Discover the hidden health benefits of forests! #Forests #Health #CarbonSequestration
Did you know that forests are nature's lungs, absorbing a third of the carbon dioxide we produce? This natural process called carbon sequestration is crucial for maintaining our planet's health. A recent study revealed that protecting forests could prevent 30% of global carbon emissions. This not only combats climate change, but also improves air quality, reducing respiratory…
Discover the hidden health benefits of forests! #Forests #Health #CarbonSequestration https://jandjinvestllc.com/discover-the-hidden-health-benefits-of-forests-forests-health-carbonsequestration-2/
Discover the hidden health benefits of forests! #Forests #Health #CarbonSequestration
Did you know that forests are nature's lungs, absorbing a third of the carbon dioxide we produce? This natural process called carbon sequestration is crucial for maintaining our planet's health. A recent study revealed that protecting forests could prevent 30% of global carbon emissions. This not only combats climate change, but also improves air quality, reducing respiratory…
Discover the hidden health benefits of forests! #Forests #Health #CarbonSequestration https://jandjinvestllc.com/discover-the-hidden-health-benefits-of-forests-forests-health-carbonsequestration/
15-Oct-2025
#Australia’s #rainforests first to switch from #carbon sink to source
Aledade's groundbreaking climate program aims to put CO2 back underground, offering a promising solution to combat carbon emissions and climate change. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #CarbonSequestration #CarbonRemoval #ClimateAction
https://charmindustrial.com/blog/how-aledade-established-a-multi-million-dollar-climate-program
Turning waste into wealth: Biochar machine offers affordable carbon capture for farmers, boosting crop yields and fighting climate change. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #Biochar #CarbonSequestration #CarbonFarming #RegenerativeAgriculture
https://triplepundit.com/2025/biochar-carbon-capture-plantvillage-pyrotower/
Colorado expands its carbon sequestration program with approval of grassland carbon project. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #CarbonSequestration #CarbonFarming #CarbonRemoval #GrasslandProtection #NatureBasedSolutions
https://carbon-pulse.com/439419/
#gribouillis #doodles #dessin #drawing #écologie #ecology #séquestrationcarbone #carbonsequestration #algue #seeweed
🦪 Oysters can trap carbon in their shells and reefs, acting as natural carbon sinks. A new study highlights their potential role in reducing atmospheric CO₂.
🔗 https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/2025/09/oysters-could-help-fight-climate-change-study-finds/?utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fedica-Autoposting
#CarbonSequestration #MarineScience #Oysters #ClimateResearch
Underground carbon storage may run out sooner than expected. Prioritizing emission cuts and clean energy expansion is crucial for a sustainable future. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #CarbonSequestration #Emissions #CleanEnergy #RenewableEnergyTransition
https://www.earth.com/news/underground-carbon-storage-could-run-out-much-sooner-than-we-thought/
Terraton aims to revolutionize biochar technology with a franchise model, raising $11.5 million to expand carbon sequestration. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #Biochar #CarbonSequestration #CarbonRemoval #ClimateTech #ClimateFinance
https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/27/terraton-wants-to-be-the-mcdonalds-of-biochar/
Energy giants Equinor, Shell, and TotalEnergies achieve milestone with first third-party CO2 storage facility in Norway, marking a significant step in carbon capture and storage technology. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #CarbonSequestration
https://interestingengineering.com/innovation/worlds-first-co2-storage-injects-carbon
National Advisory Board for Canada’s Forests Trust Corporation
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/05/08
Gary Zed is the Founder & CEO of Canada’s Forests Trust Corporation. Canada’s Forest Trust Corporation (CFTC) is a social enterprise focused on planting and managing forests to combat climate change and protect biodiversity. Partnering with organizations and youth groups, CFTC creates Smart Forests™, integrating traditional forest management with modern technology for carbon sequestration and ecological benefits. Their National Advisory Board includes experts in biodiversity, forestry, and education. CFTC’s climate and biodiversity goals emphasize long-term ecosystem sustainability and public engagement. Over the next five years, they plan to expand Smart Forests across Canada using a six-step process to plant, preserve, and protect millions of trees, fostering environmental stewardship nationwide.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is Canada’s Forest Trust Corporation (CFTC) and its mission?
Gary Zed: We are a social enterprise whose mission is planting forests in Canada, because it is good for nature and climate.
We work with leading Canadian organizations — from leading companies to national youth groups — to plant forests with their support. We work with these partners because we know that many Canadians, including employees and young people, want to play a part in taking action to protect nature and fight climate change.
Planting and managing forests brings many benefits, from sequestering carbon from the atmosphere, to habitat for animals to economic benefits to human well-being. Honestly, this has never mattered more than it does now.
Jacobsen: Why did the CFTC establish a National Advisory Board?
Zed: Well, no one can solve climate change or protect biodiversity alone. As CFTC has grown, it became clear to me that we need the best and brightest minds to advise us on a host of areas of expertise, including biodiversity, forestry, education, youth engagement, Indigenous partnerships, data, business, and climate adaptation. What’s more, trust and integrity are very important to us, and we make sure we always have leading experts advising us, especially in a world of greenwashing. We also want to expand our collective experience in various industries from insurance to retail to the auto sector.
We chose our advisors from all of these walks of life because we work at a crossroads between climate, nature, tech, youth, and business, and we are better able to work effectively when we have perspectives and talents from various sectors. I’m really honoured at the incredible group of advisors that have stepped up and joined us in our new National Advisory Board. Already they’ve rolled up their sleeves. As we look at these massive problems in front of us, there is a lot of work to get done.
Jacobsen: What are tech-enhanced nature-based solutions regarding forest planting and protection?
Zed: We take an innovative approach, by combining tried and true forest management techniques with modern technologies that provide in-depth data. We call this a Smart Forest™. A Smart Forest brings together nature’s wisdom and advanced technology.
We recognized that a forest is inherently smart and sophisticated, and they have evolved ways to renew and sustain themselves over millennia. The benefits of a healthy forest include a habitat for life and species to thrive, and many benefits for economic, environmental, and social well-being.
But we also have smart tools at our disposal in this day and age. Here’s where the tech enhanced part comes in: The effectiveness of a Smart Forest is shared with clients through cutting-edge digital dashboards, ensuring transparency and accountability for its impact, as well as reporting centres that provide on-demand access to downloadable forest impact reports.
Smart Forest is designed to store large carbon footprints, utilizing forest management techniques to maximize its ecological and climate impact.
We also collaborate with others, from Indigenous communities to experts in nature-based solutions, like the advisors on the National Advisory Board that I mentioned. This combination of nature’s wisdom, modern technology, and collaboration helps ensure the health of our forests — now and into the future.
Jacobsen: How will you involve youth groups in sustainability goals?
Zed: We have a history of working with youth across Canada through groups like Eco Schools. On our new National Advisory Board, we have experts in education like Michèle Andrews and Tam Matthews, who we lean on for expertise about engaging youth in climate and nature action. A number of our partners are national youth groups, who commit to planting trees. The youth who are involved with those groups can then feel a sense of connection to those forests through the digital dashboard.
One example I’m particularly proud of is our first Smart Forest location in New Brunswick’s endangered Acadian forest region. Through the support of School Smart Forest Stewards, we will restore 95 acres of previously devastated land, bring back biodiversity, clean air and water, and support the local economy. A big part of this project is community involvement. Schools across Canada are coming together to help reach the goal of 100,000 seedlings to fully restore this forest back to health. Participating in this can help young people learn more about the importance of biodiversity, climate change, and environmental stewardship.
Youth are so important to our philosophy that we are actually about to launch a new brand entirely dedicated to engaging Gen Z and Gen Alphas in Canada. We’re excited to share more about that soon.
Jacobsen: What are the climate and biodiversity objectives of the CFTC?
Zed: We see climate and biodiversity goals as intertwined, and forests as a powerful solution to multiple problems, including climate change and biodiversity loss. Nature and climate action are deeply interconnected, and planting forests can help with biodiversity, the well-being of species, and climate mitigation and adaptation.
One of our objectives is to sequester carbon. It is well-established that forests are proven to be effective at sequestering carbon.
The focus in environmental action has been on carbon, which is of course important, but we also know that climate and nature come hand-in-hand. That’s where our next objective comes in: supporting flourishing biodiversity while also fostering a host of biodiversity benefits, such as increased habitat for species.
A third objective is to prioritize the long-term health and sustainability of a forest for ecosystem health, habitat creation, the various benefits that come from climate change mitigation, and carbon storage — not just a flash in the pan, but for the indefinite future.
We also aim to support the democratization of nature. This means nature should be accessible to all, and we focus on connecting Canadians with information about how to help invest in and take care of nature.
Jacobsen: How will the CFTC grow millions of trees in healthy ecosystems in the next 5 years?
Zed: We are growing quickly, and our next step is to plant, preserve and protect Smart Forest ecosystems in regions across Canada. Over the next year, we will be in almost every province, and new projects will be stewarded in the next planting season.
As we set out to grow millions of trees in Canada over the next five years, we will use our 6-step approach to our Smart Forests.
The first step is to procure land. The second step is to prepare the land for planting. Step three is to plant the forest, including a diverse mix of native species. The fourth step is to preserve the trees that are planted. Step five is to protect the forest and the land. Finally, the sixth step is to promote nature-based solutions like planting forests, through education and inspiration.
We are proud to be at a point in our evolution when this approach is tried and tested, and that we can expand our impact. We are proud to plant and care for forests here in Canada, and we know that companies and organizations value our at-home approach, because they want to make a positive difference here.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Gary.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
#biodiversityProtection #carbonSequestration #climateAdaptation #SmartForests #youthEngagement
Scientists are testing iron seeding to boost phytoplankton and capture carbon, but the risks to ocean ecosystems remain uncertain. #ClimateTech #CarbonSequestration #Oceans https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2025/08/iron-seeding-ocean-organisms-phytoplankton-diatoms-carbon-sequestration/
Venny Ala-Siurua, Women on Web Globally
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/04/26
Venny Ala-Siurua, Executive Director of Women on Web, discusses the organization’s expansion into the U.S. in 2024 due to increasing abortion restrictions. Women on the Web, a Canadian nonprofit, provides telemedicine abortion services and combats digital censorship globally. Ala-Siurua highlights the challenges of online suppression, political hostility, and misinformation. She also addresses rising demand from countries like the U.S., Poland, and the Philippines. The discussion covers reproductive rights, the role of digital activism, and strategies for countering disinformation. The interview underscores the intersection of abortion access, digital rights, and human rights in an evolving global landscape.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we’re here with Venny Ala-Siurua. She is the Executive Director of Women on Web, a Canadian nonprofit that provides online abortion services and directs global health information. With over a decade in the nonprofit sector, she specializes in health, social protection, and digital rights. Holding a master’s degree in international development, she has worked with international NGOs, grassroots organizations, and multilateral entities. Under her leadership, Women on Web has navigated online censorship and expanded access to safe abortion information.
She has expertise in digital rights and reproductive health, ensuring access to accurate medical resources while addressing restrictions through technology. Thank you for joining me on this delightful CSW69, Beijing+30, Resolution 1325 25th day.
Venny Ala-Siurua: Thank you for having us.
Jacobsen: Let’s start. So, how did Women on Web expand its services in the U.S. in 2024? Everyone is generally aware that things have become more challenging since 2022. How did you expand?
Ala-Siurua: Women on Web has been around for nearly twenty years. For the first fifteen or sixteen years, we never considered working in the U.S. At any given moment, our service has been available in nearly 180 countries.
We’ve always had a global mission, covering a broad range of geographies. The U.S. was not originally a focus. At the same time, we knew that similar organizations, such as Aid Access, launched its service in 2018. So, we initially believed there was no urgent need for our presence there. We remained focused on our global mission and the other 180 countries.
However, as you mentioned, the situation in the U.S. has become increasingly restrictive since 2022. In early 2024, we began evaluating whether we should expand our service to the U.S. in response to mounting legal and logistical barriers.
We have almost twenty years of experience operating in legally and politically hostile environments. We already had a well-established help desk infrastructure, the necessary technology, and the operational readiness to expand. So, we decided that July 1, 2024, would be the official launch of our service in the U.S. We recognized that, despite other telemedicine services and community-based support networks, there remained significant unmet needs.
With that in mind, we decided to bring our expertise, team, and services to the U.S. We officially launched less than a year ago.
Jacobsen: Now, Venny, with the increasing restrictions on access to a broad range of reproductive health services, there is a common but subtle misconception. When people discuss reproductive rights or similar services, they often focus on one aspect. However, the reality is that these restrictions impact a much broader spectrum of care.
When discussing these restrictions—especially in the past few years—could you break down what that means in practical terms? How should we understand the evolving landscape of reproductive healthcare access?
Ala-Siurua: What we saw at Women on Web is that, while we had never been open in the U.S. before July 1, 2024, we always had significant traffic coming from the U.S. regardless.
We noticed a spike in traffic and inquiries every time a legislative change occurred. For example, when Texas SB8 was introduced in 2021, we immediately saw a surge in visitors and people reaching out to us. However, at that time, we had to inform them that we were not serving the U.S. and direct them to organizations like Plan C or Aid Access. The same pattern occurred when the Dobbs decision was leaked and again when it was finalized. We have always seen people coming to us in moments of crisis, and we have deeply sensed the stress and panic they were experiencing.
We’ve had steady traffic from the U.S. for years, but we didn’t always know where those people ended up. We knew where we referred them, but we couldn’t track whether they could access safe services—or if they got lost in search engines that often provide misleading or inaccurate information. Many people searching for abortion care are misdirected to crisis pregnancy centers, which are not actual healthcare providers and often exist to dissuade people from seeking abortion.
Expanding to the U.S. was partly about being able to directly help the people who were already reaching out to us in moments of crisis. While we still refer people to other trusted services, we aim to ensure that those in need immediately receive the right information and support. We’re not always in the best position to help in every case, and other telemedicine services and community networks can provide support.
Jacobsen: The pain of losing something one already had is often much greater than the satisfaction of gaining it in the first place. The loss of reproductive rights and access to these services feels particularly painful because they were once available. What emotions do people express when they come to you, saying that these services are being restricted or eliminated where they live?
Ala-Siurua: First, I want to say how heartbreaking it is to witness, in real-time, people losing their fundamental rights. It has been devastating.
I’m based in Canada, so this issue feels very close to us. We are watching our neighbours lose access to essential healthcare, and the emotions people share with us are overwhelming.
As I said, many people are panicking. We saw our last major surge in inquiries after the 2024 election. Nothing had immediately changed in terms of laws, but people assumed the worst after the election results. There’s always a lot of fear and stress when people contact us during political uncertainty.
But not everyone is reaching out out of panic. Some people contact us because they are angry.
For example, we now offer advance provision of abortion pills—meaning people can order the pills before they need them. The demographic using this service differs from our standard clientele because these people have the financial means to purchase the pills in advance. Some are doing it as a form of resistance—they see it as a way to fight back against abortion restrictions. Others are preparing for themselves and their communities, ensuring that their friends, family members, and daughters will still have access if restrictions worsen.
So, while we see fear and disempowerment, we also see people reaching out from a place of empowerment—taking control of the situation and saying, “That’s enough.”
Jacobsen: What were the key factors behind the 30% increase in abortion seekers supported by Women compared to 2023?
Ala-Siurua: when our service grows, it tells a story about where abortion restrictions are headed and in what direction. A major increase was due to our expansion into the U.S. However, the U.S. wasn’t open for the entire year, and its growth has been gradual.
It wasn’t until after the 2024 elections that we saw a sharp increase in requests. But where else is this increase coming from?
There are countries in Europe, such as Poland and Malta, that have practically banned abortion and continue to restrict access. Poland has not fulfilled its promises to liberalize its abortion laws, and we still receive a significant number of requests from there. Additionally, we have seen a rise in requests from the Philippines, where access remains extremely limited.
These countries—the U.S., Poland, and the Philippines—have significantly contributed to the increase. Another factor is that Women on Web relies heavily on people finding us through search engines. We’ve had challenges with search visibility in the past. There have been times when we lost significant website traffic, leading to declining requests.
Of course, we know that the demand for abortion pills does not change overnight. The same number of people likely needed them yesterday as they do today. But search engines can quickly suppress our visibility, directly affecting how many people can reach us.
In that respect, 2024 was better. We were able to maintain our search rankings, which meant we were there when people needed us. Interestingly, we’ve also noticed that many people aren’t just searching for “abortion pills”—they are specifically searching for Women on Web. That’s key.
Search engine don’t rank us well for key-words like abortion pills but thankfully people also just search for “Women on Web” so they know our name (thanks to outreach) and know what they are looking for.
Jacobsen: One of the most significant pioneers of abortion access in Canada was Dr. Henry Morgentaler. He founded Humanist Canada and, as a secular humanist, was involved in various organizations locally and internationally.
One interesting approach is reading hate mail as a comedy—turning negativity into something humorous. Have you ever thought about doing the same? What kind of hate mail do you receive?
Ala-Siurua: Dr. Morgentaler was one of our first board members when we set up Women on Web nearly twenty years ago. Still, he was a huge part of our foundation and one of the reasons we exist today.
As for hate mail—no, I’ve never really considered making comedy out of it. But one email still makes me chuckle a little. The subject line just said:
“Burn in Hell.”
That was it—nothing else.
I don’t remember if there was any actual content in the email, but seeing that in my inbox alongside the usual subject lines like “Meeting Request” or “Follow-Up” was surreal. So, yes, I did get a laugh out of it. But I never really thought about sharing them more widely… until now. Thanks for the idea!
Jacobsen: You could make YouTube clips about this. Essentially, you’d be using humour to reduce the impact of the nonsense you have to deal with. People who send these messages aren’t necessarily bad, but they have unhelpful ideas. So, they send things that can be hurtful, but if turning it into humour gives them a second thought, that’s a win.
Ala-Siurua: That’s a great idea.
Jacobsen: What are the challenges in reaching subgroups of people, particularly navigating digital censorship and ensuring they receive accurate information from Women on Web?
Ala-Siurua: Oh, I love this question—thank you for asking.
There are very different situations in different places. Our website is censored in both Spain and South Korea, but for different reasons and under different legal frameworks.
In Spain, we received a positive ruling in 2022. The court decided that our website should be partially unblocked, meaning people could access it. However, the consultation page—where people seek help—would remain blocked. It was not the victory we had hoped for, but it was still a surprising step forward. The ruling even acknowledged the important role that organizations like ours play in society.
At first, we were excited about the ruling—until we realized that it is technically impossible to partially unblock a website without compromising user privacy. The only way for anyone to enforce this ruling would be to undermine the privacy of both our website and the people who visit it. That, of course, is unacceptable.
As a result, the website remains fully blocked. This situation highlights a larger problem: people who don’t understand technology or abortion access are the ones making legal decisions about both. The ruling may have been groundbreaking, but in practice, it is unenforceable. So, we continue to fight. We have exhausted all domestic legal avenues and are still appealing, but Women on Web remains blocked in Spain.
The situation is even more challenging in South Korea where are our appeals have been rejected and medical abortion medicines are not even registered in the country.
However, strategic litigation is not only about restoring access to our website. At this point, I don’t expect that South Korea will reverse its decision. Instead, we use this legal battle to raise awareness about the absurdity.
It is outrageous that people in South Korea cannot even access information about abortion. Even if we don’t win the legal case, we can bring attention to the issue and push for change in the long run.
The censorship of Women on Web is a fundamental human rights violation—it restricts people’s right to access information and their freedom of expression.
One of the more recent challenges we’ve faced—one that I hope we can turn into an impactful campaign—is that South Korea censored us again. This happened just over a month ago.
A mirror website that had been helping South Korean abortion seekers since the last round of censorship was discovered by the government—and promptly blocked. This is now our fifth website that they have censored.
The question remains: Does it even make sense for them to keep doing this? We have clear evidence that there is a demand for our services. Suppose people keep finding us and using our platform. Shouldn’t that force the government to reflect on whether it is providing timely, affordable, and accessible abortion services itself?
Instead of addressing the real issue, they keep playing this censorship game. But every time they block us, we launch a new mirror site. We’re on our fifth or sixth mirror and will continue serving people in South Korea until they block us again.
At this point, it feels like a cat-and-mouse game, but we feel stronger than ever. Every time they block us, we immediately launch another site. It’s no problem for us. And thanks to technological advancements and digital activism, people keep finding us.
This movement isn’t just about Women on Web—it’s about the solidarity of those who refuse to let governments dictate who gets access to reproductive healthcare. Despite everything, people continue to help each other, giving us hope.
Jacobsen: As a follow-up, many individuals and groups are passionate advocates for free speech. In U.S. terms, they talk about free speech; in EU, UN, and Canadian terms, they frame it as freedom of expression. People in libertarian and conservative circles tend to emphasize these rights the most. Have any of them ever reached out to you?
Ala-Siurua: No. Never.
Jacobsen: Not at all?
Ala-Siurua: No. It doesn’t happen.
Jacobsen: If any of them read this, they should reconsider.
Ala-Siurua: Maybe.
Jacobsen: If they looked at the principles behind their stance, they could see this as a free speech issue and offer support.
Ala-Siurua: This is 100% a free speech issue. But at the same time, we see that many so-called free speech advocates are perfectly fine with restricting certain words—like abortion—and finding all kinds of ways to regulate women’s health on the Internet. So, yes, they talk about free speech, but in practice, they apply it selectively.
Jacobsen: I don’t want to generalize too much. Still, within these circles, there will always be some exceptions—people who genuinely believe in protecting free expression across the board. If anyone like that wants to support us, they are more than welcome to reach out. Send us a friendly email—we’d be happy to have that conversation. What is the role of the MISO MISO Alliance? How does it strengthen workers’ rights movements in East and Southeast Asia—including some of the world’s most geographically and demographically dense regions?
Ala-Siurua: I would love for my colleague—our outreach coordinator from Malaysia—to answer this question. She would do a much better job than I would.
Miso Miso Alliance was founded in 2024 to unite safe abortion groups in East and Southeast Asia. The founding organizations provide and advocate for safe abortion care in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand.
“MISOMISO” refers to misoprostol, which is used for medication abortion. In some contexts, misoprostol alone remains more accessible due to legal and regulatory restrictions on mifepristone, which is often more politically contentious despite being part of the standard regimen for medication abortion.
The alliance’s main goal is to improve coordination among groups working on reproductive rights. Right now, global funding for reproductive healthcare is being cut, making collaboration even more crucial. This is the time for organizations to unite, break out of isolated efforts, and consolidate expertise and knowledge.
Women on Web hopes to contribute its research experience and programmatic knowledge as one of many members. A key strategy for change is documentation—conducting research, collecting data, and presenting evidence to demonstrate impact. This has been crucial in supporting local groups when advocating to policymakers.
Our role in the coalition is to provide support, but Asian organizations must lead the initiative. As an international entity with a global mission, Women on Web believes leadership should remain with the local teams and groups that best understand their contexts.
Discussions around reproductive rights have existed for decades, but progress is often slow due to persistent cultural and political barriers.
Jacobsen: Even now, mainstream discourse still frames abortion primarily as a “women’s issue.” However, this broader conversation about reproductive rights should also involve men. On one hand, men have a direct role in pregnancies, so reproductive rights should concern them, too. On the other hand, discussions often exclude male contraception, even though vasectomy is a highly effective and reversible option. Not everyone wants children. Not everyone sees a family in the traditional sense.
So, in the same way, marriage is not for everyone. It is, obviously, an intimate, personal, and individual choice. However, these other options should be part of a broader conversation. What have you noted in your professional discussions—with experts, including yourself—about expanding this conversation beyond its traditional, singular focus? That focus is legitimate because it centers on the person who carries the pregnancy, but what have you observed in terms of widening the discussion to include men in these two areas?
Ala-Siurua: As for male contraception, the studies have not advanced much because for example the side-effects of using male contraception have been considered inacceptable. These are the same side-effects that women have accepted as part of using contraception.
Male contraception is possible and double-standards here are glaring.
It’s the same as censoring ads for menopause and abortion but having no problem whatsoever to advertise Viagra that is actually a lot less safer to use than abortion pills.
Jacobsen: Following from the last question, what about abortion or the Turnaway Study?
Ala-Siurua: All the stories and circumstances that lead someone to need an abortion—the ones you were referring to earlier. There are many situations, and it is not just about women being careless. Abortion decisions are often made within families and relationships, shaped by economic and personal circumstances. Contraception can fail. Some people do not want more children. Others do not have the financial stability to support another child. There are as many reasons as there are abortions, and all of them are valid.
The Turnaway Study, it is a long-term study examining women who were denied abortions and comparing them to those who were able to access the procedure. The research followed these individuals for ten years, tracking their economic and personal well-being. It showed that the reasons women initially sought abortions—such as financial insecurity or domestic abuse—were often exacerbated when they were denied the procedure. Those who could not access abortion were more likely to experience worse economic conditions than those who were able to decide for themselves and their families.
I highly recommend reading the book based on the study. It is a difficult but important read. It highlights the experiences of those who had relatively straightforward abortion decisions—where they accessed the procedure easily and moved on with their lives, only being reminded of it when researchers followed up periodically. But it also presents many stories of women who were denied abortions and how that decision altered their lives and the lives of their families. Many could not achieve their aspirations or secure the future they had hoped for.
Jacobsen: One recurring theme—perhaps a takeaway from discussions at CSW, even in informal conversations at cafés—is the global backlash against reproductive rights. It varies by region, but the trend is unmistakable.
Whatever the major problem was before, it has only worsened. If we look beyond the United States, for example, some countries are not considered free. In some regions, political representation is declining. Others, femicide is rising. These trends indicate a regionally targeted, reactionary backlash.
We are probably only seeing the first wave of this backlash. It does not appear as focused as expected, considering that many of these groups have been very open about their plans and objectives. That is just one observation.
I also pulled up the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) fact sheet:
The Turnaway Study examined the long-term effects of being denied an abortion. It found that women who were turned away from obtaining an abortion faced economic hardship and insecurity lasting at least three years. Many of them remained in relationships with partners who were abusive or unsupportive. They were also more likely to raise their children alone, negatively impacting their well-being and development. In many cases, those denied abortions faced serious health risks as well.
So, from what I gather, when reactionary groups begin to focus even more directly on reproductive rights, global coalitions will be crucial.
Ala-Siurua: Yes.
Jacobsen: What are your thoughts on that? Is my assessment inaccurate, partially right, or completely wrong?
Ala-Siurua: You are right. Every time I hear about legislative attacks or changes that restrict reproductive rights, it feels deeply concerning. It makes me feel like some people do hate women—or, at the very least, show a deep disregard for our rights.
For example, even our newly appointed Canadian PM dismantled the cabinet for women and gender equality on his first day in office, it is quite scary. I have a seven-year-old daughter, and I often think about how she will feel as she grows up and starts understanding what is happening around her. I want to empower her, but at the same time, I do not want her to be afraid—because the reality is frightening. That is a difficult balance to strike.
These policies do show hostility toward women and our reproductive rights. But at the same time, I am eternally inspired by the reproductive justice and abortion rights movements. The coalitions already exist, and they are strong.
The current situation in the U.S., for example, is devastating. But we are not starting from scratch. The movement is resilient, creative, and defiant. People are taking huge risks to protect and advance reproductive rights.
I am not taking a major risk because I am in Canada, where my location relatively protects me. I can engage in this work in a way different from many activists in the U.S., who are facing much greater threats. I also feel inspired. People are more vocal, they are angrier, and they are becoming braver in expressing their feelings.
This has happened in other places as well—places where abortion was not a public topic of discussion, where it was only talked about when someone needed it, and often not even then because of stigma. But now, abortion has become a symbol of freedom. Even people not deeply involved in this work are starting to connect it to human rights, which is inspiring.
Ironically, this is not what those restricting reproductive rights intended. In attempting to curtail and strip away these rights, they have led more people to recognize that abortion is freedom—a basic, fundamental human right. Without abortion access, there can be no gender equality. It is the baseline for ensuring autonomy, and that realization is something we can build on once this current storm, hopefully, begins to settle.
Jacobsen: What would be your recommendations at the individual level? Institutional change is important—we can set policies, create initiatives that improve access to education and economic opportunities, and form organizations and coalitions, whether structured or loosely connected.
However, individuals also need to develop resilience. Whether they like it or not, they will face pushback. If someone lives in a small, hyper-religious town, for example, they will need strength to endure the hostility that comes their way:Good luck. That is just how it is. So, on a personal level, what strategies or protective measures—what “umbrellas” or “shelters”—can people weather this backlash? In some countries, people frequently use VPNs as a basic security measure.
Ala-Siurua: That is a great point. It makes me think about this from a slightly different perspective.
Of course, if someone comes from a small religious community, I would not necessarily suggest that they start openly debating these issues at the dinner table to see what happens. But I do recommend engaging in these conversations where possible.
I always do this with my family—to the point of exhaustion. They often react with, “Oh gosh, here she goes again.” But I keep talking because these discussions matter.
At the same time, people are getting savvier and smarter about protecting themselves. As you mentioned, VPNs are an important tool. We are seeing more and more people figuring out how to access information safely and securely. So, let’s start again from there.
Abortion pills are unstoppable. They have been made available to us once, and we will not give them up again. Fortunately, information is still spreading, and more and more people are becoming aware of their rights.
Rights are not privileges. They are ours, and we are going to reclaim them.
People are helping each other, and we see it happening daily—on subreddits, for example, where there are 30,000 messages a month. People share recommendations, advice, tips, and resources in real-time. This is an ongoing, active movement, and there is huge power in the community.
Thankfully, we also have the Internet, which connects us worldwide. There is a sense of global solidarity, where we can learn from each other. While your question was about individuals, movements also benefit from this interconnectedness. The Internet has made it easier for activists, advocates, and everyday people to share strategies and support.
At Women on Web, our message has been clear: We will not stop helping each other. There will always be someone ready to provide support. This is a community, and we will not allow politicians or courts to dictate what happens to us.
I feel this every day now.
Jacobsen: How do Women on Web support Ukrainian refugees in Poland?
Ala-Siurua: When the war broke out, we started seeing requests through our service.
Many people had fled to Poland, and we acted immediately.
We scaled up, ensured we were there, and were ready.
Abortion pills are unstoppable. They have been made available to us once, and we will not give them up again. Fortunately, information is still spreading, and more and more people are becoming aware of their rights.
Rights are not privileges. They are ours, and we are going to reclaim them.
People are helping each other, and we see it happening daily—on subreddits, for example, where there are 30,000 messages a month. People are sharing recommendations, advice, tips, and resources in real-time. This is an ongoing, active movement, and there is huge power in the community.
Thankfully, we also have the Internet, which connects us worldwide. There is a sense of global solidarity, where we can learn from each other. While your question was about individuals, movements also benefit from this interconnectedness. The Internet has made it easier for activists, advocates, and everyday people to share strategies and support.
At Women on Web, our message has been clear: We will not stop helping each other. There will always be someone ready to provide support. This is a community, and we will not allow politicians or courts to dictate what happens to us.
I feel this every day now.
People speak to each other, find us online, and share information. Last year, search engines and the Internet worked in our favour, allowing people to discover our services. But I believe a significant part of this comes down to chatter—people privately exchanging information, especially in places like the Philippines, where abortion is rarely discussed openly. Platforms like Reddit, which offer anonymity, provide a safer space for these conversations than Facebook, where people must log in with their real names and faces.
This has proven to be an effective way to raise awareness. In Malaysia, for instance, someone posted a testimonial about using our service in a Malaysian subreddit. It ended up being the most upvoted post of the year, with thousands of clicks. As a result, we saw a direct increase in people using our service. This kind of organic peer-to-peer sharing is powerful, and it demonstrates how people feel safer discussing these issues in certain online spaces.
Jacobsen: Martha brought something I was unaware of to my attention. Please clarify. There are reports that big tech companies—like Meta (Facebook and Instagram)—have been involved in censorship, shadow banning, or reducing the searchability and ranking of abortion-related content. Is that accurate? Have you observed this affecting abortion services or adjacent content?
Ala-Siurua: Yes, it is systemic and widespread. It impacts anyone working online to provide abortion services, disseminate information, or advocate for reproductive rights.
Last year, within a week, we had three accounts suspended—our South Korean, Latin American, and U.S. accounts. Thanks to Repro Uncensored and the protocols we built to handle these situations, we managed to recover them. But much content gets suppressed daily—content we cannot always intervene to restore.
People often think of technology as something that operates autonomously, but that is untrue. These platforms are designed and manipulated by people, and those people can alter how systems function. For example, last year, we discovered that if you searched for abortion-related terms with a typo on Bing, you would get the expected resources—Aid Access, the M+A Hotline, Women on Web, and others. But if you typed the search term correctly, you would get entirely different results—often leading with crisis pregnancy centers.
We raised this issue with Bing, and within a few days, the search results changed. Now, if you type “abortion,” Aid Access appears. Someone had applied a filter, and someone else removed it once it was brought to their attention. This kind of search result manipulation is happening in real-time, and it is affecting not just abortion-related searches but many sexual and reproductive health keywords as well.
Abortion is not classified as healthcare on many social media platforms. Instead, it is treated as a political issue, which is inaccurate and further restricts our ability to provide services and information. Digital suppression has now become an integral part of our work. You cannot have abortion access without digital rights. They are completely interconnected.
The Internet has become a crucial resource, especially in places like the U.S.—where abortion laws are rapidly changing—and the Philippines, where access is severely restricted or nonexistent. People rely on online networks to navigate these barriers.
I could rant about this all day, too.
Jacobsen: Big tech is tech bro-adjacent. Meanwhile, organizations and individual work like ours operate on shoestring budgets, whether we write stories, conduct interviews, or run advocacy efforts. Astonishingly, companies will invest hundreds of millions of dollars to suppress legitimate coverage while reproductive rights organizations struggle for funding. Another issue has come up, but we do not have time to explore it today fully.
This is relevant because, even in freer societies like the United States, we see a shift—not necessarily in a conservative direction, but in cultural emphasis. Powerful figures, often wealthy men, are increasingly vocal about the birth rate as a societal concern.
Maintaining sustainable population levels is a valid topic. Demographers and organizations like the UN have been studying this for years. Even a well-known expert, like the late Hans Rosling, has spoken about sustainable demographic trends, the premise is not inherently problematic.
The issue is how the conversation is framed. Discussions tend to focus on the meta-analytic, statistical output—the birth rate number—rather than addressing the complex web of factors that contribute to it. They overlook that real people are making these choices, which are deeply personal and life-altering decisions.
Instead of obsessing over a declining birth rate, the focus should be on why people make these choices. Under what economic, social, and political conditions are these decisions happening? It is the same argument when discussing abortion. Instead of just counting the number of procedures, we should ask why people are seeking abortions in the first place.
Those pushing restrictions should also examine their motivations. Why do they feel so strongly about controlling this particular choice? Why do they want to limit it now, in a contemporary context where we understand reproductive autonomy better than ever before?
So, what are your thoughts? What kind of feedback do you get from the community when they hear these overly simplistic arguments about such a deeply complex issue—one that is, at its core, about individual and family decisions?
Ala-Siurua: It is frustrating. It isn’t very pleasant. I remember hearing about a U.S. state—I cannot recall which one—where lawmakers suggested they could receive more federal funding if they increased their birth rate. It was so comically bad that it was almost unbelievable.
What makes it worse is that the people making these policy decisions—which have lifelong consequences for individuals and families—do not seem to understand why people seek abortions in the first place.
In The Turnaway Study, researchers asked a governor about this issue. They went to him and said, “Why do you think people have abortions? And his response? Oh, I never really thought about that.”
Imagine that. A person with political power over reproductive rights had never even considered the fundamental question of why people make these choices. Then, when pressed, he mumbled something vague about the economy and moved on. That was it. And I just thought, “Wow.”
It is a complex topic and should not be regulated or decided by courts or politicians. So far, things are relatively stable in Canada, where abortion is treated like any other medical procedure—similar to having hip surgery.
In Canada, abortion is regulated as healthcare, with no separate laws governing it, as it should be. We are talking about basic medical care, which should be the standard everywhere. Abortion is healthcare. It is far safer than many over-the-counter medications and procedures that are freely promoted on social media platforms—take Viagra, for example, which carries more risks than abortion pills.
And yet, abortion pills remain heavily restricted in many places. Even discussing them online is suppressed. It is deeply frustrating and humiliating that some policymakers—who lack medical expertise—get to control access to life-saving services.
Jacobsen: That should be a self-evident conclusion. Human Rights Watch has been clear on this issue. Even their old web pages on abortion have stated the same thing: “…equitable access to safe and legal abortion services is first and foremost a human right.” The data is equally clear—when abortion is criminalized, tens of thousands of women die every year.
Ala-Siurua: And that is just one consequence. In addition to unsafe abortions, maternal mortality rates have risen. The reality is that taking abortion pills is far safer than carrying a pregnancy to term, especially in places like the U.S., where maternal health outcomes are worsening. Many people do not realize this but are often shocked when they hear the facts. So, what is happening here? And why is this reality ignored in public discourse?
Jacobsen: This is exactly why even those who identify as pro-life should support pro-choice policies. Let me break it down in 30 seconds:
When abortion is outlawed, three things happen—maternal mortality increases, abortion rates increase, and injuries and deaths from unsafe procedures skyrocket. If the goal is to reduce abortions, the evidence-based way to do that is to legalize and regulate them. In countries where abortion is legal, the number of abortions gradually declines, maternal survival rates improve, and abortion-related injuries decrease because the procedures take place in safe, sanitary conditions. So, if you genuinely want to reduce abortions, pro-choice policies are the most effective solution. That is what the evidence shows.
Jacobsen: Do you want to add any other points before we wrap up the chat?
Ala-Siurua: This was a great conversation, and you asked thoughtful questions. If you haven’t already, check out the r/abortion subreddit. It is one of the most active spaces where people share experiences, resources, and support.
Women, many organizations, and other abortion services rely on this community. When we cannot answer a question—especially for people from the Philippines, who are often quick to seek help—they turn to the subreddit. Digital communities like sub-reddit are supporting several other services out there who are not open and available 24/7.
People go to Reddit to ask questions and seek guidance from the community. It has become a crucial piece of the larger movement.
Jacobsen: It is good that they moderate it well. You do not see ads for pills or sketchy services popping up.
Ala-Siurua: The moderators keep it clean. If something inappropriate appears, it is removed immediately. They are online all the time. They run a small but incredibly effective operation.
Jacobsen: Has anyone done a statistical analysis of the types of queries posted? That would be interesting.
Ala-Siurua: Possibly. The Executive Director, Ariel, might know more but is very busy. She has an incredible amount of knowledge—it’s next—level. She has seen everything. When people have nowhere else to turn, they go there.
Ala-Siurua: Thanks for the great interview.
Jacobsen: You are welcome. Thank you for the compliment—I appreciate it.
Ala-Siurua: Bye.
Jacobsen: Bye.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
#biodiversity #carbonSequestration #regenerativeGrazing #soilHealth #sustainableBeef
Paper of the week - week 34:
Lesschen et al., 2021 (Dutch):
De potentie voor koolstofvastlegging in de Nederlandse landbouw
The report indicates a potential for soil carbon sequestration that is far lower than what commercial certificate sellers (like Klim) are claiming.
1/
#climatechange #climatechangemitigation #carbonsequestration #agronomy #soilcarbon #soils #agriculture #benediktspapersoftheweek
Learn how climate-smart biofuel policies can help reduce agriculture's carbon footprint. #climatechange #climatesolutions #climate #ClimatePolicy #RegenerativeAgriculture #CarbonFarming #CarbonSequestration #Sustainability
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adw6739
Experiment will attempt to counter climate change by altering ocean https://arstechni.ca/C9ZS #carbonsequestration #climatechange #oceanography #syndication #Science
