Latest News

Editorial, Opinion

Montreal upholds its colonial legacy by failing to prioritize reconciliation

by The Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

On Nov. 18, Montreal Mayor Soraya Martinez Ferrada announced the composition of her new 14-member executive committee, with roles ranging from security and housing to green economic development. While Ferrada’s committee included a plethora of portfolios, it omitted a committee member explicitly responsible for reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples—a role that had been active for almost eight years under the Valérie Plante administration. 

Ferrada has insisted that reconciliation remains a top priority for her administration, stating that the responsibilities of the role would instead be handled by Associate Councillor of Cultural Services, Diversity and Inclusion (SDIS), Josué Corvil. However, Corvil’s title contains no explicit reference to reconciliation.

In conflating reconciliation efforts with ‘cultural diversity and inclusion,’ Ferrada’s government has failed to re-enshrine the importance of acknowledging, atoning for, and taking action to provide redress for Canada’s history of colonial violence and dispossession. Instead, this homogenization collapses nation-to-nation responsibility into a vague diversity mandate. The Ferrada administration must reinstate the role and pursue reconciliation in its genuine form: A distinct political relationship rooted in Indigenous sovereignty that addresses the city’s presence on the unceded land of the Kanien’kehá:ka, Anishinaabeg, Abenaki and Huron/Wendat peoples.

Plante first introduced the reconciliation role in 2018 following citywide criticism for her executive committee’s lack of racial diversity. When announcing the creation of the role, Plante framed it as critical to strengthening dialogue with Indigenous nations and improving the efficacy of the city’s reconciliation efforts. Yet, the changes Plante’s cabinet implemented through this role remained superficial, neglecting deep-rooted issues that affect Indigenous people at disproportionate rates, such as police harassment, anti-Indigenous racism, and homelessness. Municipal action repeatedly stalled at symbolism—resulting in statements, consultations, and commemorations without durable policy, funding or enforcement. 

The Ferrada government had an opportunity to correct the egregious shortcomings of prior administrations, but by abolishing the reconciliation role, her government has abandoned its obligations—not only to move beyond the lacklustre efforts of her predecessors, but to commit to reconciliation at all. Many of the issues central to the objectives of reconciliation—land claims and stewardship, consent over development, policing, and criminalization—do not fall under the ‘diversity’ umbrella of responsibilities, making her restructuring of the committee nonsensical and highly problematic. 

Indigenous children are over 17 times more likely to be removed from their families and placed in the child welfare system than non-Indigenous children. These high rates of parent-child separation are a direct continuation of the Residential School system, which perpetuated a multi-generational cycle of family disruption. Clearly, combating colonial structures, which are deeply embedded in every aspect of governance, policing, healthcare, and child welfare, requires more than standardized Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) measures. Any policy that governs enforcement, service access, or institutional oversight should require not just consultation, but active inclusion and decision-making power. Yet, with the removal of this role, the cabinet has done more than sideline reconciliation—it has eliminated Indigenous representation altogether, effectively shutting Indigenous voices out of executive decision-making. 

The city’s decision to bury reconciliation inside Corvil’s role under SDIS runs parallel to McGill’s own chronic failure to prioritize genuine reconciliation measures. The university has repeatedly claimed its commitment to the 94 calls to action identified by the Truth and Reconciliation Committee and its own 52 Calls to Action, yet it has repeatedly failed to deliver anything more than mere symbolic commitments to institutional change. Empty land acknowledgements cannot conceal the fact that the university continues construction of the New Vic Project and aggressive legal injunction against the Kanien’kehá:ka Kahnistensera (Mohawk Mothers) despite mounting evidence of potential human remains on the site. 

If reconciliation is truly a priority, both Montreal and McGill need to act as such—structurally, not rhetorically. Reconciliation cannot be managed as a sub-file of ‘inclusion.’ It is a political process that demands redistribution of power, consent, and sustained action.

Commentary, Opinion

In exercising institutional restraint, McGill protects only itself

by Sofia Lay on

More in Commentary:

This past November, McGill’s Advisory Panel on Campus Expression (APCE) delivered a report on the state of academic freedom and expression at the university. The report recommended that McGill exercise “institutional restraint” and refrain from responding publicly to controversial geopolitical issues in order to preserve academic freedom. This policy encourages McGill to prioritize its reputation over critical advocacy, neglecting global responsibility under the pretense of protecting free thought.

Following the report’s publication, President and Vice Chancellor Deep Saini issued an enthusiastic statement affirming the APCE’s recommendations on campus expression. However, the report’s call for political neutrality undercuts McGill’s stated commitments to responsibility and global engagement. By extricating itself from political discourse, McGill forfeits its power to catalyze meaningful community discussion. 

Just last week, in light of the brutalization of Iranian protestors, McGill released an email directing students to mental health resources. Strikingly, this email was sent only to students on McGill records as Iranian passport holders and did not include a clear condemnation of the Iranian government’s actions. This message exemplifies McGill’s reticence to speak publicly on issues with global reach and disturbing human rights implications. 

While the university is eager to embrace its reputation as a globally-renowned institution, it engages selectively with the world around it, prioritizing its own reputation over advocacy. Because McGill’s priorities are not transparently reflected in its mission statements, the university’s decision to implement institutional restraint rings particularly dissonant. 

In its report, the APCE draws a false contrast between academic freedom and institutional positions, weaponizing this manufactured dichotomy to justify McGill’s silence on geopolitical issues. The report does not offer a clear definition of academic freedom, but merely describes the concept as “associational to freedom of expression” and bound by “the standards of scholarly research and inquiry.” The APCE’s intentional vagueness in defining academic freedom obscures the fact that official university stances and academic freedom are not inherently at odds with one another. Arguably, academic freedom is epitomized when educational authority figures can simultaneously espouse opinions and encourage community dissent. It is dangerous to conflate neutrality with equity and tolerance, as such practices vilify the expression of opinions. Additionally, if academic freedom extends only so far as “scholarly standards,” then opinions, institutional or otherwise, are protected only when they reinforce McGill’s pre-existing party lines.

This outcome—where the McGill administration’s biases are preached as nonpartisan and student voices are made political—is at clear odds with the APCE’s overarching goal of maintaining a vibrant academic and intellectual culture at McGill. 

The APCE advocates that McGill assume a neutral stance on all geopolitical issues. However, maintaining neutrality is a position in and of itself. In today’s polarized climate, acknowledging facts can be perceived as a political act. Institutional restraint enables McGill to refrain from affirming vital truths as suits the university’s agenda. In its report, McGill repeatedly refused to acknowledge genocide in Gaza, instead referring to the conflict as the “Israel-Gaza War.” Although intergovernmental organizations and NGO’s, including the UN, have repeatedly stated that the Israeli government’s actions align with the definition of genocide, in its report, the APCE employs misleading alternative terminology that downplays the conflict’s severity. 

Yet, McGill doesn’t stray from all political conviction. In 2022, the Provost issued a statement denouncing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and expressing “shock and sorrow” over the conflict. Herein lies just one example of how the concept of neutrality can be selectively applied to uphold some truths while obscuring those deemed “too controversial” for public endorsement. In many critical instances, McGill, a school that prides itself on promoting the “dissemination of knowledge,” chooses to remain silent and protect its reputation. 

The APCE cited community outrage regarding previous university-issued geopolitical statements as a pretense for the necessity of institutional restraint. The report stated that, on an individual level, many faculty and staff members felt discouraged from voicing their opinions on political issues because they fear being negatively misinterpreted. Thus, the students are burdened with the responsibility to foster a campus environment that promotes constructive conversation and institution-level dialogue over ‘cancel culture,’ whereas professors—hired with a duty to protect academic freedom and promote discourse—are absolved of this duty. 

The APCE portrays institutional restraint as promoting academic freedom, drawing a false contrast between the declaration of political views and the protection of free thought. Yet, in today’s polarized social climate, even the truth has become politicized. Truth is imperative to freedom, both academic and otherwise. McGill would be wise to remember this.

Prof Profiles, Science & Technology

Meet your prof: Loydie Jerome-Majewska

by Amy Gelfand on

More in Prof Profiles:

From uncovering the genes that cause birth defects to serving as Chair of the Board of Directors of the Canadian Black Scientists Network, Professor Loydie Jerome-Majewska has been a catalyst for change across fields. She serves as a professor in McGill’s Department of Pediatrics and senior scientist at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre. Jerome-Majewska sat down with The Tribune to shine light on her work in developmental biology and her efforts to advance equity and representation in the field.

Since the start of her academic journey at Wesleyan University, Jerome-Majewska has approached science with curiosity and an open mind. As an undergraduate pursuing an honours degree in biology, she gained hands-on laboratory experience working with her advisor, Laura Grabel, a professor in the Department of Biology.

“She was this amazing researcher who had children of her own, who danced after work, I mean, she just did it all,” Jerome-Majewska said. “And I thought that was just awesome. And so, I applied for graduate school.”

Jerome-Majewska continued her studies in graduate school at Columbia University’s medical campus in New York City.

“I worked with another amazing woman, [Virginia] Papaioannou,” referencing her graduate advisor and a prominent developmental biologist. “[She] was making a genetic mutation in mice using embryonic stem cells. It was brand new. Had never been done. I’ve just been fortunate to have really good advisors, and she also had children, whilst doing amazing science, she was just an amazing person.”

Combined with her postdoctoral work at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Institute with Elizabeth H. Lacy as her postdoctoral advisor—one of the women who started the whole molecular biology techniques in mice—Jerome-Majewska’s academic journey laid the foundation for her current research. Currently, she focuses on developmental disorders, using mouse models to predict how gene mutations could affect human patients.

“Now I’m interested in researching babies with congenital malformation at the time of birth, who have malformations when they’re born because things went wrong during embryogenesis.”

With a person-first approach to science, Jerome-Majewska emphasizes the importance of setting priorities to maintain balanced academic excellence, which, for her, meant stepping down from teaching to focus on her research.

“I enjoyed my teaching. I met some awesome undergrads, but you have to do it well. I’m doing a lot of other things too. I can’t do it all. You can never do it all,” she said.

Nevertheless, while the field of developmental biology continues to flourish, Jerome-Majewska notes that inclusive representation remains a challenge.

“I think there are things that impede how far we’ve moved into not just my field, but in science in general, because I don’t think everybody interested or excited who can contribute has been able to participate and contribute,” Jerome-Majewska said. “I think humans have huge potential, and if we could have all of the different people participate, we’d be so much further. Yeah, so in that way, I think that’s too bad for all of our field […], if everybody’s doing the same thing, we’re not gonna get anywhere.”

This recognition of social barriers inspired her involvement with the Black Canadian Scientists Network, which, with over a thousand members, creates space for representation and collaboration in science and is currently focused on the GenCARE project.

“We’ve been able to get part of the Genome Canada grant to sequence the genomes of people of African ancestry, looking at diseases that impact the population negatively.”

Looking toward the future, Jerome-Majewska emphasizes the importance of building a more inclusive genetic research landscape for the future generation of researchers.

“I think, for the GenCARE project, I’m super excited, because, as a Black woman, I know that precision medicine is coming, and if we don’t have the DNA from people that look like me, it’s not gonna work. And I can do something about it, I have the skills. So, it’s a no-brainer.”

Arts & Entertainment, Music

‘Oscar Peterson’: A heart that yearns for liberty

by Loriane Chagnon on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

On a warm summer day in August 1925, Oscar Emmanuel Peterson, one of Canada’s most respected jazz artists, was born. Growing up in the working-class, predominantly Black neighbourhood of Little Burgundy in Montreal, Peterson developed his musical skills alongside his four siblings and with the support of his loving parents. Forced to give up the trumpet after contracting tuberculosis, he chose to focus on the piano and soon developed a musical talent that foreshadowed his bright future. Peterson honed his skills, and with the support of his sister, Daisy, won a nationwide amateur talent competition in Canada and landed his own weekly radio show: Fifteen Minutes Piano Rambling. Soon after, Peterson signed with a record label, and, by 1945, he had released his first two recordings: I Got Rhythm and The Sheik of Araby.

Norman Granz, founder of Verve Records, became Peterson’s agent, allowing his fame to grow internationally. Granz was famous for introducing jazz to broader audiences by taking “jazz out of smoky clubs and putting it in concert halls.” He heard Young Peterson on the radio in a taxicab on his way to the Montreal airport and was immediately struck. After learning that the music was a recording of Peterson at the Alberta Lounge, Granz asked the driver to turn around and take him there so that he could meet him. In the following years, Peterson’s career grew, and he established himself as a household name in the jazz world, working with the likes of Ella Fitzgerald, Chet Baker, Duke Ellington, Billie Holiday, and Louis Armstrong. The last nicknamed him “the man with four hands” for his rapidity and precision when playing.

“The way you play music is a tonal biography of yourself, your thoughts and feelings,” said Peterson. Peterson was a quick and precise artist; he could execute lightning-fast runs, possessed incredible timing, and had a deep understanding of swing. His hands were able to tell many stories, such as that of a lover yearning for his beloved in Blue and Sentimental or of a person who has achieved success at the cost of someone special in I Can’t Get Started.

He is further remembered for his commitment to racial equality and his defiance of stereotypes, emerging as Canada’s first Black jazz star in the 20th century. He overcame racial prejudice to establish himself as a giant in his field. Further, he was a music educator and humanitarian, receiving many accolades, including eight Grammy Awards, a Praemium Imperiale World Art Award, the UNESCO Music Prize, and 16 honorary doctorates. Notably, a coalition of Black community groups has recently asked for Montreal’s Place des Festivals to be renamed after Oscar Peterson to honour his legacy, which has marked the city’s music scene.

The prolific Peterson released several albums each year and appeared on more than 200 albums by other artists. He is widely considered to be one of the best jazz pianists of all time and remains a cornerstone of the genre. His influence resonates in the works of artists like Laufey, who are reintroducing jazz to younger audiences. 

Peterson’s composition Hymn to Freedom also had a deep impact, becoming pivotal to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. The song calls for a world of unity, dignity, and liberty, with lyrics by Hariette Hamilton. Peterson’s wife, Kelly, is currently translating the composition into various languages, such as French and Cree, to allow individuals from various backgrounds to hear and understand Peterson’s vision for a free and harmonious world. 

Peterson is renowned for his technical mastery, virtuosity, and the warmth with which he played, and he is remembered for his deep love and connection with the art of music.

Behind the Bench, Sports

Conflicting feelings of fandom

by Will Kennedy on

More in Behind the Bench:

Never Google the owner of your favourite sports team. It almost never yields results that make you feel good about spending your money on tickets and merchandise, and often leaves you feeling put off altogether. 

Five National Football League (NFL) owners have been named in the latest Jeffrey Epstein file release, with all communications occurring after Epstein’s 2008 conviction for sex offences. Minnesota Vikings owner Zygi Wilf inquired about purchasing a property in Paris from Epstein in 2015. Epstein spoke via email with someone named “Josh” about New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who was arrested and charged with two misdemeanour counts of soliciting prostitution in 2019. Epstein alluded to “a past issue with Kraft that may come to light later.” Josh Harris, co-owner of multiple teams, had a multi-year business relationship with Epstein and visited his Manhattan home on at least one occasion in 2014. Meanwhile, New York Giants owner Stephen Tisch crudely discussed multiple girls, including one so-called “Ukrainian girl,” over email with the depraved pedophile. In emails where Tisch asked Epstein to be set up with this “Ukrainian girl,” she was referred to in vulgar language before Tisch followed up with “pro or civilian,” inquiring if she was a prostitute. 

On Jan. 30, Tisch put out a statement saying he “regrets associating” with Epstein and that “we all know now, he was a terrible person”—something Tisch should have known from Epstein’s prior 2008 conviction.

While the Epstein files dominate the news, Memphis Grizzlies owner Robert Pera has flown under the radar. On Jan. 29, investigative journalist Pablo Torre shared the findings of an investigation into the former Apple engineer and founder of Ubiquiti Inc., a company that specializes in making user-friendly internet equipment servicing remote areas of the globe. 

One of Ubiquiti’s top customers is the Russian military. The company stopped direct shipments to Russia when sanctions were implemented in 2022, but since then, sales have continued to pass through third parties. The company has not yet released a public statement on Russian combat units obtaining their equipment, but verified videos from the Donbas region clearly show Ubiquiti technology being used to commit war crimes against civilians. 

One Ukrainian military official estimated that 80 per cent of Russian drones use Ubiquiti equipment to relay video feed to command centers. The technology is so important that Russian military units have made Telegram videos begging for public donations in order to purchase more of the equipment. The equipment is small enough that it can be attached to the vests of operators, and, unlike satellite internet, it cannot be disabled by the provider remotely.

Although the company has stopped direct sales to Russia, sanctions experts have told Pablo Torre that pleading ignorance is not a valid legal defence for how Russia obtained their technology. 

This is not the first time Ubiquiti has been involved in a scandal over sanction violations. The company settled for over $500,000 USD in 2014 after it granted exclusive rights to a United Arab Emirates-based distributor to sell Ubiquiti technology to Iran. At the time of the settlement, Ubiquiti allegedly did not have a proper compliance department, and since then has taken no meaningful steps to ensure its technology does not end up in the wrong hands. Western tech illegally ending up in Russian hands is a large part of why the war is still ongoing. At best, Ubiquiti is being negligent; at worst, it is a willing participant in war crimes. 

From a fan perspective, it can be really disheartening to know that supporting your favourite team may directly benefit these owners. It can cause a lot of conflicting feelings and disconnect fans from the team. It often feels like blissful ignorance might be your best option as a fan because major sports owners are rarely in the news for doing good in the world.  Although our individual influence over such matters may appear minuscule, it is crucial that as a whole we pay attention to these issues, as this is the only way we can impose any sense of accountability on owners.

No fan wants to hear that the person who calls the shots for their favourite sports team is connected to a pedophile or is actively fueling wars. For those who want to support their favourite team and be part of something bigger than themselves, it is unfortunate that they may be financially benefiting some truly despicable folks in the process. Sports organizations are a massive part of the communities in which they exist and thus have a duty to properly represent the fans who support them.

McGill, Montreal, News

Professor Annie Bunting explores gender-based violence in Africa

by Josette Chandler on

More in McGill:

On Wednesday, Feb. 4,  Annie Bunting, professor of Law and Society at York University, hosted a discussion at the McGill Faculty of Law’s Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism (CHRLP) entitled “Knowledge production and gender justice in post-conflict Africa” at New Chancellor Day Hall. 

Bunting opened the presentation with a background on her past work in international feminist law, including her role as the Chair of International Gender Justice at York University. 

“I started as a Boulton fellow here at McGill back in another century, which is such an amazing program,” Bunting said. “I am really glad to be engaging with all of you, especially at the Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism because the [work done here] fits really nicely with my own.”

Bunting then explained her experience working on the Conjugal Slavery and War Project from 2015 to 2020, a project that documented cases of forced marriage during times of conflict to establish a system of reparations for survivors of gender-based violence. 

“The coalition was monitoring international criminal tribunals and their prosecution of gender crimes, starting with the international criminal tribunal for Rwanda,” Bunting said. “The special court for Sierra Leone in 2008 found forced marriage to be its own heading of a crime against humanity. This was the impetus for this further research project.”

Bunting then shifted her focus to the Kinshasa Declaration, made at a Survivor’s Hearing on reparations during November 2021 in Kinshasa, the capital of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. To help create this document, Bunting assembled survivors and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and secured financial backing from 12 African countries. 

Bunting emphasized the number and diversity of goals presented during the hearing, explaining how she, the survivors, and the NGOs involved in the creation of the declaration came to the hearing with different outcomes in mind. 

“I’m interested in the tracking of these crimes against humanity, especially forced marriage,” Bunting said. “You have survivors [who] are very concerned about school fees for their children, about medical fees, about reintegration. So, you have really quite disparate goals for this event.” 

The event then transitioned to an open discussion, during which McGill Law Professor René Provost explained how language barriers impacted the drafting of the declaration. 

“One of the challenges we encounter is that the vocabulary used to talk about sexual relations in some African languages tends to be metaphorical, which posed enormous challenges when we convert that to the language of international or criminal law,” Provost said.

Next, McGill research fellow and Board of Displaced Internationals member Yana Liubymova spoke on the connection between sexual violence and conflict through her experiences with the war in Ukraine. 

“Unfortunately, we have numbers and numbers of survivor cases, and unfortunately, the statistics are growing. But, we improved our legislation and have a special program for survivors,” Liubymova said. “The displacement process is absolutely linked with the survivors of sexual violence in war.”

Bunting concluded by emphasizing the need for a focus that expands beyond individual survivor narratives, tackling the systemic issues themselves that enable gender-based violence.  

“I don’t want to leave the impression that we should overly rely on survivor testimonies or individual harm, because I think that can limit our thinking to not engage in substantive and structural redress. And that’s not an easy thing, right? It’s not easy to talk about what structural change looks like,” Bunting said. “These individual narratives exist within this broader communal push for recognition and reparations and for substantive change.”

Commentary, Opinion

Legault’s gone—Bill 21 should be too

by Amélie Marquet on

More in Commentary:

Since his 2018 inauguration, Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ) leader and Quebec premier François Legault has prioritized secularization and the protection of Quebec’s francophone identity. His resignation in January 2026 has left the province in political uncertainty, particularly regarding Bill 21, which prohibits certain public servants—including police officers, judges, and teachers—from wearing religious symbols at work. 

The bill was adopted through the notwithstanding clause, which allows the provincial government to override sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and prevents the Supreme Court from challenging Bill 21’s validity for the next five years. With Legault’s departure, Quebec faces a choice: Continue down a path that uses secularism as a pretext for exclusion, or seize this moment of political transition to address what Bill 21 truly represents. Far from being a neutral measure of secularism, Bill 21 functions as a legal tool that legitimizes systemic employment discrimination. Legault’s resignation removes the political figurehead most personally invested in defending this framework, making it both politically feasible and ethically necessary to re-examine whether Quebec’s commitment to secularism must come at the cost of systemic discrimination against religious minorities.

Quebec’s contemporary debates on secularism are rooted in sentiments dating back to the 1940s and 1950s, when the Catholic Church exercised significant influence over social and political life, administering schools, hospitals, and moral norms. The Quiet Revolution of the 1960s marked a decisive effort by Quebecois society to reduce religious influence and assert greater provincial control over public institutions. Although Bill 21 might function as a bulwark to limit religious impact on future governance, such objectives do not require the exclusion of religious minorities from public representation or employment.

The Bill disproportionately targets marginalized groups by banning visible religious symbols or clothing—including the hijab, the kippah, and the dastar. This comes as Islamophobia, xenophobia, and antisemitism are on the rise in Canada: Police-reported hate crimes targeting Muslims increased by 173 per cent from 2020 to 2024, and antisemitic hate crimes increased by 83 per cent from 2021 to 2023.

Compared to other provinces, Quebec has significantly higher levels of Islamophobia than the rest of Canada, with 56 per cent of Quebec residents reporting a negative view of Islam compared to 36 per cent outside of Quebec. This has forced religious minorities into an impossible position: Having to choose between removing required religious symbols, or giving up on a stable, public-sector job. State employment guarantees, on average, stability, security, better salary and retirement benefits. Bill 21, therefore, enforces structural inequality under a false sense of secularism and neutrality.

Furthermore, the bill creates symbolic exclusion, arbitrarily designating who is truly considered to have Quebecois Identity. As teachers, judges, and police officers embody public authority, the exclusion of religious minorities from these professions distances them from the province’s sphere of influence.

Bill 21 not only creates structural inequality in job opportunities but also in social representation. Montreal, the most diverse city in Quebec, reported that the city is approximately 11.9 per cent Muslim, 3.8 per cent Jewish, and 0.9 per cent Sikh in 2021. The bill does more than regulate religious symbols—it insinuates who the government believes belongs in Quebec’s public sector. 

The use of the notwithstanding clause to preemptively override Charter protections further normalizes limiting minority rights and permits the bill to be passed without adherence to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The clause’s use signals that minority protection can easily be suspended for political goals, and encourages future restrictions. 

Legault’s resignation offers Quebec’s next government a chance to chart a different course—one that doesn’t require the province to choose between secularism and inclusion.

Research Briefs, Science & Technology

From fauna to flora: The benefits of switching to plant-based protein

by Sarah McDonald on

More in Research Briefs:

Vegetarianism has been on the rise for years; in 2024, 2.3 million Canadians self-identified as vegetarian, a 176 per cent increase from 2015. Several factors contribute to the marked rise, including vegetarianism’s perceived benefits for both individual consumers and the environment. But how beneficial is it really? McGill Professor of Animal Science, Surgio Burgos, and his former PhD student, Olivia Auclair—a postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University’s Environmental Change Institute—worked to determine the benefits of transitioning towards, or entirely to, a vegetarian diet.

“First, we looked at the contribution of important foods, which we call ‘livestock produce products,’ whether that be meat, red meat, white meat, or dairy foods, and the contribution to nutrients,” Burgos said in an interview with The Tribune. “[We] then looked at the environmental impact [of these foods] through greenhouse gas emissions [….] [Then we] put the information that we had gained for Canada in the context of other countries.”

In their recent review paper, Burgos and Auclair aimed to further elucidate the consequences of switching from animal-based protein to plant-based protein, analyzing nutritional, environmental, and health impacts of complete and partial dietary substitutions.

“Basically, we found that there were co-benefits of substituting red and processed meat with plant protein foods across all three of the dimensions that we looked at, so nutrition, environment and also health,” Auclair said in an interview with The Tribune. “So that’s good news, and we saw that for total replacements, where 100 per cent of red and processed meat was substituted. But we also saw, obviously smaller, but similar co-benefits when simulations were partial substitutions, so 50 per cent of red and processed meat.”

Their study found that substituting animal-based protein with plant-based protein sources led to average increases in calcium, iron, fibre, and potassium intake, as well as decreased levels of saturated fats. They, however, noted that their results were highly influenced by governmental policy. 

“For example, in the Netherlands, they don’t supplement [cow] milk with vitamin D, but we do [in Canada], it is mandatory. In the U.S., it is optional. So that vitamin D outcome changes because of [those policies],” Burgos said.

This illustrates the impact of policy on nutritional levels; the nutritional benefits of switching from animal to plant-based products are dependent upon which sources are fortified. Fortifying plant-based protein alternatives is critical to cementing the benefits of transitioning towards a plant-based diet.

Along with vitamin D, vitamin A, calcium, and iodine levels appear to have been particularly dependent on fortification policy.

“So for me, the goal of the study is to inform public policy in dietary guidance [and plant-based alternative fortification],” Burgos said. “Some countries include environmental impact as part of the considerations that they have to guide dietary guidance [….] But food fortification is another aspect of it.”

Another key finding of the study is that substituting meat with plant-based alternatives yields greater benefits than dairy substitutions.

“We’re sort of seeing there’s no clear co-benefits from substituting dairy. You get trade-offs with certain nutrients, you don’t see as big of reductions to diet-related greenhouse gas emissions, and the health gains that we saw in the dairy scenarios were only because of this increase in plant-based foods that accompany the reduction in dairy,” Auclair said. 

The research highlights the importance of choice in dietary substitutions. While the study shows that opting for plant-based alternatives can have positive environmental, nutritional, and health-based impacts, policy plays a huge role in the nutritional benefits of these substitutions. Their findings also reveal that changes don’t need to be extreme to have a real impact; substituting meat with plant-based alternatives, even just once a week, can benefit both your health and the environment.

“I think, for me, it’s not so much like telling people to eat a specific way, like ‘You should do this dietary pattern, or this dietary pattern,’ it’s really about just making more conscious food choices,” Auclair said. “And like Sergio said, like a few nights a week, integrating [plants], instead of cooking something with red meat, just try a new recipe [….] It’s about those individual choices that you make every day.”

Research Briefs, Science & Technology

Powerful greens: How natural plant compounds are used in therapeutic intervention

by Arielle Brunet on

More in Research Briefs:

Have you ever wondered why you were encouraged to eat your greens as a child? Not only are they packed with healthy nutrients, but some of these cruciferous vegetables are also home to a chemical compound called isothiocyanates (ITCs)—phytochemicals. These are shown to play a role in preventing cancer, cardiovascular disease, neurodegeneration, as well as autoimmune and inflammatory diseases.

Previous research has shown that high dosages of ITCs can be used as an anti-cancer drug promoting apoptosis—programmed cell death—of cancer cells. Sanjima Pal, a researcher for the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, confirmed this finding in her own paper but also found that ITCs can promote cellular healing at low doses.

Pal began studying isothiocyanates after completing her PhD at the National Institute of Science Education and Research in India in 2011 and is now pursuing postdoctoral studies at McGill.

Her research began by exploring ITCs’ low-concentration effects on macrophage cells—immune cells that protect our bodies from tumours and germs, among other things. Pal was particularly interested in the macrophages that promote arthritis healing and aimed to investigate how research could then contribute to therapeutic treatments of inflammatory disease.

“When at low concentration, this isothiocyanate group of compounds can modulate and switch macrophage [functional and phenotypic] properties […] towards a favourable macrophage type. This can reduce the arthritis burden,” Pal explained in an interview with The Tribune. “You [aid] wound healing from this.” 

So how exactly do ITCs do this? Once they are introduced in the cells, they target enzymes—proteins that speed up biochemical processes—which, in turn, regulate a kind of imbalance in the body’s defence system called oxidative stress. By modulating these enzymes, ITCs can help regulate the autoimmune response for a variety of diseases, such as arthritis. 

“My thesis publication was one of the first publications in that zone [….] So that time, I used an in vitro model and used human blood. In human blood, […] I isolated macrophage and then showed the same switching [of macrophage types],” Pal said. 

ITCs also form from another compound through enzymatic activity. Broccoli, cauliflower, brussels sprouts, and cabbage are among the top sources of ITCs. When we eat these vegetables, an enzyme acts on glucosinolates to produce ITCs. However, it is important to note that ITCs’ therapeutic properties for autoimmune disease or cancer may not come from natural food sources, because ITCs in this form are not bioavailable. In other words, eating broccoli for every meal will not necessarily help prevent cancer. The concentration varies too much, which affects the consistency and efficiency of the phytochemical. Nevertheless, this field could soon start being integrated into clinical practice.

“The synthesis is quite tough. And even if you synthesize it [and] purify it at a higher amount and then make it available pharmacologically, it’s a very complicated process,” Pal said, explaining the challenges of working with the ITC compound. “Because even if it is available in cruciferous vegetables, if you heat the vegetables, you lose the property.”

Overall, Pal’s research highlights how simply shifting the dosage of bioactive compounds, such as ITCs, can expand the scope of their benefits. For her future research, Pal is interested in learning more about the benefits ITCs offer and how exactly they function—especially considering that neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s, could benefit from ITC’s regulation of oxidative stress.

“This is one of the drugs I will always look forward to putting into my research work [….] It has a diverse effect and some activity we don’t even know [about], like anything at the neuronal level,” Pal said. “You can implement this compound and see how neuron and immune cells interact. This is now a hot topic.”

Student Life, The Tribune Predicts

The Tribune Predicts: Valentine’s Day Horoscopes

by Parisa Rasul on

More in Student Life:

Valentine’s Day is coming up, and love really is all around! While unpredictability is customary for this holiday, we could all do with a touch of clarity on Feb. 14th. Find out what your horoscope holds for you in The Tribune Predicts: Valentine’s Day Edition! 

Aries (March 21 – April 19): Much like the famed Greek god of warfare, your love life is a battlefield. Whether you’ll lay waste to it or not depends on how prepared you are to fight for what you want. Be ready to give it your all this Valentine’s Day, Aries, and win that special someone’s heart!

Taurus (April 20 – May 20): As an earth sign, your groundedness will keep you and your relationships stable and healthy this Valentine’s. Ditch the frivolities and opt for a relaxing and simple Saturday this year.

Gemini (May 21 – June 21): You’ll be extra busy this Valentine’s Day (like you always are), but be sure to take some time to wind down and have a special night with your special someone. As an air sign, your mind is always elsewhere, but try to be present during this holiday.  

Cancer (June 22 – July 22): You have a tendency to burn bright and let everyone know it. However, like your mascot, the crab, you sometimes hide under a protective shell. There might be an admirer in store for you this year, Cancer, but in order to secure their attention, you’ll have to leave your comfort zone!

Leo (July 23 – Aug. 22): You’re very picky about where you’ll spend your Valentine’s this year. If the never-ending search for the perfect reservation has left you fatigued, consider spending the night at home instead. Buy some chocolates, splurge on wine, and put on a movie for some at-home viewing!

Virgo (Aug. 23 – Sept. 22): Your logical, practical, and systematic tendencies seep into your love life. This Valentine’s Day, you may find yourself thinking about what your relationship means for the future. It’s definitely something to keep in mind, but don’t forget to let loose and feel the love of right now!

Libra (Sept. 23 – Oct. 23): As a Libra, you are obsessed with finding that person who’s the mirror image of yourself. This Valentine’s, however, you may not find your perfect reflection. But who needs “perfect”? Hold out for a connection you may not think will work, but might surprise you by actually balancing you out just right!

Scorpio (Oct. 24 – Nov. 21): Your emotions are messy and intense, Scorpio. You may need to take this year to figure them out and piece together what you actually want. But don’t feel let down just yet! Your mysterious personality is attractive to many, and a secret admirer awaits. 

Sagittarius (Nov. 22 – Dec. 21): Be sure to stay alert this Valentine’s Day! You love making other people laugh, and you’re mighty good at it! However, a real //clown// may be headed your way, so proceed with caution, and steer clear of the “but he’s sooo funny!” trope. 

Capricorn (Dec. 22 – Jan. 19): Capricorns, you’re probably expecting the worst this Valentine’s. You have a tendency to undermine yourself in the romance that approaches you. However, you’ll meet someone persistent in gaining your affections this year, so keep your door open for any secret, or not-so-secret, admirers. 

Pisces (Feb. 19 – March 20): Pisces, get ready for the love triangle of your life this Valentine’s Day. You’ll have to make some hard decisions soon, and be sure to make the right one! Or, even better, have fun with it…*Challengers theme plays.*

Aquarius (Jan. 20 – Feb. 18): You care a lot. You care almost too much. You’re the most non–nonchalant person when it comes to love. You may be waiting for your Mr. Darcy, and wait you must! Yearning is written in the stars for you, but don’t fret not. Mr. Darcy is indeed on his way across the misty field to win your heart!

1 … 18 19 20 21 22 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue