Category: English

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Aybars Tuncdogan, Reader in Digital Innovation and Information Security, King’s College London

The cyber-attack on Marks & Spencer will lead to an estimated £300 million hit to the company’s profits this year. It now aims to have online shopping at the store back to normal by August, more than three months after IT systems were compromised.

Fans of M&S clothing and food will be relieved after all of the uncertainty. But that level of uncertainty, as well as the huge cost, is surely a sign that big retailers, which millions of people rely on, need to change how they think about – and invest in – cybersecurity.

It has to be an absolute priority. After all, few marketing strategies or HR initiatives can save a company £300 million in just six weeks. But perhaps a more sophisticated cybersecurity department could have done just that.

To be fair, M&S faced a relatively rare, high-impact ordeal. Most cyber-attacks of this nature don’t affect customers so directly, and much of the recovery typically happens behind the scenes.

But M&S shoppers saw online orders collapse, contactless payments fail and refunds, gift cards and loyalty points not functioning. Disruption in stock-management and warehousing led to empty shelves and food waste.

On June 27, M&S issued a public apology and a £5 digital gift card to affected customers. But research suggests that the most important element of keeping customers onside is the quality of the recovery process, and whether normal service is eventually resumed.

To get back to normal service, it is possible that a ransom was paid to the cyber attackers, but M&S has refused to confirm or deny this. (One survey found that many organisations hit by cyber attacks agreed to pay a ransom – and then suffered a subsequent breach, often from the very same culprits.)

But even when normal service returns, when hackers steal customer data, as they did with M&S, research suggests that this information is often reused by criminals in identity theft and phishing. A study even found that victims of data breaches are more likely to have mortgage applications denied.

From what we know about the breach at M&S, it seems that the cyber-attackers simply used a phishing technique to get the support desk of a third-party contractor to reset the password of an admin-level account. That said, although in this case the main vulnerability was human, the lesson to be learnt here is that sometimes just one vulnerability can shake the whole system to its core.

This is why business owners need to think of cybersecurity not just as a tedious and inconvenient IT issue, but as a core function of the business. Otherwise, as the M&S case illustrates, it is simply not possible for the rest of the corporate structure to operate.

Testing times

So cybersecurity targets must be incorporated into every department to ensure collective defence. And organisations also need to stress-test the different aspects of their systems.

That could be checking on human responses, but it should also include technology (like a vulnerability in the web server), physical barriers (a poorly secured server room door) and HR procedures (failure to revoke ex-employee access).

These lines of defence have to be stress-tested regularly and from multiple angles, rather than being considered an annual checkbox activity for compliance.

Scenario-based tests – essentially a cyber fire-drill — such as internal threat simulations and response exercises, can provide useful insights into an organisation’s readiness to detect, respond to and recover from cyber-attacks.

It’s also important that organisations learn to communicate clearly once a breach occurs. Research into responses to data breaches suggests that any backlash is sharper when the company seems to be trying to hide the breach, which may later be publicised by the criminals instead.

Consumers should also remember that they are not powerless. We may not be able to prevent a data breach, but all of us can help to stop attackers from infiltrating our online worlds by something as simple as not re-using the same passwords.

By remaining sceptical, we can prevent attackers from using the information they stole to phish us later. And by thinking carefully about what personal data we share with companies, we can reduce the impact of future breaches.

Aybars Tuncdogan 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 M&S responds to its cyber-attack could have a serious impact on its future – and its customers – https://theconversation.com/how-mands-responds-to-its-cyber-attack-could-have-a-serious-impact-on-its-future-and-its-customers-260429

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Magnus Marsden, Professor of Social Anthropology, University of Sussex

The winter season of 2024-25 marked a resurgence of fur clothing – both faux and real – in fashion across Europe and North America. Shearling jackets and embroidered “Penny Lane coats” featured widely in reports on the latest fashion trends. Vintage fur coats are also back in vogue.

To many, the resurgence came as a surprise. The anti-fur movement, especially influential in the 1980s, continues to shape perceptions of fur. In the 2010s, cities including New York and Los Angeles banned the use of fur to make clothes. The UK meanwhile banned the farming of fur-bearing animals, and, alongside the EU, has committed itself to legislating against all fur imports.

Just last year the town of Worthing, in England, debated whether their mayor should wear ceremonial robes trimmed with fur or not. Despite these trends, many young people have embraced the renewed trend of wearing real fur.

Some clothes made from animal skins became popular during the counter-cultural movement of the 1960s, but historically, fur has mostly marked status, wealth and luxury. Today, many critics interpret fur’s return to fashion as a cultural expression of rightwing politics.

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.

Fur is prominent in the “boom boom” fashion trend, which emphasises excess and “male-coded values”. It has been described by fashion journalists as “over-the-top and unashamed about its own greed and lack of wokeness”.

Fur clothing is a reminder of the moral tensions between need and desire, and luxury and excess. In addition to being inter-generational, these debates are also about gender. For much of the 20th century, fur coats symbolised femininity, erotic power and class position in the west. But by the 1980s, advertising campaigns depicted women who wore fur as either stupid and unthinking or thinking and unspeakably cruel, leading many to jettison it.

Fur’s return to fashion has injected old debates with new significance. Some young people are willing to wear faux fur because it does not involve killing animals. But others argue that, because it is made from synthetic material, faux fur is actually more environmentally damaging and prefer to wear the real thing. They claim that wearing vintage fur is a form of “sustainable consumption” but are challenged by those who argue that this fashion trend ultimately justifies killing animals to make clothes.

The boom boom trend is said to embody a contemporary expression of 1980s “conspicuous consumerism”, but in an era of economic austerity the adoption of fur by young people suggests the clothes they wear identify their desires rather than their financial reality.

A global history of fur

Today, as in the 1980s, the perspectives, interests and experiences of non-Europeans are often unheard in debates around fur. A decline of fur-bearing animal populations in North America and Siberia from the early 19th century, led to a global expansion in fur farming.

Read more:
How central Asian Jews and Muslims worked together in London’s 20th-century fur and carpet trade

From the 1850s, for example, Central Asia supplied furs to Europe and North America. Local artisans cured the pelts of karakul lambs – a native breed – to yield a rich and glossy fur. In central and south Asia, men of high status wore karakul hats; in Europe and America, they were mostly used to make women’s coats.

After the Russian revolution of 1917, many nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralists, who raised sheep and other animals, left central Asia and moved with their flocks to neighbouring Afghanistan. The trade in karakul fur grew in the country, and foreign currency reserves came to depend on lambskins sold at auctions in London and New York.

In the 1960s, sheepskin coats made in Afghanistan – known as “Afghans” – became popular in the west, being worn by stars including Brian Jones of the Rolling Stones. The 1969 British edition of Vogue featured an interview with an icon of “oriental chic”, the “beautiful, dashing, intelligent, adventurous” Afghan socialite, Safia Tarzi, who lived in Paris, and ran a boutique clothing shop in Kabul.

The Afghan coat enjoyed a resurgence in 2000 having been worn by the character Penny Lane (Kate Hudson) in the film Almost Famous.

Read more:
Friday essay: how ‘Afghan’ coats left Kabul for the fashion world and became a hippie must-have

In the 1980s, the anti-fur campaign contributed to a declining market for karakul. For decades, rumours of Central Asian shepherds extracting lambs from the wombs of sheep to ensure a steady yield of delicate pelts had circulated. Moral opposition to the practice was not confined to the west.

During my research on globally dispersed activists, intellectuals and merchants from Afghanistan, a man from Afghanistan, now based in London, told me that his father banned his family from wearing karakul hats because sheep and their lambs were treated cruelly.

In the 1990s, civil war destroyed much of the infrastructure of the karakul industry in Afghanistan, but a trickle of pelts reached auction houses located in Frankfurt, Copenhagen and Helsinki.

In the 2000s, international development organisations attempted to revive the trade, though sales never returned to anyway near the levels of the 1970s. By the 2010s, families in northern Afghanistan struggling economically opted to send sons to travel illegally to Turkey to find work as shepherds for commercially oriented Turkish farmers.

Promotional videos of fashion houses occasionally touch on the Penny Lane coat’s ties to Afghanistan, but media coverage of fur fashions rarely address its historical connections to central Asia.

Magnus Marsden received funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council including for the research upon which this article is based.

– ref. From Kabul to the catwalk – the surprising global history behind fashion’s fur revival – https://theconversation.com/from-kabul-to-the-catwalk-the-surprising-global-history-behind-fashions-fur-revival-256382

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dawn Llewellyn, Associate professor of Religion and Gender, Theology and Religious Studies, University of Chester

What happens when the women immortalised in old master paintings step out of their gilded frames and into the chaos of modern domestic life? That’s the question artist Sarah Lightman tackles, with wit, irreverence and insight, in her exhibition Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully, now on at Chester Visual Arts, Grovesnor Shopping Centre.

In works from her Biblical Domestic (2021–2024) and Menstrual Hystery (2024) series, Lightman trades halos for housework, and heavenly glory for the cluttered reality of her own everyday life. Her saints and heroines aren’t meditating in divine serenity – they’re battling menopause, messy kitchens and midlife malaise.

With humour and intimacy, Lightman probes the distance between the idealised women of religious art and the ageing bodies we’re taught to hide. Her characters, drawn from both the canon of western Christian art and the sacred Jewish texts of her upbringing, are lovingly reimagined through a feminist lens.

What if Mary hated soft play as much as the rest of us? What if Eve was just trying to get through another basket of laundry? What if biblical women aged in real time?

With bold colours, absurdist touches and deep empathy, Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully reframes these archetypes for today – and starts fresh conversations about visibility, care and womanhood.

Old masters, new messes

In Fridge Frustrations (2022), Caravaggio’s Judith Beheading Holofernes (1599) becomes a scene of domestic dread. Judith still holds Holofernes’ severed head – but now her crisis is storage, not salvation:

Judith can’t find anywhere in the fridge for her organic and fresh cut of Holofernes.

Lightman retains the dramatic composition of the original but shifts its meaning entirely. Her watercolour medium softens the baroque oil intensity, introducing levity without losing emotional depth.

In The Annunciation of the Menopause (2024), she riffs on The Annunciation by Fra Angelico (1425-26), the early Renaissance fresco where the Virgin Mary receives the angel Gabriel’s news that she’ll bear the son of God.

Here, Mary’s serene acceptance is swapped for something far more visceral: she sits beside an exam table mid heavy bleed, not in graceful surrender but bodily discomfort. Gabriel is gone, replaced by a gynaecologist in latex gloves. The walls? Tiled not with gold leaf but with packets of Always. This is no divine encounter – just hot flushes, greasy hair and hormonal chaos. No spiritual serenity in sight.

Instead of youthful grace, Lightman gives us perimenopausal truth: gritty, awkward, real.

Not a rejection, but a rewriting

Lightman’s work is unabashedly feminist and unapologetically funny – but it’s also rooted in reverence. Her reinterpretations of women from Hebrew scripture honour the complexity of these figures and draw from the feminist Jewish tradition of midrash: creative interpretation that fills in the biblical silences.

Lightman isn’t discarding these sacred stories: she’s inhabiting them. She paints the parts we were never told, the thoughts and struggles left out of the male-dominated canon. Her canvases ask: what if we didn’t accept the gaps in these women’s lives? What if we imagined them into our own?

Context matters – and Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully is exhibited not in a white-walled gallery but in Chester’s Grosvenor Precinct, having previously shown at Chester’s cultural centre Storyhouse. The location is deliberate. These Madonnas and menopausal saints appear exactly where they live now: among shopping bags, toddler tantrums and the quiet sighs of women holding it all together.

Meeting Eve, Mary, Bathsheba, Susanna and Lot’s wife in a shopping centre creates a surreal and poignant dissonance. It collapses the sacred and the ordinary, and invites viewers to see their own lives reflected in these ancient figures.

Messy, mortal and magnificent

It’s a risk, of course, putting menopause, motherhood, grief, housework and rape culture centre stage. There’s a version of this exhibition that could have been grim. But Lightman’s palette is anything but dour. Her watercolours are vibrant and playful, her titles sharp with satire. These women aren’t tragic martyrs; they’re exhausted, yes, but also knowing, cheeky and in on the joke.

Lightman treats art history not as a fixed monument, but as a toolkit to be deconstructed and rebuilt. She gives her saints their bodies back – saggy, sweaty, miraculous – and their agency too.

What makes Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully so powerful is its embrace of contradiction. It is sacred and silly, sincere and subversive, heartbreaking and hilarious. It is, in essence, a feminist midrash in watercolour: retelling holy stories through the grit and glory of contemporary womanhood, and holding them close even as it pushes them open.

Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully is on display at Chester Visual Arts, Grovesnor Shopping Centre until July 13.

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. Biblical Women Ageing Disgracefully: artist Sarah Lightman reimagines characters battling midlife, motherhood and menopause – https://theconversation.com/biblical-women-ageing-disgracefully-artist-sarah-lightman-reimagines-characters-battling-midlife-motherhood-and-menopause-260522

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Horowitz, Visiting Clinical Research Fellow in Psychiatry, UCL

A new review of antidepressant withdrawal effects – written by academics, many of whom have close ties to drug manufacturers – risks underestimating the potential harms to long-term antidepressant users by focusing on short-term, industry-funded studies.

There is growing recognition that stopping antidepressants – especially after long-term use – can cause severe and sometimes debilitating withdrawal symptoms, and it is now acknowledged by the UK government as a public health issue.

One of the main reasons this issue took decades to recognise after the release of modern antidepressants onto the market is because medical guidelines, such as those produced by Nice (England’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence), had for many years declared withdrawal effects to be “brief and mild”.

This description was based on studies run by drug companies, where people had only taken the medication for eight to 12 weeks. As a result, when patients later showed up with severe, long-lasting symptoms, many doctors didn’t take them seriously because these experiences contradicted what the guidelines led them to expect.

Our recent research helps explain this mismatch. We found a clear link between how long someone takes antidepressants and how likely they are to experience withdrawal symptoms – and how severe these symptoms are.

We surveyed NHS patients and found that people who had used antidepressants for more than two years were ten times more likely to have withdrawal effects, five times more likely for those effects to be severe, and 18 times more likely for them to be long lasting compared with those who had taken the drugs for six months or less.

For patients who used antidepressants for less than six months, withdrawal symptoms were mostly mild and brief. Three-quarters reported no or mild symptoms, most of which lasted less than four weeks.

Only one in four of these patients was unable to stop when they wanted to. However, for long-term users (more than two years), two-thirds reported moderate or severe withdrawal effects, with one-quarter reporting severe withdrawal effects. Almost one-third of long-term users reported symptoms that lasted for more than three months. Four-fifths of these patients were unable to stop their antidepressants despite trying.

About 2 million people on antidepressants in England have been taking them for over five years, according to a BBC investigation. And in the US at least 25 million people have taken antidepressants for more than five years. What happens to people in eight-to-12-week studies is a far cry from what happens to millions of people when they stop.

Studying what happens to people after just eight to 12 weeks on antidepressants is like testing car safety by crashing a vehicle into a wall at 5km/h – ignoring the fact that real drivers are out on the roads doing 60km/h.

History repeating itself?

Against this backdrop, a review has just been published in Jama Psychiatry. Several of the senior authors declare payments from drug companies. In what looks like history repeating itself, the review draws on short-term trials – many funded by the pharmaceutical industry – that were similar to those used to shape early treatment guidelines. The authors conclude that antidepressants do not cause significant withdrawal effects.

Their main analysis is based on eleven trials that compared withdrawal symptoms in people who had stopped antidepressants with those who had continued them or stopped taking a placebo. Six of these trials had people on antidepressants for eight weeks, four for 12 weeks and just one for 26 weeks.

They reported a slightly higher number of withdrawal symptoms in people who had stopped antidepressants, which they say does not constitute a “clinically significant” withdrawal syndrome. They also suggest the symptoms could be explained by the “nocebo effect” – where negative expectations cause people to feel worse.

In our view, the results are likely to greatly underestimate the risk of withdrawal for the millions of people on these drugs for years. The review found no relationship between the duration of use of antidepressants and withdrawal symptoms, but there were too few long-term studies to test this association properly.

The review probably underestimates, in our view, short-term withdrawal effects too by assuming that the fact that people experience withdrawal-like symptoms when stopping a placebo or continuing an antidepressant cancels out withdrawal effects from antidepressants. But this is not a valid assumption.

We know that antidepressant withdrawal effects overlap with side-effects and with everyday symptoms, but this does not mean they are the same thing. People stopping a placebo report symptoms such as dizziness and headache, because these are common occurrences. However, as was shown in another recent review, symptoms following discontinuation of a placebo tend to be milder than those experienced when stopping antidepressants, which can be intense enough to require emergency care.

So deducting the rate of symptoms after stopping a placebo or continuing an antidepressant from antidepressant withdrawal symptoms is likely to underestimate the true extent of withdrawal.

The review also doesn’t include several well-designed drug company studies that found high rates of withdrawal symptoms. For example, an American study found that more than 60% of people who stopped antidepressants (after eleven months) experienced withdrawal symptoms.

The authors suggest that depression after stopping antidepressants is probably a return of the original condition, not withdrawal symptoms, because similar rates of depression were seen in people who stopped taking a placebo. But this conclusion is based on limited and unreliable data (that is, relying on participants in studies to report such events without prompting, rather than assessing them systematically) from just five studies.

We hope uncritical reporting of a review based on the sort of short-term studies that led to under-recognition of withdrawal effects in the first place, does not disrupt the growing acceptance of the problem and slow efforts by the health system to help potentially millions of people who may be severely affected.

The authors and publisher of the new review have been approached for comment.

Mark Horowitz is the author of the Maudsley Deprescribing Guidelines which outlines how to safely stop antidepressants, benzodiazepines, gabapentinoids and z-drugs, for which he receives royalties. He is co-applicant on the RELEASE and RELEASE+ trials in Australia funded by the NHMRC and MRFF examining hyperbolic tapering of antidepressants. He is co-founder and consultant to Outro Health, a digital clinic which helps people to safely stop no longer needed antidepressants in the US. He is a member of the Critical Psychiatry Network, an informal group of psychiatrists.

Joanna Moncrieff was a co-applicant on a study of antidepressant discontinuation funded by the UK’s National Institute for Health Research. She is co-applicant on the RELEASE and RELEASE+ trials in Australia funded by the NHMRC and MRFF examining hyperbolic tapering of antidepressants. She receives modest royalties for books about psychiatric drugs. She is co-chair person of the Critical Psychiatry Network, an informal group of psychiatrists.

– ref. Antidepressant withdrawal: new review downplays symptoms but misses the mark for long-term use – https://theconversation.com/antidepressant-withdrawal-new-review-downplays-symptoms-but-misses-the-mark-for-long-term-use-260708

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrea Taylor, Associate Professor in Risk Communication, University of Leeds

The UK Met Office has given storms forenames for the past decade as part of an effort to raise public awareness of extreme weather before it strikes. Heatwaves are becoming increasingly frequent and severe due to greenhouse gas emissions, predominantly from burning fossil fuel, which are raising global temperatures by trapping more heat in Earth’s atmosphere.

These extreme heat events aren’t named in the UK. Should that change?

Effective communication strategies are necessary to make people aware of upcoming heatwaves and help them understand how to reduce their risk. Spain started naming them in 2023, with Heatwave Zoe. Italy has a longstanding but unofficial tradition of naming heatwaves according to mythology and classical history.

The results include Lucifero (Lucifer, another name for the devil) and Cerbero (Cerberus, the three-headed dog that guards the underworld in Greek myth), popularised by the private weather service il Meteo (ilmeteo.it).

Severe heatwaves in summer 2023 and 2024 prompted a campaign to name heatwaves after fossil fuel companies, to increase awareness of their role in climate change.

However, there is limited evidence to indicate whether this would be effective in encouraging people to take proper safety precautions during heatwaves, such as staying in the shade between 11am and 3pm, closing the curtains of sun-facing windows during the day and making sure to have enough water if travelling and looking out for those who may struggle to keep themselves cool and hydrated, such as elderly people living alone.

To explore how effective naming heatwaves might be, my research team conducted online experiments with 2,152 people in England and 1,981 people in Italy.

Lucifer is scarier than Arnold

Participants were asked to imagine that next summer, they were to receive a warning that a heatwave was about to affect their country. Participants were randomly assigned information about an event that was was either unnamed, given a threatening name (Lucifer/Lucifero), or a more neutral name (Arnold).

Then they were asked how much of a risk they though that the event would pose and the actions they would anticipate taking. English participants were also asked about their thoughts on storm-naming practices in the UK and whether they felt that this should be extended to heatwaves.

We found that naming a heatwave had no effect on the intention of people to take protective measures against it in either country. In Italy, there was no difference between how people perceived the unnamed heatwave and Lucifero, but Arnold was judged to be slightly less concerning and severe.

This suggests that, while naming a heatwave does not increase concern, departing from Italy’s established convention of using threatening names does reduce it slightly.

Our participants in England rated Lucifer as more severe and concerning than an unnamed heatwave, though not by much. When asked about their thoughts on naming weather events more broadly, English participants tended to agree that naming storms made people more likely to engage with weather warnings, but only a minority were in favour of naming heatwaves. Overall we found that, while some people were generally supportive of naming weather events, others worried it could sensationalise them.

It probably won’t help much

We did not find enough evidence to support naming heatwaves in the UK.

Despite a large sample, we found only a very small effect on perceived risk and did not detect any greater intention to take safety precautions for a named heatwave. We also found that responses differed between England and Italy.

Heatwaves can cross national borders. The fact that there are national differences in how people respond to naming them could lead to unintended differences in how people interpret the risk in different places.

And unlike storms, which usually take place over a single day with a clearer start and end, heatwaves can last from days to weeks – it’s not always clear whether a prolonged hot spell is one heatwave or a series of them, which could lead to confusion if named.

Heatwaves are an opportunity to discuss the risks posed by climate change. But naming heatwaves risks coming across as sensationalist to some members of the public. This might have the opposite effect, and make people less likely to heed safety messaging about severe heat.

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.

Andrea Taylor receives funding from The Lloyds Register Foundation, UKRI and Horizon Europe.

– ref. Should the UK name heatwaves like storms? It won’t make people take them more seriously – https://theconversation.com/should-the-uk-name-heatwaves-like-storms-it-wont-make-people-take-them-more-seriously-260635