English – Page 19 – MIL Submissions Engine

November 17, 2025

Don’t stress out about overeating during the holidays – a dietitian explains how a day of indulgence won’t harm your overall health

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Bryn Beeder, Visiting Instructor in Kinesiology, Nutrition, and Health, Miami University

For many, holidays are synonymous with quality time and long-standing traditions. Typically laden with delicious foods, it’s not uncommon to eat more during the holidays than you usually would.

You likely know that feeling of being too stuffed – the point when you’re pleasantly satisfied one moment and uncomfortably full the next. On top of that physical discomfort can come extra helpings of guilt for eating more than you wanted or expected.

The physical and psychological pressure of holiday meals can be challenging. As a registered dietitian, I want to assure you that your body knows what to do with that extra food and drink, and that your overall health and well-being are defined by much more than a few days of indulgence. In fact, the experience of eating and sharing food may play a valuable role in creating lasting, positive memories of the holiday season.

Still, if you’ve ever wondered what’s happening inside your body after a big meal, you’re not alone. Understanding a bit about how digestion works can make the post-meal feelings a little less mysterious and a lot less stressful.

Slowing down digestion

Food is made up of three main macronutrients: carbohydrates, proteins and fats. Your gastrointestinal tract uses both mechanical and chemical processes to break down these nutrients into their simplest form so they can be absorbed and used for energy, repair and carrying out biological functions.

Person scooping a spoonful of peas from a table laden with Thanksgiving food — It’s common to eat more than you usually would during a holiday gathering.
The Good Brigade/DigitalVision via Getty Images

When you eat a large holiday meal, you will likely consume more of all the macronutrients than you usually would, in a shorter period of time. The larger quantity of food will require a bit more time to digest, meaning it will move more slowly along your GI tract.

Protein and fats also naturally take longer to break down. While more carbohydrate-rich foods, such as a granola bar or a glass of orange juice, give you a quick burst of energy, adding more protein- and fat-rich foods, such as eggs or chicken, to your meal provides energy that lasts longer.

In this case, the slower digestive process can actually be beneficial for steady energy and appetite control.

Physical discomfort

Rest assured, your digestive system will carry on no matter how big the meal. Rather, the question is how long digestion will take and whether that may cause some temporary discomfort along the way.

When you eat, your stomach stretches to accommodate the food you consumed. As the stomach works to pass food contents into the small intestine, there is an increased chance of heartburn – a backflow of acidic stomach contents that can cause a burning sensation in your chest or sour taste in your mouth. Extra food can also lead to stomach pain, nausea, gas and bloating, as well as a general sluggish feeling.

Person gripping stomach, stacked plates of mostly eaten food before them — Digesting a large meal can be uncomfortable.
seb_ra/iStock via Getty Images Plus

Even before the first bite, your body begins preparing for digestion. The first sight and smell of food increases your body’s production of saliva and stomach acid in anticipation of the work ahead.

When the workload is greater than usual, your body temporarily expends more energy to fuel the digestive process, both in breaking down macronutrients and in absorbing that fuel for use later. As a result, it is typical to feel more tired after a large meal.

To reduce the physical discomfort of digestion, try staying upright after a meal. While lying down may be tempting, it can increase stomach pain and the risk of heartburn. Give your body time and let gravity work in your favor by staying upright for at least two to three hours after eating. A 10- to 15-minute walk can also be beneficial to the digestive process, increasing stomach contractions and overall blood flow to the GI tract. This can in turn move food out of the stomach and into the small intestine more efficiently.

Moving past food guilt

One day of indulgence alone will not cause permanent weight gain or lasting changes to your physical health. But repeated patterns of food guilt can, over time, lead to an unhealthy relationship to food.

Beyond digestion, the way you think and talk about food can be just as important as how you feel after eating. Food does not have moral value, and yet it is easy to become caught in the habit of labeling foods as “good” or “bad.” This mindset often shows up during the holidays. Think about how often you hear yourself or others say, “I was good all morning so I can eat more tonight” or “I’m going to be bad and have the pie, too.” How you speak about food directly shapes how you feel about eating it and about yourself.

Three people sitting at a table eating and smiling at a dog asking for a bite — Food nourishes your body and your relationships.
Catherine Falls Commercial/Moment via Getty Images

Food can also bring positive emotions and good memories. When your body recognizes a strong emotion tied to a food smell, the emotional center of your brain – the amygdala – alerts the part of your brain that forms and stores long-term memories, your hippocampus. This explains why the smell of grandma’s pie can transport you to a vivid memory.

This holiday season, focus less on the calorie count and more on the company, the laughter, and the scents and flavors that make your traditions special. Eat the foods that bring you comfort and connection; you’re nourishing more than just your body.

Bryn Beeder 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. Don’t stress out about overeating during the holidays – a dietitian explains how a day of indulgence won’t harm your overall health – https://theconversation.com/dont-stress-out-about-overeating-during-the-holidays-a-dietitian-explains-how-a-day-of-indulgence-wont-harm-your-overall-health-269240

November 17, 2025

Retailers are quietly changing their return policies – here’s why you should be on the lookout this Black Friday

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Lauren Beitelspacher, Professor of Marketing, Babson College

’Tis the season for giving – and that means ’tis the season for shopping. Maybe you’ll splurge on a Black Friday or Cyber Monday deal, thinking, “I’ll just return it if they don’t like it.” But before you click “buy,” it’s worth knowing that many retailers have quietly tightened their return policies in recent years.

As a marketing professor, I study how retailers manage the flood of returns that follow big shopping events like these, and what it reveals about the hidden costs of convenience. Returns might seem like a routine part of doing business, but they’re anything but trivial. According to the National Retail Federation, returns cost U.S. retailers almost US$890 billion each year.

Part of that staggering figure comes from returns fraud, which includes everything from consumers buying and wearing items once before returning them – a practice known as “wardrobing” – to more deceptive acts such as falsely claiming an item never arrived.

Returns also drain resources because they require reverse logistics: shipping, inspecting, restocking and often repackaging items. Many returned products can’t be resold at full price or must be liquidated, leading to lost revenue. Processing returns also adds labor and operational expenses that erode profit margins.

How e-commerce transformed returns

While retailers have offered return options for decades, their use has expanded dramatically in recent years, reflecting how much shopping habits have changed. Before the rise of e-commerce, shopping was a sensory experience: Consumers would touch fabrics, try on clothing and see colors in natural light before buying. If something didn’t work out, customers brought it back to the store, where an associate could quickly inspect and restock it.

Online shopping changed all that. While e-commerce offers convenience and variety, it removes key sensory cues. You can’t feel the material, test the fit or see the true color. The result is uncertainty, and with uncertainty comes higher rates of returns. One analysis by Capital One suggests that the rate for returns is almost three times higher for online purchases than for in-store purchases.

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, the move toward online shopping went into overdrive. Even hesitant online shoppers had to adapt. To encourage purchases, many retailers introduced or expanded generous return policies. The strategy worked to boost sales, but it also created a culture of returning.

In 2020, returns accounted for 10.6% of total U.S. retail sales, nearly double the prior year, according to the National Retail Federation data. By 2021, that had climbed to 16.6%. Unable to try things on in stores, consumers began ordering multiple sizes or styles, keeping one and sending the rest back. The behavior was rational from a shopper’s perspective but devastatingly expensive for retailers.

The high cost of convenience

Most supply chains are designed to move in one direction: from production to consumption. Returns reverse that flow. When merchandise moves backward, it adds layers of cost and complexity.

In-store returns used to be simple: A customer would take an item back to the store, the retailer would inspect the product, and, if it was in good condition, it would go right back on the shelf. Online returns, however, are far more cumbersome. Products can spend weeks in transit and often can’t be resold – by the time they arrive, they may be out of season, obsolete or no longer in their original packaging.

Logistics costs compound the problem. During the pandemic, consumers grew accustomed to free shipping. That means retailers now often pay twice: once to deliver the item and again to retrieve it.

Now, in a post-pandemic world, retailers are trying to strike a balance – maintaining customer goodwill without sacrificing profitability. One solution is to raise prices, but especially today, with inflation in the headlines, shoppers are sensitive to price hikes. The other, more common approach is to tighten return policies.

In practice, that’s taken several forms. Some retailers have begun charging small flat fees for returns, even when a customer mails an item back at their own expense. For example, the direct-to-consumer retailer Curvy Sense offers customers unlimited returns and exchanges of an item for an initial $2.98 price. Others have shortened their return windows. Over the summer, for example, beauty retailers Sephora and Ulta reduced their return window from 60 days to 30.

Many brands now attach large, conspicuous “do not remove” tags to prevent consumers from wearing items and then sending them back. And increasingly, retailers are offering store credit rather than cash or credit card refunds, ensuring that returned sales at least stay within their company.

Few retailers advertise these changes prominently. Instead, they appear quietly in the fine print of return policies – policies that are now longer, more specific and far less forgiving than they once were.

As we head into the busiest shopping season of the year, it’s worth pausing before you click “purchase.” Ask yourself: Is this something I truly want – or am I planning to return it later?

Whenever possible, shop in person and return in person. And if you’re buying online, make sure you familiarize yourself with the return policy.

Lauren Beitelspacher 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. Retailers are quietly changing their return policies – here’s why you should be on the lookout this Black Friday – https://theconversation.com/retailers-are-quietly-changing-their-return-policies-heres-why-you-should-be-on-the-lookout-this-black-friday-266975

November 17, 2025

Child-care affordability is coming at the expense of equity — and it’s time governments acted

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Kerry McCuaig, Fellow in Early Childhood Policy, Atkinson Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

Five years into Canada’s $10-a-day child care plan, affordability has improved dramatically for families fortunate enough to have a space. However, the families who need care the most are being left behind.

Both the auditor general of Canada and the auditor general of Ontario have warned that the Canada-Wide Early Learning and Child Care (CWELCC) program, while successful in lowering fees, is failing to meet its other commitments — inclusion, quality and equitable access.

The $10-a-day plan was meant to be a nation-building project — one that gives every child, regardless of background, an equal start in life.

But affordability without equity is a hollow victory. If governments fail to correct course, inequities will harden into the system’s design, and the intergenerational cycle of poverty will deepen.

Subsidies down

Low-income families have traditionally been eligible for government subsidies to help pay for care. For the poorest families, the subsidy can cover the entire cost.

Yet since the program began, the number of children receiving subsidies has fallen sharply — Ontario’s auditor general reported a 31 per cent decline, and in Toronto, subsidy use has dropped below 80 per cent

Each time fees fall, more families want low-cost care. But the number of spaces hasn’t kept pace.

Competition intensifies — and more affluent families, who have greater networks and resources, move to the front of the line.

This is a well-documented social pattern known as the Matthew effect: advantage begets more advantage.

The problem is compounded by the fact that CWELCC-funded programs are not required to enrol families receiving subsidies.

By mid-2025, according to reports published on the City of Toronto open data portal, roughly 30 per cent of Toronto’s CWELCC programs — representing over one-third of all infant-to-preschool spaces — had no contract with the city to serve subsidized children.

Meanwhile, more than 16,500 children in Toronto are waitlisted for a space, while nearly one in three publicly funded programs deny them access.

A quiet incentive to underspend

Funding structures further entrench inequity. Fee subsidies are paid from provincial budgets, while CWELCC affordability funding comes from the federal government.

When families stop using subsidies — because spaces are unavailable or eligibility rules too restrictive — provinces and territories save money, while still benefiting politically from federal investments that make care appear more affordable.

Some jurisdictions don’t bother with subtlety: Saskatchewan, Alberta and the Northwest Territories have eliminated subsidy programs altogether.

A fragile truce on funding

On Nov. 10, Ontario announced a one-year extension of its federal child-care deal, maintaining current funding terms while a longer agreement is negotiated. The extension preserves the current fee — roughly $22 a day — but does nothing to address the inequities embedded in the system.

The CWELCC framework rests on five pillars: affordability, access, quality, inclusion and data accountability. In practice, only affordability has advanced.

Even if new funding materialized, money alone wouldn’t fix the problem. Federal and provincial governments control the purse strings, but in Ontario, regional policymakers already have the tools — and the responsibility — to act.

They allocate subsidies, set local priorities and conduct annual program reviews. With stronger direction, they could require all CWELCC-funded programs — both for-profit and non-profit — to:

Accept subsidized children as a condition of continued funding;
Meet quality standards, such as those in Toronto’s Assessment for Quality Improvement system; and
Set targets for equitable access based on local demographics.

In areas identified as child-care deserts, where demand far outstrips supply, service managers could also give priority to neighbourhood families until new facilities are built.

Danger of unchecked for-profit expansion

Equity cannot be achieved by giving for-profit operators a free hand — yet that’s exactly what’s happening across several provinces.

For-profit growth has exceeded the limits set in child-care agreements. These operators naturally expand where profits are fastest — in higher-income communities. The result: rapid growth in affluent areas and stagnation in places where families most need affordable, high-quality care.

Ontario’s auditor general flagged this trend, finding that nearly half of all new licensed spaces were in for-profit centres — despite federal and provincial commitments to prioritize non-profit and public expansion.

Unfettered commercial growth not only weakens public accountability but also deepens the inequities the federal child-care program was meant to eliminate.

A system designed to build a public good cannot rely on private profit as its engine.

Redirect the savings

The one-year CWELCC extension gives Ontario breathing room to get this right. By our calculations, holding the line at a $22 daily fee — rather than dropping to the promised $12 — would free up roughly $100 million in Toronto alone.

Those funds could expand care in low-income neighbourhoods, strengthen program quality, stabilize the educator workforce and rein in for-profit expansion.

Contrary to political fears, this would not cause undue hardship for middle-income families. After applying existing federal and provincial tax benefits, the median Ontario family with two children in care pays approximately $15 per child per day, which is close to the $12 goal.

The greater hardship lies with families who still can’t find a space at all.

Beyond subsidies: making access universal

Expanding subsidies won’t fix structural inequality. Under current rules, parents must prove they are employed, in school or meeting specific “activity” requirements to qualify.

These conditions exclude children whose parents are outside the labour market — precisely those who could benefit most from early education.

These rules should be scrapped. Every child deserves access to quality care, regardless of their parents’ work status.

A choice about values

Over time, Canada should move toward a universal, income-based model — similar to the Canada Child Benefit — where all children qualify for early learning and fees are scaled to family income. Fees based on the family’s ability to pay are well-established in Nordic countries.

This would replace the costly and complex patchwork of subsidies and flat fees with a simpler and fairer system.

The next phase of Canada’s early learning and child-care plan must put equity at its centre — not as an afterthought, but as the measure of success.

Canada has already proven it can make child care affordable. Now it must make it fair.

Kerry McCuaig receives funding from the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation, The Lawson Foundation, Atkinson Foundation and the Waltons Trust.

Michal Perlman receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Data Science Institute at the University of Toronto, the Margaret and Wallace McCain Family Foundation and the Lawson Foundation.

Nina Howe has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Economic and Research Council of the UK..

Petr Varmuza is affiliated with B2C2 – (Building Blocks for Child Care) as an advisory board member

– ref. Child-care affordability is coming at the expense of equity — and it’s time governments acted – https://theconversation.com/child-care-affordability-is-coming-at-the-expense-of-equity-and-its-time-governments-acted-269266

November 17, 2025

Why people trust influencers more than brands – and what that means for the future of marketing

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Kelley Cours Anderson, Assistant Professor of Marketing, College of Charleston

Not long ago, the idea of getting paid to share your morning routine online would have sounded absurd. Yet today, influencers are big business: The global market is expected to surpass US$32 billion by the end of 2025.

Rooted in celebrity culture but driven by digital platforms, the influencer economy represents a powerful force in both commerce and culture. I’m an expert on digital consumer research, and I see the rise of influencers as an important evolution in the relationship between companies, consumers and creators.

Historically, brands leaned on traditional celebrities like musicians, athletes and actors to endorse their products. However, by the late 2000s, social media platforms opened the door for everyday people to build audiences. Initially, influencers were viewed as a low-cost marketing tactic. Soon, however, they became a central part of marketing strategies.

In the 2010s, influencer marketing matured into a global industry. Agencies and digital marketplaces emerged to professionalize influencer-brand matchmaking, and regulators like the Federal Trade Commission started paying more attention to sponsored content.

The rise of video and short-form content like TikTok and Reels in the mid-2010s and 2020s added authenticity and emotional immediacy. These dynamics deepened influencer-follower relations in ways that brands couldn’t easily replicate. Influencers are now recognized as not only content creators, but also as entrepreneurs and cultural producers.

Why people trust influencers

Social media influencers often foster what researchers call “parasocial relationships” – one-sided bonds where followers feel as if they personally know the influencer. While the concept has roots in traditional celebrity culture, influencers amplify it through consistent, seemingly authentic content.

This perceived intimacy helps explain why consumers often trust influencers more than brands. Though the parasocial relationship isn’t mutual, it feels real. That emotional closeness cultivates trust, a scarce but powerful currency in today’s economy.

The goal for many influencers may be financial independence, but the path begins with social and cultural capital, acquired through community connection, relatability and niche expertise. As an influencer’s following grows, so does their perceived legitimacy. Brands, in turn, recognize and tap into that legitimacy.

Although risks exist, like algorithmic incentives and commercial partnerships that undercut authenticity, many influencers successfully navigate this tension to preserve their community’s trust.

The many ways creators add value

Like any economy, the influencer economy revolves around value exchange. Followers spend their valuable resources – time and attention – in return for something meaningful. Researchers have identified several forms of value that influencers’ content can take:

Connection, or what researchers call “social value”: Influencers often build tight-knit communities around shared interests. Through live chats, comments and relatable storytelling, they offer a sense of belonging.
Fun, or “hedonic value”: Many influencers provide enjoyment using entertainment, humor and a touch of allure in their content. Think cat videos, TikTok dances and random acts of kindness that deliver joy and distraction from the day-to-day.
Knowledge, or “epistemic value”: Creators offer informational or educational content to feed consumer curiosity. This can be through tutorials, product reviews or deep dives into niche topics.
Usefulness, or “utilitarian value”: From life hacks to product roundups, like “Amazon must-haves,” influencers provide utilitarian or practical value to help simplify consumer decisions and solve everyday problems.
Money, or “financial value”: People love finding a bargain. Discounts, affiliate links and deal alerts offer direct economic benefit to followers. Some influencers even launch their own products or digital courses, delivering long-term value through entrepreneurial spinoffs.

These forms of value often overlap, reinforcing trust, and can pay off financially for influencers. In fact, consumers are significantly more likely to trust user-generated content like influencer posts over brand-generated advertising.

Lessons for brands

First, there’s evidence that smaller is often stronger. Marketing researchers categorize influencers based on how many followers they have, and nano- and microinfluencers – defined as those with fewer than 10,000 and 100,000 followers, respectively – often generate stronger engagement than mega-influencers with more than 1 million. Influencers with smaller followings can interact with their communities more closely, making their endorsements feel more credible.

This has driven brands to focus on mid-tier and microinfluencers, where return on investment is often stronger. As a result, influencer agencies, brokers, platforms and trade associations have sprung up to facilitate these partnerships.

Second, brands should remember that influencers’ role in the market comes with new challenges. As the field continues to become more professionalized, it’s also become more complex. Like other entrepreneurs, influencers must keep up with shifting regulations – namely, FTC sponsorship guidelines – which can lead to hefty fines if violated. Many struggle to identify how to best file their taxes when they receive freebies they are expected to build content around. It can also be a challenge for influencers to keep up with continued algorithm tweaks from the multiple social media platforms where they publish.

Influencers manage more than content creation. Their role includes quickly responding to followers’ comments and managing communities, as well as handling trolls, all of which is stressful. Personal brand management adds another layer of pressure. As influencers gain more brand partnerships, they run the risk of being seen as “selling out.” Because parasocial trust depends on being viewed as authentic, aligning with the wrong brand or being too promotional can damage the very connection that built an influencer’s following. A single misstep can trigger public backlash.

While growing a following can bring brand recognition and financial independence, some influencers even fear that they will lose their own identity. Influencers can struggle with work-life balance, as this is not a nine-to-five job. It requires being “always on” and the constant blurred lines. Their lives become their livelihoods, with little separation between personal and professional identity.

In short, when engaging with influencers, strategic brands will recognize that they operate within an intense, high-pressure environment. Organizations such as the American Influencer Council offer support and advocacy, but industry-wide protections are lacking.

Influencers have earned a central place in consumer culture not just by selling products, but by offering emotional proximity, cultural relevance and value. They’re not just marketers – they’re creators, community leaders and entrepreneurs.

As the creator economy continues to grow, trust will remain its cornerstone. However, the next chapter will require thoughtful navigation of issues like regulation, platform ethics and creator well-being. Understanding influencers means recognizing both their creative work and the evolving market that now depends on them.

Kelley Cours Anderson 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. Why people trust influencers more than brands – and what that means for the future of marketing – https://theconversation.com/why-people-trust-influencers-more-than-brands-and-what-that-means-for-the-future-of-marketing-265718

November 17, 2025

Renewable energy is cheaper and healthier – so why isn’t it replacing fossil fuels faster?

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Jay Gulledge, Visiting Professor of Practice in Global Affairs, University of Notre Dame; University of Tennessee

A technician walks through a solar farm in Goma, Congo, in 2025. AP Photo/Moses Sawasawa

You might not know it from the headlines, but there is some good news about the global fight against climate change.

A decade ago, the cheapest way to meet growing demand for electricity was to build more coal or natural gas power plants. Not anymore. Solar and wind power aren’t just better for the climate; they’re also less expensive today than fossil fuels at utility scale, and they’re less harmful to people’s health.

Yet renewable energy projects face headwinds, including in the world’s fast-growing developing countries. I study energy and climate solutions and their impact on society, and I see ways to overcome those challenges and expand renewable energy – but it will require international cooperation.

Falling clean energy prices

As their technologies have matured, solar power and wind power have become cheaper than coal and natural gas for utility-scale electricity generation in most areas, in large part because the fuel is free. The total global power generation from renewable sources saved US$467 billion in avoided fuel costs in 2024 alone.

As a result of falling prices, over 90% of all electricity-generating capacity added worldwide in 2024 came from clean energy sources, according to data from the International Renewable Energy Agency.

At the end of 2024, renewable energy accounted for 46% of global installed electric power capacity, with a record 585 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity added that year — about three times the total generating capacity in Texas.

Health benefits of leaving fossil fuels

Beyond affordability, replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy is healthier.

Burning coal, oil and natural gas releases tiny particles into the air along with toxic gases; these pollutants can make people sick. A recent study found air pollution from fossil fuels causes an estimated 5 million deaths worldwide a year, based on 2019 data.

For example, using natural gas to fuel stoves and other appliances releases benzene, a known carcinogen. The health risks of this exposure in some homes has been found to be comparable to secondhand tobacco smoke. Natural gas combustion has also been linked to childhood asthma, with an estimated 12.7% of U.S. childhood asthma cases attributable to gas stoves, according to one study.

Fossil fuels are also the leading sources of climate-warming greenhouse gases. When they’re burned to generate electricity or run factories, vehicles and appliances, they release carbon dioxide and other gases that accumulate in the atmosphere and trap heat near the Earth’s surface. That accumulation has been raising global temperatures and causing more heat stress, respiratory illnesses and the spread of disease.

Electrifying buildings, cars and appliances, and powering them with renewable energy, reduces these air pollutants while slowing climate change.

So what’s the problem?

In spite of the demonstrated economic and health benefits of transitioning to renewable energy, regulatory inertia, political gridlock and a lack of investment are holding back renewable energy deployment in much of the world.

In the United States, for example, major energy projects take an average of 4.5 years to permit, and approval of new transmission lines can take a decade or longer. A large majority of planned new power projects in the U.S. use solar power, and these delays are slowing the deployment of renewable energy.

The 2024 Energy Permitting Reform Act introduced by Sens. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, and John Barrasso, a Republican from Wyoming, to speed approvals failed to pass. Manchin called it “just another example of politics getting in the way of doing what’s best for the country.”

An even bigger challenge faces developing countries whose economies are growing fast.

These countries need to meet soaring energy demand. The International Energy Agency expects emerging economies to account for 85% of added electricity demand from 2025 through 2027. Yet renewable energy development lags in most of them. The main reason is the high price of financing renewable energy construction.

Chart showing wealthier countries have lower borrowing costs — Most of the cost of a renewable energy project is incurred up front in construction. Savings occur over its lifetime because it has no fuel costs. As a result, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for those projects varies depending on the cost of financing to build them. The chart shows what happens when borrowing costs are higher in developed countries. It illustrates the share of financing in each project’s levelized cost of energy in 2024 versus the weighted average cost of capital (WACC). The yellow dots are solar projects; black and gray are offshore and onshore wind.
Adapted from IRENA, 2025, CC BY

In many developing countries, wind and solar projects cost more to finance than coal or gas. Fossil projects have a longer history, and financial and policy mechanisms have been developed over decades to lower lender risk for those projects. These include government payment guarantees, stable fuel contracts and long-term revenue deals that help guarantee the lender will be repaid.

Both lenders and governments have less experience with renewable energy projects. As a result, these projects often come with weaker government guarantees. This raises the risk to lenders, so they charge higher interest rates, making renewable projects more expensive upfront, even if the projects have lower lifetime costs.

To lower borrowing costs, governments and international development banks can take steps to make renewable projects a safer bet for investors. For example, they can keep energy policies stable and use public funds or insurance to cover part of the lenders’ investment risk.

Workers check solar cells in a factory in China in 2025. — China produces the vast majority of solar cells sold worldwide. The Chinese government has also built renewable energy projects in many Latin America countries and other developing regions.
AFP via Getty Images

When investors trust they’ll get paid, interest rates drop dramatically and renewable energy becomes the cheaper option.

Without international cooperation to lower finance costs, developing economies could miss out on the renewable-energy revolution and lock in decades of growing greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels, making climate change worse.

The path ahead

To avoid the worst effects of climate change, countries have agreed to cut their greenhouse gas emissions over the next few decades.

Achieving this goal won’t be easy, but it is significantly less difficult now that renewable energy is more affordable over the long run than fossil fuels.

Switching the world’s power supply to renewable energy and electrifying buildings and local transportation would cut about half of today’s greenhouse-gas emissions. The other half comes from sectors where it is harder to cut emissions — steel, cement and chemical production, aviation and shipping, and agriculture and land use. Solutions are being developed but need time to mature. Good governance, political support and accessible finance will be critical for these sectors as well.

The transition to renewable energy offers big economic and health benefits alongside lower climate risks — if countries can overcome political obstacles at home and cooperate to expand financing for developing economies.

Jay Gulledge is affiliated with PSE Healthy Energy

– ref. Renewable energy is cheaper and healthier – so why isn’t it replacing fossil fuels faster? – https://theconversation.com/renewable-energy-is-cheaper-and-healthier-so-why-isnt-it-replacing-fossil-fuels-faster-269685

November 17, 2025

The five best TV shows about the Tudors – recommended by a historian

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Conor Byrne, PhD candidate, early modern history, University of Southampton

We seem to have an endless appetite for Tudor history. Films, TV shows, documentaries, books and exhibitions about this famous dynasty are produced every year. And more recently, the touring production Six has offered a compelling reimagining of Henry VIII’s wives as a work of musical theatre.

As a historian of the Tudor age, I am perhaps even more interested in these offerings than most. Here are five of my favourite TV shows about the Tudor dynasty.

1. The Six Wives of Henry VIII (1970)

Each episode of this six-part BBC series was written by a different dramatist and focused on a different wife of Henry VIII, who was played by Keith Michell.

Modern viewers will immediately notice the stripped-back nature of the production compared with contemporary shows. There are, for example, hardly any outdoors scenes. But what makes this series compelling are the outstanding performances.

Katherine Howard on screen.

Michell bears an almost unnerving resemblance to the Tudor king. And his queens are distinguished by a commitment to historical accuracy, rather than being sexualised. The character of Katherine Howard (Angela Pleasence), for example, was undoubtedly influenced by the latest academic research at the time of production.

2. Elizabeth R (1971)

This six-episode BBC drama starred Glenda Jackson as the “virgin queen” Elizabeth I. It begins in 1549, during the reign of her brother Edward VI, and ends with her death in 1603.

Jackson’s portrayal of the queen is one of the most convincing. This is in no small part due to the highly effective use of costume and makeup. In the course of playing Elizabeth from young princess to elderly monarch, Jackson had her head partially shaved in order to acquire a high hairline.

And the costumes, which recreated Elizabeth’s gowns from her portraits, were regarded as so authentic that author Robert Seatter dubbed the BBC “the pre-eminent maker of costume drama”.

Glenda Jackson in Elizabeth R.

The series explores a period of over 50 years from Elizabeth’s life, from her trials and tribulations as princess during the reigns of Edward VI and Mary I to her death as an aged queen. It also compellingly depicts Elizabeth’s highly charged relationships and dramatises key episodes from her reign, including her defeat of the Spanish Armada.

3. The Shadow of the Tower (1972)

Television shows about the first Tudor king, Henry VII, are few and far between. The Shadow of the Tower is little known today, but it offers perhaps the best portrayal of Henry on screen. This 13-episode BBC series served as a prequel to the earlier dramas The Six Wives of Henry VIII and Elizabeth R.

James Maxwell stars as a shrewd, intelligent and capable king, with Norma West as his consort Elizabeth of York and Marigold Sharman as his mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort. The series depicts momentous events from Henry’s reign, including his triumph at Bosworth and his struggles with the pretenders Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck. The latter have subsequently been dramatised in later productions (The White Queen, 2013, and The White Princess, 2017) and have been the subject of recent research.

The Shadow of the Tower.

However, the undoubted strength of The Shadow of the Tower is its depiction of lesser-known events from Henry’s reign, including the 1497 Cornish Rebellion and the exploits of the navigator and explorer John Cabot.

Compared with modernised and sensationalised dramatisations of the 21st century, The Shadow of the Tower presents a believable Henry VII and his court that is grounded in historical accuracy.

4. Wolf Hall (2015, 2024)

Released in two instalments almost ten years apart, this series dramatised three of Hilary Mantel’s novels: Wolf Hall, Bring Up the Bodies and The Mirror & the Light. It explores the rise to power of Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII’s chief minister, and his downfall and execution.

Like the other shows discussed in this article, Wolf Hall is compelling viewing because of its overall commitment to historical accuracy and the stellar performances of its cast, namely Mark Rylance as Cromwell, Damian Lewis as Henry and Claire Foy as Anne Boleyn. As in the novel, the favourable portrayal of Cromwell in the TV series presented a revisionist take that caused controversy among some historians.

The trailer for Wolf Hall.

The second season also proved controversial on account of its decision to incorporate colour-blind casting – an issue that has also emerged with regards to other contemporary TV shows including Anne Boleyn (2021).

The strength of Wolf Hall lies in offering a more nuanced portrayal of a minister traditionally regarded as a ruthless thug and bully, which has subsequently inspired further research into his life and career.

5. Becoming Elizabeth (2022)

Becoming Elizabeth is set entirely during the reign of Edward VI (1547-1553) and focuses on Elizabeth’s younger years. German actress Alicia von Rittberg stars in the titular role, with her siblings Edward and Mary played by Oliver Zetterström and Romola Garai.

The series begins after Henry VIII’s death and concludes with the illness of Edward VI. The opening episodes focus on Elizabeth’s residency in the household of her stepmother Katherine Parr and the predatory attentions of Katherine’s new husband Thomas Seymour. This attention engulfed both Seymour and Elizabeth in scandal and has been recognised by historians as a formative episode in the young royal’s life.

The trailer for Becoming Elizabeth.

This scandal is interspersed with scenes of religious and political intrigues at Edward’s court, including the machinations of the Lord Protector Edward Seymour, duke of Somerset and John Dudley, earl of Warwick. The series also dramatises lesser-known episodes from Edward’s largely neglected reign, including the outbreak of Kett’s Rebellion.

Becoming Elizabeth is a fascinating series in view of its focus on a period of Elizabeth’s life that is traditionally somewhat neglected, despite some attention from historians such as David Starkey and Nicola Tallis.

It also deserves to be regarded as one of the best TV shows about the Tudors because of the much greater attention given to Edward and Mary who, like Henry VII, have traditionally been marginalised in television.

Do you have a favourite television show about the Tudors that didn’t make our list? Let us know in the comments below.

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.

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

Conor Byrne 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. The five best TV shows about the Tudors – recommended by a historian – https://theconversation.com/the-five-best-tv-shows-about-the-tudors-recommended-by-a-historian-266864

November 17, 2025

How adding plants to your driveway could reduce winter flood risks

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ross Cameron, Senior Lecturer, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Sheffield

Around 54% of UK gardens are concreted over. Shutterstock

When it comes to adapting cities to a rapidly and dramatically changing climate, the garden is on the frontline of the fight. Gardens act as green sinkholes, allowing excess rainwater to escape, as well as helping to cool cities in summer.

Gardens would provide all these (and other) benefits if they were not being concreted over – and research shows this is happening fast. Around 54% of front gardens in the UK are now concreted over, up from 46% in 1991.

As the winter storm season approaches, the risk of flooding is of increasing concern. Urban areas face the double jeopardy of more intense rainfall due to climate change and enhanced soil sealing from paving over of gardens.

At least one in six people in the UK already live with flood risk as heavy rainfall is increasing. Insurance claims linked to extreme weather are rising.

A recent report from the Royal Horticultural Society, launched on October 30, highlighted how UK front gardens now comprise 89,000 hectares of paved or concreted space, compared to only 73,500 hectares of space with plants.

At a wider scale across Europe, it is thought that about 25,000 hectares of urban land, such as gardens, is sealed each year via urban expansion and the use of impermeable surfaces.

The green spaces in cities – gardens, parks, roadside verges and urban woodlands – help stop cities from flooding. Gardens act as conduits to disperse rainwater. They trap and slow rainwater in the first place – acting as a brake on flash flooding and allowing rainwater to find its natural path to the soil water table and flow into our rivers.

Plant canopies, detain and retain rainwater (green sponges in effect) and roots re-route surface water to deeper, safer sub-surface layers (infiltration).

Plants move water from their roots to their leaves and release it as vapour – a process that works like nature’s water pump and air conditioner, cooling cities in summer. This process pumps tonnes of water back to the atmosphere every day, and in summer, significantly cools the city. The pumping action is important as it allows the soil to dry quickly – essential before the arrival of the next storm. Saturated soils don’t hold excess water any more effectively than concrete, so they need time to recover.

Ducks swim close to the edge of a garden. — High rainfalls are increasingly causing flood risks for UK homes.
Ross Cameron.

So gardens are one of the best defences to stop domestic properties from flooding. In built up areas of cities, 55% of rainfall forms surface flow (run-off – the water that potentially enters one’s front door), yet in green areas, there’s only 10% run-off – the rest is absorbed and dissipated by the soil and vegetation. Retaining good plant coverage in gardens and leaving soil open so rain can infiltrate effectively are significant factors in reducing urban flooding.

So why have home-owners decided to pave over and block the natural drains of the city? Turning front gardens into driveways has come from the need to find an off-road spot for the family car as well as a flat surface to place the bins on, and perhaps least justifiably – a place that simply can be kept clean, neat and tidy more easily.

And having an electric car creates more problems, potentially, because that means the car needs to be closer to the house to be recharged, resulting in more paving and concrete close to houses.

A driveway with a mix of plants next to it. — Drives and paths can use a mix of materials to allow them to absorb rainwater.
Ross Cameron.

Plant your driveway

But there is another way to tackle this: cars and plants can co-exist. Permeable lattice-framed blocks that support the weight of the car can be used to create driveways. These allow plants to grow through the gaps.

Alternatively, gravel pathways and drives can allow access and parking, while providing opportunities for plants to grow around the edges. Many striking garden designs use gravel and scree to grow colourful plants that also support pollinating insects and birds.

Some gardens are even designed specifically to reduce the risk of flooding and exploit plant species that are more effective at trapping and dissipating water. So-called rain gardens help surface run-off water infiltrate into the ground, purifying it in the process. Water is directed off gutters, pavements and roads towards these rain garden soak-aways where it is given time to percolate into the soil. This is where soil and plant root activity help trap silt and deactivate pollutants coming off the road surfaces.

Most people want their car parked close by, but we need to be more imaginative in how we accommodate these vehicles. Driveways don’t need to be simply sterile concrete spaces. Permeability, plants and, indeed, a better sense of place can be built in too, and help reduce flooding along the way.

Ross Cameron is affiliated with The Royal Horticultural Society

– ref. How adding plants to your driveway could reduce winter flood risks – https://theconversation.com/how-adding-plants-to-your-driveway-could-reduce-winter-flood-risks-268805

November 17, 2025

Worries about climate change are waning in many well-off nations – but growing in Turkey, Brazil and India

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of Essex

Polling on public attitudes to climate change show a dip in the numbers who worry about it in many high-income countries, compared with three years ago. This declining public concern will be a worry to those governments looking to push forward with new environmental measures.

High-income countries bear most of the costs of cleaning up the problems associated with climate change. This is largely because they are responsible for more emissions than less-developed countries, in part due to their legacy of early industrialisation. They also have the resources that low-income countries lack.

Changing public attitudes to climate change are tracked in detail by non-partisan thinktank Pew Research Center as part of massive global project. Drawing on this Pew data, the chart below shows the percentage of people in the 2022 and 2025 surveys who considered climate change a major threat across 16 high-income countries.

Overall, 73% of respondents from these countries thought climate change was a major threat in 2022, but by 2025 this had dropped to 66%.

In some countries, the fall in those who think climate change is a major threat has been quite significant – down by 13 percentage points in Poland, 11 in the Netherlands and Italy, nine percentage points in the UK and six in Germany. In the US, the decline was only three percentage points but it started from a low base, with only 54% perceiving climate change to be a serious threat in 2022 and 51% in 2025.

Across all 16 high-income countries, those with the least number of people who saw it as a major threat in 2025 were Israel (41%) and the US (51%).

Meanwhile, a YouGov poll showed that in the UK, 53% of adults think the economy and immigration are among the three most important issues facing the country, while only 15% think this about the environment.

Perceptions of climate change as major threat in high-income countries, 2022 and 2025:

Chart showing public attitudes to climate change in 16 countries. — Author’s graph based on Pew data.

In contrast, perceptions of the threat from climate change have increased in a number of middle-income countries. For example, the public are increasingly worried in Brazil (up five percentage points between 2022 and 2025) and India (up eight points). And while only 40% of Turkish people saw it as a threat back in 2013, in the 2025 poll that number had risen to 70%.

Political influences

Another factor in these changes is current politics. According to the Pew analysis, people on the right politically have become less likely to call climate change a major threat since 2022.

In Poland, 40% of those on the right say this today, down from 63% in 2022. In the US, liberals are more than four times as likely as conservatives to say climate change is a major threat (84% compared to 20%). A quarter of Germans with a favourable view of the far-right party Alternative for Germany (AfD) say climate change is a major threat, compared with 78% of those who have an unfavourable view of that party.

Some demographics of attitudes to climate change in the Pew surveys appear in the chart below. The responses in the 16 high-income countries look at variations in age, sex and education, and perceptions of the threat from climate change.

Large percentages of the respondents in these countries see climate change as a major threat, something that was also evident in the first chart. Women (76%) are more likely to think it is a major threat than men (69%); people aged 56-65 are more likely to think it (75%) than young people between the ages of 18 and 25 (72%); and graduates (79%) are more likely to think it than non-graduates(71%). But the variations in attitudes across these groups are not large.

In some countries – for example, Australia, France, Turkey and the US – adults under 35 are more likely than those aged 50 and older to see climate change as a major threat. But the reverse is true in Argentina, Japan, South Korea and Sweden.

The relationships between demographics and attitudes to climate change are part of wide research which shows women and educated people are generally more concerned about the risks posed by climate change than men and less-educated people.

It is worth noting that an average of two-thirds of the respondents in the high-income countries feel some concern about climate change in 2025, so it is still a significant issue for many.

Perceptions of threat from climate change across different groups in high-income countries:

Chart showing — Author’s graph with data sourced from Pew.

Why is this happening?

Problems such as the COVID pandemic and the war in Ukraine may have crowded out worries about climate change. In addition, there may be a sense among many people that climate change cannot be stopped. This is a type of issue fatigue where people start believing they can’t make a difference, and so are less likely to talk about it.

However, the picture facing delegates at the UN climate summit, Cop30, in Brazil is not all gloomy. Climate change policies have acquired a powerful ally over the last decade or so: the rapid fall in costs of generating electricity using renewables rather than fossil fuels, which is likely to provide countries with a financial motivation to move away from fossil fuels.

However, whether this, as well as shifting political narratives and global issues, will drive public attitudes to change again in the next three years is unclear.

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 47,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Paul Whiteley has received funding from the British Academy and the ESRC.

– ref. Worries about climate change are waning in many well-off nations – but growing in Turkey, Brazil and India – https://theconversation.com/worries-about-climate-change-are-waning-in-many-well-off-nations-but-growing-in-turkey-brazil-and-india-269160

November 17, 2025

Would you put period blood on your face? What science says about ‘menstrual masking’

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dipa Kamdar, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice, Kingston University

In the ever-evolving world of beauty trends, few have sparked as much debate – and discomfort – as “menstrual masking”. This is the practice of applying menstrual blood to the skin, usually the face, as a form of DIY skincare.

Popularised on social media, hashtags such as #periodfacemask have amassed billions of views. In most videos, users apply menstrual blood for a few minutes before rinsing it off. There’s no clear agreement on how much blood to use or how long to leave it on. Some call the practice healing or empowering, describing it as a spiritual ritual that connects them to their bodies and ancestral femininity. But what does the science say?

Advocates of menstrual masking often argue that period blood contains stem cells, cytokines and proteins that could rejuvenate the skin. There is currently no clinical evidence to support using menstrual blood as a topical skincare treatment. However, its biological composition has shown potential in medical research.

A study found that plasma derived from menstrual fluid could significantly enhance wound healing. In laboratory tests, wounds treated with menstrual plasma showed 100% repair within 24 hours compared with 40% using regular blood plasma. This remarkable regeneration is thought to be linked to the unique proteins and bioactive molecules in menstrual fluid: the same substances that allow the uterus to rebuild itself every month.

Researchers are now exploring whether synthetic menstrual fluid could help treat chronic wounds.

Stem cell research has also turned attention to menstrual blood–derived stem cells, or MenSCs. These cells grow easily and can develop into many different cell types. Studies show that mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) from various sources can help heal skin by boosting collagen, reducing wrinkles and releasing growth factors that repair damage caused by burns, UV exposure or wounds. Because they are versatile and appear safe, MenSCs are seen as a promising option for developing medical treatments to regenerate skin and slow photoaging: the premature aging caused by long-term sun exposure.

Not the same as a “vampire facial”

Some menstrual masking advocates liken the practice to the so-called “vampire facial”: a cosmetic procedure popularised by celebrities such as Kim Kardashian. Vampire facials use platelet-rich plasma (PRP) extracted from a patient’s own blood and injected into the face.

But experts caution against comparing PRP with menstrual blood. Menstrual fluid is a complex mixture of blood, sloughed-off endometrial tissue (the uterine lining), vaginal secretions, hormones and proteins. As it passes through the vaginal canal, it can pick up bacteria and fungi, including Staphylococcus aureus, a common microbe that normally lives on the skin but can cause infections if it enters cuts or pores. There’s also a risk that sexually transmitted infections (STIs) could be transferred to the skin.

PRP, by contrast, is prepared under sterile conditions. During PRP treatment, a small amount of blood is drawn and spun in a centrifuge to separate out the platelet-rich layer, which is then injected into the skin using fine needles. Some clinicians also add filler for faster cosmetic results. The procedure can cost thousands; unlike menstrual masking, which is free and easily accessible.

“Body-based” beauty

Menstrual masking isn’t the only unconventional beauty practice involving bodily fluids. “Urine therapy,” the application of urine to the skin, has roots in Ayurvedic medicine and was once believed to detoxify the body and cure ailments. Some modern advocates even claim benefits for acne or eczema, although these claims lack scientific support.

While urine does contain urea – a compound used in some moisturisers – the urea found in urine is far less concentrated and not the same as the purified, synthetic form used in skincare products. The idea that raw urine or menstrual blood could safely replace clinical-grade cosmetic ingredients is not supported by dermatological evidence.

Menstrual masking sits at the intersection of body positivity, cultural ritual and pseudoscience. For some, it’s a celebration of the menstrual cycle and a rejection of stigma. For others, it’s an unproven and potentially risky beauty trend.

The biological richness of menstrual blood is undeniable, but its safe and effective use belongs in controlled medical research – not in DIY skincare routines. As with many viral health trends, it’s vital to distinguish between symbolism and science. Menstrual masking may feel empowering, but from a dermatological perspective, it’s a practice best left to personal belief rather than the bathroom mirror.

Dipa Kamdar 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. Would you put period blood on your face? What science says about ‘menstrual masking’ – https://theconversation.com/would-you-put-period-blood-on-your-face-what-science-says-about-menstrual-masking-266648

November 17, 2025

Autistic dogs? Neurodiversity in our pets and what it might mean for us

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jacqueline Boyd, Senior Lecturer in Animal Science, Nottingham Trent University

Just anxious or autistic? Lauren Squire./Shutterstock

I live with several cocker spaniels. They are smart and affectionate, but sometimes air-headed, impulsive and extremely sensitive. It’s common for friends to describe my dogs as “having ADHD” as one of my canine whirlwinds whizz past.

People are increasingly aware of neurodiversity, and diagnoses such as autism and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) are becoming more common. And scientists are starting to give their attention to the idea that some of our animal cousins may also experience the world in different ways because of diversity in how their brains function. The concept is new, but this research may help deepen our bonds with our pets.

Anyone who has lived with, trained or cared for animals will be aware of how individual their differences in personality can be. But can animals really be neurodivergent? What might this mean for how we care for, train and manage them?

Neurodiversity is a variation in how people behave and how their brains function. This is the result of structural and chemical differences in the brain. But diagnosing animals with human conditions can be problematic.

Animals cannot directly tell us how they perceive the world, or answer typical diagnostic questions. We can only ever describe animal behaviour through the lens of our own understanding, for example labelling some dogs as impulsive. For those dogs, however, their outward impulsivity might be normal behaviour for their breed, in the same way that many cats are solitary.

However, research indicates that a range of species including dogs, rats, mice and non-human primates can show genetic and behavioural signs of neurodivergence. For instance, structural differences in genes known to be associated with hypersocial behaviour have been found in dogs.

Impulsive behaviour in dogs is also linked to low levels of the neurotransmitters serotonin and dopamine. Serotonin is important for emotional stability, while dopamine helps with focus.

Imbalances and difficulty in regulating these neurotransmitters may also be associated with ADHD in people, and is often characterised by impulsivity. This also raises the interesting possibility that by breeding animals to live alongside us, we selected animals with behaviour similar to what is reported by neurodiverse people.

Cocker spaniel jumping in grassy field. — A cocker spaniel with extra energy to burn…
rebeccaashworthearle/Shutterstock

Modelling animal autism

Scientists have developed animal models of autism to help them understand factors linked to increased risk and to be able to explore potential therapeutic support. These models are developed from selectively bred, laboratory-housed animals and might not fully represent typical population diversity. However, they are still valuable in helping us understand the biological basis of neurodiversity.

For example, some beagle dogs have a mutation in a gene called Shank3, which is linked with autism in humans and often characterised by difficulties in social interactions. Beagles with the Shank3 mutation also exhibit low desire to interact with people. It turns out that they have reduced cell to cell signalling in regions of the brain linked with attention.

They also demonstrate less of what is known as neural coupling with people. Neural coupling is where the brain activity of two or more individuals aligns when interacting. It typically occurs when people are storytelling or teaching, but a 2024 study also found it happens when dogs and humans gaze into each other’s eyes.

The Shank3 mutation might therefore result in impaired neural processing and signalling, limiting spontaneous social interactions and bonding between dogs and people. However, multiple factors are involved in the development of brain and behaviour.

Puppies who have had limited or negative early experiences with people might become less social and people-oriented. It is not easy to identify if the cause of this behaviour is biological, environmental or a combination of the two.

Shank3 canine research has also provided a hint at potential supportive medical interventions for human autism. A single dose of the psychedelic drug LSD was given to dogs with the Shank3 mutation. This resulted in increased attention and enhanced neural coupling with people over five days.

Mice and humans also seem to show a greater inclination to social behaviour after LSD administration. There are obviously legal, safety and ethical issues associated with its use, but animal models can certainly help us understand the underlying differences in how the neurodivergent brain functions.

These models might also help us diagnose human neurodivergence. Typical adult diagnostic processes involve lengthy discussion and review of how someone copes with daily life, which can be difficult as neurodivergent people often have communication difficulties.

Dogs with behavioural differences are similarly evaluated using assessment scales, mostly administered by their handlers and carers. However, video analysis and machine-based learning have been trialled as a more objective way to identify dogs with ADHD-like behaviour.

For this method, dogs’ movements in a new environment and when exposed to a robot dog were analysed by machine, rather than a person. Results from a 2021 study of dogs showed 81% agreement between objective and more traditional diagnosis.

This kind of animal research may help make the case for minimising subjectivity in human diagnosis. Objective measurements have in fact also been trialled for humans, such as eye movement in ADHD assessments.

Neurodiverse behaviours

Behavioural problems in cats and dogs that harm their wellbeing are common. One 2024 paper that collected owner-reported data from over 43,000 dogs in the US reported that more than 99% of pet dogs enrolled in the study presented with at least one behavioural problem.

Again, some of the reported behavioural concerns, such as separation-related behaviours, fear, anxiety and obsessive behaviour, mimic challenges associated with some forms of neurodivergence in people. Managing pets with such behavioural problems can be distressing and may even lead to rehoming or euthanasia. Perhaps this could sometimes be avoided if owners had a better understanding of what was going on.

In short, the evidence suggests that like us, animals can experience and respond to the world differently. Some of this will be due to natural differences in personality, but it is also likely that a proportion of our pets have differences in their brain structure and chemistry.

Neurodivergent children benefit from an appreciation of their specific and sometimes complex needs. Perhaps we can also create enriching management and training approaches for our potentially neurodiverse animal companions.

In addition to her academic affiliation at Nottingham Trent University (NTU) and support from the Institute for Knowledge Exchange Practice (IKEP) at NTU, Jacqueline Boyd is affiliated with The Kennel Club (UK) through membership and as advisor to the Health Advisory Group and member of the Activities Committee. Jacqueline is a full member of the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT #01583). She also writes, consults and coaches on canine matters on an independent basis

– ref. Autistic dogs? Neurodiversity in our pets and what it might mean for us – https://theconversation.com/autistic-dogs-neurodiversity-in-our-pets-and-what-it-might-mean-for-us-265888