Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Madeleine Orr, Assistant Professor, Sport Ecology, University of Toronto

If it feels like everyone around you (physically and digitally) has taken up an affair with running in the past few years, you’re not imagining it. Since 2023, running has been the most uploaded activity on the exercise app Strava, according to their annual Year in Sport reports from 2023, 2024 and 2025.

For many of us, running is one of the most accessible forms of physical activity. It is something we can do on our own or with friends. It requires minimal gear and does not rely on a specialized training facility. All we have to do is lace up and go.

However, the seemingly simple practice of running is entangled with complex environmental dynamics. Rising global temperatures and air pollution are making it physically harder and unsafe to run outdoors, and some of the digital tools that many runners rely on carry their own environmental costs.

Strava’s 2023 Trend Report noted that: 75 per cent of athletes said extreme heat affected their exercise plans, while poor air quality affected 27 per cent. We now have to reckon with the reality that, due to warming temperatures, running will become less accessible and safe.

Add to that the rise of “runfluencers,” running fashion trends and a new market of consumer products designed to help runners cope with heat, and it becomes increasingly clear that the relationship between running, climate change and consumption is wickedly ironic.

Hobbies can bring joy, well-being and focus to our busy lives, but so many of us don’t have one. If you’re ready to replace scrolling with stitching, or hustle with horticulture, The Hobby Starter Kit (a new series from Quarter Life) will help you get going.

The dangers of heat

Running in the heat increases the risk of exertional heat illness and heat stroke. Additionally, running in the heat can increase the risk of acute kidney disease due to insufficient cooling and dehydration during exercise-related heat stress.

For those keen to hit new personal bests, running in hotter conditions can impair performance. For example, an analysis of race data uploaded to Strava identified the average finishing time of the New York City Marathon was approximately 12 minutes slower in 2022 — when the temperature was 23C (plus humidity) — compared to 2021, when temperatures were around 13C.

And that’s just a few of the temperature-related risks associated with summer running. In addition to extreme heat exposure, the safety of summer running is also compromised by smoke and poor air quality.

Runfluencer culture

In addition to the climate-driven shifts affecting our daily jogs, the recent running boom and surrounding culture is also shifting how we run.

As runners adapt to rising heat, poor air quality and smoke-filled summers, the pressure to buy, track and optimize intensifies, further entangling running with the very environmental forces that threaten it.

If your social media algorithm is anything like ours, you might have noticed some targeted ads and sponsored content from “runfluencers” highlighting their new favourite running-related products and apps, such as Runna, a British-based coaching app known for its personalized training plans and AI-assisted pacing.

Runna was first launched in 2022, and its online presence jumped significantly after the app was acquired by Strava in April 2025.

Apps like these can help provide structure and prepare for races. However, they have also faced criticism, with experts noting concerns about the intensity of the AI-assisted training plans in regard to training spikes and risk of overuse injuries. Runna has said they “don’t use AI to generate training plans” but to “monitor a runner’s progress throughout their plan.”

While these apps promise efficiency and personalization, they are part of a wider digital infrastructure with their own environmental footprint. GPS tracking, constant data uploads, cloud storage and AI-assisted analysis all rely on energy-intensive data centres.

As running culture becomes more data-driven and automated, even a traditionally low-impact activity becomes entangled with the emissions and the energy demands of digital technology.

Beyond apps, runfluencers are also using their platforms to share their running esthetic — trying out new shoes, participating in the latest running fashion trends and showing off race day outfits.

That, in turn, promotes a culture that normalizes over-consumption under the guise of self-improvement and dramatically increases the environmental cost of what should be a low-impact activity. Such a focus can make running feel less appealing and appear less accessible.

Staying safe on a run

If you are someone with the flexibility to choose when you participate in races, consider pivoting to springtime training rather than slogging through increasingly risky summer training blocks. Not only will your training runs leading up to the race be cooler, but you can also expect more optimal marathon temperatures (2 to 13C) on race day.

For example, in the Canadian province of Ontario, races like the Mississauga Marathon in April and Toronto’s Sporting Life 10K in May offer runners safer racing temperatures and, potentially, improved performance compared to summer training and fall races.

Think about how you engage with running culture and be a smart consumer. Avoid over-consuming products and programs that you don’t need. Remember, running is one of the most accessible forms of exercise we have. You don’t need a bunch of gear and apps to participate.

As climate change intensifies and summer temperatures continue to rise, running will become less safe on hot days. Runfluencer culture and over-consumption in running fashion are dramatically increasing the environmental cost of what should be a low-impact activity.

To counter these trends, opt for spring races, listen to your body, seek advice from human coaches and pick durable gear over following the latest fashions.

These choices matter not because individual runners are to blame, but because they push back against a running culture that increasingly equates health with optimization, constant consumption and digital surveillance, even as climate change makes the sport itself more precarious.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Hurdles to a hobby: How climate change and ‘runfluencer’ culture impact our daily jog – https://theconversation.com/hurdles-to-a-hobby-how-climate-change-and-runfluencer-culture-impact-our-daily-jog-279537

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Li-elle Rapaport, Doctoral Student and Private Practice Therapist, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba

Amid a rapid, AI-driven technology boom and all the changes it’s entailed, mental health issues due to social isolation have been on the rise. Researchers in social and clinical psychology have documented this shift and coined it the “loneliness epidemic.”

Human connection is imperative to psychological well-being but the world is increasingly disconnected. With technology streamlining our lives, many report growing levels of depression, anxiety and existential dread brought on by the physical and emotional distance it creates between us.

And so psychologists have begun asking: “How do we stay connected to the here and now, and to each other?”

One facet of self-compassion theory — a concept developed by psychologist Kristin Neff that dictates treating ourselves with the same care and understanding as we would our friends — may hold the answer. “Common humanity” promotes the recognition that we are, in fact, not alone since all humans share the same fundamental experiences, emotions and struggles.

The loneliness epidemic

To begin finding a solution to social disconnectedness, it’s important to understand the vehicles that drive it. A 2024 Statistics Canada survey found more than one in 10 Canadians report often or always feeling lonely, a finding that aligns with psychological research on rising social isolation.

At the same time, studies indicate that heavy reliance on digital technologies can both reflect and reinforce this isolation.

Technology, AI and algorithms divide and capture human attention, often limiting exposure to interactions or varied points of view and perspectives. A study by clinical and social psychologists suggests that the motivation to escape everyday life and experience social gratification reinforces the relationship between mental health and AI dependence, especially for people with mental illness.

The more attention spent in the digital world, the less is available to spend with one another.

It’s easy to fall into a pattern of pessimism as we observe technology shifts toward automated entry-level jobs, addictive doomscrolling and students submitting AI-generated homework. These negative emotions, the attention we spend on them and the frustration we feel with ourselves for having these emotions can perpetuate a cycle of self-isolation.

Self-compassion and common humanity are evidence-based tools that can help stop this cycle by shifting attention back to what is important: each other.

Self-compassion and common humanity

According to Kristin Neff, an American education psychology scholar, self-compassion functions on three key tenets: self-kindness versus self-judgment, common humanity versus self-isolation and mindfulness versus over-identification.

Each facet emphasizes intentionality in our actions, both toward ourselves and others.

At its core, mindful self-compassion’s concept of common humanity is the belief that we are connected by familiar human experiences. Personal suffering is part of a shared human condition, for example, and in accepting this truth, we reduce self-judgment and weaken the tendency toward social withdrawal.

Research shows that self-compassion can be exercised like a muscle through interventions that shift awareness of our personal experiences to how these experiences connect us with others.

Appealing to the humanness of our present experiences reduces feelings of isolation and self-judgment and increases life satisfaction. Common humanity addresses our basic human need to belong.

Feeling down about not having plans with others this weekend? You’re not alone in this struggle. It is uniquely human to feel alone and want to self-soothe with a scroll on TikTok. Knowing this, it might be time to take the first step and reach out to that friend and invite them over.

From theory to practice

Demonstrating the principles of self-compassion and common humanity in the presence of others can create a positive feedback cycle. Three action-based practices help exercise control over our attention, centre community, empathize and attend to our “why.”

Invest in community. Allowing technology to seep into all corners of life is not inevitable. Self-compassion teaches that while this is human, we have the power to change our actions as an act of compassion. It is our choice to bring our attention back to the present.

This may mean making an explicit choice to unplug instead of following the urge to respond; leaning into sharing imperfect experiences and mutual not-knowing; talking something through instead of Googling it immediately; practising collaboration over outsourcing thinking.

Practise empathy. Excessive tech or AI use can leave us feeling depleted and disconnected. In order to interrupt the cycle of overusing technology, notice these emotions without judgment rather than feeling guilt and avoiding the guilt through more tech use.

To ground yourself, ask: “What do I need right now?” You may find your response involves uniquely human experiences: food, a cup of tea, calling a parent, fresh air or a walk.

Centre your ‘why.’ Think about why you choose to connect with others. Centre this “why” in your day-to-day life.

If you notice yourself opting for AI to write an email, pause for a moment and notice this reflex. It is human to seek shortcuts to preserve energy. Consider what you might gain from writing that email yourself. Notice any discomfort. Know that it’s human to feel it, and choose to write it yourself anyway. Theory suggests you might feel more connected to your people and to your own humanness in the process.

In this context, self-compassion functions as a psychological counterweight to the isolating tendencies of digital life. It helps reorient attention away from performance and productivity and back toward shared human experiences.

Li-elle Rapaport 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. How principles of self-compassion help fight loneliness in the age of AI – https://theconversation.com/how-principles-of-self-compassion-help-fight-loneliness-in-the-age-of-ai-276574

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Chetan Dave, Professor of Economics, University of Alberta

Canada’s economic policy uncertainty index has climbed back to levels not seen since the COVID-19 pandemic, a sign that a more volatile period may be taking hold. Income inequality hit a record high last year, and youth unemployment reached 14.6 per cent in September 2025, its highest point since 2010, excluding the pandemic.

Most Canadians have had relatively little experience with major economic downturns. Since the early 1990s, Canada has largely been spared the boom-and-bust cycles common in the United States. The country avoided the worst of the 2008 global financial crisis, and until COVID-19, had not experienced a major economic shock in a generation.

In that long stretch of time, Canadians have grown accustomed to relative stability, which makes the current moment feel especially disorienting. We are, as the saying goes, living in “interesting times,” and that is rarely good news for prices, employment prospects, government budgets, business investment or productivity.

Many Canadian households are carrying a fair amount of debt while facing inflation and rapid changes in job markets. What is a typical Canadian household to do? As an economist, I have some practical advice to offer.

Why uncertainty is rising

This ongoing economic angst has several overlapping sources that are both global and domestic in nature.

Geopolitical conflicts, including the ongoing war involving the United States, Israel and Iran, are increasing the costs of everyday items like food and gas. These disruptions ripple through global supply chains, feeding into higher input costs for Canadian businesses and, ultimately, higher prices for consumers.

At the same time, tariff disputes led by the U.S. are causing inflationary pressure and discouraging long-term business investment. This, in turn, weighs on productivity and wage growth.

Read more:
Food prices are already high in Canada. Will the Iran war make them worse?

Some governments have responded to these shocks with industrial policies, attempting to support or protect specific sectors such as clean energy, manufacturing or technology. However, some economists warn against this approach, arguing that governments cannot reliably “pick winners” better than markets can.

Political fault lines are also contributing to uncertainty at home. Rising anti-immigration sentiment and the separatist rhetoric in Alberta are adding another layer of social turbulence. Without a social consensus, economic planning becomes more difficult and volatility often follows.

Canada’s safety net has limits

Canada does retain an important advantage: its social safety net. Canada spends roughly 18 to 20 per cent of GDP on public social programs — around the the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average. That’s below the levels of France, Germany and most Scandinavian countries, but meaningfully above the United States.

Canadians have access to relatively accessible employment insurance by North American standards. The country’s combination of publicly funded health care and income support programs provides important protection during periods of disruption that American households do not have.

But there are limits to that protection. While Canada’s federal net debt-to-GDP ratio stands at 13.3 per cent — the lowest in the G7 according to the International Monetary Fund — the same cannot be said about provincial governments. Large-scale bailouts of households or provinces are not guaranteed because there is no constitutional or statutory requirement for them.

Three things households can do now

Economic theory identifies three ways households can build resilience against a negative income or wealth shock. The first is cutting back spending. This includes spending on both durable goods (such as vehicles or appliances) and non-durable goods (anything with a short lifespan). This can involve delaying large purchases or scaling back discretionary expenses like dining out, travel or subscription services.

The second is shifting spending to lower-cost alternatives, even within the “needs” category. Households rarely have complete flexibility to cut essentials, but they can often substitute within them. This can involve switching to lower-cost brands, using public transit more frequently or seeking more affordable housing options where feasible.

The third — the toughest one of all — is aggressively reducing unsecured debt. Canadian households owe roughly $1.77 for every dollar of disposable income, the highest household debt burden in the G7. Much of that is mortgage debt, which at least builds equity. But revolving debt — credit cards, lines of credit, car loans and the like — carries higher interest rates and greater risk.

Households can do this by paying down the highest-interest balances first, consolidating debts into lower-interest products where possible or redirecting windfalls such as tax refunds toward repayment. Avoiding the accumulation of new high-interest debt is equally important.

Building a buffer

Once those balances are under control, households should build a financial buffer and maintain it even if the economic outlook improves.

A common guideline is saving three to six months of household expenses in case of an emergency. This typically requires setting aside 20 per cent or more of take-home income, depending on household circumstances and obligations.

Canadians have access to several tax-advantaged tools to support this process. The Tax-free Savings Account allows tax-free growth with no restrictions on withdrawals, while the First Home Savings Account offers first-time homebuyers an annual contribution room of $8,000 and a lifetime cap of $40,000. The Registered Education Savings Plan helps families save for post-secondary education.

If you are able to consistently put away funds and invest them based on your risk tolerance, these accounts can significantly improve long-term financial resilience.

Income risk in a changing economy

The harder challenge, of course, is income stability in an age of uncertainty. Canada is primarily a natural resources exporter, and rapid technological change — particularly the rise of artificial intelligence — is reshaping labour markets across other sectors.

Workers face growing uncertainty about which skills will remain valuable and how stable their employment will be.

Because of this, households may need to get creative about diversifying their income sources. This can include investing in additional training or certification programs, developing side income through freelance or contract work, monetizing existing skills through consulting, or building small entrepreneurial ventures.

The current period is unsettling. But households that reduce their debt exposure, build savings and treat the safety net as the partial buffer it actually is will be in a better position to absorb whatever comes next.

Chetan Dave 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. Here’s how Canadian households can recession-proof finances as economic uncertainty climbs – https://theconversation.com/heres-how-canadian-households-can-recession-proof-finances-as-economic-uncertainty-climbs-281113

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jean-Laurent Domingue, Associate Professor, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

The Supreme Court of Canada has described the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment as “fundamental to a person’s dignity and autonomy, [including] in the context of treatment for mental illness.”

Nonetheless, legislative and policy shift in multiple provinces in the past year threaten this principle — with little meaningful political resistance. It is important to closely examine the conditions and public narratives that have made this renewed use of psychiatric coercion possible.

A legislative and policy shift

In 2025, in an explicit repudiation of harm-reduction principles, Alberta passed legislation enabling the forced treatment of people with addiction disorders on the basis that they are “likely to cause harm.”

Manitoba now allows authorities to detain people for up to 72 hours if, due to intoxication, they are considered a danger or are causing a disturbance.. In British Columbia, the government has opened involuntary care beds inside prisons for mental health and substance use purposes. The province has also expanded its Mental Health Act to allow longer involuntary hospitalization and compulsory treatment for people with substance use issues.

In March 2026, Québec introduced a bill allowing health data sharing and closer co-ordination between police and health services, with provisions to bypass consent for people deemed mentally “altered” or “distrustful” of institutions.

In all four provinces, professionals operating within these coercive frameworks are afforded immunity from legal proceedings.

‘Compassionate intervention’

These examples highlight an acceleration in overt coercive intervention provisions being added to provincial mental health and addictions legislation.

This acceleration, however, is simply a continuation of mental health and addictions legislation across Canada that makes it easier for citizens to be detained, treated and controlled without their consent (for example, Brian’s Law in Ontario, the Nunavut Mental Health Act and the Maureen Breau Act in Québec).

Across Alberta, Manitoba, British Columbia and Québec, parliamentary debates and media coverage consistently portray coercive intervention for addiction and mental health as an act of compassionate intervention.

Even governments with differing ideological orientations — like the NDP versus the Conservatives — converge around the argument that the state has a moral obligation to “protect the most vulnerable.”

This is especially true for people deemed incapable of making rational decisions due to severe addiction or mental health. In legislative debates, the notion of compassion is reinforced through narratives of urgency and failure. Existing harm-reduction strategies are described as insufficient or outdated, necessitating a decisive shift toward more interventionist models.

A disregard for science and ethics

Media coverage amplifies this messaging, emphasizing crisis conditions, public disorder and the visible consequences of addiction or mental health. This coverage legitimizes the need for new legal tools.

Coercion is articulated as care and involuntary treatment is presented not as a restriction of liberty but as a necessary response to incapacity and risk.

This appeal to compassion functions as a unifying political language, enabling cross-partisan support despite differing ideological stances.

By portraying these policies as pragmatic, humane and long overdue, policymakers limit opposition. They also reconfigure the boundaries of acceptable state intervention, illustrating how compassion can be mobilized to normalize coercion. After all, who could be against compassion?

This rhetorical focus on compassion allows governments to sidestep deeper ethical and empirical critiques, including the limited scientific evidence supporting forced treatment and the potential harms associated with it.

In fact, whether administered in closed settings or in the community, there is a striking lack of robust evidence, including an absence of Canadian research, that demonstrates clinical benefits. Instead, research points to significant adverse effects, including deaths due to forced treatments for opiate use, raising serious ethical concerns.

Police-medicine hybridization

Furthermore, this compassion-focused public discourse — and the legislation flowing from it — greatly expands the role of policing in medical matters, often with few limits. At the same time, it extends the reach of medicine and social services into policing.

This growing police–medicine hybridization is concerning for everyone, but especially for groups that have long faced disproportionate psychiatric coercion, including women and Black, Indigenous and other racialized communities.

It also signals a modern return of the asylum — not as a single institution, but as a system of confinement, surveillance and control spread across multiple sectors. Indeed, despite being presented as new, recent and proposed legislative changes are anything but. Forced detention, incarceration and treatment reflect older, deeply rooted correctional approaches with origins dating back at least to the 17th century.

These legislative developments do not suggest a novel policy response. Instead, they reconfigure longstanding patterns of confinement and control under the guise of compassion. If left unchallenged, they will normalize coercion as care and erode fundamental rights in the name of protection.

Canadian legislators should resist responding to complex social and health crises with coercive measures that lack a sound scientific basis and risk doing more harm than good.

Jean-Laurent Domingue is a Registered Nurse in Ontario, and receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Law Commission of Canada.

Axel Ounis is affiliated with the federal liberal party.

Emmanuelle Bernheim receives funding from the Canada Research Chair program, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Law Commission of Canada.

– ref. Coercion isn’t care, and new laws that enforce treatment and confinement are dangerous – https://theconversation.com/coercion-isnt-care-and-new-laws-that-enforce-treatment-and-confinement-are-dangerous-280193