Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rebecca Moosavian, Associate Professor in Law, University of Leeds

The BBC is the latest media organisation to be targeted by Donald Trump’s highly litigious machine. The fallout over a Panorama episode that included a misleadingly edited clip of the US president’s January 6 2021 speech led to the resignation of two BBC executives, and Trump’s threat to sue the BBC for $1 billion if they do not retract the episode.

How likely is he to succeed if he goes through with such a lawsuit? To answer this, we must look at two distinct issues. First, how defamation laws on the books apply to this situation. And second, how things might actually play out in practice.

Defamation laws enable individuals to obtain remedies (such as compensation) when another party makes false allegations that damage their reputation. The BBC has admitted that the Panorama footage was misleading in that it clipped together two parts of Trump’s speech that were actually 50 minutes apart.

However, this by no means ensures that a defamation claim by Trump would succeed. Trump must meet set requirements to prove that the footage was actually defamatory. He would face significant difficulties doing so in both England and the US.

First, Trump’s existing reputation is hardly unblemished, and includes court findings of fraudulent conduct, sexual assault (subject to ongoing litigation in the US), and impeachment for inciting an insurrection against a democratically-elected government (he was later acquitted).

Furthermore, he won the 2024 US election within a fortnight of the episode’s broadcast. It would therefore be difficult for his lawyers to prove that he suffered reputational harm from this Panorama episode.

Truth defences are also available in both jurisdictions. These protect a defendant whose allegations contain minor inaccuracies, as long as the “sting” of the libel – in this case, that Trump’s speech contributed to the storming of the Capitol – is true.

English defamation law is noted for being claimant-friendly (particularly compared to the US), so suing in this jurisdiction would arguably have been preferable for Trump. But in the UK, a defamation claim must be brought promptly within one year of publication.

This deadline has passed as the Panorama episode was broadcast in October 2024. So Trump’s defamation claim is time-barred in the UK. He has previously (but unsuccessfully) tried to use data protection law to protect his reputation in the UK due to its longer, six-year limitation period.

Because the Panorama documentary is also available in the US, Trump has instead threatened to bring a claim in the US state of Florida. US law is noted for providing strong free speech protections, particularly for media organisations sued by public figures. In defamation law, media free speech has been safeguarded by the landmark 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times v Sullivan.

L.B. Sullivan was a police commissioner in Montgomery, Alabama, who sued the Times for publishing an advert that criticised the police (but which contained some minor inaccuracies). The Supreme Court unanimously held that if a public official brings a defamation action, they must meet a higher benchmark than a civilian to succeed.

They must prove that the defendant made the statement with “actual malice” – that they knew the statement was false, or they made it in reckless disregard of whether it was true. This principle was extended to other “public figures” in later cases. Because actual malice is very hard to establish, it makes defamation actions incredibly difficult to win for politicians.

Defamation threats in practice

So the BBC might appear relatively safe if we focus solely on the legal texts. But in practice, there can be large gaps between what legal rules say and how defamation disputes operate in reality. Making legal threats – even those that are spurious or doomed to fail – can still be beneficial to claimants like Trump.

As leading US academic RonNell Andersen Jones has explained, these legal threats serve as PR for politicians, and undermine public faith in the journalists seeking to hold them to account.

These threats are a form of so-called “Slapp” suit – strategic lawsuits against public participation. Slapps are legal threats made to silence or intimidate critics or those who speak out about matters of public interest.

These cases are effective because they leverage the extremely high legal costs of litigation and exploit inequalities in power or resources between parties. Weaker parties are pressured into backing down, even if they have a good prospect of successfully defending themselves against the claim.

Many Slapps never even reach the courts because their targets choose to settle the case rather than risk the expense and stress of litigating. This playbook has served Trump well.

He has a sustained track record of seeking preposterous sums from media organisations on the basis of arguably flimsy claims, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, CBS and ABC (both of which paid Trump millions to settle the cases). He is no doubt calculating that the BBC will also cave in and settle early.

Trump’s defamation threat against the BBC places the latter in a precarious position. Though the BBC has a strong legal case on the face of it, it faces the financial constraints of its diminishing publicly-funded budgets, and sustained attack from political and commercial adversaries. It will now have to make a big decision on how to respond and whether to settle, like CBS and ABC before it.

Rebecca Moosavian is co-deputy director of The SLAPPs Reseach Group, an international academic network researching SLAPPs and related laws <https://www.theslappsresearchgroup.org/>

– ref. Trump v the BBC: a legal expert explains how the case could play out – https://theconversation.com/trump-v-the-bbc-a-legal-expert-explains-how-the-case-could-play-out-269551

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laura Smith, PhD Researcher and Graduate Teaching Fellow, University of Liverpool

In her 2022 novel Trespasses, Louise Kennedy captures the emotional turmoil of an intimate relationship between Cushla, a young Catholic woman, and Michael, an older married Protestant man during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Their love is difficult, not just because Michael is married but also because it is seen as a “mixed relationship” within Northern Irish society.

The Troubles was a period of violence stemming from a political divide over British rule, which lasted for about 30 years from the late 1960s to 1998. The fighting was between the Unionist/Loyalists who wanted Northern Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom and the Nationalist/Republicans who sought a united Ireland. These groups were also split on religious lines with Unionist/Loyalists being mostly Protestant and Nationalist/Republicans mostly Catholic.

Channel 4’s new adaptation of Trespasses, starring Lola Petticrew, Tom Cullen and Gillian Anderson, is set in 1975, in the height of the Troubles. With the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, which brought an era of “peace” to Northern Ireland, you might assume the experiences of Cushla and Michael would no longer be common. However, my research shows that the story’s themes of forbidden love remain for women in “mixed” relationships today.

In Northern Ireland, many people still identify as either being Catholic, Nationalist and Republican or Protestant, Unionist and Loyalist, although there is an increase in people now choosing to identify as “neither”. However, key indicators of the degree of segregation in society still remain high.

The availability of integrated schools or provision of mixed-denomination social housing remains low, which means the opportunities to mix across these communities can be limited. There is also the continued presence of “peace walls”, physical barriers made of materials such as concrete, barbed wire or corrugated metal at interfaces between residential areas, which serve as a visual reminder of the violent conflict.

Endogamy, where couples marry someone from their own community, is still the single most powerful factor that bolsters the divisions between groups. Estimates suggest that approximately 20% of all relationships in Northern Ireland are mixed. Charities such as the Northern Ireland Mixed Marriage Association (NIMMA), which was founded in 1974, continues to support couples living with these undercurrents of institutionalised segregation. And for many couples, just like Cushla and Michael, crossing the religious and political divide still carries some emotional weight.

Everyday challenges

For Cushla, worrying about being seen in public with Michael is a recurring theme throughout their love story. Her inner monologue documents decisions she makes to counteract this fear of political violence, including avoiding driving through loyalist roads that border Michael’s area.

In my own research with women currently in mixed-denominational relationships in Northern Ireland, I found that echoes of Cushla’s fears persist. While none of my participants spoke about fear of physical violence, many spoke about ways they have learned to cope with subtle disapproval from neighbours and colleagues. Telling friends and family about their relationship also proved difficult for some women.

One participant spoke about how fear infiltrated into her parents’ concerns:

I knew my parents were uncomfortable with me going to a super Protestant area they’d heard bad things about. And then, I know that they were uncomfortable at the idea of me even being in a house with like a British soldier, they didn’t like that idea at all.

There was also a common thread of how women have to negotiate different expectations from families. This often emerged while organising weddings or raising children, and was a source of emotional discomfort.

While couples may feel invincible – just like Cushla and Michael did in their dangerous and passionate relationship, leading them to get complacent with their precautions – love isn’t always enough.

Everyday peace

As my ongoing research has shown, there can be a particular emotional burden that falls on these couples as they try to maintain harmony between two different identities. This burden often falls on the woman in the relationship, and is connected to other aspects of emotional and reproductive work that women may feel pressured by society to undertake.

My work focuses on how couples manage these relationships through practising what peace and conflict researchers call “everyday peace”. It refers to the ways in which ordinary people try to make their way with as much as ease as possible through in a deeply divided society. For people in mixed relationships, this can lead them to choose to stay silent, avoid contentious issues, or become ambiguous about their identity.

Ambiguity was most strongly demonstrated with reference to names. As Cushla refers to herself, Irish names become significant identifiers of being Catholic. We watch as she is tempted to give a fake name when she is stopped at a checkpoint by a Protestant soldier.

Some of my participants similarly ask their partners to refer to them by a different name while they’re at a pub in a new area. Another example given was using a nickname when getting parcels delivered to their house. These strategies emerge out of a genuine fear, or a self-acknowledged paranoia of what might happen if the wrong person finds out they are in a mixed relationship.

My research shows that being in a mixed relationship within a society trying to heal is still complicated. While it is certainly possible to have a successful mixed relationship in Northern Ireland today, some of the contentious aspects of Cushla and Michael’s relationship do still prevail.

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

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.

Laura Smith 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. Trespasses: little has changed for couples dating across the religious and political divide in Northern Ireland – https://theconversation.com/trespasses-little-has-changed-for-couples-dating-across-the-religious-and-political-divide-in-northern-ireland-269550

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Carsten P Welsch, Professor of Physics, University of Liverpool

A particle accelerator that produces intense X-rays could be squeezed into a device that fits on a table, my colleagues and I have found in a new research project.

The way that intense X-rays are currently produced is through a facility called a synchrotron light source. These are used to study materials, drug molecules and biological tissues. Even the smallest existing synchrotrons, however, are about the size of a football stadium.

Our research, which has been accepted for publication in the journal Physical Review Letters, shows how tiny structures called carbon nanotubes and laser light could generate brilliant X-rays on a microchip. Although the device is still at the concept stage, the development has the potential to transform medicine, materials science and other disciplines.

Most people imagine particle accelerators as enormous machines, very large rings of metal and magnets stretching for kilometre beneath the ground. The Large Hadron Collider at Cern (the European Organization for Nuclear Research) in Geneva, for example, is 17 miles (27km) long.

The new research shows that it may soon be possible to build ultra-compact accelerators only a few micrometre wide – smaller than the width of a human hair. These could generate coherent, high-energy X-rays similar to those produced by billion-pound synchrotron facilities, but using devices that fit on a microchip.

Twisted light

The principle relies on a particular property of light known as surface plasmon polaritons. These are waves that form when laser light clings to the surface of a material. In the simulations, a circularly polarised laser pulse was sent through a tiny hollow tube. This polarised laser pulse is light that twists as it moves, very much like a corkscrew.

The swirling field traps and accelerates electron particles inside the tube, forcing them into a spiral motion. As they move in sync, the electrons emit radiation coherently, amplifying the light’s intensity by up to two orders of magnitude.

My team and I have created a microscopic synchrotron, where the same physical principles that drive mile-scale facilities play out – but on a nanoscopic stage.

To make this concept work, carbon nanotubes were used. These are cylindrical structures made of carbon atoms arranged in hexagonal patterns. These nanotubes can withstand very high electric fields, hundreds of times stronger than those in conventional accelerators. They can also be “grown” vertically into what we call a “forest” of closely aligned hollow tubes.

This unique architecture provides an ideal environment for the corkscrewing laser light to couple with the electrons. The circularly polarised laser fits the nanotube’s internal structure – much like a key in a lock which is why we refer to a quantum lock-and-key mechanism.

The research team that I’m a part of was led by Bifeng Lei, research associate in the school of physical sciences. 3D simulations showed that this interaction can produce electric fields of several teravolts (one trillion volts) per metre. This is far beyond what current accelerator technologies can achieve.

That kind of performance could change who gets access to cutting-edge X-ray sources. At present, scientists must apply for limited time slots at large, national synchrotron facilities, or free-electron lasers, often waiting months for a few hours of beam time.

Opening up access

The tabletop accelerator approach could make this capability available in hospitals, universities and industrial labs. In fact, wherever it is needed.

In medicine, this could mean clearer mammograms and new imaging techniques that reveal soft tissues in unprecedented detail, without contrast agents. In drug development, researchers could analyse protein structures in-house, dramatically speeding up the design of new therapies. And in materials, science and semiconductor engineering, it could enable non destructive, high speed testing of delicate components.

The study was presented at the 2025 NanoAc workshop on the topic of nanotechnology in accelerator physics, which was held in Liverpool earlier this month. The research currently remains at the simulation stage. But the necessary components already exist: powerful circularly polarised lasers and precisely fabricated nanotube structures are standard tools in advanced research labs.

The next step is experimental verification. If successful, this would mark the beginning of a new generation of ultra compact radiation sources. What excites me most about this technology is not just the physics, but what it represents.

Large-scale accelerators have driven enormous scientific progress, but they remain out of reach for most institutions. A miniaturised accelerator that delivers comparable performance could democratise access to world-class research tools, bringing frontier science into the hands of many more researchers.

The future of particle acceleration might include very large machines to further push the energy, intensity and discovery boundaries, as well as smaller, smarter and more accessible accelerators.

Carsten P Welsch 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. Tabletop particle accelerator could transform medicine and materials science – https://theconversation.com/tabletop-particle-accelerator-could-transform-medicine-and-materials-science-269537

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Henry Chung, Lecturer, School of Sport, Rehabilitation and Exercise Sciences, University of Essex

Society is fascinated with health, fitness and longevity. This obsession has spawned a multi-million pound industry centred around pushing the latest cutting-edge science, lifestyle modifications and products that claim to prevent ageing and live as long as possible.

But the secret to a long life doesn’t have to be so complicated. There are many simple things everyone can do to slow down time and feel younger.

When we talk about age, we aren’t always talking about how many candles are on your birthday cake. We actually have two different ages.

The first is of course chronological age. This is the number of years you’ve been alive.

But we also have a “biological age.” This is sometimes referred to as “true age” or “internal body age.” This refers to how well all of the body’s internal systems are functioning by looking for signs of ageing in the cells, blood and DNA.

Research indicates that a person’s biological age, rather than their chronological age, is related to how long they live. Let’s say you looked at two 60-year-old people. The person whose biological age is younger would be more likely to outlive the person who had a higher biological age.

There are now many ways to measure your biological age with epigenetic testing, which only requires a little bit of spit and can be done at home. The saliva sample is then processed in a lab where the DNA is extracted to get information about what’s happening in the body.

The everyday lifestyle choices we make affects our biological age. While some of the decisions we make can increase it (such as drinking, smoking or being inactive), other factors can actually turn back the clock. Thus, how long we live may truly be in our hands.

Here are five evidence-backed ways of reducing your biological age:

1. Run away from ageing – literally

Being more physically active and regularly exercising throughout life reduces risk of death from all causes – directly increasing longevity.

It’s also never too late to get started. One study found that sedentary people who adopted an eight-week exercise programme (60 minute workouts done three times a week) reversed their biological age by around two years.

A mixture of strength and endurance exercises done three to four times a week (with sessions as short as 23 minutes) is also shown to significantly reduce ageing.

Exercise influences something called DNA methylation, a process which controls whether certain genes are “on” or “off.” As we age it’s natural that our genes start switching off – this is why we get winkles and grey hair.

But exercise helps to slow these processes down, meaning the genes that help do important functions in the body continue doing their job for longer.

2. You are what you eat

Making healthier food choices directly reduces biological age. This effect is even greater in those with chronic disease and obesity.

One study, which looked at nearly 2,700 women, found that adopting healthier eating patterns for 6-12 months was a key factor in staying younger for longer. This diet was also shown to slow ageing by an average of 2.4 years.

Healthier food choices included eating more fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, legumes, fish, lean proteins and healthy fats (such as oil) and reducing intake of red meat, saturated fat, added sugars and sodium.

A well-balanced diet provides antioxidants, vitamins and anti-inflammatory compounds that help cells repair damage and reduce stress on our DNA. These nutrients also influence DNA methylation.

3. Improve sleep habits

Sleep is one of the strongest predictors of healthy ageing because it affects nearly every bodily system. Good quality sleep allows the body to repair DNA, restore hormonal balance, reduce inflammation and clear cellular waste – helping the immune, metabolic and nervous systems stay youthful and resilient.

One review showed that sleep quality is directly associated with how fast we age. People who sleep less than five hours per night have a significantly increased risk of age-related diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, cancer and dementia.

Additionally, a large UK study of nearly 200,000 participants found that those on shift work – and particularly night shifts – had a biological age around one year higher than their counterparts who worked at normal hours.

4. Avoid unhealthy vices

Habits such as vaping, smoking and drinking alcohol are the strongest and most consistent accelerators of ageing.

Smoking, for instance, is shown to rapidly age the lungs by up to 4.3 years and the airway cells by nearly five years.

Similarly, a study looking at 8,046 adults aged 30–79 years old found that consuming any amount of alcohol was associated with accelerated biological ageing. The more alcohol consumed the more age is accelerated.

These habits speed up biological ageing because they directly damage DNA, increase inflammation and overload cells with stress. This causes the body and organs to work harder – ageing them quicker.

5. Master your mind

Stress management is key. Research shows that being able to regulate emotions and manage stress levels predicts age acceleration. Another study found that working more than 40 hours a week on average increased biological age by two years, probably due to the stress.

Stress can directly accelerate biological age due to the way it affects hormonal response, damages DNA and reduces immunity. Stress can also indirectly affect other factors that may accelerate age, such as diet, sleep and whether we drink or smoke. This is why having a set of positive coping mechanisms to manage stress is so important.

Read more:
Your body can be younger than you are – here’s how to understand (and improve) your ‘biological age’

A growing body of research is also showing that factors such as loneliness, exposure to extreme heat and cold, air pollution and our environment (such as living in deprived areas) can all also affect how we age.

It’s important to note that the affect of these factors on age may vary depending on the person, their genetics, how long they’ve stuck with these lifestyle habits and other factors at play.

Nevertheless, this gives insight into how changing even small habits can positively improve health and well-being and, in some cases, turn back the clock.

Dr Henry Chung receives funding from Innovate UK, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), and UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). No funding from this organisations was received for the work described in this article.

Charlotte Gowers 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 lifestyle changes that might help you live longer and slow down ageing – https://theconversation.com/five-lifestyle-changes-that-might-help-you-live-longer-and-slow-down-ageing-268326

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jose L Areta, Associate Professor in Exercise Metabolism and Nutrition, Liverpool John Moores University

When we lose weight, we don’t just lose body fat – we lose muscle, too.

This can be a problem for many reasons, because skeletal muscle is far more than the tissue that helps us move. It plays a crucial role in metabolic health, regulating blood sugar and healthy ageing. Losing muscle mass is linked to a reduced mobility, increased injury risk and is thought to potentially impair long-term weight loss.

With millions of people now using weight loss drugs such as Wegovy and Ozempic, understanding what impact this muscle loss might have on their health is important.

Loss of muscle mass is also a significant challenge for athletes too, as many sports encourage them to keep body weight low while still maintaining demanding training loads and keeping their power-output high. So an energy deficit can put significant stress on an athlete’s body – but to what extent it affects their normal function, is unclear.

Yet despite these widespread implications, we still know surprisingly little about how human muscle responds at the molecular level to the combination of calorie restriction and exercise. Understanding what happens to muscle when exercising in a calorie deficit is extremely important.

Newly published research from myself and my colleagues casts light on this exact topic. We showed that weight loss accompanied by aerobic exercise might not be that bad for the muscles after all – and indeed it may have positive effects.

We recruited ten healthy, fit young men who completed two tightly controlled five-day experimental trials in our laboratory. During their first trial period, they consumed enough calories to maintain their body weight. But during the second, we reduced their daily calorie intake by 78% – a severe energy deficit.

During both trials, participants completed a tightly-controlled, 90-minute low- to moderate-intensity cycling exercise three times during each five-day period.

Throughout the trials, we measured blood markers such as glucose, ketones, fatty acids and key hormones linked to energy preservation. We did this to determine if – and to what extent – the energy deficit was affecting them.

We also collected muscle biopsies before and after each testing period. Using an advanced method called dynamic proteomic profiling, we analysed the production and abundance of hundreds of muscle proteins. This allowed us to build a detailed picture of how muscle adapts to sudden, substantial calorie restriction – even when exercise demands are maintained.

During the five days in an energy deficit, participants lost about 3kg. Hormones such as leptin, T3 and IGF-1 also dropped sharply – clear signs the body was getting into an energy preservation mode.

But inside the muscle itself, something more unexpected was happening.

Muscle tissue changes

The muscle tissue mounted a strong and surprisingly positive response to the combination of exercise and calorie restriction.

First, we saw an increase in the amount of mitochondrial proteins within the muscle – and these proteins were also being created more quickly.

Mitochondria are the power generators inside cells. They convert fat and carbohydrates into usable energy. Higher amounts of mitochondrial proteins, and faster production of them, are hallmarks of a healthier and more efficient muscle.

We also saw a clear decrease in the amount and production of collagen and collagen-related proteins.

Collagen is an abundant protein that plays a role in providing structure and strength to the muscle. However, collagen tends to accumulate in excess as we age – contributing to stiffness and impaired function.

Taken together, these changes resemble a shift toward a more metabolically youthful muscle profile.

This kind of response has also been seen in long-term calorie-restriction studies in monkeys. But this is the first time it has been demonstrated in humans.

Healthier ageing

At first glance, it seems paradoxical that the body would invest energy in maintaining or improving muscle during a time of scarcity.

Muscle tissue is demanding and costly to maintain – and movement is energetically expensive, too. Shouldn’t the body simply reduce muscle activity to save energy?

The answer to this question may lie in our evolutionary past. Humans evolved as hunter-gatherers, who often faced periods of low food availability. During those times, the ability to move efficiently – to walk and run long distances, forage or hunt – was essential for survival. A body that shut down muscle function during hunger would have been less likely to survive and reproduce.

So the protective response we observed may reflect deep evolutionary adaptations: muscles stay ready to move even when fuel is running low.

Our study involved a small number of young men who were deliberately following an extreme energy deficit for a short period of time. As such, we cannot assume identical responses in women, older adults or people who are obese or have chronic health conditions.

Future studies will need to compare weight loss with and without exercise, examine less extreme calorie deficits, include women and older adults, and measure how these molecular changes translate into actual physical performance.

Nevertheless, our findings support the idea that exercise during weight loss may protect muscle quality – and may even enhance characteristics linked to healthier ageing.

These findings also have key implications for many people. People who are taking weight loss drugs or trying to lose weight may benefit from structured exercise to help them preserve muscle quality. Older adults, who are more vulnerable to muscle loss, may especially benefit from exercising while losing weight. Athletes may approach any energy deficit with care, but know that muscle keeps adapting to exercise stimulus.

Our study shows that human muscle is remarkably resilient. Even under severe stress, when much of the body is trying to conserve energy, muscle tissue seems to respond robustly – boosting its energy-producing machinery and limiting age-related degradation.

In other words, losing weight and exercising doesn’t just help preserve muscle – it may help keep it younger.

Jose Areta received research funding from the Alliance for Potato Research and Education.

– ref. Could exercising while losing weight preserve your muscles and help keep them ‘young’? – https://theconversation.com/could-exercising-while-losing-weight-preserve-your-muscles-and-help-keep-them-young-268812

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dipa Kamdar, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice, Kingston University

Whether it is sizzling in olive oil or crushed into a curry, garlic has long been a hero in the kitchen. But beyond its strong flavour, garlic has earned a reputation as a natural remedy with a surprising range of potential health benefits. From heart health to immune support, science increasingly supports what tradition has claimed for centuries: garlic is good for you.

The secret lies in its chemistry. Garlic (allium sativum) contains sulphur compounds, including diallyl disulfide and S-allyl cysteine, that are responsible for both its distinctive smell and its medicinal effects.

The most studied of these is allicin, which forms when garlic is chopped, crushed or chewed. Allicin is unstable and quickly breaks down into other sulphur-containing compounds that are linked to several health effects. Here are some of the best supported benefits.

1. Heart health

Garlic is widely studied for its potential to support the heart and blood vessels. Garlic supplements can help reduce high blood pressure, with some studies finding effects similar to certain prescribed medications. A 2019 analysis found that garlic supplements significantly lowered blood pressure in people with hypertension. This reduction was linked to a 16%-40% lower risk of cardiovascular events, such as heart attacks and strokes.

Read more:
Stroke can happen to anyone – an expert explains how to spot the signs and act fast

Research suggests this may be because garlic extract improves arterial elasticity so that arteries become more flexible, helping them expand and contract more easily as blood flows through. Stiff arteries make the heart work harder and are a risk factor for heart disease.

Garlic compounds also appear to help relax blood vessels by increasing levels of hydrogen sulphide and nitric oxide. These are gases naturally produced in the body that help blood vessels widen so blood can flow more easily. Allicin may also help reduce blood pressure by blocking angiotensin II, a hormone that causes blood vessels to tighten.

Research suggests garlic may also lower total cholesterol – the overall amount of cholesterol in the blood – and LDL cholesterol, often called bad cholesterol because high levels can clog arteries. Some studies show that taking garlic for longer than two months can reduce LDL cholesterol by up to 10% in people with mildly raised levels.

Lab studies show that garlic compounds can block liver enzymes that produce fats and cholesterol. They may also prevent plaque building up in the arteries by reducing LDL and making it more resistant to oxidation, a process that contributes to heart disease.

2. Immune support

The antibacterial effects of allicin are well recognised. Garlic extract has also been shown to have antimicrobial activity against bacteria, viruses and fungi.

One study found that people who took aged garlic extract had milder cold and flu symptoms, recovered more quickly and missed fewer days of work or school.

More recent research suggests garlic may support the immune system by activating certain types of white blood cells. These include macrophages, which are immune cells that engulf and destroy bacteria and viruses; lymphocytes, which include T cells and B cells that recognise infections and produce antibodies; and natural killer cells, which target and destroy infected or abnormal cells such as virus infected or cancerous cells.

Garlic may also help regulate inflammation, which is a key part of the immune response.

3. Cancer prevention

Early research suggests garlic may help reduce the risk of certain cancers, particularly those affecting the digestive system, colon, lungs and urinary tract.

A study found that garlic can affect key processes involved in cancer development. It may stop cancer cells from dividing, prevent the formation of new blood vessels that feed tumours and encourage cancer cells to die naturally. These effects appear to be linked to garlic’s influence on cell signalling pathways which control how cells grow and behave. Garlic’s antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties may also contribute.

However, most of this evidence comes from laboratory and animal studies which do not always apply to humans. More robust clinical studies on people are needed.

Garlic has also been linked to other possible health benefits although research is still ongoing. Its antioxidant effects may help lower the risk of Alzheimer’s disease, and its anti-inflammatory properties may be useful in conditions such as osteoarthritis.

How much garlic is enough

There is no official recommended daily amount for garlic. Many studies use the equivalent of one to two cloves per day. Supplements are also widely available. Eating garlic as part of food provides fibre, vitamins and other plant compounds that supplements do not contain so food sources may offer extra benefits beyond supplements alone.

Garlic is generally safe but it can cause bloating, gas and heartburn especially when eaten raw or in large amounts. People with irritable bowel syndrome, acid reflux or those who are pregnant may be more sensitive.

Garlic is also known for causing bad breath and body odour. As allicin breaks down, it releases sulphur containing gases. Most are processed by the body but one called allyl methyl sulphide remains unmetabolised and leaves the body through breath and sweat.

Garlic can interact with certain medications if taken in large amounts. It may increase the effects of aspirin or blood-thinning medicines such as warfarin which can increase the risk of bleeding. Garlic may also lower blood pressure which could be a problem for people already taking medication for high or low blood pressure. Those who are pregnant or breastfeeding should be cautious because high-dose garlic supplements have not been well studied, so the effects on the developing baby or infant are not fully known.

Garlic is more than a flavour booster. It is a functional food with a growing body of scientific evidence behind it. While it is not a replacement for medical treatment, including garlic in your diet may offer real benefits for your heart and immune system.

Whether you roast it, crush it or take it as a supplement, garlic deserves a place in your health routine. If you take medication or have existing health conditions speak to a doctor or pharmacist before using garlic in large amounts. As with any natural remedy, moderation is important.

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

– ref. From heart health to drug interactions: garlic’s effect on the body – https://theconversation.com/from-heart-health-to-drug-interactions-garlics-effect-on-the-body-266646

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matthew Allen, Lecturer in Economics, Salford Business School, University of Salford

US president Donald Trump’s 15% baseline tariffs on EU imports may read like a throwback to old-school protectionism, designed to safeguard American jobs and manufacturing. But in today’s globalised and digitally driven economy, the risk isn’t just to steel or car factories, it’s to innovation itself.

The world’s most advanced technologies rely on complex, deeply integrated supply chains. Evidence from 2023 shows that even temporary US tariff shocks disrupted relationships between firms. And these tariffs won’t just hit the EU. They will disrupt the high-value tech ecosystems of partners like the UK – especially firms contributing to artificial intelligence (AI), semiconductor design and cybersecurity.

These industries underpin national resilience, data security and the competitiveness of advanced economies. For the UK, which often positions itself as a global innovation hub post-Brexit, the fallout could be significant.

Take ARM Holdings, the Cambridge-based semiconductor giant whose chip designs power 99% of the world’s smartphones and an increasing share of AI infrastructure.

ARM doesn’t manufacture chips itself. Instead, it licenses its architecture to firms like Apple, Nvidia and Qualcomm. That makes it a prime example of the UK’s value in the global innovation chain: high intellectual property (IP), low carbon footprint, huge reach.

ARM’s position as a vital link in the supply chain underlines another point. Trade policy aimed at traditional manufacturing sectors can inadvertently destabilise tech-intensive, IP-led sectors like semiconductors and software. This is echoed in research examining global tariff spillovers on tech competitiveness.

If tariffs are applied to components or design work linked to traded goods that cross EU or UK borders en route to US manufacturers, it introduces a layer of risk and cost to innovative firms and their global partners.

Even if a company’s work isn’t directly taxed, the uncertainty and red tape may make US firms think twice about sourcing from outside US jurisdictions. While Trump might present that as a victory for American manufacturing, in reality it could raise costs for US producers, damage innovation and make US firms less competitive in the industries he aims to protect.

It’s not just the giants at risk. In the UK, Cambridge’s wider tech cluster, sometimes called “Silicon Fen”, is home to dozens of ambitious AI firms. With operations spanning the UK, EU and US, companies like this depend on fast, flexible and trusted international partnerships to develop, deploy and refine their products. Tariff-related disruptions make collaboration harder at a time when speed is a competitive advantage.

This is not hypothetical. Tariffs reduce access to large markets – and when markets shrink, firms reduce investment in research and innovation.

What Trump gets wrong

Trump’s broader narrative suggests tariffs can bring back jobs and restore industrial power to the US. But innovation doesn’t work like that. A semiconductor isn’t made in one place. A cybersecurity system isn’t built by a single team. These are networked, iterative processes, involving researchers, suppliers, data centres and talent pools across continents. Disrupt that flow and you slow progress.

The UK is especially exposed because of its unique post-Brexit positioning. It trades independently from the EU but is still tightly intertwined with it, particularly in tech sectors.

Many UK firms use EU distribution centres to reach the US market or collaborate with EU partners on joint projects involving data, hardware or software This reflects the fact that the UK remains tightly integrated into European supply and value chains – exporting £358 billion of goods and services to the EU in 2024 alone. Tariffs targeting the EU could easily catch UK-originated components or design work as collateral damage.

Modelling has shown that Trump’s proposed tariffs could reduce EU-US trade volumes across multiple sectors, particularly in tech, where integrated production routes are standard.

Small and medium-sized enterprises and startups may find themselves most vulnerable. These firms typically can’t absorb sudden cost increases or legal complexities. Nor can they easily switch suppliers or reroute through different customs zones.

If you’re an early-stage AI company relying on a specific chip from Germany and a US cloud partner to train your model, a 15% tariff adds months of delays and thousands of pounds in costs, just to maintain the status quo.

From a policy perspective, the impact goes deeper. The UK government has championed sectors like AI, fintech and clean tech as pillars of economic growth. But these industries are only as strong as the networks that sustain them. If global fragmentation accelerates, the UK risks losing its role as a bridge between the US and the EU.

Meanwhile, countries like China continue to invest heavily in consolidating their innovation supply chains, from chip manufacturing to AI research, particularly in efforts to secure domestic control over advanced technologies and semiconductors. This is something that the US and EU have only recently begun to coordinate on.

In the short term, Trump’s tariff strategy may boost US customs revenue, which is up US$50 billion (£38 billion) a month by some estimates.

But this is not “free money”. These revenues are largely absorbed by businesses and ultimately passed on to consumers through higher prices, or to smaller suppliers through squeezed profit margins.

More fundamentally, it represents a belief that economic strength comes from protection rather than connection. But innovation has never worked that way. It thrives on collaboration, trust and scale. Tariffs may be politically effective, but economically they are the equivalent of building firewalls between teams that are supposed to be co-writing the future.

As the UK charts its post-Brexit global role, aligning itself with open, innovation-driven economies should be a priority. That means standing up for the integrity of global tech supply chains and recognising that disruption to one part of the system can reverberate far beyond its intended target.

Matthew Allen is affiliated with The Conservative Party as a party member. I am not a councillor or an MP. I am also not active in any campaigning.

– ref. Trump’s tariffs threaten the future of innovation – and UK tech could be collateral damage – https://theconversation.com/trumps-tariffs-threaten-the-future-of-innovation-and-uk-tech-could-be-collateral-damage-269158