Season 1, Episode 13: COVID Feelings – Looking Back at 2021
image credit | Önder Örtel
Season 1, Episode 13 | COVID Feelings – Looking Back at 2021
In this new episode, Thomas and Panu look back to a discussion they had in October 2021 about coping with the COVID-19 pandemic and how this compares with coping with climate change. As you listen, reflect on your own experiences of COVID-19 pandemic in the midst of the larger climate crisis. Back in 2021, it was clear these overlapping problems had pushed us to extend our capacity to be with our feelings amidst extreme hardship and challenge — now Panu and Thomas have been touched by COVID personally. In hindsight, Panu’s COVID and climate research and Thomas’s coping strategies ring true. Their wide-ranging 2021 dialog touched on wise use of media and avoiding “cyberchondria,” calibrating our anxiety alarm systems, restoring ourselves in the face of “macro worries,” and the importance of gratitude and embodying “love in action.” A key take away, then as now: Some suppression of emotions is quite useful and healthy in the midst of a crisis. The challenge is to be conscious of this process, and to come back to our emotional expression when we have the opportunity —for this is where we learn and grow.
Links
Could corona-anxiety lead to positive climate action? — an interview of Panu about coronavirus anxiety, eco-anxiety, and education (2020)
Panu’s 2020 lecture video in English about “coronavirus anxiety” and climate anxiety
From Thomas’ 2020 Blog: Coping with COVID-19: Where Your Feelings Go, Your Thoughts Will Follow
Forthcoming books with introductions by Panu:
Eco-Anxiety and Planetary Hope: Experiencing the Twin Disasters of Covid-19 and Climate Change (Springer, September 2022)
Eco-Anxiety and Pandemic Distress: Psychological Perspectives on Resilience and Interconnectedness (Oxford, November 2022)
A recent study of coping with climate change and COVID-19: “Investigating similarities and differences in individual reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic and the climate crisis”, Geiger et al. 2021,
A recent opinion from David Wallace Wells on US pandemic spending: “What if We Had Spent the Money on Climate?”
Transcript
Transcript edited for clarity and brevity.
[music: “CC&H theme music”]
Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness, an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.
2022 Prologue
Thomas Doherty: Well, hi folks. This is Thomas. And I am sitting here speaking with Panu. It’s June 2022. And Panu and I have been listening to an episode that we recorded in October of 2021 on COVID. The COVID-19 pandemic — and our thoughts about it as it was developing at that time. Since then, many things have happened in the world with the pandemic. As we all know! And with other areas that we’ve been talking about, like climate change. Panu and his family have actually had COVID in that intervening time. My family and I also had COVID just actually a few weeks ago. Finally caught up with us here in Portland, Oregon. And I’m healthy but I’m still feeling a little bit of the after effects.
So we thought we would revisit this episode now, in hindsight. And see how it feels to listen to it. And you all will shortly be able to listen to the episode yourself. But Panu, what was it like to listen back to what we were thinking about in October of 2021?
Panu Pihkala: Yes. Hello, all listeners. So much is going on in these times that it actually felt quite long ago. Even though it’s last October. And we recorded many episodes during that Autumn. And then because of our two week scheduling of episodes, we are only now getting at some of the last ones we did. And on one hand we also wanted to wait and see where this Covid-19 pandemic was going. And then of course we ended up having it ourselves as Thomas mentioned. My family had it the second time. And now I also personally got it. I was four days completely out of business. But because of vaccinations, nothing too serious. But it took quite a long time to recover.
And in Finland right at the time that the prevalent wave of Covid-19 had started to go down, then came the war in Ukraine. So that timing was very bad in that sense, also. That people were struck by another global stressor or macro-worry. Which came very close. So when I was listening to the episode where we discuss many emotional disturbances rising from global stressors. Of course the war in Ukraine this spring came very clearly into my mind. And that reminded me forcefully of the overlapping crises that we are living through. So it was very interesting to return to this episode from 9 months ago.
Doherty: Yeah. I agree. It felt like a long time ago. And I think listeners probably have the same sense. So many things have happened. And the pandemic is still ongoing in some ways. In a more chronic way. So I think this is a challenge. I think it’s a challenge. [Another] colleague that I listened to the episode remarked that he had a hard time separating climate change and COVID because the two issues seem to be so similar. Not necessarily causally. Well, he actually believed they are causally related because deforestation drives partly climate change. And deforestation drove partly COVID in the sense of really these new viruses [are] coming out of, you know, places like these wet markets that are mixing different species and animals. And viruses that would have lived deep in the forest or the woods are now being exposed to humans in this cross pollinating.
So, he saw a lot of overlap between both the basic system of our planet and also the responses of people to the problem. The denial. The science — denigrating science. The reactionary nature. The individualist responses where people didn't want to get vaccinated and all this other stuff. So, as we talked about in the episode I think, COVID is sort of a climate change-like phenomenon that was just accelerated. We saw a lot of these different factors. So it is really a learning. It’s a hard learning experience. It’s not necessarily a positive learning experience about the world. Because it exposed so much — so many problems.
Pihkala: Yeah. Totally agree with you on that. And the terrible intersectional injustices, also. Both globally and regionally. And in the episode we quite a lot discuss the dynamics of eco-anxiety or climate anxiety as compared with Coronavirus anxiety. Or whatever we want to call it. And this came to my mind when listening to [your] colleagues' thoughts about the episode. And I mentioned that I wrote introductions to two books which discuss the COVID-19 crisis and the climate crisis. And now they are finally also starting to be published. That sometimes frustrating slowness of academic publishing. But now in late August and in November these two books should be out. And we’ll share info about that on our podcast website.
One thing which is different is that because at least a strong wave of COVID-19 has now passed there’s a lot of people, including myself I have to say, who would just like to forget about COVID-19. At least for a long while. And this psychological dynamic, which on the one hand is pretty universal. There were some people writing about this at the onset of the COVID-19 crisis. But now it’s live. This sort of very human desire to, you know, let’s do something else for a while.
Doherty: Yeah. Which is human. And so we want to honor that. When we get through a crisis we want to put it aside. We want to - we get fatigued. And we want to set it aside. And so I think we want things to disappear. So the focus with Covid was really people were over immersed. We talked in the episode this idea of cyberchondria. Where people are doing a lot of online research about medical and health issues. And so there was such a strong anxiety reaction from many people with COVID. Particularly in the early stages of the pandemic when it was so mortally dangerous. Now there’s a hope to set aside and put it away. So it is really a developmental process. Because it isn’t going away. It’s going to be a chronic thing in our societies.
But in our story, we did come back to the basic coping of being aware of our news intake. Being in our home place. Finding the news in our own community, around our family and things like that. And also just recognizing all the hard work that we all have done with COVID. All the precautions. All the thinking. All the care, you know, for others. You know, we're surviving. Many of us are surviving. And we’re working hard. And, again, all the healthcare workers that have been working for years now in the COVID area. All the researchers. So, it’s so easy just to focus on the downside and not give ourselves, you know, the support and the compliment and the gratitude and the gratefulness of all the people. Even today that are still working. And I have many clients that are medical professionals. You know, that are still working and still in the emergency room. Still dealing with people. Even trying to find some compassion for folks that really couldn't get with the program in the sense of trying to support a societal-wide science-based empirical approach to dealing with this pandemic. So, we do need to sort of recharge our batteries. And have gratitude. And be able to focus on what’s positive in our lives.
Pihkala: Yeah. Totally agree with that. And it would be good if we would have resources and motivation and energy to organize also some festivals of gratitude for all the work that various people have done in this regard. And it would be great to have a sort of people’s fest around, you know, surviving even though there was lots of trouble. And there may be waves again and so on. But that’s very human. The need for gratitude and remembering goodness. And this is something that we end up discussing at the latest part of the episode that you will soon hear.
Doherty: Yeah. So, relistening to this episode is kind of a ritual. It’s a way to go back in time and to think about things. And, so, I invite the listeners to really use it as a reflective exercise for yourself to think about how your life has changed. And where you are now. And, you know, honor some of your losses. I would say here in Portland soon — I was approached by the Chief Resilience Officer for the City of Portland. And the disaster response team here in the city is having what they call “Heat Week.” And they’re having some events to commemorate the Heat Dome [deadly heat disaster] that happened one year ago. The major heat wave. And I’m going to be speaking on a panel around coping.
But, I really think it’s such a great idea for them to have this memorial to this heat event. Partly for the first responders to really recognize all the work that they did. And also to keep the public aware that these things happen. It’s an exercise. It’s a ritual that I rarely see coming from a government. I know [in] our last episode we talked about the [eco-anxiety] work in Finland. Which is really, you know, proactive. But, so yes. There is something about cycling back and having these rituals to think about our lives and think about what we’ve learned. And that we’re still here. And we’re still going forward. So I invite people to listen and let us know what you think about us bringing back older episodes. This is climatechangeandhappiness.com. And thank you very much. Enjoy the episode. And we’ll keep bringing them to you.
October 2021 Episode
Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty.
Pihkala: And I'm Panu Pihkala.
Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. The show for people around the globe who are thinking deeply about the personal side of climate change, particularly their emotions and their feelings about this. And we are speaking my morning and Panu's evening here on October 1, 2021. And Panu, I know, I'd like to get at some of the talks and things that you were doing this past week, we've got a lot of interesting things on our plates.
But maybe I'll just jump in to some of the things you're up to. You've done some talks, but I know you've been writing about Coronavirus and eco-anxiety and getting into the emotions about these two issues and how they're similar and different. I know I have to be dragged into talking about [Coronavirus] just because my first emotions are reluctance and frustration and fatigue. But that's the way it goes with these emotions about these issues. It's only after I get into it that I start getting more interested and inspired and curious and grateful and all this sort of stuff.
But tell me Panu what, you know. We'll just jump in, what's one of the pieces of this [Coronavirus] and eco- anxiety work you've been up to?
Pihkala: Yeah, I think many people might react to climate emotions or eco-emotions, the way that you just described, you know, that sense of reluctance. You know, it's so difficult the whole business of the climate crisis. That, do I really have to think about it or think about the feelings related to that? Probably that's not the major issue for our listeners, because you have sort of chosen to listen to this, but.
Doherty: Yeah, you've joined us welcome. Yeah.
Pihkala: Yeah. Warmly welcome. We're very glad that you are there. But yeah, I've been doing introductions to two books, which deal with eco-anxiety, and so-called “Coronavirus Anxiety.” Now, this latter one also has many names. Even the same applies, of course, to eco-anxiety, also. There's COVID-19 Fear. And there's COVID Stress Syndrome, a framework developed by some other researchers. But all of these refer to the challenging emotions related to COVID-19. And I know that both I and Thomas have had our share of this and many people more, each one in her own way.
What I'm doing in these introductions, [which are] sort of academic short articles, is that I'm exploring similarities, and then some differences. And when the COVID-19 pandemic started, I think a very sort of gut reaction of a lot of people was to try to apply what they know, and what they can do, to somehow encounter the new situation. And then there's me as an eco-anxiety researcher, trying to apply that in some constructive way to the situation. And that's one of the beginnings of this comparison. I sort of noticed there's [a] different timespan, of course, in relation to the COVID-19 threat, but then there's interesting similarities in the reactions. They are just more condensed in time. You know, when there's a growing sense of threat, but not certainty yet, people are like, hmm, there's something happening in China. And yeah, let's hope that it doesn't spread here. And some others are, you know, taking these signals more seriously, and then others try to ignore them. You know, Thomas, this sort of reminds me of many reactions to ecological crisis and climate crisis when it wasn't so widely known.
Doherty: Yeah, yeah. Yeah, one thing I found, I was able to read Panu's chapter on this. And I really appreciated you comparing some of the timelines of, of, you know, how people cope with COVID and nations cope with COVID and how we have, you know, coped with climate change. And again, that, you know, we've been dealing with people in power have known about climate issues for, you know, since you and I have been alive. You know, and longer still really since the 1950s-60s. You know, people were clued into this, you know, so-called experts, you know. Expert advisors to leaders were. But yeah, you know, again, I think, keeping it real in terms of our own experience, you know. Yes, there's so much for me bound up in COVID. And, you know, it was sort of a, I think there's a lot of suppression of emotions that happen during a disaster, right. So we have to recognize that during an emergency or disaster, we have to take action, and so we just suppress some emotions.
And, you know, I think some vocabulary is helpful here. You know, there's a difference between suppression and repression. You know, suppression is when I know, I'm feeling something, but I have to compartmentalize it in service of taking action. And so, you know, first responders have to suppress, you know, their fear, disgust, or various feelings they have, as they're going into a disaster zone and helping people. And, you know, repression is when we forget that we're suppressing, or we don't ever acknowledge in the first place, you know. And so I think, for me, there's just a lot of suppressed emotions, you know, fear about all the different things. You know, unpacking that unpacking the fear of while our work changes and fear for our families and this disruption to our lives.
And, you know, my father died, late February of 2020, just on the cusp of the major COVID, you know, shutdowns here in the US. And it was actually for a while, unclear whether he had died of COVID. But we don't believe that he did. But, you know, we had to cancel his funeral and, you know, cancel the memorial that we planned for him. And, you know, so, you know, everyone has, or many people have really these personal stories. So it's easy to speculate, you know, globally that I think, you know, that our listeners are all having personal things, you know. And that's, I think, where that natural kind of reluctance and suppression is. So, how do you think about working with that? You know, how do we work with that? Or how do I move in that and move through that?
Pihkala: Yeah, that's a very good question. And there's research emerging, also about bereavement related to COVID-19, and how grief practices have been disrupted by lockdown measures and so on. And that's another interesting branch of research. And, of course, theories of grief and sadness are so much related to climate emotions. But I do agree, Thomas, that there's been lots of suppression, and many times it has been needed. And then there's the challenge that when, finally, things start to open up, and there's great feelings of relief. For example, just this week in Finland, there's been great joy because many of the lockdown measures have been made easier now the situation has got better. So, but that doesn't remove all the need to face some of the emotional toll that has been gathered.
Of course, one might also speak about accumulation of stress. And that's something that I very personally felt after the first COVID-19 springtime. I did totally fine for two or three months, but after that, I realized that hey, there's a lot of stress gathering. Even though nobody in the near family was ill, there was some concern about some people very, very near me, and that, of course, caused stress based on compassion and so on. But, for example, in summer 2020, I had to use much more embodied coping methods or practices than I usually have to do. And this is linked with a very interesting theme related to what we are talking about with is the media stuff. We have touched upon this several times in our conversations, but that became very evident in relation to COVID-19. The need to limit one's media exposure because one can sort of feel the stress levels rising when reading about COVID-19 information, not to mention imagery.
Doherty: Yeah, yeah. And the media piece is really this is a good one because I've talked to a few people lately. Some of the people I'm working with and, you know, two people said almost the same thing about well, when I surface the idea of taking a break from the media and pulling back as both of these people are really I think having issues with excessive compulsive media intake which is contributing to all their different challenges. You know, anxieties and complications and fatigues. But, you know, they said, I don't want to bury my head in the sand, you know, I don't want to not know. And so that's something that we have to work at.
And, you know, at the early stages of COVID, it was really fascinating and really interesting. And it was curious to see, you know, and we did want to track things. I think there's a healthy piece there. But, you know, very quickly, it can go over much. Even the most healthy thing if we overdo it. Like, it's sort of like, exercise, you know, an exercise related injury. Right? I could run an exercise, but if I overtrain I'll break my body down. And so I think people will “over media-ize” and not be balanced out. And so I think that's the danger. A term you shared, you know, recently with me is cyberchondria. Right, was it cyberchondria?
Pihkala: Yeah. Yeah. That's the one.
Doherty: You know, so we like words here. You know, at the Climate Change and Happiness Podcast. We like our words. And, you know, cyberchondria is - how would you define cyberchondria?
Pihkala: Yeah, that's not an official diagnosis, but it's been borne out of real perceptions during the 2000s and 2010s, that there's often the tendency to seek health information online. And, you know, you get some vague aching somewhere, and then you start Googling. And after two minutes, you start to become convinced that this is cancer or something. Actually, for example, some Finnish health authorities have even issued campaigns, where they say that please don't google your symptoms. Come to our websites, which are reliable. So the sort of institutional work being done to counter the dangers of cyberchondria. Having so much concern about one's health. And once again, it's very natural, of course, to be concerned about one's health, but then there's the issue of how we seek information related to it.
Doherty: Yeah, yeah. So there's a sweet spot there. We do, you know, again, I think, using the disaster, you know, framing, you know, during the disaster, you know, we do need to seek out information. We need some intelligence about what's going on in the world. And so we are going to be plugged in. We want to be plugged into the media. But, again, trying to know the difference between what's new information and what's simply, you know, recycling of content, and all the marketing and all the other stuff that goes on within the media, which is not our friend, which is just designed to grab our attention and to keep us, you know, keep us locked into the whatever channel. And so knowing when to stop.
And, you know, as I tell people, you know, they won't be. Just because they take a break from electronic media, doesn't mean their head is in the sand. That's way too black and white. It's not accurate at all. In fact, the experiment that I've found personally true and, you might, listeners might try this. When you unplug from the news, you do not feel uninformed. In fact, in some ways you feel more informed about the world and you're able to think about things a little more deeply. And I think it allows some of the information to settle. Certainly we hear about things, if something's important, we'll hear about it. So actually, I feel like, you know, we become more informed about our lives when we break from the news. And less distracted. And less frenetic.
And then, you know, reminding people that we are the news. You know, we are the news. We make our own news. Our life is the news, you know, and that's where we need to be. Not as a consumer of other people's, you know, information. So, I do encourage people to, you know, just to play around with that idea. But yeah, so hypochondria. Cyberchondria. Doomscrolling. Right? You know, so excessive scrolling through stories. Yes, and you know, there was a spectacle with COVID. Of course, there's a lot of tragedy here with just the. As we talked about in our pre conversation, you know. And you get at it coming back to that timeline. You know, that at the beginning there is investigation, there's healthy, I believe you would say healthy anxiety.
Pihkala: Yeah.
Doherty: There's a very useful and healthy anxiety at the very beginning of these things.
Pihkala: Yeah. Some people notice that there's a threat which includes uncertainty. And that starts people thinking, trying to find more information so that they could better evaluate the threat and shape their responses to it. And this brings out the practical anxiety element. Which happens both in relation to ecological issues, the climate crisis, and it happened in relation to COVID-19. And, for example, the end of February 2020. In Europe, that was an interesting time, because some people started restricting their movements already. And some people, for example, still went to holidays in Northern Italy even though there was information leaking, that, you know, there's quite a number of cases there, and so on. So, that was a time when more and more people should have listened to anxiety, actually. But then, when the threat became very clear, of course, there were also panic reactions, lots of fear, and also this suppression of alarm state so that people could function better. So there's a whole range of things happening. And sometimes, in the media, people are talking about climate anxiety or eco-anxiety in an overly simplistic manner. It can include all kinds of reactions. But of course, I want to emphasize this practical anxiety dimension. And it's more like the climate skeptics who then talk of climate panic, for example, trying to frame this as sort of unneeded rushy, panicky activity, which isn't really not the case.
What I found personally helpful was when I was reading more about our systems, both conscious and unconscious. And I realized that reading this COVID-19 information, even though I sort of prepared myself for that, and tried to remember, for example, bodily practices, like, you know, keep breathing, steady, and so on. Still, it affects you sort of unconsciously. It goes to our alarm systems, and it may trigger some things related to death anxiety, or health anxiety, and so on. But I think that's one further reason for this very healthy emphasis that's here, you Thomas putting forward that there's a need to restrict [our media intake]. Even though we prepare ourselves, there's elements which reach our alarm system.
Doherty: Yeah. Yeah. So how do, you know, how to, on a daily basis, do we calibrate our alarm system? So we, you know, we need to rest it. That's, you know, that's another way to think about this with the news. You know, we need to we, you know, we need to rest our ability, you know, to take in the news, so we can kind of start to separate the wheat from the chaff in terms of what's actually useful information.
You know, we were talking about Thoreau in one of our last conversations. Henry David Thoreau writing in the 1840s, you know, and he was saying, you know, the news, you know, I'm more concerned about what's never old, you know, not what's news. But he was already dealing with just this content. So yes, one of the first steps with eco-anxiety work, I think, is realizing that, you know, is identifying what healthy anxiety is, and really claiming that because we're never going to not feel anxious about the world. It's part of our wiring. And it's very healthy. But very quickly when we get into systems and governments and things. We get into public relations and propaganda, and often, you know, leaders don't want to. You know, their advisors will bring information to them and, you know, it's not politically expedient, you know. And so then there's the shaping and the spinning of stories and things like that. And so I think we've seen that with, you know, in the US and China, in particular during COVID. So, we're rolling with that, and we can't control all of that. So that's something that's somewhat out of our control. So we have to sort of learn to roll with that. And then is, there's grief about that.
I was thinking of David Kessler's work on grief. And, you know, he talks about a river like a flowing river and certain griefs are more simple or more complicated. You know, our complicated grief is like a bunch of logs and sticks that are blocking up the river. So it's really hard to feel grief for various reasons. And I think, you know, for COVID, you know, there's different complications there for people, you know, in terms of did it affect them personally? And is it about their political beliefs or family? And things like that. So just in general, their griefs are more or less complicated, which is something to be aware of.
Pihkala: Yeah, and guilt also can be hugely complicated and there can be so many different kinds of guilt one can feel in relation to COVID-19 for example. That “should I have been more careful” type of thing and all sorts of [guilty feelings] wrenching into existence. So, feeling self-guilt and that, of course, [mutatis mutandis, changing the things that needed to change] applies also to eco-anxiety and climate anxiety. So there's numerous things that one can feel guilt or even shame about. And some of them can lead to positive behavior changes. But, of course, we have to face the issue that there's no point in feeling totally overburdened by guilt and shame for a long time. That's not gonna help anyone. Not the planet, or you or those living close to you.
Doherty: Yeah. And I think, you know, in terms of how we can cope, you know, as the listeners, as you're listening. You know, I think if you can kind of get in your body a little bit. You know, kind of feel like take a breath and be in your body. And, you know, breathe into your belly or breathe into your heart, you know, there's scales that we exist in, in the world. So we have our personal family scale, and then our community scale, and our, you know, the world scale. And because of communication technology, we are able to, you know, kind of toggle between this real personal level scale and these world scales. In terms of problems. In terms of issues. In terms of our information. What we know. And it can be really jarring. And so, you know, learning to just know where are you in terms of the scales? You know, what scale are you working on here? I mean, I think and being able to know that is a really helpful skill. Otherwise, people are really pulled in a lot of directions. And again, if we don't have that personal level, grounding, we have no base to take on these larger pieces.
And so I know, you know, for me, I talked about my father's death. And that's where I will first go around COVID, because that was, you know, one of the ways that it personally affected me and my family. And, you know, of course we think about the politics and all this other stuff. And you, Panu, do you want to talk about how COVID affected you and your family as well?
Pihkala: Yeah. Very recently, of course, we had to stay home because we actually got it now after one and a half years of managing to miss it. But luckily, the symptoms were very mild, and us adults had two vaccinations. And we practiced caution. So, for example, in this period, when we had it, but didn't know it, we didn't pass it on to anyone because we were using masks and so on. So that was a recent phase. But, of course, it's been a long time. One and half years.
And this actually links to an event that I was speaking at this morning in Finland, which was about children and the future, organized by an organization called MLL - Mannerheimin Lastensuojeluliitto for those of you who know Finnish. It's an old and respectable organization taking care of children's welfare. And there was, of course, talk about how the COVID-19 time had affected children. And of the very different conditions that children were facing. You know, some didn't receive care, or actually were victims of home violence, for example. But then others, they had more time with their parents than they have had for years. So it's an ambiguous mix. So in a sort of paradoxical vein, sometimes it also brought happiness. And perhaps this links with the theme of our podcast also. That there may be surprising dimensions of happiness happening amidst this very complex and problematic time.
Doherty: Yeah. That's great. Bringing us back to our mission here. You know, Climate Change and Happiness. What does it mean to be happy during these times? When we have these, you know, what they call macro worries. You know, with these world level worries, these eco-anxieties. How do we then, you know, carve out time for trying to figure out what it means to be happy? Or what might it be to be happy during these times and with our family? So again, that's another reason to sort of pull ourselves away from the media and look at ourselves. Look at our lives. You know, again, emotionally as I said earlier, with COVID, you know, I do know how to regulate my emotions, and I work on this and so I, I am able to, you know, surf this stuff. So it's sort of like yes, dread and frustration and a sense of tragedy and just disgust at how COVID, you know, was handled. And a lot of the, you know, the political dysfunction and corruption here in the United States. And, you know, but then I I flipped over to gratitude. And, you know, impressed. I'm so impressed with all the people that have worked so hard. I mean, I know people. My friends, and you know, my clients are medical people, medical doctors and nurses. And just the incredible, spectacular heroic work of people all around the world, you know, in terms of COVID and helping other people. And even the scientific, you know, the speed of the scientific, you know, work and the rolling out of vaccines. It's absolutely incredible.
I mean, again, it's not all perfect, and I don't want to be, you know, just a booster, or Pollyanna about this. But there are some really, truly positive emotions here. People coming together. People being creative. People trying to adapt. It's amazing how people have been able to adapt. Entertainers and various people trying to reach out, you know. So there's a whole realm of emotions. And then I think there is just that fatigue. Because we're not through it yet. It's still unclear. So I think that fatigue piece comes up for people, so.
Pihkala: Yeah, [the] chronic stressor element is present both in relation to the climate crisis and still COVID-19. Very much resonate with what you said there, Thomas. And the amount of compassion and empathy, one might even speak of, you know, love in action. There's been lots of selfishness happening. And of course, we all know that that's not the whole whole picture. And it's very tragic, for example, among the nations, how the vaccines haven't been spread equally, and so on. But still on the local level, there's been lots of, you know, things that lift up one's belief about the good sides of human nature, also.
Doherty: Yeah, I love that idea of love in action. That's a great kind of moving toward the end of our conversation today. But that's a great place to be right now in this conversation. Love in action. Think of all the things that would fit under that heading over the last number of years. You know, all the parents that have been home with their children. And, you know, all the health care providers. And, you know, yes, it brought out, you know, like, a lot of things is the best in the worst of times. You know, Dickens' language, you know.
But COVID is, you know, it's legitimate to say that, you know, the COVID-19 crisis has brought out much good in people. And much love in action. And we need to, and we need to honor that. It's not fair, if we don't talk about that. So I think, you know, listeners can maybe take a breath. And, you know, let go a little bit of the COVID stuff that we've been coping with. And just, you know, set that burden down, as it is. We have moved through it. And, you know, really spend some time, you know, sitting with that idea of love in action and how we've all embodied that in our own ways. I think that's really, that's a neat way to think about, you know, our feelings. And, you know, that we can kind of have multiple feelings, obviously. And we can shine our light on one feeling or another. The story is not over yet. And we can certainly talk about much more with this. I mean, I feel pretty good that we've been able to even step into this topic. But love and action, I really like that. And, tell me, as we conclude here, what else you have going on here in terms of your talks and activities.
Pihkala: Hmm, yeah. I'm still sort of floating with this emotional landscape of love in action. So thanks for spending time here. I really think that that's the basis also for grief, and even for guilt, you know. Those arise because we care. And then one might go into more metaphysical speculations about what's the ultimate caring thing and so on. But let's not venture there now, this week.
There's been an interesting webinar between Finland and Sweden. I know that from the point of view of most of the world, it might seem that it's like two districts of the same city, but we have a long history in this corner of Europe with the different countries. But we were talking about ecological emotions, both in Sweden and Finland and how they are talked about. There's differences in language, for example. So that was a very interesting thing happening on Wednesday. And also opportunities to meet many people who are working with the subject, so that was uplifting. But how's it been for you, Thomas, this week?
Doherty: A lot going on, Panu. I have my group for mental health professionals. A climate conscious group starting next week. So I'm preparing for that. I have a proof of this chapter on climate change in clinical psychology that I was working on. I'm reviewing a paper on support groups around climate change for students. For college students. And that's actually a positive, interesting paper. It's a mixed bag. I'm also working with people and clients that are struggling with, you know, this amassed fatigue of COVID and climate and things like that.
But yeah, I am being inspired by the things that I'm seeing and finding. And so it's, again, it's toggling between, you know, my home territory and having the news that's just in my day and in my family and in my neighborhood and on my street. And then these larger pieces. And I'm looking forward to getting into it with a group of mental health professionals and talking about this sort of stuff. So that's going to be a nice series coming up. So yeah, yeah. So let's keep up our good work. You keep up your good work. I will. And then our listeners, you all keep up all your good work and love in action. You know, those are some lenses to put on and look at the world through today. And this is Climate Change and Happiness. Climatechangeandhappiness.com. Send us thoughts and messages and ideas and we'll keep talking about this.
Pihkala: Yes. We end with these Beatles-like tones. Thanks everyone for listening. Looking forward to talking more with you, Thomas.
Doherty: Have a great evening, Panu. Bye bye.
