Category: The Conversation – Canada

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Irene Vitoroulis, Associate Professor, Developmental Psychology, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Many of us, at one time or another, have been in situations where something someone said or did felt offensive, hurtful or dismissive. These can be subtle, often unintentional, comments, questions or actions that suggest bias and negative assumptions about a person based on their identity.

Social scientists refer to them as microaggressions. They are called “micro” not because they have a small impact, but because they’re usually brief, subtle and occur during everyday interactions.

Racial microaggressions, specifically, are experiences of racism that take the form of slights, exclusions, assumptions and invalidation. Repeated over time, they can become a part of everyday social experiences.

Although racial microaggressions have been studied for decades, research is increasingly documenting how pervasive these experiences are in the daily lives of racialized young people and how they affect their mental health and well-being.

This is especially concerning for people in their late teens or early 20s. This time of life is marked by major social and academic transitions and increased vulnerability to mental health challenges.

In our recently published study, we surveyed over 1,300 students at a university in Ontario about racial microaggressions. We found that almost all of the racialized students experienced some kind of racial microaggressions.

Our study

University is a time of significant change in many people’s lives. For many, it might be the first time living away from their family home. It can also involve navigating changes in existing relationships and building new friendships and adjusting to new academic environments and demands while developing a sense of identity and belonging.

For racialized students, these transitions can also bring challenges and exposure to racial microaggressions and other forms of racism that can affect how safe and supported they feel.

University students are facing increased vulnerability to mental health difficulties, especially anxiety. Racial microaggressions can further exacerbate this burden for racialized students.

In our study, participants completed a standard socio-demographic questionnaire where they could self-select their racial/ethnic identity, and responded to questions on mental health, racial microaggressions, and other constructs.

We also used an egocentric network approach that focuses on understanding the social networks of particular individuals. This allowed us to examine the different sources of support students received and how they function.

This approach provides a more fulsome understanding of social networks compared to more generalized self-reporting. Participants can indicate the socio-demographic characteristics of their friends, and the context and content of their interactions. For example, we asked participants questions such as: “Who helps you or gives you useful information when you need it?”

This kind of question gives us a nuanced understanding of network size and the richness that social relationships provide. It can inform interventions in mental health and well-being for all students, but in particular, racialized students and other marginalized populations.

All students completed the same questionnaires to describe full-sample patterns. However, our interpretation focused on racialized students because racial microaggressions are tied to broader histories and systems of racism, and do not have the same meaning or impact across groups.

Almost all racialized students in our study reported experiencing racial microaggressions, and they reported these experiences far more often than students who identified as white. The questionnaire assessed experiences such as being treated as though one does not belong, being assumed to be foreign, being treated as a second-class citizen or being subject to stereotypes about one’s racial or ethnic group.

These experiences were associated with poorer mental health outcomes. Students who reported more racial microaggressions also reported experiencing more depression, anxiety and loneliness.

Those who experienced one of these were more likely to experience the others as well. For example, more than 80 per cent of racialized students agreed with the statement: “Other people act as if all of the people of my race are alike.”

Social support matters

At the same time, our findings showed that social support matters. Having a larger and more supportive personal network was associated with lower levels of anxiety symptoms when racialized students experienced these microaggressions.

In particular, support that was emotional and relational appeared to matter most. When students said they had people who helped make them feel better, supported with problems at home or in whom they could confide, they felt less anxious in the face of racial microaggressions.

Students appeared less vulnerable when they had more people in their personal networks who offered emotional support, caring, self-validation and opportunities for intimate disclosure.

That was even more the case for the racialized students, who were more at risk of racial microaggressions. These findings align with the stress-buffering hypothesis: when students are dealing with racism, supportive ties may help buffer some of the negative impact.

Our findings suggest that social relationships are an important part of how students experience and cope with racial microaggressions. Supportive networks may help reduce the mental health risks associated with these experiences, especially for minoritized students who are more likely to encounter subtle forms of racism.

Universities also have an important role to play. They need to continue addressing racism at both systemic and interpersonal levels by strengthening culturally inclusive climates, institutional equity and restorative processes that recognize harm and promote repair.

This would also require addressing the interpersonal and institutional conditions that sustain them. Until then, any negative effects can be mitigated by supporting broad social networks, especially among minoritized youth.

What we still don’t know

The main drawback of our study is that our results are cross-sectional and based on a regionally limited sample. These data provide a snapshot of a slice of youth who experience racial microaggressions.

Therefore, we can’t make statements about the direction of these effects over time. It is possible that that social support reduces anxiety over time and that students’ mental health and prior experiences shape how they perceive, report and respond to everyday social interactions. More long-term research is needed to better understand these processes and their relations to each other.

It’s crucial to examine the trajectories of these processes over time and critically during the transition to university and later on in the workforce. These are periods when social networks change, support systems also change and exposure to new environments can increase vulnerability.

Strengthening students’ social environments, both on and off campus, may help racialized students cope with racial stressors and feel a stronger sense of belonging. Universities can support this by creating opportunities for meaningful connection, mentorship, peer connections, culturally responsive programming and community-building.

Irene Vitoroulis has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the University of Ottawa.

Jonathan B. Santo received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and Fonds Québécois de la Recherche Sur la Société et la Culture. Jonathan also served on the Publications committee of the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development, whose outlet, the International Journal of Behavioral Development, published the research paper this article is based on.

– ref. Having a strong social network can help students deal with racial microaggressions – https://theconversation.com/having-a-strong-social-network-can-help-students-deal-with-racial-microaggressions-278037

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Molly Babel, Professor of Linguistics, University of British Columbia

Telus Digital, the global technology and digital services arm responsible for the telecommunication giant’s call centres, has recently deployed an “accent masking” artificial intelligence tool to change the way its offshore agents sound. The technology analyzes agents’ pronunciation in real time and reshapes their accents to more closely resemble generalized North American or British English speech patterns.

Linguistic profiling or accentism — stereotyping, treating someone unfairly or viewing them negatively based on their accent — can permeate aspects of our society in ways that have real-life consequences.

They can affect hiring decisions, outcomes of legal proceedings, assumptions about the crimes one might commit, assessments in education and access to housing.

Telus appears to be taking advantage of incredible technological advances in signal processing and resynthesis to reproduce an ugly aspect of human behaviour.

As language scholars we believe it is demeaning, manipulative and wrong. And, if we swap in nearly any other social characteristic, it would be discrimination. In order to see racism, we need to see race. So imagine a filter on glasses that changes people’s skin tone, for example, homogenizing our ethnic and racial identities.

There are several strands of evidence that indicate the accentism Telus is practising is not in the best interest of the call centre agents or Canadian consumers.

Some accents are harder

Our discriminatory tastes in speech start early. Children prefer playmates who share their accent, even in linguistically rich cities like Toronto. The credibility and trustworthiness adults attribute to individuals and voice-AI assistants vary with the accent.

Telus says it’s implementing an accent manipulation AI tool because some Telus customers have expressed difficulty in understanding “heavy foreign accents.” This is a leap in logic.

Researchers have known for decades that the perception of accent strength is not well-correlated with how well that voice can be understood. In the case of call centres in India or the Philippines, call agents may be first-language speakers of English, albeit a different variety than Canadian English.

As of yet, there is no public indication that this tech is being used on agents who speak English with a French Québécois accent or a Newfoundland one or a Cape Briton lilt. It’s also worth noting that everyone has an accent; unaccented speech is a myth. An accent is simply a way of speaking that is distinctive to a specific group. If this is genuinely about comprehension, then why would it apply to some accents and not others?

In any instance where we experience difficulty in understanding someone, it is always beneficial to pause and reflect on whether it is a “them problem” or a “me problem.” If there are others who find an accent comprehensible, it is most likely a “me problem.”

The cost of accent manipulation

Any human interaction is a two-way street, and the success of that communication comes, in large part, from an implicit collaborative building of understanding — an establishment of a common ground.

When Canadian customers are being duped about who they are talking to — even when this duping is, according to Telus, “to bridge communication gaps and deliver crystal-clear voice experiences” — a cornerstone of that communicative collaboration is removed, leaving an increased opportunity for misunderstanding.

Call centres often already have policies about “regulating identity” of their agents, including strict policies around accents, requirements that agents change their names to something more western-sounding or requirements that agents go through accent modification training.

These requirements can lead to workplace anxiety and stress, affecting the quality of the interaction between the consumer and agent.

Interestingly, call centre agents have already observed that if customers identify the accent as being fake or not genuine — when words and structures being used don’t match the accent — customer relations worsen, and customers become abusive.

What this means is that this “accent softening,” when identified as fake or if leading a customer to assume they are not speaking to a real person, may lead to more frustration by customers and worse treatment of call centre agents.

Exposure to diverse accents

Some might argue that it’s natural to have an easier time understanding someone whose accent is closely aligned with your own. This is true, but this benefit does not come on its own; it is a function of having more experience with an accent.

Think about it this way. There are probably people in your life that you find very easy to understand, like a spouse, family member or close friend. Indeed, that immense familiarity you have with a spouse’s voice makes it both easier to attend to and ignore your loved one. It doesn’t matter if their accent is the same as yours; it’s the experience that matters.

Experience renders both voices and accents more comprehensible. Diverse listening experiences can also make us better listeners, facilitating understanding of a wider range of accents. This is to say, as a listener, you stand to gain from exposing yourself to new voices and accents.

AI technology that can modify specific features of an acoustic speech signal while preserving the speaker’s individual identity is cool science. AI can be an incredibly useful tool, but also comes with a human responsibility. Responsible and human-centric approaches to AI should seek to limit harm.

In this case, the “accent softening” of Telus call centre agents is discriminatory to the agents. It’s also a morally dubious misrepresentation of identity to Canadian consumers that disrupts the natural and productive friction that comes with human interaction.

Molly Babel receives research funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada (NSERC) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Amanda Cardoso receives research funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

– ref. Accentism for profit? What Telus is getting wrong about accents – https://theconversation.com/accentism-for-profit-what-telus-is-getting-wrong-about-accents-282560

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Guy Rouleau, Professor in the Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University

Housed within a bony skull, the human brain remains, in large part, a mystery to all of us in the medical community.

Structurally complex with a challenging anatomy, the brain is believed to comprise more than 3,000 different types of cells, whereas most tissues have no more than a dozen. It is dynamic, reacting to the environment and changing over time. It is also difficult to access, and rarely biopsied.

And yet the brain is the essence of who and what we are. The brain allows us to think, communicate, interact with others, perceive, move and experience the world.

To flourish, our societies and economies depend in large part on our brains’ ability to function optimally. Given our aging populations and declining birth rates, we are facing a perfect storm — fewer children and more elderly citizens — underscoring the vital need to optimize brain health for every citizen.

The June 2026 meeting of the Group of Seven (G7) countries in Evian, France is an opportunity to make brain health a top priority.

An aging population

There are many factors influencing brain health over a human lifetime. For instance, some children are born with neurodevelopmental abnormalities such as intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder and learning disabilities.

Some children experience sub-optimal environmental conditions, such as poor pre-natal care, inadequate nutrition and abuse, which can reduce the young brain’s ability to achieve peak levels of performance and predispose them to mental health challenges.

These children may end up with fewer opportunities to live happy and fulfilling lives, and may be less able to contribute to our society’s success.

At the other end of the spectrum, our aging population is subject to a variety of age-related neurodegenerative diseases, which cause suffering. Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and other dementing illnesses are increasing in frequency in G7 countries, leading also to rising health-care costs.

---

Read more:
When everyday tasks become harder: Early clues to Alzheimer’s disease

---

Health-promoting interventions

As a society, we must make significant efforts to improve brain health. Two strategies can help us achieve this goal.

First, we need to vigorously adopt evidence-based interventions that have been scientifically tested and demonstrated to work in improving brain health. For children, these include improved prenatal care, sensory stimulation, active social interaction, improved nutrition, exercise and prevention of traumatic brain injury.

For adults, these interventions include reducing vascular risk factors such as hypertension, high cholesterol, diabetes, obesity and smoking. In addition, they include improved nutrition, increased physical activity, healthy sleep and increased social interaction.

These known interventions must be endorsed and promoted by governments. We have seen, for example, the dramatic success of anti-smoking interventions in countries like Canada to reduce the incidence of emphysema and lung cancer. We’ve also seen the impact of delayed government intervention and cultural attachment to tobacco on the rates of smoking in countries like France.

Funding for brain research

While there are many validated interventions to improve brain health, they are generally poorly taken up. Even if they were adopted by everyone, they would still fall significantly short of what’s needed to reduce neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative diseases. The second strategy is to develop new interventions to improve brain health.

To make this possible, we need targeted and sustained funding for brain research across the world — especially in the G7 countries, who have aging populations and the infrastructure and financial ability to invest in brain health research.

Genomics, proteomics, single cell biology, advanced brain imaging, artificial intelligence, induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) and new animal models must all be used to further our understanding of how the brain develops, functions and degenerates.

Open science research model

The great complexity of the brain and the challenges associated with its study will require large collaborative teams of scientists to work together. That’s why it’s essential that we adopt an open science research model so that data, algorithms and materials can be rapidly and freely shared, while preserving confidentiality and sovereignty.

For example, to best harness the power of AI, large high-quality data sets need to be made freely available.

For all these reasons, the science academies of the G7 countries recommend that G7 leaders adopt brain health as a priority for all members. By doing so, they would improve individual lives and contribute to the betterment of our societies.

Guy Rouleau receives funding from CIHR and ALS Canada for research on ALS.

– ref. Why brain health is an urgent priority for G7 member countries – https://theconversation.com/why-brain-health-is-an-urgent-priority-for-g7-member-countries-282213

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Peter Brown, Professor in Physics and Astronomy, Western University

The science academies of G7 member countries have identified international space governance as a pressing issue for the G7 Leaders’ Summit, to be held from June 15-17 in Evian, France.

The explosive growth of large satellite constellations over the last decade offers great promise for near-universal access to broadband internet. But this growth comes with risks that are not yet fully understood.

These include contamination of the night sky, disruption of astronomy research, increasing risk of satellite collisions and hazards from large numbers of satellites falling back to Earth.

---

Read more:
A million new SpaceX satellites will destroy the night sky — for everyone on Earth

---

Our understanding of the human impact on the near-Earth space environment is at a similar stage to our understanding of climate change back in the 1990s. We know that increased human activity is causing large disruptions to the space environment, but whether a tipping point is soon to be reached is not yet clear.

In this context, one of the most significant recommendations for G7 member states is to establish an intergovernmental panel on space sustainability (IPSS).

Impacts on atmospheric chemistry

Research and understanding of human impacts in space is still at a very early stage. For example, we don’t really know when some orbital altitudes will become so overpopulated with space debris that they reach operational capacity.

Scientists have also recently recognized that the increased global rocket-launch rate — with more than one rocket now being launched every day — may lead to a reversal in the recovery of the ozone layer.

Similarly, we are aware that satellites burning up as they fall back to the Earth’s atmosphere will have significant effects on the chemistry in the upper atmosphere. We know there are now several of these large satellite re-entries occurring every day, but the full effects of this are not clear.

Messy space governance

Several scientific bodies now advise on policy in different areas of space sustainability. One is the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee, which focuses on space debris degradation of the environment.

Another is the International Astronomical Union Centre for the Protection of the Dark and Quiet Sky, which co-ordinates efforts to reduce the impact of satellites on optical and radio astronomy.

But no single body exists to provide comprehensive policy input to governments for policy and regulatory decisions. The situation is similar to that in climate change research, when the early Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG), formed in the 1980s, transitioned to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

We urgently need an intergovernmental panel on space sustainability (IPSS).

Ten years ago, the number of active satellites in low-Earth orbit numbered almost 2,000; today, it’s close to 20,000. In recent years, governments and corporations have announced plans for up to a million more.

Defining global thresholds

How could this IPSS be structured, to approach space governance in a similar way to how the IPCC approached the climate change problem?

A primary goal should be to define global thresholds for sustainability. Much like the 1.5 C limit in climate science, the panel should identify thresholds beyond which specific orbital altitudes have reached carrying capacity.

Like the IPCC, an IPSS should include several working groups to provide transparent and accessible summaries of scientific results for policy makers.

One should focus on the physical science of the orbital environment. This means the state of low-Earth orbit as a finite resource — including estimates of space debris and collision growth, effects of space weather and models of sustainable future launch traffic.

Another working group should centre on the environmental and societal impacts of large satellite constellations. This would assess stratospheric ozone depletion caused by rocket launch emissions, the effects of higher satellite re-entry rates, changes to atmospheric chemistry and increased casualty risks. It would also quantify their impact on ground-based astronomy.

Finally a working group on mitigation and policy could set the stage for clear international standards for post-mission satellite disposal, active debris removal and new licensing requirements that account for a constellation’s “system-wide” rather than “per-satellite” risk.

Space traffic footprints

A useful addition to the IPSS would be a Task Force on Space Traffic Footprints. Modelled after the IPCC’s Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, this body would develop standardized methodologies for states to report their “space traffic footprint” — the burden their space objects pose to the safety and sustainability of the low-Earth orbit environment.

Similar to the IPCC’s role in vetting climate models, the IPSS needs to provide independent assessment of claims regarding satellite demisability — the way satellites are safely decommissioned and de-orbited. This should evaluate how successful de-orbiting technologies are and how well we can track satellites and estimate their location uncertainties.

By creating a co-ordinated international approach now, the IPSS will help balance the enormous promise of commercial activity in space with the environmental risks — just as the IPCC has done with Earth’s changing climate from human activities.

Peter Brown receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the United Sstates National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the European Space Agency, Natural Resources Canada and Defence Research and Development Canada

– ref. As corporations race for the stars, we need international collaboration on space governance – https://theconversation.com/as-corporations-race-for-the-stars-we-need-international-collaboration-on-space-governance-282214

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Amir Bahman Radnejad, Chair and Associate Professor of Innovation and Marketing, Mount Royal University

The Canadian government’s discussion paper, Getting Major Projects Built in Canada, represents a significant and long overdue shift in how it approaches major infrastructure and energy development.

After years of slow, fragmented and unpredictable project approvals, the recognition that Canada’s regulatory system has undermined competitiveness and discouraged investment is both accurate and welcome.

Investor surveys in Canada’s resource sector consistently identify regulatory uncertainty and approval delays as major deterrents to investment.

If implemented effectively, the proposed reforms — particularly efforts to reduce duplication, co-ordinate consultations, establish clearer timelines and move toward a “one project, one review” framework — could enhance Canada’s appeal to energy investors and move the country closer to its ambition of becoming an “energy superpower.”

But regulatory reform alone won’t solve Canada’s deeper problem.

---

Read more:
Mark Carney wants to make Canada an energy superpower — but what will be sacrificed for that goal?

---

The discussion paper assumes that major project delays are primarily due to inefficient processes that can be corrected through administrative streamlining. That’s only partially correct.

Many of the barriers facing Canadian energy development are structural, deeply embedded in the country’s constitution, federal system, legal environment and institutional culture. These obstacles cannot simply be resolved through compressed timelines and updated procedures.

Constitutional constraints

The first challenge is constitutional and legal. Indigenous rights and the duty to consult are entrenched in Canada’s Constitution, Supreme Court rulings, modern treaties and commitments under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Landmark Supreme Court decisions such as the 2004 Haida Nation v. British Columbia and the 2005 Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada rulings established that governments must meaningfully consult Indigenous communities when government decisions may affect asserted or established rights.

This makes Canada fundamentally different from jurisdictions like the United Kingdom or Australia, where governments face fewer constitutional constraints in fast-tracking infrastructure approval.

The federal government’s proposed One Crown Consultation Process may reduce duplication and consultation fatigue. But it doesn’t eliminate litigation risk.

The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion offers a clear warning. In 2018, the Federal Court of Appeal quashed the project’s approval because the consultation process with Indigenous communities was deemed inadequate. A project considered nationally strategic was significantly delayed not by engineering failures, but by procedural legitimacy.

The government’s fast-tracking proposals are therefore at risk of backfiring: pushing timelines too hard could slow projects down if courts keep intervening.

Canada’s federal system

The second challenge is federalism. Major energy projects in Canada require collaboration among Ottawa, provinces, municipalities and local regulators. The discussion paper assumes a level of federal-provincial co-ordination that may prove difficult in practice.

Will the federal government confront provinces that oppose nationally significant energy projects? Will Ottawa pressure British Columbia to recognize that its ports and coastal infrastructure serve national economic interests, not solely provincial ones? Will it challenge Québec’s long-standing resistance to certain pipeline and energy developments?

Provinces have several tools to delay projects through permitting processes, environmental conditions and parallel regulatory assessments. Recent history offers examples.

Energy East collapsed amid political and regulatory uncertainty. Northern Gateway was overturned through legal and political resistance. Even Trans Mountain, despite federal support, encountered significant provincial and legal barriers.

Federal efficiency isn’t enough.

---

Read more:
Regulations alone didn’t sink the Energy East pipeline

---

Bureaucratic inertia, institutional resistance

The third challenge is institutional inertia. Research in public administration suggests institutional delays are often driven not only by formal rules, but by bureaucratic risk aversion and organizational inertia.

For almost 10 years of Liberal rule under former prime minister Justin Trudeau, the federal public service expanded significantly, with the number of employees growing by more than 40 per cent.

Large administrative systems develop their own cultures, norms and decision-making habits. For Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberals, the challenge is not only the size of the bureaucracy, but its ability to adjust to a different governing philosophy and priorities.

In bureaucracies, officials are often more likely to be criticized or penalized for approving a controversial project than for letting things stall. Changing laws alone doesn’t fully change that reality.

The government’s proposed solutions are structurally sound, but they assume officials will stay committed under pressure. This is where leadership matters: implementation depends on whether commitments are seen as firm or flexible.

Institutional inertia is shaped by how federal employees and officials read their leaders’ behaviour. If ministers hold firm on timelines despite pushback, officials treat them as binding; if ministers retreat or soften them, processes expand and timelines slip.

The need for committed leadership

Many of the aforementioned structural barriers cannot simply be resolved through procedural reform unless Canada undergoes far more fundamental constitutional and institutional change, which isn’t likely.

The central challenge facing Canada today is therefore not regulatory design, but leadership. Will the prime minister and Liberal officials champion these reforms if they become politically costly? Will they make decisions that may prove unpopular — particularly among voters in seat-rich provinces like Ontario, Québec and British Columbia — defend those decisions publicly and deal with the political consequences?

The government’s discussion paper is ambitious, but ambition on paper isn’t the same as execution. Reforms of this scale will face resistance from provinces, courts, advocacy groups and the bureaucracy itself. Success will depend less on design than on whether the federal government remains committed throughout implementation.

Becoming an energy superpower requires sustained political resolve, institutional drive, strength of character and the ability to stick to decisions under pressure without backing away or reframing them. Political will can create the appearance of reform; strength of character determines whether it’s actually carried out.

Short-term heat for long-term gain

For Canada’s regulatory reform to work, federal leaders need to stick to tight timelines even when faced with lawsuits and provincial pushback. Without that commitment, new bodies like the Federal Review Coordinator and Crown Consultation Hub could end up adding process rather than speeding up approvals.

As Nelson Mandela’s example shows, long-term national goals often require taking political heat in the short term.

The real question is no longer whether the problems are understood — they are — but whether the federal government has the resolve to push through resistance from provinces, the bureaucracy and political opponents.

Without that kind of sustained leadership, these proposed reforms risk becoming another set of well-meaning changes that add co-ordination but don’t meaningfully speed up energy development.

Amir Bahman Radnejad is affiliated with Canadian Global Affairs Institute

Brenda Nguyen is affiliated with the Strategic Capability Network

– ref. Beyond regulation: Why committed leadership will decide Canada’s energy future – https://theconversation.com/beyond-regulation-why-committed-leadership-will-decide-canadas-energy-future-282777

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Bailey Laforest, PhD student in Biology, Carleton University

Humans have around 30 trillion cells in our adult bodies. Amazingly, each of these cells came from a handful of about 100 stem cells in the earliest days of development. The ability of these embryonic stem cells to turn into any cell type makes them pluripotent — something that researchers are harnessing in science and medicine today.

The use of human embryonic stem cells in research began in 1998, when several human embryos were donated from couples undergoing in vitro fertilization. From these embryos, scientists generated a virtually unlimited supply of pluripotent cells. Almost 30 years later, these embryonic stem cell lines are still used in many research labs today.

Another milestone in stem cell research came in 2007, when two labs — led by Shinya Yamanaka at the University of Kyoto in Japan and by James Thomson at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the United States — separately published papers on how they had reprogrammed mature cells (like skin cells) back to a stem cell-like pluripotent state.

These are known as induced pluripotent stem cells. Their main benefit is that they carry a person’s own DNA, enabling more personalized disease-modelling and therapies.

How can stem cells be used for diabetes treatment?

In our research lab, we use embryonic stem cells to generate insulin-producing beta cells — the cell type that is destroyed by the immune system in people with Type 1 diabetes. The loss of these insulin-producing beta cells leaves patients dependent on insulin injections to control blood sugar levels and prevent severe complications like blood vessel and nerve damage.

Insulin therapy does not relieve the emotional load of living with Type 1 diabetes. It also does not fully replace the dynamic function of the body’s own beta cells, so many people with Type 1 diabetes still experience long-term health problems.

To overcome this, researchers are making lab grown stem cell-derived beta cells to try to restore the body’s ability to produce insulin. Recent clinical trials have shown promising results of transplanting these cells into individuals with Type 1 diabetes:

• Vertex Pharmaceuticals transplanted beta cells derived from embryonic stem cells into 12 patients with Type 1 diabetes, and 10 (83 per cent) were able to stop insulin injections within six months.

• A research team from China reprogrammed a Type 1 diabetes patient’s fat cells into induced pluripotent stem cells, turned the induced pluripotent stem cells into beta cells, and then transplanted them under the patient’s abdominal muscle. Remarkably, the recipient became insulin-independent 75 days after surgery and remained so for at least 12 months.

These early trials show that stem cell-derived beta cells can survive, mature and function after transplantation into patients. But challenges remain, including ensuring cells fully develop into the cell type of interest, producing cells safely and efficiently at large scales and preventing immune rejection.

How can stem cells avoid immune rejection?

Lab-grown cells have different genetics from the patient, so the patient’s immune system attacks the transplanted cells as “non-self.”

Researchers and physicians are hoping to overcome this problem by using induced pluripotent stem cells that carry the patient’s own DNA. However, even “self-derived” cells can behave unpredictably after months of reprogramming and growth in the lab, so immune rejection remains a risk.

And in diseases like Type 1 diabetes, the cells can still be destroyed by the same autoimmune response that caused the disease in the first place.

While immune-suppressing drugs are currently used to prevent rejection, they carry serious risks that outweigh the benefits for most patients.

Researchers are now exploring ways to prevent cell rejection without the need for immune-suppressing drugs, such as using protective capsules that shield the transplanted cells or introducing genetic changes that help the cells “hide” from the immune system.

The promise of immune-evasive genetically modified cells was recently demonstrated in a 2025 study when researchers transplanted gene-edited cells into a patient with Type 1 diabetes without using any immune-suppressing drugs. Remarkably, the patient showed no immune response to the transplanted cells, which survived, secreted insulin and improved blood sugar control over 12 weeks.

This breakthrough highlights the potential of immune-evasive cell therapies to overcome one of the biggest obstacles in regenerative medicine.

The road ahead

Stem cells offer an extraordinary toolkit for scientific research and medicine. Researchers are getting better at turning these pluripotent cells into specialized tissues and the first successful clinical trials are already here. However, these therapies are still experimental and not yet approved by Health Canada or the Food and Drug Administration in the United States.

Patients should be cautious of unapproved stem cell therapies and always consult their health-care professional before joining approved clinical trials. The progress made so far brings real hope that future stem cell therapies could improve the lives of people living with chronic diseases.

Jennifer Bruin receives funding from CIHR, NSERC, Canada Research Chairs Program, and the National Killam Program

Bailey Laforest 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. Stem cells have potent potential for diabetes treatment – https://theconversation.com/stem-cells-have-potent-potential-for-diabetes-treatment-280003

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Qingshi Tu, Assistant Professor, Department of Wood Science, University of British Columbia

When people think about wildfires, they usually think about flames, smoke and evacuations. However, for many communities, some of the most important damage begins after the fire has passed.

Most wildfires leave behind a barren, blackened landscape, and within this changed environment, important impacts can leave their mark. Trees and other vegetation that once slowed rainfall and held soil in place are gone. Ash and burned debris cover the ground. Soil can become more vulnerable to erosion.

Then, the rain comes. When that happens, streams, rivers and water reservoirs receive a sudden pulse of ash, sediment and fire-suppressant chemicals washed off the land. For communities that depend on those waters for drinking water, wildfires can quickly become a long-term water-quality problem.

This risk is often overlooked when governments and communities think about wildfires. Our recent review of 23 studies across 28 watersheds brings together existing knowledge on how wildfire-related contaminants affect water sources.

One of the clearest lessons is that the impacts of wildfire do not stop at the edge of the burn scar. They can travel downstream, into the waters that people rely on every day.

---

Read more:
Why forest loss is making our watersheds leak rain

---

More contaminants in water

One of the first signs of trouble after a wildfire is often turbidity — the cloudiness caused by suspended particles in the water.

High turbidity can make drinking water much more difficult to treat. Fine particles can interfere with processes, clog filters and make disinfection less effective. After a fire, the problem is often worsened by storms that flush large amounts of ash, soil and organic material into waterways over a short period of time.

Wildfires can also increase levels of contaminants such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), some of which are carcinogenic or suspected carcinogens. Many PAHs can attach to ash, soot and fine particles, allowing them to move through a watershed when water runs off. Some lower-molecular-weight PAHs may also occur in dissolved form, creating additional challenges for monitoring and water treatment.

In some cases, chemicals used in fire suppression can also affect water quality: some fire retardants contain phosphates, which can add too many nutrients to water bodies if they get into streams or reservoirs.

Wildfires also make landscapes more vulnerable to erosion, which can release sediments, metals, dissolved organic matter and other contaminants into lakes, rivers and reservoirs.

Not every wildfire affects water in the same way. The size of the impact depends on many factors: how severely the area burned, how steep the terrain is, what kinds of soil and vegetation are present, how close the burned area is to streams and reservoirs, and how soon heavy rain falls after the fire. In many cases, the fire creates the conditions for water contamination, but the first major storm that follows delivers the blow.

There are still those other persistent factors that can lead to contamination, even years after the wildfire. This is one reason wildfire risk is becoming harder to manage in a warming world.

That broader perspective matters for water policy. If governments treat wildfire only as an emergency response problem, they will miss what happens before and long after after the flames. They will also miss opportunities to reduce long-term contamination of drinking water.

What can be done?

The first step is to recognize water protection as part of wildfire preparedness. Utilities and governments should know which watersheds are most vulnerable to severe fire and post-fire runoff. Fire-risk planning, watershed management and drinking-water planning are often handled separately. That needs to change.

The second step is better monitoring. After a major fire, communities need timely information about what is entering their water sources. Without timely monitoring, utilities are left reacting after water quality has already deteriorated.

The third step is stronger support for drinking water treatment systems, especially in smaller and rural communities. Large cities may have more backup options, flexible treatment systems and capacity. Smaller communities often do not. Yet they may face some of the greatest risks when fire affects the watersheds they depend on.

Wildfire policy should be guided by fairness as well as science. Not all communities are equally able to absorb a shock to their water supply. Communities with fewer financial resources, older infrastructure or limited treatment capacity may face longer disruptions and higher risks.

Protecting drinking water after wildfire isn’t just an environmental issue. It’s also a public health and equity issue.

As Canada heads into another wildfire season, we should widen our understanding of what wildfires leave behind. The flames may last days or weeks, but the effects on water can last far longer. If we want communities to be truly resilient, we need to protect not only the air people breathe, but also the water they depend on.

Loretta Li receives funding from Mitacs and Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, Ltd. under the Mitacs Accelerate grant, IT43279.

Raul de Leon Rabago receives funding from Mitacs and Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, Ltd. under the Mitacs Accelerate grant, IT43279.

Qingshi Tu 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. After the flames, wildfires pollute drinking water for years – https://theconversation.com/after-the-flames-wildfires-pollute-drinking-water-for-years-280127

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Melody Lynch, Adjunct Professor, Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia University

You skip the pesticides, you remove weeds by hand, you choose heirloom seeds. Organic methods give you comfort in knowing that your vegetables are grown without excessive chemicals.

But what many careful gardeners don’t know is their gardens can carry a hazard that organic methods alone may not prevent: lead.

Lead has no safe level of exposure and it’s present in the soil of some Canadian urban gardens. Where does it come from? Leaded gasoline emissions from historical use, deteriorating lead-based paint that seeps into the soil around older buildings and industrial activities like mining.

Luckily there are many simple and affordable ways to reduce lead exposure and make our gardens safer.

Lead affects us all differently

Lead has no function in the human body and is harmful in any concentration.

Though estimates vary, adults absorb around three to 10 per cent of the lead they ingest, while those who are fasting or malnourished may absorb up to 60 to 80 per cent. The number is higher for children, who may absorb up to 50 per cent — or up to 100 per cent on an empty stomach.

For adults, lead accumulates primarily in our bones and teeth due to repeated or prolonged exposure before slowly being released into the rest of the body. For children, a greater proportion of lead is absorbed in soft tissues, causing serious health problems to begin earlier in life.

Over time, exposure can cause long-term irreversible health effects on the brain and nervous system, the kidneys and the cardiovascular system.

Each year, lead exposure is responsible for 1.5 million deaths and over 33 million years of healthy life lost to disability around the world.

Gasoline, paint and time

Lead can occur naturally, but most lead pollution results from human activity, like manufacturing, or from products like batteries.

The use of leaded gasoline has been eliminated around the globe, but historically deposited lead remains in the environment because it does not degrade over time.

Unfortunately, there are no regulations for leaded paint in many global contexts where it is still widely available and used. This contributes to global health inequities.

Furthermore, low-income and racialized communities may experience disproportionate exposure to lead, an example of environmental injustice.

Why the risk is worth taking

Despite the risk, gardens can be an important source of healthy foods, especially for economically marginalized communities. There are many other benefits too.

When we take care of a garden, research shows this reciprocally enhances individual and community well-being. Gardens can strengthen our immune function, help regulate endocrine responses, support emotional stability and improve psychosocial behaviours, especially among children. They can also foster empathy toward nature and other people.

For some Indigenous Peoples and other groups with long agricultural histories, gardens can contribute to cultural continuity through practices rooted in intergenerational knowledge and spirituality.

It’s important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to managing risk and reward. Food safety concerns have been used to negatively stereotype marginalized populations who have limited alternatives, or to pre-empt public debate on land-use decisions that ultimately displace community gardens.

How to make your garden safer

Lead can get into your plants from the air or soil. Each plant will uptake lead differently depending on factors including plant type and soil characteristics. Leafy greens and root vegetables are generally more likely to absorb lead than other vegetables, for example.

Luckily, there are many simple ways to prevent lead from ending up in your homegrown foods.

1. Position your garden away from busy roads, parking areas, railways, waterways and industrial areas.
2. If you think lead may be present in your soil, you can send a sample to get tested.
3. Be cautious with chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Attempt non-chemical solutions when possible; otherwise follow recommended dosages carefully.
4. Use raised beds or pots with fresh soil if you are concerned about your soil being polluted.
5. Use compost. While it will not remove heavy metals, high-quality compost can prevent lead from moving into your produce from the soil.
6. Maintain soil pH with use of a pH meter available at the hardware store. Ensure your soil is not too acidic to prevent lead from moving from your soils into your plants.
7. Look to soil texture. Avoid soils that are too sandy, as they encourage the movement of lead into your garden plants.
8. Look to soil colour. Red and yellow soils often indicate the presence of iron oxides, which help prevent lead from moving into plants. Dark black soils often indicate high organic matter content, which helps with this protection too.
9. Use mulch, such as wood chips or decaying leaves, to prevent lead from entering your soils from the air.
10. Avoid burning waste in or near the garden, which may cause lead to enter your food. The open burning of waste is an urgent global health problem in places where waste collection infrastructure is insufficient, including some Indigenous communities in Canada.
11. Prevent young children from putting soil in their mouths while in the garden, as they are at higher risk of developing health problems if they consume lead.
12. Wash fruits and vegetables with clean water before eating to remove residues.

---

Read more:
We developed a biodegradable wash that can remove pesticides and keep fruit fresh longer

---

Perhaps the biggest action that we can take to make our gardens safer is to hold our governments accountable for clean communities. If you are worried about pollution, contact your local representative or join a cause to demand tighter regulations and improved planning policies.

For many families, a garden is not just a hobby. It’s where lunch or dinner comes from. And while progress has been made, lead exposure remains a hidden health risk for Canadians. It’s preventable if we take the right measures.

Melody Lynch received funding for this research from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and Mitacs.

– ref. Urban gardens may contain lead — here’s what the research says about the hidden health risk – https://theconversation.com/urban-gardens-may-contain-lead-heres-what-the-research-says-about-the-hidden-health-risk-280552

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Magdalena Janus, Professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia

Children with special needs often experience a range of early developmental challenges that can affect their readiness for learning and their participation in school.

This population includes children with a wide range of neurodevelopmental conditions (like autism and ADHD) as well as physical or sensory conditions and impairments.

Overall, children with special needs are more likely to experience challenges in one or more areas of their development compared to other children their age. For example, about 80 per cent of kindergarten children with identified special needs do not yet have the skills needed to fully benefit from classroom learning, compared to 27 per cent of children without special needs.

In Canada, children with special health needs are more likely to live in lower-income neighbourhoods and to experience poorer developmental outcomes.

The COVID-19 pandemic, declared in March 2020, changed many aspects of everyday life for young children across Canada. Although all children were affected, those with special needs were often impacted more deeply.

Public health measures disrupted many of the resources and supports they and their families relied on, such as health-care visits, child care and early education programs. In some cases, these supports stopped altogether.

Many pandemic policies did not fully consider the needs of vulnerable groups, including children with special needs. As a result, these children and their families were more likely to experience negative impacts during this pandemic, highlighting gaps in support and services that may have affected their development.

Status of inequities

Our team at the Offord Centre for Child Studies at McMaster University produced a report that provided a comprehensive description of the status of inequities in early childhood development in Canada for children with special needs, both before and after the onset of the pandemic. The Public Health Agency of Canada commissioned the report.

We used population-level data and five different neighbourhood-level socioeconomic measures of inequities, including neighbourhood income after tax. The child development data came from the Early Development Instrument (EDI), a 103-item, teacher-completed questionnaire that assesses kindergarten children’s ability to meet age-appropriate developmental expectations across five developmental domains.

We examined EDI data collected before and after the onset of the pandemic to see whether there were differences in teachers’ reports of children’s development in kindergarten.

The EDI database consisted of data from both a pre- and post-pandemic
cohort of children (2017-20; 2020-23). This cohort comprises a total of 540,005 children with special needs from seven provinces and one territory: Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Québec, Ontario, Manitoba, British Columbia and Northwest Territories.

We only selected provinces and territories with EDI data collection in both pre- and post-pandemic onset periods.

Defining special needs

“Special needs” encompasses a broad range of conditions affecting behaviour, communication and physical and intellectual development. A child was identified on the EDI as having special needs if they received a medical, physical or mental-health diagnosis by either a medical or a health practitioner or if they received special education support or services at school.

After the COVID-19 pandemic, a higher percentage of children with special needs didn’t meet age-appropriate developmental expectations in one or more developmental domains: physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, communication skills and general knowledge. These children are considered developmentally vulnerable.

While the overall rates of developmental vulnerability increased, the general pattern remained the same: children in lower-income neighbourhoods or areas with greater social and material disadvantage were more likely to face developmental difficulties.

Neighbourhood income

This pattern was especially strong when looking at neighbourhood income. As income decreased, the percentage of children experiencing developmental challenges increased. For other neighbourhood characteristics, such as how remote or rural an area was, the patterns were less clear.

For example, while children in very remote areas sometimes had higher rates of vulnerability, this was not consistent across all levels of remoteness, and in some cases, children in the most remote areas had lower vulnerability rates than those in more accessible regions.

Importantly, even though these patterns were similar before and after the pandemic, the overall number of children with special needs who were developmentally vulnerable increased after COVID-19.

---

Read more:
Children with special health needs are more likely to come from poorer neighbourhoods

---

On average, there was a 2.5 percentage-point increase in developmental vulnerability. While this may seem small, it represents thousands more children facing developmental challenges than just a few years earlier.

This increase is important because early developmental challenges in kindergarten are linked to greater risks for difficulties later in life, including academic struggles and social or emotional challenges.

These risks are especially pronounced for children with special needs, even though some difficulties may improve over time. Even modest increases in developmental vulnerability can have meaningful impacts — not only for children and families, but also for education and health-care systems that support them.

Girls with special needs: possibly more affected

In both the pre- and post-COVID-19 groups of children with special needs, there was a higher percentage of boys who were developmentally vulnerable compared to girls, with only a few exceptions.

For example, 83 per cent of boys with special health needs were considered developmentally vulnerable before the pandemic, rising to nearly 85 per cent after, compared to about 73 per cent and 77 per cent of girls, respectively.

Boys showed higher rates of vulnerability in most areas of development, except for language and cognitive skills. This pattern is consistent with previous research showing that boys often face more developmental and academic challenges in the early school years.

---

Read more:
New research shows quality early childhood education reduces need for later special ed

---

However, while boys had higher overall rates, the increase in developmental vulnerability after the pandemic was larger among girls. Rates rose by just over one percentage point for boys, but by more than four percentage points for girls. This suggests that girls with special needs may have been more affected by pandemic-related disruptions than boys.

Implications for essential services

Our findings have important implications for policy and practice. Understanding how developmental vulnerability is associated with neighbourhoods can help identify where support is most needed. There is a need to ensure children in more disadvantaged areas have access to health care, early intervention and specialized supports.

Schools play a key role by identifying special needs early, ideally starting in kindergarten, so that appropriate supports, such as individualized education plans, can be put in place as soon as possible.

---

Read more:
Many autistic students are denied a full education — here’s what we need for inclusive schools

---

The increase in both the number of kindergarten children with special needs and the proportion experiencing developmental challenges since the pandemic means that there will be more children requiring specialized assistance and accommodation in later grades.

Our findings highlight the growing pressures on children, families and health and education systems, and underscore the importance of responding with timely and targeted support.

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. After the COVID-19 pandemic, thousands more kindergarteners faced developmental challenges – https://theconversation.com/after-the-covid-19-pandemic-thousands-more-kindergarteners-faced-developmental-challenges-280245

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Samantha Dodson, Assistant Professor, Organizational Behaviour and Human Resources, University of Calgary

Since women began entering the modern workforce in large numbers, support roles — or those who help someone else do their work, like administrative assistants and paralegals — have been predominantly occupied by women. The people in the higher ranking positions these roles support, such as executives, lawyers and surgeons, have been predominantly men.

Women still face barriers to reaching senior positions with decision-making authority in organizations. Only 21 per cent of Canada’s top publicly traded companies are led by female CEOs. By contrast, 92 per cent of executive assistants are women.

Even within the same job role, research consistently shows women are less likely to be assigned promotable tasks — high-visibility decisions that get noticed and rewarded — than men. They are more likely to be assigned administrative tasks or “office housework”: the kind of labour that keeps an organization running but rarely leads to a raise or a promotion.

A stereotype hiding in plain sight

My recent study, co-authored with Rachael D. Goodwin, Cheryl J. Wakslak, Kristina A. Diekmann and Jesse Graham, examined gendered expectations about how men and women think. We tested these expectations across six experiments.

When we examined the segregation of men into high-power roles and women into lower-power ones, we noticed an interesting pattern.

Support roles often involve developing efficient processes and paying close attention to detail. Leadership roles tend to involve tasks like identifying and creating values, strategies and visions. Women are more likely to occupy the first type, which calls for what we term a “concrete mindset.” Men are more likely to hold roles requiring big-picture, or “abstract,” thinking.

Both abstract and concrete thinking are valuable, but they tend to be associated with different kinds of work.

We found that people broadly hold three related beliefs regarding concreteness and abstraction: that women are more detail-oriented and specific than men; that women are less big picture-oriented than men; and that women are less visionary than men.

These beliefs arose spontaneously in our first experiment and were confirmed explicitly by respondents in two follow-up studies. We found women tend to hold these beliefs more deeply than men, and the stereotypes arose across 48 occupations and industries.

What LinkedIn reveals

These stereotypes have real-world consequences that might help explain why women are overrepresented in administrative roles.

In one experiment, we analyzed nearly 550,000 LinkedIn recommendations across a range of industries and occupations. Connections were more likely to use words such as “detailed and exact” to describe women and “visionary and farsighted” to describe men.

Research confirms LinkedIn recommendations can affect hiring outcomes, so the language used in them is influential.

Consider two project managers who received positive LinkedIn recommendations (names changed for privacy):

“John is an asset to any team he joins. He regularly looks for opportunities to turn ideas into action, inject creativity into every touch point, and develop strategies for innovation. He adds value by evaluating the big-picture and volunteers recommendations that increase efficiency and cost savings.”

“Jill is a very detail-oriented, motivated, analytical individual. She executes every task or project given to her in a timely manner. Multi-tasking and planning come easily to her. If you give Jill an end goal, you can depend on her to deliver results that exceed expectations.”

Both recommendations are positive, but John is cast as someone who generates ideas and shapes direction while Jill is cast as someone who reliably executes them.

If a hiring manager reads John as strategic and forward-thinking, he is more likely to be seen as a leader. And if a manager reads that Jill is detail-oriented, this could increase her chances of being selected for administrative roles, but might block her advancement to leadership.

The cycle and how to break it

In our final experiment, we found that gender stereotypes increased the likelihood of women being assigned detailed, low-promotability tasks, such as filing paperwork and proofreading, on top of their existing workload. This perpetuates gender roles and organizational inequity.

Occupational stereotypes and task segregation reinforce each other, and that cycle is difficult to break from inside an organization. Managers and organizations must consciously engage in equitable practices and policies to break the cycle in which women are disqualified from advancement.

Our study suggests two ways that managers can do this. The first is distributing low-value, detailed work equitably. Tasks such as taking notes in meetings, planning birthday parties and taking lunch orders can disproportionately fall to women. A rotating assignment system prevents any one person from getting pigeonholed into assignments that don’t contribute to their career progression.

The second is highlighting the value of detail orientation in leadership roles. Job postings and descriptions that emphasize detail orientation as a leadership trait could expand the pool of women who apply for and are seriously considered for senior roles.

Samantha Dodson receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

– ref. Why being called ‘detail-oriented’ can stall a woman’s career – https://theconversation.com/why-being-called-detail-oriented-can-stall-a-womans-career-277936