Australia

Don't know if it's already been posted, happy for mods to delete if it's already posted somewhere else!

Worryingly, Australia is a world leader when it comes to bowel cancer.

Instead, most experts believe toxins or toxic influences in the world around us are interacting with genes to cause malignant changes.

In other words, you might unknowingly carry a gene that's only altered when you're exposed to a particular chemical, whereas someone else who doesn't have that version of the gene would be unaffected.

Lifestyle and pollution, who'd have thought /s

As I visit the city today (bus), I'm not sure how people tolerate the toxic transport pollution stench :(

This is an op-ed by Jennifer Parker, a defence and national security expert associate at the ANU’s National Security College. She has served for more than 20 years as a warfare officer in the Royal Australian Navy.

[...]

A major flaw in Australia’s Taiwan debate is the simplistic “will we or won’t we intervene?” framing, which assumes any conflict would be confined to Taiwan. In reality, an invasion would be far more complex. The Taiwan Strait’s geography, weather and Taiwan’s defences already make it a formidable task. That challenge is amplified by expected US and Japanese intervention from bases in Japan and the Philippines, forces China would try to neutralise pre-emptively.

Any invasion would almost certainly immediately trigger a broader regional conflict involving one of Australia’s key allies and at least two of its closest security partners. In a region-wide conflict, Australia’s national security interests would be jeopardised, and it would have little choice but to respond. Its key role would be defending Australia and its sea lines of communication.

[...]

Staying on the sidelines would be inconsistent with our national interests. Australia’s security, including maritime trade, would be directly threatened. Not to mention Australia’s obligations under the 1951 ANZUS Treaty.

It would also seriously damage Australia’s credibility with key security partners and regional neighbours. Moreover, if China resorts to force against Taiwan, it is unlikely to stop there. Beijing is also engaged in maritime and territorial disputes with South-East Asian states and South Korea and Japan. A successful invasion would embolden further aggression.

A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would not be an isolated act – it would trigger a regional conflict with direct consequences for Australia’s security. An invasion may not be imminent or inevitable, but China’s clear preparations demand serious attention. Australia must invest in its own defence – not because war is certain, but because deterrence depends on capability. And if deterrence fails, we must be ready to defend our vital interests.

[...]

This morning, after last night’s heavy rain, I noticed a large puddle forming near the back of my house. When I checked, I realised the outdoor drain was completely blocked, and water was starting to pool against the wall. I tried to clear some of the debris on top, but the water still wouldn’t drain away. I started worrying about possible flooding or water damage, especially since it’s been so wet this winter. I’m unsure whether I should try to fix this myself or if it’s time to call in a professional. I want to know the best steps to take when faced with a blocked outdoor drain during the colder months, especially to avoid any bigger problems down the track.

A discussion on Emergency Accommodation in South Australia, including first hand experience from the journalist.

In short:

Princeton Consumer Research carried out tests for certification for at least eight sunscreens that fell short of their advertised SPF50 claims in a recent review by consumer group Choice.

Several industry experts have raised concerns about PCR's testing methodology and calculations.

Both the Cancer Council and the Therapeutic Goods Administration said it was important people continued to use sunscreen as protection against the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation.

Noticed this as I drove past the other day. A crow getting stuck into a bin, with a cocky standing by watching. Crow hasn't worked out that blue is the paper recycling bin. Yet.

Clearly, the bin chickens have been on a recruitment drive.

Apologies for the potato quality. It's a cap from a dashcam while it was raining in low light.

When one of my friends popped over and said they had a small gift for my new office, I couldn’t have imagined what I was about to open!

For those like me who have been investigating childcare for almost a year now, the news was horrifying but not a surprise.

So the article only seems to raise these two cases, and it's not clear to me that either of these two people hurt any kids after appealing their check.

Is it just me or is this cooked? The right to appeal decisions seems fundamental to help reduce malfunctions or biases in a system. If the appeals process is too lax (doesn't seem like it?) then strength it sure but wtf is this move?