Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Pia Riggirozzi, Professor of Global Politics, University of Southampton

Across Latin America, democracy is coming under severe pressure. Authoritarian leaders across the continent have been entrenching political power through constitutional manipulation, militarised policing and the persecution of dissent.

In Venezuela, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Argentina, regimes are increasingly eroding democracy and mounting a backlash against human rights.

It is in this bleak regional landscape that the Nobel Committee’s decision to award the 2025 peace prize to María Corina Machado has landed. The award is a recognition of one woman’s defiance. But it is also an opportunity to ask what kind of democracy and what kind of peace the world should aspire to.

Machado has long been the face of Venezuela’s democratic opposition. Disqualified from public office, vilified by Nicolás Maduro’s regime and repeatedly threatened, she embodies the persistence of civic dissent.

The Nobel prize committee’s citation reads: “She is receiving the Nobel Peace Prize for her tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela, and for her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.”

Yet that transition is a long way from being achieved and remains deeply uncertain. Venezuela has fallen victim to increasing political polarisation and is now suffering one of the worst displacement crises in the hemisphere, with 8 million people having left the country since 2014. And the threat of US interference is ever present.

The prize thus risks celebrating an aspiration more than an outcome. It represents a fragile hope in a region where democratic renewal is both urgent and unfinished.

A feminist reading of courage and contradiction

The award makes Machado the first Venezuelan to receive the Nobel peace prize, underscoring the international significance of her career and support for the Venezuelan democratic cause. There is no doubt that her courage is extraordinary.

Machado has refused exile, rejected violence and unified a fragmented opposition under conditions that would crush most political careers. She was forced to go into hiding last year shortly after alleging fraud in Nicolás Maduro’s reelection on July 28 2024.

For decades, women in Latin America have been at the forefront of resistance movements. From the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentina to the Ni Una Menos protests in Buenos Aires, Santiago, Bogotá and Mexico City, women’s groups have focused on advancing human rights and social justice. Machado’s recognition inserts Venezuelan women’s political agency into that prominent tradition.

In a region where politics remains saturated by machismo and military archetypes, this is not trivial. The image of a woman – assertive, unapologetic, unbowed – being recognised as a symbol of peace and democratic resistance matters deeply.

Yet the discussion cannot stop there. Machado comes from a powerful business family. She was educated in exclusive schools in Venezuela and the US and shaped by early work in her family’s steel company – all of which may have informed and defined her political outlook.

Her position as an elite woman in a country whose crisis has hit the poor and working-class hardest highlights the need to broaden the conversation about what a just and inclusive democracy looks like.

Her economic agenda – market-oriented and pro-privatisation – raises questions about whether democratic renewal can balance economic reforms, social protection and grassroots priorities. It asks how best to address inequalities that underpin Venezuela’s crisis.

In recognising Machado, the Nobel committee has invited reflection not only on the courage of individual leaders but also on how democratic movements can more fully integrate issues of peace and social justice for all alongside the fight against authoritarianism.

Democracy, peace, and the displaced

The Nobel committee described Machado’s resistance as peaceful. In Venezuela the concept of peace is multifaceted. It encompasses not only the absence of violence but also the profound challenges of hunger, displacement and uncertainty that millions continue to face.

The mass displacement since 2014 has disproportionately affected women and girls. They often flee for gender-specific reasons such as the collapse of maternal healthcare and increased rates of gender-based violence. Many have been exposed to trafficking and sexual violence and have faced bureaucratic indifference.

They are the collateral damage of Venezuela’s authoritarian collapse. But they are also symptomatic of an international order that fails to protect women.

This situation underscores the necessity of broadening our understanding of peace to include the protection and rights of women – in this case, the many displaced Venezuelan women and girls.

It must demand a transition that not only restores electoral democracy but guarantees dignity for those who lost everything to repression and political, economic and humanitarian decay.

A mirror for the region

Machado’s Nobel prize is especially timely given that it has been awarded against a backdrop of democratic backsliding and even erosion across Latin America. Her experience highlights the way that the more democracy is undermined by a regime in power, the more difficult it becomes for an opposition to unseat that regime in elections – or assume office if it does win power.

Latin American democracies are losing institutional capacity to restrain the executive – while on the streets, popular protest is often forcibly repressed. Many opposition politicians and activists have no option but to flee or hide.

This has been Machado’s experience. But this Nobel prize sends a signal that global institutions are watching and highlights the deep concern for the future of democracy and the fragility of peace.

Pia Riggirozzi have received funding from ESRC for the project Redressing Gendered Health Inequalities of Displaced Women and Girls in Contexts of Protracted Crisis in Central and South America (ReGHID)

– ref. Nobel peace prize winner Maria Corina Machado: the Venezuelan opposition leader forced into hiding after taking on Maduro – https://theconversation.com/nobel-peace-prize-winner-maria-corina-machado-the-venezuelan-opposition-leader-forced-into-hiding-after-taking-on-maduro-267245

Source: The Conversation – UK – By James Goodwin, Visiting Professor in the Physiology of Ageing, Loughborough University

I recently heard Professor Luigi Ferrucci, an expert on ageing, speak at my local university’s medical school. One line really stuck with me: “The next great step in ageing science will be understanding how lifestyle factors slow down ageing.”

That, to me, is the ultimate goal. If we can slow the ageing process, we could delay or shorten the time we spend living with age-related illnesses. In other words, we might stay healthy for longer and only experience those diseases in the last few years of life, feeling younger and better overall.

As Ferrucci gave his talk, a new study was being published showing that one of the most surprising factors influencing ageing is our social life. It turns out that staying connected to others could slow how fast we age.

We’ve known for a while that people with strong social ties tend to live longer and enjoy better health. What’s been less clear is how our social connections affect our bodies on a biological level.

In this new American study of more than 2,000 adults, researchers looked at the strength and consistency of people’s social connections – things like family relationships, involvement in community or religious groups, emotional support and how active they were in their communities.

They devised a measure called “cumulative social advantage” (CSA) – essentially, how socially connected and supported someone is. This was a step forward because most earlier studies looked only at single factors like marriage or friendship.

The researchers then compared CSA to different measures of ageing. They looked at biological age (based on DNA changes, known as “epigenetic clocks”), levels of inflammation throughout the body, and how people’s stress-related hormones – such as cortisol and adrenaline – were behaving.

They found that people with stronger social connections tended to show slower biological ageing and lower inflammation. However, there wasn’t much of a link between social life and short-term stress responses, though the researchers suggested that this might simply be because those are harder to measure.

Altogether, the study adds to growing evidence that our social connections are closely tied to how we age. But perhaps we shouldn’t be too surprised. Humans have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years as social beings.

For our ancient ancestors, belonging to a group wasn’t just about company – it was key to survival. Working together kept us safer, helped us find food and supported our wellbeing. It makes sense, then, that our bodies have developed to thrive when we’re socially connected.

Social advantage

The study also found that social advantage is linked with broader inequalities. People with higher levels of education, better income or belonging to certain ethnic groups often showed slower ageing and lower inflammation. This suggests that both our social and economic circumstances affect how we age.

There seem to be two ways to respond to this. First, we need social policies that reduce poverty and improve education and opportunity, because these factors clearly shape health and ageing. But second, we also have some individual control. Strengthening our own social lives – staying connected, supportive and involved – can also make a difference.

I remember being in Washington DC in 2014 for the 40th anniversary of the US National Institute on Aging, where Ferrucci now serves as chief scientific director. During the event, someone asked the head of social sciences: “What will be the most important research area for the next century?” Without hesitation, he replied: “Social science and genetics.”

At the time, no such research programme existed – but he was right. As this new study shows, bringing together these two fields is helping us understand not just how we age, but how we might age better.

James Goodwin 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. Can friendship keep you young? Scientists say your social life might slow ageing – https://theconversation.com/can-friendship-keep-you-young-scientists-say-your-social-life-might-slow-ageing-266313

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

A major shift is unfolding in the field of skin cancer prevention, ignited by new research showing that an everyday vitamin supplement may prevent many cases of the world’s most frequently diagnosed cancer.

The supplement in question is nicotinamide, a form of vitamin B3.

Whereas previous studies hinted at a potential benefit, the latest research – spanning more than 33,000 US veterans – suggests that adding this simple vitamin pill to daily routines could dramatically lower skin cancer risk, especially for those who have already experienced their first case.

The scale, breadth and clarity of this evidence are driving calls to rethink how skin cancer is prevented.

Skin cancer is the world’s most common form of cancer. Non-melanoma types, including basal cell carcinoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, account for millions of new cases each year.

These cancers are linked to cumulative sun exposure, fair skin and ageing. Existing prevention strategies focus on avoiding ultraviolet (UV) rays and using sunscreen, but rates continue to climb, and patients diagnosed with one skin cancer typically face a stubborn cycle of recurrence.

Enter nicotinamide, a cheap, widely available supplement. Researchers observed that this form of vitamin B3 bolsters the skin’s natural repair systems after UV damage, reduces inflammation, and helps the immune system detect and clear abnormal cells.

In the new study, over 12,000 patients who began taking nicotinamide at 500mg twice daily for more than a month were compared to more than 21,000 who did not. Those taking nicotinamide saw a 14% lower risk of developing any new skin cancer. The protective effect was most profound when started promptly after a first diagnosed skin cancer, resulting in a 54% drop in the risk of additional cancers.

This benefit faded if supplementation started only after multiple recurrences, suggesting that timing matters. The effect was seen across both main skin cancer types but was particularly robust for squamous cell carcinoma, which can behave more aggressively and carries a greater risk of complications.

It’s important to underscore that, while hopeful, these findings do not suggest nicotinamide should replace sun avoidance or routine skin checks. Wearing hats, using sunscreen and seeking shade remain pillars of prevention.

Still, the simplicity, safety and low cost of nicotinamide mean that its incorporation as a daily “add-on” is an accessible step for most people, especially those with a track record of skin cancer. For dermatologists, this is an attractive profile compared to some prescription medicines used to prevent recurrence, which may be more expensive or have worse side-effects.

As a secondary prevention tool, it stands out as effective and practical. The timing of intervention appears paramount, with the greatest benefit gained when nicotinamide is offered straight away. In practice, this shifts the conversation, urging healthcare professionals and patients to view the first cancer as a red flag to act decisively.

Perspective is important

The findings emerge from an observational study using real-world data, meaning researchers looked at health records and drew statistical associations. Most participants were white males, so the broader relevance of these findings remains uncertain.

While this type of study cannot prove cause and effect as powerfully as a randomised trial, the results align with earlier, smaller trials that hinted at the same benefit. They reinforce the idea that a simple, non-pharmaceutical intervention could help in the battle against the world’s most common cancer, and at a fraction of the expense or risk of more intensive therapies.

This research does not settle every question. It remains to be seen how nicotinamide performs over very long periods and whether the benefit is as robust in more diverse populations. Additionally, people who have never had skin cancer were not the focus, so broader recommendations are likely to stay reserved for those with a prior history.

Still, for those confronting the anxiety of a first skin cancer diagnosis, the promise of a readily available, low-cost and well-tolerated supplement offers a new sense of control.

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

– ref. Vitamin B3 supplement may reduce your risk of skin cancer – https://theconversation.com/vitamin-b3-supplement-may-reduce-your-risk-of-skin-cancer-266766

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dale Pankhurst, PhD Candidate and Tutor in the School of History, Anthropology, Philosophy and Politics, Queen’s University Belfast

After two years of war, Israel and Hamas have agreed on the “first phase” of a US-backed peace plan for Gaza. The deal, if it holds, will involve the release of Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and the entry of aid into the enclave.

The president of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has welcomed the news. He has expressed hope that the deal acts as a “prelude to reaching a permanent political solution” between Israel and Palestine.

But what lies ahead for Hamas? A clause in the wider peace plan calls for the full dissolution of the group, both as a militant organisation and as a civil administration. It is difficult to see how Hamas leadership will negotiate their way through this without some form of disarmament or demobilisation.

The Israeli government, with backing from the US and other western countries such as the UK, has repeatedly said the full demobilisation of Hamas and its militant wing is the only possible outcome it will accept. This leads to a significant dilemma for Hamas.

Its entire reason for existence is to seek the destruction of the Israeli state through violence. There is no room for peaceful, democratic means in its objectives. So if the Hamas leadership are to pursue some form of demobilisation, they risk fracturing the organisation into dissenting armed factions that continue their militancy against Israel.

Read more:
Israel and Hamas agree ceasefire deal – what we know so far: expert Q&A

The Wall Street Journal reports that Hamas’s lead negotiator, Khalil al-Hayya, as well as other political officials living outside of Gaza, are ready to accept disarmament as part of a wider peace process. But analysts suggest other leaders and militants still based in Gaza may be less willing to compromise.

Hamas has remained remarkably resilient throughout the two years of war in Gaza. US figures from early 2025 showed that Hamas had added up to 15,000 new volunteers since the October 7 attacks in 2023, largely replacing those it had lost since the start of the conflict. Many of these recruits may be reluctant to surrender their weapons after losing family and property during the war.

At the same time, Hamas is not the only armed Palestinian group operating in Gaza. Although Hamas led the October 7 attacks against Israel, the attacking force contained militants from multiple armed groups.

These included Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the Marxist-Leninist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Maoist Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) and the Palestinian Mujahideen Movement.

Some of these groups, including the PIJ, are thought to have joined Hamas in peace talks with Israel. Others are less willing to enter negotiations. The DFLP, for example, has said in a statement that it rejects any form of international mandate or guardianship in Gaza. This includes the future involvement of the former British prime minister, Sir Tony Blair, or an international security force.

Read more:
Gaza peace plan risks borrowing more from Tony Blair’s failures in the Middle East than his success in Northern Ireland

Beyond Gaza, Hamas has to consider its future in broader Palestinian politics. The armed group has ruled over Gaza since 2007. But its traditional opponent, Fatah, which Hamas expelled from the Gaza Strip in 2007 following a bloody feud, continues to wield significant political authority in the West Bank through its dominance of the Palestinian Authority.

Relations between Hamas and Fatah have been cordial in recent years. But Hamas may fear any demobilisation of its armed forces could shift the balance of power within Palestinian politics, enabling the Palestinian Authority to renew efforts for Gaza to rejoin the West Bank under a single, unified political authority.

Some form of disarmament is possible

Comparable case studies show that the disarmament and demobilisation of insurgent groups is possible, at least in part. In Northern Ireland, the Provisional Irish Republican Army (Pira) decommissioned a large portion of its weaponry in 2005 following protracted peace negotiations.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) also demobilised its armed units in 2017, a year after a historic peace settlement was reached between the Colombian state and the leftist rebels. Both organisations disarmed despite the presence of other armed groups, such as dissident republicans in Northern Ireland and the National Liberation Army in Colombia, that continued to wage violent campaigns.

Yet in Northern Ireland, the Pira never fully demobilised its volunteer base nor did it decommission all of its weapons. British security services and the Northern Irish police have found evidence that Pira members have been involved in several murders against internal opponents since the group decommissioned.

British intelligence also believes that the Pira’s militant structures and decision-making body, the army council, remain intact. They allege that these people now oversee the political strategy of Sinn Féin, an Irish republican political party.

While some insurgent groups disarm and demobilise, their legacy is slow to fade. Would Israel be willing to accept a similar disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration arrangement in Gaza as the British have done in Northern Ireland?

It is difficult to see the government of Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, which has continually reiterated that Hamas must be completely destroyed, doing so. Yet a different Israeli administration might.

It also remains to be seen whether Hamas could plausibly disarm a portion of its forces, such as its rocket units and armed assault groups, and allow others to be absorbed into a security force system governed by a body styled on the Palestinian Authority.

A monumental shift in strategic direction would be required for Hamas to reach this point. And the group is arguably more ideologically entrenched now as an Islamist Palestinian movement than the Pira was in the 1990s or the Farc in the 2010s.

Hamas is at a crossroads. It now faces either a period of negotiating for its future with little room to manoeuvre or further war with Israel if it refuses to dissolve. The challenge for mediators is to find a pathway that satisfies Israeli security demands and Hamas’s own quest for survival and transformation within Palestinian politics.

Dale Pankhurst 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. Hamas at a crossroads as the Gaza ceasefire deal comes into force – https://theconversation.com/hamas-at-a-crossroads-as-the-gaza-ceasefire-deal-comes-into-force-267145

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lorraine Whitmarsh, Professor of Environmental Psychology, University of Bath

Saving energy isn’t just about keeping bills down. A new analysis of 100 existing studies across 42 countries shows that people with positive attitudes to the environment, or who want what they do at home to make a difference to society, are more likely to save energy.

This finding is in line with leading psychological models of behaviour, which show there is often a relationship between what we feel and what we do.

But these models, and the evidence about who is more likely to turn off the lights and save energy, also show very clearly that there is often an “attitude-behaviour gap” – what we know we should do doesn’t always translate into action.

Anyone who has tried to lose weight or quit smoking will be very aware of this. Like health behaviour, environmental actions also suffer from this gap: while most people worry about climate change, far fewer take sufficient action.

This is because it is not only attitudes that predict behaviour, but the social, economic and physical context in which we act. In fact for many people, these factors exert a stronger influence on what we do than internal factors such as attitudes.

Cost and convenience matter

Cost, convenience and societal conventions are all strong influences on our actions. This helps to explain changes in how much homes are heated (due to central heating being more widespread), or use of hot water.

Many older people remember a weekly bath being the norm in their childhoods. Yet today, daily showers are more typical – partly because many more houses have showers now. Unsurprisingly, cost is also a driver of behaviour: more people will invest in energy-saving technology when energy prices are high than when they’re low.

Similarly, the new study shows that knowledge of environmental impact has a limited effect on energy-saving behaviour. For example, we have found that environmental awareness has little influence on whether people fly for work. In our 2020 study of academic travel, the people flying the most were climate change professors – who certainly knew that aviation is a contributor to climate change.

This gap between knowledge and action exists for the same reason as the attitude-behaviour gap: namely, our behaviour is influenced by wider factors than what we feel or know. A person whose job requires air travel is likely to fly for work even when they are aware of the environmental harm.

Neighbours are influential

The new study also finds that people save more energy if they think others expect them to – showing that social norms are a powerful influence on our behaviour.

Recent work similarly shows that social factors strongly shape people’s decision to buy a heat pump – one of the most effective energy-saving actions. Having a friend or neighbour with a heat pump means you hear about its benefits and how to buy it, and are more likely to believe it is a good idea than just hearing about it through secondhand sources (such as news reports).

At least as important, though, is making energy-saving actions cheap and convenient. So policies to reduce costs of energy technologies or insulation, and which ensure skilled installers are available, are critical. Saving energy is more often motivated by financial than environmental concerns – so price is a particularly powerful lever.

The new study also finds links between energy-saving and other green behaviour, such as recycling or using public transport. Research suggests that similar actions often relate. For instance, people who save energy are more likely to save water – often because these actions flow from a “green identity”: a sense of being an environmentally interested person.

But these links are not very strong, and become weaker across more diverse actions – for example, avoiding car use and saving energy at home – because the external factors that shape these choices are very different. So, living in a rural area might preclude reducing car use, while saving energy might be possible.

Ultimately, promoting energy-saving behaviour means creating the right conditions for people to act.

While information and motivation are crucial, meaningful and sustained change depends on making the greener option affordable, convenient – and just normal. If policies and environments support energy-saving choices, large-scale behaviour change (and progress towards climate and energy goals) becomes far more achievable.

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

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

Lorraine Whitmarsh receives funding from UKRI.

Sam Hampton receives funding from UKRI and the Askehave Climate Foundation.

– ref. Why some people turn off the lights, and others don’t – https://theconversation.com/why-some-people-turn-off-the-lights-and-others-dont-266738