Sadly, most people will come across a workplace bully at some point. Unwarranted criticism, ostracism, personal insults, and verbal or physical threats are just some of the tools in the bully’s locker. Over time, the target of bullying can find it increasingly difficult to defend themselves from this behaviour.
With up to one in ten UK employees experiencing bullying, this problem could affect more than three million workers across the country.
In a recent research study drawing on data from 2,469 employees over a four-year period, we examined whether experiences of bullying were related to changes in the “big five” personality traits: openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.
It’s well known that bullying is bad for wellbeing, performance and mood. But why would we think that bullying might change core aspects of a person, including their personality?
Our predictions were primarily based on a personality change theory. The core idea is that repeatedly experiencing thoughts, emotions and reactions that are at odds with a person’s normal traits can actually change them over time.
For example, extroverts are typically cheerful, sociable people who seek excitement. However, an extrovert exposed to bullying would in all likelihood start to experience negative emotions regularly. They might withdraw socially, and could learn that social isolation is an effective way to avoid bullying. As a result, their normal outgoing traits might reduce over time.
Our results showed that being bullied was associated with significant reductions in extrovert traits and conscientiousness (that is, being dependable and organised). The drop in conscientiousness could be because the target feels demotivated by the unfairness of being bullied – or the bullying may even take the form of removing meaningful tasks from the colleague.
Being bullied was also linked to increased neuroticism, which is the tendency to experience negative emotional states such as anxiety, anger and depression.
We also found that longer periods of bullying were associated with the target becoming less of an extrovert and more neurotic.
This suggests that, in addition to all the other harms, bullying can also rob people of their cheerfulness, sociability, dependability and calmness.
Who do bullies target?
Our research also explored whether personality traits were a risk factor for experiencing bullying. We discovered that conscientiousness and extroversion may put workers at greater risk of attracting the attention of a workplace bully.
A cautious interpretation of this might infer that conscientious employees are targeted by those envious of their higher performance levels (tall poppy syndrome – where high-flying people are “cut down” out of a misplaced sense of egalitarianism). It is less clear however why extroverts might be targeted.
Interestingly, when we looked at people who experienced sustained bullying over longer periods of time, we found that other personality traits were risk factors. Neuroticism, openness (encompassing traits of imagination, curiosity and novelty) and disagreeableness were all linked to experiencing bullying for a longer duration.
This indicates that emotional, unconventional and argumentative people tend to experience the most bullying. However, it’s still not fully understood whether it is personality that attracts bullying, or whether in fact the bullying is driving personality change.
There is little other research on the personality types most likely to be targeted by bullies. And we don’t yet know if the personality changes suffered by them are likely to be permanent. However, we do have concrete knowledge about the factors that are most helpful in limiting the impact of bullying on victims.
Working in a supportive environment where wellbeing is prioritised and where there are processes to enable a resolution can really help those experiencing bullying. Equally, receiving support from colleagues, friends and family can limit the damaging effects.
Ultimately, bullying is an escalating process that causes lasting harm. The best medicine is to end the experience as soon as possible, or better yet, prevent it altogether.
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.
An innovative sustainable farming method which avoids fertilisers and pesticides in favour of natural soil regeneration has helped farmers in India increase profits while also benefiting wild birds. Our new research shows how “zero budget natural farming” has more than doubled farmer profits.
Ecologists like us evaluate low-tech agroecological approaches that harness the power of nature and people to produce food with skilled labour, knowledge and active management of ecological functions like pollination and soil nutrient cycling.
We’ve been studying two promising agroecological systems, both devised by farming communities to address the soil degradation that threatens the long-term future of food.
Zero budget natural farming is a sustainable farming system that is being heavily incentivised by the government of Andhra Pradesh, a state on the east coast of southern India. Zero budget natural farming is generating considerable interest from other countries, including Brazil, Mexico, Zambia and Indonesia.
The other farming system we’ve been examining is “regenerative farming”, increasingly popular in the UK, US and Europe. While similar, these two farming systems have very different cultural framings.
Regenerative farming is a set of principles that aims to regenerate rather than degrade soil. Farmers are encouraged to monitor their own outcomes and adaptively manage their soils.
Zero budget natural farming aims to boost crop yields and reduce costs by ending the use of synthetics (fertilisers and pesticides) and regenerating natural ecological functions. Farmers are encouraged to work together and share resources such as straw, manures and soil treatments at village level.
To understand whether these two systems could really be scalable, we measured their outcomes for nature, food production and profitability on real working farms. We focused on these key aspects because there is often a direct trade-off between them. Having more nature locally can mean that less food is produced on farmed land.
Nature-friendly farming can lower overall food production or profits, especially at scales larger than individual fields and farms, because land is taken out of production for wildlife-friendly strips around fields, for example.
If there is no change in overall food demand, this creates a risk of driving even greater nature loss and greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, as agriculture continues to expand into natural habitats.
For agroecological systems to be a solution, they must be highly productive, minimising the footprint (total area) of agriculture on Earth, while supporting enough wild nature to maintain ecological functions such as soil nutrient cycling and pollination.
Some native birds such as the Malabar pied hornbill rely on natural forests to thrive. Chris Barber71/Shutterstock
Our research shows that the shift to zero budget natural farming more than doubles farmer profits and does not reduce food production relative to chemical farming. These farms also support more wild birds, especially those that help control pests by eating insects and other invertebrates, such as drongos, pipits and warblers. For the rice-dominated small farms we studied in south India, zero budget natural farming avoids the direct trade-off between nature and food production.
But this agroecological farmland is no substitute for natural forest in terms of bird conservation. Forests are vital for birds threatened with extinction, many of which cannot thrive on farmland of any kind, such as the Malabar pied hornbill.
The situation is different for the arable farmers we’re working with in eastern and southern England, who are farming regeneratively. This approach is challenging to define so we calculated a “regenerative score” for each farm based on the consistency with which farmers adhered to the five principles of regenerative farming. Those principles include keeping the soil covered to reduce erosion and increase its organic content, and increasing crop diversity.
Becoming more regenerative on this scale has clear benefits for some indicators of healthy soils such as earthworm numbers. But our initial data indicated some declines in yield at field scale. This is likely to be larger when scaled up to landscapes, because of crop choices. The regenerative system in these arable farms is more sustainable by many measures, but not quite as productive, in terms of food output, as intensive chemical farms.
The future of farming
Things might look different in the future, as accelerating climate change makes the soil’s abilities to absorb and retain water much more important. Regenerative farming potentially offers resilience to climate change, through better soils and higher diversity, but this is challenging to demonstrate empirically. For now, regenerative farming in the English farms where we work is not a straightforward solution that delivers high food production and better nature, like zero budget natural farming in India.
One reason for the difference might be that UK arable farms are largely constrained to working with crop varieties engineered to thrive in very intensive systems with high chemical inputs. These varieties have weaker roots and potentially lower disease resistance than more traditional crop varieties. Part of the solution here is to breed crop varieties that thrive in agroecological systems without heavy chemical fertiliser use (so-called “lower input systems”). For industrial agriculture systems, this will involve the plant breeding industry.
Zero budget natural farmers are encouraged to use traditional crop varieties, and are more likely to re-use their own seeds, rather than buying them in every year. Perhaps this means their crops are better adapted to lower input conditions, with stronger roots or better positive associations with soil microbes. To cement its future, those who live and work in the region are calling for zero budget natural farming to be recognised by buyers, so farmers can access new markets for sustainable produce and take advantage of higher retail prices.
In both cases, the key to long term success may be economic, rather than purely scientific, with changes in the crop breeding industry, markets and value chains as important as how farms themselves are managed.
Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?
Lynn Dicks receives funding from UKRI (NERC and BBSRC). She is affiliated with Natural England, as a Board Member, and the East Suffolk Trust as a Trustee.
Katherine Berthon receives funding from UKRI BBSRC. She is affiliated with the H3 Project (https://h3.ac.uk/) and a member of the British Ecological Society.
Iris Berger 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.
Staring at the ceiling while the clock blinks 3am doesn’t only sap energy for the next day. A large, long-running US study of older adults has now linked chronic insomnia to changes inside the brain that set the stage for dementia.
The researchers, from the Mayo Clinic in the US, followed 2,750 people aged 50 and over for an average of five and a half years. Every year the volunteers completed detailed memory tests and many also had brain scans that measured two telltale markers of future cognitive trouble: the buildup of amyloid plaques, and tiny spots of damage in the brain’s white matter – known as white-matter hyperintensities.
Participants were classed as having chronic insomnia if their medical records contained at least two insomnia diagnoses a month apart – a definition that captured 16% of the sample.
Compared with people who slept soundly, those with chronic insomnia experienced a faster slide in memory and thinking and were 40% more likely to develop mild cognitive impairment or dementia over the study period.
When the team looked more closely, they saw that insomnia paired with shorter-than-usual sleep was especially harmful. These poor sleepers already performed as if they were four years older at the first assessment and showed higher levels of both amyloid plaques and white-matter damage.
By contrast, insomniacs who said they were sleeping more than usual, perhaps because their sleep problems had eased, had less white-matter damage than average.
Why do both amyloid plaques and blood-vessel damage matter? Alzheimer’s disease isn’t driven by amyloid alone. Studies increasingly show that clogged or leaky small blood vessels also speed cognitive decline, and the two disease states can magnify each other.
Amyloid plaques explained.
White-matter hyperintensities disrupt the wiring that carries messages between brain regions, while amyloid gums up the neurons themselves. Finding higher levels of both in people with chronic insomnia strengthens the idea that poor sleep may push the brain towards a double hit.
The study’s models confirmed the well-known effect of carrying the ApoE4 variant; the strongest common genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer’s. Carriers declined more quickly than non-carriers, and the insomnia effect was large enough to be comparable to the effect of having the gene.
Taken together, these findings add to a growing body of research, from middle-aged civil servants in the UK, to community studies in China and the US, showing that how well we sleep in midlife and beyond tracks closely with how well we think later on.
Chronic insomnia appears to accelerate the trajectory towards dementia, not through one pathway but several: by boosting amyloid, eroding white matter and probably raising blood pressure and blood-sugar levels too.
That sounds like an obvious next step, but the evidence is mixed. The Mayo Clinic researchers found no clear benefit, or harm, from the sleeping pills its participants were taking. Trials of newer drugs such as orexin blockers have hinted at reductions in Alzheimer-related proteins in spinal fluid, but these studies are tiny and short term.
Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia, delivered in person or digitally, remains the gold-standard treatment and improves sleep in around 70% of patients. Whether it also protects the brain is still unproven, although one small trial in people with mild cognitive impairment showed sharper executive function after this type of talk therapy.
So the relationship is unlikely to be as simple as “treat insomnia, avoid dementia”. Poor sleep often co-exists with depression, anxiety, chronic pain and sleep apnoea – all of which themselves hurt the brain. Unravelling which piece of the puzzle to target, and when, will take rigorously designed long-term studies.
Prevention starts early
The participants in Mayo Clinic study were, on average, 70 years old at the start of the study, but other research has shown that routinely sleeping less than six hours a night in your 50s is already linked to higher dementia risk two decades later.
That suggests prevention efforts shouldn’t wait until retirement. Keeping an eye on sleep from midlife, alongside blood pressure, cholesterol and exercise, is a sensible brain-health strategy.
Sleepless nights are more than a nuisance. Chronic insomnia appears to accelerate both amyloid buildup and silent blood-vessel damage, nudging the brain toward cognitive decline – especially in people who already carry the high-risk ApoE4 gene.
Good quality sleep is emerging as one of the modifiable pillars of brain health, but scientists are still working out whether fixing insomnia can truly head off dementia, and at what stage of life interventions will have the greatest payoff.
Timothy Hearn 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.
Two-thirds of people who underwent psilocybin-assisted therapy remained free from depression five years later, according to recent research that offers the first long-term glimpse into the lasting power of psychedelic treatment.
The findings, published by researchers at Ohio State University and Johns Hopkins University, followed up participants from a study published in 2021 to track whether the dramatic improvements in depression symptoms would endure. The results suggest they do – and, remarkably, without serious side-effects.
The original study involved 24 people aged 21 to 75 who were randomly assigned to receive psilocybin treatment in 2019 and 2020 either immediately or after an eight-week delay. Each participant received two doses of the psychoactive compound found in magic mushrooms, spaced two weeks apart, alongside 13 hours of psychotherapy support.
When researchers checked in five years later, the improvements in depression seen after one year were still holding strong, suggesting psilocybin therapy may last longer than traditional treatments, such as antidepressants or psychotherapy.
But the researchers are cautious about overselling their findings. The follow-up study lacked a comparison group, making it impossible to know whether people who recovered from depression through other means might experience similar long-term success. Eleven of the 18 participants who remained in the trial also reported using antidepressants during the study period, muddying the waters about what exactly drove their continued recovery.
The study design presents other puzzles as well. Was it the psilocybin itself that proved beneficial, or the extensive psychotherapy, or some combination of both? The original research didn’t include a placebo group – everyone knew they were taking psilocybin – raising questions about whether expectations alone might have influenced the outcomes.
Despite these limitations, other studies are painting a similar picture of psilocybin’s enduring effects on depression. While psychedelic research is still in its infancy and grapples with design challenges, the results consistently show significant reductions in depression symptoms following psychedelic-assisted therapy.
What makes these findings particularly intriguing is the suggestion that just one or two treatment sessions might deliver lasting benefits. This is in stark contrast to traditional antidepressants, which typically require daily use and often come with a catalogue of side-effects.
The researchers propose that psilocybin therapy may trigger “positive behavioural feedback loops”, helping people gain fresh perspectives and emotional insights that continue benefiting their lives long after the treatment ends. This could enable the development of healthier habits and relationships that serve as natural buffers against depression’s return.
One participant captured this transformation vividly: “I’m doing more of activities that I enjoy. My life these days is a lot more social with family. Helping out my family. Helping out friends. Connecting with old friends.”
At Lund University in Sweden, my colleagues and I are exploring similar territory, including an upcoming study on psilocybin and anorexia. And our early results, published in Scientific Reports, suggest that individual psychology plays a crucial role in both how people experience psychedelic sessions and the benefits they derive from them.
The picture becomes even more complex when considering that many people report personality changes after psychedelic experiences, particularly becoming more open to new experiences. This psychological shift adds another layer to understanding how and why psychedelics might produce lasting change.
Psychedelic research still faces significant hurdles, from creating convincing placebo groups to accounting for the self-selecting nature of many participants. These methodological challenges make it difficult to draw sweeping conclusions about psychedelics’ therapeutic potential.
Yet perhaps the most compelling evidence lies not in clinical scores but in participants’ own words about their transformed lives. As one person put it: “I think I’m more open to gratitude and more open to delight.” Such testimonies remind researchers why they’re exploring what some describe as potentially “one of the most meaningful experiences in life” – and why this emerging field of medicine deserves serious scientific attention.
Petri Kajonius 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.
If you were to read this: “Unity through music: top artists from across the globe come together on one stage to inspire and unite millions” you could be forgiven for thinking it’s an advertising blurb for next year’s Eurovision. But it isn’t. On the contrary, it’s the slogan for this year’s Intervision song contest, which takes place in Moscow on September 20.
Intervision was initially conceived during the cold war as a “counterweight” to Eurovision, but it never really caught on and was discontinued in 1980. Russia subsequently took part in Eurovision between 1994 and 2021, and it was ultimately expelled after the invasion of Ukraine. It recorded its only win in 2008, and hosted the contest in 2009.
The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, issued a decree in February this year announcing that Intervision would be revived “to further develop international cultural and humanitarian cooperation”. This year’s contest will feature artists from 23 countries, including representatives from China, Africa, Asia, Latin America, Central Asia and the Middle East. Interestingly, the US will also have an entry – although the original artist pulled out “for family reasons” on September 17. His place has been taken by an Australian singer who is resident in the US.
Intervision is a prime example of the way in which, in today’s highly febrile geopolitical situation, popular cultural and sporting events are being weaponised.
Russia’s Intervision entry is Straight to the Heart, performed by Shaman, a controversial, pro-war musician.
This is nothing new, nor is it exclusive to contemporary Russia. In the sporting world, many people saw Qatar’s enthusiasm for hosting the 2022 World Cup as a way of cementing its position as an important regional hub in the Middle East. In the sports world, the use of major events to project soft power is known as “sportswashing” – and everyone does it. Think of the opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympics which was directed by the multi-award winning film-maker Danny Boyle.
Now, analysts are examining the way the Putin administration is using music to further its political end and calling it “songwashing”.
Intervision is clearly being taken very seriously by the Kremlin. The deputy prime minister, Dmitry Chernyshenko – who presided over the planning for the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014 – is chair of the organising committee. Konstantin Ernst, head of Russia’s Channel One TV network and mastermind behind the Sochi 2014 opening ceremony, is also heavily involved.
In what appeared to be a direct snipe at Eurovision, the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov – a close ally of Putin – said Intervision would be free from “perversions or affronts to human nature”. After Eurovision in 2024, the country’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, said the contest had “surpassed any orgy, sabbath, or ritual sacrilege”. This sort of conservative messaging has been a staple of Moscow’s political communication to audiences at home and abroad for more than a decade.
The cultural boycott of Russia since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine has hurt the country’s efforts to reach audiences. Russia has been barred from an array of major sporting and cultural events such as the Olympics, the football World Cup and European Championships and Eurovision. Its ballet, opera companies and orchestra have been barred from many of the world’s most prestigious venues and works by Russian composers and playwrights have been blacklisted in many countries.
Nastya Kravchenko of Belarus performs her country’s entry, Moth.
The Kremlin’s response has been to arrange its own versions of what is sometimes dubbed “mega-events”, albeit on a much smaller scale. In 2023, Putin announced Russia would host a World Friendship Games, to be held in Yekaterinburg the following year, “to ensure the guaranteed free access of Russian athletes and sports organisations to international sports activities, and the development of new formats for international sports cooperation”. The event was subsequently postponed over fears that it would not attract enough top competitors, despite a large prize pot on offer.
A Brics Games featuring competitors from 82 countries was held in Kazan in the Russian republic of Tatarstan in June 2024. Russia topped the medals table.
The 2024 Brics Games were held in Kazan, in the Russian republic of Tartarstan, and attracted athletes from 82 countries. Brics Games
Russia’s use of such sporting and cultural events has been described as a new form of “Potemkinism” – after the showcase villages built in Imperial-era Russia to impress visitors. Although, to be fair, projecting soft power in this way is in no way exclusive to Russia or any other authoritarian states.
Intervision is the same. It’s designed to appeal to both a domestic crowd, legitimising Putin’s regime, as well as projecting “Russian values” and cultural depth to the rest of the world (at least to those paying attention). These events signal to audiences at home and abroad that things are “normal” in Russia, despite the country being engaged in a bitter war with its neighbour Ukraine.
It dovetails with attempts to build anti-western coalition through its efforts on the diplomatic stage. It is also an effort to send a message about Russia and the state of the world to audiences which might be wary of what they regard as an all-pervasive US influence.
At first glance, these Soviet-era events may appear as a quirky manifestation of cold war nostalgia. But they are part of a push by countries like Russia, China and others to build a rival cultural and international order.
It’s highly unlikely that Intervision will send the Russian entry Shaman – a controversial, pro-war singer described as one of Russia’s chief propagandists – into the global pop stratosphere. But it’s worth keeping an eye on how global audiences respond, particularly those beyond the west. It may be that some people outside the joyously camp Eurovision bubble are receptive to Intervision’s more conservative messaging.
Vitaly Kazakov receives funding from the European Commission’s Horizon Europe programme.
Drinking more than you intended may be something that many humans do, but now research is showing that a taste for alcohol is surprisingly common among animals. In fact a new study has found that chimpanzees may ingest the equivalent of two alcoholic drinks a day from eating fermented fruit.
In the last ten years or so, there has been growing evidence that the ingestion of alcohol might be more widespread across the animal kingdom than previously thought. Fruit flies, for example, lay their eggs in alcohol-rich fermented fruits, which offer the newly hatched larvae nutrients to feed on.
In 2015, scientists observed groups of chimpanzees in west Africa drinking large amounts of raffia palm alcoholic sap harvested by the local villagers. More recently, in April 2025, a population of chimpanzees at Guinea-Bissau were recorded feasting on ripe African breadfruits which contained high concentrations of alcohol.
The published studies mark a shift because evidence of alcohol consumption in wild animals tends to rely more on anecdotal observations. In Sweden, a moose made the news in 2011 when it was found stuck in a tree, apparently drunk from eating fermented apples.
And vervet monkeys in St Kitts, whose ancestors were brought there with enslaved people from west Africa, are often spotted stealing fruity cocktails from tourists.
The new study, led by biologist Aleksey Maro of the University of California, Berkeley, offers insights into how much alcohol is in the ripe fruits favoured by two wild chimpanzee communities living in eastern and western Africa.
Having spent almost a year studying chimpanzees in the wild myself, I have always been mesmerised by how excited they get when they spot their favourite fruits. Chimpanzees go crazy for fruit. They rush over to grab them and stuff their mouths full, all while making joyful noises of appreciation.
In their research, Maro and his colleagues collected more than 200 fruits from about 20 of chimpanzees’ favourite trees. They found large variation in alcohol content with some having zero or nearly zero alcohol content. But some of the fruits most enjoyed by the chimps, such as figs and plums, tend to have a very high alcohol content.
This suggests that chimps may intentionally select fruits for their high levels of alcohol. Because of the large quantity of fruits chimpanzees can eat every day (up to 4kg), the authors worked out that both female and male chimps consume roughly 14 grams of alcohol per day. This corresponds to a standard US alcoholic drink (UK standard drinks contain eight grams of alcohol).
But it’s not fair to directly compare these numbers between humans and chimps since the effect of alcohol depends on how big an individual is. Alcohol tends to be less potent in bigger people.
With an average weight of around 40kg, chimps tend to be smaller than humans. So the amount of equivalent alcohol that chimps consume actually corresponds to two American standard drinks per day. It sounds like chimps know how to have a party.
The drunken monkey hypothesis
Twenty-five years ago, Robert Dudley, who is one of the authors of the new study, proposed the “drunken monkey hypothesis”. This suggests that alcohol consumption in humans might have an ancient history. Dudley’s idea is that ingesting alcoholic fruits might have given an evolutionary advantage to animals. The alcoholic content in fruits can, for example, indicate to animals which ones are rich in energy and sugar.
Drinking alcohol can be good for health. Fruit flies, for example, ingest alcohol to kill parasites. Even in humans, studies have shown that low levels of alcohol consumption may reduce the risk of heart disease.
Support for the drunken monkey hypothesis came from research showing that the proteins humans need to break down alcohol in their body was already present in the common ancestor we share with gorillas, chimpanzees and bonobos that lived 10 million years ago.
This was a time when African forests started shrinking, and apes started coming down from the tree, adopting a more land-based lifestyle. It’s possible that these apes gained an advantage in eating ripe fermented fruits that had fallen onto the ground, avoiding the competition with other fruit-eating animals who could eat unripe fruit on trees.
Researchers also think that alcohol might make them more sociable. Chimpanzees in west Africa, for example, were observed in April 2025 eating and drinking fermented fruits together.
However, according to Dudley, in addition to having the same human protein that breaks down alcohol, chimpanzees may drink alcohol in low concentrations due to the high volume of liquid and food they ingest. So their stomach may fill up before alcohol reaches intoxicating levels.
This would explain why, in the 11 months that I spent watching chimps in Tanzania, I didn’t once see them wobbling around the forest, clutching a juicy fruit while laughing uncontrollably.
Stefano Kaburu 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.
Recognition of a Palestinian state is likely to dominate proceedings at the U.N. beginning Sept 23. 2005, when world leaders will gather for the annual general assembly.
Of the 193 existing U.N member states, some 147 already recognize a Palestinian state. But that number is expected to swell in the coming days, with several more countries expected to officially announce such recognition. They include Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Portugal and the U.K. – although Britain says it won’t support statehood if Israel takes steps to alleviate the plight of Palestinians in Gaza.
That a host of Western nations are adding their names to the near-universal list of Global South countries that already recognize a Palestinian state is a major diplomatic win for the cause of an independent, sovereign and self-governed nation for Palestinians. Conversely, it is a massive diplomatic loss for Israel – especially coming just two years after the West stood shoulder to shoulder with Israel following the Oct. 7 attack by Palestinian militant group Hamas.
As a scholar of modern Palestinian history, I know that this diplomatic moment is decades in the making. But I am also aware that symbolic diplomatic breakthroughs on the issue of Palestinian statehood have occurred before, only to prove meaningless in the face of events that make statehood less likely.
‘I have come bearing an olive branch and a freedom fighter’s gun,’ PLO leader Yasser Arafat said before the United Nations General Assembly in 1974. Bettmann / Contributor
The non-state reality
The fight for Palestinian statehood can be traced back to at least 1967. Over the course of a six-day war against a coalition of Arab states, Israel conquered and expanded its military control over the remainder of what was historic Palestine – a stretch of land that extends from the Jordan River in the east to the Mediterranean Sea in the west.
At the war’s conclusion, Israel had taken control of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.
Unlike after the 1948 war that led to its independence, Israel opted not to extend Israeli citizenship to Palestinians living in the newly conquered areas. Instead, the Israeli government began to rule over Palestinians in these occupied territories through a series of military orders.
These orders controlled nearly every aspect of Palestinian life – and many remain in effect today. For example, if a Palestinian farmer wants to harvest his olive trees near a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, they need a permit. Or
if a Gazan worker wants to work inside Israel, they need Israeli permission. Even praying in a mosque or church in East Jerusalem is dependent on obtaining a permit.
This permit system served as a constant reminder to Palestinians living in the occupied territories that they lacked control over their own daily lives. Meanwhile, Israeli authorities tried to squash the idea of Palestinian nationhood through policies such as outlawing public displays of the Palestinian flag. That, and other expressions of Palestinian national identity in the occupied territories, could result in up to 10 years in prison.
Around the same time that Meir made that comment, Palestinians started organizing around the idea of statehood.
Although the idea had been floated before, statehood was codified into official doctrine in a resolution in February 1969 in Egypt. It occurred during a session of the Palestine National Council, the legislative body of the Palestine Liberation Organization, which formed in 1964 as the official representative of Palestinians in the occupied territories.
That resolution called for a free, secular democratic state in Palestine – including all of the State of Israel – in which Muslims, Christians and Jews would all have equal rights.
From that moment on, the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation took twin paths: diplomatic pressure and armed resistance.
But events on the ground undermined the idea of a single state for all along the lines envisioned by the Cairo resolution.
The 1973 Arab-Israeli War’s inconclusive ending opened the door to greater diplomacy between Israel and the Arab states. Egypt and Israel decided that diplomacy would help them achieve their aims, culminating in the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty of 1979. But the treaty also left the Palestinians without unified Arab support.
Meanwhile, throughout the 1970s, the Israeli occupation deepened and entrenched with the building of Israeli settlements, especially in the West Bank.
Yasser Arafat addresses the United Nations General Assembly in 1974. Bettmann / Contributor
The PLO responded in 1974 by issuing what became known as the 10-Point Plan, where they pivoted to seeking the establishment of a national authority in any part of historic Palestine that could be liberated.
It was, in effect, a way of threading the needle: It signaled to moderates that the PLO was adopting a more gradualist position, while also telling the group’s rejectionist front – which opposed peace negotiations with Israel – that they were not giving up completely on the idea of liberating all of Palestine.
The move was largely symbolic – the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem were still under occupation, and the PLO was then in exile in Tunisia.
But it was nonetheless significant. It represented the bringing together of Palestinians in exile – most of whom were from towns and villages that were now part of the State of Israel – with Palestinians in the occupied territories.
It was also a moment of tremendous hope and possibility for Palestinians. What most Palestinians wanted was for the international community to recognize them as a national body, deserving of a seat at the table with other nation-states.
Compromise and rejection
Yet at the same time, many Palestinians saw the declaration as a huge compromise. The West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem comprise about 22% of historic Palestine. So the declaration effectively meant that Palestinians were giving up on the other 78% of what they saw as their land.
Reaction from the international community to the PLO’s declaration was split. Many formerly colonized countries of the Global South recognized Palestinian independence right away. By the end of the year, some 78 countries had issued statements recognizing Palestine as a state.
Israel rejected it outright, as did United States and most Western nations.
Such was Washington’s opposition that the U.S. denied Arafat a visa ahead of his planned address to the United Nations at its New York City headquarters. As a result, the December 1988 meeting had to be moved to Geneva.
While refusing to accept Palestinian statehood, the U.S. and Israel did begin to recognize the PLO as a representative body of the Palestinian people. This was part of the Oslo Accords – a diplomatic process that many believed would outline a road map for an eventual two-state solution.
While some Palestinians saw the Oslo Accords as a diplomatic breakthrough, others were more skeptical. Prominent Palestinians, including Darwish and Palestinian-American professor Edward Said, believed that Oslo was a poison pill: While framed as a step toward a two-state solution, the agreement said nothing about a Palestinian state in the interim. It only said that Israel would recognize the PLO as a representative of the Palestinian people.
In reality, the Oslo Accords have not lead to statehood. Rather, they created a system of fragmented autonomy under the newly created Palestinian Authority that, though meant to be interim, has in effect become permanent.
The Palestinian Authority was allowed only limited powers and deprived of real independence. While it had some say over schooling, health care and municipal services, Israel maintained control of Palestinian land, resources, borders and the economy. That remains true today.
Mahmoud Abbas, the leader of the Palestinian Authority after Arafat, responded by pushing again for international recognition for statehood.
And in 2012, the U.N. General Assembly voted to upgrade Palestine’s status, elevating it from a “nonmember observer” to a “nonmember observer state.”
The Palestinian delegation at the U.N. General Assembly before the vote to upgrade Palestinian status to a nonmember observer state in 2012. Stan Honda/AFP via Getty Images
In theory, this meant Palestinians now had access to international bodies, like the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice.
But any meaningful change in the status of Palestinian sovereignty would need to come through the U.N. Security Council, not the U.N. General Assembly.
The U.S. remains opposed to Palestinians gaining statehood independent of the Oslo process. So long as the U.S. has a veto on the Security Council, achieving a truly sovereign Palestinian state will likewise be off the table. And that remains the case, regardless of what individual members – even fellow Security Council members like France and the U.K – do.
Maha Nassar 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.
Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Josep M. Trigo Rodríguez, Investigador Principal del Grupo de Meteoritos, Cuerpos Menores y Ciencias Planetarias, Instituto de Ciencias del Espacio (ICE – CSIC)
El cometa 2025 A6 Lemmon, captado el 14 de septiembre de 2025 desde Alalpardo (Madrid).Alfonso José Merino
Los aficionados a la astronomía tendrán las próximas semanas la oportunidad de disfrutar de dos cometas de largo periodo descubiertos este mismo año: C/2025 A6 (Lemmon) y el recientemente catalogado C/2025 R2 (SWAN). Ambos objetos poseen órbitas muy excéntricas que los llevan a regiones externas de nuestro sistema planetario, con periodos orbitales de más de mil años.
Para verlos –o aún mejor, fotografiarlos– podremos guiarnos empleando unas cartas estelares. En otras palabras, necesitamos un cielo oscuro y saber dónde buscarlos. A continuación doy algunas directrices para conseguir observarlos.
El aumento de brillo del cometa Lemmon
Este cometa descubierto a principios de enero por el astrónomo estadounidense Carson Fuls en el marco del programa de seguimiento de cuerpos menores del Observatorio Mount Lemmon posee una órbita muy excéntrica. Los cálculos orbitales de Syuichi Nakano, del Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams, indican que, en el extremo más lejano de su órbita (llamado “afelio”), el cometa estaba a 36 000 millones de kilómetros del Sol. Eso corresponde a un período orbital de unos 1 350 años, por lo que debió ser visible en el siglo VII de nuestra era.
En cualquier caso, este pequeño cometa tuvo el pasado 16 de abril un encuentro relativamente próximo a Júpiter (a unos 349 millones de km). Como consecuencia del mismo, sufrió un tirón gravitacional del planeta gigante que ha reducido parte de su energía orbital, viendo acortado su período en unos doscientos años. Un excelente ejemplo de que aún los cometas con órbitas de alta inclinación pueden ser significativamente afectados por los encuentros con los planetas gigantes.
El C/2025 A6 Lemmon pasará a 101 millones de km de la Tierra el 21 de octubre. Posteriormente alcanzará el punto más cercano al Sol de su órbita (conocido como perihelio) el 8 de noviembre, encontrándose a 79 millones de km del astro rey. Se espera que sobreviva a esa fase de mayor calentamiento por la radiación solar y retorne al espacio profundo, como parece haber hecho en anteriores ocasiones.
En las últimas semanas, este cometa ha seguido incrementando a buen ritmo su brillo, tal y como revelan los datos enviados a la Base de Datos de Observaciones de Cometas (COBS), que recopila las observaciones de estos objetos. Si mantiene las expectativas, su brillante coma, la envoltura de gas y polvo que se entiende desde el núcleo, llegará a ser visible a simple vista con relativa facilidad desde zonas rurales a finales de octubre.
Se espera que llegue a magnitud +3 la última semana, es decir, similar a las estrellas más débiles que forman la conocida Osa Mayor. Incluso podría ser algo más brillante, conforme evolucione y se acerque a la Tierra.
En la coma ya desarrollada del cometa 2025 A6 Lemmon ya puede apreciarse el comienzo de la cola. Captado el 14 de septiembre de 2025 desde Alalpardo, Madrid. Alfonso J. Merino
El cometa irá incrementando su brillo progresivamente, mientras recorre el firmamento cruzando las constelaciones de Leo Menor, la Osa Mayor, los Perros de Caza y Boyero. En la actualidad, C/2025 A6 Lemmon se encuentra prácticamente en el límite de observación a simple vista, pero va ganando brillo cada noche. Recomiendo las cartas celestes de Gideon van Buitenen para localizarlo puntualmente.
Precisamente la semana que se muestre más brillante y asequible estará ya en la constelación de Boyero, relativamente cerca de la luminosa estrella Arturo. En todo caso, su observación dependerá de buscar un lugar sin contaminación lumínica con el horizonte oeste despejado, dado que se hallará a finales de octubre a baja altura sobre el horizonte, tras la puesta del Sol.
El súbito descubrimiento del cometa SWAN
Hace poco más de una semana, otro cometa fue descubierto saliendo de su conjunción con el Sol, tal como llamamos a la mayor proximidad angular al astro rey. Lo halló el instrumento Solar Wind Anisotropies (SWAN) de la sonda SOHO, capaz de monitorizar el campo angular cercano a nuestra estrella.
El cometa C/2025 R2 SWAN fue captado el pasado 16 de septiembre de 2025, con su cola iónica deslabazada, desde Farm Tivoli, Namibia. Gerald Rhemann y Michael Jäger
El nuevo cometa estará bien situado las próximas semanas para observarlo con prismáticos o pequeños telescopios. Deberemos buscar un entorno rural, con el oeste libre de contaminación lumínica, puesto que no es visible a simple vista. Con telescopios se aprecia su coma y una parte de su larga y fina cola iónica.
Haciendo uso de las citadas cartas celestes de van Buitenen podremos localizarlo entre las estrellas. Si no disponemos de un telescopio computerizado, procuremos tener una estrella brillante cercana de referencia inicial para poder “saltar” en el campo de nuestro telescopio hasta llegar a la posición esperada del cometa. Empleemos un ocular que proporcione bajos aumentos y mayor campo angular para distinguir bien el difuso cometa entre las estrellas de fondo.
Localización del cometa C/2025 R2 SWAN entre el 16 de septiembre y el 2 de octubre. Eddie Irizarry/ Stellarium.
Ahora sólo cabe esperar que estos cometas se comporten como deben y nos maravillen incluso más de lo esperable. Al fin y al cabo, como dijo el célebre descubridor de cometas David H. Levy en su libro Comets: Creators and Destroyers (Cometas: Creadores y Destructores): “Los cometas son como los gatos: tienen colas y hacen exactamente lo que quieren”
Josep M. Trigo Rodríguez recibe fondos del proyecto del Plan Nacional de Astronomía y Astrofísica PID2021-128062NB-I00 financiado por el MICINN y la Agencia Estatal de Investigación.
On Sept. 18, 2025, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, an independent panel of experts that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, debated changing the recommendation. According to the proposed language of the vote, infants whose mothers test positive for hepatitis B would still receive the vaccine at birth. Infants whose mothers do not test positive for hepatitis B would get the vaccine at 1 month of age, though parents would have the choice for them to receive it earlier. On Sept. 19, however, the committee tabled the vote, delaying it to the next committee meeting, scheduled for Oct. 22-23.
Although such a proposed change sounds small, it is not based on any new evidence. It would undo more than three decades of a prevention strategy that has nearly eliminated early childhood hepatitis B in the U.S.
While the committee regularly reviews vaccine guidance, nothing is business as usual about this meeting. In June 2025, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. disbanded the entire committee and handpicked new members. The committee has long-standing procedures to evaluate the evidence supporting the risks and benefits of a given vaccine, as well as other parameters of its use. But in this case, these procedures are not being followed.
Why the CDC adopted universal hepatitis B shots
Hepatitis B is a virus that infects liver cells, causing inflammation and damage. In adults, it is spread through blood and bodily fluids, which can happen through unprotected sex, contaminated needles or contact with open cuts or sores of someone who is carrying it.
The hepatitis B vaccine has been available since the early 1980s. Before 1991, public health guidance recommended giving newborns and young children the hepatitis B vaccine only if they were at high risk of being infected – for example, if they were born to a mother infected with hepatitis B or living in a household with someone known to have hepatitis B.
That targeted plan failed. Tens of thousands of children were still infected each year.
Some newborns were exposed when their mothers weren’t properly screened or if their mothers got infected late in pregnancy. Children also became infected through household contacts or in child care settings by exposures as ordinary as shared toothbrushes or a bite that breaks the skin. Because hepatitis B can survive for a week on household surfaces, and many carriers are unaware they are infected, even babies and toddlers of uninfected mothers remained at risk.
The greatest danger for infants contracting hepatitis B is at birth, when contact with a mother’s blood can transmit the virus. Without preventive treatment or vaccination, 70% to 90% of infants born to infected mothers will become infected themselves, and 90% of those infections will become chronic. The infection in these children silently damages their liver, potentially leading to liver cancer and death.
About 80% of parents choose to follow the CDC’s guidance and vaccinate their babies at birth. If the CDC’s recommendations change to delaying the first dose to 1 month old, it would leave babies unprotected during this most vulnerable window, when infection is most likely to lead to chronic infection and silently damage the liver.
The hepatitis B vaccines used in the U.S. have an outstanding safety record. The only confirmed risk is an allergic reaction called anaphylaxis that occurs in roughly 1 in 600,000 doses, and no child has died from such a reaction. Extensive studies show no link to other serious conditions.
The current recommendations are designed to protect every child, including those who slip through gaps in maternal screening or encounter the virus in everyday life. A reversion to the ineffective risk-based approach threatens to erode this critical safety net.
David Higgins is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics and volunteer board member for Immunize Colorado.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Katherine Steele, Senior Lecturer in Sustainable Crop Production, Bangor University
Many Britons enjoy a curry served with a heap of fluffy white basmati rice, its delicate aroma balancing the heat of the dish. But few stop to think about the grain’s long journey. From the paddy fields of India and Pakistan, through regional markets and rice mills, then matured for a year in silos before being shipped in bulk to the UK.
It then passes through one of the country’s 16 processing sites before reaching supermarket shelves. The UK imports around 250,000 tonnes of basmati rice every year – making it one of the world’s biggest markets.
This summer, consumers got a glimpse of what could potentially happen when that supply chain goes wrong. Four people were arrested in late July after investigators found different types of rice in bags being passed off as a well-known basmati brand.
The National Food Crime Unit uncovered the alleged fraud when tests showed the wrong type of rice inside premium-brand packets. The operation began in Leicester, where police arrested a man suspected of repackaging ordinary rice into counterfeit basmati bags. Three more arrests followed in London. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) says the investigation is ongoing and no charges have been brought.
Basmati is a prestigious grain, prized for its nutty flavour and popcorn-like aroma. Alongside jasmine from Thailand and Italy’s arborio, it sits at the top of the speciality rice market. When shoppers buy a packet of basmati, they expect quality. If it falls short, they may feel cheated and think twice about buying that brand again.
To prevent this, the UK operates strict rules under the basmati code of practice. The code sets out which varieties can legally be called basmati, how they may be blended and what level of non-basmati grain is tolerated.
There must not be more than 7% of another rice variety in a packet. It’s a figure reduced from 20% two decades ago, but which cannot be lowered further because of the realities of handling multiple varieties in large mills.
This code was agreed by the Rice Association and the British Retail Association, and it applies across Europe. When exporters in India and Pakistan develop new basmati varieties, samples are sent to the Rice Association in London for approval.
An important tool in enforcing these rules is DNA testing. Every grain carries a genetic fingerprint that can confirm whether it belongs to one of the approved basmati varieties.
Public analyst laboratories regularly test shipments entering the UK and EU. The FSA also runs an annual survey of basmati products bought at random from retailers.
The current DNA test for basmati authentication was developed through collaboration between my colleagues and me at Bangor University, the FSA and public analysts.
Katherine Steele in the laboratory. Bangor University, CC BY
We profiled hundreds of rice varieties and continue to refine the markers used to identify basmati. Before the method was approved, our team ran blind tests of results from known spiked mixtures of grains across different laboratories to ensure reliable results.
An age-old problem with modern costs
Food fraud is nothing new. For centuries, unscrupulous traders have substituted cheaper goods or mislabelled products.
While swapping rice is less harmful than adulterating food with toxic substances, it still matters. Consumers resent being duped, brands suffer reputational damage and companies that play by the rules lose out. The stakes are high because the UK rice industry is worth close to £1 billion a year.
There are points of vulnerability every time the grains get passed from one trader to the next. It is not known whether it mainly takes place overseas. Economic pressures may be making the problem worse. As the UK experiences sluggish economic growth, opportunities for food crime may be increasing.
Counterfeiting is easier to identify using DNA testing than when known mixtures of varieties are introduced further up the food chain. It is probable that some of the less well-known brands of rice sold in the UK may contain varieties that are not listed in the basmati code of practice. These could easily slip through the DNA test because complex mixtures can be made to contain all the right molecular signatures.
Even so, food sold in the UK is among the most closely regulated in the world because of the work done by the FSA. Their National Food Crime unit leads the fight against food crime as exemplified by the recent case of the counterfeit basmati, but consumers must be vigilant because there are still fraudsters about. This can include being wary of poorly printed packaging labels, misspellings, broken seals and unusual pricing. Because if the price seems too good to be true, it probably is.
Katherine Steele receives funding from UKRI, DEFRA and Food Standards Agency.
