MIL-OSI Publisher – Page 1321 – MIL Submissions Engine

September 12, 2025

How to avoid seeing disturbing content on social media and protect your peace of mind

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Annie Margaret, Teaching Assistant Professor of Creative Technology & Design, ATLAS Institute, University of Colorado Boulder

Social media often serves up disturbing images but you can minimize your exposure. Jacob Wackerhausen/iStock via Getty Images

When graphic videos go viral, like the recent fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk, it can feel impossible to protect yourself from seeing things you did not consent to see. But there are steps you can take.

Social media platforms are designed to maximize engagement, not protect your peace of mind. The major platforms have also reduced their content moderation efforts over the past year or so. That means upsetting content can reach you even when you never chose to watch it.

You do not have to watch every piece of content that crosses your screen, however. Protecting your own mental state is not avoidance or denial. As a researcher who studies ways to counteract the negative effects of social media on mental health and well-being, I believe it’s a way of safeguarding the bandwidth you need to stay engaged, compassionate and effective.

Why this matters

Research shows that repeated exposure to violent or disturbing media can increase stress, heighten anxiety and contribute to feelings of helplessness. These effects are not just short-term. Over time, they erode the emotional resources you rely on to care for yourself and others.

Protecting your attention is a form of care. Liberating your attention from harmful content is not withdrawal. It is reclaiming your most powerful creative force: your consciousness.

Just as with food, not everything on the table is meant to be eaten. You wouldn’t eat something spoiled or toxic simply because it was served to you. In the same way, not every piece of media laid out in your feed deserves your attention. Choosing what to consume is a matter of health.

And while you can choose what you keep in your own kitchen cabinets, you often have less control over what shows up in your feeds. That is why it helps to take intentional steps to filter, block and set boundaries.

Practical steps you can take

Fortunately, there are straightforward ways to reduce your chances of being confronted with violent or disturbing videos. Here are four that I recommend:

Turn off autoplay or limit sensitive content. Note that these settings can vary depending on device, operating system and app version, and can change.

Use keyword filters. Most platforms allow you to mute or block specific words, phrases or hashtags. This reduces the chance that graphic or violent content slips into your feed.
Curate your feed. Unfollow accounts that regularly share disturbing images. Follow accounts that bring you knowledge, connection or joy instead.
Set boundaries. Reserve phone-free time during meals or before bed. Research shows that intentional breaks reduce stress and improve well-being.

a settings screen with a red rectangle around one option — Where to turn off autoplay in your account on Facebook’s website.
Screen capture by The Conversation, CC BY-ND

Reclaim your agency

Social media is not neutral. Its algorithms are engineered to hold your attention, even when that means amplifying harmful or sensational material. Watching passively only serves the interests of the social media companies. Choosing to protect your attention is a way to reclaim your agency.

The urge to follow along in real time can be strong, especially during crises. But choosing not to watch every disturbing image is not neglect; it is self-preservation. Looking away protects your ability to act with purpose. When your attention is hijacked, your energy goes into shock and outrage. When your attention is steady, you can choose where to invest it.

You are not powerless. Every boundary you set – whether it is turning off autoplay, filtering content or curating your feed – is a way of taking control over what enters your mind. These actions are the foundation for being able to connect with others, help people and work for meaningful change.

More resources

I’m the executive director of the Post-Internet Project, a nonprofit dedicated to helping people navigate the psychological and social challenges of life online. With my team, I designed the evidence-backed PRISM intervention to help people manage their social media use.

Our research-based program emphasizes agency, intention and values alignment as the keys to developing healthier patterns of media consumption. You can try the PRISM process for yourself with an online class I am launching through Coursera in October 2025. You can find the course, Values Aligned Media Consumption, by searching for Annie Margaret at the University of Colorado Boulder on Coursera. The course is aimed at anyone 18 and over, and the videos are free to watch.

Annie Margaret works for/consults to Post Internet Project. She receives funding from University of Colorado Boulder PACES grant.

– ref. How to avoid seeing disturbing content on social media and protect your peace of mind – https://theconversation.com/how-to-avoid-seeing-disturbing-content-on-social-media-and-protect-your-peace-of-mind-265178

September 12, 2025

Yes, this is who we are: America’s 250-year history of political violence

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Maurizio Valsania, Professor of American History, Università di Torino

Punishment by tar and feather of Thomas Ditson, who purchased a gun from a British soldier in Boston in March 1775. Interim Archives/Getty Images

The day after conservative activist Charlie Kirk was shot and killed while speaking at Utah Valley University, commentators repeated a familiar refrain: “This isn’t who we are as Americans.”

Others similarly weighed in. Whoopi Goldberg on “The View” declared that Americans solve political disagreements peacefully: “This is not the way we do it.”

Yet other awful episodes come immediately to mind: President John F. Kennedy was shot and killed on Nov. 22, 1963. More recently, on June 14, 2025, Melissa Hortman, speaker emerita of the Minnesota House of Representatives, was shot and killed at her home, along with her husband and their golden retriever.

As a historian of the early republic, I believe that seeing this violence in America as distinct “episodes” is wrong.

Instead, they reflect a recurrent pattern.

American politics has long personalized its violence. Time and again, history’s advance has been imagined to depend on silencing or destroying a single figure – the rival who becomes the ultimate, despicable foe.

Hence, to claim that such shootings betray “who we are” is to forget that the U.S. was founded upon – and has long been sustained by – this very form of political violence.

A fuzzy photo of a large car with a woman leaning over in the back seat to help a slumped man next to her. — First lady Jacqueline Kennedy leans over to assist her husband, John F. Kennedy, just after he is shot in Dallas, Texas, on Nov. 22, 1963.
Bettman/Getty Images

Revolutionary violence as political theater

The years of the American Revolution were incubated in violence. One abominable practice used on political adversaries was tarring and feathering. It was a punishment imported from Europe and popularized by the Sons of Liberty in the late 1760s, Colonial activists who resisted British rule.

In seaport towns such as Boston and New York, mobs stripped political enemies, usually suspected loyalists – supporters of British rule – or officials representing the king, smeared them with hot tar, rolled them in feathers, and paraded them through the streets.

The effects on bodies were devastating. As the tar was peeled away, flesh came off in strips. People would survive the punishment, but they would carry the scars for the rest of their life.

By the late 1770s, the Revolution in what is known as the Middle Colonies had become a brutal civil war. In New York and New Jersey, patriot militias, loyalist partisans and British regulars raided across county lines, targeting farms and neighbors. When patriot forces captured loyalist irregulars – often called “Tories” or “refugees” – they frequently treated them not as prisoners of war but as traitors, executing them swiftly, usually by hanging.

In September 1779, six loyalists were caught near Hackensack, New Jersey. They were hanged without trial by patriot militia. Similarly, in October 1779, two suspected Tory spies captured in the Hudson Highlands were shot on the spot, their execution justified as punishment for treason.

To patriots, these killings were deterrence; to loyalists, they were murder. Either way, they were unmistakably political, eliminating enemies whose “crime” was allegiance to the wrong side.

An old portrait of an older man in a black robe. — In 1798, Henry Brockholst Livingston – later a U.S. Supreme Court justice – killed James Jones in a duel. It did not affect his career.
US Supreme Court

Pistols at dawn: Dueling as politics

Even after independence, the workings of American politics remained grounded in a logic of violence toward adversaries.

For national leaders, the pistol duel was not just about honor. It normalized a political culture where gunfire itself was treated as part of the debate.

The most famous duel, of course, was Aaron Burr’s killing of Alexander Hamilton in 1804. But scores of lesser-known confrontations dotted the decade before it.

In 1798, Henry Brockholst Livingston – later a U.S. Supreme Court justice – killed James Jones in a duel. Far from discredited, he was deemed to have acted honorably. In the early republic, even homicide could be absorbed into politics when cloaked in ritual. Ironically, Livingston had survived an assassination attempt in 1785.

In 1802, another shameful spectacle unfolded: New York Democratic-Republicans DeWitt Clinton and John Swartwout faced off in Weehawken, New Jersey. They fired at least five rounds before their seconds intervened, leaving both men wounded. In this case, the clash had nothing to do with political principle; Clinton and Swartwout were Republicans. It was a patronage squabble that still erupted into gunfire, showing how normalized armed violence was in settling disputes.

Gun culture and its expansion

A small, antique pistol. — One of the matching pair of derringer pistols used by John Wilkes Booth in the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865.
Bob Grieser/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

It is tempting to dismiss political violence as a leftover from some “primitive” or “frontier” stage of American history, when politicians and their supporters supposedly lacked restraint or higher moral standards. But that is not the case.

From before the Revolution onward, physical punishment or even killing were ways to enforce belonging, to mark the boundary between insiders and outsiders, and to decide who had the right to govern.

Violence has never been a distortion in American politics. It has been one of its recurring features, not an aberration but a persistent force, destructive and yet oddly creative, producing new boundaries and new regimes.

The dynamic only deepened as gun ownership expanded. In the 19th century, industrial arms production and aggressive federal contracts put more weapons into circulation. The rituals of punishing those with the wrong allegiance now found expression in the mass-produced revolver and later in the automatic rifle.

These more modern firearms became not only practical tools of war, crime or self-defense but symbolic objects in their own right. They embodied authority, carried cultural meaning and gave their holders the sense that legitimacy itself could be claimed at the barrel of a gun.

That’s why the phrase “This isn’t who we are” rings false. Political violence has always been part of America’s story, not a passing anomaly, and not an episode.

To deny it is to leave Americans defenseless against it. Only by facing this history head-on can Americans begin to imagine a politics not defined by the gun.

Maurizio Valsania does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Yes, this is who we are: America’s 250-year history of political violence – https://theconversation.com/yes-this-is-who-we-are-americas-250-year-history-of-political-violence-265171

September 12, 2025

Scientists detected a potential biosignature on Mars – an astrobiologist explains what these traces of life are, and how researchers figure out their source

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Amy J. Williams, Assistant Professor of Geology, University of Florida

NASA’s Perseverance rover explores Mars’ Jezero Crater. NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS, CC BY-NC

As the Perseverance rover traversed an ancient river valley in Mars’ Jezero Crater back in July 2024, it drilled into the surface and extracted a sample from of a unique, striped rock called Chevaya Falls. The rover’s instruments then analyzed the sample, which is called Sapphire Canyon, and surveyed the surrounding rock.

When scientists started looking into the data, they found two types of iron-rich minerals arranged on the rock in a distinctive, spotted pattern. Both these minerals are associated with life on Earth. One is found around decomposing organic matter on Earth, while the other is produced by certain microbes.

A team of researchers determined in a study published Sept. 10, 2025, that the sample contains a potential biosignature – which could suggest the red planet once hosted microbial life.

These minerals may have formed on the rock when ancient microbes used chemical reactions to produce energy. But chemical reactions not related to life can also produce these minerals under certain conditions.

To learn more, The Conversation U.S. asked Amy J. Williams, an astrobiologist at the University of Florida, about biosignature hunting on Mars and what’s so special about this Sapphire Canyon sample.

What are biosignatures?

A biosignature is any characteristic, element, molecule, substance or feature that serves as evidence for past or present life. It must be something that cannot be produced without life. Some examples include fossils, organic molecules derived from a biological process, or mineral patterns that form only through microbial activity.

An infographic showing six types of biosignatures, including organics, isotopes, minerals, chemicals, small-scale and large-scale structures — There are six types of biosignatures that scientists may find on Mars.
The Planetary Society, CC BY

A potential biosignature, which is how the Sapphire Canyon finding is described, is a substance or structure that might have a biological origin but requires more data or further study before scientists can make a conclusion about the absence or presence of life.

How do scientists determine whether something could be a biosignature on Mars?

Biosignatures come in many different flavors – chemical, physical or structural. Some are rather obvious, like a dinosaur fossil on Earth, but most are far more nuanced.

The search for ancient life on Earth partially informs the search for biosignatures on Mars. Researchers rely on subtle clues preserved in the rock record to address questions such as how long ago microbial life arose on Earth. We search for that evidence in environments such as craters and lake beds with high preservation potential, meaning those that are likely to preserve the biosignatures.

Scientists can apply these techniques to the search for life on Mars. That is why Perseverance was sent to Jezero Crater. In the ancient past, the crater hosted a river-fed lake, which on Earth would represent a habitable environment: one where life would want to live if it ever arose.

This crater was an ideal location to search for ancient life preserved in the rock record on Mars. Astrobiologists then search for chemical, textural and mineral patterns that resemble processes influenced by life back on Earth.

What makes this sample unique and interesting?

The Sapphire Canyon sample is unique because Perseverance’s PIXL and SHERLOC instruments revealed distinctive textures that were dubbed “leopard spots.” These spots are concentric reaction fronts – places where chemical and physical reactions occur – enriched in the minerals vivianite, which contains iron phosphate, and greigite, which is made of iron sulfide.

Dusty rocks on the surface of Mars, speckled with dark spots. — Chevaya Falls, a rock in the Martian Jezero Crater, is speckled with ‘leopard spots,’ which could indicate chemical reactions that may have once supported ancient life.
NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

On Earth, vivianite often forms in environments with lots of decaying organic matter, while certain microbes that use sulfate for energy can produce greigite. Compounds in both these minerals are part of a chemical process called redox gradients, which refers to a series of gradual changes over physical space where chemicals can oxidize (lose electrons) or reduce (gain electrons).

One example is leaving your metal bike out in the rain. Over time, the reduced iron (Fe2+) will lose an electron and oxidize to rust (Fe3+). This process can happen nonbiologically, as exposure to water and oxygen drive the chemical changes that take your new bike to a rusty bike – I suggest not leaving it in the rain.

But some oxidation and reduction processes are so slow on their own that the only way they can occur is with living organisms that push the reactions forward. This process is how many microbes, such as bacteria, get the energy to live. Because these two minerals in the Sapphire Canyon sample both occur in redox gradients, scientists predict that microbial life, if it was ever present, could have played a role in the reactions that created these mineral signatures.

Now, scientists are looking into the explanations that wouldn’t require life to form these features on the sample.

Did scientists expect to find a sample like this?

This was a finding that we had hoped for. However, it was somewhat unexpected in this particular location. This sample came from some of the youngest sedimentary rocks the mission has investigated to date. An earlier prediction had assumed signs of ancient life would come from older Martian rock formations.

Finding these features in younger rocks widens the window of time that Mars was potentially habitable and suggests that Mars could have been habitable later in the planet’s history than scientists previously thought, and older rocks might also hold signs of life that are simply harder to detect.

NASA hosted a press conference on Sept. 10, 2025, about the mysterious sample.

What are the next steps to tell whether the sample indicates signs of past life, or whether the signature is from a nonbiological process?

The mineral associations are a potential fingerprint for those redox reactions that can occur when microbes drive the reaction forward – but abiotic processes, such as sustained high temperatures, acidic conditions and binding by organic compounds, could also explain them.

However, the Cheyava Falls rock shows no signs that it’s been exposed to the high heat or acidity usually required for greigite and vivianite to form nonbiologically. Still, the only definitive way to answer this question is to return the sample to Earth, where scientists can use advanced laboratory techniques to distinguish biological from nonbiological origins.

Amy J. Williams receives funding from NASA and is a scientist on the NASA Mars 2020 Perseverance rover mission.

– ref. Scientists detected a potential biosignature on Mars – an astrobiologist explains what these traces of life are, and how researchers figure out their source – https://theconversation.com/scientists-detected-a-potential-biosignature-on-mars-an-astrobiologist-explains-what-these-traces-of-life-are-and-how-researchers-figure-out-their-source-265157

September 12, 2025

Bolsonaro’s conviction marks a historic moment in Brazil’s political history

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Marieke Riethof, Senior Lecturer in Latin American Politics, University of Liverpool

Four out of five members of Brazil’s supreme court have voted to convict the former president, Jair Bolsonaro, for plotting a military coup after losing the 2022 election to his left-wing rival, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Bolsonaro has been sentenced to more than 27 years in prison, though his lawyers say they will appeal the decision.

Seven of Bolsonaro’s allies have also been convicted on charges related to the coup attempt. Five of these people – Walter Braga Netto, Mauro Cid, Paulo Sérgio Nogueira de Oliveira, Augusto Heleno Ribeiro and Almir Garnier Santos – come from a military or navy background. Bolsonaro’s former justice minister, Anderson Torres, and the former director of Brazil’s intelligence agency, Alexandre Ramagem, have been convicted too.

This is the first time in Brazil’s long history of political instability that a coup attempt has led to a conviction. It is also symbolically important that the only woman on the panel, Judge Carmen Lúcia, cast the deciding vote. Bolsonaro has an established track record of making denigrating comments about women.

The date of the verdict is equally important. It was delivered on September 11, which coincides with the 52nd anniversary of the 1973 Chilean military coup. This shows how far democracy in the region has come since an era when much of South America was under military rule.

Alexandre de Moraes, the supreme court judge who led the Bolsonaro trial, alluded to this in August. He said that Brazil’s 1988 constitution established the judiciary’s independence by restricting “interference by the armed forces, whether official or semi-official, in Brazilian politics”.

These constitutional guarantees mean that politicians like Bolsonaro cannot undermine democratic institutions with impunity.

The coup attempt took place on January 8 2023, less than a week after Lula was inaugurated as Bolsonaro’s successor. Echoing the attack on the US Capitol building in Washington two years earlier, hundreds of Bolsonaro supporters stormed the national congress, presidential palace and supreme court in the capital, Brasília.

They left a trail of destruction. Although the protests appeared initially to be a spontaneous act, investigations soon unearthed evidence that the event had been planned by Bolsonaro and his allies.

A history of dictatorship and threats against democracy have cast a long shadow over Brazilian politics. A right-wing military dictatorship ruled the country between 1964 and 1985. It began when the armed forces overthrew the democratically elected president, João Goulart, amid an economic crisis and fears about a turn to the left. The US government of the time supported the coup.

Brazil established a National Truth Commission in 2012, which spent two years investigating the thousands of cases of torture, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and other violations that occurred during this period. However, there have been no convictions.

Under pressure from mass demonstrations and an economic crisis, the military gradually relaxed repression in the 1980s and allowed political parties to form. Brazil has been under civilian control since then. But the armed forces began to play a significant political role again during Bolsonaro’s presidency.

General Hamilton Mourão, his vice-president, served in the military during the dictatorship. And various other military figures were appointed to powerful positions in government. Bolsonaro also regularly celebrated the dictatorship and downplayed its human rights violations.

There were various examples of democratic backsliding under Bolsonaro. He, for example, questioned the legitimacy of democratic election results in 2022 – comments that saw him barred from running in elections for seven years.

Within this context, the decision to convict Bolsonaro of an attempted coup is a strong sign that Brazil’s democratic institutions have been able to withstand threats to democracy and the rule of law. It is a signal that attempts to undermine the country’s democratic institutions will not go unpunished.

Beyond Brazil’s borders

Bolsonaro’s conviction resonates beyond Brazil. During his presidency, Bolsonaro positioned Brazil as a close ideological ally to Donald Trump, who was then in his first presidential term.

Trump referred to Bolsonaro’s trial as a “witch hunt” as the court case progressed. He hit Brazil with 50% tariffs, framing them as retaliation for Bolsonaro’s prosecution. Reacting to the guilty verdict, Trump said it was “very surprising” and compared it to his own judicial struggles.

Lula has spoken out against US interference in Brazilian politics, calling the idea that “Trump can dictate rules for a sovereign country like Brazil” unacceptable.

The Brazilian foreign affairs ministry has also criticised the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, for interfering in the country’s sovereignty and democracy. In a social media post, Rubio called the conviction “unjust” and said the US “will respond accordingly to this witch hunt”.

Looking ahead, Brazil’s next presidential elections are in 2026. Unless Bolsonaro manages to appeal his conviction and election ban, he will not be running again for the foreseeable future. Although Lula has not formally announced his candicacy he would be the front-runner.

But if there is a run-off, which would most likely be with right-wing politician and former army captain Tarcísio de Freitas, the race will probably be very close. There is a risk that the conviction will turn Bolsonaro into a martyr, which would strengthen politicians like de Freitas, who identify themselves with Bolsonaro’s politics.

Ahead of his conviction, around 40,000 Bolsonaro supporters protested in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. These demonstrations indicate continuing support. However, regardless of what happens next, the supreme court’s decision makes it much less likely that challenges to democracy will succeed in Brazil.

Marieke Riethof does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Bolsonaro’s conviction marks a historic moment in Brazil’s political history – https://theconversation.com/bolsonaros-conviction-marks-a-historic-moment-in-brazils-political-history-265210

September 12, 2025

Regulating AI use could stop its runaway energy expansion

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Shweta Singh, Assistant Professor, Information Systems and Management, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

Generative AI promises to help solve everything from climate change to poverty. But behind every chatbot response lies a deep environmental cost.

Current AI technology requires the use of large datacentres stationed around the world, which altogether draw enormous amounts of power and consume millions of litres of water to stay cool. By 2030, datacentres are expect to consume as much electricity as all of Japan, according to the International Energy Agency, and AI could be responsible for 3.5% of global electricity use, according to one consultancy report.

The continuous massive expansion of AI use and its rapidly growing energy demand would make it much harder for the world to cut its carbon emissions by switching fossil fuel energy sources to renewable electricity.

So, we are left with pressing questions. Can we harness the benefits of AI without accelerating environmental collapse? Can AI be made truly sustainable – and if so, how?

We are at a critical juncture. The environmental cost of AI is accelerating and largely unreported by the firms involved. What the world does next could determine whether AI innovation aligns with our climate goals or undermines them.

At one end of the policy spectrum is the path of complacency. In this scenario, tech companies continue unchecked, expanding datacentres and powering them with private nuclear microreactors, dedicated energy grids or even reviving mothballed coal plants.

Aerial view of power plants — Microsoft is set to reopen Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania to power its AI services. (Photo taken in 2008. The plant has been dormant since 2019).
Dobresum / shutterstock

Some of this infrastructure may instead run on renewables, but there’s no binding requirement that AI must avoid using fossil fuels. Even if more renewables are installed to power AI, they may compete with efforts to decarbonise other energy uses. Developers may tout efficiency gains, but these are quickly swallowed by the rebound effect: the more efficient AI becomes, the more it is used.

At the other end lies a more radical possibility: a global moratorium or outright restriction on the most harmful forms of AI, akin to international bans on landmines or ozone-depleting substances.

This is politically improbable, of course. Nations are racing to dominate the AI arms race, not to pause it. A global consensus on bans is, at least for now, a mirage.

But in between complacency and prohibition lies a window – rapidly closing – for decisive, targeted action.

This could take many different forms:

1. Mandatory environmental disclosure:

AI companies could report how much energy, water and emissions are used to train and use their models. Having a benchmark helps to measure progress while improving transparency and accountability. While some countries have started to impose greater corporate sustainability reporting requirements, there is significant variation. While mandatory disclosures alone won’t reduce consumption directly, they are an essential starting point.

2. Emissions labelling for AI services:

Just as carbon emissions labels on restaurant menus or supermarket produce can guide people to lower-impact options, users could be given a chance to know the footprint of their digital choices and AI providers, like efforts to measure the carbon footprint of websites. In the US, the blue Energy Star label, one of the country’s most recognisable environmental certifications, helps customers choose energy-efficient products.

Alternatively, AI providers could also temporarily reduce functionality to account for varying levels of renewable energy available that powers them.

3. Usage-based pricing tied to impact:

Existing carbon pricing aims to ensure that heavy users should pay their environmental share. Research shows that this works best when carbon is priced across the economy for all companies, rather than just specifically targeted at individual sectors. Yet much depends on digital tech providers fully accounting for such environmental burdens in the first place.

4. Sustainability caps or “compute budgets”:

This would especially target non-essential or commercial entertainment applications. Organisations may limit their employees’ usage similar to how they restrict heavy office printing or indeed corporate travel. As companies begin to measure and manage their indirect supply chain emissions, energy and water footprints from using AI may require new business policies.

5. Water stewardship requirements in water-stressed regions:

A simple regulation here would be to ensure no AI infrastructure depletes local aquifers unchecked.

Market forces alone will not solve this. Sustainability won’t emerge from goodwill or clever efficiency tricks. We need enforceable rules.

Consumer awareness isn’t enough

Awareness does help. But expecting individuals to self-regulate in a system designed for ease-of-use is naive. “Only use AI when needed” might soon be like “Don’t print this email” a decade or two ago – well-meaning, often ignored and utterly insufficient.

Plastic figures plant trees on top of paper saying 'please don't print' — Coming soon: an AI equivalent?
awstoys / shutterstock

The world is building an AI-powered future that consumes like an industrial past. Without guardrails, we risk creating a convenience technology that accelerates environmental collapse.

Maybe AI will one day solve the problems we couldn’t, and our concerns about emissions or water will seem trivial. Or maybe we just won’t be around to worry about them.

The way we engage with AI now – blindly, cautiously, or critically – will shape whether it serves a sustainable future, or undermines it. Policymakers should treat AI as it would any other wildly profitable resource-intensive industry, with carefully thought through regulation.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Frederik Dahlmann receives funding from National Institute for Health & Care Research (NIHR).

Shweta Singh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Regulating AI use could stop its runaway energy expansion – https://theconversation.com/regulating-ai-use-could-stop-its-runaway-energy-expansion-258425

September 12, 2025

New exhibition explores history of decorative borders: from medieval manuscripts to William Morris

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Cynthia Johnston, Senior Lecturer in History of the Book, School of Advanced Study, University of London

Sir Galahad, the Quest for the Holy Grail by Arthur Hughes (1870). Works from pre-Raphaelite artists like Hughes are on display in the exhibition. Courtesy of National Museums Liverpool

The Nature of Gothic, at the Blackburn Museum and Art Gallery, explores the history of decorative borders over hundreds of years. It covers the period from the late medieval age to the Arts and Crafts Movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

In the late medieval period, manuscripts that were produced in northern Europe often featured decorative borders that framed the text of both religious and secular works. These borders featured motifs from the classical world such as swirling acanthus leaves, Greek meanders and intricate patterns which interlace flowers, leaves and vines.

From the early decades of the 13th century these largely naturalistic forms, used to enhance the visual appeal of the page, began to be used more widely. They were added to the front of books and important sections within them, such as the beginnings of individual psalms or chapters of the Bible.

These naturalistic frames provided platforms tangible enough for figures, animals and grotesques to be placed upon. These characters often present an alternative reality to the verses of the psalms or Aristotle’s Libri Naturales that they decorate.

The meaning and intent of these spaces is yet to be fully understood. The battle of a miniature knight versus a fully armed snail, for example, might be interpreted as the moral fight against evil in the margins of the psalm. But the meaning of a tiny man pushing another in a wheel barrow adjacent to the beginning of Aristotle’s Libri Naturales is less clear.

The great enthusiasm for the illustrated grotesques (hybrid creatures which combine human and fantastical animal forms) in these peripheral spaces began in northern France. Texts produced by the monastic schools which emerged with the rise of scholasticism in the late 12th century often carried this type of decoration.

I have been collaborating with the Blackburn museum for over a decade, and have curated this exhibition alongside Anthea Purkis, its curator of art. This exhibition features some early examples of this technique from manuscripts held by the museum as well as examples on loan from the British Library.

In the exhibition

Decorated page from a medieval manuscript — The Bedford Psalter and Hours.
British Library Collection

Although the names of very few medieval artists whose work appeared in manuscripts are known, Blackburn Museum and the British Library both hold examples of the intricate and sophisticated work of two known illuminators.

They are Mâitre Françoise, who ran his business in Paris in the third quarter of the 15th century, and Herman Scheere – perhaps the most renowned illuminator in London in the 15th century.

From his workshop on London Bridge, Scheere produced flowing extravagant frames for the pages of his books. His book the Bedford Psalter and Hours, (loaned by the British Library and on display in the exhibition) was commissioned by the younger brother of King Henry V. This aristocratic commission demonstrates the success of Scheere’s business and the appetite for the decorated border.

Some 15th century examples from northern Europe also show the influence of Islamic art on northern European aesthetics. A 15th-century Qur’an manuscript from the John Rylands Library and Research Centre in Manchester is on display in the exhibition. muh .aqqāq script is used for Arabic primary text while the interlinear script in Persian and Eastern Turkish is in minuscule naskh script. This reflects the various communities for whom the book was intended.

The beginnings of the chapters of the Qur’an manuscript, the ṣuwwar, are surrounded by borders filled with flowing abstract forms. They’re reminiscent of, but not imitative of, the natural world. This decorative tradition would have cross pollinated with western European cultures through trade and conflict.

Examples of Persian calligraphy also demonstrate the persistence of the trend for decorative borders at this time. The Rylands’ Persian MS 10, an album completed before 1785–1786AD, features an entwined Arabic calligraphy composition formed from two slogans Tawakkaltu bi-maghfirat al-Muhaymin (I entrust myself to the forgiveness of the Guardian) in black, and Huwa al-Ghafūr Dhū-al-Raḥmah (He is the All-Forgiving Lord of Mercy) in red thuluth script. Two dark indigo blue borders bear delicate silver and gold foliage surrounding a wide margin embellished with vibrant floral flourishes.

Migration to the printed page

In 15th century Germany, Johannes Gutenberg invented the moveable-type printing press. His new technology produced a codex (an ancient manuscript text in book form) that looked like a traditional manuscript with regard to text and margins.

Rubrication – the decoration of letters in coloured inks – was added by hand to the first printed books. As the ability of printers to produce more nuanced illustrations accelerated, the decorated border survived and thrived. Indeed, its importance as part of the aesthetic in terms of how a book should look to an early modern reader drove forward innovations in technology.

The Blackburn Museum’s collection of early printed books is full of examples of the new technology of print accommodating the decorative frame.

Falling in and out of favour

The decorated frame fell out of favour in the 16th and 17th centuries. For western European readers it began to appear old fashioned. But it returned during the Industrial Revolution, thanks to the work of the Pre-Raphaelite movement.

Pre-Raphaelite artists reached back to the medieval period for their inspiration as well as artistic practice. Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Morris, Sir Edward Coley Burne-Jones, Arthur Hughes and their associates set out to reject the values and industrial production of the 19th century. Medieval narratives found new audiences in Pre-Rapahelite art such as Arthur Hughes’ Sir Galahad, the Quest for the Holy Grail. In the subsequent Arts and Crafts Movement, books, ceramics, textiles and furniture were produced with minimal mechanical intervention. The medieval decorative frame thrived across various media.

A painting of Sleeping Beauty — Sleeping Beauty by Edward Burne Jones (circa 1885).
Manchester Art Gallery

William Morris’ hand-written copy of The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam provides a compelling example of the after-life of the medieval margin. On each page, the text is surrounded by a lush decorated border which is punctuated by cameos that were designed by Burne-Jones and painted by Charles Fairfax Murray.

Poem decorated with leaves and gold — The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, written and decorated by William Morris.
British Library Collection

The Nature of Gothic gives visitors the opportunity to compare the work of medieval masters of decorative art with the work produced by the Pre-Raphaelites and the Arts and Crafts Movement. Contemporary artist Jamie Holman and ceramicist Nehal Aamir also contribute modern interpretations of the decorated frame.

The result is a celebration of the verdant decorative frames which twist and turn through time, illuminating art of both the past and present.

The Nature of Gothic is at the Blackburn Museum and Art Gallery from September 13 to December 13.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

With thanks to Jake Benson for the translation of Persian 10.

Cynthia Johnston is employed by The Institute of English Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London. She receives funding from Arts Council England. This exhibit has been supported by major loans from the British Library, the John Rylands Library and Research Centre, Manchester Art Gallery and the Liverpool Museums Trust among others.

– ref. New exhibition explores history of decorative borders: from medieval manuscripts to William Morris – https://theconversation.com/new-exhibition-explores-history-of-decorative-borders-from-medieval-manuscripts-to-william-morris-261785

September 12, 2025

Ten ways diabetes and dementia are linked

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Craig Beall, Associate Professor in Experimental Diabetes, University of Exeter

The link between diabetes and dementia is becoming increasingly clear. New research shows how blood sugar problems affect brain health and vice versa. Here are ten evidence-based insights into how the two conditions are related.

1. Diabetes raises the risk of dementia

People with diabetes are about 60% more likely to develop dementia than those without, and frequent episodes of low blood sugar are linked to a 50% higher chance of cognitive decline.

2. Insulin resistance affects the brain too

Insulin resistance – the major cause of type 2 diabetes – happens when cells stop responding properly to insulin. This means that too much sugar, in the form of glucose, is left in the blood, leading to complications.

It usually affects the liver and muscles, but it also affects the brain. In Alzheimer’s, this resistance may make it harder for brain cells to use glucose for energy, contributing to cognitive decline.

3. A brain sugar shortage in dementia

The brain is only 2% of our body weight, but uses about 20% of the body’s energy. In dementia, brain cells appear to lose the ability to use glucose properly.

This mix of poor use of glucose and insulin resistance is sometimes unofficially called type 3 diabetes.

4. Alzheimer’s can raise diabetes risk

People with Alzheimer’s often have higher fasting blood glucose, even if they don’t have diabetes. This is a form of pre-diabetes. Animal studies also show that Alzheimer’s-like changes in the brain raise blood glucose levels.

Also, the highest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer’s, the APOE4 genetic variant, reduces insulin sensitivity by trapping the insulin receptor inside the cell, where it cannot be switched on properly.

5. Blood vessel damage links both conditions

Diabetes damages blood vessels, causing complications in the eyes, kidneys and heart. The brain is also at risk. High or varying blood glucose levels can injure vessels in the brain, reducing blood flow and oxygen delivery.

Diabetes can also weaken the brain’s protective barrier, letting harmful substances in. This leads to inflammation. Reduced blood flow and brain inflammation are strongly linked to dementia.

6. Memantine: a dementia drug born from diabetes research

Memantine, used to treat moderate to severe Alzheimer’s symptoms, was originally developed as a diabetes medication. It didn’t succeed in controlling blood glucose, but researchers later discovered its benefits for brain function. This story shows how diabetes research may hold clues for treating brain disorders.

7. Metformin might protect the brain

Metformin, the most widely used diabetes drug, does more than just lower blood glucose. It gets in to the brain and may lower brain inflammation.

Some studies suggest that people with diabetes who take metformin are less likely to develop dementia, and those who stop taking it may see their risk increase again.

Trials are testing its effects in people without diabetes.

Bottles of metformin on a shelf. — Metformin may lower brain inflammation.
Carl DMaster/Shutterstock.com

8. Weight-loss injections may reduce plaque buildup

GLP-1 receptors agonist drugs, such as semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy), lower blood glucose and support weight loss. Records show that people with diabetes on these drugs have a lower dementia risk. Comparing GLP1 drugs to metformin, studies have found that they were even more effective than metformin at reducing dementia risk.

Two major trials, Evoke and Evoke Plus, are testing oral semaglutide in people with mild cognitive impairment or early mild Alzheimer’s.

9. Insulin therapy might help the brain

Since insulin resistance in the brain is a problem, researchers have tested insulin sprays given through the nose. This method delivers insulin straight to the brain while reducing effects on blood sugar.

Small studies suggest these sprays may help memory or reduce brain shrinkage, but delivery methods remain a challenge. Sprays vary in how much insulin reaches the brain, and long-term safety has not yet been proven.

10. SGLT2 inhibitors may lower dementia risk

New evidence suggests that compared to GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors, (a type of diabetes drug) are superior at reducing dementia risk, including Alzheimer’s and vascular dementia, in people with type 2 diabetes. These tablets lower blood sugar by increasing sugar removal in urine. This study builds on early evidence suggesting they lower dementia risk by reducing inflammation in the brain.

This growing body of evidence suggests that managing diabetes protects more than the heart and kidneys, it also helps preserve brain function.

Questions remain whether diabetes drugs only reduce the diabetes-associated dementia risk or whether these drugs could also reduce risk in people without diabetes.

However, diabetes research has been very successful in creating at least 13 different classes of drugs, multiple combination therapies, giving rise to at least 50 different medicines. These reduce blood sugar, improve insulin sensitivity and reduce inflammation. A “side-effect” may be better preservation of brain health during ageing.

Craig Beall currently receives funding from Diabetes UK, Breakthrough T1D, Steve Morgan Foundation Type 1 Diabetes Grand Challenge, Medical Research Council, NC3Rs, Society for Endocrinology and British Society for Neuroendocrinology.

Natasha MacDonald receives funding from Diabetes UK.

– ref. Ten ways diabetes and dementia are linked – https://theconversation.com/ten-ways-diabetes-and-dementia-are-linked-264393

September 12, 2025

Why OpenAI’s solution to AI hallucinations would kill ChatGPT tomorrow

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Wei Xing, Assistant Professor, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Sheffield

OpenAI’s latest research paper diagnoses exactly why ChatGPT and other large language models can make things up – known in the world of artificial intelligence as “hallucination”. It also reveals why the problem may be unfixable, at least as far as consumers are concerned.

The paper provides the most rigorous mathematical explanation yet for why these models confidently state falsehoods. It demonstrates that these aren’t just an unfortunate side effect of the way that AIs are currently trained, but are mathematically inevitable.

The issue can partly be explained by mistakes in the underlying data used to train the AIs. But using mathematical analysis of how AI systems learn, the researchers prove that even with perfect training data, the problem still exists.

The way language models respond to queries – by predicting one word at a time in a sentence based on probabilities – naturally produces errors. The researchers in fact show that the total error rate for generating sentences is at least twice as high as the error rate the same AI would have on a simple yes/no question, because mistakes can accumulate over multiple predictions.

In other words, hallucination rates are fundamentally bounded by how well AI systems can distinguish valid from invalid responses. Since this classification problem is inherently difficult for many areas of knowledge, hallucinations become unavoidable.

It also turns out that the less a model sees a fact during training, the more likely it is to hallucinate when asked about it. With birthdays of notable figures, for instance, it was found that if 20% of such people’s birthdays only appear once in training data, then base models should get at least 20% of birthday queries wrong.

Sure enough, when researchers asked state-of-the-art models for the birthday of Adam Kalai, one of the paper’s authors, DeepSeek-V3 confidently provided three different incorrect dates across separate attempts: “03-07”, “15-06”, and “01-01”. The correct date is in the autumn, so none of these were even close.

The evaluation trap

More troubling is the paper’s analysis of why hallucinations persist despite extensive post-training efforts (such as providing extensive human feedback to an AI’s responses before it is released to the public). The authors examined ten major AI benchmarks, including those used by Google, OpenAI and also the top leaderboards that rank AI models. This revealed that nine benchmarks use binary grading systems that award zero points for AIs expressing uncertainty.

This creates what the authors term an “epidemic” of penalising honest responses. When an AI system says “I don’t know”, it receives the same score as giving completely wrong information. The optimal strategy under such evaluation becomes clear: always guess.

The researchers prove this mathematically. Whatever the chances of a particular answer being right, the expected score of guessing always exceeds the score of abstaining when an evaluation uses binary grading.

The solution that would break everything

OpenAI’s proposed fix is to have the AI consider its own confidence in an answer before putting it out there, and for benchmarks to score them on that basis. The AI could then be prompted, for instance: “Answer only if you are more than 75% confident, since mistakes are penalised 3 points while correct answers receive 1 point.”

The OpenAI researchers’ mathematical framework shows that under appropriate confidence thresholds, AI systems would naturally express uncertainty rather than guess. So this would lead to fewer hallucinations. The problem is what it would do to user experience.

Consider the implications if ChatGPT started saying “I don’t know” to even 30% of queries – a conservative estimate based on the paper’s analysis of factual uncertainty in training data. Users accustomed to receiving confident answers to virtually any question would likely abandon such systems rapidly.

I’ve seen this kind of problem in another area of my life. I’m involved in an air-quality monitoring project in Salt Lake City, Utah. When the system flags uncertainties around measurements during adverse weather conditions or when equipment is being calibrated, there’s less user engagement compared to displays showing confident readings – even when those confident readings prove inaccurate during validation.

The computational economics problem

It wouldn’t be difficult to reduce hallucinations using the paper’s insights. Established methods for quantifying uncertainty have existed for decades. These could be used to provide trustworthy estimates of uncertainty and guide an AI to make smarter choices.

But even if the problem of user preferences could be overcome, there’s a bigger obstacle: computational economics. Uncertainty-aware language models require significantly more computation than today’s approach, as they must evaluate multiple possible responses and estimate confidence levels. For a system processing millions of queries daily, this translates to dramatically higher operational costs.

More sophisticated approaches like active learning, where AI systems ask clarifying questions to reduce uncertainty, can improve accuracy but further multiply computational requirements. Such methods work well in specialised domains like chip design, where wrong answers cost millions of dollars and justify extensive computation. For consumer applications where users expect instant responses, the economics become prohibitive.

The calculus shifts dramatically for AI systems managing critical business operations or economic infrastructure. When AI agents handle supply chain logistics, financial trading or medical diagnostics, the cost of hallucinations far exceeds the expense of getting models to decide whether they’re too uncertain. In these domains, the paper’s proposed solutions become economically viable – even necessary. Uncertain AI agents will just have to cost more.

However, consumer applications still dominate AI development priorities. Users want systems that provide confident answers to any question. Evaluation benchmarks reward systems that guess rather than express uncertainty. Computational costs favour fast, overconfident responses over slow, uncertain ones.

Falling energy costs per token and advancing chip architectures may eventually make it more affordable to have AIs decide whether they’re certain enough to answer a question. But the relatively high amount of computation required compared to today’s guessing would remain, regardless of absolute hardware costs.

In short, the OpenAI paper inadvertently highlights an uncomfortable truth: the business incentives driving consumer AI development remain fundamentally misaligned with reducing hallucinations. Until these incentives change, hallucinations will persist.

Wei Xing does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why OpenAI’s solution to AI hallucinations would kill ChatGPT tomorrow – https://theconversation.com/why-openais-solution-to-ai-hallucinations-would-kill-chatgpt-tomorrow-265107

September 12, 2025

¿Qué implica para España el ataque ruso con drones en Polonia?

Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Armando Alvares Garcia Júnior, Professor de Direito Internacional, Relações Internacionais e Geopolítica/Geoeconomia, UNIR – Universidad Internacional de La Rioja

Soldados polacos en la zona donde impactó uno de los drones rusos. RTVE

Durante la madrugada del 10 de septiembre, Europa experimentó uno de los incidentes de seguridad más graves de su historia reciente: una formación de drones rusos atravesó el espacio aéreo polaco en el marco de una ofensiva sobre Ucrania y fue abatida por cazas de la OTAN.

Uno de estos aparatos impactó en la localidad de Wyryki-Wola, lo que activó alertas en toda la estructura de defensa euroatlántica y evidenció la vulnerabilidad de la frontera oriental de la Alianza.

La penetración de 19 drones en territorio polaco, en paralelo a un ataque masivo sobre Ucrania, puede o no entenderse como un accidente. Las autoridades polacas, por ejemplo, interpretaron el episodio como un gesto de fuerza diseñado para poner a prueba tanto la unidad política como la capacidad operativa de la OTAN ante amenazas híbridas y directas por parte de Rusia.

Este tipo de incursiones obliga a repensar los límites físicos y jurídicos de la disuasión colectiva y pone en jaque los mecanismos tradicionales de control de escalada.

La activación inmediata del artículo 4 del Tratado del Atlántico Norte respondió a la percepción de un peligro directo a la integridad y soberanía polacas. Aunque esa disposición legal no implica un compromiso automático de defensa militar conjunta (como el artículo 5), sí obliga a consultas diplomáticas urgentes para coordinar la posición aliada y calibrar la naturaleza jurídica e internacional de la amenaza.

Esta herramienta ha sido empleada solo en contadas ocasiones, reflejando la gravedad de la situación y la importancia del consenso intergubernamental en la respuesta.

¿Cuál es el compromiso de España con la OTAN?

España ha reforzado este año su compromiso con la defensa colectiva de la OTAN, liderando desde julio la Brigada Multinacional en Eslovaquia, con base en Lešť, donde mantiene desplegados alrededor de 828 efectivos en el que es su contingente exterior más numeroso.

También participa en la Presencia Avanzada Reforzada (Enhanced Forward Presence) mediante despliegues rotatorios y ejercicios periódicos en el flanco oriental, como el reciente NATO’s Forge 2025 en Letonia, en el que contribuyó con tanques Leopard 2E, vehículos Pizarro y sistemas antiaéreos NASAMS, además de rotaciones temporales en Polonia y Lituania.

Igualmente, España aporta cazas Eurofighter y otros medios a misiones de policía aérea y vigilancia, como el Baltic Air Policing y operaciones en Islandia y Rumanía, reforzando su perfil como aliado clave tanto en la OTAN como en la Brújula Estratégica de la Unión Europea, que integra esfuerzos en inteligencia, ciberseguridad y protección de infraestructuras críticas.

Esta proyección exterior no exime a las autoridades españolas de sus responsabilidades jurídicas en plan doméstico. Cualquier aumento significativo del despliegue militar o modificación sustancial de las reglas de enfrentamiento debe someterse a un proceso de debate y aprobación en el Parlamento, asegurando un control democrático efectivo sobre las misiones internacionales y el cumplimiento de los compromisos asumidos por España en el marco del derecho internacional.

Este procedimiento resulta esencial en contextos donde la línea que separa la disuasión de un conflicto abierto se vuelve especialmente difusa.

Diferentes países, estrategias distintas

El incidente de los drones evidencia la existencia de estrategias divergentes dentro de la Alianza y la Unión Europea. Polonia y los Estados bálticos exigen medidas inmediatas de refuerzo y nuevas rondas de sanciones, mientras Alemania y Francia apuestan por una respuesta gradual y diplomática para evitar su escalada.

La administración estadounidense mantiene, bajo la presidencia de Trump, un discurso ambiguo que limita la cohesión estratégica, introduciendo un factor de incertidumbre en las capitales europeas.

En el seno de la Unión Europea, el debate sobre autonomía estratégica se acelera. Kaja Kallas, como Alta Representante para la Política Exterior, abogó por ampliar sanciones contra intermediarios energéticos y acelerar la implantación de la Brújula Estratégica. Esto no tiene otro objetivo que dotar a la UE de mayor capacidad militar autónoma que complemente y refuerce al sistema OTAN sin superponer competencias.

Más allá del plano militar, la reciente invasión del espacio aéreo polaco –siempre considerando la necesidad de datos contrastados y evitando conclusiones precipitadas ante la proliferación de relatos poco verificados– genera efectos económicos y energéticos inmediatos. Las turbulencias en los mercados tienden a incrementar los precios de la electricidad y el transporte en toda la Unión Europea, con un impacto directo sobre los consumidores españoles y de otros Estados miembros.

El riesgo de que este tipo de agresiones evolucione hacia escenarios híbridos –combinando operaciones cinéticas con campañas de desinformación y ataques cibernéticos– obliga a reforzar la estrategia española, especialmente en la protección de infraestructuras críticas, inteligencia y ciberseguridad, tanto a escala nacional como comunitaria.

A esto se añade que, según recientes estudios y análisis europeos, España y el sur de Europa han sido identificados como objetivos de campañas de desinformación y sabotaje de origen externo, requiriendo una cooperación aún mayor en resiliencia y defensa digital.

El respeto a la integridad territorial, consagrada en la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, sirve de base para las consultas en la OTAN y la posible elevación del caso ante instituciones multilaterales. Del mismo modo, la legitimidad de cualquier uso de la fuerza defensiva debe quedar inscrita tanto en las resoluciones de la Alianza como en la normativa constitucional de cada Estado miembro, especialmente España, cuya práctica constitucional refuerza el carácter parlamentario de las grandes decisiones estratégicas.

¿A qué se enfrenta ahora la Alianza Atlántica?

La Alianza Atlántica se enfrenta a una encrucijada, en la que la unidad y la rapidez de respuesta serán vitales para evitar fracturas que puedan debilitar su capacidad de disuasión y defensa. El despliegue español, su participación en ejercicios multinacionales y las lecciones aprendidas en operaciones preventivas reflejan tanto el compromiso europeo como la necesidad de dotar a las decisiones de legitimidad democrática y multilateral.

En este escenario, España asume tanto una responsabilidad militar como también diplomática, institucional y social, contribuyendo a la estabilidad colectiva sin descuidar los principios del derecho internacional y la garantía del control parlamentario.

El desafío de la frontera oriental evidencia que la defensa europea requiere respuestas integrales, cooperación avanzada y una interpretación dinámica del derecho internacional en tiempos de crisis.

Armando Alvares Garcia Júnior no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.

– ref. ¿Qué implica para España el ataque ruso con drones en Polonia? – https://theconversation.com/que-implica-para-espana-el-ataque-ruso-con-drones-en-polonia-265155

September 12, 2025

Les animaux de compagnie sont-ils des gages de bonheur ? Des recherches apportent des bémols

Source: The Conversation – in French – By Christophe Gagné, PhD candidate, Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)

Les gens se tournent souvent vers les animaux de compagnie pour améliorer leur humeur et trouver de la compagnie. Améliorer le bien-être et réduire la solitude font partie des raisons les plus souvent citées pour adopter un animal.

La croyance selon laquelle les animaux de compagnie apportent de nombreux bienfaits à leurs propriétaires est très répandue, mais des recherches montrent qu’avoir un animal n’est pas une panacée pour la santé psychologique.

Malgré cela, les animaux de compagnie sont souvent présentés dans les médias et sur les réseaux sociaux comme des solutions efficaces pour réduire le stress et la solitude, entretenant l’idée répandue de leurs bienfaits pour la santé. Cela peut inciter les gens à adopter des animaux de compagnie sans tenir pleinement compte des responsabilités et des exigences que cela implique, ce qui peut avoir des conséquences négatives tant pour eux-mêmes que pour leurs animaux.

En tant que psychologues sociaux étudiant les relations entre les humains et les animaux de compagnie, nous adoptons une approche plus nuancée, en examinant quand, comment et pour qui les animaux de compagnie peuvent — ou non — améliorer le bien-être.

Ce que dit la recherche

De nombreuses études ont montré que les propriétaires d’animaux de compagnie sont moins anxieux, se sentent moins seuls et moins stressés que les personnes qui n’en ont pas. Les propriétaires d’animaux domestiques se déclarent également plus satisfaits de leur vie.

Ces études retiennent souvent notre attention, car elles font écho à une croyance largement répandue : nos animaux domestiques sont bons pour nous. Ce type de recherche rassure et valide le lien profond que nous pouvons ressentir avec nos compagnons. Mais elles ne montrent qu’un seul côté de la médaille.

D’autres études n’ont trouvé aucun lien significatif entre le fait d’avoir un animal de compagnie et le bien-être humain. En fait, les personnes qui ont des animaux de compagnie ne déclarent pas nécessairement un bien-être plus élevé ni une meilleure santé mentale que celles qui n’en ont pas.

Notre étude sur le rôle des animaux de compagnie dans le bien-être humain, menée au Canada pendant la pandémie de Covid-19, a donné des résultats surprenants : elle a révélé qu’avoir un animal de compagnie était généralement associé à un bien-être et une santé mentale moindres.

L’étude portait à la fois sur des propriétaires d’animaux de compagnie et des personnes sans animaux, dans le but de comparer les deux groupes au niveau de différents indicateurs de bien-être pendant la pandémie. Les propriétaires d’animaux ont déclaré un bien-être inférieur à celui des non-propriétaires pendant cette période, notamment des niveaux de solitude plus élevés.

Ces incohérences entre les différentes études montrent que le lien entre le fait d’avoir un animal de compagnie et le bien-être n’est pas si simple. Notre étude a révélé certaines de ces nuances. Par exemple, par rapport aux propriétaires d’autres animaux de compagnie, les propriétaires de chiens ont déclaré un bien-être plus élevé.

Pour comprendre ces résultats mitigés, les chercheurs ont commencé à examiner de plus près la nature de la relation entre les propriétaires et leurs animaux de compagnie. Cette approche pourrait nous aider à mieux comprendre les facteurs qui font en sorte que la présence d’un animal de compagnie soit bénéfique au bien-être.

La qualité du lien

Tout comme nos relations avec les autres êtres humains, le lien qui nous unit à nos animaux de compagnie est complexe. De nombreux aspects de cette relation peuvent influencer les bienfaits que nous en tirons. Ce n’est pas seulement le fait d’avoir un animal de compagnie qui compte, mais aussi la façon dont nous tissons des liens avec eux et interagissons avec eux.

Par exemple, les propriétaires qui ressentent plus d’anxiété à l’idée d’être séparés de leur animal, ou qui remettent davantage en question l’affection de celui-ci, ce qui reflète un attachement inquiet à l’animal, disent également se sentir plus déprimés. Le fait de percevoir nos animaux de compagnie comme moins compréhensifs ou plus insensibles à nos besoins est également associé à des niveaux plus élevés de dépression, d’anxiété et de solitude.

À l’inverse, plus les gens ont le sentiment de partager des caractéristiques avec leurs animaux de compagnie (par exemple, la loyauté, la paresse), plus ils sont susceptibles de rapporter un bien-être plus élevé. Les animaux de compagnie sont également perçus comme vivant dans le présent, sans s’attarder sur le passé ni s’inquiéter pour l’avenir. Interagir en faisant preuve de présence attentive avec nos animaux peut nous aider à nous concentrer sur le moment présent, ce qui favorise également un plus grand bien-être.

En cultivant les aspects positifs de nos relations avec nos animaux de compagnie et en travaillant sur les aspects plus difficiles, nous pouvons atténuer le stress lié à certains des défis que représente leur prise en charge, notamment les ressources financières nécessaires ou l’anxiété que nous ressentons lorsqu’ils tombent malades.

Avoir un animal de compagnie : les défis

En réalité, avoir un animal de compagnie s’accompagne de responsabilités et de défis qui ne semblent pas être abordés aussi souvent que les avantages. Ces aspects plus difficiles de la prise en charge d’un animal de compagnie peuvent parfois être éprouvants sur le plan émotionnel et nuire au bien-être psychologique du propriétaire.

Avoir des animaux de compagnie, même si on les aime beaucoup, demande du temps, de l’énergie et des ressources financières. Pour certains, cette responsabilité peut représenter une source supplémentaire de stress. Dans notre étude, le fait d’avoir un animal de compagnie était associé, durant la pandémie de Covid-19, à un bien-être moindre chez les femmes et chez les personnes ayant deux enfants ou plus à la maison, des groupes déjà confrontés à des exigences accrues liées aux enfants et aux tâches ménagères.

Déjà des milliers d’abonnés à l’infolettre de La Conversation. Et vous ? Abonnez-vous gratuitement à notre infolettre pour mieux comprendre les grands enjeux contemporains.

De même, avoir un animal de compagnie était associée à un bien-être moindre chez les personnes sans emploi ou ayant un emploi moins stable (par exemple, les étudiants, les personnes au foyer). Des ressources financières limitées pouvaient rendre plus difficile la prise en charge de l’animal.

De même, devoir s’occuper d’un animal malade peut être éprouvant sur le plan émotionnel pour les propriétaires. Les personnes qui s’occupent de chiens atteints d’une maladie chronique déclarent se sentir désespérées et impuissantes, en particulier lorsqu’elles ne peuvent pas soulager la souffrance de leur animal.

D’autres facteurs, tels que les problèmes de comportement d’un animal et le deuil vécu après la perte d’un animal de compagnie, peuvent également être difficiles à vivre pour les propriétaires. Pour ceux qui envisagent d’adopter un animal, il est important de tenir compte de ces réalités afin de prendre une décision éclairée.

Répondre aux besoins de notre animal

Il y a de nombreux facteurs importants à prendre en compte avant d’accueillir un nouvel animal de compagnie dans notre maison. Avant tout, nous devons nous assurer que nous avons le temps, l’énergie et les ressources nécessaires pour répondre à ses besoins.

Choisir un animal de compagnie avec soin, en fonction de ce que nous pouvons réellement lui offrir et sur la base d’informations fiables concernant ses caractéristiques et ses besoins, nous donne les meilleures chances d’avoir une relation positive et épanouie.

Répondre aux besoins de nos animaux de compagnie peut également améliorer notre propre bien-être en tant que propriétaires, démontrant ainsi le potentiel des relations interespèces mutuellement bénéfiques. Mais lorsque ces besoins ne sont pas satisfaits, les animaux de compagnie et leurs propriétaires peuvent finir par se sentir stressés et anxieux.

Lorsque l’on envisage d’adopter un animal de compagnie, il est important de se poser la question suivante : pourquoi voulons-nous un animal de compagnie ? Si l’idée est d’améliorer notre bien-être psychologique, nos recherches suggèrent qu’il faudrait peut-être y réfléchir à deux fois.

Catherine Amiot fait partie du conseil d’administration émergent de la PHAIR Society, une société savante qui vise à promouvoir la recherche sur les relations intergroupes entre les humains et les animaux. Elle a reçu du financement du Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada (CRSH) et du Fonds de recherche du Québec – Santé (FRQS) pour les recherches menées dans son laboratoire et présentées dans cet article.

Christophe Gagné ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Les animaux de compagnie sont-ils des gages de bonheur ? Des recherches apportent des bémols – https://theconversation.com/les-animaux-de-compagnie-sont-ils-des-gages-de-bonheur-des-recherches-apportent-des-bemols-263144