'Dangerous climate breakdown' warning as hottest January on record shocks scientists
Last month was the warmest January on record, according to new data.
The finding has baffled scientists, who had expected changes in ocean currents in the Pacific to take the edge off .
Figures released by the European Copernicus climate service show average temperatures around the world in January were 1.75C warmer than before greenhouse gas emissions started to rise significantly in the industrial revolution around 150 years ago.
That's 0.1C above . And it comes after a year in which , the target for climate negotiations, for the first time.
Dr Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London, warned that the rising pace of would increase the risk of extreme weather and its consequences.
"This January is the hottest on record because countries are still burning huge amounts of oil, gas and coal," she said.
"The Los Angeles wildfires were a stark reminder that we have already reached an incredibly dangerous level of warming. We'll see many more unprecedented extreme weather events in 2025."
Read more:
January had been expected to be slightly cooler than last year because of a natural shift in weather patterns and ocean currents in the Pacific, called La Nina.
But that hasn't been enough to slow the upward trend in temperatures.
'Frankly terrifying'
Bill McGuire, emeritus professor of geophysical & climate hazards at UCL, said: "The fact that the latest robust Copernicus data reveals the January just gone was the hottest on record - despite an emerging La Nina, which typically has a cooling effect - is both astonishing and, frankly terrifying.
"Having crashed through the 1.5C limit in 2024, the climate is showing no signs of wanting to dip under it again, reflected by the fact that this is the 18th of the last 19 months to see the global temperature rise since pre-industrial times top 1.5C.
"On the basis of the Valencia floods and apocalyptic LA wildfires, I don't think there can be any doubt that dangerous, all-pervasive, climate breakdown has arrived."
Read more from Sky News:
The , with more intense rainfall increasing the risk of surface flooding.
The Environment Agency released figures in December showing 4.6 million properties in England are at risk from flooding as drainage systems are overwhelmed by rainfall. That's a 43% increase on previous estimates.
But adapting to a climate change is hugely expensive.
The government on Wednesday announced it would spend £2.65bn over two years to shore up existing flood defences and protect an extra 52,000 homes and businesses - a tiny fraction of the number at risk.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
4 days ago
- Medscape
Diabetes Status May Not Affect Outcomes of Preventive PCI
The PREVENT trial found preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) combined with optimal medical therapy was more effective than medical therapy alone in reducing major adverse cardiac events in patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable plaques. The new analysis found patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable plaques had similar 2-year cardiac outcomes regardless of diabetes status, but those who received preventive PCI combined with optimal medical therapy had lower rates of cardiac events than those who received medical therapy alone. METHODOLOGY: The post hoc analysis of the PREVENT data compared the clinical outcomes of preventive PCI plus optimal medical therapy and medical therapy alone in patients with (n = 490) or without (n = 1116) diabetes. Plaques were defined as non–flow-limiting when the fractional flow reserve was > 0.80; vulnerable plaques were identified using intracoronary imaging. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina at 2 years after randomization; the median follow-up duration was 4.3 years. TAKEAWAY: At 2 years, the incidence of the composite primary endpoint was not significantly different between patients with diabetes and those without the condition (1.8% and 1.9%, respectively; P = .956). = .956). The composite primary endpoint occurred less frequently with preventive PCI than with optimal medical therapy alone for both patients with diabetes (0% vs 3.7%; log-rank P = .003) and those without diabetes (0.5% vs 3.2%; log-rank P < .001). = .003) and those without diabetes (0.5% vs 3.2%; log-rank < .001). The reduced incidence of the primary endpoint with preventive PCI was mainly driven by reduced rates of ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization and hospitalizations for unstable or progressive angina in both patients with diabetes and those without the disorder. IN PRACTICE: 'These findings support that preventive PCI…irrespective of diabetes status, in patients with non–flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques,' the researchers wrote. Vulnerable plaques 'may be guilty by association but may not be the sole culprit behind residual cardiovascular risk,' wrote Diana A. Gorog, MD, PhD, of Imperial College London, London, England, in an editorial accompanying the journal article. Such plaques 'may be just one marker of a vulnerable patient, but not the only determinant of risk. Perhaps we need to find better ways of identifying the vulnerable patient, rather than focusing solely on vulnerable plaques,' Gorog added. SOURCE: This study was led by Min Chul Kim of Chonnam National University Hospital in Gwangju, South Korea. It was originally presented at American College of Cardiology (ACC) Scientific Session 2024 and was published online on May 29, 2025, in European Heart Journal . LIMITATIONS: The clinical outcomes were exploratory as the study was powered only for the composite primary endpoint, with event rates lower than anticipated. The researchers did not differentiate between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, which might have limited the generalizability of the findings. Intravascular imaging at follow-up was not performed routinely. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by the CardioVascular Research Foundation, Abbott, Yuhan Corp, CAH-Cordis, Philips, and Infraredx. Several authors reported receiving research grants, consulting fees, and honoraria from various pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, including the funding agencies.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
First bacteria we ever meet can keep us out of hospital
The first bacteria our bodies meet – in the hours after we're born – could protect us from dangerous infections, UK scientists say. They have shown, for the first time, that good bacteria seem to halve the risk of young children being admitted to hospital with lung infections. The researchers said it was a "phenomenal" finding and could lead to therapies that boost good bacteria in babies. Our early encounters with microbes are thought to be crucial in how our immune system develops. We come out of the womb sterile, but this doesn't last for long. All the nooks and crannies of the human body become home to a world of microbial life, known as the microbiome. More than half your body is not human Microbiome podcast: The Second Genome Researchers at University College London and the Sanger Institute investigated the earliest stages in our body's colonisation by bacteria, fungi and more. They collected stool samples from 1,082 newborns in the first week of life. The team then performed a massive genetic analysis on all the DNA in the samples to work out exactly which species were present and how common they were in each child. They then tracked what happened to those babies, using hospital data, for the next two years. One particular early inhabitant of the human body, Bifidobacterium longum, seemed to have a protective effect. Only 4% of babies with this species would spend a night in hospital with a lung infection over the next two years. Babies with different starter-bacteria were two-to-three times more likely to need to stay in hospital. It is the first data to show the formation of the microbiome affects the risk of infection. "I think it's really phenomenal. It's amazing to be able to show this. I'm excited," Prof Nigel Field, from UCL, told the BBC. The most likely culprit for children ending up in hospital is respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), but what joins the dots between this and B. longum? That is the "million dollar question" for Prof Field. We know B. longum starts off digesting breast milk which both contains food for the baby and encourages good bacteria. The exact details have not yet been worked out, but either the bacteria themselves or the compounds they make by digesting food are interacting with the immune system "and are influencing the way in which the immune system matures and is able to recognise friend from foe," according to Prof Field. The protective bacteria were found only in babies that came into the world via a vaginal delivery rather than a caesarean. Even then they were not discovered after every vaginal delivery. The researchers say their findings do not justify the practice of vaginal seeding, where some new parents smear babies with a swab taken from the vagina. How method of birth alters babies' bacteria The good bacteria seem to be coming from the end of the mother's digestive system, an idea known in the field as the "first lick". "I feel pretty confident in saying that vaginal seeding is not a good thing," said Prof Field. However, the long-term ambition is to come up with microbial therapies – like a probiotic yogurt – that could be given to babies to set their microbiomes on a healthy path. Prof Louise Kenny, from the University of Liverpool and a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist, said: "A caesarean section is often a life-saving procedure, and can be the right choice for a woman and her baby." She said that while the benefit was seen only in babies born vaginally, it was not in every child born that way so "further research is needed to create a full, nuanced picture".
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
First bacteria we ever meet can keep us out of hospital
The first bacteria our bodies meet – in the hours after we're born – could protect us from dangerous infections, UK scientists say. They have shown, for the first time, that good bacteria seem to halve the risk of young children being admitted to hospital with lung infections. The researchers said it was a "phenomenal" finding and could lead to therapies that boost good bacteria in babies. Our early encounters with microbes are thought to be crucial in how our immune system develops. We come out of the womb sterile, but this doesn't last for long. All the nooks and crannies of the human body become home to a world of microbial life, known as the microbiome. More than half your body is not human Microbiome podcast: The Second Genome Researchers at University College London and the Sanger Institute investigated the earliest stages in our body's colonisation by bacteria, fungi and more. They collected stool samples from 1,082 newborns in the first week of life. The team then performed a massive genetic analysis on all the DNA in the samples to work out exactly which species were present and how common they were in each child. They then tracked what happened to those babies, using hospital data, for the next two years. One particular early inhabitant of the human body, Bifidobacterium longum, seemed to have a protective effect. Only 4% of babies with this species would spend a night in hospital with a lung infection over the next two years. Babies with different starter-bacteria were two-to-three times more likely to need to stay in hospital. It is the first data to show the formation of the microbiome affects the risk of infection. "I think it's really phenomenal. It's amazing to be able to show this. I'm excited," Prof Nigel Field, from UCL, told the BBC. The most likely culprit for children ending up in hospital is respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), but what joins the dots between this and B. longum? That is the "million dollar question" for Prof Field. We know B. longum starts off digesting breast milk which both contains food for the baby and encourages good bacteria. The exact details have not yet been worked out, but either the bacteria themselves or the compounds they make by digesting food are interacting with the immune system "and are influencing the way in which the immune system matures and is able to recognise friend from foe," according to Prof Field. The protective bacteria were found only in babies that came into the world via a vaginal delivery rather than a caesarean. Even then they were not discovered after every vaginal delivery. The researchers say their findings do not justify the practice of vaginal seeding, where some new parents smear babies with a swab taken from the vagina. How method of birth alters babies' bacteria The good bacteria seem to be coming from the end of the mother's digestive system, an idea known in the field as the "first lick". "I feel pretty confident in saying that vaginal seeding is not a good thing," said Prof Field. However, the long-term ambition is to come up with microbial therapies – like a probiotic yogurt – that could be given to babies to set their microbiomes on a healthy path. Prof Louise Kenny, from the University of Liverpool and a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist, said: "A caesarean section is often a life-saving procedure, and can be the right choice for a woman and her baby." She said that while the benefit was seen only in babies born vaginally, it was not in every child born that way so "further research is needed to create a full, nuanced picture".
