Monday 6th April 2026
Blog Page 477

Local councillor appears to insult cyclists

0

Liam Walker, an Oxfordshire councillor for transport, became subject to scrutiny last week after responding to a tweet insulting cyclists. There has since been a formal complaint against Walker, which is under investigation by the Oxfordshire County Council. 

The tweet came in response to a suggestion from the Twitter account Build Back Better Ox, which cited superior infrastructure as the best means of improving cycling capacity in Oxfordshire and linked to a YouTube video demonstrating the efficiency of the Dutch system. 

A Twitter user replied to the post, suggesting that cyclists who praise the Netherlands for its attitude to cycling should simply relocate there, to which the councillor replied that it was “well put”. This tweet met was met with widespread negative reactions from local cyclists and residents, among these being Green Party councillor Dick Wolff’s letter calling for the councillor to be dismissed. 

Both the tweet and Walker’s reply have since been deleted. In an article by the BBC, Walker is quoted as saying that he “implied [he] agreed with the view” that people who supported a “pro-bicycle” outlook should move to the Netherlands, and states that it was “a tongue-in-cheek-comment”.

Mr Walker has also stated that he is “sorry if anyone was offended” and denied that he was attempting to discourage people from adopting more sustainable transport methods. He has also addressed the resignation of former Oxfordshire cycling champion Suzanne Bartington, calling it “a great shame” and promising that active transport remains on the council’s agenda.

Image Credit: Tejvan Pettinger.

Local residents campaign against St John’s quarry plans

0

For the past five years, residents of Barford have protested a county council minerals plan that would lead to a large sand and gravel quarry to be built on the edge of their village. The land it would be constructed on is part of the assets of St John’s College.

Protestors argue that the quarry would contradict claims that St John’s “takes every opportunity to reduce its environmental impact”, as published on their website.  

Matt Western, MP for Warwick and Leamington, has stated that his belief that “the proposed quarry has wide-reaching negative implications for public health and environmental protections.” He has further said that this specific quarry “is the only site in the minerals plan in such close proximity to a residential area, and it simply isn’t needed” claiming that the site was proposed on predictions of overinflated figures for housing demand. He has supported the Barford campaign for an extended period, securing a debate in parliament and presenting a petition urging the government to intervene and halt the proposals. 

Those protesting argue that the construction of this quarry could expose 1,500 villagers and 200 primary and nursery school children to toxic particulate dust, causing permanent damage to their lungs. The building of the quarry would also destroy the high-quality agricultural land. 

Charlotte Morgan, Oxford University alumna and committee member of Barford Residents Association, said: “The college says it does all it can for the environment, but this is a huge site, with top grade of agricultural land, growing four different crops of vegetables a year. If the quarry goes ahead it will never be restored.”

St John’s College released a statement concerning their involvement: “As a registered charity and landowner, we have an obligation and responsibility to both the local community and county to respond to a request for sites, via our appointed agents, to be considered to provide sand and gravel for the district councils to build homes for those people needing homes in the future.”

A committee member, Malcolm Eykyn said: “We have worked tirelessly for the last five years raising awareness about the proposed quarry threat as well as raising substantial funds to help fight our cause.” The villagers raised £15,000 in vital funds in less than two weeks during March, in order to provide professional advice to prepare the best case to take to the inspector in a meeting held last Tuesday. 

Last Tuesday, in one of the final rounds of the decision being made, government inspector, Stephen Normington, heard both sides of the argument, attempting to resolve the ongoing dispute. While a final decision remains to be made, he has stated that “without prejudice to my eventual conclusion on the soundness of the Plan, the concerns raised by participants do appear to have some degree of basis”.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Oxford expected to get $100m from vaccine

Oxford stands to make over $100 million from developing a successful COVID-19 vaccine.

The University has landed a 6% stake profits from its partnership with AstraZeneca, according to reports in the Wall Street Journal.

As part of the deal with the company, the vaccine will be sold without profit during the pandemic. However, if the vaccine is needed subsequently during seasonal returns of the virus, the deal could be worth hundreds of millions of pounds to the University.

Oxford has said that any profits will be reinvested into medical research, including the University’s new Pandemic Preparedness and Vaccine Research Centre. The centre is being developed alongside AstraZeneca.

Oxford’s leadership acknowledged the importance of profiting from its scientific achievements.

Sir John Bell, regius professor of medicine at Oxford, said that if Oxford did not have a stake in the vaccine, “people are going to come back and say, ‘Oh my God, another British university inventing something worth a ton of money, and guess what, they gave it away for free’.”

“The University didn’t enter this discussion with the idea of making a ton of money. Let’s say [the vaccine] becomes a seasonal coronavirus vaccine, and it sells a billion dollars a year. For us to be sitting there and making no money looks pretty dumb.”

Vice-chancellor Louise Richardson added that Oxford “could have funded an awful lot of medical research since the Second World War”, if it had kept the rights to penicillin last century.

The University began to look for a commercial partner after realising it may struggle to distribute and manufacture the vaccine.

Professor Bell said: “We were headed into the jungle without a machete. We happen to be a rather good university, but universities don’t’ do this stuff.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that Oxford closed talks with the pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. after concerns that it could not provide the vaccine to poorer countries. Merck offered Oxford 1% in royalties.

The University then turned to UK company AstraZeneca to help manufacture and distribute the vaccine. As part of the deal, the company committed to providing global distribution which did not favour any one country.

A University statement in April, when the deal was reached, said: “Under the new agreement, as well as providing UK access as early as possible if the vaccine candidate is successful, AstraZeneca will work with global partners on the international distribution of the vaccine, particularly working to make it available and accessible for low and medium income countries.”

The University collaborated with its spinout company Vaccitech to develop the vaccine. Oxford holds a stake in Vaccitech, which was founded in 2016 as part of efforts to make University research more commercially competitive. It is backed by investment institutions such as GV (formerly Google Ventures) and Sequoia Capital China.

Oxford produced 62 spinout ventures between 2007-16, more than any other university. The companies aim to turn a profit and channel money back into University research.

The University says that Vaccitech will not receive royalties during the pandemic. 

The University of Oxford has been contacted for comment.

Image credit: Felipe Esquivel Reed, Wikimedia Commons

Oxford-Cambridge expressway could be back on the table

0

There is speculation that the Oxford-Cambridge expressway is back on the table, after a hiatus on work behind the proposal in March.

The release of a new prospectus last week by Arc Leadership Group has fired this speculation. The prospectus, released by an organisation composed of local councils and businesses and chaired by Barry Wood, leader of North Oxfordshire District Council, called for economic stimulus through new projects in the counties between Cambridge and Oxford. Though the prospectus speaks about many forms of stimuli, “road and rail infrastructure” and “east-west connectivity” are referenced.

According to the BBC, Arc Leadership Group has denied that it intends to construct an expressway.

During the past few years, an Oxford-Cambridge expressway has been mooted on several occasions. The last time was in March when the National Infrastructure Commission stressed the need for the project to “be built as quickly as possible to unlock land for new homes.” However, work was paused, and the Department for Transport announced that they were looking at other projects to connect Oxford and Cambridge.

Speaking to the BBC, Wood emphasised that “improvements to other parts of connectivity” were necessary, seeing that communities between the two cities “may well need bypasses around them.”

However, the Oxfordshire chapter of the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) has swiftly condemned the idea of an expressway. Speaking to Cherwell, CPRE Oxfordshire Communications Manager Julia Benning argued that a new road would cut through green-belt land, and would be the more expensive option. She highlighted the “need to reduce emissions” and her organisation’s support of the “more climate friendly” option of improved rail links. She stated that residents had not been consulted about the new proposals whilst research by CPRE Oxfordshire has indicated that 75% of the county’s population “believes the Green Belt should not be developed.”

Highways England said that they were “pausing further development” of the expressway project whilst working on “other potential road projects” to support economic stimulus in communities between Oxford and Cambridge. With the government announcing housing reforms in August which could give an impetus to green-belt developments, it is clear that even if the Oxford-Cambridge expressway has been shelved for the moment, the debate between Westminster and local communities will continue.

Barry Wood was contacted for comment

Image credit: Rept0n1x / Wikimedia Commons

Oxford students awarded £80,000 research grants

Three DPhil students at the University of Oxford have been given £80,000 each to fund their research. 

The award was made by the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851, which seeks to support individuals with ‘exceptional promise’ in their research into industry based scientific projects. Of the ten Industrial Fellowships granted this year, three went to Oxford University students studying for science-based doctorates. 

One of the students, Daniella Cheang, is developing a way to improve molecular synthesis by mimicking a natural process to build a library of compounds. This research could help in future drug development, as Daniella hopes to adapt this work for industrial use. The project also aims to be environmentally friendly, with water as the only waste product.  

The other two grant recipients are working on engineering-based projects.

Maral Bayaraa, a DPhil candidate in Engineering Science, plans to research how SAR interferometry, geotechnical modelling, and deep learning can be used to develop an early warning system for dam collapse. The goal is to prevent not only the loss of lives, but also environmental damage.  

Tom Waddell is working on the development of a computational model which will be used to predict future health conditions of type 2 diabetes patients. Such a model has never been created and could have significant benefits for researchers attempting to develop and test drugs to combat the disease. Tom said that he felt “very proud and fortunate” to have received the grant, which would allow him to “undertake valuable work in diabetes research.”

The Royal Commission spends around £2 million every year funding research projects which it believes have the potential lead to industrial development. Part of the goal of the fellowships are to ensure the maintenance of Britain’s role in scientific research and development. 

As well as helping with the funding of research, the fellowship also aims to promote close collaboration with industry. The recipients of this year’s award will work in partnership with major firms including AstraZeneca, Satellite Applications Catapult and Perspectum.

Students at Oxford University have a history of success in the programme. In 2019 three students also received the award to allow them to carry out research. 

Bernard Taylor, the President of the Royal Commission, said: “this year’s cohort demonstrates the potential and diversity of talent within British science” and that their research is “promising to unlock new products and revenue across the pharmaceutical, energy, defence and infrastructure industries.”

Overview: Oxford’s COVID-19 vaccine progress

Clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccine were resumed following the death of a participant; the vaccine’s genetic programming was validated by the University of Bristol; and the Director of the Jenner Institute, Adrian Hill, expressed hope that some vulnerable groups could receive the vaccine by Christmas.

Global trials were “voluntarily paused” on 6th September after a volunteer developed transverse myelitis, a condition which causes inflammation of the spinal cord. While trials resumed in Brazil, South Africa, Japan and the United Kingdom resumed throughout September, the Food and Drug Administration in the United States refused to allow the trial to continue until they were convinced the volunteer’s illness was not caused by the vaccine.

30,000 volunteers are participating in trials for the Oxford vaccine in the United States, with a further 20,000 volunteers globally. It is hoped that the trial’s large sample size will mean that a vaccine can be developed more quickly, and that herd immunity can be induced safely within the global population.

The chief investigator of the trial at Oxford University, Professor Andrew Pollard, said: “We are very pleased the FDA has reached the same conclusion as the other regulators of the clinical trial sites around the world, declaring the trial safe to proceed in the USA…We will continue to adhere to our rigorous safety processes while moving as quickly as possible so we can start protecting people around the world against this terrible virus as soon as possible.”

The death of a trial volunteer in Brazil was also investigated. However, the volunteer had not received the vaccine, only the placebo, so it was not deemed to be connected to the trial.

This news comes in the same week that a team at Bristol University have independently confirmed that the Oxford vaccine genetic programming works as its developers intended. The validation goes “significantly above and beyond any regulatory requirements anywhere in the world”.

The Oxford vaccine works by co-opting the ability of viruses to introduce their genetic material into a cell, causing it to assemble more viruses. A harmless chimpanzee adenovirus is used to introduce a sequence of DNA from a SARS-CoV-2 virus which only produces the parts of a virus recognised by the body’s immune system. Scientists hope that this reduces the risk of a person becoming ill after receiving the vaccine. The research from Bristol University confirms that this process works, and that the required viral proteins are produced.

Professor Adrian Hill, who is leading the development process, has expressed hope that some high risk groups, such as the elderly, could receive doses of the vaccine by the end of the year. In a statement to members and alumni of Magdalen college he stressed that “the initial licence would be for emergency use, not full approval”.

Such approval would be dependent on safety data, including that collected from trials in the United States. The pause in the trials in the US has shown that the process of developing new vaccines is rarely straightforward, and so it is difficult to predict exactly when one may be approved for the general population.

Image credit: Amir Pichhadze

Summer Nostalgia

0

At a time when the future is so uncertain we find ourselves reflecting on the past. This photoshoot has been inspired by such feelings of reflection, childhood and simply nostalgia for what this summer could have and should have been.

Tales from the Household: Lockdown

0

Monday, 6:32 p.m. The email arrives saying someone in the house has tested positive and you’re going into isolation for 14 days. We lead such active lives at university that the split-second change of an imposed lockdown can feel like whiplash after a car slams on the brakes. Something analogous to the five-stages of grief ensues (denial – but it can’t really be 14 – anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance – it is what it is) as the condolence texts flood your phone. Looking out on a 14-day line of dominoes, it can seem like the goal of each day is just to knock one down, but during my time in isolation I’ve found that the people in my household and our community as a whole has shown support for each other in spectacular ways.

Given Oxford’s recent rise in coronavirus cases, it’s more vital than ever that we uphold our social responsibility by isolating so that we protect the vulnerable members of our city. With that in mind, here are some suggestions to help you make the most of lockdown:

  1. House Events: Let’s be honest, you weren’t going to Park End anyway, so having some planned gatherings might be a step up for your social calendar. So far, my household has had drinks nights (which, if you’re not a drinker, could work to your advantage when it comes to the board game portion of the evening), dinners together, and movie nights (the Rudy Giuliani/Borat shock may well have brought us closer as a household).
  2. Indoor Workouts: One of the hardest things about isolation is, of course, not being able to go outside. Workouts in your room can help you take back control of your fitness. Pamela Reif, MadFit, and other training YouTube channels offer free high intensity workouts that let you sweat out some of the confinement. Also, if your friends or college will deliver items to your house, dumbbells can arrive quickly and provide a nice mind-muscle connection for tapping into your strength.
  3. Food: I am not embarrassed to admit that I depended upon the kindness of others and take-out meals before lockdown. While it may be overstatement to say that, by necessity, I’ve come into my own as a chef, I am now a cooking-convert. Time in the kitchen has become one of the most cherished parts of the day as my household and I catch up while sharing recipes, eating, and washing pots. We’ve found there’s something shockingly cathartic in taking raw ingredients and turning them into a nice meal for yourself. The obvious problem is of course that it’s hard to get the items you need for the full two weeks. I’ve personally found that anyone in our community is happy to help out people in isolation by going on food runs, but if you’d rather do the shopping yourself, Sainsburys and Tesco have delivery services and, for locally-sourced produce or specialty items, Farmdrop is an excellent – albeit slightly pricier – option. (For all of these, you have to plan a couple days in advance.) Of course, there’s a place for pizza delivery nights, too.
  4. Work: This can tend more toward personal preference. Though I’m not a list-maker, I’ve found that writing down in the morning the different work items I want to accomplish in the day can be helpful. Not only does it give the hours some structure but, at the end of the day – even though I almost certainly have not finished the essay or gotten to the Beckett lecture – it’s still satisfying to see my progress.
  5. Distractions: A word on procrastination’s evil twin. At Oxford, we’re always focusing on the next thing. Some of the best moments during lockdown have been when my housemates and I have made impromptu visits to each other’s rooms. Whether isolating with friends or people you hardly know, lockdown presents an opportunity to get to know your household in new ways. Drop-ins not only change up the tempo of the day but allow you some healthy distraction. 

When I came back to Oxford in October, I felt incredibly fortunate to be able to return to university when so many of my friends in the United States could not. I still do. Despite the difficulty lockdown presents, I cherish the ability to see my friends in safe settings and work in Oxford’s inspiring environment. I appreciate the tireless work of college administrators and staff who ensure our community stays safe and healthy.  

This term will inevitably present challenges. We are quite literally doing Oxford as no one has ever done it before. (How often can you say that at a 900-year-old institution?) At any moment you can get “the email.” But amidst the lack of certainty, creative emerges. Now, I like knowing the only box I have to check in the near-term is the one to vote in US elections from abroad. Lockdown doesn’t mean a two-week freeze on the clock when at any moment your household can have a new distraction.

Oxford’s Clarendon Centre to be redesigned in multi-million pound project

0

The Oxford Clarendon Centre is expected to be redesigned following a proposal made by the London-based consultancy firm, Lothbury Investment Management.

The main aims of redesigning the building would be to create more dynamic public spaces in the heart of the city, and to open a new link to the nearby Frewin Court building which has been largely unused over recent years. The new design proposals would also include a ground and roof level.

The shopping centre owners have claimed that the coronavirus pandemic has taken a negative toll on footfall on Oxford’s high street, and thus want to diversify the centre, which would no longer be exclusively used for retail.

Adam Smith, from Lothbury Investment Management, said in a comment to the Oxford Mail that: “There have been dramatic changes in the retail sector since the Clarendon Centre first opened in 1984.”

He suggested that a range of new uses is being proposed for the shopping centre. Hence, in addition to retail, restaurants and cafes, they are also exploring how laboratory facilities, student accommodation, and further office space can be provided with the redesign of the venue.

Smith added: “At the heart of the redevelopment will be a new public space. We hope this will add to the famous squares and quadrangles of Oxford and be truly accessible to all. We want this to become a new green oasis in the heart of the city to provide an area in which people can relax, work and play in a safe, inspiring environment.”

When informed that the new redesign of the Clarendon Centre will be a multi-storey building, Smith said that they are “excited to be providing public access to a landscape designed roof space which will showpiece the stunning Oxford skyline.”

The consultancy firm will therefore look into consulting with shoppers and residents about the proposed changes, before submitting an application to the Oxford City Council by the end of this year.

Hence, the project team will be organising a ‘digital drop-in’ on Wednesday 4th November, at 6pm. The event will feature a presentation from the architects, and provide an opportunity for shoppers and residents to submit any queries.

Image credit: YorkshireLad/ Wikimedia Commons. License: CC BY-SA 4.0

University’s REACH Programme receives additional funding to improve water security

0

The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has provided new funding to the University of Oxford’s REACH programme, which seeks to improve water security in Africa and Asia.

On 20th October 2020, it was announced that the FCDO’s grant for the programme will extend to 2024 and increase to £22.5 million. REACH, which began in 2015, is a global research programme that focuses on using world-class science to improve policy and practice regarding water security.

Professor Louise Richardson, Vice Chancellor of the University of Oxford, said: “We at Oxford are committed to supporting the next phase of the work in order to improve the lives of over 10 million people who are desperately in need of support. We are very grateful to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office for funding this work and to our many partners across the globe who collaborate with us in advancing the goals of REACH.”

REACH has worked closely with partners such as UNICEF, national governments, private sector companies, and academic institutions. Through these collaborations, the programme has improved water security for over two million people since 2015 in countries such as Kenya, Ethiopia, and Bangladesh.

According to REACH’s Global Strategy for 2020-2024, published on its website, they aim to continue scaling up the project to reach a target population of 10 million people. To do so, they will focus on addressing inequalities across different scales, such as by developing more inclusive decision-making tools. The issue of climate change will also be tackled, which aims to enhance climate communication and improve coordination between water supply and water management sectors.

Crucially, REACH also aims to improve water quality management, such as by guiding the development of strategies to regulate environmental pollution stemming from urban and industrial growth. At the institutional level, REACH will also partner national and local governments to review and reform water security policy and regulation. These efforts work towards achieving the world’s Sustainable Development Goals by 2030, which were set out by the UN.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed systemic inequalities and vulnerabilities around the world. According to the University’s press release, Professors Rob Hope and Katrina Charles, who are the Directors of REACH, said: “The pandemic has compounded the severity of the impacts resulting from water-related climate hazards, such as floods, droughts and cyclones… Building water secure institutions reduces the need for and the cost of emergency funding to avoid unnecessary hardship on the most vulnerable, and increases resilience to future risks and shocks.”

Image Credit: DFID/Wikimedia Commons. License: CC BY 2.0