Sea turtle Barnacle Bill treated at UK's first dedicated rehab centre
Last year, 35 sea turtles were found stranded on British shores, compared to just 12 in 2022.
Many arrive suffering from severe hypothermia, disoriented by storms and ocean currents - an issue that experts say is being driven by climate change.
Of the seven species of sea turtle, three are classified as endangered, with two of those, Hawksbills and Kemp's Ridleys, being critically endangered.
In response, SEA LIFE Brighton has opened the UK's first purpose-built Turtle Rehabilitation and Repatriation Centre, providing specialist care to nurse these vulnerable creatures back to health.
2:11
The project was the brainchild of SEA LIFE's curator Joe Williams.
He told Sky News: "Turtles shouldn't be turning up here in the UK. Climate change is a massive driver in this.
"Climate change leads to more storms, and storms can very much disorient turtles when they're out at sea. Then particularly when they're in cold waters, they lose control of their limbs."
The centre opened in December, and already had its first patient: Barnacle Bill, a loggerhead turtle that was rescued off the coast of Guernsey in 2023.
SEA LIFE aquarist Grace Cavanagh said: "She's named Barnacle Bill because she was found with a lot of barnacles on her.
"And that means she's probably been floating about cold stunned, hypothermic for quite a while. There's been a lot of critical care for her to make sure she was okay."
Barnacle Bill was treated for hypothermia in Guernsey, and the focus now is on rehabilitation, so she is ready to be returned to the wild.
Read more from Sky News:
William and Kate mark Valentine's Day with romantic photo
What we know about asteroid that could hit Earth
Unlike the other turtles at SEA LIFE Brighton, Bill is not on display.
She is housed in a special tank, behind strict biosecurity measures, to limit human exposure.
Bill has a regular regime of "enrichment" to try and stimulate her natural behaviours such as swimming, exploration and feeding.
The tank has a wave machine to mimic the sea, and Bill's meals are sometimes hidden beneath rocks to encourage her natural foraging instincts.
Get Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow our channel and never miss an update.
Tap here to follow
Once she's ready, Barnacle Bill will be transported back to the wild aboard a Royal Navy warship.
Although there's no definite schedule, the team at SEA LIFE say it could be any day now.
But with turtle strandings rising every year, the Brighton centre may not stay empty for long.
Main image: GSPCA Guernsey
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Study: Avoiding ultra-processed foods while dieting can double weight loss
By Consuming a diet low in ultra-processed foods could help supercharge weight loss , promising research suggested today. Additive-laden foods such as crisps and sweets have been vilified for decades over their supposed risks, with dozens of studies linking them to type 2 diabetes , heart disease and cancer . Experts have even called for UPFs—typically anything edible that has more artificial ingredients than natural ones—to be slashed from diets. Now, British scientists who tracked dozens of adults have discovered those who ate a diet rich in minimally processed foods and avoided UPFs, lost twice as much weight as those who often consumed UPFs. Sticking to meals cooked from scratch could also help curb food cravings, they also found. However, diets high in UPFs had little impact on blood pressure, heart rate, liver function and cholesterol. 'But not all ultra-processed foods are inherently unhealthy based on their nutritional profile.' In the study, the researchers tracked 50 people who were already consuming diets packed with UPFs and split them into two groups. Half were given an eight-week diet plan comprising minimally processed foods, such as overnight oats and spaghetti bolognese, while the other half were given foods like breakfast oat bars or lasagne ready meals. After completing one diet, the groups then switched. Researchers matched the two diets nutritionally on levels of fat, saturated fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt and fibre using the Eatwell Guide, which outlines recommendations on how to eat a healthy, balanced diet. They found those on the minimally processed diet lost more weight (2.06 per cent) compared to the UPF diet (1.05 per cent loss). The UPF diet also did not result in significant fat loss, the researchers said. Dr Dicken added: 'Though a 2 per cent reduction may not seem very big, that is only over eight weeks and without people trying to actively reduce their intake. 'If we scaled these results up over the course of a year, we'd expect to see a 13 per cent weight reduction in men and a 9 per cent reduction in women on the minimally processed diet, but only a 4 per cent weight reduction in men and 5 per cent in women after the ultra-processed diet. 'Over time this would start to become a big difference.' Those on the trial were also asked to complete questionnaires on food cravings before and after starting the diets. Those eating minimally processed foods had less cravings and were able to resist them better, the study suggests. However, researchers also measured others markers like blood pressure, heart rate, liver function, glucose levels and cholesterol and found no significant negative impacts of the UPF diet. The Eatwell Guide recommends the average woman should consume around 2,000 calories a day, while an average man should consume 2,500. Both diet groups had a calorie deficit, meaning people were eating fewer calories than what they were burning, which helps with weight loss. However, the deficit was higher from minimally processed foods at around 230 calories a day, compared with 120 calories per day from UPFs. Professor Rachel Batterham, senior author of the study from the UCL centre for obesity research, said: 'Despite being widely promoted, less than 1 per cent of the UK population follows all of the recommendations in the Eatwell Guide, and most people stick to fewer than half. 'The best advice to people would be to stick as closely to nutritional guidelines as they can by moderating overall energy intake, limiting intake of salt, sugar and saturated fat, and prioritizing high-fibre foods such as fruits, vegetables, pulses and nuts. Tracy Parker, nutrition lead at the British Heart Foundation, also said: 'The way this study was designed means it is more reflective of real-world conditions than previous research on UPFs. 'The small size of the study is a limitation, and the fact that most participants were women limits how much we can generalize the findings to the general population. 'We also can't be certain how closely the diets were followed, as participants self-reported what they ate during the study. 'Larger, longer-term studies will be needed to see if the greater weight loss on the minimally processed diets seen here translates into bigger improvements in risk factors, including blood pressure and cholesterol and blood sugar levels, and a reduced risk of developing heart and circulatory diseases.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Avoiding ultra-processed foods while dieting can double weight loss, finds new study
Consuming a diet low in ultra-processed foods could help supercharge weight loss, promising research suggested today. Additive-laden foods such as crisps and sweets have been vilified for decades over their supposed risks, with dozens of studies linking them to type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Experts have even called for UPFs—typically anything edible that has more artificial ingredients than natural ones—to be slashed from diets. Now, British scientists who tracked dozens of adults have discovered those who ate a diet rich in minimally processed foods and avoided UPFs, lost twice as much weight as those who often consumed UPFs. Sticking to meals cooked from scratch could also help curb food cravings, they also found. However, diets high in UPFs had little impact on blood pressure, heart rate, liver function and cholesterol. Researchers today argued their findings echoed calls to limit certain types of UPFs but cautioned it also showed that not all UPFs are 'inherently unhealthy'. Dr Samuel Dicken, an expert in behavioural science and health at University College London and study co-author, said: 'We saw significantly greater weight loss on the minimally processed food diet. 'Previous research has linked ultra-processed foods with poor health outcomes. 'But not all ultra-processed foods are inherently unhealthy based on their nutritional profile.' In the study, the researchers tracked 50 people who were already consuming diets packed with UPFs and split them into two groups. Half were given an eight-week diet plan comprising minimally processed foods, such as overnight oats and spaghetti bolognese, while the other half were given foods like breakfast oat bars or lasagne ready meals. After completing one diet, the groups then switched. Researchers matched the two diets nutritionally on levels of fat, saturated fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt and fibre using the Eatwell Guide, which outlines recommendations on how to eat a healthy, balanced diet. They found those on the minimally processed diet lost more weight (2.06 per cent) compared to the UPF diet (1.05 per cent loss). The UPF diet also did not result in significant fat loss, the researchers said. Dr Dicken added: 'Though a 2 per cent reduction may not seem very big, that is only over eight weeks and without people trying to actively reduce their intake. 'If we scaled these results up over the course of a year, we'd expect to see a 13 per cent weight reduction in men and a 9 per cent reduction in women on the minimally processed diet, but only a 4 per cent weight reduction in men and 5 per cent in women after the ultra-processed diet. 'Over time this would start to become a big difference.' Those on the trial were also asked to complete questionnaires on food cravings before and after starting the diets. Those eating minimally processed foods had less cravings and were able to resist them better, the study suggests. However, researchers also measured others markers like blood pressure, heart rate, liver function, glucose levels and cholesterol and found no significant negative impacts of the UPF diet. The Eatwell Guide recommends the average woman should consume around 2,000 calories a day, while an average man should consume 2,500. Both diet groups had a calorie deficit, meaning people were eating fewer calories than what they were burning, which helps with weight loss. However, the deficit was higher from minimally processed foods at around 230 calories a day, compared with 120 calories per day from UPFs. Professor Rachel Batterham, senior author of the study from the UCL centre for obesity research, said: 'Despite being widely promoted, less than 1 per cent of the UK population follows all of the recommendations in the Eatwell Guide, and most people stick to fewer than half. 'The best advice to people would be to stick as closely to nutritional guidelines as they can by moderating overall energy intake, limiting intake of salt, sugar and saturated fat, and prioritising high-fibre foods such as fruits, vegetables, pulses and nuts. Tracy Parker, nutrition lead at the British Heart Foundation, also said: 'The way this study was designed means it is more reflective of real-world conditions than previous research on UPFs. 'The small size of the study is a limitation, and the fact that most participants were women limits how much we can generalise the findings to the general population. 'We also can't be certain how closely the diets were followed, as participants self-reported what they ate during the study. 'Larger, longer-term studies will be needed to see if the greater weight loss on the minimally processed diets seen here translates into bigger improvements in risk factors, including blood pressure and cholesterol and blood sugar levels, and a reduced risk of developing heart and circulatory diseases. 'Completely cutting UPFs out of our diets isn't realistic for most of us. But including more minimally processed foods—like fresh or home cooked meals—alongside a balanced diet could offer added benefits too.'
Sky News
15 hours ago
- Sky News
A real-world CSI for sea life: The lab investigating deaths we're all complicit in
It's like real-world CSI, but for sea life. Lying dead on a cold steel slab at the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) is a harbour porpoise, the UK's smallest - but arguably cutest - marine mammal. It's about to be dissected to establish how it died. If there are crimes investigated in this lab, they're the kind we're all complicit in. Dolphins drowned in fishermen's nets; whales deranged by military sonar and driven ashore; porpoises killed by the blunt-force trauma of a speedboat's prow; a few however die due to the most insidious and increasingly abundant scourge at sea: plastic. ZSL biologist Rob Deaville holds up a few metres of tangled rope and fishing line that he removed from the tail of a minke whale that washed up dead in East Yorkshire in 2020. The mess of nylon and polyester, encrusted in goose barnacles, had cut almost halfway through the whale's flukes (the lobes that form a tail), rendering them useless. Unable to dive and therefore feed, the whale starved. "A four-kilogram mass of rope effectively killed a 10-tonne whale," says Mr Deaville. "It's a really horrendous way for that animal to go." The Cetacean Strandings Investigation Programme (CSIP), which Mr Deaville leads, has been running for 30 years. It has recorded more than 20,000 strandings of whales, dolphins, seals and sharks. The 4,500 necropsies they have performed give biologists a rare opportunity to learn more about these elusive animal's lives. Biologists can also learn more about the threats the animals face, whether it's shifting predators and prey linked to climate change, disease outbreaks, chemical pollution or plastics. Large entanglements like the one that killed the minke whale are pretty rare in UK waters, says Mr Deaville. But he worries that as plastic continues to be dumped in the ocean, it will end up more like the enclosed and litter-filled Mediterranean Sea where plastic-related deaths are common. "In a way, the Med is a warning sign," says Mr Deaville. The necropsy of the harbour porpoise is a hard watch. A sad end for this diminutive relative of the dolphin, so far from its natural element, being sliced apart in the name of science. But the gruesome - and smelly - work reveals crucial data and often a cause of death. Our poor harbour porpoise, it turns out, wasn't the victim of plastic pollution, but a violent assault. Examining its ribcage, Mr Deaville points out the split blubber and broken ribs characteristic of a fatal blow from the beak of a bottlenose dolphin. For reasons as-yet unknown to science, dolphins often attack and kill their smaller cousins. However, samples of tissues and stomach contents from this and thousands of other animals contain evidence of environmental contaminants, including microplastics, the most insidious form of plastic pollution. A recent study by ZSL and the University of Exeter on the stomach contents of whales and dolphins stranded on UK shores found microplastics in the stomachs of all of them. Other studies have found even smaller "nanoplastic" particles in nearly every tissue of sea mammals, from blubber to brain. There's no clear evidence of harm, but microplastics can release toxic chemical additives used in plastic manufacturing, and also act as surfaces on which bacterial "biofilms" grow with unknown affects. Professor Heather Koldewey, a marine biologist at ZSL, says: "We've got these little balls of toxicity that are now floating around the ocean, being ingested by a range of species from the bottom to the top of the food chain. "What we're really starting to unpick now, is what impact is that having." The hard and pretty gruesome work being done here has never been more crucial. Delegates are this week heading to the United Nations in Geneva to resume negotiations towards a Global Plastics Treaty. It's an attempt to try and reduce the unnecessary use of plastic, ensure more recycling and bring an end to the practice of using our seas as a dumping ground for plastic waste. "An ambitious treaty has to start at the production end of plastic," says Prof Koldewey. "When it gets in the ocean [it] is almost impossible to deal with. "If you're thinking about something like a microplastic or a nanoplastic, the same size or smaller than plankton, how can you possibly clean that up out of the ocean?" Scientists hardly need more evidence to prove plastic is a problem. But the work of CSIP and other researchers shows they're only beginning to understand the impact of the mess we've already made. And its one that may persist for centuries. That fact alone, should persuade the world to act faster.
