The Conversation – UK – Page 109 – MIL Submissions Engine

November 26, 2025

Tattoos may raise the risk of melanoma skin cancer – new research

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Christel Nielsen, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Lund University

Can tattoos protect your skin from the sun’s harmful rays, or do they make things worse? A new study I conducted with colleagues suggests there may be cause for concern. We found that people with tattoos had a 29% higher risk of developing melanoma, a serious form of skin cancer often linked to ultraviolet (UV) exposure.

However, tattoos did not appear to increase the risk of squamous cell carcinoma, another type of skin cancer related to UV damage. Although both cancers share a common cause, they arise from different cell types and differ in severity, with melanoma being far more dangerous.

Tattoos are a powerful form of self-expression and a cornerstone of modern identity. In Sweden, around one in three adults is tattooed, showing how body art has moved firmly into the mainstream. Yet despite their popularity, scientists still do not know whether tattoos have any impact on health, or how any potential effects might unfold over time.

Epidemiologists are now trying to answer these questions. The work is challenging because people who choose to get tattoos often differ from those who do not in ways that can influence health outcomes.

Another difficulty is that most health records do not note whether someone is tattooed, which means long-term patterns are hard to study. Without this basic information, it becomes difficult to know whether tattoos themselves play a role in health or whether differences are driven by other factors.

Melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma both develop slowly and are relatively uncommon, which makes long-term research challenging. Following large groups of tattooed and non-tattooed people for many years would be expensive and time-consuming. So our team used a different approach. We started with people who had already been diagnosed with cancer and looked backward to see who had tattoos. This type of research, known as a case-control study, is an efficient way to detect potential associations.

Sweden maintains high-quality national registers that record information on health and demographics. From the National Cancer Register, we identified everyone aged 20 to 60 who was diagnosed with melanoma in 2017 or squamous cell carcinoma between 2014 and 2017.

This included 2,880 melanoma cases and 2,821 squamous cell carcinoma cases. For each case, we selected three comparison people of the same age and sex from the Total Population Register, who had not been diagnosed with skin cancer.

We then sent questionnaires to all participants, asking about tattoos, including decorative tattoos, permanent makeup and medical tattoos, as well as their size, location, and age at first tattoo. This allowed us to establish whether someone had been tattooed before or after developing cancer.

A total of 5,695 people took part in the melanoma study (1,598 with melanoma) and 6,151 in the squamous cell carcinoma study (1,600 with that cancer).

People with tattoos were 29% more likely to develop melanoma compared with those without tattoos. The risk increase seemed to be highest in those who had tattoos for more than ten years, although the numbers were smaller in this group, so results should be interpreted cautiously.

For squamous cell carcinoma, tattoos made no difference. The results were consistent across analyses, suggesting no link between tattoos and this type of skin cancer.

We also found no evidence that larger tattoos increased risk. This was unexpected, since larger tattoos contain more ink and therefore more potentially harmful substances.

One possible explanation is that tattoo ink does not remain confined to the skin. The body’s immune system treats it as a foreign substance and transports some ink particles to the lymph nodes. These particles can stay there long-term. While we do not yet know whether this causes harm, it could potentially lead to chronic inflammation, which has been linked to cancer development.

Another explanation may be measurement error: people tend to overestimate tattoo size. Future studies using more precise measures may help clarify this.

Lifestyle and confounding factors

What makes this study unique is the range of lifestyle factors we could consider. We included data on sun exposure (both occupational and recreational), tanning bed use, smoking, education level, marital status and household income. We also factored in skin type, pigmentation, age and sex.

These details matter because they can influence both who gets tattoos and who develops cancer. For instance, people who spend a lot of time in the sun may be more likely to have tattoos and to develop melanoma. Accounting for these differences reduces bias and strengthens confidence in the results.

In research, this issue is known as confounding. If confounding factors are not properly controlled, they can distort findings and lead to misleading conclusions.

Recent US research suggested that large tattoos might even reduce the risk of melanoma, but that study did not control for key factors such as skin type or UV exposure. The results may therefore reflect behaviour rather than biology. For example, people with large tattoos may avoid sunbathing or tanning beds to protect their body art, which would naturally reduce UV damage.

So, do tattoos cause skin cancer? The simple answer is that we do not know yet. Our results suggest a possible link between tattoos and melanoma, but one study is never enough to prove causation.

More research is needed to explore potential biological mechanisms, such as chronic inflammation, and to examine how different types of ink or colours might interact with UV exposure. The composition of tattoo pigments varies widely, and many contain compounds that can break down into harmful by-products when exposed to sunlight or laser removal treatments.

If you have tattoos, there is no need for panic, but awareness matters. Continue to protect your skin from UV radiation just as you would otherwise: use sunscreen, avoid excessive tanning and check your skin regularly for new or changing moles.

Our findings highlight the need for long-term monitoring and better data collection on tattoos in health records. With tattoos now common worldwide, this is an important public health issue. Continued research into the biology of tattoos and their long-term effects will help ensure that people can make informed choices about their bodies, their art and their health.

Christel Nielsen receives funding from The Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development, The Crafoord Foundation, and The Magnus Bergvall Foundation.

– ref. Tattoos may raise the risk of melanoma skin cancer – new research – https://theconversation.com/tattoos-may-raise-the-risk-of-melanoma-skin-cancer-new-research-266809

November 26, 2025

Eight ways to resist spending too much on Black Friday bargains

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Cathrine Jansson-Boyd, Professor of Consumer Psychology, Anglia Ruskin University

But how will she feel about it later? Dean Drobot/Shutterstock

It is that time of the year again – Black Friday is almost upon us. What used to be just an American event has now taken over the calendar in many other countries as one of the key shopping events of the year.

However, market research by investment platform Aegon, conducted on 2024’s Black Friday shoppers, found that almost 60% of participants would spend their money differently, if they could go back in time.

Regret is not unusual when consumers buy on impulse. Afterwards, they may ask themselves whether they should have bought the Sony television rather than the Samsung. There is a lot to be said for trying to engage in careful decision making.

But that’s easier said than done. When we come across products that seem cheap or fairly priced, the same part of our brains that deals with pleasure is activated. Couple this feel good factor with an extra sense of urgency around sales like Black Friday and consumers often feel compelled to buy something. Such urgency may be created by stating that the product is only available at a discounted price for 24 hours or that there are only a limited number of products.

There are things you can do to curb your spending and avoid being tempted by clever marketing techniques, though.

1. Never shop when tired

Fatigue tends to lead to less rational decisions and lowers your self-control. Making decisions requires mental energy and that energy is limited.

When you are tired, your emotions tend to take over and you are more likely to be tempted by huge savings and items that look pretty, even if they are not something that you need.

2. Shop in the morning

This is when you have mental sharpness and therefore will probably make better decisions. Try to avoid making major decisions later in the day, as that’s when your willpower and focus start to dip as decision fatigue kicks in.

Decision fatigue is mental and emotional strain that generally occurs when people have been engaging in too many choices. This happens to most people at some point during the day as we make hundreds of decisions everyday.

3. Don’t rush

Always allow yourself enough time so you can think carefully about what you are buying. Adding just one second to the time you take when considering a purchase could help you make better decisions.

Time allows the brain to collect additional information and filter out aspects that are not relevant. For example, imagining that you are conducting a search for an iron online. As you look at the options there are some flashing banners on the side, preventing you from focusing on what you want.

Such a distraction can divert you away from product attributes that may otherwise influence your choice. Adding a second allows you to refocus and helps you to ignore the flashing banner.

4. Do your homework

Not everything on offer is a good deal. Make sure you know what the items cost previously so that you know how much it is reduced by. The easiest way to find this out is by asking an AI tool to tell you previous prices.

It has been reported that in previous years, as little as 2% of all the Black Friday offers were at their cheapest price compared to six months before and six months after. Knowing what the items cost previously can help your brain put the brakes on and stop yourself from making rash decisions.

Woman standing in street looking at shopfront with black Friday promotion signs in the window. — Take a moment before you commit to a purchase.
JEAN-BAPTISTE PREMAT/Shutterstock

5. Make a list and add a budget

It will reduce the temptation to engage in excessive spending.

6. Try not to purchase things using a card

You are likely to spend more when you use a card or your phone to pay. Instead, when possible, use cash. That way you can see how the money in your wallet is disappearing and you are more likely to stop spending when you are out of cash. Think of how aware you are of your budget during a game of Monopoly when your paper money starts to run low.

7. Don’t touch any products

If you like shopping in-store, you should know that research has shown you are more willing to buy products and pay more for them if you touch them. So, try to keep your hands to yourself.

8. Ask yourself why something is reduced

With time pressure hanging over your head, you may not consider why a product is on sale. Perhaps it is as simple as a newer model having been released recently or possibly because previous purchasers have not viewed them favourably. Just to be on the safe side, check out some reviews for the sales item just to make sure you are getting what you really want.

As long as you are sensible, and taking some precautionary steps, you should find that you will be more satisfied with what you bought.

Cathrine Jansson-Boyd 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. Eight ways to resist spending too much on Black Friday bargains – https://theconversation.com/eight-ways-to-resist-spending-too-much-on-black-friday-bargains-270317

November 26, 2025

What will the budget mean for economic growth? Experts give their view

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow

Since the election last year, the UK government has said economic growth is its top priority, as a way to improve living standards, cut NHS waiting lists and ease pressure on household finances. But with the Office for Budget Responsibility predicting growth this year to be a below-average 1.5%, it seems things haven’t gone entirely to plan.

So would Rachel Reeves’ second budget provide any glimmers of hope? Here’s how our panel of experts reacted.

Tax-raising budget that may encourage growth – but doesn’t guarantee it

Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, University of Glasgow

This is a substantially tax-raising budget, but one that tries to obscure where the burden will fall. Rather than confronting the need to raise the basic rate of income tax, the government has opted for a prolonged freeze in thresholds. This is, in effect, a sizeable stealth tax: as wages rise with inflation, more middle-earners are pulled into higher-rate bands.

However, this approach is still more weighted towards raising revenue from higher earners than a broad-based rise that would spread the load across the income distribution. A sharp break between the basic and higher rates – an unusual feature of the UK income tax setup – remains. Changes to national insurance follow a similar stealth logic. The rate remains unchanged, yet its scope has widened, particularly through restrictions on pension salary-sacrifice.

Whether these kinds of changes break Labour’s manifesto commitments not to raise taxes on “working people” is increasingly a matter of semantics. Many working people’s take-home pay will be less than it would have been, even if the headline tax rates have not changed.

One positive consequence of raising the revenue this way, however, is that individuals and households – not just employers – will carry much of the cost. Some measures that would have directly targeted businesses, like a bank windfall tax, have been abandoned.

This makes the budget more supportive of growth than early reports anticipated, because taxes that fall primarily on employers take funding away from things like opening new facilities or creating jobs.

London skyline. — No windfall tax for the banks.
Phillip Roberts/Shutterstock

Yet the growth forecasts remain weak because there is still no plan to raise productivity. Government investment in skills and infrastructure is lacking, and tighter immigration controls (which the government is also imposing) limit labour supply and impose other transaction costs on businesses. Growth requires broader changes to these other aspects of economic policy and cannot be generated through tax reform alone.

£3 trillion government debt weighs heavily on Reeves’ budget choices

Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City St George’s, University of London

The chancellor has announced measures to raise £26 billion in her budget statement. Driving her decision is the need to cap the size of the government’s debt, which, at £2.9 trillion amounts to 95% of the total size of the UK economy.

But also feeding into her choices is the need to abide by her self-imposed fiscal rules. These require her to cut the deficit (the difference between tax revenue and spending) every year for the next five years. An additional challenge is that the cost of paying interest on this huge national debt has gone up sharply in recent years, with the government now paying more in interest that it spends on education.

The fiscal rules are designed to reassure financial markets, which lend the government the money it needs, that the chancellor is prudent with the country’s finances. Tax rises were necessary to meet Reeves’ “ironclad” rules (based on the forecasts of spending watchdog the Office for Budget Responsibility) with the aim of stabilising that huge debt.

The problem is that small changes in any of the forecasts can throw the government off course. As the former head of the Office for Budget Responsibility, Robert Chote, noted: “The chances of any economic or fiscal forecast being accurate in every dimension are infinitesimally small.” However, Reeves has now left herself more “fiscal headroom” (the amount she can increase spending further without breaking her rules) – £21.7 billion.

She has gone some way to acknowledging the problem of predictions by making two changes in the fiscal rules. Last year she exempted investment spending – on building roads, power stations and houses – from the rules, in the hope of encouraging economic growth.

And this year, she has announced that the Treasury will produce a budget forecast only once a year. This will avoid the difficult spring statement she had to present this year.

But neither of these changes are guaranteed to give her the stability she needs to encourage economic growth and security. Relying on a single OBR forecast makes each budget a hostage to fortune. It might be wise to give a range of economic and revenue forecasts, as the Bank of England already does. The very concept of a fixed amount of “headroom” is probably too rigid and leads to continual changes in policies and taxes.

Since 1997 when fiscal rules were introduced, the Treasury has announced ten sets of rules with 28 different specific targets. For example, when once it was prudent to keep the debt below 40% of GDP, now 100% is an acceptable target. So it is clear that the markets themselves do not view the fiscal rules as immutable, and would probably like more stability and predictability in government spending and tax policy.

Where is the investment in infrastructure and industry?

Phil Tomlinson, Professor of Industrial Strategy and Regional Development, University of Bath

Budget day can often feel like Groundhog day. The same old problems – chronic under-investment, crumbling infrastructure and weak productivity – continue to bedevil the UK economy, with low growth significantly reducing the chancellor’s room for fiscal manoeuvre. Hers is not the first government to find itself unable to break this doom loop.

So in her second budget, Rachel Reeves focused mainly on tax-raising measures. There was some mention of a commitment to raising investment in critical infrastructure for sectors like transport, energy and digital development, but the details were set out earlier this year.

Pre-budget announcements also included a commitment to employ an extra 350 planners to support the government’s ambitious plan to build 1.5 million homes over this parliament. As well as providing a boost to the construction industry, building more affordable homes should improve the mobility of the labour market.

Aerial view of new housing development. — Building ambition.
richardjohnson/Shutterstock

And making it easier for workers to relocate to regions with better job opportunities (which align with their skills) will give a much needed boost to productivity. It may also attract new private investment in local industries and “left behind” regions of the UK.

The critical part of any infrastructure project is actually getting it done. But often major projects, after being announced to great fanfare, can become bogged down in delays caused by a lack of skilled labour and changing economic circumstances.

To be a success it is vital to ensure that project targets are set early, and resources are ring-fenced. There also needs to be sufficient funding set aside to support skills and training that align with long-term infrastructure priorities. The budget included little about this.

If the government wants drivers to switch to electric, it must be wary of the powers of dissuasion

David Bailey, Professor of Business Economics, University of Birmingham

From April 2027, fuel duty rates – frozen back in 2010 and then cut in 2022 – will rise again in line with inflation. This was inevitable. The freeze has cost the government something like £10 billion a year in lost revenue.

And as more drivers switch to electric vehicles, fuel duty (which even with the freeze raises some £35 billion a year for the government) will start to dry up. The government needs to find cash, and fuel duty is a lever it feels it can pull.

More positive news for drivers is the 2026 arrival of the “fuel finder” scheme which will force petrol forecourts to share real-time prices so that customers can shop around more easily.

As expected, a pay-per-mile tax for electric and hybrid vehicles will be introduced, from April 2028. And while a long-term shift to pay-per-mile could make a lot of sense, the devil is very much in the detail. Electric vehicle (EV) owners in rural areas, who typically drive longer distances, could be badly hit, and the move needs to be carefully thought through.

Aerial view of electric vehicle at charging point. — This way?
Clare Louise Jackson/Shutterstock

The Office for Budget Responsibility thinks this could bring in £1.1 billion by 2029. But it could also put some people off making the switch to EVs, which is probably why the government has expanded EV grants to encourage take up.

A big, missed opportunity to shift the dial on EVs came in the government failing to cut VAT on public charging from 20% to 5%, to match the VAT rate on domestic electricity. This means drivers who can’t charge at home will continue to pay more, something which really needs to be tackled if the government wants people without private parking to make the switch.

Phil Tomlinson receives funding from the Innovation and Research Caucus (IRC).

David Bailey, Maha Rafi Atal, and Steve Schifferes 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. What will the budget mean for economic growth? Experts give their view – https://theconversation.com/what-will-the-budget-mean-for-economic-growth-experts-give-their-view-270715

November 26, 2025

What will the budget means for economic growth? Experts give their view

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow

So would Rachel Reeves’ second budget provide any glimmers of hope? Here’s how our panel of experts reacted.

Tax-raising budget that may encourage growth – but doesn’t guarantee it

Maha Rafi Atal, Adam Smith Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, University of Glasgow

£3 trillion government debt weighs heavily on Reeves’ budget choices

Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City St George’s, University of London

And this year, she has announced that the Treasury will produce a budget forecast only once a year. This will avoid the difficult spring statement she had to present this year.

Where is the investment in infrastructure and industry?

Phil Tomlinson, Professor of Industrial Strategy and Regional Development, University of Bath

If the government wants drivers to switch to electric, it must be wary of the powers of dissuasion

David Bailey, Professor of Business Economics, University of Birmingham

More positive news for drivers is the 2026 arrival of the “fuel finder” scheme which will force petrol forecourts to share real-time prices so that customers can shop around more easily.

Phil Tomlinson receives funding from the Innovation and Research Caucus (IRC).

– ref. What will the budget means for economic growth? Experts give their view – https://theconversation.com/what-will-the-budget-means-for-economic-growth-experts-give-their-view-270715

November 26, 2025

Ukraine peace deal will hinge on security guarantees – but Kyiv has been there before

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jennifer Mathers, Senior Lecturer in International Politics, Aberystwyth University

Whether the various peace plans now under discussion bring an end to Russia’s war against Ukraine will depend largely on security guarantees. But securing an agreement between Ukraine, its allies and Russia about how Ukraine’s future security will be assured may prove to be the most difficult part of any peace deal.

Ukraine already has bitter experience of what happens when a security guarantee turns out to be no guarantee at all.

Back in 1994, Ukraine reluctantly put its faith in the vague assurances of the Budapest memorandum. According to the terms of that agreement, Ukraine gave up the Soviet-era nuclear weapons stationed on its territory and pledged to sign the non-proliferation treaty and remain a non-nuclear country.

In exchange, Russia, Britain and the US promised to respect the independence, sovereignty and borders of Ukraine and not to use force against that country.

But the only commitments that Moscow, London and Washington made was to seek action by the UN security council to support Ukraine – and then only if Ukraine were attacked or threatened with attack by nuclear weapons. The memorandum made no mention of what should happen if Ukraine faced an attack using conventional forces.

As Ukraine’s then-president, Leonid Kuchma, remarked after the deal was done: “If tomorrow Russia goes into Crimea, no one will raise an eyebrow.”

Twenty years later, Kuchma’s prediction came true. In 2014, Russian troops occupied strategic points in Crimea. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, then engineered a widely discredited referendum on the region’s future status and claimed it as part of the territory of the Russian Federation.

Russia went on to arm, fund and direct local militias in eastern Ukraine and covertly sent its own soldiers to fight with them to undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty.

Britain and the US – among other western countries – imposed economic sanctions on Russia and provided training, funding and supplies to the Ukrainian armed forces. This material support accelerated rapidly after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. But these measures have not stopped Russia’s aggression or guaranteed Ukraine’s security.

Now, as the full-scale conflict in Ukraine nears its fourth anniversary, the success of a new set of peace deals will, in large part, hinge on whether Kyiv can rely on its allies to come to the rescue if Russia decides to resume hostilities at some future stage.

Empty promises

In 2023, former US president Bill Clinton expressed his regrets at his role in the Budapest Memorandum. He revealed that back in 2011 Putin had told him that Russia’s leaders did not consider themselves to be bound by the agreement.

In the 1990s, Ukraine’s leaders had a variety of reasons for actively choosing to relinquish nuclear weapons. These included the promise of much-needed economic assistance from the west and the Ukrainians’ own experience of the devastating impact of nuclear technology in the shape of the 1986 Chernobyl accident.

There was also a strong consensus in Ukrainian society in favour of non-nuclear status. But recently released archival documents demonstrate that the country’s leaders had serious reservations about how Ukraine’s security would be ensured after nuclear weapons were removed from its territory.

The Budapest Memorandum is an example of an agreement shaped by short-term considerations with long-term consequences very different from the ones that at least some of the signatories anticipated. Western countries, led by the US, were focused on confining the thousands of Soviet nuclear weapons to one country to reduce the chances that they might end up in the hands of terrorist groups or rogue states.

In the mid 1990s any future threat that Russia might pose to Ukraine was outweighed in the eyes of the west by two other considerations. The first was optimism that Russia would develop into a democracy and become a partner rather than an adversary.

The second was that Russia was too weak to pose a threat in the foreseeable future. The absence of genuine security guarantees in the Budapest agreement, therefore, reflected the predominant view in the west that pledges of good will would be sufficient to protect Ukraine.

Hard choices for Zelensky

With this history in mind and faced with the prospect of having to agree to a negotiated settlement, the Ukrainian president, Volodymr Zelensky, has been insistent that Ukraine will only be truly secure inside Nato. Opposition to Nato membership for Ukraine from Russia – but also from several members of the alliance, especially the US – has led the Ukrainians and their allies to search for alternatives.

The “coalition of the willing” – a group of countries supporting Ukraine including the UK, various European nations, Canada and Turkey – have indicated their willingness to provide forces in the air, at sea and even on the ground to deter further aggression. But the plan for a multilateral peacekeeping force relies on the participation of the US for much of its credibility.

It’s not clear whether Washington will be willing to provide such assurances. Previously the Trump administration has played down any commitment to providing security guarantees for Ukraine.

For Russia, on the contrary, the Budapest Memorandum appears to be the precedent that it is following in crafting security assurances for Ukraine. The peace plan currently under discussion – which we now know that Russian official Kirill Dmitriev had a large role in drafting – offers only a bland assurance that Ukraine would receive reliable security guarantees.

At the same time it imposes a limit on the size of Ukraine’s armed forces. It also prevents it from joining Nato and bans the troops of Nato member states on its territory. All of which would severely undermine Ukraine’s security.

As a result, each of the interested parties have very different views about the nature of security guarantees that would be sufficient. Ukraine is pushing for Nato membership. Russia is vehemently opposed. The Europeans are trying to find a pragmatic halfway house. The Trump administration is reluctant to commit American resources to much of anything.

The chances a negotiated settlement to this war will be reached quickly or easily by negotiations remain remote, at best.

Jennifer Mathers 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. Ukraine peace deal will hinge on security guarantees – but Kyiv has been there before – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-peace-deal-will-hinge-on-security-guarantees-but-kyiv-has-been-there-before-270614

November 26, 2025

Electric vehicle owners face new pay-per-mile tax – what could be the environmental costs?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amin Al-Habaibeh, Professor of Intelligent Engineering Systems, Nottingham Trent University

Modern electric vehicles are transforming the roads with low noise, rapid acceleration and zero exhaust emissions. However, drivers of electric vehicles in the UK will now face a new 3p per mile charge and drivers of hybrid vehicles a 1.5p per mile charge.

In her speech, chancellor of the exchequer Rachel Reeves said: “All cars contribute to the wear and tear on our roads, drivers will taxed on how much they drive not just on the type of car they own.”

This new EV tax would add up to an extra cost of £300 annually, based on a vehicle travelling 10,000 miles per year. The government argues that this tax is needed to compensate for the reduction in fuel duty from the transition to electric vehicles, and because of its budget deficit.

Given that electric vehicles are more expensive than petrol or diesel vehicles and they require further investment for home EV charging stations, it was previously considered important to provide incentives or grants to encourage the move to electric vehicles.

Rachel Reeves announced changes to EV taxes in the budget.

There are three main scenarios that can show the potential effect on the environment.

Scenario 1: the environmental champions

Let’s consider a family that has an EV and likes to do things that are good for the environment. They may prefer to continue using electric vehicles to support net zero and clean air in their cities, despite the tax rise.

The chancellor’s decision would increase the cost of using their EV. But if the monthly increase of running the EV exceeds the cost of public transport, this environmentally conscious family might consider using their car less and using public transport more.

In this way the family will still contribute to the economy with the new tax, but by choosing a more sustainable transport option they will reduce their energy use, as well as the tyre and brake particle pollution their EV creates.

Scenario 2: the financially driven

In another scenario, a financially conscious couple might have bought their EV because they liked driving but wanted to avoid paying so much for petrol, tax and congestion charges.

Alongside the new pay-per-mile tax, congestion charges for EVs are rising. In London, for instance, the 100% cleaner vehicle discount for electric vehicles will be replaced the end of December with a 25% discount for electric cars and 50% for vans until March 2030. This does at least offer some saving over petrol and diesel still.

The cost analysis will depend on many factors. These include purchase cost, vehicle excise duty, road tax, costs of congestion charges and low emissions zones, maintenance costs, mileage per year, style of use, business tax, fuel or electricity costs, depreciation, location of electric charging (home or public), and any other expected additional taxes or related interest rates.

According to research, for an average annual distance of 10,000 miles, the annual cost of running an electric vehicle is about £1,154. This is about 50% less than the estimated £2,316 equivalent cost to run a conventional petrol car for the same period. With the extra 3p per mile tax, the annual running cost would be £1,454 so the EV could still be an attractive option.

However, on average, electric vehicles in 2025 were 18% more expensive up front than petrol or diesel vehicles. According to OneEv Group, an EV app company, the cost of buying an electric vehicle is £39,000 compared with a petrol vehicle at £33,000.

And based on fuel and electricity prices, the cost of ownership for three years is reported to be around £41,650 and £38,445, respectively. This means EV ownership over three years is already more expensive by £3,205. If the car is driven 10,000 miles per year, with the new 3p per mile tax the total difference would come to £4,105 over three years.

Based on the above, if they carry on travelling the same number of miles, but don’t change their car, there are some financial downsides but no additional environmental consequences.

Scenario 3: the late adopters

All new cars will have to be electric or hybrid from 2030. But people who are currently driving petrol or diesel cars still might not switch to electric vehicles due to the additional costs.

There are already estimates of around 440,000 fewer EV sales because of the new pay-per-mile tax. In this case, the expected government shift to net zero by 2050 might have to be delayed. And pollution levels would be reduced by less.

Therefore, it is with this group of people that there might be the biggest environmental consequences.

Environmental effect and car sales

How big might the effects of the new tax be in a worst-case scenario? We can work out a rough potential estimate for EV drivers switching back to internal combustion engines.

There are about 36.2 million cars in the UK, of which there are 1.3 million EVs. And 13.9% of UK vehicles drive more than 10,000 miles, based on available data from 2021.

If a similar proportion of the 1.3 million EV drivers decided to move to internal combustion engine vehicles because they would suffer most from the new tax, this could mean 180,700 more petrol and diesel cars on the road. Assuming an equal split between petrol and diesel, this could result in over 433,680 extra tonnes of CO2 emmitted per year (based on 240g of CO2 per mile).

Similarly, calculating particulate matter at 0.005g/km (0.008g/mile), the extra cars would equate to around 14.45 more tonnes of particulate matter. Using the same method, the same number of cars could create 346.9 tonnes per year of nitrogen oxide gases (based on 0.192g/mile). This would mean significant additional air pollution.

In addition to the possible increased air pollution, engine oil change could require on average an additional five litres per year per vehicle. This would be about 903,500 additional litres of engine oil.

Any increase in petrol or diesel use could also create an increased risk of cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses related to pollution in cities.

We don’t know that this scenario will come to pass but it gives a sense of how environmental impacts can add up when many people react to different incentives. However, if the same number of people in this scenario carried on using EVs, and some drove less, then there would be no increase in air pollution levels. And potentially the particulate level could decrease because of fewer journeys.

What remains the biggest threat to the environment is if a large group of people who were thinking of buying EVs choose not to do so.

Amin Al-Habaibeh receives funding from Innovate UK, The British Council, The Royal academy of Engineering, EPSRC, AHRC, The British Academy and the European Commission.

– ref. Electric vehicle owners face new pay-per-mile tax – what could be the environmental costs? – https://theconversation.com/electric-vehicle-owners-face-new-pay-per-mile-tax-what-could-be-the-environmental-costs-270193

November 26, 2025

What the budget could mean for you – experts react to the chancellor’s announcement

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Andrew Burlinson, Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield

UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has made some significant reforms in her latest budget. Notably, she has committed to easing living cost pressures with widespread energy bill support, higher taxes for the most expensive homes, and axing the two-child cap on certain benefits.

In a speech to Labour MPs a couple of days before the announcement, she made clear that her tax and spend decisions were a package and not a “pick-and-mix” from which backbenchers could choose the measures they liked. While Reeves will no doubt face further opposition, it may be that many of the things she has announced largely align with what Labour backbenchers had been hoping to hear.

Here’s what our panel of experts made of her plans.

Help with energy bills in a bid to tame inflation

Andrew Burlinson, Lecturer in Economics, University of Sheffield

Typical household energy bills (at £1,725 per year) remain more than £450 higher than pre-crisis levels. Reeves is therefore pledging to “grip the cost of living” with a package of short- and long-term solutions.

Instead of axing the 5% VAT paid on energy bills, as had been widely trailed, Reeves has removed certain social and environmental levies from electricity bills, which she says will save households up to £150. These levies funded government policies supporting vulnerable people and low-carbon technology adoption, which will now be paid for through general taxation.

This is a welcome progressive shift. Sharing these costs across all households disproportionately hurt people on lower incomes who paid the same percentage in levies as wealthier customers. What’s more, while these levies represent a relatively small chunk of people’s bills (about 16%) compared to wholesale costs, removing them will help bring down energy-related inflation.

Homes with solar panels on frosty day. — Warm and cosy.
richardjohnson/Shutterstock

The chancellor is also rightly extending the warm homes discount scheme, which takes an additional £150 off some people’s electricity bills and which will now reach six million households. Yet the temporary discount does not reverse a decade of low, even substandard, government-backed energy-efficiency schemes.

However, the warm homes plan, which aims to improve energy efficiency in homes, will now receive an extra £1.5 billion to tackle fuel poverty. Done properly, investment in energy efficiency and low-carbon technologies can cut bills, improve people’s health and reduce emissions – a “win-win-win”.

A ‘mansion tax’ for the most expensive properties

Alper Kara, Professor of Banking and Finance, Brunel University of London

The government announced a new council tax surcharge on the most expensive properties in England and Wales from April 2028. The “mansion tax” will be levied annually, costing £2,500 for properties worth more than £2 million and £7,500 for those worth over £5 million.

Around 145,000 homes will be affected, mostly in London and south-east England. The value of those properties will probably go down a little.

Yellow Ferrari parked outside London houses. — London will bear the brunt of the mansion tax.
William Barton/Shutterstock

But more broadly, the measure – which it is claimed will raise £400 million by 2031 – risks adding further complexity to the council tax system without resolving long-standing weaknesses such as its out-dated and unfair valuations.

And while the mansion tax targets wealthier homeowners, the actual revenue earned may end up being lower than planned due to things like “price bunching”, where buyers and sellers keep valuations just below the bands, distorting the market. There might also be a decline in high-value property sales which would reduce stamp duty revenue for the Treasury.

A further measure with implications for housing is the 2% rise in tax on property income, which will cut landlords’ profits and may persuade some to leave the market. This in turn could easily reduce the supply of rental homes available, potentially increasing rents where demand is high. It may also limit investment in maintenance and improvements, leading to a decline in the quality of rental accommodation.

An end to the two-child benefit cap but more anti-poverty measures needed

Ruth Patrick, Professor in Social and Public Policy, University of Glasgow

Scrapping the two-child limit is an incredibly welcome reform that starts the urgent work needed to drive down what remain high levels of child poverty. Four-and-a-half million children in the UK faced poverty in 2022-23, and too many will still face hardship without further investment and reform from this government.

At this year’s Labour conference, Prime Minister Keir Starmer ambitiously pledged that he wanted his government to end child poverty. To realise this, he will need to usher in change on a much greater scale than has been announced.

The two-child limit was an ill-designed and arguably cruel policy which assigned children to poverty simply (and only) because of the number of siblings they had. The charity Child Poverty Action Group estimates that 109 children each day are born into households affected by the cap, purely because they have two or more elder siblings.

Woman walking down street with children. — Support for more siblings.
Ajit Wick/Shutterstock

Removing the two-child limit restores the historic link between need and entitlement to support, which the policy had eroded. But the same problem remains for the wider benefit cap, which limits the amount of social security people can receive and currently leaves many subsisting far below the poverty line.

Any day now we will see the publication of a UK-wide child poverty strategy – the first in almost a decade. My hope is that this builds on the chancellor’s announcements, and points to a future where all children can be protected from poverty.

Andrew Burlinson previously received funding from UKERC (UKRI) and relevant funding from EPSRC.

Ruth Patrick is a member of the Labour Party.

Alper Kara 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. What the budget could mean for you – experts react to the chancellor’s announcement – https://theconversation.com/what-the-budget-could-mean-for-you-experts-react-to-the-chancellors-announcement-270699

November 26, 2025

Pillion: what a sex therapy expert thinks of this domination-themed queer rom-com

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chantal Gautier, Senior Lecturer in Psychology and Sex and Relationship Therapist, University of Westminster

If you’re looking for a film that’s daring and emotionally layered, then Harry Lighton’s debut feature Pillion absolutely hits the mark. The film follows Colin (Harry Melling), a shy suburban guy stuck in routine and Ray (Alexander Skarsgård), a magnetic unreadable biker whose presence exudes both aloofness and intrigue.

What starts as a rough transactional alleyway hook-up, quickly shifts into a 24/7 BDSM (best understood when read in three pairs: bondage and discipline, domination and submission, sadism and masochism) dynamic built on power, ritual and control.

Within the broader framework of BDSM, Pillion situates Colin and Ray’s dynamic inside the concept of consensual total power exchange: a structured voluntarily arrangement in which a submissive (or “slave”) offers continuous obedience and service to a dominant (or “master”) extending beyond “scenes” and into daily life.

At its core Pillion explores power, eroticism, masculinity and identity. Lighton doesn’t shy away from the erotic elements. In fact, Lighton uses them as a springboard for deeper questions of self-definition. As we witness moments of submission and humiliation rituals (shot with a mix of tension and tenderness), we follow Colin’s emotional journey. From confusion to curiosity and eventually, a sense of charged enjoyment he didn’t expect, Colin finds himself surrendering in ways he never imagined.

The trailer for Pillion.

One of the film’s most memorable sequences places submissives lined up face-down with bare backsides on picnic tables in the middle of a forest. Colin’s despair is unmistakable. It’s in these moments the film’s title snaps into sharp focus, clarifying who leads, who submits, and who rides pillion (the “bottom” in queer discourse).

Lighton solidifies dominant-submissive slave devotion with an unexpected sense of groundedness. The involvement of real-life members of the Gay Bikers Motorcycle Club amplifies the scene’s credibility, giving it a charged, lived-in authenticity.

Beneath the leather mask

But what symbolic or emotional function does control serve for Ray (if there is one, it might simply be this is what Ray is into – what we call their erotic template).

The film offers two compelling possibilities. First, the symbolic elements of BDSM (collars, rituals and rules) create a relationship framework that reaffirms the dominant-submissive bond of unity. For Ray, this connection doesn’t stem from emotional openness but from the stability he maintains through structure and control.

BDSM becomes a space where instructing Colin allows Ray to assert his identity through a style of masculinity that values control. Ray has deliberately curbed his emotional expression. At his core, he is someone who does not allow himself to need. So, for Ray, the dominant-submissive slave dynamic, becomes a mechanism for keeping vulnerability at bay.

Second, research on attachment styles suggest dominance within BDSM can offer the kind of predictability and structure that people with avoidant attachment styles often experience as safe. People like Ray who are uneasy with emotional closeness or unpredictability, may find reassurance in the clearly defined expectations of these dynamics. With emotional disclosure minimised and expectations clarified, the dominant role creates conditions that shield Ray from the forms of vulnerability he finds threatening.

The film’s exploration of masculinity deepens, revealing how societal and cultural norms shape what is considered “manly”. Ray embodies commonly held masculine ideals, including stoicism, self-control, confidence and a sculpted physique. Colin’s more submissive, compliant energy challenges these expectations, revealing masculinity as culturally shaped rather than fixed.

Alexander Skarsgård on Pillion.

Awakening of self

In his “slave” role, Colin embodies both conventional and unconventional masculinity. His surrender emerges as strength – endurance, discipline, sexual stamina. Because submissive roles demand patience, obedience and the resilience to meet discomfort (consensually), they cultivate qualities that expand, rather than diminish, the boundaries of masculinity, providing a more fluid and expansive understanding of masculine identity.

For Colin, the dominant-submissive slave journey becomes a path of self-discovery, allowing him to recognise what he wants, what he excels at – his “aptitude for devotion” – and ultimately who he is. His evolving masculine identity takes shape as he embraces the newly uncovered self, not with shame, but with authenticity.

The film makes clear that BDSM dynamics, despite popular assumptions, are not bound by gender. And while Pillion concentrates on a gay male relationship, the emotional terrain it explores – power, vulnerability and identity – resonate across genders.

Eventually, in pursuit of greater happiness Colin begins to question the arrangement, perhaps prompted by those rare fleeting moments when Ray lets his guard down. Summoning newfound courage, he asks for a “day off” from their daily dominant-submissive dynamic. After a chaotic and rebellious detour, Ray agrees to the new terms. But a question lingers at the film’s emotional core: can Ray allow himself to experience emotional closeness beyond his role as “master”?

Pillion is an emotionally intelligent multi-layered film, rich with moments of humour, wonder and rawness. Boldly provocative it immerses viewers in a world of BDSM, while challenging conventional assumptions about desire, relationships and identity. Lighton delivers a film anchored by exceptional performances from both its main cast and its supporting ensemble, crafting a story that sticks with you long after the credits rolls.

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.

Chantal Gautier 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. Pillion: what a sex therapy expert thinks of this domination-themed queer rom-com – https://theconversation.com/pillion-what-a-sex-therapy-expert-thinks-of-this-domination-themed-queer-rom-com-270224

November 26, 2025

Anthology 4 shows there’s still more to discover about The Beatles

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Glenn Fosbraey, Associate Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Winchester

A lot can happen in three decades. Since 1995, we’ve seen nine different UK prime ministers, the birth and death of the Minidisc, iPod and DVD. Manchester City sank to the third tier of English football then rose to become champions of Europe. One thing that hasn’t wavered, though, is the popularity of The Beatles.

On November 21, The Beatles’ Anthology 4 was released to an eager worldwide audience, 30 years after the first instalment in the series, Anthology 1, and 56 years after the band split.

Released in November 1995, Anthology 1 was initially met with bemusement by reviewers. Some dismissed its contents as “scrappy old demo tapes, TV recordings, and studio outtakes” which were “of scant interest to anyone but obsessives”. Perhaps there were simply a lot more “obsessives” than critics thought – the public bought the album in droves. Anthology 1 topped charts all over the world with the highest first week of sales ever recorded.

Anthologies 2 and 3 followed in March 1996 and October 1966, respectively. Although they didn’t quite reach the commercial heights of Anthology 1, they still sold in their millions. Their releases also coincided with the peak of Britpop, which came not so much to bury the Fab Four’s legacy as to raise it to new heights with figureheads Noel and Liam Gallagher of Oasis regularly espousing their idolatry for the band.

Trailer for The Beatles Anthology on Disney+.

The Anthology trilogy may not have been the first outtakes and demos albums (that honour goes to The Who and their 1974 Odds and Sods collection), but they did break new ground in showing how a retrospective of band’s career can move beyond a compilation of previously released tracks.

The Anthologies told the story of The Beatles, tracking their development from amateur cover-artists to bona fide musical pioneers. It showed listeners how their favourite songs were constructed, morphing from, in the case of Strawberry Fields Forever, a home recording, through a series of experimental studio versions, to the finished product.

Most importantly, though, the albums offered intimate access to private spaces. It felt as if we were in Studio 2 with the band, listening to them chatting, playing around, trying things out, then, finally, creating some of the greatest songs ever committed to tape.

Anthology 4

As with all the previous instalments, Anthology 4 shows how the personalities of John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr were so key to their appeal. Their famous sense of humour and joie de vivre can be heard throughout. On Baby You’re A Rich Man (Takes 11 and 12), following Lennon’s request for bottles of Coke from roadie Mal Evans, McCartney jokingly asks for some cannabis resin before wryly remarking “that’s recorded evidence for the high court tomorrow”.

Harrison laughs at his inability to “do a Smokey [Robinson]” on While My Guitar Gently Weeps (Third Version – Take 27); and Lennon seems to be having the time of his life singing All You Need is Love (Rehearsal for BBC Broadcast). Their humility shines through, too.

On Julia (Two Rehearsals), for example, we hear Lennon speaking with producer George Martin about his struggles with playing and singing it. Here’s the most celebrated artists of all time unsure whether he’s good enough. The recording took place only a matter of months after the release of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, an album considered to have changed not only music, but pop culture at large. And when Starr bashfully asks whether anyone “has heard the Octopus one” before giving Octopus’s Garden (Rehearsal) an airing, we genuinely feel his anxiety.

Another extraordinary element of this collection (and the previous three) is the Beatles’ shift from just seeming like a group of lads larking about to a group of musicians creating masterpieces, then back again. It happens so quickly and so naturally that it’s almost disorientating.

More than any of the other Anthologies, the significance of Martin’s contribution is printed in bold, then underlined, twice, in red ink. If anyone ever deserved the accolade of “fifth Beatle” it was he, with his skills as an arranger and composer gloriously evident on I am The Walrus (Take 19 – Strings, Brass, Clarinet Overdub), Strawberry Fields Forever (Take 26), and Something (Take 39 – Strings Only Instrumental).

Sadly, it looks like the well of treasures may have finally run dry. The collection includes several tracks Beatles devotees will have already hoovered up via Abbey Road Super Deluxe, The Beatles (White Album) 50th Anniversary Edition, and Let It Be Super Deluxe. But, when it comes to The Beatles, enough is never enough. As well as the album, there is also an extended version of the 1990s docuseries Anthology airing on Disney+ on November 26th, and a 25th Anniversary edition of the book (also titled Anthology).

Anthology 4 already has something in common with its mid-90s ancestors courtesy of some less-than-charitable press, but whether it will mirror their success remains to be seen. What is for sure, though, is that The Beatles’ commercial juggernaut, well into its seventh decade now, shows no signs of slowing down.

Glenn Fosbraey 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. Anthology 4 shows there’s still more to discover about The Beatles – https://theconversation.com/anthology-4-shows-theres-still-more-to-discover-about-the-beatles-270486

November 26, 2025

Pillion: what a sex therapist expert thinks of this domination-themed queer rom-com

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Chantal Gautier, Senior Lecturer in Psychology and Sex and Relationship Therapist, University of Westminster

The trailer for Pillion.

Beneath the leather mask

But what symbolic or emotional function does control serve for Ray (if there is one, it might simply be this is what Ray is into – what we call their erotic template).

Alexander Skarsgård on Pillion.

Awakening of self

– ref. Pillion: what a sex therapist expert thinks of this domination-themed queer rom-com – https://theconversation.com/pillion-what-a-sex-therapist-expert-thinks-of-this-domination-themed-queer-rom-com-270224