The Economist. Hello and welcome to The Intelligence from The Economist. I'm Rosie Bloor. And I'm Jason Palmer. Every weekday we provide a fresh perspective on the events shaping your world.
Plastic is such a wonderfully useful substance that it's ubiquitous. Unfortunately, it degrades into microplastics, tiny particles which find their way into every part of the human body. Our correspondent investigates their impact.
And back during America's presidential election, we told you astrologers were weighing in unusually fervently. But truth is, story prognosticating is experiencing a boom more generally. And of course, it's getting a boost from artificial intelligence. But first,
I've been in Goma, a city on the border with Rwanda since early last week. Emmet Livingston writes about Africa and is in Goma at the moment. Internet connection there is very poor, but he's been able to send us occasional dispatches. Over the time that I've been here, I've watched as M23 rebels and Rwandan troops advanced from about 15 miles west of the city.
For two years, the city of Goma in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo has been almost completely encircled by a military group known as the March 23 movement or M23. At the weekend, the forces keeping the M23 rebels out of Goma collapsed. Fighting continues, and this weekend, the attackers pushed from the north and overran government positions.
Goma is the largest city in the east of the Congo. There are two million people there who watched as their city was captured. The atmosphere in the city while this was happening was absolutely chaotic. Electricity and water has been cut for days, so most people were relying on word of mouth information.
Then, street battles began right in the centre of town, with M23 and Robandon troops battling a hodgepodge of defenders. These included Congolese Special Forces, Regular Soldiers, and Malisha Men. The fighting was extremely intense, with machine gun fire and the launching of rocket-propelled grenades, and also mortars. Like most people in Goma, I spent the day inside, on the floor.
I visited wards in Endocio Hospital in Goma, which is run by the Red Cross, where staff were overwhelmed by dozens of patients coming in every day with gunshot and trappenal wounds. This morning where I am, northwest of the city centre, it's quiet. M23 appeared to have taken control. I saw columns of their fighters marching past this morning towards the centre.
the airport has also been captured. That said, there are still reports of Congolese holdouts in the city fighting last ditch battles. Most people are in a bit of a daze and waiting to see what happens next. Our deputy editor Robert Guest has travelled extensively in Rwanda and Congo and sees this invasion of Goma as part of a wider trend.
So ostensibly what's happened is that a rebel group called M23 have taken control of the largest city in eastern Congo. But no one in Congo believes that that's what's actually happened. This so-called rebel group doesn't look anything like any of the other militias you see in eastern Congo. They have modern weapons, clean uniforms, they're incredibly disciplined, and they are basically armed and directed by the state next door, Rwanda.
They're also accompanied by actual Rwandan soldiers, thousands of them according to the UN and Rwanda denies this, but people on the streets in Goma can see very well that this is what's happening.
So just how significant is the occupation of Goma? Well, let me give you an analogy. Donbas in Ukraine. You may remember several years back, Vladimir Putin took over a chunk of Ukraine while pretending that he wasn't. So he armed and directed a group of local separatists and gangsters to take over a significant patch of Ukrainian territory, and they declared themselves self-governing republics.
And all the time, it was clearly an action by the Russian state, but it had deniability. Well, that's pretty much what's going on here. Rwanda's dictator Paul Kagame has armed and directed this group, and they've carved out a big chunk of territory.
not just Goma, but large amounts of the area around it. And why have they done that partly for security reasons? So, Rwanda wants a buffer state, but this is much exaggerated. Rwanda is still talking about the people who carried out the genocide back in 1994, as if they're still a live threat. But they've mostly either been killed by the Rwandan army,
or they're too old or disorganized to pose a serious threat to the very highly disciplined and well-defended country that is Rwanda. And the other thing that's going on is the wholesale looting of the minerals in eastern Congo, the gold, the coal town. Rwanda doesn't really mine very much gold at all itself, yet it's mysteriously become a large gold exporter. This is, according to most of the studies, that have been done into it simply because they're looting and smuggling gold out of Congo.
So if what you're saying is that the M23 military group is essentially a proxy for Rwanda, what are the consequences for those in Congo who are now run by them? Consequences in Congo are horrific. It's not just the M23, there are many other armed groups operating in eastern Congo, but the M23 are by far the most disciplined, strong and effective of them.
all told. For about 8 million people have been forced to flee their homes in Congo and that includes possibly 400,000 just in the past month. The scale of suffering there is extraordinary. I've met people in villages who had all their possessions stolen and then all the women were raped by one group and then
A few months later another group comes along and does exactly the same thing and beats them because they don't have too many possessions left to steal anymore because the last lot stole them. You can't blame Rwanda entirely for the chaos that prevails in eastern Congo. The Congolese state based a very long way away on the other side of the country and Kinshasa is weak and corrupt and there's something of a power vacuum in eastern Congo. But Rwanda is responsible for
fostering the chaos and for making it very difficult for Congo to set up anything resembling a functioning government on its own territory. And they deny that they're doing this, but this is a colonial enterprise. They seem to want to control at least de facto an area of territory that may end up being actually larger than their own country.
And Robert, to take your Ukraine analogy, we know that when Russia took Donbas, the intention was eventually to take over the whole of Ukraine. What do you think Rwanda's plan is? How far does it actually want to go into Congo? It's not plausible that Rwanda could occupy the whole of Congo. That is an area 90 times larger than Rwanda. But because they are a stronger and more disciplined force and the Congolese state is very weak,
There is diplomatic chatter about the idea that they might try to overthrow the government in Kinshasa. But I suspect the long term game here is to build a large buffer zone in eastern Congo on their border to control it de facto, but probably not.
to try to claim legal ownership of it because that would be very clearly contrary to international law and they rely a lot on money from donors around the world so they have to maintain this sort of pretense of acting within the law, but people on the ground in goma can see very well that there are Rwandan troops in their streets, so they're not fooled.
And Robert, why is this happening now? The underlying reasons are local and longstanding, but why is Goma falling right now? I suspect it's something to do with the change of administration in the US. We've seen this steady erosion of the international taboo against a strong country grabbing the territory of a weaker country. This was obviously massively violated by Russia.
We see that China constantly menaces Taiwan and claims seas that belong to other people. And now the most important democracy in the world, the United States has a leader who says that he wants to expand American territory and threatens Greenland and Panama. So there's been a change in the mood. And also, whereas the previous American administration was very engaged in the region and would pull up the Rwandans when they were threatening to do something bad in Congo and warn them not to,
The current administration, no one really knows what its Africa policy is, but I suspect it's not a careful, principled articulation of why might make right is something that breeds misery. So what's the broader lesson of this, then? I think it's a troubling one. I think
We're in a world where the bedrock principle that you don't try to move borders by force is under unprecedented strain. And we know from history, well, pretty much everywhere in the world, but especially in Africa, that whatever you may say about the faults about where the borders are, when you try to move them, it usually leads to bloodshed and catastrophe.
And if this blatant violation of the rules-based order is allowed to stand, we're going to see more of them. Robert, thank you very much for talking to me. Thank you.
Microplastics are everywhere. In the air, on the ground, in rivers and the oceans. And perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, in our bodies. Slavaya Chankava is our healthcare correspondent.
Ever since Austrian scientists began looking for them in people in 2018, they've turned up in our blood, lungs, kidneys, liver, heart, and even the brain. But how harmful they are to us is still unclear. So why should we be concerned about microplastics?
There's still very little data on this, but from the studies that do exist, there are reasons to believe that they can be harmful in many different ways, ranging from infertility to heart attacks or cancer, and because they're everywhere, reducing our exposure to them seems prudent. So Slovail, let's just take a step back for a second. What are microplastics?
There are tiny particles, the usual definition is smaller than five millimeters, and they can go down to as tiny as less than one micrometer, which is one hundredth the width of human hair, so really, really tiny.
And they accumulate in the environment from degrading plastic waste, so water bottles, plastic packaging, synthetic fabrics, car tires, paints, you name it, they just come from all sorts of places. And they leach into our foods from plastic containers in which it's packaged and store.
Surveyor, it sounds like some of the concerns about microplastics mirror those about air pollution, where we also talked about some of the tiny particles. Is that right? That's exactly right. The smaller microplastics are, the more concerning they are for researchers. The tiniest ones, which are smaller than one micrometer, are small enough to pass through the linings of the lungs and go into the bloodstream all over the body.
We still don't have very good ways to measure them. We don't know what concentration or longevity of exposure in the human body starts to cause harm, which is exactly the story we had with air pollution decades ago.
And what sorts of problems do they think that microplastics might cause? So there are suspicions that they may cause physical damage by blocking ducts and scratching tissues. They could cause chemical damage to cells.
outer DNA when they get into a cell, or they can also act as a miniature Trojan horses for heavy metals, bacteria, all sorts of nasties that cling to them as they circulate in the environment.
So it sounds like there are lots of possibilities of things they may cause, but not a lot of certainty. For now, there is very little evidence from direct studies in humans. And one is a study published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine in which doctors examined the plaque scraped from the arteries of people who are just having that as a standard procedure to reduce blockages.
So they examined the plaque and in about half of the 250 or so people in the study, they detected microplastics. In the following three years, the people with microplastics were far more likely about four times more likely to have.
heart attacks, strokes, or to die from any reason at all. It could be that the presence of microplastics in their arteries was just a byproduct of some process that causes these health problems, but this study has really rang alarm bells among doctors. But given how ubiquitous they are, as you say, is it possible to avoid them?
It's impossible. We could, however, reduce our exposure. So we could be using less synthetic fabrics, particularly those that shed a lot, which are very fashionable sometimes, cleaning up household dust. They've been found at high concentrations in the air. For example, here in London, scientists found about 1,000 of them per square meter. And that's not even counting the smallest of them, which they were unable to measure.
You could avoid food packaged in plastics, to the extent that you can. Eating plastic containers often releases lots of them, so don't microwave your food. Take away containers, perhaps don't use plastic kettles, that sort of stuff.
There's a lot of research going on, particularly in Europe right now, with an eye towards identifying ways to measure them reliably, and then that will lead to some sort of regulation, perhaps, on reducing their presence in the environments. Thank you, Savannah. Terrifying stuff and no answers. Thank you, Rosie. Sorry to be bringing sort of bad news.
Historically, the common way to get an astrological reading would be to look at a horoscope column in a newspaper, which usually imparts generic advice based on your star sign. And if you really wanted something more detailed, you could go book an appointment with an astrologer who may give you more customized feedback. Vishnu Padmarabhan is an Asia correspondent for The Economist.
But today, getting astrological advice is much easier, thanks to technology, and increasingly, thanks to technology that's powered by AI. There are apps where you can now input your details, such as the time and place of your birth, and then ask questions about your prospects in work, relationships, marriage, and so on, and the apps will give you an answer. And these type of services are really booming across the world.
And when you say booming, how booming? What are the numbers?
So it's difficult to say, but some market research estimates suggest that spending on astrology-related products and services could grow to $23 billion globally by 2031, up from 13 billion in 2021. And if you look at some of the data from these astrology apps, the numbers are also pretty impressive. So co-star, which is an astrology app that claims to use AI in America, says it has more than 30 million users, and they charge for queries.
So you get the first couple of questions free, but if you want to ask more, you need to pay. So it's for $3, you get five questions. Then there's another app in India called AstroTalk, which is not AI based, but it connects astrologers to customers. And they claim to have 40,000 astrologers on their platform and 80 million users. And then on top of all of this, there are a lot of content creators on social media that are fueling interest in astrology. So these are people who do podcasts on astrology or create short video content on TikTok and YouTube about astrology.
I'm not sure if I trust any advice you might find on a podcast, but like if there are so many people involved in this, who are they? Who are the big consumers of this stuff? So it looks like the big consumers are actually youngsters. Gen Z has sort of really got into astrology. And many of them are actually using the platform to seek relationship advice. I mean, and this is not just true in the West with across the world. So the apps in India and China, for example, are predominantly being used by Gen Z.
But in a more general sense, why all of this appetite do you think forestrology at the moment?
There are a few reasons. One is that it reflects the decline of organized religion. So people are looking for meaning in different places. Astrology has become one of those places. Another reason is modern life is more stressful. So one survey in America said that 61% of Americans feel that astrology provides comfort in these uncertain times. And interestingly, on Google, for example, global searches for the term astrology hit a 10-year high in December 2020, which was the peak of the pandemic.
I guess the one thing that surprises me here is that AI and algorithms and high-tech platforms and so on should intersect with something that is sort of ancient, mystical, not very computery. Actually, that's the surprising thing that came out of my reporting for the story is there are some parallels between astrology and AI. So astrology is essentially that analysis of star movements, which actually involves a lot of data collection and telling a story from the data.
which is what a lot of today's algorithms do, including the ones that are used in the astrology apps that use AI. So for example, the algorithm used in currently GPT, which is a very popular Indian astrological platform, which gives users chat GPT style responses to their astrological related questions. So that uses a large language model that has been trained on data
which includes planetary positions and astrological material source from websites and forums. Similarly, co-star uses AI tools to combine data from space, which is sourced from NASA with insights from human astrologers to give personalized responses to users. More pointedly than Vishnu, do you buy it? Do you put any stock in the outputs of these?
No, actually, I don't. I played around with a lot of apps, and while some of the technology is impressive, the responses they gave me back weren't, and were very far-fetched. Go on, what did it predict for you? So, for example, when I asked one of these apps if I need to work harder, it basically told me no. I have the potential to tap into my natural sense of individuality, rebellion, and creativity, and I don't need to conform to traditional work expectations.
Which are well and great, but I don't think my boss would have appreciated citing that. And especially the reason they gave this is because of Pluto's semi-sex style movement related to Uranus. Vishnu, thanks very much for your time. Thanks, Jason.
Subscribing to Economist Podcast Plus helps make our journalism possible. Thank you. Search Economist Podcast Plus for a free trial. That's all for this episode of The Intelligence. Let us know what you think of the show. You can get in touch at podcasts at economist.com. We'll see you back here tomorrow.