In recent years, anxiety about the spread of microplastics has been growing. It is in the oceans, even in animals and plants, and in the bottled water we drink daily.
Microplastics seem to be everywhere. And what is even more unpleasant is that it is not only everywhere around us, but also unexpectedly in the human organism.
According to researchers at the University of New Mexico, microplastics from the water and food we consume, as well as the air we breathe, make their way from our intestines to other parts of the body, such as the kidneys, liver and even the brain.
To reach this new conclusion, for four weeks the scientists gave mice water with the amount of microplastics that humans are thought to ingest each week. Previous studies have shown that five grams of microplastic enter the human body every week, which is roughly the weight of a credit card.
According to Eliseo Castillo, associate professor of gastroenterology and hepatology at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine, the discovery that microplastics are making their way from the gut to other tissues in the human body is concerning. According to him, it changes the immune cells, called macrophages, and this can lead to inflammation in the body.
Further, in another study, Dr. Castillo will focus on how a person’s diet affects the way microplastics are absorbed by the body.
He and his team will subject the lab animals to several different diets, including one high in fat and one high in fiber. Pieces of microplastic will be part of the “menu” of some of the animals, while others will not.
According to a study published in the journal Environmental Pollution, however, regardless of the type of food we eat, there is no escaping microplastics. Scientists have found that 90% of proteins, including vegan alternatives, contain microplastics, which are linked to negative health effects.
Could biodegradable plastics help?
The backlash against single-use plastics has seen many companies seeking to use alternatives that claim to be more biodegradable or compostable. But in some cases these alternatives may actually be compounding the microplastic problem. Research by scientists at the University of Plymouth in the UK found that bags labelled as “biodegradable” can take years to disintegrate, and even then they mostly break down into smaller pieces rather than their component chemical parts. (Learn more about why biodegradables won’t solve the plastic crisis in this article by Kelly Oakes.)
Fortunately, there is some hope. Researchers are developing a number of approaches to help get rid of the plastic pollution in our environment. One approach has been to turn to fungi and bacteria that feed on plastic, breaking it down in the process. A species of beetle larvae that can devour polystyrene has also offered another potential solution. Others are looking at using water filtration techniques or chemical treatments that can remove microplastics.
John, chapter 2. 1 – 12. The miracle at the wedding in Cana of Galilee. 13 – 25. Christ in Jerusalem. The cleansing of the temple.
2:1. On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there.
2:2. Jesus and His disciples were also invited to the wedding.
“On the third day.” It was the third day after the day Christ called Philip (John 1:43). That day, Christ was already in Cana of Galilee, where he came, probably because His pure mother had gone there before Him – to a wedding in a familiar family. We can assume that at first He went to Nazareth, where He lived with His mother, and then, not finding her, He went with the disciples to Cana. Here both He and His disciples, probably all five of them, were also invited to the wedding. But where was Cana? Only one Cana in Galilee is known – a small town an hour and a half northeast of Nazareth. Robinson’s suggestion that there was another Cana four hours from Nazareth to the north is not well founded.
2:3. And when the wine was finished, His mother said to Jesus: they have no wine.
2:4. Jesus says to her: what have you to do with Me, woman? My hour has not yet come.
2:5. His mother said to the servants: whatever he tells you, do.
“when the wine is finished.” Jewish wedding celebrations lasted up to seven days. (Gen. 29:27; Judg. 14:12-15). Therefore, at the time of the arrival of Christ with His disciples, when several days had already passed in festivities, there was a shortage of wine – apparently, the hosts were not rich people. The Blessed Virgin had probably already heard from Christ’s disciples about the things that John the Baptist had said about her Son, and about the promise of miracles that He had given His disciples two days before. Therefore, she considered it possible to turn to Christ, pointing out to Him the difficult situation of the housewives. Perhaps she also had in mind the fact that the disciples of Christ, with their presence at the celebration, had disturbed the calculations of the hosts. However, whatever the case may be, there is no doubt that she expected a miracle from Christ (St. John Chrysostom, Blessed Theophylact).
“Woman, what have you to do with Me?” Christ answered this request of His mother with the following words. “What have you to do with Me, woman? My hour has not yet come.” The first half of the reply seems to contain some reproach to the Blessed Virgin for wanting to induce Him to begin working miracles. Some see a tone of reproach also in the fact that Christ calls her here simply “wife” and not “mother”. And indeed, from Christ’s next words about His “hour,” it can no doubt be inferred that by His question He meant to tell her that henceforth she must abandon her usual earthly motherly view of Him, by virtue of which she thought, that it is within its right to demand from Christ as a mother from a son.
Earthly kinship, however close it may have been, was not decisive for His divine activity. As at His first appearance in the temple, so now, at the first appearance of His glory, the finger that pointed to His hour did not belong to His mother, but only to His heavenly Father” (Edersheim). Yet Christ’s question contains no reproach in our sense of the word. Here Christ is only explaining to His mother what their relationship should be in the future. And the word “woman” (γύναι) does not contain in itself anything offensive, applied to the mother, that is, in the address of a son to a mother. We see that Christ calls His mother in the same way, when before His death, looking at her with love, He appointed John to be her protector in the future (John 19:26). And finally, in the second half of the answer: “My hour has not yet come,” we cannot at all see a refusal of the mother’s request. Christ says only that the time for a miracle has not yet come. From this it appears that He wanted to fulfill His mother’s request, but only at the time appointed by His heavenly Father. And the Most Holy Virgin herself understood the words of Christ in this sense, as is evident from the fact that she told the servants to carry out everything that her Son ordered them to do.
2:6. There were six stone jars there, set for washing according to the Jewish custom, holding two or three measures each.
2:7. Jesus tells them: fill the jars with water. And they filled them to the brim.
2:8. Then he tells them: pour it now and take it to the old man. And they took it.
According to the Jewish custom, the hands and dishes were to be washed at a meal (cf. Matt. 15:2; 23:25). Therefore, a large amount of water was prepared for the wedding table. From this water, Christ ordered the servants to fill six stone jars, with a volume of two or three meras (by meras here, probably, is meant the ordinary measure of liquids – bath, which was equal to approximately four buckets). Such vessels, holding up to ten buckets of water, stood in the yard, not in the house. So the six vessels contained up to 60 buckets of water, which Christ turned into wine.
The miracle was performed on such a scale that someone would later explain it in a natural way. But why did Christ not make wine without water? He did so “so that those who drew water themselves could witness the miracle and it would not look ghostly at all” (St. John Chrysostom).
2:9. And when the old matchmaker had taken a bite of the water that had turned into wine (and he did not know where the wine came from, but the servants who had brought the water did), he called the bridegroom
2:10. and said to him: every man puts first the good wine, and when they are drunk, then the lower, and you have kept the good wine until now.
“the old matchmaker” (in the original, ὁ ἀρχιτρίκλινος – the main person responsible for the table in the triclinium. The triclinium is the dining room in Roman architecture, note pr.).
The master of the feast tasted the wine and found it very good, which he told the bridegroom. This testimony confirms that the water in the vessels was indeed turned into wine. Indeed, there could not have been any self-suggestion on the part of the steward, for he was evidently ignorant of what the servants had done at Christ’s command. Moreover, he certainly did not indulge in immoderate use of wine, and was therefore perfectly capable of determining the actual quality of the wine served to him by the servants. In this way, Christ, ordering wine to be brought to the steward, wanted to remove any reason for doubt as to whether there really was wine in the vessels.
“when they get drunk” (ὅταν μεθυσθῶσι). After all, the guests were also sufficiently able to appreciate the wine served to them. Christ and the Blessed Virgin would not have stayed in a house where there were drunken people, and the hosts, as we said, were not rich people and did not have too much wine, so that they would get “drunk”… The expression of the steward: “when the drunkard” means that sometimes inhospitable hosts serve their guests bad wine; this happens when the guests are no longer able to appreciate the taste of the wine. But the steward does not say that in this case the host had such a consideration and the guests were drunk.
The evangelist interrupts the account of this conversation with the bridegroom, and mentions not a word of the impression which the miracle made on all the guests. For him it was important insofar as it served to strengthen the faith of Christ’s disciples.
2:11. Thus Jesus began His miracles in Cana of Galilee and manifested His glory; and His disciples believed in Him.
“Thus Jesus began the miracles…” According to the most authoritative codices, this place should have the following translation: “this (ταύτην) Jesus did as the beginning (ἀρχήν) of the signs (τ. στηντες)”. The evangelist sees Christ’s miracles as signs attesting to His divine dignity and His messianic vocation. In this sense, the apostle Paul also wrote about himself to the Corinthians: “the marks (more precisely, the signs) of an apostle (in me) were shown among you in all patience, in signs, wonders and powers” (2 Cor. 12:12 ). Although Christ three days before had given His disciples proof of His wondrous knowledge (John 1:42-48), but then He revealed Himself only as a prophet, and such there were before Him. While the miracle in Cana was the first of His works, about which He Himself said that no one had done such things before Him (John 15:24).
“and manifested His glory.” The meaning of this sign and its importance is indicated in the words: “and manifested His glory.” What kind of glory are we talking about here? No other glory can be understood here than the divine glory of the incarnate Logos, which the apostles contemplated (John 1:14). And in the further words of the evangelist: “and His disciples believed in Him” the action of this manifestation of the glory of the incarnate Logos is directly indicated. The disciples of Christ gradually came to faith in Him. At first their faith was in its infancy – that was while they were with John the Baptist. This faith was afterwards strengthened as they drew near to Christ (John 1:50), and after the manifestation of His glory at the wedding at Cana they reached such great faith that the evangelist finds it possible to say of them that they “believed” in Christ, that is, they have convinced themselves that He is the Messiah, and a Messiah at that, not only in the limited sense that the Jews expected, but also a being standing higher than the ordinary messengers of God.
Perhaps the evangelist makes the remark that the disciples “believed in view of the impression made upon them by the presence of Christ at the merry wedding feast. Being brought up in the strict school of John the Baptist, who taught them to fast (Matt. 9:14), they may have been perplexed by this regard for the joys of human life which their new Master displayed, and himself took part in the celebration and took them there. But now that Christ had miraculously confirmed His right to act differently from John, all doubts of the disciples should have disappeared and their faith strengthened. And the impression of the miracle at Cana produced on the disciples was especially strong because their previous teacher had not performed a single miracle (John 10:41).
2:12. After that He went down to Capernaum Himself, and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and they stayed there not many days.
After the miracle in Cana, Christ went to Capernaum with His mother, His brothers (for the brothers of Christ – see the interpretation of Matt. 1:25) and the disciples. As to the reason why Christ went to Capernaum, we judge from the circumstance that three of the five disciples of Christ lived in that city, namely Peter, Andrew and John (Mark 1:19, 21, 29). They could continue their fishing activities here without breaking communion with Christ. Perhaps the two other disciples, Philip and Nathanael, also found work there. But what did the coming to Capernaum of Christ’s mother and brothers mean? The most likely assumption is that the entire family of Jesus Christ decided to leave Nazareth. And indeed, from the synoptic Gospels it appears that Capernaum soon became the permanent residence of Christ and His family (Matt. 9:1; Mark 2:1; Matt. 12:46). And in Nazareth only the sisters of Christ remained, apparently already married (Matt. 13:56).
“Capernaum” – see The interpretation to Matt. 4:13.
“He came” – more precisely: he came down. The road from Cana to Capernaum went downhill.
2:13. The Jewish Passover was approaching, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem
In Capernaum Christ obviously did not draw attention to Himself. He had to begin His public activity in the capital of Judaism, namely in the temple, according to the prophecy of Malachi: “Behold, I am sending My Angel, and he will prepare the way before Me, and suddenly the Lord, whom you you seek, and the Angel of the covenant, whom you desire; behold, He is coming, says the Lord of hosts” (Mal. 3:1).
On the occasion of the approach of the Passover, Christ went or, more precisely, ascended (άνέβη) to Jerusalem, which to every Israelite seemed to stand on the highest point of Palestine (cf. Matt. 20:17). His disciples were with Him this time (John 2:17), and perhaps His mother and brothers.
2:14. and he found in the temple sellers of oxen, sheep, and doves, and money-changers sitting.
According to the custom of worshipers, immediately after arriving in Jerusalem, Christ visited the temple. Here, mostly in the outer court, which served as a place where the Gentiles could pray, and partly in the temple galleries, He found people selling sacrificial animals to the worshipers, or were busy exchanging money, for at the Passover every a Jew was obliged to pay a temple tax (didrachm, see Commentary on Matt. 17:24) and necessarily with the ancient Jewish coin that was offered to the worshipers by the money changers. The coin to be brought into the temple treasury was half a shekel (which corresponds to eight grams of silver).
2:15. And making a scourge of wood, he drove out of the temple all, also the sheep and the oxen; and he spilled the changers’ money and overturned their tables.
This trade and exchange of money disturbed the prayerful mood of those who came to pray. Especially hard was this for those pious pagans who were not allowed to enter the inner court where the Israelites prayed, and who had to listen to the bleating and the squealing of the animals and the cries of the merchants and buyers (merchants, must it should be noted, they demanded for the animals often three times more expensive, and the buyers, of course, raised a dispute with them). Christ could not tolerate such an insult to the temple. He made a whip from the pieces of rope lying around the animals and drove the merchants and their cattle out of the temple yard. Still more cruelly did He deal with the money-changers, scattering their money and overturning their tables.
2:16 a.m. and to the dove sellers he said: take this from here and do not make My Father’s house a house of commerce.
Christ dealt more gently with the dove sellers, commanding them to remove the cages with the birds (ταύτα = this, not ταύτας = “they”, i.e. the pigeons). To these merchants He explains why He interceded for the temple. He told them: “do not make My Father’s house a house of commerce”. Christ thought it his duty to plead for the honor of His Father’s house, evidently because He considered Himself the only true Son of God…, the only Son Who could dispose of His Father’s house.
2:17. Then His disciples remembered that it was written: “jealousy for Your house has eaten Me up.”
None of the merchants and money changers protested against Christ’s actions. It is possible that some of them perceived Him as a zealot – one of those zealots who, after the death of their leader Judas the Galilean, remained faithful to his motto: to restore the kingdom of God with the sword (Josephus Flavius. The Jewish War. 2:8, 1) . Others, however, probably realized that they had been doing wrong until now, rushing into the temple with their wares and organizing a sort of market here. And as for Christ’s disciples, they perceived in the action of Christ, in His zeal for the house of God – a fulfillment of the prophetic words of the psalmist, who, saying that he was consumed by zeal for the house of God, prefigured with what zeal for the glory of God the Messiah would performs His ministry. But since in the 68th psalm quoted by the evangelist it is about the sufferings that the psalmist endured because of his devotion to Yahweh (Ps. 68:10), the disciples of Christ, remembering the excerpt from the psalm quoted, should at the same time have thought about the danger to which their Master exposed himself, declaring himself so boldly against the abuses which the priests apparently patronized. These priests, of course, were not the ordinary priests who came at the appointed time to serve in the temple, but the permanent officials from among the priests – leaders of the priesthood who lived in Jerusalem (and especially the high priestly family), and who had to constantly to derive benefits. From this trade, the merchants had to pay a certain percentage of their profit to the temple officials. And from the Talmud we see that the market at the temple belonged to the sons of the high priest Anna.
2:18. And the Jews answered and said to Him: by what sign will You prove to us that You have the authority to act thus?
The Jews, that is, the leaders of the Jewish people (cf. John 1:19), the priests of the highest rank (the so-called sagans), immediately began to demand from Christ, who probably seemed to them a zealot (cf. Matt. 12:4), to give them a sign as a proof of His right to act as a reprover of disorders in the temple. They, of course, could not deny that their position of leadership was only temporary, that the “faithful prophet” should appear, before whose coming Simon Maccabee and his descendants had assumed the government of the Jewish people (1 Maccabees 14: 41; 4:46; 9:27). But, of course, this “faithful prophet” had to prove his divine messengership with something. It was in this sense that they put the question to Christ. Let Christ perform a miracle! But they did not dare to capture Him, because the people were also indignant at the desecration of the temple, which the priests allowed out of favor.
2:19. Jesus answered them and said: destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
The Jews demanded of Christ a miracle to prove that he had the right to act as Yahweh’s authorized messenger, and Christ was willing to give them such a miracle or sign. But Christ gave His answer a somewhat mysterious form, so that His word remained misunderstood not only by the Jews, but even by the disciples (verse 22). By saying “destroy this temple” Christ seemed to have in mind the Jewish temple, which is indicated by the addition “that” (τοῦτον). If, in saying these words, Christ had pointed to His body, then there would have been no misunderstanding: all would have understood that Christ was foretelling His violent death. Thus, by “temple” (ό ναός opposed to the word το ίερόν, which means all the rooms of the temple and the court itself, cf. John 2:14-15) could be understood above all the temple that was visible to all. But on the other hand, the Jews could not fail to see that they could not limit themselves to such an understanding of Christ’s words. After all, Christ told them that it was they who would destroy the temple, and they, of course, could not even imagine raising a hand against their national shrine. And then, Christ immediately presents Himself as the restorer of this temple destroyed by the Jews, apparently going against the will of the destroying Jews themselves. There was some misunderstanding here again!
But still, if the Jews and Christ’s disciples had paid more attention to Christ’s words, perhaps they would have understood them despite all their apparent mystery. At least they would have asked what Christ meant to tell them by this apparently figurative statement; but they deliberately dwell only on the plain literal sense of His words, endeavoring to show all their groundlessness. Meanwhile, as was explained to the disciples of Christ after His resurrection, Christ actually spoke of the temple in a double sense: both of this stone temple of Herod, and of His body, which also represented the temple of God. “You – as Christ said to the Jews – will destroy your temple by destroying the temple of My body. By killing Me as your adversary, you will incur God’s judgment and God will hand over your temple to destruction by the enemies. And along with the destruction of the temple, the worship must also cease and your church (the Jewish religion with its temple, b.r.) must end its existence. But I will raise up My body in three days, and at the same time I will create a new temple, as well as a new worship, which will not be limited by those boundaries in which it existed before.”
2:20. And the Jews said: this temple was built for forty-six years, so will You raise it in three days?
“in three days.” Christ’s words about the miracle He could perform in three days seemed ridiculous to the Jews. They remarked with derision that Herod’s temple had taken forty-six years to build—how could Christ rebuild it, if it was destroyed, in three days, that is, as they probably understood the expression “in three days,” as possible -a short time? (cf. 1 Chron. 21:12); Luke 13:32).
“is built”. By “building the temple” the Jews evidently meant the long work of erecting various temple buildings, which was not completed until 63 A.D., therefore, only seven years before its destruction.
2:21. However, He was talking about the temple of His body.
2:22. And when He rose from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had spoken this, and they believed the Scriptures and the word that Jesus had spoken.
Christ did not answer anything to the remark of the Jews: it was clear that they did not want to understand Him, and even more so – to accept Him. Christ’s disciples also did not question Him about the words He said, and Christ Himself did not need to explain to them at that moment. The purpose with which He appeared in the temple was accomplished: He announced His intention to begin His great messianic work and began it with the symbolic act of cleansing the temple. It was immediately revealed what the attitude of the leaders of the Jewish people would be towards Him. Thus He began His public ministry.
2:23. And when he was in Jerusalem at the feast of Passover, many, seeing the miracles that he did, believed in his name.
2:24. But Jesus Himself did not trust them, for He knew them all,
2:25. and there was no need for anyone to testify about the man, because Sam knew what was in the man.
“many . . . believed in His name.” Here the evangelist talks about the impression that Jesus Christ made with His first appearance in Jerusalem on the masses. Since on this occasion the Lord performed many signs or wonders (cf. verse 11) during the eight days of the Passover festival, and since He repeatedly acted as a teacher, as appears, for example, from the words of Nicodemus (John 3:2) and partly from the words of Christ Himself (John 3:11, 19), many believed in Him. If here John mentions only the “miracles” that brought many Jews to Christ, he testifies that for the majority the signs were indeed the decisive moment in their conversion to Christ. That is precisely why the apostle Paul said: “the Jews ask for omens” (1 Cor. 1:22). They believed “in His name”, that is, they saw in Him the promised Messiah and wanted to found a community with His name. But the Lord knew all these believers well and did not trust in the constancy of their faith. He also knew every person He met by virtue of His wondrous insight, examples of which He had already given His disciples recently (John 1:42 – 50). Therefore, the number of Christ’s disciples during these eight days of the feast did not increase.
Modern New Testament criticism suggests that in the second half of the chapter under consideration, John tells about the same event that, according to the synoptics, happened at the last Passover – the Passover of suffering. At the same time, some exegetes consider the chronological description of the synoptics to be more correct, doubting the possibility of such an event already in the first year of Christ’s public ministry. Others give preference to John, suggesting that the synoptics have placed the event in question not in the place where it should be (cf. the interpretation of Matt. 21:12-17, ff. and the parallel places). But all the doubts of the critic have no basis. First of all, there is nothing incredible that the Lord spoke as a rebuker of the disorders reigning in the temple – that center of the Jewish people, and at the very beginning of His public ministry. He had to speak boldly in the most central place of Judaism – in the Jerusalem temple, if he wanted to declare Himself as the messenger of God. Even the prophet Malachi foretells the coming of the Messiah by saying that He will appear precisely in the temple (Mal. 3:1) and, as can be concluded from the context of the word (see the following verses in the same chapter of the book of Malachi), again in the temple he will execute his judgment on the Jews who are proud of their righteousness. Moreover, if the Lord had not then revealed Himself so clearly as the Messiah, He might have been doubted even by His disciples, to whom it must have seemed strange that their Master, who had already performed a great miracle at the wedding at Cana, should suddenly hide himself again from the attention of the people, remaining unnoticed in the quiet of Galilee.
They say: “but Christ could not immediately declare that He is the Messiah – He did this much later”. To this they add, that by acting as the reprover of the priests, Christ immediately placed himself in hostile relations with the priesthood, who could have immediately seized Him and put an end to His work. But this objection is not convincing either. Why should the priests seize Christ, when He demanded of the merchants only what was lawful, and they knew this very well? Moreover, Christ does not rebuke the priests directly. He drives out only the merchants, and the priests hypocritically might even thank Him for taking care of the honor of the temple…
Moreover, the conspiracy of the priests against Christ had been gradually taking shape, and they would not, of course, have dared, without a thorough discussion of the matter in the Sanhedrin, to take any decisive steps against Christ. In general, criticism has not been able to adduce convincing grounds to make us believe in the impossibility of repeating the event of the expulsion of the merchants from the temple. Conversely, there are some important differences between the Synoptics’ and John’s account of this event. Thus, according to John, the Jews asked Christ by what right He carried out the cleansing of the temple, and according to the Synoptics, the high priests and scribes did not ask such a question, but only reproached Him for accepting praise from children. Moreover, according to the Synoptics, the word of the Lord to the desecrators of the temple sounds much harsher than His word to John: there the Lord speaks as a Judge who came to punish the people who made the temple a den of robbers, and here He denounces the Jews only in that they turned the temple into a place of commerce.
Source in Russian: Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments: In 7 volumes / Ed. prof. A. P. Lopukhin. – Ed. 4th. – Moscow: Dar, 2009, 1232 pp.
Two years ago, London announced the Migration and Economic Development Partnership (MEDP), now referred to as the UK-Rwanda Asylum Partnership, which stated that asylum seekers in the UK would be sent to Rwanda before their cases could be heard.
The national Rwandan asylum system would then consider their need for international protection.
In November 2023, the UK Supreme Court said the policy was unlawful due to safety concerns in Rwanda. In response, the UK and Rwanda created the new bill, declaring Rwanda a safe country, among other stipulations.
Risk of refoulement
UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is working on having the bill passed and recently said that the first flight transporting asylum seekers is set to leave in 10 to 12 weeks, around July, according to international media reports.
However, the UN Special Rapporteurs warned that removing asylum seekers to Rwanda, or anywhere else, could put airlines and aviation authorities at risk of refoulement – the forced return of refugees or asylum seekers to a country where they may face persecution, torture or other serious harm – “which would violate the right to be free from torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.
The experts said that “even if the UK-Rwanda agreement and the Safety of Rwanda bill are approved, airlines and aviation regulators could be complicit in violating internationally protected human rights and court orders by facilitating removals to Rwanda.”
They added that airlines should be held responsible if they assist in the removal of asylum seekers from the UK.
The UN experts have been in contact with the UK Government and national, European and international aviation regulators to remind them of their responsibilities, including under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
The UN Human Rights Council appoints Special Rapporteurs to monitor and report on global situations and issues. They serve in their individual capacity, are not UN staff, are independent of any government or organization and are not compensated for their work.
On Monday, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs endorsed the agreement for a body to strengthen integrity, transparency, and accountability in European decision-making.
The agreement that was reached between eight EU institutions and bodies (namely Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the European Committee of the Regions) provides for the joint creation of a new Body for Ethical Standards. MEPs endorsed the deal with 15 votes in favour, 12 against, and no abstentions.
The Body will develop, update, and interpret common minimum standards for ethical conduct, and publish reports on how these standards have been reflected in each signatory’s internal rules. The institutions participating in the Body will be represented by one senior member and the position of Chair of the Body will rotate every year between the institutions. Five independent experts will support the work of the Body, who will be available to be consulted by a party to the agreement on standardised written declarations, including declarations of interest.
A successful push for watchdog functions
Parliament was represented in the negotiations by Vice-President Katarina Barley (S&D, DE), Chair of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs Salvatore De Meo (EPP, IT), and rapporteur Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, DE). They managed to improve significantly the Commission’s proposal, described as “unsatisfactory” by MEPs in July 2023, by adding to the tasks of the independent experts the competence to examine individual cases and issue recommendations. The provisional agreement was approved by Parliament’s Conference of Presidents on Thursday.
Quotes
Parliament’s co-negotiators stated the following.
Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, DE): “Lobbying rules in the EU institutions will finally be enforced by an independent referee. That will be a massive improvement to the current faulty system of self-control. Independent checks by the new Ethics Body’s experts are a hard won success that will improve lobbying transparency. This will send a clear signal to voters: your vote counts. Independent control of lobbying rules will increase citizens trust in the European democracy.”
Katarina Barley (S&D, DE): “The Ethics Body is a big step forward for transparency and openness in Europe. This is all about putting citizens’ interests first and making sure EU institutions stick to the highest ethical standards. I am proud that this breakthrough was made possible by Parliament’s unwavering dedication to serving Europeans. Establishing this new Authority demonstrates our dedication to fairness and reliability across the EU.”
Salvatore De Meo (EPP, IT): “The provisional agreement voted today in the AFCO Committee represents a first step towards the creation of common rules on ethics and transparency between the different institutions. It is now up to the plenary to confirm support for this agreement which, despite its several shortcomings, would contribute to more harmonized practices between the European institutions.”
Next steps
Parliament will hold a final vote on whether to endorse the agreement during the plenary session that is currently underway in Strasbourg, on Thursday 25 April. The provisional agreement will still need to be signed by all parties before it can come into force.
Background
The European Parliament has been calling for the EU institutions to have an ethics body since September 2021, one with real investigative authority and a structure fit for purpose. MEPs reiterated the call in December 2022, in the immediate aftermath of the allegations of corruption involving former and current MEPs and staff, alongside an array of internal improvements to enhance integrity, transparency, and accountability.
Mother Earth is clearly urging a call to action. Nature is suffering. Oceans filling with plastic and turning more acidic. Extreme heat, wildfires and floods, have affected millions of people.
Climate change, man-made changes to nature as well as crimes that disrupt biodiversity, such as deforestation, land-use change, intensified agriculture and livestock production or the growing illegal wildlife trade, can accelerate the speed of destruction of the planet.
This is the third Mother Earth Day celebrated within the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Ecosystems support all life on Earth. The healthier our ecosystems are, the healthier the planet – and its people. Restoring our damaged ecosystems will help to end poverty, combat climate change and prevent mass extinction. But we will only succeed if everyone plays a part.
For this International Mother Earth Day, let’s remimd ourselves – more than ever – that we need a shift to a more sustainable economy that works for both people and the planet. Let’s promote harmony with nature and the Earth. Join the global movement to restore our world!
Let’s act now
There are multiple, feasible and effective options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to human-caused climate change, and they are available now, according to the last UN Climate Change report backed by science. IPCC Report
World Environment Situation Room
UN Environment offers a web gallery where you can access data classified by theme and geographical area that has been transformed into attractive multimedia material to make it more understandable for all users.
Did you know?
The planet is losing 10 million hectares of forests every year – an area larger than Iceland.
A healthy ecosystem helps to protect us from these diseases. Biological diversity makes it difficult for pathogens to spread rapidly.
It is estimated that around one million animal and plant species are now threatened with extinction.
Dialogues with Nature
International Mother Earth Day 22 April 3
To commemorate this day, interactive dialogues are held annually at the United Nations. Unfortunately, they will not take place this year, but we invite you to read the Dialogue between the Philosopher Voltaire and Nature in the 18th century.
The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration provides a great opportunity to revive our natural world amidst the ongoing environmental crisis. While a decade may seem lengthy, scientists emphasize that these next ten years are pivotal in combating climate change and preventing the loss of countless species. Read the ten strategic actions within the UN Decade that can contribute to building a #GenerationRestoration.
Illustration: Official press photo of the organizers
By Biserka Gramatikova
On April 20, the official opening of the Bulgarian pavilion at the Venice Biennale took place. “Memory is what keeps us safe,” said the Bulgarian Acting Minister of Culture during the opening. In the Biennale on the theme “Foreigners Everywhere”, Bulgaria participated with the art installation “Neighbors”, which according to the foreign media is a must-see at the 60th edition of the Biennale.
The “Neighbors” project is a multimedia and interactive installation – the work of Krasimira Butseva, Julian Shehiryan and Lilia Topuzova. The work is the result of 20 years of research and artistic work by the authors. The curator is Vasil Vladimirov. The Bulgarian pavilion recreates a hidden, intimate and somewhat solemn aspect of Bulgaria’s socialist past. The installation recreates three rooms – a reconstruction of the homes of Bulgarians repressed by the communist authorities.
In the first room, visitors encounter sounds and pictures from the camps in Bleene and Lovech. The archival materials are real testimonies of former prisoners in these camps. The second room is dedicated to people who have learned to speak with non-verbal communication and for whom real communication is an abstraction. In the third white room is the space of the “white spots” in consciousness – a memory of the silent, deprived of memory or life. The overall feeling the installation leaves with the viewer is one of subtle horror, nostalgia and tension.
Curator Vasil Vladimirov told the New Delhi-based publication “Stir World” that this is the story of some outsiders not recognized by society, whose hopes for alleged retribution, for validation of the suffering they experienced, remain unheard.
The Venice Biennale can be seen until November 24. The Golden Lion awards have already been presented, with the Australia and New Zealand pavilions honoured.
Krasimira Butseva teaches at the University of the Arts in London. In his creative and research practice he works with topics such as political violence, traumatic memory, official and unofficial history of Eastern Europe. As a photographer and artist, she has been part of international group exhibitions.
Lilia Topuzova is a professor of history at the University of Toronto. Historian and filmmaker who explores in his work the scars of political violence and silence as a protective reaction against trauma. He is the writer and co-director of the documentaries The Mosquito Problem and Other Stories (2007) and Saturnia (2012).
Julian Shehiryan is a multimedia artist, researcher and writer who lives in Sofia and New York. Shehiryan creates site-specific and spatial multimedia installations that use architectural spaces, objects and objects through artistic interventions, video, sound and experimental technologies. In his scientific practice, he deals with the history of psychotherapy, post-war art and transnational history
An iPhone – illustrative photo. Image credit: Thom Bradley via Unsplash, free license
If you find yourself constantly tapping away on your iPhone, trying to free up space and achieve that much-desired speed boost, you may start to consider purchasing a cleaner app. But what do these apps truly offer, and is investing your time and money into one a wise choice?
With iPhone sales soaring to $65.8 billion , it’s clear that the market for these devices is expanding rapidly. Given how much we lean on our smartphones daily, paying attention to the hidden apps running behind the scenes becomes super important. You might not have thought about it, but those apps you love? They’re hogging valuable RAM that your device desperately needs to keep all its cool features running smoothly. If you’re experiencing sluggish phone performance, it could be due to insufficient memory. Luckily, by installing a cleaning app from the App Store, you can ensure that unnecessary programs aren’t hogging space. Clearing up RAM on your iPhone is a simple move that kicks its most important functions into high gear.
2 Free space
If you find your iPhone slowing down because it’s packed with cached data, it’s not just your imagination. The more you load up your device without cleaning out the clutter, the harder it is for your iPhone to keep up, especially with demanding apps and games. With iPhone cleanup you can free up more resources on your smartphone. First of all, you will clean up more memory on your device, and secondly, you will free up more RAM and processor resources. The now popular CleanUp App – Phone Cleaner can find duplicate photos, videos and contacts. CleanUp app also allows you to compress videos and organize your contact book. In addition to smart cleaning, the application can create a secret section in the device memory to store valuable data.
3 Fighting Viruses
In this era, downloading files from the web is something you probably do frequently. Think twice before you do it because that one step could invite trouble—malware—that risks not only the seamless operation of your iPhone but also jeopardizes the security of personal data tucked away inside it. Imagine this – an app for your iPhone that’s not only free but also patrols around looking for nasty bugs or unwanted guests hiding in its corners. Don’t allow pesky viruses and malware to compromise your data privacy – arm yourself with a robust cleaning tool for maximum protection. Scanning through feedback on different cleanup apps can really pay off in picking the safest bet against online threats.
4 Increases the Service Life of the Device
If you’ve had your iPhone for some time, you might notice it doesn’t run as swiftly as it used to. Often, the culprit behind your device’s sluggishness is all those unneeded files and leftovers hogging precious space. This clutter can cause overheating and make your battery run out way faster. If removing unneeded apps manually is your game plan, prepare for it to eat into your day—it’s far from a quick fix. Luckily, with a storage CleanUp app, keeping your phone running smoothly and enhancing its speed becomes a walk in the park. Imagine keeping your iPhone zippy and extending its shelf-life just by clearing out the digital junk pile now and then – sounds pretty good, right?
5 Removal Solutions
In the digital age where the number of apps at your fingertips is endless, it’s common to fill up your iPhone with downloaded applications that you seldom use. These dormant apps don’t just sit idly; they consume precious storage and can bog down your device’s performance with unnecessary background activities. However, there’s a silver lining in the form of cleaning tools specifically designed for iPhones. These handy tools empower you to swiftly identify and clear out the clutter of unused apps, ensuring your device operates efficiently and keeps its resources optimized. If you’re aiming to tidy up your iPhone and enhance its functionality, turning to a cleaning tool could be the key to eliminating any redundant software cluttering your space.
The more you engage with your iPhone, the more likely you are to amass a collection of inactive files and apps that not only take up valuable space but also slow down your device. This is when the magic of cleaning apps comes to the rescue. Specifically designed for iPhones, apps like Storage CleanUp tirelessly work to locate and eradicate those pesky, unnecessary files, thereby boosting your phone’s performance and making room for what truly matters. By installing a dedicated phone cleaner app, you can dodge those annoying alerts about running out of space or dealing with inactive apps, making your mobile experience sleeker and more streamlined.
Final Thoughts
If you have a huge amount of free time, then iPhone optimizing can be done manually. You can log into each application and clear cache, cookies where available, and sort through photos, videos and contacts. It’s unlikely that any of us have that much time and the desire to do all this manually if there are apps for cleaning our smartphones.
The leaders of 10 multilateral development banks (MDBs) today announced joint steps to work more effectively as a system and increase the impact and scale of their work to tackle urgent development challenges.
In a Viewpoint Note, the leaders outlined key deliverables for joint and coordinated action in 2024 and beyond building on the progress since their Marrakesh statement in 2023, as their institutions work to accelerate progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and to better support clients in addressing regional and global challenges.
Published at the conclusion of a retreat hosted by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), which holds the rotating chair of the MDB Heads Group, the actions represent the strengthened collaboration amongst MDBs. The Note will also serve as a valuable contribution for the forthcoming G20 Roadmap to evolve MDBs into a “better, bigger and more effective” system and in other fora.
The MDB Heads committed to concrete and actionable deliverables in five critical areas:
1. Scaling up MDB financing capacity. MDBs expect to generate additional lending headroom in the order of $300-400 billion over the next decade, with the support of shareholders and partners. Actions include:
Offering a diverse set of innovative financial instruments to shareholders, development partners and capital markets, including hybrid-capital and risk-transfer instruments, and promoting the channeling of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) through MDBs.
Providing more clarity on callable capital which would help rating agencies better assess the value of callable capital.
Continuing to implement and report on the G20 Capital Adequacy Framework (CAF) Review recommendations and related reforms.
2. Boosting joint action on climate change. MDBs are increasing their common engagement on climate. Actions include:
Continuing to align operations to the goals of the Paris Agreement and to jointly report on climate financing, as well as engaging in the UN-led process towards a new collective goal on climate finance.
Continuing to support and improve early-warning systems for natural disasters.
3. Strengthening country-level collaboration and co-financing. MDBs are engaged in discussions and supporting country-owned and country-led platforms to make it easier for countries to work with the banks. Actions include:
Assessing proposals on country-led and country-owned platforms, towards a common understanding and next steps, including for some MDBs to implement platforms.
Continue harmonizing procurement practices, including by relying on each other’s procurement policies to reduce transaction costs and increase efficiency and sustainability.
4. Catalyzing private-sector mobilization. MDBs are committed to scaling up private-sector financing for development goals, including by pursuing innovative approaches and financial instruments. Actions include:
Scaling up local-currency lending and foreign-exchange hedging solutions to boost private investment. MDBs are working to identify scalable approaches.
Expanding the type and disaggregation of the statistics that MDBs and Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) release through the Global Emerging Markets Risk Database (GEMs) Consortium, supporting investors to better assess investment risks and opportunities.
5. Enhancing development effectiveness and impact. MDBs agreed to heighten the focus on the impact of their work. Actions include:
Increasing collaboration on joint impact evaluations, including by sharing approaches to monitoring and assessing impact, and pursuing harmonization initiatives where useful.
Taking stock of the key performance indicators (KPIs) on nature and biodiversity that are currently in use and explore the feasibility of alignment of some indicators ahead of COP30 in 2025.
On the eve of the greatest Orthodox holiday of the Resurrection of Christ, wives and mothers of prisoners of war from Russia and Ukraine are asking the superiors, clergy and all believers in Orthodox countries to cooperate with the authorities for the release of their sons, brothers and husbands on the principle of “all for all”.
The initiative is the organization “Our way out” – a public movement for the return home of the military personnel of the army of the Russian Federation, created by three women: Irina Krinina, Olga Rakova and Victoria Ivleva. The first two left their homeland and settled in Ukraine to be closer to their husbands, who are in Ukrainian captivity, and the third is a journalist and human rights activist. They do not want to return to Russia because they do not agree with the government’s policy there. Now they are helping Russian mothers and women to find their husbands, working to accelerate the exchange of prisoners. “In times of war, people are measured by battalions and behind the numbers the person is not visible, and we call to raise a voice that in the eyes of God every person’s soul is important and everyone has the right to salvation and forgiveness,” it says in the appeal of “Our way out.”
Their appeal is joined by women from Ukraine, whose sons, husbands and relatives are in the terrible conditions of Russian POW camps. “This war is suffering for the mothers and women both here in Ukraine, whose sons and men die in defense of their country, it is also suffering for the women and mothers in Russia, who for some unknown reason send their sons to this terrible war,” says Olga Rakova at the presentation of their project at the end of December 2023 (here). “We can achieve a lot if we ordinary women come together,” she adds.
The last exchange of prisoners between Russia and Ukraine took place on February 8, and for now such actions have ceased. The initiators emphasize that, in general, the release of prisoners of war is a complicated and very slow process. For the various groups of prisoners, not only Ukraine and Russia, but also third countries and international organizations participate in it. As a rule, political, economic, and military motives come to the fore in these negotiations. With priority from Ukrainian captives, the Russian side releases military specialists, highly qualified officers, pilots. Russia is also making extra efforts to release soldiers recruited from prisons (so-called “prisoners”). These are criminals recruited by the Russian army straight from prison with the promise that after the contract is over they will be released without serving their sentences. They are of interest to the negotiators from Russia, because after their release from captivity they are returned to the front again. Thus, the Russian mobilized military and contract workers are left with no prospect of returning to their homeland soon.
All this creates the possibility for the existence of a huge number of fraudulent schemes with which the already stressed relatives of the captives are manipulated. The “all for all” exchange will put an end to such practices, according to “Our Exit”.
During the course of the war, the number of prisoners of war increased. Exact numbers are not reported by either side, but it is in the tens of thousands. And if Ukraine, according to “Our Way Out” and other humanitarian organizations, complies with the Geneva Convention and provides the necessary requirements for life in the camps, then Ukrainian prisoners of war are kept in appalling conditions.
Several prisoner of war exchanges have taken place at the initiative of the Roman Catholic Church, but the Orthodox Church has so far not initiated such a process.
In July 2023, Hungary launched an initiative to release Ukrainian prisoners of war of Transcarpathian Hungarian origin, in which the Order of Malta of the Roman Catholic Church and the Russian Orthodox Church participated as mediators. Prisoners of war were released from Russian camps and handed over to Hungary, and the patriarchate described its involvement as “motivated by Christian philanthropy.”
According to the women of the organization “Our Way Out”, “only the Church can bring the issue of the exchange of prisoners from the plane of statistics to a moral humanitarian discourse, when the soul of each person is important. It can also show a willingness to negotiate and overcome acrimony.”
Pope Francis heeded the plea of the “Our Way Out” movement and included in his Easter message a call for an “all for all” prisoner exchange between Russia and Ukraine.
“Our way out” believes that the Orthodox Church can and should be an important factor in the implementation of such an act. The priests, the shepherds, dedicated to the care of the human soul, know that Christian charity is above justice and can see in the captive the suffering man. On the eve of the Resurrection of Christ, they call on the local Orthodox churches to make appeals to organize an Easter general exchange of prisoners – all from one side for all from the other.
There are only two weeks left until the Orthodox Easter, in which mothers, wives and relatives of the captives on both sides hope for the compassion of people of faith who can support the appeal for their common liberation on the principle of “all for all”.
Scientists and doctors have considered red wine to be healthy for years. A study linked moderate alcohol consumption – defined as one drink or less per day for women and two or less per day for men – to a 30-40% lower death rate from heart disease in drinkers compared to non-drinkers, Forbes reports.
Red wine has become healthy because it contains not only alcohol, but also the health-enhancing antioxidants from the grape skins. One powerful antioxidant is resveratrol, which repairs damaged blood vessels, prevents blood clots and reduces inflammation. This has led experts to recommend red wine in moderation for health benefits. Wine sales have grown tremendously since the 1990s.
Now we think differently. Moderate drinkers live longer on average, but not because they drink alcohol. This is because they tend to be healthier – more active, more educated, eat better food. Early research led us to believe that moderate consumption was healthy. But here are four reasons why you shouldn’t think of red wine as healthy, even if you drink less than a glass a day.
1. Moderate alcohol consumption is associated with worse, not better, cardiovascular health A 2022 study in JAMA Network Open looked at 371,463 people in the UK and found that moderate drinking was associated with 1.3 times higher risk of high blood pressure and 1.4 times higher risk of coronary heart disease. The study took into account a person’s genetic predisposition to alcohol use, which helped overcome some limitations of earlier research.
2. Alcohol Use Increases Cancer Risk Even with Moderate Drinking Alcohol is a known carcinogen, accounting for 6% of all cancers and 4% of cancer deaths, accounting for 75,000 cancer cases and 19,000 deaths annually in the US. Alcohol increases oxidative stress and the metabolic products of alcohol, namely acetaldehyde, damage liver DNA. It also directly damages the DNA of mouth and throat cells, significantly increasing the risk of breast cancer even with moderate consumption. Women who drink three alcoholic drinks a week have a 15% higher risk of breast cancer than those who don’t drink at all.
3. Sleep quality is worsened by alcohol Alcohol is a sedative. It helps you fall asleep faster. But this negatively affects the quality of your sleep. This is often noticeable even after a few drinks. A study of 4,098 Finns found that alcohol increased stress responses and impaired recovery during the first three hours of sleep. Along with hangovers, poor sleep makes you less alert the next day.
4. It Will Take a Deadly Amount of Red Wine to Benefit from Its Antioxidants Red wine contains resveratrol. But it doesn’t contain enough of it to significantly affect your health. A study measured how much resveratrol is absorbed into the body from a glass of alcohol, as well as two other polyphenols (catechin and quercetin) that have positive effects on health. Blood concentrations of all three were found to be too low to be beneficial. To get high enough, you need to drink a large amount – gallons, in fact.
