NewzIntel.com

Category: Report

  • MIL-OSI Global: How is classified information typically shared and can officials declassify secrets whenever they want? A national security expert explains

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Dakota Rudesill, Associate Professor of Law, The Ohio State University

    Director of Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testifies during a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence hearing on March 26, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images

    U.S. District Judge James Boasberg on March 27, 2025, ordered top Trump administration officials to preserve records of their messages sent on the messaging app Signal from March 11 to March 15 following a transparency watchdog group’s lawsuit alleging that the officials have violated the Federal Records Act.

    This marked the latest development since The Atlantic on March 24 published a Signal chat among Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other national security officials discussing specific plans to attack Houthi militants in Yemen. Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief at The Atlantic, was mistakenly included in the chat and wrote about what he saw.

    Trump administration officials have shared contrasting accounts about whether they were discussing sensitive war information on Signal – but maintain that they did not share classified information.

    Senator Roger Wicker, the Republican chair of the Senate Arms Services committee, and Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat chairing the committee, on March 27 requested an investigation into how the Trump officials used Signal to discuss military strikes.

    Amy Lieberman, a politics and society editor, spoke with national security scholar Dakota Rudesill to better understand what constitutes classified information and how the government typically handles its most closely kept secrets.

    Democratic representatives share text messages on March 26, 2025, sent by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to other top Trump administration officials.
    Kayla Bartowski/Getty Images

    How are government officials supposed to communicate about classified information?

    The first way someone with the proper clearance can communicate about classified information is in person. They can talk about secret things in what is called a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF. This means a secure place, often with a big, heavy door and a lock on it, where security officials have swept the area for bugs and no one can easily eavesdrop. People who are in SCIFs usually have to leave their cell phones outside of the room, and then they can talk freely about secret information. A SCIF can be a particular room, or a floor of a building, or even an entire building.

    Second, there is print communication: written documents with classification markings, which have to be handled in really particular ways, like in a safe location, and can be transported between SCIFs in secure containers.

    Third, intelligence agencies, the White House and the Department of Defense also all have secure electronic systems. These include visual teleconferences, which are similar to a Zoom call and are secure for discussing highly classified information, as well as secure email systems and secure phones.

    Many people with clearances have what is called “high side” email, which is shorthand lingo for classified email and messaging. Many people with security clearance would have two work hard drives and two computers. One of them is “low side,” where there is access to unclassified official email, documents and the internet.

    All of these methods of secure communication can be clunky and take more time than people in our smartphone age are used to. That is the cost of protecting the nation’s secrets. My sense is the Trump administration officials wanted to move fast and turned to Signal, a commercial app that promises encryption. Signal is generally considered secure but is not perfect. There is abundant public evidence that Signal is not totally secure and indeed has been penetrated by Russian intelligence.

    Can something be declassified after the information has been shared?

    Yes. The president can classify and declassify at will via oral or written instruction.

    The president’s constitutional powers include removing classification controls after information has been released or leaked. Trump could at any point declassify the information shared on Signal. Several of the Cabinet-level officials on that Signal chat also have expansive delegated powers over classification.

    Even so, Trump’s national security Cabinet would have presumably still violated the law. For example, by putting national defense information inappropriately on an insecure app and not checking to verify the clearances of everyone on the chat and thereby allowing a reporter to be present, one could reasonably conclude that the team was showing “gross negligence,” running afoul of the Espionage Act.

    The Espionage Act, enacted in 1917, criminalizes unauthorized retention and dissemination of sensitive information that could undermine the national security of the U.S. or help a foreign country.

    Was the information shared on Signal likely classified?

    Looking at the Signal message transcript that The Atlantic shared, it seems like at least four things were all but surely classified.

    The most obvious was the details that Secretary of Defense Hegseth provided on the strike plans. These include the precise times that planes were taking off, what kind and when the bombs would fall. Recent reports have quoted defense officials confirming that this information at the time was classified.

    Second, the chat revealed that the president gave a green light for secret strikes at a Situation Room meeting.

    Third, there is the mere fact of these top officials deciding whether and when to execute attacks authorized by the president.

    And fourth, according to media reports, the chat included the name of an intelligence officer whose position may have been secret.

    The Trump administration says that there was no classified information in the chat. But several analysts have noted that defies belief. The exception would be a prior decision to declassify, but we have no evidence of that.

    FBI Director Kash Patel, left, Tulsi Gabbard, director of National Intelligence, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe testify during a House Select Intelligence Committee hearing in Washington, D.C., on March 26, 2025.
    Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

    What other issues does this bring to mind?

    First, we don’t know whether the Trump officials carefully thought about it before they set up this chat on Signal, which the Pentagon has warned government officials against using because of hacking concerns.

    Second, even if the officials did make a focused decision to use Signal, what is the wisdom of that? I find it really, really hard to imagine that was a prudent decision when we think about how insecure this app is. There is also the fact that Steve Witkoff, Trump’s envoy to Ukraine and the Middle East, was party to the chat while he was in Russia. We do not know for sure if he had a device running Signal on him personally while he was in Russia, but in any event he would have been under intense Russian surveillance.

    A broader issue is how the Trump administration is enforcing the law is a giant question mark. Usually, the law both authorizes the U.S. government to do things, and also says it cannot do things. Law enables and limits everyone, including the president. However, Trump wrongly claims that he is the final authority on the law, and so far the Justice Department only seems to be enforcing the law against people outside of the administration.

    So does the law limit the Trump administration in any practical sense? Right now it is not clear – and there is abundant reason to be concerned about that from a rule of law standpoint.

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

    – ref. How is classified information typically shared and can officials declassify secrets whenever they want? A national security expert explains – https://theconversation.com/how-is-classified-information-typically-shared-and-can-officials-declassify-secrets-whenever-they-want-a-national-security-expert-explains-253207

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Signal-gate: a national security blunder ‘almost without parallel’

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor

    Depending on what you think of Donald Trump, his administration could fit either of the following two descriptions. Chaotic, vindictive and accident-prone, marked by mendacity, driven by impulse and bent on securing the will of the leader, rather than – as in the US constitution – the will of the people. Or it could be a government masterminded by a man playing 4D chess while all around him are playing chequers. A president whose deal-making skills and focus on outcomes ensure the security and prosperity of America and its allies.

    If you base your assessment on the people Trump has chosen as his key national security advisers then, after the recent Signal chat group intelligence debacle, you’d almost certainly opt for chaotic and accident-prone, at the very least.

    Looking around the Signal chatroom, who do we have? National security advisor Mike Waltz, Vice-President J.D. Vance, secretary of state Marco Rubio, defense secretary Pete Hegseth, director of national intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA director John Ratcliffe and a supporting cast of other senior Trump staffers. And, unwittingly, the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg.

    Heads must roll, say Trump’s critics. But who from this hydra-headed beast should take the fall? Should it be Waltz, who invited Goldberg to the chat group? Or Hegseth, who posted operational details of a US attack, including the when, where and how, hours before it was due to take place? Should it be Vance, whose swipe at America’s freeloading European allies has caused considerable angst across the Atlantic?

    Or perhaps one or another of Gabbard and Ratcliffe, who sat in front of the Senate select committee on intelligence on Tuesday and maintained that no classified material or “war plans” had been revealed to the group – sworn evidence now revealed to be unreliable at best?

    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.

    At present it seems as if none of them are going to pay for their dangerous incompetence. Instead their ire is turned on Goldberg, who has variously been called a “sleazebag” by Trump himself, “loser” and the “bottom scum of journalists” by Waltz and a “deceitful and highly discredited, so-called journalist who’s made a profession of peddling hoaxes time and time again” by Hegseth.

    Robert Dover of the University of Hull, whose research centres on intelligence and national security, believes this is a “national security blunder almost without parallel”. He points to the hypocrisy of people like Hegseth who savaged Hillary Clinton for using a private email server to conduct official business when she was secretary of state under Barack Obama.

    Dover also notes the damage the episode will have done to America’s already shaky relations with its allies in Europe. Being disparaged by the vice-president as freeloaders and dismissed by the defense secretary as “pathetic”, he believes, will be “difficult to unsee”.



    Read more:
    Signal chat group affair: unprecedented security breach will seriously damage US international relations

    But credit where it’s due, it appears that US diplomacy may at least be bearing some – limited – fruit. At least, that is, if the two partial ceasefires recently negotiated between Russia and Ukraine actually materialise. That’s a fairly big if, of course. Despite a pledge by both sides that they could support a deal to avoid targeting each other’s energy infrastructure, there’s no sign yet of a cessation of attacks.

    And there has been a degree of scepticism over the recently announced plan for a maritime ceasefire to allow the free passage of shipping on the Black Sea. Critics say this favours Russia far more than Ukraine. Over the course of the war, Ukraine has successfully driven Russia’s Black Sea fleet away from its base in Crimea, giving it the upper hand in the maritime war. But maritime strategy expert, Basil Germond, says the situation is more nuanced, and the deal represents considerable upside for Ukraine as well.



    Read more:
    Russia has most to gain from Black Sea ceasefire – but it’s marginal, and Ukraine benefits too

    Setting aside America’s eventful recent forays into foreign relations, there’s a major domestic fix brewing which many US legal scholars believe could plunge the country into a constitutional crisis.

    Anne Richardson Oakes, an expert in US constitutional law at Birmingham City University, anticipates a potential clash between between the executive and the judiciary which could threaten the separation of powers that lies at the heart of American democracy.

    Oakes observes there are more than 130 legal challenges to Trump administration policies presently before the courts, some of which will end up in front of America’s highest legal authority, the Supreme Court, which is tasked with assessing the constitutionality of those policies. She warns that we’ve already seen evidence that Trump and his senior officials resent what they consider to be interference from the judiciary into the legitimate executive power of the elected president.

    Will there be a stand-off where the Trump administration simply ignores the Supreme Court’s ruling? It’s happened before, says Oakes. In the mid-20th century, in Little Rock, Arkansas, when the governor used the state’s national guard to prevent the court-ordered desegregation of public schools. On that occasion the then president, Dwight D. Eisenhower, sent in federal troops to enforce the court’s ruling and a constitutional crisis was averted.



    Read more:
    US stands on the brink of a constitutional crisis as Donald Trump takes on America’s legal system

    But what if it’s the serving president who chooses to ignore a Supreme Court ruling? This was the case in the 1830s when greedy cotton farmers in Georgia were bent on forcing the Native American peoples off their lands. The Cherokee actually took the state of Georgia to the Supreme Court, which ruled that as a “dependent nation” within the United States they were entitled to the protection of the federal government and that the state of Georgia had no right to order their removal.

    As historian Sean Lang of Anglia Ruskin University recounts, Georgia ignored the Supreme Court’s ruling and sent in troops to expel the Cherokee who were then forced to move to new lands in a journey known as the “Train of Tears”. Lang writes that then US president, Andrew Jackson, a populist advocate of states’ rights and former “Indian fighter”, ignored the Supreme Court’s ruling, “sneering that [Chief Justice John] Marshall had no means of enforcing it”.

    Lang concludes: “It’s a history lesson Greenlanders, Mexicans and Canadians – and indeed many Americans who may fall foul of this administration and seek recourse to the law – would do well to study.”



    Read more:
    Trump’s America is facing an Andrew Jackson moment – and it’s bad news for the constitution

    Trump’s chilling effect

    The Trump administration’s antipathy towards judges who have opposed its policies have extended towards those law firms who have in some way crossed the US president. But the legal system is not the only sector to feel the chilling effect of Trump’s displeasure, writes Dafydd Townley.

    The world of higher education in the US is also apprehensive after the administration went after Columbia University, home to some of the most outspoken protest over US policies towards Israel and Gaza. Columbia has recently had to agree to allow the administration to “review” some of its academic programmes, starting with its Middle Eastern studies, after the administration threatened to cancel US$400 million (£310 million) of government contracts with the university.

    The news media is also under heavy pressure. The administration has taken control of the White House press pool from the non-partisan White House Correspondents’ Association and has blackballed Associated Press for refusing to call the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. We’ve also seen Trump himself bring lawsuits against media organisations he judges to have crossed him. And now the president has called for the defunding of America’s two biggest public broadcasters, NPR and PBL, for what he perceives as their liberal bias.

    Townley, an expert in US politics at the University of Portsmouth is concerned that this all adds up to a deliberate attempt to cripple institutions which underwrite American democracy.



    Read more:
    Donald Trump’s ‘chilling effect’ on free speech and dissent is threatening US democracy

    Popularity falls as prices rise

    Trump’s leadership continues to be very polarising, writes Paul Whiteley, a political scientist and polling specialist at the University of Essex, who has spent years studying political trends in the US. Looking at the most recent numbers, Whiteley finds that while Trump’s approval ratings are fairly steady at 48% approval and 49% disapproval, when you dig down you find that only 6% of registered Democrats approve of his performance, while 93% disapprove. For registered Republicans it’s almost exactly the opposite.

    Whiteley takes his analysis further, looking at measures such as consumer sentiment, which has fallen sharply since January, with talk of tariffs and the return of inflation affecting people’s confidence in the economy. He points out there tends to be a fairly strong historical correlation between confidence in the economy and popular approval of a president’s performance.



    Read more:
    Three graphs that show what’s happening with Donald Trump’s popularity

    Another factor which will surely affect people’s confidence in the government are the job losses flowing from Elon Musk’s work as “efficiency tsar”. Thomas Gift, the director of the Centre on US Politics at University College London, believes that federal job losses as a result of Musk’s cuts are spread indiscriminately among Democrat and Republican states. As a result there may be some Republican voters who are experiencing what he calls “buyer’s remorse”.

    At the same time, rising inflation is flowing into the cost of living, something many people voted for Trump to punish the Democrats for. As Gift points out, both parties are experiencing a dip in support at present as people reject politics for having a generally negative effect on their lives. But from now, it’ll be the Republicans who will feel the sting of popular disapproval more keenly.



    Read more:
    Trump’s job cuts are causing Republican angst as all parties face backlash

    World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.

    – ref. Signal-gate: a national security blunder ‘almost without parallel’ – https://theconversation.com/signal-gate-a-national-security-blunder-almost-without-parallel-253245

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Thousands are feared dead in Myanmar’s quake. Trump’s USAID cuts will cause even more unnecessary deaths

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Adam Simpson, Senior Lecturer, International Studies, University of South Australia

    In early 2021, after a decade of political and economic reforms, Myanmar looked like it was finally beginning to shake off the hangover of decades of military rule. Foreign investment was growing, and standards of living were gradually improving.

    In February that year, however, the military again grabbed power after ousting Aung San Suu Kyi’s democratically elected government in a coup. This sent the country spiralling towards civil war and social and economic collapse.

    In the latest addition to the daily misery of Myanmar’s long-suffering people, a huge 7.7-magnitude earthquake hit the centre of the country on Friday. Its epicentre was just outside Mandalay, the county’s second-largest city.

    The Thai capital of Bangkok, more than 1,000 kilometres from the epicentre, experienced extensive damage too. Video images showed a collapsing building under construction and sloshing rooftop infinity pools causing waterfalls down high-rise condominiums.

    Information on the extent of the damage in Myanmar was slower to emerge, given the junta has largely banned social media and communications apps, such as Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Signal and X.

    The death toll has now passed 1,000 at the time of writing. US Geological Survey modelling, however, suggests there could be more than 10,000 deaths and economic losses potentially exceeding the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

    Unusually for the isolationist military juntas of Myanmar, its leader, Min Aung Hlaing, immediately issued a call for international assistance.

    The junta, however, has full control of as little as 21% of the country in the ongoing civil war, with the rest contested or controlled by ethnic armed groups and resistance fighters. This indicates some hard-hit areas of the country may be inaccessible to international aid.

    Compounding these difficulties, the Trump administration has decimated the US Agency for International Development (USAID) activities in the country. This will make it far more challenging to determine the areas most in need and distribute any aid on the ground.

    Natural disasters in Myanmar

    Along with its history of brutal and authoritarian military rule since gaining independence in 1948, Myanmar is also regularly afflicted by natural disasters.

    At least 430 people are believed to have died in floods last September due to the remnants of Typhoon Yagi. In 2023, Cyclone Mocha reportedly killed about 460 of the Rohingya ethnic minority, who are largely confined to government camps in Rakhine state in inhuman conditions.

    The worst natural disaster in living memory, however, was Cyclone Nargis in 2008, which left at least 140,000 dead. On that occasion, the military junta resisted international assistance, likely resulting in many unnecessary deaths.

    At that time, there was no independent media in Myanmar and it was almost impossible to find out what was actually happening on the ground.

    Fortunately, the proliferation of mobile phones in the last decade has allowed information to spread much more widely, even with the junta’s internet blocks and other methods of censorship currently in place.

    When Cyclone Nargis occurred – the year after the iPhone was launched – only around 1% of the Myanmar’s population had mobile phones. By the time of the coup in 2021, Myanmar had a smartphone penetration rate of 114%. (This means the country has more smartphones than people.)

    Foreign assistance has been compromised

    While Min Aung Hlaing has gone farther than his predecessor in 2008 in asking for international help, US President Donald Trump’s actions have ensured that any aid will be far less effective than it would have been two months ago.

    On Friday, the same day the earthquake hit, the Trump administration told Congress it would cut nearly all remaining jobs at USAID and shut the agency, closing all USAID missions worldwide.

    Jeremy Konyndyk, the president of Refugees International and a former USAID official, called the move “a total abdication of decades of US leadership in the world”. He argued the firings would cut “the last remnants of the team that would have mobilised a USAID disaster response” to the earthquake.

    In 2024, USAID spent US$240 million (A$380 million) in Myanmar, around one-third of all multilateral humanitarian assistance to the country.

    However, since Trump’s inauguration in January, the number of USAID programs in Myanmar has shrunk from 18 to just three. Several NGOs and at least seven US-funded hospitals operating along Myanmar’s border with Thailand have been shut down.

    Myanmar’s exiled independent media outlets, which shine a light on the military’s atrocities, have also seen their funding slashed by the Trump administration’s USAID cuts.

    What happens now?

    The day before the earthquake, Min Aung Hlaing addressed troops at the 80th anniversary of Armed Forces Day Parade. He announced national elections would go ahead in December – a vote that human rights groups are already calling a “sham”.

    There is no conceivable way elections of any integrity can be held in the country under military rule or while the civil war continues to rage.

    Military-backed parties have been overwhelmingly rejected by Myanmar’s electorate in every remotely free or fair election over the last four decades. This includes the most recent elections held in 2020, won by the National League of Democracy (NLD), led by Aung San Suu Kyi.

    While the world should welcome – and urgently respond to – Min Aung Hlaing’s invitation for international assistance, this doesn’t mean the past is forgotten. Thousands of innocent lives have been lost as a result of the military’s unnecessary and destructive 2021 coup.

    If the NLD had remained in government, the country would be infinitely more prepared to deal with consequences of this earthquake. Once again, the military’s brutal rule – and Trump’s draconian aid cuts – will no doubt cause more unnecessary suffering and deaths.

    Adam Simpson 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. Thousands are feared dead in Myanmar’s quake. Trump’s USAID cuts will cause even more unnecessary deaths – https://theconversation.com/thousands-are-feared-dead-in-myanmars-quake-trumps-usaid-cuts-will-cause-even-more-unnecessary-deaths-253403

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Turkey is an incredibly powerful broker in the current world crisis, and a masterful negotiator

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha Lindstaedt, Professor in the Department of Government, University of Essex

    A Turkish military ship in the Bosphorus. Atakan Divitlioglu/Shutterstock

    While Turkey’s government is struggling to deal with mass protests at home (after Istanbul’s mayor Ekrem Imamoglu was imprisoned), in foreign affairs it is in an increasingly strong position as a key power broker in deals with Europe, the US and Russia. At the crossroads between Asia and Europe, Turkey is strategically important to just about everyone, and is emerging as a clever negotiator.

    Since the early 2000s, Turkey has relied on a foreign policy approach that emphasised cooperation instead of competition. Economic ties were a priority, which helped Turkey steadily improve its relationships with Russia, Iran and Syria.

    While remaining a part of Nato and a major trading partner with the European Union, Turkey views its ties with Russia, Ukraine, China and countries in the Middle East as equally important. Turkey has shown that it will work with whatever government benefits its interests, and has taken advantage of regional conflicts to be a convenient ally when needed.

    At the same time, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has no qualms about confronting both friends and rivals equally, giving it strategic flexibility.

    Rocky relationship with Russia

    Turkey is Russia’s second biggest trading partner. Ankara continues to rely on Russian gas and banking networks, doing over US$60 billion (£46.3 billion) in trade annually with Moscow. The Turkish relationship with Russia improved dramatically in 1995 when Russia stopped supporting the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) and Turkey stopped supporting Chechen rebels.

    Since then, Turkey has maintained a functional relationship with Russia, while never being pliant to Moscow.

    Turkey was critical of Russia setting up military bases in Syria, in Tartus and Khmeimim and as it controls the airspace in northern Syria it also has the ability to restrict Russian access. Ankara has also used its military presence in Idlib, in northern Syria, to check Russian influence in the past. Turkey’s drone offensive in Idlib in 2020 helped the Syrian opposition and pushed back Syrian government and Russian-backed activity in the north-west.

    The importance of the Black Sea

    The Black Sea is another area of competition where Turkey has emerged with the upper hand during the war in Ukraine. Russia aimed to exercise control over the Black Sea, even seizing several Ukrainian ports which affected global grain supply in 2022.

    But Turkey negotiated the release of millions of tonnes of grain and has ensured the safety of shipping routes through the Black Sea by enforcing the Montreux Convention. This 1936 agreement granted Turkish control over the shipping route between the Black Sea (through the Bosporus Strait, the Sea of Marmara and the Dardanelles, through which hundreds of millions of tons tonnes of cargo pass each year) and the Mediterranean.

    Citing the agreement, Turkey also restricted Russian reinforcements into the Black Sea, which has restricted Russian naval power considerably.


    Shutterstock

    Though Turkey has not levied sanctions on Russia and has kept its revenue streams open, Turkey also does not accept the Russian annexation of Crimea. With more than 5 million Turks claiming to have Crimean Tatar roots, Crimea has both strategic and historical importance to Turkey.

    Yet, Turkey maintains communication with Moscow (and Erdoğan and Vladimir Putin are “dear friends”). Complicating this “friendship” is the fact that Turkey also supports Ukraine, supplying it with Bayraktar TB2 drones, heavy machine guns, laser-guided missiles, electronic warfare systems, armoured vehicles and protective gear.

    Ultimately, Turkey wants Ukraine to remain independent in order to check Russian naval power in the Black Sea. As such, Turkey is likely to work with Nato to ensure that Ukraine is not defeated.

    To that end, Turkey is willing to contribute peacekeepers to a post-ceasefire settlement, under the right conditions.

    Meanwhile, Turkey has used the Ukraine conflict to diversify its supply routes for energy (relying more on suppliers from the Caucasus region and central Asia), to reduce its dependence on Russia. Turkey is in a strong position, especially with the discovery of gas reserves in the Black Sea and eastern Mediterranean. Ankara aims to become an energy hub facilitating the transit of gas from the Caucasus, central Asia and Russia to Europe through the Trans-Anatolian natural gas pipeline.

    Turkey and Syria

    Turkey’s relationship with its neighbour Syria has also been pragmatic and shrewd. Turkey was able to pursue rapprochement with Syria in 2005, when Bashar al-Assad became the first Syrian president to visit Turkey since Syria gained its independence in 1946.

    But while Erdoğan maintained a relationship (to prevent Syria from moving even closer to Iran), he ultimately chose to abandon this relationship when it no longer suited him. He hosted anti-Assad figures in Turkey from time to time, and created a safe zone on its border which housed displaced Syrians and armed fighters. He gave rebels the go-ahead to oust Assad in 2024.

    Just as the war in Syria provided Turkey with opportunities, so too has the conflict in Ukraine. Ankara has strengthened its bargaining position and pushed for greater diplomatic and economic concessions from western allies. Turkey is taking advantage of the US’s retreat from Nato to push for closer cooperation with Europe.

    Turkey also is taking advantage of Donald Trump’s more lenient policies towards Russia to improve its relationship with the US. This is primarily based on wanting to improve defence cooperation. During the cold war, Turkey relied on the US for arms, funding and equipment, but was not able to use these weapons without US authorisation.

    After 1989, Turkey carved out different markets for its weapons imports and faced US sanctions for buying S-400 surface-to-air missiles from Russia in 2020. Turkey would like to purchase F-35 supersonic fighter jets from the US, and is hoping that the US will move away from sanctioning third countries that have engaged with Russia.

    Whose critical ally?

    Turkey has made sure that it is not seen by the US as a junior partner in the Middle East region. For example, when Turkey launched operations in north-east Syria in 2019, where it repeatedly fired close to US forces, the US offered no military response.

    The US sees Turkey as a key ally in spite of some different strategic goals. In addition to its geopolitical importance, Turkey also hosts US and Nato military forces at several of its bases and US nuclear weapons (20 B61 nuclear bombs) at its Incirlik Air Force Base.

    Turkey now wants to expand its diplomatic and military footprint. As a member of the G20, with one of the 20 biggest economies in the world and the second largest and second most powerful military force in Nato after the US, it has a lot of power. And in geopolitical juggling, currently Turkey is in the luxurious position of everyone wanting Ankara to be on their side.

    Natasha Lindstaedt 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. Turkey is an incredibly powerful broker in the current world crisis, and a masterful negotiator – https://theconversation.com/turkey-is-an-incredibly-powerful-broker-in-the-current-world-crisis-and-a-masterful-negotiator-253084

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What users need to know about privacy and data after 23andMe’s bankruptcy filing

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Aileen Editha, PhD Candidate in Law, Queen’s University, Ontario

    News of 23andMe’s bankruptcy has reignited concerns about data privacy, particularly what happens to customers’ personal and genetic information. (Shutterstock)

    23andMe, one of the first companies to provide direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits, has filed for bankruptcy. Since its founding in 2006, it has sold over 12 million DNA kits, with high-profile users including Oprah Winfrey and Warren Buffett.

    The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 23 under the United States Bankruptcy Code. This means 23andMe — now considered a debtor-in-possession — will start restructuring its finances and operations under court supervision.

    Despite the bankruptcy filing, 23andMe said it’s not shutting down. Having secured US$35 million in financing for the restructure, 23andMe has stated in an open letter that it will continue operating. Customers still have full access to their accounts, reports and data.

    News of the bankruptcy has reignited concerns about data privacy, particularly what happens to customers’ personal and genetic information. Considering 23andMe’s past challenges and controversies, these concerns are understandable.



    Read more:
    The 23andMe data breach reveals the vulnerabilities of our interconnected data

    In 2023, hackers exploited old passwords to gain access to the personal information of 6.9 million people. While 23andMe said no genetic data was compromised, information like family trees, birth years and geographic locations were. Some of the stolen data was later put up for sale on a hacking forum.

    In addition to the breach and resulting legal suits, the company has been in financial trouble since 2021. In 2024, 23andMe laid off 40 per cent of its workforce and saw all its independent directors resign unanimously in response to CEO Anne Wojcicki’s decision to take the company private. Wojcicki has since stepped down.

    Data as assets

    A key concern now is what will happen to customer data during the bankruptcy process. The possibility of new ownership has some customers concerned about how their sensitive genetic information will be handled in the future.

    23andMe’s privacy policies say the following:

    “If we are involved in a bankruptcy, merger, acquisition, reorganization, or sale of assets, your Personal Information may be accessed, sold or transferred as part of that transaction and this Privacy Statement will apply to your Personal Information as transferred to the new entity.”

    This means 23andMe could technically sell customer information as part and parcel of the company to ensure competitive bids. This information includes both individual-level data, such as genotypes, diseases and traits, as well as de-identified data that doesn’t include names or addresses.

    23andMe is one of the first companies to provide direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits.
    (Shutterstock)

    The company could also expand licensing agreements with pharmaceutical companies, which would allow them to use customer information for research. For instance, 23andMe’s “discovery collaboration” with GlaxoSmithKline allows consumer data to be used for research on novel drugs.

    23andMe has stated customer data will remain protected during the bankruptcy process, since any buyer “will be required to comply with applicable law with respect to treatment of customer data.”

    It is also important to note, however, that 23andMe may emerge successful from its restructuring. Filing for bankruptcy doesn’t mean a company will necessarily cease to operate. Many companies, including rental car company Hertz, General Motors and Red Lobster, all filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy but eventually recovered and continued business operations. 23andMe could follow a similar path.

    How privacy laws affect consumer data

    In commercial spheres, an individual’s genetic information is treated the same as their personal information under privacy laws. The extent to which customers should be concerned also depends on where they are located.

    For instance, the European Union and United Kingdom’s General Data Protection Regulation will provide additional protections to customers.

    Customers in Canada have some protection under the Personal Information and Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), as they are legally permitted to withdraw consent to the use of their personal information so long as they provide reasonable notice. However, this may still be limited by legal or contractual agreements.

    A 23andMe user’s ancestry results are displayed beside a saliva collection kit in Wilmington, Del. in 2018.
    (Shutterstock)

    In the U.S., however, the situation is much more complicated as there continues to be a lack of a harmonized legal approach to consumer privacy. Some U.S. states have enacted laws to better protect consumer privacy, like California’s Consumer Privacy Act and the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act.

    However, U.S. federal legislation like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, better known as HIPAA, doesn’t apply because 23andMe isn’t classified as a health-care agency or an associate of a health-care organization.

    What should consumers do?

    There are numerous uncertainties surrounding the situation, like whether or not 23andMe will eventually cease to operate and who it might sell to. Additionally, regardless of whether or not 23andMe is sold, its privacy policies can change anytime.

    In light of these uncertainties, concerned customers should err on the side of caution and delete their accounts. It is, however, important to note that 23andMe and its laboratory partners may still retain some consumers’ personal and genetic information, even after accounts are deleted.

    Concerned customers should make sure to withdraw their consent and request the deletion of both their individual-level and de-identifed data from the database. California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta and Ontario’s Privacy Commissioner Patricia Kosseim have also given this advice.



    Read more:
    With 23andMe filing for bankruptcy, what happens to consumers’ genetic data?

    The anxiety and concern surrounding 23andMe’s future is an indicator that a harmonized and effective framework is needed to regulate consumer privacy.

    As legal scholars Sara Gerke, Melissa B. Jacoby and I. Glenn Cohen aptly stated in their recent research article, “a legal system that relies heavily on privacy statements to protect customer data leaves customers vulnerable to unexpected uses of their data, with limited remedies.”

    Without clear regulations, consumers are forced to rely on the word of companies. With genetic data at stake, it’s imperative that policymakers take action to protect consumer privacy in the face of uncertainty.

    Aileen Editha 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. What users need to know about privacy and data after 23andMe’s bankruptcy filing – https://theconversation.com/what-users-need-to-know-about-privacy-and-data-after-23andmes-bankruptcy-filing-253012

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The spring clock change may affect your mind and body longer than you realise

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefano Arlaud, PhD candidate in Time Processing and Metacognition of Time Processing, SBBS, Queen Mary University of London, Queen Mary University of London

    ViDI Studio/Shutterstock

    Twice a year, around a quarter of the world’s population dutifully reset their clocks. It may seem like a minor adjustment, but some people struggle with fatigue, irritability, and brain fog in the days following the transition. For others — especially night owls — the adjustment period can last for weeks.

    Circadian rhythms govern many physiological processes in plants, animals and even bacteria, highlighting life’s remarkable sensitivity to changes in environmental conditions.

    Your biological internal clock is controlled in a small region of the brain called the hypothalamus. It regulates hormone release, body temperature and metabolism. So if your circadian rhythm is out of kilter, those things will be disrupted too.

    Most people take three to seven days to adjust to daylight saving time (DST). However, night owls can take two to three weeks to realign their sleep-wake cycles.

    Research suggests diet also plays a role. People who eat high-fat diets seem to experience prolonged circadian misalignment after the spring clock change. A 2008 study on rodents found that those on high-fat diets adapted 20% more slowly to a six-hour light shift compared to those on low-fat diets. Scientists don’t fully understand why diet and circadian rhythms are linked.

    We do know light exposure is also important for adapting to time change. One hypothesis suggests that a high-fat diet reduces circadian sensitivity to light. Researchers have wondered whether the connection between high-fat diet and circadian sensitivity may be since late evening eating is associated with weight gain. But a 2024 study found no significant differences in meal timing between diet groups, suggesting that it’s the food itself, rather than the time it is eaten, that’s the key factor.

    It’s not just you – the spring transition can make you sleepy for a while.
    Prostock-studio/Shutterstock

    Exposure to natural light is one of the most important factors in helping the body adjust to a new time. The more morning sunlight a person gets, the faster their circadian rhythm realigns. Research suggests that adaptation is harder in spring than in autumn, with increased wakefulness during sleep (10–30 minutes more), greater sleep fragmentation (between 5–20%), and poorer sleep quality after the spring transition.

    The link between natural light and cognitive function was highlighted by a 2020 study which demonstrated the benefits of increased daylight exposure. Thirty participants spent one week working in each of two office environments with identical layouts, furnishings and orientations. But one was fitted with smart glass (that can change its tint) and was set to optimise daylight. And the other had traditional blinds, that were closed. Participants in the optimised daylight condition slept 37 minutes longer and scored 42% higher on decision-making tasks.

    The human circadian rhythm runs slightly longer than 24 hours (typically 24.2–24.5 hours). This makes clock delays (autumn transition) easier to adjust to than clock advances (spring transition) because our body naturally drifts forward each day. Delaying sleep aligns with this tendency, whereas advancing sleep disrupts melatonin release, which regulates your energy levels and the natural urge to go to bed.

    In 2007, German researchers monitored 50 healthy adults for four weeks before and after each transition and found that spring adaptation took five to seven days longer than fall adaptation.

    Our core body temperature increases throughout the day, peaking in the late afternoon. A 2008 Finnish study studied nine adults before and after both transitions and found that during the spring transition, people’s gradual increase in body temperature was delayed by 30–60 minutes. It also found sleep quality dropped by 5–15%, and nighttime movement increased by 10–25% — all indicators of circadian misalignment. Total time in bed increased after the spring transition but participants’ sleep was fragmented and of lower quality.

    The spring clock change seems to create a slightly increased risk for those with life-threatening health conditions. Research has linked daylight saving time (DST) transitions to changes in mortality rates, during the first eight weeks after the transition, particularly in relation to cardiovascular complications. A 2024 study analysing 14 million deaths in the US from 2015 to 2019 found a slight increase in all deaths after the spring transition but a decrease in mortality after the autumn transition.

    The study also found a rising trend in dementia-related mortality, with a 5% increase in deaths peaking in the fifth week after the spring transition. Additionally, a slight increase in cancer-related mortality was noted in the first week after DST begins.

    Research also shows it’s a good idea to pay extra attention when you’re on the roads after the clocks go forward. A 2023 study investigating the effects of DST on driving fatigue found drivers showed signs of greater fatigue after the clock change. Their cars swayed in their lanes about 13% more often and their eyelids closed slightly more often. Participants still showed impairment one month later.

    However, in a follow-on trial after the autumn return to standard time, drivers reported feeling less sleepy.

    These findings suggest the spring transition can have a ripple effect that lasts for weeks. It also suggests we are more finely tuned to the natural world than we might think.

    Spring DST may seem like a simple one-hour shift, but for many, it’s much more than that.

    Stefano Arlaud 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. The spring clock change may affect your mind and body longer than you realise – https://theconversation.com/the-spring-clock-change-may-affect-your-mind-and-body-longer-than-you-realise-252987

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Tourists are cancelling trips to the US – here’s how this could affect its economy

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ross Bennett-Cook, PhD Researcher, Carnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University

    The United States is one of the top three most visited countries in the world. The big draw cards – cities such as San Francisco, New York and Chicago and national parks such as Yosemite – have attracted international tourists for decades. This combined with its role as a global business powerhouse meant it had 66.5 million visitors in 2023 – and the 2024 figure is expected to be higher still.

    But a lot has changed in recent months, and 2025’s figures may not be as strong. The 2024 reelection of Donald Trump as the president of the United States and the consequential changes in foreign diplomacy and relations, alongside internal cultural shifts, are starting to change global attitudes towards the US – attitudes that appear to be affecting tourists’ desire to visit the US.

    In a recent report by research firm Tourism Economics, inbound travel to the US is now projected to decline by 5.5% this year, instead of growing by nearly 9% as had previously been forecast. A further escalation in tariff and trade wars could result in further reductions in international tourism, which could amount to a US$18 billion (£13.8 billion) annual reduction in tourist spending in 2025.

    There is already some evidence of travel cancellations. Since Trump announced 25% tariffs on many Canadian goods, the number of Canadians driving across the border at some crossings has fallen by up to 45%, on some days, when compared to last year. Canada is the biggest source of international tourists to the US. Air Canada has announced it is reducing flights to some US holiday destinations, including Las Vegas, from March, as demand reduces.

    According to a March poll by Canadian market researcher Leger, 36% of Canadians who had planned trips to the United States had already cancelled them. According to data from the aviation analytics company OAG, passenger bookings on Canada to US routes are down by over 70% compared to the same period last year. This comes after the U.S. Travel Association warned that even a 10% reduction in Canadian inbound travel could result in a US$2.1 billion (£1.6 billion) loss in spending, putting 140,000 hospitality jobs at risk.

    An unwelcoming environment?

    Some would-be visitors have cited an unwelcoming political climate as part of a concern about visiting the US – including angry rhetoric about foreigners, migrants and the LGBTQ+ community. The Tourism Economics report also cited “polarizing Trump Administration policies and rhetoric” as a factor in travel cancellations.

    There are other factors that may influence travellers from, for instance, western Europe, which represented 37% of overseas travel to the US last year. These include US tariffs pushing prices up at home and the US administration’s perceived alignment with Russia in the war in Ukraine.

    Canadian trips to the US are going down.

    Research by YouGov in March found that western European attitudes towards the US have become more negative since Trump’s reelection last November. More than half of people in Britain (53%), Germany (56%), Sweden (63%) and Denmark (74%) now have an unfavourable opinion of the US. In five of the seven countries polled, figures for US favourability are at the lowest since polling began in November 2016.

    Border issues

    Some high-profile cases at the US border could also be putting off tourists. In March, a British woman was handcuffed and detained for more than ten days by US Customs Enforcement after a visa problem. In the same month, a Canadian tourist was detained after attempting to renew her visa at the US-Mexico border. During the 12-day detention, she was held in crowded jail cells and even put in chains.

    Mexico is the US’s second largest inbound travel market. Tourism Economics suggests that issues around new border enforcement rules will raise concerns with potential Mexican tourists. During Trump’s first term in office, Mexican visits to the US fell by 3%. In February this year, air travel from Mexico had already fallen 6% when compared to 2024.

    Many countries including Canada have been updating their travel advice for the US. For instance, on March 15 the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office updated its advice for the US, warning visitors that “you may be liable to arrest or detention if you break the rules”. The previous version of advice, from February, had no mention of arrest or detention. Germany has made similar updates to its travel advisory, after several Germans were recently detained for weeks by US border officials.

    Multiple European countries, including France, Germany, Denmark and Norway have also issued specific travel warnings to transgender and non-binary citizens, as US authorities demand tourists declare their biological sex at birth on visa applications. This comes as the US has stopped issuing of passports with a X marker – commonly used by those identifying as non-binary – for its own citizens.

    Alternative destinations

    As thousands of travellers cancel their trips to the US, other destinations are seeing a spike in interest. Hotels in Bermuda have reported a surge in enquiries as Canadians relocate business and leisure trips away from the US, with some predicting a 20% increase in revenue from Canadian visits.

    Europe too has reported increased bookings from Canada, with rental properties experiencing a 32% jump in summer reservations when compared to last year, according to some reports.

    There are already growing concerns that visa and entry restrictions will disrupt fans and athletes from enjoying 2026 men’s Fifa World Cup, held on sites in the US, Canada and Mexico. Visitors from some countries, such as Brazil, Turkey and Colombia, could wait up to 700 days to obtain visas. The International Olympic Committee has also raised concerns over the 2028 Olympics Games in Los Angeles, although US officials have insisted that “America will be open”.

    With mounting visa delays, stricter border enforcement and growing concerns over human rights and anti-minority rhetoric, the United States risks losing its appeal as a top holiday destination. The long-term impact on its tourism industry may prove difficult to reverse.

    Ross Bennett-Cook 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. Tourists are cancelling trips to the US – here’s how this could affect its economy – https://theconversation.com/tourists-are-cancelling-trips-to-the-us-heres-how-this-could-affect-its-economy-252858

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: America’s clean air rules boost health and economy − charts show what EPA’s deregulation plans ignore

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Richard E. Peltier, Professor of Environmental Health Sciences, UMass Amherst

    Regulations have cleaned up cars, power plants and factories, leaving cleaner air while economies have grown. Cavan Images/Josh Campbell via Getty Images

    The Trump administration is “reconsidering” more than 30 air pollution regulations, and it offered industries a brief window to apply for exemptions that would allow them to stop following many air quality regulations immediately if approved. All of the exemptions involve rules finalized in 2024 and include regulations for hazardous air pollutants that cause asthma, heart disease and cancer.

    The results – if regulations are ultimately rolled back and if those rollbacks and any exemptions stand up to court challenges – could impact air quality across the United States.

    “Reconsideration” is a term used to review or modify a government regulation. While Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin provided few details, the breadth of the regulations being reconsidered affects all Americans. They include rules that set limits for pollutants that can harm human health, such as ozone, particulate matter and volatile organic carbon.

    Zeldin wrote on March 12, 2025, that his deregulation moves would “roll back trillions in regulatory costs and hidden “taxes” on U.S. families.“

    What Zeldin didn’t say is that the economic and health benefits from decades of federal clean air regulations have far outweighed their costs. Some estimates suggest every $1 spent meeting clean air rules has returned $10 in health and economic benefits.

    How far America has come, because of regulations

    In the early 1970s, thick smog blanketed American cities and acid rain stripped forests bare from the Northeast to the Midwest.

    Air pollution wasn’t just a nuisance – it was a public health emergency. But in the decades since, the United States has engineered one of the most successful environmental turnarounds in history.

    Thanks to stronger air quality regulations, pollution levels have plummeted, preventing hundreds of thousands of deaths annually. And despite early predictions that these regulations would cripple the economy, the opposite has proven true: The U.S. economy more than doubled in size while pollution fell, showing that clean air and economic growth can – and do – go hand in hand.

    The numbers are eye-popping.

    An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the first 20 years of the Clean Air Act, from 1970 to 1990, found the economic benefits of the regulations were about 42 times greater than the costs.

    The EPA later estimated that the cost of air quality regulations in the U.S. would be about US$65 billion in 2020, and the benefits, primarily in improved health and increased worker productivity, would be around $2 trillion. Other studies have found similar benefits.

    That’s a return of more than 30 to 1, making clean air one of the best investments the country has ever made.

    Science-based regulations even the playing field

    The turning point came with the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, which put in place strict rules on pollutants from industry, vehicles and power plants.

    These rules targeted key culprits: lead, ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter – substances that contribute to asthma, heart disease and premature deaths. An example was the removal of lead, which can harm the brain and other organs, from gasoline. That single change resulted in far lower levels of lead in people’s blood, including a 70% drop in U.S. children’s blood-lead levels.

    Air Quality regulations lowered the amount of lead being used in gasoline, which also resulted in rapidly declining lead concentrations in the average American between 1976-1980. This shows us how effective regulations can be at reducing public health risks to people.
    USEPA/Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office (1986)

    The results have been extraordinary. Since 1980, emissions of six major air pollutants have dropped by 78%, even as the U.S. economy has more than doubled in size. Cities that were once notorious for their thick, choking smog – such as Los Angeles, Houston and Pittsburgh – now see far cleaner air, while lakes and forests devastated by acid rain in the Northeast have rebounded.

    Comparison of growth areas and declining emissions, 1970-2023.
    EPA

    And most importantly, lives have been saved. The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to periodically estimate the costs and benefits of air quality regulations. In the most recent estimate, released in 2011, the EPA projected that air quality improvements would prevent over 230,000 premature deaths in 2020. That means fewer heart attacks, fewer emergency room visits for asthma, and more years of healthy life for millions of Americans.

    The economic payoff

    Critics of air quality regulations have long argued that the regulations are too expensive for businesses and consumers. But the data tells a very different story.

    EPA studies have confirmed that clean air regulations improve air quality over time. Other studies have shown that the health benefits greatly outweigh the costs. That pays off for the economy. Fewer illnesses mean lower health care costs, and healthier workers mean higher productivity and fewer missed workdays.

    The EPA estimated that for every $1 spent on meeting air quality regulations, the United States received $9 in benefits. A separate study by the non-partisan National Bureau of Economic Research in 2024 estimated that each $1 spent on air pollution regulation brought the U.S. economy at least $10 in benefits. And when considering the long-term impact on human health and climate stability, the return is even greater.

    Hollywood and downtown Los Angeles in 1984: Smog was a common problem in the 1970s and 1980s.
    Ian Dryden/Los Angeles Times/UCLA Archive/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

    The next chapter in clean air

    The air Americans breathe today is cleaner, much healthier and safer than it was just a few decades ago.

    Yet, despite this remarkable progress, air pollution remains a challenge in some parts of the country. Some urban neighborhoods remain stubbornly polluted because of vehicle emissions and industrial pollution. While urban pollution has declined, wildfire smoke has become a larger influence on poor air quality across the nation.

    That means the EPA still has work to do.

    If the agency works with environmental scientists, public health experts and industry, and fosters honest scientific consensus, it can continue to protect public health while supporting economic growth. At the same time, it can ensure that future generations enjoy the same clean air and prosperity that regulations have made possible.

    By instead considering retracting clean air rules, the EPA is calling into question the expertise of countless scientists who have provided their objective advice over decades to set standards designed to protect human lives. In many cases, industries won’t want to go back to past polluting ways, but lifting clean air rules means future investment might not be as protective. And it increases future regulatory uncertainty for industries.

    The past offers a clear lesson: Investing in clean air is not just good for public health – it’s good for the economy. With a track record of saving lives and delivering trillion-dollar benefits, air quality regulations remain one of the greatest policy success stories in American history.

    This article, originally published March 12, 2025, has been updated with the administration’s offer of exemptions for industries.

    Richard E. Peltier receives funding from the US Department of Agriculture and the Rio Grande International Science Center.

    – ref. America’s clean air rules boost health and economy − charts show what EPA’s deregulation plans ignore – https://theconversation.com/americas-clean-air-rules-boost-health-and-economy-charts-show-what-epas-deregulation-plans-ignore-251203

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Being hated worked for Just Stop Oil

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By George Ferns, Senior Lecturer in Business and Society, University of Bath

    Protesters outside the Bafta awards in London, March 2022. William Joshua Templeton / shutterstock

    The climate activist group Just Stop Oil (JSO) has announced the end of its campaign of direct action. Many will read the group’s legacy through the lens of public hostility: the frustration caused, the angry headlines, the outrage at its tactics. Not only have JSO activists been spat at, physically assaulted and run over by angry car drivers, but 15 members are also currently serving jail sentences following arrests and charges.

    But the intense backlash directed at JSO is not evidence that its campaign faltered. It is a sign that these activists succeeded in emotionally charging the public debate about climate change. They gave the public something to argue about, react to, even mock — and in doing so, made the climate crisis impossible to ignore.

    The alternative, an apathetic consensus, would entail passively accepting the dominant approach to address the climate crisis. That means market-based solutions, a faith in technological innovation, and incremental policy reforms within existing political and economic systems. These have arguably to date failed, as global temperatures continue to skyrocket.

    Through my own research on climate activism, I have studied how environmental protest influences policy, corporate behaviour and financial markets. Activists can stimulate change, but not through rational arguments alone.

    Change happens by making an emotional splash. It creates antagonism, dissent and tension, which are all needed to enliven public debate. Emotions including anger, fear and guilt play a key role in the ability of activists to create moral urgency and force issues into the spotlight.

    JSO harnessed this emotional logic not only from supporters, but from critics. Those who dragged protesters off roads, raged in comment sections and professed their hate towards the group were reacting because the group had emotionally triggered them. Like a person who gets under your skin, JSO became very hard to ignore.

    As business scholars Thomas Davenport and John Beck argue in their book The Attention Economy, in a saturated information landscape, being memorable — even disruptively — is a strategic advantage. In this sense, JSO “hacked” this logic by demanding emotional and cognitive attention, whether through support or outrage.

    Disruptive protests may be unpopular, but they are effective at attracting media attention and public awareness. As many studies suggest, the more illogical or disruptive a protest, the more media coverage it receives — despite coverage not necessarily translating into more donations and support.

    Of course, disruption risks alienating some people — but that can actually strengthen a movement’s overall influence. The “radical flank effect” shows that when radical activists push boundaries, they often make moderate voices in the same movement appear more reasonable. Recent research on JSO found that even when the group provoked public anger, support for moderate organisations such as Friends of the Earth increased.

    This dynamic reflects what sociologist Thomas Roulet calls The Power of Being Divisive. Being controversial can actually benefit a cause by amplifying its message and deepening support from those already aligned. Polarisation, in this view, is not always harmful — it can be strategically useful. In the case of JSO activists, controversy did not dilute their message. Rather, it intensified its resonance with those already primed to act.

    Turning emotion into action

    JSO has also uniquely been able to provide direction for many struggling to navigate climate change’s volatile emotional context. As philosopher Glenn A. Albrecht describes in his book Earth Emotions, events such as climate change, mass species extinction and environmental degradation are creating a global emotional crisis, marked by a mix of grief, anxiety and powerlessness.

    JSO has effectively tapped into this emotional turbulence, turning despair into urgency and action. Its actions can be seen as emotional interventions for a society struggling to process ecological loss.

    Left undirected, emotions related to conditions such as climate change-related “eco-anxiety” can lead to paralysis – a state of emotional overwhelm that prevents people from taking meaningful action or engaging with the climate problem. But research shows that when movements channel emotions — especially by transforming fear into shared action — they build momentum. One study of climate organisers found that protest participation gave people a way to manage despair by reclaiming a sense of purpose and solidarity.

    A frequent refrain is that the objectives are valid, but the strategies are too extreme. But history shows that disruptive tactics have long played a role in forcing attention to urgent issues. From the suffragettes chaining themselves to railings, to civil rights sit-ins, to ACT UP’s dramatic interventions during the Aids crisis — disruption has often preceded progress. Movements that are easy to ignore tend to be forgotten. JSO made itself, and its cause, impossible to ignore.

    JSO’s campaign may be over, but the emotional legacy it leaves behind — frustration, urgency and debate — will outlast its tactics. The group exposed a society uneasy with the scale of change climate action demands, and showed that public anger is not a threat to activism, but a measure of its impact. If you were angry at them, that’s understandable — disruption is inconvenient. But the real question now is where we direct that energy: towards those resisting climate action, or those demanding we seriously do something about it.

    George Ferns 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. Being hated worked for Just Stop Oil – https://theconversation.com/being-hated-worked-for-just-stop-oil-253379

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: US’s new ‘America First’ intelligence approach downplays Russia and ignores climate change

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Hastings Dunn, Professor of International Politics in the Department of Political Science and International Studies, University of Birmingham

    The recently appointed US director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, and other top intelligence officials appeared before the Senate intelligence committee to discuss the US intelligence services’ annual threat assessment (ATA).

    Most of the committee’s time and attention was focused on the revelation by the editor of the Atlantic magazine that he had been inadvertently added to an insecure chat group, in which top security officials discussed detailed plans for an attack on Yemen. Gabbard and her colleagues steadfastly refused to admit that this had been a security breach. It was an unhelpful distraction from the main event, a discussion of the latest ATA report.

    Produced annually, the ATA is a combined assessment by 18 US intelligence agencies, headed up by the Office for National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency, of the major threats to national security in America. The 2025 version is the first of Donald Trump’s second term and reflects Trumpism’s major shift from America’s previous security priorities in three ways.

    First, the assessment gave priority to what it identified as domestic security threats over those posed by foreign adversaries. Second, the report ignored climate change as a critical threat to US security. And third, there was an unprecedented softening of the language in relation to Russia.

    In her opening statement Gabbard identified “cartels, gangs and other transnational criminal organisations” as “what most immediately and directly threatens the United States and the wellbeing of the American people”.

    These threats are closer to home, but they hardly warrant their lead billing – particularly given the way that Trump himself has regularly invoked the threat of “world war three” ever since he started his campaign to return to the White House more than two years ago.

    But what they do indicate is an America increasingly focused on the narrow predilections of its president and his Maga supporters.

    An even more notable omission is the absence of any mention of climate change, either as an existential threat to human life as we know it or as a force multiplier to other threats such as migration, environmental disasters or famine.

    This led to a testy exchange between Gabbard and Senator Angus King, an independent senator from Maine. King asked the director of national intelligence: “Has global climate change been solved? Why is that not in this report? And who made the decision that it should not be in the report when it’s been in every one of the 11 prior reports?” Gabbard replied: “What I focused this annual threat assessment on … are the most extreme and critical direct threats to our national security.”

    This was an unconvincing response, given that the 2025 ATA specifically notes the security impact of melting sea ice in the Arctic. The report also notes increasing cooperation between Russia and China in the Arctic and a growing Chinese footprint in the region.

    Russian threat relegated

    But the most notable difference in this year’s ATA concerns Russia. The Trump administration’s new approach to Moscow and the Russian leadership infuses the language and substance of this year’s intelligence report. The 2024 threat assessment led the section on Russia with the assertion that Moscow “seeks to project and defend its interests globally and to undermine the United States and the west”.

    In 2025, the headline finding about the threat from Russia is that the Kremlin’s objective is “to restore Russian strength and security in its near abroad against perceived US and western encroachment”. This, the report said, “has increased the risks of unintended escalation between Russia and Nato”.

    Gone are the references to Russia as “a resilient and capable adversary across a wide range of domains”. Instead, this year’s ATA downplays the actual threat that the Kremlin poses to America’s interests by describing Russia merely as an “enduring potential threat to US power, presence and global interests”.

    The 2025 report also assesses that Russia “has seized the upper hand in its full-scale invasion of Ukraine and is on a path to accrue greater leverage to press Kyiv and its western backers to negotiate an end to the war that grants Moscow concessions it seeks”. It doesn’t question why that might be the case or how it could be reversed.

    Moreover, it presents the Kremlin’s malign influence activities as aimed at countering threats. This affords them an unprecedented degree of legitimacy and implies that the west poses a threat to Russia. This, of course, has long been a favourite talking point of Vladimir Putin’s.

    Change of policy

    More than just a change in threat assessment, the 2025 ATA doubles down on a change in policy. The report takes as a given that “Russia retains momentum (in) a grinding war of attrition … (which) will lead to a gradual but steady erosion of Kyiv’s position on the battlefield, regardless of any US or allied attempts to impose new and greater costs on Moscow.”

    The inevitable conclusion is that the US should not pressure Russia to halt its illegal and brutal war of aggression against Ukraine. Rather Washington’s approach to security should accommodate the Kremlin’s ever multiplying conditions for a ceasefire.

    The report’s language on China is less ambiguous. It describes Beijing as “the most comprehensive and robust military threat to US national security” and as likely to “continue to expand its coercive and subversive malign influence activities to weaken the United States internally and globally”.

    The report also notes that Beijing is critical to the alignment of all four major state actors that pose threats to the US: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.

    But China, and the other state adversaries, still take second place in America’s national security thinking to accommodate the administration’s inwardly focused “America First” mindset. This is not merely an indication of the isolationist tendencies in the foreign policy approach of Trumpism. It’s a deliberate abdication of US global leadership.

    Trump and his team may believe that this will make America more secure – and the 2025 threat assessment is framed in a way that justifies such an approach. But it fails to provide any credible evidence that it might succeed.

    David Hastings Dunn has previously received funding from the ESRC, the Gerda Henkel Foundation, the Open Democracy Foundation and has previously been both a NATO and a Fulbright Fellow.

    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. US’s new ‘America First’ intelligence approach downplays Russia and ignores climate change – https://theconversation.com/uss-new-america-first-intelligence-approach-downplays-russia-and-ignores-climate-change-253154

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Chewing gum: another way for microplastics to enter your body?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael Richardson, Professor of Animal Development, Leiden University

    Anastassiya Bezhekeneva/Shutterstock

    We are riddled with microplastics. It is in our bloodstream, in our lungs, in our liver – pretty much anywhere you look in the human body, you will find minuscule bits of plastic.

    And there are many ways for us to ingest, inhale or otherwise absorb these tiny fragments. For example, a single plastic teabag sheds over 10 billion microplastic particles into a cup of tea.

    And if you redecorate your home and sand down the old paintwork, the plastic binders in the paint can release microplastics into the air, which you might then inhale. You could swallow them when you drink from single-use plastic water bottles. Now another source of microplastics in the body has been discovered: chewing gum.

    Chewing gum contains long molecules called polymers. Some brands of gum contain natural polymers from tree sap. Others contain synthetic polymers derived from the petroleum industry. These various polymers are similar to plastics – and some actually are plastics. Chewing gum polymers, both natural and synthetic, can release microparticles when they are worn down by chewing.

    In the chewing gum study – which was presented at the American Chemical Society meeting 25 March – a single volunteer chewed ten brands of chewing gum – five natural and five synthetic. Saliva samples were taken from the volunteer’s mouth and put under the microscope. Surprisingly, microplastics were found in both the natural and synthetic chewing gums.

    The researchers, from the University of California, Los Angeles, calculated that one piece of gum could shed hundreds or a few thousand microplastic particles into the mouth, where they probably ended up being swallowed.

    The types of plastics found in the gums were polystyrenes (used for things like takeaway food containers), polyethylenes (such as those used to make plastic grocery bags) and polypropylenes (which are used to make, among other things, car bumpers and medicine bottles).

    But, before we start worrying about the microplastics liberated by chewing gum, we need to know how large they were.

    Size matters

    The microplastics found in the saliva of the gum-chewing volunteer were 20 micrometres or more in size. That is about the diameter of the thinnest human hair. But from the perspective of a cell in the human body, 20 microns is huge (a red blood cell, for instance, is about seven microns in diameter).

    This is important because the microplastics that are known to be capable of harming cells and embryos are 500 to 1,000 times smaller than that (20 to 500 nanometers). These super-small microplastics are called nanoplastics.

    Nanoplastics are bad news because they are small enough to be engulfed by living cells via a process called endocytosis. When nanoplastics are absorbed into cells, they can cause all sorts of trouble, such as triggering the cell to produce toxic molecules called reactive oxygen species. These toxins may not kill the cell outright, but they can weaken it.

    Likewise, the plastic particles that have been shown to cause birth defects in animal embryos are also the very small ones (the nanoplastics), not the much larger microplastics that were found in the saliva of the gum chewer.

    The chewing gum study is fascinating. It shows how easily we can unwittingly expose ourselves to hundreds of microplastics. However, we cannot confidently assign any kind of health risk to chewing gum.

    The microplastics that are liberated by the chewing of gum are relatively huge, and we know nothing about the effects – if any – of such large particles in the human body. And we don’t know if chewing gum releases nanoplastics at all. The trouble is that nanoplastics are so tiny that they require specialised apparatus to detect them. For that reason, the researchers in the US who studied chewing gum decided not to look for them.

    Some commentators think that the potential health risks of microplastics have been exaggerated, while others criticise the quality of some of the scientific studies on microplastics. We are inclined to agree with these criticisms. Hopefully, it will not be too long before we truly understand whether the microplastic scare will turn out to be justified – or just hype.

    Michael Richardson receives funding from The Dutch Government.

    Meiru Wang 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. Chewing gum: another way for microplastics to enter your body? – https://theconversation.com/chewing-gum-another-way-for-microplastics-to-enter-your-body-252842

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Senegal sees French troops depart as west Africa reassesses colonial ties

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ezenwa E. Olumba, Doctoral Research Fellow, Conflict, Violence, & Terrorism Research Centre, Royal Holloway University of London

    France has handed over control to the Senegalese government of two military bases in Senegal’s capital, Dakar that it has used for decades. The move follows an announcement in late 2024 by Senegal’s president, Bassirou Diomaye Faye, that all foreign troops would be required to leave the country.

    “Senegal is an independent country, a sovereign nation, and sovereignty does not allow for the presence of foreign military bases,” Faye told Agence France-Presse in November.

    Unlike in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, where military juntas have expelled French and American troops in recent years, this move comes from a democratically elected leader. Faye secured a decisive victory in Senegal’s 2024 presidential election and came to power despite efforts by the former president, Macky Sall, to extend his rule beyond constitutional limits.

    Other democratic nations in west Africa seem to be reassessing their ties with western powers, too. The Ivory Coast, for example, has called for the end of its colonial-era military pact with France. And there are indications that US forces may soon be asked to leave Ghana.

    The fact that democratically elected governments are taking a similar stance to military leaders in the region should prompt deeper reflection on the factors driving these decisions.

    Younger generations of African leaders, shaped by decades of witnessing foreign-backed governments fail to boost development and security, are increasingly focused on decolonising their countries. This shift has also been driven by growing public awareness of the exploitation of Africa’s natural resources by some former colonial powers.

    Some observers attribute these developments to disinformation campaigns targeting France and other western governments. But the reality is that foreign interventions and paternalistic policies in Africa have done little to benefit African populations.

    Senegal’s push for sovereignty

    To further distance itself from France, the Senegalese government plans to replace the CFA franc with a national currency. The CFA franc, which is controlled by the French treasury, is a currency used in 14 countries in west and central Africa. It gives French companies easier access to natural resources in African countries where it is used.

    The move to replace it could test Senegal’s relationship with France. In 2019, when Italy’s former deputy prime minister, Luigi Di Maio, raised concerns about the impact of the CFA franc on Africa’s development, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, dismissed the issue, stating: “I will not respond”.

    Alongside economic reforms, Senegal is also reshaping its public spaces. It will soon begin renaming streets and landmarks that were previously associated with colonial figures. And the government wants to update school textbooks and create a department that will manage how Senegal’s national heritage is documented.

    There is a broader regional movement to replace colonial-era street names. In Niger’s capital, Niamey, Avenue de Gaulle, named after the former French general and statesman, has been renamed Avenue Djibo Bakary after the city’s first post-independence mayor.

    Similar efforts are underway in central Africa. In March 2025, a court ruling in Uganda mandated the removal of British colonial monuments and renaming streets that honour “crooks and historical figureheads”.

    Among the figures affected include Maj. Gen. Henry Edward Colville, an early commissioner of the Uganda Protectorate, and Frederick Lugard, a key colonial administrator in Africa. Lugard also played a central role in creating Nigeria for British colonial rule.

    Political shifts in the Sahel

    A political shift seems to be taking place in Africa, particularly in the Sahel. In the 1960s, during the early years of African independence movements, many leaders from the continent took up arms against the colonial establishment.

    This included Amílcar Cabral, leader of the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde in Guinea-Bissau, as well as Nelson Mandela, who co-founded Umkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the African National Congress party in South Africa.

    They were treated as threats to the colonial order, at least outside their own supporter base. Cabral was assassinated in 1973 by political rivals, with the alleged support of the Portuguese security establishment.

    Nelson Mandela, who was imprisoned for 27 years by the South African apartheid regime he opposed, was on the US government’s terrorist list until 2008 despite being released from custody in 1993 and becoming the country’s first black president in 1994.

    The rhetoric and actions of many military-led governments in the Sahel, along with some democratically elected leaders, echo those of Africa’s early independence movements. Like their predecessors, these leaders are often condemned by foreign governments, yet they appear to have growing support among people in the region.

    Public rallies held by Captain Ibrahim Traoré in Burkina Faso regularly draw large crowds. The same is true for the military leaders in Niger. Traoré was even welcomed by cheering crowds during the recent inaugurations of democratically elected presidents in Senegal and Ghana.

    This is an unusual reception for a leader who came to power through a military coup. Such moments reflect the sentiment of millions who see these leaders less as military rulers and more as symbols of resistance against foreign influence.

    Some analysts have warned of instability following the expulsion of foreign troops from the Sahel. But decades of foreign military interventions have done little to improve security in the region. Counterinsurgency operations have not only failed to contain violence – the influence of insurgent groups has grown.

    According to a February 2025 report by the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, the Sahel has been the epicentre of violence in Africa for four consecutive years. More than 10,000 deaths were attributed to militant Islamist violence in the region throughout 2024, with civilians being the primary targets.

    Africa must take the lead in addressing its security and economic challenges, engaging with international partners on equal terms rather than as a passive participant. African leaders should prioritise security, education and development while opening dialogue with disaffected groups that feel excluded from political and economic opportunities.

    Ezenwa E. Olumba 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. Senegal sees French troops depart as west Africa reassesses colonial ties – https://theconversation.com/senegal-sees-french-troops-depart-as-west-africa-reassesses-colonial-ties-251978

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: White snus: why ‘tobacco free’ doesn’t mean risk free

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alma Larsdotter Zweygberg, Doctoral Researcher, Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet

    White snus is becoming more popular with teenagers Jeppe Gustafsson/Shutterstock

    A habit that is worrying health authorities in Sweden where increasing numbers of teenagers are taking what’s known as “snus” is also concerning football authorities in England where one-fifth of professional players are regularly indulging because they say it improves their game.

    White snus consists of small, tobacco-free pouches containing nicotine, plant-based fibres and flavourings. These pouches look a like a cross between a tea bag and a tablet of chewing gum, and they’re put between the lip and the gum to give users a burst of nicotine without some of the drawbacks of tobacco. Nicotine strength varies widely between different white snus products.

    Traditional snus, a moist brown tobacco product, is almost exclusive to Sweden. However, the introduction of white snus – also known as nicotine pouches – has led to rapid global expansion.

    The rise in popularity of white snus around the world can be attributed to aggressive social media marketing campaigns where “Zynfluencers” are sponsored to promote white snus in their lifestyle content and the product is advertised across social media. While marketing for cigarettes and vapes is strictly regulated in the EU, the rules for white snus are up to the individual countries to decide. Many countries don’t regulate white snus so consumers – even very young ones – can order the nicotine pouches easily.

    It’s not just English male professional footballers who’re fans of white snus. In Sweden, 15% of young women aged 16-29 use white snus daily, while only 2.5 % smoke cigarettes daily in the same age group.

    Some commercials target women by suggesting that white snus offers a discreet “clean” way to feel the benefits of a nicotine hit. They highlight that users report a rush of endorphins that can relieve stress and pain and improve mood and memory – without the smell of cigarette smoke and the inconvenience of smoking or vaping breaks.

    Some nicotine pouch commercials target female consumers.

    The marketing of white snus often stresses that they are “tobacco-free” because the pouches do not contain tobacco leaf. But that label can be misleading – the nicotine in these products is usually derived from tobacco leaves.
    Some also confuse tobacco-free with nicotine-free. Both these misconceptions can make consumers think that the pouches are safe.

    Advertisements often emphasise how white snus can be used anywhere and enhance social situations, while offering a variety of flavours from coffee to spearmint and black cherry, and serving as an alternative to cigarettes, vapes and traditional forms of tobacco.

    Despite their growing popularity – and marketing attempts to associate white snus with healthier nicotine use – little is known about the specific health risks of white snus. But a lack of research into the effects of nicotine pouches does not mean they are safe.

    A healthy alternative?

    The nicotine pouch was originally developed by a nicotine replacement therapy company in the early 2000s – but they didn’t gain traction until 2016 when the tobacco snus company Swedish Match introduced their product Zyn, which became a leading nicotine pouch brand in the US. Zyn is now owned by Philip Morris International, one of the world’s largest tobacco companies White snus is not an approved nicotine replacement therapy, which means that it is not recommended as an aid to quit smoking.



    Read more:
    Why nicotine pouches may not be the best choice to help you to stop smoking

    While nicotine-free white snus exists, most products on the market contain nicotine. Nicotine is highly addictive, so many of those who try a nicotine product – no matter which one – will find it hard to stop using it. Nicotine has several effects on the body, including increased heart rate and activation of the brain’s reward system, which contributes to its appeal.

    Young people are especially sensitive to the addictive properties of nicotine. The wide range of white snus flavours available, often fruit, menthol or candy, may further lower the threshold for use.

    But research suggests that nicotine may also have a negative impact on brain development. Other potential risks include a negative effects on cardiovascular and oral health. But long-term effects specific to white snus remain unclear. Few studies have been conducted, and many of the existing ones have been sponsored by the tobacco industry. There is a need for large, independent, high-quality studies to assess long-term health risks.

    With many young people using white snus, the unanswered questions about its health effects become more pressing. Until more research is available, it’s important to stay cautious: “tobacco-free” does not mean risk free.

    Rosaria Galanti receives funding from Karolinska Institutet; University of Novara (IT); for teaching and research collaborations

    Alma Larsdotter Zweygberg 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. White snus: why ‘tobacco free’ doesn’t mean risk free – https://theconversation.com/white-snus-why-tobacco-free-doesnt-mean-risk-free-252085

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A new natural history GCSE is welcome – but climate change needs to be part of the whole curriculum

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alison Anderson, Professor of Sociology, University of Plymouth

    MStoylik/Shutterstock

    The recent announcement that young people in England, Wales and Northern Ireland will have the opportunity to take a new GCSE in natural history from September 2025, driven by a campaign led by naturalist Mary Colwell, is welcome news.

    The new qualification will include practical skills to pursue a career in the natural world, including observation, monitoring, recording and analysis. It will also include immersion in outdoor activities, and has support from the Natural History Museum, the Field Studies Council and the Wildlife Trusts.

    However, while this will go some way to further bring sustainability and climate concerns into schools, the qualification is optional. It compartmentalises a subject that needs to be woven across the curriculum, so that every child is equipped to deal with the challenges we face and can appreciate that it impinges on every aspect of life.

    In England, the whole national curriculum is under review. This provides a crucial opportunity to embed climate change and sustainability education throughout the curriculum. The independent review’s recent interim report identifies a need for a “greater focus on sustainability and climate science”.

    It makes welcome reference to the need for the curriculum to keep pace with rapid social, environmental and technological change, and to equip young people to deal with future challenges.

    This is in line with the findings of my research, with colleagues. We explored young people’s views of climate change education in secondary schools, carrying out a national survey of 1,000 14- to 18-year-olds and two follow-up in-depth workshops.

    We found that young people consistently identified climate change as the top concern for their future lives, putting it above the cost of living crisis and young people’s mental health and wellbeing. Seven in ten teenagers told us they would welcome the opportunity to learn more about climate change in school. The same number thought climate change education should be included across all subjects.

    Teach the Future, a youth-led organisation campaigning to improve education on the climate emergency and ecological crisis, published a shadow curriculum and assessment review interim report. These findings, gathered from the responses of over 500 young people, highlight the marginalisation of climate change and nature on the current English curriculum.

    Woven through learning

    Our research shows there needs to be a step change in how the education system prepares young people for a rapidly changing world. Engaging them meaningfully with the issues and practical solutions may motivate them to consider a green career.

    In maths, for example, mathematical concepts could be introduced through calculating the effect of introducing solar panels on the school roof. Pupils could measure air quality, or calculate the carbon footprint of different food choices. The evidence suggests that a project-led approach, rooted in experiential learning locally relevant to the student, would be particularly effective.

    Climate can be part of the whole curriculum.
    Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

    Our report also found that current teaching on climate tends to focus narrowly on impacts and rarely on solutions. This may contribute to many young people’s sense of climate change anxiety, leaving them feeling demotivated and disenfranchised.

    There is much that could be learnt from the approach taken by Scotland. Its learning for sustainability vision takes a cross-curricular, solutions-focused approach. Young people are often involved in creatively solving problems or finding solutions to questions that are meaningful to them.

    Tools for understanding

    My research suggests it is not enough for students to be taught facts and figures about climate change and biodiversity loss. They need to be provided with the critical thinking and media literacy skills to meaningfully engage with the issues.

    There is much mis- and disinformation on climate circulating online. With the rise of artificial intelligence, the distinction between fact and fiction is becoming increasingly difficult to discern. An emphasis on media literacy and critical thinking skills would help young people generate and evaluate ideas for tackling the crisis.

    Overhauling and refreshing England’s current curriculum and assessment system will not be easy. Even if climate change is increasingly included, this still may take place too slowly.

    The interim report makes clear that the intention is to continue “with our ‘evolution not revolution’ approach”, which will inform the final report to be published this autumn. However, there is an urgent need to act quickly if we are to avoid catastrophic climate change.

    Professor Alison Anderson received funding from the AHRC Impact Acceleration Account for this research project which was conducted in association with the British Science Association.

    – ref. A new natural history GCSE is welcome – but climate change needs to be part of the whole curriculum – https://theconversation.com/a-new-natural-history-gcse-is-welcome-but-climate-change-needs-to-be-part-of-the-whole-curriculum-253080

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why we love the escapism of apocalyptic dramas

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Scott Jones, Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of Birmingham

    Disney’s streaming hit Paradise – a political thriller that sees the murder of a former president in a peaceful community – leans into dystopian themes around apocalypse survival and living in a sealed world. The drama joins an growing array of TV shows and films exploring similar ideas.

    In Apple TV’s compelling drama Silo, civilisation has resorted to living and working deep in an underground storage facility as a means to protect humanity from the wasteland above.

    Michelle and Barack Obama’s Netflix thriller Leave The World Behind depicts the US facing chaos and unrest as a cybersecurity attack takes down the country’s entire technological infrastructure, leading to catastrophic scenes of fallen cities on fire.

    Similar tropes appear in Zero Day, starring Rober De Niro as a former president tasked with finding out who is behind a cyber attack that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people.

    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.

    And then there is The End, a climate-crisis musical starring Tilda Swinton that dips into the strange world of a wealthy family living deep underground in a luxurious bunker, decades after an environmental catastrophe has hit the earth.

    Dystopian dramas are clearly in vogue right now, but films and TV dramas have often reflected the fears and anxieties of their times. A Clockwork Orange (1971) portrayed the class conflict and wanton violence of the 1970s. TV series Threads (1984) tapped into fears of a nuclear attack. Ghost in the Shell (1995) focused on identity in an increasingly technology-obsessed world. And Children of Men (2006) centred on the bleak terror of a world without children.

    More recently, The Walking Dead (2010 onwards) focused on what it means to cling onto humanity in an unrelenting world, while Squid Game (2021-) is a dystopian reflection of capitalism exploring the circumstances that drive desperate people to participate in a deadly competition for money.

    My research explores cultural aspects of consumption and one of my research interests is forms of escapism, mainly provided by films, television and video games. A question that sometimes arises is whether we actually desire dystopia.

    Well, streaming giants might argue it’s good for business. Zero Day has remained in Netflix’s top-ten chart for the past month, Apple has renewed Silo for two more seasons, and Disney just ordered a second season of Paradise. The third and final season of Squid Game will air in June – previous seasons have broken Netflix records for downloads and views.

    This trend for dystopian movies and TV shows underscores the public appetite for this content, despite its alarmingly prescient feel and tone. Paradoxically, this seems to starkly contrast with the notion that people turn to video games, movies and boxset binges to escape the mundanity of everyday life and the wearisome realities that we must contend with.

    In my research with colleagues at Lancaster University, we explored these issues: when reality is disrupted in some unexpected way, our beliefs and assumptions about how we think the world should operate are challenged.

    Drawing on interviews, we explored participants’ experiences of bingeing TV shows against a backdrop of changing real-world events and the impact these changes had on their ability to suspend their disbelief. The people we spoke to turned to culture for a sense-making escape.

    Escapism here is less about feeling abandoned and more about a search for hope and rediscovering the coordinates for our existence. Dystopian narratives might provide some food for thought: how would we cope if the apocalyptic events portrayed on screen were to really occur?

    TV dramas like Zero Day and films like Leave the World Behind identify and zoom in on the terrors and anxieties of the present: AI and the “rise of the machine”, war and global instability, profound inequality, disinformation, online hostility and cyber threats. However, in doing so, these dramas can also exemplify what might be required to transform or alter a dystopian reality, meaning as viewers we engage in a form of “critical dystopia”.

    Our appetite for dystopian narratives could derive from the idea that we never imagine ourselves to be the subject of some major catastrophic event. In a discussion about dystopia, critical marketing academics Alan Bradshaw, James Fitchett and Joel Hietanen explored how we often equate dystopian events and imaginings as happening to others, not necessarily us.

    This is aided by the fact that we often occupy the role of a distant onlooker, not the perspective of someone living under the catastrophic events being portrayed.

    Bradshaw, Fitchett and Hietanen argue that much of our everyday existence consists of fairly mundane encounters and repetitive experiences. As an antidote to this safe ordinariness, we are drawn to extreme versions of life, and harbour repressed fantasies and desires of destruction and catastrophe. So we indulge in dystopian desires and impulses, albeit at a distance or vicariously through video games, movies, books and TV shows from the comfort of our sofas.

    Finally, some people seem to find a sense of enjoyment in imagining their own ruin – what is described as a “death drive”, that simultaneously contradicts yet co-exists with self-preservation instincts. Philosopher and cultural theorist Slavoj Žižek suggests that there are people who derive pleasure from dystopian narratives, fascinated at the prospect of their own annihilation.

    However, through optimistic endings, dystopian dramas imply that we may be able to intervene, prevent or even reverse the alarming consequences. We then indulge in fantasies of a new utopia in an attempt to return to our known reality, or receive a prophetic nudge in the direction of a more improved world to replace the dystopia.

    In this case, viewers of edge-of-your-seat dramas like Zero Day and Paradise search for hope and relief, and as detached observers fantasise about how catastrophe and self-annihilation can be paused or even better, averted.

    Scott Jones 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. Why we love the escapism of apocalyptic dramas – https://theconversation.com/why-we-love-the-escapism-of-apocalyptic-dramas-253063

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Everyday discrimination’ linked to increased anxiety and depression across all groups of Americans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Monica Wang, Associate Professor of Public Health, Boston University

    Everyday discrimination happens to all races and genders. FG Trade Latin/E+ via Getty Images

    People who most frequently encounter everyday discrimination – those subtle snubs and slights of everyday life – are more likely to suffer from anxiety and depression.

    What’s more, that finding remains true no matter the person’s race, gender, age, education, income, weight, language, immigration status or where they live.

    These are the key takeaways from our recent study, published in JAMA Network Open.

    Everyday discrimination refers to the routine ways people are treated unfairly because of characteristics such as skin color, perceived background or general appearance.

    Generally, it means disrespectful treatment: waiting longer than others for help at a store, having your ideas dismissed without consideration at work, or hearing rude comments about your identity.

    Although marginalized groups endure everyday discrimination most often, our study indicates that this is a widespread issue affecting people of all races and backgrounds.

    Everyday discrimination can affect both physical and mental health.
    FG Trade Latin/E+ via Getty Images

    I’m a professor who specializes in community health. My team and I analyzed data from the 2023 National Health Interview Survey, which included a weighted sample of nearly 30,000 U.S. adults, adjusted to accurately reflect more than 258 million people – approximately 75% of the country.

    Along with reporting frequency of everyday discrimination, participants completed clinical screenings for depression and anxiety.

    The results were striking: Nearly 56% of participants experienced at least occasional everyday discrimination, with 3.6% having “high levels,” meaning they faced discrimination most frequently – at least monthly and often weekly.

    High levels were most prevalent among Black adults, at 8.6%. Multiracial respondents were next with 6.4%. Hispanics and white participants were at about 3%, Asians just over 2%.

    Women and immigrants, people with disabilities and those who are overweight, obese or struggling with food insecurity also reported higher levels.

    When compared with those reporting no discrimination, participants with high levels had five times the odds of screening positive for either depression or anxiety, and nearly nine times the odds of screening positive for both.

    As discrimination increased, the increase in screening positive for depression, anxiety or both varied by race, with a more noticeable rise among groups that are often overlooked in these discussions – white, Asian and multiracial adults.

    This doesn’t mean discrimination is less harmful for Black, Hispanic/Latino or other racial and ethnic groups. One possible reason for our study’s findings may be that groups that have long endured structural discrimination may have developed more ways over time to cope with it.

    Why it matters

    At some point, all of us experience unfair treatment due to our personal traits. But this type of discrimination isn’t just unpleasant. Our study shows it has real consequences for health.

    Along with depression and anxiety, discrimination creates chronic stress, leading to increased risk for hypertension, heart disease, impaired brain functioning, accelerated aging and premature death.

    For some, everyday discrimination may emerge at different times in life. This can happen to people as they get older or when they become ill.

    But for others, it is a constant. This includes people living in marginalized communities, people of color, those socioeconomically disadvantaged or with disabilities, or those who identify as LGBTQ+.

    Ageism is one of many forms of everyday discrimination.

    What other research is being done

    Multiracial people are uniquely challenged because they navigate multiple racial identities. This often leads to feelings of isolation, which increases mental health risks.

    White adults, though less frequently exposed to racial discrimination, still face mistreatment, particularly if they have lower incomes, limited education or working-class backgrounds. In recent years, white people have perceived rising levels of discrimination against their own group.

    People of Asian descent are vulnerable to societal pressures and harmful stereotypes, which spiked during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    When factors are combined – for example, adding financial insecurity or immigration status to racism – compounded health challenges arise.

    What’s next

    Understanding how discrimination affects health for all can lead to policies and programs targeting root causes of mental health disparities and the rising rates of depression and anxiety.

    Discrimination isn’t just a Black versus white issue. It’s a public health crisis affecting all Americans. Acknowledging its harmful health effects is a first step.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Monica Wang receives funding from the National Institutes of Health.

    – ref. ‘Everyday discrimination’ linked to increased anxiety and depression across all groups of Americans – https://theconversation.com/everyday-discrimination-linked-to-increased-anxiety-and-depression-across-all-groups-of-americans-250884

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: My documentary Motherboard follows my first 21 years of motherhood – these films about single mums inspired me

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Victoria Mapplebeck, Professor in Digital Arts, Royal Holloway University of London

    On a warm and sunny May bank holiday in 2003, I had one of those rare days that truly changes your life forever. I sat in my bathroom, hands shaking as two pink lines emerged on the pregnancy test I was holding.

    I was 38, single and broke. This pregnancy was the result of a brief relationship which had only amounted to four dates. Shell-shocked as I was, I laughed out loud in a moment of joy I knew there was no coming back from. Nine months later I gave birth to my son Jim.

    My old Nokia still holds the text thread of the three years I was in touch with Jim’s dad. My messages began “I had a great time last night”, and ended “Have you got the results yet?” He had requested a paternity test when Jim was two. A week later we both received the results. The probability that he was Jim’s biological dad was 99.99%. This news prompted a final reply from Jim’s dad: “Yes, I got the results … I’m moving to Spain.”

    A clip from the author’s film, Motherboard.

    We didn’t hear from him again for over a decade. Unable to combine motherhood with my previous career as a TV director, I quit my job overnight. I got a job teaching filmmaking and was out of the film industry for over a decade.

    I began filming my son Jim as he grew up. I recorded hundreds of hours of footage, capturing each twist and turn in Jim’s life, from the thumbs-up he gave me during my first scan, to his first day at college.

    Jim is 21 now. Filmed over 20 years, my feature documentary Motherboard charts the highs and lows of solo motherhood. It explores how Jim and I navigated him meeting his dad for the first time at 13, closely followed by my breast cancer diagnosis and Jim’s party-hard late teens, when tempers frayed and doors slammed.

    When I was making Motherboard I burnt through any books, films and TV that I could find, exploring solo motherhood. Many repeated the same old tabloid cliches and movie tropes of single mums. They were victims or martyrs, their only moment of joy watching the sun set over their estate before the bailiffs turned up.

    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.

    In I’ll Show Myself Out: Essays on Midlife and Motherhood (2022), author and comic Jessi Klein writes that: “Motherhood as a story, is so infrequently told, because the world tells us that what mothers do is unremarkable and unimportant.” She goes on to explore the structure of the hero’s epic journey in Hollywood blockbusters, in which the (usually male) hero embarks on a quest and returns home transformed.

    Klein turns this formula on its head. “Motherhood is a hero’s journey, it’s not a journey outwards to the most fantastic, farest-flung places, but a journey inwards, downwards to the deepest parts of your strength.”

    My own film, Motherboard, and several of the films that inspired me, follow the trope of the hero’s journey. But the key difference is that the director is often the hero and the author of her own story. The following films and TV series capture the pain, happiness, chaos and comedy of the hero’s journey that is motherhood.

    1. Lollipop (2024)

    Director Daisy-May Hudson recently developed her own experiences of being homeless with her mum and younger sister into her feature drama debut. Lollipop tells the story of Molly, a young single mum who loses custody of her kids after a short stay in prison. The joy of the film is that it’s the polar opposite to the broken single mums we see in Ken Loach’s Ladybird, Ladybird (1994) and Cathy Come Home (1966).

    Daisy-May Hudson was named as a ‘breakthrough’ director by Bafta in 2015.

    In Hudson’s entirely female cast, Molly and her best mate Amina are fierce single mums who transform the obstacles they face into laugh-out-loud moments of comedy. These are single mums that are flawed, impulsive, powerful, funny and, most importantly, believable.

    2. Better Things (2016)

    Better Things is a TV series, written by and starring Pamela Adlon, based on her own experiences of being a single mum to her three teenage daughters in LA. There’s a great scene in the final series where Adlon’s character, Sam, is being examined by her doctor who asks her if she’s stressed out because she has “too many errands to run”.

    Pamela Adlon and the cast of Better Things discussing the show.

    She replies:

    “No, no. Errands are, like, groceries and going to the post office, it’s the real mum stuff … Soccer club sign-ups and dance classes and tutors and tuition payments and parent-teacher conferences and schools and camps that I have to get them into, mean girl issues with my youngest at school and birth control with my oldest and cruelty from my middle daughter. And then there’s my own mom, who is driving me nuts … And I am definitely going through menopause. So, yeah, Dr. Babu, it’s, like – it’s a lot.”

    3. Boyhood (2014)

    Richard Linklater’s Boyhood often comes up when critics are reviewing Motherboard. It’s a film I love. Filmed over a decade, it depicts the childhood and adolescence of Mason Evans (played by Ellar Coltrane).

    The trailer for Boyhood.

    “I always described it as a film about growing up”, Linklater told the Guardian, “But it’s also a film about parenting”. Linklater was probably the first director I encountered whose character of a single mum (played by Patricia Arquette) felt real to me.

    Patronising empowerment

    I listened to a podcast recently in which Adlon challenged the words that are often used to describe Better Things. “Brave”, “raw” and “vulnerable” come up constantly.

    Critics and audiences often tell me that I’m brave. It can feel condescending. I’ve never heard the word attributed to Linklater’s Boyhood. What sets myself and Adlon apart from Linklater, is that we are both single mothers ourselves.

    As politicians continue to obsess over the recent statistic that “more boys have smartphones than dads”, families with absent fathers will continue to be seen as tragic and flawed. But single mothers are not a problem to be solved. Lollipop, Better Things and Motherboard are all proof of Klein’s belief that “a mother’s heroic journey is not about how she leaves … but about how she stays”.

    Victoria Mapplebeck received funding for Motherboard from OKRE

    – ref. My documentary Motherboard follows my first 21 years of motherhood – these films about single mums inspired me – https://theconversation.com/my-documentary-motherboard-follows-my-first-21-years-of-motherhood-these-films-about-single-mums-inspired-me-253059

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Early-onset Alzheimer’s: new drug shows promise in slowing the disease

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rahul Sidhu, PhD Candidate, Neuroscience, University of Sheffield

    The drug also caused a notable decrease in amyloid plaque buildup, which is a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. ART-ur/ Shutterstock

    Alzheimer’s disease is usually associated with old age. But around 5%-10% of all Alzheimer’s cases occur in people under the age of 65. Early-onset Alzheimer’s disease progresses more rapidly and often strikes people in the prime of their lives. Treatment options remain limited.

    But new data from a recent clinical trial suggests that a previously discontinued experimental drug, called gantenerumab, could help. The study found that gantenerumab reduced the buildup of amyloid plaques – one of the hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease – in the brain. This may help slow cognitive decline in people with early-onset Alzheimer’s.

    Early-onset Alzheimer’s is often linked to genetic mutations in three specific genes. These mutations cause the brain to produce excessive amounts of amyloid beta, a protein that clumps together to form plaques. These plaques disrupt brain function, leading to memory loss.

    Early-onset Alzheimer’s advances quickly – and the rapid decline is devastating. That’s why researchers are racing to find treatments that can slow the disease.



    Read more:
    Young-onset Alzheimer’s can be diagnosed from as early as 30 – and the symptoms are often different

    The recent clinical trial was a randomised, placebo-controlled study to evaluate gantenerumab’s effects on people with early-onset Alzheimer’s. Researchers monitored changes in the participants’ cognitive abilities, and also used brain imaging and blood biomarkers (the presence of specific proteins in the blood which are linked to Alzheimer’s), to track the disease’s progress throughout the study.

    The trial included 73 participants with rare inherited genetic mutations known to cause early-onset Alzheimer’s. These participants were either asymptomatic or had mild Alzheimer’s symptoms at the start of the study.

    The results were intriguing. In a subgroup of 22 participants, who hadn’t had any cognitive issues at the start of the study, taking the treatment for an average of eight years reduced the risk of developing symptoms from a nearly 100% likelihood, to 50%. Brain scans also showed a notable decrease in amyloid buildup.

    Immune defenders

    Gantenerumab is a monoclonal antibody – a lab-engineered protein designed to attach to amyloid beta in the brain. By binding to these plaques, it signals the immune system to clear them away. This may potentially slow Alzheimer’s progression.

    The drug works by engaging microglial cells. These are the brain’s primary immune defenders. Microglia constantly monitor the brain for damage and remove harmful substances, including amyloid beta. However, in people with Alzheimer’s disease, microglia often fail to clear plaques efficiently. Gantenerumab enhances this natural defence mechanism by tagging amyloid plaques, making them easier for the microglia to recognise and break down.

    Microglia cells fail to clear plaques effectively in people with Alzheimer’s.
    ART-ur/ Shutterstock

    Amyloid beta is thought to play a central role in Alzheimer’s by triggering inflammation, interfering with cell communication and ultimately killing neurons. By removing these plaques, gantenerumab may help to protect brain function. However, it doesn’t reverse existing damage – which is why early intervention is critical.

    An advantage of gantenerumab is that it can cross the blood-brain barrier – the protective shield that blocks many drugs and harmful substances from reaching the brain. This allows it to act directly on amyloid plaques, making it more effective than some earlier treatments that struggled with drug delivery.

    But as promising as these results are, gantenerumab isn’t without risks.

    A major concern is amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. These are swelling or small spots of bleeding in the brain that show up on MRI scans. This is a common side-effect of amyloid-targeting therapies.

    In this latest trial, 53% of participants experienced these amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, including small brain bleeds in 27% of participants, brain swelling in 30% of participants and iron deposits from bleeding in 6%. While no participants had major brain haemorrhages or died from the treatment, these side-effects remain a serious concern – requiring regular monitoring through brain scans.

    Another limitation is the modest cognitive benefit observed in the trial. While gantenerumab reduced amyloid plaques, the extent to which this translates into meaningful improvements in memory and thinking skills remains unclear.

    Gantenerumab is also expensive to manufacture, which could make widespread access difficult if it gains regulatory approval. As this is an experimental drug, we do not currently know how much it would cost. But other similar anti-amyloid therapies, such as donanemab, currently cost around £25,000 per patient per year.

    The study also had a small sample size and only focused on a rare genetic form of early-onset Alzheimer’s. More research is needed to see how these results may apply to the wider dementia community.

    The future of treatment

    Although the trial was terminated early after the study’s sponsor pulled out, these findings contribute to the ongoing debate over the causes of Alzheimer’s disease.

    According to the amyloid hypothesis, the buildup of amyloid plaques in the brain is the main cause of Alzheimer’s disease. Clearing these plaques will slow the disease’s progression. The success of the Alzheimer’s drugs lecanemab, donanemab and now gantenerumab, lend themselves to this theory.

    This study also underscores the importance of early diagnosis. Amyloid-targeting therapies appear to work best in the early stages of Alzheimer’s, before significant brain damage occurs. Advances in biomarker testing – including blood tests and brain scans – could help identify at-risk people sooner. This would improve the effectiveness of drugs such as gantenerumab.

    Although gantenerumab is not a cure and was discontinued by its manufacturer in 2022 because it failed to demonstrate efficacy in slowing the progression of Alzheimer’s disease, this new data could perhaps lead to gantenerumab being manufactured again. It also represents another step forward in the fight against Alzheimer’s.

    Alzheimer’s research is advancing faster than ever before. Whether a success or a setback, each new study adds to our understanding of the disease and brings us closer to more effective treatments. For now, the gantenerumab trial offers a hopeful sign that scientists are making progress in slowing the course of this devastating condition.

    Rahul Sidhu 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. Early-onset Alzheimer’s: new drug shows promise in slowing the disease – https://theconversation.com/early-onset-alzheimers-new-drug-shows-promise-in-slowing-the-disease-253049

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Rivers are increasingly being given legal rights. Now they need people who will defend these rights in court

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Oluwabusayo Wuraola, Lecturer in Law, Anglia Ruskin University

    The River Ouse near Lewes in Sussex, England. Melanie Hobson / shutterstock

    A district council in England has passed a motion to grant its local river the rights to flow freely, to be free from pollution and to enjoy its native biodiversity. The move by Lewes District Council in East Sussex to recognise the fundamental rights of the River Ouse is the first of its kind in the UK.

    The Ouse (not to be confused with larger rivers of the same name in Yorkshire and East Anglia) flows southwards for 35 miles into the English Channel and suffers from the usual problems afflicting many rivers in the UK: chemical pollution, sewage dumping and so on.

    As a legal academic who researches exactly these sorts of rights, I was excited to see the news from Lewes (even if the council’s motions ultimately can’t overrule national laws). But simply granting a river some rights isn’t enough. We now need to think about who will actually defend these rights.

    This may mean appointing someone to represent the rights of the river. Who these representatives are, and how they think about nature and conservation, can be as important as the granting of these rights in the first place.

    Appointing representatives who care about their own personal and property interests would be a grave mistake, as would appointing anyone who prioritises the rights of humans to a healthy environment over a more intrinsic right of nature (remember: the idea is that the River Ouse has rights in itself and shouldn’t need to demonstrate its worth to humans).

    As further rivers, lakes, forests and more are granted rights like the Ouse, we’ll need to train up an army of people willing to represent the rights of nature.

    Natural entities should have legal rights

    The law professor Christopher Stone pioneered the rights of nature concept back in the 1970s. He argued that natural entities, like rivers or forests, should have legal rights and that a “guardian” or representative should be appointed to defend those rights in court when they are threatened.

    Some legal systems have adopted this model. For example, in New Zealand, the Whanganui River was granted legal personhood, and two “human faces” were appointed to act and speak on its behalf. Their duties are outlined in a 2017 act, which specifies that these representatives must have the skills, knowledge and experience needed to effectively advocate for the river’s rights.

    The Whanganui River was awarded legal personhood in 2017 due to its spiritual importance for local Māori people.
    Ron Kolet / shutterstock

    But even as rights of nature are being considered in many countries, there is still little consideration of who will represent these rights effectively. For instance, back in 2008 Ecuador became the first country to grant the rights of nature in its constitution. However the constitution states that “all persons” are representatives of the rights of nature. This is simply impractical: we can’t expect every citizen to truly care about the rights of nature.

    Efforts to apply the rights of nature in Ecuador have often failed. Legal challenges can become highly politicised and there is little legal infrastructure beyond general constitutional principles.

    For example, in a case brought after road builders had dumped material into the Vilcabamba River, plaintiffs claimed to represent nature in court. However, they were not genuinely advocating for the river’s rights – their main concern was protecting their downstream property.

    An ecocentric perspective

    Ultimately, defending the rights of nature in court will be a struggle if the nature in question – the river, forest or lake – is not represented by someone with an ecocentric perspective. That means prioritising the intrinsic value of nature itself, rather than focusing on how it can serve human interests.

    To protect it from mining and deforestation, Los Cedros cloud forest was awarded the same rights as people.
    Andreas Kay / flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

    Ecocentric advocates have proved to be the most effective defenders of the rights of nature in many court cases. For example, in lawsuits involving Ecuador’s Los Cedros cloud forest and its marine ecosystems, ecocentric arguments helped secure stronger legal protections and even inspired the courts to grant further rights of nature.

    One of the most common legal frameworks involves appointing “all persons”, “a person”, or “a resident” as representatives or protectors. For instance, Uganda’s National Environment Act 2019 states that anyone has the right to bring an action before a court “for any infringement of rights of nature”.

    Similarly, the city of Toledo, Ohio, tried to introduce the Lake Erie bill of rights which stated that the city or any resident could act on behalf of the lake’s ecosystem. (The bill was declared unconstitutional by a federal court in 2020 and did not become the law).

    Lake Erie lies between Canada and the US. It is surrounded by heavy industry and has had periods of intense pollution.
    Ted Auch, FracTracker Alliance / flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

    Having such broad representation can make these legal protections less effective. This is what Stone, the law professor, envisioned back in the 70s: representatives should be trained to view nature as having intrinsic value – the very reason it is granted rights – and to protect it on that basis.

    There are some promising examples. Guardians were appointed to protect the Magpie River in Canada, for instance, after it was granted legal personhood in 2022. Their responsibilities include participating – on behalf of the river itself – in any consultations on projects that might affect the river.

    When the River Atrato in Colombia was also granted legal rights, the court required the formation of a commission (with representatives from the state and local communities) to train and oversee the work of the guardians.

    Moves to give rights to nature are promising. But from Colombia to Canada to Sussex, we’ll need a whole army of nature protectors to actually enforce those rights.

    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 40,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Oluwabusayo Wuraola is a knowledge expert member of the United Nations Harmony with Nature Programme.

    – ref. Rivers are increasingly being given legal rights. Now they need people who will defend these rights in court – https://theconversation.com/rivers-are-increasingly-being-given-legal-rights-now-they-need-people-who-will-defend-these-rights-in-court-251736

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Nasa’s Curiosity rover has found the longest chain carbon molecules yet on Mars. It’s a significant finding in the search for alien life

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Derek Ward-Thompson, Professor of Astrophysics, University of Central Lancashire

    The Curiosity rover near the site of Mont Mercou on Mars. NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

    Nasa’s Curiosity Mars rover has detected the largest organic (carbon-containing) molecules ever found on the red planet. The discovery is one of the most significant findings in the search for evidence of past life on Mars. This is because, on Earth at least, relatively complex, long-chain carbon molecules are involved in biology. These molecules could actually be fragments of fatty acids, which are found in, for example, the membranes surrounding biological cells.

    Scientists think that, if life ever emerged on Mars, it was probably microbial in nature. Because microbes are so small, it’s difficult to be definitive about any potential evidence for life found on Mars. Such evidence needs more powerful scientific instruments that are too large to be put on a rover.

    The organic molecules found by Curiosity consist of carbon atoms linked in long chains, with other elements bonded to them, like hydrogen and oxygen. They come from a 3.7-billion-year-old rock dubbed Cumberland, encountered by the rover at a presumed dried-up lakebed in Mars’s Gale Crater. Scientists used the Sample Analysis at Mars (Sam) instrument on the Nasa rover to make their discovery.

    Scientists were actually looking for evidence of amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins and therefore key components of life as we know it. But this unexpected finding is almost as exciting. The research is published in Proceedings of the National Academies of Science.

    Among the molecules were decane, which has 10 carbon atoms and 22 hydrogen atoms, and dodecane, with 12 carbons and 26 hydrogen atoms. These are known as alkanes, which fall under the umbrella of the chemical compounds known as hydrocarbons.

    It’s an exciting time in the search for life on Mars. In March this year, scientists presented evidence of features in a different rock sampled elsewhere on Mars by the Perseverance rover. These features, dubbed “leopard spots” and “poppy seeds”, could have been produced by the action of microbial life in the distant past, or not. The findings were presented at a US conference and have not yet been published in a peer reviewed journal.

    The Mars Sample Return mission, a collaboration between Nasa and the European Space Agency, offers hope that samples of rock collected and stored by Perseverance could be brought to Earth for study in laboratories. The powerful instruments available in terrestrial labs could finally confirm whether or not there is clear evidence for past life on Mars. However, in 2023, an independent review board criticised increases in Mars Sample Return’s budget. This prompted the agencies to rethink how the mission could be carried out. They are currently studying two revised options.

    Signs of life?

    Cumberland was found in a region of Gale Crater called Yellowknife Bay. This area contains rock formations that look suspiciously like those formed when sediment builds up at the bottom of a lake. One of Curiosity’s scientific goals is to examine the prospect that past conditions on Mars would have been suitable for the development of life, so an ancient lakebed is the perfect place to look for them.

    The Martian rock known as Cumberland, which was sampled in the study.
    NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

    The researchers think that the alkane molecules may once have been components of more complex fatty acid molecules. On Earth, fatty acids are components of fats and oils. They are produced through biological activity in processes that help form cell membranes, for example. The suggested presence of fatty acids in this rock sample has been around for several years, but the new paper details the full evidence.

    Fatty acids are long, linear hydrocarbon molecules with a carboxyl group (COOH) at one end and a methyl group (CH3) at the other, forming a chain of carbon and hydrogen atoms.

    A fat molecule consists of two main components: glycerol and fatty acids. Glycerol is an alcohol molecule with three carbon atoms, five hydrogens, and three hydroxyl (chemically bonded oxygen and hydrogen, OH) groups. Fatty acids may have 4-36 carbon atoms; however, most of them have 12-18. The longest carbon chains found in Cumberland are 12 atoms long.

    Mars Sample Return will deliver Mars rocks to Earth for study. This artist’s impression shows the ascent vehicle leaving Mars with rock samples.
    Nasa/JPL-Caltech

    Organic molecules preserved in ancient Martian rocks provide a critical record of the past habitability of Mars and could be chemical biosignatures (signs that life was once there).

    The sample from Cumberland has been analysed by the Sam instrument many times, using different experimental techniques, and has shown evidence of clay minerals, as well as the first (smaller and simpler) organic molecules found on Mars, back in 2015. These included several classes of chlorinated and sulphur-containing organic compounds in Gale crater sedimentary rocks, with chemical structures of up to six carbon atoms. The new discovery doubles the number of carbon atoms found in a single molecule on Mars.

    The alkane molecules are significant in the search for biosignatures on Mars, but how they actually formed remains unclear. They could also be derived through geological or other chemical mechanisms that do not involve fatty acids or life. These are known as abiotic sources. However, the fact that they exist intact today in samples that have been exposed to a harsh environment for many millions of years gives astrobiologists (scientists who study the possibility of life beyond Earth) hope that evidence of ancient life might still be detectable today.

    It is possible the sample contains even longer chain organic molecules. It may also contain more complex molecules that are indicative of life, rather than geological processes. Unfortunately, Sam is not capable of detecting those, so the next step is to deliver Martian rock and soil to more capable laboratories on the Earth. Mars Sample Return would do this with the samples already gathered by the Perseverance Mars rover. All that’s needed now is the budget.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Nasa’s Curiosity rover has found the longest chain carbon molecules yet on Mars. It’s a significant finding in the search for alien life – https://theconversation.com/nasas-curiosity-rover-has-found-the-longest-chain-carbon-molecules-yet-on-mars-its-a-significant-finding-in-the-search-for-alien-life-253249

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Banning face coverings, expanding facial recognition – how the UK government and police are eroding protest rights

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daragh Murray, Senior Lecturer in International Human Rights Law at Queen Mary University of London, Queen Mary University of London

    Adam Rhodes UK/Shutterstock

    It’s a dangerous time for protest rights in the UK. The government has introduced a bill that would make it a criminal offence to conceal your identity at a protest.

    The crime and policing bill establishes an offence if a person conceals their identity within a specifically designated area. That is, an area where the police believe that a protest is taking place, or is likely to take place, and that involves, or might involve, the “commission of offences” (people breaking the law).

    These powers are preemptive and vague – how is the “likelihood” of a protest or offences determined? What specific “offences” does the bill refer to? What safeguards exist? Ultimately, the bill does not appear to place any real limits on the degree of discretion extended to the police.

    The passage of this bill would have significant implications for the right to anonymity in public places. It is unparalleled among liberal democratic states, bringing UK practice into line with Russia, Hungary and China.

    Under existing public order law, police already have the power to direct people to remove face coverings. The police justify these new powers on the basis that “individuals may follow the initial direction of the police officer to remove their face covering, but … move … and redeploy the face covering shortly afterwards.”

    The bill continues the previous government’s attempts to erode the right to protest. It’s clear that the motivation for these laws is not concern for public safety, but a desire to significantly extend surveillance powers.



    Read more:
    Policing bill is now law: how your right to protest has changed

    Facial recognition

    Why is a ban on face coverings being introduced now? No significant new challenges to the policing of protest have emerged in recent decades. The difference now, however, is that facial recognition has recently become a viable policing technology.

    As our forthcoming book details, facial recognition technology has rapidly transformed police surveillance capabilities, with profound effects on human rights, the formation of suspicion and on interactions between police and citizens.

    Retrospective facial recognition (the use of facial recognition on recorded materials) is now used by every police force in the UK, and has been, in some cases, for more than a decade. This expansion occurred under the radar and without public debate. Its extent was only revealed through investigative journalism.

    Live facial recognition, which involves real-time identity checks, is also expanding. South Wales Police recently deployed this technology across Cardiff’s pedestrian areas. And London’s Metropolitan Police are planning to install the first permanent live facial recognition cameras in the capital.

    Being identified by police was once only a possibility, now it is a near certainty. The only rules currently governing the police’s use of facial recognition are developed by police forces themselves.

    London’s Met police have used live facial recognition at specific events and protests.
    Andy Soloman/Shutterstock

    In recognition of the dangers posed by such surveillance, we were recently involved in developing, with the UN, a model protocol for law enforcement. It sets out practical guidance that all states should follow when policing protest, making clear that efforts to preserve one’s anonymity should not be treated as suspicious.

    It explicitly prohibits the use of remote biometric technology, like facial recognition or retina scanning, to identify protesters during peaceful demonstrations – something we argue is inconsistent with police’s obligation to facilitate peaceful protest. This protocol was unanimously adopted by the 47 member states of the UN Human Rights Council.

    Why the right to anonymity matters

    The right to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are central to the health of a democratic society. This includes the ability to participate anonymously in protests.

    But these rights are not absolute. This means that they can be limited – including in the interests of public safety or the prevention of crime and disorder – if doing so can be considered “necessary in a democratic society”. Given the importance of protest to democratic life, the threshold is high.

    The purpose of protest is to disrupt. The fights for women’s right to vote, trade union recognition and racial equality are all examples where a degree of disruption and disorder has been an intrinsic part of political change. Human rights law requires that public authorities show a certain degree of tolerance in this regard.

    To this end, human rights case law recognises that, no matter how shocking or “unacceptable”, any restrictions on freedom of expression and of assembly – other than in cases of incitement to violence, hate speech, or the rejection of democratic principles – risk undermining democracy itself.

    There is strong research evidence that surveillance of protesters cultivates chilling effects, whereby individuals change their otherwise normal behaviour due to the fear of surveillance. As we explain, this generates compound human rights harms that may fundamentally undermine the ability of citizens to challenge the status quo.

    With this proposed law, the UK is moving out of line with other democratic states and closer into step with Russia and China. Without changes, this bill risks transforming protests into surveillance opportunities.

    Daragh Murray receives funding from UKRI Future Leaders Fellowship, Grant Number: MR/T042133/2.

    Pete Fussey 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. Banning face coverings, expanding facial recognition – how the UK government and police are eroding protest rights – https://theconversation.com/banning-face-coverings-expanding-facial-recognition-how-the-uk-government-and-police-are-eroding-protest-rights-252976

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: We analyzed racial justice statements from the 500 largest US companies and found that DEI officials really did have an influence

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Donald T. Tomaskovic-Devey, Professor of Sociology and Director of the Center for Employment Equity, UMass Amherst

    In 2020, American businesses responded to an unprecedented wave of racial justice protests with an equally unprecedented surge in corporate commitments. Even as President Donald Trump was calling protesters “terrorists,” companies in industries across the U.S. pledged donations, launched diversity initiatives and issued statements in support of equity and inclusion.

    As social scientists who study corporate political behavior, we, like many others, wondered whether this wave of corporate statements signaled a true commitment to racial justice or whether it was just symbolic. Some skeptics suggested that corporate statements about racial justice were just window dressing. Still others worried that corporations were becoming “woke” and distracted from making profits.

    These concerns have taken on new meaning as the attack on diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, has become a cornerstone of the new administration. When Donald Trump returned to office, two of his first acts were to ban DEI in federal government employment and overturning 60 years of affirmative action mandates on firms that do business with the government.

    This made us wonder: Were the DEI efforts of recent years actually associated with greater corporate commitments to racial justice? Or was it just more political theater?

    To try to better understand what was happening in corporate America, we collected every racial justice statement made by a Fortune 500 firm in response to the 2020 murder of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter protests.

    We found that most firms stayed silent, while others made only weak symbolic responses. Just 1 in 5 made strong commitments, pledging resources and structural changes to their business practices, such as revamping hiring policies or funding racial justice organizations.

    For that 20%, however, commitments could be substantial.

    Take Microsoft, for example. Just 10 days after Floyd’s murder, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella sent an internal memo condemning police brutality and urging employees to take action. He also announced that Microsoft would donate $1.5 million to racial justice organizations. Microsoft then pledged to invest US$150 million in diversity and inclusion efforts and to establish a $50 million fund to support Black-owned business partners. Microsoft also committed to doubling its Black-owned suppliers by 2023 and Black senior executives by 2025.

    The impact of the DEI professional network

    DEI professionals help companies manage the diversity of their workforces by promoting fairness in treatment and social inclusion. Their basic job is to ensure that workplaces are respectful to all employees. The rise of this job title signals a managerial shift from tolerating cultural diversity to promoting broad inclusion. Some DEI practices – for example, diversity training focused on discrimination – can lead to backlash, research has shown. But inclusive practices, such as ensuring mentoring for everyone, simply tend to foster better workplaces.

    This made us wonder what distinguished the minority of firms that made more robust commitments to racial justice from the others. Our hunch was that when firm leadership discussed how to react to the Black Lives Matter protests, companies that already had DEI professionals with influential voices took stronger action.

    To test our hypothesis, we first searched globally for all DEI job titles in all large firms in LinkedIn. LinkedIn profiles provide the most recent 10 jobs a person holds, so we can identify when and at what firm people had DEI jobs. LinkedIn has proven to be a reliable source of career data for corporate professionals and is especially appropriate for a new and growing job title such as DEI.

    The general picture is clear.

    There was a rapid rise in DEI positions in the U.S., with a big jump in 2020, followed by declines in 2022, when our data ends. Among Fortune 500 companies, however, only about half had any DEI professionals. DEI roles were growing rapidly, but they were far from universal in the largest corporations.

    We also discovered that there was a set of firms central to the global DEI professional network. These firms were a source of future DEI staff for other companies. We measured centrality within the DEI network as the number of people in a firm’s DEI workforce that once worked in other prominent firms in the DEI network. Network centrality is a common way social scientists measure influence in groups.

    To be clear, these weren’t companies that specialize in DEI, but rather had hired DEI staff to help run their core business. The most central firms to the DEI professional network included some of the country’s largest banks, consulting firms and corporations, such as IBM, Johnson & Johnson and General Electric. These firms are also more likely to have made longer and larger investments in DEI staff than other firms.

    Based on prior studies of influence in social networks, we suspected that when a firm’s DEI staff were recruited from these prominent firms in the DEI network, they would have more influence over corporate decisions on how to respond to the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. We found that the 20% of firms that made strong racial justice comments had much more prominent DEI staff than those that remained silent or made only symbolic statements. This finding has held up in multiple statistical models, where we have controlled for other factors that might be of relevance to making strong racial justice commitments.

    DEI staff, it appears, were influential when the national conversation turned to racial justice. Conversely, we also found that firms with politically conservative CEOs were much more likely to remain silent in the face of Black Lives Matter protests.

    The future of DEI?

    We wondered whether the association of DEI professionals and stronger racial justice commitments was stable, or perhaps just a fleeting result of strong mass protest in 2020. So we examined a second instance of corporations taking a stance. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court was considering the constitutional status of affirmative action practices in college admissions. Before the Supreme Court made its ruling, many firms sought to weigh in to influence the result by submitting legal briefs documenting the reasons why they thought the court should rule in favor of affirmative action.

    We found the same kinds of patterns of corporate support for affirmative action in 2022 as we did from the earlier protests in 2020. A total of 46 firms in the Fortune 500 publicly supported affirmative action. Once again, there is a strong relationship between the prominence of DEI professionals and taking action on racial justice policy. Those firms with greater prominence in the DEI network in 2020 were significantly more likely to sign onto a friend-of-the-court briefing in 2022.

    When firms make stronger investments in DEI work, and their DEI professionals are more central to the national DEI network, those DEI professionals were more influential in producing stronger racial justice commitments. This reflects long-term firm investments and the development of a robust, influential DEI staff.

    But only 20% of firms made strong commitments, while the vast majority were pretty silent in the face of national calls for racial justice. DEI roles had begun to drop after 2021, even before Trump’s election, and the current political attack on DEI will be chilling. There was already evidence in 2023 that some major firms were hiring fewer minority employees across their workforces. The influence of DEI professionals was never widespread and is likely now in decline. But we suspect that this decline will be fastest among the firms that were never really committed to racial justice and have particularly conservative CEOs.

    What about responses to the new political environment? As of March 2025, only 31 of the Fortune 500 signaled that they planned to roll back their DEI efforts or eliminate them altogether. Eleven firms publicly defended their DEI efforts, nine of which were among the strong racial justice responders in 2020. None of the firms that were silent in 2020 have defended DEI so far this year.

    So far among the Fortune 500, 92% of firms have remained largely silent about their DEI intentions. Perhaps the most interesting are Amazon, Meta, Google, Target, Ford and Walmart – all firms that made strong racial justice pledges in 2020 but have joined the DEI backlash this year. However, other firms have resisted these trends. The future of equal opportunity in U.S. employment will likely depend, at least in part, on how these silences and defenses are worked out in firms’ internal human resource practices and public commitments.

    This research was supported by the Center for Employment Equity at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation..

    Jorge Quesada Velazco and Kevin L. Young do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. We analyzed racial justice statements from the 500 largest US companies and found that DEI officials really did have an influence – https://theconversation.com/we-analyzed-racial-justice-statements-from-the-500-largest-us-companies-and-found-that-dei-officials-really-did-have-an-influence-249999

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Want to stay healthier and fulfilled later in life? Try volunteering

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Cal J. Halvorsen, Associate Professor of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis

    New volunteers get trained in Lexington, Ky., to help out at CASA of Lexington in April 2023. AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

    As gerontologists – social scientists who study aging populations – we envision a future in which older people leave a doctor’s visit with a prescription to go volunteer for something.

    Does that sound far-fetched? There’s scientific research backing it up.

    Good for your health

    While spending more than a dozen years researching what happens when older adults volunteer with nonprofits, including churches, we’ve found that volunteers consider themselves to be in better health than their peers who don’t. In addition, their blood pressure is lower, and they appear to be aging more slowly than other people of the same age.

    Other researchers have found that volunteering is associated with a lower risk of having a heart attack.

    The mental health benefits are just as striking.

    Volunteering is tied to having fewer symptoms of depression and being more satisfied with your life. It often brings an instant boost in mood – along with a deeper sense of meaning and purpose.

    Even engaging in what’s known as “informal helping” – lending a hand to friends, neighbors or community members in need, without getting paid or participating in an organized program – can help you in similar ways.

    There are also health benefits for those who start volunteering much earlier in life.

    Children and teens who volunteer tend to have better health and lower levels of anxiety and fewer behavioral problems than those who don’t volunteer.

    Changing demographics

    The number of U.S. adults at least 62 years old – the earliest age at which you can claim Social Security retirement benefits – has grown by nearly 35 million since 2000, while the number of children and teens under 18 has fallen by nearly 1.5 million. There are now about 76 million Americans over 62 and 71 million under 18.

    This change has been gradual. Following a long-term demographic shift, record numbers of Americans are reaching retirement age.

    Benefits for society and the economy

    The benefits of volunteering aren’t just for the volunteers themselves.

    The total value of the hours of unpaid work volunteers put in totals an estimated US$170 billion each year, according to AmeriCorps, the federal agency focused on national and community service.

    And participating in community service programs can lead to better job prospects for volunteers, that same agency has found.

    AmeriCorps Seniors, which focuses on engaging volunteers ages 55 and older, runs programs that offer major benefits to their communities. These include the Foster Grandparent program, which connects older adult mentors to children, and the Senior Companion program, which connects volunteers to older adults seeking some help to continue living independently in their own homes.

    A current AmeriCorps Seniors pilot program is helping adults 55 and up, who can have more trouble landing new jobs than younger people, gain new job skills through their community service.

    People of all ages can get together through volunteering. Some organizations intentionally encourage this kind of intergenerational cooperation, including CoGenerate and Generations United.

    Rebuilding communities

    Researchers have also found that volunteering may increase trust within a community, especially when it brings together people from different backgrounds.

    It can strengthen “social cohesion,” a term researchers use to describe how much people bond and help each other, and reduce prejudice.

    Volunteers’ views on social issues may change through their work, too: More than 4 in 5 adults over 55 who tutored public school students to strengthen their reading skills in the national Experience Corps program, for example, stated that their views on public education evolved as a result. Those volunteers expressed more support for public education and said they’d be more likely to vote in favor of spending on schools.

    An American pastime

    Our findings are backed by science, but they also have roots in American history.

    Alexis de Tocqueville – a French philosopher and diplomat who arrived in the United States in 1831 to study the new nation’s penal system – was so impressed by the scale of volunteering in the U.S. that he wrote about it in his 1835 book “Democracy in America.”

    Tocqueville observed that “Americans of all ages, all conditions, all minds” were likely to unite in many kinds of groups or associations.

    More recently, former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy has said that volunteering can strengthen communities, and that “community is a powerful source of life satisfaction and life expectancy.”

    If you aren’t volunteering today, here are a few ideas to help you begin.

    Start small. Try joining an organization or association in your community, taking part in neighborhood cleanups or volunteering at your local senior center, animal shelter or museum. Love gardening? You can take care of local parks, conservation areas, community gardens and more.

    Once you’re ready for a bigger commitment, consider becoming a mentor through programs such as OASIS Intergenerational Tutoring or Big Brothers Big Sisters.

    And consider a more extensive level of commitment to organizations or causes you care deeply about. This might include joining a nonprofit board of directors, volunteering more hours, or taking on a volunteer leadership role.

    At a time when trust is eroding and divisions seem insurmountable, volunteering offers something rare: an evidence-backed way to reconnect with communities, institutions and each other.

    Reach out to your favorite nonprofit, visit Volunteer.gov or VolunteerMatch.org, or connect with a nonprofit resource center, a regional United Way or a community foundation to find volunteer opportunities near you.

    Cal Halvorsen is a Senior Research Fellow at CoGenerate. He received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to examine the longitudinal effects of volunteering on cardiovascular disease biomarkers.

    Seoyoun Kim receives funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to examine the longitudinal effects of volunteering on cardiovascular biomarkers.

    – ref. Want to stay healthier and fulfilled later in life? Try volunteering – https://theconversation.com/want-to-stay-healthier-and-fulfilled-later-in-life-try-volunteering-252585

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The UK has a lot of people out of work because of mental illness – but listening to those affected reveals that’s rarely the whole story

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Annie Louise Irvine, Research Affiliate, King’s College London

    ARMMY PICCA/Shutterstock

    What is going on in the UK when it comes to the massive rise in benefit claims related to mental health? It’s complicated, that much is certain.

    Understanding the causes of mental health-related economic inactivity and what to do about it is at the top of the UK government’s policy agenda. It recently set out plans in a green paper to improve access to effective employment support for people with mental health problems. At the same time, controversial reforms to health and disability benefits were central to Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s spring statement.

    As a social researcher, listening closely to people’s lived experiences has taught me that while their distress is genuine, significant and at times severe, it is rarely the whole story of what is constraining their ability to find and stay in work.

    Mental distress is almost invariably bound up in other challenging circumstances that also pose barriers to work – issues such as homelessness, violence and abuse, caring commitments, lone parenthood, poverty, involvement with the criminal justice system, and the obstacles caused by inflexible employers and insecure work.

    This has made me wonder if the system’s very narrow focus on health as a barrier to work is part of the problem.

    It’s not that the mental health conversation has gone too far – but it may have become too narrow. While it is essential to respond to people’s distress, we can’t understand their capacity for work, or support their steps back into employment, unless we pay attention to all the other factors that limit their opportunities for work.

    The work capability assessment (WCA) was introduced 17 years ago to determine how far and in what ways someone’s disability, illness or health condition limits them from working. Since then, welfare support has been narrowed down to questions of obligation and conditionality – with health as the central focus.

    But this narrow approach, and the exclusive link between ill health and work-related obligations, has crowded out the full range of challenges, constraints and contingencies that affect people’s capacity for work. When health is the only thing the system is interested in, it’s the only thing claimants can discuss.

    So now, with the UK government’s plan to scrap the WCA and introduce a new kind of “support conversation”, there is an opportunity to bring this broader range of factors back into the picture.

    In a positive shift, the government has recognised that discussions about work need to include a better understanding of people’s goals and aspirations, and that these conversations should also facilitate access to support for debt, housing, careers, training and social connection.

    How this might be done is a question that needs careful thought and experimentation. The government is seeking responses on how this “support conversation” should be designed and delivered.

    In a recent workshop, we explored the opportunities and challenges that might arise from a more holistic approach to assessing capacity for work. Participants in our workshop felt there was potential for more positive experiences and effective support.

    But they also envisaged risks both for claimants and welfare services, including the potential for claimants to be retraumatised, as well as extra admin and the possibility of raising unrealistic expectations.

    Better support for people who want to work

    As the government’s Pathways to Work green paper recognises, there are many people for whom formal paid employment may never be possible. But there are some people in the health-related benefits group who would like to work.

    In my most recent research project, I met people living with mental health difficulties and neurodivergence who were keen to work but felt frustrated at the lack of personalised support. Here are a few examples of what they told me:

    In my experience, they don’t help you, they just tell you to do this, that and the other. But they’re not supporting you through the process of finding a job. They’re just throwing these jobs at you. (female, 26)

    I do want to work. It’s just, I want to be able to work and then keep the job. And right now, I just I don’t feel like I’ve got the right things in place to help me with that … I don’t want to use it as just an excuse … What I want is: ‘Oh, I’ve got ADHD, can you please take that into account?’ (male, 33)

    I really don’t know what [job] to go for … A lot of my issues have been connected to frustration and feeling stuck, and not being able to find a pathway into sustainable employment – and things related to education. It’s all kind of linked in a bundle (male, 38)

    Shifting the balance towards personalised and holistic support is a step in the right direction. But the spectre of welfare conditionality, and the threat of sanctions if someone is unable to fulfil work-related activities, will always be a block on engaging those who might be able to work, given the appropriate time and support.

    While the green paper describes sanctions as a “last resort”, it does not go far enough on removing compliance from people’s encounters with the system.

    Mental ill health is often part of a bigger picture of challenging circumstances including lone parenthood or poverty.
    Alena Ozerova/Shutterstock

    The goal should be to make a safe space for people to go beyond the health conversation. The new “support conversation” must allow people to talk about their health and non-health constraints, and the full range of support they need to move into appropriate work.

    We do need to talk about mental health – the reality of people’s distress must never be undermined. But we need to talk about more than just mental health, and approach people’s work-related challenges with an appreciation that mental health problems rarely arise out of nowhere. We cannot understand capacity for work without understanding people’s wider social context.

    Lastly, we really need to ditch the “any job” approach. It is the fit of a particular workplace and particular job with a person’s unique life circumstances that makes the difference as to whether work is feasible, fulfilling and sustainable.

    Annie Louise Irvine has received research funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. She is affiliated with the ESRC Centre for Society and Mental Health, the University of York School for Business and Society, and serves as a non-executive Director for the organisation Better Connect.

    – ref. The UK has a lot of people out of work because of mental illness – but listening to those affected reveals that’s rarely the whole story – https://theconversation.com/the-uk-has-a-lot-of-people-out-of-work-because-of-mental-illness-but-listening-to-those-affected-reveals-thats-rarely-the-whole-story-252891

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: As federal environmental priorities shift, sovereign Native American nations have their own plans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alyssa Kreikemeier, Assistant Professor of History, University of Idaho

    Billy Frank Jr., left, a Nisqually tribal elder, was arrested dozens of times while trying to assert his native fishing rights during the ‘Fish Wars’ of the 1960s and 1970s. In this 2014 photo, he stands with Ed Johnstone of the Quinault tribe. AP Photo/Ted S. Warren

    Long before the large-scale Earth Day protests on April 22, 1970 – often credited with spurring significant environmental protection legislation – Native Americans stewarded the environment. As sovereign nations, Native Americans have been able to protect land, water and air, including well beyond their own boundaries.

    Their actions laid the groundwork for modern federal law and policy, including national legislation aimed at reducing pollution. Now the Trump administration is seeking to weaken some of those limits and eliminate programs aimed at improving the environments in which marginalized people live and work.

    As an environmental historian, I study how Native Americans have shaped environmental management. Tribal nations are the longest stewards of the lands today known as the United States. My work indicates not only that tribal nations contributed to the origins and evolution of modern environmental management on tribal and nontribal lands, but also that they are well poised to continue environmental management and scientific research regardless of U.S. government actions.

    Environmental sovereignty

    Native peoples stewarded and studied their environments for millennia before European colonization. Today, Native nations continue to use science, technology and Indigenous knowledge to benefit their own people and the broader population.

    Their stewardship continues despite repeated and ongoing efforts to dispossess Native peoples. In 1953, Congress reversed centuries of federally recognizing tribal authority, passing a law that terminated tribal nations’ legal and political status and federal obligations under treaties and legal precedents, including requirements to provide education and health care.

    This termination policy subjected tribal nations and reservation lands to state jurisdiction and relocated at least 200,000 Native people from tribal lands to urban centers.

    A groundswell of Native American resistance captured national attention, including protests and tactics such as “fish-ins,” which involved fishing at traditional grounds guaranteed by treaties but not honored by land use at the time. Their efforts led federal courts to affirm the very rights termination had sought to expunge.

    Native nations regained federally recognized rights and political power at the same time as the national environmental awakening. In fact, tribal nations exercised environmental sovereignty in ways that restored federal recognition and influenced broader U.S. environmental law and policy.

    Air quality

    In the 1960s, air pollution in America posed a serious health threat, with smog killing Americans on occasion and harming their long-term health. Under the 1970 Clean Air Act amendments, the federal government set national standards for air quality and penalties for polluters.

    As early as 1974, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe in southeastern Montana began monitoring its own air quality. Finding that its air was substantially cleaner than other areas of the country, the tribe used a new approach to push the Environmental Protection Agency to approve enhanced protections beyond the minimum federal standards. The Northern Cheyenne wanted to prevent polluting industries from moving into locations with cleaner air that could be polluted without exceeding the federal limits. That protection was codified in the 1977 Clean Air Act amendments, which established legal protections and a process for communities to claim greater pollution protections nationwide.

    In 1978, the Northern Cheyenne used their higher standards to limit pollution sources on private land upwind of tribal lands, temporarily blocking the construction of two additional coal-fired power plants.

    Within a decade, the Assiniboine and Sioux nations at Fort Peck and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes also claimed enhanced air protection and developed air quality monitoring programs even before most state governments did. Dozens of tribal nations have taken control of their air quality in the years since.

    This September 1941 photo shows Native Americans fishing for salmon at Celilo Falls, Ore.
    Russell Lee/Library of Congress via AP

    Waterways

    Native nations also exercise sovereignty over waterways. In the Pacific Northwest, people whose ancestors have lived in the area for at least 16,000 years have moved to protect themselves and their lands from the effects of massive hydropower projects.

    The Columbia River Basin hydropower project, which began in the 1930s, now includes over 250 dams that together generate nearly half of the United States’ hydropower. Its dams and associated development stretch from the Canadian Rockies to Southern California, with effects crossing dozens of Native nations as well as international and state boundaries. The construction of the dams inundated multiple tribal nations’ lands and displaced thousands of Native people.

    When four dams were built on the lower Snake River in Idaho in the 1960s, they inundated ancestral lands and fishing grounds of Columbia River Native Americans, including the Nez Perce Tribe. The dams decimated fish populations many tribes have long relied upon for both sustenance and cultural practices and destroyed ancient and culturally significant fishing sites, including Celilo Falls near The Dalles, Oregon, which had been fished for at least 10,000 years.

    Nez Perce scientists and environmental managers, working alongside other Northwest tribes, have documented the near extinction of numerous species of salmon and steelhead fish, despite federal, state and tribal agencies investing billions of dollars in hatchery programs to boost fish populations. The Nez Perce Department of Fisheries Resources Management protects and restores aquatic ecosystems. In collaboration with nearby communities, the tribe also restores significant areas of habitat on nontribal lands. That includes decommissioning many miles of logging roads, removing mine tailings and sowing tens of thousands of native plants.

    The Nez Perce and other tribes advocate for the removal of those four dams to restore salmon populations. They cite, among other evidence, a 2002 Army Corps of Engineers study that found removal was the most effective way to meet the Endangered Species Act’s requirements to restore decimated fish populations.

    As part of a collaboration between federal agencies and Native tribes, juvenile coho salmon are released into the Columbia River Basin.
    AP Photo/Gillian Flaccus

    Taking a long view

    Native Americans and tribal nations see environmental sovereignty as essential to their past, present and future.

    In 2015, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes became the first Native nation to take over a federal dam when they purchased the Selis Ksanka Qlispe dam, operating on the Flathead River in Montana. Managed by a tribal corporation, the dam produces enough hydropower to supply 100,000 homes, bringing millions of dollars to tribal coffers rather than enriching a corporation in Pennsylvania.

    Over the decades, Native nations have partnered with federal agencies and used federal laws and funds to manage their environments. They have also built connections between tribes and nations across the continent.

    For instance, the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission coordinates and assists Columbia Basin tribes with environmental management and fishing rights. In northern New Mexico, the Indigenous women of Tewa Women United work against the legacy and ongoing effects of nuclear research affecting their homelands and communities from Los Alamos National Laboratory.

    Across the U.S., the Indian Land Tenure Foundation works with Native peoples to secure control of their homelands through land return and legal reforms, while Honor the Earth organizes Indigenous peoples in North America and globally to advance social change rooted in Indigenous sovereignty through treaty organizing and advocacy.

    Tribal governments have been hit hard by the shifts in federal priorities, including Trump administration funding cuts that have slowed scientific research, such as environmental monitoring and management on tribal lands.

    Tribal governance takes a long view based in Native peoples’ deep history with these lands. And their legal and political status as sovereign nations – backed by the U.S. Constitution, treaties, more than 120 Supreme Court rulings and the plain text of federal laws – puts Native nations in a strong position to continue their efforts, no matter which ways the federal winds blow.

    I have conducted research for the National Park Service as an employee of the University of New Mexico’s School for Architecture and Planning. My research at the University of Idaho has been partially supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation’s Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research.

    – ref. As federal environmental priorities shift, sovereign Native American nations have their own plans – https://theconversation.com/as-federal-environmental-priorities-shift-sovereign-native-american-nations-have-their-own-plans-251685

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: From censorship to curiosity: Pope Francis’ appreciation for the power of history and books

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joëlle Rollo-Koster, Professor of Medieval History, University of Rhode Island

    Pope Francis delivers the Angelus noon prayer in St. Peter’s Square, at the Vatican, on Nov. 10, 2024. AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia

    In January 2025, while doing research at the Vatican archives, I heard Pope Francis’ Sunday prayers in St. Peter’s Square. The pope reflected on the ceasefire that had just gone into effect in Gaza, highlighting the role of mediators, the need for humanitarian aid, and his hope for a two-state solution.

    “Let us pray always for tormented Ukraine, for Palestine, Israel, Myanmar, and all the populations who are suffering because of war,” he concluded. “I wish you all a good Sunday, and please, do not forget to pray for me. Enjoy your lunch, and arrivederci!”

    A few weeks later, Francis was admitted to the hospital, where he remained for more than a month, receiving treatment for double pneumonia.

    In those weeks of uncertainty, I thought back to the pope’s words that Sunday afternoon. They encapsulate Francis’ image: a spiritual leader using his influence to try to bring peace. He is also a down-to-earth man who wishes you “buon appetito.”

    Francis does not fear addressing contemporary politics, unlike many of his predecessors. And some popes have closed their eyes to not just current events but past ones: learning and history that threatened their vision of the church.

    As a medievalist, I appreciate Francis’ contrasting approach: a religious leader who embraces history and scholarship, and encourages others to do the same – even as book bans and threats to academic freedom mount.

    People in St. Peter’s Square watch a broadcast as Pope Francis makes his first appearance since entering the hospital.
    AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia

    Infamous index

    For 400 years, the Catholic Church famously maintained the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, a long list of banned books. First conceived in the 1500s, it matured under Pope Paul IV. His 1559 index counted any books written by people the church deemed heretics – anyone not speaking dogma, in the widest sense.

    Even before the index, church leaders permitted little flexibility of thought. In the decades leading up to it, however, the church doubled down in response to new challenges: the rapid spreading of the printing press and the Protestant Reformation.

    The Catholic Counter-Reformation, which took shape at the Council of Trent from 1545-1563, reinforced dogmatism in its effort to rebuke reformers. The council decided that the Vulgate, a Latin translation of the Bible, was enough to understand scripture, and there was little need to investigate its original Greek and Hebrew version.

    Bishops and the Vatican began producing lists of titles that were forbidden to print and read. Between 1571-1917, the Sacred Congregation of the Index, a special unit of the Vatican, investigated writings and compiled the lists of banned readings approved by the pope. Catholics who read titles on the Index of Forbidden Books risked excommunication.

    In 1966, Pope Paul VI abolished the index. The church could no longer punish people for reading books on the list but still advised against them, as historian Paolo Sachet highlights. The moral imperative not to read them remained.

    The title page of a version of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, published in 1711.
    National Library of Slovenia/Drw1 via Wikimedia Commons

    Historian J.M de Bujanda has completed the most comprehensive list of books forbidden across the ages by the Catholic Church. Its authors include astronomer Johannes Kepler and Galileo, as well as philosophers across centuries, from Erasmus and René Descartes to feminist Simone de Beauvoir and existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre. Then there are the writers: Michel de Montaigne, Voltaire, Denis Diderot, David Hume, historian Edward Gibbon and Gustave Flaubert. In sum, the index is a who’s who of science, literature and history.

    Love of humanities

    Compare that with a letter Francis published on Nov. 21, 2024, emphasizing the importance of studying church history – particularly for priests, to better understand the world they live in. For the pope, history research “helps to keep ‘the flame of collective conscience’ alive.”

    The pope advocated for studying church history in a way that is unfiltered and authentic, flaws included. He emphasized primary sources and urged students to ask questions. Francis criticized the view that history is mere chronology – rote memorization that fails to analyze events.

    In 2019, Francis changed the name of the Vatican Secret Archives to the Vatican Apostolic Archives. Though the archives themselves had already been open to scholars since 1881, “secret” connotes something “revealed and reserved for a few,” Francis wrote. Under Francis, the Vatican opened the archives on Pope Pius XII, allowing research on his papacy during World War II, his knowledge of the Holocaust and his general response toward Nazi Germany.

    An attendant opens the section of the Vatican archives dedicated to Pope Pius XII on Feb. 27, 2020.
    Alberto Pizzoli/AFP via Getty Images

    In addition to showing respect for history, the pope has emphasized his own love of reading. “Each new work we read will renew and expand our worldview,” he wrote in a letter to future priests, published July 17, 2024.

    Today, he continued, “veneration” of screens, with their “toxic, superficial and violent fake news” has diverted us from literature. The pope shared his experience as a young Jesuit literature instructor in Santa Fe, then added a sentence that would have stupefied “index popes.”

    “Naturally, I am not asking you to read the same things that I did,” he stated. “Everyone will find books that speak to their own lives and become authentic companions for their journey.”

    Citing his compatriot, the novelist Jorge Luis Borges, Francis reminded Catholics that to read is to “listen to another person’s voice. … We must never forget how dangerous it is to stop listening to the voice of other people when they challenge us!”

    When Francis dies or resigns, the Vatican will remain deeply divided between progressives and conservatives. So are modern democracies – and in many places, the modern trend leans toward nationalism, fascism and censorship.

    But Francis will leave a phenomenal rebuttal. One of the pope’s greatest achievements, in my view, will have been his engagement with the humanities and humanity – with a deep understanding of the challenges it faces.

    Joëlle Rollo-Koster does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. From censorship to curiosity: Pope Francis’ appreciation for the power of history and books – https://theconversation.com/from-censorship-to-curiosity-pope-francis-appreciation-for-the-power-of-history-and-books-250734

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Cuts to science research funding cut American lives short − federal support is essential for medical breakthroughs

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Deborah Fuller, Professor of Microbiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington

    Divesting from the next generation of researchers means cutting the lifeblood of science and medicine. J Studios/DigitalVision via Getty Images

    Nearly every modern medical treatment can be traced to research funded by the National Institutes of Health: from over-the-counter and prescription medications that treat high cholesterol and pain to protection from infectious diseases such as polio and smallpox.

    The remarkable successes of the decades-old partnership between biomedical research institutions and the federal government are so intertwined with daily life that it’s easy to take them for granted.

    However, the scientific work driving these medical advances and breakthroughs is in jeopardy. Federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation are terminating hundreds of active research grants under the current administration’s direction. The administration has also proposed a dramatic reduction in federal support of the critical infrastructure that keeps labs open and running. Numerous scientists and health professionals have noted that changes will have far-reaching, harmful outcomes for the health and well-being of the American people.

    The negative consequences of defunding U.S. biomedical research can be difficult to recognize. Most breakthroughs, from the basic science discoveries that reveal the causes of diseases to the development of effective treatments and cures, can take years. Real-time progress can be hard to measure.

    Medical breakthroughs are built on years of painstaking research.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    As biomedical researchers studying infectious diseases, viruses and immunology, we and our colleagues see this firsthand in our own work. Thousands of ongoing national and international projects dedicated to uncovering the causes of life-threatening diseases and developing new treatments to improve and save lives are supported by federal agencies such as the NIH and NSF.

    Considering a few of the breakthroughs made possible through U.S. federal support can help illustrate not only the significant inroads biomedical research has made for preventing, treating and curing human maladies, but what all Americans stand to lose if the U.S. reduces its investment in these endeavors.

    A cure for cancer

    The hope and dream of curing cancer unites many scientists, health professionals and affected families across the U.S. After decades of ongoing NIH-supported research, scientists have made significant progress in realizing this goal.

    The National Cancer Institute of the NIH is the world’s largest funder of cancer research. This investment has led to advances in cancer treatment and prevention that helped reduce the overall U.S. cancer death rate by 33% from 1991 to 2021.

    Basic science research on what causes cancer has led to new strategies to harness a patient’s own immune system to eliminate tumors. For example, all 12 patients in a 2022 clinical trial testing one type of immunotherapy had their rectal cancer completely disappear, without remission or adverse effects.

    Cuts in NIH funding will directly affect patients.

    Another example of progress is the 2024 results of an ongoing clinical trial of a targeted therapy for lung cancer, showing an 84% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death. Similarly, in a study of women who were immunized against the human papillomavirus at age 12 or 13, none developed the disease later. Since the widespread adoption of HPV vaccination, cervical cancer deaths have dropped 62%.

    Despite these incredible successes, there is still a long way to go. In 2024, over 2 million people in the U.S. were estimated to be newly diagnosed with cancer, and 611,720 were expected to die from the disease.

    Without sustained federal support for cancer research, progress toward curing cancer and reducing its death rate will stall.

    Autoimmune and neurodegenerative diseases

    Nearly every family is touched in some way by autoimmune and neurodegenerative diseases. Government-funded research has enabled major advances to combat conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease.

    For example, approximately 1 in 5 Americans have arthritis, an autoimmune disease that causes joint swelling and stiffness. A leading cause of disability and economic costs in the U.S., there is no cure for arthritis. But new drugs in development are able to significantly improve symptoms and slow or prevent disease progression.

    Researchers are also gaining insight into what causes multiple sclerosis, an autoimmune disease where the immune system attacks the protective covering of nerves and can result in paralysis. Scientists recently found a link between multiple sclerosis and Epstein-Barr virus, a pathogen estimated to infect over 90% of adults around the world. While multiple sclerosis is currently incurable, identifying its underlying cause can provide new avenues for prevention and treatment.

    The NIH’s BRAIN Initiative has invested more than $3 billion in neuroscience research since it began in 2013.
    Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

    Alzheimer’s disease causes irreversible nerve damage and is the leading cause of dementia. In 2024, 6.9 million Americans ages 65 and older were living with Alzheimer’s. Most treatments address cognitive and behavioral symptoms. However, two new drugs developed with NIH-supported research and clinical trials were approved in July 2023 and July 2024 to treat early-stage Alzheimer’s. Federal funding is also supporting the development of blood tests for earlier detection of the disease.

    None of these breakthroughs are a cure. But they represent important steps forward on the path toward ultimately reducing or eliminating these devastating ailments. Lack of funding will slow or block further progress, leading to the continued rise of the incidence and severity of these conditions.

    Infectious diseases and the next pandemic

    The world’s capacity to combat infectious disease will also be weakened by cuts to U.S. federal support of biomedical research.

    Over the past 50 years, medical and public health advances have led to the eradication of smallpox globally and the elimination of polio in the U.S. HIV/AIDS, once a death sentence, is now a disease that can be managed with medication. Moreover, a new version of treatments called preexposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, offers complete protection against HIV transmission when taken only twice per year.

    Similarly, the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the critical role biomedical research plays in responding to public health threats. Increased federal support of science during this time allowed the United States to emerge with new drugs, vaccine platforms with the potential to treat a variety of chronic diseases, and insights on how to effectively detect and respond to pandemic threats.

    The ongoing avian influenza outbreak and its spillover into American dairy herds and poultry farms is another pandemic threat looming on the horizon. Rather than build upon infrastructure for outbreak surveillance and preparedness, grants that would allow scientists to better understand long COVID-19, vaccines and other pandemic-related research are being cut. Decreased funding of biomedical research will hamper the U.S.’s ability to respond to the next pandemic, putting everyone at risk.

    Research across the country has ground to a halt as grants remain in limbo or have been terminated altogether.
    Scott Olson/Getty Images

    Losses from defunding biomedical research

    The National Institutes of Health contributed over $100 billion to support research that ultimately led to the development of all new drugs approved from 2010 to 2016 alone. Over 90% of this funding was for basic research into understanding the causes of disease that provides the foundation for new treatments.

    Under the new directive to eliminate projects that support or use terms associated with diversity, equity and inclusion, the NIH and other federal agencies have made deep cuts to biomedical research that will directly affect patient lives.

    Already, nearly 41% of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lifetime, and nearly 11% with Alzheimer’s. About 1 in 5 Americans will die from heart disease, and nearly 1.4 million will be rushed to an emergency room due to pneumonia from an infectious disease.

    Defunding biomedical research will result in a cascade of effects. There will likely be fewer clinical trials, fewer new treatments and fewer lifesaving drugs. Labs will likely shut down, jobs will be lost, and the process of discovery will stall. The U.S.’s health care system, economy and standing as the world’s leader in scientific innovation will likely decline.

    Moreover, when the pipelines of scientific progress are turned off, they will not so easily be turned back on. These consequences will affect all Americans and the rest of the world for decades.

    University shortfalls directly resulting from cuts to research support will dramatically reduce the capacity of American institutions to educate and provide opportunities for the next generation. Funding cuts have led to the shuttering or heavy reduction of training programs for future scientists.

    Graduate students and postdoctoral trainees are the lifeblood of biomedical research. Supporting these young people committed to public service through research and health care is also an investment in medical advancements and public health. But the uncertainty and instability resulting from the divestment of federally funded programs will likely severely deplete the biomedical workforce, crippling the United States’ ability to deliver future biomedical breakthroughs.

    By cutting biomedical research funding, Americans and the rest of the world stand to lose new cures, new treatments and an entire generation of researchers.

    Deborah Fuller receives funding from the National Institutes Health. The personal views expressed here are those of the authors.

    Patrick Mitchell receives funding from the National Institutes of Health. The personal views expressed here are those of the authors.

    – ref. Cuts to science research funding cut American lives short − federal support is essential for medical breakthroughs – https://theconversation.com/cuts-to-science-research-funding-cut-american-lives-short-federal-support-is-essential-for-medical-breakthroughs-252150

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Chronic kidney disease often goes undiagnosed, but early detection can prevent severe outcomes

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Eleanor Rivera, Assistant Professor of Population Health Nursing Science, University of Illinois Chicago

    Testing for kidney function can help identify chronic kidney disease early enough to intervene. PIXOLOGICSTUDIO/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

    For a disease afflicting 35.5 million people in the U.S., chronic kidney disease flies under the radar. Only half the people who have it are formally diagnosed.

    The consequences of advanced chronic kidney disease are severe. When these essential organs can no longer do their job of filtering waste products from the blood, patients need intensive medical interventions that gravely diminish their quality of life.

    As an assistant professor of nursing and an expert in population health, I study strategies for improving patients’ awareness of chronic kidney disease. My research shows that patients with early-stage chronic kidney disease are not getting timely information from their health care providers about how to prevent the condition from worsening.

    Here’s what you need to know to keep your kidneys healthy:

    What do your kidneys do, and what happens when they fail?

    Kidneys have multiple functions, but their most critical and unglamorous job is filtering waste out of the body. When your kidneys are working well, they get rid of everyday by-products from your normal metabolism by creating urine. They also help keep your blood pressure stable, your electrolytes balanced and your red blood cell production pumping.

    The kidneys work hard around the clock. Over time, they can become damaged by acute experiences like severe dehydration, or acquire chronic damage from years of high blood pressure or high blood sugar. Sustained damage leads to chronically impaired kidney function, which can eventually progress to kidney failure.

    Kidneys that have failed stop producing urine, which prevents the body from eliminating fluids. This causes electrolytes like potassium and phosphate to build up to dangerous levels. The only effective treatments are to replace the work of the kidney with a procedure called dialysis or to receive a kidney transplant.

    Kidney transplants are the gold standard treatment, and most patients can be eligible to receive them. But unless they have a willing donor, they can spend an average of five years waiting for an available kidney.

    Most patients with kidney failure receive dialysis, which artificially replicates the kidneys’ job of filtering waste and removing fluid from the body. Dialysis treatment is extremely burdensome. Patients usually have to undergo the procedure multiple times per week, with each session taking several hours. And it comes with a major risk of death, disability and serious complications.

    If your kidneys aren’t working, dialysis can do their job for them.
    Picsfive via Getty Images

    What are the risk factors of chronic kidney disease?

    In the U.S., the biggest contributors to developing chronic kidney disease are high blood pressure and diabetes. Up to 40% of people with diabetes and as many as 30% of people with high blood pressure develop chronic kidney disease.

    The problem is, as with high blood pressure, people with early-stage chronic kidney disease almost never experience symptoms. Clinicians can test a patient’s overall kidney function using a measure called the estimated glomerular filtration rate. Current guidelines recommend that everyone – particularly people with risk factors like high blood pressure and diabetes – get their kidney function routinely tested to ensure the condition doesn’t progress silently.

    Early treatment for kidney disease often relies on managing high blood pressure and diabetes. New medications called SGLT2 inhibitors, originally developed to treat diabetes, may be able to directly protect the kidneys themselves, even in people who don’t have diabetes.

    Patients with early-stage kidney disease can benefit from knowing their kidney function scores and from treatment innovations like SGLT2 inhibitors, but only if they are successfully diagnosed and can discuss treatment options during routine visits with their health care providers.

    What are some barriers to early treatment?

    Early treatment for chronic kidney disease often gets overlooked during routine clinical care. In fact, as many as one-third of patients with kidney failure have no record of health care treatment for their kidneys in the early stages of their disease.

    Even if a diagnosis for chronic kidney disease is noted in a patient’s medical record, their provider might not discuss it with them: As few as 10% of people with the disease are aware that they have it.

    That’s partly due to the constraints of the U.S. health care system. The diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of early-stage chronic kidney disease occurs mostly in the primary care setting. However, primary care visit time is limited by insurance company reimbursement policies. Especially with patients who have multiple health problems, doctors may prioritize more noticeably pressing concerns.

    Chronic kidney disease can progress silently over many years.

    The result is that many clinicians put off addressing chronic kidney disease until symptoms emerge or test results worsen, often leaving early-stage patients undiagnosed and poorly informed about the disease. Research shows that people who are nonwhite, female and of lower socioeconomic status or education level are most likely to fall into this gap.

    But patients are eager for this knowledge, according to a study I co-authored. I interviewed patients who had early-stage kidney disease about their experiences receiving care. In their responses, patients expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of information they received from their health care providers and voiced a strong interest in learning more about the disease.

    As kidney disease progresses to the later stages, patients get treated by kidney specialists called nephrologists, who provide patients with targeted treatment and more robust education. But by the time patients progress to late-stage disease or even kidney failure, many symptoms can’t be reversed and the disease is much harder to manage.

    How can patients take charge of kidney health?

    People who are at risk for chronic kidney disease or who have developed early-stage disease can take several steps to minimize the chances that it will progress to kidney failure.

    First, patients can ask their doctors about chronic kidney disease, especially if they have risk factors such as high blood pressure or diabetes. Studies show that patients who ask questions, make requests and raise concerns with their provider during their health care visit have better health outcomes and are more satisfied with their care.

    Some specific questions to ask include “Am I at risk of developing chronic kidney disease?” and “Have I been tested for chronic kidney disease?” To help patients start these conversations at the doctor’s office, researchers are working to develop digital tools that visually represent a patient’s kidney disease test results and risks. These graphics can be incorporated into patients’ medical records to help spur conversations during a health care visit about their kidney health.

    Studies show that patients with chronic kidney disease who have a formal diagnosis in their medical records receive better care in line with current treatment guidelines and experience slower disease progression. Such patients can ask, “How quickly is my chronic kidney disease progressing?” and “How can I monitor my test results?” They may also want to ask, “What is my treatment plan for my chronic kidney disease?” and “Should I be seeing a kidney specialist?”

    In our research, we saw that patients with chronic kidney disease who had seen a loved one experience dialysis treatment were especially motivated to stick with their treatment to prevent kidney failure.

    But even without the benefit of direct experience, the possibility of kidney failure may motivate patients to follow their health care providers’ recommendations to eat a healthy diet, get regular physical activity and take their medications as prescribed.

    Eleanor Rivera receives funding from the National Institutes of Health. She is affiliated with the National Kidney Foundation and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

    – ref. Chronic kidney disease often goes undiagnosed, but early detection can prevent severe outcomes – https://theconversation.com/chronic-kidney-disease-often-goes-undiagnosed-but-early-detection-can-prevent-severe-outcomes-250744

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Foreign aid cuts could mean 10 million more HIV infections by 2030 – and almost 3 million extra deaths

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Rowan Martin-Hughes, Senior Research Fellow, Burnet Institute

    CI Photos/Shutterstock

    In January, the Trump administration ordered a broad pause on all US funding for foreign aid.

    Among other issues, this has significant effects on US funding for HIV. The United States has been the world’s biggest donor to international HIV assistance, providing 73% of funding in 2023.

    A large part of this is the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which oversees programs in low- and middle-income countries to prevent, diagnose and treat the virus. These programs have been significantly disrupted.

    What’s more, recent funding cuts for international HIV assistance go beyond the US. Five countries that provide the largest amount of foreign aid for HIV – the US, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and the Netherlands – have announced cuts of between 8% and 70% to international aid in 2025 and 2026.

    Together, this may mean a 24% reduction in international HIV spending, in addition to the US foreign aid pause.

    We wanted to know how these cuts might affect HIV infections and deaths in the years to come. In a new study, we found the worst-case scenario could see more than 10 million extra infections than what we’d otherwise anticipate in the next five years, and almost 3 million additional deaths.

    What is HIV?

    HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) is a virus that attacks the body’s immune system. HIV can be transmitted at birth, during unprotected sex or thorough blood-to-blood contact such as shared needles.

    If left untreated, HIV can progress to AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome), a condition in which the immune system is severely damaged, and which can be fatal.

    HIV was the world’s deadliest infectious disease in the early 1990s. There’s still no cure for HIV, but modern treatments allow the virus to be suppressed with a daily pill. People with HIV who continue treatment can live without symptoms and don’t risk infecting others.

    A sustained global effort towards awareness, prevention, testing and treatment has reduced annual new HIV infections by 39% (from 2.1 million in 2010 to 1.3 million in 2023), and annual deaths by 51% (from 1.3 million to 630,000).

    Most of that drop happened in sub-Saharan Africa, where the epidemic was worst. Today, nearly two-thirds of people with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa, and nearly all live in low- and middle-income countries.

    HIV can be diagnosed with a simple blood test.
    MaryBeth Semosky/Shutterstock

    Our study

    We wanted to estimate the impact of recent funding cuts from the US, UK, France, Germany and the Netherlands on HIV infections and deaths. To do this, we used our mathematical model for 26 low- and middle-income countries. The model includes data on international HIV spending as well as data on HIV cases and deaths.

    These 26 countries represent roughly half of all people living with HIV in low- and middle income countries, and half of international HIV spending. We set up each country model in collaboration with national HIV/AIDS teams, so the data sources reflected the best available local knowledge. We then extrapolated our findings from the 26 countries we modelled to all low- and middle-income countries.

    For each country, we first projected the number of new HIV infections and deaths that would occur if HIV spending stayed the same.

    Second, we modelled scenarios for anticipated cuts based on a 24% reduction in international HIV funding for each country.

    Finally, we modelled scenarios for the possible immediate discontinuation of PEPFAR in addition to other anticipated cuts.

    With the 24% cuts and PEPFAR discontinued, we estimated there could be 4.43 million to 10.75 million additional HIV infections between 2025 and 2030, and 770,000 to 2.93 million extra HIV-related deaths. Most of these would be because of cuts to treatment. For children, there could be up to an additional 882,400 infections and 119,000 deaths.

    In the more optimistic scenario in which PEPFAR continues but 24% is still cut from international HIV funding, we estimated there could be 70,000 to 1.73 million extra new HIV infections and 5,000 to 61,000 additional deaths between 2025 and 2030. This would still be 50% higher than if current spending were to continue.

    The wide range in our estimates reflects low- and middle-income countries committing to far more domestic funding for HIV in the best case, or broader health system dysfunction and a sustained gap in funding for HIV treatment in the worst case.

    Some funding for HIV treatment may be saved by taking that money from HIV prevention efforts, but this would have other consequences.

    The range also reflects limitations in the available data, and uncertainty within our analysis. But most of our assumptions were cautious, so these results likely underestimate the true impacts of funding cuts to HIV programs globally.

    Sending progress backwards

    If funding cuts continue, the world could face higher rates of annual new HIV infections by 2030 (up to 3.4 million) than at the peak of the global epidemic in 1995 (3.3 million).

    Sub-Saharan Africa will experience by far the greatest effects due to the high proportion of HIV treatment that has relied on international funding.

    In other regions, we estimate vulnerable groups such as people who inject drugs, sex workers, men who have sex with men, and trans and gender diverse people may experience increases in new HIV infections that are 1.3 to 6 times greater than the general population.

    The Asia-Pacific received US$591 million in international funding for HIV in 2023, which is the second highest after sub-Saharan Africa. So this region would likely experience a substantial rise in HIV as a result of anticipated funding cuts.

    Notably, more than 10% of new HIV infections among people born in Australia are estimated to have been acquired overseas. More HIV in the region is likely to mean more HIV in Australia.

    But concern is greatest for countries that are most acutely affected by HIV and AIDS, many of which will be most affected by international funding cuts.

    Rowan Martin-Hughes receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. He has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

    Debra ten Brink has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

    Nick Scott receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia. He has previously received funding to conduct HIV modelling studies from the Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care, Gates Foundation, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNICEF, World Bank and World Health Organization.

    – ref. Foreign aid cuts could mean 10 million more HIV infections by 2030 – and almost 3 million extra deaths – https://theconversation.com/foreign-aid-cuts-could-mean-10-million-more-hiv-infections-by-2030-and-almost-3-million-extra-deaths-253017

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: First year of Georgia’s ‘foreign agent’ law shows how autocracies are replicating Russian model − and speeding up the time frame

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Anastasiya Zavyalova, Associate Professor of Strategic Management, Rice University

    Demonstrators protest the foreign influence law in front of the Georgian Parliament building on May 28, 2024. Nicolo Vincenzo Malvestuto/Getty Images

    Autocracy is on the move worldwide and becoming more resilient.

    One of the driving forces behind this phenomenon is something scholars call “authoritarian learning,” a process by which autocratic leaders study each other and adapt tactics based on what appears to work, and how to proceed when they encounter resistance.

    Take Georgia. The ruling Georgian Dream party has steered the Caucasus nation from a path toward democracy back to autocracy – and it has done so by learning from Russia. In particular, it adopted a “foreign agent” law in May 2024 – legislation that came straight from Vladimir Putin’s playbook.

    Sold to the public as increasing transparency, the legislation has been utilized to persecute Georgia’s opposition and arrest dissidents with impunity.

    As researchers examining the structure and effects of autocratic regimes, we view Georgia’s first year of its foreign agent law as an example of how politicians are not only learning the tactics of Russian authoritarianism but improving on them in a shorter time frame.

    Bouncing from Europe to Russia

    Georgia’s current ruling party came to power after then-President Mikheil Saakashvili enacted a major series of reforms in the 2000s. Saakashvili, who was jailed in 2021 under highly contested charges, inherited a Georgia seen as a failing and corrupt state tethered to Russia.

    The reform-minded politicians of Saakashvili’s government set the country on a pro-Western path. But after Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, a socially conservative coalition under the banner Georgian Dream won the parliamentary elections in 2012.

    Georgian Dream was buoyed by the fortune of billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili, a Russian citizen until 2011. The party capitalized on the public’s fatigue after a decade of Saakashvili’s necessary but intense reforms. The new coalition married a promise for continuing the pro-Western reforms, but with a more traditional, conservative approach to social issues.

    This appeal to traditional Georgian values won support in rural communities and carried the coalition to an absolute majority in Parliament in 2016. Since then, Georgian Dream has adopted pro-Russian rhetoric, accusing a “global war party” of running the West. Increasing attacks on the European Union, in particular, have been a part of a broader strategy to bring Georgia back into Russia’s orbit.

    The Georgian Dream progression in power has mirrored that of Putin in Russia. In 2012, Putin signed a “foreign agents” law that originally targeted NGOs receiving foreign funding and alleged to be engaged in political activity.

    The Kremlin equated this law to the 1938 Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, in the United States, and justified it as a means to increase transparency around foreign involvement in Russia’s internal affairs.

    Unlike FARA, however, Russia’s version of the law neither required establishing a connection between foreign funding and political activity nor provided a clear definition of political activity.

    This vagueness allowed for a wide range of NGOs deemed undesirable by the Kremlin to be labeled as “foreign agents.” The result was the suppression of NGO activities through financial, administrative and legal burdens that led to their liquidation or departure from the country.

    Over the years, this law has reduced Russian civil society’s ability to independently voice and address issues that its population faces.

    Yearlong slide into autocracy

    Georgian Dream passed a very similar foreign agent law on May 28, 2024, after overcoming a presidential veto. It forced NGOs receiving more than 20% of their funding from abroad to register with the Ministry of Justice as “serving the interests of a foreign power.”

    Activists opposing the law have been physically assaulted, and the law has been utilized against what the ruling party has described as “LGBT propaganda.”

    The law fits a wider political landscape in which the ruling party has moved to restrict freedom of the press, prosecuted political opponents and postponed Georgia’s European Union candidate status despite the overwhelming majority of Georgians being pro-EU.

    Protestors take part in a pro-European rally in Warsaw, Poland, on April 30, 2024.
    Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto via Getty Images

    Improving on Russian authoritarians

    Three critical factors played a role in allowing for the foreign agent law in Russia to expand its reach: the power imbalance between the Russian government and NGOs, limited action by international authorities, and delayed media attention to the issue.

    At the time the law was passed, civil society inside Russia itself was split. Some foresaw the dangers of the law and engaged in collective action to oppose it, while others chose to wait and see.

    As it happened, the law and the accompanying repressive apparatus spread to a broader range of targets. In 2015, Putin signed a law that designated an “undesirable” status to foreign organizations “on national security grounds”; in 2017, an amendment expanded the targets of the law from NGOs to mass media outlets; and at the end of 2019, the law allowed the classification of individuals and unregistered public associations – that is, groups of individuals – as mass media acting as foreign agents. By July 2022, the foreign funding criterion was excluded and a status of a foreign agent could be designated to anyone whom the Russian authorities deemed to be “under foreign influence.”

    Russia’s experience highlights the process of early stages of authoritarian consolidation, when state power quashes independent sources of power, and political groups and citizens either rally around the government or go silent. The foreign agent law in Russia was passed only after the protests that accompanied the 2012 elections, which returned Putin to the presidency for the third term.

    In Georgia, the ruling government borrowed from Russia’s lead – after backing down from its first attempt to pass a foreign agent law in the face of massive protests, it pushed it through before the elections.

    The law was then used to raid NGOs sympathetic to the opposition days before the October 2024 parliamentary election. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said before the elections that in the event of Georgian Dream’s victory, it would look to outlaw the pro-Western opposition, naming them “criminal political forces.”

    In the wake of President Donald Trump’s suspension of USAID assistance in February 2025, Georgian Dream has seized the opportunity to expand its war on civil society, echoing Russian, Chinese and American far-right conspiracy rhetoric that foreign-funded NGOs were fomenting revolution. To combat such phantoms, Georgian Dream has passed new legislation that criminalizes assembly and protest.

    A springboard for repression

    The foreign agent law has been a springboard for repressive activities in both Russia and Georgia, but while it took Russia a decade to effectively use the law to crush any opposition, Georgian Dream is working on an expedited timetable.

    Although the EU has suspended direct assistance and closed off visa-free travel for Georgian officials as a result of the law, Trump’s turn toward pro-Russian policies has made it more difficult to obtain Western consensus in dislodging the Georgian government from its authoritarian drift.

    Georgia’s experience, following the Russian playbook, illustrates how authoritarians are learning from each other, utilizing the rule of law itself against democracy.

    Christopher A. Hartwell has received funding from the Institute for Humane Studies and the Swiss National Science Foundation.

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

    – ref. First year of Georgia’s ‘foreign agent’ law shows how autocracies are replicating Russian model − and speeding up the time frame – https://theconversation.com/first-year-of-georgias-foreign-agent-law-shows-how-autocracies-are-replicating-russian-model-and-speeding-up-the-time-frame-250878

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –