Category: English

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

Renewed talk of no-longer-secret negotiations between the Kremlin and the White House over a plan to end the war in Ukraine that heavily favours Russia adds to a broader sense of doom in Kyiv and among its western partners.

Coupled with the fallout from a sweeping corruption scandal among Ukraine’s elites and stalling efforts in Brussels to provide additional financial aid to Kyiv, a storm is brewing that may lead to Moscow prevailing in its war of aggression.

However, this is not a foregone conclusion. Ukraine is having a very difficult time at the moment on various fronts. The fall of Pokrovsk in eastern Ukraine is a question of when, not if, and of how many men both sides will lose before Russia captures the ruins of the city.

Russia has also upped pressure on the Zaporizhian part of the front and around Kherson on the coast. It is very likely that the Kremlin will continue to push its current advantages, with fighting possibly increasing in the north again around Ukraine’s second-largest city of Kharkiv.

For now, the war of attrition clearly favours Russia. But from a purely military perspective, neither the fall of Pokrovsk nor further Russian territorial gains elsewhere spell the danger of an imminent Ukrainian collapse.

However, war is never solely a military endeavour – it also requires political will and financial resources. A more existential threat to Ukraine’s war effort, therefore, is the continuing fallout from the corruption scandal. Here, too, certainties are few and far between.

A characteristic feature of political scandals in Ukraine is the difficulty of predicting the reaction of Ukrainian society. Some incidents can become a trigger for large-scale protests that lead to massive change.

This was the case with the Euromaidan revolution in 2014. The revolution triggered a chain of events, from the annexation of Crimea to the Russian-proxy occupation of parts of the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, to the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Other political crises pass without major upheaval. This was the case with the dismissal of the popular commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian army, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, in 2024. Widely seen as a possible challenger to Volodymyr Zelensky in future presidential elections, Zaluzhnyi was subsequently sent into exile as Ukraine’s ambassador to London.

So far, the current corruption scandal has not sparked mass protests in Ukraine. Nor has there been a very harsh response from European leaders. But the fact that virtually all of Zelensky’s inner circle is involved in corruption, according to Ukraine’s national anti-corruption bureau (Nabu), has forced the president to launch a comprehensive response.

Sanctions were imposed on Timur Mindich, Zelensky’s long-term friend and business partner, who fled the country just hours before Nabu raids on November 10. Then, a week after the latest scandal broke, Ukraine’s parliament dismissed the ministers of justice and energy, German Galushchenko and Svitlana Hrynchuk, who were both involved in the scandal.

Meanwhile, Zelensky himself has embarked on a whistle-stop diplomatic tour of European capitals to shore up support for his beleaguered government and country.

He managed to secure deliveries of US liquefied natural gas imports from Greece, which should help Ukraine through the difficult winter months. A landmark military deal with France also promises improved air defences for Ukraine in the short term, and the delivery of 100 fighter jets over the next decade.

Important as they are, these are stopgap measures rather than game changers. And not even all the necessary stopgap measures are done deals. The EU and its member states are still prevaricating on an urgently needed loan to Ukraine. If this loan does not materialise, Kyiv will run out of money in February to pay its soldiers, civil servants and pensioners.

In the meantime, Zelensky is also facing pressure from his own parliamentary faction, Servant of the People. He will be keen to present his tour of Europe to them as a vote of confidence by his western allies. Yet he may also still have to offer the resignation of his longtime ally Andrii Yermak, who was also implicated in the latest corruption scandal.

As head of the presidential office, Yermak is sometimes considered the de facto ruler of Ukraine. Dismissing him would probably please Zelensky’s domestic and foreign critics. Not doing so, on the other hand, should not be seen as a sign of strength. The very fact that the position of such a key ally is up for discussion is a further sign that Zelensky’s political power is, perhaps, fatally weakened.

Moving forward

Critically missing in all of this are three things. The first is a Ukrainian succession plan. Opposition politicians like former president Petro Poroshenko and former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko are as unpopular as they are tainted by allegations of corruption during their reigns.

There is no clear route to replacing Zelensky if he refuses to step down. And even if he were replaced, a broader-based coalition government is unlikely to find a magic wand to turn Ukraine’s precarious military situation around.

The second unknown is the White House and its dealings with the Kremlin. Apparently, a 28-point US-Russia peace plan is in the making. Yet again, this plan requires major concessions from Ukraine on territory and the future size of its army, while providing no effective security guarantees.

European foreign ministers have been quick to insist that any peace plan needs Ukrainian and European backing. But their appetite to push back hard may be waning. If Kyiv’s western allies get the sense that Ukraine and Zelensky are lost causes, militarily and politically, they may cut their losses and retrench.

This would probably see these countries beef up their own defences and sign up to a US-backed plan that trades Ukrainian land and sovereignty for the extremely slim prospects of Russia accepting such a bargain.

The third critical unknown is whether Putin will cut a deal or drag out negotiations with Trump and push on regardless in Ukraine. Putin’s past track record of playing for time speaks for itself.

Recent comments by Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov that there were no new developments to announce on a possible peace plan also strongly suggest that there has been no change in the Kremlin’s approach. Given what is apparently on the table, even if Putin were inclined to make a deal, it would hardly be of comfort for Kyiv and Brussels.

The danger for Kyiv and its European partners is that talk of Ukraine’s political and military collapse turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy. The consequence of that – Kyiv’s submission to a Russian peace dictate – would be the result of the dysfunctional nature of Ukraine’s domestic politics and the fecklessness of western support as much as any collusion between Trump and Putin.

Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

Tetyana Malyarenko receives funding from the Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University and the Research Council of Norway (project WARPUT, 361835, implemented by Norwegian Institute of International Affairs)

– ref. Ukraine and Europe’s weakness exposed as US and Russia again negotiate behind Kyiv’s back – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-and-europes-weakness-exposed-as-us-and-russia-again-negotiate-behind-kyivs-back-270104

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael Smith, Associate Professor of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle

Around a quarter of UK homes lie on disused coalfields. These abandoned coal mines are flooded with water that is naturally heated by the Earth.

This has enormous potential as a sustainable energy source. Schemes such as the mine water district heat network in Gateshead, in north-east England, are already providing low-carbon, cheaper heat and hot water to residential homes.

To maximise the full potential of this energy source by developing new schemes and expanding existing ones, it is critical that people have trust in new energy systems and are motivated to connect to them. This will speed up the number of homeowners signing up.

Communities built around former coal mines tend to have higher levels of socioeconomic disadvantage compared to other areas of the UK, with more social housing. Mine water district heating is a potential source of cheaper energy for these communities, but social housing residents must be involved in the transition to new, sustainable energy systems. This will ensure a smooth transition and avoid people feeling like new systems are being imposed on them.

In our new research, we interviewed 18 Gateshead residents about what a switch to mine water heating would mean for them.

We spoke to people from a community where homes are scheduled to move from gas heating to the mine water district heat network. Residents told us about their awareness of mine water heat, their motivations to connect and resources which could support them through the transition. We heard from social housing tenants, homeowners, private renters and landlords to understand how specific issues would affect different people’s lives and homes.

Read more:
How mine water could warm up the UK’s forgotten coal towns

Our participants had limited awareness of mine water heat. Only around a third of participants in our study had previously heard of district heat networks. People had a range of incorrect assumptions about how they work. Improving awareness is clearly needed to enable homeowners to make informed decisions about whether to adopt the new technology. This could involve working with residents to design resources to increase their understanding and ensure that the issues most important to residents are addressed.

Residents we interviewed liked the idea of cleaner, greener energy, but many people said cost would be a barrier unless the mine water heat is cheaper than gas. They would happily “do their bit” for the environment, but not if it means higher bills.

One homeowner, a woman in her 70s, told us: “We like to do our bit with recycling and trying to save on energy costs, but that’s a luxury. If you’re a pensioner, you can’t. You don’t have unlimited resources … it shouldn’t [cost] any more than an ordinary gas boiler.”

The people we spoke to were proud that heat is being produced from old mines. They felt it connected the area’s coal mining heritage to a more sustainable future. Our participants liked the idea of generating energy from the disused mines in the area. When another 38-year-old resident discovered that the heat came from mine water, they said it “feels like a waste that we haven’t been tapping into that sooner”.

Community co-creation

Mine water district heating schemes provide an opportunity to involve communities in their energy futures. Community engagement ensures that people feel network expansion is being done with them, and not to them.

Raising awareness is important, but that isn’t enough to increase trust and acceptance. Addressing incorrect assumptions that sustainable energy will inherently be more expensive for consumers is key.

In Gateshead, there are cost savings through cheaper energy bills and no maintenance costs to the consumer. Communication of this information to consumers is vital to overcome resistance.

Building a narrative linked to the legacy of energy from coal mines can resonate with communities who are proud of their coal mining heritage. However, that needs to be achieved without glorifying mining history, because so many communities were adversely affected by the consequences of mine closures.

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 47,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Michael Smith receives funding from Innovate UK and Northern Net Zero Accelerator.

Faye Doughty 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. How heat from old coal mines became a source of local pride in this northern English town – new study – https://theconversation.com/how-heat-from-old-coal-mines-became-a-source-of-local-pride-in-this-northern-english-town-new-study-269959

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Luo Mai, Reader at the School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh

It’s becoming increasingly difficult to make today’s artificial intelligence (AI) systems work at the scale required to keep advancing. They require enormous amounts of memory to ensure all their processing chips can quickly share all the data they generate in order to work as a unit.

The chips that have mostly been powering the deep-learning boom for the past decade are called graphics processing units (GPUs). They were originally designed for gaming, not for AI models where each step in their thinking process must take place in well under a millisecond.

Each chip contains only a modest amount of memory, so the large language models (LLMs) that underpin our AI systems must be partitioned across many GPUs connected by high-speed networks. LLMs work by training an AI on huge amounts of text, and every part of them involves moving data between chips – a process that is not only slow and energy-intensive but also requires ever more chips as models get bigger.

For instance, OpenAI used some 200,000 GPUs to create its latest model, GPT-5, around 20 times the number used in the GPT-3 model that powered the original version of Chat-GPT three years ago.

To address the limits of GPUs, companies such as California-based Cerebras have started building a different kind of chip called wafer-scale processors. These are the size of a dinner plate, about five times bigger than GPUs, and only recently became commercially viable. Each contains vast on-chip memory and hundreds of thousands of individual processors (known as cores).

The idea behind them is simple. Instead of coordinating dozens of small chips, keep everything on one piece of silicon so data does not have to travel across networks of hardware. This matters because when an AI model generates an answer – a step known as inference – every delay adds up.

The time it takes the model to respond is called latency, and reducing that latency is crucial for applications that work in real-time, such as chatbots, scientific-analysis engines and fraud-detection systems.

Wafer-scale chips alone are not enough, however. Without a software system engineered specifically for their architecture, much of their theoretical performance gain simply never appears.

The deeper challenge

Wafer-scale processors have an unusual combination of characteristics. Each core has very limited memory, so there is a huge need for data to be shared within the chip. Cores can access their own data in nanoseconds, but there are so many cores on each chip over such a large area that reading memory on the far side of the wafer can be a thousand times slower.

Limits in the routing network on each chip also mean that it can’t handle all possible communications between cores at once. In sum, cores cannot access memory fast enough, cannot communicate freely, and ultimately spend most of their time waiting.

We’ve recently been working on a solution called WaferLLM, a joint venture between the University of Edinburgh and Microsoft Research designed to run the largest LLMs efficiently on wafer-scale chips. The vision is to reorganise how an LLM runs so that each core on the chip mainly handles data stored locally.

In what is the first paper to explore this problem from a software perspective, we’ve designed three new algorithms that basically break the model’s large mathematical operations into much smaller pieces.

These pieces are then arranged so that neighbouring cores can process them together, handing only tiny fragments of data to the next core. This keeps information moving locally across the wafer and avoids the long-distance communication that slows the entire chip down.

We’ve also introduced new strategies for distributing different parts (or layers) of the LLM across hundreds of thousands of cores without leaving large sections of the wafer idle. This involves coordinating processing and communication to ensure that when one group of cores is computing, another is shifting data, and a third is preparing its next task.

These adjustments were tested on LLMs like Meta’s Llama and Alibaba’s Qwen using Europe’s largest wafer-scale AI facility at the Edinburgh International Data Facility. WaferLLM made the wafer-scale chips generate text about 100 times faster than before.

Compared with a cluster of 16 GPUs, this amounted to a tenfold reduction in latency, as well as being twice as energy efficient. So whereas some argue that the next leap in AI performance may come from chips designed specifically for LLMs, our results suggest you can instead design software that matches the structure of existing hardware.

In the near term, faster inference at lower cost raises the prospect of more responsive AI tools capable of evaluating many more hypotheses per second. This would improve everything from reasoning assistants to scientific-analysis engines. Even more data-heavy applications like fraud detection and testing ideas through simulations would be able to handle dramatically larger workloads without the need for massive GPU clusters.

The future

GPUs remain flexible, widely available and supported by a mature software ecosystem, so wafer-scale chips will not replace them. Instead, they are likely to serve workloads that depend on ultra-low latency, extremely large models or high energy efficiency, such as drug discovery and financial trading.

Meanwhile, GPUs aren’t standing still: better software and continuous improvements in chip design are helping them run more efficiently and deliver more speed. Over time, assuming there’s a need for even greater efficiency, some GPU architectures may also adopt wafer-scale ideas.

The broader lesson is that AI infrastructure is becoming a co-design problem: hardware and software must evolve together. As models grow, simply scaling out with more GPUs will no longer be enough. Systems like WaferLLM show that rethinking the software stack is essential for unlocking the next generation of AI performance.

For the public, the benefits will not appear as new chips on shelves but as AI systems that will support applications that were previously too slow or too expensive to run. Whether in scientific discovery, public-sector services or high-volume analytics, the shift toward wafer-scale computing signals a new phase in how AI systems are built – and what they can achieve.

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. These dinner-plate sized computer chips are set to supercharge the next leap forward in AI – https://theconversation.com/these-dinner-plate-sized-computer-chips-are-set-to-supercharge-the-next-leap-forward-in-ai-270094

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of Essex

The resounding victories in recent elections by Democrats Zohran Mamdani in New York, Abigail Spanberger in Virginia and Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey has reinvigorated the party after a dismal year since Donald Trump became president.

The victories were not a mandate for a sharp ideological shift to the left. This may be true for Mamdani, but it is not for Spanberger and Sherrill, since both are mainstream centrist Democrats. The main reason for the victories can be seen in the chart below.

Trends in presidential job approval and Donald Trump’s handling of the economy 2025:

The data comes from successive polls in the United States conducted by YouGov on behalf of the Economist magazine. All three candidates focused on the issue of the US economy which proved to be a winning strategy since it is clear the economy strongly affects Donald Trump’s job approval ratings.

As the president’s ratings on the economy decline, so does his job approval ratings. The result is that the Republicans took the blame for failing to deal with the issue.

The midterm Congressional elections in the US are due to take place in November 2026. Given the strong relationship between the economy and support for the president, it is interesting to examine how the economy is likely to influence support for the Democrats in those elections.

To investigate this, we can look at elections to the House of Representatives over a long period, given that they occur every two years.

The graph below compares the number of House seats won by the Democrats and economic growth in the US in all 40 House elections since 1946. Economic growth is weighted so that the Democrats benefit from high growth when they control the House but are penalised by this when the Republicans are in control.

This also works in reverse with low growth producing a poor electoral performance for the party when Democrats are in charge and a good performance when the Republicans are in control.

The relationship between economic growth and House seats won by Democrats 1946 to 2024:

The impact of the economy on voting in these elections is clearly quite strong, but the number of House seats won declines as the party’s majority gets larger. This is what is known as a “ceiling” effect meaning that when the majority is very large it is difficult to win more seats even in a thriving economy.

But this relationship can nonetheless be used to develop a forecasting model of the seats likely to be captured by the party in midterm elections next year.

When forecasting seats, an additional factor to consider is the inertia of party support over successive elections. If the Democrats did well in one year, they were likely to do well two years later.

For example, in 2008 when Barack Obama won the presidential election, the Democrats captured 233 House seats and the Republicans 202. In the following midterm election in 2010 the party won 257 seats while the Republicans won 178 and so the Democrats retained control of the House.

At the moment the House has a Republican majority of 219 against 213 Democrats. So Republican control is quite vulnerable to a surge in support for the Democrats.

Multiple regression analysis

The forecasting model involves a multiple regression analysis. This uses several variables to predict the behaviour of a specific variable – in this case the number of House seats won by the Democrats.

In addition to the two variables already mentioned, approval ratings and the performance of the economy, the fact that the incumbent president is a Republican is included in the modelling as well since this influences the vote for the Democrats.

We know the number of House seats from the 2024 election and the fact that Trump is a Republican, so to forecast Democrat House seats we need a prediction for economic growth in 2026.

The Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis provides data which forecasts growth in the US economy up to 2028. It predicts that growth in real terms will be 1.8% in 2026 – and when this is included in the modelling, the overall forecast from these variables is 80% accurate.

If a variable is a perfect predictor of House seats it would score 1.0 and if it failed to predict any seats at all it would score 0. The impact of growth on seats when the Democrats controlled the House was 0.75, the inertia effect of past Democrat seats was 0.26 and Trump’s presidency was 0.19.

Low growth boosts Democrats’ prospects

Clearly economic growth dominates the picture showing that low growth rates next year will strengthen the Democrat challenge. This is likely to happen since a recent IMF report suggests that US growth is likely to slow next year.

Actual and predicted House seats in elections 1946 to 2026:

The third chart shows the relationship between Democratic House seats predicted by the model and the actual number of seats won by the party. The predictions track the actual number of Democrat House seats fairly closely and so the forecast should be reasonably accurate

It should be noted that all forecasting models are subject to significant errors. As the chart shows, the predicted number of seats is not the same as the actual number and if something unforeseen happens the predictions could be wrong. That said, however, the forecast is that the Democrats will win 223 seats – an increase of ten over their performance in 2024. This will give them enough to hand them control of the House.

Paul Whiteley has received funding from the British Academy and the ESRC.

– ref. Economic forecasts point to a Democrat win in the 2026 US midterm elections – https://theconversation.com/economic-forecasts-point-to-a-democrat-win-in-the-2026-us-midterm-elections-270178

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

The pancreas is essential for staying alive and healthy. This small organ sits behind the stomach and has two main jobs. It produces digestive enzymes that break down food and hormones such as insulin and glucagon that control blood sugar.

Everyday habits such as heavy drinking and unhealthy eating can gradually damage the pancreas. Once injured, the consequences can be serious and include inflammation, diabetes and, in some cases, cancer.

Several common lifestyle factors can put the pancreas under strain:

1. Alcohol

Regular heavy drinking is one of the leading causes of pancreatitis. Acute pancreatitis causes severe abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting and often needs hospital care. Repeated episodes can develop into chronic pancreatitis, where long-lasting inflammation and scarring permanently reduce pancreatic function. This can lead to malabsorption of fats, vitamins and other nutrients, diabetes and a higher risk of pancreatic cancer. Researchers have several theories about how this damage occurs.

Alcohol can cause digestive enzymes such as trypsin, which normally work in the small intestine, to activate inside the pancreas before they reach the gut. Instead of digesting food, they digest pancreatic tissue and trigger severe inflammation.

Alcohol also makes pancreatic juices thicker and stickier. These thicker fluids can form protein plugs that harden into stones and block tiny ducts. Over time this causes irritation, scarring and the loss of pancreatic cells. When the pancreas breaks down alcohol it produces a toxic chemical called acetaldehyde that irritates and damages cells and triggers inflammation.

Alcohol also encourages the release of chemical messengers that switch on inflammation and keep it active. This makes tissue damage more likely.

Guidelines recommend drinking no more than 14 units of alcohol per week. It is safest to spread this across several days and to avoid binge drinking.

2. Smoking

Smoking increases the risk of both acute and chronic pancreatitis. Acute pancreatitis develops suddenly with severe pain and sickness. Chronic pancreatitis develops over many years and repeated inflammation causes permanent damage. Several studies show that the more someone smokes, the higher the risk. Another study found that quitting significantly reduces risk, and after about 15 years the risk can fall close to that of a non smoker.

Smoking is also strongly linked to pancreatic cancer. Scientists do not yet fully understand every mechanism, but laboratory studies show that nicotine can trigger sudden increases in calcium inside pancreatic cells. Too much calcium harms cells and worsens inflammation. Tobacco smoke also contains carcinogens that damage DNA.

One of the earliest genetic changes in pancreatic cancer involves a gene called Kras, which acts like a switch that controls how cells grow. In more than 90 percent of pancreatic cancers this gene is mutated, which locks the growth switch in the on position and encourages uncontrolled cell growth.

3. Diet

Diet affects the pancreas in several ways. Eating a lot of saturated fat, processed meat or refined carbohydrates raises the risk of pancreatic problems.

One major cause of acute pancreatitis is gallstones. Gallstones can block the bile duct and trap digestive enzymes inside the pancreas. When enzymes build up they begin to damage the organ. Diet contributes to gallstone formation because high cholesterol levels make bile more likely to form stones.

Another type of fat in the blood is triglycerides. When triglycerides rise to very high levels, large fat particles known as chylomicrons can clog tiny blood vessels in the pancreas. This reduces oxygen supply and triggers the release of harmful fatty acids that irritate pancreatic tissue.

Frequent spikes in blood sugar from high sugar foods also strain the pancreas. Constant surges in insulin over time reduce insulin sensitivity and may increase the risk of pancreatic cancer.

4. Obesity

Obesity increases the risk of acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. Fat can accumulate in and around the pancreas, a condition called pancreatic steatosis or non-alcoholic fatty pancreatic disease. This build up can replace healthy cells and weaken the organ.

Excess body fat also increases levels of pro-inflammatory molecules such as TNF-alpha and IL-6, creating long-lasting inflammation that supports tumour growth. Obesity disrupts insulin sensitivity and hormone signals from fat tissue. Gallstones are more common in people who are obese and can increase the risk of pancreatitis.

5. Physical inactivity

A sedentary lifestyle worsens insulin resistance and forces the pancreas to produce more insulin. Without activity to help muscles absorb glucose, the pancreas remains under constant strain. This metabolic stress increases susceptibility to diabetes and pancreatic cancer.

Physical activity may lower pancreatic cancer risk both directly and indirectly. It supports immune function, improves cell health, reduces obesity and lowers type 2 diabetes risk. Regular movement strengthens antioxidant defences and increases the activity of disease fighting immune cells.

Pancreatic cancer may lead to diabetes, as a damaged pancreas cannot produce enough insulin. Diabetes can increase the risk of pancreatic cancer.

Adults are encouraged to include strength training at least twice a week and to aim for 150 minutes of moderate activity or 75 minutes of vigorous activity each week.

Because pancreatic conditions can be life threatening, recognising early symptoms is important. Seek medical advice if you have persistent abdominal pain, unexplained weight loss, loss of appetite, nausea or vomiting that do not settle, jaundice, greasy or foul smelling stools or chronic fatigue.

Many risks are modifiable. Limiting alcohol intake, quitting smoking, eating a diet rich in fruit, vegetables and whole grains and being physically active all reduce the likelihood of pancreatic disease. Even small changes such as choosing plant-based protein or cutting back on sugary drinks help lighten the load on this vital organ.

By understanding how the pancreas becomes damaged and by noticing symptoms early, you can take simple steps to protect it. Look after your pancreas and it will look after you.

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. Five everyday habits that could be harming your pancreas – https://theconversation.com/five-everyday-habits-that-could-be-harming-your-pancreas-266647