Category: Analysis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Political satire as tragicomedy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Benefits beyond carbon savings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

E-bike grants could get more people out of cars

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The price of family life

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What happens next?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1. Smarter training

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

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

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

2. Better injury prevention and medical support

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

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

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

3. Optimised recovery and nutrition

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

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

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

4. Experience and tactical intelligence

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

5. Financial and legacy incentives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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