Category: English

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Petra Alderman, Manager of the Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science

In the space of just three weeks, the Shinawatra family has suffered a succession of blows that threaten to undo its more than two decades at the top of Thai politics. The first blow came in late August when the constitutional court removed Paetongtarn Shinawatra from premiership for ethical misconduct.

The Pheu Thai party, whose de facto leader is Paetongtarn’s father and former Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, lost its bid to lead the next government one week later. Then, on September 9, the supreme court sentenced Thaksin to one year in prison for past convictions of corruption and abuse of power.

All of this comes just two years after Pheu Thai struck a deal with the country’s conservative royalist-military establishment that paved the way for Thaksin to return to Thailand after more than 15 years in exile. The reformist Move Forward party had won the 2023 general election that year, but was blocked from taking office and dissolved by the constitutional court.

The deal allowed Thaksin, who had been ousted from power by a military coup in 2006 and subsequently fled the country, to return on preferential terms. It also enabled Pheu Thai’s prime ministerial nominee, Srettha Thavisin, to lead a coalition government.

For a family that has survived two military – and countless judicial – coups, the speed and scale of the recent blows are remarkable. Could this be the end of the Shinawatra family’s influence over Thai politics?

Read more:
Thailand has another new prime minister and an opening for progress. But will anything change?

The Shinawatra family’s position at the top of Thai politics has always been precarious. While parties aligned with Thaksin continued to win elections after the 2006 coup, their terms were always cut short by judicial interventions.

Thaksin’s sister, Yingluck, was ousted from power by another military coup in 2014. And after winning the 2019 election, Pheu Thai’s then-leader Sudarat Keyuraphan was prevented from taking power as the military sought to retain control after five years of rule.

The 2023 deal did not improve the Shinawatras’ political fortunes for long. The constitutional court removed Srettha Thavisin from his post in August 2024 in an ethics case for appointing a cabinet minister who was once jailed.

Paetongtarn subsequently took office. But less than a year later, a flare-up in a historical border conflict with Cambodia escalated into a full-blown political crisis on the Thai side.

Read more:
Thailand and Cambodia’s escalating conflict has roots in century-old border dispute

A private phone call with former Cambodian prime minister Hun Sen, in which Paetongtarn criticised the Thai military general overseeing the border region, was leaked. At a time of heightened nationalism and the military’s increased popularity, Paetongtarn was painted as unpatriotic and weak.

While Paetongtarn weathered the initial fallout, legal challenges began to mount and on July 1 she was suspended from premiership pending an ethical misconduct investigation. Paetongtarn’s duties were handed over to the deputy prime minister, Phumtham Wechayachai, in a caretaker capacity.

Read more:
A border conflict may cost the Thai prime minister her job

The timing of Paetongtarn’s suspension could not have come at a worse time for the Shinawatras. A historical legal case against Thaksin over accusations that he insulted the monarchy was scheduled to resume after a year-long adjournment. And the supreme court’s investigation into Thaksin’s hospital stay that helped him avoid serving time in prison upon his return to Thailand in August 2023 was also ongoing.

Loss of power

Paetongtarn’s removal from office was widely anticipated, but Pheu Thai’s subsequent loss of government was not. The Pheu Thai prime ministerial candidate, Chaikasem Nitisiri, was by no means an ideal nominee due to his low public profile and fragile health. But many political observers still saw him as a plausible replacement for Paetongtarn in the weeks leading to her dismissal.

However, the momentum shifted away from Pheu Thai and the Shinawatras following the constitutional court’s ruling in early September. The conservative Bhumjaithai party swiftly proposed an alternative governing coalition and struck an agreement with the progressive People’s party – the direct successor of Move Forward – to form a government.

Pheu Thai’s loss of power is more than a short-term setback. It indicates a shift in conservative support away from Thaksin and the Shinawatras.

Thaksin’s 2023 deal rested on two premises: his continuous ability to win elections and revive Thailand’s economy. Pheu Thai has failed to deliver on both. Given the party’s declining popularity, the country’s conservative establishment may no longer see it as a useful ally in its fight against the rising progressive challenge.

In the aftermath of the 2014 coup, younger generations of Thais became more politically engaged. Disillusioned with the “old” pattern of politics that pitted the Shinawatras against the establishment, they supported newly created reformist parties. This support has continued to grow, culminating in protests between 2020 and 2022 that challenged the previously sacrosanct monarchy.

The supreme court’s decision to send Thaksin to prison presents another clear blow to the Shinawatras. However, it does not represent a complete political annihilation. There are ways in which Thaksin’s time in jail could be cut short, including by applying for a royal pardon.

Days before the supreme court ruling, Thaksin abruptly left Thailand. He was thought to be attending a medical check-up in Singapore but instead landed in Dubai, his long-term home in exile. This raised suspicions that he was fleeing Thailand ahead of an unfavourable verdict.

But, to the surprise of many, he returned in time for the ruling and displayed an uncharacteristic degree of deference. He accepted the ruling without defiance or vindictiveness and promised to devote the rest of his life to serving the monarchy, the nation and the Thai people.

Thaksin’s return suggests that, despite all the challenges, he calculates that there is still some space for him and his family in Thai politics. As a seasoned political operator, he will do anything to stage a comeback.

Yet if Bhumjaithai, now leading a minority government, proves itself a more reliable partner for the conservative establishment, the Shinawatras could find themselves permanently sidelined.

With or without them, Thailand’s prospects for true democracy remain limited. The Bhumjaithai-led government does not represent a change in political direction, but more of a conservative elite pivot.

Petra Alderman 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. Thailand’s politically influential Shinawatra family is fading from centre stage – for now – https://theconversation.com/thailands-politically-influential-shinawatra-family-is-fading-from-centre-stage-for-now-265217

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Martin Whyte, Associate Professor of Metabolic Medicine, University of Surrey

A higher dose of the weight loss drug semaglutide (better known by its brand name Wegovy) may help people lose up to 25% of their body weight – without the risk of severe side-effects. These findings are based on the results of two recently published clinical trials.

Semaglutide has proven to be effective in helping people lose weight. But weight loss tends to plateau after about one year of use – even when taking the highest approved dose of the drug. This means patients may not reach their weight loss goals.

So researchers set out to understand whether a higher dose can be effective without the risk of severe side-effects.

In the first trial, researchers studied the effect of a 7.2mg dose of semaglutide in adults with obesity. This is three times the currently approved 2.4mg dose found in Wegovy. Participants were randomly assigned to either receive the higher dose, the standard dose or a placebo drug once a week for a period of 72 weeks.

Read more:
Semaglutide: beware of buying the weight-loss drug online

Participants were also told to reduce their daily calorie intake by around 500 calories per day and increase the amount of physical activity they did each week (aiming for around 150 minutes).

The participants who received the 7.2mg dose lost an average of nearly 21% of their body weight – compared with 17.5% for those on the standard dose. Participants who took the placebo only lost 2.4% of their body weight. These figures are based on those who fully adhered to the treatment regimen.

Around 33% of the participants on the higher dose also experienced very high levels of weight loss – losing 25% or more of their total body weight. This is roughly double the proportion seen in the standard-dose group, where just under 17% achieved this degree of weight loss.

The participants who used semaglutide also saw greater improvements in their cardiometabolic health compared to those who only received the placebo.

As might be anticipated, side-effects were more common in people taking the higher dose of semaglutide than those taking the lower dose. The most common side-effects were gastrointestinal issues, such as nausea or diarrhoea. Around 3% of participants using the higher dose and 2% of participants using the standard dose stopped using the drug because of these gastrointestinal issues.

A second trial then investigated what effect a higher dose of semaglutide would have in people with type 2 diabetes.

It’s well established that people with type 2 diabetes tend to lose less weight on semaglutide compared to those without diabetes. It’s not currently known why this is. So the second trial sought to understand whether a higher dose of semaglutide would also have a significant effect on weight loss in people with type 2 diabetes.

This time they recruited 512 participants with obesity who also had type 2 diabetes. They used the exact same study design as they did in the previous study.

Those treated with 7.2mg of semaglutide lost just over 13% of their body weight. The standard dose group lost around 10% of their body weight, while the placebo group lost just under 4% of their total body weight.

Beyond weight loss, the 7.2mg dose of semaglutide brought measurable improvements in metabolic health. On average, waist circumference decreased by 6.5cm compared to the placebo group. Blood glucose levels (HbA1c, a measure of diabetes control) also fell by nearly 2% in those taking the higher dose.

Gastroinstestinal problems were again the most commonly experienced side-effects in those taking semaglutide – with around 6% of the study’s participants stopping the trial because of these side-effects.

Patient benefit

Semaglutide promotes weight loss by mimicking the body’s natural GLP-1 hormone, which helps regulate blood sugar and appetite. These drugs act on brain pathways that control energy balance and food intake, leading to reduced hunger and an earlier sense of fullness (satiety) after eating. This can help people to eat less, leading to weight loss.

Read more:
Eight conditions weight-loss jabs might be beneficial for

Higher doses of semaglutide lead to greater weight loss by more strongly activating the brain regions that control appetite, resulting in reduced hunger and increased feelings of fullness. They also slow stomach emptying more effectively, helping to decrease overall food intake.

The results from these two trials show that a higher dose of semaglutide is both safe to use and very effective. Being able to use a higher dose of semaglutide offers more options for patients when it comes to managing their weight and controlling their blood sugar. It also gives an option to people who may not respond to the standard 2.4mg dose or whose weight loss may plateau.

These findings also show that semaglutide can compete against other weight loss drugs, such as tirzepatide (Mounjaro). In an earlier head-to-head trial, a 10gm-15mg dose of tirzepatide resulted in a 20% loss of body weight in participants – while a standard dose of semaglutide only resulted in an approximately 14% loss in body weight. But these recent studies now show that a higher dose of semaglutide can lead to comparable levels of weight loss.

These results may also raise questions about whether dose escalation may become a future standard of care in obesity treatment.

Martin Whyte 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. Weight loss drug semaglutide shown to be safe and potentialy more effective at higher dose – new findings – https://theconversation.com/weight-loss-drug-semaglutide-shown-to-be-safe-and-potentialy-more-effective-at-higher-dose-new-findings-265312

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Taylor, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Leeds Beckett University

Sadly, there are signs that racism is increasing across the world.

Research from Europe and Australia in recent years has found a rise in the number of people experiencing racism. Reports from the US and UK have indicated that most ethnic minority participants felt racism was getting worse. And a global study has found rising incidents of discrimination.

Animosity to those who appear different to us seems easy to arouse, especially in times of hardship and upheaval. Throughout history, human groups have scapegoated minorities, such as Jews, the Roma and immigrants.

Some scientists have suggested that racism is an innate human trait that evolved in the distant past. According to the evolutionary psychologist Pascal Boyer, racism is “a consequence of highly efficient economic strategies” that enables us to “keep members of other groups in a lower-status position, with distinctly worse benefits”.

In other words, why would our ancestors decrease their own chances of survival by sharing resources with other groups?

Another theory from evolutionary psychology is that racism may have evolved as an “energy-saving” strategy. To interact or mate with ethnically different groups would have involved a lot of time and energy, through coordinating with different social norms. Therefore, we developed a tendency to view different groups as different species to avoid, saving ourselves “costly interaction with outgroup members”.

However, I argue the above theories are dubious. First of all, evidence suggests that, due to tiny populations, there was an abundance of resources for early human beings, and so no need to actively deny others from accessing food and water. Second, the above theories don’t fit with what anthropology tells us about the behaviour of early human groups.

There is a great deal of anthropological and archaeological evidence showing that prehistoric groups didn’t avoid each other. They often intermarried, frequently mixed and changed membership. The same pattern is shown by an absence of territorial behaviour and a strikingly low level of warfare.

Alternative explanations

Maybe other areas of psychology can provide a better explanation. Research shows a link between prejudice and poor psychological functioning, including poor relationships with insecurity and aggression. This can often be traced back to a disturbed and insecure childhood. Other research has shown a link between racism and anxiety, demonstrating that people become more prejudiced during challenging times.

More generally, studies demontrate that when people are made to feel insecure or anxious, they are more likely to identify with their national or ethnic groups. This enhances their self-esteem and their sense of identity, as a defence against insecurity and anxiety.

There are clearly social and economic factors that encourage racism, such as hierarchy and inequality. But the above research suggests that racism is largely a psychological defence mechanism against anxiety and insecurity.

Five stages to racism

From this psychological perspective, it’s possible to identify different stages in the development of racism. According to the theory I propose in my book DisConnected, the process begins when a person lacks a sense of security and identity, which generates a desire to affiliate themselves with a group. This affiliation strengthens their identity and provides a sense of belonging.

What’s wrong with this? Why shouldn’t we take pride in our national or religious identity, and feel a sense of brotherhood or sisterhood with others who share our identity?

Because group identity often leads to a second, more dangerous stage. In order to further strengthen their sense of identity, members of a group may develop antagonism towards other groups. Such hostility may make the group feel more defined and cohesive, as if they can see themselves more clearly in opposition to others.

A third stage of the process is when members of a group withdraw empathy from members of other groups, limiting their concern and compassion to their peers. They may act benevolently towards members of their own group but be indifferent or callous to anyone outside it. As I show in DisConnected, the withdrawal of empathy turns other human beings into objects, and enables cruelty and violence.

Fourth is the homogenisation of individuals belonging to other groups. People are no longer perceived in terms of their individual personalities or behaviour, but in terms of prejudices about the group as a whole. Any member of the group is a legitimate target and can be punished for the alleged transgressions of other individuals from the group. In contemporary terms, any asylum seeker can be punished for the alleged crime of an individual asylum seeker.

Finally, people may project their own psychological flaws and personal failings onto another group, as a strategy of avoiding responsibility. Other groups become scapegoats, and consequently are liable to attacked or even murdered. People with strong narcissistic and paranoid personality traits are especially prone to such projection, since they struggle to accept their personal faults, instead searching for others to take the blame.

In other words, racism is a symptom of psychological ill-health, a sign of anxiety and of a lack of identity and inner security. Psychologically healthy people with a stable sense of identity and security are very rarely (if ever) racist. They ultimately have no need to strengthen their sense of self through group identity.

In my view, racism is an aberration, not an innate human trait. It’s also worth remembering that the very concept of race is baseless. There is no genetic or biological basis for dividing the human race into distinct “races”.

There are just groups of human beings — all of whom came from Africa originally — who developed slightly different physical characteristics over time as they travelled to, and adapted to, different climates and environments.

Steve 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. Racism isn’t innate – here are five psychological stages that may lead to it – https://theconversation.com/racism-isnt-innate-here-are-five-psychological-stages-that-may-lead-to-it-264391

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Simon Goodman, Lecturer in Evolutionary Biology, University of Leeds

Once a haven for flamingos, sturgeon and thousands of seals, fast-receding waters are turning the northern coast of the Caspian Sea into barren stretches of dry sand. In some places, the sea has retreated more than 50km. Wetlands are becoming deserts, fishing ports are being left high and dry, and oil companies are dredging ever-longer channels to reach their offshore installations.

Climate change is driving this dramatic decline in the world’s largest landlocked sea. Found at the boundary between Europe and central Asia, the Caspian Sea is surrounded by Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan, and sustains around 15 million people.

The Caspian is a hub for fishing, shipping, and oil and gas production, and is of rising geopolitical importance as it sits where the interests of global superpowers meet. As the sea shallows, governments face the critical challenge of maintaining industries and livelihoods, while also protecting the unique ecosystems that sustains them.

I’ve been visiting the Caspian for more than 20 years, working with local researchers to study the unique and endangered Caspian seal, and support its conservation. Back in the 2000s, the far north-eastern corner of the sea was a mosaic of reed beds, mudflats and shallow channels that teemed with life, providing habitats for spawning fish, migrating birds, and tens of thousands of seals that gathered there to moult in the spring.

Now these remote wild places we visited to catch seals for satellite tracking studies are dry land, transitioning to desert as the sea retreats, and the same story is playing out for other wetlands around the sea. This experience parallels that of coastal communities, who year by year are seeing the water recede away from their towns, fishing wharves and ports, leaving infrastructure stranded on newly-dry land, and the people fearful for the future.

A sea in retreat

The level of Caspian Sea has always fluctuated, but the scale of recent change is unprecedented. Since the turn of the current century, water levels have declined by around 6cm per year, with drops of up to 30cm per year since 2020. In July 2025, Russian scientists announced the sea had dropped below the previous minimum level recorded during the era of instrumental measurements.

During the 20th century, variations were due to a combination of natural factors and humans diverting water to use for agriculture and industry, but now global warming is the main driver of decline. It might seem inconceivable that a body of water as large as the Caspian could be at risk, but in the hotter climate the rate of water entering the sea from rivers and rainfall is reducing, and is now being outstripped by increased evaporation from the sea surface.

Even if global warming is limited to the Paris agreement target of 2°C, water levels are predicted to fall up to ten metres compared to the 2010 coastline. With the current global trajectory of greenhouse gas emissions, the decline could reach 18 metres, which is about the height of a six-storey building.

Because the northern Caspian is shallow – much of it only around five metres deep – small decreases in depth mean huge losses of area. In recent research, colleagues and I showed that even an optimistic ten-metre decline would uncover 112,000 square kilometres of seabed – an area larger than Iceland.

What’s at stake

The ecological consequences would be dramatic. Four out of ten ecosystem types unique to the Caspian Sea would disappear completely. The endangered Caspian seal could lose up to 81% of its current breeding habitat, and Caspian sturgeon would lose access to critical spawning habitat.

As in the Aral Sea disaster, where another massive lake in central Asia almost entirely disappeared, toxic dust from exposed seabed would be released, with serious health risks.

Millions of people are at risk of displacement as the sea recedes, or face highly degraded living conditions. The sea’s only link to the global shipping network is through the delta of the Volga River (which flows into the Caspian) and then via an upstream canal to the Don River for connections to the Black Sea, Mediterranean and other river systems. But the Volga is already struggling with reduced water depth.

Ports like Aktau in Kazakhstan and Baku in Azerbaijan need dredging just to keep operating. Similarly oil and gas companies are having to dredge long channels to their offshore facilities in the north Caspian.

Already the costs of protecting human interests are in the billions of dollars and are only set to grow further. The Caspian is central to the “middle corridor”, a trade route linking China to Europe. As water levels fall, shipping loads must be reduced, costs rise, and settlements and infrastructure risk being stranded tens or even hundreds of kilometres from the sea.

A race against time

Countries around the Caspian are having to adapt, relocating ports, and dredging new shipping lanes. But these measures risk conflicting with conservation goals.

For instance, there are plans to dredge a major new shipping channel across the “Ural saddle” of the north Caspian. But this is an important area for seal breeding, migration and feeding, and will be a vital area for the adaptation of ecosystems as the sea recedes.

Since the rate of change is so rapid, traditional fixed boundary protected areas risk becoming obsolete. What’s needed is an integrated, forward-looking approach to planning across the whole region. If the areas ecosystems will need to adapt to climate change are mapped and protected now, planners and policy makers will be better able to ensure future infrastructure projects avoid or minimise further damage.

To do this Caspian countries will have to invest in biodiversity monitoring and planning expertise, all while coordinating action across five different countries with different priorities.

Caspian countries are already recognising the existential risks, and have begun to form intergovernmental agreements to address the crisis. But the rate of decline may outstrip the pace of political cooperation.

The ecological, climatic and geopolitical importance of the Caspian Sea means its fate ultimately matters far beyond its receding shores. It provides a key case study in how climate change is transforming major inland water bodies across the world, from Lake Titicaca to Lake Chad. The question is whether governments can act fast enough to protect both the people and nature of this rapidly changing sea.

Simon Goodman has provided advice to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) on Caspian seal conservation, and in the past has conducted research and advised oil and gas companies in the Caspian on how to minimise their impact on seals. His recent work was not funded by or linked to industry. He is co-chair of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) pinniped specialist group.

– ref. Climate change is fast shrinking the world’s largest inland sea – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-fast-shrinking-the-worlds-largest-inland-sea-265239

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Robert Simmons, Professor of Economics, Lancaster University

The 2025 summer football transfer window was a record for the English Premier League with teams spending £3.9 billion on transfer fees for new players. That’s more than the top divisions of France, Germany, Italy and Spain combined.

The most expensive transfer was Alexander Isak’s drawn out switch from Newcastle United to Liverpool, who forked out £125 million for the forward and will also pay him a salary of around £13 million a year (plus bonuses).

So there is plenty of money being spent at the top end of English football. But it’s a very different story in the tiers below, where the likes of Morecambe FC and Sheffield Wednesday have spent the summer in crisis over financial issues.

In fact, all three divisions below the Premier League (Championship, League One and League Two) make a financial loss every year. The economic chasm between the teams at the top and those at the bottom is only getting wider and there is an ever-increasing chance that some clubs will soon become insolvent.

And though the economic strife affecting teams in the lower leagues might not seem like such a big problem for the Premier League giants and their fans – any fans of any team, in fact – it should be.

The four divisions (92 clubs) of English league football are linked every season by promotion and relegation. Such is the fluidity of this system that Brighton and Hove Albion and Bournemouth are now enjoying life in the Premier League having gradually clawed their way up from the fourth tier.

In the other direction, Luton Town has been relegated twice in the past two years from the Premier League to League One. The jeopardy attached to the hope and dread of going up or going down is part of what makes English football so captivating – and attractive to broadcasters and sponsors.

If clubs are weak financially, and unable to afford to develop or bring in fresh talent, the whole system risks becoming static. In recent years, even promoted sides struggle (all the teams promoted to the Premier League in the last two seasons have been immediately relegated again), often resulting in unappealing fixtures where weaker teams are thrashed by stronger ones. This kind of competitive imbalance could undermine the value of future broadcast rights fees.

Those fees are important part of the football economy, although again, it is the teams at the top of the tree which benefit the most.

Championship, League One and League Two clubs received negligible fee income from broadcast rights until recently, after a new broadcast deal with Sky TV started in 2024 which is worth £935 million over five years. (The current domestic Premier League deal is worth £6.7 billion over four years.)

Sharing is caring

So lower division clubs now have games accessible to viewers and a new income stream that should help offset financial losses. But the real financial win comes from getting as far up the football pyramid as possible

For the lower leagues then, promotion is always the biggest goal. The new celebrity-backed owners of Birmingham City and Wrexham have the explicit ambition of reaching the Premier League. The end of season playoff final between two Championship teams fighting for promotion to the Premier Leagues is estimated to be worth around £200 million, given the increased broadcast incomes that would follow.

For its part, the Premier League has often restated a commitment to keeping the 92-team hierarchical structure of English football intact, and currently supports teams in the lower leagues through a mechanism of “solidarity payments”.

As of the 2024-25 season, these payments were £5.5 million per club for Championship teams (apart from those relegated from EPL which receive much larger “parachute payments” instead), £1 million per club for League One and £0.75 million per club for League Two.

Nevertheless, many EFL clubs still rely on loans and capital injections, often by their owners, to get by. And the gap in economic power remains vast.

In 2023-24, Liverpool’s total revenue was £614 million while Morecambe’s was £4.57 million.

If the EPL is serious about sustaining the 92-team hierarchical structure in England then there is scope for dramatically increasing these solidarity payments – which could be made conditional on sound financial practices by receiving clubs. Like a wealth tax for football, more generous payments would essentially help to reduce economic inequality across English football as a whole, and make for a financially much healthier sport.

Robert Simmons 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. Big-spending Premier League needs to spread more of its wealth to poorer clubs or everyone loses – https://theconversation.com/big-spending-premier-league-needs-to-spread-more-of-its-wealth-to-poorer-clubs-or-everyone-loses-263750