Is tech toxic for our teens (and us)? AI, social media bans and digital well-being

Are smartphones, social media and AI helping us connect, or steadily reshaping our attention, relationships and ability to cope with discomfort?

Recorded at the Integrated Mental Health Conference in Abu Dhabi earlier this year, mentl founder Scott Armstrong speaks with Justin Thomas of Sync, the global digital well-being programme from the King Abdulaziz Center for World Culture, Ithra.

Justin examines the evidence linking problematic technology use with anxiety, depression, loneliness and disruption to work, study and relationships. Drawing on research across 35 countries and seven world regions, he makes an essential distinction: the concern is problematic technology use, not technology use in general.

As Justin puts it, “correlation isn’t causation, but it is cause for concern.”

The conversation explores:

• Why anxiety cannot be blamed on smartphones alone
• How doomscrolling can amplify fear and perceived threats
• Why the attention economy rewards louder and more manipulative content
• How technology can become a way of avoiding difficult emotions
• Whether addictive design should be regulated
• The risks of artificial intimacy with AI chatbots
• Why children and vulnerable users may be especially exposed
• Whether social media bans will protect young people or push them elsewhere
• How families, platforms, governments and individuals all share responsibility
• What a healthier relationship with technology could look like

The debate has moved rapidly. The UK has announced plans to prohibit under-16s from using certain social media platforms, with implementation expected from spring 2027. The UAE has introduced Cabinet Resolution No. 106 of 2026, prohibiting children under 15 from holding personal social media accounts and requiring enhanced safeguards for users aged 15 to under 16.

This is not an argument against technology. It is a discussion about benefit, harm, human vulnerability and whether regulation and research can keep pace with innovation.

Watch the full episode of The mentl space for a wide-ranging conversation about the anxious generation, digital wellbeing, AI companionship, social health and the fight for human attention.

Chapter list

00:00 Introduction and the youth anxiety question
02:34 What research across 35 countries reveals
05:59 The three threats facing the anxious generation
09:06 Doomscrolling and emotional avoidance
11:34 The attention economy and addictive design
14:14 Social media bans: protection or unintended harm?
18:05 AI chatbots, loneliness and artificial intimacy
25:50 Regulation, responsibility and safer technology
32:11 Reclaiming control, digital wellbeing and AI slop
39:27 The mentl awards and mental health progress in the UAE

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:05

Welcome back to the mental space. We are at the Sikina Integrated Mental Health Conference here in Abu Dhabi. And joining me live is a man that knows all about digital well-being. Well, let's hope. Justin Thomas of Sync, which is the digital well-being.

SPEAKER_01 0:24

Tell me, Justin. Global Digital Well-being program from the King Abdulazi Center of Well Culture, also known as Ithra.

SPEAKER_00 0:32

In Saudi Arabia. I remember because we and viewers of the podcast, you remember that we actually broadcast live from the SYNC summit uh last year or the year before when you came out with a huge report. Tell me a little bit more, because I know you're going to be on stage later talking about digital well-being. Um, we see our young people struggling. Um, I write reports for Signet Healthcare when we see, you know, the in the UE and also in Saudi Arabia, the 18 to 24-year-old bracket really struggling with anxiety and unmanageable stress. Tell me what the work is that you're doing on that front.

SPEAKER_01 1:08

Okay, so I think there's um, I mean, the jury is out, the evidence isn't in. There's a lot of kind of so there's a really popular book, many people will be familiar with it, the anxious generation. Yes. And so there is lots and lots of correlational evidence. So you kind of see this spike in many countries in anxiety, depression, even rates of suicide and self-harm, yeah, around about the same time that we had an explosion of smartphones and social media amongst young people. So there's this really, if you like smoking gun, it's correlational evidence, um, which for scientists is not enough. But I think some people would argue correlation isn't causation, but it is cause for concern. So a lot of the work that we do is really digging deeper on this and looking at what possible roles the digital technologies might play in uh mental health and also social health, increasingly looking at social health. Um, and obviously they're all integrated. No health, no, no health without mental health. Absolutely. No mental health without social health.

SPEAKER_00 2:16

So tell me where you are at then, or where sync is at then in this argument, debate, um, journey of discovery. Where do you fall down? What's the what are the numbers showing you?

SPEAKER_01 2:30

Okay. So I think the the last time we ran our survey, we looked at 35 countries, seven world regions, and that in and of itself is quite unique. And we were particularly keen to ensure that we we kind of had a good coverage of nations from the Middle East, North Africa, places that are often missing from the picture. And I think some of the big, if you like, headlines around this particular topic of if you like the the sharper end of problematicity, is that what you find in all 35 of the countries, so this we cultural invariance, there's no exceptions. All of the countries you find um a varying degree of a relationship between problematic technology use. Okay, so what we're talking about there is people who game to such an excess that it causes problems either for them in the workplace or their studies or their relationships, they use or they use social media to an extent that their relationships are damaged by it or the employment, so their functional, they're social and functional, their occupational and social functioning are somehow dampened. In in every country, we find significant rates of this. And then when we look at correlations between anxiety, depression, loneliness, yeah, again, we find the same patterns. So the and this is a really important point: problematic technology use, not technology use in general.

SPEAKER_00 4:04

So it's really fine the difference for us, yeah. From a scientific perspective.

SPEAKER_01 4:08

From a scientific perspective, I think you're looking at this more from a clinical perspective. So the key, the the rule of thumb, if you like, it's heuristic utility, is that if the problem impacts your functioning in terms of the world of work or the world of study, whatever your occupation is, if it impacts that detrimentally or it really significantly impacts your social relationships, like you people just can't be around you, or your relationships fall apart as a consequence of the behaviours, then we start to talk about problematicity. So there's not like there's no biomarker here, there's no kind of hot, there's no two hours is the limit. Yes, it's gonna be contextually different for different people.

SPEAKER_00 4:54

Um if we looked bigger macro in a way, and it might be an impossible question to ask, but um you know, when we look at the rise in anxiety, as you say, the smoking gun might not be there, or it well, the smoking gun is there, but we we don't know the trigger. We don't know who pulled the trigger. But you know, this kind of like you know, we see anxiety rising, we have this constant drip feed of either polarizing content, angry content, inaccurate, fake content that's designed to manipulate us in one direction or another direction. Um talk to me between the two almost like the two different perspectives, between gut instinct of what's actually happening almost on a societal level. You know, there'll have been a reason why you know Saudi Arabia and Ithra created Sync in the first place, and then what yeah, where is the science at with that conversation? Because it feels very much to everybody that something's happening. Yeah, we just don't quite know what.

SPEAKER_01 6:01

Yeah, I think you've I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Scott. And I think one of the I rarely do that. No, well, you have because there's lots of evidence, there's you know, all and it but it's scattered, there's not a unified kind of uh sort of position here. You kind of it's even it's a quite a polarized debate sometimes. Um and evidence takes a while to gather. Research tech doesn't research doesn't move at the rate of technological innovation. So that so there are challenges. Um but I think to you to speak to your piece about my own intuitions around this, I what from my own kind of observations and from you know kind of data-driven intuition, what you're seeing, I think, is that so that it's not monocausal. So if there's a rise in anxiety and mental health problems, it's a disservice to point the finger just at one cause. Like, you know, it's smartphones that that smacks to me of kind of uh you know duplicitousness. But I think what you've got is you've got, I think if you think about young people, young people are facing at least three major existential threats that maybe me and you didn't grow up with. One that we perhaps did, one threat we probably grew up with, which was the threat of thermonuclear annihilation. Okay, another threat is, and I say threat, yeah, threat, another um or perceived threat. Yeah, another one is um you know, climate change, yeah. The climate, the climate crisis. Yeah. And now to add to that, we also have an again perceived threat, if you like, a perceived threat to the future of some people say the future of work, but I would go one step further and say the future of purpose.

SPEAKER_00 7:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 7:44

So even if these things don't ever happen, talking about AI. Oh, yeah, yeah, talking about AI. So even if these things never happen, you're still you'd be still or children, young people are still inhabiting an environment where these threats are real. And just to kind of backtrack to the threat of thermonuclear nuclear annihilation, cold war. Yeah, um, I think the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, did a study of young people growing up with that threat, so like 1980s, back end of the Cold War when it peaked. And what they found was that young people as a consequence of that were more nihilistic. They even there were even instances of nuclear night terrors, um, and people had less hope or optimism for the future. Really? And they correlated that with the if you like the rise of kind of substance misuse epidemics. So I think to ignore the threats that are in our ecosystem, the things we're talking about, the threats that are in our ecosystem, is arguably all part and parcel of, you know, if there'sn't this, and again, this is me going on intuition here.

SPEAKER_02 8:48

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 8:48

So there's there's a lot of these threats that you know, anxiety is driven by fear of bad things that might happen. There are a lot of really big fundamental bad things that might happen that people talk about. So young people are arguably quite anxious. And then I think throw into that mix uh digital technologies that can sometimes amplify stories. You know, people can get locked into doom scroll type situations where they're, you know, they're hearing about this more often, and our natural cognitive biases then amplify the likelihood. You know, if I've heard about something very often, it's a bigger threat than if I haven't heard about that. No, I haven't heard about it, it's probably not going to happen if I'm hearing about it all the time. And these are ancient brain structures that do this, like the frontal cortex can argue them away, but these things are happening in the background. Um, and tech as an amplifier, I think feel like technology can be an amplifier. And I think the other problematic role that tech plays is it allows us to distract ourselves from these uncomfortable things. So psychologists talk about this concept of experiential, experiential avoidance. And when we habitually, if you like, run away from being able to sit with or process our unpleasant emotions, yeah. Uh we we lose the opportunity to develop, if you like, tolerance for discomforts. We also lose the opportunity to develop, you know, kind of more functional and adaptive problem-solving skills. So I think technology is definitely in the mix, but it's certainly not this monocausal. If we ban phones or if we ban children from social media, everything's gonna go back to kind of equilibrium, you know, whatever whenever that was, or whatever that golden age was.

SPEAKER_00 10:39

It was there a golden age, though, because every time I think back to it, I remember my childhood absolutely sucked. But anyway, um, we always perceive that things were better. Um so I know this is me trying to have a conversation with the scientist, um, who and I left school with five GCSEs. But you know, I you read or I've read about the fact that you know, as we walk through the world, you know, we collect so much data that we don't even know that we're collecting. Um, because you know, we couldn't process every single piece of information that hits our brains. Yeah, yeah. If I was to go back 30 years ago, I would imagine slash assume that maybe we were soaking up less polarizing, destructive, negative, angry headlines, information because it's being pump fed to us. You know, when we say um amplified, is that a factor in the fact that there's actually more of this than there's ever been? 100%.

SPEAKER_01 11:38

Yeah. Yeah, I think so. What you've got is you've got like f you've got you've you've got this exponential growth in information, but the human ability to process information is is unchanged since the Neolithic, arguably. Okay. Like we've got a finite capacity to process my wife often calls me caveman brain. No, we have caveman brain. Yeah, we are what was that I like to say? We are kind of you know, the uh we're a we're a Nokia phone inside an iPhone 17 case. You know, we we kind of have the wetware of our Neolithic ancestors, yeah. So we don't have we haven't increased our capacity to to if you like process information or pay attention. This is the whole idea of the attention economy. Yeah, and as there's uh ever increasingly exponentially more and more information, if that information wants our attention, it has to compete, so it has to get loud, it has to get clever, it has to get sneaky, it has to, you know, it has to foster intimacy, don't listen to anybody else just talk the kind of the chatbot sycophantic approach. So yeah, there really is a drive. I mean, people, human attention is um the new gold.

SPEAKER_00 12:44

Some people the attention economies and I remember watching a documentary even about Facebook and Meta, which would basically say, look, if you're not paying for the product, you are the product rather. Yeah, exactly. Um, and again, we're also I mean, not to demonize social media, but I do love to demonise social being here. Um is it the it's almost like you know, it's not necessarily the technology, it's what we do with it.

SPEAKER_01 13:08

Yeah, 100%. I think not to let technology totally off the hook. I think it is so we we are we do have autonomy, we can choose how we interact, we can create and craft relationships with this technology so that it serves us and doesn't, if you like, turn us into its servants, so we can do that. Like some of us are in a privileged position to be able to negotiate our way out of that you know tangled web. Yeah. But I think there are things that technology companies did and are continuously doing that actually make it really difficult. So there's you know, the whole idea of addictive by design. Yeah, you know, we could get to a space where it is healthful by design, you know, mental health promoting by design. And again, that's where you start to look at like kind of political actors and and the kind of the levers of of nation-level policy. For me, not knee-jerk, reactive, sort of let's let's ban this particular group from access. I mean, that's a really children are a really easy target in this this kind of debate. Yeah, like why not let's ban uh manipulative, addictive design features as well, at least there's a compromise if you're gonna.

SPEAKER_00 14:31

I mean, there's an interesting one because you know I I've I've seen different um I I think we need repairing as well. It was it's a different argument, but you know, we see Australia has banned it, um uh either smartphones or social media, certainly social media for under 16s, um, and there are a number of other countries looking at that. Um, what's the harm of that? The harm of the band.

SPEAKER_01 14:53

Yeah, what's the harm of the band? I I think that I think it's well intentioned, I honestly do. But I think the and it this all remains to be seen. Yeah. I my perception, I the the easiest way for me to say this, there's a famous author who I love dearly, passed away, Doris Lessing. And she's a famous quote where she said, if you want your children to read books, lock them all in a cupboard and say, do not touch. Yeah. So first of all, it kind of elevates the status of it. And we know that there are, you know, there are a million different technological workarounds for this to kind of be circumvented. And then maybe for young people to end up in safest in places that are even less well regulated than the current kind of gaggle of platforms that attract young people.

SPEAKER_00 15:45

It's hard for them to be less well regulated. Are they regulated? I mean Europe, we have Europe take it pretty much. There are the I mean there are platforms. But I remember, sorry, and I'm it's my ADHD. I am an interrupter, drives my wife nuts. But I remember um um I uh whether it was your CEO or your director at that first inc um conference, actually opening the conference saying something like, There are more regulations on a toaster. Yes, that was a good line. Yeah, it was a great line, uh and actually quite a sobering line. Then there are around social media, which I mean at last count, Facebook had more followers than Jesus and Christianity ever had, or pick your religion, you know.

SPEAKER_01 16:25

Yeah, yeah, totally. If I if I wanted to launch a chocolate bar tomorrow, I am going to have to jump through hoops. Mainstream chocolate bar to be in the supermarkets. Yeah. If I want to push a platform AI, you know, your a the AI nanny, you know, it will look after your children, you know, while you sleep. I I'll probably get away, I'll probably get a round of applause. There'll be very little, there'll be, you know, relatively less regulation for me to be able to do something like that.

SPEAKER_00 16:51

Please don't start developing that one.

SPEAKER_01 16:53

Please, please. Um, but there's an imbalance on, and I think we talk about this idea of stifling innovation. This is a famous line. The pushback is, you know, we don't want to stifle innovation, but it's not innovation that stifled, it's profitability that's stifled. No one is against innovation. Innovate, innovate, innovate, create all kinds of weird and wonderful things in the lab, but don't unleash them on the public until they're proven safe. At the minute, we've kind of some people like Tristan Harris from the Center for Humane Technology, they kind of coined this idea that we are we're just essentially running this huge open experiment on a generation auto. Let's let's unleash this on the world and see what happens.

SPEAKER_00 17:35

Well, we've kind of already done that already, though, didn't we? With like uh Web 2.0. Yeah. I mean, with with with social media, with Facebook, with the, you know, and we're we're already embrawled in this serious debate on, and I know there's a massive court case going on in the US right now, isn't there, about you know, the digital harms to to children there. Um, if we look at AI, because I mean obviously it's you know a fascinating debate, and it'll be moved on by the time we even publish this podcast, but uh I know even my use of chat GPT, and I'm 53 and I'm maybe you know, and I'm open and aware of mental health, um, and I have to, and I will, yeah, chat GPT sadly is probably my best friend at the same time, well, which I know it's not my best friend, but at the same time, I've programmed it to challenge me. I've deliberately intentionally said to it, don't tell me what I want to hear. You use the word sycophant, you know, don't BS me. I actually, you know, if I ask you a question, I need to know the pros and the cons. Um, and if you know, I don't want you to assume that I want you to tell me that I'm right. I don't think there's many people out there that's doing that. And then when we look at the younger generation who might be turning, because again, you're talking about loneliness, we're talking about disconnection, they're turning to this chatbot that seems to be their best friend, and there's very little confrontation there. Um, but that's quite a worrying state of affairs. I mean, we've already seen some headlines around this space. 100%.

SPEAKER_01 19:09

I think your your your articulation of how you use it is that kind of speaks to my point before that some of us who are fortunate enough to have the skills, capacity, you know, networks that can help us to re-engineer the uh things in a way that's you know kind of uh aligned with our values and what we want and what's healthy. Not everyone can can do that. And I think um just when you said that, really, my my first contact with AI, I remember it vividly. Uh, and so I've got 20 years experience as a an experimental psychologist, also as a psychotherapist. So I am bringing that to the relationship so that they're my safeguards that I have. Um and so I asked it was meta AI. So meta uh meta pushed the AI chatbot into WhatsApp, yeah, and I thought, oh, let's have a play. Yeah, and I asked it this question. There was a context, the context's not important, but the question was um, where did the rose originate? So the flower, the rose, where did it originate? So I waited, you know, the three little the little chatbots, like the little bubbles come up, and I'm waiting for my answer. And it doesn't answer me, it just says to me, What a beautiful question, you know, and I felt validated, I felt seen in that moment. I realized if I had a predilection towards grandiosity, narcissism, grandiose delusions, yeah, right there is a vulnerable, you know, that the there's an exploit, the vulnerability is potentially being exploited by this chatbot that's obviously been told, don't just you know, uh create intimacy, create, don't just give information. We want these people to come back, we want eyes, we want, you know, eyes, we want hearts and minds. And for me, I thought, wow, that is gonna really be a challenge for some people.

SPEAKER_00 21:00

Yeah, you know. I mean, we see it even with social media, and it's which is again AI of a different type, but you know, algorithmically, for me or you I still find myself, I mean, and again, now that I've been diagnosed with ADHD and I've on the medication, and maybe don't get caught in so much doom scrolling, but we're reasonably intel, well, you're more than reasonably intelligent adults, and we find it hard sometimes to put the bloody thing down. 100%. So, how are the kids, the 18-year-olds, the 13-year-olds, the 11-year-olds, the eight-year-olds with that where where they're still developing that blasticity, how are they to put the thing because we you know, and how many parents, and I know because I've seen it happen in my own house, which is like, no, you're not allowed on the iPad, as you with the adult, are scrolling uh on on the phone. So, how are they to then form this defense against? Something as sophisticated as AI, even now, today, let alone in by the time they hit five, ten years time, what what what we're looking at?

SPEAKER_01 22:11

I think that that speaks to the idea of an experiment. Because I think not not just their inability perhaps to self-regulate and to really understand what's what's going on in that you know that relationship, but also the idea that they're in a developmental window. So how does that shape the adults that they become and the parents that they become and the children that they parent? So there are really downstream consequences to this, and that's why there are people saying innovate, innovate, innovate, but let's test that these things are safe first. But I think just in terms of neuroanatomy, we know the frontal cerebral cortex is not fully developed until we're about 25. You know, some people probably kicks in a bit early, 55, you know, some people maybe 65, yeah. Um, but so but the thing that these technologies the thing that why we keep scrolling, and this is age independent, is because it's speaking to ancient reptilian brain structures. These things are are uh in some extent pleasurable, you know. Either they're pleasurable in the sense that they speak to things we want or things we desire, so social validation, for example. So I'll often, you know, I'll post on LinkedIn and I'll go back and I'll I'll look and see how many people have liked it. And I'll think, oh, personal best. You know, I'm growing in a scheme, you know. So these are things like, and that's that's you know, the cerebral cortex will tell me and is it again calm down, yeah. Isn't it fascinating that even you're never going to reach that?

SPEAKER_00 23:45

No, but give it out, give it out, but yeah, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 23:48

There's still some ancient part of us that it's like when we watch a horror. The best example is you watch a horror movie, yeah. You're you're you feel the fear, your cerebral cortex tells you that's not real. There's a guy just off screen with a ponytail saying, and cut. Yeah, so we know it's not real, but you still feel the fear, you know. So the same way that we know the chatbot's not our friend, yeah, but we still feel the love, we still feel the intimacy. You know, I think these are, and especially if you're younger and you don't have a full developed cerebral cortex yet, or you know, whatever the mechanisms are that help us to self-regulate, they're not fully developed or fully they're not just developed, but you know, well practiced. Uh the there's potentially harms and and not just for I think this is another thing we're saying, let's ban this thing for those under 16, like that's a magic age. But you know, I think it's this whole point of like adults are somehow immune to the that from it's bad for the whether it be Brexit, whether it be you know for adults.

SPEAKER_00 24:50

I mean look, we've seen patterization rise all around the world, haven't we? We've seen the rise of populism and how it's been exploited all around the world.

SPEAKER_01 24:58

Exactly. So I think this I think the cautionary tale here is about more the the if you like the increase in wisdom of the population. It was a kind of an old antiquated word, but the idea of wisdom and compassion at population level to keep pace with the artificial intelligence, so real human wisdom, compassion, and an ability to reign these things in and understand the like the impact they're likely to have on us and to be able to get above that. And to be again, we want to use these tools, we want to use them for all the benefits that they can give humanity because undoubtedly they can, yeah. But we at the same time need to not be vulnerable to the the maluse, the misuse, and the fact that we potentially don't know what's around the corner, especially if we give them to our youngest and most vulnerable minds.

SPEAKER_00 25:51

So, um, I mean, an easy question for you to answer here. Um, what's the solution, Justin? Because it g because it kind of feels like, you know, I think my big concern is is the lack of regulation and that profitability above all else is what's driving this. It's not about innovation, it's about generating more and more and more dollars. And in this space, when it comes down to profitability, it doesn't necessarily need to be technology. We've seen for decades, whether it be tobacco, whether it be, you know, um advertising, like there's not a I wish we were a moral, you know, that we could yeah, a moral being or race, but actually, there's always bad actors that have been for a long time, but it seems like the obviously this is now it's almost like an arms race, you know. We started with knives and then we went to spears and then we went to swords and then we went to gatling guns, and it just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Is there a way to actually change direction on this?

SPEAKER_01 27:00

I think there's a way, there's what we would call like kind of um benefit maximization and harm minimization, right? So this is about us growing into the tools that we've created, so we shape the tools, and thereafter the tools shape us. So we're in, I think we're in that moment now where we realize we're being shaped by these tools, and we can, you know, we can we have a moment where we can decide how we want to kind of push back against the way in which society is being individuals and societies are being shaped by the tools. I think that's what well initially we're seeing knee-jerk reactivity, but I think for me, the sol it's not mono like the problems are never monocausal and nor should the solutions be. And I think what you really need to look at are um kind of socio-ecological solutions. So every sh every segment, so so from the individual to the family to community, like these are things that are fundamental. The whole idea of the family is cake.

SPEAKER_00 28:06

Well, we're we're here at the conference today where we're talking about the year of family. Yeah, you know.

SPEAKER_01 28:10

But then but that but that can't be where you stop. You then have to actually look at the people who create these technologies. So if you like co-regulation or self-regulation, let us agree that certain practices are now malpractices, and if you do that, you lose the permission to operate in our society. Yeah, so then you start to look at, if you like, kind of uh self-regulation amongst the tech companies, and then above that, then you're looking at kind of governmental regulation and then kind of multilateral kind of agreements. These are the big challenges that they kind of your your country says we don't want XYZ for for a long time. These platforms are international, yeah, you know, so it's kind of not bound by your particular laws. Although you in recent times you've seen the pushback with the EU. Yeah, if you want to operate in our territory, yeah, you know, it must conform to the kind of the ways in which we want these things to act. So it's got to be it's got to be all of those levels without any kind of um if you like victim, could almost say it as victim blaming, you know, kind of you're the problem, you know. You you doom scroll and now you're depressed, and there's a link between the depression, it's all you, you know, like it put to put that on the individual, I feel, is like definitely the wrong way to go. Or yeah, or to put it all on the parents, you know. I feel for the case. Your kid has now been roped into the street.

SPEAKER_00 29:38

I mean, if we look at the people that are designing these products, you know, and I I look at my father's generation, you know, like and uh arguably they were one of the least, I would say the least caring um generations because they were sold a dream because advertising, literally, you know, TV advertising blew up and they were constantly being bombarded by a car, by a house, buy these new products. That was the first time the products had been really mass marketed. Like that's the solution to life. It's not experiences, it's not your kids. Children should be seen and not heard. It's you need these more, you need more of these products. Um sorry, rant over. You mentioned two words which I you know, and I came from the media industry, and I never really saw it work there. And now we're talking about social media or tech companies, self-regulation, co-regulation. I use that word, co-regulation, co-regulation because it yeah, if I look at Elon Musk, he doesn't seem to me like the biggest self or indeed co-regulator, if I'm honest with you.

SPEAKER_01 30:40

Yeah, um I think it's like you said before, we're in a space at the moment, we're in an arms race space at the moment. If we don't do it, someone else in another country will do it. So let's not slow anything down, let's not regulate, let's just get this, let's let's get over the line first.

SPEAKER_00 30:58

I mean, it's that equally, isn't it? It really is mad. I mean, I remember I I I I I think I ultimately got fired from a job because I refused to do an interview with a tobacco company that wanted to actually say, you know, their premise was we're going into vaping because we want to kill fewer people. And and and I refused to do it. But the journalist that did do the interview did actually pose the question well, if you want to stop killing people, why not stop making the product? And their response was, Well, if we don't, someone else will. Yeah. And it seems to me to be really, yeah, really flawed logic. Um, I could bow on about this all day and I find it absolutely fascinating. Um, I do want to ask you about the mental awards in a minute because I'm gonna be really, really selfish, but tech companies are not gonna not gonna say self-regulate, social media is not gonna disappear tomorrow, and even if it did, it might not necessarily solve everything. What are the what are the things that we can do? I mean, you talked about the fact that you know we catch ourselves and we can educate ourselves and just try to learn how to use these tools so they're a benefit to us rather than, you know, well, we run them rather than they run us. What are the things that people should be looking at, be aware of, or maybe just some practical advice on how they can navigate life right now with technology and the you know, digit navigating back to digital wellness?

SPEAKER_01 32:25

Yeah, I think that's what makes that's where I really have a deep optimism because I think you uh as humans we are self-reflective, we're we're metacognitive, we get to a point where we start we do certain things habitually, and every now and again we kind of wake up and we think about you know the way in which we think about the world or the way in which you know, so we we we've got that as a saving grace. And I do I think my my optimism is that like uh for you know what you would you call like the evolution of social consciousness, so we'll get to a point where we're like enough, yeah. You know, we'll kind of and I think we're we're we're approaching that place. I feel like we're approaching that place where there's enough conversations, there's enough shared experience, there's enough people promoting insight about, you know, kind of have you ever noticed how your arm just reaches for the phone and and you don't know why? You know, and then someone explains that to you, that's because you're trying to chase away an unpleasant feeling, you know, you're in you know, so there's this kind of just if you like kind of gentle raising of awareness, it sounds quite bland, but yeah, eventually it reaches a tipping point, and I think you do then start to see you start to see change in terms of our evolution in terms of the way in which we relate to these devices. At the moment, we're like kids in a candy store. You know, everything's insane, it's amazing. Look what I can do with this, it's ah you know, it's like you know, excite we're all excited and thrilled, and eventually we calm down, we become still, sakina, we reflect, and we move on, we grow with it, and we think, you know, about our values and these these terribly boring things that are part of our cognitive heritage, our spiritual heritage, if I can use that word.

SPEAKER_00 34:11

You can use that word, yeah. Um is in some respects, is AI actually almost accelerating that process? I mean, I'm no, I look, I'm 53, and I have already now just come off Facebook because there's so much AI slop there that you that you know you can and I think the younger generation is actually smart, you know. Originally I was like, you know, it takes me a minute to go, oh what a load of bullshit. You know, that's not true. That even down to the stuff that's like fake movie reviews and all that sort of thing, it gets to that point where now if it's just full of absolute crap, then people turn off, they switch off. Um, and it feels like is that accelerating, do you think? I don't know, you know.

SPEAKER_01 34:57

Yeah, I mean, I honestly don't I this is why it's a fascinating space because I don't know, and depending on what mood I'm in, will probably influence the answer, you know.

SPEAKER_00 35:04

I think I mean I've I saw the debates the other day, like you know, stranger things and like how much controversy there's been because they actually used AI to kind of finish the the episode and loads of uh the kids going nuts about the fact that um if I can say that, is that right? Going nuts, yeah, but really sort of outraged that AI was used in places rather than you know human actors.

SPEAKER_01 35:27

Yeah, I think there is I think there are some really interesting parallels with history, yeah. But I think it qu I think AI is qualit qualitatively different. So people often like harp back to the Industrial Revolution and the displacement of the weavers. So that where we get the word Luddites, yeah, yes. No, we get the Luddites from, and you read if you read some of the the literature, you can see real echoes there. But there's part of me again that thinks, okay, that was if you like, uh the replacement of our dexterity, our physical movement, and quite low-level stuff, you know, with machines. But this is our, you know, if you like our humanity, our crown jewels, the thing we pride ourselves on, or our language, uh, that can now be, if you like, outsourced. That is a really, I think we're at a critical juncture in in in human history. This is, I mean, not to kind of um, you know, hype it up too much, it's like it like it needs more hype, but I honestly do think we are uh this is really a a pivotal moment on our journey as a as a species. Um, and and how we act, respond in this space will determine the future of humanity. It really is. It's that I think it's that important, and really it does require attention, research, policy makers to step up and legislate, and individuals to be, you know, humans, reflective, critical, concerned.

SPEAKER_00 36:56

Um see, that's the gulfing class here right now. We've got a scientist talking about a critical moment for humanity, and I'm talking about the finale of Stranger Things. Same thing, same, same thing, brother, same thing. Um go on, I'm gonna be selfish. Uh, two years in a row, uh finalist and winner at the at the mental awards. Um, and you wrote a really kind piece about the mental awards, but you know, we're about to relaunch for 2026. What did that process of engaging with the mental awards mean, give? Why did you choose to be part of it and then come back again? Why was it meaningful for you?

SPEAKER_01 37:37

Yeah, no, honestly, Scott, it was um there was a moment there where I think with the mental awards and with the work of Sakina and Dr. Nahida, like I think you guys have really like kind of have you like brought a this compassionate, multidisciplinary, uh service user engaged or lived experience engaged kind of uh movement to to the UAE. And when I felt I first arrived in the UAE, I was in the UAE for 15 years, and when I first arrived, um mental health was not even mentioned. It really was. It was just, it wasn't, and yeah, you hear horror stories about people just kind of languishing. We don't talk about that, that's just you know, that's just cousin Mahmoud in the in the attic. You know, we heard these kind of horror stories, it was deeply, deeply kind of uh stigmatized and hidden. And I think when you see people are receiving and then fast forward like the 15 years or so, and I know you guys have been working diligently over that period to make this happen. I think that were for me the first. I think I joined the second mental award, but to see it have that kind of visibility, that kind of with a celebratory. I think I called it the the mechaler of mental health. Oh, which I have the moment, you know.

SPEAKER_00 38:58

I've quite requoted that many times.

SPEAKER_01 39:00

Yeah, but it was that's what it really that was a moment. I feel I'm a mental captured that moment whereby not not only do we now talk about it, but we celebrate it in you know, we celebrate it when people have recovered, we celebrate it, we support compassionately while people are going through it, and we you know, we work tirelessly to to prevent, you know, that the people from kind of falling off the edge into these spaces where it's difficult, you know, where people are and it will it has always happened and it will always happen, but I think just to create this space where it's less stigmatized, uh even to the extent where you know the stories of people who are living with these types of um experiences are celebrated, which I think is just it's a it's a it's a great place to be. Yeah. Um and it's I I used to look at the UAE back then and think it's so behind now. I think with the work of Sakina with the work of mental, um, I now look and think other places need to catch up, other places can learn from this. I'm not just being nice because I'm on your podcast. It's from a real place of sincerity. Honestly, it's it's it's really good to see. And I feel like I've played a little tiny part in that. You know, I've kind of worked I worked diligently here for many years, researching in the background.

SPEAKER_00 40:26

Yeah, and I it's nice to feel like I'm part of that. Absolutely. And I I talk to people who've been, you know, I mean, I'm relatively new in this space like four or five years. Whereas, you know, you talk to people who are the OGs that have been pushing, and they they do feel like finally, I mean, you guys are you know standing on the shoulders of giants, Justin, shall we say? Um, I would love to carry on this conversation, but you've got a panel to go to. Yeah, and I think my hotel's ringing me to say, Scott, it's time to check out, otherwise, we're gonna charge you for an extra day. Um, uh look, I mean, uh, thank you for being part of the mental awards, but just thank you for the work you're doing because it needs to it needs to start and it needs to continue, yeah, and we need to to pay attention. So thank you. Yeah, been a pleasure. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you. Uh and that's what a scientist has to say about stranger things. Uh if you enjoyed this conversation half as much as I have, then please subscribe. If you're watching on YouTube, the button's just there, click it. He said, trying to encourage you to be you know uh uh notified by social media again. But uh please subscribe um and join us again for the next time at the mental space. Justin, thank you very much. We out.

SPEAKER_01 41:31

Nice, thank you, Scott.

SPEAKER_00 41:34

Yeah, conversation and I will leave.