An internal investigation found no proof of misconduct on the disputed research of former epidemiology professor John Corbett McDonald.

McDonald’s research on the health effects of chrysotile asbestos  came under scrutiny in early February following a CBC documentary which suggested that  McGill had allowed the asbestos industry to sponsor and influence scientific studies.

The controversy led Vice-Principal (Health Affairs) and Dean of Medicine David Eidelman to request a preliminary internal review by the chair of the department of epidemiology, Rebecca Fuhrer, despite calls from anti-asbestos activists to organize an independent investigation. On April 4, Eidelman announced that Fuhrer had not found any evidence of research misconduct, and requested that McGill’s Research Integrity Officer Abraham Fuks conduct an additional investigation on the integrity of McDonald’s research.

“The financial support from the industry was acknowledged in publications and there is no evidence to suggest that the sponsors influenced the data analyses or the conclusions,” Fuks’ report reads. “I find no warrant to initiate further investigations of the allegations that we have received.”

Eidelman presented the report to Senate, the highest academic body in the university, on Oct. 17.

“[The report] casts a lot of light … [and] allows one to understand why people may make allegations,” Eidelman said. “I don’t believe we have anything to hide. We have no investments in the asbestos industry … [the] conspiracy is simply not true.”

The report notes that although McDonald received funding from the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association (QAMA), his research was also funded through the federal Department of Health and Welfare.

“It is clear QAMA’s interests were designed to protect the asbestos industry with the implication that if it funded the research, it would thereby control the outcomes or their dissemination,” the report reads. “[However], this does not by itself demonstrate that the research was controlled or that its dissemination was influenced by QAMA.”

Further allegations claimed that McDonald had denied his connection to the asbestos industry. Fuks argues that McDonald did not make an attempt to hide that the funding for his research came from asbestos companies, and that “there is no evidence that the design of the research, its conduct, and its reporting was influenced by the industry.”

Kathleen Ruff, anti-asbestos activist and recipient of the Canadian Public Health Association’s 2011 National Public Health Hero award, called the report “biased, misleading, and inaccurate.” The report mentions her among those who provided materials to the investigation, such as newspaper clippings and other documentation.

“I provided evidence to Dr. Fuks, showing that Prof. McDonald used his research to lobby against improved occupational safety standards for asbestos workers,” Ruff told the Tribune. “Dr. Fuks ignored this evidence of collusion with the asbestos industry … legitimate concerns were ignored, and critical information was excluded from the report. No meaningful involvement was allowed.”

The report noted that McDonald has been criticized for studies that found that amphibole asbestos is more closely associated with mesothelioma, or malignant tumours, than chrysotile asbestos.

“Some of the controversies in this contested field stem from the choice of language to describe the data derived from the research,” the report reads. “In fact, the statements by [McDonald] and colleagues were generally carefully worded and explicitly supported by their research findings.”

Ruff disputed the claim in Fuks’ report that McDonald’s findings have been corroborated and supported by the scientific community.

“The key conclusion of Prof. McDonald’s research is that chrysotile asbestos is virtually innocuous except at astronomically high exposure levels,” she said. “This conclusion is rejected by the overwhelming consensus of scientists. There is, to my knowledge, not a single reputable, independent scientist who has replicated this finding.”

Among the criticisms the report addresses is those by Brown University professor David Egilman, who questioned McDonald’s methodology and suggested that the his research methods were flawed. According to the report, McDonald used older methods to contrast data from previous decades, as there was no data to compare to if he used newer techniques. Fuks writes that McDonald “understood the drawback [of using older methods] and assessed [the] data accordingly. ”

Ruff noted that McDonald testified before the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in 1972 against a proposal to increase US safety regulations regarding asbestos and that in 1999, he spoke at a conference in Brazil, organized by the Ministry of Labour and Employment, allegedly presenting findings that chrysotile asbestos could be eliminated by the body except at extremely high levels of exposure.

Fuks declined to comment on the report.

The report recommends that McGill’s Board of Governors consider avoiding investing in asbestos companies, and that McGill host an academic conference on the current evidence on the toxicity of asbestos, and the burden of dealing with asbestos in old buildings.

During Senate, Eidelman welcomed the suggestion to host a conference, and said that he aimed to organize one in the near future. Other professors, like Associate Professor of Political Science Catherine Lu, expressed interest in the suggestion.

“The Report raises some questions,” Lu said. “In terms of the conference proposed, do we need to think of a conference that also discusses the relationship between universities and industries with an agenda?”

The report does not mention that in early February, over 70 medical doctors and health researchers called for the resignation of asbestos exporter and member of the McGill Board of Governors Roshi Chadha. Chadha took a leave of absence for the remainder of the winter semester and resigned from the Board early in the summer.

—Additional reporting by Bea Britneff. 

At last Thursday’s Council meeting of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU), concerns about ambiguity in the SSMU constitution led councillors to vote to commit all nonbinding motions passed in the Oct. 15 SSMU General Assembly (GA) to the Steering and Policy committees. These committees will investigate SSMU constitutional ambiguities, and determine whether to bring these motions to the next council meeting, to be held on Nov. 1.

The fall GA lost quorum after passing two motions. The remaining four motions were therefore nonbinding, as they were adopted by what then became a consultative forum.

Following precedent from last year, Speaker Michael Tong decided to bring the adopted motions to Council after consultation with the movers of the motions and the Steering Committee. Tong explained that the SSMU constitution allows for two options when motions pass under a consultative forum.

The by-laws say that motions of this character “shall be inscribed upon the agenda of the next general assembly or at the discretion of the speakers in consultation with the movers and the Steering Committee, upon the agenda of the next council meeting.”

SSMU President Josh Redel said that he does not believe there has ever been a clear distinction on whether a motion that comes to Council from a consultative forum is considered a Council motion or still a GA motion.

The ambiguity in the constitution also extends to the process of passing unbinding resolutions, since a resolution passed last semester now requires the online ratification of motions passed at a SSMU GA. At the Oct. 15 GA, only the two motions passed with quorum moved into the online ratification process.

Speaking on behalf of the Steering Committee, Redel recommended tabling all four motions, which included one regarding SSMU support for accessible education, opposition to Plan Nord, opposition to Canadian military involvement in Iran, and ethical investment at McGill.

SSMU Vice-President University Affairs Haley Dinel, who also sits on the Steering Committee, explained that the idea was to table the motions at Thursday’s Council, rewrite them in Committee, and conform them to fit into SSMU’s mandate.

SSMU Vice-President Clubs and Services Allison Cooper said she wanted to consider ratifying the first of the four motions—the motion regarding renewing support for accessible education. SSMU Vice-President External Robin Reid-Fraser supported Cooper’s suggestion.

“I feel that this is a motion that comes from … a policy SSMU has had for five years … and that was renewed last year,” Reid-Fraser said. “[Ratifying this motion] is just renewing that policy. It’s not a new thing.”

Other councillors had reservations about proceeding with one motion, and tabling the rest.

“I believe that if we do decide to table the motions, I think we should table them all together or not table them all together,” Nicole Georges, arts representative to SSMU, said. “I really think that we should follow procedure and keep them all together … [I don’t think] we should start cherry-picking.”

Redel expressed concern about violating direct democracy, saying that he did not think the four motions should be changed or debated upon by Council.

SSMU Vice-President Internal Michael Szpejda suggested that Council first address the now apparent ambiguities of the SSMU constitution.

“We should fix the [ambiguity] first so we can be sure of how we pass these motions,” Szpejda said. “Then [we should] bring these motions back to Council.”

SSMU Vice-President Finance and Operations Jean Paul Briggs then proposed a motion which mandates the Steering and Policy Committees to further discuss the constitutionality of whether or not the four GA motions should be brought to the next Council on Nov. 1. Briggs’ motion passed with 18 votes for and seven against.

Following Council, Cooper expressed her disappointment about the vote.

“First off, the decision to table the GA decisions went against a precedent that students and movers of motions were expecting,” she said. “I think debating them … is entirely within Council’s role.”

Last Wednesday, McGill Senate convened for the second time this academic year. Topics discussed over the course of meeting included the Report of the Open Forum on Free Expression and Peaceful Assembly, undergraduate cross-faculty course accessibility, postgraduate supervision, and the Achieving Strategic Academic Priorities (ASAP) 2012 project.

While presenting his Report of the Open Forum, Dean of Arts Christopher Manfredi spoke to Senators about the discussions that took place at last semester’s Open Forum series, as well as his findings, after comparing McGill policies and protocols to those at other large universities.

Following Manfredi’s presentation, Catherine Lu, associate professor in the department of political science, expressed serious concerns about the James Protocol, a provisional security protocol that currently governs access to the James Administration building. The Protocol was issued after students occupied the building’s 6th floor for six days this past February.

“I think it’s been an irritant to collegiality,” Lu said. “I think it is unnecessary, uncalled for, and unjustified. I would like to see something done [about it] quickly.”

Law Senator Stephanie Bachelet asked Manfredi and Munroe-Blum if there were plans to revise the James Protocol.

“They have been quite dramatically revised already,” Munroe-Blum responded. “We’re open to hearing recommendations or suggestions.”

Munroe-Blum also confirmed that the three recommendations listed in Manfredi’s report will be implemented.

On the topic of undergraduate cross-faculty accessibility,  Arts Senator Max Zidel presented two questions to Senate.

“In what ways can McGill encourage and remove barriers preventing interfaculty and inter-departmental course registration?” Zidel asked. “In what ways can McGill foster cross-faculty and inter-departmental programming?”

In response, Provost Anthony Masi said that McGill’s institutional and resource constraints make it difficult for the university to make a large variety of courses accessible to students across multiple departments and faculties.

“Budgetary constraints, and shortages of faculty, support staff, and space characterize the environment at McGill,” Masi said. “[The] priority is for students to register for those courses required to complete their degree. Course schedules offer what they can.”

These challenges aside, Masi said the administration would continue to work on these issues, and that the university has already made some progress in that regard.

“We have [already] created several inter-disciplinary initiatives … [and] over the years, the Faculty of Arts has reduced the number of required credits [for a major],” Masi said. “I will explore with Deans the ways we could address students wanting a more broad experience.”

Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) Senator Jonathan Mooney presented several questions regarding post-graduate supervision at McGill. In particular, Mooney expressed concern about proper training in supervision for newly hired faculty, as well as resources for graduate students experiencing difficulties with their supervisors.

“[There is] a huge power differential between professors and students,” Mooney said. “One concern at [last week’s] Consultation Fair was about students not having advocates when they have a problem with their supervisor.”

Dean of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (GPS) Martin Kreiswirth responded that supervision is at the centre of training for new faculty, and that GPS has organized 18 events to help address concerns regarding graduate supervision.

Later during the meeting, Masi gave a presentation on ASAP 2012—McGill’s next five-year strategic academic plan. He presented three strategic priorities, and six broad goals for McGill over the next five years, including maintaining a student-centred focus, appropriate resource management, enhancing research, extending community engagement, and renewing facilities.

Several student senators expressed concern that the ASAP 2012 presentation did not feature an action plan for implementing the strategic priorities and goals. Masi responded that it would be very difficult for him to create a systematic action plan that would be applicable to all areas and spheres of the university.

“Each Dean is expected to come up with mechanisms that reflect these objectives,” Masi said. “Faculties will address this differently.”

Following the presentation, Senate passed the motion to endorse the ASAP 2012 academic priorities and goals.

Last Friday, McGill Principal Heather Munroe-Blum called for Quebec to increase its enrollment of international students in a speech hosted by the Montreal Council on Foreign Relations. Munroe-Blum drew attention to a topic that has been the subject of much debate in recent years—the place of international students in Canada and Canadian universities.

“International students are exactly what Quebec needs,” Munroe-Blum said. “They spend years in our institutions, they speak or are motivated to learn French, they know and embrace Quebec’s values, and they are already integrating into our society.”

A study by Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada estimated that international students spent over $7.7 billion dollars in Canada in 2010, and created over 81,000 jobs that same year. According to Maclean’s magazine, the two provinces most successful in recruiting international students are Ontario and British Columbia.

Although Quebec was ranked third in this study, Munroe-Blum mentioned that the province’s international student population decreased by eight per cent between 2001 and 2010.

“We face an international race for talent and Quebeckers are not winning,” she said. “We can only win with incentives for universities to attract, support, and retain top talent with quality and accessibility.”

In recent years, other provincial governments have aimed to attract more international students to their universities. In 2010, Ontario’s new Trillium Scholarship program created 75 scholarships for international graduate students studying in Ontario, while Ontario’s residency rules were modified to encourage these students to stay in the province after the completion of their degrees.

Marc Weinstein, McGill’s Vice-Principal (Development and Alumni Relations), told the Tribune that the McGill Alumni Association does not have any specific programs in place to encourage alumni to stay in Quebec after graduation.

“However, we do offer a range of career service programs that … are aimed at matching graduating McGill students with McGill alumni who have employment opportunities they are looking to fill,” he said. “This no doubt contributes to an increase in graduates choosing to launch their careers [in Quebec].”

In her speech, Munroe-Blum pointed to tuition as a frequently debated issue involving international students.

“Some would argue that low tuition will attract talent, but … low tuition does not lead to quality, and quality is precisely what students are looking for,” she said.

According to the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS), international students have faced steep tuition increases since 1976, and in 2009, CFS argued against continually rising international tuition fees.

“High differential fees are an unfair burden and a barrier to post-secondary education for international students,” CFS wrote. “Ultimately, such fees could threaten Canada’s ability to attract and retain foreign scholars.”

Memorial University in Newfoundland offers some of the lowest tuition rates in Canada—approximately $2,550 per year for Canadian undergraduate students, and $8,800 for international. However, only 7.9 per cent of the 17,944 students enrolled at Memorial in the fall of 2011 were international students, according to their website

In comparison, McGill’s student body is composed of roughly 25 per cent international students, each of whom pay over $14,000 in tuition per year. Despite McGill’s success in attracting international students, Munroe-Blum emphasized that very little of this additional money goes to the university.

“Under the current Quebec funding system, most of the tuition paid by students from outside Quebec returns to the government,” Munroe-Blum said. “With a few exceptions, McGill keeps only a small portion of the fees these students pay to support these students in their studies.”

In B.C., the system of incorporating international students into universities works very differently. According to Tim Rahilly, associate vice-president of students at Simon Fraser University (SFU), B.C. universities charge all Canadian students the same tuition. The institutions then set their own international student fees and—unlike McGill—none of this money is given to the province.

“The [international] fee usually is slightly more than the equivalent of what the institution gets for domestic students—a per head fee from the province, [plus] student … tuition [fees],” Rahilly told the Tribune. “The province does not fund any international student spaces.”

Rahilly added that B.C. universities who increase their international enrollment therefore benefit both from the differential student fees and from the diversification of their student body.

Munroe-Blum also discussed  the importance of the diversity brought by international students to McGill and Canada. She said that although Quebec currently falls short in attracting international students, there is time for the province to reprioritize the issue.

“Quebec is … positioned to win the race for global talent if we move quickly, competitively, and with confidence,” she said. “Quebec needs … a clear strategy for making Quebec a global education and research destination, or we will fall even further behind.”

—Additional reporting by Bea Britneff.