With Russian losses in Ukraine "ghosting close" to one million, we must prepare for the possibility that Vladimir Putin will think a nuclear attack is Russia's "only option", former British Army officer and chemical weapons expert Hamish de Bretton-Gordon told The Telegraph.

Although Russia's battlefield nuclear missiles would be "small", compared to the atom bomb that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, their use would shatter the "nuclear equilibrium" that has "prevented WW3 for 75 years".

What are nuclear weapons? 
They come under two broad categories: atomic bombs, which use power released by the splitting of atomic nuclei, and hydrogen bombs (also known as thermonuclear bombs), whose explosive force derives from nuclear fusion.

Although the "exact number" of nuclear weapons in any country's possession is a "closely held national secret", the world's nine nuclear powers are thought to hold "roughly" 12,331 nuclear warheads between them, said the Federation of American Scientists.

What are 'tactical' nuclear weapons?
Sometimes called "battlefield" or "non-strategic" missiles, tactical nuclear weapons are designed for use in military encounters between opposing forces, rather than for strategic strikes on an adversary's territory. Smaller and less powerful than strategic nuclear weapons, they still have explosive yields of up to 300 kilotons – 20 times that of the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.

In 2022, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists estimated that Russia had 1,912 of these missiles. The US was thought to have 200, including 100 deployed across five European countries. 

What are strategic ballistic missiles?
These powerful missiles, sometimes known as intercontinental missiles, are the big brothers of the tactical weapons. With ranges between 6,000 and 9,300 miles, they're capable of reaching targets on the other side of the world in a matter of minutes, and contain enough power to raze cities. These bombs, which are the ones depicted in nuclear apocalypse films and TV shows like "Threads", were first developed by the Soviet Union in 1958. The United States built its own the following year and China followed suit some 20 years later.

"Exploitative", "reprehensible" and "surprisingly empathetic" are just some of the adjectives critics have used to describe "Virgin Island", Channel 4's controversial new reality show.

The series follows 12 virgins between the ages of 22 and 30 as they embark on an intimacy course at a luxury "hands-on" retreat, where sex experts try to help them lose their virginity.

'Visibly upsetting'
"Just when you thought the barrel had been scraped", Channel 4 has "managed to shave some final dregs from the very bottom", said Claudia Connell in the Daily Mail. This show is "turning the genuine concerns of the poor souls" who are participating into "cruel" and exploitative "low-rent entertainment".

It's an "icky, uncomfortable sexperiment" that puts "already vulnerable people" into "visibly upsetting" situations, said Emily Baker in The i Paper. Yes, the participants are there of their own volition but watching a therapist "slide his hand up a young girl's thigh" as she "visibly squirms" makes for "unpleasant TV".

You'll need to "have a cushion handy to hide behind", said Anita Singh in The Telegraph, lest you "die of second-hand embarrassment". The first episode left me marvelling at how the virgins can be "awkward in the company of the opposite sex" but somehow don't mind an entire camera crew filming them. There's "no way on Earth" I'll be tuning in for episode two.

'Admirable courage'
Although "Virgin Island" might "sound like an Alan Partridge pitch", it's "more complex than it first seems", said The Guardian's Rebecca Nicholson. The courage of the 12 participants is "admirable", and it is "touching" to see them overcome the feeling that they're "not like everyone else".

It touches on "some interesting topics", said Vicky Jessop in London's The Standard, including why people are "increasingly abstaining" from sex. One of the therapists suggests that our "cultural obsession with porn and rom-coms" has led to a preoccupation with "perfectionism". But, while it's "heartwarming" to watch these shy people "open up and get experimental" as they're "chivvied along" by therapists, one can't help feeling that this really should be taking place "behind closed doors".

It's the annual RHS Chelsea Flower Show next week, with all its colourful plant displays, innovative show gardens and glorious flower marquees. And, after a bloom-filled visit, there's nothing better than whiling away a couple of sunny hours in a London teahouse nearby. Here are some of our favourite spots.

11 Cadogan Gardens, Chelsea
Just a short walk from the Flower Show, 11 Cadogan Gardens has an afternoon tea specially designed to evoke the aromas of the hotel's beautiful private garden, including delicious rhubarb custard choux buns. Afterwards, take a stroll beneath the mulberry trees in the shady garden. Bliss.

The Goring, Belgravia
This historic hotel will be hosting its Bloomin' Lovely Afternoon Tea until 5 June. Refreshments are served out on the veranda overlooking the leafy gardens. The floral-inspired menu is filled with sweet treats spanning everything from blackcurrant and hibiscus scones to raspberry and lychee macarons.

Petersham Nurseries, Richmond
Tea is served every Thursday to Sunday in the elegant greenhouse and, among the mouth-watering delights on offer are a rhubarb and ginger crumble tartlet, and a caprese coffee and almond cake. The savoury bites are just as enticing: think smoked trout and pickled cucumber brioche buns, and broad bean, pea and goat's cheese filo cups.

Dalloway Terrace, Bloomsbury
Dalloway Terrace has undergone a transformation for spring with cascades of hydrangeas, soft-blush peonies and roses. As for the food, the floral-themed sweet treats include delicate strawberry, elderflower and lemon tarts and buttery scones slathered with Cornish clotted cream and homemade strawberry and hibiscus jam.

Is Donald Trump a good dealmaker?
The Economist's editorial board
The "most intense bout of White House diplomacy for a generation" reveals that Donald Trump is good at "catalysing negotiations, but bad at closing them", says The Economist. He can "deliver results" but, after "stoking crises", he "seldom succeeds in solving them". His tactics will have "diminishing returns" if other countries start to think he's "bluffing". Even if some of his dealmaking succeeds, it will be at the cost of "fomenting broad and long-lasting instability".

How one teenager uses AI
Elaine Moore in the Financial Times
Understanding how teenagers use technology is "helpful", writes Elaine Moore, not just "for keeping an eye" on them but as "a form of divination" – foretelling how we'll all use tech in the future. Take one teen's "preference for ChatGPT over Google" because of the search engine's "annoying" cookies and adverts. She used it to "create a tailored exam revision timetable" but also "if I had an interesting dream I might ask about that".

I feel terribly depressed whenever I see a talented woman stepping out with her breasts on show – why do they do it?
Jenni Murray in the Daily Mail
"Three cheers" for the Cannes Film Festival and its "ban on nudity on the red carpet", writes Jenni Murray. It was "embarrassing" when Bianca Censori wore a "completely see-through mini dress" to this year's Grammys. The "tawdry descent into barely-there dressing" leaves me "utterly depressed". I don't understand why any woman wants to "look as though she's touting for business on OnlyFans" at a ceremony recognising "her hard work" as an artist.