̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford

Conservation efforts are bringing species back from the brink

sc604 — Tue, 18 Mar 2025 18:30:46 +0000

A major review of over 67,000 animal species has found that while the natural world continues to face a biodiversity crisis, targeted conservation efforts are helping bring many species back from the brink of extinction.

Cambridge researchers developing brain implants for treating Parkinson’s disease

sc604 — Thu, 23 Jan 2025 10:33:21 +0000

As part of a £69 million funding programme supported by the Advanced Research + Invention Agency (ARIA), Professor George Malliaras from Cambridge’s Department of Engineering will co-lead a project that uses small clusters of brain cells called midbrain organoids to develop a new type of brain implant, which will be tested in animal models of Parkinson’s disease.

̽��ֱ��project led by Malliaras and Professor Roger Barker from the Department of Clinical Neurosciences, which involves colleagues from the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford, the ̽��ֱ�� of Lund and BIOS Health, is one of 18 projects funded by ARIA as part of its Precision Neurotechnologies programme, which is supporting research teams across academia, non-profit R&D organisations, and startups dedicated to advancing brain-computer interface technologies.

̽��ֱ��programme will direct £69 million over four years to unlock new methods for interfacing with the human brain at the neural circuit level, to treat many of the most complex neurological and neuropsychiatric disorders, from Alzheimer’s to epilepsy to depression.

By addressing bottlenecks in funding and the lack of precision offered by current approaches, the outputs of this programme will pave the way for addressing a much broader range of conditions than ever before, significantly reducing the social and economic impact of brain disorders across the UK.

Parkinson’s disease occurs when the brain cells that make dopamine (a chemical that helps control movement) die off, causing movement problems and other symptoms. Current treatments, like dopamine-based drugs, work well early on, but can cause serious side effects over time.

In the UK, 130,000 people have Parkinson’s disease, and it costs affected families about £16,000 per year on average – more than £2 billion in the UK annually. As more people age, the number of cases will grow, and new treatments are urgently needed.

One idea is to replace the lost dopamine cells by transplanting new ones into the brain. But these cells need to connect properly to the brain’s network to fix the problem, and current methods don’t fully achieve that.

In the ARIA-funded project, Malliaras and his colleagues are working on a new approach using small clusters of brain cells called midbrain organoids. These will be placed in the right part of the brain in an animal model of Parkinson’s disease. They’ll also use advanced materials and electrical stimulation to help the new cells connect and rebuild the damaged pathways.

“Our ultimate goal is to create precise brain therapies that can restore normal brain function in people with Parkinson’s,” said Malliaras.

“To date, there’s been little serious investment into methodologies that interface precisely with the human brain, beyond ‘brute force’ approaches or highly invasive implants,” said ARIA Programme Director Jacques Carolan. “We’re showing that it’s possible to develop elegant means of understanding, identifying, and treating many of the most complex and devastating brain disorders. Ultimately, this could deliver transformative impact for people with lived experiences of brain disorders.”

Other teams funded by the programme include one at Imperial College London who is developing an entirely new class of biohybridised technology focused on engineering transplanted neurons with bioelectric components. A Glasgow-led team will build advanced neural robots for closed-loop neuromodulation, specifically targeting epilepsy treatment, while London-based Navira will develop a technology for delivering gene therapies across the blood-brain barrier, a crucial step towards developing safer and more effective treatments.

Adapted from an ARIA media release.

Cambridge researchers are developing implants that could help repair the brain pathways damaged by Parkinson’s disease.

Our ultimate goal is to create precise brain therapies that can restore normal brain function in people with Parkinson’s

George Malliaras

Science Photo Library via Getty Images

Substantia nigra in the human brain, illustration

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Professor Duncan Richards appointed as Head of Department of Medicine

Anonymous — Fri, 06 Dec 2024 16:59:07 +0000

Professor Richards joins Cambridge from the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford, where he has been since 2019. His particular research interest is the demonstration of clinical proof of concept of novel therapeutics through the application of experimental medicine techniques, especially human challenge studies.

As Climax Professor of Clinical Therapeutics, director of the Oxford Clinical Trial Research Unit (OCTRU), and the NIHR Oxford Clinical Research Facility, he led a broad portfolio focused on new medicines for multiple conditions. His focus has been the acceleration of promising new drug treatments through better decision-making in early phase clinical trials.

Professor Richards also brings with him a wealth of experience in a number of Pharmaceutical R&D clinical development roles. In 2003 he joined GSK and held a number of roles of increasing responsibility, latterly as Head of Clinical Pharmacology and Experimental Medicine, including directorship of GSK’s phase 1 and experimental medicine unit in Cambridge (CUC).

Commenting on his appointment, Professor Richards said: “As a clinical pharmacologist, I have been fortunate to work across a broad range of therapeutic areas over the years. I am excited by the breadth and depth of expertise within the Department of Medicine and look forward to working with the first-class scientific team. My goal is to work with the Department team, the Clinical School, and hospitals to maximise the impact of the important work taking place in Cambridge.”

Members of the department’s leadership team are looking forward to the continued development of the department under Professor Richards, building on its legacy of collaboration and groundbreaking translational research to drive our future success.

Professor Mark Wills, Interim Head of Department of Medicine, said: “Duncan brings to his new role a fantastic breadth of experience, which encompasses his clinical speciality in pharmacology, extensive experience of working within the pharmaceutical industry R&D at senior levels and most recently establishing academic clinical trials units and human challenge research facilities.

“I am very excited to welcome Duncan to the Department and looking forward to working with him, as he takes on the role of delivering of the Department of Medicine’s vision to increase the efficacy of translation of its world class fundamental research, and its impact upon clinical practice and patient wellbeing.”

Menna Clatworthy, Professor of Translational Immunology and Director of the Cambridge Institute for Therapeutic Immunology and Infectious Disease (CITIID), said: "Duncan has a wealth of leadership experience in biomedicine, in both academia and pharma. That skillset will be invaluable in ensuring the Department of Medicine continues to deliver world-leading research to transform patient outcomes."

Charlotte Summers, Professor of Intensive Care Medicine and Director of the Victor Phillip Dahdaleh Heart & Lung Research Institute, said: “Duncan’s exemplary track record of translating fundamental scientific discoveries into therapies that benefit patients will help us further increase the impact of our research as we continue our mission to improve human health.”

̽��ֱ��appointment underpins the recently announced five-year collaboration between GSK and the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, the Cambridge-GSK Translational Immunology Collaboration (CG-TIC). ̽��ֱ��£50 million investment will accelerate research and development in kidney and respiratory diseases to improve patient outcomes.

Professor Richards will assume the role in February 2025, replacing Interim Head of Department Dr Mark Wills who was appointed after the departure of Professor Ken Smith in January 2024. Dr Wills will continue as Director of Research and Deputy Head of the Department of Medicine as well as leading his research group.

Professor Richards trained in medicine at Oxford ̽��ֱ�� and after junior doctor roles in London, he returned to Oxford as Clinical Lecturer in Clinical Pharmacology. His DM thesis research was on a translational model using platelet ion flux to interrogate angiotensin biology and he is author of the Oxford Handbook of Practical Drug Therapy and the 3rd edition of Drug Discovery and Development.

Professor Richards has been a core member of the UK COVID-19 Therapeutics Advisory Panel. He is a member of the Oxford Bioescalator Management Board, UK Prix Galien Prize Committee, and the therapeutic advisory committee of several national platform clinical trials.

Professor Duncan Richards has today been announced as the new Head of the Department of Medicine at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

I am excited by the breadth and depth of expertise within the Department of Medicine and look forward to working with the first-class scientific team

Duncan Richards

Yes

Ultra-powered MRI scans show damage to brain’s ‘control centre’ is behind long-lasting Covid-19 symptoms

sc604 — Tue, 08 Oct 2024 01:28:45 +0000

Using ultra-high-resolution scanners that can see the living brain in fine detail, researchers from the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford were able to observe the damaging effects Covid-19 can have on the brain.

̽��ֱ��study team scanned the brains of 30 people who had been admitted to hospital with severe Covid-19 early in the pandemic, before vaccines were available. ̽��ֱ��researchers found that Covid-19 infection damages the region of the brainstem associated with breathlessness, fatigue and anxiety.

̽��ֱ��powerful MRI scanners used for the study, known as 7-Tesla or 7T scanners, can measure inflammation in the brain. Their results, published in the journal Brain, will help scientists and clinicians understand the long-term effects of Covid-19 on the brain and the rest of the body. Although the study was started before the long-term effects of Covid were recognised, it will help to better understand this condition.

̽��ֱ��brainstem, which connects the brain to the spinal cord, is the control centre for many basic life functions and reflexes. Clusters of nerve cells in the brainstem, known as nuclei, regulate and process essential bodily functions such as breathing, heart rate, pain and blood pressure.

“Things happening in and around the brainstem are vital for quality of life, but it had been impossible to scan the inflammation of the brainstem nuclei in living people, because of their tiny size and difficult position.” said first author Dr Catarina Rua, from the Department of Clinical Neurosciences. “Usually, scientists only get a good look at the brainstem during post-mortem examinations.”

“ ̽��ֱ��brainstem is the critical junction box between our conscious selves and what is happening in our bodies,” said Professor James Rowe, also from the Department of Clinical Neurosciences, who co-led the research. “ ̽��ֱ��ability to see and understand how the brainstem changes in response to Covid-19 will help explain and treat the long-term effects more effectively.”

In the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic, before effective vaccines were available, post-mortem studies of patients who had died from severe Covid-19 infections showed changes in their brainstems, including inflammation. Many of these changes were thought to result from a post-infection immune response, rather than direct virus invasion of the brain.

“People who were very sick early in the pandemic showed long-lasting brain changes, likely caused by an immune response to the virus. But measuring that immune response is difficult in living people,” said Rowe. “Normal hospital-type MRI scanners can’t see inside the brain with the kind of chemical and physical detail we need.”

“But with 7T scanners, we can now measure these details. ̽��ֱ��active immune cells interfere with the ultra-high magnetic field, so that we’re able to detect how they are behaving,” said Rua. “Cambridge was special because we were able to scan even the sickest and infectious patients, early in the pandemic.”

Many of the patients admitted to hospital early in the pandemic reported fatigue, breathlessness and chest pain as troubling long-lasting symptoms. ̽��ֱ��researchers hypothesised these symptoms were in part the result of damage to key brainstem nuclei, damage which persists long after Covid-19 infection has passed.

̽��ֱ��researchers saw that multiple regions of the brainstem, in particular the medulla oblongata, pons and midbrain, showed abnormalities consistent with a neuroinflammatory response. ̽��ֱ��abnormalities appeared several weeks after hospital admission, and in regions of the brain responsible for controlling breathing.

“ ̽��ֱ��fact that we see abnormalities in the parts of the brain associated with breathing strongly suggests that long-lasting symptoms are an effect of inflammation in the brainstem following Covid-19 infection,” said Rua. “These effects are over and above the effects of age and gender, and are more pronounced in those who had had severe Covid-19.”

In addition to the physical effects of Covid-19, the 7T scanners provided evidence of some of the psychiatric effects of the disease. ̽��ֱ��brainstem monitors breathlessness, as well as fatigue and anxiety. “Mental health is intimately connected to brain health, and patients with the most marked immune response also showed higher levels of depression and anxiety,” said Rowe. “Changes in the brainstem caused by Covid-19 infection could also lead to poor mental health outcomes, because of the tight connection between physical and mental health.”

̽��ֱ��researchers say the results could aid in the understanding of other conditions associated with inflammation of the brainstem, like MS and dementia. ̽��ֱ��7T scanners could also be used to monitor the effectiveness of different treatments for brain diseases.

“This was an incredible collaboration, right at the peak of the pandemic, when testing was very difficult, and I was amazed how well the 7T scanners worked,” said Rua. “I was really impressed with how, in the heat of the moment, the collaboration between lots of different researchers came together so effectively.”

̽��ֱ��research was supported in part by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford COVID Medical Sciences Division Rapid Response Fund.

Reference:
Catarina Rua et al. ‘7-Tesla quantitative susceptibility mapping in COVID-19: brainstem effects and outcome associations.’ Brain (2024). DOI: 10.1093/brain/awae215

Damage to the brainstem – the brain’s ‘control centre’ – is behind long-lasting physical and psychiatric effects of severe Covid-19 infection, a study suggests.

̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

3D projections of QSM maps on the rendered brainstem

Yes

New vaccine effective against coronaviruses that haven’t even emerged yet

jg533 — Mon, 06 May 2024 09:00:25 +0000

This is a new approach to vaccine development called ‘proactive vaccinology’, where scientists build a vaccine before the disease-causing pathogen even emerges.

̽��ֱ��new vaccine works by training the body’s immune system to recognise specific regions of eight different coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, and several that are currently circulating in bats and have potential to jump to humans and cause a pandemic.

Key to its effectiveness is that the specific virus regions the vaccine targets also appear in many related coronaviruses. By training the immune system to attack these regions, it gives protection against other coronaviruses not represented in the vaccine – including ones that haven’t even been identified yet.

For example, the new vaccine does not include the SARS-CoV-1 coronavirus, which caused the 2003 SARS outbreak, yet it still induces an immune response to that virus.

“Our focus is to create a vaccine that will protect us against the next coronavirus pandemic, and have it ready before the pandemic has even started,” said Rory Hills, a graduate researcher in the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge’s Department of Pharmacology and first author of the report.

He added: “We’ve created a vaccine that provides protection against a broad range of different coronaviruses – including ones we don’t even know about yet.”

̽��ֱ��results are published today in the journal Nature Nanotechnology.

“We don’t have to wait for new coronaviruses to emerge. We know enough about coronaviruses, and different immune responses to them, that we can get going with building protective vaccines against unknown coronaviruses now,” said Professor Mark Howarth in the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge’s Department of Pharmacology, senior author of the report.

He added: “Scientists did a great job in quickly producing an extremely effective COVID vaccine during the last pandemic, but the world still had a massive crisis with a huge number of deaths. We need to work out how we can do even better than that in the future, and a powerful component of that is starting to build the vaccines in advance.”

̽��ֱ��new ‘Quartet Nanocage’ vaccine is based on a structure called a nanoparticle – a ball of proteins held together by incredibly strong interactions. Chains of different viral antigens are attached to this nanoparticle using a novel ‘protein superglue’. Multiple antigens are included in these chains, which trains the immune system to target specific regions shared across a broad range of coronaviruses.

This study demonstrated that the new vaccine raises a broad immune response, even in mice that were pre-immunised with SARS-CoV-2.

̽��ֱ��new vaccine is much simpler in design than other broadly protective vaccines currently in development, which the researchers say should accelerate its route into clinical trials.

̽��ֱ��underlying technology they have developed also has potential for use in vaccine development to protect against many other health challenges.

̽��ֱ��work involved a collaboration between scientists at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford, and Caltech. It improves on previous work, by the Oxford and Caltech groups, to develop a novel all-in-one vaccine against coronavirus threats. ̽��ֱ��vaccine developed by Oxford and Caltech should enter Phase 1 clinical trials in early 2025, but its complex nature makes it challenging to manufacture which could limit large-scale production.

Conventional vaccines include a single antigen to train the immune system to target a single specific virus. This may not protect against a diverse range of existing coronaviruses, or against pathogens that are newly emerging.

̽��ֱ��research was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council.

Reference: Hills, R A et al: ‘Proactive vaccination using multiviral Quartet Nanocages to elicit broad anti-coronavirus responses.’ Nature Nanotechnology, May 2024. DOI: 10.1038/s41565-024-01655-9

Researchers have developed a new vaccine technology that has been shown in mice to provide protection against a broad range of coronaviruses with potential for future disease outbreaks - including ones we don’t even know about

Our focus is to create a vaccine that will protect us against the next coronavirus pandemic, and have it ready before the pandemic has even started.

Rory Hills

Stefan Cristian Cioata on Getty

Syringe and vaccine bottle

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

Artificial intelligence beats doctors in accurately assessing eye problems

jg533 — Wed, 17 Apr 2024 18:00:45 +0000

̽��ֱ��clinical knowledge and reasoning skills of GPT-4 are approaching the level of specialist eye doctors, a study led by the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge has found.

GPT-4 - a ‘large language model’ - was tested against doctors at different stages in their careers, including unspecialised junior doctors, and trainee and expert eye doctors. Each was presented with a series of 87 patient scenarios involving a specific eye problem, and asked to give a diagnosis or advise on treatment by selecting from four options.

GPT-4 scored significantly better in the test than unspecialised junior doctors, who are comparable to general practitioners in their level of specialist eye knowledge.

GPT-4 gained similar scores to trainee and expert eye doctors - although the top performing doctors scored higher.

̽��ֱ��researchers say that large language models aren’t likely to replace healthcare professionals, but have the potential to improve healthcare as part of the clinical workflow.

They say state-of-the-art large language models like GPT-4 could be useful for providing eye-related advice, diagnosis, and management suggestions in well-controlled contexts, like triaging patients, or where access to specialist healthcare professionals is limited.

“We could realistically deploy AI in triaging patients with eye issues to decide which cases are emergencies that need to be seen by a specialist immediately, which can be seen by a GP, and which don’t need treatment,” said Dr Arun Thirunavukarasu, lead author of the study, which he carried out while a student at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge’s School of Clinical Medicine.

He added: “ ̽��ֱ��models could follow clear algorithms already in use, and we’ve found that GPT-4 is as good as expert clinicians at processing eye symptoms and signs to answer more complicated questions.

“With further development, large language models could also advise GPs who are struggling to get prompt advice from eye doctors. People in the UK are waiting longer than ever for eye care.

Large volumes of clinical text are needed to help fine-tune and develop these models, and work is ongoing around the world to facilitate this.

̽��ֱ��researchers say that their study is superior to similar, previous studies because they compared the abilities of AI to practicing doctors, rather than to sets of examination results.

“Doctors aren't revising for exams for their whole career. We wanted to see how AI fared when pitted against to the on-the-spot knowledge and abilities of practicing doctors, to provide a fair comparison,” said Thirunavukarasu, who is now an Academic Foundation Doctor at Oxford ̽��ֱ�� Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

He added: “We also need to characterise the capabilities and limitations of commercially available models, as patients may already be using them - rather than the internet - for advice.”

̽��ֱ��test included questions about a huge range of eye problems, including extreme light sensitivity, decreased vision, lesions, itchy and painful eyes, taken from a textbook used to test trainee eye doctors. This textbook is not freely available on the internet, making it unlikely that its content was included in GPT-4’s training datasets.

̽��ֱ��results are published today in the journal PLOS Digital Health.

“Even taking the future use of AI into account, I think doctors will continue to be in charge of patient care. ̽��ֱ��most important thing is to empower patients to decide whether they want computer systems to be involved or not. That will be an individual decision for each patient to make,” said Thirunavukarasu.

GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 – or ‘Generative Pre-trained Transformers’ - are trained on datasets containing hundreds of billions of words from articles, books, and other internet sources. These are two examples of large language models; others in wide use include Pathways Language Model 2 (PaLM 2) and Large Language Model Meta AI 2 (LLaMA 2).

̽��ֱ��study also tested GPT-3.5, PaLM2, and LLaMA with the same set of questions. GPT-4 gave more accurate responses than all of them.

GPT-4 powers the online chatbot ChatGPT to provide bespoke responses to human queries. In recent months, ChatGPT has attracted significant attention in medicine for attaining passing level performance in medical school examinations, and providing more accurate and empathetic messages than human doctors in response to patient queries.

̽��ֱ��field of artificially intelligent large language models is moving very rapidly. Since the study was conducted, more advanced models have been released - which may be even closer to the level of expert eye doctors.

Reference: Thirunavukarasu, A J et al: ‘Large language models approach expert-level clinical knowledge and reasoning in ophthalmology: A head-to-head cross-sectional study.’ PLOS Digital Health, April 2024. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000341

A study has found that the AI model GPT-4 significantly exceeds the ability of non-specialist doctors to assess eye problems and provide advice.

We could realistically deploy AI in triaging patients with eye issues to decide which cases are emergencies.

Arun Thirunavukarasu

Mavocado on Getty

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

Pork labelling schemes ‘not helpful’ in making informed buying choices, say researchers

jg533 — Thu, 11 Apr 2024 09:27:35 +0000

Researchers have evaluated different types of pig farming – including woodland, organic, free range, RSPCA assured, and Red Tractor certified, to assess each systems’ impact across four areas: land use (representing biodiversity loss), greenhouse gas emissions, antibiotics use and animal welfare. Their study concludes that none of the farm types performed consistently well across all four areas – a finding that has important implications for increasingly climate conscious consumers, as well as farmers themselves.

However, there were individual farms that did perform well in all domains, including an indoor Red Tractor farm, an outdoor bred, indoor finished RSPCA assured farm and fully outdoor woodland farm. “Outliers like these show that trade-offs are not inevitable,” said lead author Dr Harriet Bartlett, Research Associate at the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford's Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, who was formerly at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

“Somewhat unexpectedly we found that a handful of farms perform far better than average across all four of our environmental and welfare measures,” added senior author Andrew Balmford, Professor of Conservation Science at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. However, none of the current label or assurance schemes predicted which farms these would be.

“ ̽��ֱ��way we classify farm types and label pork isn’t helpful for making informed decisions when it comes to buying more sustainable meat. Even more importantly, we aren’t rewarding and incentivising the best-performing farmers. Instead of focusing on farm types or practices, we need to focus on meaningful outcomes for people, the planet and the pigs – and assess, and reward farms based on these,” said Bartlett.

̽��ֱ��findings also show that common assumptions around food labelling can be misplaced. For instance, Organic farming systems, which consumers might see as climate and environmentally friendly, have on average three times the CO2 output per kg of meat of more intensive Red Tractor or RSPCA assured systems and four times the land use. However, these same systems use on average almost 90% fewer antibiotic medicines, and result in improved animal welfare compared with production from Red tractor or RSPCA assured systems.

̽��ֱ��way we classify livestock farms must be improved, Bartlett says, because livestock production is growing rapidly, especially pork production, which has quadrupled in the past 50 years and already accounts for 9% of greenhouse gas emissions from livestock. Pig farming also uses more antibiotics than any other livestock sector, and 8.5% of all arable land.

“Our findings show that mitigating the environmental impacts of livestock farming isn’t a case of saying which farm type is the best,” said Bartlett. “There is substantial scope for improvement within types, and our current means of classification is not identifying the best farms for the planet and animals overall. Instead, we need to identify farms that successfully limit their impacts across all areas of societal concern, and understand, promote and incentivise their practises.”

̽��ֱ��study reached its conclusions using data from 74 UK and 17 Brazilian breed-to-finish systems, each made up of 1-3 farms and representing the annual production of over 1.2 million pigs. It is published today in the journal Nature Food.

“To the best of our knowledge, our dataset covers by far the largest and most diverse sample of pig production systems examined in any single study,” said Bartlett.

James Wood, Professor of Equine and Farm Animal Science at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, commented: “This important study identifies a key need to clarify what different farm labels should indicate to consumers; there is a pressing need to extend this work into other farming sectors. It also clearly demonstrates the critical importance that individual farmers play in promoting best practice across all farming systems.”

Trade-offs in the externalities of pig production are not inevitable was authored by academics at the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and the ̽��ֱ�� of São Paulo.

̽��ֱ��research was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC).

Reference: Bartlett, H.,‘Trade-offs in the externalities of pig production are not inevitable.’ Nature Food, April 2024. DOI: 10.1038/s43016-024-00921-2

Adapted from a press release by the ̽��ֱ�� of Oxford.

Farmers don’t have to choose between lowering environmental impact and improving welfare for their pigs, a new study has found: it is possible to do both. But this is not reflected in the current food labelling schemes relied on by consumers.

̽��ֱ��way we classify farm types and label pork isn’t helpful for making informed decisions when it comes to buying more sustainable meat.

Harriet Bartlett

Charity Burggraaf/ Getty

Two pigs on a farm

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommerical

An early medieval money mystery is solved

ta385 — Tue, 09 Apr 2024 05:00:00 +0000

Byzantine bullion fuelled Europe’s revolutionary adoption of silver coins in the mid-7th century, only to be overtaken by silver from a mine in Charlemagne’s Francia a century later, new tests reveal. ̽��ֱ��findings could transform our understanding of Europe’s economic and political development.