Category: Analysis

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Emma Newport, Associate Professor in English Literature, University of Sussex

This year marks the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen’s birth. An Austen enthusiast might attend the birthday ball at the Alton Assembly Rooms in Hampshire or take an Austen-themed walking tour. They might dance at the Pump Rooms in Bath, a city with strong Austen connections, or in Utah, which has none.

These kinds of immersive events tend to surge in times of social and economic fragility. In part, this may be due to a particular form of nostalgia that psychologists have noted helps to mitigate loneliness and forge social connection.

During the pandemic, the Netflix show Bridgerton marked a revival of Austen-adjacent worlds. Fandoms that invite participation function like virtual realities, offering the kind of immersion we might expect from a headset and game console. But is this merely escapism, or do such immersible worlds offer ways of experiencing the present differently and more reflectively?

My first encounter with the immersive potential of Austen came through science fiction. In series seven of Red Dwarf (1997), characters are dispatched into the fictional Pride and Prejudice Land. It’s part of the newly arrived crew member Kristine Kochanski’s (Chloë Annett) favourite game, Jane Austen World – a virtual reality simulation she uses to civilise the other characters.

This article is part of a series commemorating the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen’s birth. Despite having published only six books, she is one of the best-known authors in history. These articles explore the legacy and life of this incredible writer.

Kryten, the service droid, breaks into this Regency idyll aboard a second world war tank and detonates a tea party, roaring “Dinner is served!” The absurdity left a strong impression on my younger self about Austen’s perceived delicacy, and the chaotic energies that surround her cultural afterlives.

Written by Robert Llewellyn (who also plays Kryten), the episode leans hard into domestic satire. Kryten’s female-coded role as cook, cleaner, carer and emotional manager puts him at odds with the interloper Kochanski, a middle-class, degree-educated white woman determined to instil gentility into the racially diverse group who occupy the lowest rung of the ship’s hierarchy.

Kryten’s unvoiced rage culminates in literal explosion, his head detonating when his labour goes unacknowledged. The episode becomes unexpectedly dense: an examination of gender, class, race and post-human servitude. Beneath the explosive humour is a serious comment on immersion and gendered emotional labour.

Austen’s world of tea tables and letter writing, here rendered virtual, is shown to be both seductive and suffocating. It is a place where emotion is both cultivated and dangerously suppressed.

Austen’s claustrophobic worlds

Returning to Austen’s writing at university, I carried my own Dwarf-inspired desire to explode Austen – and to join Mark Twain in a desire to “dig her up and beat her over the skull with her own shin-bone” when I had to read Pride and Prejudice (1813).

I mistakenly believed Austen’s novels offered an obsessive focus on narrow domesticity while ignoring war, revolution, poverty and the illiberal qualities of a supposedly enlightened age. However, in later life I came to realise that, like the confines of a mining ship in deep space, what Austen describes is less small than it is dense and claustrophobic.

Austen’s writing is sharply attentive to the relationship between imaginative freedom and physical constraint, especially for women. Her characters frequently reflect on travel and distance. In Persuasion (1817), Anne Elliot remarks that men “live in the world” while women like herself “live in it only by hearing of it”. In Mansfield Park
(1814), Edmund Bertram jokes that his cousin Fanny Price will “be taking a trip into China” through her reading.

His remark is inflected by Austen including reference to British author Samuel Johnson and his collection The Idler (1760), which Edmund lists among the books he imagines Fanny to be transported by. In an essay from The Idler, Johnson dismisses travel writing as disappointing, failing in immersing the reader for it so often only describes “the face of the country”.

Edmund and Fanny’s conversation takes place in the country house’s East Room, which Austen researchers have described as the most prominent metaphor for Fanny’s “spiritual distance” from the rest of the household. The room is filled with castoffs: faded embroidery, unwanted books, bad portraits. Fanny, too, is a penniless castoff, taken in by wealthier relations but frequently overlooked.

When her uncle sends her back to her lower-class family for refusing a lucrative match, Fanny is punished for her autonomy. She cannot leave Mansfield Park at will, and her imagined departures, whether into books, ideas or “China” – where she might enter a form of narrative virtual reality – offer no protection from real-life threats. Fanny’s reading in the East Room is abruptly curtailed by Edmund’s needs and the encroaching domestic chaos of an amateur theatrical production.

Yet this constraint is part of Austen’s point. The grand estate of Mansfield Park is funded by a shadowy West Indian plantation and enslaved labour, an economic foundation that goes unspoken and unseen. Those who travel there do so off the page.

When Fanny raises the question of the plantation’s ethics, she is met with silence. Who and what is not seen – Fanny, the plantation and its workers, the real costs of luxury – become as significant as what is. Fanny’s room, stripped of wealth, stands in quiet opposition to the brutal source of Mansfield Park’s comforts.

Immersible worlds – whether a Regency ball in Bath, a role in a household play, or a journey into “China” – can be a form of forgetting as much as imagining. The cast at Mansfield throw themselves into Elizabeth Inchbald’s Lovers’ Vows (1798), a sexually suggestive play, with little reflection on how their roles might influence or be influenced by their desires. Fanny, unwilling to participate, sees these risks more clearly, as she does with the larger social problems to which her cousins remain wilfully unseeing.

In Austen’s novels, the immersive imagination is double-edged: it contains the risk of abstraction and of losing touch with the present, even as it offers solace and self-making. What Austen reminds us, then, is to interrogate our relationship with immersible worlds.

As technology brings us ever closer to the virtual realities experienced by the boys from the Dwarf – and as our lived reality is growing more precarious, impoverished and violent – immersible worlds await the careworn. Yet we must beware simply rehearsing the silences which Austen so carefully wrote around.

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.

Emma Newport 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. Enjoyed together, Red Dwarf and Jane Austen offer a lesson in immersive world building – https://theconversation.com/enjoyed-together-red-dwarf-and-jane-austen-offer-a-lesson-in-immersive-world-building-259612

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tarini Bhamburkar, Research Affiliate, University of Bristol

Much of England has been celebrating the Lionesses’ historic win at the Uefa European Women’s Championship – the first time a senior England football team has won a major championship abroad and retained a major trophy. However, not everyone was pleased.

Former footballer and manager Joey Barton took to X to express his underwhelm, writing: “Well done to the Lioness winning the Nonsense Pottery Trophy. Those penalties were borderline embarrassing again. Don’t ever ask for equal pay again. Youse are miles off it. 🐕💨”

Barton has faced a backlash for his outdated response to the historic win, with many pointing out that the Lionesses have won more cups for England than Barton – who has won zero with the senior team, having played only 17 minutes as a substitute for them.

Sadly, Barton is just one in a long line of men who have attacked sportswomen, while refusing to recognise that women have been excelling at sport for over a century. At the same time, there is a long line of women players and fans who have repeatedly called out such misogyny.

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.

I have spent the last year-and-a-half digging into newspaper archives where the stories of some of these women can be found. In their own words, these sportswomen and their fans detail their experiences as pioneers – and the attacks they faced along the way.

The earliest accounts of women engaging in sport in Britain show them playing tennis or croquet, or being adept at horse riding, in the 19th century. These were seen as permissible recreational activities for the “fairer sex”, but only if the practice of them remained noncompetitive.

But in the late Victorian age this changed, as women started playing many more sports – in some cases professionally. Women’s participation in athletics and competitive sports such as cricket was furiously debated – predominantly by men, who saw it as defying traditional gender roles. At the time, a woman wanting to be a professional sportswoman was widely seen as questionable and ungraceful.

There were, however, many female sports people and fans who were arguing against such ideas. I was particularly struck by one interview from 1890 with the remarkable Miss Daisy Stanley, captain of the Blue Eleven women’s cricket team.

The Original English Lady Cricketers are one of the earliest examples of paid, professional sportswomen who toured nationally between 1890 and 1892. They comprised 30 women divided into two teams: the Red XI and Blue XI.

Stanley’s interview was published on the front page of the weekly woman-edited newspaper, Women’s Penny Paper. As a progressive women’s newspaper, it was keen to profile a professional female player and inspire its women readers.

Throughout the interview, the unnamed lady journalist refers to her interviewee as “Captain Stanley” (rarely using any other term for her), asking significant questions about herself, her team and her ambitions. The article notes the enthusiasm for these women cricketers after their first public match in Liverpool against a local men’s side, where “visitors assembled in thousands”.

But the journalist laments the unserious treatment of the players at the hands of the “gentlemen” players, noting: “Whenever the game has been between ladies and gentlemen, the latter have … assumed broomsticks and treated their adversaries as weaker vessels.”

You can trace the thread from the attitudes to this pioneering cricket match in 1890 right up to Barton’s comments about the Lionesses in 2025.

Undaunted, the “tall and well-built” Captain Stanley, who looked “capable of much execution in the way of play”, rose through these afflictions. Before becoming a professional cricket player and playing regularly, she had considered the game impossible for girls to excel in – a view she reveals in the interview to have been “materially altered” by her experience of playing the game professionally.

Stanley is full of praise for ladies’ participation in sports, deeming that “there is not a more healthy … or beneficial game than cricket for our sex”.

In the wider society of the time, though, the possibilities – and benefits – of sports for women were being puzzled out socially and publicly through articles in periodicals. An article titled “Athletics for Ladies” in Cassell’s Family Magazine in 1896 lauded the benefits of women’s cautious “physical or muscular progress”, for example, but saw “football as a man’s game”.

The idea of women playing sports, let alone playing competitively, was both mocked and rebuked by swathes of the British media and public. But despite the ubiquitous pushback around them, women like Captain Stanley remained undeterred. In the interview in the Women’s Penny Paper, she mentions her thorough knowledge of the game, gives a shout-out to worthy team members and their skills, and celebrates her love of the sport.

Reflecting on having watched the paid professional Victorian women playing their cricket match so well, the impressed interviewer notes something that we would do well to remember today: “That here, as elsewhere, when women really take a thing in hand, they can and will carry it out thoroughly.”

The Lionesses have certainly done that, and we have the facts to back it up. After all, Chloe Kelly’s winning penalty kick on Sunday was reportedly faster than any shots on goal by the men this Premier League season. Try arguing with that.

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.

Tarini Bhamburkar has received funding from the Royal Historical Society.

– ref. The Victorian sportswomen who had to fight misogynistic abuse, just like the Lionesses – https://theconversation.com/the-victorian-sportswomen-who-had-to-fight-misogynistic-abuse-just-like-the-lionesses-261798

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Patrick David Sharrocks, PhD Candidate in Tsunami Geohazards, University of Leeds

On July 30, one of the largest earthquakes ever recorded struck off the Kamchatka peninsula, in Russia’s far east. Within minutes, tsunami warnings were issued in Russia, much of Asia and across the Pacific in Hawaii, New Zealand and California.

But this wasn’t the first time a huge tsunami had hit Kamchatka. In 1952, an even more powerful earthquake hit the same fault line – but it was kept hidden from the world.

Kamchatka is no stranger to seismic activity, with a large earthquake occurring as recently as 2020 (the fourth most powerful anywhere in the world that year). However, only the biggest earthquakes can create large destructive tsunamis and cause Pacific-wide warnings like those experienced on Wednesday.

On a plate boundary, where two pieces of the Earth’s crust meet, such large earthquakes often occur on consistent timescales known as “seismic cycles”. In some areas, these cycles are long: on the Cascadia boundary off the Pacific coast of North America, for instance, the last major tsunami-generating earthquake was in 1700.

However, the plates move much faster near Kamchatka (around 8 centimetres a year) and the the cycle is much shorter. Large tsunamis were generated from earthquakes in 1737, 1841, 1952 – and now 2025 is a continuation of this cycle.

Just after midday on November 5 1952, tsunami waves up to 8 foot (2.4 metres) hit Hawaii. This was an early test for the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center, which had recently been established on the islands in response to a 1946 tsunami following an earthquake in Alaska.

Earlier that day, seismologists across the world had detected signals from an earthquake pinpointed to the northwest Pacific around Kamchatka. When the wave hit Hawaii, scientists there quickly used the exact time of the wave and the known speed of tsunamis (in deep water, these are similar to a jet plane) to deduce it must have been created by that giant earthquake in the northwest Pacific. But from Kamchatka itself, there was silence.

There were no reports of an earthquake or tsunami in the Soviet press. Not a word was written in state newspaper Pravda, which instead focused on preparations for the Great October Revolution anniversary two days later.

Days and months passed without any recognition of the tsunami and earthquake. Even an interview with a Russian volcanologist, Alexander Evgenievich Svyatlovsky, was stored as a “state secret”, despite him merely explaining how the tsunami had originated.

Such secrecy was common at the height of the cold war, with Chernobyl and other disasters often being underreported by the Soviet authorities. It was only after the release of state archives in the early 2000s that the full picture could be told.

The devastation at Severo-Kurilsk

The isolated fishing town of Severo-Kurilsk lies on an island just south of the Kamchatka peninsula. According to state archives, 6,000 people lived there in 1952, spread thinly across the coastline.

On the morning of November 5, inhabitants were woken by a major earthquake, the strongest anyone there had ever felt. Around 45 minutes later a wave arrived, slowing and steepening as it reached the shore. Soldiers on lookout were able to warn people of the danger, and many fled to high ground.

But tsunamis are wave trains with a series of peaks and troughs. They act much like waves you’d experience on a beach – except that these waves stretch thousands of metres into the ocean, hitting the shore not every few seconds but with tens of minutes between each one.

Minutes after some residents had returned to their homes, a second, larger wave struck. It rose some 12 metres high – as tall as a three-storey building – and hit the town from behind. A third wave soon followed, washing away much of the town that remained.

In all, the tsunami caused 2,336 deaths out of a population of 6,000. The survivors never shared the details for fear of reprisals, and the story remained a state secret.

Today, Severo-Kurilsk sits 20 metres above sea level, rebuilt and fortified. Videos from the 2025 tsunami show flooding at the port, but there are no reported fatalities – testament to modern warning systems and urban planning.

One problem remains: the repositioning of the town has placed it in the path of deadly mudflows from the nearby volcano Ebeko (only 7km away). For Severo-Kurilsk, tsunamis represent only one of many threats in this corner of the Pacific.

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.

Patrick David Sharrocks receives funding from the Natural Environment Research Council, grant number NE/S007458/1.

– ref. The Soviet Union’s secret tsunami – https://theconversation.com/the-soviet-unions-secret-tsunami-262452

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dan Baumgardt, Senior Lecturer, School of Physiology, Pharmacology and Neuroscience, University of Bristol

When the COVID pandemic hit, many people turned to the eerily prescient film Contagion (2011) for answers – or at least for catharsis. Suddenly, its hypothetical plot felt all too real. Applauded for its scientific accuracy, the film offered more than suspense – it offered lessons.

One scene in particular stands out. Kate Winslet’s character delivers a concise lesson on the infectious power of various pathogens – explaining how they can be spread from our hands to the many objects we encounter each day – “door knobs, water fountains, elevator buttons and each other”. These everyday objects, known as fomites, can become silent vehicles for infection.

She also considered how each infection is given a value called R0 (or R-nought) based on how many other people are likely to become infected from another. So, for an R0 of two, each infected patient will spread the disease to two others. Who will collectively then give it to four more. And so a breakout unfolds.

The R0 measure indicates how an infection will spread in a population. If it’s greater than one (as seen above), the outcome is disease spread. An R0 of one means the level of people being infected will remain stable, and if it’s less than one, the disease will often die out with time.

Circulating infections spread through a variety of routes and differ widely in how contagious they are. Some are transmitted via droplets or aerosols – such as those released through coughing or sneezing – while others spread through blood, insects (like ticks and mosquitoes), or contaminated food and water.

But if we step back to think about how we can protect ourselves from developing an infectious disease, one important lesson is in understanding how they spread. And as we’ll see, it’s also a lesson in protecting others, not just ourselves. Here is a rundown of some of the most and least infectious diseases on the planet.

In first place for most contagious is measles.

Measles has made a resurgence globally in recent years, including in high-income countries like the UK and US. While several factors contribute to this trend, the primary cause is a decline in childhood vaccination rates. This drop has been driven by disruptions such as the COVID pandemic and global conflict, as well as the spread of misinformation about vaccine safety.

The R0 number for measles is between 12 and 18. If you do the maths, two cycles of transmission from that first infected person could lead to 342 people catching the illness. That’s a staggering number from just one patient – but luckily, the protective power of vaccination helps reduce the actual spread by lowering the number of people susceptible to infection.

Measles is extraordinarily virulent, spreading through tiny airborne particles released during coughing or sneezing. It doesn’t even require direct contact. It’s so infectious that an unvaccinated person can catch the virus just by entering a room where an infected person was present two hours earlier.

People can also be infectious and spread the virus before they develop symptoms or have any reason to isolate.

Other infectious diseases with high R0 values include pertussis, or whooping cough (12 to 17), chickenpox (ten to 12), and COVID, which varies by subtype but generally falls between eight and 12. While many patients recover fully from these conditions, they can still lead to serious complications, including pneumonia, seizures, meningitis, blindness, and, in some cases, death.

Low spread, high stakes

At the other end of the spectrum, a lower infectivity rate doesn’t mean a disease is any less dangerous.

Take tuberculosis (TB), for example, which has an R0 ranging from less than one up to four. This range varies depending on local factors like living conditions and the quality of available healthcare.

Caused by the bacterium] Mycobacterium tuberculosis, TB is also airborne but spreads more slowly, usually requiring prolonged close contact with someone with the active disease. Outbreaks tend to occur among people who share living spaces – such as families, households, and in shelters or prisons.

The real danger with TB lies in how difficult it is to treat. Once established, it requires a combination of four antibiotics taken over a minimum of six months. Standard antibiotics like penicillin are ineffective, and the infection can spread beyond the lungs to other parts of the body, including the brain, bones, liver and joints.

What’s more, cases of drug-resistant TB are on the rise, where the bacteria no longer respond to one or more of the antibiotics used in treatment.

Other diseases with lower infectivity include Ebola – which is highly fatal but spreads through close physical contact with bodily fluids. Its R0 ranges from 1.5 to 2.5.

Diseases with the lowest R0 values – below one – include Middle East respiratory syndrome (Mers), bird flu and leprosy. While these infections are less contagious, their severity and potential complications should not be underestimated.

The threat posed by any infectious disease depends not only on how it affects the body, but also on how easily it spreads. Preventative measures like immunisation play a vital role – not just in protecting people, but also in limiting transmission to those who cannot receive some vaccinations – such as infants, pregnant women and people with severe allergies or weakened immune systems. These individuals are also more vulnerable to infection in general.

This is where herd immunity becomes essential. By achieving widespread immunity within the population, we help protect people who are most susceptible.

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.

Dan Baumgardt 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. ​The contagion scale: which diseases spread fastest? – https://theconversation.com/the-contagion-scale-which-diseases-spread-fastest-261975

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adam Taylor, Professor of Anatomy, Lancaster University

For a growing number of middle-aged men, ageing no longer means surrendering to sagging skin, sore joints or slowing metabolism. Instead, it’s becoming a science experiment. The new frontier? Injectable peptides – experimental compounds that promise rapid recovery, fat loss and muscle gains with the ease of a twice-daily to weekly jab.

Once confined to elite labs and obscure bodybuilding forums, these amino acid chains are now flooding wellness spaces, social media feeds and online marketplaces. Although they are marketed as “next-generation biohacks” and “research chemicals”, many peptides are not approved for human use and lack basic clinical testing.

Still, their popularity is growing – fuelled by testimonials, influencer hype and the seductive promise of turning back time.

But beneath the surface of glossy marketing and fitness fantasies lies a far more sobering truth: many of these substances operate in a medical grey zone, with unknown long-term risks, questionable manufacturing standards, and in some cases, life-threatening side-effects.

Peptides aren’t entirely new to medicine. The first peptide drug – insulin – was isolated in 1921 and became commercially available in 1923. Today over 100 peptide medications are approved, including semaglutide – better known as Ozempic and Wegovy.

But the compounds now circulating in fitness communities represent a very different category. They’re experimental substances that have shown promise in animal studies but have never undergone proper human trials.

The ‘Wolverine stack’

One such compound, first discovered in human gastric juice, that is attracting lots of attention is BPC-157. Early animal studies suggest it may help repair damaged tissue throughout the body.

Researchers tested it on mice, rats, rabbits and dogs without finding serious side-effects. The compound appears to support healing of the tendons, teeth and digestive organs, including the stomach, intestines, liver and pancreas.

Scientists don’t yet fully understand how BPC-157 works, but animal studies suggest it triggers several biological processes essential for healing. The compound appears to help cells move to damaged areas and encourages the growth of new blood vessels, bringing nutrients and oxygen to tissues in need of repair.

Another compound gaining attention is TB500. It is a synthetic version of thymosin beta-4, a naturally occurring protein fragment that plays an important role in repairing and regenerating damaged cells and tissues.

It also helps protect cells from further harm by reducing inflammation and defending against microbes. The combination of BPC-157 and TB500 has earned the nickname “the Wolverine stack”, named after the Marvel superhero famous for his rapid healing.

Then there’s IGF-1 LR3, a modified version of a natural protein (IGF-1) linked to muscle growth. This synthetic compound was shown to increase muscle mass by 2.5 times in animal studies, though it has never been studied in humans.

The limited human research that does exist for these compounds offers inconclusive results. For example, a study showed that over 90% of patients experienced reduced knee pain after BPC-157 injections. However, the study had no control group and several methodological issues, so the results should be viewed with caution.

Hidden dangers

Even though the early results seem exciting, these experimental compounds can be dangerous. Making them involves special chemicals called coupling agents, which can trigger serious allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis – a life-threatening condition.

The health consequences extend well beyond allergic reactions. Long-term injection of performance-enhancing substances can lead to heart failure that can occur rapidly with little warning, as documented in recent medical case studies of young bodybuilders.

Injection-related injuries pose another significant threat. “Compartment syndrome” can develop at injection sites in leg muscles, causing numbness, blood clots and muscle spasms that result in permanent loss of function.

In severe cases, skin and underlying tissue can suffer necrosis (tissue death), requiring antibiotics or surgery to treat. More alarming still are reports of users contracting HIV, hepatitis B and C, and serious eye infections from contaminated injections.

These compounds don’t just target muscles – they affect the entire body in ways scientists are only beginning to understand. Some interfere with natural insulin production, while others activate biological pathways that healthy cells use for growth and repair.

The concern is that these same pathways are exploited by cancer cells. The VEGF pathway, which promotes blood vessel growth, is active in about half of all human cancers, including melanoma and ovarian cancer. Laboratory studies suggest that thymosin beta-4 may play a role in helping colorectal and pancreatic cancers spread.

While there’s no direct evidence linking compounds like BPC-157 or TB500 to cancer, researchers emphasise that the long-term effects remain unknown because these substances have never undergone proper human trials. The World Anti-Doping Agency has banned these compounds, noting they lack approval from any health regulatory authority and are intended only as research tools.

A growing problem

Yet their use appears to be spreading rapidly. A 2014 study found that 8.2% of gym members used performance-enhancing drugs. By 2024, a comprehensive review suggested the figure could be as high as 29%. Perhaps most concerning: only 38% of users recognised the health risks involved.

These experimental compounds represent a dangerous gamble with long-term health. Unlike approved drugs, they haven’t undergone the rigorous testing required to understand their safety profile in humans. While they may promise enhanced performance and healing, they deliver it at a cost that users may not fully understand until it’s too late.

The appeal is understandable – who wouldn’t want faster healing and better muscle tone? But the reality is these substances remain experimental for good reason. Until proper human trials are conducted, users are essentially volunteering as test subjects in an uncontrolled experiment with their own bodies.

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.

Adam Taylor 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. Peptides: performance-boosting, anti-ageing drugs or dangerous snake oil? – https://theconversation.com/peptides-performance-boosting-anti-ageing-drugs-or-dangerous-snake-oil-259531

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Shashi Kant Yadav, Lecturer, Northumbria University, Newcastle

A small coastal community in Kivalina, Alaska sued several major oil and gas companies, including Exxon Mobil, in 2008. Local representatives argued that greenhouse gas emissions from these companies were contributing to the erosion of the coastline and causing irreversible damage to their village by heating the climate.

But the US Court of Appeals dismissed the claim, citing a lack of evidence linking the corporate emissions with coastal erosion.

In France, 2024, climate campaigners filed a criminal complaint against the major shareholders and the board of directors of TotalEnergies. They alleged that fossil fuels extracted by the company produced emissions that caused floods and storms that damaged property and irreversibly depleted biodiversity.

Despite acknowledging damage related to climate change generally, the Parisian criminal court also dismissed the case. Again, it said there was insufficient evidence to link the activities of TotalEnergies and damage from extreme weather.

Between 2008 and 2024, significant advances were made in climate science that enable us to understand how specific activities affect the climate, and contribute to wildfires, extreme heat and flash floods. The science linking these disasters to fossil fuel giants remains insufficient in the eyes of courts, however.

That’s because climate attribution science generally fails to meet the necessary standard of legal evidence to assign liability. For example, a recent advisory opinion published by the International Court of Justice acknowledged that states have a responsibility to address climate change, and that it is possible to establish a link between a state’s wrongful acts or omissions and the damage resulting from climate change. Despite this, claimants still sometimes fail to prove such a link in court.

However, a new study has demonstrated a computer model that can reduce scientific uncertainty around linking emissions from a particular source to outcomes related to climate change. This end-to-end attribution model, as it is called, could strengthen legal claims against entities damaging the climate.

Tracing emissions to damages

The end-to-end attribution model uses a three-step process to assign liability for climate damage.

First, using historical emissions data from online databases such as Carbon Major, the model simulates two scenarios: one with all historical emissions (the real world), and the other where the emissions from a particular company are excluded. The difference in emissions between these two scenarios is then paired with the concomitant increase in the global temperature, which shows how much warming can be directly attributed to that company.

Using statistical methods, the model can then connect the relevant global temperature increase to changes in the intensity of heatwaves in a particular region. It could, for instance, calculate how much hotter the five hottest days of the year have become in a given year because of the company’s emissions.

The model estimates the economic impact of these intensified heatwaves. It can do this using data on the consequences of reduced productivity and crop losses for growth, for example. It calculates how much money a region lost because of the heatwaves linked to the company’s emissions and gives a dollar value for the damages.

By combining these three steps, the model traces the path from a company’s emissions to specific economic losses, theoretically making it possible to hold emitters financially accountable for climate damages.

In doing so, the study estimated that emissions from Chevron alone caused between US$791 billion (£589 billion) and US$3.6 trillion (£2.7 trillion) in heat-related economic losses globally between 1991 and 2020, and that without emissions from 111 large oil, gas and coal producers (collectively referred to as “carbon majors”) such as ExxonMobil, BP, Saudi Aramco and Gazprom, the global economy would be US$28 trillion richer.

The advantages for claimants

Climate court cases in which claimants seek to assign liability to oil and gas companies are on the rise worldwide.

About 230 lawsuits have been filed against fossil fuel giants and trade associations since 2015. More than two-thirds of these were filed between 2020 and 2024, and many are awaiting a final decision. For such cases, end-to-end attribution could be helpful.

End-to-end attribution can assist claimants in meeting the commonly used “but for” test, by demonstrating that, but for a specific company’s emissions, certain climate-related damages would not have occurred. The method can also meet other liability tests. One is called proportional liability, and it attempts to quantify the extent to which a company’s emissions contributed to increased risk or the severity of damage. This flexibility strengthens the method’s applicability across different legal systems.

The end-to-end attribution method enables claimants to connect global warming to local disasters, such as the 2021 Pacific Northwest “heat dome”. This is crucial, as climate litigation focused on single, high-impact events is usually more successful.

It is well established that emissions from companies in the US and Europe have caused significant harm which is disproportionately suffered in the global south. End-to-end attribution strengthens the evidence base for such climate justice arguments in courtrooms.

There are no established standards for how courts worldwide evaluate scientific evidence. Consequently, while the end-to-end attribution method can link fossil fuel companies and climate-related legal injuries, the courts, depending on differences between jurisdictions and the context of each case, may require higher thresholds to trigger criminal or civil liability.

Additionally, fossil fuel companies often argue that any harm caused by their activities should be weighed against the benefits their products also provide. However, the benefits of fossil fuels should not exempt companies from climate-related liability, because climate change is an existential threat.

End-to-end attribution provides a vital scientific tool for making fossil fuel companies accountable, and could reshape climate litigation globally.

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.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Climate change: new method can more accurately attribute environmental harm to individual polluters – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-new-method-can-more-accurately-attribute-environmental-harm-to-individual-polluters-256002

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ioannis Costas Batlle, Senior Lecturer in Education, University of Bath

School holidays are underway across the UK. But while young people might be getting a break from the classroom and having a chance to spend more time on their hobbies, they are still learning – whether they’re playing video games, painting toy soldiers or out on their bike.

Learning doesn’t just happen at school, college, or university. For Danish learning expert Knud Illeris, any process not caused by biological maturation (for instance, growing from a baby into a toddler) counts as learning. Learning is both inevitable and ubiquitous: it is part of being alive. We cannot “not learn”.

We can chunk the enormity of what learning is into smaller digestible portions. These three portions (called learning contexts) are formal learning, non-formal learning and informal learning. We can think of them as an iceberg, with some parts visible and others hidden below the water.

Different contexts

Formal learning is the very tip of the iceberg. This aims to intentionally teach someone something. It is provided by an education or training organisation that will give you a certificate or diploma to show what you have learned. Schools, colleges and universities are examples of formal learning contexts.

Non-formal learning extends beneath the iceberg’s tip but remains above the water level. Like formal learning, it is learning as the result of some kind of teaching. However, non-formal learning is not necessarily provided by an education organisation, nor is it necessarily recognised with a certificate or diploma. Music lessons, sports clubs, cooking classes, developing skills at work, or museum tours all count as non-formal learning.

Beneath non-formal learning, shrouded under the sea, is the gargantuan base of the iceberg: informal learning. Unlike formal and non-formal learning, informal learning is generally unintentional, unplanned and unconscious. This could be absorbing social norms, such as how to greet someone you don’t know, or unexpectedly learning new words by listening to podcasts.

It’s a widely accepted assumption among academics that most of the learning we do is informal. And it makes sense when you think about how much young people’s development is unconscious and unplanned. For example, while being taught formally in school classrooms, they simultaneously informally learn values such as what it means to be – and behave like – a “good student”.

The iceberg illustrates why we often think of learning in a narrow way. We overvalue what is easily recognisable, such as the schooling that leads to an exam result. And we undervalue the much larger, but comparatively less visible remainder of the iceberg: non-formal and informal learning, such as through hobbies.

Young people, in particular, may overvalue formal learning for two reasons. First, it is tangible. It features physical buildings – schools, colleges and universities – where young people go almost every day to learn. In turn, they aim to leave these buildings with qualifications that “prove” what they have learned.

Second, even though across our lifespans we spend a tiny fraction in formal learning contexts compared to non-formal and informal ones, that tiny amount is disproportionately weighted towards our youth. Children and teenagers spend a huge amount of time being formally educated.

Learning through hobbies

To encourage young people to flourish as learners, we need to help them value non-formal and informal learning contexts. Hobbies are great for this. Hobbies are serious leisure activities which young people find interesting and fulfilling. They are serious because hobbies require perseverance to gain experience, a skillset and a knowledge base.

Whenever someone intentionally teaches a young person something hobby-related, that counts as non-formal learning. For instance, a coach explaining how to bounce a basketball, a music teacher describing how to hold a drumstick, or a friend explaining the rules to a board game.

Hobbies are equally infused with informal, unplanned and often unconscious learning. Playing video games inadvertently develops eye-hand coordination and cognitive function (storing and processing information). Stamp collecting can foster attention to detail. Skateboarding can improve resilience in the face of failure.

Part of the reason young people’s non-formal and informal hobby-related learning above is so difficult to recognise is because it is rarely described as “learning”. Instead, they “play” music and videogames; they “do” skateboarding and drawing.

Though play is one of the best ways young people learn, both young people and the adults in their lives may undervalue its impact. While adults may assume there is no relationship between play and learning, teenagers may perceive play as childish.

Too many young people think they are “bad learners” because they struggle in formal learning. However, I bet they are extraordinary learners when it comes to their hobbies. We simply need to help them recognise the value of non-formal and informal learning.

Ioannis Costas Batlle 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. School’s out – but as young people paint, skateboard and play with their friends, they’re still learning – https://theconversation.com/schools-out-but-as-young-people-paint-skateboard-and-play-with-their-friends-theyre-still-learning-261125