Category: English

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Simon Mabon, Professor of International Relations, Lancaster University

In the past two months, more than 1,000 people seeking food have been killed, according to the UN Human Rights Office. While the figure has been disputed by Israel and the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation which was set up to distribute aid, 28 nations this week condemned the “horrifying” killing of Gazans trying to get food.

As the Israel Defense Forces continues its assault in the city of Deir al-Balah in central Gaza, including an attack on the staff residence of the World Health Organization on July 21, UN bodies are warning that the besieged strip’s last lifelines are collapsing.

Already around 60,000 Gazans have been killed and growing numbers are now dying from hunger and malnutrition, according to the Hamas-led Gaza Health Ministry. More than 90% of the private homes in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed.

For all the talk of a ceasefire – one that is long overdue – there is little hope. Israeli military operations continue and Gazans must risk their lives in search of food and aid.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

Malnutrition is rife. According to the IPC’s report in May – the international organisation that monitors food security – “goods indispensable for people’s survival are either depleted or expected to run out in the coming weeks” with nearly 500,000 people considered to be facing “catastrophe”, with a further 1.1 million in an “emergency” risk category.

For the IPC, the catastrophe category is one of extreme food shortages, critical malnutrition leading to starvation and high death rates. The emergency category is one of severe food shortages, very high malnutrition and even death.

Israeli officials continue to speak of moving Gazans into what has been termed a “humanitarian city” but what former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert described as a “concentration camp”. In the same interview Olmert called decision to move Gazans into the camp as “ethnic cleansing”.

All the while, the world’s leaders look on. Most are apparently content to condemn – but little action has been taken.

The clamour for Israel’s allies to take a harder stance on its actions in Gaza is growing louder by the day. On July 23, a group of 38 former EU ambassadors published an open letter to EU heads of states and senior officials accusing Israel of taking “calculated steps towards ethnic cleansing” and calling out the EU’s failure to “respond meaningfully to these horrific events”.

But what do actions look like? Pressure must be applied to the Netanyahu government. In the UK, both prime minister Keir Starmer and foreign minister David Lammy have been quick to stress that the UK has urged Israel to respect international law.

They point to the sanctions the UK has imposed on Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, two rightwing ministers in Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government, as a result of their repeated incitements of violence against Palestinians. While Lammy suggests that further sanctions could follow if Israel does not change its behaviour in Gaza and bring about an end to the suffering, the atrocities continue.

Practical steps to pressure Israel

Pressure is growing on the UK government to recognise Palestine as a state – something that I was told by a contact in the Labour government more than a year ago was on Labour’s agenda before October 7. Lammy insists the government is committed to a two-state solution, but this is not diplomatically viable given that the UK only recognises one state involved in these events.

The state of Palestine is recognised as a sovereign entity by 147 other members of the UN. That’s 75% of all members.

Other steps could be a full arms embargo, something that has long been called for but rejected by the UK government, which has banned some, but by no means all arms sales to Israel. A number of countries have properly banned arms sales to Israel since October 2023, including Italy, Spain, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and Japan.

There are other more incendiary options. One would be for the UK and others to properly adhere to their obligations under international law.

The International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defence minister, Yoav Gallant, in November 2024. There are 125 countries that have signed up to the ICC (the US isn’t one of them). They could arrest Netanyahu if he enters their countries.

There are a range of other things that could be tried. A look at what the international community did to make South Africa a pariah during the later years of apartheid would be worthwhile.

EU should use its diplomatic muscle

As Israel’s biggest trading partner, the EU has the potential to wield considerable clout, so the question must be asked: why has so little been done, beyond mere words.

In June, the EU found Israel to be in breach of its human rights commitments under the terms of the EU-Israel association agreement. Yet to date there have been as yet no moves to suspend trade.

Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign policy chief declared that “all options remain on the table if Israel doesn’t deliver” on its pledges. These include full or partial suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, sanctions on members of government, military or settlers, trade measures, arms embargoes, or the suspension of academic cooperation – including the prestigious Horizon Europe Research and Innovation programme.

Of course, getting all 27 member states to agree to such an approach is easier said than done. And national leaders will obviously have to consider that taking steps to put pressure with Israel could damage relations with the Trump administration in the US.

But all the while, the situation on the ground is deteriorating, with the world watching while Gaza burns. The failure by Israel’s allies to take meaningful steps to pressure Israel to prevent the wanton killing and displacement is a stain on humanity.

After the horrors of the second world war, Rwanda, Myanmar and Srebrenica, the world said “never again”. Without action, there’s a risk it will shrug its shoulders and say “never mind”.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Simon Mabon receives funding from Carnegie Corporation of New York and The Henry Luce Foundation.

– ref. Gaza is starving – how Israel’s allies can go beyond words and take meaningful action – https://theconversation.com/gaza-is-starving-how-israels-allies-can-go-beyond-words-and-take-meaningful-action-261783

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Holly Ingram, Senior Midwifery Lecturer, Anglia Ruskin University

Are you a woman who exercises regularly? If so, here’s a vital question: do you train your pelvic floor muscles as part of your routine?

If the answer is no, now’s the time to start. It’s never too late to protect yourself from pelvic floor dysfunction – and the benefits go far beyond avoiding leaks.

The pelvic floor is a complex hammock of muscles and ligaments stretching from the front of your pelvis to your tailbone. It weaves around the urethra, vagina and anus, supporting the pelvic organs and helping them stay in the right place.

These muscles are essential for bladder and bowel control, sexual function and core stability. In fact, your pelvic floor works alongside the diaphragm, abdominal muscles, and back muscles in what’s known as the “core canister” or “core rectangle.” Together, they help stabilise the spine, protect internal organs, and support movement, especially in high-impact or strength-based activities.

How does sport affect pelvic floor health?

Many sports rely heavily on core strength. Running, jumping, lifting and full-contact sports like rugby all demand stability, control and muscular endurance. But they also place significant strain on the pelvic floor.

That’s why pelvic floor dysfunction is surprisingly common among sportswomen. Around one in two women in the UK will experience pelvic floor symptoms at some point in their lives – but rates are even higher among female athletes. A 2024 study of female rugby players found that 63% experienced pelvic floor dysfunction serious enough to affect both their performance and daily life, often requiring physiotherapy or specialist support.

Movements such as jumping, running, landing and breath-holding during exertion all increase intra-abdominal pressure, which pushes down on the pelvic floor. Without proper conditioning, these muscles can become strained or fatigued, especially if they’re weaker than the surrounding core muscles.

Endurance sports can also take their toll, causing the pelvic floor to repeatedly contract under pressure. Like any muscle, the pelvic floor is susceptible to overuse injuries and needs time to recover.

Pelvic floor dysfunction can show up in several ways, including leaking urine or faeces during exercise, coughing or sneezing; disrupted bowel habits; a heavy or dragging feeling in the lower abdomen or vagina; pain during sex; a bulging sensation or visible tissue in the vaginal area; and pelvic organ prolapse.

These symptoms may appear during exercise – or at rest – and often worsen over time without the right support or training.

Exercise can help with pelvic floor dysfunction – only if the pelvic floor is actively and effectively engaged. Many workouts target the abs or general core, but if the pelvic floor isn’t included with the same intensity, muscular imbalances can develop. Combined with gravity and high-impact movement, this puts the pelvic floor at greater risk of dysfunction.

The good news? The pelvic floor responds well to training. With regular, focused practice, these muscles become stronger, more coordinated and more resilient – helping to prevent dysfunction and even aiding recovery after childbirth.

How to train your pelvic floor

Not sure where to start? Here’s a simple exercise:

1. Imagine you’re holding in wind – gently contract your anus.

2. Next, squeeze your urethra as if stopping a flow of urine.

3. Now, lift upwards through the vagina.

4. Hold the contraction for a few seconds (or as long as you comfortably can), then release.

That’s one pelvic floor contraction: well done!

Try doing a few reps at a time, and gradually build up. You can incorporate these into your run, add them to your core workout, or practise them during rest days or cool-downs. The goal is to make pelvic floor training a regular part of your routine.

Your pelvic floor deserves just as much attention as your abs, glutes or quads. If you’re a woman who exercises, training these deep core muscles can boost your performance, reduce your risk of injury and support your overall health now and in the future.

So next time you lace up your trainers or hit the gym, don’t forget your pelvic floor. Your body will thank you.

Holly Ingram does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Pelvic floor training can help active women avoid exercise-related symptoms – https://theconversation.com/pelvic-floor-training-can-help-active-women-avoid-exercise-related-symptoms-259711

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

In an unexpected twist in the fight against cancer, humble kitchen bacteria and a plant best known for sweetening tea could one day help in treating one of humanity’s deadliest diseases, new research suggests.

A group of scientists in Japan has discovered that fermented stevia, a plant commonly used as a calorie-free sweetener, may hold intriguing anti-cancer properties. While these findings are early and need much more research, they hint at a potential future role for stevia in tackling pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most difficult cancers to treat. Symptoms typically appear only after the disease has spread, and conventional therapies like chemotherapy rarely result in a cure. The outlook is bleak: fewer than 10% of patients survive five years beyond diagnosis.

This urgent need for more effective and less toxic treatments has driven researchers to explore plant-based compounds. Many chemotherapy drugs already used today have botanical origins – including paclitaxel, derived from the bark of the Pacific yew tree, and vincristine, sourced from the Madagascar periwinkle – offering a proven pathway for discovering new cancer-fighting agents.

Read more:
Chemotherapy can be a challenging treatment – here’s how to deal with some of the side-effects

Stevia, a leafy plant native to South America, is widely known for its natural sweetness. It’s a familiar presence on supermarket shelves, but few think of it as a medicinal plant.

Stevia leaves are rich in bioactive compounds, some of which have shown hints of anticancer and antioxidant activity in previous research. The challenge has been harnessing this potential, as unfermented stevia extracts are only mildly effective in laboratory settings, often requiring high doses to affect cancer cells.

That’s where fermentation comes in. Known for creating yogurt, kimchi and sourdough bread, fermentation is more than a culinary technique. I’s a form of microbial alchemy that can transform plant compounds into new, bioactive molecules.

Researchers at Hiroshima University asked a simple but innovative question: what if stevia was fermented with the right bacteria? They experimented with a strain called Lactobacillus plantarum SN13T, a relative of a bacteria commonly found in fermented foods. Fermentation produced a compound called chlorogenic acid methyl ester (CAME), which showed much stronger anti-cancer effects than raw stevia extract.

In lab tests, the fermented stevia extract caused pancreatic cancer cells to die in large numbers but left healthy kidney cells largely unharmed. Further analysis revealed that CAME was responsible for this effect. It worked by blocking cancer cells at a specific phase of their life cycle, preventing them from multiplying and by triggering apoptosis, a natural process where cells self-destruct when damaged or no longer needed.

CAME seems to alter the genetic programming of cancer cells. It activates genes that promote cell death while simultaneously suppressing those that help cancer cells grow and survive. This double hit both slows cancer progression and encourages malignant cells to kill themselves.

The power of fermentation

Fermented stevia extract was also found to be a stronger antioxidant than its unfermented counterpart. Oxidative stress – an imbalance of potentially harmful moelcules known as free radicals in the body — is linked to cancer and other diseases. By neutralizing these free radicals more effectively, the fermented extract may offer extra protection for healthy cells.

This is not the first time fermentation has been shown to unlock hidden benefits. Fermented soy and ginseng have been found to offer enhanced health properties compared to their raw forms.

But the stevia findings stand out because of the compound’s selectivity. Killing cancer cells while sparing healthy ones is the holy grail for cancer researchers.

It’s important to note that these results come from lab-grown cells, not from animal or human studies. Many substances that look promising in petri dishes fail in clinical trials due to the complexity of the human body. Still, the discovery is exciting and warrants further exploration.

This research highlights the potential of everyday foods and their natural microbes as untapped sources of new medicines. It also reflects growing interest in “microbialbiotransformation” – using beneficial bacteria to create powerful compounds from plants.

In the case of stevia, a simple quest for a natural sweetener has evolved into something potentially far more profound: a stepping stone toward a cancer therapy that’s natural, targeted and cost-effective.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Justin Stebbing does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. From sweetener to cancer fighter? Fermented stevia shows promise in pancreatic cancer study – https://theconversation.com/from-sweetener-to-cancer-fighter-fermented-stevia-shows-promise-in-pancreatic-cancer-study-261599

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dylan Ryan, Lecturer in Mechanical & Energy Engineering, Edinburgh Napier University

Solar power is the fastest growing source of electricity globally. Normally, anyone wanting to tap into it would have to rely on roof-mounted panels. But in many parts of Europe, people have found a simple alternative in the form of “plug-in panels” that can be arranged on balconies.

Instead of having to be wired into the house, you can feed the power generated by these panels into an inverter and a standard plug. Is this something that might catch on in the UK? Let’s investigate.

First, solar installations usually come under “permitted development” with regard to planning permission. But you still might need to apply, particularly if you live in a shared development or a listed building.

For example, some apartment blocks are insured collectively; if solar panels are going to affect the building’s insurance, it’s going to affect the whole block. There may also be rules regarding what you can put on your balcony, so consult your building manager.

The UK government is promising to ease restrictions on solar balconies, but we shall have to see how it addresses these issues.

There are also safety concerns. The power generated by the panel has to be balanced with consumption. Which, in practice, may restrict their use to a circuit that only connects to low-power devices (lights, TVs or computers are fine, but not ovens or kettles).

So you need to be aware of what the panels are connected to, particularly if you have an older home which may have been built before modern electrical safety standards. Also, to connect the panels, you would need a weatherised external plug, which not all flats have.

How much power could you get?

As luck would have it, I have a south-facing balcony, so let us run the numbers.

I came across a 800W system online that sells for £499 (with supports that would allow me to mount it). It has an area of 3.95m² and is made of a thin photovoltaic film (about 10-12% efficient).

The optimum angle for a solar panel in Edinburgh where I live is 37.6 degrees. Mounting them vertically (draped over the railing of a balcony, as is often the case) will reduce performance, with typical losses of 30-45%. My balcony is also completely shaded for half of the day due to a neighbouring building, so a panel will generate little power at those times.

The position of the sun varies as it moves across the sky during the day, as well as seasonally, as does the solar energy received. We can input this data plus our location into an online calculator, which will account for hourly and seasonal variations.

This estimates output for a vertically mounted panel at 132 kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/yr). Assuming electricity costs of £0.24/kWh, that means a payback period of 15.7 years (thin film solar systems typically last between ten and 20 years).

If we could orientate the panel at the optimum angle of 37.6° (tilt them out from the edge of the balcony), the power generated would rise to 182 kWh/yr (a payback period of 11.4 years, although this could fall foul of planning rules).

Free from the shading of my neighbour on the top floor and angled optimally, output from a plug-in panel could rise to 370 kWh/yr (payback 5.6 years). But this is for south-facing balconies. An east- or west-facing balcony would produce 30% less power and a north-facing panel, half as much or less.

Is it worth it?

Another issue is that you can only use the generated electricity when you are in the house. If, for example, I’m out half the time the panels are generating power (which is likely), the payback period doubles – so they will probably never pay for themselves. A battery could help store power for use later, but that adds costs plus the hassle of wiring everything up.

Let’s look at a monocrystalline panel (these last longer than film and are more efficient) that is roof-mounted at the optimum angle (so it’s clear of any obstructions) and wired up to feed into the grid so any power you don’t use, you can sell it to the network.

Assuming a 4kW monocrystalline array at an installation cost of £5,500, the online calculator estimates generation of 2,970 kWh/yr for a payback period of 7.7 years (on a system that will last 25-30 years). And that’s not even considering any possible grants that you might be eligible for.

Whether or not balcony solar is feasible is going to be very site-specific. If you have a balcony with an uninterrupted view south and you are not going to fall foul of any planning or electrical issues, it might be worth it.

If you face north, or there’s another building in the way, or your fuse box looks like a prop from Downton Abbey, less so. In many cases, a solar generator mounted at an optimum angle and exporting electricity to the grid might be a better idea, even if the initial installation costs are higher.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Dylan Ryan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Plug-in solar panels are the latest green energy trend – here’s what you need to know – https://theconversation.com/plug-in-solar-panels-are-the-latest-green-energy-trend-heres-what-you-need-to-know-260467

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Gemma Ware, Host, The Conversation Weekly Podcast, The Conversation

Israel has never officially confirmed or denied having nuclear weapons and has never signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Instead, even as evidence has emerged about its nuclear capabilities, Israel has maintained a policy of nuclear ambiguity.

The origins of this opacity lie in a secret deal forged in a one-on-one meeting between Israeli prime minister, Golda Meir, and the US president, Richard Nixon, at the White House in September 1969.

In this episode of The Conversation Weekly podcast, we speak to Avner Cohen, professor of non-proliferation studies at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterrey in the US, about that 1969 deal and why it has endured for more than 50 years. Cohen is the author of Israel and the Bomb, considered the definitive work on Israel’s nuclear programme, and has been interrogated by the Israeli state for his research.

Cohen tells us that the understanding between Meir and Nixon meant the US accepted Israel as a special kind of nuclear weapon state. In turn, Israel committed to restraint, not to test nuclear weapons, and not to be the first to introduce them to the region. Neither side has confirmed the existence of a deal, and there are only hints at it in the historical record. Cohen explains:

 Once you realise that there is actually a deal, it explains a great deal of the situation. Why the US [is] looking the other way, why the issue is determined to be removed from the diplomatic agenda, and why many other countries, especially in the west, prefer not to see the Israeli nuclear issue.

Listen to the conversation with Avner Cohen on The Conversation Weekly podcast.

This episode of The Conversation Weekly was written and produced by Mend Mariwany and Gemma Ware with assistance from Katie Flood and Ashlynne McGhee. Mixing and sound design by Eloise Stevens and theme music by Neeta Sarl.

Newclips in this episode from CNN, AP Archive, BBC News and ABC.

Listen to The Conversation Weekly via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here. A transcript of this episode is available on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Avner Cohen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Origins of Israel’s nuclear ambiguity lie in a secret deal forged between Richard Nixon and Golda Meir – podcast – https://theconversation.com/origins-of-israels-nuclear-ambiguity-lie-in-a-secret-deal-forged-between-richard-nixon-and-golda-meir-podcast-261789

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul on July 23 for a third round of talks since face-to-face negotiations resumed in May. Expectations were low. Two previous rounds have yielded very few concrete results, apart from agreements on prisoner exchanges the return of the bodies of soldiers killed in action.

The latest meeting was the shortest yet, lasting just 40 minutes. The negotiating teams were led by former Ukrainian defence minister Rustem Umerov and Vladimir Medinsky, a senior aide to Russian president Vladimir Putin. They agreed on another exchange of prisoners and on setting up three working groups on political, military and humanitarian issues to engage online rather than in face-to-face meetings.

But if the talks have achieved very little, they have demonstrated two things. First, that the two sides remain very far apart on what they would consider acceptable terms for a ceasefire, let alone a peace agreement. And, second, that neither side is prepared to walk away from the negotiations, worried about incurring the wrath of the US president, Donald Trump.

A fourth round of negotiations has not been ruled out, but it is unlikely to involve either Vladimir Putin or Volodymyr Zelensky, given that their negotiating positions still offer little hope of a deal ready to be signed at a leaders’ summit.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

The latest round of talks, however, took place in a different context to the earlier two meetings. Earlier in July, Trump set a deadline of 50 days, ending on September 2, for the fighting to stop.

After this if there’s no progress towards a ceasefire, the US president will consider imposing hefty secondary sanctions on Russia’s remaining trade partners. The aim would be to starve Moscow’s war economy of crucial foreign income, principally from heavily discounted sales of oil and gas to willing buyers including India and China.

The first ten days of this 50-day ultimatum have now passed. While the talks in Istanbul might be seen as a sign that Kyiv and Moscow are taking Trump seriously, the lack of tangible results suggests otherwise. There is no indication that either Russia or Ukraine have moved from their maximalist demands.

Russia keeps insisting on the recognition of its illegal occupation in Ukraine, on future limits to Ukraine’s military strength, and on a denial of the country’s accession to Nato. Ukraine meanwhile asks for its territory to be restored and its sovereignty – including its ability to determine its alliance arrangements – to be respected.

Playing for time

Developments on and around the battlefields in Ukraine don’t offer any signs that Moscow or Kyiv are ready even for a ceasefire either. Russia continues to make incremental gains along the 1,000km of frontlines in Ukraine.

It also keeps pounding Ukrainian cities, including the capital Kyiv, with nightly drone and missile attacks. These have taken place at unprecedented scales of hundreds of drones that have repeatedly overwhelmed Ukraine’s already stretched air defence systems.

Yet, Ukraine has been buoyed by the promise of more US arms deliveries – paid for by other Nato allies – and the continuing commitments by its international partners to support the country. These include those made at the recent Nato summit in The Hague and the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Rome.

Add to that Trump’s apparent pivot away from Putin and his recently more constructive relationship with Zelensky, and it becomes clear why Kyiv – like Moscow – thinks that time is on its side.

Both may be proved wrong. Zelensky’s latest efforts to consolidate his power – a large-scale cabinet reshuffle and a decree to curb the independence of two of Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies – have caused alarm among EU officials in Brussels. More importantly, they have also triggered rare public protests against the government in Kyiv and other major Ukrainian cities, including Dnipro, Lviv and Odesa.

The protests may not get enough traction to pose a real danger to the government. But they indicate that support for Zelensky is not unconditional.

This is something that the Ukrainian president appeared to acknowledge when he outlined his plans to submit an additional bill to parliament to protect the independence of the embattled anti-corruption agencies. What is widely seen as a power grab by the president’s inner circle also has the potential of undermining public morale at a critical time in the war.

All of this also feeds into a Russian narrative of Zelensky as an illegitimate leader of his country who Russia cannot negotiate with. But it would be a mistake to assume that Russia can simply wait until Ukrainians are simply too exhausted to continue resisting Russia’s invasion or when western support will stop keeping Ukraine in the fight.

Even if Europeans become disillusioned with Zelensky, Russia’s war against Ukraine is too much of an existential question for European security that they will abandon Kyiv just because they do not agree with its anti-corruption policies.

It’s also not clear how long Russia can sustain the intensity of its ground and air campaigns against Ukraine or how long these will provide even the kinds of incremental gains that they currently achieve. Trump’s new plan for arming Ukraine by selling arms and ammunition to European Nato allies who would then deliver them to Kyiv is likely to blunt the effectiveness of the Russian air campaign and stymie its ground offensive.

So playing for time is unlikely to get either Moscow or Kyiv any closer to achieving their war aims. But preventing the other side’s victory – whether that’s on the battlefield or at the negotiation table – may well be enough for now for both Putin and Zelensky.

At the moment, continuing their war of attrition is the second-best solution that both presidents can agree on. The outcome of the third round of talks between their negotiators indicates that they may have reached such an implicit understanding already.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

– ref. Russia-Ukraine talks: both sides play for time and wait for Donald Trump’s 50 days to run out – https://theconversation.com/russia-ukraine-talks-both-sides-play-for-time-and-wait-for-donald-trumps-50-days-to-run-out-261793

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Noelia Noël, Senior Lecturer, School of Mathematics and Physics, University of Surrey

Every night, as telescopes around the world open their domes to study the cosmos, astronomers are forced to contend with an unexpected form of pollution: bright white streaks slicing across their images.

These luminous trails are caused by satellites. Specifically, the growing number of “megaconstellations” launched into low Earth orbit (LEO). These mega-constellations consist of many, sometimes hundreds, of satellites. They are intended to work as a system, providing services such as global internet access. Commercial companies that operate mega-constellations include SpaceX, Amazon and OneWeb.

The streaks in astronomy images aren’t just cosmetic. They can corrupt sensitive astronomy data, generate false signals, and even trigger alerts for events that never happened.

There may now be a partial solution to the luminous trails vexing astronomers. An ultra-black coating could be applied to the satellites themselves, dimming the trails that they leave in images. This material, called Vantablack 310, absorbs more than 99.99% of visible light.

Modern astronomical observations rely on long exposure imaging, collecting faint light from distant galaxies, exoplanets, or supernovae over several minutes or hours. When a satellite crosses the field of view during that time, it reflects sunlight into the telescope, creating a saturated streak across the image.

The impact is already substantial. Researchers at the Vera C Rubin Observatory in Chile – a flagship survey telescope set to revolutionise our understanding of the Universe – estimate that over 30% of the telescope’s twilight images already contain at least one satellite trail. And it’s not only visible light astronomy that’s at risk.

Radio telescopes, infrared detectors, and even gravitational wave observatories are reporting increasing interference from satellites – including reflected light, unwanted radio emissions, and other forms of contamination. The ultra-black coating won’t alleviate these issues, of course. Other solutions will need to be found for these other forms of interference.

Read more:
Could the first images from the Vera Rubin telescope change how we view space for good?

A crowded sky

With more than 16,000 active satellites already in orbit and tens of thousands more planned, the skies are becoming increasingly congested. While these constellations offer enormous benefits, including global internet access, disaster response, agricultural monitoring, and climate surveillance, they also threaten the clarity of astronomical observations.

Satellites in low Earth orbit (typically 500km-600km altitude) are often visible to the naked eye shortly after sunset or before sunrise. For sensitive telescopes, they can be ten to 100 times brighter than the recommended limits set by the International Astronomical Union.

I am one of a team of researchers at the University of Surrey that is exploring Vantablack 310 as a next generation coating to reduce satellite brightness. The trials are being carried out by UK scientists in partnership with the Surrey Space Centre, and materials innovators Surrey NanoSystems.

Originally developed for high-contrast optical systems – such as instruments that need to spot faint signals next to very bright ones – the coating absorbs more than 99.99% of visible light.

In 2026, Vantablack 310 will be tested in orbit for the first time aboard Jovian 1, a CubeSat – a small satellite about the size of a cereal box. It was developed at the University of Surrey and launched as part of the UK’s Jupiter programme, a university-led initiative that trains students in real-world satellite design, testing and operations, while supporting cutting-edge space research.

The mission will assess how the coating performs under the harsh conditions in space, such as temperature swings, ultraviolet radiation, and micro-meteoroid impacts. If successful, it could significantly reduce how bright satellites appear to telescopes – making the streaks they leave behind much fainter and easier to remove from astronomical images.

Ultra-black coatings will not make satellites invisible. Even the darkest object in orbit will reflect some light. But the goal is not invisibility – it is compatibility. Reducing satellite brightness below key thresholds ensures that scientific observations remain viable.

What’s at stake is more than just clean astronomical data. The night sky is one of humanity’s oldest shared resources – a source of scientific insight, cultural heritage, and spiritual meaning across time and geography. From the star lore of indigenous people to ancient navigation systems, the night sky has always helped us understand our place in the universe.

Publicly funded observatories in lower income countries – where many of the world’s darkest skies still exist – are also disproportionately affected, despite those countries having little say in the decisions that affect their skies.

Framing the issue solely as a technical inconvenience for elite institutions misses the point. This is also about equity, access, and environmental justice. Who gets to access the sky, and who decides how it is altered, are global questions that demand inclusive solutions.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

This project was funded with six months of support from the Research England Development Fund (UKRI), focusing on mitigating satellite light pollution, including the in-orbit testing of ultra-black coatings.

– ref. An ultra-black coating for satellites could stop them spoiling astronomy pictures – https://theconversation.com/an-ultra-black-coating-for-satellites-could-stop-them-spoiling-astronomy-pictures-259171

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Jacqueline Peel, Professor of Law and Director, Melbourne Climate Futures, The University of Melbourne

Climate change “imperils all forms of life” and countries must tackle the problem or face consequences under international law, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found.

The court delivered its long-awaited advisory opinion overnight. The momentous case opens the door for countries impacted by climate disasters to sue major emitting countries for reparations.

And citizens could seek to hold governments to account for a failure to safeguard their human rights if their own or other countries fail to take adequate action to ensure a safe climate.

Here’s what the court ruled – and the global ramifications likely to flow from it.

Climate change breaches human rights

The ICJ case was instigated by law students at the University of the South Pacific in Vanuatu in 2019. They successfully launched a campaign for the court to examine two key issues: the obligations of countries to protect the climate from greenhouse gases, and the legal consequences for failing to do so.

The court found a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is essential for the enjoyment of many other human rights. As such, it found, the full enjoyment of human rights cannot be ensured without the protection of the climate system and other parts of the environment.

The ruling confirms climate change is much more than a legal problem. Rather, the justices concluded, it is an:

existential problem of planetary proportions that imperils all forms of life and the very health of our planet.

Most nations have signed up to global human rights agreements such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The ICJ ruling means parties to those agreements must take measures to protect the climate system and other parts of the environment.

An advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice is not legally binding. But it is an authoritative description of the state of the law and the rights of countries to seek reparations if the law is breached. As such, it carries great legal weight.

Just as climate science assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have become the gold standard for understanding the causes and impacts of climate change, the court’s ruling provides a clear baseline against which to assess countries’ action, or inaction, on climate change.

Keeping 1.5°C alive?

In recent years, many states’ emissions reduction targets under the Paris Agreement have seemed to “settle” at levels which would hold global temperature increases to 2°C at best.

But the International Court of Justice ruled the much more ambitious 1.5°C goal had become the scientifically based consensus target under the Paris Agreement.

Some countries argued formal emissions targets should be left to the discretion of each government. However, the court found against this. Rather, each nation’s targets had to be in line with – and make an adequate contribution to – the global goal of holding heating to 1.5°C.

The court found each state’s emissions reduction pledges should be judged against a stringent “due diligence” standard. The standard takes into account each country’s historical contributions to emissions, level of development and national circumstances, among other factors.

The ruling means rich countries, such as Australia, will be required under international law to make more ambitious emission-reduction pledges under the Paris Agreement, such as for the 2035 target currently under consideration by the Albanese government.

The court decision also provides a measure of climate justice for small island states, which have historically low emissions but face a much higher risk of damage from climate change than other nations.

Holding states accountable for inaction

Because climate change is global, it is difficult – but not impossible – to attribute damage from extreme weather to the actions of any one nation or group of nations.

On this question, the court said while climate change is caused by the cumulative impact of many human activities, it is scientifically possible to determine each nation’s total contribution to global emissions, taking into account both historical and current emissions.

If a nation experiences damage caused by the failure of another nation, or group of nations, to fulfil international climate obligations, the ruling means legal proceedings may be launched against the nations causing the harm. It may result in compensation or other remedies.

For small, climate-vulnerable nations such as those in the Alliance of Small Island States, this opens more legal options in their efforts to encourage high-emitting nations to properly address climate change.

Importantly, the court made clear nations can be legally liable even if damage from climate change comes from many causes, including from the activities of private actors such as companies.

That means nations cannot seek an exemption because others have contributed to the problem. They must also act to regulate companies and other entities under their jurisdiction whose activities contribute to climate change.

Paris Agreement quitters aren’t safe

One line of argument put to the court by Australia and other states was that climate treaties represented the only obligations to tackle climate change under international law.

But the court found this was not the case. Rather, other international laws applied.

The United States pulled out of the Paris Agreement earlier this year. The court’s opinion means the US and other nations are still accountable for climate harms under other international laws by which all countries are bound.

Could this lead to greater climate action?

The International Court of Justice has produced a truly historic ruling.

It will set a new baseline in terms what countries need to do to address climate change and opens up new avenues of recourse against high-emitting states not doing enough on climate change.

Jacqueline Peel receives funding from the Australian Research Council under her Australian Laureate Fellowship and Kathleen Fitzpatrick Award on ‘Transforming International Law for Corporate Climate Accountability’.

– ref. Historic ruling finds climate change ‘imperils all forms of life’ and puts laggard nations on notice – https://theconversation.com/historic-ruling-finds-climate-change-imperils-all-forms-of-life-and-puts-laggard-nations-on-notice-261848

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kim Dovey, Professor of Architecture and Urban Design, The University of Melbourne

Balinese officials have begun the demolition of more than 40 businesses at Bingin Beach, a popular tourist spot in the Uluwatu region.

In June, the Balinese House of Representatives determined the settlement is on public land, and is therefore illegal and needs to be demolished. But I’d argue it doesn’t.

The ‘illegal’ settlement

The Bingin Beach coastal settlement began development in the 1970s as an informal surfer hub at the base of a steep escarpment. The beach is a few hundred metres long and largely disappears at high tide.

Originally lined with a string of makeshift warungs (small food stores) and cheap accommodations, the settlement has grown incrementally over the decades, up and along the escarpment, with an intensive mix of surf shops, restaurants and small hotels.

The steepness of the slope precludes vehicle access. The only public access is via two somewhat narrow pedestrian stairways.

While it initially served the surfer community, the settlement now caters to a broader tourist market, with some rooms going for upwards of US$150 per night.

But after more than 50 years of incremental development, the House of Representatives has declared the settlement was illegally constructed on state land, and has ordered the demolition of 45 buildings – effectively the entire settlement.

While most of the buildings seem highly durable, the demolition order is based on illegality, and not durability. A spokesperson for the traders argues most of the businesses are locally owned, and livelihoods are at stake.

The ‘legal’ settlement

The former farmland at the top of the escarpment is also covered with tourist developments that mostly emerged since 2010, and now extend up to a kilometre inland. This is a much more familiar landscape for Bali: a mix of walled hotel compounds and private villas, with manicured gardens and swimming pools.

However, one could scarcely call this larger settlement “planned”. Shops and restaurants emerge wherever they can find a market along the narrow roads. There are no sidewalks and pedestrians are constantly engaged in an anxious game of negotiated passing.

The infrastructure of roads and lanes has also been designed incrementally, across the former farm fields, as the settlement developed. The resulting street network is convoluted and largely unwalkable. The most common street sign is “no beach access this way”.

What is informality?

I’m an academic, architect and urban planner who studies informal settlements and informal urbanism more generally. In this context “informal” can mean illegal, makeshift and unplanned, but it can also mean incremental, adaptive and inventive.

Informal settlement is the means by which a large proportion of Indonesians produce affordable housing. It is also the most traditional form of indigenous housing globally.

After many decades of governments trying to demolish such settlements, the overwhelming consensus across the United Nations Human Settlements Programme is that wholesale demolition is rarely an answer. On-site formalisation and upgrading is the more sustainable pathway.

When engaging with informal settlements, we need to preserve the infrastructures that work and only demolish where necessary. The Bingin Beach escarpment settlement has proven sustainable and has become an integral part of the local heritage.

Its demolition will destroy livelihoods and displace the surfing market, while feathering other nests.

So why is it being demolished? Perhaps to clear the ground for the next round of up-market resorts – what urban studies research calls “accumulation by disposession”. Bingin is widely seen as a major real estate hotspot for investment.

What is overdevelopment?

One of the key dangers of informal settlement is “overdevelopment”. Without
formal planning codes, density can escalate to destroy the very attraction that produced the settlement.

Most buildings along the Bingin Beach escarpment are two to four storeys, and step back with the slope of the escarpment. The exception is the 2019 addition of the Morabito Art Cliff hotel that rises more than six storeys, obscuring the natural landscape, blocking views, and setting a precedent for more of the same.

If everyone in the area built like this, the Bingin settlement would be replaced with a cliff of buildings. To demolish this one building would set a useful precedent of containing the settlement to a sustainable scale.

The Impossibles dream

A few hundred metres south-west of Bingin Beach, a different story unfolds near the beach known as Impossibles. Here, a precarious limestone cliff largely precludes access to the beach, and the clifftop has long been lined with low-rise tourist compounds.

This earlier layer of development is now being demolished and replaced with larger, denser resorts as part of the Amali project which claims a “rare cliff-front location”. The location is “rare” because about half of the 50-metre-high cliff has been excavated to construct villa units quite literally in the cliff.

This excavation was well underway when, in May 2024, it caused much of the remaining natural cliff face to collapse onto the beach and into the ocean. It remains unclear whether the excavation was formally approved. Either way, it prompts the question: what if everyone did that?

The Bingin escarpment and the Impossibles cliff face represent very different kinds of development. One is incremental, irregular and geared to its social and environmental context, while the other is large-grain and environmentally destructive. It makes no sense to demolish the former in order to make way for the latter.

It is imperative to not only save the Bingin Beach settlement, which is part of Bali’s surfing heritage, but also to awaken from the impossible dream of building more and more villas on this fragile and limited coastland.

Kim Dovey does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Bali is built on informal and ‘illegal’ settlements. Bulldozing Bingin Beach misses the real threat of overdevelopment – https://theconversation.com/bali-is-built-on-informal-and-illegal-settlements-bulldozing-bingin-beach-misses-the-real-threat-of-overdevelopment-261755

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Popi Sotiriadou, Associate Professor of Sport Management – Director Business Innovation, Griffith University

Most sports look to support their athletes to become “faster, higher, stronger” – in reference to the Olympic Games’ original motto – so it is perhaps surprising that cycling’s world governing body is trying to slow down elite riders.

However, there’s good reason the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) recently announced new rules to slow riders down.

These rules – which apply to elite road and cyclo-cross mass-start events for men and women such as the Tour de France – come into place shortly and are aimed at improving rider safety.

Read more:
I rode the Tour de France to study its impact on the human body – here’s what I learned

What are the new rules?

From August 1, a new bicycle gearing regulation will kick in.

Professional cyclists will only be allowed to use a 54-tooth front chainring with an 11-tooth rear cog.

This replaces the current common setup of 54-10.

To put this into context, a 54-tooth chainring is the big front gear on a bike and the 11-tooth cog is a small rear gear. Moving to a slightly bigger cog (54-11) makes it harder to hit top speeds: the change from a 54-10 to a 54-11 gear setup could reduce the top speed by about 2.4 kilometres per hour.

Pro riders can reach incredible speeds during descents, sometimes surpassing 130 kilometres per hour.

Then, from January 1 2026, handlebars must become wider, increasing from a minimum 350–360 millimetres width (depending on the event) to at least 400mm wide.

The handlebar width affects how a rider controls their bike: narrower bars reduce frontal surface area, making a rider more aerodynamic which again means a faster ride.

This is especially useful in time trials or sprints.

Wider bars offer better stability and control, helping navigate tight turns, peloton traffic, or crosswinds.

The UCI has also announced plans to introduce a formal helmet approval protocol in 2027, which will include separate standards for helmets used in mass-start events and time trials.

This shift suggests helmets may soon be subject to the same pre-race approval process as frames and wheels, potentially leading to safer, more regulated head protection.

New rules, different opinions

Professional cycling is getting faster due to stronger athletes, better training and advanced, lighter equipment.

As a result, high-speed crashes, especially downhill or in crowded sprint finishes, have become more common and more dangerous.

The UCI maintain the new regulations are part of a broader strategy to mitigate speed-related risks, enhance safety and uphold the integrity of the sport.

However, these measures have sparked debate within the cycling community.

Some elite cyclists, particularly those who have suffered severe crashes and injuries, suggest it is time safety caught up with technology.

Wout van Aert, who suffered a severe knee injury in September 2024 during a wet descent, said:

Limiting the number of gears would make the sport much safer.

Chris Froome, four-time Tour de France winner, also said he supported strategies “to keep the speeds down on the descents”.

The Professional Cycling Council supports testing gear ratio limits.

It is also likely these changes could limit cutting-edge innovations that only wealthy teams can afford. This would in turn narrow technological disparities across teams.

Former pro Michael Barry though believes gear restrictions are not the answer, and the UCI should instead focus on improved course design and inspection, better barriers and crash protective clothing.

Technology experts agree, arguing speed is determined more by a rider’s power output and aerodynamic drag than by gear ratios. To enhance safety, they propose alternative solutions such as real-time rider tracking, crash-protective clothing, improved course design and inspection and faster medical response.

The wider handlebar rule has also stirred controversy, especially among smaller-framed riders, many of whom are women, who typically ride with 360–380mm handlebars for better comfort and control.

Under the new regulation, those forced to use bars that exceed their optimal fit range could end up suffering from poor wrist alignment, increased fatigue and a higher risk of repetitive strain injuries.

Despite the growth of women’s cycling, the UCI has not made exemptions for smaller riders, raising concerns a one-size-fits-all solution may compromise inclusively and safety.

Even though regular riders can continue to use the equipment they prefer, what happens in the pro world often shapes non-elite rider preferences and trends, and the bikes sold in stores. If narrower bars are banned at the top level, manufacturers may stop offering them.

Historically, advancements in aerodynamics, gear ratios and component weights seen in the pro peloton have become standard features on consumer bikes.

A delicate balance

The UCI’s new regulations mark a likely shift towards standardised equipment and heightened safety. This deliberate emphasis on safety naturally elevates awareness among all cyclists about the crucial link between equipment choices and rider wellbeing.

While these restrictions may foster a more level playing field, they also risk curbing the sport’s long-standing tradition of engineering innovation.

The very appeal of professional cycling has often been intrinsically tied to the relentless pursuit of technological advancements that yield even fractional competitive advantages.

Striking a balance between ensuring safety and preserving this spirit of ingenuity remains a crucial challenge for the sport’s future.

Popi Sotiriadou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Cycling’s governing body is introducing new rules to slow down elite riders. Not everyone’s happy – https://theconversation.com/cyclings-governing-body-is-introducing-new-rules-to-slow-down-elite-riders-not-everyones-happy-260917

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Benjamin Pope, Associate Professor, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Macquarie University

The day before my thesis examination, my friend and radio astronomer Joe Callingham showed me an image we’d been awaiting for five long years – an infrared photo of two dying stars we’d requested from the Very Large Telescope in Chile.

I gasped – the stars were wreathed in a huge spiral of dust, like a snake eating its own tail.

We named it Apep, for the Egyptian serpent god of destruction. Now, our team has finally been lucky to use NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to look at Apep.

If anything could top the first shock of seeing its beautiful spiral nebula, it’s this breathtaking new image, with the JWST data now analysed in two papers on arXiv.

Violent star deaths

Right before they die as supernovae, the universe’s most massive stars violently shed their outer hydrogen layers, leaving their heavy cores exposed.

These are called Wolf-Rayet stars after their discoverers, who noticed powerful streams of gas blasting out from these objects, much stronger than the stellar wind from our Sun. The Wolf-Rayet stage lasts only millennia – a blink of the eye in cosmic time scales – before they violently explode.

Unlike our Sun, many stars in the universe exist in pairs known as binaries. This is especially true of the most massive stars, such as Wolf-Rayets.

When the fierce gales from a Wolf-Rayet star clash with their weaker companion’s wind, they compress each other. In the eye of this storm forms a dense, cool environment in which the carbon-rich winds can condense into dust. The earliest carbon dust in the cosmos – the first of the material making up our own bodies – was made this way.

The dust from the Wolf-Rayet is blown out in almost a straight line, and the orbital motion of the stars wraps it into a spiral-shaped nebula, appearing exactly like water from a sprinkler when viewed from above.

We expected Apep to look like one of these elegant pinwheel nebulas, discovered by our colleague and co-author Peter Tuthill. To our surprise, it did not.

Equal rivals

The new image was taken using JWST’s infrared camera, like the thermal cameras used by hunters or the military. It represents hot material as blue, and colder material in green through to red.

It turns out Apep isn’t just one powerful star blasting a weaker companion, but two Wolf-Rayet stars. The rivals have near-equal strength winds, and the dust is spread out in a very wide cone and wrapped into a wind-sock shape.

When we originally described Apep in 2018, we noted a third, more distant star, speculating whether it was also part of the system or a chance interloper along the line of sight.

The dust appeared to be moving much slower than the winds, which was hard to explain. We suggested the dust might be carried on a slow, thick wind from the equator of a fast-spinning star, rare today but common in the early universe.

The new, much more detailed data from JWST reveals three more dust shells zooming farther out, each cooler and fainter than the last and spaced perfectly evenly, against a background of swirling dust.

New data, new knowledge

The JWST data are now published and interpreted in a pair of papers, one led by Caltech astronomer Yinuo Han, and the other by Macquarie University Masters student Ryan White.

Han’s paper reveals how the nebula’s dust cools, links the background dust to the foreground stars, and suggests the stars are farther away from Earth than we thought. This implies they are extraordinarily bright, but weakens our original claim about the slow winds and rapid rotation.

In White’s paper, he develops a fast computer model for the shape of the nebula, and uses this to decode the orbit of the inner stars very precisely.

He also noticed there’s a “bite” taken out out of the dust shells, exactly where the wind of the third star would be chewing into them. This proves the Apep family isn’t just a pair of twins – they have a third sibling.

Understanding systems like Apep tells us more about star deaths and the origins of carbon dust, but these systems also have a fascinating beauty that emerges from their seemingly simple geometry.

The violence of stellar death carves puzzles that would make sense to Newton and Archimedes, and it is a scientific joy to solve them and share them.

Benjamin Pope receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Big Questions Institute.

– ref. Swirling nebula of two dying stars revealed in spectacular detail in new Webb telescope image – https://theconversation.com/swirling-nebula-of-two-dying-stars-revealed-in-spectacular-detail-in-new-webb-telescope-image-258314

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack McNamara, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Exercise Physiology, University of East London

Your fitness tracker might be lying to you. That 10,000-step target flashing on your wrist? It didn’t come from decades of careful research. It came from a Japanese walking club and a marketing campaign in the 1960s.

A major new study has found that 7,000 steps a day dramatically cuts your risk of death and disease. And more steps bring even greater benefits.

People hitting 7,000 daily steps had a 47% lower risk of dying prematurely than those managing just 2,000 steps, plus extra protection against heart disease, cancer and dementia.

The findings come from the biggest review of step counts and health ever done. Researchers gathered data from 57 separate studies tracking more than 160,000 people for up to two decades, then combined all the results to spot patterns that individual studies might miss. This approach, called a systematic review, gives scientists much more confidence in their conclusions than any single study could.

So where did that magic 10,000 number come from? A pedometer company called Yamasa wanted to cash in on 1964 Tokyo Olympics fever. It launched a device called Manpo-kei – literally “10,000 steps meter”. The Japanese character for 10,000 resembles a walking person, while 10,000 itself is a memorable round number. It was a clever marketing choice that stuck.

At that time, there was no robust evidence for whether a target of 10,000 steps made sense. Early research suggested that jumping from a typical 3,000 to 5,000 daily steps to 10,000 would burn roughly 300 to 400 extra calories a day. So the target wasn’t completely random – just accidentally reasonable.

This latest research paper looked across a broad spectrum – not just whether people died, but heart disease, cancer, diabetes, dementia, depression and even falls. The results tell a fascinating story. Even tiny increases matter. Jump from 2,000 to 4,000 steps daily and your death risk drops by 36%. That’s a substantial improvement.

But here’s where it gets interesting. The biggest health benefits happen between zero and 7,000 steps. Beyond that, benefits keep coming, but they level off considerably. Studies have found meaningful benefits starting at just 2,517 steps per day. For some people, that could be as little as a 20-minute stroll around the block.

Age changes everything, too. If you’re over 60, you hit maximum benefits at 6,000 to 8,000 daily steps. Under 60? You need 8,000 to 10,000 steps for the same protection. Your 70-year-old neighbour gets 77% lower heart disease risk at just 4,500 steps daily.

The real secret of why fitness targets often fail? People give up on them.

Research comparing different step goals found a clear pattern. Eighty-five per cent of people stuck with 10,000 daily steps. Bump it to 12,500 steps and only 77% kept going. Push for 15,000 steps and you lose nearly a third of people.

One major study followed middle-aged adults for 11 years. Those hitting 7,000 to 9,999 steps daily had 50-70% lower death risk. But getting beyond 10,000 steps? No extra benefit. All that extra effort for nothing. Other researchers watching people over a full year saw the same thing. Step programmes worked brilliantly at first, then people slowly drifted back to old habits as targets felt unrealistic.

Most steps happen without you realising it

Here’s something that might surprise you. Most of your daily steps don’t come from structured walks or gym sessions. Eighty per cent happen during everyday activities – tidying up, walking to the car, general movement around the house.

People naturally build steps through five main routes: work (walking between meetings), commuting (those train station treks), household chores, evening strolls and tiny incidental movements. People using public transport clock up 19 minutes of walking daily just getting around.

Research has also found something else interesting. Frequent short bursts of activity work as well as longer walks. Your body doesn’t care if you get steps from one epic hike or dozens of trips up the stairs. This matters because it means you don’t need to become a completely different person. You just need to move a bit more within your existing routine.

So, what does this mean for you? Even 2,500 daily steps brings real health benefits. Push up to 4,000 and you’re in serious protection territory. Hit 7,000 and you’ve captured most of the available benefits.

For older people, those with health conditions, or anyone starting from a sedentary baseline, 7,000 steps is brilliant. It’s achievable and delivers massive health returns. But if you’re healthy and can manage more, keep going. The benefits climb all the way up to 12,000 steps daily, cutting death risk by up to 55%.

The 10,000-step target isn’t wrong exactly. It’s just not the magic threshold everyone thinks it is.

What started as a Japanese company’s clever marketing trick has accidentally become one of our most useful health tools. Decades of research have refined that original guess into something much more sophisticated: personalised targets based on your age, health and what you can actually stick to.

The real revelation? You don’t need to hit some arbitrary target to transform your health. You just need to move more than you do now. Every single step counts.

Jack McNamara does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Sweet spot for daily steps is lower than often thought, new study finds – https://theconversation.com/sweet-spot-for-daily-steps-is-lower-than-often-thought-new-study-finds-261605

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nando Sigona, Professor of International Migration and Forced Displacement and Director of the Institute for Research into International Migration and Superdiversity, University of Birmingham

The letter that arrived for eleven-year-old Guilherme in June 2025 was addressed personally to him. The UK Home Office was informing him that he and his eight-year-old brother Luca must return to Brazil. Their parents, an academic and a senior NHS nurse, both long-term UK residents with valid visas were not included in the order.

“Whilst this may involve a degree of disruption in family life,” the letter stated, “this is considered to be proportionate to the legitimate aim of maintaining effective immigration control.”

The family’s difficulties with the Home Office began after the parents divorced a few years after arriving in the UK. Mother and children arrived in the UK as dependants on the father’s visa. After the divorce, the mother secured her own skilled worker visa, while the father was granted indefinite leave to remain in 2024.

Under current rules, skilled workers must wait five years before applying for settlement. For the children to qualify for settlement, both parents must be settled or one must have sole responsibility – neither condition applies here. Only after media attention did the Home Office reconsider the decision.

This case is just the latest example of how barriers to migrants’ family life are embedded in the UK’s immigration system – something I have been studying for years. The Labour government’s recently announced immigration plans extend and bolster these barriers.

Current rules require migrants to earn at least £29,000 to sponsor a spouse or child – a figure set to rise to £38,700 in early 2026 after changes introduced by the last government. The newest immigration plans propose doubling the path to settlement from five to ten years. And they restrict the rights to family reunion to only “nuclear” families: divorced parents, adult children and extended kin are left out.

These changes are aimed at reducing migration and restoring “public trust”. But in practice, they make family unity a luxury — harder to achieve for low-paid migrant workers and even for working-class British citizens with foreign partners.

Read more:
‘Just the rich can do it’: our research shows how immigration income requirements devastate families

The price of family life

Recent research my colleagues and I conducted — based on over 50 interviews with migrant domestic and food delivery workers and other experts — shows how the immigration system fractures families and puts children at risk.

Faith, a Zimbabwean domestic worker, explained how she was unable to bring her eldest daughter to the UK due to age restrictions on dependant visas. Her daughter was later trafficked into the UK and, though she eventually rejoined her mother, hasn’t recovered from the trauma of separation: “She’s struggling to sleep, can’t eat … always emotional, saying she feels dizzy, scared to be around people.”

Faith had been trapped in an abusive relationship for a long time because her visa was tied to her partner. When she eventually left her partner, her visa was withdrawn – leaving her in breach of immigration rules. Her younger child was placed in care while Faith was detained for breaching the terms of her visa.

Jamal, a food delivery rider from Eritrea, had a similar experience of legal dependency. He came to the UK on a dependant visa linked to his British wife. After their relationship deteriorated, his ability to remain in the country was threatened: “If we have problems, she can cancel my visa. This was her weapon.”

Susan, a Zimbabwean woman working in the care and cleaning sector, moved to the UK to look after her adult daughter who had cancer. When her six month visitor visa expired, she applied for asylum, but her application was refused and eventually she was detained for almost a month.

She faced deportation but was released after a legal aid lawyer helped her submit strong evidence of her daughter’s condition. Reflecting on her experience, she explained: “When it benefits them, they say I’ve had no contact [with my family in the UK]. When they want to deport me, they say I have family to return to [in Zimbabwe].”

Immigration status doesn’t just define one’s own legal position, it can determine who gets the right to have a family in the UK and who does not. While some of our interviewees secured status through a partner’s EU citizenship and reunited with family members already in the UK, others who rely on temporary visas are excluded.

Changes to the immigration in recent years have placed a higher value on how migrants can contribute or provide “value” – seeing them as workers (or students) first, not members of families. Many are allowed in the UK for a limited time and without the right to bring with them even the closest family members. The effect is particularly harsh on women in domestic work, whose visas are short-term and not renewable.

Many interviewees reported that immigration barriers delayed or obstructed their children’s education or healthcare. Samantha’s daughter waited over two months for a school placement because their legal status was still pending. Adriana was charged £8,000 for NHS maternity services because of her undocumented status, which restricts access to free healthcare to GP and emergency care.

Even in less extreme cases, legal insecurity takes a toll. Children grow up hearing their parents talk about “papers”, “Home Office letters” or the risk of being “sent back”.

That the Home Office sent a removal letter to an eleven-year-old is not a clerical error. It is the system working as designed. And even when public outrage forces a reversal — as in Guilherme’s case — the wider machinery of enforcement continues.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Nando Sigona is Scientific Coordinator of “Improving the Living and Working Conditions of Irregularised Migrant Households in Europe” (www.i-claim.eu), a three-year six-country research project, funded by the European Commission’s Horizon Europe and UKRI.

– ref. How the UK’s immigration system splits families apart – by design – https://theconversation.com/how-the-uks-immigration-system-splits-families-apart-by-design-261134

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Noel Flay Cass, Research Fellow in Energy Demand Behaviour, University of Leeds

If you’re thinking of buying a new electric car worth up to £37,000, the UK government has offered to knock up to £3,750 off the price. The measure adds up to £650 million in grants for people to buy EVs (electric vehicles), but as a researcher who studies transport policy and climate change, I think this money would be better spent subsidising e-bikes.

Numerous questions surround the new government policy. Might people who can afford a new car buy one anyway, without the 10% discount? Might car dealers simply reduce the discounts they offer by a similar amount? Given the 20% VAT on an EV, doesn’t a sale actually result in a 200% immediate return for the government? And isn’t this mainly a bung to car manufacturers and company fleets?

The grants come on top of financial assistance for replacing cars, vans, taxis and motorbikes with electric options, announced in February – £120 million in total, including £500 grants for e-motorbikes. But almost no subsidies are available for two-wheeled, pedal-assisted EVs: e-bikes and e-cargo bikes.

The main financial help for buying e-bikes is the cycle to work salary-sacrifice scheme. The employer buys the bike and then instalments are deducted from a participant’s pay before tax, but the scheme’s eligibility is limited to employees on standard payroll tax (PAYE workers) whose sacrifices don’t drop their pay below minimum wage.

This also excludes those who are out of work, the low-paid, the self-employed and retired, arguably people who might benefit most from an e-bike.

Benefits beyond carbon savings

We know that e-bike owners replace lots of trips and miles driven by cars. We also know the upfront cost of around £2,000-£3,000 is a barrier to more people owning one, despite e-bikes being much cheaper than cars.

Estimates of annual carbon savings from e-bikers avoiding car trips vary, from as little as 87kg CO₂ in a 2016 study to 394kg in research published the following year. Estimates published in 2020 and 2023 put the annual climate dividend at 225kg and 168kg of CO₂ respectively – roughly in line with emissions for one person making a return short-haul flight.

These might seem small savings compared to the tonnes of CO₂ that an EV can save. However, e-bike incentives would have two big advantages.

First, policies that encourage active travel, including cycling, have been assessed by the government multiple times to determine the payoff from investment. It turns out that they have huge benefit to cost ratios – 9:1 on average (internationally it’s 6:1).

Conservatively, policies to encourage cycling pay back £5.50 in social benefits for every £1 invested. These benefits are largely savings for the healthcare system. In a project I worked on, in which we lent e-cargo bikes for free to 49 households in Leeds, Brighton and Oxford for several months, e-cargo bike users cycled up to three times more than non-users in our surveys.

E-cargo bike borrowers also reported mental-health benefits on top of satisfaction at being able to combine fitness with functional everyday trips, which were longer than they would attempt on a conventional bike. The cargo bikes especially helped with combining trips – commutes with shopping and school runs, for instance – meaning that more than 50% of trips and miles replaced car usage.

Second, e-bike incentives can be designed to appeal especially to the lower-paid, who have been found to use their e-bikes more than wealthier buyers, which would also replace more car trips. The highest of a sliding scale of means-tested incentives in a Canadian study attracted poorer first-time e-bike buyers with existing high car-use.

This reaped average annual carbon savings of 1,456kg for those in receipt of the maximum CAN$1,600 (£868). As the authors suggest, these incentives may have helped low-income households realise their preferences for less dependence on cars.

E-bike grants could get more people out of cars

But how many drivers want to drive less? According to research that groups people into camps based on travel preferences, up to 50% of travellers in the UK are “malcontented motorists” and “active aspirers” (to travel differently).

Our research also found that guilt, or trying to minimise car use, was a major motivator for nearly all of our participants. While the government has funded free e-(cargo) bike trials like ours, the main cycling organisations we talked to pointed out that use would “fall off a cliff” when the trial ends because of the cost barrier. Those who would struggle to buy one were back in the same position as before.

A government evaluation of free e-bike loans concluded they were poor value for money, but it tracked purchases made soon after with a tiny response rate. Our project followed up after a year and found 20% of our borrowers had bought an e-cargo bike. Trial loans and grants together might achieve even more.

The new EV grant money could provide nearly 750,000 e-bike or e-cargo bike purchase-incentives the size of the Canadian ones, which could lead to annual carbon savings of 1.125 million tonnes of CO₂, according to the weekly average savings they found in that group.

Given the conservative benefit to cost ratio of 5.5:1 from such a UK scheme, this investment could also reap more than £3.6 billion in social benefits – especially from a fitter car-dependent population. There would potentially be a massive boost to the struggling UK e-bike and e-cargo bike market as well.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Noel Flay Cass receives funding from UK Research & Innovation grant EP/S030700/1 through the Elevate project: (Innovative Light ELEctric Vehicles for Active and Digital TravEl).

– ref. Subsidising e-bikes instead of cars could really kick the electric vehicle transition into high gear – https://theconversation.com/subsidising-e-bikes-instead-of-cars-could-really-kick-the-electric-vehicle-transition-into-high-gear-261429

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Colleen Murrell, Chair of the Editorial Board, and Full Professor in Journalism, Dublin City University

Donald Trump’s campaign against the “fake news” media continues largely unchecked, with a decision that is expected to reduce reporting and close down some local news stations around the US.

This follows a House of Representatives decision on July 18 to agree with the Senate and slash US$1.1 billion (£813 million) funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which manages the money for National Public Radio (NPR), the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and their member stations. These cuts will affect the next two years of their operations.

There are fears that some local and rural stations will be forced to lay off staff and may even have to close, if they haven’t amassed significant cash reserves or receive other funding. Don Dunlap, the president of KEDT-TV/FM in Texas, said in an interview: “There are ten public TV stations in Texas, and we’re thinking probably six of them will close down within a year.”

Experts are warning that in national emergencies such as wild fires and floods, local news media are “absolutely essential services” – and that they may not be able to help keep citizens well informed in future. “Nearly three-in-four Americans say they rely on their public radio stations for alerts and news for their public safety,” NPR’s CEO Katherine Maher said .

Trump has had these media outlets in his sights for a while, claiming they are a waste of taxpayers’ money and are ideologically biased against Republicans – a claim denied by NPR and PBS.

Read more:
PBS and NPR are generally unbiased, independent of government propaganda and provide key benefits to US democracy

Public broadcasting regularly sends out alerts related to extreme weather and emergency news. This appears particularly pertinent after the recent Texas floods which killed 135 people. Kate Riley, CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, said local news outlets provide “essential lifesaving public safety services, proven educational services and community connections to their communities every day for free”.

Republican senator from Alaska Lisa Murkowski said she recently received a tsunami warning from her local radio station after an earthquake. Murkowski has tried to introduce an amendment to reduce the cuts to local stations.

The more-than-1,000 NPR stations around the US are vulnerable precisely because significant funding comes from federal sources. According to figures from news organisation Politico: “Approximately 19% of NPR member stations count on CPB funding for at least 30% of their revenue.”

Ed Ulman, president and CEO of Alaska Public Media, told Politico that over a third of public media stations in his state will shut down “within three-to-six months”. He has begun a renewed public funding campaign on social media.

Even at well-funded TV stations such as Arizona PBS, owned by Arizona State University and run by its Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communications, some curtailing of plans is afoot. The station provides daily programming to the region, and has trained generations of journalism students to enter careers in TV and radio. Following the announcement of these federal cuts, I spoke to Scott Woelfel, the station’s general manager, who said:

Arizona PBS will lose about US$2.3 million per year over the next two years. That represents around 13% of our total budget. While that is a significant percentage, its loss will not prevent us from operating. In fact, we prepared a reduced budget in the likely event that the rescission would occur, and have been operating under it since July 1 … It contains cuts across the board in an equal amount to the lost revenue.

Following these federal cuts, 60% of the station’s funding will derive from charitable giving, 16% from corporate support and a further 24% from state grants for education services. Woelfel doesn’t plan on making any staff cuts, but said some unstaffed positions will remain open indefinitely – and that the station will be “delaying major new initiatives until new funding is found”.

What happens next?

Overall, these cuts are likely to create additional “news deserts” – regions of the US which don’t have access to important local news and information.

After President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 into law to give funds to public broadcasting, he said: “While we work every day to produce new goods and to create new wealth, we want most of all to enrich man’s spirit. That is the purpose of this act.” But such touching sentiments now seem old-school in this era of Trump’s loud media wars.

In the past week, the US president has also announced he would sue “the ass off” Rupert Murdoch, founder of News Corp, and the Wall Street Journal, which News Corp owns. This follows the WSJ’s publication of a story concerning a 2003 birthday letter framed around the outline of a naked woman that Trump allegedly sent to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump said the letter was fake. His US$10 billion lawsuit also takes in the WSJ’s owner, Dow Jones, and two of its reporters.

As Trump pushes forward with significant changes to the media landscape, he is no doubt hoping that friendly television stations such as Fox News – also a part of Murdoch’s empire – as well as his influencer following will stay loyal to his brand.

His Maga followers will undoubtedly be supportive of budget cuts and his anti-PBS and NPR statements. But when it comes to reporting from a flood or fire, influencers tend not to be on the ground supplying local residents with up-to-date information. Voters may find those important, and sometimes life-saving, services hard to replace.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Colleen Murrell received funding from Irish regulator Coimisiún na Meán (2021-4) for research for the annual Reuters Digital News Report Ireland.

– ref. Trump’s budget cuts could shut down local news outlets and reduce reporting on emergencies – https://theconversation.com/trumps-budget-cuts-could-shut-down-local-news-outlets-and-reduce-reporting-on-emergencies-261493

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul Hough, Lecturer Sport & Exercise Physiology , University of Westminster

In elite sport, the phrase “past your prime” is rapidly being redefined.

At 38, Jess Fishlock just became the oldest goalscorer in UEFA Women’s Euro history. At Euro 2024, Portuguese defender Pepe made headlines not for a red card or faking injury — but for simply stepping onto the pitch at age 41, becoming the oldest player to feature in a European Championship. Fellow veterans Cristiano Ronaldo (39), Luka Modrić (38), and Keylor Navas (38) also made appearances.

And it’s not just football. Serena Williams won the Australian Open at 35 (while pregnant). Roger Federer won a Grand Slam at 36. Rafael Nadal became the oldest French Open champion at 36. Novak Djokovic, now 38, won Olympic gold in 2024 and reached the semi-finals of all three Grand Slams this 2025.

In American sports, Tom Brady retired at 45 after 23 physically punishing NFL seasons. LeBron James, at 39, is still dominating in the NBA, having won the inaugural NBA Cup with the LA Lakers in 2023.

These aren’t just feel-good stories; they reflect a growing trend. Athletes are staying competitive for longer and pushing the boundaries of peak performance. But how?

Research backs the shift. A study on Olympic athletes found that between 1992 and 2021, the average age of male Olympians rose from 25 to 27, and female athletes from 24 to 26. In football, a study of UEFA Champions League players found the average player age rose by nearly two years between 1992 and 2018.

So how are older athletes continuing to thrive in elite sport? Here are some of the key factors.

1. Smarter training

Modern athletes benefit from personalised training programmes informed by cutting-edge sports science. Tools like GPS tracking, heart rate variability (HRV), and biomarker analysis help coaches monitor performance, recovery and injury risk.

Metrics such as HRV, for example, can indicate when an athlete might need more rest, which is crucial for older athletes who take longer to recover after intense competition.

Athletes are no longer reliant on a single coach. Today, they work with integrated teams – sports scientists, strength and conditioning coaches, and performance analysts – all dedicated to improving their fitness and performance.

2. Better injury prevention and medical support

Athletes now undergo regular fitness testing and musculoskeletal screening to identify potential weaknesses before they lead to injury. And when injuries do occur, recovery methods have vastly improved.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries were once considered career-ending for older athletes. But thanks to advanced surgical techniques and biological therapies, recovery is now faster, and athletes return to play much sooner.

Zlatan Ibrahimović, at age 35, returned to top-level football just seven months after an ACL tear – a feat nearly unthinkable a decade earlier.

3. Optimised recovery and nutrition

Ageing athletes have different recovery needs — and sports science has stepped up. Cryotherapy, compression therapy, and advanced sleep protocols all help reduce muscle soreness and accelerate repair.

Nutrition plays a key role too. Ageing bodies experience more inflammation and slower repair, so diets rich in polyphenols (found in berries, leafy greens, and dark chocolate) are used to support vascular health and recovery. Athletes may also take approved supplements such as glucosamine and chondroitin to support joint health and slow degeneration.

The result? Older athletes can train more consistently and recover faster between games.

4. Experience and tactical intelligence

Speed and strength decline with age, but tactical intelligence often improves. Older athletes can compensate for age-related declines in physical capacity with their advanced game-reading skills and spatial awareness. For instance, footballers like Paul Scholes and Andrés Iniesta adapted their playing styles with age, relying more on positioning and passing intelligence than physical capacity.

5. Financial and legacy incentives

Today’s stars aren’t just competing for medals – they’re building brands. With massive financial rewards on offer, there’s a clear incentive to prolong careers.

Cristiano Ronaldo, for example, recently signed a two-year contract extension with Al-Nassr that will see him play until age 42 — reportedly earning an estimated £492 million. For many athletes, the chance to leave a lasting legacy and secure generational wealth keeps them in the game.

While we can’t stop the biological effects of ageing, today’s athletes are proving we can delay their impact – and even thrive later in life.

With smarter training, better recovery strategies and cutting-edge medicine, the upper age limit for peak performance continues to stretch. These advances may allow more veteran athletes to defy expectations and continue competing at the highest level.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Paul Hough does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Five ways professional athletes are redefining the limits of age in sport – https://theconversation.com/five-ways-professional-athletes-are-redefining-the-limits-of-age-in-sport-261028

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rebecca Anne Barr, Associate Professor in English Literature, University of Cambridge

British satirist Cold War Steve has published a series of images based on the British painter William Hogarth’s The Rake’s Progress (1733-35). Hogarth’s 18th-century original charts the catastrophic decline of an affluent young man, Tom Rakewell. Cold War Steve’s 2025 reimagining substitutes the foolish rake with the US president, Donald Trump.

Hogarth’s eight densely packed images are a forerunner of the modern comic script, a kind of condensed graphic novel. The works swarm with life and hidden meanings for viewers to decode.

Tom starts out in high life, flashing his cash and enjoying himself. But he is rapidly drawn into a vortex of late-night drinking, gambling and prostitution. Desperate to save himself from extreme poverty, he sells himself in marriage to an older woman (no cougar, alas, but a rather decrepit heiress).

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

But he still cannot control his behaviour. Tom is eventually imprisoned for debt, loses his mind – either to syphilis or sorrow – and dies in Bedlam, the notorious 18th-century madhouse.

Hugely popular and culturally influential, A Rake’s Progress is a modern morality tale. It’s a warning against the perils of self-indulgence, and a devastating critique of those too wealthy and foolish to care about the damage they do.

Political satire as tragicomedy

Keeping close to the original narrative, Cold War Steve uses the 18th-century paintings as backdrops, while altering the object of the satire by making Trump the main target. Renamed Trump’s Progress, this is a pointed political satire, directed at those in power.

Steve’s is a 21st-century reimagining, not a pious homage. Instead, Trump’s Progress has an irreverent punk aesthetic: a horde of Trump-supporting celebrities (such as Don King, Hulk Hogan and Liberace) are photoshopped into his digital canvases, cavorting crazily alongside Trump as he moves from his immense wealth to political pre-eminence.

Both funny and dark, this is political satire as tragicomedy. The contemporary satirist takes Hogarth as precedent, suggesting a bad end lies in store for the president.

Just as the 18th-century rake ends up in the madhouse, Cold War Steve ends his sequence with an aged Trump lying in a prison cell. Trump is tended to by Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his daughter Ivanka, while his other erstwhile friends look less than pleased to be incarcerated along with him.

Hogarth was a key figure in 18th-century culture. His images of late-night drunkenness , sleazy politicians, and the cheek-by-jowl of luxury living and extreme poverty encapsulated the irrepressible messiness of modern life.

Hogarth reflected Britain’s aspirations to liberty and progress, but also its ongoing struggles with consumerism, luxury, corruption, and greed. These are issues that dominate our present day too, and give Hogarth’s satires an urgent and unsettling relevance.

This is not the first time Cold War Steve has used historical images from the 18th century to indict the present. In a recent article, I explored how Hogarth became a powerful visual source for the satirist during the COVID-19 crisis.

In May 2020, Steve published an update of Hogarth’s famous print, Gin Lane. The original shows London as a drunken dystopia, as the poor turned to cheap imported gin to ease their daily grind.

But Cold War Steve’s version dramatically altered the image’s moral message. By populating the city street with members of the Tory party and Britain’s business elite, he accused the government of gross moral negligence in treating the pandemic as an opportunity to make money.

The choice of Hogarth is not accidental. Not merely familiar to students of art history, Hogarth has a cultural legibility that makes his work an influential satirical template for artists who want to comment on the social malaise of their times.

Being in conversation with Hogarth gives contemporary works added gravitas. The veteran cartoonist Steve Bell created numerous parodies of Hogarth throughout his time at the Guardian and other publications.

In 2016, English artist Thomas Moore created a version in which the 18th-century gin craze has been replaced by the obesity epidemic. Hogarth’s impoverished city street is now full of fast food shops, pubs and pawnbrokers. The manic energy and cultural anxiety of Hogarth’s satires resonates with our own accelerated culture and widespread sense of moral and social decline.

In his study of the cultural afterlives of the 18th century, scholar James Ward has shown that postmodern popular culture often invokes Hogarth to question the assumption that our distance from the past is the same as progress.

By splicing together images of the past with the present, Cold War Steve’s visual satires make the serious political point that society has failed to progress since the enlightenment. In his eyes, the vices that Hogarth showed ravaging his society are still part of a culture of political shamelessness, personified by Trump.

Steve’s energetically subversive reworking of 18th-century material shows how Hogarth’s satires continue to be understood and appreciated by diverse audiences.

Former prime minister Boris Johnson portrayed Hogarth as a patriotic British product. But by successfully translating Hogarth’s satires for a transatlantic audience, Cold War Steve shows that his appeal transcends both national and political divides. Current politics might be almost beyond parody on both sides of the pond, but Steve’s bleak humour shows us that satire is thriving.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Rebecca Anne Barr does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Trump takes lead role in Cold War Steve’s reimagining of Hogarth’s 18th-century satire, The Rake’s Progess – https://theconversation.com/trump-takes-lead-role-in-cold-war-steves-reimagining-of-hogarths-18th-century-satire-the-rakes-progess-261701

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Valentina Rossi, Postdoctoral researcher, Palaeontology, University College Cork

A delicate, innocuous little fossil reptile known as Mirasaura grauvogeli – “Grauvogel’s wonder reptile” – is forcing a rethink about the evolution of skin and its appendages such as feathers and hair.

These newly discovered fossils, from the Middle Triassic (247 million years old)
Grès à Voltzia site in northeast France, preserve evidence of some of the most astonishing soft-tissue features described to date in ancient reptiles. We are two of the authors of a new paper on these finds, published in Nature.

These fossils show that the tree dwelling Mirasaura had a large and startling crest along its back. The crest is formed by elongated appendages that are neither scales, feathers nor hair.

Until now, complex skin outgrowths such as feathers were thought to have evolved only much later – in birds, dinosaurs and pterosaurs. This probably occurred through a single origin in the common ancestor of these animals. In all other types of reptile, the only skin outgrowths present are scales.

Mirasaura has overthrown this paradigm in sensational fashion. Compared with the size of its body, the long blades of its tall dorsal crest are enormous. Closer inspection reveals this crest comprised individual, overlapping appendages, each with a narrow central ridge and a lobed outline, similar to the shaft and form of feathers.

However, the fossil structures seem to lack the fine branching architecture that characterises most feathers in modern birds. What’s more, Mirasaura is not related to birds, dinosaurs or pterosaurs, but instead belongs to a very ancient group of reptiles, the drepanosauromorphs, that are known only from the Triassic.

The soft tissues of Mirasaura are preserved as a thin brown film, rich in fossil melanosomes – cell structures that contain the pigment melanin during life. Research by our team at University College Cork and others has revealed widespread preservation of fossilised melanosomes in ancient vertebrates. These pigment granules can actually be used to reconstruct melanin-based colour patterns in extinct animals.

Our team’s research has shown that fossil melanosomes can also help reconstruct the soft tissue anatomy of fossil animals, because melanosomes from different body tissues have different shapes and sizes. Our comprehensive examination of the fossilised soft tissues in Mirasaura, coupled with rigorous statistical analysis of the preserved melanosomes, reveals that their geometry is consistent with melanosomes in feathers, but not with melanosomes found in hair and in reptilian skin. This strongly suggests the Mirasaura skin appendages share common developmental features with feathers.

Were the Mirasaura structures feathers, then? The solid, continuous blade of soft tissues either side of the central shaft shows no evidence for branching, which is a defining characteristic of most feathers in birds, dinosaurs and pterosaurs. The water is muddied, however, by the simple unbranched structure of some peculiar feathers in birds – such as the bristles of the turkey’s “beard”. Similar unbranched filaments are known in many dinosaurs and pterosaurs, and are widely considered to represent simple feathers.

Certain dinosaur fossils even have flattened, strip-like feathers that lack branching but possess a central shaft, considered by some experts to be an unusual – extinct – feather type. Whether the resemblance between these fossil structures and the Mirasaura skin outgrowths is superficial or belies closer evolutionary ties remains to be seen.

Intriguingly, research on the developing chick embryo shows that feathers can lose their branched structure when certain genes are manipulated. We are currently examining in greater detail the morphology and composition of the Mirasaura structures to help us interpret their anatomy more definitively.

Irrespective of what type of skin outgrowth they represent, our analyses of the anatomy of Mirasaura consistently position it, as well as other drepanosauromorph reptiles, at the base of the reptile tree. This supports data from developmental biology indicating that the genetic basis for the growth of complex skin appendages probably originated in the Carboniferous period, over 300 million years ago.

Mirasaura therefore provides the first direct evidence that complex skin appendages did appear early during reptile evolution, and are not unique to pterosaurs, birds and other dinosaurs.

We owe these new insights to painstaking conservation efforts, which serve as a reminder of the critical importance of natural history collections in conserving our natural heritage.

The earliest discoveries of Mirasaura remains were unearthed in the 1930s by fossil collector Louis Grauvogel. After decades in the Grauvogel family, these specimens were donated to the State Museum of Natural History Stuttgart in 2019, where careful preparation revealed their true significance.

Now, the Mirasaura specimens force us to accept that even before the age of dinosaurs, reptiles were evolving striking anatomical traits normally associated with much younger fossils. This adds an intriguing dimension to future research into the origins of feathers, prompting palaeontologists to consider fossils from more diverse reptile groups – and from time periods before the appearance of dinosaurs and their direct ancestors.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Valentina Rossi research is funded by the European Research Council. She is affiliated with University College Cork (UCC)

Maria McNamara receives funding from the European Research Council and Research Ireland.

– ref. Mysterious fossil may rewrite story of skin and feather evolution in reptiles – https://theconversation.com/mysterious-fossil-may-rewrite-story-of-skin-and-feather-evolution-in-reptiles-261695

Source: ForeignAffairs4

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rosa Busquets, Associate Professor, School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University

When actor Orlando Bloom revealed recently that he’d undergone a procedure to have his blood “cleaned”, many people raised eyebrows. The Pirates of the Caribbean star had turned to a treatment known as apheresis – a medical process in which blood is removed from the body, centrifuged or filtered to extract certain components, then returned in an attempt to flush out microplastics and other toxins.

Apheresis is typically used to treat conditions such as autoimmune diseases or abnormally high levels of blood cells or proteins. Its use as a detox for microplastics, however, is scientifically unproven.

Still, Bloom said he suspected his body had absorbed plastic through daily exposure, and wanted it out of his system.

He’s probably right about the exposure. Scientists have found microplastics – tiny plastic fragments less than 5mm in size – in our air, water, soil, food and even inside human tissue. But when it comes to removing them from the bloodstream, that’s where the science gets murky.

As researchers studying microplastic contamination, we’ve examined this issue in the context of dialysis – a life-saving treatment for patients with kidney failure. Dialysis filters waste products like urea and creatinine from the blood, regulates electrolytes, removes excess fluid and helps maintain blood pressure.

But our study found that while dialysis is a medical marvel, it can also have an ironic downside: it could be introducing microplastics into the bloodstream. In some cases, we found that patients undergoing dialysis were being exposed to microplastics during treatment due to the breakdown of plastic components in the equipment – a troubling contradiction for a procedure designed to cleanse the blood.

Apheresis is closely related to dialysis: both involve drawing blood from the body, circulating it through plastic tubing and filters, then returning it – so both procedures carry a similar risk of introducing microplastics from the equipment into the bloodstream.

What are microplastics?

Microplastics are plastic particles that range in size from about 5mm (roughly the length of a grain of rice) down to 0.1 microns – smaller than a red blood cell.

Some microplastics are manufactured deliberately, like the plastic microbeads once common in facial scrubs. Others form when larger plastic objects degrade over time due to sunlight, friction, or physical stress.

They’re everywhere: in the food we eat, air we breathe and water we drink. Plastic packaging, synthetic clothing such as polyester, and even artificial lawns contribute to the spread. Car tyres shed plastic particles as they wear down, and food heated or stored in plastic containers may leach microplastics.

One estimate suggests the average adult may ingest around 883 microplastic particles – over half a microgramme – per day.

So far, large-scale epidemiological studies have not established an association between microplastic exposure and specific diseases. Such studies are needed, but yet to be completed.

However, early research suggests that microplastics may be associated with inflammation, cardiovascular conditions, and DNA damage – a potential pathway to cancer.

What remains unclear is how microplastics behave inside the body: whether they accumulate, how they interact with tissues, and how (or if) the body clears them.

The irony of filtration

It’s tempting to believe, as Bloom seems to, that we can simply “clean” the blood, like draining pasta or purifying drinking water. Just as a sieve filters water from pasta, dialysis machines do filter blood – but using far more complex and delicate systems.

These machines rely on plastic components, including tubes, membranes and filters, which are exposed to sustained pressure and repeated use. Unlike stainless steel, these materials can degrade over time, potentially shedding microplastics directly into the bloodstream.

Currently, there is no published scientific evidence that microplastics can be effectively filtered from human blood. So, claims that dialysis or other treatments can remove them should be viewed with scepticism, especially when the filtration systems themselves are made of plastic.

While it’s tempting to chase quick fixes or celebrity-endorsed cleanses, we are still in the early stages of understanding what microplastics are doing to our bodies – and how to get rid of them. Rather than focusing solely on ways to flush plastics from the bloodstream, the more effective long-term strategy may be reducing our exposure in the first place.

Bloom’s story taps into a growing public unease: we all know we’re carrying the burden of plastic. But addressing it requires more than wellness trends: it calls for rigorous science, tougher regulation, and a shift away from our reliance on plastic in daily life.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Rosa Busquets receives funding from UKRI, in a UKRI/ Horizons Staff exchanges Clean Water project (101131182). She is honorary Associate Professor at UCL and Honorary Professor at Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. She is panel member of the UNEP EEAP, where is work group lead in a field that includes microplastics. She is also funded by DASA.

Luiza C Campos is a Professor of Environmental Engineering at University College London.

– ref. Orlando Bloom tried to ‘clean’ his blood to get rid of microplastics – here’s what the science says – https://theconversation.com/orlando-bloom-tried-to-clean-his-blood-to-get-rid-of-microplastics-heres-what-the-science-says-261203