The Conversation – UK – Page 145 – MIL Submissions Engine

January 16, 2026

Being cold doesn’t make you sick, so why are illnesses more common in winter?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Manal Mohammed, Senior Lecturer, Medical Microbiology, University of Westminster

Many people across cultures grow up hearing that cold weather makes you sick. Going outside without a coat, breathing in cold air, sleeping in a chilly room, getting caught in cold rain or snow, or simply feeling chilled are often blamed for causing colds or flu.

This belief feels true to many people because illness often follows cold exposure. However, modern research shows that the connection between cold weather and illness is more nuanced than the idea that cold directly causes disease.

Cold temperatures themselves do not cause infections. Instead, they influence a combination of biological, environmental and social factors that make people more vulnerable to respiratory illnesses, especially during the winter months.

Colds and flu are caused by viruses, not by cold air. Viruses such as rhinoviruses, which cause the common cold, and influenza viruses spread from person to person through respiratory droplets or physical contact, regardless of the temperature outside. That said, rates of respiratory infections consistently increase during colder seasons in many parts of the world – a pattern that has been observed globally.

This seasonal pattern is partly due to the way that cold temperatures and low humidity affect viruses in the environment. Research shows that many respiratory viruses, including influenza viruses and coronaviruses, survive longer and remain infectious for extended periods in cold, dry conditions.

Dry air also causes tiny droplets released when people breathe, talk, cough or sneeze to evaporate quickly. This creates smaller particles that stay suspended in the air longer, increasing the chance that others will inhale them. As a result, cold, dry air helps viruses persist in the environment and improves their chances of reaching another person’s respiratory system.

Cold air also affects how the body defends itself against infection. Breathing in cold air lowers the temperature inside the nose and airways, which can trigger vasoconstriction. Vasoconstriction means the narrowing of blood vessels, which reduces blood flow to tissues.

In the lining of the nose and airways, this reduced blood flow can weaken local immune responses that normally help detect and eliminate viruses before they cause infection.

Cold exposure and cold-related stress can also interfere with the normal function of the airways, particularly in people with sensitive respiratory systems. Together, these effects can suppress the body’s first lines of defence in the nose and throat. Cold air does not create viruses, but it can make it easier for viruses to gain a foothold once exposure occurs.

Crowds and close contact

Seasonal changes in human behaviour and indoor environments also play a major role. Cold weather encourages people to spend more time indoors, often in close contact with others. Crowded spaces with poor ventilation allow virus-containing droplets to build up in the air, making transmission between people more likely.

During winter, reduced sunlight exposure leads to lower production of vitamin D in the skin. Vitamin D is involved in regulating immune function, and low levels are associated with weaker immune responses. Indoor heating, while essential for comfort, dries out the air.

Dry air can dry the lining of the nose and throat, reducing the effectiveness of mucus. Mucus normally traps viruses and helps move them out of the airways, a process known as mucociliary clearance. When this system is impaired, viruses have an easier time infecting cells.

Cold weather can be especially challenging for people with existing respiratory conditions such as asthma or allergic rhinitis, which is commonly known as hay fever. Epidemiological studies (research that examines patterns of disease in populations) show that cold conditions can worsen symptoms and increase functional impairment in these people. This can intensify the effects of respiratory infections when they occur.

Taken together, the evidence paints a clear picture of what cold weather does and does not do. Cold temperatures are linked with higher rates of respiratory infections, including influenza and coronaviruses, particularly in temperate regions during winter. Laboratory and environmental studies show that viruses survive longer and spread more easily in cold, dry air.

Cold exposure can also weaken immune defences in the nose and airways, including reduced mucus movement and decreased antiviral activity in nasal tissues. Behavioural and environmental factors typical of winter, such as indoor crowding, poor ventilation, and reduced sunlight leading to lower vitamin D levels, further increase the risk of viral spread.

What the evidence does not support is the idea that simply being cold, such as stepping outside without a coat, directly causes a cold or flu. Instead, cold weather acts as a risk amplifier. It creates conditions that help viruses survive, spread, and overcome the body’s defences.

Understanding this distinction has practical value. Improving indoor ventilation and maintaining adequate humidity during winter can reduce transmission risk. Supporting immune health, including maintaining adequate vitamin D levels, may also help.

Public health messages are most effective when they focus on how viruses spread through contact and respiratory droplets, rather than reinforcing the myth that cold exposure alone causes illness.

In short, cold weather and illness are linked, but not in the way many people assume. Cold temperatures do not cause infections by themselves. Instead, they shape the biological, environmental and social conditions that allow respiratory viruses to thrive.

Recognising this complexity helps explain why colds and flu peak in winter and supports more effective strategies for prevention, while dispelling a simple but misleading belief about cold weather and sickness.

Manal Mohammed 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. Being cold doesn’t make you sick, so why are illnesses more common in winter? – https://theconversation.com/being-cold-doesnt-make-you-sick-so-why-are-illnesses-more-common-in-winter-272935

January 16, 2026

Have US tariffs failed to bite? China’s trade surplus hits a record US$1.2 trillion

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jiao Wang, Assistant Professor of Economics, University of Sussex Business School, University of Sussex

The numbers are in, and they paint a picture that defies the conventional wisdom of Washington’s trade hawks. In 2025, China’s trade surplus surged to a record high of US$1.2 trillion (£900 billion). In December alone, the surplus reached US$114 billion, driven by a higher-than-expected 6.6% growth in exports and 5.7% growth in imports.

The trade surplus refers to the amount by which Chinese exports outnumber its imports. And far from being strangled by external pressure – in particular from the US under Donald Trump – China’s export engine is running hotter than ever.

This creates a paradox for the ordinary observer. For several years, the narrative has been that the US is locked in a divisive trade war with China. This has brought sweeping tariffs intended to decouple the two economies and reduce American reliance on Chinese manufacturing.

Wrangling following Trump’s liberation day tariff announcement on April 2 2025 was apparently settled in November. This left the average tariff imposed on Chinese goods being imported to the US at 47%, down from 145%.

So if the world’s largest economy is shutting the door on Chinese goods, how can Beijing be posting its best export numbers in history? The answer suggests that the US has not won the trade war, and that China’s economy has proven far more adaptable than anticipated.

What happened in 2025 reveals a massive pivot in global trade flows. The tariffs did bite where they were intended: China’s direct exports to the US plummeted by 20% last year, and imports into China from the US fell by 14.6%. But while the front door to the American market was closing, China found other routes.

In 2025, exports to Africa continued to grow strongly by 26%, shipments to countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) grew by 13%, and trade with Latin America climbed by 7%. Even exports to the EU managed an 8% rise, despite growing friction over European concerns about unfair competition from Chinese state-supported industries.

So, the 20% loss in the US market was mathematically overwhelmed by double-digit gains in the developing regions and emerging markets.

The ‘great reallocation’

Is this something completely new? No – China has been balancing its trade network continuously over the past decade, utilising its belt and road initiative. This is its strategy to boost trade through investment in new land and sea routes, which covers the historic Silk Road trade route.

In this way, China is seeking to reduce its dependence on western consumers. But there is a deeper layer to this success that explains why the trade war hasn’t reduced China’s global footprint.

Research has documented something called a “great reallocation” in supply chains, observed both in the first trade war – which began in 2018 when the US and China hit each other with tariffs in a struggle for trade dominance – and the current one. While direct US-China trade has decreased since 2018, the US has significantly increased imports from countries such as Vietnam and Mexico. And these “third-party countries” have simultaneously increased their imports of intermediate parts from China.

A Chinese container ship arrives in the Mexican port of Manzanillo.
Fernando Macias Romo/Shutterstock

In 2025, this trend accelerated. Chinese firms are not just exporting final goods – they are shipping components to factories in south-east Asia and Mexico, which are then being assembled and shipped to the US at very low or zero tariffs, under respective bilateral trade agreements with the US.

This means the US is still effectively buying Chinese goods. It’s just paying a middleman to dodge the tariffs.

The implications of this ballooning surplus are different from previous eras. When China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, the world worried about it “dumping” cheap textiles and toys.

Today, the friction is over high-value industries. China’s 2025 export boom was driven by cars plus mechanical and electrical products – specifically, the “new three”: electric vehicles, lithium batteries and solar panels.

China is no longer just the world’s factory floor. It is becoming a hi-tech supplier and often a competitor to advanced economies’ own suppliers – which is where the ongoing tension arises from.

However, this export reliance also signals a domestic weakness. With China’s housing market still subdued and domestic investment declining, Chinese firms are eager to find demands elsewhere to keep their factories humming.

In 2026, this momentum shows little sign of slowing. The Global PMI (purchasing managers’ index, an indicator that assesses global market conditions) showed five consecutive months of expansion in 2025. This suggests the global economy is picking up some speed, which is good news for Chinese exporters.

However, in the long run, China running a trade surplus with more than 170 countries creates a structural imbalance that may become politically unsustainable. The challenge in Beijing, Washington and beyond is to find an equilibrium before this “winner-takes-all” dynamic forces even more drastic protectionist responses.

Jiao Wang 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. Have US tariffs failed to bite? China’s trade surplus hits a record US$1.2 trillion – https://theconversation.com/have-us-tariffs-failed-to-bite-chinas-trade-surplus-hits-a-record-us-1-2-trillion-273658

January 16, 2026

Reform UK: will high-profile defections change the party’s image?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Parveen Akhtar, Senior Lecturer: Politics, History and International Relations, Aston University

A core function of political parties is to nurture talent and, in some cases, provide a credible path to power for ambitious politicians. In this fraught climate, Reform UK increasingly appears to be an alternative route for those who see no such path via the Conservative party.

Before Robert Jenrick’s sacking (over his own supposed plan to defect), Nadhim Zahawi was the latest, and arguably the most high-profile, Conservative to throw his lot in with Reform. It seems a growing number of former Conservative MPs and councillors see Reform as a second chance at political relevance.

A former chancellor of the exchequer, albeit for just two months at the tail end of Boris Johnson’s premiership, Zahawi brings with him the symbolic capital of high office.

In announcing his switch, Zahawi claimed that only a “glorious revolution” could fix a “broken” Britain: “Nothing works, there is no growth, there is crime on our streets, and there is an avalanche of illegal migration that anywhere else in the world would be a national emergency.” The rhetoric is familiar, but the messenger matters.

Zahawi’s defection comes at a delicate moment for Nigel Farage. As Farage faces renewed scrutiny over allegations of racism and antisemitism during his school days, the recruitment of high-profile, non-white former Conservatives is both politically convenient and strategically risky.

Although Reform has undergone a rapid programme of “professionalisation” under its chairman, Zia Yusuf, these defections remain significant. Reform can now more plausibly claim to house people who have sat around the Cabinet table and understand how government works. Zahawi brings name recognition and governing experience to a party still widely caricatured as a vehicle for political amateurs. This matters for a party attempting to shift from a protest movement to an electoral contender.

Reform’s anti-Muslim reputation

But Zahawi represents more than experience. Alongside Reform’s London mayoral candidate, Laila Cunningham, his presence helps Farage rebut accusations that Reform is an anti-Muslim or racist party. Cunningham, formerly a Conservative councillor in London, defected to Reform in June 2025. She cited frustration with both main political parties and their failure on crime and immigration.

At a time when diversity within Reform has become a flashpoint for internal dissent, this is no accident.

For Farage, this is a familiar manoeuvre. His relationship with Islam has always been more complicated than that of Europe’s explicitly ethnonationalist right. He left Ukip in 2018 after then party leader Gerard Batten appointed far-right activist Tommy Robinson as an adviser to the party. Farage criticised Batten’s fixation with Islam, and said Ukip was drifting into a singularly anti-Muslim posture.

He has repeatedly distanced himself from Robinson, and his clashes with figures such as former Reform MP Rupert Lowe reflect an ongoing effort to differentiate Reform from the far right. The aim is clear: to position Reform as uncompromising on immigration without being reducible to crude racial politics.

The presence of non-white, Muslim politicians may therefore make Reform appear a viable option for voters who want “change”, but are reluctant to back a party they perceive as overtly racist or anti-Muslim.

Yet this same strategy risks alienating other Reform supporters. Farage knows that his digital base is often significantly further to the right.

Farage currently faces claims from a number of former classmates who describe a pattern of racist bullying during his schooldays. Farage has denied the claims – while acknowledging he engaged in “aggressive banter”, he said that he “never directly racially abused anybody”.*

For someone who has built a career on denying personal racism while mobilising grievance politics, this is uncomfortable territory. Zahawi’s defection, like others before it, functions as reputational insulation: evidence that Reform is inclusive, pragmatic and electorally serious.

Meanwhile, Farage is receiving increasing financial backing from wealthy donors, which provides a sense of security and room to manoeuvre, even if parts of his grassroots support online revolts. In some ways, Farage is skating on thin ice. But he knows his backers have significant resources. He is willing to compromise on his most vociferous base in the immediate term if the bigger vision still holds true.

In this sense, Zahawi’s move exposes a central contradiction about Reform. Is it a refuge for failed politicians rejected by the Conservatives? Or is it a party making a serious attempt to broaden its electoral coalition? The answer may be both.

What is clear is that Farage is attempting to play two games at once: reassuring sceptical voters that Reform is not racist, while continuing to benefit from a base that thrives on racialised outrage.

Parveen Akhtar has previously received funding from the ESRC and the British Academy

Tahir Abbas has received research funding from the European Commission via the H2020 Framework Programme for the DRIVE project, and via the Internal Security Fund Police stream for the PROTONE project.

– ref. Reform UK: will high-profile defections change the party’s image? – https://theconversation.com/reform-uk-will-high-profile-defections-change-the-partys-image-273533

January 16, 2026

Exercise snacks: the best bursts of activity to incorporate into your day

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jack McNamara, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Exercise Physiology, University of East London

Bodyweight exercises, such as squats, can be easily incorporated into your day. Studio Romantic/ Shutterstock

Your fitness tracker might be telling you that you need 10,000 steps, 30 minutes of cardio or even an hour at the gym every day. But what if you could improve your health in just a few minutes a day? A growing body of research suggests you can.

“Exercise snacks” are brief bursts of vigorous exercise, typically lasting one minute or less, scattered throughout your day. Think climbing a few flights of stairs, doing some squats during a work break or a quick burst of jumping jacks before lunch.

Unlike traditional workouts, these “snacks” aren’t done back-to-back – they’re spread across your waking hours, separated by one to four hours of your regular activities such as working, commuting or watching TV.

The concept differs from high-intensity interval training (Hiit), where you might do multiple intense bursts intense activity within a single 20-minute workout. Exercise snacks are more like grazing throughout the day rather than sitting down for a full meal.

A recent meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that in previously sedentary adults, exercise snacks significantly improved cardiorespiratory fitness, a measure of how well your heart and lungs work during physical activity.

The review concluded that these bite-sized workouts delivered meaningful health benefits, with an impressive 83% of participants sticking to their routines for up to three months.

Why exercise snacking works

Around a third of adults worldwide don’t get enough physical activity. When asked why, the answers are almost always the same: no time and no motivation. Exercise snacks tackle both barriers head on.

In a 2019 study, sedentary young adults were asked to vigorously climb a three-flight stairwell three times per day – with one to four hours of recovery between bouts. Each session also included a brief warm-up of jumping jacks, squats and lunges.

After six weeks, the stair climbers showed significant improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness compared to a control group – a key marker linked to longevity and reduced cardiovascular disease risk.

What’s particularly striking about exercise snacks is their efficiency. While current guidelines recommend 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous activity per week, exercise snacks can deliver measurable benefits in far less time – sometimes just a few minutes daily.

A 2024 randomised controlled trial compared stair-climbing exercise snacks to 40 minutes of moderate-intensity cycling three times weekly. Remarkably, the exercise snacks group – doing three, 30-second, all-out stair climbs per session – improved their fitness by 7%, while the cycling group showed no significant change.

Two business women walk up a set of stairs while talking to each other. — Stair climbing is another beneficial exercise ‘snack’ you can do during your work day.
PR Image Factory/ Shutterstock

The potential benefits extend beyond fitness. A large-scale study of over 25,000 adults who didn’t exercise found that those who accumulated just three to four minutes of vigorous activity daily through activities such as fast walking or climbing stairs, had a 40% lower risk of dying from any cause. They also had a nearly 50% lower risk of dying from cardiovascular disease compared to those who did none.

There’s evidence exercise snacks have blood sugar benefits, too. Research has shown that brief, intense exercise snacks performed before meals can reduce post-meal blood sugar spikes in people with insulin resistance (a precursor to type 2 diabetes) – potentially good news for anyone concerned about their metabolic health.

The best exercise snacks

The beauty of exercise snacks is their flexibility. You don’t need special equipment, a gym membership or to even change your clothes. Here are some practical ways to incorporate them into your day:

Stair climbing is perhaps the most researched exercise snack. If you work in an office building or live in a block of flats, you’ve got free exercise equipment at your disposal.

Try climbing vigorously – fast enough that you’re breathing hard by the top – for 20-60 seconds, two to three times throughout your day. Earlier research found that women who progressively increased their stair climbing to five ascents daily saw a 17% improvement in fitness after just eight weeks.

Walking bursts count too, provided they’re vigorous. Try doing a brisk one-minute walk around the office or a quick lap of your garden a few times a day. But in order to see benefits, you’ve got to make sure the pace is quick enough that holding a conversation becomes difficult.

Bodyweight exercises such as squats, lunges or wall push-ups can be done almost anywhere. Try a set of ten squats every time you make a cup of tea or some wall push-ups before lunch. The key is intensity – you should feel your heart rate rise and be slightly out of breath.

Consistency matters more than perfection when it comes to exercise snacks. The research shows that even very brief sessions – as short as 20 seconds – can contribute to fitness improvements so long as they’re repeated regularly.

The trick is building these snacks into existing habits. Climb stairs before your morning coffee. Do squats during TV adverts. Take a brisk walk after finishing a work call.

Exercise snacks won’t replace the full range of benefits you’d get from a comprehensive fitness programme. But for the millions of us who struggle to find time for traditional workouts, they offer a practical entry point – one backed by increasingly robust science.

The biggest gains in health happen when someone goes from doing nothing to doing something. So next time you’re waiting for the kettle to boil or have a few minutes between meetings, consider having an exercise snack. Your heart will thank you.

Jack McNamara 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. Exercise snacks: the best bursts of activity to incorporate into your day – https://theconversation.com/exercise-snacks-the-best-bursts-of-activity-to-incorporate-into-your-day-272836

January 16, 2026

Robert Jenrick sacked by Tories and embraced by Reform – what his Newark constituency tells us about the future

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Thomas Lockwood, PhD Researcher in Politics, York St John University

Within just a few hours of being publicly sacked from the shadow cabinet by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, , Robert Jenrick held a press conference to announce he was joining Reform. Badenoch cited “clear, irrefutable evidence” the Jenrick had been plotting to defect to Reform in a maximally damaging way.

In his press conference, Jenrick attacked his former party, painted a bleak view of the state of Britain and declared that Nigel Farage was the only person who could save it.

Jenrick has said that he doesn’t intend to trigger a by-election, which means the people of Newark, his constituency in the English East Midlands, have lost a Conservative MP and gained a Reform one. Newark will then, come a general election, become a test of Reform’s penetration into traditional Tory shire heartlands. Here, the 2024 election results already looked like a warning light: the Conservatives held on against Labour but Reform emerged as a meaningful third force. Newark is an affluent market-town and rural seat, where traditional Tory loyalty has long dominated.

Jenrick held Newark (contested under new boundaries) quite comfortably in 2024. He won 20,968 votes, taking 38.2% of the vote share, and ending up with a majority of 3,572 over Labour, which came second with 17,396 or 32.5% of the vote. Reform had 15.5% of the vote – 8,280 votes.

Newark’s vote in 2024

A pie chart showing the election result in Newark in 2024. — How the Newark vote broke down in 2024.
UK Parliament

In the 2025 Nottinghamshire County Council elections, Reform gained control regionally (taking 40 of 66 seats), but the Conservatives held or narrowly beat Reform in Newark-area divisions, indicating shire Tory loyalty persists against the insurgent wave.

Those 2024 general election numbers in the constituency really do matter though. They show Newark is no longer a seat where the Conservatives can rely on a big cushion. The party held on, but it did so in a fragmented contest with nine candidates and amid a clear anti-Conservative mood nationally.

It’s also clear that Reform’s 15% is not an incidental protest vote. It is large enough to be decisive if the right splits further – or to become the base for a serious challenge if it consolidates, such as via an electoral pact, as unlikely as that currently looks.

Yet the most useful indicator of whether Reform can consolidate is what happens between general elections – in contests where party organisation and motivated voters matter.

In Newark & Sherwood District Council by-elections in November 2025, Reform won two seats and the details are striking. In the Castle ward, Reform’s Michelle Home won with 204 votes, narrowly ahead of the Local Conservatives on 193.

In Balderton North & Coddington, Reform’s Kay Smith won with 545 votes, beating Local Conservatives on 480.

By-elections can be weird: turnout is low, issues can be hyper-local, and parties sometimes don’t throw full resources at them. But taken together, these results suggest Reform has crossed an important threshold: it can win actual contests in areas such as these, not just rack up national vote share.

Wider local election data points the same way. In Newark & Sherwood’s 2025 results (reported at district level), Reform’s vote share sits virtually level with the Conservatives (33.7% vs 33.6%), while Reform wins multiple seats.

The constituency profile: fertile territory

Newark has characteristics often associated with Reform’s strongest performances, including a mixed economy of market town, suburban edges and rural hinterland.

A government local data profile for Newark-on-Trent reports roughly 95.3% identifying as white. That are pockets of deprivation and education and skills gaps in the constituency, which can prove receptive to narratives about being overlooked by distant decision-makers.

It’s important to stress that none of this mechanically produces a Reform MP. It does, however, help to explain why messages about immigration, institutions and “broken politics” might resonate; and why a candidate pitching themselves as an insurgent against the status quo might find an audience.

But the crucial variable is Jenrick himself. He is not a blank slate. He has high name recognition, ministerial experience and a public profile built around “tough” issues (especially immigration and crime) that overlap with Reform’s core terrain. He has, lately, been shifting further to the right, posting provocative social media videos about immigration, ticket fare dodgers and crime.

This matters because of what might be called a permission slip effect: when a familiar, high-status politician validates a challenger party, it can give cautious voters “permission” to treat that party as credible rather than purely protest. This is why Reform has been pleased to welcome other defectors from the Conservative party who had previously served in ministerial roles, such as former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi.

For a “Jenrick-as-Reform” candidacy to top Labour in Newark, Reform needs to add at least 17 points from elsewhere. These would almost certainly come from former Conservative voters and non-voters. Jenrick would need to pull about half of his 2024 Conservative coalition across with him. That is possible but far from guaranteed. Some may, of course, wish to punish him.

The right vote could split in a way that hands Labour the seat even if Reform rises with Jenrick as its candidate. Newark’s 2024 margin was already tight enough for that scenario to be plausible.

Wanting “a Reform MP” is also different from wanting “Reform-ish politics”. That is the final complication: Reform has built its appeal partly on being an anti-Tory option. It remains to be seen whether voters like the convenience of a known figure as Reform candidate or reject it as recycled politics.

Either way, Newark is no longer just Jenrick’s seat. It is now a live laboratory test for the future of the British right – and for the fragmentation and reinvention of British politics.

Thomas Lockwood 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. Robert Jenrick sacked by Tories and embraced by Reform – what his Newark constituency tells us about the future – https://theconversation.com/robert-jenrick-sacked-by-tories-and-embraced-by-reform-what-his-newark-constituency-tells-us-about-the-future-273646

January 16, 2026

Northern England’s rail upgrade could signal change in direction for public transport

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marcus Mayers, Visiting Research Fellow, Manchester Metropolitan University

The UK government says it has learned valuable lessons from the expense, delays and political embarrassment of HS2. And now it has laid out detailed plans for train passengers in northern England who have been so badly “let down” in the past.

Northern Powerhouse Rail will apparently bring new and upgraded routes from east to west of the region, linking Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford, Leeds, Sheffield and Hull. Major capacity and journey time improvements have been promised.

Away from the actual tracks though, the scheme could come to represent a welcome change in the direction of travel for public transport more generally.

Funding for example, will follow a new hybrid model – with central government retaining overall control but with local authorities also contributing through devolved transport budgets and regional investment plans.

Delivery of the project will also involve a large amount of collaboration between the London-based Department for Transport (DfT) and politicians in the north of England. This could signal a welcome political commitment to a nationally significant scheme being shaped through regional collaboration.

But it could also prove to be quite a test for a government department that is often criticised for being too centralised and overly complex. So is the DfT ready to implement a genuinely devolved transport system?

As it is, the department has a fairly broad range of responsibility. Apart from railways, it covers roads and local transport, maritime issues and security, and decarbonisation and technology.

Over the years, each of these areas within the department has developed close relationships with the industries they oversee. And while such collaboration can be beneficial, it also risks creating a revolving door between government and industry.

This can distract from the fundamental objective of delivering an efficient transport system, as decisions are made which benefit industries rather than the travelling public.

Moving forward

An alternative approach for the department would be to redefine transport outputs more clearly in terms of social or economic value. After all, if journeys do not create value, why are they being made?

The department could then be reorganised to focus on specific demands and needs rather than particular modes of transport. There could be a section focused on commuting and local travel for example, with another specialising in intercity travel, and another devoted to international passengers.

For instance, suppose there is a departmental goal to support 150,000 business meetings and 150,000 social interactions each day between Manchester and Birmingham. A broad mix of tactics to achieve this might include high-speed rail, intercity coaches, private car travel and digital connectivity through virtual meetings.

Some devolved regions are already experimenting with this kind of demand-based approach. Manchester’s “Bee network” initiative – the first mayoral authority to take buses back from commercial operators – is one example.

Railway track stretches ahead to horizon. — On the right tracks?
semen semyonitch/Shutterstock

What is certain is that the DfT must adapt if it is to serve the UK population effectively, especially as regional powers grow and digital technology continues to reshape how people connect.

As the transport pioneer Henry Ford observed: “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.”

New links

The challenge for the UK government, beyond a plan to improve rail travel in northern England, is to configure the DfT’s resources in a way that ensures both physical and digital transport are fit to support the people and economy of the UK.

Northern Powerhouse Rail therefore becomes a test not just of investment ambition, but of institutional and operational design. Had the DfT been organised more clearly around outcomes or needs (rather than modes of transport), a more integrated set of solutions might have emerged sooner, combining rail, road and digital connectivity as a single system.

Even so, the programme signals a long overdue and welcome shift in direction. By forcing new ways of working between Whitehall and the regions, it creates the conditions for a more integrated approach to transport over time.

If the department is willing to learn from this experiment in devolution, Northern Powerhouse Rail could mark not just a new railway for the north, but the beginning of a more adaptive and effective transport system across the whole of England.

Marcus Mayers receives is a transport advisor to the MP JJulia Buckley.

David Bamford 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. Northern England’s rail upgrade could signal change in direction for public transport – https://theconversation.com/northern-englands-rail-upgrade-could-signal-change-in-direction-for-public-transport-273516

January 15, 2026

What next for Iran as Trump pulls back?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor, The Conversation

This newsletter was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

For anyone who has watched Iranians take to the streets before, as they have at reasonably regular intervals over the years, this week’s protests had a depressingly familiar feel – viewed from the safety and comfort of the UK, that is.

What started as angry bazaar traders complaining about the economic mismanagement that had led to surging inflation and the collapse of the Iranian rial spread quickly across the country and to almost every level of society at the beginning of January. Tens of thousands of people, desperate to break free from the stifling oppression of the theocracy, took to the streets to call for an end to the Islamic Republic and for a system that would respect their fundamental rights and democratic freedoms.

For a while it felt as if this might be their chance. The Islamic Republic is close to breaking point, with an ageing Ayatollah presiding over a sclerotic regime, a parlous economy and a military weakened and demoralised by the 12-day war with Israel and the virtual destruction of its proxies across the Middle East.

But as has happened so many times before, the bravery of the protesters was met with the savagery of a regime with its backs to the wall, for whom the only response seems to be to massacre, rather than listen to, the people it should be protecting.

Many of those following the story had mixed feelings when the US president, Donald Trump, signalled the US would get involved. Maybe US intervention might be what was needed to collapse the regime and set the people of Iran free, or – at the very least – force the regime to negotiate and agree to some much-needed democratic reforms. On the other hand, a US military intervention in Iran had (and has) the potential to be an utter disaster.

Nevertheless, when Trump posted a message, “Iranian Patriots, keep protesting – take over your institutions!!! … help is on its way,” it felt as if this might be the moment of change. But the US pulled back – unready to act and uncertain of what intervention could achieve. Now the forces of repression are once again taking over Iran’s streets.

We spoke with Scott Lucas, a Middle East expert at the Clinton Institute, University College Dublin and a regular commentator on The Conversation, who addressed several of the key issues that will affect the future of Iran.

It’s clear that the vast majority of Iranians reject the theocracy. And not just from the fact that there have been so many massive protests calling for democratic change. They’ve repeatedly told researchers the same thing. In the latest survey conducted late last year by Ammar Maleki of Tilburg University and Pooyan Tamimi Arab of the University of Utrecht they found the 80% of Iranians reject the regime.

But, interestingly, there was less of a consensus about what Iranians want to replace it. Only about one-third support the exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi (although that number appears to be growing) and about twice as many felt that protests and strikes were more likely to force change than elections. The second most popular option for change was foreign pressure or intervention, but as we’ve seen this week, foreign intervention seems unlikely, for the present at least.

Bamo Nouri, meanwhile, believes that a US military intervention is pretty much the last thing that Iran needs right now. Experience has shown that the threat of foreign intervention has actually had the opposite effect, allowing the feared Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to consolidate its domestic power.

And Iranians tend to be wary of western interventions. Everyone knows about the coup of 1953 in which the US, with British help, unseated the democratically elected prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh for the crime of nationalising Iran’s oil industry (as we’ve seen recently in Venezuela, this still goes down badly with energy superpowers).

Soon after the protests started to really spread across Iran (and before the killing started in earnest) the regime employed a tactic they have used before to great effect. They shut down the internet. In a tech-savvy country like Iran, word of protests spreads like wildfire, so preventing people’s access to social media meant that it was far more difficult to organise online.

In theory, at least. But between 80 and 90% Iran’s aforementioned tech savvy population now uses a VPN to access the internet. This, writes Konstantinos Mersinas and Francesco Ferazza, tech experts at Royal Holloway, University of London, meant that the regime was forced to actually shut down the infrastructure that supports all communications networks in Iran.

It’s a measure of how seriously the authorities were taking these protests that the Islamic Republic was happy to live with the consequences of the shutdown, write Mersinas and Ferazza, that they were willing to suffer a breakdown in banking, payments, logistics and all the other facets of everyday life that depend on online communications.

Greenland under pressure

The US president, meanwhile, continues to covet Greenland. Whether for its mineral wealth, its vital strategic position or just the fact that by acquiring it for the US would mean he has added more territory to the map of the US than any of his predecessors.

There’s no getting away from the fact that Greenland is slap bang in the middle of one of the Earth’s most contested regions. And Trump is right when he says it’s important for US national security to have a robust Nato military presence there. As Caroline Kennedy-Pipe, professor of war studies at Loughborough University, points out, Russia has spent the past decade beefing up its assets in the region and far outmatches western military capabilities across the Arctic.

This is only going to increase as the Arctic continues to warm, writes geopolitics specialist Klaus Dodds of Middlesex University. The region is at the heart of what he refers to as the “new great game” between global superpowers.

Vector map of the Arctic — Contested: the Arctic is increasingly seen as a potential area of conflict as the competition for great power status between Russia, China and the US develops.
Dimitrios Karamitros/Shutterstock

Dodds is concerned that 2026 may see a series of cynical but expedient territorial swaps, whereby Trump’s America is happy to see Putin’s Russia take the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard in return for a free hand in Greenland (we’ll say nothing about Ukraine at this point). Taking a bigger picture view, Dodds concludes that: “The ground would thus be prepared for a new world order in which Putin, China’s president Xi Jinping and Trump all have their spheres of domination, not just influence.”

Danish foreign Minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, and his Greenlandic counterpart, Vivian Motzfeldt, went to the White House on January 14 to meet US vice-president, J.D. Vance, and secretary of state, Marco Rubio, to discuss the future of the world’s largest island. The meeting reportedly lasted less than an hour, ending when it was clear, as Rasmussen told journalists, that there is still a “fundamental disagreement” over the future of Greenland.

Still, at least Greenland was represented at the meeting. The island’s 57,000 people have been angered at times by Denmark’s failure to include them in some of the discussions about their future. As they say in Greenland: “nothing about Greenland without Greenlanders”.

Ukraine observes a bitter landmark

There was a bitter landmark for Ukraine this week. On Tuesday Vladimir Putin’s “special military operation” moved beyond the 1,418 days it took the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin to beat Hitler’s Germany.

Comparing the two conflicts, Stefan Wolff notes the unqualified support offered by the US under its president Franklin D. Roosevelt, compared to the vacillations of the current occupant of the White House. And free Europe had a rather more impressive leader in Winston Churchill.

As the fourth anniversary of the full-scale Russian war in Ukraine approaches, Wolff takes stock of the situation and worries that Ukraine is a long way from becoming another much-needed example of the maxim that “aggression never pays”.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

– ref. What next for Iran as Trump pulls back? – https://theconversation.com/what-next-for-iran-as-trump-pulls-back-273622

January 15, 2026

One in five Britons say losing their pet was worse than losing a person – new study

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Fiona Brook, Lecturer, Psychology, Birmingham City University

For one in five people, losing a pet has been more distressing than losing a human loved one. New research has revealed that 21% of those who experienced both types of bereavement found their pet’s death harder to bear.

The findings challenge how society views pet loss. It’s often dismissed as “disenfranchised grief” – a type of mourning that isn’t socially recognised or validated in the same way as other bereavements.

Yet for most pet owners, their animals are family. A 2025 survey by the animal charity RSPCA found that 99% consider their pets part of the family rather than “just a pet”. On Instagram, #dogsarefamily alone has 3.4 million posts.

The latest study of 975 British adults revealed something striking. Around 7.5% of people who’d lost pets met clinical criteria for “prolonged grief disorder” – comparable to rates following many human deaths.

A depressed woman staring out of a window. — Many suffer from prolonged grief disorder.
fizkes/Shutterstock.com

Grief typically involves a range of emotions including anger, denial, relief, guilt and sadness. Prolonged grief disorder, however, is more severe – the psychiatrists’ diagnostic manual, the DSM-V, defines it as “intense and persistent grief symptoms which are not only distressing in themselves but also associated with problems in functioning” lasting 12 months or more after a loss.

Currently, only human deaths qualify for this diagnosis. But the research, led by Philip Hyland of Maynooth University in Ireland, found no measurable differences in how prolonged grief disorder symptoms manifest, whether the loss involves a person or a pet.

Pet loss actually accounted for 8.1% of all prolonged grief disorder cases in the study – a higher proportion than many types of human losses. Those who had lost a pet were 27% more likely to develop prolonged grief disorder symptoms than those who hadn’t.

That figure sits between the rates for losing a parent (31%) and losing a sibling (21%). It’s higher than the rates for losing a close friend or other family member.

The findings suggest diagnostic criteria may be missing something important. What matters most isn’t who has died, but the quality and meaning of the relationship with the deceased.

One major risk factor for prolonged grief disorder is lack of social support after loss. People grieving pets often face this difficult period without adequate understanding from those around them, potentially leading to the disorder developing.

Many participants expressed embarrassment and shame about sharing their feelings. This can lead to isolation and make it harder to process the loss.

Lack of recognition and support

By excluding pet loss from diagnostic criteria, some people may struggle to access support or workplace adjustments during this difficult time. The lack of recognition can compound an already painful experience.

Pet death also comes with unique challenges. Owners may be involved in the decision to euthanise their pet – something that doesn’t happen with human loss.

For some, this brings comfort, feeling they’ve supported their pet at the end. For others, it’s traumatic – particularly if they’ve felt excluded from the decision by the vet or worried they acted too early. Traumatic circumstances are another risk factor for prolonged grief disorder.

While the study suggests the DSM-V diagnostic criteria may need updating, help is available now for those grieving a pet. The RSPCA offers a pet bereavement toolkit to help people navigate their loss.

Specialist counsellors also work with pet bereavement. Getting support from professionals who understand the significance of the bond between people and their pets could help reduce the risk of prolonged grief disorder, offering the understanding and compassion needed during such a painful time.

Fiona Brook runs a small private psychotherapy practice, Fiona Brook Counselling and Psychotherapy

– ref. One in five Britons say losing their pet was worse than losing a person – new study – https://theconversation.com/one-in-five-britons-say-losing-their-pet-was-worse-than-losing-a-person-new-study-273410

January 15, 2026

I was a designer for RuneScape – its comeback reveals how old games can be rejuvenated

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matthew Holland, Senior lecturer in game design and development, Anglia Ruskin University

RuneScape experienced a surge of popularity over the 2025 holiday season. While fan nostalgia for a game that is now 25 years old plays a role, the revival more clearly reflects recent changes to RuneScape’s controversial monetisation – changes that appear to be drawing players back.

I worked at RuneScape from 2008 until 2014. First as a content developer – a designer, writer and implementer for the frequent updates – then as a senior designer, design lead and product owner for non-subscription monetisation.

Runescape is a multiplayer fantasy roleplaying video game, originally played via web browser but now downloadable. It was venerable even when I joined, and the questions that were on my team’s minds at the time are still relevant now – particularly around risks and benefits of courting player nostalgia, preserving versus modernising the game, and how to monetise in a sensitive way.

Reliable player numbers for RuneScape are hard to come by. The game’s publisher Jagex publishes real-time concurrent player counts, which show clear long-term trends, but does not release monthly active user figures. While exact revenue breakdowns are not public, changes in active players still matter because engaged players are the most likely to subscribe or spend.

The RuneScape franchise includes the main game, which has been live since 2001, and Old School RuneScape. The latter was launched in 2013 as a deliberately preserved version of the game as it existed in 2007, aimed at nostalgic players.

A comparison of active players shows that Old School RuneScape doesn’t share the current surge in RuneScape’s popularity. It had a peak in April 2025, which is difficult to attribute because Sailing – Old School RuneScape’s first new skill since 2013 – was added later in the year.

The skill allows players to captain custom ships, explore vast oceans and discover new islands. Sailing itself highlights the fascinating dichotomy of making substantial additions to a game whose tradition and timelessness were such a selling point.

There’s much to be said about nostalgia as a player motivation; including players long absent from RuneScape returning to it, and those travelling back via Old School RuneScape. Research on World of Warcraft and World of Warcraft Classic suggests that nostalgia may be tied less to game mechanics than to social presence – the experience of a densely populated world. Returning players may find that this social dimension no longer exists in the same form.

RuneScape – balanced more toward modernisation than Old School RuneScape’s respect for long-standing players – is experiencing a revival of its own. Nostalgia may be a factor, but a more immediate explanation for December’s player spike lies in one of the game’s enduring development tensions: how far Jagex can modernise and monetise the game without alienating its most loyal players.

The influence of monetisation

In 2012, RuneScape added options for microtransactions – additional payments on top of or alongside subscriptions. These included a conventional store and a game of chance for cosmetic upgrades or gameplay-affecting items.

An additional revenue stream is important to a publisher; a subscription limits how much can be earned from players with greater spending power and generates nothing from those who cannot afford it.

Resistance to microtransactions is well documented in western markets, particularly when players perceive them as double charging or as granting unfair competitive advantages. Publishers often continue despite negative reactions, as seen in the controversy around the Blizzard game Diablo Immortal in 2022.

This secondary monetisation was often heavily adjusted, even while I worked on the original implementation and oversaw that group in 2013-14. Since 2014, RuneScape also had a polls system and a remarkably powerful programme of letting player choice influence development.

October 2025 introduced a poll for players to approve a considerable rework to reduce and stabilise the impact of microtransactions on player progression. It passed the required 100,000 votes on the first day. The vote wasn’t left to chance, though. For Jagex, under new CEO Jon Bellamy, it’s part of a strategy to “restore” RuneScape “even if it hurts the bottom line”. The result of the vote was predictable but valuable in proving this viewpoint isn’t just a vocal minority.

The surge suggests it’s working so far. Whether these players remain active and subscribed remains to be seen: some may be returning from 2012, and their nostalgia for RuneScape as it was may not fit the current game. Others might have been long-term players had it not been for the monetisation. It may attract new players, familiar with the game but deterred by the billing model.

Also unpredictable is whether additional subscriptions will restore the lost revenue. Some of the key monetisation features remain – including Bonds, which allow cash-rich players to buy game-time that can be sold for in-game currency to time-rich players – so Jagex’s financial flexibility remains better than subscriptions alone. The move is “something most games wouldn’t dare” according to gaming news platform Polygon, and should be very popular with players. But will that goodwill translate into enough shifted revenue?

I’m pleased with the outcome and I suspect others who’ve worked on RuneScape monetisation would share that. That balance between happy players and the bottom line – which can easily fail in either direction – was always difficult to maintain. While contributing to studio health is satisfying, I hope there are several developers soon being freed up to work on other content.

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.

Matthew Holland 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 was a designer for RuneScape – its comeback reveals how old games can be rejuvenated – https://theconversation.com/i-was-a-designer-for-runescape-its-comeback-reveals-how-old-games-can-be-rejuvenated-273308

January 15, 2026

Northern England’s rail upgrade could signal change in direction fo public transport

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marcus Mayers, Visiting Research Fellow, Manchester Metropolitan University

Away from the actual tracks though, the scheme could come to represent a welcome change in the direction of travel for public transport more generally.

As it is, the department has a fairly broad range of responsibility. Apart from railways, it covers roads and local transport, maritime issues and security, and decarbonisation and technology.

This can distract from the fundamental objective of delivering an efficient transport system, as decisions are made which benefit industries rather than the travelling public.

Moving forward

What is certain is that the DfT must adapt if it is to serve the UK population effectively, especially as regional powers grow and digital technology continues to reshape how people connect.

As the transport pioneer Henry Ford observed: “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.”

New links

Marcus Mayers receives is a transport advisor to the MP JJulia Buckley.

– ref. Northern England’s rail upgrade could signal change in direction fo public transport – https://theconversation.com/northern-englands-rail-upgrade-could-signal-change-in-direction-fo-public-transport-273516