Many people turn to the fiery blend of roots and citrus as a quick health kick to start the day, often in the form of a ginger shot. But as an avid Ginger Shot fan myself, I was shocked to realise how wasteful buying small shots for £1-£2 a go was. In a bid to tighten my budget and ditch single-use plastics, I experimented with homemade recipes. And I’ve finally found a winner.
When the colder weather often brings a rise in cold and flu, it’s no wonder these shots are growing in popularity. Ginger and turmeric have long histories in traditional remedies; both roots are rich in natural compounds with links to easing nausea and supporting digestion. London nutritionist Clariss Lenherr said: “Ginger possesses anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties attributed to compounds such as gingerol, so ginger shots may help support a healthy immune system.” Making ginger shots at home is straightforward, and after several attempts using various ingredients such as apple juice, carrots, oranges and honey, I’ve simplified my recipe to just four natural components.
The recipe, which is similar to Aline Cueni’s formula of the ‘Aline Made blog’, calls upon lemon juice, an apple, turmeric, root ginger, and water.
Aline also suggests sweetening the mixture with date syrup, but I don’t think you need it. A drizzle of honey will do.
To make this fiery juice at home, you will need a blender and a sieve to remove the pulp from the ginger. It’s best blended with the skin left on the ginger.
Wash the ginger and apple, then chop both ingredients into small pieces. Add them to a blender and follow with the juice of half a lemon, avoiding the pips.
Pour in one cup of tap water and add the turmeric before securing the lid and blitzing everything for a few seconds.
The colour should be a bold yellow-orange hue with a thick consistency.
Place a sieve over a bowl or jug and pour the mixture into it. Allow the liquid to sieve through, using the back of a spoon to push it along if needed.
Transfer the finished ginger shot mixture to a clean, dry glass bottle or drink straight away. If you don’t like it as fiery, dilute the mixture with more water or add a drizzle of honey or syrup to sweeten it.
The mixture should make around eight servings. Store in the fridge for three to five days, and always shake the mixture well before pouring.
But what if you could enjoy these valuable perks forever, without having to retain your status through your stay activity every year?
You’d then have the freedom of exploring other hotel brands and accommodation types, all while taking comfort in your VIP treatment anytime you do stay with a Marriott.
As it turns out, Marriott Bonvoy also has a lifetime elite status program, which gives you elite-level perks during stays for the rest of your life.
Each lifetime status level requires you to both earn a certain number of elite qualifying nights throughout the history of your loyalty account, as well as hold that status level for a certain number of years in total:
Lifetime Silver Elite: 250 elite qualifying nights + five years of Silver Elite
Lifetime Gold Elite: 400 elite qualifying nights + seven years of Gold Elite
Lifetime Platinum Elite: 600 elite qualifying nights + 10 years of Platinum Elite
(There are also some Marriott Bonvoy members with Lifetime Titanium Elite status, although that’s a grandfathered status level from the days of the Marriott/Starwood merger that is no longer available to be earned.)
You can find your Marriott Bonvoy lifetime status tracker on the online dashboard or the mobile app. Fill up both counters – one for elite qualifying nights and one for status years – to progress to the next tier of lifetime status.
Which Nights & Years Count Towards Marriott Lifetime Status?
All Marriott Bonvoy elite qualifying nights and status qualifications should count towards your lifetime status totals, regardless of whether you earned them through organic stay activity, credit cards, promotions, or one-time gestures from the program itself.
Meanwhile, if you were to get both a personal and business US-issued Bonvoy card, you’d earn 30 elite nights every year towards your lifetime status totals. You can increase this number to 40 if you hold the Amex US Marriott Bonvoy Brilliant Card and the Amex US Marriott Bonvoy Business Card, since the former card comes with 25 elite nights and the latter with 15.
Similarly, your lifetime elite nights also encompass any bonus nights earned from a Double Elite Nights promotion, which typically comes around once a year, usually at the beginning of the year.
When it comes to Lifetime Elite years, Marriott counts both the year in which you earn elite status and any calendar years in which you continue to hold that status.
For example, if you reach Platinum Elite in 2024 by earning 50 elite nights, then both 2024 (qualification year) and 2025 (benefits carried all year) would almost certainly count toward your Lifetime Platinum tally.
As for 2026, your Platinum benefits would still be in effect through February, so Marriott’s terms suggest it may also count as an eligible year.
The language doesn’t require that you retain status for the entire calendar year, but since it isn’t crystal clear, it’s best to treat 2026 as a possible bonus year rather than a guarantee.
It also doesn’t matter how you earn that status in the first place.
Whether you’ve earned through hotel stays, promotions, or complimentary credit card perks.
If you hold either card continuously, each year would count toward your Lifetime Gold tally.
Similarly, if you hold the U.S. Marriott Bonvoy Brilliant Card, the complimentary Platinum Elite status it provides will count toward the 10 years required for Lifetime Platinum Elite.
Earn years towards Lifetime Elite Status simply by holding a credit card
Marriott Lifetime Status vs. Earned Status
Besides the permanent nature of lifetime status, are there any other major differences between lifetime status and regular status earned every year?
The only notable difference lies in the Annual Choice Benefit: only Marriott Bonvoy members who cross the 50- or 75-night thresholds in a calendar year are eligible to choose an Annual Choice Benefit, such as a set of five Nightly Upgrade Awards.
Even if you’re a Lifetime Platinum Elite member, you won’t receive a choice benefit unless you actually stay 50 elite nights in a year. This creates some incentive for continued loyalty after you’ve achieved lifetime status.
In terms of the actual hotel experience, there shouldn’t be any difference between a Platinum Elite and a Lifetime Platinum Elite member in terms of how they’re treated at a hotel.
It’s not quite clear whether or not hotels can see that you’re a lifetime status member, and even if they could, there’s nothing in the terms and conditions that entitles lifetime status members to anything more than regular earned status members.
Since Platinum Elite status is where you get the most meaningful benefits like free breakfast and the occasional suite upgrade, it can make sense to pursue Lifetime Platinum Elite as a long-term objective.
By contrast, Lifetime Silver Elite and Lifetime Gold Elite don’t really add much value — they’re best viewed as stepping stones.
That said, it’s worth pausing before committing to this “status marathon.”
Marriott Bonvoy has been trending downhill in recent years: award redemptions often cost more, and cash rates are sometimes higher than comparable chains in markets like Asia or the Middle East.
Chasing status with mattress runs just for the sake of qualifying may not be the best use of your time or money.
If you stay 30-35 nights a year at hotels, you can reach Lifetime Platinum Elite status after about 10 years’ time.
As a Canadian, you’d still need to stay 30-35 nights a year even with the help of Marriott Bonvoy American Express Card, a fairly steep hurdle for most travellers.
Simply holding the Marriott Bonvoy Brilliant Card for 10 years would cover your 10 years of Platinum Elite status.
Pair it with the US Bonvoy Business Card, and you’ll also stack up 400 nights along the way, leaving you with just 200 nights to earn organically — about 20 nights a year.
Alternatively, hold the pair for 15 years without travelling at all and you’d reach the 600-night threshold entirely through credit cards. (But really, why pay the fees if you aren’t traveling and making use of the perks?)
For those who are close to the nights requirement but still lacking years, you could pause at Year 8, coast into Year 9 without lifting a finger, and even get Year 10 if your benefits carry into the following calendar year.
Speaking personally, I’m sitting at 458 nights and six years of Platinum.
I reached Titanium this year, which means 2026 will bump me to seven eligible years.
In 2027, if Marriott continues to offer soft landing policy, I’ll be downgraded just one tier to Platinum and get credit for an eighth year
In 2028, I’ll make a push for Platinum again, which would bump me to nine.
By 2029, I’d hit 10 Platinum years and lock in Lifetime Platinum status. Thanks to credit card nights and regular travel, the nights side doesn’t worry me much, it’s really just a matter of timing the years right.
For many Marriott loyalists, Lifetime Platinum Elite is an achievable target with some planning.
The key is to balance the pursuit with your actual travel needs: don’t go out of your way to mattress-run unless you’re very close to hitting a milestone, and keep in mind that flexibility with other hotel chains can sometimes be just as rewarding.
Once you’ve locked in Lifetime Platinum, you’ll always have a safety net of benefits whenever you return to Marriott, while giving yourself the freedom to explore elsewhere.
In the end, Lifetime Platinum is worth chasing only if it fits naturally into your travel patterns or if you can shortcut the journey with US credit cards.
If you’re starting from scratch, it’s usually better to focus on maximizing overall hotel value and stay flexibility rather than forcing a Marriott-only strategy.
Conclusion
Marriott Bonvoy offers a fairly approachable lifetime elite status program to complement its regular elite structure, and Lifetime Platinum Elite status would be a worthy goal for anyone who’s serious about leveraging rewards points to raise their travel game in the long run.
With the right credit card setup in place, many travellers wouldn’t need to go too far out of their way to reach Lifetime Platinum Elite. As long as you intend to retain Platinum Elite status year after year, you’ll get there eventually after a decade or so.
By leveraging promotions that offer double elite qualifying nights, you can boost your numbers and reach the night thresholds much faster.
A new animated movie made mainly with AI could challenge the time and resources it takes to put together a Hollywood production.
According to a Sunday report from The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is giving its tools and computing resources to a new feature-length movie called “Critterz,”which follows the journey of forest creatures who embark on a quest after a stranger intrudes on their home.
Chad Nelson, a creative specialist at OpenAI, conceptualized “Critterz” three years ago while experimenting with OpenAI’s image generation tool Dall-E. It was originally a short film funded by OpenAI that was released in 2023. Nelson has since joined forces with movie production companies in London and Los Angeles to make his vision of a feature film a reality.It’s unclear if OpenAI will be marketing the full-length movie.
Nelson says that the film will demonstrate what OpenAI’s tools can do, creating a highly visible (the plan is to debut at the Cannes Film Festival in May) use case for the technology.
“OpenAI can say what its tools do all day long, but it’s much more impactful if someone does it,” Nelson told WSJ. “That’s a much better case study than me building a demo.”
After being introduced at Cannes, “Critterz” is expected to be released in theaters globally next year. In a press release on Monday, Vertigo Films said the film will be funded by Vertigo’s Paris-based parent company, Federation Studios.
With a budget of less than $30 million, the movie would cost less to make than a standard Hollywood film. For reference, major Hollywood productions like Disney’s “Tangled” cost over $200 million to create, while the studio’s “Tarzan” cost $130 million. If successful, it could cause Hollywood to take notice and use AI for future films.
“Critterz” would also take less time to produce: The production team is aiming to create it in nine months instead of the standard three to four years. Production has started, with casting decisions aiming to go out within the next few weeks.
Other Hollywood studios have already begun experimenting with AI. In July, Netflix disclosed that it had used AI to generate a scene on an Argentine TV show called “El Eternauta.” Meanwhile, Disney has experimented with tapping into AI to create clones or digital body doubles of actors.
Entertainment companies have also pushed back against unauthorized AI use. In June, Disney and Universal filed the first major Hollywood lawsuit against AI startup Midjourney, alleging that the startup copied its characters from copyrighted works without permission.
A new animated movie made mainly with AI could challenge the time and resources it takes to put together a Hollywood production.
According to a Sunday report from The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is giving its tools and computing resources to a new feature-length movie called “Critterz,”which follows the journey of forest creatures who embark on a quest after a stranger intrudes on their home.
Chad Nelson, a creative specialist at OpenAI, conceptualized “Critterz” three years ago while experimenting with OpenAI’s image generation tool Dall-E. It was originally a short film funded by OpenAI that was released in 2023. Nelson has since joined forces with movie production companies in London and Los Angeles to make his vision of a feature film a reality.It’s unclear if OpenAI will be marketing the full-length movie.
Sam Altman’s Worldcoin is the latest cryptocurrency to get the so-called treasury strategy treatment — when a publicly traded company uses a significant amount of cash on its balance sheet to buy digital assets.
On Monday, Eightco surged more than 3,000%, from $18 per share to $45 per share, off the announcement that it will purchase $270 million of Worldcoin — while Worldcoin skyrocketed nearly 50%, from $1.03 to $1.53.
The digital identity cryptocurrency project wants to authenticate every person on Earth by scanning their irises, generating a unique “IrisCode” but not, the company says, saving their biometric data.
Sam Altman co-founded Worldcoin in 2019 with the goal of verifying “humaness.” AFP via Getty Images
Eightco will change its name to Orbs, an homage to the Worldcoin mission, when the deal officially closes later this week, pending Nasdaq’s approval.
“This is not just a crypto token strategy … this is tech infrastructure,” Dan Ives, Wedbush Securities analyst and Eightco’s new chairman, told me in an exclusive interview. “There is a ceiling on the future of AI without true human proof identification … Worldcoin is integral to the AI buildout.”
Ives and investor Tom Lee believe Worldcoin’s appeal lies in its ability to “verify humanness” — that a user is a person and not a bot filling out surveys, taking online exams, signing documents or even appearing on dating apps.
Tom Lee (left) and Dan Ives, pictured with a device that scans irises, are betting on Worldcoin’s popularity increasing in the coming years. Courtesy of Marcy Simon
In a world increasingly dominated by AI agents and bots, delineating between humanity and artificial intelligence will become incredibly valuable.
“On a dating app you might match with a tennis pro or supermodel but it’s a robot … on a future dating app, you’ll have an icon that says ‘proof of human,’” said Lee, who is the chairman of BitMine — which invested $20 million in Eightco.
This story is part of NYNext, an indispensable insider insight into the innovations, moonshots and political chess moves that matter most to NYC’s power players (and those who aspire to be).
“For companies looking to make an advertising push, they’ll shell out a lot more for ads targeted to verified humans,” Lee added.
Of course, the idea of Worldcoin scanning everyone’s iris might sounds downright dystopian to some critics.
But Lee counters this concern, arguing that, unlike companies such as Apple, which store biometric data, Worldcoin generates a cryptographic hash — a zero-knowledge proof that confirms humanness without storing or exposing personal biometric information.
The World App stores this IrisCode data on the Worldcoin blockchain, promising privacy.
Worldcoin has scanned 16 million people’s irises and aims to reach 100 million this year. Worldcoin
“This is the intersection of AI and crypto,” Ives said.
However, Worldcoin already faces regulatory scrutiny in countries like Portugal and temporary bans in China, Spain and Hong Kong over biometric data privacy concerns.
As dozens of companies embrace Digital Asset Treasuries (DATs) by holding Bitcoin and Ethereum, Eightco’s choice of Worldcoin as its primary treasury asset is strategic because its governance token status allows holders to influence the World Network’s development, potentially shaping security and policy decisions.
Unlike Bitcoin and Ethereum, which are easily purchased on user-friendly platforms like Coinbase and Robinhood, acquiring Worldcoin requires you scan your iris or create a digital wallet and purchase it through another digital coin like Ethereum.
Worldcoin, co-founded by Sam Altman and Alex Blania in 2019, has verified over 16 million human identities and aims to reach 100 million users in the next year as it scales its global digital identity network. Users who verify their identity receive tokens to encourage participation.
“AI and Wall Street are moving to the blockchain,” Ives said.
Many medical experts are rightly alarmed by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s unscientific claims — from debunked vaccine-autism links to exaggerated warnings about food dyes and ADHD.
Their outrage grew when he cut the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices from 17 members to seven, some sharing his views, and fired Centers for Disease Control Director Susan Monarez, prompting three top CDC officials to resign.
Yet these same experts mostly stayed silent when the CDC, under pressure from teachers’ unions, kept children out of school for nearly two years — while Europe largely stayed open — or when public health authorities leaned on social-media platforms to censor medical voices that disagreed with them.
Only now, with power shifted, do they sound the alarm about CDC politicization.
The contrast is striking: Outrage seems to follow the politics of power rather than the principles of public health.
Supporters of government involvement in public health never expected a figure like Kennedy to run the nation’s public-health system.
But here’s the reality: No federal agency, even the CDC, is immune to political, ideological or special-interest pressures.
History shows that public-health agencies can be swayed by powerful unions, activist groups or lobbying organizations.
The challenge is not the occasional controversial leader — it’s the system itself.
Science moves forward through debate in professional societies, not government diktats.
Yet once officials issue “guidelines,” they often become de facto mandates, crowding out competing views and presenting themselves as the public’s “official truth.”
During COVID, the public watched as guidelines on masks, school closures and vaccines shifted with political winds — sometimes disregarding emerging data or alternative interpretations.
Citizens and doctors alike struggled to know which recommendations reflected science and which reflected politics.
Founded in 1946 as the Communicable Disease Center to fight malaria, smallpox and tuberculosis, the CDC initially focused on research and support for state and local health agencies.
Its primary role was logistical coordination and helping local health authorities implement effective disease control measures.
Over time, it expanded into personal health matters and areas only tangentially related to public health, like firearm violence — classic mission creep that attracts lobbyists like moths to a flame.
Public health works best locally. Communities differ in demographics, population density and risk.
Ideally, the CDC should return to supporting and coordinating with local agencies, leaving personal health decisions to patients and their doctors.
This approach also encourages innovation, allows for tailored responses, and keeps public health grounded in evidence rather than ideology.
Recent developments are encouraging. Several professional medical organizations publicly disagreed with the CDC’s COVID booster recommendations and offered alternatives.
New Mexico’s health department will work with its pharmacy board to include guidance from other reputable organizations, and California, Oregon and Washington are forming a “health alliance” to develop independent vaccine recommendations.
This pushback demonstrates that even in a highly centralized system, states and professional groups can reclaim influence over public-health decisions.
As a physician, I generally support the new CDC and Food and Drug Administration COVID booster guidance, which aligns US policy more closely with other countries.
But I oppose forcing barriers on people who want a vaccine that officials say they don’t need.
Nevertheless, the rebellion by some states and several professional and scientific societies is positive — even if, deep down, their motivation could be partisan politics.
It might be that both sides in this battle are coming to realize that CDC mission creep is harmful to our public and personal health.
Congress should restore the CDC to its original role as the Communicable Disease Center, focusing on support and coordination, rather than bureaucratic overreach and political signaling.
If that occurs, Americans — and their children — will be better protected by a public-health system that genuinely safeguards public health, instead of one that intrudes into every personal choice and political debate.
Jeffrey A. Singer, MD, practices general surgery in Phoenix, and is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. His latest book is Your Body, Your Health Care (Cato Institute).
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is preparing a report that will allegedly claim a link between prenatal Tylenol (acetaminophen) use and autism, but current evidence does not support a causal relationship, and major medical groups continue to recommend prudent acetaminophen use in pregnancy when indicated; meanwhile, Tylenol parent Kenvue’s shares sold off sharply following the reports and remain volatile.
What’s in the planned report
Multiple outlets report that the forthcoming HHS autism report led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is expected to suggest that acetaminophen use in pregnancy is linked to autism and to highlight low folate levels, while pointing to folinic acid (leucovorin) as a potential way to reduce symptoms for some individuals with autism, according to people familiar with the draft cited by the Wall Street Journal, which was first to report the news.
HHS has said conclusions should not be assumed until the final report is released, and Kenvue has stated it has continually reviewed the science and sees no causal link between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism.
Past claims about autism
Fortune Well has contextualized RFK Jr.’s broader claims by reporting his focus on “environmental toxins” as key drivers of rising autism diagnoses, framing his assertions amid scientific uncertainty on specific non-genetic causes.
Fortune Well also scrutinized RFK Jr.’s earlier “MAHA report,” reporting that it cited nonexistent or misinterpreted studies, signaling concerns about rigor and interpretation likely to shape reception of any new claims about acetaminophen.
What the science says
A very large 2024 JAMA study of nearly 2.5 million Swedish children, using sibling-control analyses to account for familial confounding, found no association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and diagnoses of autism, ADHD, or intellectual disability, a finding also summarized by NIH and advocacy groups.
Conventional adjusted models often show small associations, but these are likely explained by unmeasured factors; in the JAMA study, the slight risk elevations disappeared in sibling analyses, while a prior meta-analysis without sibling controls reported ~19% higher odds for autism symptoms and ~21% for ADHD symptoms, illustrating how confounding can influence results.
Major professional societies (ACOG and SMFM) continue to recommend acetaminophen as a first-line option for pain and fever in pregnancy when medically indicated, at the lowest effective dose for the shortest necessary time, and they do not advise changing practice based on current evidence.
A 2021 “precautionary” consensus statement urged caution with acetaminophen in pregnancy, but ACOG and other groups responded that the evidence for causality is weak and does not justify altering clinical guidance, underscoring the difference between association signals and proof of cause.
Kenvue stock reaction
Reports that RFK Jr.’s upcoming HHS document will tie Tylenol in pregnancy to autism triggered a sharp selloff in Kenvue shares, with coverage noting declines of more than 6% intraday and a notably severe session for the stock when it fell over 14% before paring losses.
Additional outlets highlighted that Kenvue was among the market’s most active movers as the news spread, and global coverage described the company’s stock as “hit” following the report chatter.
Recent trading data show wide intraday swings and heavy volume in the aftermath, with a day’s range that captured a deep drop and partial recovery, underscoring ongoing volatility rather than a settled trend.
The planned report is expected to assert an acetaminophen–autism link, but the strongest recent evidence does not support causation, and leading medical bodies still endorse careful, indicated use of acetaminophen in pregnancy; Kenvue’s stock has been under pressure amid the headlines and remains volatile.
For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.
Fortune Global Forum returns Oct. 26–27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and global leaders will gather for a dynamic, invitation-only event shaping the future of business. Apply for an invitation.
Warren Buffett isn’t really known for having significant investment in FTSE 100 companies. The only one Berkshire Hathaway has an interest in right now is spirits company Diageo.
In the past, however, Buffett used to have a decent-sized stake in Tesco (LSE:TSCO). And I think the Oracle of Omaha’s reasons for selling the stock are worth paying attention to today.
Buffett’s Tesco investment
Buffett began buying shares in Tesco in 2006 and by 2012 had come to own around 5% of the entire company. But the Berkshire CEO eventually sold his entire stake between 2013 and 2014.
One reason for Buffett’s change in view was Aldi and Lidl emerged as genuine rivals. But the other was the discovery that Tesco had been inflating profits by recognising revenue from suppliers in its income statement too early.
The firm launched an investigation, but it still suffered significant damage to its reputation. It was also fined £129m by the Serious Fraud Office and £85m by the Financial Conduct Authority.
That was enough to convince Buffett to sell, but the Oracle of Omaha didn’t immediately ditch the FTSE 100 retailer. Instead, Berkshire unloaded shares gradually as the situation unfolded.
Buffett later noted that the strategy of being patient probably caused Berkshire’s losses to be greater than they would otherwise have been. But this was difficult to see at the time.
The accounting issue is now well behind Tesco. But there’s another UK company in my portfolio that’s dealing with a strikingly similar issue at the moment.
WH Smith
Last month, WH Smith (LSE:SMWH) announced that this year’s profits are set to be around £70m lower than expected. The reason: booking revenues from suppliers too early.
The reported issue is in the firm’s North American division. The exact scope of the problem, however, is unclear – there’s an investigation going on to establish that.
The parallels between the issues at Tesco a decade ago and the current problems at WH Smith are striking. But there are a couple of important differences.
One is that – as far as I can see – WH Smith isn’t facing the same competitive challenges Tesco was. Having sold off its high street operations to focus on travel outlets, I think it’s in a strong position.
Another is that a number of Tesco’s historic fines were to do with breaching industry standard rules around the treatment of grocery suppliers. These don’t apply to WH Smith.
The two situations aren’t the same, but they do have a lot in common. And this gives investors a tricky choice, which is why I’ve been thinking about Warren Buffett’s approach to Tesco.
A dilemma
My instinct with my WH Smith investment is to follow Warren Buffett’s example with Tesco. That involves being patient and waiting, rather than selling immediately.
This is risky, and the benefit of hindsight reveals that Berkshire might have done better with a different approach. But investing always involves risk.
All investors can do is what seems best at the time. And I think there are still good reasons for optimism about WH Smith over the long term.
I still think the firm’s competitive position is a long-term strength. But I can understand why other investors might think there’s too much risk to consider buying the stock at the moment.
The two other Britons who lost their lives have previously been named as theatre director Kayleigh Smith, 36, and her partner Will Nelson, a 44-year-old lecturer at Manchester’s Arden School of Theatre.
Image: Kayleigh Smith and Will Nelson shared a photo of their time in Lisbon. Pic: Instagram/Kayleigh Smith
Authorities have said the likely cause of the crash was an issue with a cable which connected the streetcar’s two cabins.
The Gloria funicular, which is 140 years old, was packed with passengers when it came off the rails, and 21 people were injured in the tragedy, including five seriously.
Mr Young, also known as Dave, was from Holyhead in Wales, and had a long career as a customs officer, according to his family.
They said in a statement released by North Wales Police: “A lifelong transport enthusiast, in retirement, he enjoyed visiting heritage railways and tramways around the world.
“It is a comfort to his sons, their mother, and his brothers that his final moments were in pursuit of the hobby which gave him so much happiness.”
The funicular features two separate yellow carriages which travel between Restauradores Square in central Lisbon and the Bairro Alto area, with journeys taking three minutes. It is electrified and uses steel cables.
Image: The remains of the crashed funicular carriage in Lisbon. Pic: Reuters
The derailment resulted in one of the carriages crashing into a building at a bend in a road.
In its first investigative report into the crash, Portugal’s Office for Air and Rail Accident Investigations said on Saturday the cabins had travelled “not more than about six metres” when they “suddenly lost the balancing force provided by the cable connecting them”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:53
Lisbon funicular crash: What happened to the cable car?
The report stated: “Cabin No. 2 suddenly reversed, its movement halting approximately 10 meters beyond due to its partial excursion past the end of the track and the burial of the underside of the trambolho (trolley) at the end of the cable trench.
“Cabin No. 1, at the top of Calcada da Gloria, continued its downward movement, increasing its speed.
“The cabin’s brakeman immediately applied the pneumatic brake and the hand brake to try to halt the movement. These actions had no effect in stopping or reducing the cabin’s speed, and it continued accelerating down the slope.”
Follow the World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
An examination of the wreckage showed “the connecting cable had given way” at the attachment point to the cabin at the top of the hill, the report added.
Also among the dead were five Portuguese nationals, two Canadians, two South Koreans, one American, one French, one Swiss and one Ukrainian.
A preliminary and final report are expected to be published later.
A federal agent wears a badge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement while standing outside an immigration courtroom at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building in New York City, on June 10.
Yuki Iwamura/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Yuki Iwamura/AP
The Department of Homeland Security announced it’s launching an immigration enforcement operation in Illinois in the latest escalation of federal action on U.S. cities and states led by Democrats.
The agency said in a post on X that the U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement’s “Operation Midway Blitz” is in honor of Katie Abraham, a 20-year-old woman it says was killed in January in a drunk-driving hit-and-run accident involving a man who is an undocumented immigrant in Illinois.
Officials identified him as Julio Cucul-Bol. NPR has not confirmed details about the incident. The DHS post featured an interview with the parents of the victim, Joe and Michelle Abraham, who said the incident took place in Urbana, Ill.
DHS says the ICE operation targets “criminal illegal aliens who flocked to Chicago and Illinois” because they knew Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker’s sanctuary policies would protect them.
This latest announcement about Illinois follows a summer in which the Trump administration has targeted Democratic-led cities for increased immigration enforcement and National Guard deployments.
It also follows an earlier announcement from DHS that said it was launching a new immigration enforcement effort in Massachusetts, according to reporting from NPR member station WBUR in Boston.
Meanwhile, National Guard troops — some of them armed — are still patrolling the streets of Washington, D.C., ostensibly to address the administration’s concerns about crime. This is despite the fact that the city is experiencing a 30-year low in crime, according to the U.S. Justice Department from earlier this year. And earlier Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with President Trump, allowing immigration raids in Los Angeles to continue. This allows immigration agents to conduct “roving patrols” and profile people based on their appearance in Los Angeles and Southern California.
Chicago intervention
The announcement that Illinois will be the target of increased immigration enforcement comes after a confusing weekend during which Trump escalated threats toward Chicago and then walked them back.
Throughout the weekend, Trump maintained that the National Guard would be sent to the city and to other major U.S. cities, all led by Democrats, to fight crime and to step up immigration arrests and deportations.
Like in Washington, D.C., where Trump sent National Guard troops last month, data shows that violent crime has gone down in Chicago in recent years.
Trump posted on social media that Chicago was about to find out why the Department of Defense is called the “Department of War.” (Last week, the president signed an executive order renaming the department, but it would take an act of Congress to make that official.)
In response to Trump’s post, Pritzker this weekend wrote on X that Trump was “threatening to go to war with an American city. This is not a joke. This is not normal.”
But then Trump later told reporters on Sunday as he left the White House, “We’re not going to war. We’re going to clean up our cities. We’re going to clean them up so they don’t kill five people every weekend. That’s not war, that’s common sense.”
As Trump’s back and forth continued, residents in Chicago expressed deep concern about what this threatened federal action would look like. It appears, for now, this federal presence will take the shape of an increase in ICE agents on the streets. As of Monday afternoon, there has been no indication there’s been an uptick in immigration enforcement.
Boston faces enforcement surge
Over the weekend, DHS confirmed to WBUR that it is launching a second immigration enforcement surge throughout Massachusetts, but didn’t specify how long there would be increased ICE activity.
This enforcement effort may be heavily focused on the city of Boston, according to WBUR which reported that the DHS specifically called out Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, claiming the city’s sanctuary laws “attract and harbor criminals.”
In May, federal immigration officials said they arrested nearly 1,500 people as part of a month-long crackdown called “Operation Patriot,” WBUR reported. DHS refers to this new surge as “Patriot 2.0.”
This kind of federal intervention in major U.S. cities and states is not likely to stop any time soon, as Trump has also threatened to send troops to Baltimore and New Orleans in recent days.
NPR’s Joe Hernandez and Kat Lonsdorf contributed to this story.
The device will look like an iPhone 16 with a 6.3-in. display, possibly at 120Hz. Colors may include black, white, steel gray, green, purple, and light blue. The processor will be a 3nm A19 chip, with advanced thermal performance and support for Apple’s own network chips.
iPhone 17 Pro
More durable, the devices might use an aluminium frame and less glass than before. The camera system changes too, becoming a larger horizontal bump across the width of the device, featuring three lenses and up to 8x zoom. Better battery life and a super speedy A19 Pro chip (with more RAM) are also on the tab;e. The Pro Max brings all the above with an even better camera.
iPhone 17 Air
Replacing the iPhone 17 Plus, the star of the show might be the new iPhone Air. Set to replace the iPhone Plus, the iPhone Air is just 5.5mm thin and carries a 6.6-in. display. Lighter, it will use AI to help optimize battery life, comes in four colors, including sky blue, and might cost around $1,000. (The price is tariff sensitive). It may use an eSIM, Apple’s C2 5G modem, and carry a single camera. It could still boast a powerful A19 chip.
