Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Ticker Views

Are serial killers dying out?

Published

on

Netflix series ‘Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story’, shares a glimpse into one of the world’s worst serial killers

The Milwaukee cannibal, Jeffrey Dahmer, killed 17 men and boys over a 13 year period.

His violent crimes involved drugging his victims, eating them, and acts of necrophilia.

He pleaded insanity in court but was later found guilty on 15 counts of murder.

Dahmer received 15 life terms for his gruesome crimes but was killed at the Columbia Correctional Institution by his fellow inmates. 

Sue Firth is a UK-based psychologist, who said these behaviours are thankfully quite rare.

“If you ever get the chance to listen to a proper interview with him, it’s quite interesting. He sounds very sensible.”

“He was actually a very repressed individual, couldn’t make a fundamental connection, didn’t have very many friends, and therefore didn’t learn social skills.”

“I think the saddest thing is that he then became so repressed, and started to experiment with the thought of dead people, because of course, they’re inanimate, they can’t answer back.”

SUE FIRTH, PSYCHOLOGIST

According to FBI documents, Dahmer told investigators he tried to create “love slaves”.

Dahmer’s father claimed things changed after his son had hernia surgery at four-years-old.

After that surgery, he stopped speaking and became withdrawn. Some believe this contributed to the violence he later inflicted on others.

Firth said Dahmer’s history of trauma could explain part of his actions, although it is not an excuse.

“He certainly sounded to me as if he knew what he was doing.”

“I think the sad reality is, once you’ve got somebody who’s dead, he’s now following up with the kind of behaviour that he did as a child, which is looking at how the skull is formed, how the brain is formed,” she said.

Are we getting better at catching these killers?

From Jeffrey Dahmer, to the deadly crimes of Ted Bundy, and Joseph James DeAngelo—technology and psychological assessment is helping authorities to put these notorious criminals behind bars.

“Forensic scientists are even getting better in understanding their own psychology and their approach to crime scenes,” said Associate Professor Xavier Conlan from Deakin University.

“As forensic scientists, we’d like to say with the development of new technologies, there’s no crime that can’t be solved, it’s just that we sometimes don’t have the technology yet to solve it.”

The introduction of DNA sampling helped to catch Joseph James DeAngelo, who comitted his last murder in 1986 before being caught in 2018.

“Testing people based off DNA when they do their own family testing actually brought down the Golden State killer.”

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR XAVIER CONLAN, DEAKIN UNIVERSITY

“Technology really has advanced and helps solve cold cases,” Dr Conlan said.

Joseph James DeAngelo, also known as the Golden State killer.

Forensic scientists believe there may even be some parallels between Dahmer and their own work.

“He would do things like put hydrochloric acid and inject it into the skulls of some of these later victims to try and improve his own approaches to being able to retain the bones that he’d like to keep.”

“Certainly forensic scientists and scientists look to improving their approach to being able to look after their samples,” Dr Conlan said.

Costa is a news producer at ticker NEWS. He has previously worked as a regional journalist at the Southern Highlands Express newspaper. He also has several years' experience in the fire and emergency services sector, where he has worked with researchers, policymakers and local communities. He has also worked at the Seven Network during their Olympic Games coverage and in the ABC Melbourne newsroom. He also holds a Bachelor of Arts (Professional), with expertise in journalism, politics and international relations. His other interests include colonial legacies in the Pacific, counter-terrorism, aviation and travel.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

Coalition’s primary vote plunges to record low and One Nation surges to record high in Newspoll

Published

on

Adrian Beaumont, The University of Melbourne

The Coalition’s primary vote slumped four points to a record low 24% in the latest Newspoll, while One Nation was up four points to a record high 15%. One Nation also surged to 15% in an Essential poll.

The national Newspoll, conducted October 27–30 from a sample of 1,265 voters, gave Labor a 57–43% lead over the Coalition, unchanged from the previous Newspoll in early October.

Primary votes were 36% for Labor (down one point), 24% for the Coalition (down four points), 15% for One Nation (up four points), 11% for the Greens (down one point) and 14% for all others (up two points).

Analyst Kevin Bonham said the poll set or matched a few records:

  • the worst Coalition primary vote ever in a public national poll
  • a tie for the highest One Nation vote in a national poll, matching last week’s Essential poll
  • the lowest combined vote for Labor and the Coalition in Newspoll history.

The Coalition’s previous worst primary vote was 27% in a mid-September Newspoll.

In the new Newspoll, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s net approval was down four points to -5, with 51% of voters dissatisfied with his performance and 46% satisfied.

Opposition leader Sussan Ley’s net approval slumped 13 points to -33; she has dropped 24 points since August.

Albanese led Ley by 54–27% as better prime minister, compared to 52–30% in early October.

This is the graph of Albanese’s net approval in Newspoll with a trend line. Labor easily won the 2025 election, despite his ratings being negative at the time.

Australia may be on a trajectory where One Nation overtakes the Coalition to become the main right-wing party. Far-right parties have already overtaken centre-right parties in some European countries.

In the United Kingdom, the Election Maps UK poll aggregate has the far-right Reform party leading with 30.5%, followed by Labour at 19.1%, the Conservatives at 17.5%, the Liberal Democrats at 13.4% and the Greens at 12.6%. With the UK’s first-past-the-post voting system, Reform would win a majority of House of Commons seats on this polling.

Even if One Nation overtakes the Coalition in Australia, the Australian Labor Party has a far higher primary vote than UK Labour. I expect Coalition preferences would favour One Nation, but as long as the combined vote for Labor, the Greens and left-leaning others holds up, One Nation wouldn’t win an Australian election.

Essential poll: One Nation surges to 15%

The national Essential poll, conducted October 22–26 from a sample of 1,041 voters, gave Labor a 50–44% lead over the Coalition by respondent preferences, including undecided voters. Labor’s lead was 51–44% in late September.

Primary votes were 36% for Labor (up one point), 26% for the Coalition (down one point), 15% for One Nation (up two points), 9% for the Greens (down two points), 8% for all others (up one point) and 6% undecided (steady).

By 2025 election preference flows, Labor would lead the Coalition by a more than 55–45% margin.

Albanese’s net approval was up three points in the Essential poll to +1, with 45% of respondents approving of his performance and 44% disapproving. Ley’s net approval was down two points to -11.

On Albanese’s October 20 meeting with US President Donald Trump in Washington, 37% thought it was good for Australia’s long-term interests, 18% bad and 26% said it would have no real impact.

On the direction the Liberals should take to provide an alternative government, 48% of total respondents said they should adopt more progressive positions, 24% more conservative positions and 28% thought they should maintain their current positions. Among only Coalition voters, 49% were in favour of more progressive positions, compared to 29% for more conservative.

Ley was thought best to lead the Liberals by 13% of total respondents, followed by Andrew Hastie and Jacinta Price at 10% each, with 42% unsure. Among only Coalition voters, Ley had 22%, Hastie 20% and Price 13%.

Overall, respondents supported Australia’s target to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 by a 44–27% margin. Among only Coalition voters, this support shrank to 38%, with 35% opposed.

Labor has big lead in NSW DemosAU poll

A New South Wales state poll by DemosAU and Premier National, conducted October 17–22 from a sample of 1,016 voters, gave Labor a 59–41% lead over the Coalition (compared to Labor’s lead of 54.3–45.7% at the March 2023 election).

Primary votes were 37% for Labor, 30% for the Coalition, 13% for the Greens and 20% for all others.

The next NSW election will be in March 2027. Before the May federal election, Labor had been struggling in the NSW polls, but the party has surged since then.

Labor Premier Chris Minns led the Liberals’ Mark Speakman by 44–25% as preferred premier in the poll. Cost of living was rated the most important issue by 36% of respondents, followed by housing affordability on 25%.

Upper house voting intentions were 30% for Labor, 21% for the Coalition, 15% for One Nation, 13% for the Greens, 5% for Family First and 3% each for Animal Justice and Legalise Cannabis.

Half of the 42 upper house seats will be up for election in 2027, using statewide proportional representation with preferences.

Polls of upper house voting intentions are rare in Australia and typically understate major party support. It’s unrealistic for the combined vote for the Coalition and Labor in the upper house to be 16 points below the lower house figure.

Queensland DemosAU poll has solid LNP lead

A Queensland state poll by DemosAU and Premier National, conducted October 13–20 from a sample of 1,006 respondents, gave the Liberal National Party (LNP) a 54–46% lead over Labor, a one-point gain for Labor since a July DemosAU poll.

Primary votes were 37% for the LNP (down three points), 29% for Labor (up one point), 14% for One Nation (up two points), 12% for the Greens (down one point) and 8% for all others (up one point).

LNP Premier David Crisafulli led Labor’s Steven Miles as preferred premier by a 44–32% margin.

On the biggest issue facing Queensland, 30% said lack of affordable housing, 27% cost of living and 20% crime. On the performance of the government on key issues, the LNP had net ratings of -36 on housing and -38 on cost of living, but a much better rating on crime (-2).

A recent Resolve Queensland poll had primary votes that implied a narrow Labor lead after preferences. This DemosAU poll is far better for the LNP.

Midterm elections in Argentina and Trump’s ratings slide

In Argentina’s midterm elections on October 26, far-right President Javier Milei’s Liberty Advances party made decisive gains in both chambers of the legislature, though it still remains short of a majority. I covered these elections for The Poll Bludger.

In the United States, Trump’s net approval rating in analyst Nate Silver’s aggregate of US national polls has dropped to -11.8 (with 54.6% of Americans disapproving of his performance, compared to 42.9% approving). This is down 4.2 points since October 20.

Trump’s falling approval ratings could be linked to the ongoing government shutdown in the US, which began on October 1 and is now poised to become the longest in US history, breaking the 35-day record set during Trump’s first term.

Voters will head to the polls on Tuesday in the US in several key elections, including the governorship in Virginia and New Jersey and the mayoral race in New York City. Democratic front-runner Zohran Mamdani has led independent candidate and former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in the New York City race, though the polls have tightened in recent days.

I will follow the election results for The Poll Bludger.The Conversation

Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

Kim Kardashian’s brain aneurysm diagnosis: what it means and who is most at risk

Published

on

Adam Taylor, Lancaster University

In the run up to the launch of the latest series of The Kardashians, her new legal drama All’s Fair and the celebrations for her 45th birthday, Kim Kardashian made a very different kind of headline. She revealed that she had been diagnosed with a brain aneurysm.

Kardashian revealed her diagnosis in a teaser for The Kardashians Season 7, which includes footage of her undergoing an MRI scan believed to have identified the condition. So far, no details have been released about the type, size or location of the aneurysm, or whether it required treatment. It’s therefore unclear whether the finding represents a serious health threat or an incidental discovery; something that’s becoming increasingly common as more people undergo full-body scans or imaging for other reasons.

An aneurysm is a widening or bulging of any artery in the body. It most commonly occurs in the aorta (the body’s main artery), as well as in arteries of the limbs, neck and brain. When the swelling affects arteries in the brain, it is known as a cerebral aneurysm.

Brain aneurysms can have devastating effects. The nerve cells in the brain are not designed to come into direct contact with blood. To protect them, the brain has a natural defence system called the blood brain barrier, which carefully regulates what can and cannot pass from the bloodstream into brain tissue.

The largest risk factor of developing a brain aneurysm is being female. These aneurysms are around 60% more common in women than in men, and this increases further after menopause. Oestrogen helps to keep blood vessels flexible; when its levels fall after menopause, blood vessels become more vulnerable to damage.

A family history of aneurysms also increases risk. Someone who has two first-degree relatives – that’s parents, children or siblings – who have experienced a ruptured aneurysm has an 11% higher chance of developing one themselves. This is because genetic factors influence the structure and strength of blood vessel walls, making some people more vulnerable to weakness and damage.

This genetic link is also seen in several connective-tissue disorders which change the structure and function of artery walls, increasing the likelihood of an aneurysm. These include Ehlers Danlos syndrome, which causes overly stretchy skin and joints and weakens connective tissues, including those in blood vessels; Marfan syndrome, which often leads to long limbs, flexible joints and a higher risk of heart and blood vessel problems; Loeys Dietz syndrome, a rare condition that causes arteries to twist and widen; and Neurofibromatosis type 1, which causes non-cancerous growths along nerves and can weaken blood vessel walls.

Lifestyle factors can also play a role in increasing aneurysm risk. Current and former smoking are both strongly linked to weakened blood vessels. Quitting smoking reduces the risk, but it does not completely remove it when compared with those who have never smoked. High cholesterol can also damage blood vessels and raise the likelihood of an aneurysm.

In Kardashian’s case, she has mentioned stress as a contributing factor. Although stress itself does not directly cause aneurysms, it can increase blood pressure. Persistent high blood pressure, whether brought on by emotional stress or underlying health issues such as certain types of kidney disease, can weaken and damage blood vessel walls, making aneurysms more likely to develop.

Recreational drug use can also contribute to aneurysm risk, although there is no suggestion that this is relevant in Kardashian’s case. Cocaine raises blood pressure while narrowing blood vessels in the brain. These combined effects push pressure within the brain’s arteries even higher, increasing the chance of aneurysm formation and rupture. Amphetamine and methamphetamine have similar effects, altering blood vessel diameter, raising blood pressure and driving inflammation that weakens vessel walls. These processes contribute to aneurysm formation and an increased rate of progression and rupture.

When an aneurysm does form, its effects depend largely on where it develops and whether it ruptures, which can make symptoms unpredictable and sometimes difficult to recognise.

Ruptured cerebral aneurysms often begin with a small leak of blood that causes a sudden, severe headache, often described as “the worst headache of my life” or a thunderclap headache. This may serve as a warning sign of a larger rupture that could occur hours, days or even weeks later. Other symptoms can include uncoordinated movements, nausea, vomiting and sudden changes in consciousness.

Unruptured cerebral aneurysms tend to cause a wider range of symptoms because the effects depend on where the aneurysm is developing. Nerves responsible for vision, balance, hearing, swallowing and speech all run close to major blood vessels in the brain, so even a small change in pressure can have noticeable effects.

Vision problems are common, presenting as double or partial loss of sight. Eye pain or difficulty moving the eyes due to muscle weakness, a stiff neck and ringing in the ears may also occur. Less common symptoms include neck pain and difficulty swallowing.

Because these symptoms overlap with many other conditions, diagnosing an aneurysm can be challenging. Unruptured aneurysms often grow slowly and may not cause symptoms until they reach a certain size, while ruptured aneurysms appear suddenly and require emergency treatment.

Once discovered, aneurysms are measured and categorised. The smaller the aneurysm, the lower the risk of rupture. Those with a diameter under 7mm are least likely to rupture, those between 7mm and 12mm are considered medium, 12mm to 25mm are large, and anything over 25mm is classed as giant. The size and location of the aneurysm are key factors in determining its risk. Aneurysms on arteries at the base of the brain carry a higher chance of rupture.

Treatment depends on individual circumstances, and not all aneurysms require intervention. In fact, many people live healthily with small aneurysms without ever realising they have them. There are growing detection rates as imaging becomes more common and less invasive, and AI is also being used to improve accuracy. Small, symptom-free aneurysms are often monitored with regular imaging scans, especially in people with few additional risk factors. Treating underlying conditions such as high blood pressure can reduce the risk of rupture.

Those cerebral aneurysms that rupture or are at high risk of rupture require surgical intervention. The two most common procedures are clipping and endovascular repair. Clipping is a more invasive operation that involves opening the skull to access the aneurysm directly, and it is better suited to certain aneurysm locations.

Endovascular repair is less invasive and involves inserting a catheter through a blood vessel in the leg, guiding it into place and delivering a coil that prevents blood from entering the aneurysm. These coils are usually made of platinum and measure between half the width of a human hair to twice the width.

Because aneurysms are often silent until they reach a critical point, any sudden or unexplained neurological symptoms should always be assessed by a medical professional.The Conversation

Adam Taylor, Professor of Anatomy, Lancaster University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

Foreign spies are trying to steal Australian research. We should be doing more to stop them

Published

on

Brendan Walker-Munro, Southern Cross University

When we think of spies, we may go to images of people in trench coats and dark glasses, trying to steal government papers. Or someone trying to tap the phone of a senior official.

The reality of course can be much more sophisticated. One emerging area of concern is how countries protect their university research from foreign interference. And how we safely do research with other countries – a vital way to ensure Australia’s work is cutting edge.

This week, research security experts including myself will meet in Brussels to talk about how to conduct free and open research in the face of growing security risks around the world.

What does Australia need to do to better protect its university research?

What is research security?

Research security means protecting research and development (R&D) from foreign government interference or unauthorised access. It is especially important in our universities, where the freedom to publish, collaborate, and work together is seen as a virtue.

Australia’s universities face escalating, deliberate efforts to steal commercially or militarily valuable research, repress views critical of foreign regimes, and database hacking.

As my July 2025 report found, adversaries are no longer just stealing data or cultivating informal relationships. We’re seeing deliberate efforts to insert malicious insiders, target researchers and exploit data and cyber vulnerabilities.

ASIO head Mike Burgess has stressed there is an incredible danger facing our academic community from spies and secret agents.

In 2024, Burgess warned of an “A-team” of spies targeting academia:

leading Australian academics and political figures were invited to a conference in an overseas country, with the organisers covering all expenses […]. A few weeks after the conference wrapped up, one of the academics started giving the A-team information about Australia’s national security and defence priorities.

But Australia can’t just stop collaborating with foreign nations. Some are far more scientifically advanced than we are, and we risk cutting ourselves off from developments in the latest technology.

In other cases, we might be unfairly discriminating against researchers from other countries.

The international research landscape is changing

Since January, US President Donald Trump has slashed university funding, banned foreign students and orchestrated a campaign of lawsuits and investigations into campus activities.

This has a huge flow-on effect to Australia, as we have tied ourselves strongly to the US for science and technology funding.

So Australia is looking to the EU as a more reliable and sustainable funding partner.

It has reactivated talks to join the €100 billion (A$179 billion) Horizon Europe fund. Australia abandoned its original attempt in 2023 citing “potential cost of contributions to projects”.

Horizon Europe isn’t just a massive pot of money for Australian researchers. It’s also a way to bring Australia closer to the EU on other initiatives, like the EU Science Diplomacy Alliance, which ensures scientific developments are pursued for the safety, security and benefits for all people.

Yet if Australia wants to join Horizon Europe, it will need to prove it takes research security as seriously as other EU nations. In April 2024, Australia and the EU agreed to strengthen research security and

measures to protect critical technology and to counter foreign interference in research and innovation.

Australia does not have an adequate policy

But Australia does not have a proper national policy on research security. It also does not have a proper guide for our 43 universities in how they should approach it or what the minimum standards are.

The guidelines we have for “countering foreign interference” are entirely voluntary, and not centrally monitored for compliance in any way.

A 2022 federal parliamentary report detailed a litany of attempts by foreign agents to get access to our universities. It made 27 recommendations about improving that situation. To date, the federal government has not yet acted on about three quarters of these.

These included a recommendation to ban involvement in “talent recruitment programs”, where academics are offered vast sums of money or other benefits to duplicate their research in countries like China.

The EU approach

Australia’s approach is in stark contrast to the EU, which has made research security a priority.

In May 2024, the European Commission directed all 27 member states to adopt laws and policies to “work together to safeguard sensitive knowledge from being misused”.

Germany has since adopted “security ethics committees” – modelled on human and animal ethics committees – to scrutinise potential projects for dangerous or high-risk research.

The Netherlands, Denmark and United Kingdom all set up government contact points to help academics answer questions about research security practices.

It will take more than just policies

Australia needs clearer, stronger national policies for research security. But if we are going to take this seriously, we need more than just policy guidance.

To properly scrutinise and set up research, universities need time, support and information. This also means they need more funding.

In some universities there might be one person responsible for research security, and this may not be their sole job.

So we also need funding to give academics a way to identify and manage risks in research and support information sharing across institutions.

Through these measures we will be able to demonstrate to the world we are doing research securely – and it is safe to fund and work with Australia.The Conversation

Brendan Walker-Munro, Senior Lecturer (Law), Southern Cross University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Trending Now