A recent study by the University of Birmingham has revealed that banning smartphones during school hours does not necessarily lead to improved mental health or academic performance among students.

The SMART Schools Study 

The SMART Schools study, conducted by the University of Birmingham, set out to evaluate whether banning phone use throughout the school day leads to better mental health and wellbeing among adolescents. Given growing concerns over the potential negative effects of excessive smartphone use, such as increased anxiety and depression, disrupted sleep, reduced physical activity, lower academic performance, and greater classroom distractions, many schools have introduced restrictive phone policies. However, despite these widespread bans, there has been little empirical evidence assessing their actual effectiveness.

The study compared outcomes among students in schools with restrictive policies (where recreational phone use was not permitted) and those in schools with more permissive policies (where phones could be used during breaks or in designated areas).

The findings (published in The Lancet) suggest that simply prohibiting phone use during school hours is not enough to address these broader issues, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach to managing adolescent smartphone use.

The Methodology 

Conducted over a 12-month period ending in November 2023, the study involved 1,227 students aged 12 to 15 from 30 secondary schools across England. Among these schools, 20 had restrictive phone policies, prohibiting recreational phone use during school hours, while 10 had permissive policies, allowing phone use during breaks or in designated areas. The researchers collected data on various health and educational outcomes, including mental wellbeing (assessed using the Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale), anxiety and depression levels, physical activity, sleep patterns, academic attainment in English and Maths, and instances of disruptive classroom behaviour. Also, participants reported their smartphone and social media usage.

Key Findings 

The study found no significant differences between students in restrictive and permissive schools concerning mental wellbeing, anxiety, depression, physical activity, sleep, academic performance, or classroom behaviour. While students in schools with phone bans reported slightly less phone (approximately 40 minutes) and social media use (about 30 minutes) during school hours, there was no meaningful reduction in overall daily usage. On average, students across both types of schools used their smartphones between four to six hours daily.

Link Found, But Need To Do More 

In comments that appear to be somewhat contrary to the published findings, Dr. Victoria Goodyear, Associate Professor at the University of Birmingham and lead author of the study, says, “We did find a link between more time spent on phones and social media and worse outcomes, with worse mental wellbeing and mental health outcomes, less physical activity and poorer sleep, lower educational attainment and a greater level of disruptive classroom behaviour. This suggests that reducing this time spent on phones is an important focus. But we need to do more than focus on schools alone, and consider phone use within and outside of school, across a whole day and the whole week.”  

Implications of the Findings 

The results indicate that while excessive smartphone and social media use is associated with negative health and educational outcomes, banning phones during school hours alone is insufficient to address these issues. The study also seems to suggest that interventions should extend beyond the school environment, encompassing strategies that encourage responsible phone use throughout the entire day and week. A holistic approach of this kind could involve educating students on digital wellness, promoting alternative activities that do not involve screen time, and engaging parents in monitoring and guiding their children’s phone use.

Challenges and Criticisms 

One challenge highlighted by the study is the pervasive nature of smartphone use among adolescents, making it difficult for school policies alone to effect significant change. Critics may also argue that the study’s cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causation between phone policies and student outcomes. Also, the reliance on self-reported data for smartphone usage could introduce reporting biases. Further longitudinal research may, therefore, be needed to explore the long-term effects of phone use and the efficacy of comprehensive intervention strategies.

Comparative Studies 

While Birmingham University’s study is being hailed as a ‘landmark’ one, in fact, several other studies and campaigns over the past decade have focused on the impact of smartphone use on adolescents’ mental health, academic performance, and overall wellbeing. For example:

– In 2015, the London School of Economics conducted a study examining the effects of mobile phone bans in schools. The research found that students’ academic performance improved when cell phone usage was banned in schools. This ban not only helped students score higher in exams but also reduced the temptation to use cell phones for non-scholarly purposes.

– In 2024, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt spearheaded a global campaign to reduce smartphone dependency among children. His book, “The Anxious Generation,” explores the profound impact of smartphones on child development and the emerging mental health crisis since 2012. Haidt argues that excessive screen time displaces traditional child activities, contributing to widespread anxiety and depression. He emphasises the importance of creating smartphone-free environments in schools and encouraging more real-world play and social interactions. Despite some criticism about oversimplifying the connection between smartphones and mental health issues, Haidt’s efforts sparked significant discussion on the topic and inspired many to advocate for a balanced approach to technology in childhood.

The collective takeaway from all these kinds of studies appears to be that while reducing smartphone usage is beneficial, focusing solely on school policies may not be sufficient. Therefore, may commentators now believe a broader, more comprehensive approach involving educators, parents, and policymakers is essential to effectively address the challenges associated with adolescent smartphone use.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

While the SMART Schools study primarily focuses on adolescent wellbeing and education, its findings have broader implications for businesses, particularly those operating in the technology, education, and workplace wellbeing sectors. The key takeaway from the study (i.e. that simply banning smartphone usage is not enough to mitigate its negative effects) raises important questions about digital policies in professional and commercial settings.

For businesses in the technology and social media industries, the study highlights the growing scrutiny over excessive smartphone use and its potential negative impact on mental health. With increasing evidence suggesting that overuse of digital platforms can contribute to anxiety, depression, and sleep disruption, there is a mounting expectation for tech companies to take more responsibility. This could mean a greater push for ethical design, such as introducing more effective screen time management tools, promoting digital wellbeing features, and even redesigning platforms to encourage healthier usage habits. Companies that fail to acknowledge these concerns risk facing regulatory scrutiny and reputational damage, as governments and consumers alike demand action.

The findings also have implications for businesses operating in the education and training sectors. Schools are not the only places struggling to balance technology use with productivity. Employers, for example, also face challenges in managing digital distractions in the workplace. The study suggests that outright bans on devices may not be the most effective solution, prompting organisations to rethink their approach to workplace technology policies. Rather than restricting access to phones entirely, businesses may benefit from fostering a culture of responsible use, similar to the approach recommended for schools. Encouraging employees to set boundaries around phone use, providing digital wellbeing workshops, and even implementing workplace policies that promote focused, distraction-free time could improve productivity and overall job satisfaction.

Also, companies in the health and wellbeing sector may see increased demand for services that help individuals manage their screen time. From mindfulness apps and digital detox retreats to workplace wellbeing programmes that promote better work-life balance, businesses that provide solutions for managing technology overuse could find new opportunities for growth. As more research emerges on the effects of smartphone use, there may also be a stronger market for advisory services that help organisations develop balanced digital policies.

Businesses that rely on digital engagement, such as marketers, advertisers, and online content creators, should take note of shifting attitudes toward screen time. If consumers (particularly younger demographics) begin to adopt more mindful technology habits, engagement strategies may need to adapt. Brands that prioritise ethical marketing, promote digital wellbeing, or offer tools to help users moderate their time online may find themselves better positioned in a marketplace where excessive smartphone use is increasingly seen as a problem rather than a convenience.

In essence, the study’s findings appear to serve as a reminder that technology policies, whether in schools, workplaces, or broader society, need to be a bit more nuanced than simple bans. Businesses that proactively address these challenges, whether by promoting digital wellbeing, rethinking workplace policies, or innovating new ways to foster healthier technology habits, are likely to be best placed to navigate the evolving digital landscape.

Microsoft 365 subscribers are facing a price increase unless they actively opt out of Microsoft’s Copilot AI.

The tech giant has announced that its AI assistant will now be bundled into Microsoft 365 Personal and Family plans, leading to higher subscription fees for users who do not take action. While Microsoft claims this reflects added value, critics argue that the company is effectively forcing AI adoption by making the opt-out process cumbersome.

The price of Microsoft 365 Personal is rising from £5.99 to £8.99 per month, or from £59.99 to £89.99 per year. Microsoft 365 Family is increasing from £7.99 to £10.99 per month, or from £79.99 to £109.99 annually. This marks the first price hike for these plans since their introduction in 2020. Microsoft says the changes reflect over a decade of added benefits and investment in innovation. However, many subscribers are frustrated, as these increases primarily result from the inclusion of Copilot, rather than general improvements to the service.

Microsoft Copilot, the company’s AI-powered assistant, integrates directly into Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and OneNote, offering AI-generated text, data insights, and automation features. Microsoft argues that Copilot will improve productivity and is worth the additional cost. However, many users feel they are being forced into an AI subscription they did not ask for, with no clear option to decline at the outset. Those who do not want Copilot must actively opt out to avoid paying extra.

Reports indicate that the opt-out process itself can be frustratingly difficult. For example, instead of offering a simple option to remove Copilot, Microsoft users need to go to their account settings and select “Cancel subscription” before being presented with alternative plans. These include “Personal Classic” and “Family Classic,” which retain the original pricing but exclude Copilot. Some critics have described this as a ‘dark pattern’, i.e. a tactic designed to push users towards more expensive options by making the alternative harder to find.

With over 84 million Microsoft 365 subscribers, this move could generate an estimated £2.5 billion in additional annual revenue for Microsoft. The company has made significant investments in AI and cloud infrastructure, and this pricing shift suggests a push to monetise those developments. This mirrors similar moves by other tech firms, which are integrating AI into existing products while charging a premium for access.

For users who want to retain their current pricing, time is limited. Microsoft has stated that the ability to switch to Classic plans will only be available for a “limited time,” though it has not specified an exact deadline. Subscribers who do not act will see their costs rise automatically, making it essential for those who do not want Copilot to opt out as soon as possible.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For many Microsoft 365 subscribers, the issue here is not just the price increase, but the way it has been introduced. While Microsoft frames this as an enhancement to its service, the reality is that Copilot is an optional feature being added by default, with users expected to take action to avoid paying for it. The decision to make this an opt-out rather than opt-in change has left many feeling that they are being steered towards higher costs without a clear and upfront choice.

That said, some users may find Copilot a valuable addition, particularly those who regularly use Microsoft 365 applications for work or study. The AI-powered assistant has the potential to improve productivity, automate repetitive tasks, and generate useful insights. However, whether these benefits justify the increased cost is a decision that should ultimately be left to each user, rather than being imposed by default.

Microsoft’s approach highlights a growing trend in the tech industry, where companies are seeking to monetise AI by embedding it into existing services. While innovation inevitably comes with a price, the key concern here is transparency and user choice. By making the opt-out process more difficult than necessary, Microsoft risks alienating long-term subscribers who may feel that they are being pushed into paying for something they neither need nor want.

The message here is this : for those who do not wish to pay extra for Copilot, time is of the essence. Microsoft has confirmed that opting out is possible, but with no clear deadline on how long the Classic plans will remain available, delaying could lead to unnecessary costs. Users must therefore weigh up whether Copilot is worth the additional outlay and, if not, take steps to opt out before the price increase takes effect.

Australia has banned DeepSeek from all government devices, citing national security concerns.

The directive mandates the removal of all DeepSeek products from government systems. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke called it an “unacceptable risk.”

DeepSeek, a Chinese AI start-up, recently launched a chatbot rivalling Western models at a lower cost, but scrutiny over its data handling practices has grown. The platform stores user data on Chinese servers, raising concerns about potential government access. Italy and Taiwan have also restricted its use, while the US and several European nations are investigating its security implications.

The ban follows similar actions against Chinese tech firms, including Huawei and TikTok, reflecting wider geopolitical tensions. DeepSeek’s launch has also disrupted global AI investments, leading to a decline in AI-related stocks, including Australian chipmaker BrainChip.

For businesses, the move highlights the need for strict AI security policies. Organisations should vet AI applications, ensure compliance with data regulations, and restrict sensitive data interactions to mitigate risks.

London-based biomaterials company Modern Synthesis has unveiled a new class of nonwoven materials derived from ‘bacterial nanocellulose’.

Sustainable Alternative To Other Materials

These innovative textiles can be made to replace everything from plastic films to leathers, thereby offering a sustainable alternative to some of the fashion and automotive industries’ most environmentally damaging materials.

Who Is Modern Synthesis?

Founded by former Adidas designer Jen Keane and biomaterials specialist Ben Reeve, Modern Synthesis is an emerging leader in the development of next-generation textiles that move beyond petrochemical and animal-derived materials. The company, headquartered in London, is focused on harnessing bacterial nanocellulose to create a versatile range of fabrics that are not only high-performance but also fully biodegradable.

Keane, now CEO, came into the spotlight in 2018 when she successfully ‘grew’ a shoe using bacteria, demonstrating the potential of biofabrication. However, she believes the true potential lies not in shaping materials as they grow, but in using bacterial cellulose as a foundational fibre that can be manipulated and scaled like traditional textiles.

What is this New Material and Why is it Significant?

Modern Synthesis’ material is primarily made from bacterial nanocellulose, i.e. a natural fibre that is eight times stronger than steel when produced at the nanoscale (materials measured in nanometres, typically less than 100 nm). Unlike plant-based cellulose (which requires intensive farming, land, and water), bacterial nanocellulose is cultivated through fermentation. This makes it a highly efficient and sustainable alternative.

What sets Modern Synthesis apart is its proprietary process, which integrates bacterial nanocellulose with a woven or knitted textile scaffold. This method allows the final material to be fine-tuned for different textures and mechanical properties, making it possible to replace synthetic leathers, coated fabrics, and even high-performance technical textiles.

Unlike most bio-based leather alternatives (which often rely on synthetic binders to achieve durability), Modern Synthesis’ process is entirely free from petrochemicals. The result is a fully biodegradable material that behaves much like conventional textiles but with a significantly reduced environmental footprint.

How is the Material Made?

The production process is an advanced form of microbial fermentation. The company uses a strain of bacteria known as Komagataeibacter rhaeticus, which naturally produces nanocellulose when fed with agricultural sugars. As the bacteria grow, they deposit nanocellulose fibres around a specially designed yarn scaffold, resulting in a unique, nonwoven textile structure.

This controlled approach allows for the fine-tuning of material properties, such as flexibility, strength, and texture, by adjusting the bacterial growth conditions and the composition of the scaffold. Unlike synthetic textiles that require chemical treatments to achieve similar properties, Modern Synthesis’ materials develop these characteristics organically.

Environmental and Industry Implications

The implications for both the fashion industry and the wider materials market could be vast. For example, leather and synthetic textiles, such as polyurethane-based vegan leathers, are major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, plastic pollution, and deforestation. The carbon footprint of Modern Synthesis’ bacterial nanocellulose-based textiles is expected to be significantly lower than that of both traditional leather and synthetic alternatives.

Water usage is another key area of impact. Traditional leather production requires thousands of litres of water per square metre, whereas bacterial nanocellulose fermentation uses a fraction of that amount. Also, Modern Synthesis’ material does not involve toxic tanning chemicals, further reducing its environmental impact.

For businesses, this innovation could offer a way to meet growing consumer demand for sustainability without sacrificing quality or performance. Luxury brands and sportswear companies have already shown interest, with Danish fashion house Ganni collaborating with Modern Synthesis in 2023 to create a handbag made entirely without petrochemicals.

Potential Applications

Beyond fashion, Modern Synthesis’ materials have potential applications in:

– Footwear. As a lightweight, durable replacement for leather and synthetic uppers.

– Automotive interiors. The material’s high-temperature resistance and durability make it an attractive option for dashboards and upholstery.

– Smart textiles. The company is exploring how nanocellulose can be integrated with electronics for wearable technology.

Keane has highlighted the versatility of the material, stating, “Cellulosic materials don’t melt like synthetics do. If you think about car dashboards, how they start to warp when left in the sun too long—our materials won’t do that.”

Challenges and Limitations

While Modern Synthesis’ technology seems promising, there are still many hurdles to overcome before widespread adoption. For example, the company recognises that scaling production to meet industrial demand remains a major challenge. With this in mind, the company is currently working to increase production at its pilot facility fivefold, but larger-scale manufacturing will require further investment and infrastructure.

Another challenge is recyclability. While the material is biodegradable, ensuring it is also recyclable without compromising its durability remains a key focus. Many bio-based materials require additional treatments that can hinder their ability to be repurposed at the end of their life cycle. Modern Synthesis is understood to be actively working with “green chemistries” to develop formulations that balance performance with circularity.

Who Else is Developing Similar Materials?

Modern Synthesis is actually part of a growing movement towards microbial-based textiles. Other players exploring bacterial nanocellulose include:

– MycoWorks, which specialises in mushroom-derived mycelium leather.

– Bolt Threads. Developed Mylo, another mycelium-based leather alternative.

– Ananas Anam, the creators of Piñatex, a plant-based leather alternative derived from pineapple leaves.

However, most of these alternatives still require synthetic binders, whereas Modern Synthesis’ approach stands out for being entirely bio-based and customisable at the nanoscale.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

Modern Synthesis’ bacterial nanocellulose-based textiles could be an important advancement in the quest for sustainable materials. By leveraging microbial fermentation to create high-performance, biodegradable fabrics, the company is offering an alternative that challenges both traditional leather and synthetic textiles on environmental grounds. Unlike many bio-based alternatives that still rely on petrochemical additives, this new class of material is not only renewable but also fully biodegradable, making it a compelling solution for industries seeking to reduce their ecological footprint.

However, while the potential is undeniable, challenges remain. Scaling up production to meet commercial demand is a critical hurdle, as is ensuring the material can be seamlessly integrated into existing supply chains. Also, achieving true circularity (i.e. where the material is not just biodegradable but also efficiently recyclable) will be essential in determining its long-term impact. Modern Synthesis appears to be actively addressing these concerns, but success will likely depend on continued innovation and investment.

What appears to set Modern Synthesis apart is not just its scientific approach but its vision for redefining how materials are made. By collaborating with major fashion brands and exploring applications beyond apparel, the company is positioning its technology as a viable replacement for some of the most environmentally damaging materials in use today. If production challenges can be overcome, bacterial nanocellulose textiles could play a key role in reducing reliance on fossil fuels, lowering carbon emissions, and transforming industries that have long been dependent on resource-intensive materials.

This innovation could, therefore, offer a promising glimpse into the future of sustainable manufacturing. While it may take time to achieve widespread adoption, the foundations are being laid for a possible material revolution and one that moves beyond extraction and towards biofabrication. If Modern Synthesis and others in the field can bridge the gap between laboratory breakthroughs and large-scale industry use, bacterial nanocellulose textiles could become a defining material of the sustainable era.

If you want to sell to more customers, check out this clever way to create your ideal customer avatar, directly from social media data.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, it may be best to download it first]

If you need multiple windows of the same app (e.g. File Explorer, Notepad, or Word), you don’t have to navigate menus. Here’s how to quickly and easily open more windows:

How to do it :

– Hold Shift and Click on an open app’s icon in the taskbar.

– This will launch a new window of that app instantly.

– This is perfect for multitasking, such as working on multiple documents at once.