Category: The Conversation – UK

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dan Baumgardt, Senior Lecturer, School of Physiology, Pharmacology and Neuroscience, University of Bristol

Does anyone else think we’ve all become a bit too protein-obsessed? Once upon a time, we got our protein from meat, fish, dairy and pulses. Now it seems like every consumable product comes loaded with it — from energy bars to protein-packed cereals and baked goods.

I’m surprised no one’s thought of stirring it into their tea for a boost. Oh wait, they have.

That’s not to say I’m anti-protein. Far from it. Protein plays an essential role in body functions such as growth, immunity and digestion. It’s important that we get enough of it each day.

But the million-dollar questions we should be asking are: how much do we actually need? When is it too much, or too little? And where should we be getting it from?

Protein is one of the three macronutrients we need in the largest amounts – the others being carbohydrates and fats. Micronutrients such as vitamins and minerals are important too, but they’re needed in much smaller quantities — typically milligrams, or even micrograms.

Protein is involved in a huge range of physiological processes. It’s of course crucial for muscle growth and repair. Bodybuilders looking for an Adonis (or Amazonian) physique often consume large amounts alongside strength training. But protein isn’t just about muscles – it’s a core structural material for bone, skin, hair and nails too.

It also plays vital roles inside the body. It allows muscles to contract, makes up digestive and metabolic enzymes, and is a key component of haemoglobin (which carries oxygen), ferritin (which stores iron) and antibodies (which fight infection).

But remember: protein doesn’t work in isolation. Our bodies also rely on carbohydrates and fats — providing short and long-term energy sources that are just as important.

Carbohydrates provide four calories of energy per gram, and fats proide nine calories per gram. While protein can also be used as an energy source – also producing four calories per gram – carbs are more accessible for tissues to use rapidly. And crucially, building muscle also requires fuel. So, if your diet is too low in carbohydrates, your muscle gains may stall and you may find yourself depleted of energy.

In general, protein is filling and can help reduce snacking. And too little protein can be harmful. Protein deficiency can occur due to inadequate diet, eating disorders, or conditions such as cancer, Crohn’s, or liver disease. Symptoms include fatigue, muscle wasting and a weakened immune system.

Because protein also helps regulate fluid balance in the body, a deficiency can lead to swelling or oedema. In severe cases, as seen in some developing countries, the condition kwashiorkor — marked by a swollen belly — can result from inadequate protein intake.

How much?

It can sometimes be difficult to work out how much protein you should be eating each day, especially when different sources give variable advice.

A good starting point is to consider your overall energy requirements. Government recommendations suggest that up to 35% of your daily calories should come from fat, and up to 50% from carbohydrates. That leaves a minimum of 15% for protein — which for someone on a 2,500-calorie diet works out to about 95g of protein per day.

Another calculation accounts for your body size too, giving a value more specific to the individual. Around 0.8g protein per kilogram of body weight for a sedentary adult is advised.

For athletes and bodybuilders – who often aim for around 2g per kilogram — this can mean as much as 200g of protein a day. And that’s hard to achieve through regular food alone. For context, 30 eggs contain 200g of protein, as does 2.5kg of cooked beans. Certain foods have more protein (like the go-to chicken breast), though the overall volume of food required can still be high.

That’s where protein powder often comes in — usually offering 20g–30g of protein per scoop – as supplementation. It’s absolutely fine to incorporate some powder or shakes into a healthy diet alongside wholefoods, which are the best protein sources. But it’s important to set limits – and avoid the temptation to go overboard.

Too much

Is it possible to be taking on too much protein? The answer is yes, if you’re regularly consuming more than your body needs.

Excess protein is broken down and excreted through the kidneys, which may cause dehydration and place additional strain on renal function. Unused protein can also be converted into fat, potentially leading to weight gain. High-protein diets are sometimes associated with gastrointestinal side effects such as bloating, diarrhoea and bad breath.

And while many high-protein foods are healthier, others (such as red or processed meats) may also be high in saturated fat, which can increase the risk of serious conditions like heart disease.

So yes — protein is essential, but balance is key. Your daily needs depend on your body size, activity levels and general health. Consider your goals: are you aiming to maintain a certain weight, or looking to lose fat or gain muscle? Some starting points are:

• aim for at least 0.8g protein per kilogram of body mass daily
• balance it with adequate carbs and fats
• prioritise wholefood sources over protein supplements where possible
• increase your intake responsibly if you’re training hard or trying to gain muscle
• but be cautious with too high, sustained intakes — these may do more harm than good.

As someone who could do with a wee bit more in his own diet, I’m off to try that protein-in-my-tea trick. Wish me luck.

---

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Dan Baumgardt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How much protein do you really need? Too much or too little can be harmful – https://theconversation.com/how-much-protein-do-you-really-need-too-much-or-too-little-can-be-harmful-261211

Source: The Conversation – UK – By James O’Donoghue, Research Associate Professor in Planetary Astronomy, Meteorology, University of Reading

Earth will complete a rotation 1.33 milliseconds earlier than usual on Tuesday, August 5. That makes it one of the shortest days of 2025 at 86,399.99867 seconds long. How that happens, and how we can even measure it with such precision, might make your head spin faster too.

On average, Earth physically rotates in 23 hours, 56 minutes, 4 seconds and 90.5 milliseconds – this is called a sidereal day. It is Earth’s “true” rotation relative to distant objects in deep space, like stars.

However, the kind of day most people go by is 24 hours long and that is called a solar day – it’s the time between two sunrises, or consecutive noons. The extra 4 minutes comes from the fact that Earth has to rotate 1 more degree, to 361 degrees, for the Sun to appear in the same place again.

Both kinds of day are slightly shorter on August 5 2025, largely due to what is happening with winds in Earth’s atmosphere, fluid circulation in the ocean and magma – and even the Moon’s gravitational pull.

Deviations from 24 hours have been accurately measured since the 1970s using atomic clocks and astronomy. Over the course of a year, these changes build up: in 1973, for example, the sum of deviations added up to +1,106 milliseconds, meaning that the Earth lagged behind in its rotation by just over a second. Leap seconds were introduced in the same year to correct for this, with one second added to the clock at the end of the day – 23:59:60.

Absurd levels of accuracy are needed in time-keeping. Global positioning systems (more commonly called GPS) can pinpoint where you are in space, that’s no problem. But if the planetary surface you are on has physically spun slightly faster or slower than expected that day, an uncorrected GPS won’t know that, and your position won’t match with your map.

A 1.33 millisecond deviation translates to a position error of about 62 cm at the equator, so 1973’s cumulative drift would have caused GPS errors of around half a kilometre if left uncorrected over the year.

Why doesn’t the Earth stay still?

To find out how fast the Earth is spinning at all, you need to find a reference frame in which, ideally, nothing is moving. Everything in space moves relative to everything else, but the farther we look, the more still things seem; just as distant hills appear to move slower while you’re on a train, and nearby farms rush by.

Luckily, there are objects so magnificently bright that they outshine entire galaxies. These are quasars, and they are visible across the universe from billions of light years away.

Quasars are supermassive blackholes up to billions of times the mass of our Sun, which emit between 100 and 10,000 times more light than our entire galaxy, the Milky Way. Quasars are detectable from billions of light years across the universe, where things are essentially stationary, so they act as cosmic beacons.

Radio telescopes measure our position relative to these, yielding values of Earth’s true rotation period to sub-millisecond accuracy.

Those ultra‑precise observations are also the starting point for computer models which include movements of the atmosphere, oceans, celestial motions and more to predict the length of day. This is how we know, in advance, when a day is shorter, and how to correct GPS as a result.

Winds in Earth’s atmosphere are the biggest influence on the length of each day as a result of their collisions with the land surface, particularly when they hit mountain ranges. Incredible as it may sound, wind actually slows the spin of the Earth this way.

Earth’s prevailing winds are fastest in the northern hemisphere winter, but slowest from June to August, so the summer months always bring the shortest days of the year (even though we tend to say these are the “longest” days in the northern hemisphere, because of their greater daylight duration).

These daily and seasonal changes are just short‑lived blips atop broader slowdowns. Over decades, the melting of the polar ice caps has been slowing the Earth’s rotation. To understand why, consider a spinning ballerina retracting their outstretched arms – they begin to spin much faster. A spinning ball, like Earth, is no different.

Earth is oblate, meaning the surface at the equator is 21.5 km farther from the centre of the planet than the surface at the poles. As climate change melts the polar ice caps, meltwater moves from the poles to the equator via the ocean. Rising sea levels mean water is farther from the surface, and just like the ballerina moving their arms back out, it aids Earth’s slowdown. Redistribution of Earth’s mass changes our rotation in similar ways, including by earthquakes.

The Moon, while beautiful, can be a huge drag over billions of years. Earth’s oceans are raised by the Moon’s gravity, but as the Earth rotates, the raised oceans are carried slightly ahead of the Moon in its orbit. But the Moon continues pulling on those oceans, dragging them backwards against the Earth’s anticlockwise rotation, which slows us down.

Earth’s rotational energy isn’t lost, it’s transferred to the Moon, which gains orbital speed and causes it to escape Earth’s gravity a little better – this is why it’s moving away from us at 3.8 cm a year. Our length of day has increased from 17 hours 2.5 billion years ago largely due to the Moon sapping Earth’s angular momentum over the eons.

Earth’s rotation has slowed every year from 1973 to 2020 (where precise measurements exist), with each year accumulating hundreds of milliseconds of lag, which has already been accounted for by adding 27 leap seconds. Things changed from 2020 – the Earth started spinning faster instead of slower every year, probably the result of angular momentum exchange between the Earth’s core and mantle, but modulated by the numerous other motions we’ve explored.

July 5, July 22 and August 5 were singled out as some of this year’s fastest days far in advance, because on top of the Earth’s internal motions and seasonal quirks in atmospheric winds, the Moon’s position in orbit also slows the Earth twice per orbit (every two weeks). This is because when the Moon is directly above the equator, all of its tidal drag acts east to west, but on these dates, it is positioned farthest north and south, weakening that effect.

You won’t notice the sunrise arrive 1.33 milliseconds sooner, but to precision atomic clocks, quasar‐referenced astronomical measurements, it will be obvious.

James O’Donoghue receives funding from the UK Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC).

– ref. Why on Earth is the planet’s day getting shorter? – https://theconversation.com/why-on-earth-is-the-planets-day-getting-shorter-260946

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Sabrina Fitzsimons, Co-Director of DCU CREATE (Centre for Collaborative Research Across Teacher Education), Lecturer in Education, Dublin City University

Tense, overworked employees everywhere will recognise the features of burnout: exhaustion, depersonalisation (feeling detached from others or yourself in the workplace) and a reduced sense of personal accomplishment. It happens when chronic workplace stress isn’t managed appropriately.

At the other end of the stress spectrum is rustout. You may well have experienced it. This is when employees become bored, apathetic and unmotivated, often doing the minimum necessary work. This can result in them procrastinating, browsing social media or looking for something more stimulating elsewhere.

Rustout is mental and emotional decline caused by repetitive, mundane tasks and ongoing professional stagnation. Unlike burnout, which results from work overload, rustout arises from underutilisation and a lack of stimulating work.

It can be amplified when a workplace values efficiency and meeting specific outcomes over professional engagement, leaving people feeling invisible or replaceable. In other words, it occurs when people are not challenged enough.

It may sound like a strange complaint to those who would love to think about work a little bit less. But in the long run, it has the potential to lead to career dissatisfaction and may have an impact on mental health.

Yet, within many occupations, rustout remains an unspoken issue. Perhaps this is due to an unofficial expectation that work is supposed to be boring.

Our research explored rustout in a particular profession: teacher educators. These are university lecturers who teach trainee teachers. We surveyed 154 teacher educators and carried out follow-up interviews with 14 of them.

While most described enjoying their work and its variety, we found an undercurrent of symptoms and experiences indicative of rustout. We believe our findings may have resonance with other occupational settings.

Rustout may sound a bit like the social media trend of quiet quitting. However, the teacher educators we spoke to were not deliberately stepping back from their duties or plotting their exit. In fact, they remained highly committed to their students – making their situation even more frustrating.

They often saw it as a vocation and took pride in guiding new teachers into the profession. Many spoke of the joy it was possible to find in their work and the many brilliant, inspiring young people they had helped to nurture. However, some had lost this enthusiasm.

Ever-growing piles of paperwork forced their focus away from what they enjoyed. Crucially, there was a sense that it was no longer the job they had signed up for.

Focus on teacher educators

Teacher educators in higher education balance multiple responsibilities: teaching, supervising their students’ teaching placements, mentoring, and extensive administrative work. These demands leave little space for engagement with research, which is increasingly valued in metrics-driven universities.

We found that the bureaucratisation of higher education in Ireland and the UK has led to excessive paperwork, compliance tasks, and constant system changes. One teacher educator told us: “A good 70% of my workload now is almost just admin, which is very depressing.”

Combined, these can leave little time for the more creative or professionally enriching aspects of the role, such as curriculum design, teaching or research. “I often feel I have produced nothing at the end of the week, and there is no sense of development,” one said.

Rustout can also occur when there is a misalignment between professional aspirations and job demands. For example, in our study, some highly qualified teacher educators with significant experience in research, leadership and teaching felt dragged down by repetitive, low-value tasks rather than work that aligned with their expertise.

As one said: “People can be pigeon-holed into a role, and they are left in that comfort zone rather than being challenged or invited to try something that might stimulate or get the creative juices flowing.” Some may be happy to sit with rustout for some time, but being stuck in this situation can lead to professional dissatisfaction.

Restricted professional growth can lead to feelings of rustout. This includes limited opportunities for career mobility, rigid structures, and a lack of workplace career support.

If employees are seen as a “safe pair of hands” who can keep the operation moving, their professional satisfaction is not addressed. “The conversation doesn’t happen; it’s just ‘Did you get the job done’,” one teacher educator said. “It’s not about work satisfaction; you are lucky to have your job.”

Hidden costs of rustout

Rustout has both personal and institutional consequences. On an individual level, it leads to disengagement, apathy and reduced motivation. One said they were “functioning without thriving,” with repetitive tasks eroding their sense of purpose.

Many teacher educators said they were unable to discuss dissatisfaction due to workplace culture and performance expectations. “Rustout exists in teacher education. Absolutely. However, I have no experience of ever having a conversation with anyone around it,” one said.

This may be because it suits everyone not to talk about it. Nothing is being rocked when staff are working and doing their jobs. This silence benefits institutions in the short term, since it maintains stability and delays difficult conversations. However, in the long term, it can contribute to retention issues, a negative workplace culture and possibly reduced innovation.

We believe rustout should be put on the mental health agenda in workplaces, just as burnout is. Employers must acknowledge that the wellbeing of their employees is integral to overall success.

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. Feeling unstimulated and apathetic at work? You might be experiencing rustout – https://theconversation.com/feeling-unstimulated-and-apathetic-at-work-you-might-be-experiencing-rustout-260837

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Kim Sherwood, Lecturer in Creative Writing, University of Edinburgh

Our hero is on his way to confront danger, feign love and give away a little of his soul. As he takes a long plane journey over Europe into enemy territory, he reflects on what his younger self would make of him now: “Would he recognise himself beneath the surface of this man who was tarnished with years of treachery and ruthlessness and fear?”

You would be forgiven for imagining these as the thoughts of Thomas Shelby, screenwriter Steven Knight’s war hero-turned-Peaky Blinders gang leader. Or the meditations of Viggo Mortensen’s Russian mobster with a heart of gold in Knight’s 2007 film, Eastern Promises.

In fact, this is a passage from Ian Fleming’s fifth James Bond novel, From Russia With Love (1957) – a favourite read of another conflicted, powerful man, John F. Kennedy.

Like Bond, Knight’s protagonists are intelligent, charming, witty, courageous, withdrawn and ruthless – scarred by violence with a seam of cold anger. It is this crosscurrent that makes Knight such a strong pick as the scribe for Bond’s next cinematic incarnation, expected to be released in 2028.

If you’ve not read Fleming before, you might be surprised by Bond’s self-reflection and melancholy here – a strand throughout the books which we saw manifest most significantly on screen during Daniel Craig’s tenure. It’s something I am confident Knight will bring to the screen with crackling intensity, and which I have explored in my own Double O trilogy.

As a lifelong Bond fan, it was a dream come true when the Ian Fleming Estate commissioned me to write a trilogy of novels expanding the world of 007. My mission was to introduce new “Double O” agents.

In Double or Nothing (2022), Bond has gone missing and Moneypenny – now chief of the Double O Section, in the world’s most overdue promotion – doesn’t know if he’s been captured or even killed. In the sequel A Spy Like Me (2024), a rogue Johanna Harwood (003) infiltrates the lion’s den to rescue 007. In the final novel, Hurricane Room, out in May 2026, Bond returns as the Double O agents make their last stand.

The Hurricane Room title comes from the same chapter of From Russia With Love, as Bond’s plane experiences turbulence. As “lighting flung its hands across the windows”, Bond draws on the image of the hurricane room:

In the centre of Bond was a hurricane room, the kind of citadel found in old-fashioned houses in the tropics … To this cell the owner and his family retire if the storm threatens to destroy the house, and they stay there until the danger is past. Bond went to his hurricane room only when the situation was beyond his control, and no other possible action could be taken.

I read From Russia With Love aged 12. It was my first Bond novel and I fell in love with this hero whose inner resources keep him from ever giving up. This is also a quality that Knight unpacks beautifully with the dangerous but soulful Tommy Shelby – probably the only gangster to get a Rambert dance treatment (the series has been adapted into a ballet by the British dance company).

Creating icons

An icon is recognisable by eye. We know Bond by a series of images – the tuxedo, the martini, his Walther PPK pistol – just as we know Shelby by his extreme fade, club collar and peak lapels.

But if a character is as flat as a religious icon, they can’t grow or evolve. That’s not the case with Shelby, who we’ve seen grow with Cillian Murphy over a decade, or Bond, who has evolved with us for seven decades and as many actors. Knight can give us a Bond who is both iconic and human.

Another shared strand between Fleming and Knight is the deliberate use of national myth. Fleming set Bond up as a symbol of Britain. When the villains of From Russia With Love want a scandal that will destroy Britain, they look for a symbol: “Of course, most of their strength lies in myth – in the myth of Scotland Yard, of Sherlock Holmes, of the Secret Service… Myths are built on heroic deeds and heroic people. Have they no such men?” And the reply: “There is a man called Bond.”

Fleming then spends the book destroying him. But Bond’s power as a symbol has endured, exemplified in the 2012 Olympic opening ceremony as Daniel Craig, using all the magic of the movies, parachuted in with the Queen.

In Peaky Blinders, Knight takes totemic images from our national consciousness, such as the trenches in the first world war, the Houses of Parliament and Birmingham’s industrial past. But he also gives us the wider picture, from working-class veterans with PTSD to Italian, Jewish and Black families, and women struggling for independence. It’s this refreshing look at our identity that promises Knight’s take on Bond as a symbol will be just as fascinating as Fleming’s.

When Fleming first sat down to write Bond, he told a friend: “I am going to write the spy story to end all spy stories.” He certainly revolutionised the genre, but it wasn’t the end, only the beginning.

It’s been my honour to write in this universe, and I can’t wait to see where Knight takes it next. James Bond Will Return.

---

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

---

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.

---

Kim Sherwood 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. I write James Bond novels – here’s why Peaky Blinders creator Steven Knight will bring a crackling new intensity to 007 – https://theconversation.com/i-write-james-bond-novels-heres-why-peaky-blinders-creator-steven-knight-will-bring-a-crackling-new-intensity-to-007-262547

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Christopher Holliday, Senior Lecturer in Liberal Arts and Visual Cultures Education, Department of Interdisciplinary Humanities, King’s College London

Development of a new James Bond film is underway at Amazon Studios, with the creater of Peaky Blinders, Steven Knight, now attached to write the screenplay, which will be directed by Denis Villeneuve.

The pair have given little away about what to expect from Bond 26. Knight said he wanted to do something “the same but different”, while Villeneuve said he would “honour the tradition” of the franchise. But a look back at how the films have dealt with key elements of Bond shows that following tradition can mean going in many different ways.

Take Bond’s toolbag of gadgets, which have been a part of the James Bond movies since their debut in the 1960s. Over the decades, the films have both leaned into and shifted away from the allure of hi-tech gadgetry in ways that plot key turning points in the franchise.

These peaks and troughs reflect what’s going on in the wider world as well as factors such as the influence of other successful film franchises. So with AI on the minds of many right now, the new film could embrace contemporary themes of technology. But re-booting the franchise when a new lead actor is cast is also often associated with a grittier or “back to basics” approach.

The first few Bond films starring Sean Connery, including Dr No (1962), From Russia With Love, and Goldfinger (1964) feature a smattering of spy technology. But by You Only Live Twice (1967), producers had opted for a space capsule hijack narrative – reflecting the influence of the US-Soviet space race – and a villain’s lair in a hollowed-out volcano.

However, the next entry – On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969) centred largely on the emotional realism of Bond’s (George Lazenby) courtship and subsequent marriage to Tracy di Vicenzo (Diana Rigg). The lesser focus on technology coincided with a new Bond actor – a pattern to be frequently repeated later on in the franchise. But for other reasons, the shift in tone was, perhaps, to be expected.

Bond author Ian Fleming was writing On Her Majesty’s Secret Service at his holiday home – Goldeneye – in Jamaica, while Dr No was being filmed nearby. The book was published on April 1, 1963, the day From Russia With Love began filming (the film was released in October that year). The less gadget-focused approach of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service could be seen as a possible jab by Fleming at what he saw as the cinematic Bond’s growing overreliance on the latest tech.

Journeying back through the franchise, it is not hard to find instances where moments of technological excess are countered almost immediately by a more pared down, character-centred set of priorities.

After On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, Connery returned for one further Eon Productions film, Diamonds Are Forever (1971), which, like You Only Live Twice, featured a space-themed narrative. Live And Let Die (1973), Roger Moore’s debut as Bond, is somewhat more down to Earth and was the first film not to feature Bond’s gadgetmaster Q (who is referred to as Major Boothroyd in Dr No).

But a growing reliance on technology can be seen during the 70s Moore films, culminating with Moonraker (1979) – which was heavily influenced by Star Wars (1977) – in which Bond goes into space.

Moore’s follow-up, For Your Eyes Only (1981), was – as that film’s director John Glen noted – a film that went “back to the grass roots of Bond.” The global economic recession that took place between 1980 and 1982 certainly helped support this shift in tone.

For Your Eyes Only had a lower budget than Moonraker, so the filmmakers had to act in a similar way to their leading character, who made innovative use in the film of his shoelaces to climb up a rope on a sheer rock face in Greece.

The last few Roger Moore films have examples of Bond’s complex connection to technology, such as the computer microchip narrative of Moore’s final film A View to a Kill. But the next film, The Living Daylights (1987), was a return to the grittier Bond of the novels – with a focus on classic spycraft. From an action-packed opening in Gibraltar, the narrative moves to Bratislava where Dalton helps a KGB General defect to the west.

When Dalton departed after Licence to Kill (1989), which shows the influence of big-budget 80s Hollywood action movies, the series’ return after a six-year hiatus brought Bond into the information age. The cyberterrorist narrative of GoldenEye (1995), Pierce Brosnan’s debut as Bond, is fully indebted to a broader curiosity surrounding emerging internet sub-cultures.

Brosnan’s final outing, Die Another Day (2002) featured an Aston Martin that could turn invisible, which critics and audiences dismissed as a series nadir. The post-9/11 climate of protector narratives in defence of national security featured an altogether grittier action cinema counting Jason Bourne as its most popular hero. Die Another Day’s invisible Aston Martin and the indelible image of a computer-generated Bond surfing amid digital icebergs did not quite align with this state of post-millennial geopolitics.

Enter Daniel Craig, and the franchise’s emphatic declaration that it was going to do things for real, per the title of a documentary on Craig’s debut Casino Royale (2006). This was a statement of intent, anchored not just to a reduction in computer-generated imagery (CGI) behind-the-scenes, but equally by a turn away from the kinds of excessive technological wizardry that defined earlier instalments.

The absence of Q from Craig’s debut Casino Royale (2006) for the first time since Live and Let Die appeared to confirm a more “back to basics” feel. When the character did finally appear in Craig’s third film Skyfall (2012), Q (now played by Ben Whishaw) remarks to Bond: “Were you expecting an exploding pen? We don’t really go in for that anymore.”

With another reboot on the way, the question now is whether the new film will draw inspiration from real-world technologies and push once more at the limits of technical innovation. Perhaps Villeneuve will exploit his science-fiction credentials finetuned in Arrival (2016), Blade Runner 2049 (2017) and his successful Dune films (2021-2024).

But given how contemporary cultural landscape is awash with the threat of AI, maybe the franchise does need to beat a hasty retreat from technology in order to stand out. Either way the filmakers will be able to argue they are sticking to tradition.

Christopher Holliday 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. Will the new James Bond embrace hi-tech gadgets in an age of AI? The films have a complicated history with technology – https://theconversation.com/will-the-new-james-bond-embrace-hi-tech-gadgets-in-an-age-of-ai-the-films-have-a-complicated-history-with-technology-262447

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jenna Carr, Graduate Teaching Fellow and Sociology PhD Researcher, University of Liverpool

A decade ago, the National Crime Agency identified a new drug supply method. Before then, drug supply was predominantly between user-dealers – people supplying their social circles to fund their drug use, rather than for commercial gain.

In 2015, police outside of London identified a pattern of more frequent arrests of young people and vulnerable adults, implicated in drug supply outside of their local areas. They were also frequently suspected to be associated with members of criminal gangs. Thus, “county lines” was born.

The National Crime Agency used the term “county lines” to describe the phone or “deal” line used to organise the sale of drugs – mainly heroin and crack cocaine – from cities with oversaturated supplies, to rural, coastal areas with less supply.

The deal line was controlled by gang members based in the inner city area, such as London or Liverpool, known as “exporter” areas. The sale of drugs would be completed by a young or vulnerable person who had been exploited and sometimes trafficked out of their home areas to rural “importer” areas, such as north Wales and Cornwall. The crossing of local authority and police boundaries made county lines difficult to police, and to safeguard those who had been exploited.

County lines is notably violent. It involves gang violence, knife crime, drug misuse, sexual exploitation and modern-day slavery.

Ten years on, county lines as a supply model continues to evolve. A recent assessment by the National Police Chiefs’ Council found that the practice is becoming more localised, with fewer lines running between police force boundaries, and more running from one end of a force to the other end. It is also no longer limited to the supply of class A substances, with police reporting seizures of cannabis, cash and weapons.

Researchers are now suggesting that the term “county lines” itself is outdated, and instead should be replaced with a term that focuses more on the exploitation involved, rather than drug supply.

Who gets involved

County lines affects both children and vulnerable adults. The government has estimated 14,500 children to be at risk of child criminal exploitation, but this is likely to be an underestimation. Particular risk factors include being between 15 and 17 years old, experiences of neglect and abuse, economic vulnerability, school exclusion and frequent episodes of missing from home.

Cuckooing, where a gang will take over homes as a base for drug supply, largely affects vulnerable adults, rather than children.

One challenge in responding to county lines is that vulnerability can be difficult to recognise.
Victims and perpetrators of exploitation are often one and the same. Often, victims will be unwilling to cooperate with police, out of fear of legal consequences and repercussions from their exploiters.

Those who have been exploited into participating in county lines often do not accept that they are a victim – they may think they are profiting from their involvement, both financially and socially. The ongoing cost of living crisis draws young and vulnerable people into county lines as a response to poverty and lack of legitimate and financially viable opportunities.

Responding to county lines

My ongoing research looks at the development of county lines policy and responses to the problem over the last ten years. Responses to county lines have been mainly led by law enforcement, with coordinated police “crackdowns”. But research shows that high-profile police operations are largely symbolic, and have the effect of drawing vulnerable people into the criminal justice system, which creates further harm.

One important development has been the use of the Modern Slavery Act to prosecute county lines. The purpose of this is to offer a legal defence for someone who has been exploited into selling drugs. But research has shown, rather than acting as a safeguard and a defence, it acts as a “gateway into criminalisation”.

If someone crosses the boundary of being a victim to becoming a perpetrator of exploitation, they can also find themselves being subjected to punitive criminal justice responses under the Modern Slavery Act. This is especially true for black men and boys, who have historically been treated more harshly, for example through stop and search, in relation to drug crime.

It’s become clear that county lines is an issue that criminal justice alone cannot respond to. Those who are at risk require safeguarding, not criminalisation. To this end, the government funds a specialist county lines victim support service that operates in the four main exporter locations.

But the availability of this support service only in exporter locations shows that the county lines response is a postcode lottery. Police forces in importer areas have fewer resources to dedicate to training officers to deal with complex county lines cases. A consistent national approach is still required.

What’s next?

The current government is planning to make child criminal exploitation and cuckooing specific criminal offences through new legislation. This has been celebrated as a success by child safety charities.

But should more criminalisation be the priority? Research shows that drug prohibition and punitive responses are ineffective at preventing young people and vulnerable adults becoming involved in county lines. The demand for drugs and structural issues such as poverty are fuelling county lines – policing alone cannot address this.

Instead of punitive legal responses, public health and addressing the demand for drugs should be priority. Investment is needed in support services and social care, which have been decimated by austerity cuts, to build a society where vulnerable people do not need to become involved in drug supply.

---

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

---

Jenna Carr 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 we’ve learned in ten years about county lines drug dealing – https://theconversation.com/what-weve-learned-in-ten-years-about-county-lines-drug-dealing-261438

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mooyoung Han, Professor of Environmental Engineering, Seoul National University

Droughts and floods are becoming more frequent and more severe across the globe. The cause is often rain — either too little or too much. The monsoon regions of the world, where societies have weathered cycles of drought and deluge for thousands of years, hold essential lessons about rainwater monitoring and conservation.

In Korea, one such lesson dates back to the 15th century. In 1441, during the reign of King Sejong, Korea established the world’s first official rain gauge (cheugugi) — a cylindrical copper instrument — and also created a state-administered rain monitoring network.

This wasn’t just a technical invention; it was part of a wider policy. On September 3 of that year, according to the Annals of the Choson Dynasty (a Unesco Memory of the World record), local magistrates across the country were ordered to measure rainfall regularly and report it to the central government.

This system represented one of the earliest forms of climate data governance and set a precedent for valuing rain as a measurable, manageable and fairly governed resource — a public good to be shared and respected. It also reflected a philosophical tradition in Korea of respecting rain not as a curse, but as a gift — one that must be understood, welcomed and shared.

India too has a rich tradition of rainwater harvesting, spanning from the Vedic period and the Indus–Sarasvati Valley civilisation (3,000–1,500BC) to the 19th century. Throughout diverse ecological zones, Indian communities developed decentralised systems to capture and store rainwater. The archaeological site of Dholavira in Gujarat, for example, featured sophisticated reservoirs designed to collect monsoon runoff.

Historical records, including ancient inscriptions, temple documents and folk traditions, indicate that these systems were not only engineered but also governed, with established rules for sharing, maintaining and investing in water as a communal resource. In some regions of India, every third house had its own well. Although these practices declined during colonial rule, they are now being revived by local communities, government initiatives, and non-governmental organisations.

The revival of traditional wells is gaining momentum, particularly in urban areas facing water scarcity. For example in the city of Bengaluru in southern India, local communities and organisations are using age-old well-digging techniques to tap into shallow aquifers. These efforts are often supported by the state or central government, as well as specialists and organisations including the Biome Environmental Trust, Aga Khan Trust for Culture, Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage, and the Centre for Science and Environment.

India’s current prime minister has also launched a campaign called Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain as part of a nationwide effort to restore and promote community-led rainwater harvesting.

Reviving ancient wisdom

In Korea, there’s also been a resurgence of this ancient wisdom in modern contexts. Although urban initiatives like the Star City rainwater management system show promise, the movement towards reviving old practices like rainwater harvesting is still growing.

Meanwhile in Cambodia, the Rain School Initiative empowers students and teachers to manage rainwater for drinking and climate education. Rainwater is not just a technical solution — it is a cultural key to resilience. It offers autonomy, sustainability and hope.

That is why we propose to establish UN Rain Day on September 3, in recognition of Korea’s historical contribution and in celebration of global rain literacy. It is a symbolic date that reminds us how rain has shaped civilisations and how it can shape our future — if only we choose to listen to the wisdom of water.

Designating international days has proven effective in raising awareness and catalysing global action. For instance, World Water Day (March 22) has spurred international cooperation and policymaking on water issues since its establishment in 1993. World Toilet Day (November 19) has elevated the global conversation around sanitation and public health.

A UN Rain Day would spotlight rain as a vital yet often overlooked resource. This is something that’s especially crucial for climate adaptation in monsoon regions and beyond.

---

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.

---

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. What the world can learn from Korea’s 15th-century rain gauge – https://theconversation.com/what-the-world-can-learn-from-koreas-15th-century-rain-gauge-261530

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anna Kenyon, Senior Lecturer in Population Health, University of Lancashire

Every day, we’re faced with constant opportunities for stimulation. With 24/7 access to news feeds, emails and social media, many of us find ourselves scrolling endlessly, chasing our next hit of dopamine. But these habits are fuelling our stress – and our brains are begging for a break.

What our brains really need is some much needed time off from concentrating. By not consciously focusing on anything and allowing the mind to drift, this can reduce stress and improve cognitive sharpness.

This can often be easier said than done. But attention restoration theory (Art) can help you learn to give your brain space to drift. While this might sound like a fancy name for doing nothing, the theory is supported by neuroscience.

Attention restoration theory was first put forward by psychologists Rachel and Stephen Kaplan in 1989. They theorised that spending time in nature can help to restore focus and attention.

They proposed there are two distinct types of attention: directed attention and undirected attention. Directed attention refers to deliberate concentration – such as studying, navigating through a busy place or posting on social media. Basically, it’s any activity where our brain’s attention is being directed at a specific task.

Undirected attention is when we’re not consciously trying to focus on anything – instead allowing things to gently capture our attention without trying. Think listening to chirping birds or watching leaves gently rustling in the breeze. In these instances, your attention naturally drifts without having to force your focus.

Without time for undirected attention, it’s thought that we experience “attentional fatigue”. This can make it increasingly difficult to focus and concentrate, while distractions become more likely to grab our attention.

In the past, we encountered many situations in our daily lives that we might classify as “boring”. Moments such as waiting for the bus or standing in the supermarket queue. But these dull moments also gave our minds a chance to switch off.

Now, our smartphones give us the opportunity for constant entertainment. Being able to constantly expose ourselves to intense, gripping stimuli offers little mental space for our overworked brains to recover.

But attention restoration theory shows us how important it is to create space for moments that allow our brains to “reset”.

Restoring attention

The origins of Kaplan and Kaplan’s theory can actually be traced back to the 19th century. American psychologist William James was the first to formulate the concept of “voluntary attention” – attention that requires effort. James’ ideas were published against the backdrop of the broader cultural movement of Romanticism, which lauded nature.

Romantic ideas about the restorative power of nature have since been backed by research – with numerous studies showing links between time in nature and lower stress levels, better attention, improvements in mental health, mood and better cognitive function.

The restorative benefits of nature are backed by neuroscience, too. Neuroimaging has shown that activity in the amygdala – the part of the brain associated with stress and anxiety – was reduced when people were exposed to natural environments. But when exposed to urban environments, this activity was not reduced.

Numerous studies have also since backed up Kaplan and Kaplan’s theory that time in nature can help to restore attention and wellbeing. One systematic review of 42 studies found an association with exposure to natural environments and improvements in several aspects of cognitive performance – including attention.

A randomised controlled trial using neuroimaging of the brain found signs of lower stress levels in adults who took a 40-minute walk in a natural environment, compared to participants who walked in an urban environment. The authors concluded that the nature walk facilitated attention restoration.

Research has even shown that as little as ten minutes of undirected attention can result in a measurable uptick in performance on cognitive tests, as well as a reduction in attentional fatigue. Even simply walking on a treadmill while looking at a nature scene can produce this cognitive effect.

Time in nature

There are many ways you can put attention restoration theory to the test on your own. First, find any kind of green space – whether that’s your local park, a river you can sit beside or a forest trail you can hike along. Next, make sure you put your phone and any other distractions away.

Or, when you face boring moments during your day, instead of picking up your phone try seeing the pause as an opportunity to let your mind wander for a bit.

Each of us may find certain environments to be more naturally supportive in allowing us to switch off and disengage the mind. So if while trying to put attention restoration theory into practice you find your brain pulling you back to structured tasks (such as mentally planning your week), this may be sign you should go someplace where it’s easier for your mind to wander.

Whether you’re watching a ladybird crawl across your desk or visiting a vast expanse of nature, allow your attention to be undirected. It’s not laziness, it’s neurological maintenance.

Anna Kenyon has received research funding from the National Academy for Social Prescribing & Natural England, the University of Lancashire, West Yorkshire Health and Care Partnership and the Institute for Citizenship, Society & Change. She is an Associate member of the Faculty of Public Health.

– ref. How letting your mind wander can reset your brain – https://theconversation.com/how-letting-your-mind-wander-can-reset-your-brain-259854

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachel Woods, Senior Lecturer in Physiology, University of Lincoln

From collagen powders to immunity gummies, supplements are everywhere – in our Instagram feeds, on supermarket shelves and filling our bathroom cabinets. Promising better sleep, glowing skin, sharper focus or even a longer life, they’re marketed as quick fixes for modern health woes.

As a nutritionist, I’m often asked whether supplements are worth the money – and the answer is: it depends. Based on online claims, you might think they can cure almost anything.

While some supplements do have a valuable role in certain circumstances, they are often misunderstood and frequently oversold. Yet many people are unaware of the risks, the limitations and the marketing tricks behind the labels.

Here are five things I wish more people knew before buying supplements.

1. Start with food, not supplements

If you can get a nutrient from your diet, that is almost always the better option. The UK’s Food Standards Agency defines a food supplement as a product “intended to correct nutritional deficiencies, maintain an adequate intake of certain nutrients, or support specific physiological functions”. In other words, supplements are there to support your diet, not replace real foods.

Whole foods offer much more than isolated nutrients. For example, oily fish like salmon provides not just omega-3 fats, but also protein, vitamin D, selenium and other beneficial compounds. These interact in ways we don’t fully understand, and their combined effect is difficult, if not impossible, to replicate in supplement form.

Scientists have tried to isolate the “active ingredients” in fruit and vegetables to recreate their benefits in pills, but without success. The advantages seem to come from the complete food, not one compound.

That said, there are circumstances where supplements are necessary. For instance, folic acid is recommended before and during pregnancy to reduce the risk of neural tube defects in the foetus. Vitamin D is advised during winter months when sunlight is limited. People following a vegan diet may need vitamin B12, since it is mostly found in animal products.

2. You might not realise you’re taking too much

It is far easier to take too much of a supplement than it is to overdo it with food. In the short term, this might lead to side effects such as nausea or diarrhoea. But long-term overuse can have serious consequences.

Many people take supplements for years without knowing whether they need them or how much is too much. Fat-soluble vitamins like A, D, E, and K are stored in the body rather than excreted. Too much vitamin D, for example, can lead to a build-up of calcium, which may damage the kidneys and heart, as well as weakening bones. High doses of vitamin A can cause liver damage, birth defects in pregnancy, and decreased bone density.

Even water-soluble vitamins can cause problems, with long-term overuse of vitamin B6 being linked to nerve damage.

Since most people don’t regularly check their blood nutrient levels, they often don’t realise something is wrong until symptoms appear.

3. Don’t trust social media advice

Spend a few minutes online and you will probably see supplements promoted as “immune-boosting”, “natural”, or “detoxifying”. These words can sound convincing, but they have no scientific definition. They are marketing terms.

The Food Standards Agency is clear that supplements “are not medicinal products” and “cannot exert a pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action”. Yet many online claims suggest otherwise. This kind of marketing, sometimes called “healthwashing”, gives the impression that supplements have powers they do not. Supplements are not subject to the same testing and regulation as medicines. This means they can be poorly formulated, wrongly dosed, or mislabelled.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has rules about how health claims can be made, including on social media. But enforcement is difficult, especially with influencer marketing and affiliate schemes. Multi-level marketing (MLM) schemes add further complexity. Sellers, often with no medical or scientific training, promote products using personal anecdotes rather than evidence. While the ASA provides specific guidance on how MLM sellers can advertise supplements, these rules are frequently ignored, are rarely enforced and often slip through regulatory gaps, meaning there are some truly astonishing claims being made.

4. The supplement industry is more about sales than science

The global supplement market is worth over £100 billion. Like any major industry, its goal is growth and profit. This influences how products are developed and marketed.
If a supplement truly worked, it would be recommended by doctors, not influencers.

Some supplements are supported by evidence, but they tend to be the less eye-catching ones, such as iron or vitamin D. Many others are advertised with claims that stretch far beyond what the research shows and are often promoted by people with no formal training in nutrition or healthcare.

5. Some supplements aren’t safe for everyone

Being available over the counter does not mean a supplement is safe. Even products labelled as “natural” can interact with medicines or cause harm.

St John’s Wort, sometimes used for low mood, can have dangerous side effects if taken alongside some antidepressants, birth control and blood pressure medications. Vitamin K can interfere with blood thinners like warfarin. High-dose iron can cause digestive problems and affect how some antibiotics are absorbed.

Many supplements haven’t been tested for safety in pregnant people. Others, like high-dose vitamin A, are known to be harmful in pregnancy and can pass through breast milk. If you’re pregnant, breastfeeding, taking medication or managing a health condition, speak to a pharmacist, GP or dietitian before starting a new supplement.

Supplements can support health when there is a specific need, but they are not a cure-all. Before spending money on a product with big promises, ask yourself: do I really need this, or would I be better off spending the money on nutritious food?

Rachel Woods does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Five things I wish people knew about supplements – by a nutritionist – https://theconversation.com/five-things-i-wish-people-knew-about-supplements-by-a-nutritionist-262099

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Lauren A. Siegel, Senior Lecturer in Tourism and Events, University of Greenwich

It’s no secret that social media has changed travel. Holidaymakers increasingly seek to imitate images posted by influencers and their peers on platforms like Instagram and TikTok. In our increasingly digital world, travellers now chase the perfect shot like treasure hunters. That can mean navigating crowds, long lines and sometimes even danger – all for content from the world’s most “Instagrammable” spots.

In a widely viewed TikTok video, influencer Zoe Rae (the sister of Love Island star Molly-Mae Hague) voiced her disappointment after visiting Bali. Apparently, it did not look as it did when she saw it online. Her comments attracted a backlash, with critics arguing she was simply experiencing the reality behind the content she and others have helped to promote.

Research has found that many influencers and social media users participate in an “aesthetic economy”. That is, travel is “performed” for likes, views and brand deals. The result? Holidaymakers seeking out highly photogenic (“Instagrammable”) destinations from which to stage their content.

Sometimes “getting the shot” becomes more important than any meaningful cultural exchange between hosts and guests. The behaviour of social media-induced tourists has been found to be more irresponsible than that of other types of travellers.

There were 379 selfie-related deaths between 2008-21, and the quest for the perfect photo can also lead to trespassing and vandalism. Additionally, studies have found that social-media-induced tourists can cause varying levels of damage to the hotspots they visit. This can include environmental erosion, traffic congestion, pollution, increased rubbish and generally making daily life difficult for locals.

Stage-managed selfies

But the demand has fuelled the development of shadow economies like “selfie museums”. These have begun to emerge around the world: Chicago’s wndr Museum, London’s Selfie Factory, Selfie House in Prague, Brazil’s Museum Selfie Day in Sao Paulo, to name just a few.

Our new study shines a light on these parks – purpose-built, self-contained spaces that give visitors a visually stunning, curated environment in which to create content (most often of themselves). For the price of admission, they get convenient access to lighting, props, professional photographers and backdrops for creating content for social media in “Instagrammable” places.

Selfie parks in Bali, Indonesia, offer rice terraces, swings, nests and other “sceneography” associated with its destination image. And there are add-ons like dress rentals, professional photographers who can follow visitors around the park, and personalised photo-editing services.

Selfie parks can offer soft control over visitors in the form of guards, guides and security cameras to monitor behaviour. And they implement daily safety checks and regularly train staff to ensure guests are supervised as they take photos. This is an important alternative to the sometimes risky behaviour of selfie-seekers in viral hotspots.

Of course, the elephant in the room here might be the commodification and inauthenticity that selfie parks represent. Other research has found that locals can be divided about staged photo opportunities, with some seeing them as inauthentic and gimmicky.

There is an awareness that these encounters do not represent the real life of locals. Others, however, consider the money to be made and employment that these opportunities can provide.

---

Read more:
Why are people taking selfies in front of the LA wildfires?

---

Our findings from Bali showed that the selfie parks are extremely successful – with more than 1,500 visitors reported in low season. The offering has been expanded in recent years to add more photo spots, infinity pools and even a day club.

For now, all of Bali’s selfie parks are locally owned and managed. This creates an important source of employment, as well as being a launchpad for entrepreneurship among locals.

The idea of selfie parks may take a bit of getting used to. But having spaces where people can take photos, videos and create social media content safely, while bringing in revenue and employment for local communities, offers a viable solution. This is especially true of the places that struggle most with the negative impacts of tourists motivated by social media.

Love them or loathe them, selfie parks probably aren’t going away. And they may represent a broader shift in how people travel, share and consume experiences. In destinations facing an influx of selfie-seeking visitors, they might just be a surprisingly practical solution.

Other “viral” destinations should consider establishing dedicated spaces in which tourists can create content. Destinations like the island of Santorini, nicknamed Greece’s “Instagram island” amid extreme overcrowding alongside other harms, could be the type of place to benefit.

If so many of today’s tourists are chasing the perfect picture, maybe it makes sense to give them a place designed exactly for that.

Lauren A. Siegel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How selfie parks limit tourism damage to the world’s most ‘Instagrammable’ destinations – https://theconversation.com/how-selfie-parks-limit-tourism-damage-to-the-worlds-most-instagrammable-destinations-262071