Latest News

McGill, News

Mohawk Mothers accuse McGill of concealing new evidence of human remains at the New Vic site

by Yusur Al-Sharqi on

More in McGill:

At a press conference on April 30, the Kanien’kehá:ka Kahnistensera (Mohawk Mothers) alleged that McGill University and the Société québécoise des infrastructures (SQI) found new evidence of human remains earlier this month at the site of the New Vic Project, where an ongoing investigation into possible unmarked graves is underway. The Mothers claim that McGill did not share its latest findings report with them, despite their previous settlement agreement requiring transparent communication between the two parties.

The Mohawk Mothers have been in a legal battle with McGill since 2015 over the construction of the New Vic Project, an $870 million CAD development which the Mothers claim is the site of unmarked Indigenous graves. The site hosts the former Allan Memorial Institute, where parts of the CIA’s MK-Ultra program—an unethical mind-control experiment conducted in the 1950s and 60s—were carried out. 

On April 6, 2023, the Mothers reached a historic settlement agreement with McGill, SQI, the Royal Victoria Hospital, the City of Montreal, and the Attorney General of Canada, mandating a comprehensive investigation into the site and a jointly appointed archaeologist panel to oversee work on the site. When the panel disbanded in August 2023, the Mothers turned to the Superior Court of Quebec, which ordered McGill to reinstate it. McGill successfully appealed, and the Supreme Court of Canada later declined to hear the Mothers’ appeal. As a result, the panel remains inactive.

During the press conference, the Mothers detailed the potential evidence found on the site following their agreement with McGill: Hundreds of small bone fragments of unknown origin, fragments of two children’s shoes from the early 20th century, and alerts from historic human remains detection dogs (HHRDDs). The Mothers cited a study indicating that there is only a 0.06 per cent chance of two HHRDDs falsely identifying remains at a site—three separate dogs indicated the presence of possible remains at the New Vic site. 

The new report allegedly suggests the presence of remains at the site based on the culmination of evidence from three separate remote sensing technologies in the past two years: Ground penetrating radar, human remains detection dogs, and most recently, an S4 Subterra Grey probe, which is specially designed to detect unmarked graves. 

In an interview with The Tribune, Mohawk Mother Kwetiio described her conflicting emotions surrounding their discovery of the report.

“It’s very bittersweet because you would like to think that there’s nothing there,” Kwetiio told The Tribune. “I didn’t want anything to be there, and yet I wanted them to be found [….] It just brings back all of the trauma.” 

In a written statement to The Tribune, McGill’s Media Relations Office (MRO) wrote that the most recent report on the presence of remains was commissioned by the SQI, not by McGill, as the land in question falls under the SQI’s purview. The MRO also denied the Mothers’ claims that human remains are on the site. 

“Since work on the New Vic project has been launched, no human remains, or unmarked grave indicators of any sort have been found,” the MRO wrote. “McGill has respected the spirit and the [settlement agreement] since its inception.”  

In light of these developments, Mohawk Mother Kahentinetha told  The Tribune that the Mothers sent a letter the morning of April 30 to the Assistant Chief Coroner of Quebec, Géhane Kamel, requesting that she intervene to prevent McGill’s further excavation of the site, which could damage potential evidence. 

“We […] asked the coroner to work with Indigenous experts, a Mohawk medical pathologist, and a Mohawk archaeologist alongside cultural monitors to ensure a credible, transparent and impartial investigation,” Kahentinetha said.

Phillippe Blouin, an anthropologist and associate of the Mothers, elaborated on the importance of McGill’s collaboration with Indigenous Peoples themselves. 

“All this talk about reconciliation has to lead to meaningful action with the [Indigenous] people actually existing here,” Blouin said. “There are people all around, many are in Kahnawà:ke, and they have specific demands.”

Despite their efforts, Kahentinetha highlighted the ongoing challenge the Mothers face in establishing productive communication with McGill. While they have attempted to engage in direct dialogue with the institution, they claim that the response has been largely unresponsive.

“You know what I would like to do, and I tried to do, is […] talk to them and tell them about us, tell them how we feel, who we are, understand us, what our role is, and let’s talk together about it,” Kahentinetha said. “We’ve tried to do that, but it hasn’t worked. I hope it will.”

Letters to the Editor, Opinion

Letter to the Editor: The symbolic student voice

by Abe Berglas on

More in Letters to the Editor:

At McGill, the main conduit for student input in decision-making is committees, working groups, advisory councils, and other bodies that meet and deliberate. When decisions that impact students are made, students must have a role, as provided by both Quebec’s Act respecting the accreditation and financing of student associations and McGill’s own Charter of Student Rights.

The theory is nice, but all infrastructure with students incorporated is decaying. Governing bodies are quietly retired or transformed to exclude students. Remaining committees meet increasingly rarely. Agendas are written behind-the-scenes and dictate every moment of a meeting. McGill handpicks its own student membership. These shifts in power rely on the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) lack of institutional memory and the fact that student leaders are unaware that things were once different. 

Some portions of governance are always being recycled. Governance upkeep is time-consuming and often underappreciated, in any setting. You might ask, is it notable that some committees are changing, or losing relevance? Not necessarily, if we consider one committee at a time. But my one year here has generated an extensive list of eroded governance processes involving students.  It is actually rarer to find a well-working committee than one in the process of being transformed to circumvent student input. Even reading good faith into the university, the result is the same: students, where they still exist on these bodies, are powerless. Claims of student apathy are used to justify this lapse in accountability.

The Student Achievement and Accessibility (SAA) Advisory Committee was discontinued this year, based on low student engagement. I found out only after emailing the SAA, having selected four student members. I spoke to a previous member who had good attendance, but found that the meetings were ineffective, and feedback was met with defensiveness. I asked to meet with the SAA in a town-hall setting, but they were unwilling to extend a meeting invitation to students beyond those who initially expressed interest in the advisory committee. 

The International Student Services Advisory Committee didn’t meet for the first half of the year because they were waiting for one representative to confirm their presence. The students that I assigned to the committee were never told. Their first meeting was in February.

The Committee on Student Services scheduled only four meetings; one was cancelled, and one was a training session. 

The University Health and Safety Committee cancelled three of their four monthly meetings during Fall 2024 due to a lack of agenda items. Their one meeting that semester was 10 minutes. 

Student members on the Committee on Student Grievances and the Appeal Committee for Student Discipline and Grievances were meant to get in-person training. This training was postponed multiple times and finally cancelled. Instead, they were given asynchronous training. 

The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee (EDIC) has rejected every addition to the agenda requested by Subcommittee chairs, only allowing strictly defined governance items to be discussed. Only the Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning) Angela Campbell was able to bring an item to the attention of EDIC that was unrelated to large-picture governance. 

The Universal Access Capital Projects Working Group (mentioned in this earlier blog post about the degradation of committees with student members) was also discontinued—I only learned of this when I asked at a meeting with McGill’s Director of Equity Tynan Jarrett. During that time, funding for at least one project, gender neutral bathrooms, was significantly cut. No students were alerted. 

When I went to attend meetings at the James Administration Building, I wasn’t on their list of visitors the first few times. I had to wait 5 to 10 minutes each time for the receptionist to call someone at the meeting room. 

I have submitted two requests for review to the Advisory Council on the Charter of Student Rights. As per the Charter, I should have heard back within 30 days. This didn’t happen either time, and I had to escalate the issue to McGill’s secretariat department to get a response. The second time, I was told the committee works on only one request at a time, the first of which has taken over six months.

I’m running applications for the 2025/2026 committee representatives, and the exercise seems insulting. I hate the idea that I’ll look through and filter hopeful students, and I’ll send their names off into the void, for them never to be contacted again. 

These lapses are especially relevant in a time when McGill is defining acceptable and unacceptable avenues for student voices. We are pointed to the institutional mechanisms, but how? Committees are being scrubbed from McGill websites. Student representatives are left in the dark. And when there are sufficient barriers to participation, and no students left, these committee leaders can say, “there’s no interest!” and return to their work without the inconvenience of consultation. 

Off the Board, Opinion

It’s time for the United States to finally get its 51st state

by Ellen Lurie on

More in Off the Board:

For many of my Canadian peers, the phrase “51st state” earns an eye-roll, no doubt in response to U.S. President Trump’s ceaseless political and economic antagonism. Yet, growing up in Washington, DC, “51st state” was a rallying cry, a call for the enfranchisement of the city’s over 700,000 residents who are, at present, unrepresented in the federal legislature. How can the same two words represent forceful domination and aggression here in Canada, but liberation and freedom in DC? As it turns out, DC statehood wasn’t as mainstream of a political movement as I thought.

I grew up in Adams Morgan, a neighbourhood in the northwest corner of DC decorated with colourful townhouses, live music venues, bookstores, and a plethora of delicious international cuisine, all running along its famous 18th Street. Adams Morgan is known for its cultural vibrancy and artistic nature, making it—in my opinion, at least—the best place in the world to spend your childhood.

Since I can remember, Adams Morgan has been a bustling centre of political and community activity: Debates over protecting its original architecture from condo pop-ups; mobilization for the preservation of our beloved Adams Morgan Plaza; enthusiastic celebration of the neighbourhood’s history at the Adams Morgan Day festival; widespread mourning over the closure of classic spots like Columbia Station, a jazz club I was indoctrinated into loving by my father. 

Yet, no community-based activity is more significant to residents of Adams Morgan—and DC, more generally—than the movement for statehood. Since the United States’ founding almost 250 years ago, Washington, DC has been relegated to the status of a federal district, meaning that the city, despite having a larger population than several states, is completely disenfranchised. We have no senators, only a single (non-voting, mind you) representative in the House, and a mere three seats in the Electoral College. Yet, DC pays more taxes per capita to the federal government than any state. 

Our representation at the federal level is not the only political consequence of DC’s lack of statehood. Our local government operates under Home Rule, where residents are allowed to elect their Mayor, Councilmembers, and Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners, but Congress maintains ultimate power to overturn our laws, disapprove our budgets, and make judge appointments to our courts. As dismal as that already sounds, our right to self-governance is only expected to shrink under Trump, as just this February, Congress introduced a bill to repeal Home Rule entirely.

Voter suppression of Washingtonians is not simply a matter of regional discrimination, either; DC statehood is a racial justice issue. For over 50 years, the district was a majority-Black city, with Black people still today representing the largest racial demographic in the city. The disenfranchisement of what was, for quite some time, the United States’ most Black city by population percentage is not an accident. The anti-democratic tactics governing DC are a component of a larger system suppressing Black power in politics. 

In a 2016 referendum, nearly 80 per cent of DC residents voted in favour of statehood, making it perhaps the most mainstream political movement in the city. Making DC the “51st state” was a bedtime civics story all my friends and I grew up hearing, something so intuitive that it was thought of as cliché to write about in your college applications. In fact, when initially coming up with ideas for this Off the Board piece, I dismissed this topic for being far too overdone.

Yet, as I have begun to realize throughout my time at McGill, most of my peers—including my fellow international students from the U.S.—lack any knowledge about the DC statehood cause. For many, the phrase “51st state” holds an entirely different meaning, having been co-opted into a broader vocabulary to describe Trump’s political aggression towards Canada. In the process, DC’s fight for democratic rights has been erased from the conversation. 

At a time as politically tumultuous as today, it is crucial that those who are able to vote prioritize civic engagement do so, not just on their own behalves, but on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of residents in DC whose voices are sidelined by an unjust, archaic, and racist democratic precedent. 

Commentary, Opinion

A welcome until it wasn’t: The double standard of Quebec’s secularism

by Millen Yemane on

More in Commentary:

Montreal’s city hall recently took down a welcome sign in its lobby that portrayed a woman in a hijab, less than a year after its installation. This decision comes amid a series of changes implemented under Quebec’s Bill 21 and the continued movement towards secularization—the separation of public institutions from religious influences through legislation intended to enforce religious neutrality.

Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante defended the decision to remove the sign by citing the “discomfort” it caused and the overarching desire to secularize public institutions. However, this raises an important question: What exactly does it mean to experience discomfort when seeing a veiled person?

If a depiction of a person wearing a hijab on a wall makes one uncomfortable, then surely a walk down rue Ste.-Catherine must be unbearable. After all, nearly 12 per cent of Montreal is Muslim. Representing this reality in public art has no bearing on the secularization of public institutions, nor should it produce unease. The welcome sign was simply an accurate depiction of Montreal’s religious and cultural diversity—something lawmakers should regard with pride rather than discomfort, especially considering Canada’s commitment to multiculturalism. 

The targeted nature of Quebec’s commitment to secularism shows in its inconsistencies. Consider, for example, the Mount Royal Cross. Proponents of Bill 21 argue the cross does not exist in the public sector, making it appropriate, and transcends religion in its emblematic significance—points that are not without reason. However, the religious implications of displaying a 103-foot-tall LED-lit symbol of the Catholic Church overlooking the city are glaringly obvious. 

Yet, the monument is exempt from secular legislation as a symbolic element of Quebec’s cultural heritage.  The desire to protect an integral aspect of the city’s cultural identity is legitimate. But could the same not be said about Montreal’s Muslim population? The value of Muslim culture extends far beyond faith: It represents a deep-rooted part of Montreal’s evolving cultural identity as a religiously pluralistic city.

Many would mourn the loss of the Mount Royal Cross—the elimination of Muslim individuals in hijabs in art should engender a comparable reaction. The lack of such a response begs the question: Is the discomfort Plante describes from the depiction of a religious symbol, or from the depiction of a hijabi? The persistence of this double standard suggests an anti-Muslim motivation hiding within so-called “neutrality.”

Parti Québécois Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon went as far as to describe the welcome sign as an example of religion “invading” the public sphere; but how can something invade a space it has long been a part of? A public sphere encompasses all aspects of social existence. To designate religion as an invader is to say religious minorities have no place in Montreal beyond the confines of their own homes.

But the reality is this: Muslim hijabis are here—as are dastar-wearing Sikhs and Jews in kippahs. These are all real communities with active roles in Montreal’s daily life. The use of barbed language like “invading” or “discomfort” reflects a typical xenophobic line of thought, one that validates anti-Muslim sentiment by implying that individuals wearing hijabs, and by extension Islam, are inherently alien. The term “invasion” misrepresents history as well, implying that the city’s public spaces were once purely secular and are now suddenly under siege. While it’s true that Quebec once used secularism to sever the corruption of religion-affiliated organizations from their governance, as seen in the Quiet Revolution, it now uses it to justify xenophobia.

The freedoms of conscience and equality are very important, but the use of legislative pretext for discriminatory action does little to protect these freedoms. If anything, actions like removing the welcome sign distance Quebec from the state of religious neutrality it craves. Such an approach risks secular fundamentalism that disproportionately targets visible religious minorities, ultimately undermining its purpose of secularizing the province in a fair and non-sectarian manner. It’s important to recognize that despite current secularization movements, Montreal always has been and always will be multi-religious—a characteristic that enriches a city, not devalues it. 

Commentary, Opinion, Private

Term limits on elected officials infringe on democracy

by Emma Simon on

More in Commentary:

In advance of the upcoming election, Canadians are haunted by a seemingly innocent quandary—do term limits break democracy? But let’s start with a different question, one you probably know the answer to: How long can any given Canadian prime minister govern? If you answered, “Until they’re voted out or resign,” you’re correct. This flexibility, with no term limits for the prime minister, is an underrated feature of the Canadian democratic system—one that other countries could learn from. Unfortunately, term limits for elected officials can actually harm democracy by restricting voter choice and making politicians less accountable in their final term.

Since the formation of the confederation, Canada has had 30 prime ministries—although only 24 individuals have held the position. Our current Prime Minister, Mark Carney, has only been in office for a handful of weeks, but others have stayed in power for much longer. William Lyon Mackenzie King, for example, sat three separate terms between 1921 and 1948, totalling over 21 years in office. Likewise, Sir John A. Macdonald, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, and Pierre Elliott Trudeau each spent over 15 years as prime minister.

Should we be concerned that these extended terms signal a frail Canadian democracy? Other nations would be. The United States, for example, implemented a term limit for the presidency in 1951, following the end of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s 12-year presidency, the longest in United States history. Meanwhile, Mexico banned reelection entirely in 1933, with presidents only being permitted to serve a single six-year term each. Even France bowed to the trend in 2008, limiting the president to two consecutive terms with a constitutional limit, as is the case in the U.S. 

Now, Canadians have started to wonder if term limits for prime ministers would be a good idea. In a 2019 poll, 54 per cent of respondents believed term limits to be necessary for elected officials. Some have even proposed that Canada follow the U.S.’s example and adopt its own term-limit policy.

Proponents argue that term limits prevent dangerous executive branch takeovers in the style of many historical and current despots. Clear limits stop leaders from rule-lawyering their way into reigns of arbitrary length, calling sham elections without the slightest shift in power—obviously, an outcome every democratic country wants to avoid.

But term limits are a poor way to thwart it. They’re like locking a cookie jar and assuming that, without limits, people would just keep taking cookies until they’re sick. While this might work on an unruly kid, it’s not a fair approach for a country of responsible adults. When lawmakers impose term limits, they’re essentially saying they know better than the voters. But in many cases, a leader serving two consecutive terms may not be a sign of power-hungry behaviour—it could just mean that the leader is genuinely popular and doing a good job, earning the continued support of the people.

Furthermore, once a politician is elected for the last time, all concerns about the will of the people vanish. After all, if the politician has no chance of being elected again anyway, why should they try to please the voters? Term limits encourage this lack of accountability by placing the leader in a situation where no action they take—short of perhaps breaking the law—will cause them to lose power. With nothing to lose, they might feel entitled to take unpopular actions without suffering any consequences.
When the laws and constitutions implement no term restrictions, the only real limit on politicians’ terms is how much voters like them. And voters know what they want. Just ask William Lyon Mackenzie King, who was voted out of office not once, but twice! Given a baseline level of democracy, voters can always kick unpopular candidates out of office. But in Canada, they are trusted, as reasonable adults, to dip their fingers into the cookie jar as many times as they like.

Student Life

Farewell to The Tribune: The last words from our graduating editors

by Drea Garcia Avila, Shani Laskin, Monique Kasonga, Eliza Lee, Roberta Du, K. Coco Zhang, Amalia Mairet, Auxane Bussac, Matt Adelberg, Kellie Elrick, Charlotte Hayes, Anoushka Oke, Aliya Singh, Hannah Nobile on

More in Student Life:

Drea Garcia Avila, Creative Director: During my first year of university in November 2021, my friend off-handedly mentioned that The McGill Tribune was looking for illustrators. What started as a creative outlet led to me becoming a Staff Creative for two weeks, Design Editor for the next three semesters, and, finally, the Creative Director. I watched the paper ground its roots in advocacy and activism, from dropping “McGill” from its name, to adopting an Anti-Oppressive Mandate, covering stories locally and beyond. Our creative community has flourished this year, and I’m incredibly proud and grateful for my years at the paper. While I’m immensely sad to leave, I cannot wait to see what our brilliant team does next year.

Shani Laskin, Managing Editor: Where to begin… My time at The Tribune fundamentally shaped my university experience. I came in as a Staff Writer for News at 18 years old—nervous and unsure of myself. I quickly fell in love with news coverage and journalism, feeling the thrill of chasing a story, listening to people’s experiences, and challenging my assumptions. To me, The Tribune has been an invaluable space for knowledge co-creation; at a university without a journalism program, we become our own teachers. The community at this paper has raised me, and, after nearly four years, I’m happy to know I’m leaving The Trib in incredibly capable hands.

Monique Kasonga, Opinion Editor: Joining the Opinion Section pitch meeting on Zoom in my first year, I never expected to stick around for so long. Four years later, I have learned more than I could have ever imagined. From the guidance of those who were editors before me to the growth I have witnessed in our amazing writers, being a part of this team has been an absolute pleasure. Watching the paper evolve into what it is today has been unforgettable, and I can only hope that the model and mandate The Tribune has established will serve as a reminder, for all publications, of the importance of responsible journalism in the face of injustice. 

Eliza Lee, News Editor: I’m so grateful to have spent the last three years covering campus life, news, and resistance for The Tribune. From Sports Staff Writer to News Editor, each of my roles at the paper has taught me how to better write, think, and care about this community. None of this would have been possible without the guidance and support of The Tribune team. To Editors, Board members, and writers, it has been a privilege to learn from and with you all. Of all the lessons I learned throughout my degree, “curiosity delivers” might be the most memorable. Wow, thanks!

Roberta Du, Web Editor: Since arriving at McGill, I’ve always admired The Tribune—first through my friend Shani, then as I became a weekly reader myself. Hearing about the community drew me in, but being part of it exceeded every expectation. As Web Editor, I didn’t just code and maintain pages and sites; I finally found the courage to write—something I’d always wanted to try but feared. This experience has been transformative. To anyone thinking about joining: Do it. You’ll find purpose, growth, and an incredible group of people. 

K. Coco Zhang, Science & Technology Editor: I couldn’t recall how I first stumbled on the Facebook page of The Tribune’s SciTech section, but it happened sometime in 2022, right around when I realized I needed to look beyond my endless cycle of nutrition textbooks. I was searching for something more fulfilling, something that would nourish my mind and my passion. The Tribune turned out to be exactly that. Looking back now, I couldn’t be more grateful to have become part of this community, where I’ve grown not just as an editor and journalist, but as a person.

Amalia Mairet, Features Editor: I joined The Tribune in my first year at McGill. My time at the newspaper started with a short roundup for the Arts and Entertainment (A&E) section. Since then, I’ve reviewed student plays and new albums, served on the Board of Directors, and, finally, spent a year in Features—the role I’ve been aiming for since the beginning. The Tribune  has let me bring my love of storytelling into student journalism. It’s been a privilege to be trusted with people’s stories and help bring them to life. To everyone who wrote a 2000-word epic with me this year: See? It all came together in the end.

Auxane Bussac, Student Life Editor: When I stumbled across The Trib at Activities Night three semesters ago, I had no idea it would bring such a long-awaited meaning to my university experience. From contributor to Staff Writer to Editor, learning and striving in Student Life was a privilege. My journey has been nothing short of amazing—our newsroom is full of inspiring people who have helped me grow both as a person and as a journalist. I will forever be grateful to this team for teaching me about myself, my peers, and what it means to be a university student who speaks truth to power. Maybe I’ll get a “curiosity delivers” tattoo.

Matt Adelberg, Copy Editor: As Copy Editor, my role is somewhat hidden from the rest of the paper—I’m just one editing pass among many on Production Day. However, for almost the past two years, I’ve had the privilege of reading and having some small part in every piece that’s come off the press. I’d like to give some gratitude from behind the scenes. Thank you to the writers for teaching me about all things McGill for so long; to my fellow editors for giving me a home and embracing my most anal-retentive nitpicks; and to the readers, for taking our earnest attempts at creation and running wild with them.

Kellie Elrick, Arts & Entertainment Editor: My first article at The Tribune was an investigative piece for News. I was terrified, thrilled, feverish, and fascinated. I later began writing for A&E, where I discovered that publishers would send The Tribune books—unpublished ones! That we could read and review! For free! I fell in love with the wonderful events and publications we cover and the lovely, curious community that flourishes at the paper. Though a late Easter means we will be denied the opportunity to publish a long-planned A&E piece on “Things on the rise other than Christ,” I am eternally grateful for my time here and will be eagerly reading The Tribune next year.

Charlotte Hayes, Arts & Entertainment Editor: The first time I attended an A&E pitch meeting, I was sitting in my dorm room, nervously joining a Zoom call with my camera off. Due to pandemic restrictions, I wouldn’t set foot in The Tribune office for almost a year, but even through the screen, I could tell I had stumbled into something special. Since then, the A&E section and The Trib as a whole have become some of the most meaningful parts of my degree. A long line of wildly talented A&E writers and editors have shaped me into the journalist (and person) I am today. I still have no idea how to thank them properly, so I guess this paragraph will have to do.

Anoushka Oke, Sports Editor: The Tribune has been part of my life since I came to McGill in 2021, and it has left a mark on my university experience. From my days as a News Staff Writer to the past couple of years as Sports Editor, this space has helped me grow as a writer and thinker. As somebody who came to McGill during the pandemic, The Tribune offered me a sense of community, and I have made so many friends here. It has been a privilege to witness the paper grow and work alongside so many intelligent and kind people. I will miss all of you dearly, and I can’t wait to see all the amazing things the next Editorial Board accomplishes!

Aliya Singh, Social Media Editor: Having a strong community when you’re miles away from home is a rare gift—and for me, that community has been The Tribune. From the moment I stepped into our office, I was welcomed by some of the brightest, kindest, and funniest people I’ve had the privilege of knowing. These are people who hold knowledge with humility and create space for growth, laughter, and care. As I say goodbye, I’m filled with gratitude—for the conversations, the chaos, and the quiet moments in between. Working on social media gave me a space to balance creativity and connection, and I leave knowing I was part of something deeply special. Thank you, Tribune.

Hannah Nobile, Photo Editor: To every lovely writer and creative I had the pleasure of working with—thank you for welcoming me with open arms. It’s been such a privilege to witness the love, passion, and care poured into every piece that filled our pages. The Tribune has given me the hardest yet sweetest farewell to my time at McGill that I could have ever imagined. And while I’m heartbroken to have to say goodbye, I can’t help but feel immensely excited for every future student who walks through those office doors for the first time. What a journey it will be!

Science & Technology

Concealed identity: How social science research overlooks multiracial participants

by Jasjot Grewal on

More in Science & Technology:

For many multiracial individuals, answering a seemingly simple question—“What is your race?”—can be anything but straightforward. Demographic forms, surveys, and research questionnaires often present a narrow list of options. These limited categories, often shaped by researchers’ own biases, can lead to results that may not fully encompass one’s true racial identity. 

In a recent study published in the journal Race and Social Problems, N. Keita Christophe, assistant professor in McGill’s Department of Psychology, explored different ways of collecting demographic information on race in social science research, methods which ultimately inform researchers’ understanding and classifications of multiracial participants in their samples. 

Christophe and his colleagues also compared the participants’ self-reported racial identities to those of their biological parents and found that many multiracial folks identified differently than their parents. These discrepancies challenge widely held assumptions about how race is inherited, perceived, and recorded.

“One would assume that the races I select are a sum of what my biological mother is and my biological father is, right? But what we observed is that that really wasn’t holding true for a really big piece of the sample,” Christophe explained in an interview with The Tribune.

The study came about as a project of The Loving Study Collaborative—a team dedicated to capturing the experiences of multiracial college students. Despite being the quickest-growing populations in the U.S. and Canada, multiracial individuals are still frequently underrepresented—or misrepresented—in social science research. 

“[Multiracial individuals are] really absent from a lot of big-scale data. I think what a lot of people do, both at government levels but also in academic research, is they often might just group people into a specific minority group. So, if I check Black and white and Asian, someone might just put me in the Black category or put me in the Asian category,” Christophe said. “So in a lot of research settings, multiracial people just kind of get erased from science, or they’re in their own group of multiracial people, but that group might be small because of the way they ask the question, so they exclude them from the analyses.” 

Christophe encouraged other researchers to consider that the methods used to ask demographic questions can impose categorization bias on racialized persons, and that changing the wording of these questions can result in different-sized sample groups. 

“Identity is really complex, and there are decisions that go into how people choose to self-identify on forms, and there’s a reason that people aren’t selecting the same groups for themselves as they may select for their parents,” Christophe said. “Maybe they don’t identify with those groups very strongly. Maybe they have a phenotype or physical appearance that doesn’t really match some of the groups they check for their parents, so they’re not checking them themselves.”

Christophe emphasized that the ways in which multiracial folks identify are complicated and evolving. Some might choose to identify with one identity over others, some may identify as a blend of their parents’ races all the time, and some might change their identification based on context. He explained that social science research needs to do more work to accommodate these nuances in identity. 

“There’s not a lot of people doing this work, but I think it’s a population that needs a lot more research,” he said. “Studying risk, resilience, discrimination, health, and well-being in multiracial populations—it’s almost like it’s a very new area. Students and more junior people in the field can actually make big contributions [….] There’s definitely a lot of room to jump in and look at interesting questions and get your voice heard.” 

Science & Technology

Rethinking environmental risk assessment for Indigenous communities

by K. Coco Zhang on

More in Science & Technology:

Across Canada, Indigenous communities are grappling with a severe environmental crisis. Approximately 4,500 sites on reserve lands are listed as contaminated in the Canadian Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory, representing 29 per cent of all such sites nationwide. This disproportionate concentration of contaminated sites has resulted in significantly higher exposure to environmental contaminants for Indigenous populations compared to the general population. 

Despite the urgency of this issue, there remains a notable lack of research into holistic, culturally appropriate methods of assessing environmental contamination and its health impacts on Indigenous communities.

In response to this critical gap, Katie Chong, a PhD student in McGill’s Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, conducted a study evaluating conventional risk assessment practices across Indigenous communities in Canada. 

Using an anonymous mixed-method survey, Chong gathered insights from 38 stakeholders—including representatives from Indigenous governments, environment and health offices, federal and provincial agencies, and academia—who are actively involved in risk assessment work in Indigenous contexts.

One of the study’s key findings pointed to risk communication—the process of sharing information about potential environmental hazards with stakeholders—as the most challenging aspect of the assessment process. Participants noted particular difficulties in navigating the balance between communicating the risks of consuming contaminated traditional foods and acknowledging these foods’ deep cultural, nutritional, and spiritual significance. 

Nearly all respondents identified time constraints, high costs, and limited resources as moderate to serious barriers in their work. Few respondents were familiar with innovative risk assessment methods, and around three-quarters agreed that current approaches require significant improvement.

Chong’s research also underscores how the disproportionate exposure of Indigenous communities to environmental contaminants is rooted in historical and ongoing environmental racism. 

“Environmental racism is basically a broad term that refers to marginalized and racialized communities being inequitably exposed to or affected by environmental issues, such as contamination or climate change,” Chong said in an interview with The Tribune. “It has been the root of pervasive environmental justice issues both within Canada and globally.”

Beyond health effects, environmental contamination threatens cultural continuity. Of particular concern are species such as the boreal caribou, which are significant to many Indigenous groups, not only as a source of food but as a central figure in ceremonies, stories, and community knowledge. When environmental contamination endangers such species, Indigenous communities risk losing generations of traditional knowledge and cultural identity.

While Canadian federal and provincial environmental policies regulate industrial activities and contaminated site remediation through frameworks like Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) and Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA), these conventional approaches often fall short.

“These two frameworks basically quantify how much of a chemical a person or species is exposed to and how toxic that chemical is. This allows us to calculate risk and [inform] decisions on a regulatory level,” Chong explained.

However, these conventional approaches often fail to address the complex and unique risk contexts that many Indigenous communities face. HHRAs, for instance, typically exclude critical exposure scenarios relevant to Indigenous practices, such as participation in ceremonial events or the harvesting and consumption of traditional foods.

The shortcomings of current assessment methods extend beyond their narrow scope. 

“These methods provide a [restricted] definition of health that’s based on contaminant exposure and toxicity, which often fails to [encompass] the much broader and more holistic [understanding] of health that many Indigenous communities hold,” Chong added. 

Moreover, these assessments are time-consuming and resource-intensive, posing a significant barrier given the vast number of contaminated sites and chemicals requiring evaluation.

Moving forward, Chong advocates for the development of more inclusive and culturally grounded assessment approaches. While acknowledging the study’s limitations, including its small scale and the diverse contexts of Indigenous communities across Canada, she emphasized its role as a foundation for future research.

“[This study] supports the need to develop new approaches to risk assessment that are designed for and by Indigenous communities specifically,” Chong noted, highlighting the importance of integrating diverse perspectives and improving cumulative risk assessment techniques.
According to study participants, modernizing risk assessment requires advancing cumulative risk evaluation, enhancing risk communication, and promoting Indigenous leadership and knowledge at every stage of the assessment process.

Science & Technology

Neurostructural correlates of obesity: Evidence for brain-body interactions

by Daniel Pyo on

More in Science & Technology:

A recent study led by Filip Morys, a Research Associate at The Neuro in Montreal under the supervision of Dr. Alain Dagher, explores the bidirectional relationship between obesity and brain function. The findings reveal that weight gain can be both a cause and a consequence of changes in the brain.

“We have this bi-directional model of obesity and brain interactions where changes in the brain can be vulnerability factors for weight gain in younger adults, and in older adults, chronic obesity is actually leading to brain damage,” Morys explained in an interview with The Tribune. 

In other words, brain structure and function can shape a person’s susceptibility to obesity, while long-term obesity may, in turn, contribute to cognitive decline and other neurological impairments. One key factor in this complex relationship is inflammation. 

“Being obese essentially means that your body is in a constant state of low-grade inflammation because fat tissue produces substances that cause inflammation in the body,” Morys said.

While this chronic inflammatory state is known to contribute to insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease, it also appears to impact brain health. 

The study found that inflammation-related changes in brain structure and function may influence eating behaviour and self-regulation, potentially creating a feedback loop that makes weight management more difficult.

To investigate these brain-body interactions, Morys’ team used non-invasive imaging techniques, including diffusion-weighted imaging, which measures water movement in brain tissue. 

This allowed them to examine differences in brain structure and function among individuals with varying body mass indices (BMI), providing insights into microstructural changes linked to obesity.

“What we’re looking at is not necessarily direct inflammation,” Morys clarified. “We’re doing non-invasive brain imaging, which makes it difficult to definitively say the changes are neuroinflammation.” 

Despite this limitation, their findings suggest that obesity-related brain changes may be linked to inflammatory processes, which can alter cognitive function and decision-making related to food intake.

Individuals with higher BMI also tended to exhibit changes in the brain regions involved in impulse control and reward processing, areas that are critical for regulating eating behaviour. Disruptions in these networks may explain why some people struggle with overeating despite knowing the associated health risks. 

Moreover, decreased connectivity between key brain areas could impair a person’s capacity to manage cravings and choose healthier foods. These findings underscore the complexity of obesity and highlight the importance of addressing cognitive and emotional factors alongside conventional weight management approaches in treatment plans.

For many years, the neurological consequences of obesity were poorly understood; however, research efforts are ramping up. Strategies like cognitive training or anti-inflammatory treatments targeting brain function may help mitigate obesity risk. In older adults, reversing or mitigating brain damage caused by long-term obesity may help slow cognitive decline and improve quality of life.

Looking ahead, Morys hopes to conduct long-term studies to track how brain function and obesity interact over time.

“Ideally, we would love to observe these changes over the course of time, starting with children and following them throughout their entire lifetime to trace how brain changes relate to body mass index and obesity,” Morys said. 

Such research could yield critical insights into the lifelong relationship between brain health and body weight, paving the way for more personalized and effective treatments.

Ultimately, this study supports the idea that obesity is not simply a result of willpower or lifestyle choices, but a multifaceted condition encompassing biological, neurological, and environmental influences. By understanding how the brain influences appetite, behaviour, and metabolism, scientists can develop more holistic interventions that address the root causes of obesity, rather than focusing on its symptoms alone. 

Editorial, Opinion

McGill condemns everything but genocide 

by The Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

After an academic year marked by Israel’s intensified genocide in Gaza and heightened campus dissent, McGill has not only failed in its responsibility to preserve student safety and educational democracy: It has intensified hostilities by vilifying the Palestinian liberation movement.   

On March 27, a strike motion submitted by two McGill students passed through a Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Special Strike General Assembly. The student body then ratified the motion, which led to a three-day student strike between April 2 and 4. The strike—which called for divestment from weapons manufacturers and Israel, as well as ending disciplinary cases against pro-Palestine student demonstrators—asked union members to avoid class and instead attend daily alternative educational programming, including workshops, teach-ins, film screenings and a rally on April 3. This was the first SSMU-sanctioned student strike since 2004. 

However, as seen since October 2023, the administration’s response to the strike has been repressive, targeted, and violent. This hostility is fueled and maintained by McGill’s increasing police presence on campus and employment of privately hired security forces. McGill does not train these private security officers on the Charter of Students’ Rights, nor does the institution offer students any official channel of complaint against them. The pervasive, unqualified nature of such a security force is enough to induce tension on a psychological level, where students feel that their university, which they pay to attend, considers them criminals or worthy of being treated as such. McGill has neglected its institutional responsibility to foster a safe and open environment; instead, the very security hired to protect students endangers them and results in increasing intimidation and censorship. 

Such unchecked power accommodates violence. While existing to allegedly “ensure a safe environment”, most McGill students do not feel any safer with the oversaturation of security presence on campus. By justifying increased police presence and violence against its students while simultaneously ignoring protestors’ Boycott, Divest, and Sanction demands, McGill demonstrates its negligence of students’ calls to action, democratic free speech, and institutional acknowledgement of its complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The strike is a testament to McGill students’ continued mobilization for Palestine in the face of antagonism, repression, and violence from McGill. However, on April 7, McGill announced a Notice of Termination of their Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with SSMU, due to some protestors who allegedly threatened and intimated students and instructors who still went to class, and injured a McGill staff member with a thrown fire hydrant. McGill can not use this distressing incident to discredit the entire Palestinian liberation movement. 

And the irony is evident. In December, campus security forcibly detained and violently physically assaulted a member of the Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM) after the member took a picture of a security guard, and the member is yet to receive any response from the university administration regarding recourse. McGill can not condemn an entire movement, especially as it tries to engage in democratic assembly for its cause, due to one violent incident, while simultaneously refusing to condemn or rectify its security’s violence against students. 

The strike itself was motioned in a democratic manner, allowing every SSMU member to express their stance. SSMU encouraged all students to show up and offered a space for alternative opinions. Still, the motion to strike passed. McGill, to tell students that they should not have passed the strike motion in SSMU’s channels as it “further divided a campus community already deeply cleaved and hurting” is to say that students can not make their voice heard if the university thinks it’s too “controversial.” It is to say that students can not mobilize against a genocide, as it may counter the opinions of those who agree with the Israeli regime’s entirely immoral and inhumane apartheid. 

McGill is creating the hostile environment that it claims pro-Palestinian activism perpetuates. The university must uphold democratic avenues of protest. To say that the university’s “goal is not to silence dissent” is not enough—actions must speak louder. It is not lost on protestors that construction emerged on the Y-intersection on the first day of the strike. McGill must stop imposing strategic maneuvers and police violence against its own student body during times of protest.

McGill, open your eyes: Israel is committing genocide. At least have the courage to acknowledge it.

1 … 65 66 67 68 69 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue