Anyone for tennis?

Anyone For Tennis.      Well, who would not be for tennis?               The winners of this years’ Australian Open, Elena Rybakina and Carlos Alacarz (at right and left ) each took home $4.15 million dollars. In a resounding rebuke to the fellow who said, “There is no prize for second,” the Runners Up, Novak Djokovic and Aryna Sabalenka each took home $2.15 million. These four brilliant tennis players collectively walked away with $12.6 million after each had played  seven games of tennis spread over two weeks. Actually, Djokovic only played five and a half games as he won on a forfeit in round four and in Round Five,  his opponent retired injured while leading by two sets to love.                           

Kimberley Inglis, (pictured left) the Western Australian who surprise everyone with her court craft, won $450 000 for making it to and losing  the 4^th Round. She also picked up $22 000 as her share of losing the First Round of the Ladies’ Doubles. Her fiancée, Mark Polmans  collected $242 000 as his share for Runner Up after a loss in the Men’s Doubles. Polmans also collected $40 000 for losing the First Qualifying Round in the week prior to the Australian Open. So, this young couple walked away  from the Rod Laver Arena with  a combined bankroll of $824 000. This should ensure the couple can spend the next 12 months playing on the international circuit and at Wimbledon, Roland Garros and Flushing Meadows.

Millions of tennis lovers around the world enjoyed watching the Australian Tennis Open earlier this year. The Australian Open pays about a $1 million  less to the ultimate winners than the English/Wimbledon and US Open. However, it is certainly much more generous and supportive of the lower ranked players. For instance, if you were one of the 64 players who lost the first-round match at  Rod Laver  Arena this year you would have collected $150 000. If you made it into the second round and lost, you would have been one of the 32 players who each collected $225 000. These figures are on a par with the US Open but are about 10% higher than what was paid in 2025 at Wimbledon (England)  or Roland Garros (France) to those who lost in the first and second rounds of the tournament.

The Australian Open has rapidly increased its overall total prize pool in recent years. In 2002 the total pool was $16.5 million. In 2020 it had grown by 23% to $71 million. Since then, it has increased by a whopping 64% and the total prize pool for 2026 was $111.5 million.

The England and US Opens will always be richer than the Australian Open because they attract much larger crowds, collect  huge television revenues and have many more and far richer commercial sponsors. However, The Australia Open, in true blue Aussie style, has made a conscious decision to not pay the major winners as much as the other Grand Slam countries in order  to support the lower ranked players. It does this by  awarding attractive payouts to the losers  in the early rounds.

This is similar to what happened in Australian cricket in the player pay negotiations in the early 2000s. Though the top Australia cricketers still received  very high remuneration, the underlying philosophy of the negotiations between Cricket Australia and the Players’ Association was of supporting the broader playing base rather than maximising the very top. This provided more money for week-end  grade cricketers and for developing junior cricket Australia wide. 

It makes you proud to be an Aussie. And it makes sense. You cannot win a Wimbledon final unless there are competitors for the champion to beast. Champions need a variety of opponents who can afford to travel with their manager, coach, physiotherapist  to  compete for the title. Similarly, you cannot play winning test cricket if the supply of talented youngsters has dried up because their junior associations all withered  on the vine of poverty.

Hmmm. $150 grand for losing  the first round of the Open . I might go and dig out my battered old tennis racquet and hit the practice courts.                                                                                                      I can lose with the best of them! 

Nuremburg speaks to the present day about the rise of a totalitarian dictatorship

Nuremburg speaks to the present day about the rise of a totalitarian dictatorship

Totalitarianism, if not fought against could triumph anywhere. George Orwell

History shows us that when powerful men control the media and the justice system, democratic values are eroded and sometimes are extinguished completely. Tragically, as the philosopher, George Santayana pointed out, “Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it”. In 2026, as we view world events, an excellent motion picture, “Nuremberg” forces us to view the horrific past. Hopefully, we will learn from it.

Nuremberg speaks to the present day by dramatizing how ordinary institutions, charismatic leaders, and public inactivity can allow a totalitarian dictatorship to commit vast crimes while telling everyone it is legal and justified. It shows how atrocities grow not from monsters but from ordinary people who try to ignore it or else dress it up in patriotism and flag waving. Lots of flag waving.                                                                                                                                         

It warns us that no society is automatically “immune” from the terrible descent into evil and it  tells us that accountability, law, and individual moral courage are the only real safeguards.              Its courtroom setting also reminds us that even those employing totalitarian powers must eventually be held accountable; that no evil transgressor can be immune forever.

The film shows that while some powerful people can  appear as charismatic, intelligent, even likeable and charming, they are responsible for egregious crimes against individual citizens and against humanity. Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe) is portrayed as intelligent, charming and able to dominate the courtroom and manipulate professionals like his official US Army psychiatrist, Major David Kelley (Rami Malek).  We see how rhetoric and charisma can seduce people into supporting or excusing authoritarian politics in any era.

The film also demonstrates how the powerful and their obedient underlings rationalise their inherently evil actions by claiming they were  “Only following orders”. Defendants repeatedly used patriotism, duty, obedience, and bureaucracy (“we just carrying  out our orders,” “it was legal”) to rationalise their abhorrent actions. This speaks directly to modern situations where officials or citizens co-operate with abusive policies while distancing themselves from responsibility by claiming they are only  following the orders of their superiors. In Minneapolis on February 4^th, Thomas Homan, described as President Trump’s Border Czar, on several occasions stated that his ICE agents, who had recently shot and killed two unarmed and non-resisting American citizens, were carrying out the direct wishes of the President. Presumably, at present in the USA, that makes everything OK.

The context of the Nuremberg trials shows how the Nazis used legal changes through the government and the courts, state generated propaganda, emergency powers, and violence (for example, the Reichstag fire, concentration camps,  The Nuremberg Laws) to dismantle democracy. The message is that democratic systems erode gradually, through many “small” choices, rather than in a single dramatic coup. Today, in the USA we see on our television screens large groups of federally funded, masked men moving in large groups, apprehending American citizens in the streets and asking them for their identification. US citizens have never before been required to carry identification papers and the penalty for not doing so has never been abduction and incarceration …or death!   At present though, this is becoming more a common expectation rather than a rare exception.

Universal Human Rights: The Nuremberg Trials helped to articulate the idea that certain crimes, genocide, systematic persecution, armed and aggressive invasion of another country,  are heinous crimes against humanity, not just violations of any one country’s laws. The United Nations was formed to prevent armed aggression by one nation against another. The film’s focus on charges violating Human Rights resonates with current debates about war crimes, international incursions, ethnic cleansing, and state violence.  

The film emphasises that even strong and powerful leaders can be held personally accountable: By putting top Nazi officials on trial, Nuremberg insists that political and military leaders cannot hide behind the state or the excuse of war. There is no such thing as “Full Immunity”.  This principle underpins modern international courts and serves as a warning to contemporary leaders who use dehumanising policies or encourage mass violence.

Seduction of fascism and relevance to the present.                                                    There is an  allure of “strongmen”: Critics note that the film uses the dynamic between Goring and the  psychiatrist Kelley, to show how clever, ruthless figures gain power by playing on fear, pride, and prejudice. That dynamic mirrors how modern demagogues can attract followers who think they are too intelligent  to be fooled. However, no country is exempt: In one scene, Kelley suggests that the United States itself is not immune to fascism, and this has been highlighted as especially resonant for today’s audiences. Recent commentary connects Nuremberg to present day concerns about human rights abuses, demonisation of minorities and the erosion of democratic norms in contemporary governments.

Lessons about resisting totalitarianism                                                                                         It is impossible to overstress the importance of democratic institutions and civil courage. It is acknowledged  by all who cherish freedom that the price of Liberty is Eternal Vigilan                    The film implies that honest courts, a free media, and independent public officials matter. However, this  only works if individuals choose to uphold justice rather than careerism or obedience to a powerful or charismatic leader. A whole cohort of FOX News journalist steadfastly tow the "Party line" when any evert goes beyond the bounds of what were once regarded as acceptable behaviour.  It invites viewers to ask what they themselves would do if ordered to carry out inhumane policies under a regime that rewarded such acts.                             

Remembering as prevention: Finally, Nuremberg shows concentration camp footage and the testimony of extermination camps to confront viewers with the brutal fact that dehumanisation leads to Mass Murder. The continuing relevance of these horrific scenes lies in remembering that these crimes are not just about the past but, also about recognising early warning signs of dictatorship and genocide today.           

At present, the US government is abducting alleged “aliens” off the streets and deporting them to gaols in foreign countries. They are doing this without any Due Process, yet the Republican majority in the US Congress and the Murdoch dominated mainstream media are not holding the President or the federal government to account. The tide comes in little by little.

The role of the media. In a free society the Right of Dissent is the hallmark of a democracy. That is why free speech is so prized by free people. It is enshrined in the Constitution of the USA. The media should be a bastion of free and independent thought. Sadly, much of the modern media is now controlled by multi billionaires, such as the Murdoch Family and billionaire, Jeff Bezos. These men are not journalists. They are business men who are  concerned with their power to influence and their ever-bulging bank balances. They use their media outlets to curry favour with powerful leaders. They view their media assets, not as a means of presenting the truth, but as vehicles for printing untruths that will make them richer and more powerful.

The Present. This year we have seen tragic video scenes of unarmed American citizens gunned down by masked agents of the federal government. The immediate reaction to these murders by US government leaders and by Murdoch’s Fox News, was to tell the nation  that the two people had been killed because they were “Urban Terrorists” who were a lethal danger to federal agents going about their lawful business of identifying “Aliens” and deporting them to foreign lands. People all over nhe world saw with our own eyes that those charges were completely false.          Within minutes of the killings, President Trump and his obedient subordinates had all decided that the victims were highly dangerous terrorist and deserved to be killed.  Our own eyes revealed the shameful deceit of the President, his Chief of Staff, Stephen Miller, plus the US Attorney General and the Director of Homeland Security. Our eyes told us that both of the murdered victims were unarmed, posed no threat to anybody and  were shot dead by untrained, undisciplined (though very highly paid) masked federal agents.

Goring’s psychiatrist wrote a book about his experiences in Nuremberg, warning that Totalitarianism could  even  rise in America. Nobody believed him and his book was a financial flop. Today we are witnessing an American President who has control of the Supreme Court, The Justice Department and most of the Media. He has acted without the authority of the Congress where Republicans, in awe of, or cowed by a dominating President, seem reluctant to provide the constitutional checks and balances that the Founding Fathers of the USA deliberately wrote into the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Both of these documents make it very clear that the government is the servant of “We, The People” not vice versa.

Nuremberg, the movie, is not only a commemoration of the past. It suggests that to avoid what Hannah Arendt called "The banality of evil" requires vigilance and moral courage against unconstitutional behaviour, the corruption of the courts and the justice system, dehumanising language against minorities, the muzzling of free media. It requires the courage and fortitude of individual citizens to resist carrying out unconstitutional and unjust orders.

In Minneapolis recently, the Attorney General of the United States, Pam Bondi, borrowing from the extortionate tactics of Al Capone, told the state governor that she would reduce the activities of ICE agents rounding up “Aliens” in that city if he handed over to her the state electoral rolls. The US constitution mandates that elections are the province of the states. For what reason would the President want electoral data about every US voter?  Is it an  ominous harbinger of electoral interference in order to manufacture electoral success for one party only? That is the sort of thing that happens in totalitarian states where elections are a sham and the result is known before a single vote is cast. Although Nuremberg did not labour the point, when the German people voted for Adolf Hitler in March 1933 it was the last time they voted in an election for a very long time.  Their next vote came sixteen years later, after the devastation of World War 2, in August 1949.

President Trump frequently labels news he does not like as “Fake News”. A significant section of the media, controlled by the Murdoch family, writes lies to support Trump’s views and actions. Trump uses social media to spread his own versions of the truth and denigrate anybody who dissents from his views. It is chilling that the President and his underlings are telling us not to believe what we have seen with  our eyes, We saw two US citizens murdered by federal agents acting with the due process criteria of the Ku Klux Klan. The President and others, on national news media, almot immediatelytold us that what we saw were two “urban terrorists” threating the life and limb of customs agents going about their lawful duty. That really was Fake News. Nuremberg is asking us to remove the scales from our eyes and believe what we see, not what government spokespersons or a biased media  tell us we saw in order to promote and protect themselves. George Orwell, who understood how totalitarian regimes gain power over people, wrote in his monumental novel about a dystopian society, “1984”, that “The party told you to reject the evidence of your own eyes and ears. It was their final and most essential command.”

Nuremberg provides a stark  warning that all lovers of Liberty and Justice must heed and act upon as required, if the important  qualities of life in a democracy are to be preserved. Otherwise, those who want to know who was responsible for the rise of the dictatorship, will only need to look in their bathroom mirrors to find out who the culprit is!

Finally, a quote from two other men who loved Freedom and Justice For All,  in the hope that every freedom loving person will step up, speak out and be accountable.                                            Edmund Burke. It is sufficient for the triumph of Evil that good men do nothing.
John F. Kennedy. Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.

My apologies that the Blog text is not configured exactly as the draft is configured. NB

         Shingles Vaccine Shows Surprise Dementia Benefit.                                                                                                                            Stanford University researchers discover viral infections may be a cause of dementia.                                                                                                                                                                                              A major Welsh study found that older adults receiving the shingles vaccine were 20% less like to be diagnosed with dementia. In 2013,  the Welsh government started giving free shingles vaccines to people reaching 80 years of age by a certain date . Over 280 000 people were involved and scientists studied them over seven years, compared to other 80 year olds outside the cut-off date.                      Shingles virus is a by-product of Chicken Pox and never leaves the human body. Shingles often strikes someone later in life when they are stressed or their immune system is compromised
Stanford University became involved in this research and found that not only were vaccinated people  20% less like to get dementia but the shingles vaccinations slowed the rate of progress of dementia.      This was a startling discovery. For many years scientist and doctors  believed that dementia had two main causes:- 
A. Build up of protein on the brain’s circuitry which prevented messages/memory being processed and 
B. Vascular problems, where poor blood flow into the brain affected abilities such as thinking, speaking and memory recall.                                                                                       
The Stanford University researchers' study of the Welsh data led to them saying there may also be viral causes of dementia.                    While revealing there is very strong evidence that a vaccine can impede or even reduce dementia, the Stanford scientists emphasised the urgent need for detailed clinical trials to prove that infection, inflammation and the body’s failing immune system may be curable causes of dementia. 
References.                                                                                                                                Stanford Medicine. www med.stanford.edu 2/4/2025; www.racgp.org.au 8/4/2025.         

 

Should You Avoid Drinking Water at Mealtimes?   

Separating Myth from Science on Hydration and Digestion.                                            Recently, a woman on ABC Radio was insisting that we should  not drink water for half an hour before or after meals. She said water dilutes the gastric juices. I thought the idea sounded plausible but wondered if it was supported by scientific research.  She sounded very knowledgeable and very adamant. Her main argument was that water, when consumed close to mealtime, dilutes the stomach’s gastric juices—primarily hydrochloric acid and enzymes. This, in theory, could make it harder for the stomach to break down food, leading to poorer digestion or discomfort.                                                                                                                                                                           What Does the Science Say? Scientific research does not support the notion that drinking water before, during, or after meals, is harmful or disrupts digestion. In fact, the Science says water plays a helpful role in the digestive process. The stomach is far more sophisticated than the radio lady’s claim.      It automatically adjusts the stomach’s acidity, even if you drink water with meals. The stomach’s cells constantly monitor acidity and maintain the ideal ph levels at around 1.5 to 2.5 to promote good digestion. How clever!                                                                                                                                                                              Does drinking water slow digestion? No, it does not! Liquids empty from the stomach much faster than solids and research does not show that adding water slows the digestive process. The research shows that drinking water 30 minutes before a meal helps regulate appetite so that you eat less and it supports digestion. Water during a meal helps moisten the food and aids digestion.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          The Bottom Line. Be very wary of unverified expert opinions! Even when they are expressed confidently by an “expert”. Remember, someone once described an Expert as “A drip under pressure”.

 Drinking water before and after meals is safe and normal. It does not dilute the gastric juices and it is   actually beneficial to digestion.   

 So, drink up. Drinking water is good at any time.                                                                                         The really good news is that further  research revealed   that 85% to 95% of wine and beer is…WATER   A glass of Gin and Tonic is 90% WATER.                                                                                                     As they say… Bottoms Up… and Good Health!