Category: MIL-OSI

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Ireland, Senior Lecturer in Energy Geoscience, Newcastle University

“We are going to get all our oil and gas out of the North Sea”, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch said recently. Her promise to “maximise extraction” sets up a clash between political ambitions, economic reality and geological limits.

Reform UK has also said drilling for more oil and gas in the North Sea would be a “day one” priority. But even if the Conservatives or Reform were to be elected and lifted the current moratorium on new exploration licenses, there might not be the promised prizes of oil and gas under the seabed – or enough appetite from investors – to deliver on that promise.

BP, in those days British Petroleum, first extracted gas from under the North Sea in 1967. It marked the start of what was to become, for decades, one of the most valuable sectors of the UK economy, with more than 400 separate oil and gas fields developed to date.

But production peaked in 1999 and the North Sea now produces less than half as much as in its heyday.

It is now a “mature” basin: most of the biggest and easiest-to-develop fields have already been discovered and depleted. What remains are smaller, sometimes more remote, and often more technically challenging or expensive resources and reserves.

This is typical of ageing oil and gas provinces, where production declines even as operating costs rise. New projects must compete with oil and gas extracted from other parts of the world where it is easier and cheaper and more appealing to investors.

Finding oil and gas

Historically, only one in eight exploration wells in the North Sea led to a field producing oil and gas. That ratio has improved: between 2008 and 2017, a bit more than one in four wells led to a commercial success.

But far fewer wells are being drilled today. Even with the advances in technology, such as improved geophysical imaging which allows us to better define opportunities ahead of drilling, the big discoveries were probably made decades ago.

UK exploration wells vs offshore fields by year:

The UK government’s North Sea Transition Authority estimates there could still be around 3.5 billion barrels of oil equivalent in more than 400 undeveloped prospects. But most of these potential fields are small, isolated or technically complex. Developing them will require high oil and gas prices, fiscal stability, and a lot of investor confidence.

Politics vs geology

Even if a future government relaxes exploration licensing rules, geology will remain the bigger constraint. The North Sea is simply not as cheap as it was, and global fossil fuel giants have many other options. It is currently far cheaper to produce oil and gas in other regions, the Middle East or North Africa for example. Projects in these countries are all competing for the same capital.

Volatility in the energy sector will continue to make investors cautious. The 2015 oil price crash cut activity in the UK sector to its lowest level in decades, and it has never fully recovered. As fossil fuels are sold on the global market, political volatility, international and national, can lead to rapid shifts in investor confidence.

In the UK the introduction of a windfall tax in 2023 and changing requirements for environmental impact assessments are all making decision making on long-term projects riskier. And while the UK still needs considerable volumes of gas in future (and more modest amounts of oil) both are declining as our energy system evolves and renewable energy expand.

The UK’s mix of economic uncertainty, mature geology and smaller discoveries will make it harder to attract major international energy firms.

The future of the North Sea

That doesn’t mean the North Sea has finished as a source of oil and gas. For instance, undeveloped discoveries – where oil or gas has been confirmed but not yet produced – represent a lower-risk opportunity. But returns may be modest as many are relatively small and isolated from existing infrastructure.

New exploration licenses, if issued, might extend production modestly, but they are unlikely to deliver another game-changing discovery.

Some analysts argue that future licensing should be highly strategic, limited to projects with clear economic importance or climate compatibility. That approach could reduce reliance on imported gas, which tends to be more carbon-intensive than gas produced domestically. This would certainly make more sense than restarting fracking. But it would still not recreate the industry’s heyday.

Easy oil is over

The North Sea will still produce oil and gas for years to come, but its role will shrink. Even with friendlier policies, the era of big discoveries and rapid growth isn’t coming back.

Maximising extraction may sound appealing to politicians, but geology, economics and climate commitments all point to the North Sea’s best oil and gas days being behind it. The real challenge now is managing the investment during decline while investing in the cleaner solutions that will replace it.

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.

Mark Ireland has previously received funding from companies with fossil fuel interests.

– ref. Plans to ‘maximise extraction’ of North Sea oil and gas would soon run into geological limits – https://theconversation.com/plans-to-maximise-extraction-of-north-sea-oil-and-gas-would-soon-run-into-geological-limits-264614

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

Why do health stories about food and cancer grab so much attention? Because they offer an enticing promise: that a single item on your plate, or even a sudden change in what you crave, might hold the key to spotting disease early.

It’s a compelling idea, but in reality the science of appetite, taste, and cancer is far messier than the headlines suggest.

This eye-catching idea oversimplifies reality. While cancer can change appetite and taste, there’s no solid evidence that a sudden craving, such as an abrupt fixation on sweets, serves as a dependable early warning signal for undiagnosed cancer.

This is a classic case where interesting clinical anecdotes and stories have been stretched into a sweeping rule that doesn’t work as a screening tool.

The grain of truth behind these headlines comes from clinical observations. Some cancer patients do report altered taste and appetite. In older case studies, patients described dramatic changes – tea suddenly tasting awful, or favourite foods becoming repulsive – sometimes before diagnosis, sometimes after treatment began.

These accounts seem compelling, but they were never designed to prove that a particular craving reliably predicts cancer. They show that cancer can affect how we taste and eat, not that a single symptom can replace proper diagnosis.

Modern research paints a more complex picture. Studies examining “altered food behaviour” around cancer cover a wide range of changes: cravings, aversions, emotional eating and treatment-related appetite shifts.

These studies look at different cancers, stages, and time points – before, during and after treatment. The overall message is that eating behaviour can change in the context of cancer, influenced by biology (inflammation and metabolism), physiology (changes to taste and smell) and psychology (stress and mood).

Read more:
Why a daily glass of milk really could reduce bowel cancer risk – an oncologist explains

What we don’t see is a specific craving pattern that reliably warns of cancer in healthy people. Appetite changes can be part of the cancer story, but they’re not a diagnostic shortcut.

It’s worth bearing in mind how common appetite changes are in everyday life. Many ordinary factors affect what tastes good and what the body wants, including medications, pregnancy, stress, quitting smoking and anaemia.

A sudden enthusiasm for a particular food might be interesting, but it rarely points to a single cause. That’s why doctors look for clusters of symptoms and lasting patterns rather than drawing conclusions from one change.

Chewing ice

There is one area where cravings connect meaningfully to health: ice chewing. Constantly chewing ice (called pagophagia) can signal iron deficiency, which has treatable causes that should be found and addressed. This is completely different from claims that tumours program sugar cravings.

Ice chewing represents a well-established link between unusual eating behaviour and a specific, testable condition. Iron deficiency itself is both common and often missed.

Iron is essential for making haemoglobin, which carries oxygen in red blood cells, and plays broader roles in energy and immune function. When levels drop, symptoms are often vague: persistent fatigue despite adequate sleep, exercise intolerance, shortness of breath and headaches, to name a few.

These overlap with many other conditions, which is why testing matters rather than guessing. Iron comes from red meat, poultry, seafood, beans, lentils, leafy greens, and fortified cereals and breads. However, a “good” diet doesn’t always guarantee adequate iron if losses are high, needs are elevated, or absorption is poor – another reason to confirm and treat the problem with proper testing.

No magic clues

Returning to the headlines, it’s easy to see why supposed tell-tale cravings capture attention. They promise a simple signal in a confusing health landscape. But medicine rarely offers magic clues.

The sensible approach is twofold. First, treat new, persistent, and unexplained changes in taste or appetite as worth noting – not panicking about. Consider the full picture: other symptoms, recent illnesses, medications, stress and overall health. If behaviour like ice chewing appears or fatigue becomes stubborn, checking for iron deficiency makes sense.

Second, for cancer risk concerns, rely on established warning signs and screening tests. Unexplained weight loss, unusual bleeding, changes in bowel habits, swallowing difficulties, new or changing lumps and age-appropriate screening catch far more cancers than chasing a single craving ever will.

Read more:
King Charles is changing his diet to keep his cancer at bay – here’s what the evidence says

The craving narrative carries another danger: it can fuel harmful behaviour, like trying to “starve” a tumour by cutting out major nutrients.

Severe restriction can cause dangerous weight loss, malnutrition and, worse, treatment tolerance, undermining recovery rather than helping. Tumours don’t outsmart sensible nutrition. What helps most is maintaining strength with a balanced diet, staying active when possible, following evidence-based screening and treatment, and using targeted tests – like iron studies – when symptoms suggest they might be helpful.

Appetite and taste are sensitive measures of health and their changes deserve attention. They’re part of the medical conversation, not a crystal ball.

If something feels wrong and stays wrong – whether that’s a new aversion to familiar foods, an odd fixation that won’t go away, or constant ice chewing – the next step isn’t to search Google for hidden meanings. Instead, talk with a doctor.

Simple tests can quickly rule out common problems, and if something more serious is happening, acting on established warning signs and screening guidelines offers the best chance of catching it early.

Justin Stebbing 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. Can certain food cravings predict a cancer diagnosis, up to three months before other symptoms appear? – https://theconversation.com/can-certain-food-cravings-predict-a-cancer-diagnosis-up-to-three-months-before-other-symptoms-appear-264378

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Hiroki Shin, Associate Professor of History, University of Birmingham

The confusion and commotion over cryptocurrency often reminds me of the 19th-century German drama Faust. In Goethe’s masterpiece, the devil Mephistopheles offers an emperor the tantalising vision of limitless wealth through the printing of paper money.

The emperor grasps the idea (unheard of at the time the play is set), and the magical wealth which paper creates brings brief prosperity to his troubled dominion.

But what appeared to be an inexhaustible source of value soon proves illusory. A combination of misunderstanding and hype leads to economic and moral corruption, and the empire descends into chaos.

It is a tale which could well have parallels for digital currencies now. People use them despite not fully understanding how they work, sometimes to their financial loss.

And history shows us that we should be wary of the idea that currency systems always change for the better, following some sort of natural evolutionary path. In fact, new currency systems don’t always succeed, and even when they do, monetary regime change can be a long and arduous process.

Coins and tokens were used more than 2,000 years ago, and continued through to the 19th century before paper finally dominated. Rather than a clean, irreversible shift from coins to notes, nations often alternated between the two systems.

There were failed experiments with paper money in 14th-century China, 17th-century Sweden and 18th-century France, to mention just a few.

Research on these problematic attempts suggests that social division also makes new currency shifts especially vulnerable.

During the American war of independence for example, a currency (the “continental dollar”) was briefly introduced in 1775. It was later abandoned due to mismanagement and misunderstanding, but had also served to sharpen political tensions between the patriots who supported it, and the loyalists to Britain, who detested it.

Similarly, in the 1750s and 1760s, the Swedish government issued non-redeemable paper money to pay its war debts. The consequent extreme inflation coincided with intense social division and led to a period of political chaos.

In 1789, at the start of the French Revolution, a paper form of government bond was issued, which rapidly lost its value. Seven years later, the “assignat” had become virtually worthless.

Britain fared slightly better, as I explore in my book The Age of Paper. Its departure from the metal standard in 1797, amid the financial pressures of the Anglo–French war, did not produce a collapse of the nation’s paper currency.

But the paper-based regime came to a halt in 1819, a year of bitter class conflicts, which culminated in the Peterloo massacre, where at least 18 people were killed and hundreds wounded by the cavalry at a peaceful rally for democratic reform. The public had come to detest Bank of England notes, which became a symbol of economic depression and political oppression.

Britain then followed the pattern of other nations, reverting to a traditional monetary system that rested on the solid value of precious metals.

These cases of failed paper currencies – and there are many more – show that the general acceptance of currency ultimately requires shared values and social solidarity. Paper currency works when people trust it, knowing that it has been valued and accepted by others in the past, and will be valued and accepted in the future.

It would otherwise be unlikely for a piece of paper to become a reliable means of payment and value. Once such shared values are lost, there is usually a downward cycle of currency depreciation.

Cryptic currency

In the 21st-century, cryptocurrencies challenge the conventional idea of money as something of value – or at least linked to something of value, like gold. And as something that is issued and managed by a trusted central authority.

For cryptocurrencies exist only in the realm of blockchain technology. Their value is created and maintained not by central banks, but by complex computer algorithms.

To many, all of these abstract computational processes make cryptocurrencies as mysterious as Mephistopheles’ dark magic in Faust.

Even so, with Donald Trump’s strong support, cryptocurrencies are enjoying a surge in popularity. This trend will undoubtedly be reinforced by further deregulation which means requirements for transparency will be relaxed, and safeguards for consumer protection weakened.

The rise in popularity has coincided with the US government’s apparent preference for weakening the dollar in the international currency markets as a way of boosting US exports by pushing down the prices of US goods abroad.

These events may lead to a profound transformation in the monetary system on a global scale. As the US dollar loses value and crypto regulations are relaxed, countries and investors around the world may be enticed to diversify their assets and increase their holdings of cryptocurrency.

But the combination of social division and rapid expansion may not be a positive sign for the future of cryptocurrency. Far from establishing it as a dominant medium of exchange in a new decentralised regime, history suggests that its rapid growth in a fractured society might instead accelerate its self-destruction.

Hiroki Shin 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. History is full of failed attempts to establish new currencies. So what makes crypto different? – https://theconversation.com/history-is-full-of-failed-attempts-to-establish-new-currencies-so-what-makes-crypto-different-258867

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Naomi Joseph, Arts + Culture Editor, The Conversation

Gritty social realism is never an easy watch. It depicts characters, often working class, struggling to find their bearings in a society that is hostile to their very existence. They tend to expose hard truths about the world we live in and often how we are complicit in upholding harsh systems that continuously fail people.

In Britain, this genre is championed by the likes of Ken Loach and Mike Leigh. In the Francophone world, it is dominated by Luc and Jean-Pierre Dardenne and now Jasmin Gordon.

The Courageous is Gordon’s debut film as a director. It follows the complicated and messy character of Jule, a single mother of three who has made many mistakes (one of which has left her with a jaunty ankle bracelet) and just can’t make things work.

As our reviewer Alison Smith, an expert in European cinema, writes: “Jule is fundamentally at odds with the ordered society of rural Switzerland, and in consequence her life is a constant struggle.” But, she doesn’t want anyone, especially her kids, to know how bad things are.

This is a morally murky film, Jule’s attempts to keep up appearances drives her to behave in ways which further marginalises her. However, it is clear that the system, and those who exist comfortably within it, don’t want to help in any way pushing her to more desperate acts and into deeper isolation. As Smith found, it is a incredibly powerful film but, like many other social realist works, there are few uplifting moments.

The Courageous is in select cinemas now

Warring couples and kings

If you are looking for something a bit more silly and lighthearted, then we recommend you go and see The Roses instead. A remake of the 1989 film The War of The Roses, this reboot stars the endlessly charming Olivia Coleman and Benedict Cumberbatch as the Roses who turn from lovers to fighters when one’s career takes off as the other’s tanks.

We sent Veronica Lamarche, an expert in relationships and psychology, to see the movie and she was struck by how people were affected by the dynamic between the couple. One woman, she notes, left the screening in tears having seen a reflection of her relationship in the film.

In her piece, she highlights how the film was a good reflection of how couples need to learn how to talk to each other and maybe even argue. In it, she outlines the psychology and offers advice on how to handle bumps before things get so bad you’re throwing knives at each other.

The Roses is in cinemas now

Someone who was good at winning battles and also negotiating was King Æthelstan whose skills in these fields led to the unification of several regions, which would become the kingdom England. The First King of England: Æthelstan and the Birth of a Kingdom by David Woodman addresses both themes of English unification and viking politics.

There is family drama, legal intrigue and exploration of how historical narratives are formed in this book. Clare Downham, an expert in the period, found it a welcome addition to the history on England’s first king, which shies away from simplistic views of this complicated and, at times, unlikable monarch.

Battling Normans and playwrights

It is often incorrectly asserted that the formation of England purely came as a result of the battle of Brunanburh (937). However, much paperwork and negotiation was also involved. A much more important battle to the history of England was the battle of Hastings in 1066.

A new BBC drama King and Conqueror depicts the events leading up to the battle and the Norman conquest. It stars James Norton as the Anglo-Saxon king, Harold II and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau as the Norman duke, William II (who would go on to be known as William the Conqueror).

We know what happened at that battle thanks two main sources: the Bayeux Tapestry and the chronicler William of Poitiers. We asked art historian and expert in the tapestry Millie Horton-Insch what she thought of the series and she said that she was pleased to see “the narrative devices that are most effective in this new drama are those also included in tapestry”.

King and Conqueror is on BBC iPlayer now

A new play at London’s Wyndham’s theatre, Born With Teeth, imagines the process of Shakespeare (Edward Bluemel) and his contemporary Christopher “Kit” Marlowe (Ncuti Gatwa) writing Henry VI Parts 1, 2 and 3 together. These plays have historically been attributed to the bard alone – but some have argued since at least the 18th century that Marlowe contributed to these works. Recent linguistic analysis of the plays does seem to back up this hypothesis.

The play presents three imagined secret meetings in the back room of a pub where the pair butt heads as they are forced to write together. Will Shüler, an expert in theatre, found it be a funny and imaginative play about theatre itself and the creative process, particularly under the religious constraints of the Elizabethan age.

Born with Teeth is on at Wyndham’s Theatre until November 1 2025

– ref. Stories of people at war – what to watch, read and see this week – https://theconversation.com/stories-of-people-at-war-what-to-watch-read-and-see-this-week-264636

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Adriana Marin, Lecturer in International Relations, Coventry University

The US president, Donald Trump, has signalled a new approach to tackling the “narco-terrorists” in Latin America, and particularly Venezuela, making it clear he is willing to use military force against them. A report in the New York Times that Trump had issued a “secret directive” to the Pentagon to employ force against certain drug cartels appeared to be borne out by a US strike, on September 2, on a Venezuelan speed boat in the southern Caribbean that killed 11 people.

The president said the strike was against members of Tren de Aragua (TdA), a Venezuelan gang he has branded “narco-terrorists”.

The situation escalated when two Venezuelan fighter jets flew over US Navy ships in the Caribbean Sea two days later in a move that the Pentagon condemned as “highly provocative”.

The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has warned that operations against drug cartels “will happen again”. He added that previous US drug policies had not worked and “what will stop them is when you blow them up”.

Trump released a grainy video on social media of a speeding boat after the September 2 incident. US officials said the boat was carrying drugs, but attempts at verification were inconclusive. A Venezuelan government official had questioned whether the video depicted what Washington claimed.

The operation raises legal questions over proportionality and use of force. If this was an intentional strike against a non-state armed group, it signals a significant shift in US policy. The deployment of counterterrorism methods – once directed at al-Qaida or the Islamic State – against a Latin American criminal cartel represents a dramatic escalation with serious implications.

This also fits within a wider Trump initiative to take on drugs cartels including issuing a US$50 million (£37 million) reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro, who the Trump administration links with drug smuggling. In early 2025, the US designated the TdA as a foreign terrorist organisation (FTO), along with several other Latin American cartels.

The decision was unusual. FTO status has historically been applied to ideologically driven groups, not profit-orientated criminal organisations. Yet the designation unlocked the ability of the US to use counterterrorism measures and a political commentary that frames gangs as wartime adversaries rather than criminals.

The US has not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea , which governs maritime enforcement, but it generally treats many of its provisions as international law. Domestically, only Congress can declare war under the constitution, while the president acts as commander-in-chief. Previous administrations have relied on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force as the legal basis for counterterrorism operations abroad, but this has never been applied to drug cartels. This creates a grey zone: Washington claims authority to act, but both the international and domestic legal foundations remain contested.

Read more:
Guyana’s president wins another term in election watched keenly by Venezuela and US

Expanding the fight

FTO designation expands what can be done under domestic law. However, it does not create a right to kill
suspects in international waters. Such a shift is important, as it changes what would usually fall within the remit of policing, reframing it as armed conflict. This militarisation introduces the apparatus of warfare: missiles, warships, and rules of engagement that lower thresholds for the use of lethal force.

By conflating organised crime with terrorism, responses risk becoming militarised in ways that lack accountability. A warning from the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth that “it won’t stop with just this strike” is another suggestion that this is a campaign rather than a one-off action. Militarised counter-narcotics operations are not new, but framing them through the lens of counter-terrorism is, and suggests a wider use of military force.

Proponents of a hardline approach contend that cartels such as TdA resemble insurgent organisations. Working across borders, they adapt quickly and use violence, they diversify into trafficking, extortion and protection rackets, while exploiting migration flows and infiltrating law enforcement.

From this perspective, conventional criminal justice tools are ineffective. Extraditions are often delayed and prosecutions unreliable because cartels frequently operate across borders, benefit from corrupt protection networks and are difficult to apprehend.

Yet conflating organised crime with terrorism carries serious risks. Unlike al-Qaida or the Islamic State, TdA seeks profit and control, not radical political change. Labelling it a terrorist organisation risks blurring legal boundaries. The designation of an act as terrorism often shift rules of engagement from due process to battlefield logic, lowering the threshold for lethal force.

The legal basis is also tenuous. FTO status broadens domestic authorities but does not itself provide a licence to use force under international law. Any claim of self-defence would require also imminent danger, this has not been shown.

Risks in the region

This strike delivers Maduro a propaganda gift. For years, Venezuela has portrayed US pressure as imperial aggression designed to undermine its sovereignty. The destruction of a Venezuelan vessel by a US missile, even in international waters, appears to validate that claim. It is likely to give Maduro an opportunity to rally domestic supporters, consolidate control over security institutions and court sympathetic foreign allies who share his anti-US position.

Neighbouring governments face a dilemma. Many are weary of cartel violence, human trafficking, and the effects of criminal infiltration. Some may even welcome Washington’s tougher approach. Yet few leaders wish to legitimise unilateral US military action. Even if there is some support for tougher action against cartels, regional political leaders are likely to divide over whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks of being drawn into conflicts they did not sanction.

Finally, there is a deterrence paradox. High-profile strikes may remove leaders, but they rarely dismantle networks. Instead, groups splinter, adapt and sometimes embed further into civilian life. The “balloon effect” – squeezing crime in one place only to displace it elsewhere – remains a constant. In short, military action does not usually eliminate criminal economies, it often changes or moves them. Militarisation risks fuelling escalation.

The US strike against the TdA blurs the line between law enforcement and war. It sets a precedent where states can justify cross-border assassinations under the guise of “counter-terrorism” against criminal suspects. The question is not whether TdA is violent – it is. The real issue is whether labelling it as “terrorism” legitimises a military approach that could be counterproductive, unlawful and dangerous. Washington’s new “narco-terrorism” doctrine risks fuelling the very instability it claims to fight.

Adriana Marin 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. Why the US new military operation against Latin American drug cartels stokes regional tensions – https://theconversation.com/why-the-us-new-military-operation-against-latin-american-drug-cartels-stokes-regional-tensions-264645

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Heba Ghazal, Senior Lecturer, Pharmacy, Kingston University

A dangerous new drug adulterant is spreading through America’s illicit opioid supply, and it’s making overdoses significantly harder to reverse. Medetomidine, a veterinary sedative normally used to sedate pets, is increasingly being mixed with heroin and fentanyl, creating a cocktail that experts warn could be far deadlier than previous street drug combinations.

Known as “flysky” on the streets, this animal tranquilliser has already been linked to at least two overdose deaths in Pennsylvania and represents a troubling evolution in the continuing opioid crisis. Unlike traditional opioid overdoses, those involving medetomidine can’t be effectively treated with naloxone, the medication paramedics use to reverse overdoses.

The emergence of medetomidine mirrors the earlier spread of xylazine, another veterinary sedative that earned the nickname “zombie drug” for its ability to cause severe, treatment-resistant skin wounds. The earliest confirmed detection of medetomidine as a street drug adulterant occurred in Maryland, where it was found in a synthetic opioid mixture probably containing fentanyl.

From there, the drug spread rapidly. Traces appeared across multiple US states and into Canada, and by early 2024, medetomidine was linked to overdose clusters in Philadelphia and other locations, following the same geographical pattern that xylazine had taken years earlier.

What makes medetomidine particularly concerning is its extraordinary potency. Medetomidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist – a type of drug that affects the nervous system. While approved only for veterinary use in the UK to sedate animals and provide pain relief for pets, experts estimate it may be 200 to 300 times more potent than xylazine when used as a drug adulterant.

This extreme potency means that even tiny amounts can have devastating effects. Users experiencing medetomidine-laced drug overdoses typically display extreme drowsiness, muscle twitching, dangerously low heart rate and blood pressure, and laboured breathing.

Chicago cases from 2024 revealed additional concerning symptoms: extremely high blood pressure, severe confusion and critically low blood oxygen levels – often dropping below 90%, a threshold that can cause organ damage.

Perhaps most alarming is medetomidine’s resistance to naloxone, the opioid overdose-reversal drug that has saved countless lives. While naloxone can counteract heroin and fentanyl by blocking opioid receptors in the brain, medetomidine affects the body through entirely different pathways. This means there is no approved antidote for medetomidine poisoning, leaving healthcare professionals with limited options when treating overdoses involving this adulterant.

The withdrawal process is equally tricky. Philadelphia health officials report that people withdrawing from medetomidine-laced drugs experience dangerous spikes in blood pressure and heart rate – symptoms severe enough to trigger a heart attack in some cases. Users also endure uncontrollable nausea and vomiting, intense anxiety, restlessness and violent shaking.

Understanding why dealers add these veterinary drugs to street opioids requires examining the economics of the illicit drug trade. According to a 2022 DEA report, a kilogram of xylazine powder can be bought from Chinese suppliers for as little as U$6.00 (£4.44). This rock-bottom pricing allows drug traffickers to increase their profit margins significantly while making weak or diluted opioid batches feel more potent to users.

These sedatives also serve as effective cutting agents (substances used to add bulk and weight to drugs without requiring expensive active ingredients). For dealers, it’s a win-win. They can stretch their supply while creating a product that feels stronger and lasts longer than pure opioids alone.

Managing new drug adulterants like medetomidine presents unique difficulties for both medical professionals and law enforcement. The drugs make intoxication and withdrawal symptoms more severe and complicated, while also making it harder to identify which specific substance is causing particular symptoms in a patient.

Medetomidine compounds these problems because it’s rapidly metabolised by the body, making it difficult to track the timing and duration of its effects. Additionally, these veterinary sedatives are not included in routine drug screenings or toxicology tests, meaning their presence often goes undetected by medical professionals and law enforcement, despite their potentially lethal effects.

UK response

While no cases of acute medetomidine toxicity have been published in the UK, the country has already experienced problems with xylazine, a similar veterinary sedative.

British health authorities have detected xylazine in 35 cases through toxicology tests and drug seizures. Of 16 people found to have xylazine in their systems, 11 cases proved fatal – deaths that occurred primarily during May 2022 and August 2023.

In response to the growing threat, the government has taken decisive action. Over 20 dangerous substances have been banned as part of efforts to combat synthetic drugs and improve public safety.

Xylazine is now controlled as a class C substance, carrying penalties of up to two years in prison for possession and up to 14 years for production and supply.

The government is also working to better equip police, healthcare workers and Border Force agents to tackle this evolving threat through improved training and detection capabilities.

The case of medetomidine highlights a disturbing reality about modern drug policy: the illicit drug supply continues to change in unpredictable and dangerous ways. Neither medetomidine nor xylazine was developed for human consumption, and there are no human studies examining their drug interactions, lethal doses or safe reversal protocols.

As these veterinary sedatives become more common in street drugs, the challenge for healthcare professionals continues to grow. Traditional overdose response protocols, built around reversing opioid effects with naloxone, become inadequate when faced with multi-drug combinations that affect the body through completely different mechanisms.

Read more:
‘There has never been a more dangerous time to take drugs’: the rising global threat of nitazenes and synthetic opioids

For users, families and communities already devastated by the opioid crisis, the emergence of medetomidine represents yet another layer of risk in an already dangerous landscape.

As the drug supply becomes increasingly unpredictable, the need for comprehensive approaches to drug policy – encompassing everything from harm reduction to treatment access to law enforcement – becomes ever more urgent.

Heba Ghazal 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. An animal sedative keeps turning up in opioid deaths – what you need to know about medetomidine – https://theconversation.com/an-animal-sedative-keeps-turning-up-in-opioid-deaths-what-you-need-to-know-about-medetomidine-264080

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Audrey O’Grady, Associate Professor in Biology, University of Limerick

Imagine a mum who can have children from two different species. Family gatherings would be interesting, to say the least. In the insect world, this is no joke. A new study published in Nature shows that queens of the Iberian harvester ant (Messor ibericus) routinely lay eggs of not just to their own kind, but also of males of another species, Messor structor.

The researchers even coined a word for it, xenoparity, meaning “foreign birth”. It pushes the boundaries of what we mean by “species”. And this is the first known case in the animal kingdom of this happening as part of an animal’s life cycle.

The most typical reproduction strategy in the natural world involves a mother and father of the same species who breed and produce sons and daughters, also of the same species.

However, there are exceptions to the rule. Social insects, ants in particular, are known to violate it. A 1999 study found that 17 out of 164 central Europe ant species are known to create hybrid offspring.

Typically, in ant colonies, fertilised eggs develop into workers and queens and unfertilised eggs develop into males. All the ants that we usually see foraging are females who cannot reproduce (workers), but do all the other work. Ants that breed, female queens and males, normally have wings and can be seen during mating flights. Afterwards, males often die while the females found new colonies.

However, in some ant species, unfertilised eggs develop into female clones of the mother. This process is called parthenogenesis.

Generally, ant colonies which include different ant species may contain either one or several queens that can mate with either single or multiple males. Some ant species produce only wingless males that mate inside the nest and never participate in nuptial flights.

In 2002 an even more interesting reproduction strategy was found in two seed harvester ant species, common in southwestern US, whose queens lost their ability to produce female workers of their own kind. They need to mate with a male from a different species to lay eggs that develop into hybrid species female workers. This cross-species mating is essential for the survival of both species.

The new discovery

The article provides startling insights into ant reproduction. Workers (females) in these colonies are hybrids. Like the seed harvester ants, the Iberian harvester queens can’t make workers on their own. They need sperm from M. structor, and the daughters are half M. ibericus, half M. structor. This is similar to social hybridogenesis documented in other harvester ants, where only cross-species daughters become workers.

But the fascinating part is that Iberian harvester queens produce ordinary M. ibericus sons as well as M. structor sons. These males aren’t hybrids. They’re clones, carrying only their father’s DNA. Iberian harvester queens act almost like a rental womb. This resembles male-only cloning known from some clams and a stick insects.

The researchers sequenced the DNA of hundreds of Iberian harvester ants and repeatedly found this same pattern.

M. ibericus and M. structor split from a common ancestor millions of years ago. They look and behave differently in the wild, with M.ibericus having smaller queens. Yet one is now literally producing the other. Multiple colonies of M.ibericus live together in habitats ranging from pastures to suburban areas. But M.structor ants are a mountain species and their colonies live separately. The two ant species can live close together in overlapping habitats in lanes and fields near mountains.

The cloned M. structor sons raised inside M. ibericus colonies don’t just differ genetically, they even look odd. Compared with their wild cousins, they appear almost hairless.

The most probable explanation of how this reproduction strategy evolved is a phenomenon called sperm parasitism. This is when females of one species use sperm of the males of another species to stimulate asexual reproduction or even partially incorporate the male’s genome into their offspring.

Over time, they cut out the middleman (adult M.structor males) and started making their own supply of cloned M. structor males. Instead, they mate with these clones that hatch in the colony nest.

It shows that evolution can re-engineer reproduction in radical ways. People sometimes like to think nature follows straight paths. Parents make their own species. Colonies stick to one lineage.

But evolution doesn’t care about our rules. So the next time you see ants marching across a path, remember, somewhere in southern Europe, there’s a queen casually running a two-species household. And you thought your family tree was complicated.

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. One queen ant, two species: the discovery that reshapes what ‘family’ means in nature – https://theconversation.com/one-queen-ant-two-species-the-discovery-that-reshapes-what-family-means-in-nature-264384

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Caygill, Senior Lecturer in Politics, Nottingham Trent University

Angela Rayner has resigned as the UK’s deputy prime minister after a report found she had breached the ministerial code by not paying enough stamp duty on her second home.

In her resignation letter she said she deeply regretted what she maintained was an error, and the report from the prime minister’s ethics adviser said she had “acted with integrity” despite the breach. However, it was still enough to force Rayner, who was also housing secretary, to step down, prompting a cabinet reshuffle.

We asked Thomas Caygill, senior lecturer in politics at Nottingham Trent University, to explain what was likely to happen next and what the affair could mean for the government.

Why did Angela Rayner have to resign?

At the 2024 general election, Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised the British public that any government he led would work to clean up politics after years of Tory sleaze. When in opposition, both he and Rayner took a very firm line in response to scandals among Conservative ministers, including Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak.

So the Labour pair have, in a way, made a rod for their own backs. Rayner had no choice but to resign after the findings of the report prepared by the prime minister’s independent ethics adviser (Sir Laurie Magnus) concluded that she did not meet the “highest possible standards of proper conduct”. If you set high ethical standards, you have to meet them without exception.

What happens now?

Rayner’s resignation leaves a gap around the cabinet table. She served as both secretary of state for housing, communities and local government and deputy prime minister. The first post will need filling and has triggered a wider cabinet reshuffle.

Starmer does not necessarily need to appoint a new deputy prime minister as the role is technically a mere honorific, given to a member of the cabinet to signify seniority. The office was vacant between 2015 and 2021, for instance. However, Starmer may feel the need to shore up his position after recent rebellions amongst his own MPs.

Rayner has also resigned as deputy leader of the Labour party, a position she was directly elected to by party members and which is unconnected with the position of deputy prime minister. She did not have to resign this post as a result of the Magnus report – since it related to her conduct in ministerial office – but she presumably did so to avoid being a further distraction for the government and party.

The cabinet does have the power to appoint a temporary deputy leader or leave the position vacant until the party conference (starting on the September 28). There are some rumours that justice secretary Shabana Mahmood could be appointed as temporary deputy leader.

However there will need to be a new election with a timeline set by Labour’s National Executive Committee. There is no set time so it could be over in weeks or it could take months. It is unlikely that the NEC will meet before early next week to make that decision.

We can expect Labour’s conference (September 28 to October 1) to become a showcase of potential candidates for deputy leader. Nominees must be a Labour MP.

They will also need the support of 20% of Labour MPs and either 5% of local Labour parties (CLPs) or at least three affiliates (at least two trade unions) amounting to 5% of affiliated supporters. There will then be a vote of all party members and affiliated supporters.

Who might replace Rayner in either role?

We can probably expect the winner of the deputy party leader contest to be a big challenger to Starmer’s authority – most likely from the left of the party. Names currently being touted are Emily Thornberry (current chair of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee) and Rosena Allin-Khan. Both MPs served as shadow ministers while Labour were in opposition but were not invited to join the government last July after Labour’s election victory.

A challenger to Starmer is most likely given the mood of the parliamentary and wider party following poor poll ratings and recent rebellions over welfare reform. Anneliese Dodds is another potential contender. She resigned from government last year over cuts to international development.

Why is this situation so damaging for Keir Starmer?

Starmer is now in a more perilous position without Rayner. She was popular with the left of the party and seen as a key bridge between him and the wider party. Monday saw the launch of the phase two of Starmer’s government which has now been overshadowed by Rayner’s tax affairs and subsequent resignation.

Rayner was a rival to Starmer and no longer having her in government bound by collective ministerial responsibility will mean she is able to criticise the government and Starmer more vocally. She has also been key to the development and introduction of the employment rights bill, although this is now in its final stages and expected to become law in the coming months. It is undoubtedly one of her achievements in office.

She is also a northern working-class woman and her departure is symbolic in this regard, especially as Lucy Powell has also now left government as part of the wider reshuffle.

The only upside for Starmer is that he can now reshuffle his cabinet to cement phase two of his government. However, reshuffling as a result of a scandal could project government instability – something Labour promised to stop ahead of the 2024 general election. Reshuffles can be a chance to turn a moment of weakness into a moment of strength but that will be far harder in this case.

What should we expect for Rayner now?

We can expect Rayner to take a step back for now. However she remains an MP and is a vocal member of the party. In time she will likely become an active backbencher and a potentially vocal critic of the government (now that she is not bound by collective ministerial responsibility).

With just under four years left of Labour’s term, if she avoids being a critic, she could re-enter government in the future. What happens will depend on how she sees her own future.

How damaging is this for Labour?

This is damaging for the party, it has already seen a rapid decline in its poll ratings over the course of the past year. It harms the party’s reputation further, after promising change and promising to bring an end to scandal, they have been tinged by it again.

This plays into Reform UK’s hands who are trying to argue that the two main parties are cut from the same cloth. Nigel Farage will be filled with glee that this has all exploded during the Reform UK conference, where he is seeking to cement himself and his party as the real opposition to Labour.

This of course doesn’t mean Labour will lose the 2029 general election, however it is feeding a narrative that Labour will find hard to break unless it can prove to the British people that it is delivering on its promises. Starmer said on Monday that the government was moving into its delivery phase, and it’s not a moment to soon.

Thomas Caygill is currently in receipt of a British Academy/Leverhulme Small Research Grant for research on post-legislative scrutiny in the Scottish Parliament and has previously received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

– ref. What will Angela Rayner’s resignation mean for Keir Starmer’s government? Expert Q&A – https://theconversation.com/what-will-angela-rayners-resignation-mean-for-keir-starmers-government-expert-qanda-264714