hacklink hack forum hacklink film izle hacklink marsbahisizmir escortsahabetpornJojobetcasibompadişahbetBakırköy Escortcasibom9018betgit casinojojobet

News

Tag: children

  • Australian father of teen sextortion victim backs banning young children from social media

    Australian father of teen sextortion victim backs banning young children from social media

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Wayne Holdsworth became an advocate for banning Australian children younger than 16 from social media because his son took his own life after falling victim to an online sextortion scam.

    Mac Holdsworth died last year at his Melbourne family home at the age of 17 after a 47-year-old Sydney man who purported to be an 18-year-old woman demanded money for an intimate image the boy had shared.

    Since then, the grieving father has taken his tragic story to around 20 schools to warn students of the risks of social media.

    “I saw firsthand the damage that social media could do. I saw Mac, my son, get sexually extorted on social media,” Holdsworth said. “His mental health deteriorated at a rapid rate.”

    Online predators began approaching the teenager before his 16th birthday and his father believes such a ban could have saved his life.

    Australia’s House of Representatives on Wednesday voted for such a ban and the Senate is expected to make it law soon.

    Holdsworth said most of the 3,000 students he’s spoken to, from age 12 to 17, agree with a ban on children under the age of 16.

    “They come up to me and they say, ‘I’m so glad that this is going to be implemented,’” Holdsworth said. “Even the kids see it now that they’re going to be protected from those predators outside that are preying on them.”

    He said three girls approached him after a school address on Monday to tell him that they were being subjected to sextortion. One had already handed over 2,500 Australian dollars ($1,600) of her parents’ money to a blackmailer.

    Holdsworth said he was the first adult they had confided in.

    “The parent won’t know until the credit card statement comes out,” he said.

    “So it’s prevalent. It happened last night and it’ll happen tonight,” he added.

    Holdsworth described the government plan to ban children younger than 16 from social media as “absolutely essential for the safety of our children.”

    But not all parents are convinced that banning young children from social media is the answer.

    Critics say the legislation was rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, would not work, would create privacy risks for users of all ages and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children.

    They also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of positive aspects of social media, drive children to the dark web, make children too young for social media reluctant to report harms they encounter, and take away incentives for platforms to make online spaces safer.

    Independent Sydney lawmaker Kylea Tink on Tuesday became the first member of the House of Representatives to speak publicly against the bill, which would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.

    “As a mom of three young adults … I’m very aware of the negative impacts of social media and the challenges of parenting in this digital world,” Tink told Parliament. “I also recognize, however, that my children are digital natives and are very literate about how these platforms work. For this reason, I encourage everyone involved in this debate to ensure they are listening to the voices of young Australians when it comes to this decision-making process rather than assuming that the grownups in the room know best.”

    Tink was among 13 lawmakers who voted against the bill in the House on Wednesday. They were overwhelmed by 102 legislators who voted for it.

    The platforms have urged a Senate committee that examined the legislation on Monday to delay a vote until after a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies is completed next June.

    The four-hour committee meeting on Monday attracted 15,000 written submissions.

    X Corp. told the committee that billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk’s platform had “serious concerns as to the lawfulness of the bill,” including its compatibility with the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    “There is no evidence that banning young people from social media will work and to make it law in the form proposed is highly problematic,” X said.

    Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, said the legislation was “inconsistent with what Australian parents have told us that they want, which is a simple and effective way for them to set controls and manage their teens’ online experience.”

    Under the bill, parental consent for children to use social media does not override the ban.

    Lizzie O’Shea, chair of the Digital Rights Watch charity, which aims to uphold the digital rights of Australians, said she was appalled by the process and limited timeframe the government used to pass such significant and contentious legislation.

    She said she was very aware of the serious risks posed by social media platforms, “but I do not support a ban personally because I understand both the limits of that particular policy and the expert evidence that is coming out from people who work in this space about the problems for young people being excluded from those spaces,” O’Shea said.

    Her concerns centered on privacy, negative mental health impacts on excluded children and the possibility that young children would find ways to access social media spaces that would become even less child friendly as a result of the ban.

    “I’m profoundly aware of the dangers of large social media platforms running a certain kind of business model that prioritizes data extraction and exploitation of vulnerability over the public interest or the building of community and the protection of democracy,” she said.

    Swinburne University digital media expert Belinda Barnet, who supports the ban, feels she is part of a minority among professionals in the digital field.

    “I like it mainly because I think many of the social media platforms as they exist right now are not suitable environments for young children,” she said.

    Source link

  • Australia’s House of Representatives passes bill that would ban young children from social media

    Australia’s House of Representatives passes bill that would ban young children from social media

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Australia’s House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would ban children younger than 16 years old from social media, leaving it to the Senate to finalize the world-first law.

    The major parties backed the bill that would make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.

    The legislation passed 102 votes in favor to 13 against. If the bill becomes law this week, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restrictions before the penalties are enforced.

    Opposition lawmaker Dan Tehan told Parliament the government had agreed to accept amendments in the Senate that would bolster privacy protections. Platforms would not be allowed to compel users to provide government-issued identity documents including passports or driver’s licenses. The platforms also could not demand digital identification through a government system.

    “Will it be perfect? No. But is any law perfect? No, it’s not. But if it helps, even if it helps in just the smallest of ways, it will make a huge difference to people’s lives,” Tehan told Parliament.

    Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the Senate would debate the bill later Wednesday. The major parties’ support all but guarantees the legislation will pass in the Senate, where no party holds a majority of seats.

    Lawmakers who were not aligned with either the government or the opposition were most critical of the legislation during debate on Tuesday and Wednesday.

    Criticisms include that the legislation had been rushed through Parliament without adequate scrutiny, would not work, would create privacy risks for users of all ages and would take away parents’ authority to decide what’s best for their children.

    Critics also argue the ban would isolate children, deprive them of positive aspects of social media, drive children to the dark web, make children too young for social media reluctant to report harms they encountered and take away incentives for platforms to make online spaces safer.

    Independent lawmaker Zoe Daniel said the legislation would “make zero difference to the harms that are inherent to social media.”

    “The true object of this legislation is not to make social media safe by design, but to make parents and voters feel like the government is doing something about it,” Daniel told Parliament.

    “There is a reason why the government parades this legislation as world-leading, that’s because no other country wants to do it,” she added.

    T he platforms had asked for the vote on legislation to be delayed until at least June next year when a government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies made its report on how the ban could been enforced.

    Melbourne resident Wayne Holdsworth, whose 17-year-old son Mac took his own life last year after falling victim to an online sextortion scam, described the bill as “absolutely essential for the safety of our children.”

    “It’s not the only thing that we need to do to protect them because education is the key, but to provide some immediate support for our children and parents to be able to manage this, it’s a great step,” the 65-year-old online safety campaigner told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

    “And in my opinion, it’s the greatest time in our country’s history,” he added, referring to the pending legal reform.

    Source link

  • Social media sites call for Australia to delay its ban on children younger than 16

    Social media sites call for Australia to delay its ban on children younger than 16

    MELBOURNE, Australia — An advocate for major social media platforms told an Australian Senate committee Monday that laws to ban children younger than 16 from the sites should be delayed until next year at least instead of being rushed through the Parliament this week.

    Sunita Bose, managing director of Digital Industry Group Inc., an advocate for the digital industry in Australia including X, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok, was answering questions at a single-day Senate committee hearing into world-first legislation that was introduced into the Parliament last week.

    Bose said the Parliament should wait until the government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies is completed in June.

    “Parliament is asked to pass a bill this week without knowing how it will work,” Bose said.

    The legislation would impose fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) on platforms for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.

    It seems likely to be passed by Parliament by Thursday with the support of the major parties.

    It would take effect a year after the bill becomes law, allowing the platforms time to work out technological solutions that would also protect users’ privacy.

    Bose received heated questions from several senators and challenges to the accuracy of her answers.

    Opposition Sen. Ross Cadell asked how his 10-year-old stepson was able to hold Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube accounts from the age of 8, despite the platforms setting a nominal age limit of 13.

    Bose replied that “this is an area where the industry needs to improve.”

    She said the proposed social media ban risked isolating some children and driving children to “darker, less safe online spaces” than mainstream platforms.

    Bose said her concern with the proposed law was that “this could compromise the safety of young people,” prompting a hostile response from opposition Sen. Sarah Henderson.

    “That’s an outrageous statement. You’re trying to protect the big tech giants,” Henderson said.

    Unaligned Sen. Jacqui Lambie asked why the platforms didn’t use their algorithms to prevent harmful material being directed to children. The algorithms have been accused of keeping technology-addicted children connected to platforms and of flooding users with harmful material that promotes suicide and eating disorders.

    “Your platforms have the ability to do that. The only thing that’s stopping them is themselves and their greed,” Lambie said.

    Bose said algorithms were already in place to protect young people online through functions including filtering out nudity.

    “We need to see continued investment in algorithms and ensuring that they do a better job at addressing harmful content,” Bose said.

    Questioned by opposition Sen. Dave Sharma, Bose said she didn’t know how much advertising revenue the platforms she represented made from Australian children.

    She said she was not familiar with research by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health that found X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat made $11 billion in advertising from U.S. users under 18 in 2022.

    Communications department official Sarah Vandenbroek told the committee said the evaluation of age assurance technologies that will report in June would assess not only their accuracy but also their security and privacy settings.

    Department Deputy Secretary James Chisholm said officials had consulted widely before proposing the age limit.

    “We think it’s a good idea and it can be done,” Chisholm told the committee.

    Source link

  • A social media ban for children younger than 16 is introduced in Australia’s Parliament

    A social media ban for children younger than 16 is introduced in Australia’s Parliament

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Australia’s communications minister introduced a world-first law into Parliament on Thursday that would ban children younger than 16 from social media, saying online safety was one of parents’ toughest challenges.

    Michelle Rowland said TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram were among the platforms that would face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.

    “This bill seeks to set a new normative value in society that accessing social media is not the defining feature of growing up in Australia,” Rowland told Parliament.

    “There is wide acknowledgement that something must be done in the immediate term to help prevent young teens and children from being exposed to streams of content unfiltered and infinite,” she added.

    The bill has wide political support. After it becomes law, the platforms would have one year to work out how to implement the age restriction.

    “For too many young Australians, social media can be harmful. Almost two-thirds of 14- to 17-years-old Australians have viewed extremely harmful content online including drug abuse, suicide or self-harm as well as violent material. One quarter have been exposed to content promoting unsafe eating habits,” Rowland said.

    Government research found that “95% of Australian care-givers find online safety to be one of their toughest parenting challenges,” she said.

    Social media had a social responsibility and could do better in addressing harms on their platforms, she said.

    “This is about protecting young people, not punishing or isolating them, and letting parents know that we’re in their corner when it comes to supporting their children’s health and wellbeing,” Rowland said.

    Child welfare and internet experts have raised concerns about the ban, including isolating 14- and 15-year-olds from their already established online social networks.

    Rowland said there would not be age restrictions placed on messaging services, online games or platforms that substantially support the health and education of users.

    “We are not saying risks don’t exist on messaging apps or online gaming. While users can still be exposed to harmful content by other users, they do not face the same algorithmic curation of content and psychological manipulation to encourage near-endless engagement,” Rowland said.

    The government announced last week that a consortium led by British company Age Check Certification Scheme has been contracted to examine various technologies to estimate and verify ages.

    In addition to removing children under 16 from social media, Australia is also looking for ways to prevent children under 18 from accessing online pornography, a government statement said.

    Age Check Certification Scheme’s chief executive Tony Allen said Monday the technologies being considered included age estimation and age inference. Inference involves establishing a series of facts about individuals that point to them being at least a certain age.

    Rowland said the platforms would also face fines of up to AU$50 million ($33 million) if they misused personal information of users gained for age-assurance purposes.

    Information used for age assurances must be destroyed after serving that purpose unless the user consents to it being kept, she said.

    Digital Industry Group Inc., an advocate for the digital industry in Australia, described the age limit as a “20th century response to 21st century challenges.”

    Source link

  • Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic

    Australia’s plan to ban children from social media proves popular and problematic

    MELBOURNE, Australia — How do you remove children from the harms of social media? Politically the answer appears simple in Australia, but practically the solution could be far more difficult.

    The Australian government’s plan to ban children from social media platforms including X, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram until their 16th birthdays is politically popular. The opposition party says it would have done the same after winning elections due within months if the government hadn’t moved first.

    The leaders of all eight Australian states and mainland territories have unanimously backed the plan, although Tasmania, the smallest state, would have preferred the threshold was set at 14.

    But a vocal assortment of experts in the fields of technology and child welfare have responded with alarm. More than 140 such experts signed an open letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemning the 16-year age limit as “too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively.”

    Details of what is proposed and how it will be implemented are scant. More will be known when legislation is introduced into the Parliament next week.

    Leo Puglisi, a 17-year-old Melbourne student who founded online streaming service 6 News Australia at the age of 11, laments that lawmakers imposing the ban lack the perspective on social media that young people have gained by growing up in the digital age.

    “With respect to the government and prime minister, they didn’t grow up in the social media age, they’re not growing up in the social media age, and what a lot of people are failing to understand here is that, like it or not, social media is a part of people’s daily lives,” Leo said.

    “It’s part of their communities, it’s part of work, it’s part of entertainment, it’s where they watch content – young people aren’t listening to the radio or reading newspapers or watching free-to-air TV – and so it can’t be ignored. The reality is this ban, if implemented, is just kicking the can down the road for when a young person goes on social media,” Leo added.

    Leo has been applauded for his work online. His home state Victoria nominated him for the Young Australian of the Year award, which will be announced in January. His nomination credits his platform with “fostering a new generation of informed, critical thinkers.”

    One of the proposal’s supporters, cyber safety campaigner Sonya Ryan, knows from personal tragedy how dangerous social media can be for children.

    Her 15-year-old daughter Carly Ryan was murdered in 2007 in South Australia state by a 50-year-old pedophile who pretended to be a teenager online. In a grim milestone of the digital age, Carly was the first person in Australia to be killed by an online predator.

    “Kids are being exposed to harmful pornography, they’re being fed misinformation, there are body image issues, there’s sextortion, online predators, bullying. There are so many different harms for them to try and manage and kids just don’t have the skills or the life experience to be able to manage those well,” Sonya Ryan said.

    “The result of that is we’re losing our kids. Not only what happened to Carly, predatory behavior, but also we’re seeing an alarming rise in suicide of young people,” she added.

    Sonya Ryan is part of a group advising the government on a national strategy to prevent and respond to child sexual abuse in Australia.

    She wholeheartedly supports Australia setting the social media age limit at 16.

    “We’re not going to get this perfect,” she said. “We have to make sure that there are mechanisms in place to deal with what we already have which is an anxious generation and an addicted generation of children to social media.”

    A major concern for social media users of all ages is the legislation’s potential privacy implications.

    Age estimation technology has proved inaccurate, so digital identification appears to be the most likely option for assuring a user is at least 16.

    Australia’s eSafety Commissioner, an office that describes itself as the world’s first government agency dedicated to keeping people safer online, has suggested in planning documents adopting the role of authenticator. The government would hold the identity data and the platforms would discover through the commissioner whether a potential account holder was 16.

    Tama Leaver, professor of internet studies at Curtin University, fears that the government will make the platforms hold the users’ identification data instead.

    The government has already said the onus will be on the platforms, rather than on children or their parents, to ensure everyone meets the age limit.

    “The worst possible outcome seems to be the one that the government may be inadvertently pushing towards, which would be that the social media platforms themselves would end up being the identity arbiter,” Leaver said.

    “They would be the holder of identity documents which would be absolutely terrible because they have a fairly poor track record so far of holding on to personal data well,” he added.

    The platforms will have a year once the legislation has become law to work out how the ban can be implemented.

    Ryan, who divides her time between Adelaide in South Australia and Fort Worth, Texas, said privacy concerns should not stand in the way of removing children from social media.

    “What is the cost if we don’t? If we don’t put the safety of our children ahead of profit and privacy?” she asked.

    Source link

  • Who Is PGA Tour Pro Justin Lower’s Wife, Janise? Lifestyle, Children, Career & Other Details Revealed

    Who Is PGA Tour Pro Justin Lower’s Wife, Janise? Lifestyle, Children, Career & Other Details Revealed

    Everyone needs some kind of support system in their lives, and it becomes especially important to have one when you’re an active athlete. And in American professional golfer Justin Lower’s case, that support system is his wife Janise Sandrock Lower. The couple tied the knot on September 21, 2019, and have been inseparable ever since. Fans have even spotted Janise cheering for her husband when he is showcasing his skills on the greens.

    The information about how the couple met is not disclosed to the public, but the fans have seen Janise and Lower built a life together, including raising their daughter, Ariana Lynn. To add to their family member, the couple also has a dog named Darby. We all know how challenging it can be for an athlete to play an active role in their family, but with the right person to help you, these struggles become a lot easier. What we’re getting at is that, as the partner of a professional athlete, Janise likely plays a vital supporting role in Lower’s golfing career.

    Her love and encouragement undoubtedly contribute to Lower’s success on the PGA Tour. As of August 2024, Lower and Janise have been married for over 4 years. The golfer made a post on their third anniversary in 2021 on Instagram and wrote, “Happy Anniversary4️⃣ @janiselauren Here’s to a lifetime more.” Throughout their relationship, Lower has achieved impressive golfing milestones, including 7 top-10 finishes on the PGA Tour and ranking 15th in the 2024 PGA Tour rankings. Janise’s unwavering support likely plays a significant role in Lower’s accomplishments, both on and off the golf course.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    Article continues below this ad

    But it all got even better when the golfer and his wife welcomed their first child into the world.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    Article continues below this ad

    A new addition to the Lower family

    Janise and Justin Lower were over the moon as they awaited the arrival of their first child, due on Christmas Eve in the year 2022. This little bundle of joy was about to bring even more joy than Lower’s thrilling rise to PGA Tour stardom. After his daughter was born, Lower took to Instagram to write, “We welcomed Ariana Lynn to the world on 12/20/22! 7 lbs 8 oz • 21 in. Baby Ari is already a little trooper and greater than any gift we could have hoped for. 🤍” Looks it it’s one happy family!

    As Lower continued to crush it on the golf course, finishing fourth at the Fortinet Championship and eighth at the Butterfield Bermuda Championship, his growing family was his biggest source of inspiration.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    Article continues below this ad

    With his PGA Tour card secure, Lower’s focus shifted between his thriving golf career and the upcoming arrival of his baby. Coach Mike Emery beamed with pride, saying, “Justin is getting better by leaps and bounds… His practice ethics are awesome, and it’s really paying off.”

    Ken Hyland, Malone’s 76-year-old golf coach, echoed Emery’s sentiment, “I’ve seen ’em all, and probably played with most of them. I would say, it’s early, but, yeah, Justin is.” And we all know how that is going, the golfer is making waves in the industry and has had 3 top-10 performances this year alone. So, maybe it’s safe to say that his wife’s support is working out pretty well for Lower. What do you think? Let us know in the comment section below!

    Source link

  • Australian states back national plan to ban children younger than 16 from social media

    Australian states back national plan to ban children younger than 16 from social media

    MELBOURNE, Australia — Australia’s states and territories on Friday unanimously backed a national plan to require most forms of social media to bar children younger than 16.

    Leaders of the eight provinces held a virtual meeting with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to discuss what he calls a world-first national approach that would make platforms including X, TikTok, Instagram and Facebook responsible for enforcing the age limit.

    “Social media is doing social harm to our young Australians,” Albanese told reporters. “The safety and mental health of our young people has to be a priority.”

    The government leaders had been discussing for months setting a limit, considering options from 14 to 16 years of age.

    While Tasmania would have preferred 14, the state was prepared to support 16 in the interests of achieving national uniformity, Albanese said.

    The legislation will be introduced into Parliament within two weeks, and the age ban would take effect a year after it passes into law, giving platforms time to work out how to exclude children. The government has yet to offer a technical solution.

    The delay is also intended to allow time to address privacy concerns around age verification.

    The main opposition party has given in-principle support to the 16-year age limit since it was announced on Thursday, suggesting the legislation will pass the Senate.

    The minor Greens party was critical, saying the ban would prevent the emergence in Australia of future child environmental activists like Sweden’s Greta Thunberg.

    More than 140 academics with expertise in fields related to technology and child welfare signed an open letter to Albanese last month opposing a social media age limit as “too blunt an instrument to address risks effectively.”

    Critics say most teenagers are tech savvy enough to get around such laws. Some fear the ban will create conflicts within families and drive social media problems underground.

    Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, argues that stronger tools in app stores and operating systems for parents to control what apps their children can use would be a “simple and effective solution.”

    The government likens the proposed social media age limit to the laws that restrict the sale of alcohol to adults aged 18 and older across Australia. Children still find ways to drink, but the prohibition remains.

    “We think these laws will make a real positive difference,” Albanese said.

    But Lisa Given, professor of information sciences at RMIT University, described the legislation as “really problematic.”

    “Many of our social networks are actually about the provision of extremely critical information to kids,” Given told Australian Broadcasting Corp.

    “There’s no doubt that they’re also facing bullying and other challenges online, but they actually need the social supports to know how to navigate the platforms safely and so they need more support from parents, from care-givers, not less access to a single or multiple platforms,” Given added.

    Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said children would retain access to online education and health services.

    The legislation would also include strong privacy protections surrounding age verification.

    “Privacy must be paramount, including that of children,” Rowland said. “We should also be very clear about the realities. These platforms know about their users in a way that no one else does.”

    Rowland said YouTube would likely be included among the mainstream platforms defined under the legislation as age restricted services.

    But YouTube Kids could be exempted. Gaming and messaging services would not face age restrictions, she said,

    “This legislation would strike a balance between minimizing the harms experienced by young people during a critical period of their development while also supporting their access to benefits as well,” Rowland said.

    Source link

  • Study Reveals Over 77 Percent Of Indian Children Lack WHO-Suggested Dietary Diversity

    Study Reveals Over 77 Percent Of Indian Children Lack WHO-Suggested Dietary Diversity

    About 77 per cent of children in India aged 6-23 months lack diversity in diet as suggested by the WHO, with the country’s central region showing the highest prevalence of minimum dietary failure, a study has found. The states of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh reported the highest levels of inadequate diversity in children’s diets — all above 80 per cent — while Sikkim and Meghalaya were the only two to report an under-50 per cent prevalence. The World Health Organisation (WHO) suggests using the Minimum Dietary Diversity (MDD) score to evaluate the quality of a child’s diet — it is considered to be diverse if it contains five or more food groups, including breastmilk, eggs, legumes and nuts, and fruits and vegetables.
    Analysing National Family and Health Survey data from 2019-21 (NFHS-5), researchers, including those from the National Institute of Health and Family Welfare, found that the country’s overall rate of minimum dietary diversity failure has dropped from 87.4 per cent, which was calculated using data from 2005-06 (NFHS-3). However, “our study shows that the prevalence of minimum dietary diversity failure remains high (above 75 per cent) in India,” the authors wrote in the study published in the National Medical Journal of India.
    The team also looked at children’s dietary habits across various food groups like proteins and vitamins, comparing data from 2019-21 with that from 2005-06. The consumption of eggs registered an “impressive” rise, from around 5 per cent in NFHS-3 to over 17 per cent in NFHS-5 while that of legumes and nuts increased from nearly 14 per cent during 2005-06 to over 17 per cent during 2019-21. “The consumption of vitamin A-rich fruits and vegetables increased by 7.3 percentage points, whereas the consumption of fruits and vegetables increased by 13 percentage points over the same time. For flesh foods, the consumption increased by 4 percentage points,” the authors wrote.
    However, the consumption of breastmilk and dairy products was found to drop from 87 per cent in NFHS-3 to 85 per cent in NFHS-5 and 54 per cent to 52 per cent, respectively. The authors also found that the children of illiterate and rural-residing mothers having no exposure to mass media, those born first and not exposed to counselling and health check-ups at Anganwadi or Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) centres were more likely to be consuming diets deficient in diversity. Anaemic children and those having a low birth weight were also found to have a higher chance of consuming a non-diverse diet.
    To tackle the issue of inadequate diversity in children’s diets, the authors called for a holistic approach from the government, including an improved public distribution system, intensified ICDS programme, use of social media and nutrition counselling through local self-governance. PTI KRS DIV DIV.

    Disclaimer: Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.

    (This content including advice provides generic information only. It is in no way a substitute for qualified medical opinion. Always consult a specialist or your own doctor for more information. NDTV does not claim responsibility for this information.)

    Source link

  • Vitalife WellFest for Kids, the UK’s first Wellness Festival dedicated solely to children

    Vitalife WellFest for Kids, the UK’s first Wellness Festival dedicated solely to children

    Saturday 12th October, from 2.30 – 5.30PM

    Venue: Longacre School, Hullbrook Lane, Shamley Green, Guildford GU5 0NQ

    Following King Charles’ recent speech about the importance of children’s well-being, the upcoming Vitalife WellFest is set to be a must-attend event for families looking for a holistic approach to the health and well-being of their children.

    Scheduled to take place on Saturday, 12th October from 2.30 to 5.30pm, the UK’s first wellness festival dedicated solely to children, aims to be a fun and educational afternoon for all attendees.

    This exciting event focuses on empowering children and their families with knowledge on the importance of health and wellness from a young age. Planned activities at the first Vitalife WellFest for kids include a variety of yoga and mindfulness workshops, including breathwork, affirmations and sound healing; music and movement workshops, such as drumming and street dancing; and a range of mindful arts and crafts. These workshops aim to provide children with the very necessary tools to regulate and manage their emotions in an immersive and engaging way, to help them more easily navigate the world around them.

    The timing of this festival perfectly coincides with King Charles’ announcement of the Children’s Wellbeing Bill, aimed at prioritising the well-being of children within educational and social care systems. This bill seeks to ensure that children are safe, healthy, happy, and treated fairly. The message shared, aligns seamlessly with the mission of Vitalife WellFest – to promote a healthy, happy lifestyle for children in an exciting and interactive manner.

    Tickets for the event are priced at £25 per child aged 4-11 years. This includes all workshops and activities as well as a fabulous, FREE goodie bag full of health and wellness gifts!

    “We are thrilled to launch Vitalife WellFest for Kids, and offer families a platform to discover the importance of wellness in children” says Anushka Tandon, founder of Vitalife Wellness and the brainchild behind Vitalife WellFest.  “Learning these tools at a young age is essential in today’s world, and our commitment lies in promoting children’s well-being through enjoyable and engaging activities.”

    Keep an eye out for further event updates, including the venue and a detailed schedule of activities.

    Book your tickets HERE – sales end soon! 

    About Anushka Tandon, organizer of Vitalife Wellfest

    Anushka Tandon, founder of Vitalife Wellness, is a London based Functional Nutritionist and Holistic Health Coach, specialising in Women’s health and Children’s health. Her holistic approach to health and healing, enables her to help her clients get to the root cause of their health issues, rather than merely treating their symptoms. Deeply passionate about teaching children how to look after their own health from an early age, Anushka regularly runs Children’s health, yoga and mindfulness workshops in London and Surrey, and is hoping to make Vitalife Wellfest a regular feature in the calendar!

    Source link

  • States sue TikTok, claiming its platform is addictive and harms the mental health of children

    States sue TikTok, claiming its platform is addictive and harms the mental health of children

    NEW YORK — More than a dozen states and the District of Columbia have filed lawsuits against TikTok on Tuesday, alleging the popular short-form video app is harming youth mental health by designing its platform to be addictive to kids.

    The lawsuits stem from a national investigation into TikTok, which was launched in March 2022 by a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general from many states, including California, Kentucky and New Jersey. All of the complaints were filed in state courts.

    At the heart of each lawsuit is the TikTok algorithm, which powers what users see on the platform by populating the app’s main “For You” feed with content tailored to people’s interests. The lawsuits also emphasize design features that they say make children addicted to the platform, such as the ability to scroll endlessly through content, push notifications that come with built-in “buzzes” and face filters that create unattainable appearances for users.

    In its filings, the District of Columbia called the algorithm “dopamine-inducing,” and said it was created to be intentionally addictive so the company could trap many young users into excessive use and keep them on its app for hours on end. TikTok does this despite knowing that these behaviors will lead to “profound psychological and physiological harms,” such as anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia and other long-lasting problems, the complaint said.

    “It is profiting off the fact that it’s addicting young people to its platform,” District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb said in an interview.

    Keeping people on the platform is “how they generate massive ad revenue,” Schwalb said. “But unfortunately, that’s also how they generate adverse mental health impacts on the users.”

    TikTok does not allow children under 13 to sign up for its main service and restricts some content for everyone under 18. But Washington and several other states said in their filing that children can easily bypass those restrictions, allowing them to access the service adults use despite the company’s claims that its platform is safe for children.

    Their lawsuit also takes aim at other parts of the company’s business.

    The district alleges TikTok is operating as an “unlicensed virtual economy” by allowing people to purchase TikTok Coins – a virtual currency within the platform – and send “Gifts” to streamers on TikTok LIVE who can cash it out for real money. TikTok takes a 50% commission on these financial transactions but hasn’t registered as a money transmitter with the U.S. Treasury Department or authorities in the district, according to the complaint.

    Officials say teens are frequently exploited for sexually explicit content through TikTok’s LIVE streaming feature, which has allowed the app to operate essentially as a “virtual strip club” without any age restrictions. They say the cut the company gets from the financial transactions allows it to profit from exploitation.

    Many states have filed lawsuits against TikTok and other tech companies over the past few years as a reckoning grows against prominent social media platforms and their ever-growing impact on young people’s lives. In some cases, the challenges have been coordinated in a way that resembles how states previously organized against the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries.

    Last week, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued TikTok, alleging the company was sharing and selling minors’ personal information in violation of a new state law that prohibits these practices. TikTok, which disputes the allegations, is also fighting against a similar data-oriented federal lawsuit filed in August by the Department of Justice.

    Several Republican-led states, such as Nebraska, Kansas, New Hampshire, Kansas, Iowa and Arkansas, have also previously sued the company, some unsuccessfully, over allegations it is harming children’s mental health, exposing them to “inappropriate” content or allowing young people to be sexually exploited on its platform. Arkansas has brought a legal challenge against YouTube, as well as Meta Platforms, which owns Facebook and Instagram and is being sued by dozens of states over allegations its harming young people’s mental health. New York City and some public school districts have also brought their own lawsuits.

    TikTok, in particular, is facing other challenges at the national level. Under a federal law that took effect earlier this year, TikTok could be banned from the U.S. by mid-January if its China-based parent company ByteDance doesn’t sell the platform by mid-January.

    Both TikTok and ByteDance are challenging the law at an appeals court in Washington. A panel of three judges heard oral arguments in the case last month and are expected to issue a ruling, which could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Source link