Loneliness, the ill of a hyperconnected era ?

by Claire Anne Brule | January 26, 2024 | News, Uncategorized

Is loneliness the ill of this hyperconnected era? This question is being asked by many observers and organisations such as the WHO (World Health Organisation). Our world has been described as a village since distances have shrunk thanks to high-speed travel and of course the worldwide web and social media. Everyone knows everyone else in a village. But there is a big difference between knowing one another and meeting.

Last November, the WHO announced the creation of a commission on social links “in order to tackle the question of loneliness as an urgent threat to health, to prioritise the promotion of social links and to accelerate the scaling up of solutions in nations, independently of their level of income.”

In its press release, the WHO stressed the urgency of the subject, due to its magnitude. According to the Organisation, social isolation is defined as “the inadequacy of social relations” whereas loneliness is “the social suffering associated with the feeling of not having any links with others.” The WHO Managing Director underlined that the “high level of social isolation and loneliness in the world has serious consequences on health and well-being. People who have insufficient close social links are more likely to suffer from a CVA stroke, anxiety, dementia, depression, suicide and many other disorders.”

Research workers have in fact investigated this subject and several studies have been published. One of them, conducted in Denmark, linked social isolation to a greater risk of mortality within 7 years. An American study linked loneliness, but not social isolation, with greater cardio-vascular risks in patients already suffering from diabetes.

Loneliness, a worldwide and inter-generational ill

The Gallup poll organisation last year conducted a “mega-survey” on the subject. Covering some 142 nations of diverse economic conditions, it revealed that 24% of people surveyed felt “very or quite” lonely. The survey did not detect any difference in the percentage of women and men in most nations. A report, conducted with Meta (Facebook) was published at the end of last year on the state of social links worldwide. In its introduction, it quotes a sentence which goes back some 2,500 years: Man, according to Aristotle, the philosopher, is “a social animal”.

The report provides further details on the situation per nation, age and gender. Thus, 8% of people feel “very lonely”. This represents some 370 million people in the 142 nations covered by the survey. On the question of social interactions over the last 7 days, with family or friends, in the event that they live with or close to the person, 8% stated that they had had no interaction and 7% only once. This is a worrying result since it raises the question of interactions with people living nearby.

Another question concerns the interactions of those people surveyed with groups who share their interests or beliefs. 37% claimed to have had no interaction with them during the last 7 days and 11% only once. It should also be noted that the survey considers two themes: the feeling of loneliness and the feeling of being socially connected. Although the results are often similar, they do not correspond completely: a person feeling highly connected could suffer more from loneliness in moments without interaction.

The survey did not reveal any particular geographic distribution. The five nations with the lowest levels of loneliness were: Latvia, Ukraine (!), Slovenia, Germany and Vietnam. The five nations with the highest levels were: Lesotho, the Philippines, Uganda, Botswana and Afghanistan. Remember that it is the feeling indicated by the people themselves and not a statistical indicator elaborated from more objective data such as the number of visits, outings etc.

One point which is shown by the survey, is not intuitive. One readily associates loneliness with old age. The reality is more subtle, loneliness affects all age brackets. Recently in France, a study conducted by IFOP revealed that 62% of young people between 18 and 24 years old regularly felt lonely, compared with 37% of people aged over 65.

Focus on France

This IFOP study provides other data on the situation in France. Family, far ahead of friends, workmates or neighbours, represent the main network for socialisation. When asked the question, “at what frequency do you spend time together every day?”, unsurprisingly, family achieves 30% of responses, compared with 7% for friends.

9% of people are isolated in that they see nobody at least once per month. The highest rate is in the Paris region, which is densely populated, at 14%, and the lowest at 2% in Brittany, closely followed by Normandy at 3%. The detail of the situations of these people, alongside their residency, reveals that men, manual workers, those with limited means or impoverished are more concerned by such isolation.

The feeling of loneliness is experienced regularly by some 44% of French people, this percentage has diminished compared with 2022 (50%). The feeling manifests itself for them by moments of sobbing (67%) or anxiety and stress (66%). 50% claim to have suffered moments of depression and 34% have had suicidal thoughts. To counter this feeling of loneliness, 69% surfed on the social networks, 32% drank alcohol alone and 13% exchanged with conversational artificial intelligence.

Fostering of links

These surveys constitute a strong appeal for fostering the links around us. Even if the world is within reach at a mere single click, it nevertheless remains that such interaction is primarily between a human and a machine. That cannot replace the need to meet an “alter ego”, other humans which are both unique and similar. The insistence on the autonomy of an individual could be a separation factor damaging to the feeling of belonging and to the links which could unite.

In a recent interview for La Croix, Jon Fosse the holder of the Nobel prize for literature recalled these two sides of the human condition: “I believe that each human being has something unique and that, at the same time, every human being has something in common”. In order to maintain the link, it is important to also cultivate the feeling of belonging to our common humanity.

See all our articles on the family and on society.

Abortion in the Constitution: An Unjustified and Dangerous Bill

by Claire Anne Brule | January 16, 2024 | Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE – 16^th January 2024

Abortion in the Constitution : An unjustified and dangerous bill

The bill aimed at registering abortion in the French Constitution, to be examined tomorrow by the National Assembly Laws Commission is both unjustified and dangerous. Not only is the addition of abortion rights to the constitution totally unfounded, but it moreover equates to absolving an act which puts lives in danger. The bill overlooks the difficulties endured by many women wishing to sustain their pregnancy to its term.

Registration in the Constitution of the “Freedom of women, which is guaranteed to them”, to resort to abortion, is a threat to the right to live, the safeguard of human dignity, the freedom of conscience for carers, which is regularly questioned, and the freedom of expression on a social and humanitarian question which remains a sensitive taboo.

234,300, is the record number of abortions recorded in 2022 i.e. some 17,000 more than in 2021 (an 8% increase). That figure alone, shows that in France the availability of abortion is not restricted. On the other hand, its registration in the Constitution would further condemn many women to silence: the government cannot ignore the fact that resorting to abortion has become a marker of social inequality, poverty-stricken women are more likely than others to resort to abortion.

Abortion may also sometimes be the expression of violence made against women. For 40% of the 201,000 women concerned each year by violence in the home, the violence began during the first pregnancy. It is not abortion which is under threat in France today but rather the possibility for women who so wish, to complete their pregnancy.

According to Caroline Roux, the Deputy General Manager of Alliance VITA, “This bill is symbolic of the indecent exploitation of abortion. To enshrine abortion in constitution, when its availability is not under threat, is senseless. The social urgencies are quite different. Currently, the urgency is for prevention not to include it in constitution. The social priority should be to provide true alternatives to those women who wish to complete their pregnancy, so that abortion is never seen as an inevitability.”

Medicinal Abortion Being Challenged in the American Supreme Court

by Claire Anne Brule | January 12, 2024 | News

Medicinal abortion being challenged in the American Supreme Court

The United States Supreme Court on 13^th December 2023 accepted to consider an appeal in order to re-establish restrictions on the use of Mifepristone, the product used for medicinal abortions.

The case initiated in Texas with an appeal by the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine association. The latter claimed that the authorisation for marketing of Mifepristone had been improperly delivered by the FDA (Food & Drug administration) in 2000. The procedure for deliverance of the product, also known in France under the name RU 486, was subsequently modified several times in particular in 2016 and again in 2021.

A product subject to special requirements

Mifepristone is used in combination with another product, misoprostol, which is taken 48h later to induce expulsion of the foetus. Abortion by the combination of these two products represents more than 50% of abortions in the USA (76% of abortions in France). It may be conducted in hospital or at home.

Mifepristone belongs to the list of pharmaceutical products subject to special requirements, as is the case in France, due to sanitary and safety problems and due to the irreversibility of abortion. The product must be delivered directly to the person (“dispensation in person requirement”) by a certified medical prescriber and is only available through certified chemists.

The FDA requirements associated with deliverance are multiple:

Check of the dating of the pregnancy,
Check that it is not an extra uterine pregnancy
Have the ability to perform a surgical operation in the event of an incomplete abortion or severe haemorrhage, and ensure access for patients to medical installations equipped for blood transfusions.

Women are informed of the possible serious consequences which could result from this type of abortion even if they are rare, notably severe haemorrhage. Indeed, medicinal abortion may in some cases lead to complications especially as they can be conducted at home, away from any medical facilities.

The modifications to the procedures for the deliverance of Mifepristone

Initially authorised for use up to 7 weeks pregnant, its use was extended in 2016 to abortions at up to 10 weeks pregnant. As a comparison, in France medicinal abortions may be conducted in hospital environments or at home only up to 7 weeks pregnant. Since 2021, the obligation for “dispensation in person” has been deleted with the possibility of obtaining the product by post.

The first judgement suspended deliverance of the product in Texas. Then the Court of Appeals following an appeal by the FDA and the Danco company which markets the product, authorised deliverance of the product but more restrictively according to the pre-2016 conditions, up to 7 weeks pregnant.

The FDA and Danco then appealed against that decision to the Supreme Court in April 2023. In the first instance, the Supreme Court decided to maintain the marketing of Mifepristone under its current conditions, including its deliverance by post, whilst accepting to consider the appeal.

The decision by the Supreme Court should not involve the marketing conditions for 2000 but rather the modification of the rules for deliverance with regard to the sanitary safety requirements. Their decision should be forthcoming within a few months before the end of their yearly session, in June 2024.

European Regulations on Artificial Intelligence : Where is this Leading us?

by Claire Anne Brule | December 21, 2023 | European legislation, News, Uncategorized

European Regulations on Artificial Intelligence : Where is this leading us?

An agreement aimed at European regulations to govern artificial intelligence was achieved on 8^th December between the EU member States and the European Parliament. Heralded as a World first, the agreement is intended to establish a European-wide text which would come into force at the earliest in 2025. The preparatory work was launched in 2021, before Chat GPT and other general public applications had revealed the day-to-day impact which such technologies bring with them.

What do these future regulations include?

The regulations will include a definition of the systems dependent on AI. According to the European Parliament, “The priority is to ensure that the AI systems used in the EU are safe, transparent, traceable, non discriminatory and environmentally friendly. The AI systems must be supervised by people rather than automation, in order to avoid harmful results.” The regulations also intend to establish a common definition from the technological standpoint which can be applied to future innovations.

The principle guiding the intended law concerns the systematic evaluation of risks and the setting of different rules according to the level of risk.

Risks which are considered as unacceptable would be AI systems such as mass biometric recognition, social scoring (which is practiced in China), the manipulation of behaviours etc. Some exceptions are however already included, for example for the police in the context of the war against terrorism, the search for victims of human trafficking etc.

The bill mentions a prohibition for “AI systems which manipulate human behaviour in order to bypass freedom of choice.” The notion of freedom of choice is very ancient and has led to numerous philosophical discussions, without ever achieving any agreement on its meaning. Certain critics have pointed out the difficulty of including it in a regulation which aims to establish rules and to protect the general public.

The systems considered as “high risk” are those which have “a negative impact on safety or fundamental rights.” They will be subject to evaluation before being released and throughout their life cycle, as more powerful versions of a system could impact the level of risk.

In practical terms, an appendix to the bill quotes an example of a system used “to evaluate students in educational and professional training establishments and to evaluate the participants for the tests commonly used in order to be accepted in educational establishments”, or again AI “intended to be used to make decisions for promotions and dismissals in the context of contractual professional relations.” It also covers “AI systems intended to be used to send or establish priorities for dispatching emergency services, including emergency fire and rescue services.”

Regarding more general AI systems including generating systems such as ChatGPT, the bill introduces requirements for “transparency”. The model must be conceived such as to not generate any illegal content, and must comply with the rules of copyright and sounds, pictures, texts must mention their artificial origin.

Low risk systems (such as “chat services” provided to customers) must inform their users that they are interacting with an AI system.

A technological upheaval which raises concrete questions

The possible applications of AI affect all domains: health, law, education, armed forces etc.

The questions to ask, and to ask oneself as a user, are numerous. Who decides? On what criteria and by what methods? Who has access to the data and are they adequately secure? How are the data used and for what purpose? Is the AI system linked to a human chain of responsibility which can be questioned?

A recent example which appeared in Nature magazine illustrates the possible upheavals caused by AI in day to day life. An applied mathematics laboratory in Denmark has used an enormous existing data base covering the entire Danish population to estimate, among other things, the probabilities of a premature death. The information includes lifetime events linked to health, education, profession, income, home address and working hours, recorded daily.

Based on the assumption that events share similarities with language, and using an AI technique similar to the ChatGPT model, the tool was able to “predict” premature death (at between 35 and 65 years) with greater efficiency than the existing models. The benefit of such a system for insurance and health insurance companies is obvious and would jeopardise the basic idea of the mutualisation of risks between individuals. In an indeterminate time-frame, this type of use could lead to greater prenatal selection for insurance cost reasons.

An unstable compromise?

The compromise achieved by the European Parliament and the EU member States is the fruit of discussions between multiple players and divergent economic and political interests. For France, various opinions were expressed, either calling for greater control (for example prohibiting facial recognition systems in public spaces) or for more flexibility. The bill introduces a so-called “regulatory sand-pit” which has already been used in the domain. It consists of defining a framework in which companies may test innovations with relatively few constraints.

The stakes are enormous and the marketplace is currently dominated by American and Chinese players. The European approach differs through its call for regulation, whilst other nations are satisfied with voluntary codes of practice, based on general principles such as those put forward by the OECD.

In the United States, control is achieved through a recently signed presidential executive order. It is therefore more easily adaptable according to the evolution of the systems and requests by the technology players. It is probable that the pressure calling for “more flexibility”, or the cancellation of “excessively stringent” rules, will increase in the years to come.

Many of the players are pointing out the speed with which AI innovations are being developed and deployed. This theme was underlined by an expert, Philippe Dewost, during his address at the “Université de la Vie 2023” (2023 Life University by Alliance Vita). It has become urgent to work towards a robust consensus to position humanity at the centre, in AI as well as in bioethics.

The MEPs Have Adopted a Text Which Endangers Children’s Rights

by Claire Anne Brule | December 15, 2023 | Human rights, News, Uncategorized

On 14^th December 2023 the European Parliament voted for a proposed rule initiated by the European Commission concerning the recognition of filiation acts between European Union member States; highly controversial, this rule could seriously undermine the national authority of member States for the establishment of filiation and for children’s rights. Especially as the proposal goes so far as to establish a European filiation certificate.

The text had already been put to the vote on 7^th November.

For this text, the Parliament has a mere consultative role. It is up to all the governments of the European Union member States to decide whether they accept this rule by a unanimous vote. This would appear improbable as several member States have voiced their opposition.

In 2021, in response to the European Commission consultation, Alliance VITA expressed an opinion warning against the systematic recognition of filiation throughout the EU maintaining the principle of subsidiarity of the States on the subject. They underlined the importance of fighting against human trafficking, which necessitates ensuring the priority of the authority of member States for the recognition of filiation.

In an analytical note intended for MPs and the Commission, Alliance VITA analysed the way in which this proposal contravenes the remit established by the EU Treaty and French public order with respect to surrogate motherhood. Indeed, the French penal code punishes filiation infringements with regard to substitution motherhood.

The pretext of freedom of movement within the European Union must not be allowed to mask the interference which this proposed rule would constitute for the member States regarding filiation and the safeguarding of children’s rights.