A caring mother is the single most important factor in preventing teenagers from abusing (滥用) drugs and alcohol, researchers said on Friday. An international study showed that teenagers living with both parents are less likely to suffer from alcohol and drug problems, and a strong maternal bond is the most effective way to fight against them.

“These findings suggest that living with both parents may prevent drug use,” said Dr. McArdle, of Newcastle University in northern England, who led the study. “They also suggest that attachment (依恋), particularly to mothers, is a more effective factor and that this truly across cultures and substances.” The report, which is published in the journal Addiction, involved nearly 4,000 teenagers in England, Ireland, Italy, Germany and the Netherlands. They were questioned about their use of several kinds of drugs and alcohol. The teenagers also filled in questionnaires about their relationship with their parents and grandparents, how well they were supervised (监护) after school and whether they were allowed to meet friends at home.

“Both the quality of family relationships and the structure of families have significant influences on youth drug use, McArdle said in a statement. But he added a strong maternal bond offered the greatest protection against developing drug habits. The rate of drug abuse among teenagers living with both parents and who had a good relationship with their mothers was 16.6 percent. If either factor was missing, the drug abuse rate rose to 32 percent. More than 42 percent of teenagers living in one parent families who did not have a strong bond with their mothers used drugs.

Drug prevention campaigns in British schools and on television warn teenagers about the danger of drugs and alcohol but McArdle said no one is dealing with the problem of parental responsibility.

Nowadays, the term “quiet quitting” has taken over the Internet, meaning lying flat, or taking a break from the overwork. It appears to have originated from a TikTok video posted by Brian Creely. Creely showed an Insider article written by senior reporter Aki Ito. The headline read, “Fed up with long hours, many employees have quietly decided to take it easy at work rather than quit their jobs.” Creely said, “More people are quiet quitting instead of leaving.” The video has received nearly 100,000 likes and more than 4,000 comments, the vast majority describing the benefits of doing the bare minimum.

Despite a number of news outlets reporting that quiet quitting is a trend that is being encouraged, Insider found many users on the app were actually warning people against doing so.

Ashley Herd, a former employment lawyer, posted two videos about quiet quitting. In her videos, she argued that while limiting work to what is specified in the job description is fine, doing so quietly can be detrimental. “If someone is stressed out, they should feel able to have that conversation with their manager,” she said.

A TikToker and consultant Mary posted a video titled “Minorities should be careful quiet quitting”. In the video, she said, “Unfortunately in America minorities are held to a different standard. We are looked at differently. So we have to go above and beyond to be successful. We can’t risk being regarded as not performing.”

In recent weeks, TikTokers have been warning workers that quiet quitting could lead to “quiet firing”, labeled as a new workplace trend. The phrase describes the longstanding practice of constructive dismissal—creating an environment that leads a worker to quit their job in order to avoid having to fire them. Creators are receiving hundreds of thousands of views that post about quiet firing and call out managers who employ the practice.

The life expectancy(预期寿命）gap between the richest and the poorest members of society in England widened to nearly 10 years,British researchers have found.

The study analyzed a total of 7.65 million deaths in England between 2001 and 2016 based on data from the Office for National Statistics.

Researchers at Imperial College London found that the life expectancy gap between the richest and the poorest sectors of society increased from 6.1 years in 2001 to 7.9 years in 2016 for women and from 9.0 years to 9.8 years for men.

The life expectancy of women in poorest communities in 2016 was 78.8 years,compared to 86.7 years in the richest group.For men,life expectancy was 74.0 years among the poorest,compared to 83.8 years among the richest,according to the study published Thursday in the journal Lancet Public Health.

The largest contributors to life expectancy inequalities were deaths in children younger than five years old,mostly the baby deaths,as well as respiratory disease,heart disease,lung and digestive cancers,and dementia among the elderly.

Majid Ezzzti,senior author of the research,noted that“a perfect storm of factors”led to the earlier deaths of poor people,including dead working income,rising price of healthy food,funding squeeze for health and late diagnosis of diseases.

“Greater investment in health and social care in the most deprived areas will help change the worrying trends seen in our work.We also need government and industry action to erase food insecurity and make healthy food choices more affordable,so that the quality of a family’s diet isn’t decided by their income,”he suggested.