Everyone hates Keir. Here’s why

As we write. the current troubles of UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer are profound. One of the reasons they are so bad is that, almost before he took office, almost no one has warmed to him: many evince active dislike. Meaning this serious, intelligent man can draw on no reserves of public goodwill in the way that a more raffish character like say Boris Johnson could. Why?

We think part of the answer lies in this article by Larry Elliott. For it charts Britain’s fall from manufacturing powerhouse to fragile services-led house of cards in a few punchy paragraphs, while noting China’s almost inverse trajectory to high tech manufacturing superpower. How so? Elliott compares the policies of two politicians who took power at around the same time in their respective nations: Deng Xiaoping and Margaret Thatcher. While the former did everything he could to foster manufacturing, the latter, a true disciple of unfettered free markets, believed:

…… market forces should determine which businesses thrived. If Britain excelled in financial and business services……… That’s what the country should concentrate its efforts on, while other nations made the ships and the machine tools

Underwritten by the short term unearned bonanza of North Sea Oil, this catechism was applied unchecked. With the results we see today. No British Government will ever again have the resources to satisfy the clamours of its citizens-for hospitals, for thriving high streets and clean water, nor create the booming economy they crave. But, used to abundant wealth and easy answers, these citizens still think like spoiled heirs burning through the last remains of the family patrimony. So any sensible family lawyer like Starmer, who tries to utter the self-earned nature of their plight, will pass unheeded, or worse, actively scorned. Such people will always prefer a story teller to a truth teller. And for a way forward? Restore manufacturing, to which end Elliott has some policy recommendations of course . But his real answer is psychological, not economic.

The bottom line is that to rebuild manufacturing Britain has to see the world through the prism of a developing country not a developed one.

In other words -forget its pride.

[1] How can Britain regain its manufacturing power? Start thinking like a developing country | Larry Elliott | The Guardian

#economics #UK #China #Deng Xiaoping #Margaret Thatcher #manufacturing #politics

Narco Warriors: brilliant new podcast on the war that’s shaped two centuries

Photo by Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs on Pexels.com

We’ve always been pretty much against the illegal drugs trade, if that is still a safe thing to say. For its reach and power give it the heft of many a nation. Its turnover is estimated to be between $300-$600 billion per year. If you throw in all the deaths-from assassinations, associated diseases and economic disruption, then these at 500 000 a year are more than many nations’ mortality statistics. And like any State, it has organised armed soldiers, trained and ready to kill. No wonder so much effort has gone in to controlling the sale and distribution of illegal drugs since the nineteenth century. when the Chinese attempted to control the illegal importation of opium. Narco Warriors, a podcast series from highly experienced journalist Lindsay Charlton is the latest attempt to chronicle the long decades of this deadly and interminable war.

Charlton and his team of researchers have assembled hardened veterans of the war-customs officers, investigators, police officers- as well as those who operate in its shadowy intelligence led nooks and corners. The listener is taken on a vast sweep of lands and seas, of shootings, confrontations, agency turf wars and many earnest intelligent brave people trying to do the best jobs they can for their countries. And we salute them, above all for their endless dedication to the public good: for its clear that people of this calibre could have made a lot more money a lot more safely in many other walks of life. And there we might end it. Except for one thought, which that old Devil has just come round and whispered into our ear.

What is a drug anyway? If you say that cannabis, cocaine and heroin are highly dangerous and addictive substances, then you must say the same for alcohol and nicotine. But these are sold openly on the streets in many western countries. Indeed the attempt by the United States to prohibit alcohol from 1919 to 1933 was one of the most unhappy and unsuccessful enterprises which that country ever undertook . For one thing, it was an object lesson in facilitating the rise of violent organised crime, a historical irony not without relevance to present policy. The real problem is that the appetite for cocaine, heroin and alcohol are all driven by human demand. Gangsters are simply those capitalists who supply the illegitimate part and operate according to the same laws of supply and demand as their peers in legal sectors of the economy. As for that demand -there is strong evidence that it is fuelled by rampant economic inequality and the associated poor housing and social and economic insecurity which that entails. In which case the State’s resources would be better spent on building homes, schools and raising the minimum wage rather than on all those flashy speedboats and burly types in uniforms. But: society made its choices long ago, and who are we to call them wrong? If you want to know the consequences of those choices, told by the people who were there, then listen to the first episode [1] And all the subsequent ones of course!

[1]https://audioboom.com/posts/8855552-narco-terrorism-the-forever-war

#drugs #addiction #narcotrafficers #law enforcement #police #transport #smugglingm #opium wars

Food: is it quite as good as you thought?

Food is everywhere these days. Shelves groan with glossy cookbooks, restaurants and gastropubs queue up for tax breaks, and the airwaves are thick with chirpy kitchen‑dwellers—some dropping their aitches with theatrical enthusiasm, others sounding as if they’ve just strolled out of a rowing club bar. Everywhere you look, there’s another beaming evangelist waving a saucepan and assuring us that their latest ‘blend’ is nothing short of a revelation. One could be forgiven for thinking that food itself has become a national moral project, a jolly good thing in which we are all expected to take an interest.

However the readers of our little blog being a thoughtful lot, we thought we’d put up two stories which might provide a little counter-balance to the general merriment. The first from the indefatigable Kat Lay of the Guardian (clearly she knows about more than just antibiotics) does not suggest food is bad per se. But it does suggest that being extremely careful about what you eat, and who is selling to you might be a very good idea[1] Her headline tells you exactly what we mean: Ultra-processed foods should be treated more like cigarettes than food – study

“OK, OK”. you say, “but wot I eat is my choice, innit, guvnor? If I ain’t doin’ no one else no ‘arm, wosser problem?” Well according to Nature Briefing, Eating Well is about more than your health, this might be:

Debates over what to eat — more protein, say, or less ultra-processed food — often neglect any mention of how our food systems affect the biosphere that keeps us alive. But nutrition doesn’t exist in a vacuum, notes Earth-systems scientist Johan Rockström. He co-chaired the latest update to the Planetary Health Diet, which aims to optimize human health globally and reduce environmental and social harms. It notes that “global greenhouse-gas emissions could be cut by 20% by 2050 by eating healthily, reducing food waste and adopting sustainable production practices”, writes Rockström. “If diets remain unchanged, however, emissions will increase by 33%.”Nature | 7 min read
Reference: The EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy, sustainable, and just food systems report

We want humanity to survive, really we do. If you went extinct there would be no one to man the check out tills at supermarkets and we’d have to use those ghastly check-out-yourself tills that are so slow, complicated and inconvenient. Yeah food is alright, sometimes. But as the old saying goes-be careful what you wish for.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2026/feb/03/public-health-ultra-processed-foods-regulation-cigarettes-addiction-nutrition

#food #nutrition #climate change #obesity #health #fat #protein #fast food #processed food

Two new stories give fresh hope on cancer

Two stories give us hope of real progress in understanding and treating cancer. The first from the excellent Emma Gritt of the Mail [1] concerns the work of the great Dr Mariano Barbacid whose work has been so crucial in elucidating and developing the whole theory of oncogenes and the role they play in cancer. His team has been studying the effects of three drugs on the KRAS gene, deeply implicated in the development of the pancreatic form of the disease. But: don’t read us, read Emma-she knows a lot more than we do

The second story, from the inimitable Ian Sample of the Guardian [2] concerns the application of the Google Deep Mind AI tool to study genetic drivers of cancer-and other diseases too. To quote Ian:

“We see AlphaGenome as a tool for understanding what the functional elements in the genome do, which we hope will accelerate our fundamental understanding of the code of life,” Natasha Latysheva, a DeepMind researcher, told a press briefing on the work.

Once again click!. You’ll get a lot more from Ian than you will from us.

Both stories blend into two of our old LSS favourites. Firstly, the use of AI to look at complex biological patterns which humans alone struggle to perceive. (LSS 1 12 20 et seq) Secondly, that repeatable frequencies in DNA may be tied, probabilistically, to repeatable patterns of symptoms. Veteran readers will recall our hopes that this methodology may apply to psychiatric disorders too: (LSS 18 12 25 and 29 12 25). Of course, we expect to learn of environmental and epigenetic factors as well. But if we are right, these genetic advances may provide a firmer starting point for future investigations than we have now. How much more is achieved when facts are sacrosanct, not convenient entities to be selected and disposed according to the immediate convenience of their user! A lesson which certain US politicians and the news channels which so fanatically support them would do well to learn.

[1] Huge pancreatic cancer breakthrough as scientists achieve ‘permanent disappearance’ of disease with new triple-threat approach tested in lab | Daily Mail Online

[2]Google DeepMind launches AI tool to help identify genetic drivers of disease | Genetics | The Guardian

#AI #deep mind #cancer #genes #DNA #medicine #health #oncogenes #psychiatric disorder #heart disease

Forget the Middle East:Here’s the real crisis to watch out for

With the current tensions in the Middle East flooding the channels, you could be forgiven for thinking that benighted region is the only part of the planet that counts. It isn’t. It soon won’t count for much at all. And once again we are indebted to that most erudite of writers, George Monbiot of the Guardian[1] for telling us why. George has got hold of a report called the UK National Security Assessment, written by some of the sharpest minds in the country- MI5, GCHQ, that lot. And when we say they’re bright, trust us -they are. We won’t deprive you of the pleasure of reading all of George’s article. But the essence is simple: rapidly accelerating climate change is completely upending the normal relationships between nations, and taking us all to a dark and dangerous place

Let’s take one example. The glaciers of the mighty Himalaya-Karakoram system supply the water to some of the largest and most economically important rivers in the world. Among them are the Yangtse, the Mekong, the Brahmaputra and Ganges. All in all, they are the lifeblood of about 2 billion people in some of the world’s most progressive economic areas. And now those glaciers are melting-fast.[2] Leading to both short term floods and long term water shortages. At the moment this region is divided among three major powers_ Pakistan, India and China. All are nuclear-armed. All, being nations will attempt to defend their own local interest and local potentials, for that is what nations do. Each will reach for the water it must have to survive. And sooner or later these interests will clash. Mightily.

Now there will be a temptation among some of our readers, particularly those who hang out in the Dog and Duck, to say “let them get on with it- we can just sit it out” (That is a very polite way of conveying what they will say). But you can’t, gentle readers. As you may have noticed from your History, world wars are like beach parties, they tend to draw everyone in. Powers like Russia the USA and the EU will be forced to choose sides if only to protect their supply chains. Add to that the effects on migration numbers from all those refugees, world prices, supply chains and collapsing currencies and you have a mess to make the financial crash of 2008 look like, like-well one of those beach parties we alluded to above, really. Here then at last will come the consequences of doing nothing serious or substantail about global warming. And it will be well deserved by us all.

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/27/uk-government-report-ecosystem-collapse-foi-national-security?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[2]https://iccinet.org/landmark-report-himalayan-glaciers-disappearing-two-thirds-faster-than-before/

#global warming #himalaya #glacier #ganges #flood #yangtse #drought #China #India #Pakistan #world war three

Pollution: Devi Sridhar is a breath of fresh air

If any one writer gets showcased more than any here, it’s probably Professor Devi Sridhar. Over the years we’ve showcased some pretty brainy sorts-Larry Elliott, Simon Kuper, Gillan Tett to name but a few, and we admire them all. But as this is still primarily a medicine and science blog, and because that’s Devi’s manor, she takes the biscuit. To say nothing of her acuity, which nowhere is more sharply displayed than in today’s article for the Guardian about the mortiferous effects of Air pollution.[1]

Once again we will do little more than hand you over to the Sage of Edinburgh, who will tell you all you need to know in just the right amount of words; not too many and neither too few. But check out this killer quote , for that is exactly what it is:

According to the World Health Organization, 99% of the global population is exposed to air-pollution levels that exceed its health-based guidelines and air pollution is now the world’s single largest environmental risk, linked to nearly 7 million premature deaths each year

Thanks Devi. You were a real breath of fresh air during the COVID-19 pandemic. You’re even more so now

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/27/air-pollution-kills-thousands-london-ulez

#pollution #premature death #heart disease #stroke #health #medicine

Can Cancer really save you from Alzheimer’s? Some great research, but also some caveats

Could having cancer really protect you from Alzheimers? For years epidemiologists have noticed that people who have had cancer — especially certain solid tumours — seem to have a reduced statistical risk of developing Alzheimer’s, but the mechanisms have been unclear. Now an exciting mew study suggests a possible explanation. Some cancer cells overproduce a protein called Cystatin C. This enters the brain where it interacts with the amyloid-β plaques which many researchers associate with the development of Alzheimer’s. Now, we can’t do better than put you onto Nature Briefing Why Cancer and Alzheimer’s don’t mix. and their admirable analysis of a paper that originally appeared in then Journal Cell. It contains all the links and primary source matter you will need. But we’ll make a couple of observations( see below); for that is our wont.

Cystatin C, a protein produced by cancer cells, could partially explain why people who have had cancer have a lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. In a study in mice, researchers found that the protein can infiltrate the brain and bind to the molecules that make up the hallmark brain plaques of Alzheimer’s disease. This interaction draws the attention of immune cells, which then degrade the plaques. If confirmed in humans, the findings could suggest a path toward new therapies for Alzheimer’s, says cancer researcher Jeanne Mandelblatt. Nature | 5 min read
Reference: Cell paper

Firstly the research is obviously tip-top and exciting- regular readers will know our love of an unexpected truth hiding in plain sight . There’s potential here for some really radical treatments for Alzheimer’s and goodness knows what other neurological conditions. However: so far, the work only pertains to mice. That’s usual: but as it scales up to humans, there’s many a slip ‘twixt cup and lip as the old adage would have it. What’s more, the relationship between cancer and Alzheimer’s is complex and multifactorial — immune system changes, metabolic shifts, treatment effects and environmental and epigenetic factors may all have their say. And Cystatin C itself has been implicated in both protective and harmful processes in the brain, depending on context.

And there is a deeper problem which has nothing to do with the earnest efforts of the researchers but everything to do with the less than acute hominins who surround them and who will read about this in popular daily newspapers and in mediabytes on dubious feeds. Ever prone to believe stories rather than weigh evidence some will conclude that “ a cure for Alzheimer’s has been found!” Others will ignore the old warnings of the logic teachers, ever suspicious of over hasty correlation between cause and effect. Yes, this is exciting research, But cautious people will expect no life changing applications any time soon.

#Cystatin C #cancer #alzheimer’s #neurology #brain #health #medicine

Neo Liberalism to National Market Liberalism: is this a Great Global Transformation?

“The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

These words of Ronald Reagan were the best and most concise summary ever of the creed of Neoliberalism, which he shared so avidly with Margaret Thatcher. They called themselves Conservatives: but their belief was utterly radical, dominating all public discourse and transforming the world at least until the Great Crash of 2007-2008.

The radical nature of that transformation is laid out by Branko Milanović in The Great Global Transformation. We have two reviews for you, one via the inestimable Nature Briefing [1] and the other by Ivan Radanović for the equally prestigious London Review of Books [2] As ever we won’t spoil these excellent pieces, humbly begging you to read both. However we could not resist this passage from Radanović’s review. For it highlights the contradiction at the heart of the Reagan led project which would ultimately bring it crashing down:

For Branko Milanović and many others, China is at the centre of the current ideological paradigm shift. China’s rise, enabled by global neoliberalism, also made the end of global neoliberalism inevitable, by growing too big to be integrated into a global order whose rules are written by the US and its allies.

The Chinese saw a blindspot which the complacent westerners had missed: if you build an economy where the private sector is good and the state bad, how do you cope when foreign governments act like private companies? In Britain many utilities privatised by Thatcher are owned by foreign governments: is that Socialism or Capitalism? The shrewd rulers of China simply flipped this conundrum: the State and the Communist Party oversee the activities of a thriving private sector. Is that Socialism or Capitalism? In which case, what do words like “Conservative”, “Liberal” and Neo Liberal” really mean?

Milanović worthily joins a list of critics of the Neoliberal project including Wilkinson and Pickett, Thomas Piketty, and Will Hutton. It is easy to see Neoliberalism’s faults now, but it was very popular once. And before we rejoice its final passing, what follows may be very much darker indeed.

[1]“Nationalism grows on the terrain of never-satiated mass plenty and greed,” writes economist Branko Milanovic in his new book, The Great Global Transformation. Milanovic argues that globalization benefited previously poor populations, notably those in China, and the already rich, but left the middle and lower classes in countries such as the United States behind. The result is “the exponential growth of ‘nationalism, greed and property’”, writes sociologist Roberto Patricio Korzeniewicz in his review. “For Milanovic, greed is the iron cage of our times, and our future is bleak.”

Nature | 7 min read

[2] Branko Milanović – is neoliberalism being replaced by something more capitalist? – LSE Review of Books

The Great Global Transformation: National Market Liberalism in a Multipolar World. Branko Milanović. Allen Lane. 2025.

#politics #economics #Ronald Reagan #free markets #capitalism #socialism #communism

Larry Elliott on Davos-and why things have gone wrong for all of us

Crowd gathers to view Swiss mountains by annezazu is licensed under CC-CC0 1.0

Bewilderment, incomprehension, despair, rage; there’s plenty around at the moment, both inside the privileged halls of the Davos World Economic Forum and outside, where more humble folk gather. If you want to know why, then a good place to start is this piece by Larry Elliott of the Guardian . We don’t want to put a spoiler on Larry’s article: but we note the following, just to ease you in:

1 The old liberal rules-based order is creaking because it’s really, truly ancient: it was set up in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference

1.5 2026-1944 =82. That’s a lot of time

2 Emerging countries such as such as China, India and Brazil see no reason why the governance of anything need reflect the world as it was in 1944, rather than as it is in 2026.

2.5 What’s wrong with that?

3 Bretton Woods depended on two assumptions: that the United States was the worlds undisputed hegemon, and that its manufacturing, financial and intellectual leaderships were supreme. And Europe was second. Both of these assumptions have since become laughable.

4 It’s one thing to have a lovely, cosy, open, democratic, liberal,swinging, rules-based order or whatever, when everyone is doing well out of it. But quite another in a world where the rich are getting richer while those on middle incomes and below are struggling, as Larry points out.

5 At Bretton Woods Keynes saw two institutions as vital: the World Bank and the IMF. The latter, he insisted, could only succeed if both creditor and debtor nations had a role to play. Especially the Creditors who by increasing imports, would help Debtor nations to overcome problems like balance of payments crises. Instead the US as the world’s creditor par excellence decided they weren’t going to risk their own surpluses to help anyone else. Let them adjust for their feckless ways with budget cuts, austerity monetary discipline and lovely lower living standards!

5.5 There is a delicious irony here: for despite doing all that, the US has still wound up importing gargantuan quantities of goods from poorer countries, And its trade deficits, government and private debts are equally a source of domestic shame and international amusement.

6 Larry concludes “ A properly functioning rules-based system would remedy this defect.”

You know our thoughts on that gentle readers.(LSS 16 1 25 et seq) But this is not the time to blow our own trumpet. In fact, we forbid you to read those blogs! Instead click to Larry’s article. Read it. Read it again. And you shall understand.

[1] The ‘rules-based order’ Davos craves has bigger problems than Trump: it represents a world that no longer exists | Larry Elliott | The Guardian

#economics #international relations #world economic forum #BRICS #finance #IMF #JM Keynes

How the Emperor Justinian tried to Make Rome Great Again-and failed

When the Emperor Justinian succeeded to the Roman Empire in 527 AD it was already well past its best. All the western provinces-lands we now call Britain, France, Spain, North Africa, even Italy and Rome-had been lost in the previous century. What was left, the Eastern Empire governed from Constantinople, was still the most powerful state, primus inter pares. But no longer the sole hegemon it had been. However Justinian had big ideas: he would fully restore the glory of the Roman Empire. He would rebuild all the cities and defences which had decayed. He would reunite all Christians under his leadership and build a series of new churches across his domain. Above all decided “to reconquer all the countries possessed by the Romans to the limits of the two oceans”[1]

At first it went well. North Africa was captured, after a struggle. Forces were despatched as far as parts of Spain, with limited success. But it was in Italy that things started to go wrong. When Justinian became Emperor, Italy still had a thriving economy: there were big cities, Catholics, even a Pope. It was Roman in everything but name, being ruled by barbarian Ostrogoths. But names and titles mattered to Justinian. Accordingly he launched a series of wars (535-554 AD) designed to reconquer what he saw as Rome’s ancient homeland, and thereby restore its former glories. It didn’t matter that he had the help of able men like Belisarius and Narses: nor that he spent immense amounts of money and lost thousands of men; nor that he tried, and kept on trying. The contending armies swept back and forth across the peninsula, killing. taking and re-taking cities, destroying farms, aqueducts and roads. Even Rome suffered a long and disastrous siege. When the Empire finally prevailed, it wasn’t for long because the Lombards invaded in 568 AD and quickly wrested most of it away from Imperial control.

And back home did anyone thank their ambitious Emperor? Effectively, the citizens were bankrupted by the cost of all those armies, churches and palaces. Constantinople was torn apart by riots between sports fans. And the Christians, whom Justinian so loved, were divided into two irreconcilable factions, the Monophysites and the Orthodox, a feud which would have disastrous consequences for his successors. Of course Justinian was not to blame for the plague that struck the empire. But there was little left in the kitty to repair the ravages it unleashed., When Justinian died in 565AD he left the Empire larger-but fatally weakened in economic and human terms. He was a consequential Emperor, but he was a dreamer, unable to grasp that some things are truly lost forever. We shall leave the last damning words to Professor Davis

But the historian of Europe is forced to admit that by undertaking a reconquest of the West when all his forces were needed to defend his empire on the Persian and Slavonic frontiers, Justinian exhausted the resources of his Empire in pursuit of a policy which could not possibly succeed,[2]

Can anyone think of any modern parallels?

1] RH Davis A History of Medieval Europe Longman 1989 p 50

[2] ibid.p61

#roman empire #politics #economics #history #justinian #church #christianity