Global Pulse

标签： North America

北美洲

  • BBC at the Clancy trial. What happens next?

    BBC at the Clancy trial. What happens next?

    The high-profile Lindsay Clancy trial has entered its seventh consecutive day of jury deliberations, with BBC journalist Ione Wells reporting live from the courthouse as the proceedings hang in the balance. After weeks of witness testimony, legal arguments, and evidence presentation, the case now rests entirely in the hands of the 12-member jury, who have been sequestered to weigh the facts and reach a unanimous verdict. For members of the public and legal observers following the closely watched proceedings, the extended deliberation period has sparked widespread questions about how the case will unfold from this point forward.

    Legal analysts note that multi-day deliberations are not uncommon in complex criminal cases, where juries must sort through volumes of evidence, conflicting witness statements, and intricate legal instructions before reaching a conclusion. An extended deliberation often signals that jurors are carefully debating the details of the case rather than rushing to a judgment, adding an extra layer of tension to the wait for a verdict. BBC’s on-the-ground coverage from the courthouse has provided real-time updates for audiences following the trial across the United Kingdom and beyond, with Wells documenting every development as the jury continues its work.

    So what potential outcomes can we expect in the coming days? If the jury reaches a unanimous verdict, the judge will formally read the decision in open court, and sentencing will be scheduled at a later date if a guilty verdict is returned. If jurors remain deadlocked and unable to reach a unanimous decision after extended deliberations, the defense and prosecution will enter a new phase of proceedings, with the judge likely to declare a mistrial and leave the door open for a potential retrial at a later date. Until the jury delivers its final decision, all parties involved remain in a holding pattern, waiting to learn the outcome of one of the most closely followed criminal trials of the year.

  • What happens if a mistrial is declared in Lindsay Clancy case?

    What happens if a mistrial is declared in Lindsay Clancy case?

    After seven days of closed-door deliberations over the fate of Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts mother accused of killing her three young children, the trial has hit an unprecedented stalemate: the 12-member jury has remained hopelessly deadlocked, leaving the presiding judge on track to formally declare a mistrial.

    Clancy, 33, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder for the 2023 deaths of her 5-year-old daughter Cora, 3-year-old son Dawson, and 8-month-old son Callan. She does not dispute that she killed the three children, but has entered a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. Her legal team argues Clancy was suffering from severe postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings, a debilitating mental health condition that erased her ability to tell right from wrong, and thus she cannot be held criminally liable for her actions. Prosecutors have pushed back fiercely against this narrative, arguing the killings were a premeditated, intentional act that meets the legal standard for first-degree murder.

    Under Massachusetts and U.S. federal legal rules, a jury must return a unanimous verdict beyond a reasonable doubt to convict or acquit a defendant in a felony murder trial. Over the course of deliberations, jurors have notified Judge William Sullivan three separate times that they are unable to reach a consensus, even after Sullivan issued a rare Tuey-Rodriguez charge – an additional set of instructions that encourages jurors to re-examine their own positions and engage openly with opposing perspectives in an effort to break the deadlock. When the panel again confirmed it could not reach an agreement, Sullivan publicly signaled he had no remaining legal option but to declare a mistrial. He has delayed the formal declaration for one hour to allow Clancy’s lead attorney, Kevin Reddington, to file an emergency appeal.

    A mistrial declaration does not equate to an acquittal, nor does it validate the prosecution’s case against Clancy; it simply ends the current trial without a formal verdict, opening the door to three distinct possible outcomes for the high-profile case, which has drawn intense national public attention over its six-week run. If a mistrial is formally entered, prosecutors can choose to dismiss the charges entirely, negotiate a plea deal with Clancy’s defense team, or request a retrial with a newly seated jury. Legal experts note that dismissal remains unlikely for a case of this severity, and most expect prosecutors to push for a new trial.

    “In serious felony cases like these, prosecutors often ask for a retrial,” explained Heather Cucolo, a New York Law School professor and leading expert in mental health law. She added, “A case like this that obviously has been so high profile, and there is so much of an emotional response to the facts of this case, I think it’s very likely that the prosecutor will ask for a retrial.”

    Until the next steps are finalized, Clancy will remain in custody at the same mental health facility where she has been held since the killings, on the original murder charges. If a retrial is scheduled, the timeline for a new proceeding will depend on multiple factors, including court availability, pre-trial motions filed by either side, and scheduling for expert witnesses, both for the prosecution and defense. The entire six-week original trial has been marked by intense public interest, with crowds regularly gathering outside the Massachusetts courthouse to follow updates.

    To protect the jury’s privacy, the identities of the nine women and three men who served on the panel have not been released to the public, and Judge Sullivan banned all photography and recording of jurors during the proceedings. Once the case concludes, however, individual jurors are free to choose whether to speak publicly about their deliberations. Past high-profile trials have seen jurors come forward to share their experiences, including through media interviews or published books, meaning details of the internal deadlock could emerge in the coming weeks.

    This case has shone a new spotlight on postpartum psychosis, a severe, rare mental health emergency that can occur in the period after childbirth. For individuals experiencing suicidal thoughts or emotional distress after childbirth, or anyone struggling with similar mental health challenges, support is available globally through Befrienders Worldwide at www.befrienders.org, and for UK residents through BBC Action Line at bbc.co.uk/actionline.

  • Hospitality and education boosts US job creation in August

    Hospitality and education boosts US job creation in August

    The U.S. labor market delivered a startling upside surprise in August, as newly released government data shows job creation far outpaced expert projections, driven by strong hiring gains in hospitality and education sectors. The world’s largest economy added 162,000 nonfarm payroll positions last month, a figure that comes in nearly three times higher than the 56,000 net new jobs that financial analysts had predicted ahead of the report.

    Preliminary data breaks down the growth to two key industries. Hiring jumped at restaurants, bars, and other food and accommodation services, a typical seasonal uptick during the final month of peak summer travel and leisure. The other major contributor was local government education, as school districts across the country bulked up their staffing ahead of the 2024–2025 academic year, which begins in late August and early September for most U.S. public schools.

    In addition to the August surprise, the Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised earlier underperforming jobs data from June and July upward. These revisions confirm that the U.S. labor market has maintained more momentum through the middle of the year than initial reports indicated, quelling earlier fears of a sharp slowdown in employment growth.

    The stronger-than-expected jobs report has already shifted market expectations for U.S. monetary policy. The Federal Reserve has been watching labor market data closely to gauge the strength of the economy and the impact of prior interest rate adjustments. Analysts now widely anticipate that the central bank will move forward with another interest rate increase at its next policy meeting scheduled for later this September, as persistent labor market strength gives policymakers room to continue tackling still-elevated inflation.

  • US diesel prices hit an all-time-high

    US diesel prices hit an all-time-high

    American drivers are now facing historic cost burdens at fuel pumps, with record-breaking diesel prices pushing household and industry expenses higher as the ongoing US-Israel conflict with Iran continues to squeeze household budgets across the nation.

    New data released by the American Automobile Association (AAA) confirms the national average price of a gallon of diesel has reached $5.85 — a dramatic jump from $3.71 just one year prior, and a new all-time high that surpasses the price spike triggered by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. This sharp upward trend began immediately after the Iran conflict escalated in late February, tracking closely with skyrocketing wholesale crude oil costs driven by supply chain disruptions.

    The root of the supply shortage traces back to movement restrictions through the Strait of Hormuz, the critical chokepoint off Iran’s southern coast that carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s daily oil trade. In response to the outbreak of war, Iran has effectively closed the waterway, cutting off a major artery for global crude supplies and sending market prices soaring.

    To address voter anger over rising fuel costs, US President Donald Trump has announced a new energy agreement with Venezuela, which the US invaded in January, promising the deal will deliver substantial relief for American consumers at the pump. Under the terms of the deal, revealed Saturday, 17 strategic Venezuelan oil fields holding 65 billion barrels of proven oil reserves will be opened for development. Interim Venezuelan President Delcy Rodríguez states the project will bring more than $100 billion in direct investment to Venezuela, plus an additional $209 billion in tax revenue over the lifespan of the project. A senior US official confirmed to CBS News, the BBC’s US partner, that the US government will hold a 55% controlling stake in the joint venture, which will be operated by an experienced private sector partner with existing operations in Venezuela.

    Despite the optimistic framing from the White House, energy analysts have voiced significant skepticism about the deal’s ability to lower fuel prices quickly or resolve longstanding challenges that have blocked large-scale investment in Venezuela’s oil sector for decades. Many question whether the agreement can overcome years of underinvestment, regulatory uncertainty, and infrastructure decay that have kept Venezuelan oil production far below its potential.

    The skyrocketing fuel costs have already had a major political impact, with just months to go before November’s critical midterm elections. Rising prices at the pump have fueled widespread frustration among US voters, and recent Reuters/Ipsos polling reflects this discontent: President Trump’s national approval rating has dropped to just 33%, and only 31% of American adults express support for his handling of the Iran conflict.

    Price hikes are not evenly distributed across the country, AAA data shows. Drivers in Western US states face far steeper costs than consumers in other regions, a gap driven by differing state fuel taxes and longer transportation distances from major domestic oil production hubs. For example, Washington state currently boasts the highest average diesel price in the nation at $6.81 per gallon, up from $5.03 per gallon just 12 months ago. Diesel is not the only fuel hitting American pocketbooks: average national gasoline prices have also climbed to a historic $4.15 per gallon, up from $3.20 a year ago, pushing up costs for personal travel and goods transportation across every sector of the economy.

  • How could US-Iran conflict end? Three experts give their views

    How could US-Iran conflict end? Three experts give their views

    After seven months of open conflict between the United States and Iran, hopes for an immediate breakthrough peace deal have once again faded, as both sides exchange targeted strikes and dig in with uncompromising public rhetoric. The latest escalation comes just days after Washington announced a sweeping new phase of its campaign: a total economic blockade designed to punish not only Iran but also any third-party nations that continue to conduct trade with Tehran.

    The core goal of this new pressure campaign, US officials say, is to force Iran back to the negotiating table and end its repeated disruptions to commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint that has been effectively closed to large-scale commercial traffic since the conflict began between the US, Israel and Iran in February. The June Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), a tentative framework negotiated by both sides that was supposed to lead to a permanent ceasefire and full peace agreement within 60 days, officially expired at the end of August without any progress toward its stated goals.

    To unpack the current stalemate and the potential trajectory of the conflict, three leading regional security experts from major international think tanks shared their analysis of the shifting dynamics on and off the battlefield.

    Jason Campbell, a Senior Fellow at the Washington DC-based Middle East Institute, argues that the biggest source of ongoing uncertainty is the lack of clear, fixed US strategic goals for the conflict. “The White House is constantly re-evaluating what political outcomes it is willing to accept,” Campbell explained. Early planning assumed that limited military action would deliver a quick US victory, but that assumption has failed to materialize, leading the US to test a mix of military pressure and economic coercion.

    Currently, Campbell says the Biden administration appears comfortable with a state of controlled stasis: maintaining the broad economic blockade while carrying out periodic targeted strikes to limit Iran’s ability to disrupt shipping through the strait. US officials are betting that the new round of harsh sanctions will weaken Tehran’s position enough to force it back to negotiations on US terms. In recent weeks, US forces have managed to open a limited shipping channel through the strait, enough to avoid a catastrophic global oil price spike or broader economic collapse, but these incremental gains fall far short of the original US objectives when the conflict launched. For Campbell, the most likely outcome is that Iran will demand major concessions to reach a deal, terms that will remain politically unacceptable for the current US administration.

    Dr. Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, an Associate Fellow with Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa Programme in London, says the latest US strikes and sanctions have not changed Iran’s core calculations about the conflict. “Tehran is already preparing for tighter economic pressure and a continuation of the sporadic on-off attacks we have seen over the past two months,” Tabrizi noted. Iran’s strategy remains to respond to US attacks in a proportionate way, avoiding actions that would trigger a full-scale regional war while refusing to back down.

    The new economic squeeze will undoubtedly deepen harm to Iran’s economy, which has already been battered by months of conflict and has long struggled with deep structural problems — instability that was already visible in large-scale anti-government demonstrations in December and January earlier this year. Even so, Tabrizi says there is no indication that economic pressure will push Iran’s leadership to change its position or make concessions at the negotiating table any time soon. That does not mean Tehran has ruled out a path to de-escalation, but rather that it is waiting for the US to return to the terms of the June MoU or offer concrete concessions of its own. “Tehran does not want to cave in to US pressure or alter its own approach in response to sanctions or additional attacks,” Tabrizi added.

    Nicholas Hopton, a Distinguished Fellow in international security at the Royal United Services Institute in London and former UK ambassador to Iran, argues that the latest escalation of military action will not force Iran to surrender, and economic pressure is unlikely to work as intended. That is because major trade partners of Iran including China and Russia refuse to back Washington’s unilateral sanctions, allowing Tehran to maintain critical economic ties even under the blockade. “Iran can continue to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz — they have a thumb on the jugular of the global economy,” Hopton noted.

    When it comes to the question of the White House’s exit strategy, Hopton argues the framework for a solution already exists in the June MoU. If Washington returns to negotiate the full deal outlined in that agreement, it would deliver what the US frames as a victory: weakening hardline factions within Iran’s Islamic Republic and creating international guarantees that Tehran will not develop a nuclear weapon. The core provision of the MoU — lifting all US sanctions on Iran — would over time weaken the influence of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp (IRGC), which dominates large swathes of Iran’s economy. Opening Iran to broad new global economic engagement would gradually drive radical political and social change, resulting in an Islamic regime that is fundamentally different in its approach and priorities, Hopton explained.

    Reaching that outcome will not be easy, however, given the IRGC’s deep penetration of Iran’s economy. It would also require significant strategic patience from the US and its partners, a commodity that is in very short supply at this stage of the conflict. “For the time being, I think we’re going to carry on with a messy, inconclusive situation that is bad for everyone,” Hopton concluded.

  • 100 influencers invited to US Open spark debate on ‘tennis etiquette’

    100 influencers invited to US Open spark debate on ‘tennis etiquette’

    The US Open, one of tennis’ four prestigious Grand Slam tournaments, is facing a growing debate centered on a major shift to expand its audience reach: doubling the number of accredited influencers and content creators for this year’s New York event. The move, designed to introduce tennis to younger, digitally native audiences, has ignited discussion over how to grow the sport without compromising its long-held, unwritten etiquette rules that govern both player and fan behavior.

    Tennis has always relied on a foundation of quiet decorum during active play, a core norm that sets it apart from many other professional sports. For spectators, the expectation is simple: avoid disrupting players mid-point, a rule that reflects respect for the intensity and focus required to compete at the highest level. This year, the US Open’s decision to grant press-level accreditation to roughly 100 digital creators – twice the number invited in 2025 – as part of its broader push to turn the event into a fan-focused “tennis Disneyland” has tested that norm.

    Tension boiled over during two-time US Open champion Naomi Osaka’s opening round match on the main court at Arthur Ashe Stadium, the world’s largest tennis venue with a capacity of more than 23,000. A group of content creators set up a portable ring light for a photoshoot in their hospitality suite while Osaka was in the middle of serving, prompting an official reprimand from the chair umpire. A viral video captured the same group talking loudly while filming content during active play, forcing the umpire to publicly call for them to stop. When Osaka returned to the court for her second-round match Thursday, the umpire was forced to repeat calls for crowd silence multiple times – a frequency Osaka said she had never experienced before.

    “I tell people I normally just focus on the match and the court, but there was a moment where there was people shouting and you could hear it quite clearly,” Osaka told reporters after the match. “I think it bothered my opponent, too.”

    The four-time Grand Slam champion echoed a common middle ground held by many players, acknowledging that influencer outreach can help grow the sport, but calling for stricter management of fan and creator behavior. “It could be a good thing for people to make the sport of tennis popular to their specific audience, but I think it has to be managed a lot better, especially in the situation like my first-round match,” she said. “Overall, I think there are huge positives. You want people to continue to grow the sport. I just think it has to be in a way that everyone knows the rules and the etiquette.”

    That sentiment was echoed by American world No. 3 Jessica Pegula, who described some disruptive behavior as outright “disrespectful.” “I can appreciate the influencers coming and showcasing the US Open experience,” Pegula said. “But I do think that it’s tough when you see videos when they’re taking pictures and using the selfie lights. People are down there trying to perform. It’s their career and their job. It seems a bit disrespectful. I think it’s become a little too much this year.”

    Coco Gauff, the world No. 4 who has become one of the sport’s biggest young stars, framed the expectation as a simple matter of following event norms. “I definitely think it’s cool to have a new demographic and I definitely think it helps grow the sport,” Gauff said. “But if you’re being invited to a red carpet, you wouldn’t show up in jeans. I think it’s just follow the etiquette of the sport. That’s all.”

    Not all players have pushed back on the expanded influencer policy, however. Many veteran competitors have embraced the push to expand tennis’ reach, arguing that growing the fan base outweighs growing pains. Men’s seventh seed Daniil Medvedev, who has had a complicated relationship with New York crowds in the past, said he supports the US Tennis Association’s (USTA) new approach. “I think the more we try to raise awareness about tennis, the better it is, the more popular the sport is,” Medvedev said. “The more the sport grows, the better it is. I trust USTA with what they are doing. I think [there is] a lot more upside than downside, so go for it.”

    American 11th seed Frances Tiafoe echoed that optimism, praising the US Open for welcoming a diverse mix of attendees. “I think the Open is great because you get all types of people that want to come and watch tennis,” he said. “All different walks of life, different types of people, different type of occupations. Personally, I love that. I have no problem with anybody doing anything, coming to watch the tennis.”

    The expanded influencer accreditation is just one part of a years-long series of overhauls the US Open has rolled out to rebrand itself as a more accessible, fan-friendly event. In 2024, the tournament introduced free fan movement, allowing spectators to take their seats at any time rather than waiting for changeovers. The following year, it expanded the tournament to 15 days, adding a “Fan Week” before the main singles draw that features revamped mixed doubles competition and exhibition matches with retired and current stars. Tournament chief executive Craig Tiley has publicly framed these changes as part of a goal to create “the tennis Disneyland” that draws casual and hardcore fans alike.

    Speaking ahead of the tournament, Tiley defended the creator credential program as a necessary adaptation to modern media consumption. “We need to find ways of reaching new audiences, reaching people in a way that they connect with media today,” he said. “The creation of the creator credential has been a key part of that because it’s enabled us to talk to people in a way that they’re listening. That’s been a big focus.”

    In the wake of the high-profile disruption during Osaka’s opening match, tournament organizers have already stepped up efforts to reinforce etiquette rules. Digital screens across the Arthur Ashe Stadium complex now display frequent reminders asking attendees to “refrain from any activity that could disrupt the game, including noise levels, flash photography and ring lights.”

    In a formal statement, the USTA reiterated its commitment to balancing growth and respect for competition. “The USTA is always striving to grow tennis in this country and bring new audiences into the sport,” the organization said. “We want all of our fans and guests to have an incredible time when they attend, but we also need to ensure they do not interfere with the action and competition on the court. We are continually looking for ways to ensure fans in the stands know what is permitted and what is prohibited.”

  • Watch: Inside court as Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer asks judge to remove juror

    Watch: Inside court as Lindsay Clancy’s lawyer asks judge to remove juror

    The high-profile triple-murder trial of Lindsay Clancy has reached a critical juncture, as the defendant’s legal team made a notable courtroom request to remove one seated juror from the panel. On-record footage captured the in-court proceeding where Clancy’s defense lawyer formally presented the motion to the presiding judge, marking a new development in a case that has drawn widespread public attention.

    Following the submission of the motion, the jury has now moved into its seventh consecutive day of closed-door deliberations, as panelists continue weighing evidence and testimony to reach a unanimous verdict in the killings of three young children. Court observers note that the extended deliberation period signals the complexity of the case and the seriousness with which jurors are approaching their decision-making responsibility. No immediate ruling on the defense’s juror removal request has been reported as of the latest updates from the courthouse.

  • Tensions flare as judge declines to remove holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial

    Tensions flare as judge declines to remove holdout juror in Lindsay Clancy trial

    One of the most emotionally charged criminal trials in recent U.S. history has hit a new impasse, as a Massachusetts judge has refused to dismiss a holdout juror who stands accused of ignoring binding court instructions on the legal standard of reasonable doubt. The case, which has captured national public attention, centers on 36-year-old Lindsay Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse who faces three counts of first-degree murder for the deaths of her three young children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 8-month-old Callan — at the family’s Massachusetts home in January 2023.

    Clancy does not dispute that she strangled her children in the family home’s basement, but her legal team has mounted an insanity defense, arguing she was experiencing severe postpartum psychosis at the time of the killings and was unable to discern right from wrong. Clancy herself was left paralyzed from the waist down after jumping from a second-floor window of her home immediately following the deaths, and she has attended recent court proceedings from a wheelchair.

    After six days of deliberations spanning roughly 35 hours, the nine-woman, three-man jury remains deadlocked, marking the third time the panel has notified the court of its inability to reach the required unanimous verdict. What makes this latest development unprecedented in the trial is the open division among jurors: the jury forewoman submitted a formal note to presiding Judge William Sullivan alleging that one member of the panel refused to follow the court’s written and verbal instructions on reasonable doubt, the strictest standard of proof in the U.S. legal system.

    This revelation sparked tense, dramatic exchanges in the Plymouth courtroom. Clancy’s lead defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, immediately filed a motion to dismiss the holdout juror, arguing that a juror who refuses to abide by the court’s legal instructions cannot fairly participate in deliberations. The prosecution, led by assistant district attorney Jennifer Sprague, pushed back against the request, setting off an animated sidebar discussion between the two legal teams and the judge that was not audible to reporters present. Court observers noted clear exasperation in Reddington’s body language and facial expressions throughout the exchange.

    Judge Sullivan opted to interview each juror individually to assess the situation before issuing his ruling, reminding the entire panel after the private questioning that a unanimous guilty verdict can only be handed down if every member of the jury believes the prosecution has proven Clancy’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In the end, the judge ruled that the holdout juror would remain on the panel, stating that it would be inappropriate for the court to insert itself into the internal dynamics of jury deliberations by taking sides in the deadlock.

    Following the ruling, Reddington appeared visibly frustrated and upset, and reporters observed him consoling Clancy, wrapping an arm around her as the court adjourned. Speaking to reporters after the session, Reddington confirmed that his motion to remove the non-compliant juror had been denied, and declined to confirm an 11-1 split reported by the jury forewoman, saying he had no insight into the lone juror’s specific position. Prosecutor Sprague, for her part, endorsed Judge Sullivan’s decision, noting that the court has no way to evaluate the substance of internal juror deliberations, nor should it attempt to do so.

    The court is scheduled to revisit the deadlock issue first thing Friday morning. If the jury ultimately fails to reach a unanimous verdict, Judge Sullivan will be required to declare a mistrial, leaving prosecutors to decide whether to pursue a second trial against Clancy. A conviction on the first-degree murder charges would result in an automatic sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. If the jury accepts Clancy’s defense and finds her not guilty by reason of insanity or lack of criminal responsibility, she would instead be committed to a state psychiatric facility for treatment.

    This case has drawn widespread public attention for its devastating context, shining a new light on the risks and impacts of severe postpartum mental illness in the United States. For anyone experiencing emotional distress or suicidal thoughts, support is available through global mental health organizations including Befrienders Worldwide, with additional resources listed for UK residents on the BBC Action Line.

  • Transplanted pig kidney works in US man’s body for record 271 days

    Transplanted pig kidney works in US man’s body for record 271 days

    A groundbreaking development in organ transplantation has set a new record: a kidney harvested from a genetically modified pig has functioned normally in a human patient for 271 days, the longest successful duration ever recorded for this experimental procedure, according to medical teams at Mass General Brigham in the United States. The case, recently published in the *Lancet* medical journal, offers a glimmer of hope amid a persistent global crisis of organ donor shortages that leaves thousands of patients waiting for life-saving treatment every year.

    The recipient of the experimental transplant was 66-year-old Tim Andrews, who was living with end-stage kidney disease caused by type 2 diabetes. Like thousands of patients across the United States and the United Kingdom, Andrews faced a years-long wait for a human donor kidney. He was told it could take up to seven years to reach the top of the transplant waiting list, while the average life expectancy for a patient on long-term dialysis is just five years. “I had a little bit of a shortage of time… it becomes very depressing,” Andrews recalled of his ordeal before the procedure. When offered the option of a pig kidney xenotransplant—an organ sourced from another species—he described the opportunity as “hope” and the “light at the end of the tunnel.”

    The transplant was performed on January 25, 2025. From the moment surgeons connected the pig kidney to Andrews’ blood vessels, the organ began working to filter his blood, eliminating the immediate need for regular, time-consuming dialysis appointments that had upended his daily life. The pig kidney continued to function without critical failure for 271 days, a new global benchmark for the field of xenotransplantation. Although early signs of immune rejection were detected, clinicians successfully managed the reaction by adjusting Andrews’ immunosuppressant medication. Eventually, after approximately six months, the pig kidney began to fail as inflammation developed and damage accumulated in its blood vessels. It was removed in October 2025, after which Andrews returned to short-term dialysis for 82 days. In January 2026, he received a donor human kidney, which has continued to function well as of the latest clinical updates.

    Notably, clinicians report that the pig kidney’s failure was not triggered by the acute antibody-mediated immune rejection that has doomed early xenotransplant attempts. The exact cause of the organ’s decline remains under investigation, marking a key area for future research.

    Pigs have long been identified as the most promising candidate species for human xenotransplantation: their organs are roughly the same size as human organs, and controlled farming of pigs for medical use has been refined over decades of research. However, using unmodified pig organs in humans triggers an immediate, devastating immune response, where the body identifies the foreign tissue and launches an attack that destroys the organ within minutes. To overcome this barrier, researchers developed genetically modified Yucatan miniature pigs, with 69 genomic edits designed to “humanize” their organs:
    – These edits remove molecular markers on pig cells that the human immune system recognizes as foreign
    – They add human genetic material that acts as biological camouflage, hiding the pig tissue from immune detection
    – Additional modifications disable endogenous retroviruses embedded in pig DNA, eliminating the risk of cross-species viral infection

    Mass General Brigham’s transplant team emphasizes that their successful 271-day outcome proves that genetically modified pig kidneys can act as a life-saving “bridge” for patients waiting for a human donor organ. For patients like Andrews, this bridge means freedom from the relentless cycle of dialysis while they wait, and a far higher chance of surviving long enough to receive a permanent human transplant.

    Dr. Leonardo Riella, from the center for transplantation sciences at Mass General Brigham, framed the ongoing organ shortage as a public health crisis. “We are working really hard to bring hope and we truly feel that xenotransplantation can be an alternative for patients who don’t have a living donor where we could potentially bypass dialysis and get them to a transplant,” he said.

    g the milestone, the research team’s published analysis acknowledges that the case highlights both the enormous promise of xenotransplantation and the critical challenges that remain to be solved before the procedure can become widely available to patients in need. Across the globe, 100,000 people are currently waiting for a kidney transplant in the U.S. alone, with only around 25,000 transplants performed annually. More than 7,000 patients are on the UK’s kidney waiting list, making the search for alternative organ sources a pressing public health priority.

  • US investigating if missile hit Iran wedding, Vance says

    US investigating if missile hit Iran wedding, Vance says

    Tensions between the United States and Iran have spiked once again following allegations that a recent US missile strike in southern Iran killed multiple civilians, including two children, at a residential wedding ceremony. US Vice President JD Vance has publicly stated he remains “extremely skeptical” of the Iranian claims, while confirming that US military officials have launched a formal investigation into the incident.

    According to the Iranian Red Crescent Society (IRCS), a humanitarian organization operating in the country, shrapnel from an incoming missile struck a private home hosting a wedding in the town of Sirik on Tuesday. The group reported that at least four people were killed immediately in the strike, and an additional 67 people were injured. Iranian state media later updated the casualty count, noting that a 22-year-old woman succumbed to her injuries shortly after being admitted to a local hospital. The five deceased victims have been publicly identified by local sources as 50-year-old Zarkhatoon Taheri, 43-year-old Kolsum Mallahi Nazhdnia, 16-year-old Mohammad Mallahi, and 4-year-old Amirali Karimi. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei has condemned the incident as a deliberate “war crime.”

    The strike was alleged to have occurred the same day that the US launched missile strikes against Iranian targets in retaliation for what US officials described as “attempted attacks” by Iran against American military personnel deployed in the region. A spokesperson for US Central Command has pushed back against the civilian casualty claims, asserting that the US military “never targets civilians” in its operations.

    Speaking during a White House press briefing on Thursday, Vance cast doubt on the accuracy of the Iranian reporting on the incident. “I will say that the Iranian state media has not been a very good scribe about what’s happened in the conflict thus far. So I’m extremely sceptical of this,” Vance told reporters, adding “I know that we’re investigating.”

    Independent analysis by BBC Verify has corroborated key parts of the Iranian account of the incident. The verification team confirmed that a video and two photographs captured on Tuesday near the coast of Kuhestak clearly show a destroyed telecommunications tower, with additional footage showing severely damaged residential structures approximately 130 meters (427 feet) north of the destroyed tower. Forensic analysis by BBC Persian found that the wedding-hosting home was located roughly 112 meters (367 feet) from the targeted telecommunications tower, placing the civilian gathering within the blast range of the strike.

    In response to the alleged wedding strike, Iran has launched fresh retaliatory attacks targeting US military bases located in Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, further escalating a months-long active conflict that began when the US and Israel launched a joint military offensive against Iran on February 28. This escalation marks a sharp worsening of already strained relations between Washington and Tehran, with both sides now bracing for further confrontations in the coming days.