Wednesday, October 09, 2024

Can Montana’s ‘last rural Democrat’ survive another election?

WALZ SHOULD STUMP WITH TESTER
ON ABORTION IT'S A WIN-WIN

TWO WHITE GUYS TALKING ABORTION
BAM FRONT PAGE NEWS

The Conversation
October 9, 2024 

U.S. Senator Jon Tester (D-Mont.) (Shutterstock.com)

Jon Tester has never had it easy.

The three-term Democratic senator from Montana has scored more than 50% of the vote only once in his three runs for the U.S. Senate, attracting 50.3% of the vote in 2018 against state auditor and future U.S. Rep. Matt Rosendale.

This year, Tester’s always-perilous path to reelection seems narrower and more harrowing than ever before. And the outcome could determine whether the Senate remains in Democratic control or flips to the Republicans.

Current polls and political prognosticators are even starting to turn on the moderate from the farming community of Big Sandy with the flattop haircut. FiveThirtyEight has Tester’s opponent, former Navy SEAL and businessman Tim Sheehy, up four percentage points, and the venerable Cook Political Report has gone so far as to say the race “leans Republican.”

For Montana State University political scientist Jessi Bennion, this election may be the end of an era in rural America.

“I used to always call Tester the unicorn candidate because there was no one like him,” she told my students a couple of weeks back. “He was a farmer, he was a rural Democrat, the last rural Democrat.”
ADVERTISEMENT



Jon Tester, right, first won election to the U.S. Senate in 2006, when he beat Republican incumbent Conrad Burns, left, by a margin of 3,562 votes out of 406,505 cast. Win McNamee/Getty Images


The end of the unicorn?

I teach political reporting at the University of Montana School of Journalism, and every two years I send students out to interview candidates, profile races and talk with voters. It is true that the state has changed even since Tester won in 2018.

Despite an influx of outsiders over the past decade, Montana is still a sparsely populated state boasting 1.1 million people in the latest census. Though the state has historically relied on mining and timber for much of its economy, new economic activity in tourism and technology have helped fuel a 10% jump in population in the most recent census.

But with that influx, housing costs have soared and so have property taxes. It also leaves one of Montana’s political traditions in danger.

See, Montana has a history of doing something very few people do these days – ticket splitting, when a person votes in an election for candidates from opposing parties. In a time of deep polarization, it is hard to imagine, but out here in the Rocky Mountains and the northern plains, voters would consistently vote for a Republican for president and often for the Legislature, but also for Democrat Jon Tester.

Tester was able to put together a coalition of voters in the few pockets of liberals – college towns such as Missoula, union strongholds such as Butte and Indigenous voters on the reservation – and carve away enough moderate voters in more rural areas to eke out wins. When I moved here in 2009, it was not just Tester who did this. Back then, Montana had a Democratic governor, attorney general and head of schools. But over time those statewide offices have all gone, often by double digits, to Republicans.

No Democrat has won statewide since Tester did it back in 2018.

Migration and the march from purple to red

Then COVID-19 hit Montana.

The state saw a surge in population, jumping nearly 5% between 2020 and 2023, and experts such as political scientist Jeremy Johnson told my students earlier this fall that it is important to know who these new residents are.

“I still think the race, you know, can be competitive,” Johnson said. “I do think that some of my broader themes here – the polarization, the calcification, the reluctance to ticket split – makes it harder for Tester. Plus, I think there is some evidence that more Republican-leaning voters have moved to the state than Democrat-leaning voters in the last few years.”

One analysis reported on by the Montana Free Press found that for every two Democrats who moved to Montana since 2008, three Republicans did.

Montana does not have party registration, so when you vote in a primary, they give you a ballot for both parties, and you choose the one you want to participate in. In the highly publicized U.S. Senate primary this year, only 36% of primary voters voted in the Democratic primary, while 64% chose to vote in the Republican primary.

The one question mark of 2024


Supporters of an abortion rights initiative at a rally on Sept. 5, 2024, in Bozeman, Mont., with Sen. Jon Tester, whose path to reelection may be helped by a large turnout of abortion rights voters. William Campbell/Getty Images

Ask Sen. Tester, and he will say his campaign is anything but over. He is stressing his independence from his political party, how Republican President Donald Trump signed bills he sponsored and his long-running support of veterans as cornerstones of his campaign.

But his path to reelection may run right through Roe v. Wade.

Montana’s constitution was written in 1972, and it has some pretty progressive elements, including a right to a clean environment and an explicit right to privacy, as opposed to the more implied one in the U.S. Constitution. And in 1999, the state Supreme Court said that right to privacy included abortion access.


Still, in part to ensure that a later court decision could not strip away that right, voters have put CI-128 on the ballot this fall, which would explicitly include protection for abortion access in the state constitution.

Tester hit the issue hard in his last debate with Sheehy on Sept. 30, 2024.

“The bottom line is this: Whose decision is it to be made?” Tester said during the debate. “Is it the federal government’s decision, the state government’s decision, Tim Sheehy’s decision, Jon Tester’s decision? No, it’s the woman’s decision. Tim Sheehy’s called abortion ‘terrible’ and ‘murder.’ That doesn’t sound to me like he’s supporting the woman to make that decision.”


Tester’s supporters hope the initiative could inspire younger voters and moderate women to flock to the polls this fall, and that might make Tester’s path to reelection a bit more doable.

But it is going to take a bit of unicorn magic, perhaps, for Tester to win a fourth term.

Back at Montana State University, Bennion said the situation looks pretty dire for the Democrats in rural states.

“I don’t see, unless our state changes in a lot of different ways, I don’t see a Democrat winning in a long time,” he said. “Just the way our state is growing, the kind of person that is moving here and voting.”

Lee Banville, Professor and Director of the School of Journalism, University of Montana

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How billionaires are buying the presidency for Trump

Thom Hartmann
October 9, 2024 

Tesla CEO and X owner Elon Musk reacts next to Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. president Donald Trump during a campaign rally, at the site of the July assassination attempt against Trump, in Butler, Pennsylvania, U.S., October 5, 2024. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo

“The evil man is a source of fascination; ordinary persons wonder what impels such extremes of conduct. A lust for wealth? A common motive, undoubtedly. A craving for power? Revenge against society? Let us grant these as well. But when wealth has been gained, power achieved and society brought down to a state of groveling submission, what then? Why does he continue? The response must be: the love of evil for its own sake.”
Unspiek, Baron Bodissey



Donald Trump has been found by a jury of his peers to have raped a woman. He’s a traitor who’s embraced foreign dictators, particularly Vladimir Putin, who just sentenced an American to prison while actively bombing a democratic American ally. He’s a convicted criminal who stole money from a children’s cancer charity and scammed students out of millions of dollars. He tried to end American democracy by force. Like Hitler justifying the Holocaust, he claimed some Americans are genetically inferior. And he’s a whisker away from the presidency.

How is this even possible?

You can trace it all back to dark money.

Ever since Citizens United legalized literally unlimited contributions to the new category of political action committees it created (SuperPACs), just in the 15 months from January 2023 to April of 2024 over $8.6 billion was raised for this year’s federal campaigns with over 65% of that money — $5.6 billion — running through PACs.


Nine years ago, President Jimmy Carter said on my program:
“It [Citizens United] violates the essence of what made America a great country in its political system. Now it’s just an oligarchy, with unlimited political bribery being the essence of getting the nominations for president or to elect the president. … So now we’ve just seen a complete subversion of our political system as a payoff to major contributors, who want and expect and sometimes get favors for themselves after the election’s over.”


He’s right. But it’s even worse than Carter imagined. Dark money — billions from the morbidly rich and giant corporations, often untraceable — has taken over the entire GOP and is the main weapon being used today against members of the Democratic Party.

It’s also badly distorting public policy.


For example, remember when Donald Trump was outspoken about banning TikTok from America because the app is owned by Chinese billionaires beholden to that nation’s communist government? In August of 2020, he signed an Executive Order that said, in part:
“This data collection [by TikTok] threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans' personal and proprietary information — potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage.”


Proving the old adage that even a broken clock is right twice a day, Trump was right about TikTok and its owner, ByteDance. Federal lawsuits blocked his ban so it never went into effect, but in the meantime a fellow most Americans have never heard of — Jeffrey Yass — either flew down to Mar-a-Lago and spent time with Trump or met him backstage at an Elon Musk event (media reports conflict).

Yass — the world’s 64th richest person worth an estimated $40 billion — owns Susquehanna International Group, a trading company that owned large blocks of stock in both ByteDance (TikTok’s parent) and Digital World Acquisition Corporation, the company that merged back in March with Trump Media & Technology Group just as that company was desperately running out of cash.


Reportedly, the merger not only prevented Trump’s Truth Social app from going bankrupt but also let Trump take the combined company public, putting an estimated 3 billion dollars in his own personal pocket.

Even more interesting, given Yass’ holding $15 billion in ByteDance stock — the largest holding outside China, representing 7% of the company’s stock — after the Trump/Yass meeting the former President suddenly reversed his opposition to TikTok. As ABC News reported at the time:
“[T]he former president has been rebuilding his relationship with a GOP megadonor who reportedly has a major financial stake in the popular social media platform.”


And that megadonor has been busy.


While Pennsylvania-based Yass’ entire donation portfolio to Republican politicians was reported as a mere $78,000 in 2012, this year he’s the nation’s second largest political donor, reportedly having dropped more than $80,000,000 in support of Republicans over the past few months. He’s spent more in Pennsylvania than the top 10 corporate PACs combined, according to the All Eyes on Yasscampaign.

You and I have one vote each, and are limited to giving a maximum of $3,300 to any one political candidate. Pretty much every penny after that falls into the simple category of dark money, or potential dark money.

And America’s billionaires and corporations are pouring billions of that dark money into PACs and SuperPACs that are, right now, flooding the nation’s airways with attack ads against Democrats.


How did it come to this?

In 2010, five corrupt Republicans on the Supreme Court made it super easy for billionaires to give lavish gifts and support to Supreme Court justices and members of Congress. Their Citizens United decision blew open the doors to a bizarre new era of dark money-driven oligarchy in America.

A report from Americans for Tax Fairness details the damage these democracy-destroying decisions, made by SCOTUS members who, themselves, were at the time being groomed by billionaires, have done to our political system.


This is the brave new world Clarence Thomas’ tie-breaking vote brought America when the Supreme Court, in their 2010 Citizens United decision, legalized both political bribery and massive intervention in elections by corporations and billionaires.

Prior to Thomas’ vote on that decision, Harlan Crow — who helped finance the original Swift Boat attacks on John Kerry in 2004 — and other billionaires had lavished millions on him and his family.

Crow gave the group that Thomas’ wife, Ginni, started a half million dollars; he bought Thomas’ mother’s home and others in the neighborhood so she could live rent-free for the rest of her life; he put Thomas’ nephew through an expensive prep school. Another billionaire bought Thomas a quarter-million-dollar luxury RV.


It was a remarkably successful investment for Crow, his family, and his billionaire buddies. Just his own family’s political contributions went from an average of a few hundred thousand dollars a year during the decade preceding 2010 to multiple millions every year after Thomas’ vote. Americans for Tax Fairness calculated it at an 862% increase just for the Crow family.

In 2010, the year of the Citizens Uniteddecision, all of America’s billionaires together spent a mere $31 million on elections: There were still substantial limits on dark money in American politics.

That number jumped to $231 million in the 2012 and 2014 elections, and over $600 million for both 2016 and 2018.


The dark money blowout came in 2020, when Trump was running for re-election and there was a very real chance the billionaires could seize complete control of our federal government.

They spent a total of $2,362,000,000 in that election, with $1.2 billion of it going to elect conventional politicians who would then be beholden to their patrons.

As Americans for Tax Fairness notes:

“The report finds that almost 40% of all billionaire campaign contributions made since 1990 occurred during the 2020 season. Billionaires had a lot more money to give politicians and political causes in 2020 as their collective wealth jumped by nearly a third, or over $900 billion, to $3.9 trillion between the March beginning of the pandemic and a month before Election Day.
“Billionaire fortunes have continued to climb since: as of October 2021, billionaires were worth $5.1 trillion, more than a 20-fold increase in their collective fortune since 1990, when it stood at $240 billion, adjusted for inflation.
“These campaign donations are a profitable investment: they buy access to politicians and influence over tax and other policies that can save tycoons billions of dollars. While that $1.2 billion ‘investment’ in 2020 was massive, it totaled less than 0.1% of billionaire wealth (and less than one day’s worth of their pandemic wealth growth), leaving almost unlimited room for future growth in billionaire campaign spending.”


And this year will be far worse, once the dark money numbers come in this winter. As NBC News tells us:
“Political ad spending is projected to reach new heights by the end of the 2024 election cycle, eclipsing $10 billion in what would amount to the most expensive two years in political history.”


While Thomas Jefferson was still the US envoy to France and living in Paris, just after the Constitution had been written but a year before it would be ratified, John Adams wrote him on December 6, 1778 arguing that Jefferson’s fear of a strongman president wasn’t as big a concern as Adams’ fear of rich people corrupting American politics:
“You are afraid of the one — I, of the few. We agree perfectly that the many should have a full fair and perfect Representation. — You are Apprehensive of Monarchy; I, of Aristocracy.”


Today, if Trump is reelected, we will have both.

Kamala Harris has made it clear that if she’s elected her first order of business will be to pass the For The People Act, which will overturn large parts of Citizens United and again regulate dark money in politics.

That’s probably why our airwaves are currently saturated with hit-piece ads against Harris and other Democrats — paid for by shady dark money PACs — that make GHW Bush’s Willie Horton ads seem tame.

Rightwing billionaires are nearly in control of our government — and easily control the Republicans on the Supreme Court and in Congress — but now they want all of it. And they sure as hell don’t want to have to cough up the taxes to pay for our government.

This election may be America’s last stand against this country becoming, like Hungary and Russia, a full-on oligarchy run of, by, and for a small, malevolent group of the morbidly rich. But, to paraphrase Jim Morrison’s 60’s protest anthem: They got the money, but we got the numbers.

And now we must turn out those numbers if our democracy is to survive this all-out assault by a handful of obscenely rich people who think, as does billionaire-funded Curtis Yarvin (JD Vance’s favorite philosopher) that we should just all “get over” our “dictator phobia.”

Wall Street Journal shredded for publishing J.D. Vance's 'moral depravity' about hurricane

Travis Gettys
RAW STORY
October 9, 2024

MSNBC

Panelists on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" shamed the Wall Street Journal for publishing a disingenuous op-ed by J.D. Vance on president Joe Biden's response to Hurricane Helene.

The Republican vice presidential candidate falsely claimed the administration had waited too long to provide aid, diverted disaster relief funding to sheltering migrants and suggested the Federal Emergency Management Agency favored LGBTQ people, which underlines similar false claims made by GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.

"You wonder about the editorial standards of the Wall Street Journal, which we respect and read all the time, talk about on the show, just publishing uncritically what J.D. Vance is saying about the management of this hurricane," said co-host Willie Geist. "We've been saying now since Helene hit and Donald Trump has been saying these things. What a disgusting moment to go right to lies, to go right to division when people need unity, they need help."

"By the way, they're getting the Republican governors of Tennessee and Georgia, as well, that FEMA is doing a great job – they're here, they're on the ground," Geist added. "We talked to Gov. [Roy] Cooper yesterday of North Carolina who said it's a tense moment, there's destruction everywhere you look, but we're getting help, and Donald Trump cannot help himself, and J.D. Vance is the beta, he has to echo the lie. My gosh, what an appalling time to do that."

Vance's op-ed was published as another potentially stronger storm bears down on central Florida, and panelist Eddie Glaude shamed the Republican ticket for sowing misinformation and distrust as millions fear for their lives and livelihoods.

"It's not only bereft, it's reflection of kind of a moral depravity, so that you translate people's sorrows into grievance," Glaude said, "and you're translating people's gravity into that nature. It shows you the calculus informing these folks, it's morally depraved in my view."

Host Joe Scarborough recalled when he was in Congress in the 1990s, during the Republican recalcitrance of the Bill Clinton presidency, and said that lawmakers worked together to respond to a string of natural disasters.

"We had three hurricanes come to shore in northwest Florida," Scarborough said. "Bill Clinton was there, you want the president of the United States there. You want him there, you want everything that comes with the president of the United States there. That's what every governor, governor of Tennessee, Gov. [Bill] Lee, a very conservative Republican, Gov. [Henry] McMaster in South Carolina, very conservative governor, of course, Gov. [Brian] Kemp in Georgia, overwhelmingly popular governor, and you have Sen. Thom Tillis in North Carolina, all of these officials have been saying that the White House and the administration is doing a great job, and they're very grateful. [Florida Gov.] Ron DeSantis saying he's gotten everything he's asked for, and this is no standards."

"One of the things I always tell people when they spread conspiracy theories is go to the Wall Street Journal," Scarborough added. "It's a Murdoch paper, go to the Wall Street Journal. As you point out, the Wall Street Journal, is publishing this information that might as well be in Epoch Times. The fact that it's from a vice presidential candidate matters not. This is the same man who lied about cats and dogs being eaten when the governor of his own state said stop. This is when you said there are no standards, this is a perfect example of it. There's lies every day."

Watch below or click the link here.

 

Caffeine is a heart-healthy habit



Oxford University Press USA




A new paper in Rheumatology, published by Oxford University Press, finds that consuming more caffeine may improve heart health.

Vascular disease, damage of blood vessels, and their resulting consequences, heart attack and stroke, are among the leading causes of death in the general population. In patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, such as lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, these risks are even much higher. This is both due to the diseases themselves and some of the treatments for them, particularly cortisone derivatives.

Until now, doctors’ recommendations to reduce these vascular risks were essentially about avoiding risk factors. This included stopping inflammation, decreasing cortisone medications, as well as conventional recommendations like not smoking, reducing cholesterol, and controlling high blood pressure.

But researchers from Sapienza University of Rome, in Italy, involved in this study believe patients may be able to improve vascular health by doing something that’s actually enjoyable. The laboratory results of these investigators suggest that caffeine, present in coffee, tea, and cocoa, actively helps endothelial progenitor cells, the group of cells that helps regenerate the lining of blood vessels and are involved in vascular growth.

It’s well known that a diet rich in vitamin D (found in oily fish and eggs) and A (found in many fruits) and polyunsaturated fatty acid, and low in sodium, seems to play a role in decreasing the inflammatory burden. Scientists have wondered about caffeine as well. Besides the well-known stimulant effect on the body, caffeine also exerts an anti-inflammatory effect because it binds with the receptors expressed on the surface of immune cells. The effect of caffeine consumption on cardiovascular health has been widely investigated, with conflicting results.

Researchers here investigated 31 lupus patients without traditional cardiovascular risks factors using a seven-day food questionnaire. After a week the investigators took the patents’ blood to measure blood vessels health. They found that patients who consumed caffeine had better vascular health, as measured through endothelial cells, which form the important inner layer of blood vessels.

“The present study is an attempt to provide patients with information on the possible role of diet in controlling the disease,” said the paper’s lead author, Fulvia Ceccarelli. “It will be necessary to confirm the results through a longitudinal study, aimed at assessing the real impact of coffee consumption on the disease course.”

The paper, “Caffeine improves systemic lupus erythematosus endothelial dysfunction by promoting endothelial progenitor cells survival,” is available (on October 9th) at https://academic.oup.com/rheumatology/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/rheumatology/keae453.

Direct correspondence to: 
Fulvia Ceccarelli
Department of Clinical Internal, Anesthesiologic and Cardiovascular Sciences
Sapienza University of Rome
Viale del Policlinico 155, 00161
Rome, ITALY
fulviaceccarelli@gmail.com

To request a copy of the study, please contact:
Calla Veazie
Calla.Veazie@oup.com


Simulated forest multifunctionality under climate change and forest management




 News Release 
KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.
GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT 

image: 

 Graphical abstract

view more 

Credit: Du, X., Lei, X.D., He, X., Lan, J., Guo, H., Xu. Q.G.





The ecological, economic, social and cultural values of forests have gained increasing recognition among the public. Traditionally focused on timber production, forest management objectives have shifted toward enhancing ecosystem multifunctionality. Forest ecosystem service multifunctionality refers to a forest's ability to simultaneously provide multiple services for human well-being.

In a recent study published in the KeAi journal Forest Ecosystems, researchers in China applied a transition matrix growth model to simulate the effects of various management strategies on forest ecosystem services and multifunctionality in the context of climate change. Conducted in Jilin Province, northeastern China, the study incorporated climate change factors to reveal how appropriate management can enhance forest multifunctionality across all climate scenarios.

"Transition matrix growth models are widely employed as powerful tools in forestry due to their simple structure and ease of application, enabling long-term predictions for forests with complex structures, " explains Xue Du, first author of the study. “However, they have not previously been used to predict and simulate forest multifunctionality.”

Climate change and forest management are two crucial factors affecting forest multifunctionality. Simulating the effects of different management and climate scenarios on forest ecosystem services is essential for maximizing the multifunctionality of forests.

The team’s findings highlighted the significant impact of forest management on ecosystem services, which outweighed the effects of climate scenarios alone.

“No single management scenario maximized all forest ecosystem services,” says Du. “Nonetheless, an upper-story thinning management strategy with a 5% intensity emerged as the most effective for forest multifunctionality, surpassing the lowest values by more than 20% across all climate scenarios for natural mixed forests.”

According to corresponding author Xiangdong Lei, ecosystem services and multifunctionality can be enhanced through appropriate management measures amidst a changing climate.

“Our study underscores the potential of transition matrix growth models as decision support tools,” says Lei. “We aim to provide recommendations for long-term strategies for multifunctional forest management in light of future climate change.”

###

Contact the author: Xiangdong Lei, Institute of Forest Resource Information Techniques, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China, E-mail: xdlei@ifrit.ac.cn

The publisher KeAi was established by Elsevier and China Science Publishing & Media Ltd to unfold quality research globally. In 2013, our focus shifted to open access publishing. We now proudly publish more than 100 world-class, open access, English language journals, spanning all scientific disciplines. Many of these are titles we publish in partnership with prestigious societies and academic institutions, such as the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC).

 

Insects from the bodies of illegally hunted rhinoceros may provide valuable forensic information



Wiley




New research in Medical and Veterinary Entomology reveals that when rhinoceros are found dead after being illegally killed by poachers, analyzing insects on the decomposing body aids in estimating the time since death. This information has been used by investigators and officials to construct cases against suspected perpetrators.

The study included 19 rhinoceros that were illegally killed and dehorned in the Republic of South Africa between 2014 and 2021. Scientists collected 74 samples of insect evidence from these rhinoceros remains, from which an accurate estimate of their time of death was calculated. The specimens comprised 18 species from 12 families belonging to three insect orders.

“This has implications across both the science of forensic entomology and forensic wildlife, and especially highlights the opportunities for improving the global understanding of the procedures related to wildlife criminal cases,” said co–corresponding author Ian R. Dadour, PhD, of Source Certain and Murdoch University, in Australia. “Over the last 30 years, the results of this new activity combined with ranger teams and satellite tracking have led to a rebound in rhinoceros populations.”

URL upon publication: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mve.12760

 

Additional Information
NOTE: 
The information contained in this release is protected by copyright. Please include journal attribution in all coverage. For more information or to obtain a PDF of any study, please contact: Sara Henning-Stout, newsroom@wiley.com.

About the Journal
Medical and Veterinary Entomology covers the biology and control of insects, ticks, mites, and other arthropods of medical, veterinary, and forensic importance. Papers submitted to Medical and Veterinary Entomology should be novel research papers in the form of original articles or short communications, or review articles. Letters to the editor also are welcome. We do not publish purely descriptive studies that are limited in scope.

About Wiley
Wiley is a knowledge company and a global leader in research, publishing, and knowledge solutions. Dedicated to the creation and application of knowledge, Wiley serves the world’s researchers, learners, innovators, and leaders, helping them achieve their goals and solve the world's most important challenges. For more than two centuries, Wiley has been delivering on its timeless mission to unlock human potential. Visit us at Wiley.com. Follow us on FacebookXLinkedIn and Instagram.

 

Our food system is broken and we only have 60 harvests left, researchers warn



Taylor & Francis Group





Plant-based diets, compassionate agriculture, Indigenous methods, consumer pressure, new laws, international agreements and even vegan pets – these are the solutions for fixing our broken food and farming systems, say dozens of environmental advocates, researchers, farmers and industry pioneers in a new book.

Editors Joyce D’Silva and Carol McKenna sound the alarm in their introduction to Regenerative Farming and Sustainable Diets, warning that ‘our food system is broken’.  Radical change is needed, they say, in our world where one‑third of food is lost or wasted, 780 million people are hungry, and three billion people cannot afford to eat healthily.

In this context, eminent researcher and author Philip Lymbery argues for an overarching UN Global Agreement to transform food systems. He warns: We have just sixty harvests left in our soils to save the future for our children. For people, animals and the planet, the clock is ticking. There is no time to lose. What we do now will define the next one thousand years.”

In his chapter, scientist Tim Benton illuminates how increased meat consumption has been a major driver of our planetary crisis: “As demand has risen – partly because of a growing global population but mainly owing to increased meat consumption and the associated increase in demand for animal feed – so too has the use of chemical inputs such as fertiliser, pesticides and herbicides to maximise yields on existing cropland… Nature has suffered as a result. Food production is therefore a central cause of declining biodiversity, deforestation, water and air pollution and land degradation.”

But far from simply tolling a klaxon of doom, the authors of the book’s chapters elicit hope by offering solutions for feeding the world, while nourishing our soils and protecting our species.

UK dairy farmer David Finlay charts his own path away from intensive agriculture and towards compassionate farming. Within just eight years, he has created a system which: produces bountiful milk, sees calves stay with their mothers and reach mature weight sooner, feeds cattle on leafy forage instead of mass-produced cereals, boosts farm biodiversity and has become ‘climate positive’.

Indian scholar Vandana Shiva invites us to learn from the Indigenous peoples who protect 80% of the planet’s biodiversity by looking after the 22% of the land still under their stewardship.  She says: “We can bridge the climate change emissions gap through ecological agriculture now, not at some point in the future. Even if only 10% of farms and pastures are managed regeneratively by maximising photosynthesis and root exudates, we can mitigate emissions by fixing more living carbon in plants and building up carbon in soil. The solution to hunger extinction and the climate emergency is to return to Earth and regenerate her biodiversity in soils, our farms, forests, our diets and our guts.”

British haematologist Shireen Kassam evidences the way plant-based diets boost both human and planetary health. She cites the EAT‑Lancet planetary health diet which suggests humans derive more than 85% of their energy from healthy plant foods. Such an approach has been shown to reduce deaths from all causes by more than 60% and reduce cancer rates by up to 40%.

But perhaps it’s not just humans who should eat plant-based diets. In his chapter, researcher Andrew Knight argues for feeding cats and dogs a vegan diet. He says that the production of pet food contributes over a quarter of the livestock sector’s environmental impact. And he calculates that if all of the world’s cats and dogs were vegan “nearly seven billion fewer vertebrates would be killed”.

Indeed, Knight presents evidence that if all the pet dogs in the world were vegan, it would save enough food to feed the entire population of the EU.  And if all pet cats were vegan, it would save the same amount of greenhouse gas emissions as the whole of New Zealand emits.

But can our naturally carnivorous canine and feline housemates really lead healthy lives as vegans? Knight argues yes. He cites studies which have demonstrated that dogs and cats who are fed nutritionally-sound vegan diets have health at least as good, and in some respects better than, those fed meat‑based diets.

And while the various chapter authors largely sing in unison over the way forward, some strike different notes about which groups are best placed to bring about change.

Leon co-founder Henry Dimbleby - who has led two independent reviews for government – argues that we cannot rely on shoppers or farmers to drive change. Instead, he calls on governments to step up:

“We need new legislation to improve the lives of farm animals – a continuous ratcheting up of the standards we expect for factory farmed animals to relieve the cruelty we inflict upon them.  It’s no good expecting food producers or retailers to act voluntarily: the commercial incentives to produce cheap meat are simply too strong. Nor can we rely on consumer pressure.  Although animal welfare ranks high amongst consumer concerns, most people have neither the time nor the information necessary to trace the provenance of all the meat they buy.”

But the executive director of Waitrose, James Bailey, who nods approvingly to Dimbleby’s work in his chapter, seems to disagree with him on this particular issue. Instead, he points at customers:

“Revolutionary change will only happen when it is demanded by shoppers. We need customers who understand what is at stake, willing to buy food produced in more sustainable ways that will probably be a bit more expensive. The reason that vegan food has quadrupled in shelf space in the last five years in the UK isn’t because supermarket priorities have changed. It’s because customer priorities have changed.”

In her chapter, Lyla June Johnson, an expert in Indigenous food systems, urges us to learn from traditional methods, inspiring us to step up to the challenge: 

“We do not need to settle for tiny orchards, nor do we have to simply let nature take its course. We can be active agents and participants in the way the land looks and tastes on massive, regional scales. Perhaps this signals to us as humans that we indeed have an ecological purpose in this world if we simply wield our energy in a regenerative manner.”

 

Heavy metals in the ocean become more toxic



How climate change impacts contaminants in the sea



Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel (GEOMAR)





The ocean is warming, becoming more acidic, and losing oxygen – these are well-known effects of climate change. What has been less studied is how these changes are affecting contaminants in the seas. A new study titled “Impacts of Climate Change on the Transport, Fate, and Biogeochemistry of Contaminants in Coastal Marine Ecosystems” has investigated the interaction of trace elements with climate change. The findings have been published in the Nature journal Communications Earth & Environment.

Climate Events are Releasing More Contaminants

“We wanted to understand how trace elements are being affected by climate change – an area that has seen very little research so far,” explains Dr Rebecca Zitoun, marine chemist at GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel and co-lead author of the study alongside her Croatian colleague Dr SaÅ¡a Marcinek from the RuÄ‘er BoÅ¡ković Institute in Zagreb. “We examined both human-induced and natural sources.” Metals such as lead, mercury, and cadmium enter the oceans not only through human activities such as industry or fossil fuel burning. Natural sources are also changing due to climate change: rising sea levels, rivers overflowing or drying up, melting sea ice and glaciers – all these processes mobilise and increase contaminant flows.

The study summarises the findings of a working group of the UN Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP) focusing on metal contaminants in the ocean. The working group was initiated by Dr Sylvia Sander, Professor of Marine Mineral Resources at GEOMAR and former head of the Marine Environmental Studies Laboratories at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Monaco. Christoph Völker from the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI) is also contributing from Germany.

"Our working group has focused on the effects of climate change and greenhouse gases on contaminants in the ocean," explains Dr Sander. One example of these impacts is rising mercury levels in Arctic waters: melting glaciers, thawing permafrost and coastal erosion are releasing more mercury from natural sources. This poses a particular threat to communities that rely on traditional fishing, as mercury accumulates in the food chain and can end up on our plates through the consumption of contaminated fish.

Human Sources of Toxic Metals

“Human activities have increased the global flow of toxic metals such as lead by tenfold and mercury by three to seven times compared to pre-industrial levels,” says Professor Sander, highlighting another example. “Toxic elements like silver are increasingly detectable in coastal waters, originating from coal combustion and the growing use of silver nanoparticles in antibacterial products.” Additionally, shipping and the use of plastics contribute to the spread of heavy metals. Plastics can bind metals such as copper, zinc, and lead from the water. These bound contaminants can also enter the food chain.

In the future, the human contribution of heavy metals could rise further due to the increasing exploitation of the oceans.

Trace Elements in Seawater are Sensitive to Climate Change

Climate changes, such as rising sea temperatures, ocean acidification, and oxygen depletion, impact trace elements in various ways.

Higher water temperatures increase the bioavailability and uptake of trace elements such as mercury by marine organisms. This happens because higher temperatures boost metabolism, reduce oxygen solubility, and increase gill ventilation, leading to more metals entering organisms and accumulating in their bodies.

As the ocean absorbs most of the carbon dioxide (CO2) released by humans, it becomes more acidic – the pH level drops. This increases the solubility and bioavailability of metals such as copper, zinc, or iron. The effect is particularly pronounced with copper, which is highly toxic to many marine organisms at higher concentrations.

Furthermore, the growing depletion of oxygen, especially in coastal zones and on the seabed, enhances the toxic effects of trace elements. This stresses organisms that live directly in or on the seabed, such as mussels, crabs, and other crustaceans.

Double Burden: Pollutants and Climate Change

Human activities influence the amount of contaminants in coastal regions in two ways: directly through the release of pollutants into the environment, and indirectly through the impacts of human-induced climate change on natural sources.

However, the study also reveals that there is still insufficient data on how climate change influences contaminants in the ocean. The working group calls for increased research into new and under-studied contaminants. Additionally, better models should be developed, and legislation adjusted to improve control over the impact of contaminants in the seas.

Dr Rebecca Zitoun: “To better understand the impacts on ecosystems and human health, we need to close knowledge gaps on the interactions between pollutants and climate change and develop standardised methods that provide globally comparable data.” This is a crucial step towards strengthening marine protection and developing sustainable solutions for vulnerable coastal areas.

 

About the GESAMP-Working group

The study is part of the findings of Working Group 45 (WG45: “Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Related Impacts on Contaminants in the Ocean”) of the UN expert group on marine environmental protection (GESAMP). GESAMP (“Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection”) was established by the United Nations in 1969 to provide scientific advice on protecting the marine environment. The organisation's main goal is to identify new threats to the oceans and propose solutions to address these challenges and protect the seas.

 

Major £1.25 million funding award for project investigating the politics of famine



Project investigating famine in South Sudan and Somalia is awarded prestigious European Research Council grant



University of Bath



The political circumstances that lead to famines, and that allow them to continue over months and years, are to be investigated by researchers at the University of Bath, following the award of a major funding grant from the European Research Council (ERC). 

The team, made up of researchers in the UK, South Sudan and Somalia, has received £1.25 million from the ERC’s prestigious Starting Grant fund to complete the five-year ‘Everyday Politics of Famine’ (PolFam) project.  

They will carry out a unique multi-site research project at locations in South Sudan and Somalia, to understand the micro politics among communities that actually experience famine, observing and interviewing residents to better understand the social and political meanings of famine. 

The project’s leader, Dr Naomi Pendle, a Lecturer in Bath’s Department of Social and Policy Sciences, says: “More than 690,000 people are currently experiencing famine, with 24 million people on the edge of famine*. Famines are also becoming more frequent and deadly, especially as warring parties are turning to starvation as a method of war. To understand why famines persist we need to deepen our understanding of famine politics.” 

Dr Pendle says that current understanding of famine politics is dangerously outdated: “While we know that most contemporary famines are caused by wartime acts of starvation, we do not have a good grasp of famine’s social and political meaning in communities that have experienced it, and how these meanings shape famine politics in the future. 

“We need to better understand how regions where famines were uncommon even fifty years ago, have now become prone to deadly famines. We also need to pay attention to how social discourse can shift blame away from governments and warring parties, and instead leave famine survivors feeling guilty.” 

She adds: “For years, there has been a consensus that famine is the result of political failure – but our understanding of the politics at play has been limited by the lack of in-depth research that prioritises the perspectives and experiences of people who actually experience famine, and by dated assumptions about the nature of these politics.” 

“There is an urgent need to understand why famine persists not just because of the human suffering it causes, but because of what it can reveal about contemporary global power and politics.” 

The project will focus on four social elements: histories and musical memories of past famine; community-narratives that enforce social networks; burial and posthumous practices; and media and social media’s role in anti-famine politics. Importantly, the research prioritises being embedded in the communities of study, to allow the team to carry out ethnographic observations. The team is primarily made up of South Sudanese and Somali scholars, many of whom sadly have firsthand experience of surviving famine themselves. All of the team, including the Dr Pendle, will build on years of existing experience living in these contexts during war and crises. They piloted their research with previous British Academy funding that looked that the role of law during famine. 

The project team aim to deliver a new theory of the politics of famine, that prioritises the social and political realities of those who have experienced famine, to reinvigorate anti-famine activism and to make famine politically unthinkable. 

Dr Pendle and her team have also recently been awarded a British Academy funded grant of nearly £300,000 for a project titled Death during Famine that focuses on research in South Sudan, with a significant dimension aimed at supporting the revival of famine studies at universities in famine contexts. 

Professor Monica Greco, Head of Bath's Department of Social and Policy Sciences, said: "We are delighted for Dr Naomi Pendle to be awarded this prestigious ERC Starting Grant. The project promises to deliver crucial new understanding of the factors that lead to and perpetuate famine conditions, which will be of great use to policymakers and organisations looking to prevent famines in future." 

ENDS 

For more information contact Will McManus in the University of Bath press office: wem25@bath.ac.uk / +44(0)1225 385 798 

*https://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-website/ipc-dashboard/ 

The University of Bath 

The University of Bath is one of the UK's leading universities, with a reputation for high-impact research, excellence in education, student experience and graduate prospects.  

We are ranked in the top 10 of all of the UK’s major university guides. We are also ranked among the world’s top 10% of universities, placing 150th in the QS World University Rankings 2025. Bath was rated in the world’s top 10 universities for sport in the QS World University Rankings by Subject 2024.  

Research from Bath is helping to change the world for the better. Across the University’s three Faculties and School of Management, our research is making an impact in society, leading to low-carbon living, positive digital futures, and improved health and wellbeing. Find out all about our Research with Impact: https://www.bath.ac.uk/campaigns/research-with-impact/