You have worked your whole life to save up enough to retire. And now you have — but you are afraid to spend those hard-earned savings.

Being frugal in retirement may seem like a good thing. You are most likely living on a fixed budget with no more paychecks flowing in. For many retirees, however, concerns about outlasting their savings leave them limiting themselves unnecessarily.

Why do people tend to underspend in retirement?

For many retirees, the “biggest hurdle is psychological rather than financial,” said U.S. News & World Report. “Many retirees have spent decades living below their means, making thoughtful financial decisions and consistently saving for the future,” which means that “by retirement, those behaviors have become second nature.” It can be hard for these retirees to suddenly change their money mindset and pivot to spending the retirement savings they worked so hard to accumulate.

Fear is another component. “According to a recent survey by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, more than three in four retirees agree they can afford to spend freely — but nearly half say they still underspend out of fear they’ll run out of money,” said Charles Schwab.

Then there is the very real puzzle of figuring out an appropriate amount to spend. After all, it is impossible to know how long you will live or how well your investments will perform.

What are the risks of underspending in retirement?

The risk of overspending in retirement is obvious; the risk of underspending may be less so. But “according to financial advisors, it ultimately amounts to something similar: not living as fulfilling a life as one could have,” said CNBC. “It represents a life not lived, the vacations you didn’t take because you were afraid you were going to run out of money,” said certified financial planner Marianela Collado to the outlet.

Sure, you can ultimately pass on what remains to your heirs or to a charity or another organization of your choosing. But by playing it safe and never tapping into what you worked so hard to accrue, you never get to reap the rewards of all that labor.

How can you figure out a safe rate of spending in retirement?

Admittedly, the “‘right’ withdrawal rate is far from settled science, in that you’re trying to figure out how much to extract under uncertain market conditions and an unknowable time horizon,” said Morningstar. Instead of trying to come up with a hard-and-fast withdrawal rule that will last throughout your retirement, think of it as something you can continually reassess as your circumstances shift.

Known as “flexible withdrawal strategies,” these “ebb and flow with a portfolio’s balance,” said Morningstar. Such strategies may allow you to withdraw more of your portfolio during your own lifetime “rather than leave behind big balances after death.” Maybe you slow down your spending after a big year of travel, for example, or a market downturn. As long as you allow yourself to ramp it up when things are going well and you have golden years you want to live to the fullest.

The UN is preparing to choose a new secretary general for the first time in a decade as six candidates vie to succeed António Guterres of Portugal.

But the winner faces a huge challenge, with a host of geopolitical crises and the very status of the body itself in question.

Who is in the running?

Calls for a “madame secretary general” have been growing “louder”. So the next appointment will “test whether the UN is committed to breaking glass ceilings” by appointing a woman to the post for the first time, said the Australian Institute of International Affairs.

The candidates include Michelle Bachelet, former president of Chile; Maria Fernanda Espinosa, former foreign minister of Ecuador; Rebeca Grynspan, former vice president of Costa Rica; and Carolyn Rodrigues Birkett, former foreign minister of Guyana and permanent representative to the UN.

Several female candidates were overlooked in 2016, when Guterres was elected to serve the first of his two terms. “If I am polite, I would say the world was not prepared for it,” said Bachelet in April. “Is it prepared now? I hope so,” adding that appointing a woman as secretary general would be “a good signal”.

Among the men in contention is Rafael Grossi, the Argentinian diplomat who is director general of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and Macky Sall, a former prime minister and president of Senegal.

The successful candidate will be chosen by the UN General Assembly following the recommendation of the Security Council, whose permanent members are the UK, China, France, Russia and the US.

Those nations “have the future of the world body in their hands”, said Agence France-Presse. Observers say “it is difficult to pick a favourite” because the world’s major powers are “divided on the outcome”, but Grossi has been “repeatedly mentioned”.

What does the secretary general do?

The secretary general is the chief administrative officer and public face of the UN. The role is “equal parts diplomat and advocate, civil servant and CEO”, according to the UN itself.

They oversee several important UN bodies, including the Security Council, which is charged with maintaining peace and security. However, unlike a prime minister or president, the secretary general does not have the power to make laws or command countries. The role is more about persuasion, diplomacy and authority rather than objective political or military power.

What will be in their in-tray?

Gaza and Ukraine will be high in the pile but they’ll have a “tough task” because the “relevance, power and financial capability” of the UN is “under an increasingly harsh spotlight”, said Deutsche Welle.

“Simply put,” said Politico, the UN is “an increasingly irrelevant global institution”, because the United States, “its most powerful member”, is “abandoning and defunding” many parts of its “sprawling structure”.

The Security Council itself “barely functions” because of the “rivalries” between the US, China and Russia, all of whom have the power of veto. “Even as a venue for international gatherings”, the UN is “fading” because leaders would “rather meet and make deals” at the G20.

Updated guidance on single-sex public spaces came into force across most of the UK on Wednesday, despite opposition from trans-rights groups and many MPs.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s new code of practice says people must use facilities such as toilets and changing rooms according to their biological sex. It was updated following the Supreme Court judgment last April, which ruled that the terms “man”, “woman” and “sex” under the 2010 Equality Act referred to biological sex, rather than gender identity.

The equality watchdog says trans people should use either gender-neutral facilities or those that match their biological sex, a move welcomed by groups campaigning for sex-based rights. But critics say the code is difficult to implement, unworkable in practice and could lead to discrimination against trans people.

Where does the guidance apply?

It’s the EHRC’s services, public functions and associations code of practice that has been updated. That applies to organisations such as cafes, leisure centres, gyms and hairdressers, as well as public toilets, local sports clubs with at least 25 members, hospital wards, domestic violence shelters and rape-crisis shelters. It covers England, Scotland and Wales. (Northern Ireland uses different equality legislation, and is still considering the impact of the Supreme Court ruling.)

The code “does not impose legal obligations”, nor is it a “statement of the law”, said lawyers at Pinsent Mason. But it can be “used in evidence in legal proceedings”, so organisations are likely to treat it as “the most reliable guide for managing legal risk”. It is also “important to bear in mind” that the employment code, which guides workplaces, has not changed.

How will it be implemented?

Nearly 13,000 toilets and more than 5,000 changing rooms might need to be “revamped”, said Sky News. At least 18,000 signs may need changing. The building work could cost more than £14 million per year, an analysis by the Press Association suggests. Cleaning the new facilities could also cost public sector bodies, such as councils, more than £20 million. Both estimates “may be too low”, said Sky News.

Many organisations have already made changes they say are in line with the code. But some, such as Lambeth Council in London (run by Green Party councillors), say they might refuse to implement the guidance if advised that it’s lawful to do so.

What does it mean for trans people?

Organisations might be able to exclude trans people from single-sex spaces if they decide someone could “object” to their presence. If they allow trans women into women-only spaces, those will no longer legally qualify as women-only spaces under the Equality Act.

The code says that where it is “proportionate” for spaces to remain single sex, such as a rape crisis centre, then only those of the same biological sex should use them. But it would be “very unlikely to be proportionate to put a trans person in a position where there is no service that they are allowed to use”.

The code also notes that forcing a trans person to use services related to biological sex could amount to discrimination. It suggests gender-neutral “third spaces”, such as unisex lockable cubicles, should be provided where possible, said The Guardian.

What has been the reaction?

The guidance is “unworkable” and could “lead to widespread harm for trans people and those who don’t conform to gender stereotypes”, said a spokesperson for the Trans+ Solidarity Alliance. It also “puts businesses and charities in the crossfire of endless litigation”.

Critics question how organisations could visually identify biological sex. Legal action on how the code is implemented is likely, both from those who “think the guidance itself is wrong” and from gender-critical groups who “will want to challenge any organisations” they believe aren’t complying, said the BBC.

There are also criticisms about the delay in publication of the guidance. The draft was sent to the equalities minister, Bridget Phillipson, last September for approval.

After an amendment was made in June, 135 MPs, 69 from Labour, signed a motion calling for it to be scrapped, “primarily because of worries about its impact on transgender people”, said The Guardian. Those MPs are “increasingly doubtful” that the guidance is "workable in the real world”.

Labour MP Kevin McKenna, "questioned whether trans patients in hospitals could really be cared for in gender-neutral side rooms, given these are scarce and often needed for clinical reasons”. He said he feared the unsafe and impractical guidance “may not survive contact with reality”, and “will not make life any safer” for anyone.

However, Maya Forstater, from the sex-based rights charity Sex Matters, said: “The law is clear and the code is practical, giving many examples that apply to everyday services.”

Winning a scholarship can help make covering the cost of college much more manageable. And unlike student loans, which you have to pay back, scholarships are money that is gifted to you free and clear — well, almost.

In some cases, you may have to pay taxes on that scholarship money. So, what are those cases? The problem with that question is “answering it often seems to require a Ph.D.,” with confusion abounding among both parents and students, said The Wall Street Journal. Figuring it out in advance, however, is key to minimizing tax impacts or at the very least being aware of them.

When do taxes not apply to scholarships?

Perhaps it is first easier to understand when you do not owe taxes on scholarship funds. “A general rule is that your college scholarship is tax-free when it is used to pay for ‘qualified education expenses,’” said Kiplinger. These are the costs that are “typically limited to items required for all students to attend a particular institution” — think “tuition, fees, books and supplies.”

The student, as well as the school, must also meet certain requirements for the scholarship money to be tax-free. Specifically, the student must be a “candidate for a degree at an educational institution that has regular faculty, regular curriculum and a regularly enrolled population of students in attendance,” said H&R Block.

When do you owe taxes on scholarships?

If you use your scholarship funds for costs beyond what is absolutely required for all students in attendance at the program, then income taxes will generally apply. So, for instance, “if a student uses scholarship dollars to buy a computer that’s not required, those funds are likely taxable,” said the Journal. The same goes for “funds used to pay for room, board, most travel and optional expenses,” as well as any “money the student receives for other services, such as office work,” alongside “stipends for living expenses.”

Additionally, for your scholarship to be tax-free, the amount cannot exceed your qualified education expenses. “If your scholarship exceeds the amount of your qualified education expenses, you may need to report the excess amount on your tax return,” said Kiplinger.

How should you report a taxable scholarship?

If your scholarship is indeed taxable, you will need to report that to the federal government. The process for doing so is the same as it is for any other income.

You will report the taxable scholarship amount using either Form 1040, Form 1040A or Form 1040E Z on the line labeled “Wages, salaries, tips.” If “no W-2, Wage and Tax Statement was received, also enter ‘SCH’ by the taxable amount,” said H&R Block.

With back-to-school season in full swing across parts of the U.S., many American families are feeling an extra pain in their wallets from buying school supplies. The cost of these supplies ebbs and flows over the years, but economists say 2026 is an especially difficult year for buying new pencils or glue sticks — and families may not feel relief in the near future.

How much have school supply costs increased?

The “price of a typical school supply list has increased 7.7% over the past year, with some essentials seeing much larger jumps,” according to an analysis from progressive think tanks The Century Foundation and Groundwork Collaborative. The highest spikes were seen among lunch boxes, which had a 26.8% year-to-year jump; notebooks, up 23%; index cards, up 22%; and notebook paper, up 20%. In total, families will pay about $175 more on school items in 2026, the think tanks said.

The spike in school supplies isn’t entirely new. The average “school supply list costs about 34% more than it did 10 years ago,“ which “works out to roughly 3 to 4% per year over the last decade,” said WWL-TV. In addition, “today’s supply lists often go well beyond the basics, with requests for disinfectant wipes, paper towels, copy paper and, in some cases, electronics like Chromebooks or laptops.” These requirements can “leave families with fewer opportunities to save.”

Combined with the rising cost of food, the average U.S. household will spend about $4,000 this year between school supplies and school lunches, the think tanks said. At least 45% of parents “plan to take on debt to pay for back-to-school shopping this year,” according to a Credit Karma survey, while half of American parents are “cutting back on other expenses to make room for back-to-school shopping,” said Deloitte.

Why have school supplies become so expensive?

Many are pointing to the economic policies of the Trump administration as a cause. The White House’s tariffs “on a range of imports have driven up the price of binders, pencils and other school supplies,” said CBS News. Many school supplies, including pens, markers and notebooks, are “manufactured overseas, making them subject to higher tariffs.” Newell Brands, the makers of supplies including Sharpie, Paper Mate and Elmer’s glue, announced they’d be implementing price increases to offset the tariffs.

Beyond the tariffs, other “school supply companies also blame higher energy costs due to the Iran war for having to raise their prices,” said CBS. ACCO, the parent brand of Mead and Trapper Keeper, has said that “higher oil prices stemming from the conflict have driven up the company’s costs and led to price hikes for consumers.” With all of these global issues, parents at home “don’t have a lot of wiggle room on the matter,” Julie Margetta Morgan, the president of The Century Foundation, said to The 19th.

Many parents are “searching their local back-to-school fairs for supplies, or seeking out backpack giveaways and school supply distributions” to lessen the burden, and others are “working more over the summer to cover increased costs,” said The 19th. Still, not all parents are feeling the relief. Content creator Victoria Albano posted a recent reel on Instagram showing a $230 Target bill for her incoming first grader’s school supplies. “I was up all night trying to figure out what to buy and what not to buy,” Albano told The 19th. “I’m not struggling, but I’m not where I want to be.”

The next major fight between Israel and Palestine might be fought not on the ground, but rather below it. Israel is currently attempting to seize the land around archaeological sites throughout the West Bank, the largest of which has an ancient history going back three millennia. But Palestinian officials believe Israel is claiming these areas illegally, and they are revving up for a political battle.

Why is Israel going after these sites?

Israel is “undertaking a major drive to develop and expand archaeological sites in the occupied West Bank” because officials believe it is “incumbent upon Jewish citizens to connect to their history and heritage,” said The Forward. There are several locations that Israel is working on developing, with two being the most prominent: Sebastia, a small village near the West Bank city of Nablus, and Jericho, another West Bank city that is home to the ancient Hasmonean Palaces.

Sebastia is “one of the most layered archaeological sites in the Middle East” and is now a “flashpoint in a fight between Israeli and Palestinian authorities over land, heritage and narrative,” said CNN. The town’s history “goes back at least 3,000 years” to when it was the capital of the ancient Kingdom of Israel. The archaeological site “lies in Area C of the West Bank, under full Israeli civil and security control according to the Oslo Accords,” while the town itself is in “Area B, under mixed Palestinian-Israeli jurisdiction.”

In Jericho, Israeli officials want to control the Hasmonean Palaces site because they claim it is under “deliberate and systematic destruction by the Palestinian Authority,” which Israel says has “targeted it and other sites in a bid to erase evidence of Jewish ties to the land,” Israel Ganz, the head of the West Bank’s Yesha Council, told The Forward. To try and control these sites, as well as others, Israel’s parliament has proposed a bill to create a new Israeli body in the West Bank, which would “have the power to conduct excavations, declare sites, expropriate lands and more,” said Haaretz.

What has the Palestinian response been?

The Israeli bill, as well as Israel’s overall push near the sites, has “drawn criticism from Palestinians and Israeli rights groups who say it is tantamount to annexation of occupied land and would expand Jewish settlements,” said Reuters. Israel’s actions are “intended to expand control in these areas, deep inside Palestinian territories,” Hani Al-Hayek, the Palestinian Authority’s tourism minister, said to the outlet.

Palestinian officials are taking action to stop Israel’s movement in the region. At their urging, UNESCO recently designated Sebastia a full “World Heritage site, hoping it will prevent Israel extending ​its control at the ancient village,” said Reuters. Some Israelis seem to agree that their government is being overzealous. The digs are “another way of weaponizing. That is, you attach more importance to a certain kind of heritage and less importance to other kinds of heritage,” Rafi Greenberg, an archaeology professor in Israel, told CBS News.

The Israeli government, however, remains steadfast. “The area is Israeli territory. It belongs to the Jewish people,” Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu told CNN. No matter the end result, this archaeological debate will be a “test case to a battle not just over the past but about the present and the future of the territory and the people who live near its historic stones.”

“To Do. Buy Japanese Yen (JPY) $5-10 bil,” read a note written by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a cabinet meeting on Friday. By Monday, he had confirmed on X that the US had participated in “coordinated foreign exchange actions” with the Japanese government to counter “disorderly yen movements”.

In recent weeks, the yen sank to a 40-year low against the dollar, the latest milestone in Japan’s economic decline. However, having traded at ¥163 to the dollar on Thursday, the yen has strengthened to ¥155 to the dollar since the intervention.

Donald Trump claimed the joint move would be “good for the world economy”. But some analysts believe the intervention will best serve America’s interests.

Why is the yen so weak?

Japan, the world’s fourth biggest economy, has “long struggled with a weak yen”, said CNN. After suffering recession and “chronic deflation” in the 1990s, Japan has kept interest rates much lower than other developed economies. In April, the Bank of Japan increased its rate to 1% – the highest since 1995 – while the US rate usually lies between 3.5% and 3.75%. While such low rates hope to stimulate consumer spending, they also are much less attractive to international investors.

Global events such as the Iran war have also impacted Japan’s import-heavy economy. The country is “resource-poor”, said The Japan Times, with around “95% of its oil imports” coming from the Middle East before the recent conflict began. While a weak yen is beneficial for Japan’s exporters and the tourism industry, energy and fuel inflation have hit the country’s population hard.

Other issues such as a “decades-long slide in its working-age population”, substantial government debt and low productivity have also hampered economic growth, said the BBC.

What’s in it for Trump?

The president called the move a “signal of friendship” between the two nations. The US is “always there for Japan”, a country that has been “very good to us, with the exception, of course, of Pearl Harbor”.

But the US also stands to benefit. The Japanese government has been buying up yen, thereby “raising the value of their currency”, said The Guardian. But to pay for this, Japan has been selling off US government bonds, which are kept by many countries as a “store of national wealth”. If, however, these bonds are sold quickly and in large quantities, it can lead to a rise in the interest rate the US pays on its debt, thus making it more expensive for the US to borrow money.

Another factor behind the intervention could be that Trump sees Japan’s Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi as an “ideological ally”. In October, the US bought “billions of Argentinian pesos to help prop up the country’s finances” just weeks before midterm elections for President Javier Milei, another ally of Trump’s. Takaichi’s defence agenda – she is planning to double spending to 2% of GDP over the next five years – has been “broadly welcomed” by the Trump administration.

Is this a sign of things to come?

Both US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Japanese Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama have announced they would not hesitate to participate in further joint interventions.

In April, the Bank of Japan took action to boost the yen, said CNN, but it proved to be only a “temporary success”. Analysts are “less optimistic” that this latest intervention could “fundamentally alter the broader course of the yen’s weakening”.

Within Japan, there is concern that Takaichi’s spending plans will put further pressure on the currency. A two-year cut in sales tax on food and soft drinks from 8% to 1% is an attempt to ease cost-of-living pressures, and the PM has promised to invest hundreds of billions as part of a pro-growth agenda that led to her election. However, the policies could instead “strain public finances and rattle markets”, said the Financial Times.

It’s widely assumed that eight hours is the perfect amount of sleep but a new study found the “sweet spot” is a little less than that, said sleep specialist Dr Allie Hare in The Telegraph.

Getting it right matters because new research, published in Nature, found that “falling short, or exceeding” the “precise window” discovered by the research, is “linked with poorer brain, heart and immune health”.

What did the research say?

People who got between six hours 24 minutes and seven hours 48 minutes of sleep a night were found to have better functioning immune systems, brains and hearts, according to researchers at Columbia University Irving Medical Center.

This ideal amount of sleep was associated with less ageing, as measured by organ-specific biological clocks. Duration alone doesn’t cause organs to age faster or slower, but the findings do suggest that insufficient or excessive sleep may be “markers of poorer overall health across the body”.

Is it different for men and women?

There is also a gender factor because women “seem to do better with a little longer”, Marie-Pierre St-Onge, a professor at Columbia University, told The Washington Post. They need “15, 20 minutes” more sleep, which reflects the “slightly longer” sleep duration reported by the “general population”, which “tends to be slightly longer in women than men”.

Previous research found that sleep is “largely linked to ageing and the pathological burden of the brain”, said Junhao Wen, an assistant professor at Columbia and lead author of the study. But the new research "goes further” and shows that “too little and too much sleep” are “associated with faster ageing in nearly every organ”.

Should we all be getting seven hours?

There are a number of conflicting theories about how much sleep we need. According to individual needs theories, there is no single ideal amount of sleep, because genetics, age, health, activity level and even life circumstances influence how much sleep someone needs. Adaptive or evolutionary theories hold that the correct amount of sleep varies depending on factors such as season, workload, stress, illness and safety.

But we “might be overthinking it”, said Emma Beddington in The Guardian. Sleep is “important and fascinating for science to explore, but surely, for the rest of us”, it’s “best left mysterious”.

There’s “so little we can do” to reach the “ideal” amount of unconsciousness, so “knowing precisely how bad that is for us is unhelpful”.

Summertime heat can bring sky-high electric bills, which may have you searching for new savings opportunities. Solutions can range from the low-cost option of increasing the temperature by a few degrees to the high-cost solution of installing an entirely new cooling system. A middle-of-the-road option that may be worth exploring? Upgrading to a smart thermostat.

These devices make it easy to set your system on your schedule, so you are not running it unnecessarily when you are at the office or away on vacation. Some are even more advanced, automatically detecting your absence and switching to a more energy-friendly mode. While these shifts can cut down on usage and increase efficiency, calculating the actual electric bill savings you will see is not necessarily clear-cut.

How can a smart thermostat save you money?

The potentially cost-saving feature most smart thermostats offer is an app that you can use to easily set a schedule for the heating and cooling of your home. “Technically, you can do this with any thermostat, but smart thermostats make it especially easy with their eco modes and suggestions, which means the average user typically starts saving more money when they adopt a smart thermostat,” said CNET. The app can also display your energy usage habits, which can help you course correct going forward.

Some more advanced smart thermostats take things a step further. They figure out when “nobody is home, most commonly with motion or occupancy sensors, or by checking the location of your phone,” and then they flip to an “energy-saving model” if no one is around, said Consumer Reports.

What is the average savings a smart thermostat offers?

Compared to the savings some smart thermostat manufacturers claim, “independent research tends to paint a more conservative picture,” said CBS News. Many studies show “average savings closer to 10% to 15%.”

The savings rate you see will depend on a variety of factors. In general, the “largest savings are often seen by homeowners who previously left their thermostat at the same temperature around the clock,” said CBS News. If you were already scheduling your thermostat, you may not see as big a difference. Same goes for if you are home most of the time, or if you live somewhere with more moderate temperatures.

When can installing a smart thermostat make sense?

Whether a smart thermostat “makes financial sense for your budget depends largely on your current habits, your HVAC system and how long you expect to stay in your home,” said CBS News. Consider how much you are currently adjusting your home’s temperature based on your occupancy and how often you are there; switching modes during absences is the main way smart thermostats offer savings.

Some HVAC systems, such as “an older HVAC system without a C-wire” and “electric baseboard radiators,” tend not to work with smart thermostats, said Consumer Reports. Systems like “modern variable-speed air conditioners, and especially heat pumps,” may become less efficient with a smart thermostat, since they are “designed to work better and more efficiently when they run constantly at a fixed temperature.”

Lastly, it is important to account for the cost of the thermostat itself, which runs from “around $100 for the cheapest models to more than $350 for top models with all the bells and whistles,” said CNET. You will also need to pay for installation. Still, with the average savings most smart thermostats offer, you can expect to offset those costs “within a year or two.”

Like all technology, video games have evolved over the years and for the most part, those advancements have been welcomed. But Sony’s recent announcement that it will cease producing physical video games has rattled fans, particularly those who rely on selling and buying used games. The move could be a major setback for the global second-hand gaming market, estimated at nearly $7 billion.

Why is Sony ending physical discs?

The quintessential game disc is “going away, at least on PlayStation,” Kotaku said. Sony, the company behind the iconic console, is set to end production of physical discs for all first-party and third-party PlayStation games in January 2028. Games released before 2028 will “continue to have physical versions, but everything that comes after will be digital-only.”

The majority of all new games are sold digitally, but “many fans still prefer to own their games on discs,” said Kotaku. The end of discs doesn’t “necessarily preclude Sony and other companies from still selling game boxes in brick-and-mortar stores.” They would just have to “download codes inside, similar to this fall’s Grand Theft Auto 6.” But it’s unclear if the PS6 will “even have a disc drive, either built into the console or as an optional external attachment.” Sony has not confirmed the console's features yet; many have “assumed it would be backwards compatible with the current generation of games,” including the physical disc versions.

Sony was “clear as to why it’s making the change,” said The Verge. Sundowning physical media is a “natural direction” for the company to “adapt to consumer trends,” as the “general preference for digital media significantly outpaces physical discs,” Sony said in its announcement. The transition will enable Sony to “align more closely with how most of our community prefers to access and play games today.”

The company’s financials “prove it, too,” said The Verge. In the fourth quarter of the 2025 fiscal year, the “full game software digital download ratio” of games on PS4 and PS5 was 85%, Sony said.

How will second-hand gaming be affected?

One of the biggest losers due to Sony’s controversial decision to abandon physical discs is the second-hand game market. The market for used games will “keep shrinking and eventually disappear,” Kazunori Ito, the director of equity research at Morningstar, said to CNBC.

If this is the future of gaming, then “brick-and-mortar game retail is doomed,” even though, historically, at least one-third of games have been sold as used, Michael Pachter, the managing director of strategic planning at Wedbush Securities, said to CNBC. This is an “extremely anti-consumer decision” that has no “legitimate justification and communicates a disdain for players,” Michael Futter, the cofounder of video game industry consultancy F-Squared, told the outlet.

Even comedian Trevor Noah weighed in on PlayStation’s news. For a lot of gamers, physical discs are the “only way they could afford to play games because they could get them secondhand,” he said on X. You could also “give games to your younger siblings, which is a great way to introduce them to the games you were playing.”

Games preservation group DoesItPlay is planning an “economic and gameplay blackout” for the week of Aug. 23. The “PSBlackout” calls for players to keep their PlayStations powered off the whole week. “No logins, no play sessions, no purchases on any of Sony’s platforms,” said the announcement on X. However, the “efficacy of these player-organized boycotts” is “dubious at best,” said PC Mag.

In the past, companies have undone controversial choices after experiencing heavy backlash, but analysts believe it “remains unlikely that Sony will U-turn on this,” said IGN. “I sympathize with physical media fans,” but Sony “will not reverse this decision," Serkan Toto, the CEO of Japanese game industry consultancy firm Kantan Games, said to the outlet. They knew what the “online reaction would look like,” and now they “wait for this storm to pass.”

Sony has more than “120 million active PlayStation users,” Toto added. Even if “500,000 cancel in protest,” that would be just “1% of that business gone,” which is “of course not enough for Sony to start rethinking.” Digital is “just too lucrative.”

Labour looks set to pass its first test with voters since Andy Burnham took over as prime minister, with the party’s candidate the favourite to succeed him as Manchester mayor in today’s by-election

The race to replace Burnham has been somewhat “overshadowed by events in Westminster” over the past week. But the region’s two million voters go to the polls today to take part in “the biggest by-election in British political history”, said The Guardian.

Who’s running?

Bev Craig, current leader of Manchester City Council, is standing for Labour against Reform UK councillor for Baguley, Sian Niamh Astley, in what has been a heated contest between the two parties.

Other names throwing their hat into the ring include Altrincham councillor Geraldine Coggins, representing the Green Party, Bowdon councillor Phil Eckersley for the Conservatives, and Didsbury West Liberal Democrat councillor Richard Kilpatrick. Marlon West is standing for Restore Britain, with former mayoral candidate Marcus Farmer running as an independent.

How does the vote work?

UK mayoral elections use a system known as supplementary voting that gives voters the option to choose their first- and second-choice candidate.

If any candidate secures more than 50% of the first-choice votes, they will automatically be elected mayor. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the contest moves to a second round between the two candidates who received the most first-choice votes. All other candidates are eliminated, and ballot papers are counted again factoring in second-choice votes.

What do the polls say?

When Burnham declared his intention to return to Westminster, “the prospect of Labour losing control of Greater Manchester was used as an argument to keep him in post”, said Dan Haygarth in The Independent. After the mayoral by-election was announced, some bookmakers even made Reform the early favourite, but polls suggest that Labour will retain the mayoralty with “relative ease”, leaving Reform and the Greens to battle it out for second place.

YouGov polling from 17 July had Craig on 38% to Astley’s 24%, with Coggins in third on 17%. But in a second-round run-off, the Labour candidate would trounce Reform’s 62% to 38%

With both the Greens and Reform offering radical alternatives to a deeply unpopular Starmer government, this election could have been “a mighty close battle and very difficult for Labour to hold on”, Jon Tonge, professor of politics at the University of Liverpool, said in The Independent. But now voters are less likely to be “looking for an alternative to Labour; they’re prepared to support Labour, for now at least, across Greater Manchester”.

What’s at stake?

The winner of Thursday's race will take control of the biggest mayoral authority outside London, with a £3 billion budget and wide-ranging powers across housing, health, policing and transport. But the race also has deep implications far beyond Manchester.

Professor Rob Ford, of the University of Manchester, said in The Guardian that the real mark of success would be whether Labour was able to push back the Green tide in Manchester and close the gap in Reform-leaning areas such as Wigan and Bolton.

Whatever the result, Greater Manchester will be “very close to the heart of power given the location of Number 10 North”, Professor Andrew Russell, from the University of Liverpool, said on the BBC. “Not for the first time of late, all eyes will certainly be on the city.”

A mathematician has somewhat unceremoniously announced that he has disproven an almost 90-year-old problem — with the help of Anthropic’s artificial intelligence model. The announcement sent waves through social media and the inner circles of mathematics, as the latest in a series of AI-driven mathematical achievements that shook the field and called future math into question.

What math problem did AI tackle?

The Jacobian conjecture is “false,” Harvard University mathematician and Anthropic employee Levent Alpoge said on X, thanking his “close friend Akhil for asking about it” and his “other close friend Fable” for “working during the World Cup final.” Attached was a mathematical formula, a counterexample to the decades-old problem. Despite the fact the problem “bedeviled highly accomplished mathematicians for almost 90 years,” the conjecture “proved no obstacle” for Anthropic’s “latest frontier AI model,” said Mashable.

A conjecture is an “idea that some mathematicians believe is true,” but nobody has been “able to prove or disprove,” said mathematician Melissa Lee at The Conversation. This algebraic geometry theory suggests that a “certain type of mathematical function would also work in reverse” and was “formally set out” by Ott-Heinrich Keller in 1939, said New Scientist. It was one of 18 “fiendishly difficult problems for mathematicians to tackle in the 21st century,” according to a list curated by mathematician Stephen Smale in 1998.

The AI-generated counterexample that Alpoge shared online is the “latest in a series of AI-driven mathematical breakthroughs,” said Fortune. The technology’s “progress (or assault)” on unsolved mathematics has “compounded rapidly since mid-2025,” when models first solved “five of six problems” at the International Mathematical Olympiad.

After that, OpenAI’s model disproved an “80-year-old Erdos conjecture on combinatorial geometry” in May. In June, more than a dozen researchers from 15 universities published a declaration on AI and mathematics, urging their colleagues to “set guardrails around transparency, attribution and peer review” before AI “reshapes what mathematical knowledge even means,” Fortune added. Mathematicians, “relegated to the role of shepherd,” are left to watch AI “close these questions one-by-one, reaching places where the human mind can’t follow.” The mathematicians’ reaction is a “now familiar mixture of dread and amazement.”

What does this mean for the future of math?

The significance of the AI’s discovery varies depending on whom you ask. The counterexample did not “cause me to update my priors about what AI can and can’t do," professor and mathematician Andrew Blumberg said to Mashable. This is “exactly the kind of thing I would expect AI to be able to do.”

The counterexample to the Jacobian conjecture is still a significant achievement for AI in mathematics, Blumberg said, but there’s a difference between providing proof of a mathematical problem and showing a singular counterexample that disproves it. In other words, the counterexample “tells us essentially nothing.” Just that there are a lot of polynomials (a math equation that has numbers and letters representing variables). It’s “hard for people to check them all, but it’s not hard for machines.”

Among other “recent AI-assisted breakthroughs,” the Jacobian conjecture counterexample stands out for being “remarkably simple,” Lee said at The Conversation. The difficulty in finding the solution seems to have “lain not in an intricate construction or a lengthy proof” but rather in finding a good way of “navigating an enormous search space of possible polynomial mappings to find one with the right properties.” AI, this suggests, may “prove to be just as valuable for discovering unexpected mathematical objects as it is for constructing proofs.” What this means for the “future of mathematics and human mathematicians” remains to be seen.

For some, the recent developments with AI foreshadow a future of “increasingly capable AI models that will solve ever more complex problems,” said New Scientist. AI can “already produce master’s degrees in mathematics,” mathematician Ivan Fesenko at Westlake University in China said to the outlet. In a year, it will produce “Ph.D. degrees in mathematics.” Then the question arises, “do we really need so many mathematicians around if AI can do such things so nicely?”

Picking up the phone and realizing a debt collector is on the other end is a stomach-dropping experience. It is also a conversation that can have numerous potential implications, which is why it’s essential to know ahead of time how to navigate the call when the time comes.

Unfortunately, these conversations are becoming more prevalent amid soaring credit card bills and unpaid medical debt. “Lawsuits filed by debt collectors over unpaid credit card bills and other outstanding balances have surged to their highest levels in years,” said the Pew Charitable Trusts, per The Wall Street Journal. Here is how to prepare.

You have a right to know the facts.

Believe it or not, “many sold debts have errors about the amount owed or even who owes it,” said NerdWallet. So, as soon as you hear from a debt collector, first verify all of the details to ensure they are accurate.

When a debt collector contacts you, they are legally required to provide you with certain information about the debt within five days. But do not just take their word for it — you should also “gather your own records, including information on the original creditor and your history of payments,” said NerdWallet.

You should be cautious about what you share.

Watch what you say when speaking with debt collectors, as it could work against you later. For instance, avoid offering personal financial information, including your bank account number or details on your assets, as this “might be used to collect from you through a wage garnishment, bank levy or property lien if the creditor or collector gets a judgment against you,” said Nolo.

Similarly, avoid making any promises regarding the debt. “Your acknowledgment of the obligation might revive the statute of limitations” or the length of time the creditor has to take legal action to collect the debt, said Nolo.

You should absolutely keep detailed records.

As you navigate communicating with debt collectors, make note of what is said and who you talk to, as well as the date and time of the call. This is important because it “will help you determine who’s calling you from where and what debt each collector calls about,” said Nolo. You can also “track how often a particular collector calls and document inconsistencies in what collectors say to you from one call to the next.” You will be glad to have this info in case you need to file a complaint or you end up in court.

You can tell a debt collector to stop contacting you.

While working with a debt collector can help you resolve your debt, if it feels overwhelming or you have any hesitations, you have the right to ask them to stop contacting you. You can draft a letter saying as much using one of the forms on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) website, and the debt collector is obligated to comply. Just keep in mind that if the debt is yours, “stopping communication with a debt collector doesn’t make the debt go away,” said the CFPB.

You have protection against certain types of communications.

Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, debt collectors cannot harass or threaten you. Prohibited behavior ranges from “repeatedly calling you at any time, day or night or before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m.” to using “any false, deceptive or misleading representation,” said Experian. If you think a debt collector may have violated your rights, be sure to submit a complaint with the CFPB.

As tens of thousands of people continue to be evacuated from parts of southern France ravaged by wildfires, firefighters are facing a new threat never seen before in the region in the form of “fire clouds”.

Described by Nasa as the “fire-breathing dragon of clouds”, pyrocumulonimbus formations are the result of extreme heatwaves and can lead to wildfires.

Sophie Brocas, the prefect of the Gironde in Bordeaux at the epicentre of recent blazes, told Le Monde the “incredible, unprecedented, unknown phenomenon” meant we are “entering a new dimension” when it comes to fighting the effects of global warming.

How are they formed?

Pyrocumulonimbus or cumulonimbus flammagenitus – more commonly known as fire clouds – are created by intense heat from the Earth’s surface. This is usually caused by volcanic eruptions or large wildfires where temperatures can reach as high as 800C.

The rapidly rising plume of air cools and forms fire clouds, which, when combined with enough moisture and strong updrafts, can develop into so-called “fire storms”. These produce downdrafts that spread burning embers and dry lightning that starts new fires; and they can even form dangerous fire tornadoes.

The result is so intense, they effectively create their own internal weather systems.

Are they getting more common?

Fire clouds have become increasingly common in the US, Canada and Australia, where the 2019-20 “black summer” bushfires killed at least 33 people and destroyed more than 11 million hectares (27.2 million acres) of bush, forest and parks.

Fire officials in New South Wales reported that embers from the fire storm were landing 18 miles ahead of the front, three times more than the usual distance, said the BBC. But until now, there have been no documented cases in France or northern Europe.

Given pyrocumulonimbus are more likely in extreme weather conditions such as high temperatures, strong winds and little moisture, scientists have warned climate change is likely to increase the chance of them forming.

How can they be stopped?

With the advent of devastating fire clouds, French authorities have “reached a point of ‘operational impossibility’ that requires us to accept the need for strategic retreat”, Lieutenant Colonel Eric Brocardi, spokesman for the National Firefighters Federation of France, told Agence France-Presse.

These fires are convective, which is a problem because they create their own winds “that constantly shift direction, unlike a standard fire that spreads in a conical pattern”. This makes the movement of the blaze “completely unpredictable” as it spreads outwards and becomes impossible to fight head-on.

“It’s a David-versus-Goliath scenario: the idea is that, at some point, we’ll find a weak spot and strike there”, said Brocardi.

“Salvation will come either from the sky – in the form of rain, though it would need to pour heavily for three days – or by finding a way to steer the fire towards a place where it will die out on its own. The sea, for example.”

We’ll be seeing huge numbers of colourful migrants in the UK this summer – in what is widely predicted to be the largest arrival of painted-lady butterflies for 17 years.

“We are in the midst of a miracle”, said wildlife writer Simon Barnes in The Observer. Last time there was a painted-lady spike, in 2019, they were seen in their hundreds of thousands. Clouds of the butterflies have already been spotted, as Butterfly Conservation’s annual Big Butterfly Count – the world’s largest citizen-science insect count – gets under way. Large numbers have been recorded along the east coast into northern England and, at Hickling national nature reserve, close to the Norfolk coast, 253 of them have been seen feeding on one patch of brambles.

What are painted ladies?

Formally known as Vanessa cardui, they are medium-sized orange butterflies with black markings and, on their forewing tips, white spots on a black background. Every year, in a spectacular long-distance migration, they fly from the desert fringes of North Africa, the Middle East and central Asia to mainland Europe and then Britain and Ireland. Then in September, they fly south again, completing a 9,000-mile round trip and one of the world’s longest insect journeys. “They can move from egg to adult in less than six weeks,” said Barnes in The Observer, so it might take “three or four” generations to reach the UK.

In an average year, the number of painted-lady arrivals in the UK hovers around 15,000, although, some years, hardly any reach our shores. But butterfly experts are confidently predicting such a surge in numbers this year that we’re in for “a once-in-a-decade ‘painted lady summer’”, said The Guardian.

Why are numbers spiking?

It’s down to a combination of “favourable early spring conditions in southern Europe”, the recent heatwaves and “benign southerly winds”, said The Guardian. Sightings have been increasing for several weeks but “there’s been a big recent immigration” in the past week, Dan Hoare of Butterfly Conservation told the paper. Painted ladies “grow extremely fast, feed easily and fly really well” and, after breeding particularly successfully during heatwaves in France and Spain, they have benefited from “favourable winds to get them across the Channel”.

The last time this happened, in 2019, more than 420,000 painted ladies were recorded in the UK. But that most recent summer spike pales in comparison to the record year of 2009, when more than two million painted ladies arrived in the UK over a two-day period in May. Over the course of that summer, there were a “barely credible” billion British painted ladies, said Barnes in The Observer.

What about wider butterfly numbers?

In marked contrast to the excitement about the “painted-lady summer”, butterfly numbers in the UK have long been decreasing, according to Butterfly Conservation. Sightings hit record lows in 2024, although there was “improvement” in 2025. Climate change, habitat loss, pollution and plant pesticides have contributed to a picture where more than three-quarters of butterfly species are in decline.

Warnings about the “fragility of nature in the 21st century” are the “naturalist’s lot”, said Barnes in The Observer. But the “awe and disbelief” that will no doubt greet this year’s painted-lady numbers are “symbols of hope”. The bumper success of that butterfly’s 9,000-mile intercontinental journey is a reminder that “if you give nature even the fragment of a chance, it’s always avidly seized”. If the “right decisions” are made, at local, national and international levels, British butterfly “recovery is still possible”.

When summer is sweltering, there is nothing more luxurious than a swimming pool in your own backyard. But is it actually a smart investment?

Installing a swimming pool is certainly not cheap nor is it a quick and easy project. Once it’s there, it’s hard to undo, and you will need to commit to the necessary maintenance and upkeep costs. On the flip side, how nice would it be to splash around with your kids on any given day or swim laps each morning? Couldn’t it even attract potential buyers if you decide to sell someday? Here are the pros and cons to evaluate before making the splash.

How much does a swimming pool cost overall?

The cost of a pool varies hugely depending on the type you install. “On average, expect to pay $2,146 to install an above-ground pool and $49,638 for an in-ground pool,” said Citizens Bank.

Even if you feel fine about that number, keep in mind that the costs do not stop there. You will also have to cover the expense of maintaining the pool and the higher electric bills that pool pumps, filters and heaters can generate. You will most likely also deal with a higher home insurance bill for the added coverage. And if anything goes wrong, you will need to pay for that as well. For instance, a “tear in a swimming pool’s lining is a common issue encountered by pool owners,” and “repairing it can cost anywhere between $1,000 and $6,000 depending on how big the tear is,” said Kiplinger, based on data from HomeServe, a home repair administrator.

Can a swimming pool increase your home’s value?

It depends. A major influence is your home’s location and the climate there. “In some markets, especially those with warm climates, in-ground pools may add more value to the property than in colder climates where a pool would get only a few months use each year,” said Zillow.

The popularity of pools in your neighborhood also has a bearing. “If you live in a neighborhood where many of your neighbors have swimming pools, your investment is probably solid,” and “in those circumstances, not having a pool might decrease your home’s marketability,” said HGTV.

A lot comes down to your specific pool and its condition and features, too. “Older pools, especially those requiring significant repairs or updates, can drag down the overall value of the property,” said Zillow. By contrast, “homes with saltwater pools sell for 1.5% more than comparable homes without one — and they sell two days faster.”

What else should you consider to decide if a pool is worth it?

Before getting a pool, it is absolutely worth running the numbers, both to assess the total overall cost and to determine how much of your investment you may get back in resale. But money is not the only factor to ponder.

Particularly if you have young kids, pool safety is a major consideration. You will want to include at least a locked fence around the pool. This can add to the cost of the project, not to mention the stress of ownership.

It is also important to weigh your options for paying for the pool and the benefits or disadvantages of each of them. If you have significant equity in your home, you may be able to get a lower interest rate on a home equity loan or home equity line of credit (HELOC). A personal loan or credit card can also be an option, though you should be aware of the added cost of interest on those.

US dominance of the AI landscape is receding with the release of Kimi K3, the newest model developed by a Chinese start-up called Moonshot AI.

Kimi K3 is as “powerful as the most advanced AI systems” from the US, such as OpenAI and Anthropic, while being “cheaper to run”, said The Telegraph. It is available for people to freely download and is an “open-weight model”. This allows developers to download it, modify it and run it on their own servers for free, “positioning it for easier adoption and a wider market globally”, said CNN.

How good is K3?

K3 was “beating” Anthropic’s Opus 4.8 model and OpenAI’s 5.5 in most coding and “general AI agent benchmarks”, according to results released by Beijing-based start-up Moonshot. This was while costing “about a third of Anthropic’s Opus 4.8”, said the Financial Times. But K3 was “falling short” of Anthropic’s Fable model.

Unlike the “closed” and “proprietary” American systems, K3’s “open nature” allows global users to “modify the system for advanced reasoning and complex software development”, said the BBC. It will be the world’s first open source model in the “three-trillion-parameter class”. A parameter refers to “learned values within a machine learning model that determine how it maps input data into outputs”, said IBM.

The release of K3 had an “immediate” market reaction, said The New York Times. The Nasdaq dropped around 1%, with investors selling shares in US companies like Intel and Nvidia, who make computer chips to power AI.

How have Anthropic and OpenAI reacted?

Anthropic and OpenAI have accused Chinese companies of “improperly harvesting data” from their systems to “accelerate” their own competing models’ development. However, after years of “operating under export controls” and “tight computing constraints”, China’s advances “cannot be explained by distillation alone”. There is “real innovation going on”, said Graham Webster, a Stanford University professor.

The “steady stream” of Chinese open-source AI models, including K3, that “rivals” the performance of “costly systems from Silicon Valley” have become the “preferred choice” for developers, said the NYT. President Trump has “repeatedly framed maintaining America’s “lead” in the “defining technological race of our time” as a “strategic imperative for preserving the country’s economic and national security”. These technological developments have “underscored the geopolitical stakes of the US-China contest for leadership”.

What does this mean for US dominance in AI?

Xi Jinping released a statement saying AI development should not be a “solo performance by a single country” but instead a “symphony of international cooperation”. He said China was “ready to work with all parties to seize the opportunities of AI development”.

US AI leaders and policy makers had taken “comfort” from “estimates that China remained six to 12 months behind”, even with Chinese open-weight models “gaining momentum”, said Axios. However, the release of Kimi K3 suggests that “cushion may have collapsed far faster than expected”. With the “entire game changed”, this could “trigger some code red for some”, said AI analyst Kim Isenberg.

American labs are “hardly out of ammunition” with OpenAI and Anthropic “racing ahead” to build newer systems like GPT-6 and Claude Opus 5. But even if the US “pulls ahead” again, China has shown it can “close the gap quickly”.

A shrinking pool of ultra-wealthy donors increasingly bankroll Britain’s political parties. Should we be worried?

Why is this issue in the news?

The short answer is because of Reform UK. In December 2025 the Electoral Commission, the statutory body that regulates elections and political finance, reported that Reform had received £9 million from the Thai-based crypto investor Christopher Harborne – the largest donation to a political party ever made by a living person in the UK. (Harborne also gave £5 million, said to be a personal gift, to Nigel Farage in 2024.)

The latest figures show that just under £25 million was donated to UK political parties in the first quarter of 2026: £9.9 million to Reform, £6 million to the Conservatives, £4 million to Labour and £3 million to the Lib Dems. Of the money given to Reform, £7 million of it came from Harborne and one other donor, Ben Delo, the Hong Kong-based founder of a crypto exchange. This is, increasingly, a theme of all political funding. In 2015, donations of £1 million or more from individuals and companies accounted for 1% of all private political donations. By 2024, such high-value donations made up fully 35% of the total.

Why is this happening?

Voluntary donations fuel party politics in the UK. State funding is limited to relatively small amounts given to opposition parties. Parties need money to pay their staff, conduct research, advertise and fight elections. The steady decline of membership – the Tories had around three million members in the 1950s, and now have around 130,000 – has seen fees replaced by donations.

Big donations are not limited to Reform: members of the Sainsbury family have given tens of millions to the Conservatives and Labour, including a £10 million bequest to the Tories in 2022, the largest donation in UK history. Yet the past decade has seen the rise of a new generation of mega-donors, less well known, often residing abroad. At the same time, overall spending has grown, aided by the Tories’ controversial decision to raise the electoral spending cap by 80% in 2023. The total spent by all parties at the 2001 election was £27 million; at the 2024 election, it was nearly £69 million.

What does the law say about political spending?

For election campaigns, spending limits are set for each national party (calculated at £54,010 per constituency contested) and for each local candidate (from £11,390). There is, however, no general limit on political donations. Since 2000, donations over £11,180 (previously £7,500) must be reported to the Electoral Commission. However, loopholes abound. For instance, Frank Hester and his company The Phoenix Partnership donated £15 million to the Conservatives before the 2024 election (63% of the party’s campaign spending) but broke it up into smaller amounts to avoid scrutiny.

Donors have to be “permissible”, meaning they’re an individual who is on the electoral register (this includes overseas voters), or a UK-registered company, union or other body. Those who are not UK voters can get round the ban by giving money via UK subsidiaries, or by using so-called unincorporated associations.

Why is this a matter for concern?

Money affects electoral outcomes. Arguably, Reform could not have established itself as a major party without generous funding for it and its predecessor, the Brexit Party. And by and large, parties do not get something for nothing. Political scientists often divide donors into three (overlapping) groups: “ideologues”, motivated by a cause; “investors”, who give money to those they think will represent their interests; and “intimates”, who enjoy the access it gives to lawmakers and the associated prestige. The dangers of this are well-rehearsed. But as donations grow more narrow and concentrated among the super-rich, the fear is that parties are ever-more vulnerable to donor pressure. It is no coincidence, critics say, that two-thirds of Reform’s money comes from crypto businessmen, and that the party is calling for a regulatory “Big Bang 2” to turn the UK into a “crypto hub”.

But the problem spreads wider than that. Transparency International UK has assessed that £42 million given to political parties since 2001 came from donors either alleged, or proven, to be involved in fraud, corruption or money-laundering.

Is there an alternative to the current system?

Many nations cap not what parties can spend but what donors can give. Australia has a $50,000 annual donation cap; Canada limits individuals to around $1,750 per year; France caps them at $7,500. In each case, however, the state makes up the shortfall – per voter, France spends over ten times as much as the UK on political parties – and in Britain such state funding is unpopular; most taxpayers reject the principle that they should fund parties they disagree with.

At the other end of the spectrum from France is the US, where the Supreme Court has scrapped all donation and spending limits on freedom of speech grounds. The cost of US elections, and the influence of the very rich, has since rocketed.

Are there any plans to limit donations?

Labour’s 2024 manifesto promised to “protect democracy by strengthening the rules around donations”. Philip Rycroft’s independent review into foreign financial interference recommended, among other things, an annual £100,000 cap on political donations from British voters living abroad; a suspension of crypto donations; and tighter “Know Your Donor” checks. In March, these were added as amendments to the Representation of the People Bill, which was due to come to the Commons for its third reading last week.

The bill’s progress was abruptly delayed, because of backbench amendments aimed at capping domestic political donations. The Labour MP Stella Creasy proposed a universal annual cap of £100,000 on individual donations. (This would have stripped Reform of around 85% of its funding.) Both Reform and trade unions – whose block donations to Labour could have been affected – objected. The delay will allow Andy Burnham’s government to reshape the legislation.

If you are saving for retirement with a 401(k) plan, there is a good chance you enjoy matching contributions from your employer. Those using an IRA do not have that same opportunity, however, as the retirement saving option is opened independently outside of an employer. The Saver’s Match, set to roll out in 2027, will finally give some IRA owners (and workplace savers) a chance to claim a matching contribution.

Created under the Secure 2.0 Act of 22, the Saver’s Match program will “provide income-eligible retirement savers with a matching annual contribution worth up to $1,000 for single tax filers and $2,000 for joint filers,” said CNBC. The Treasury Department will deposit these contributions directly into retirement accounts.

What is the IRA Saver’s Match?

In short, the Saver’s Match is a “government-funded contribution to an eligible retirement account,” said U.S. News & World Report. Under the program, the Treasury Department will direct deposit matching contributions into the retirement accounts of eligible account owners.

These contributions will be “equal to 50% of retirement contributions up to $2,000, for a maximum yearly match of $1,000,” said CNBC. Eligibility for matching contributions, and the amount of the contributions, is income-dependent.

Who is eligible for the Saver’s Match?

“Eligibility for the Saver’s Match is based on income: single filers with a modified adjusted gross income of $20,500 or less in 2027 (or $41,000 for joint filers) are eligible to receive a 50% match on up to $2,000 of their contributions,” said Investopedia. As income increases, the amount of matches goes down, phasing out for single filers earning between $20,500 and $35,500 ($41,000 to $71,000 for those filing jointly).

Another asterisk in eligibility is that it also matters what type of IRA you have. “Although contributions to an IRA may qualify workers for the match, any money the worker is entitled to can only go into a traditional IRA — not a Roth IRA,” said CNBC. Effectively, this “means that workers who save via a Roth” would “need a traditional account to receive the match.”

Those with workplace retirement plans, such as 401(k) plans, are also eligible for the Saver’s Match if they meet income thresholds.

How does the Saver’s Match compare to the Saver’s Credit?

The Saver’s Match is replacing the Saver’s Credit, which is a nonrefundable tax credit designed to encourage low- and middle-income savers to contribute to a retirement plan. A tax credit is designed to directly reduce the amount of taxes you owe.

The problem with the credit, however, is that it was something “low-income savers largely couldn’t use since they owe little or no taxes,” said Investopedia. With the Saver’s Match, it is not necessary to pay taxes to get the matching contribution. All you have to do is meet eligibility requirements and contribute to your retirement account.

When President Donald Trump announced he was gifted a new luxury Boeing 747-8 from Qatar to use as an interim Air Force One, many national security analysts were worried about risks potentially inherent to the plane. Now that Trump has started using the vehicle, it seems some of those concerns have been borne out, with even Trump himself insinuating that the plane may have security lapses.

What makes Trump’s new plane different?

The plane was designed to be used only during Trump’s presidency. It is built on the body of a Boeing jumbo jet, but there are some significant differences from prior Air Force Ones. The biggest change is that it appears to almost uniquely suit Trump’s taste, complete with a new color scheme after the plane was “repainted in dark navy blue, deep red and gold,” said CBS News.

In keeping with Trump’s affinity for gold and luxury, the plane’s interior features “cognac leather seats” with lie-flat capabilities alongside tray tables made of “mahogany with silver trim,” CNN reported. To communicate with the outside world, the plane serves as an “airborne command post equipped with a new communications system that enables resilient, secure connectivity to respond to global events without disruption,” said L3 Harris Technologies, the contractor used by the U.S. Air Force to upgrade the plane.

What are the security issues?

For all the talk of the gilded plane, there is no shortage of worries about how secure it is. The new model “lacks the same defensive countermeasures that were security features of the old model, including its advanced antimissile capabilities,” sources told The New York Times. At least two Air Force officials were “surprised to see Trump fly on the new jet overseas, where there are greater security risks.”

The plane was gifted by Qatar, a nation that Trump “used to accuse of supporting terrorism,” said MS NOW. But since receiving the jet, the White House has “cozied up to Qatar to a remarkable degree, even unilaterally extending a NATO-like security guarantee to the nation.” That has not changed the fact that the plane “may ​not be as ⁠secure as the baby blue Air Force One that preceded it,” said Reuters.

The White House originally shot back at these insinuations, sending subpoenas to the reporters at The New York Times who wrote about the plane; these were later withdrawn. Trump has since “acknowledged that the Boeing jet given to him by Qatar cannot match the defensive armor of a true presidential aircraft,” said The Guardian, telling reporters he will go back to using the original plane while the new one is “grounded and ‘maxed out’ with the protections it was never built with.” Republicans in Congress have blocked efforts to halt further work on the vehicle.

During a recent overseas trip to Turkey, Trump initially flew aboard the plane but “switched to an older, more heavily defended aircraft for the return leg amid rising tensions with Iran, reportedly on the advice of the Secret Service,” said The Guardian. Despite the security concerns, as well as ethics controversies over accepting the $400 million jet, it is “perfectly safe for the president’s travels but will receive additional upgrades and enhancements in the fall, which will take approximately one month to complete,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

A financial trick that uses credit card debt to make money has returned because of relatively high savings rates.

Financial conditions are now in a “sweet spot” for the strategy known as stoozing, said The Telegraph.

A “successful stoozer”, said MoneySuperMarket, effectively turns credit card debt into a short-term interest-free loan while keeping their actual money in a high-paying savings account.

The difference between the savings interest and any credit card fees is your profit. But while the concept is “relatively simple”, successful stoozing “requires careful organisation and financial discipline”.

What is stoozing?

Stoozing is a way of “manipulating 0% spending credit cards to make money”, said MoneySavingExpert.

The method means you can “maximise interest earnings”, said The Independent, by spending on a 0% interest credit card “while diverting your actual cash into high-yield savings accounts”.

How stoozing works

Stoozing involves taking out a long-term 0% spending credit card and using it for your normal daily spending, while any unspent money from your bank account – such as your wages – goes into a top savings account to earn interest.

You need to make sure you pay off the credit card bill each month. When the 0% deal is about to end, you will need to either “pay off the balance using the money from the savings account or transfer it to a new credit card with a 0% balance transfer”, said Go.Compare. Meanwhile, any interest you earn on the money in the savings account ends up as profit.

Pros and cons of stoozing

The method can be “lucrative”, said MoneySavingExpert, but it will not work if you are “not very financially organised, unsure of how it works, have a poor credit history, don’t have financial self-discipline, or have other credit card, overdraft or loan debt”.

It is a “relatively low-effort” way to earn some extra money and maximise savings interest, said Moneyfacts.

But there are risks. You could be hit with interest charges if you don’t clear the debt, said CompareTheMarket, “undoing all the good work of having your money in a savings account”.

Taking out too much debt can also have a “negative impact” on your credit score, said Money to theMasses, which may make it harder to borrow money for a “legitimate reason” such as if you need a mortgage.

Plus, you may regret “locking away your savings” if you suddenly need the money sooner than expected, as there may be penalties for early withdrawals.

Is stoozing worth it?

Stoozing “only really works”, said uSwitch, when “savings interest rates are high”.

The method can be “worth the hassle”, said Go.Compare, if you have “strong credit” as well as “discipline for timely repayments”. Stoozers also need to be able to invest borrowed funds “profitably”. It is risky if you will struggle to pay the credit card bill or “the returns are too small for the effort involved”.

There are alternatives to stoozing, such as reward or cashback cards that pay “a percentage of your money back or build points to redeem in shops”.

Heat waves this summer have brought droughts to large swaths of the United States, and they are spelling disaster for many farmers. Coupled with the lingering problems from last year’s dry winter, some farmers say their livelihood in the fields is literally and figuratively drying up.

Why is this particular drought so bad?

While droughts are a frequent fixture of summertime, 2026 has been worse due to a confluence of factors, including the arrival of El Niño. The ocean-warming weather pattern “can contribute to severe droughts,” which often “disrupt growing seasons in key breadbaskets of the world” including parts of the United States, said Mother Jones. Some experts believe this El Niño could be the strongest so far this century, making it an especially dry season.

The extreme heat in many American areas is also a contributor, leading to drought patterns that are “intensifying across several key farming regions while corn and soybean crops enter critical reproductive stages,” according to the USDA. Some areas in the Western U.S. are routinely reaching over 100 degrees Fahrenheit, which is “increasing stress on vegetation and raising concerns over fire ignition.”

Farmers are also still recovering from an unusually dry winter, which was an “extraordinarily dry one in the Western part of the country” and has been “taking a bite out of farmers' plans,” said PBS News. One notable dearth is occurring along the Colorado River system in Arizona, where the drought is “pitting farmers against residents of cities and suburbs as well as industrial users including data centers, solar projects and semiconductor plants,” said Reuters.

How are farmers being affected?

Many could be “feeling the impacts of the ongoing drought and extreme heat this summer both in the short-term and long-term future,” said WRAL-TV Raleigh. Some customers have had to cut back on buying plants because of water restrictions, which have also “led to some smaller crops” this summer. “We just have enough water to grow what we normally grow. We didn’t expand any more this year,” farmer John Harmuth said to WRAL-TV.

Across the country in California, a similar scenario is playing out. The state has been the “king of broccoli production for decades,” but “water struggles provide an opening for New York, Maine and other Eastern states to boost their own production of the green vegetable,” said Politico’s E&E News. While California isn’t “about to be unseated” as the top broccoli grower, farmers in the Golden State may see increased competition as farmers in the East “could fill some of the gap caused by drought if the region coordinates its efforts.”

With farmers continually losing access to water, many are turning to state governments for solutions. In Arizona, farmers are fighting with “housing developers and solar companies” who are “buying up agricultural land,” said Reuters. They are urging Arizona politicians to “impose a moratorium on residential growth, arguing that farmers are critical to the country's food security.” Innovations such as “cross-country water pipelines similar to those for oil” could also help, said farmer Jace Miller to the outlet. Companies “can't just keep taking water from agriculture.”

Two of the biggest tech giants are locked in a head-to-head legal battle, with Apple claiming OpenAI stole trade secrets as the AI start-up plans its first hardware devices.

Apple launched the “blockbuster lawsuit” last week, accusing OpenAI and several of its staff – formerly Apple employees – of “stealing secret hardware plans”, said the Financial Times. One of the staff named in the lawsuit is OpenAI’s head of hardware, who was “a top Apple device designer”.

The lawsuit, which doesn’t name OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman, amounts to “a spectacular breakdown in the relationship” between two of Silicon Valley’s “biggest names”.

What is the background between the two?

Apple and OpenAI launched a partnership in 2024, working to integrate OpenAI technology into Apple’s voice assistant, Siri. Apple also built ChatGPT into operating systems for iPhones, iPads and Macs.

But tensions began to surface last year when OpenAI bought a hardware start-up co-founded by Jony Ive, the former chief designer at Apple – and the brains behind the iPhone. OpenAI’s $6.4 billion purchase of io Products signalled that it was “foraying into hardware”, said The Guardian.

OpenAI is working with the “design guru” to develop a line of AI devices, including a hand-held gadget similar to a smart speaker, but equipped with a camera. These are “intended to compete with the iPhone and other Apple products”, said Bloomberg. Ive is “helping lead an effort to supplant” the very device he did so much to create. Much of his design team at Apple followed him and now work either at OpenAI or on its hardware products. This “exodus” has “fuelled resentment” at Apple.

The scale of departures is “astounding”, said Business Insider. More than 400 former Apple employees now work at OpenAI, with some being “unusually senior”. Apple is “furious” that it’s losing talent to “a scrappy start-up” that’s “refusing to stay in its lane”. Last month it unveiled its revamped Siri, which used Google’s Gemini AI model rather than OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

What does the lawsuit claim?

“OpenAI’s nascent hardware business now rests on the shakiest of foundations, rotten to its core by its illegal reliance on misappropriated trade secrets,” Apple wrote. The suit claims OpenAI “poached Apple employees”, said The Guardian, “coaxing them to hand over confidential material, product designs and other tightly held information”.

It names Tang Yew Tan, OpenAI’s chief hardware officer – and a former vice-president at Apple. In 2024, Tan left Apple to work on Ive’s start-up. After OpenAI purchased io Products, it appointed Tan as its own chief hardware officer. The lawsuit claims Tan took information about Apple suppliers with him.

Apple also alleges that when its employees went for job interviews at OpenAI, Tan “asked them to show up with something unusual”, said The Verge: hardware components they were working on at Apple and unreleased product samples for “show and tell sessions”.

Apple claims another former employee took an Apple laptop when he left for OpenAI, and used an authentication bug to breach the company’s internal network and download “dozens of Apple’s confidential hardware-related files”.

After filing the lawsuit, Apple sent “a barrage” of legal warnings to about 40 of its former employees at OpenAI, looking for evidence, said the FT. These “aggressive tactics” show “just how broad and combative the legal fight could become”.

What does OpenAI say?

OpenAI says it is not aware of “any evidence that the complaint has merit”. “We have no interest in other companies’ trade secrets,” said a spokesperson. But if the case goes to trial, it could “reveal the secret hardware OpenAI has long teased”, said CNET, perhaps before it is ready to launch.

Apple is seeking damages and a court order that would block OpenAI from possessing or using its trade secrets. Essentially, OpenAI is “a huge threat” to Apple, said Business Insider. It wants to either “directly challenge the iPhone, or completely replace this device as the go-to gadget of the AI era”.

OpenAI is “ridiculously well funded”, so Apple can’t easily acquire it to bring talent back into the fold. It’s also “too ambitious to swat away or subsume easily”. This explains “the intensity (or desperation?)” of Apple’s lawsuit.

The dispute also “underscores just how intertwined Apple and OpenAI have become”, said Bloomberg. “It’s an extraordinarily awkward situation, made all the more remarkable by the web of personal relationships that still connects the two companies.”

Nicaragua will stop holding elections in a bid to prevent foreign-backed interference, the country’s long-standing president Daniel Ortega has announced.

In a speech to commemorate the Sandinista revolution, which overthrew the US-backed Anastasio ⁠Somoza dictatorship in 1979, the 80-year-old strongman leader declared “the days when parties backed by the Yankees and the Somocistas would return to power are over – never again”.

Who is Daniel Ortega?

A key figure in the revolution, Ortega has held office continuously since 2007, having also served as president in the 1980s.

During his nearly two decades in power, his government has transformed Nicaragua into an “authoritarian state”, according to the UN Human Rights Council.

He has cemented control over virtually all branches of government, including the army and judiciary, and crushed political opposition, with hundreds killed and even more imprisoned following mass anti-government protests in 2018. Last year, further constitutional reforms extended presidential terms to six years, made his wife, Rosario Murillo, co-president, and effectively established a one-party system.

Why has he cancelled elections?

The last elections in 2021 were “widely disputed” after Ortega “detained opponents and business leaders and criminalised dissent”, said Reuters. Hundreds of opposition figures were imprisoned in the run-up to the vote, including a number of presidential hopefuls, before being stripped of their citizenship and expelled to the US and Guatemala.

Nicaraguans had been due to go to the polls again next year before Ortega’s recent announcement that “there won’t be any more elections here for them to try to seize the government and seize power”.

But analysts and opposition figures say the move has highlighted the Ortegas’ fear of a growing opposition movement taking root.

“Ortega and Murillo are evidently afraid at the idea that the slightest political opening could create the conditions for dissent to manifest and threaten their grip on power,” said Tiziano Breda, a senior analyst at Armed Conflict Location & Event Data, a non-profit organisation that tracks political violence. “Instead of staging a rigged election, they have opted to eliminate electoral competition altogether.”

What will the international reaction be?

In the wake of the US military raid in January to capture Venezuela’s then-President Nicolás Maduro, the Nicaraguan government announced it would release more political prisoners, “apparently an effort to stave off pressure on itself”, said AP News. “But there has been no follow-up and little transparency on the issue.”

Despite proscribing the Ortega government as a dictatorship, and imposing sanctions on more than 2,350 Nicaraguan officials and their relatives, the Trump administration has remained remarkably quiet on Ortega and the potential for regime change.

There are a “range of explanations” for this, said Politico’s Nahal Toosi, “including that the regime is making smart moves on battling drug trafficking, that it’s benefiting from a lack of natural resources for Trump to covet and that it doesn’t have a slew of migrants in the US”.

“The lesson from Nicaragua is: don’t matter too much, don’t embarrass Washington and don’t become a domestic political issue,” said Juan Gonzalez, a former Latin America aide to Joe Biden. “For an administration that doesn’t care about democracy or human rights, that’s an effective survival strategy for authoritarians.”

When it comes to a major purchase like a car, you likely want to save any money you can. Unfortunately, car-buying deals are not so easy to come by these days.

Though increases in new car prices have slowed since they shot up during the pandemic era, the “average cost of a new car remains historically high,” said Nerdwallet. “At the end of 2025, the average transaction price hit an all-time high of $50,326 according to Kelley Blue Book — and despite recent moderation, prices haven't strayed far from that peak.” And unfortunately, used cars are not that easy on the wallet either lately, especially given rising financing and car insurance costs.

But for many, a set of wheels is a necessity. If you are in the market, here are some ways you can try to trim costs.

1. Do your research

Doing your homework before you set foot in a dealership is essential. Get familiar with car models in the class you are interested in, and see what is well-rated for factors like performance, reliablity and value. Figure out what a fair price is for that vehicle using “online pricing guides, such as Kelley Blue Book, Edmunds or NADA guides, to know what price you should pay,” said Nerdwallet.

2. Get pre-approved

Equally important is getting prepared financially. “Before you start visiting dealerships, get a pre-approved financing offer,” as this will ensure that the “dealer has to offer a better deal if they want to earn your business for this part of the transaction,” said U.S. News & World Report. Be sure to shop around, too, before you settle on any one offer from an auto lender, to ensure you get the best rate.

3. Keep your eye out for incentives

“Check dealership and manufacturer websites for local and national incentives such as cash-back offers, low-rate or even 0 percent financing, and lease deals with low monthly payments, said Consumer Reports. It is not uncommon to find these sorts of offers “among less-popular offerings — such as sedans, small hatchbacks, and front-wheel-drive (as opposed to all-wheel-drive) SUVs,” said the outlet. Certain times of year to buy a car are also better than others if you are after a good deal.

4. Brush up on your negotiation tactics

Whether you are working with a car dealer or a private seller, it never hurts to ask for a better offer. One “good negotiation tip is to focus on the car’s total price,” said TaxAct. “A salesperson will sometimes try to gauge how much of a monthly payment you can afford instead of your total budget, which can lead to you spending more money than you anticipated,” especially once car ownership costs are factored in.

The trump card in a negotiation, however, is being comfortable walking away. “Just showing the willingness to get up and leave is often a powerful enough message to get the dealership staff to take notice and make you a better offer,” said U.S. News & World Report.

5. Stay flexible

Staying open about which car you get and the features it has can go a long way towards getting a better price. For instance, “note which brands have more or fewer cars in stock,” as those with more inventory will typically be more willing to negotiate, said Kiplinger (a sister site of The Week). Also consider the different trims offered in a vehicle, and which features seem like a necessity and which you are fine living without. If you feel like you need certain add-ons but the price is not matching up with your budget, “consider downsizing or shopping among models that aren’t as popular,” said Consumer Reports.

Andy Burnham began his premiership in dramatic style last night, with a brutal purge of ministers loyal to his predecessor in a cabinet reshuffle far more wide-ranging than many expected.

Today the new PM welcomes the first meeting of his top team, “spanning the mainstream wings of the party, including key Northern allies and ministers who fell out with Starmer”, said Politico’s UK political correspondent, Sam Blewett.

Who took the top jobs?

Burnham aside, the biggest winner following the toppling of Keir Starmer is the new Chancellor, John Healey. A surprise pick, the veteran MP – who quit as defence secretary last month in a row over funding – first held a Treasury brief under Tony Blair back in the early 2000s. Hailing from the centre of the party, he is seen as a safe pair of hands who, it is hoped, will not spook the markets like some other names who had been tipped to replace Rachel Reeves.

Chief among these was former Labour leader and net zero champion, Ed Miliband, who has instead been appointed foreign secretary. He replaces Yvette Cooper, who moves to the health department in what is technically a demotion. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is one of the few Starmer-era ministers to keep her job, along with Pat McFadden at the Department for Work and Pensions, and Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy.

And what about the rest?

Burnham loyalists make up much of the rest of the cabinet, with his right-hand woman and key enforcer Louise Haigh becoming chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, first secretary of state and Cabinet Office minister, tasked with making government run effectively.

Anneliese Midgley, one of the key figures in Burnham’s leadership campaign, has become chief whip, while Miatta Fahnbulleh, another close ally of the PM who has been advising him on policy, takes over from Miliband as energy secretary.

Rounding off a long evening of Westminster psychodrama, former deputy PM Angela Rayner returned to her old job as housing and communities secretary, while one-time leadership contender Wes Streeting becomes secretary of state for defence.

What does the line-up say about Burnham’s plans?

Downing Street has insisted Burnham and Healey have the “same outlook” when it comes to the major issues that the new PM wants to tackle, including re-industrialisation, devolution and the cost of living. While his appointment signals that the new government will prioritise defence spending – perhaps through the issuing of so-called “war bonds” – many see Healey as more of a blank slate than the likes of Miliband or Mahmood, suggesting economic policy could ultimately emanate from No. 10, rather than next door.

In his first speech as PM, Burnham vowed to end rough sleeping, raise the income tax personal allowance, cut VAT on electricity bills and reform social care. Now it’s up to Healey to find the cash and flexibility, within strict fiscal rules, to make these and other ambitions happen.

The elevation of Miliband to the Foreign Office suggests Burnham also wishes to break from Starmer when it comes to international relations, to “focus relentlessly on the domestic”, said Blewett. Having a “big figure from Labour’s left in charge of the foreign brief could help smooth that ride”.

If there is one thing we learnt from yesterday’s appointments it is that Burnham has a “much stronger theory of power – a view about how he wants to use the office and what he wants to prioritise – than his recent predecessors”, said journalist Sam Freedman in his Comment is Freed newsletter.

Unlike Starmer, whose government “looked buffeted by events and U-turns” from day one, Burnham “has indicated not just that he has priorities but that he is willing to make the institutional changes required to make them happen”.

In an ideal world, you would enter your golden years debt-free. By erasing what is usually among the biggest debts anyone has, your mortgage, you would undoubtedly make the math on your monthly retirement budget much easier. But whether or not paying down that debt is feasible to do — let alone the most financially responsible move to make — is a whole other question.

The answer will depend on the specifics of your financial situation and mortgage loan. After all, the “right answer for a homeowner carrying a 2.875% mortgage, a solid brokerage account and a reliable pension looks very different from the one facing someone with a 6.5% loan heading into heavy IRA withdrawals,” said Kiplinger.

Why prioritize paying off your mortgage before retirement?

The most obvious benefit of paying off your mortgage before retirement is that you will cut a major expenditure from your budget. “Without the monthly mortgage payment, your Social Security, retirement funds, or pension will go much further, providing more funds for living expenses, hobbies, and travel,” said Investopedia.

You also stand to save a significant amount on interest, particularly if your mortgage has a high interest rate. “Depending on a home loan's size, interest rate and term, the interest can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars over the long haul,” said Charles Schwab. You can then put those funds towards other uses or invest them.

When does it not make sense to pay off your mortgage before retiring?

Even if the peace of mind a paid-off mortgage offers sounds appealing, it is not necessarily the right move financially. “Tying up too much of your savings or net worth in your home can create challenges,” if down the road you lack the liquidity to cover an emergency expense or a significant healthcare bill, said Investopedia.

It is also important to weigh the costs—both literal and opportunistic—to an early mortgage paydown. Depending on your lender, you could end up owing prepayment penalties for paying off your mortgage ahead of schedule. Or, if you have higher-interest debt, such as credit card debt, but focus on your mortgage instead, that could end up costing you more overall due to the accrual of interest.

Shifting your focus to your mortgage could also result in you putting “retirement savings on the back burner, which could come back to bite you when you stop working,” said Northwestern Mutual. And, depending on your mortgage rate and how it compares to potential investment returns, you might actually be better off investing those funds instead of putting them toward an early mortgage payoff.

What should you consider when deciding whether to pay off your mortgage?

A lot of the decision comes down to the numbers. You will want to consider, “Does your mortgage rate cost you more than what you can likely earn elsewhere? If it does, then paying it off might be better,” said Investopedia.

Additionally, you will want to determine how paying down your mortgage would affect your cash reserves. If you need to drain your savings to do so, then it might not make sense for your overall financial health.

Things are very difficult in Cuba. Since February, the country’s power grid has suffered three nationwide blackouts: there is currently electricity for two hours a day at most in Havana, and less in rural areas. Mains water works roughly every other day. The average monthly wage, in real terms, is under US$20. Food production has fallen drastically; shortages are common. Petrol is prohibitively expensive. Cuba’s once-impressive healthcare and education systems are in tatters.

Tourism – the island’s main economic lifeline – was down 58% in the first five months of 2026 compared with the year before. Long-haul flights there have stopped because they can’t refuel. Mosquito-borne diseases such as dengue fever and chikungunya have staged a comeback, and the UN reported last month that child mortality has risen sharply. An estimated fifth of the population has left since 2021.

Why is this happening?

Cubans have endured decades of mismanagement from their own communist government, along with economic warfare from the US – but the past few years have been particularly harsh. Cuba invested heavily in tourism and underinvested in healthcare during the 2010s, only to see both sectors heavily impacted by the Covid pandemic. Miguel Díaz-Canel, who in 2021 became the nation’s first leader not from the Castro family since 1959, ordered a crackdown that year on the largest wave of protests seen for decades.

But the main cause of the present trouble is a US oil blockade, which began in January – the biggest such action since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. Trump at the same time issued an executive order designating Cuba a national security threat – and called on Cuba’s leaders to “make a deal before it is too late”.

Why does the US think Cuba is a national security threat?

It didn’t offer specific reasons beyond Cuba’s alliances with Russia and China, along with claims that it “destabilises the region through migration and violence”. Cuba’s communist regime has historically been a bugbear for the US, particularly for Republicans. And Trump’s Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, a son of Cuban immigrants, favours regime change.

But the timing suggests that the decision to tighten the screws was inspired by the successful US action against Venezuela on 3 January – and, more broadly, by Trump’s desire to assert US primacy in the western hemisphere. In March, the president told reporters he believed he’d have “the honour of taking Cuba... I think I can do anything I want with it.”

What’s Venezuela’s role in this?

Venezuela became Cuba’s main regional ally in 1999, when Hugo Chávez’s left-wing government began supplying Fidel Castro with cheap oil. The alliance continued under Chávez’s successor, Nicolás Maduro, and until this year, 75% of its oil imports came from Venezuela and Mexico. But after seizing Maduro in January, killing 32 Cuban security personnel in the process, the US made Venezuela cut off Cuban oil supplies; Mexico did the same under the threat of tariffs. The island requires around 100,000 barrels of oil per day for its power stations and infrastructure to function; since January, episodic shipments have only given short-term relief.

It now seems that the Trump administration is looking for a similar outcome to Venezuela: sources told The Wall Street Journal they were aiming for regime change by the end of 2026.

What are the US demands?

They haven’t shared them in public, though the Cuban government confirmed in March that talks were taking place. Trump’s previous actions suggest that his definition of regime change is flexible. In Venezuela, the US left Maduro’s government in place under the control of his deputy, Delcy Rodríguez; the country was forced to open up its oil and mining to US investors, but not to democratise. In the case of Iran, similarly, Trump has shown himself willing to treat a change of personnel at the top as regime change. The Cuban leadership may feel they have some wiggle room; in June it announced a package of 176 free-market reforms in an effort to placate the US. But there are big obstacles to a political settlement on both sides.

Why might a deal be difficult?

A law from 1996 prohibits the US from recognising any Cuban government that includes Raúl Castro, Fidel’s brother, who is still, aged 95, a major figure in Cuban politics. Florida’s Cuban-American community, a key part of Trump’s voter coalition, would also object to any deal that did not mean the end of the regime. The US might settle for custody of Castro, who was indicted this May by a Florida grand jury for his part in shooting down two planes belonging to a Cuban exile group in 1996.

But the Cubans are unlikely to agree to that, and there is no plausible opposition party or Delcy Rodríguez-like figure to deal with – though Raúl Castro’s grandson, Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, a reputed playboy who’s close to the Cuban military’s wealthy holding company, is said to have been auditioning for the role.

What if there’s no deal?

An American invasion looks unlikely: Trump is clearly wary of that level of commitment, and has his hands full trying to extricate himself from his “excursion” in Iran. Cuba’s military isn’t the fighting force it used to be, but the country has been resisting US pressure since 1962, and it’s difficult to see the Cuban elite colluding – as some of Venezuela’s did – with a theatrical special-forces raid on Raúl Castro or Díaz-Canel. Castro’s age may be the best hope for a solution, but Cuba has been a one-party state for generations, and with the Trump administration on the opposite side, any transition is likely to be messy.

From the point of view of ordinary Cubans, however, something has to give. “Living like this is agony,” Meyboll Font, a 51-year-old Havana resident, told Agence France-Presse last week.

You could have sworn you did not spend that much, but once again, you get to the end of the month, and the numbers in your bank account are not quite adding up. So, what gives? There is one easy way to get to the bottom of this mystery: expense tracking. By taking note of every time you spend throughout the month, you can more easily see where you might be overspending and where you might be able to cut back.

What are the benefits of tracking your spending?

Tracking your spending is effectively an exercise in attention. When you get into the nitty-gritty of your day-to-day expenditures, you can quickly start to see where exactly your money is going and identify patterns in your spending.

That noticing is only the first step, however — “pairing action with that attention is what really makes a difference,” said Nerdwallet. With increased awareness, perhaps you can figure out what is causing you to veer off budget each month and then make adjustments there. Or, maybe you will spot spending you did not even totally realize was happening, such as on subscriptions or other recurring purchases. Once you cut those out, you free up room in your budget to put towards building your emergency savings account, paying off debt or inching closer to your long-term financial goals.

Ultimately, “not only is tracking spending fundamental to understanding where your money is going, but it also ensures that your spending truly aligns with your goals and priorities,” said Daniel E. Milks, certified financial planner and co-founder of Fiduciary Organization, to Fortera Credit Union.

Is expense tracking the same thing as budgeting?

Expense tracking and budgeting certainly can go hand in hand, but they are not one and the same. Tracking your spending simply refers to the act of “monitoring where your money goes,” whereas “budgeting is more of a proactive approach to managing your money,” said Chase.

You can think of expense tracking as an information-gathering step, with the data you gather there informing the budget you create and adhere to.

How can you track your spending?

There are a number of ways that you can go about tracking your spending. The best option will be whichever feels easiest to you.

A “notebook or printed tracker,” for instance, can be “good for people who remember better by writing things down,” while a spreadsheet can work well for those who “like totals, categories and monthly comparisons,” said MoneyFit, a nonprofit financial education and counseling organization.

There are also a variety of budgeting apps and tools available. “For those who prefer the convenience of automation, linking checking and savings accounts to a budgeting app can often simplify the process,” said Milks to Fortera Credit Union.

Japan is to open its first centralised intelligence agency since the Second World War in the face of increased security threats posed by China, Russia and North Korea.

With pacifism enshrined in its post-war constitution and culture, Japan has for decades had to rely on co-operation with US military intelligence support. Now Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has described the reforms as a “first step” towards strengthening the country’s independent espionage capabilities.

How will it work?

Legislation that passed the upper house of Japan’s National Diet in May creates two new bodies: a National Intelligence Council, which acts as the government’s command centre for intelligence gathering and analysis, and a National Intelligence Bureau, which is responsible for operations.

Japanese leaders have “privately approached partners such as the US, Australia and Germany in recent months for advice on technology, staffing and priorities,” said The New York Times.

The idea is that the two new bodies will improve Japan’s intelligence abilities “by strengthening coordination, reducing interagency barriers and ensuring that intelligence products better meet policymakers’ requirements”, defence expert Sanshiro Hosaka told Al Jazeera.

To allay public concern that intelligence gathering could be used for political advantage, supplementary resolutions have been passed “to ensure personal information and privacy are not unnecessarily infringed”, said Japan’s national broadcaster NHK. The amendments also specify that the government “should not gather information in a way that undermines political neutrality”.

Why now?

Japan’s intelligence system has “long been fragmented, with defence officials, diplomats, the police and others collecting and analysing information without sharing intelligence across departments”, said the NYT. “That has left the country especially vulnerable to espionage and foreign interference.”

To make matters worse, Japan also lacks an anti-espionage law, which has made it relatively easy for foreign intelligence activities to go unpunished. “Japan has had enough of being a ‘spy paradise’,” said Philip Shetler-Jones and Masashi Umehara from the Royal United Services Institute think tank.

The Trump administration’s repudiation of long-standing allies has revealed the dangers of over-reliance on US intelligence sharing. With the reform of its intelligence system, Japan’s approach to security is “becoming more self-reliant and autonomous”.

How are Russia and China operating in Japan?

Russian and Chinese operations within Japan have increased in recent years. In 2024, cybersecurity research group Citizen Lab exposed a so-called “paperwall” of Beijing-run websites disguised as Japanese-language news sources to spread pro-China disinformation.

The Russian military, meanwhile, has taken advantage of lax espionage laws to establish a secretive intelligence unit in Tokyo known as the 20th Directorate. “Posing as diplomats or businesspeople, its officers work to buy or steal battlefield technology and smuggle it into Russia”, said The New York Times. The NYT cited Ukrainian government estimates that 90% of Russian missiles and drones used in Ukraine contain Japanese components.

President Donald Trump may continue his rhetoric against Greenland, but a different Arctic land 1,200 miles away, Svalbard, faces similar pressure from other countries. With increasing influence from China and Russia, the Norwegian territory could end up playing an outsize role in global affairs.

What’s happening in Svalbard?

The island is subject to a 1920 treaty that allows people from 49 nations to live and work there without a visa, largely for scientific research. Svalbard has since become the “planet’s leading hub of Arctic science and a rare site of international cooperation,” but this also collides with “increasingly fractured international relations and countries’ quest for influence in the fast-warming Arctic,” said CNN.

China and Russia have been working in Svalbard and established research stations that “provide a gateway to Arctic influence,” said CNN. Due to its abundant natural resources, Svalbard has become a “pawn on Russia’s chessboard,” said France24. And Russia hopes that controlling more of Svalbard will allow it to dominate the nearby Bear Gap, one of the “key maritime routes through which Russian naval vessels and submarines can move from their Arctic bases into the North Atlantic,” said Al Jazeera.

China’s hold on Svalbard is not as strong as Russia’s, but it still maintains a presence. In the nation’s 2018 strategy outline for the Arctic, China “called itself a ‘near-Arctic state’ and repeatedly referred to Svalbard,” said CNN. The country also has “plans for a ‘polar silk road,’ an infrastructure and shipping corridor across the top of the world.” China also has several research stations in Svalbard, including a major testing station on Spitsbergen, Svalbard’s only permanently populated area.

What’s next for Svalbard?

Some are worried that Svalbard’s use by other countries will embolden authoritarianism, as Russia and China will “likely work toward common ends in the development of future Arctic governance,” said The Arctic Institute. Norway’s response “may determine if Svalbard maintains its status as an international research hub or becomes defined by its importance in global trade and military security.” Norway also has its own plan to “mine a huge stretch of Arctic seabed around Svalbard and beyond for critical minerals.”

When it comes to war, the 1920 treaty “prohibits the construction of military bases and fortifications” on Svalbard. However, the article in the treaty that prohibits this is only one sentence and states Svalbard cannot be “used for ‘warlike purposes,’ leaving much room for interpretation,” said The Arctic Institute. Russia has recently been using Svalbard as a “gray zone” for military testing, and the “utilization of these methods is becoming more concentrated on Svalbard as the Arctic Circle captures evermore geopolitical attention.”

Norway seems to be pushing back against Chinese and Russian provocation. In 2022, the government “changed voting rules to prevent non-Norwegians from voting” in Longyearbyen, the capital of Svalbard, said CNN.

And some of the pushback has also been symbolic. This year, two granite Chinese lions were removed from the research station on Spitsbergen. There’s “no Chinese research station on Svalbard,” said Eivind Vad Petersson, the state secretary in the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to CNN. There’s a “Norwegian research station with Chinese tenants. That’s a distinction with a difference.”

Data from more than 747,000 participants has been made available to scientists and doctors, creating an unparalleled genomic and electronic health record database “powering next-generation discoveries” in so-called “precision medicine”, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the US medical research agency, has announced.

What is it?

Precision medicine, as defined by the NIH’s National Human Genome Research Institute, is an “innovative approach that uses information about an individual’s genomic, environmental and lifestyle information to guide decisions related to their medical management”.

Generally considered analogous to “personalised medicine” or “individualised medicine”, its goal is “to provide a more precise approach for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease”.

What are the obstacles?

In theory, “therapies targeted to a person’s genetic make-up should be more effective and have fewer side effects”, said the BBC’s David Cox. But in practice, personalised medicine has in the past proved “erratic and expensive”. Another problem has long been that it “requires people to trust governments and companies with their genomic data, while the regulatory environment around medicines is ill-equipped to cope with therapies that are designed for just one person”.

That is the “paradox at the heart of precision medicine,” said NIH director Jay Bhattacharya. “To tailor treatments to individuals, you actually need very large populations to uncover the patterns that connect genetics, lifestyle, and the environment to health outcomes.”

What conditions could benefit from it?

NIH’s All of Us data has already fuelled more than 1,400 peer-reviewed publications across the US and around the world. Recent related breakthroughs range from a first-of-its-kind clinical genetic test predicting inherited risk of heart disease to the development of a low-cost prostate cancer risk model.

In a small-scale trial in California, people with early-stage dementia were given bespoke treatment plans targeting their personal nutritional deficiencies, ongoing infections and environmental exposures, which saw their symptoms improve.

A new “groundbreaking” genomic test could see millions of women with breast cancer spared debilitating chemotherapy, following the results of a trial that could “transform healthcare guidelines worldwide”, said The Guardian.

And in April, The New York Times reported on the story of KJ Muldoon, born in 2024 with an incredibly rare enzyme deficiency. In the space of just six months, a team at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine designed a personalised therapy that was able to correct the single misspelled letter in his DNA using gene-editing technology. It was perhaps the “most important medical story of the decade”, said the paper.

AI modelling has also made analysis of huge datasets cheaper and more efficient. A recent study in the Annals of Medicine and Surgery suggests this is already having an impact on a range of critical specialities, including cardiology, infectious diseases, and oncology where machine learning models are able to analyse new sets of biomarkers so enabling “ultra-targeted therapies that strike tumour-specific mutations with remarkable precision”.

Even in psychiatry, AI is increasingly being used to predict treatment resistance for antidepressants well in advance. “This is the future of tailored, bespoke medicine,” said Forbes.

Covering the cost of fertility treatment can feel like yet another hurdle in a process that is already physically and emotionally draining. Not only do you have to go through the testing and medical procedures involved, you can also end up paying tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

For families who want to have kids or women who want to afford themselves a little more time, though, this can feel like a price well worth paying. But the process may necessitate some financial planning. Research can also go a long way, as insurance companies increasingly offer coverage.

How much can fertility treatments cost?

The cost of fertility treatments can vary widely depending on the specific treatment that is necessary. A “typical egg preservation cycle is about $10,000,” while a frozen embryo transfer “could total about $2,500,” said The Bump. Meanwhile, a procedure like in vitro fertilization (IVF) “could add up to a total of $13,000 to $14,000.” Opting for a surrogate, meanwhile, can run anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000.

There is also the reality that a fertility treatment is not always a one-time thing. In fact, “most people will need more than one cycle to achieve pregnancy,” said The Wall Street Journal.

Can insurance help cover fertility treatments?

Over the past decade, “more companies have already stepped up to help employees,” said Jaime Knopman, a reproductive endocrinologist for CCRM Fertility of New York, to the Journal. Now, said the outlet, “more than 40% of companies offer overall fertility benefits, according to a 2024 survey of employee benefits plans from the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans.”

Still, this does not mean you will get full coverage, and certain parts of the treatment process may not be covered. For example, “your plan may cover fertility medications, but only those of a specific brand. Or it may cover routine lab work, but only at designated labs,” said Discover. This makes it absolutely vital to do in-depth research and ask questions.

If your company does not offer coverage, it could be worth asking HR. “Some patients even successfully lobbied their human-resources departments to change a company’s policies and benefits plans,” said the Journal.

What are other options for covering the cost of treatments?

There are options besides your own bank account or insurance for helping to cover the cost of fertility treatments. Some alternatives include:

FSA or HSA funds: Flexible spending accounts, or FSAs, and health savings accounts, or HSAs, “may be used to help pay for IVF and other fertility treatments,” said First Citizens Bank.

Provider payment plans or financial assistance: Your doctor “may offer a payment plan, discounts for uninsured patients or even a shared-risk program,” said Discover.

Nonprofits and charities: There are many “national and local nonprofit organizations that support fertility treatments and related costs,” said Discover. They may have eligibility requirements, however, as some are “established to assist with specific types of patients, while many include income thresholds.”

People dealing with record summer heat waves across the United States and Europe aren’t getting much of a respite when the sun goes down. Climate change is causing temperatures to stay high at night, and climate scientists and health experts say hotter evenings may lead to social and medical consequences.

Why are hotter nights a problem?

Intense heat at night is “raising the risk of heat exhaustion and heat stroke even higher, especially for people without access to air conditioning,” said NPR. In cases where the temperature after sundown doesn’t drop below 75 to 80 degrees Fahrenheit, people are “not getting the opportunity for recovery overnight, as we’ve historically seen,” Ashley Ward, the director of the Heat Policy Innovation Hub at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute, told NPR.

It is largely the fault of climate change that no nighttime recovery is occurring, as “each summer we are seeing more heat waves similar to the current one and also more hot nights,” said NPR. The “number of nights where the temperature never falls below 70 degrees Fahrenheit is increasing everywhere in the U.S. except the Northern Great Plains,” according to 2023’s Fifth National Climate Assessment. In fact, the extent of the continental U.S. “experiencing hot summer nights is growing at a faster rate than the extent experiencing hot summer days.”

Many people also find sleeping in hot weather difficult, which could further contribute to negative health effects. A June heat wave in the United Kingdom resulted in nearly 65% of people saying they “struggled to sleep,” according to a YouGov survey, while about half said they lost at least three hours of sleep per night. When this happens, the “implications are significant: a drop in work performance, an increase in accidents, lower school test scores” and a “decline in mental health,” Dr. Laurence Wainwright from the U.K.’s University of Oxford told The Guardian.

The type of residence in which people sleep can also make a difference. In Philadelphia, hotter nights are becoming “more dangerous than the days, particularly for older people who live alone in brick rowhouses in the city,” said The Philadelphia Inquirer. Without cooler temperatures, these rowhouses “can become ‘brick ovens’” at night and lead to heat-related deaths. Philadelphia’s dense neighborhoods can also be “several degrees warmer than other areas even within the city,” further exacerbating the problem.

What can be done about this?

With the continually changing climate, nights will likely remain hot, especially during summer. A 2022 Lancet Planetary Health study “projected that heat-related deaths could rise sixfold by the end of the century, largely because of warmer nights, unless planet-warming pollution is significantly curbed,” said The Sacramento Bee. Heat currently “kills more Americans in an average year than any other weather hazard.” The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s 10-year range from 2014 to 2024 recorded an average of about 250 heat-related deaths annually.

Experts say there are warning signs you can look out for to prevent overheating, whether during the day or night. “In its early stages, heat-related injury can be subtle, so it can be fatigue, increased thirst, nausea, vomiting sometimes and oftentimes muscle cramps, which is a symptom of dehydration,” the Cleveland Clinic’s Dr. Bryan Baskin said to AccuWeather. People “often think that only those out working in the environment, athletes, people who are outside all the time are at risk, and it’s really not true.”

When the 2028 Summer Olympics kick off in Los Angeles, a Russian team could be among the competitors for the first time in more than a decade. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has lifted its suspension of Russia’s Olympic organization, which had been in place since 2016. Many are angry at the prospect of Russia rejoining the international competition, especially amid its ongoing war with Ukraine.

What was the IOC’s decision?

The IOC “provisionally lifted the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee that had been in effect” since October 2023, the group said in a statement, because it wanted to “ensure a fair opportunity for participation” by Russian athletes. The suspension is also being lifted because Russia is “no longer trying to claim regional sports organizations on Ukrainian soil” as part of the Russian Olympic Committee, said The Athletic. Russia must also abide by anti-doping measures since the country “systemically organized a doping program to pump up their athletes” during the 2014 Winter Games.

But there is also a “lack of confidence in the global sporting community relating to the return of Russian athletes to international competition,” the IOC acknowledged. As a result, the “decision in relation to the display of the Russian flag, anthem, colors or any identifications for the Olympic Games at the appropriate time” will be made in the future, said the IOC, as will any decisions on potentially hosting international events in Russia. Russian officials will also still not be invited to Olympic events.

Olympic officials have stated that they no longer want to punish Russian athletes for their country’s decision to invade Ukraine. “We wanted to ensure all athletes have the possibility to compete at the Olympic Games and not be held responsible for their government’s actions,” IOC President Kirsty Coventry said during a press conference. “But we’ve also been very clear that we do not condone any violence and war around the world.”

What does this mean for the 2028 Olympics?

The IOC’s decision represents a “significant step for bringing Russian athletes, who have struggled with their country’s pariah status on the world stage, back into the international fold after several years,” said The New York Times. The choice to potentially reintroduce Russia to the Olympics will be a “highly controversial decision by the IOC and one likely to be condemned by European countries in particular,” said the BBC.

But “many within the IOC were also mindful of the current geopolitical landscape, and accusations of double standards if the sanction against Russia was maintained, while other countries that have launched military action against other nations escape punishment,” said the BBC. Others say that Russia’s ban should only have ended when the country pulls out of Ukraine, and that allowing it in the 2028 Olympics “risks emboldening President Vladimir Putin and handing him a propaganda win.”

So while the IOC’s decision does mean Russia “could compete at the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics,” said Politico, Russian participation in the games will not come without backlash, including from Ukraine. The IOC’s choice “sends a deeply concerning signal to the international community,” Ukraine’s foreign ministry said on X. “We also call on international sports federations to maintain the existing restrictions on representatives of the aggressor state, in line with their commitment to protecting the integrity and values of international sport.”

The series of heatwaves “afflicting” Europe this summer have been the “worst ever”, said The Guardian. Cities have become practically “unliveable” and higher temperatures are “further exacerbating” socioeconomic and economic divisions.

The unfortunate consequences of the current heat for many in the UK are “disturbed sleep and sticky days in the home office”. But around the world, high temperatures often exacerbate gender inequality, and women, particularly in low-income families, are “at the sharp end”.

Why are women more affected?

Women are more at risk of health complications during a heatwave for two main reasons, Dr Nighat Arif, an NHS GP who specialises in women’s health, told the BBC. First, women respond differently to men in the heat – they sweat less and start sweating at a higher temperature. These thresholds make it harder to “quickly shed heat” and fewer visible indications mean women can find it hard to judge how much their “bodies are under burden”.

The second reason is hormone regulation. Levels of oestrogen and progesterone shift “most substantially” during the menstrual cycle, perimenopause, menopause, pregnancy and while breastfeeding. This can knock the brain’s temperature regulation systems “out of kilter”, said Dr Arif.

Periods may feel more uncomfortable, while hot flushes and night sweats are more likely for perimenopausal and menopausal women. A recent study published by The Lancet suggested that heat stress may “increase the likelihood of adverse outcomes for the mother and child, particularly in higher-risk pregnancies”, said the BBC.

How does this present itself socially?

“How people experience heat is often gendered” and “socially and culturally determined”, said researchers Febe De Geest and Sergio Jarillo on The Conversation. In domestic settings, particularly across Africa, Asia and Oceania, women are forced to spend more time indoors in “poorly ventilated homes”, acting as primary caregivers. In Bangladesh, Cambodia and Nepal, heatwaves have also been linked to increases in child marriages: “struggling families force unions on their daughters to ease financial stress and reduce household costs”.

In workplace settings, research shows that women are sometimes required to wear more clothing for religious reasons and tend to receive “inadequate sanitation”. So they are likely to drink less to “avoid using unhygienic toilet facilities, leading to dehydration and further health problems”. These factors are not “trivial inconveniences; they compound heat exposure in ways that shape how women experience hot weather”.

Even in countries typically associated with better provisions for the heat, there is a “seasonal upswing in violence associated with hot weather”, said The Guardian. This could be due to the “temperature-aggression theory”, where hot weather increases “discomfort, frustration, impulsivity, and aggression, all of which make violence more likely”, or could be linked to greater alcohol consumption, which in turn “increases the opportunities for interpersonal conflicts and subsequent violence”.

Depressingly, it only takes “fairly small shifts” in temperature to increase the likelihood of domestic violence, particularly for the most vulnerable, said the European University Institute. A 1C rise in daily temperature is associated with “approximately a 2.7% increase in domestic violence reports”.

And in disadvantaged areas the effect is “much more intense”, due to more crowded living arrangements, lower cooling capacity and lower access to outdoor spaces. “Each degree of additional temperature is associated with up to a 50% larger relative increase in domestic violence incidents compared to richer areas.”

What can be done?

In practical terms, during periods of extreme heat it is important that women drink “least six to eight cups of non-alcoholic, non-caffeinated, transparent-liquid drinks” to help with temperature regulation, Dr Anisha Patel told ITV. Above all, women should continue to take prescribed medication as normal, including HRT or other drugs designed to help with the menopause.

Across the world, women are “already adapting creatively, and often without institutional support” to improve their situation, said De Geest and Jarillo on The Conversation. In Ahmedabad, India, women have painted their roofs white and used “coconut husks and paper waste” to make the structures cooler, and in Jakarta women have “established shaded communal areas that function as informal cooling centres”.

Policymakers need to realise that women suffer on many fronts, not just in biology but across “culture, power and intersections of class, caste and migratory status”. Their suffering is “largely invisible” to those heading climate responses.

Making sure women can cope with the heat is “not a woman’s problem”, Dr Arif told the BBC. “This is a societal problem. If we get it right for women, we get it right for everyone.”

Weddings, and the amount they cost, can run the gamut from a small, DIY ceremony in the backyard to a massive bash that shuts down Madison Square Garden. Obviously, the latter may only be within reach for certain pop stars and their football-playing partners, but that still leaves a wide range for how much you and your soon-to-be spouse could potentially spend.

When making the determination, it is important to weigh two things: making your big day a special one and honoring your financial reality. Your wedding may mark the start of your next chapter, but your finances are what will largely shape your future as a married couple.

What is a typical wedding budget?

As a benchmark, the average wedding costs $34,200, said wedding planning website The Knot, based on findings from its 2026 Real Weddings Study. You can expect the bulk of that to go toward your venue and any necessary rentals, such as tableware and tables themselves, as well as catering and drinks. But there are countless other small costs that can quickly add up: cake, photographer, flowers and decor, music, outfits, rings, wedding planner.

How can you determine how much is right for you to spend?

How much you “should budget for a wedding depends on your financial situation,” said NerdWallet. While this may seem obvious, it is easy to get carried away with a grand vision when you sit down to start planning. Consider what savings you and your partner have set aside for the wedding, how much of your upcoming earnings you can set aside and whether you are getting any outside financial help, such as from your parents.

It is also important to put your wedding in context with your other financial goals. “Zoom out and identify short- and long-term financial goals you have individually and as a couple,” said Charles Schwab, whether that is paying off student loans, buying a house or retiring early. Figure out how you would “prioritize them in order of most importance and allocate your resources appropriately,” keeping in mind that “ideally, your wedding spend shouldn’t get in the way of other financial goals.”

How can you make an effective wedding budget?

One of the first steps in making a wedding budget is to “sit down and have open and honest discussions about what your must-haves are, and what you’re comfortable leaving off as you build your budget,” said Minted, a wedding stationery brand. This will give you a guiding vision as you start allocating available funds.

As you build the budget, do not forget to leave some wiggle room ahead of your absolute maximum, which you should also make sure to set and agree to honor. “Even the best planners who budget early on might forget to add items or will inevitably have things they need to add on,” said Andrew Westlin, a certified financial planner at Betterment, to The Knot. This could include anything from add-on service charges to a last-minute rain tent to extra time on the dance floor.

Contrary to popular belief, prenuptial agreements are not just for the ultra-wealthy. Nor are they necessarily unromantic, or a sure sign that at least one person involved in the relationship is thinking about its eventual demise. They are actually a smart, clear-eyed way for two people to enter into what is not only a commitment in love but also a financial intertwining.

Increasingly, more couples approaching the altar are starting to understand the distinct purpose a prenup can serve, whether they are entering the union with significant savings (or debt) or have children from a prior relationship. The most recent Harris Poll on the topic “found that 15% of couples who had been married or were engaged in 2022 reported signing a prenup — up significantly from the 3% who had done so in 2010,” said Investopedia.

What does a prenup cover?

A prenuptial agreement is a “legally binding, written contract signed before marriage that outlines how assets, debts and property division will be handled in the event of divorce or death,” said Charles Schwab. A couple can tailor their prenup to their unique needs (and the state in which they live can also shape requirements), but in general, prenuptial agreements often include:

• A list of each partner’s assets and debts and instructions for how those will be divided in the event of divorce
• Financial rights and responsibilities during the marriage, such as the management of household expenses and joint accounts, as well as taxes
• Provisions for any children from a previous relationship, which may include preserving certain assets for their inheritance
• Expectations for spousal support or alimony in the event of divorce

When is a prenup worth considering?

The major benefit of a prenup is that it gives you the right to decide how assets are divvied up if you and your spouse should ever part ways. Rather than “relying on your state’s laws, a prenup allows you to set clear terms for how you want to handle assets and debts in a divorce,” said Experian.

Entering the marriage with this sort of clarity can especially make sense if “you may be bringing significant savings to the partnership, anticipate getting a significant inheritance in the future or co-own a business that you want to protect,” said Fidelity. It can also be useful if you have children from a previous relationship or if you “foresee taking time from the workplace for childrearing or caregiving, and earning less as a result.”

Debt is also another worthwhile consideration. If “your spouse has major debt,” a prenup “can specify which debts remain separate, reducing the risk you’ll become responsible for your spouse’s major debts,” said Experian.

Finally, the agreement can go a long way toward ensuring financial alignment when entering a marriage, helping couples get on the same page about “their plans to handle everyday marital finances, such as contributing to a joint account or keeping retirement savings separate,” said NerdWallet.

What are the risks of not having a prenup?

Without a prenup, “decisions about how you divide the property and assets you own together, as well as those you brought into the marriage, will be made at an emotionally fraught time,” said Fidelity. And if you cannot reach an agreement, the court will make one for you. For couples living in a community property state, this may mean assets get divided 50/50. You could even end up responsible for your ex’s debts.

So, while a prenup conversation may not be the easiest to have amid the excitement of wedding planning — and the cost of creating one is not necessarily cheap — it could save you from emotional and financial strife down the road should your happily ever after end sooner than expected.

The time it takes for a property to sell has hit a record high, and there are plenty of reasons for delays.

A mix of “buyer financial uncertainty and a shortage of conveyancing firms”, means it now takes “longer than at any time in at least a decade” to sell a property, said The Times.

Figures from property data firm TwentyCi show that it takes an average of 211 days – or 6.9 months – between a property being listed for sale and new owners moving in.

Meanwhile, almost half of homes listed on property portals over the past three years have failed to sell, according to Zoopla.

Unrealistic pricing

The “biggest sticking point” is pricing, said Zoopla. “Overambitious and unrealistic” values are the “biggest reason homes remain unsold”.

In many of these cases, the appropriate course of action is to lower the asking price, as this is often “the only way to attract a buyer”.

Reduced demand

Sellers are also suffering from a lack of demand, amid concerns about geopolitical tensions, while “political uncertainty is emerging as another headwind for the market”, said the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.

High mortgage rates are also impacting buyer budgets, and leading to hesitation.

Competition

Data from property website Rightmove shows the number of homes for sale is at its highest level since 2015.

This makes it a “buyers’ market”, said MoneyWeek, so sellers need to be “more flexible on pricing to attract interest amid high levels of competition”.

Poor first impressions

Lower levels of demand and high supply make it more important that your home is accurately priced and attractive to sellers.

Think about “first impressions”, said the HomeOwners Alliance, such as the state of your garden and whether your wheelie bins are on show.

Buyers may struggle to look beyond the wear and tear inside your house, so you may need “enhancements or staging to help it sell”.

Additionally, while buyers expect to do “some work to a house” they buy, it could be worth your while sorting out problems such as damp, subsidence, or anything that could be flagged in a survey, before listing, rather than “waiting for a buyer to find out”.

Market conditions

There may be market conditions outside your control such as high mortgage rates and economic uncertainty. These can “shape how confident buyers feel and how quickly properties move”, said the Guild of Property Professionals. This may mean sellers have to “adapt their expectations and strategies accordingly”.

Many sellers don’t realise how much “seasonality matters”, said Lynch Brother Homes, with January, February and March producing the “quickest average time to sell”, while late November to Christmas is typically the “deadest period”.

The wrong estate agent

Not all estate agents are “created equal”, said agency brand Tucker Gardner. Factors such as “dark, blurry photos or a minimal description” on online listings may mean potential buyers “simply scroll past to the next property”.

So, if you aren’t getting viewings and your agent seems to have put your property “on the back burner”, it might be time for a change.

Sara Duterte, vice president of the Philippines, has appeared in court to face impeachment proceedings in a trial that has brought long-standing political tensions to a head.

The 48-year-old daughter of former president Rodrigo Duterte is accused of corruption, bribery, misappropriating millions in government funds and threatening to have the current president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr, assassinated.

Duterte, who in 2024 became the first Philippine leader to face impeachment proceedings, denies the charges, calling them political harassment. The trial, which began on Monday, is the culmination of the fallout and feud between the Marcos and Duterte families, the country’s most powerful political dynasties.

Who are the Duterte and Marcos families?

Rodrigo Duterte ruled the Philippines with an iron fist from 2016 to 2022. In the 2022 election, Sara was the running mate of presidential candidate Marcos Jr, son of the dictator who ruled for 20 years before being deposed in 1986.

The two younger scions were “unstoppable”, said the BBC. The so-called “Tiger of the North” and “Eagle of the South” – in reference to the families’ geographical origins – were “seen as a dream team” and won a landslide. In the end, however, “there was not enough power to share between them”.

Cracks appeared when Marcos’ allies in the Senate began investigating Duterte for alleged misuse of government funds. The pair also disagreed on their approach to Beijing; Marcos ordered the navy to “stand up to China” in the South China Sea, said Al Jazeera, in “sharp contrast” to pro-China Duterte. This trial shifts the “power struggle” to “a new battleground”, said the BBC, which will now “play out on livestreams for the entire nation”.

What is the case against Duterte?

In October 2024, Duterte said “her relationship with Marcos had become so ‘toxic’ that she sometimes imagined beheading him”, said Al Jazeera. She also “threatened to dig up the remains of Marcos’ father” and “dump them in the sea”. In November, Duterte claimed during a “profanity-laced” livestream that she had told someone: “If I get killed, go kill BBM” (Marcos’ nickname is Bongbong so he’s commonly referred to as BBM) and his wife.

His supporters filed an impeachment complaint based on this livestream, and the alleged misuse of funds. But last year that case was “derailed for procedural reasons”, said Foreign Policy. Marcos’ supporters then refiled the case, leading to a new trial.

What is the significance of the trial?

Prosecutors see the case as “a test of accountability ‌and public trust”; the defence denounces it as “a politically driven bid” to unseat an elected official, said Reuters. The outcome could “shape the 2028 presidential race”, in which Duterte has announced she intends to run. Marcos cannot run as Philippine law permits presidents only a single term, but his family and coalition “expect to remain powerful”, said Al Jazeera.

There are “fears of widespread protests” and political turmoil that would “impact the Philippines’ economic growth” should Duterte – the current frontrunner – be convicted and barred from standing in 2028.

But “conviction will be difficult”, said Foreign Policy. Two-thirds of the chamber, 16 senators, must support impeachment. Of the 24 sitting senators, 14 are “Duterte allies”. However, “those allies are coming under pressure”, with two arrested on corruption charges and one “on the run from an ICC warrant”. More pro-Duterte senators may “come under fire in what looks like political pressure tactics”.

A parasite capable of causing extreme diarrhea has been found in 18 states, with a particularly large outbreak in Michigan. Though the source of the infections has yet to be identified, experts recommend taking precautions with fresh produce and practicing good hygiene to reduce the risk of contracting the disease.

What is cyclosporiasis?

Cyclosporiasis is a form of food poisoning that comes from the parasite Cyclospora cayetanensis. It can cause “watery, and sometimes explosive, diarrhea and other stomach problems,” as well as a low-grade fever in some cases, said the Cleveland Clinic. Symptoms can start any time between two and 14 days after consuming contaminated food or water. The parasite is more common in tropical countries, but in mid-June, 145 cases were reported in the U.S.

“People became sick after eating food in the United States and did not report any travel during the 14 days before they got sick,” said the CDC. Those infected ranged from ages 5 to 86 years old, and though there have been hospitalizations, there have yet to be any deaths from the condition.

There has been growing concern about cyclosporiasis because Michigan, “which typically identifies about 50 cases of cyclosporiasis in a year, has reported at least 170 cases” in under two weeks, said CNN. There is “currently no evidence of a single, multistate Cyclospora outbreak linking all cases,” said the CDC. Instead, researchers are “working to identify various potential clusters and sources of illness in multiple states.” Though Michigan has had the most cases, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin have also had reported infections.

Investigators have yet to pinpoint the cause of the current outbreak, but the most likely culprits are “cilantro, basil, plants that grow and that you might put in a salad or use as a garnish,” or “strawberries, blueberries, melons, things that grow in fields,” David Freeman, a professor emeritus of infectious diseases at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said to CNN.

What can be done?

Taking precautions is key to preventing illness. Cooked food is safer than fresh produce, as heat can kill the parasite. Washing produce can also help reduce the chance of ingesting the parasite. “Thoroughly washing hands and kitchen counters, as well as cutting surfaces, is important too,” but “bleach doesn’t kill the parasite,” said CNN. “Handwashing with soap and water and a follow-up with an alcohol-based hand sanitizer are safer bets.”

If you contract cyclosporiasis, antibiotics can help clear the infection. If not treated, “symptoms may last for a month or longer” and increase the “risk of severe dehydration and other complications,” said the Cleveland Clinic. “With proper diagnosis and treatment, most people feel better after a week or two,” but you “may still have occasional bouts of diarrhea for up to a month.”

For many Americans, an auto loan is a sizable chunk of their monthly budget. Refinancing can be one way to get that payment down. This is particularly true lately, as auto loan refinance rates have been falling at a faster pace than rates for original auto loans, making the potential savings that much more notable.

“Drivers who refinanced in the first quarter of 2026 saw a 2.24 percentage point interest rate decrease on average from their original loan, compared with a 0.47 point decrease two years earlier,” said Experian, per The Wall Street Journal. In terms of real dollars saved per month, “buyers with high payments found that refinancing drove their costs down by an average of $81 a month in the first quarter,” said the outlet.

Here is what to know about how auto loan refinancing works and how to determine whether the payoff is actually there.

How does auto loan refinancing work?

When you refinance your auto loan, you effectively take out a new loan with its own interest rate and terms. This loan replaces your existing auto loan. Upon approval, the new lender pays off your existing loan and then assumes the remaining balance.

Ideally, the new loan will offer more favorable terms than your existing loan, such as a better interest rate or lower monthly payments. You will go through the loan application process again for a refinance loan, and the terms will hinge largely on your credit profile.

What are the benefits of auto loan refinancing?

As mentioned, refinancing your auto loan could result in paying a lower interest rate. Maybe your credit has improved since you initially applied, and you have since consistently made on-time payments on your loan. Or, “you might have accepted a higher rate at a dealership than you could have qualified for elsewhere, and you now want to reduce that rate through refinancing,” said NerdWallet. An improved interest rate environment could also open up more competitive rates.

Refinancing may additionally allow you to pay off your loan sooner, which in turn could save you in total interest charges over the life of the loan. You could also refinance to lower your monthly payments, which will come in handy if you are struggling to repay your car loan. Just keep in mind that “while extending your loan term can lower your monthly payments, it will take longer to pay off your car, which could result in higher overall interest costs,” said PNC Insights, PNC Bank’s personal finance blog.

When should you think twice before refinancing?

A baseline to evaluate when deciding whether to refinance your auto loan is whether or not it will save you money. But even if it will, there are still downsides to consider, and in certain situations, it may not be worth pursuing.

In some cases, “financing fees outweigh the benefits,” such as if you have to pay a hefty prepayment penalty to your existing lender alongside origination or application fees, said Credit Karma. Applying for a new loan also has an impact on your credit, which you may want to avoid if you are planning to apply for other new credit soon, like a mortgage on a home purchase.

It is lastly important to evaluate the value of the car itself. “Refinancing to extend your term or taking cash out of your equity could leave you owing more than what your car is worth, referred to as being upside-down on your loan,” said NerdWallet. In this case, “if you decide to sell or trade in your car, you would have to pay the lender the difference.”

The US-UK relationship is being tested again by two high-profile legal cases in which American military personnel were tried by US authorities over alleged offences that took place on British soil.

What were the cases?

Four women and a 16-year-old girl accused US airman Hannes Marschalek of indecent exposure in 2022, while he was stationed at RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk, the largest US airbase in the UK, said The Guardian.

Cambridgeshire police initiated the investigation, but the case was turned over to American forces three weeks later. Court martial documents show that in July 2022, Marschalek texted two friends to say he “definitely just flashed a couple ladies walking from the train. LOL.”

Marschalek accepted a plea bargain and was dismissed from the air force by a military judge and sentenced to two months in a correctional facility at Lakenheath. However, in April this year a US military appeal court dismissed the guilty verdict on the grounds that prosecutors had charged him under the wrong offence. He remains on the sex-offender registry in the US, but had he been “prosecuted in the English criminal courts, Marschalek would have faced up to two years in jail”.

In December 2023, Sarah Steele accused Jacob Wulfson, a US air force captain also based at Lakenheath, of drugging, assaulting and strangling her after meeting via a dating app. Steele, a University of Cambridge academic, claimed that the subsequent court martial heard testimony about “how many people he’d killed, supposedly to get him a lower sentence for committing a serious violent crime against me”, said the BBC.

Wulfson was convicted of strangulation, dismissed from the military and given “six months’ detention”, but was cleared of sexual assault by an “all-male panel” of air force officers.

How does a court martial work?

A court martial is a legal proceeding undertaken by the military to try personnel accused of wrongdoing within a military context. In the US, the trials are governed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which in addition to criminal offences, includes some perceived moral transgressions such as infidelity.

The US military justice system has a “distinct legal framework and is separate from British civilian courts”, said ITV News. There are also significant deviations from US civilian law, said law professor Joshua Kastenberg on The Conversation. Judges are “uniformed officers” who are “subject to the chain of command”. A court martial also only needs a two-thirds majority to establish guilt, instead of unanimity, with a jury panel “made up of military personnel who outrank the accused service member and are picked to serve by senior commanding officers”.

Why weren’t the cases tried in the UK?

American forces in the UK are governed by the 1951 Nato Status of Forces Agreement, which was incorporated into British law in the Visiting Forces Act 1952. As well as outlining visa exemptions and the right to bear arms, this “obscure” agreement allows the US government to prosecute overseas military personnel under certain conditions, said The Guardian. Traditionally, this has covered offences committed while on duty, or against a member of the US military or their dependents.

Outside those criteria, the British police have jurisdiction. However, in practice, the “process is ambiguous”. In the cases involving Marschalek and Wulfson, local British police handed control over to the US. The US military is claiming a “much wider jurisdiction – and British police and prosecutors are allowing them to do it”.

This week, Justice Secretary and Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy told the Commons officials were “working across government to establish the full facts” of the two cases, said the East Anglian Daily Times.

The prime minister’s spokesperson said that Wulfson’s was “clearly a deeply distressing case”. It was “very concerning that a case like this never reached the CPS” and was “heard in front of an all-male panel” of US air force officers.

A US air force spokesperson said it is “dedicated to working transparently with our British partners to ensure the fair administration of justice”.

If you were to die with a mortgage balance remaining, mortgage protection insurance — also known as mortgage life insurance — would ensure it got paid off. That way, your loved ones could continue to live in your home without worrying about continuing to make payments.

This might sound like a good arrangement, especially considering how big an investment a home is and how much of a family’s budget monthly mortgage payments can comprise. But is mortgage protection insurance really necessary, and is it actually the best way to achieve that peace of mind?

What is mortgage protection insurance?

Mortgage protection insurance (MPI) is a type of life insurance, often offered by mortgage lenders and insurance companies, that ensures any balance remaining on your mortgage is paid off in the event that you pass away. “Some mortgage protection insurance policies also offer payment protection for a limited time if you lose your job or experience a disability during the term, although that is not necessarily standard with all policies,” said Yahoo Finance.

This is different from a typical life insurance policy where a death benefit is paid out to your beneficiaries. Instead, with mortgage protection insurance, the payout goes directly to the mortgage lender. Note that MPI typically will “only cover the principal and interest portion of a mortgage payment,” meaning “other fees like HOA dues, property taxes and homeowners’ insurance would still be your responsibility,” said Bankrate.

Should you get mortgage protection insurance?

Mortgage life insurance is by no means necessary; it is entirely optional. But if you are looking for peace of mind, “most MPI policies are issued on a “guaranteed acceptance” basis, which “can be advantageous if you have a health condition,” as there is no health exam required to qualify, said Bankrate.

Even so, “mortgage protection life insurance policies are generally ill-advised,” said Investopedia. For starters, MPI serves a very limited purpose, and the money a policy pays out will go to the mortgage lender, not your beneficiaries. Premiums can also be steep and are “often much higher than term life insurance,” said NerdWallet.

Further, those premiums stay the same over time, even as the payout decreases as you pay down your mortgage. Particularly if your mortgage is “nearly paid off or you paid for the home with sale proceeds from another home, paying for an MPI policy might not make the most financial sense,” said Bankrate.

How does mortgage protection insurance compare to life insurance?

If you are worried about protecting loved ones from mortgage payments in the event of your death, a “term life insurance policy typically provides more bang for your buck,” said NerdWallet. For one, life insurance is “more flexible than MPI because the money goes directly to your beneficiaries” as opposed to your mortgage, allowing your beneficiaries to use the money as needed, said U.S. News & World Report.

Additionally, while the value of MPI declines over time as you pay down your mortgage, the “death benefit on a standard term policy remains the same,” said Experian. That said, mortgage protection insurance does not require a medical exam to qualify for coverage, while life insurance does.

Karl Marx famously described religion as the opium of the people. Now, a study has shown that going to church has a similar effect on the body to morphine. Researchers from Oxford Brookes University asked 265 people in the UK and Brazil how close they felt to other worshippers before and after 24 religious events – ranging from Catholic and Baptist services to Afro-Brazilian rituals. The participants were also given a standard pain-threshold test to help assess the activation of the brain’s “mu-opioid” system, the neural pathway responsible for the body’s response to pain, reward and addiction. Its receptors can be activated by external opioids such as morphine, but also natural ones – the endorphins produced by the brain to relieve pain and stress. The results showed that, after the ritual, the participants felt more connected to one another, and more able to tolerate pain. This doesn’t mean that sermons are sedating people, said the team. Instead, these events may have developed to nurture feelings of closeness in large groups in much the same way as social grooming does between pairs of apes.

The earliest-known plague victims

When four Stone Age cemeteries were excavated in Siberia in the 1980s and 1990s, archaeologists were puzzled by the number of children among the dead; at some of the sites, two-thirds of the bodies were under 15 years old. Now, thanks to new DNA sequencing techniques, the mystery has been solved: the children were victims of the world’s earliest-known plague outbreak. An international team of scientists analysed pulp from the teeth of the hunter-gatherers buried near Lake Baikal, the oldest and deepest lake in the world, and found DNA from a previously unknown strain of the plague bacterium, Yersinia pestis, in nearly 40% of the individuals – a higher proportion than found in some medieval plague pits. Radiocarbon dating shows that many of them died within a very short time span; in several cases parents and children were buried together. The evidence suggests the plague struck twice, the first time 5,500 years ago. This “flies in the face” of the long-standing assumption that the plague only took hold after the advent of agriculture and the formation of densely populated settlements, said lead author Dr Ruairidh Macleod, of the University of Oxford. The theory is that individuals became infected by a strain that was particularly lethal to the young through close contact with marmots (rodents that are known reservoirs of the plague), perhaps while butchering them. It would then have spread through the community.

The impact of the HPV jab

Girls vaccinated against HPV when they are 12 or 13 have a close to zero chance of dying from cervical cancer before the age of 30, a study has found. The researchers, from Queen Mary University of London, used official data to assess the impact of the HPV vaccine on cervical cancer survival. They found that deaths have fallen sharply since the jab became routine in 2008. No women aged 20-24 died from cervical cancer between 2020 and 2024; without the jabs, 23 deaths would have been expected, says the report in The Lancet. “It’s incredible to think that a single jab can almost eliminate a particular type of cancer,” said lead researcher Professor Peter Sasieni. He warned, however, that vaccination rates are falling and, without “concerted efforts” to increase uptake, deaths could start to rise.

Loss of smell can be devastating

People may not think of anosmia – the loss of the sense of smell – as a serious condition, but it can have a similar effect on a person’s sense of well-being as having a stroke. A team from the University of East Anglia looked at studies on the emotional and psychological impacts of stroke, diabetes, Parkinson’s, kidney failure and heart disease, and compared them with findings on people with anosmia and ageusia (the loss of the sense of taste). It turned out that those with taste and smell conditions had experienced a sharp reduction in well-being that often rivalled that of the patients in the other groups. Typically, they no longer found pleasure in food, had difficulty socialising, and were more anxious about their safety (as, for instance, they could no longer smell gas). They had high rates of social withdrawal and 20% were depressed.

A spider’s spring-loaded trap

A newly discovered species of spider has been observed weaving a spring-loaded snare, which it uses to catch an ant that is usually too aggressive for arachnids to prey on. The ballista spider spends its days lurking in webs on the undersides of leaves in the rainforests of north Queensland, Australia. When night falls, it lowers itself from its web and fixes a tight line of silk to a leaf below, to act as an anchor. Then it returns to its web, leaving a tension line behind it, repeating the process until it has built a cone-shaped scaffold. Finally, it wraps the cone in a thinner silk and returns to its web. Soon the ants arrive, in attack mode. One bites into the cone, which is sticky. Its jaws become glued to it, and as it wriggles, the cone detaches, catapulting the whole thing – ant and all – into the spider’s web at force, and the spider can then safely eat it.

As the trap only targets these ants, the researchers, from Macquarie University, suspect that the spiders lace the silk with a particular pheromone that both attracts and angers exclusively this species. They also suspect that the spiders pick off the green tree ants quietly, one by one, to avoid triggering an alarm that might cause thousands of aggressive ants to descend on the scene.

New drug for diabetes

The first drug that has been found to delay the onset of type 1 diabetes is to become available on the NHS in England and Wales. In patients with type 1 diabetes, the immune system starts attacking the insulin-producing cells in the pancreas. As a result, the patient has to take insulin, via injections or a pump. Teplizumab – a form of immunotherapy – binds to immune cells to slow their attack and so delays the need to take insulin by two to three years. However, to work it must be given to people when they are in stage 2 of the condition – when their immune cells are attacking, but they have no symptoms yet. That being the case, people will only know they need it if they are offered a blood test because they have a family history of diabetes, take part in a screening study, or have a blood test for some other reason that raises a red flag with their GP.

There may be a few sore heads and impeccably timed phone-calls to bosses in England this morning, after last night’s win over Mexico in the World Cup, but any football fans must be thankful they don’t live in Germany where workers will have to report to a doctor in person, to get a sick note on the first day they are ill, under sweeping new reforms.

The government is “tired of its workers calling in sick”, said the Deep Dive, but unions and family doctors are opposed to the new law.

What is Germany doing?

“The number of sick days is too high,” said Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, announcing the plan. The government is “creating a set of tools that will enable those involved, both employees and companies, to correct this,” he added.

The “tough” new rules are “aimed at boosting Germany’s stagnating economy”, wrote Hans van Leeuwen, international economics editor of The Telegraph.

Although they will be “welcomed” by employers, they have “angered” the country’s “powerful trade unions”. The services sector union, Verdi, accused Merz of creating a “culture of distrust of employees”.

Doctors also have “opposed” the new system because they believe the new requirements will “swamp” GP surgeries with “unnecessary appointments”.

What are sickness policies like elsewhere?

In the Netherlands, employers are generally obliged to pay employees on sick leave 70% of their wages for up to two years. If that amount is less than minimum wage, then the employer must boost this to the minimum wage for the first year. Norway is even more generous: it provides up to a year of income replacement at 100% of salary (subject to an earnings cap).

Although the US is one of the richest countries in the world, there is no nationwide entitlement to paid sick leave in the US, so access depends largely on state laws, local ordinances and employer policies. This means coverage varies considerably. Only 14 of the 50 states have paid sick leave mandates in place, which means sick workers are often forced to rely on health insurance pay-outs to cover their wages.

In the UK employees who earn over £125 a week and are off sick for four or more days in a row, are entitled to £123.25 per week of statutory sick pay for up to 28 weeks. This equates to around 15% of the average UK weekly wage. Employees need to give their employer proof if they’re ill for more than seven days. Many employers have a sick pay policy which is more generous.

How many sick days do people take?

In 2025, 149 million working days were lost to sickness or injury in Britain – an average of more than four days per worker. On average, Americans take roughly one to three days of sick leave per year.

In Germany, workers take about three weeks, or 15 working days, of sick leave per year. This is lower than in France, but higher than Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland and Italy.

By July 1776, Great Britain and its 13 colonies on North America’s eastern seaboard had been at war for more than a year; they would remain so until 1783.

Although long revered as an “American scripture”, the Declaration of Independence actually “began its life as a press release”, with a limited, pragmatic purpose, writes the historian Michael D. Hattem. The Second Continental Congress, a committee of delegates from 13 of the colonies convened in Philadelphia, wanted a formal document to justify their rebellion to the world, and to secure foreign military alliances.

At the time, some thought it less important than Congress’ decision on 2 July to vote for independence. John Adams, later the second US president, wrote to his wife that 2 July, not 4 July, should be celebrated as a great anniversary, “solemnised with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other from this time forward forever more”.

What does the document say?

That the 13 colonies declare themselves free from British colonial rule, to administer themselves as the “united States of America” (a phrase coined earlier that year). The Declaration’s famous preamble asserts: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

It then outlines Americans’ grievances against Britain and King George III. Complaining that the states have informed “our British brethren” of these grievances, to no avail, it proclaims that the 13 states therefore have no choice but to sever “all political connection” with Britain.

How had the two sides come to be at war?

Relations had deteriorated sharply since Britain’s victory over France in the Seven Years’ War in 1763. Defending the American frontier from France and its Native American allies had brought Britain to near-bankruptcy. The colonies, with a fast-growing population of some two million, paid virtually no taxes to the home country, while heavily taxed Britain paid for their defence. King George III and his ministers looked to raise revenues; Parliament passed a series of taxes, including the Stamp Act (1765) and Townshend Acts (1767). They believed Parliament had full authority to do so.

The colonists thought such laws had no legitimacy because they lacked representation in Parliament, and fiercely resisted, launching boycotts and protests. Tensions built, and exploded during the Boston Massacre (1770) and the Boston Tea Party (1773).

In response, Britain imposed the punitive Coercive Acts (1774), closing Boston Harbour and stripping Massachusetts of self-governance. Violence escalated, and in April 1775 war broke out, with the Battles of Lexington and Concord – dubbed by Ralph Waldo Emerson “the shot heard round the world”.

Was independence inevitable?

At the start of the war, most on the American side envisaged it not as a war of independence, but as a temporary defence of what they saw as their legal rights as British citizens. In July 1775, Congress sent the Olive Branch Petition, a direct plea to King George III, which explicitly denied wanting independence. The king refused to look at it, and issued the Proclamation of Rebellion, declaring the colonists traitors and hiring 30,000 German mercenaries to help crush them.

In January 1776 in Philadelphia, the English radical Thomas Paine published “Common Sense”, a pamphlet arguing that America should demand outright independence. It sold in large numbers, and proved very influential. George Washington, the commander of the Continental Army, declared it “unanswerable”. The colonists also realised that they needed help from foreign powers, notably France, and wouldn’t get it if they remained loyal British subjects.

How was the Declaration of Independence written?

After the independence resolution was proposed, in June 1776, Congress appointed the Committee of Five (John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Robert Livingston and Roger Sherman) to draft the Declaration. It was first written by Jefferson, largely by candlelight, over a period of 17 days. The other four made minor changes; it was then edited by Congress. The revised text was approved on 4 July, and most of the 56 Founding Fathers who signed it did so on 2 August.

What role did the Declaration play at the time?

In Philadelphia, it was printed by John Dunlap (today, 26 of these “Dunlap Broadsides” are believed to exist); and on 6 July, it was reproduced in the Pennsylvania Evening Post. This triggered an extraordinary public response: public readings were accompanied by cheering and cannon fire, as well as the destruction of royal symbols such as the king’s coats of arms; in New York, it was read to troops serving in Washington’s army, who tore down a lead statue of George III on horseback and melted it into musket balls.

The first anniversary celebrations took place in 1777. Massachusetts was the first state to make 4 July an official day of celebration, in 1781.

What is its legacy?

The Declaration of Independence is one of the most important documents in human history. It inspired the French Revolution’s Declaration of the Rights of Man, which Jefferson helped draft. Dozens of independence declarations from Venezuela (1811) to Vietnam (1945) echo or directly copy its language. Abraham Lincoln thought it expressed the true principles of the United States, and referred in his 1863 Gettysburg Address to “a nation conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”. Martin Luther King Jr, in his “I Have a Dream” speech, called it a “promissory note” – and demanded that Americans “cash this cheque”.

Thomas Jefferson: tainted hero

John Adams said of the Declaration of Independence that there was “not an idea in it but what had been hackneyed in Congress for two years before”. Jefferson himself said it did not aim at “originality of principle or sentiment”; rather, it was “an expression of the American mind”.

Although the exact influences remain a subject for scholarly discussion, the most obvious sources for it included Paine’s “Common Sense”, George Mason’s draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and England’s 1689 Bill of Rights. Jefferson also adapted John Locke’s argument that individuals have inalienable rights to “life, liberty, and property” – substituting “the pursuit of happiness” – and Locke’s notion that government is based on a social contract, which, when broken, authorises rebellion.

Jefferson, America’s third president, has long been both a national hero and a contested figure, because he was a scion of Virginia’s planter class who owned more than 610 slaves and fathered children with one of them, Sally Hemings. (“How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?” asked Dr Johnson in his pamphlet “Taxation no Tyranny”.) The Declaration also complains of British alliances with “the merciless Indian Savages”.

“Hailed as a political genius by some”, Morgan McSweeney was seen as a “Machiavellian puppeteer manipulating a compliant” Keir Starmer on his journey from Labour Party leader in 2020 to prime minister in 2024, said Patrick Cockburn in The i Paper.

Yet in his first interviews since appearing before the Foreign Affairs Committee in April, two months after quitting as Starmer’s chief of staff, McSweeney claimed the party failed to prepare adequately for office, and that one of the hardest tasks in opposition was trying to “persuade people that we could win”.

Emerging from the shadows to speak to the Financial Times and the BBC, McSweeney is presumably trying to “establish a public profile in his post-political life”, said Ian Dunt in The i Paper. “His way of achieving this is to admit to rudimentary errors in political operations as if they were startling insights available only to those with the requisite experience.”

What did he say?

McSweeney was “surprisingly candid” with the BBC’s Nick Robinson on his “Political Thinking” podcast about the Labour Party’s failure to lay the groundwork for government while in opposition, said Ethan Croft in The New Statesman.

“We didn’t prepare enough for what kind of world we were going to,” said McSweeney, and the party didn’t grasp that it was in a “very different era” to when it was last in office. “We didn’t have enough conversations at the top of the party about what that meant, how to prepare for it, what that meant for the state.”

What mistakes were made?

McSweeney believes the “first self-inflicted wound” of the Starmer government was the Treasury’s decision to cut winter fuel payments for “10 million better-off pensioners”, said the FT. This was then “compounded” by the donations scandal involving McSweeney and the Labour Together think tank, and the first budget, which prioritised long-term financial reforms over immediate help for the electorate who voted them into power.

The former chief-of-staff admitted that the government should have been “laser focused on the cost of living from day one”. Voters were “really angry with the state of the country. They thought we promised change and we got distracted.”

Labour quickly lost popular support. Its approval ratings fell from 37.5% in July 2024 to 23.3% in June 2025 – the steepest drop for any government in its first year since 1983, said Shea Ferguson on UnHerd.

Ultimately, it was his role in the appointment of Peter Mandelson as the UK’s ambassador to the US that forced McSweeney to resign. McSweeney had recommended Mandelson for the role, and admitted that “I failed in my job and failed in my duty”. But he denied it was his fault that Mandelson was offered the position. “I hope that one day Mandelson recognises the damage he has done to a Labour government that carried the hopes of millions of people.”

What can Andy Burnham learn?

McSweeney believes Labour MPs were motivated to oust Starmer because they concluded he could not win the next election, “not because they want to scratch some ideological itch”, said the FT. The former adviser also welcomed the idea of Burnham as Starmer’s successor, and approves of the plan to split No. 10 between London and Manchester.

If McSweeney can “serve any function” now, said Dunt, it is to “provide a moral warning to Andy Burnham’s team”. When Labour was elected in 2024, McSweeney and Starmer had a “historic responsibility” to dispel populism and show that mainstream politics could operate effectively. They had spent years attacking Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak for “governing like drunken clowns in a restaurant kitchen”.

But in office, Labour had “no project, no set of beliefs, no plan for what they wanted to do”, and crucially failed to deliver “quick change” to earn the electorate’s trust. Barring a substantial shock, Burnham will become the next prime minister, and he “must not make the same mistake”.

The Supreme Court has released a slew of opinions to mark the end of its current term, and one of them could prove to be a landmark case for personal protections. The Court has ruled that privacy laws must protect against widespread searches of phone location data — a decision that could prove to have a monumental impact on future Fourth Amendment cases.

What did the Supreme Court decide?

The Court’s opinion in the case, Chatrie v. United States, holds that people have an “expectation of privacy from the government as their mobile devices track them throughout their daily activities,” said Politico, even if this data has already been shared with tech companies like Google and Apple. The crux of the case stems from a 2019 armed robbery at a Virginia bank and how police tracked down the robber.

During the hunt for the robbery suspect, police used a cellular data search warrant called a geofence warrant to “capture location data from all the phones in the vicinity of the bank for 30 minutes before and after the robbery,” said The New York Times. The eventual suspect was found using the geofence warrant, but he argued that this type of broad search was illegal under the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, because innocent people’s data could also be obtained using the search.

The Trump administration pushed back, contending that users do not have an “expectation of privacy after voluntarily sharing their location data with companies like Google,” said Politico. But the Supreme Court did not buy that argument, ruling that “sensitive data scooped up by geofence warrants counts as a Fourth Amendment search, and offers individuals a reasonable expectation of privacy, even if they may be in a public area,” said The Guardian. The 6-3 ruling included dissents from conservative-leaning Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett.

What is the bigger picture?

The Court did not completely strike down the use of geofence warrants, instead sending the matter back to the Circuit Court of Appeals to determine whether these warrants are actually constitutional violations. “It is therefore now up to the court of appeals to decide whether, at each step of the search process, the warrant satisfied the Fourth Amendment’s requirements of particularity and probable cause,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in her majority opinion.

The Court’s decision could weigh the scales in determining whether the lower court eventually cuts down geofence warrants. Privacy advocates have “raised concerns about geofence warrants, calling them a form of dragnet surveillance because the information is not just about one suspect, but anyone who was in the location in question,” said NBC News. These advocates have “warned that such warrants could be used to target disfavored political groups, including protesters.”

In the meantime, while the lower court decides, the Supreme Court’s ruling “narrows the scope of what cloud-stored data the federal government can lawfully obtain without an individualized warrant,” said The Hill. Policing could also be affected by the ruling, as geofence warrants are “typically employed by investigators when they know specific details of a crime but don’t yet have a suspect.” Not allowing them to proceed could make solving crimes using cellular data more difficult.

Pope Leo XIV has excommunicated members of a breakaway group of traditionalist Catholics after they consecrated bishops without Vatican approval.

The pontiff warned the Society of St Pius X (known as the SSPX) on Tuesday that its plans to consecrate four new bishops would be a “sin of extreme gravity”. After the consecrations went ahead on Wednesday, “the Vatican responded aggressively”, going “above and beyond the minimal sanctions foreseen by the church’s canon law”, said The Associated Press.

Six bishops and hundreds of priests belonging to the society have been excommunicated. The Pope also warned the estimated 600,000 Catholics who attend its services that the order is no longer sanctioned to carry out sacraments like confession and marriage.

What is the Society of St Pius X?

Founded in 1970 by French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, the SSPX is a traditionalist group that purports to practise a “pure” form of Catholicism, untainted by modernising or secular influences. It rejects much of the so-called Vatican II reforms of the 1960s, “which revolutionised the church’s relations with other Christians, Jews and people of other faiths and allowed Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular”, said AP. The order continues to adhere to the Latin Mass and uses pre-Vatican II liturgy in its services.

According to SSPX figures, it has 751 priests, 264 seminarians, 145 religious brothers, 88 oblates and 250 religious sisters representing 50 nationalities. It has a presence in 77 countries, with the largest being in France and the US.

Throughout its history, the society has had a rocky relationship with the Vatican. In 1988 Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops without the approval of Pope John Paul II. The Vatican ruled that this was illicit and stated that those directly involved had incurred excommunication.

In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI rescinded the excommunications of the surviving bishops as a gesture towards reconciliation. However, despite years of talks aimed at bringing the society back into full communion with the Church, the society’s official status has remained unresolved.

What has it done now?

On 1 July, the SSPX consecrated four new bishops at its international seminary in Écône, Switzerland, the location of the 1988 consecrations that caused the previous schism. Creating new bishops without papal approval is regarded as a “schismatic act” in canon law.

However, an SSPX priest told the more than 16,000 worshippers who gathered for the illicit consecration Mass that, since Vatican II, “the authorities of the church have been animated by a spirit that is contrary to that of the faith”, said National Catholic Reporter. Therefore, the consecration of bishops “entirely faithful to her holy tradition” was justified as “a sacred duty toward the holy church”.

Can they be reconciled? 

Since becoming Pope in May last year, Leo XIV “has reached out especially to the conservative and traditionalist wing of the church that was in many ways alienated during the Pope Francis pontificate”, said AP.

However, last month he told a reporter that, “while division among Christians is always a painful matter”, the society could not remain in good standing if it rejected “certain fundamental elements of the Church”, said Vatican News. “If that is the choice they make, I am sorry, but we must move forward.”

The group “is ignoring the doctrinal elephant in the room”, said Eric Sammons, editor of traditionalist Catholic magazine Crisis: being in communion with the Pope is “an essential part of what it means to be Catholic”. Complaints about the Church’s “lackadaisical enforcement of Catholic teaching”, however well-founded, cannot be taken seriously from “a group that itself violates a foundational principle of Catholic doctrine”.