Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Molly Sheila Harbor, PhD Candidate in Psychology, University of Reading

It’s safe to say nobody likes vomiting. But while it’s not a pleasant experience by any means, few of us really give much thought to it – except maybe when we’ve had a few too many drinks or when stomach flu is doing the rounds.

But for around 2%-7% of the population, vomiting) provokes anxiety so severe they’ll do anything to avoid it. This specific fear of vomiting is known as emetophobia. Though much about the condition remains unknown, research is beginning to explore the debilitating impact it can have on sufferers.

Emetophobia affects everyone differently. For some, this fear centres around vomiting themselves, while for others it’s a fear of seeing somebody else vomit. Many also experience a combination of both fears. Some people can also pinpoint a specific traumatic event related to their phobia, while for others there is no distinct cause.

Emetophobia can also have varying degrees of impact on a person’s life – ranging from mild to debilitating, according to a recent review my colleagues and I published.

The most common characteristic of emetophobia is avoidance. People with the condition often steer clear of situations where they think vomit might be a risk. Many avoid public transport, crowded places, theme parks, dining at restaurants or consuming alcohol. Some even go so far as refraining from saying or typing the word “vomit.”

This fear and avoidance can even influence long-term life decisions – with some people avoiding pregnancy and children due to concerns with morning sickness and the illnesses (such as stomach flu) that kids are prone to.

Not only can these avoidance behaviours affect social and professional life, they can also have an impact on physical health. For example, some people with emetophobia restrict their diet or avoid certain foods – such as meat, due to perceived risk of Salmonella (a food-borne illness that can cause vomiting). This can result in nutrient deficiencies and becoming underweight.

People have also been shown to engage in compulsive behaviours such as hand washing, magical thinking (the belief that certain habits or specific thoughts can stop vomiting from happening) and excessive cleaning to avoid being sick. These symptoms overlap with other psychiatric disorders – specifically anorexia nervosa and obsessive-compulsive disorder. This has often led to misdiagnosis, with patients referred to services who are not specialised in treating emetophobia.

Another common and often overlooked symptom of emetophobia is nausea – with the majority of people experiencing feelings of sickness on a daily basis, despite having no underlying medical condition. As emetophobia goes hand-in-hand with a preoccupation with vomiting, there’s usually a heightened awareness of bodily sensations which can cause anxiety.

Everyday mundane experiences such as feeling overly full after a meal or getting a headache from too much screen time can trigger the automatic thought: “I am going to be sick.” This creates a vicious cycle, as the more attention a person gives to these sensations, the more likely they are to misinterpret them as signs of illness. This in turn reinforces and entrenches the fear.

Treating emetophobia

A lack of research into emetophobia means treating the condition currently remains a hurdle.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) seems to be the most evidence-based treatment investigated so far. This treatment approach aims to change thought patterns and behaviour. For emetophobia, this involves changing beliefs about vomiting and slowly reducing avoidance habits through exposure – such as visiting feared places and reducing excessive hand-washing.

Although some studies have shown promising results from using CBT for emetophobia, these studies only investigated a small number of participants. This means it’s difficult to draw firm conclusions about the treatment’s effectiveness until larger studies have been done.

Another option is exposure therapy, which has been tried and tested on people suffering from other phobias and has shown great outcomes. Exposure therapy involves gradually facing feared situations with the help of a therapist to teach the brain these things are not dangerous and reduce overall fear.

But it’s worth noting that although exposure therapy is recommended for other phobias, only 6% of people with emetophobia would be willing to try it. This doesn’t make exposure therapy a very accessible option for the majority of people struggling with this disorder.

Further complicating matters is the fact that people with emetophobia often avoid places such as GP surgeries and hospitals because of the risk of seeing someone who is unwell or catching a vomiting bug. This means they struggle to access what help might be available.

There’s a clear need for increased awareness of this condition, from both the general public and doctors. Awareness can help limit misdiagnosis, show sufferers treatment is available and reduce misconceptions.

Emetophobia is more than simply not liking vomit. It can affect every aspect of life. Our continued research aims to explore effective treatment options for this complex disorder.

Molly Sheila Harbor 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. Emetophobia: what it’s like to have a fear of vomiting – https://theconversation.com/emetophobia-what-its-like-to-have-a-fear-of-vomiting-269310

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Elena Papagiannaki, Lecturer in Economics, Edinburgh Napier University

The Greek government has passed a law allowing private employers to extend shifts to 13 hours per day, framed in terms of “flexibility” and “growth”. It’s marketed as voluntary and fairly paid, but effectively it dismantles the standard eight-hour day, despite survey data showing workers overwhelmingly oppose it.

But while critics question its legality, technically it does comply with the European Union’s working time directive. For many, especially in hospitality, it simply formalises what already exists: long hours, low pay, little rest.

The reform mirrors a broader European and global shift towards deregulated work. And it proves that the fight for shorter hours is far from over, as I set out in a chapter in the forthcoming book Global Futures of Work: A Critical Introduction.

After Greek workers’ 1936 victory securing the eight-hour day, the country has now reached a point where Greeks are again among the most overworked in Europe. Data from the EU’s statistics office and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show full-time employees log about 1,900 hours a year, compared with 1,510 in the UK and 1,330 in Germany.

Weekly hours add up to 41-42 on average, the highest in the EU. Yet wages and productivity remain low. This paradox of working more but earning less reflects a regime centred on labour intensification and wage suppression, weak collective bargaining and precarious jobs.

Since 2005, Greece has loosened its working time regime under “flexibility” reforms. A 2005 law allowed daily shifts to be stretched by two hours, another change in 2021 redefined overtime, while a third law two years later revived the six-day week.

And now the fair work for all bill permits 13-hour days on a “voluntary” basis. Together, these measures have eroded the eight-hour norm, substituting collective bargaining for the needs of employers.

The Greek government claims that workers want longer days, but the evidence suggests otherwise. The drive to extend working hours masks a refusal to raise real wages and household income. Since the 2008-09 financial crisis, GDP has shrunk by 27% and remains below pre-crisis levels, while household disposable income has fallen by 35 percentage points.

Even the recent minimum-wage hike (a 6% increase to €880 (£775) per week for full-time workers) offers no real gains in purchasing power, leaving workers poorer than before the crisis. Instead of higher pay, the government’s solution is longer days – stretching time when it cannot stretch income.

A survey earlier this year by the Greek labour institute found that 94% of workers support shorter hours with no pay cut, and nearly 60% reject a 13-hour day outright. Among those already working such hours, 70% say the “voluntary” label is meaningless, with workers forced to put in these hours to make ends meet.

For many, the new law simply confirms the overwork they already face. For others, it represents a return to the 19th century. The wave of nationwide strikes demanding its repeal raises a clear question. If workers reject it, and EU law supposedly guarantees the opposite, how can the measure pass?

EU – protector or enabler?

Most opposition parties questioned the 13-hour workday’s legality under EU law, but the EU working time directive itself provides the loophole. It stipulates a 48-hour weekly average and 11 hours’ daily rest, yet imposes no cap on daily hours.

Member states may grant opt-outs, allowing workers to “voluntarily” exceed the limits, effectively legalising overwork. In response to a Greek MEP, the European Commission confirmed that Greece’s reform complies with EU rules. It admitted that the directive allows the 13-hour workday if the 48-hour weekly average is met in the reference period of four months. It is presented as “worker protection”, but this logic simply permits exhaustion now, rest later.

The UK government’s rebuke of South Cambridgeshire District Council for trialling a four-day work week shows that resistance to shorter hours is hardly unique to Greece. Across advanced economies, longer working time has been normalised.

And NHS staff reportedly performed more than 1 million hours of unpaid overtime every week before the pandemic. By 2025, it has been claimed that inefficiencies and delays have added another 7.5 million extra work hours every week across the NHS workforce.

Amazon workers in the US work ten-hour shifts and 55-hour weeks during peak seasons, with similar patterns in the UK. Amazon said its work patterns offer flexible career opportunities and that its staff were the “heart and soul” of its operations. Another elite tech firm looks like following suit: Google’s Sergey Brin actually called for a 60-hour week.

The push to extend working hours is not an anomaly in Greece, but part of a broader trend across advanced economies – the normalisation of overwork in the name of flexibility and growth.

Workers are expected to adapt, erasing boundaries between work and life. Greece’s 13-hour day doesn’t mark progress but a retreat from hard-won labour rights. And it threatens to undo historic victories on working conditions in pursuit of further productivity increases and profits.

Elena Papagiannaki is a Research Fellow at the Institute for the Future of Work (ifow.org)

– ref. Exhausted employees don’t want it – so why has Greece introduced a 13-hour work day? – https://theconversation.com/exhausted-employees-dont-want-it-so-why-has-greece-introduced-a-13-hour-work-day-269118

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marika Taylor, Pro-vice-chancellor, Professor, University of Birmingham

In 1980, Stephen Hawking gave his first lecture as Lucasian Professor at the University of Cambridge. The lecture was called “Is the end in sight for theoretical physics?”

Hawking, who later became my PhD supervisor, predicted that a theory of everything – uniting the clashing branches of general relativity, which describes the universe on large scales, and quantum mechanics, which rules the microcosmos of atoms and particles – might be discovered by the end of the 20th century.

Forty-five years later, there is still no definitive theory of everything. The main candidate is string theory, a framework that describes all forces and particles including gravity. String theory proposes that the building blocks of nature are not point-like particles like quarks (which make up particles in the atomic nucleus) but vibrating strings.

It suggests that, if we could look deep inside electrons, we would see loops of strings, vibrating just like those on a violin. Different patterns of string vibrations correspond to different particles.

String theory unifies all the forces of nature. Forces that seem very different, such as gravity and electricity, are deeply related to one another. The forces are linked by so-called dualities: the same underlying phenomena can be described in different ways.

The force of gravity is described in terms of geometry, shapes and positions. Other forces are described in terms of different mathematical concepts, including algebra and numbers.

The unification of forces hence implies profound relationships between branches of mathematics. Such relationships had previously been proposed by mathematicians, particularly by Robert Langlands, and string theory gives physical explanations for the relationships.

Although string theory could be the correct theory of everything, it is hard to test experimentally. The effects of string theory become visible at very small scales and very high energies.

Particle accelerators explore the internal structure of particles by colliding them and breaking them apart. However, even the biggest colliders at Cern in Switzerland don’t have enough energy to break particles down into strings.

Clues in the cosmos

How can we test string theory experimentally if we can’t reach high enough energies in colliders? The answer may lie in looking up to the skies.

The very early universe was dense and hot, and the primordial soup would have been made up of strings. We can see the history of the universe imprinted in current day observations, from surveys of galaxies through to measurements of the cosmic radiation that permeates all of space and is a leftover from the big bang.

In the early 20th century, American astronomer Edwin Hubble showed that the universe is expanding. Galaxies are moving further apart from each other.

At the end of that century, detailed observations of the expansion showed that it is in fact accelerating. Galaxies today are moving apart faster than they were a million years ago.

What is driving this acceleration? Gravity is an attractive force so it slows down the expansion of the universe. The acceleration of the universe is driven by a new kind of energy, which is spread throughout the whole of space. Scientists call this dark energy and it makes up about 70% of the energy of the universe.

We don’t know exactly what dark energy is. The most plausible explanation is that it is the inherent quantum energy of the universe. In the quantum world, particles can never just sit still, with no energy. There is always a little bit of quantum jitter and associated energy.

Atoms cooled down to absolute zero temperature still have energy because of their quantum motion. Dark energy could potentially be explained as being the underlying quantum energy of all the forces and particles in nature, including gravity.

Experiments are pinning down the properties of dark energy. Desi is an observatory based in Arizona, US, which is mapping out galaxies and quasars. The space based telescopes Euclid and Roman will measure the universe in unprecedented detail, mapping out the history of billions of galaxies over billions of years.

Recent results from Desi suggest that dark energy is changing in time in a way that is consistent with string theory models – although this is yet to be fully verified by further measurements.

This doesn’t prove string theory because string theory can produce a variety of different universes, with differing patterns of dark energy. However, the Desi results suggest that interpreting dark energy as quantum energy of strings may be on the right track. There are of course phenomena other than strings that could explain the change in dark energy.

Euclid and Roman will make very precise measurements and will be able to exclude many such theories of dark energy and some specific versions of string theory – helping to narrow down the bits theorists should focus on.

Another way to verify string theory may be via black holes. Once something falls inside a black hole, it cannot escape. Inside a black hole there are very strong forces and particles are torn apart. We still don’t understand exactly what happens inside a black hole, but string theory teaches us how a black hole retains information about what has fallen inside.

That’s because string theory assumes there is no “singularity” inside a black hole – a point of infinite density and gravity – but instead that the objects are spread out as balls of strings called fuzzballs.

Future, more precise, measurements of gravitational waves (ripples in the fabric of spacetime) will be looking for the subtle signals of the quantum behaviour inside black holes predicted by string theory. If black holes are fuzzballs, they should produce a different signal when they merge, lasting longer and containing echoes. What’s more, if extra dimensions exist, as string theory proposes, black holes may oscillate in different ways which we could also detect.

In addition to cosmological measurements, scientists can run thought experiments, just as Einstein did with his theories of relativity. String theory has led to new insights not just in mathematics but also in other areas of science. For example, string theory has proven to be useful in understanding how quantum systems can be used in computing.

I don’t think a complete understanding of a theory of everything is just around the corner, but in the 45 years since Hawking’s Lucasian lecture we have certainly learned a lot. And right now, things are looking up for string theory.

Marika Taylor currently receives funding from EPSRC, STFC, UK government deparments and the European Horizon programme.

– ref. String theory: scientists are trying new ways to verify the idea that could unite all of physics – https://theconversation.com/string-theory-scientists-are-trying-new-ways-to-verify-the-idea-that-could-unite-all-of-physics-268149

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalie Pollard, Professor of Contemporary Literature and Culture, University of Exeter

What do you picture when you think about climate change? For many of us, it is the same set of dramatic images: melting glaciers, sinking landforms, rising seas or extreme weather.

These are powerful visuals. They shock, grab headlines and galvanise environmentalism. However, this imagery offers a partial account of transformation, often underplaying political responsibility and colonial history. In my new book, 21st-Century Climate Imaginaries, I call these charismatic images “climate memes”.

Monumental images of melting or calving glaciers lend drama to earth’s changing form, but tend to bypass the thorny social and economic roots of ice loss. Research shows that glacial melt is accelerating especially in regions at the frontline of resource extraction and colonial occupation. My research asks: why is this?

Imagine a glacier melting in the Andes. Blood-red threads of wool – like streams of meltwater – are running down the mountain. It is 2006. This is an activist intervention by Chilean-born artist Cecilia Vicuña. It is the first in her series of performances and soft sculptures, The Blood of the Glaciers. Her giant-order red threads spell out the effects of foreign direct investment in the wake of Augusto Pinochet’s regime, which sparked a dramatic rise in overseas mining corporations in Chile.

Here, as in many regions of the developing world, mining and industrial transportation make the glaciers bleed. The problem is acute because glaciers are water savings banks, essential in years with low rainfall. Glaciers sustain life. Industry-heavy sacrifice zones bleed life dry. Vicuña’s artistic activism shows how extractive mining is a primary driver of glacial recession. Melting is not just a “climate” issue or “natural” disaster. The cause is human activity.

Standing knee-deep in seawater on the shoreline of Tuvalu, the country’s foreign minister addresses Cop26 delegates with these words: “We are sinking”. Simon Kofe’s 2021 speech was broadcast globally from a point that had recently been above sea level. From his semi-submerged podium, Kofe made visible to the world the situation people endure in low-lying Pacific islands.

Since the 1980s, sinking islands have become a powerful shorthand for climate crisis. Apocalyptic spectacles of raging seas symbolise planetary transformation. An often-cited example is the documentary of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. It showed Tuvalu engulfed by tides, alongside the incorrect remark that “Pacific nations have all had to evacuate”.

In 2009, Marshallese activist Kathy Jetñil-Kijiner joined forces with Greenlandic climate poet Aka Niviâna and environmentalist organisation 350.org. They produced an influential video-poem: Rise: From One Island to Another. The performance connects changing Greenlandic ice and Pacific waters with Indigenous resistance to fossil capitalism.

Climate images of melting and sinking often go hand-in-hand with colonial narratives of Indigenous vulnerability. In contrast, Rise brings to life the history of Greenlandic and Marshallese opposition to development for extraction and scientific exploitation. The two activists highlight the nuclear colonial legacy of the Pacific Proving Grounds and Greenland’s Camp Century, linking military histories in the Arctic and Pacific: “nuclear waste / dumped / in our waters / on our ice”.

It is not always easy to remember that environmental change is caused by specific technological, military and political acts. Indigenous arts activism helps by showing how climate memes make sense only in the context of histories of exploitation and resistance, which often take place in developing countries.

Today, activists and artists across the world are challenging popular, generalised climate memes, such as those of melting and sinking. As I show in 21st-Century Climate Imaginaries, attention to the local and specific helps people process how social and environmental violence are intimately linked. Arts activism, working directly with people’s lived experiences of change, can offer much-needed, grounded alternatives to spectacular climate soundbites. How far these interventions are positively reshaping how we understand our responsibilities to a fast-changing world is yet to be seen.

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.

Natalie Pollard 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. Apocalyptic images of melting glaciers and sinking islands won’t help anyone imagine a better future – https://theconversation.com/apocalyptic-images-of-melting-glaciers-and-sinking-islands-wont-help-anyone-imagine-a-better-future-268909

Source: The Conversation – UK – By David Yates, Senior Lecturer in Accounting, University of Sheffield

It is difficult to ignore the intertwined nature of the commercialised UK higher education model and its reliance on international student fee income. One in four students enrolled in higher education courses in the UK in 2023-24 is of non-UK origin. This is an increase from just over one in five in 2019-20. A total of over £10 billion of universities’ student fee income is raised from non-UK students.

Recent reports that Sheffield Hallam University stymied an academic’s research as a result of pressure from China has thrust the influence that foreign nations may have on UK universities into the spotlight.

Sheffield Hallam has denied that commercial interests played a part in the decision. “For the avoidance of doubt, the decision was not based on commercial interests in China,” a university spokesperson said. “Regardless, China is not a significant international student market for the University.”

For many UK universities, though, international student fees are a vital part of their income. This has followed the reduction of government financial support for universities and successive steps towards marketisation of the higher education sector.

Marketisation means universities compete with each other to attract students, who pay fees for their education. However, fees in the UK are regulated (and Scottish and Welsh governments subsidise students from their respective juridictions) and often do not cover the total cost of teaching and administration of courses. Universities have responded by increasing recruitment of international students to plug the funding gap.

In a marketised model, international students are attractive as their fees are uncapped, meaning that institutions can charge much higher amounts for the same number of students.

Universities are also judged in rankings that include things like how international their student body is, and the ratio of staff to students. Recruiting more international students helps keep the ratio of staff to students lower because higher international student fees mean that fewer students are needed to fund a course.

In 2016-17, international student fee income made up 15.2% of an average institution’s total income. This has risen to 24.6% in 2022-23. This greater reliance on international student fee income as a percentage of overall revenues has been driven by several factors.

Data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency also shows how important individual regions are as part of the overall international student cohort. In 2023-24, the top two countries are India and China. India provided 107,480 students to the UK higher education sector, 25.1% of all international students. China contributed 98,400 students, 23.0% of international students.

Financial risk

The implications of such rises in the proportion of revenues being raised from international student fee income are vast. Most apparent is the increased risk that this exposes UK universities to in terms of volatility in international student numbers.

This is much more unpredictable than changes in government finance, which tend to be announced in advance. Simply put, fluctuations in international student numbers have a big effect on income. And this is a key factor in the current financial crisis in UK higher education.

Marketisation has been linked to cuts that universities are imposing on departments, closing courses and making significant redundancies. This is because greater volatility means that institutions are likely to seek to cut costs such as staff in response to lower revenues, as staff costs represent a large portion of the overall cost base for universities.

The Universities and Colleges Union estimates total job losses within the sector to be in the region of 15,000. Such widespread and rapid cuts are likely to have severe knock on effects for the UK economy as a whole and the universities sector. Industrial action is already affecting the delivery of courses, research activity, and key knowledge exchange and practical impact activities.

Current government policy implies a perseverance with the marketised model, although a proposed 6% levy on international student fees seeks to encourage institutions to pursue more diverse sources of revenue. However, this is unlikely to have any material effect on where institutions draw their students.

The Higher Education Policy Institute has suggested that such a levy could cost an already financially precarious sector in the region of £621 million. Universities may well react by increasing the volume of international students they take on board, as increasing domestic fees may deter home applicants.

Such behavioural effects may well exacerbate such risks in the future. Alternatively, further staff cuts are likely to have prolonged effects for the sector in terms of the quality of education it can provide, and the value delivered to students. Courses may become shorter, student-staff contact time reduced, and optional modules cut.

Rather than focus on one incident, it is the marketised model itself that has landed universities in this the current crisis. They find themselves beholden to the fee income that the market provides. Currently, the need to promise – and provide – a superior experience to their prospective student applicants is driving many financial decisions in the sector.

This includes large amounts of spending on capital projects that has left many institutions with budget deficits and in some cases, heavily depleted cash reserves.

Incentives are required that will encourage sustainable stewardship of our higher education institutions. Until that happens, it is unlikely that anything will change. Capital remains all powerful. The pursuit of it will continue to supplant traditional ideological values of the university, with seemingly no cost too high for universities seeking to “remain in the game”.

David Yates has historically received research funding grants from the British Accounting and Finance Association, the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures, and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, all for projects unrelated to this article. He is a former member of the Labour Party.

– ref. How the market for international students puts pressure on universities’ academic freedom – https://theconversation.com/how-the-market-for-international-students-puts-pressure-on-universities-academic-freedom-269007