At least ten dead and more than 100 injured following Magnitude 5.5 Earthquake in central Bangladesh.

The United States Geological Survey recorded a Magnitude 5.5 Earthquake at a depth of about 10 km, roughly 30 km to the northeast of the Bangladeshi capital, Dhaka, slightly after 10.35 local time (slightly after 4.35 am GMT) on Saturday 22 November 2025. At least ten people, including at least one child, have died as a result of the event, with more than 100 injured. Most of those killed or injured appear to have been struck by debris falling from buildings in densely populated urban areas; three people were reportedly killed in a single incident when they were struck by a falling balcony. The event was felt across Bangladesh, as well as neighbouring areas of India.

Debris which fell from buildings into a crowded street in Dhaka, Bangladesh, during an Earthquake on 22 November 2025. Reuters.

Earthquake activity in northern Bangladesh is influenced by the uplift of the Tibetan Plateau, due to the impact of India into Eurasia to the south. The Indian Plate is moving northwards at a rate of 5 cm per year, causing it to impact into Eurasia, which is also moving northward, but only at a rate of 2 cm per year. The collision of the Indian and Eurasian plates has led to the formation of the Himalayan Mountains, the Tibetan Plateau, and the mountains of southwest China, Central Asia and the Hindu Kush.

Block diagram showing how the impact of the Indian Plate into Eurasia is causing uplift on the Tibetan Plateau. Jayne Doucette/Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

Eastern Bangladesh is also in an area particularly prone to Earthquakes; much of nearby Myanmar lies on the Burma Plate, a small tectonic plate caught between  the Eurasian Plate to the northeast, the Indian Plate to the west and southwest and the Sunda Plate to the southeast. As these larger plates move together the Burma Plate is being squeezed and fractured, with a major fault line, the Kabaw Fault, having formed across much of the north of the country, along which the Burma Plate is slowly splitting. Most Earthquakes in the region are caused by movement on this fault.

The movement of the Burma and surrounding plates. Sheth et al. (2011).

The central part of Bangladesh is potentially affected by both tectonic systems, but is rather less prone to earthquake events, with only six Earthquakes of Magnitude 5.5 or greater since 1950. This may help to explain the level of deaths and injuries associated with this event, although building safety has been a long standing political issue in Bangladesh, marked by events such as the Tazreen Factory Fire in 2012, in which at least 112 people died in a fire at a nine-story factory building with insufficient fire escapes, and the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013, in which an eight story commercial building collapsed, killing 1134 people. Since 2013, the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, 2018 Transition Key Accord, and most recently the Readymade Sustainability Council, have sort to get international garment manufacturing companies operating in Bangladesh to sign up to fire and building safety protocols, but there remains little general building regulation.

See also...

The origin of kissing.

Kissing, if interpreted as mouth-to-mouth contact between members of the same species with no food being transferred, is widespread in the Animal Kingdom, as well as in most (but not all) Human societies. Variants on this have been seen in Mammals, Birds, Fish and even Insects. If this process is narrowed to oral-oral contact with some movement of the lips, then it is still widespread in Old World Monkeys and Apes. 

The advantages of kissing, viewed in a strictly evolutionary sense, are hard to define. Kissing does not appear to aid survival, or enhance reproductive success, and presents an opportunity for the transfer of infections. It has been suggested that kissing may enhance mate selection, enabling one kisser to evaluate the odour, health and/or social skills of the other, although there is no real way to prove this. Another suggestion is that kissing enhances arousal, thereby increasing the likelihood of mating success, though again, this is unprovable. Neither of these explanations can account for kissing between individuals who do not seem to be intent on mating, which is just as widespread as mating-related kissing. One theory which could account for this is that kissing is a social gesture which displays trust, coming intentionally close to the (potentially dangerous) mouth and teeth of a social peer or potential mate, while another is that the practice might facilitate the transfer of potentially beneficial microbes, though again, these hypotheses are impossible to prove one way or the other.

The Kiss, by Gustav Klimt. Österreichische Galerie Belvedere/Google Arts & Culture/Wikimedia Commons.

The meaning of kissing is subject to cultural interpretation in Human societies. Some societies do not kiss at all. In others kissing is an everyday, yet meaningful, event. It can also be a highly symbolic activity. Given this cultural variation in Humans, it is quite possible that kissing is also cultural in non-Human Primates, and may be present in some populations and not others. 

While a number of researchers have come up with different possible explanations for the purpose of kissing, the origin of the practice does not appear to have been examined to date, despite the insight that understanding this could provide on the purpose of the practice. The presence of kissing in different, but closely related, species of Primates suggests that it has not appeared separately in each of these species, but that it first appeared in a common ancestral species, and was then adapted by each evolving lineage to meet their needs.

In a paper published in the journal Evolution and Human Behaviour on 19 November 2025, Matilda Brindle of the Department of Biology at the University of Oxford and the Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment at University College London, Catherine Talbot of the School of Psychology at the Florida Institute of Technology, and Stuart West, also of the Department of Biology at the University of Oxford, present the results of a study in which they developed a comparative framework for the practice of kissing across different species of Primate, which was then used to examine the evolutionary history of the behaviour within the group.

Top panel: kissing across the Animal Kingdom (clockwise): Rhesus Macaques, Macaca mulatta; Galapagos Albatross, Phoebastria irrorata; Polar Bears, Ursus maritimus; Wolves, Canis lupus; Prairie Dogs, Cynomys ludovicianus. Bottom panel: non-kissing mouth-to-mouth behaviours (left to right): premastication in Orangutans, Pongo sp.; trophallaxis in Indian Black Ants, Camponotus compressus; and Kiss-fighting in French Grunts, Haemulon flavolineatum. Brindle et al. (2025).

A full systematic review of kissing in Primates in academic literature proved to be impractical. The lack of clear scientific terminology around kissing, combined with a general reticence to discuss such matters in scientific studies, and a very large body of work on kissing in fields such as literature, rendered specialist search engines such as Web of Science unable to produce useful results. Consequently, Brindle et al. settled on a non-systematic review of the literature, combined with searching platforms such as YouTube for evidence of kissing behaviour, with the intent of establishing evidence of kissing in a species, not any data about this. They note that absence of such data does not mean the behaviour does not exist.

In doing this, Brindle et al. set out to answer seven questions, namely: (i) Which primates have been observed kissing? (ii) Does kissing show a phylogenetic signal? (iii) When did kissing first evolve in this group? (iv) How many times did kissing evolve? (v) Has kissing been lost across the course of evolution in any lineages? (vi) Are Neanderthals likely to have kissed? And (vii) how well do different life history variables correlate with the occurrence of kissing?

For the purpose of their study, Brindle et al. defined kissing as 'non-agonistic interactions involving directed, intraspecific, oral-oral contact with some movement of the lips/mouthparts and no food transfer'. This definition still included behaviours seen in Animals such as Ants, Birds, and Polar Bears, but was much more common and widespread in Primates. Brindle et al. further restricted their study to Old World Monkeys and Apes, groups where there was sufficient data for useful comparisons to be made. 

Non-sexual kissing in Orangutans, a mother kissing her child. Sumatran Orangutan Society.

Brindle et al. make it clear that they were looking for the ultimate cause of kissing rather than the proximal one, which is to say, the reason why Primates first started kissing rather than the reasons for this occurring in any group of Primates who already had the behaviour.

They further note that kissing is likely to have begun as a modification of another behaviour. They note that a recent suggestion has been made that kissing began as a part of a oral grooming behaviour, but doubt the veracity of this, noting that this is not usually how Primates groom, and that no evidence was offered to support the hypothesis. They suggest instead that kissing might be a modification of oral-to-oral food transfer, a common phenomenon in Primates.

Because kissing has been speculatively linked to mating success, Brindle et al. compared the presence of kissing in a Primate species to the mating system used by that species. They also compared the presence of kissing to the diet, food sharing and premastication (chewing food before giving it to another individual, typically an infant) habits of each species, since these behaviours might give a species a preadaptation towards kissing. They note that species with frugivorous or omnivorous diets are more likely to share foods with infants, due to the patchy distribution of foods within the environment. Fruits and meats are also the foodstuffs most commonly premasticated before giving them to infants. Reliable data on premastication was only available for the Great Apes. Data on diets from Neanderthals and Modern Humans was included in the dataset.

Kissing the War Goodbye by Victor Jorgensen. US National Archives and Records Administration/Wikimedia Commons.

Brindle et al. used a phylogenetic tree constructed using the 10kTrees Project V3.0 resource, which was cut to include only Old World Monkeys and Apes, including Humans and Neanderthals. Neanderthals were included not just because they nested within the available data, but because it has been suggested that there is evidence from the oral microbiome that Modern Humans and Neanderthals may have exchanged microbial species via kissing some time after the two species split.

The phylogenetic tree was constructed using a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo framework with the practice of kissing identified as either present or unknown (since it is impossible to assume that a species does not kiss simply because we have not observed it). Neanderthals were also classified as unknown. 

Kissing was found in all species of Great Ape except the Eastern Gorilla, Gorilla beringei. It was also observed in a variety of Old World Monkeys, although chiefly within the Papionini (Macaques and Baboons). Brindle et al. note that much of the data on the Papionini relates to same-sex kissing, at least in part because that was the subject of the studies which had looked at the behaviour in this group.

Brindle et al. conclude that kissing appeared in the common ancestor of all extant Great Apes some time after the split with the common ancestor of all extant Lesser Apes (Gibbons), i.e. between 21.5 and 16.9 million years ago. The trait has subsequently been retained, with the one possible loss in Eastern Gorillas. Kissing was found in eight species of Papionini, but it was impossible to determine that the trait was present in the common ancestor of the group; it has either evolved or been lost multiple times (possibly both). Brindle et al. also conclude that kissing was almost certainly present in Neanderthals.

Phylogeny illustrating the reconstructed evolutionary history of kissing within the Apes (Hominoidea). The occurrence of kissing and other life history variables is displayed at the tips of the tree. Left to right: kissing (observed/not observed); mating system (single/multi-male); diet (folivorous, frugivorous, omnivorous); food sharing (present/absent); and premastication (present/absent). At the tips and nodes of the tree, black circles indicate a trait has been reported or reconstructed as ‘present’; white circles indicate kissing has not been reported or was reconstructed as ‘absent’; grey circles indicate equivocal reconstructions (mean probability less than 0.65); circles are not present where data are missing. The Neanderthal tip represents the mean probability that kissing was ‘present’, based on Bayesian estimation. Maximum Clade Credibility tree created from a sample of 10,000 molecular phylogenies from the 10kTrees project. Brindle et al. (2025).

Brindle et al. also note that there seems to be a strong association between kissing and multi-male mating systems (i.e., systems in which multiple males may compete for the right to mate with a female), with the kissing existing alongside long bonding of females to a single male only in Western Gorillas and some Human societies. Premastication was found in every species in which kissing has been observed, but there was generally an absence of data for species where kissing had not been observed, leading Brindle et al. to refrain from making a judgement on the relevance of this trait.

Brindle et al. conclude that kissing is present in all Great Apes except Eastern Gorillas, and that there is strong evidence that the trait appeared once in the group, between 21.5 and 16.9 million years ago. The data is less clear for Old World Monkeys, where the trait may have appeared once and subsequently been lost in many lineages, or appeared several times in different lineages.

The retention of kissing as a behaviour in Great Apes strongly suggests that it provides an evolutionary advantage, which Brindle strongly suspect is associated with sexual selection, although they do not believe this is sufficient to assert that this was the reason it originally evolved. They note that the limitations of the data they used leave plenty of opportunity for further research on the subject.

See also...

Canada loses Measles-free status.

Canada has officially lost its Measles-free status, according to a press release issued by the Pan American Health Organization on 10 November 2025. The decision came following a meeting of the Measles, Rubella, and Congenital Rubella Syndrome Elimination Regional Monitoring and Re-Verification Commission in Mexico City between 4 and 7 November, which heard that the Measles Virus has been circulating in Canada for at least 12 months. This finding also ends the Measles-free status of the wider Americas region, the second time this has happened, despite the region being the first to gain such a status in 2016. The first loss was caused by an outbreak in Venezuela in 2018, with the region regaining Measles-free status in 2024.

The Measles, Rubella, and Congenital Rubella Syndrome Elimination Regional Monitoring and Re-Verification Commission heard that there have been 12 596 confirmed cases of Measles in the Americas between 1 January and 7 November 2025, with ten countries being affected. However, 95% of these cases have occurred in three countries, Canada, the United States, and Mexico. There have also been 28 recorded deaths due to the Virus, 23 in Mexico, three in the United States, and two in Canada.

There are still active outbreaks in six countries in the region,  Canada, Mexico, the United States, Bolivia, Brazil, Paraguay, and Belize, mostly thought to be triggered by imported cases. Under-vaccinated communities have been particularly badly hit, with 89% of cases affecting unvaccinated people or people of unknown vaccination status. The most affected group are children under one year of age, with the second most affected group being children aged one-to-four.

The Canadian outbreak began in New Brunswick in October 2024, and has since spread to every province of Canada. As of November 2025 the disease is still circulating in four provinces, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan.

Measles is a human disease caused by a Virus in the Paramyxovirus family. The Virus infects the respiratory tract, then spreads throughout the body. It can lead to major epidemics with significant morbidity and mortality, especially among vulnerable people. Among young and malnourished children, pregnant women, and immunocompromised individuals, including those with HIV, cancer or treated with immunosuppressives, Measles can cause serious complications, including severe diarrhoea, blindness, encephalitis, pneumonia, and death.

Thin-section transmission electron micrograph revealing the ultrastructural appearance of a single Viron, of the Measles Virus. The measles Virus is a Paramyxovirus, of the genus Morbillivirus. It is 100-200 nm in diameter, with a core of single-stranded RNA, and is closely related to the Rinderpest and Canine Distemper Viruses. Two membrane envelope proteins are important in pathogenesis. They are the F (fusion) protein, which is responsible for fusion of virus and host cell membranes, viral penetration, and hemolysis, and the H (hemagglutinin) protein, which is responsible for adsorption of virus to cells. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Wikimedia Commons.

Transmission is primarily person-to-person by airborne respiratory droplets that disperse rapidly when an infected person coughs or sneezes. Transmission can also occur through direct contact with infected secretions. Transmission from asymptomatic exposed immune persons has not been demonstrated. The Virus remains contagious in the air or on contaminated surfaces for up to two hours. A patient is infectious from four days before the start of the rash to four days after its appearance. There is no specific antiviral treatment for Measles, but most people recover within 2-3 weeks.

An effective and safe vaccine is available for prevention and control. The Measles-containing-vaccine first-dose is given at the age of nine months, while the Measles-containing-vaccine second dose is given at the age of 15 months. A 95% population coverage of Measles-containing-vaccine first-dose and Measles-containing-vaccine second dose is required to stop measles circulation.

In areas with low vaccination coverage, epidemics typically occur every two to three years and usually last between two and three months. However, their duration varies according to population size, crowding, and the population’s immunity status.

Vaccination against Measles is estimated to have prevented more than six million deaths in the Americas over the past 25 years. However, it is estimated that in 2024 regional cover for the second dose of the vaccine had fallen to 79%, well below the 95% coverage thought necessary to prevent the disease circulating. It is estimated that only 31% of countries in the Americas Region achieved 95% coverage for the first dose of the Measles vaccine, and that only 25% reached that level for the second dose.

See also...

Mountain of dumped waste appears beside the River Cherwell in Oxfordshire, England.

A mountain of waste 150 m long and about 6 m deep has appeared in a field near the village of Kidlington in Oxfordshire, England. The waste appears to have been dumped illegally between March and September 2025, despite the site being monitored by the UK's Environment Agency. The agency visited the site in July, following complaints from local residents that several vehicles were visiting the site every day, dumping large volumes of waste, and issued a 'cease and desist' order, and subsequently obtaining a court order banning the dumping of waste at the site. However, no physical barrier to dumping appears to have been put in place, with dumping subsequently continuing till September.

Waste dumped in a field beside the River Cherwell in Oxfordshire. The road to the left is the A34. Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images.

The location where the waste has been dumped is on a floodplain, and the area has been subjected to heavy rainfall during recent storms, causing the river level to rise, with waste visibly being washed into the river on Tuesday 18 November. Despite this, the Environment Agency apparently has no plans to clear the site, instead stating that it is launching a major criminal investigation into the dumping activity, and will ensure those responsible are made to clear the waste.

Much of the waste at the site appears to have come from schools and local authorities in the Southeast of England, which are legally obliged to ensure their waste is disposed of properly by licensed contractors,  leading to speculation that the dumping may be linked to large-scale fraud and corruption within those organisations. Local MP, Calum Miller, has raised questions as to whether the Environment Agency is equipped to deal with events of this nature, where organised criminal gangs are engaged in industrial scale activities. He has further asked for the government to order the clearing of the site.

Legal waste sites in the UK are subject to strict monitoring and environmental regulations, and a landfill tax of £124 per tonne. Criminal organisations which circumvents these regulations and pay no tax can therefore make a lot of money in a short period of time, leading to a rising number of incidents similar to the one in Oxfordshire (although generally smaller). The Environment Agency estimates that there are currently over 100 criminal organisations involved in illegal dumping in the UK, the majority of which will also be involved in other criminal activities.

See also...

Uranus approaches opposition.

The planet Neptune will reach opposition (i.e. be directly opposite the Sun seen from Earth) at 17 minuted past noon GMT on Friday 21 November 2025. This means that it will both be at its closest to the Earth this year, about 18.51 AU (18.51 times the average distance between the Earth and the Sun, or about 2 769 000 000 km), and completely illuminated by the Sun. While it is not visible to the naked eye observer, the planets have phases just like those of the Moon; being further from the Sun than the Earth, Neptune is 'full' when directly opposite the Sun. 

The orbits and positions of Earth, Uranus, and the planets of the Outer Solar System at 12.00 noon GMT on Friday 21 November 2025. JPL Small Body Database.

While the relative positions of the planets have no direct influence on life on Earth, the opposition of Saturn does present the best opportunity for observations of the planet by Earth-based observers. Uranus is never visible to the naked eye, but on Friday 21 November the planet will be visible with a reasonable telescope in the constellation of Taurus, reaching its highest in the sky at about midnight.

Image of Uranus made with the Near-Infrared Camera on the James Webb Space Telescope, showing Uranus’s seasonal north polar cap and dim inner and outer rings, as well as  9 of the planet’s 27 moons – clockwise starting at 2 o’clock, they are: Rosalind, Puck, Belinda, Desdemona, Cressida, Bianca, Portia, Juliet, and Perdita. NASA/European Space Agency/Canadian Space Agency/Space Telescope Institute.

Uranus orbits the Sun at an average distance of 19.2 AU, completing one orbit around the Sun every 84 years. This means that the planet is almost stationary compared to the faster moving Earth, so that it reaches Solar Opposition only four days later each year than the year before, and reaches conjunction (when it is directly behind the Sun seen from the Earth), roughly six months later.

See also...