutes one-quarter, a half or even all of the words of today’s English language. The number of different words in Shakespeare’s texts is around 21,000 words. Some of those words are repeated, which is how we get to the total number of around one million words in works attributed to Shakespeare. (To illustrate, the previous sentence contains 26 words in total, but “of”, “words” and “to” are repeated, so the number of different words is 22). The Oxford English Dictionary has around 600,000 different words in it, but many are obscure technical terms. So, let’s round down to 500,000. Even if every word within Shakespeare had been coined by him (which is of course not the case, as noted above), that would still only be 4.2% of today’s English language. So, Shakespeare could only ever have contributed a very small fraction, though quite possibly more than most writers. <h2>3. Shakespeare had a huge vocabulary</h2> Ludicrously, popular claims about Shakespeare’s huge vocabulary seem to be driven by the fact that his writings as a whole contain a large number of different words (as noted above, around 21,000). But the more you write, the more opportunities you have to use more words that are different. This means Shakespeare is likely to come out on top of any speculations about vocabulary size simply because he has an exceptionally large surviving body of work. A few researchers have used other methods to make better guesses (they are always guesses, as you can’t count the words in somebody’s mind). For example, <a href="https://academic.oup.com/sq/article-abstract/62/1/53/5064657?redirectedFrom=fulltext" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hugh Craig</a>, a Shakespearean scholar who has pioneered the use of computers for analysing language in literature, looked at the average number of different words used across samples of writings of the same length. He found that, relative to his contemporaries, the average frequency with which different words appear in Shakespeare’s work is distinctly … average. <h2>4. Shakespeare has universal meaning</h2> Sure, some themes or aspects of the human condition are universal, but let’s not get carried away and say that his language is universal. The mantra of the historical linguist is that all language changes – and Shakespeare isn’t exempt. Changes can be subtle and easily missed. Take the word “time” – surely a universal word denoting a universal concept? Well, no. For each word in Shakespeare, we used computers to identify the other words they associate with, and those associations reveal the meanings of words. “Time”, for instance, often occurs with “day” or “night” (for example, from Hamlet: “What art thou that usurp'st this time of night”). This reflects the understanding of time in the early modern world (roughly, 1450-1750), which was more closely linked to the cycles of the moon and sun, and thus the broader forces of the cosmos. In contrast, today, associated words like “waste”, “consume” and “spend” suggest that time is more frequently thought of as a precious resource under human control. <h2>5. Shakespeare didn’t know much Latin</h2> The myths above are popular myths, spread by academics and non-academics alike (which is why they are easy to find on the internet). Myths can be more restricted. Within some theatrical circles, the idea that Shakespeare didn’t know much Latin emerged. Indeed, the contemporary playwright Ben Jonson famously wrote that Shakespeare had “small Latin, and less Greek”. Shakespeare lacked a university education. University-educated, jealous, snooty playwrights might have been keen to take him down a peg. Working with the Latin scholar <a href="https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/english/staff/caterina-guardamagna/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Caterina Guardamagna</a>, we found that Shakespeare used 245 different Latin words, whereas in a matching set of plays by other playwrights there were just 28 – the opposite of what the myth dictates. That Shakespeare used so much Latin without a university education makes his achievement in using it all the greater. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-myths-about-shakespeares-contribution-to-the-english-language-189402" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Books

5 myths about superannuation

Superannuation may seem complicated but it doesn’t have to be. Here are five common myths together with the real facts about your hard-earned retirement nest egg. 1. My money is locked up and there’s no point worrying about it until I retire Your super is a lifetime investment project that starts when you first enter the workforce and needs to last for life, and the longer you plan for it the better. Even though you can’t access your super until you reach retirement age or a condition of release (e.g. retirement, death or invalidity), you still have control – it’s your money. You can move your super between funds as well as adjust your contribution levels. Some people may choose to have a Self Managed Super Fund (SMSF) to give them more control. However, SMSFs come with more responsibility, given your obligation to also be a trustee. To find out about your choices and how to have the control you want over your super, speak to a financial adviser. 2. I’ve worked my whole life so my super should be enough to provide for my retirement Sure, your super is designed to support your retirement. However, the level of support it will provide depends on a range of factors. As a starting point, ask yourself two key questions: <ul> <li>How much income and savings will I need in retirement to cover my living costs? </li> <li>Will I have enough super at my planned retirement date to achieve this?</li> </ul> The answers will help you work out how ready you really are for retirement. And once you’re clearer on what’s needed, it might pay to seek financial advice to help you put an effective retirement planning strategy in place. 3. My pre-tax contributions to my superannuation are 100 per cent tax free Unfortunately this isn’t true – there is a 15 per cent tax on every super contribution, including compulsory contributions made by your employer or voluntary contributions you make yourself. And this rate increases over certain amounts. So while the tax on your super is generally going to be lower than your usual income tax, making it a very worthwhile option, there is still tax payable. There are methods and strategies to minimise the tax you pay on super, but you need to speak to a professional to find out how. 4. Retirement means I’ll have to stop working Wrong. Just because you retire, it doesn’t mean you need to stop working entirely. If you don’t feel ready to retire fully – either financially or emotionally – then working part-time or casually could be an option for you. There is no set age at which you need to stop working. But the benefit of getting older is that you can access your super and enjoy tax breaks on your income and earnings. 5. Industry super funds don’t charge a commission Industry super funds can be structured differently to commercial funds in terms of the costs you pay. However there are still charges that apply, so it pays to review all fees and charges when choosing the best fund for you. Image credits: Getty Images

Retirement Income

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

An unbroken night’s sleep is a myth. Here’s what good sleep looks like

MSG is back. Is the idea it’s bad for us just a myth or food science?

Two-up, Gallipoli and the ‘fair go’: why illegal gambling is at the heart of the Anzac myth

Do parolees really ‘walk free’? Busting common myths about parole

3 cholesterol myths debunked

Princess Di's relative lays to rest longstanding burial myth

5 myths about bedbugs

Four myths about the financial side of divorce

Doctor debunks air fryer myth

Busting a king-sized myth: why Australia and NZ could become republics – and still stay in the Commonwealth

6 travel myths that aren’t true

Kochie silences Boomer housing myth

Movie myths meet movie maths

Common retinol myth debunked by experts

Do hypoallergenic cats even exist? 3 myths dispelled about cat allergies

5 common food myths busted

“No it’s not haunted”: Property listing tackles local myths

Have you fallen for the myth of ‘I can’t draw’? Do it anyway – and reap the reward

Five myths about Shakespeare’s contribution to the English language

5 myths about superannuation

Our Partners