Renate Ysseldyk, Department of Health Sciences

By Ariel Root

Religion. Ethnicity. Gender. Age. All of these groups influence one’s sense of belonging. One’s self-image. These factors, and others, can give us a sense of social identity. They can influence how we manage our social world, and can have profound impacts on our health. “Social identities reflect our group memberships…and are often helpful in coping with stressful life experiences, and also in [healthy] aging.”

Renate Ysseldyk is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Health Sciences at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, where she is interested in the influence of psychosocial factors, like social identities, on stressful experiences such as religious discrimination or transitions associated with aging. Her research focuses on the social determinants of health, particularly among vulnerable populations, and how social identities can influence physical and mental health.

Ysseldyk indicates that many of her research challenges relate to the sample populations within her studies. Vulnerable populations, in her research, have included women who have experienced abuse, and older adults who are living with dementia. “But these [challenges] are also some of the most rewarding experiences, because you’re really making a difference for people who need it,” she explains. Ysseldyk recalls a project she worked on recently, led by Artswell and in collaboration with the Alzheimer Society of Ottawa and Renfrew County, Bruyère Continuing Care, and the Community Foundation of Ottawa, called “”. Community participants living with dementia gathered weekly with their caregivers to build a new social identity based on making music, reminiscing about the past, and connecting with each other.

Using a combination of observational measures (designed specifically for people living with dementia), interviews, and survey questionnaires, Ysseldyk and her students evaluated the cognitive and mental health benefits of the Music Matters program, finding that it was also an extremely rewarding project. “Seeing people who were originally quiet, but later opened-up and sang and danced… you can see on their faces that [the program] is improving their life… it’s really fun,” she explains. And the benefits of the program were equally evident among the caregivers, who developed a sense of social identity with the group over time, and this had personal, social, health, and even spiritual impacts.

Combining aging, identity, religion, stress and coping, Ysseldyk acknowledges that a lot of her projects are intertwined – they have to be. And so there are many projects that stand out for Ysseldyk. She recounts her PhD work when she first considered the relationship between social identity and religious affiliation, exploring the psychological implications and outcomes of individuals coping with various threats to their religious identity. From there, Ysseldyk completed a CIFAR post-doctoral fellowship with the University of Exeter in the UK, and later a SSHRC post-doctoral fellowship with the University of Queensland in Australia, both under the guidance of Drs. Alex and Cath Haslam. Here is where she was “really introduced to doing research on some of the social determinants of health in older adults.” Ysseldyk credits these experiences to having evolved her research and demographic interests. And so, despite having several “different lines of research, they all overlap. There’s no one big goal” for Ysseldyk. In fact, it’s about “trying to figure out the little ways to improve peoples’ health, well-being, and overall quality of life.”

“The concept of social determinants of health can be abstract, and discovering the “causes of the causes” requires digging” – and a lot of it. More digging will always lead to more questions, and more answers. In deciding where to research next, Ysseldyk says her next step is often built on what she did last: “What did I learn in the last project that will lead to my next question?” Ysseldyk says she’s always had an interest in both health and psychology. And through her graduate studies and post-doctoral work, she was able to merge those two, as well as overlap with social neuroscience.

Several of Ysseldyk’s next projects will similarly require an interdisciplinary research team, as she continues to investigate the role of various social factors on the health and well-being of older adults. With colleagues from neuroscience as well as several community partners, including Bruyère Continuing Care and Riverstone Retirement Communities, they will consider the links between valued social identities and both mental and physical health outcomes, such as depressive symptoms and telomere length.

But regardless of the question—or the answer—for Ysseldyk, it’s about the journey. “I love the teaching and the research. Finding new things that interest me and that might help improve the health and well-being of others, that’s what drives me to work every day, and to answer these questions… it’s that I truly want to be here and to make some positive difference—great or small—in people’s lives.”

To find out more about Renate Ysseldyk, click here.

By Ariel Root

Apply 60 different stressors for half a second each over a one-hour period, and the test animal will appear to be resigned to its fate. Okay. What about applying the same stressor to humans, for 24 hours, every day, for five years? Maybe 80% of those tested might show depressive-like behaviours, but what about the 20% that don’t; what is it about those 20% that make them resilient? How come they can survive greater stressors, and not only survive, but in some cases, flourish? What makes some individuals so resilient, and others so vulnerable?

In the early 1970’s, Hymie Anisman remembers researchers investigating the effects of traumatic events on humans or animals, and asking why they develop feelings of depression. “While that was interesting, it was the wrong question. The question shouldn’t be why [people] fall into a depression, but why didn’t everybody fall into this state?… but of course, that’s very difficult to answer.”

Anisman was a Canada Research Chair in Behavioural Neuroscience, and continues as a Professor in the Department of Neuroscience investigating the influence of stressful events on neurological and immunological changes. He has partnered with researchers internationally, as well as with those from the Royal Ottawa’s Institute of Mental Health Research (IMHR). Using animal models, Anisman and his collaborators are able to introduce a particular social stressor (e.g., a bully, a new environment), observe the resulting behaviours, and link anxiety- or depressive-like behaviors to neurochemical changes in the brain. “Neurotransmitters are signaling molecules, and they can cause other neurons to fire, or stop firing.” This cascade of signals is a complicated process, but Anisman observes these processes, striving to link the release of certain chemical compounds to specific behaviours.

At the beginning of his career, Anisman was involved in the discovery of the multi-hit hypothesis notion, whereby re-exposure to the same, or a similar, stressor can elicit neurological changes at a greater level compared to the first exposure. This discovery was also paired with the suggestion that in many cases, illness development related to depression or addiction is often a result of combination of the stressor, genetics, or early life trauma. This notion of “priming was a big deal, [and one] of the most rewarding findings” for Anisman.

Since then, Anisman has also participated in research regarding the effects of stress on inflammatory processes, particularly as they relate to cytokine activation and distribution. While cytokines are activated under stressful conditions, and intend to be helpful, in high concentrations they can be damaging, and are linked to stroke, diabetes, and depression. “In all cases, inflammation is the common denominator, and can make you more vulnerable” to developing one or more of the other diseases.

Anisman indicates that “brain regions speak to other parts of the brain, but the brain also speaks to other parts of the body… and [I] believe that there is a link between the immune system and the brain.” Through collaboration with researchers at the IMHR, Anisman is researching the effects of various stressors on the gut microbiome following introduction of antibiotics, probiotics, or prebiotics. He is specifically wondering, “if we manipulate the gut, how [could this] affect the immune response, and how could that affect the brain?” The collaborative team is first trying to determine if there is, in fact, a relationship between the gut bacteria and mood states, and if this relationship can be altered through diet or modified gut biome factors.

Anisman has become particularly interested in the human resilience spectrum and to what extent resilience is influenced by psychosocial factors, such as community, religion, or relationships. “Vulnerability and resilience are not two ends of a continuum,” he explains. “If you are very well connected, or have a very good social group, you can cure certain types of conditions. So what are the factors that make a person more or less resilient? What are the genetic factors? The personality factors?” And, while a traditional rodent model can enable observations of hormonal changes in the brain, they are not always ideal for these streams of research, introducing new challenges for Anisman’s research.

Collaborations within ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, the IMHR, and with international partners has been rewarding for Anisman. He acknowledges the importance of interdisciplinary teams. “If everybody knew everything, we wouldn’t need teams; interdisciplinary teams allow us to do things we wouldn’t be able to do otherwise.” Venturing into research dealing with the microbiome, Anisman has teamed with other affiliate researchers of the CHAIM centre to enable research regarding psychosocial stressor response and resilience, and early childhood development. “When you have research partners who you can trust, and who know things you don’t, together, with a degree of overlap, you can come up with exciting projects.”

For Dr. Anisman’s contact information, go here.

Cheryl Peters, CIHR Postdoctoral Fellow, Health Sciences

by Ariel Root

When she saw workers without proper health and safety protection, Cheryl Peters found her niche in Industrial Hygiene, helping to prevent workers’ diseases and to improve workplaces. She assumed she would end up in the oil and gas industry, but didn’t expect developing a keen interest in a variety of very high, and very unique occupational exposures. Peters declares that her career path has stemmed from a combination of necessity, circumstance, and luck, “but I never thought that I would be an academic researcher.”

Peters came to ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University in 2015, and is now a Canadian Institute of Health Research Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Health Sciences, with a cross-appointment at the Institut national de la recherche scientifique (Institut Armand-Frappier) in Montreal. Her program of research at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ focuses mainly on epidemiological studies of men’s occupational kidney, skin, and prostate cancers.

“In Canada, more than 80% of the jobs with dangerous or hazardous exposures are still held by men…and this is one reason that men are still getting more cancer than women,” she explains, especially for both occupational kidney and skin cancers. More than 90% of outdoor workers are men.

But there’s also an interesting consideration when reviewing screening frequency for prostate cancer—worker willingness. Are there differences by job? How does a worker’s job influence his or her willingness to seek cancer screening? Peters explains that it seems like there’s more than just socioeconomic status or education at play here, and that comparing screening willingness to job type is more like a job culture examination.

Because her main research interests are occupational and environmental epidemiology, and carcinogen exposure assessment, Peters is also an Affiliated Scientist of the Occupational Cancer Research Centre at Cancer Care Ontario, and the Occupational Exposures Lead Scientist at CAREX Canada.

is a multidisciplinary team of researchers based at Simon Fraser University, which works in collaboration with researchers at University of British Columbia, University of Victoria, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, and the Occupational Cancer Research Centre based at Cancer Care Ontario. Peters has been involved in the CAREX project since its inception in 2007, where she observed the levels of exposures to carcinogens at workplaces.

More recently, however, her contributions to the project have been related to knowledge translation of the collected data to help researchers, practitioners, and policy makers to reduce carcinogen exposures at work. “It’s all about getting the numbers into the right hands,” she says.

Peters hosts targeted webinars, and works directly with lawyers and unions, performing case review or in-person training related to specific occupational hazards. In some cases, Peters has worked with First Nations communities, performing tutorials on how to use the occupational data collected. Peters expresses the importance in tailoring the research to best benefit the users.

But Peters also acknowledges the hurdles from insufficiently specified data. “We need measurements taken in various environments and occupations.” A lot of what has been recently recorded is now privately owned, and therefore not accessible.

Peters loves the practical components of her research—manipulating numbers, data, and statistics—as well the application and translation of these models and analyses into practice. “I like doing research that is relevant to the workers… and I believe that quantifying [these hazards] can lead directly to policy change that can affect all workers.”

In these cases, Peters acknowledges the importance of applying a new way to look at the research. Having been able to go into the field, and talk directly with workers, Peters learned invaluable lessons from incorporating novel opinions and considerations. “I thought I would struggle to find people, or get a lot of pushback, but I didn’t… lots of people on worksites are passionate about their health… and were able to highlight other workplace hazards.” Peters expects the CHAIM Centre will similarly bring new angles and considerations to her research. “I love the interdisciplinary aspect… connecting with people I may not have otherwise.”

While at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, Peters will continue to examine gender differences in workplace cancer, and build further understanding of the influences of workplace culture. She also expects to identify new sources of environmental and occupational cancers, but acknowledges the current challenges from insufficient data. Her CIHR post-doctoral fellowship will enable her to conduct field explorations, as well as to attend additional training courses, and to translate gained knowledge back into the working communities.

Talking to real workers and identifying their workplace concerns has left a lasting impression on Peters. “It’s long been accepted that men live shorter lives [than women]. But I think that a lot of that is related to exposures at work.” For Peters, this inequity is worth investigating, highlighting, and changing for future generations.

For Dr. Peters contact information, go here.

By Ariel Root

Between insurance plan deductibles, co-payments, or no insurance at all, Canadians are paying over $6 billion out of pocket for prescription drugs. That’s 22% of all prescription drug costs in Canada. Inequities and inconsistencies between provinces have placed undue strain on Canadian businesses and citizens. Implementing National Pharmacare would improve access, fairness, and safety, all while decreasing costs. Overall, Canadians could save more than $10B each year. This means, however, “that someone else could lose $10B each year… and you can guarantee that they (drug companies, insurance companies, pharmacy chains, etc.) are doing what they can to not lose that money” suggests political economist Marc-André Gagnon.

Gagnon is an associate professor at the School of Public Policy and Administration (SPPA) and a leading authority on how public health policy and the pharmaceutical sector intersect. His interests and expertise stretch over the spectrum of social and health policy, political economy and history of economic thought, pharmaceutical policy and regulation, science and technology studies, and innovation policy and intellectual property. Following his Masters of Advanced Study in Economics from Paris-1 Sorbonne and École Normale Superieure de Fontenay/St-Cloud, Gagnon completed a PhD in Political Science at York University. While writing his PhD, Gagnon was exploring questions such as “what is capital in the knowledge-based economy? And what do companies have to do to make a buck?” when his supervisor told him to apply his theories and inquiries to the real world. “Do a case study, he told me. So I did.”

“I was listening to a CBC radio show, and they were giving away a book to the first caller. I won the book,” Gagnon tells. “The book explained how the pharmaceutical industry had more profit, but less innovation.” The perfect case study… serendipitous almost.

From a theoretical standpoint, Gagnon is particularly interested in the disconnect between financial incentives and the societal desired outcomes of pharmaceuticals; a disconnect that results from the institutional corruption within companies. “Our current system provides huge incentives for drug companies to create bias in the science behind their products, such as through using PR companies to ghostwrite clinical studies and then managing their publications in medical journals as a way of influencing physician prescribing habits.” Considering these perspectives and dimensions, bias is created in the scientific process, the marketing, and the lobbying, allowing firms to capitalize their productive capacity as well as influence laws, public policies, culture and socio-institutional settings, accruing monopolistic gains. And so Gagnon asks, “are we fostering unethical processes when it comes to medicine because the financial incentives do not align with what we want in terms with social outcomes?”

Gagnon reflects on one of his first exciting investigations, while exploring the amount of money spent on pharmaceutical promotion, compared to the money spent on its research and development. At the time of investigation, Gagnon recalls the United States spending more than twice as much on promotion compared to research and development each year. “And this was promotion just to physicians.”

Since this experience, Gagnon has continued to ask questions in the pharmaceutical context, as highlighted by his participation in the case for universal Pharmacare. Canadians will fill over 500 million prescriptions at retail pharmacies in 2016. This will cost about $30 billion; four times as much as we spent on prescriptions 20 years ago. No other component of Canadian health care has grown as quickly. Universal “Pharmacare”—working in conjunction with our “Medicare” system—is the best way to achieve this at a fair and affordable cost to patients and society as a whole. All Canadians deserve equitable access to necessary medicines. And lately, Gagnon tells, a lot is happening. “Lots of groups are mobilizing [these ideas].” Provincial ministers, policy makers and parties; “this is great in terms of having consistent and strong effort and support; I really appreciate all of it.”

But, Gagnon indicates that these topics involve a lot of money, and people who are invested in ensuring that things don’t change. Personal attacks are not a foreign concept. “We’re evolving in a world with strong financial interests at stake. [Some companies] are willing to do a lot so that nothing will change, and to influence policy makers.”

Gagnon’s multidisciplinary background and training has sparked his interest in answering questions and mapping the pharmaceutical industry with different lenses. Using his political science, economics, sociology, law, and ethics training, Gagnon is excited to dig deeper into the theoretical levels to understand this sector during his sabbatical. “Taking what I have learned in the last six years, and extracting the lessons, I’ll be using the theoretical lessons to analyze other political sectors.” Exploring and exposing political traction, corporate influence, and the creation of bias, Gagnon’s plans to apply his theoretical lessons to other industrial sectors will be nothing short of interesting, exciting, and enriching.

For Dr. Gagnon’s contact information, go here.

Pills image courtesy of Michelle Meiklejohn at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

By Ariel Root

As a frightening mixture of pathogens, organic materials, heavy metals, gases, pesticides, pharmaceuticals and other chemicals, wastewater requires specialized facilities and techniques to properly and sufficiently remove these contaminants, and then manage the removed wastes. While the goal in developing new engineering techniques for wastewater treatment is to remove these contaminants, the system must be applicable to big treatment plants, as well as small treatment systems in remote and rural communities—and that can be a challenge.

Banu Örmeci is a Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and a Canada Research Chair in Wastewater Treatment Engineering. Her research aims to improve and develop the design and performance of treatment processes in order to clear pathogens and contaminants from wastewater and sludge, so they do not pose a threat to public health or the environment.

Örmeci’s interests have a wide application, including treatment development and treatment optimization. Having studied the fundamental processes involved in wastewater treatment, Örmeci thoroughly understands the fate of pathogenic and chemical contaminants before, during, and after the treatment processes. “Wastewater treatment is not only about removing pathogens and chemicals from wastewater; it’s also about understanding their impacts on the environment if they are discharged to the environment in small quantities in wastewater effluents”. Chlorine is the cheapest and most widely used method of disinfection in North America but it does produce disinfection by-products that are harmful. Alongside application of ultraviolet light based disinfection to eliminate the chlorine byproducts, Ormeci works on alternative disinfection methods that can safely destroy harmful microorganisms. Some of Örmeci’s research strives to improve the performance of such current processes, as well as develop new technologies that will achieve similar treatment results, but reduce operational costs.

One such development was her investigation of an environmentally-friendly and cost-effective wastewater treatment process using microalgae that could grow naturally while cleaning out nutrients and contaminants. Örmeci acknowledges, that the “unique circumstances of Canada requires that simple and effective treatment processes are developed for communities in the North. What works well in Ottawa or Toronto doesn’t [always] work well in small and rural communities especially in cold and remote regions.” Partnering with industry has helped her advance new products, and explore new applications in Canada and abroad.

Working with industry and municipalities, Örmeci says that often partners “approach [her] with a problem that they need help solving…This real-world research is exciting, and important,” she says. “It’s engineering but it’s also directly related to public health and environment, so there are many relevant applications, and there is a high demand.” Örmeci has two U.S. patents and six pending international patents, and another commercialization on its way by one of the largest multi-national companies in the wastewater industry. “My research has been patented, licensed and commercialized; it’s very rewarding to see something that was developed in our lab be used at full scale in a treatment plant.”

But for Örmeci, the goal is not always a patent. In May 2016, Örmeci was named the recipient of the 2016 . In addition to her fundamental and industrial research, she is a dedicated educator and mentor, organizing outreach events to promote and encourage the participation of women in science and engineering fields. Örmeci is the Faculty Advisor of the ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University Women in Science and Engineering (CU-WISE) group that is responsible for organizing events, camps, or panels, in high schools and at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ to help young women through support, advice, and camaraderie.

Aligned with the ’s mandate, Örmeci recognizes the importance of educating the public about the important and significant research within the science and engineering domains. “Knowledge mobilization is not just about doing the research, but also about translating the research results to public and practitioners and generating the products that can benefit the Canadian economy. The society should ideally benefit from the research.”

“I like doing different things. I like the variety, and the challenge; different techniques, different areas, different projects… [but] time is always a bottleneck.” Örmeci has no intentions of slowing down, as she continues to lead engineering research through developments and design, as well as ongoing outreach and education that will benefit Canadians.

For Dr. Örmeci’s contact information, go here.

Alex Wong, Department of Biology

By Ariel Root
Bacteria were among the first life forms to appear on Earth, and can be found in virtually every corner across the planet. Some bacteria perform important roles in the environmental ecosystem, whereas others help us digest food or absorb nutrients. Still other bacteria can cause life-threatening diseases. “They’re really cool. They do different things, and do lots of things that we don’t even think or know about. It’s fascinating how they can generate so much diversity,” says ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University’s Alex Wong. And then there’s the interesting issue of antibiotic resistance. A growing challenge has emerged as more bacteria are becoming resistant…a challenge that is well-worth investigating.

Alex Wong is an Assistant Professor of Biology at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, focusing on the genetic causes and consequences of biological adaptation. He is interested both in characterizing the direct genetic targets of natural selection, and in studying the indirect effects of selection throughout the genome. “I am particularly interested in investigating the consequences of genetic interactions (epistasis) for rates and patterns of molecular evolution, and in understanding the potentially non-adaptive consequences of natural selection.” So basically, how do some bacteria become resistant to antibiotics, and what could this all mean for health and illness.

Wong’s academic career started as a mix of the hard and social sciences. Following his BA in philosophy and biology, Wong pursued a Masters of Philosophy at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, establishing his ability to synthesize information, think critically, and write cohesively. Wong then studied the rapidly evolving reproductive proteins in fruit flies during his doctoral work at Cornell University, questioning the specific genetic changes that lead to character trait changes in an organism. His introduction to Psuedomonas wasn’t until postdoctoral work at the University of Ottawa, where he developed a keen interest in evolutionary observations in the lab.

While choosing a bacteria to study can be difficult, Wong describes one of his main research projects is an experimental evolutionary study of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa – a pathogen associated with inflammation and sepsis, and colonizes in organs such as the urinary tract, kidneys, or lungs. “Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a bacterium found in wet environments such as soils, bathtubs, a kitchen sink… and it’s mostly harmless.” However, the bacteria can be especially of concern for immunocompromised individuals—most notably, those with cystic fibrosis. “Because these individuals’ lungs are full of fluid, it provides the ideal breeding ground for the bacteria, … and some cells can persist despite antibiotics.” Introduction to P. aeruginosa as a teenager can result in cells that remain into adulthood, when the uniquely nutritional environment in the lungs of these individuals enables the bacteria to create colonies that can flourish. Unforeseen diminishing lung strength in these individuals is beginning to be associated with a long-ago introduction to P. aeruginosa.

Wong has explored some of the evolutionary resistance in bacterium using a variety of tools, such as the computational analysis of population genetics and comparative genomic data, experimental evolution, and molecular genetics. It’s all about “new ways to find vulnerabilities that are unique to bacteria… [some] are resistant to one or more antibiotics, while others are not vulnerable at all.”

Using the theories and practices of evolutionary biology in an applied setting related to individual care basis, or policy is what keeps Wong excited. However, in order to tackle antibiotic resistance, he acknowledges that health needs be thought of in the broader framework that considers social sciences, policy, and hard sciences. “Policy on how we use [antibiotics], to public education on antibiotics in agriculture, down to the genetics of antibiotics… the goals of the [CHAIM] Centre fit exactly with how we need to think about resistance – multi-dimensionally.”

The challenge in these investigations, Wong says, is that “things rarely work out the way we think they’re going to. It’s part of the fun, and part of the frustration,” he laughs. When thinking about resistance, Wong reiterates how important external partnerships have been with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, University of Ottawa, and internationally.

Some of Wong’s challenges have also become his strengths. He describes times that his “favourite hypothesis is also the false hypothesis. But then,” he says, “it’s fun to figure out what is actually going on.” In fact, working with students in the lab has been particularly rewarding for Wong. Getting students into the lab, analyzing data, and fostering interest and inspiration, Wong and his students continue the journey to finding new ways to identify the unique vulnerabilities to some of the antibacterial resistances.

For Dr. Wong’s contact information, go here.

By Ariel Root

“Something that’s important to note about nanoparticles, is that it’s more than just their size; they’re also special. There’s something special about them: they have greater surface area; they have interesting electronics; they glow. There’s always something different about a nano-material that makes it separate from just a small amount of the bulk.” Maria DeRosa, TEDxĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ U, 2010.

From her graduate school days, Maria DeRosa has been interested in developing novel bionanotechnology, called aptamers, for detecting molecular targets of relevance to health. “Nano science and nano tech are looking at ways to apply these technologies to important problems. So…how can nanotechnology help?”

DeRosa is an Associate Professor in the Department of Chemistry and Institute of Biochemistry, and also works in collaboration with government researchers from Agriculture and Agrifood Canada, Health Canada and Environment Canada, as well as industrial partner and farmer groups. Her educational training as a material scientists during her doctoral years at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, combined with her post-doctoral work determining how DNA works in the body, as well as an external sensor, prepared DeRosa with the necessary skills to work with aptamers.

An aptamer is a small single-strand of DNA or RNA sequences that bind specifically to a variety of target molecules, and therefore have many environmental, agricultural, and health applications. Specifically, aptamers can be bound to neurotransmitters, allowing inflow of dopamine into the brain, but can also increase delivery efficiency of fertilizers into plants. DeRosa is interested in the use of aptamers for the design of novel bionanotechnology related to biosensing and catalysis.

DeRosa has long had an interest in research that provides understanding of bionanotechnology at the molecular level, but at the same time has tangible benefits beyond expanding knowledge, and the scientific community. When DeRosa started her faculty position at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, she was introduced to the health impacts of mycotoxins.“These secondary metabolites that are produced by fungi can be widespread on crops and food commodities. I realized that developing low cost, easy-to-use technology that detects these contaminants in food would be a worthy pursuit and could have a global impact on health,” resulting in her pursuit of developing aptamers for mycotoxins in food.

“We need food because food gives us the energy, and it gives us the nutrients and building blocks that we need in order for our cells, our proteins, and our tissues, to function…it’s central to us, and to our health.” Ingestion of mycotoxins from foods can cause cancer or stunting, and can affect both humans and animals. In the Canadian context, detection of these toxins is performed in a laboratory setting, though aptamers could enable farmers to test on site; a helpful and economical tool. In the developing world however, mycotoxins are a health crisis, and the ability to accurately detect mycotoxins is not always available in any sort. “We need to be able to detect these toxins in cheapest, and most practical, way,” which means farmers need to be able to perform these tests on site, and in the field. For instance, DeRosa shows a USB flash-drive sized stick, and explains that the farmer would grind up some grain, mix with a bit of water, and place a droplet onto the sensor. If mycotoxins were present, a small plus sign would appear—similar to a pregnancy test.

DeRosa explains that the key is to make the aptamers cost-efficient while maintaining accuracy. “Aptamers have to be specific, and we can’t have false negative, or false positives. They have to maintain accuracy at low levels.” However, many hurdles persist regarding aptamer design and the complexities of food matrices. “In pure water, even low-end versions can find a toxin. But in food, there are proteins, and bacteria… the tough part is the intricate mix [within a food].” DeRosa has successfully created an aptamer that will bind to norovirus in meat sources, but she indicates that each food has a unique matrix of components, and therefore aptamer design has to be reinvented and redefined for each toxin and food source. In a lab, tests can clean, separate, or count components of the food, “but at the farm or grain elevator, or in a developing country… that’s the challenge.”

DeRosa indicates that she has “wonderful students and colleagues who keep [her] inspired and driven.” She is particularly interested in developing ideas in collaboration with her students and colleagues, who have all helped to define specific problems, or specific foods, as related to aptamers. Together, she enjoys developing a solution. “I don’t know if I’ve had an impact outside of the scientific community yet, but I’m hopeful that one is coming.” DeRosa recalls that her research group was one of the first to apply aptamers to food and agricultural problems, “… and now I see that many other research groups are also working in this area. I hope that soon all these efforts (in our group and others) will pay off in the form of technology that can be applied outside of the lab and in the real world.”

For Dr. DeRosa’s contact information, go here.

Dr. Josh Greenberg, School of Journalism & Communication

By Ariel Root

Communication is a crucial component of emergency response and crisis management. Warning imminently threatened populations, coordinating involved stakeholders, engaging community partnerships, and understanding public risk perceptions are all essential and effective risk communication strategies; they are also one of the more difficult challenges for any organization. Added to the complexities of different crisis event scenarios, the media can either help or hinder in times of emergency. Media organizations not only notify the public about risks, but they can also amplify fears and anxieties about health issues that may pose only a small threat. These controlled or amplified fears will influence how health officials have to understand, respond to, and manage different health risk scenarios.

Josh Greenberg is the Director of the School of Journalism and Communication and an Associate Professor of Communication and Media Studies at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University. His research examines media coverage of outbreaks and infectious disease risks; crisis and risk communication activities and strategies of key public health and industry actors; and the impacts of technology change on public health communication. His current projects focus on the ‘wicked’ communication problem posed by vaccine hesitancy, and the risk communication dilemmas associated with public health scares marked by high levels of scientific uncertainty, such as . Greenberg’s interest in these issues were piqued long before he became an academic, when he briefly worked for a public relations agency specializing in healthcare and witnessed “the powerful role of PR in our current healthcare environment, and the ways that communication both constitutes and troubles our understanding of health risk.”

Greenberg is the lead investigator of the Communication, Risk and Public Health Research Group, an interdisciplinary group involving faculty and graduate students at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´. He has served as an expert panel member for the Council of Canadian Academies and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, and is a member of the World Health Organization’s Emergency Risk Communications Guideline Development Group. Greenberg has also worked as a research consultant to both national and community-based public health organizations across Canada and has advised federal government departments and agencies on strategic communication and public engagement.

Greenberg is an advisory board member of , a non-profit partnership of leading international practitioners, academics and consultants that work with governments and other organizations to communicate effectively during emergencies or other high risk events. In addition, he sits on the Advisory Board of , which fosters research, education, and issue campaigns that engage and empower the science community, while cultivating public and political demand for evidence-based decision-making—precisely what Greenberg identifies as one of the more challenging aspects of his research. Because he currently works “on issues involving debates among experts in epidemiology, virology, bacteriology,” it is critical that he understands the science of a variety of possible health risks. “I have no formal training in these areas of core science, but I do have a strong understanding of how actors with different types of scientific expertise craft and mobilize rhetoric to advance their views in what is an increasingly crowded and competitive communications environment.”

Greenberg thoroughly enjoys applying his knowledge and skills to a variety of topics of public importance and derives considerable intellectual and professional enjoyment from interacting with academics that work across the social sciences, humanities, and natural sciences, and interfacing with communication professionals. Because of his wide and varied interests, his research is often an “opportunity to collaborate with experts completely outside of my field, who share similar interests and concerns but approach them in different ways.” One project involves collaboration with a medical anthropologist and geographer, and another with international public health professionals. “These types of collaborations are highly intellectually stimulating and rewarding,” he says.

Greenberg say he couldn’t imagine himself doing anything else. “Sometimes I feel like I have the best job in the world. I have freedom to develop new research, to work alongside other scholars I admire, and to participate in academic and policy-oriented conversations about issues I think are really interesting and important.”

For Dr. Greenberg’s contact information, go here.

By Ariel Root

Air pollution, green space, and wind turbines. Cardiovascular disease, diabetes, dementia, and cancer. Formal training in statistics, and epidemiology. And partnerships across mathematics, chemistry, geography, and biological disciplines. Paul Villeneuve reflects back on an inspirational co-op work term at Health Canada during his statistics undergraduate training. He was required to apply statistics to better understand specific health issues, but found it much more appealing than theoretical statistics. “I guess,” he laughs, “that’s when I thought epidemiology would be more fun.”

Villeneuve is an Associate Professor in the Department of Health Sciences, and cross-appointed to the School of Mathematics and Statistics at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University. He is also an Affiliate Scientist at the Ontario Occupational Cancer Research Centre (OCRC) in Toronto, Senior Editor for the Canadian Journal of Public Health, and an Associate Editor for Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada.

From the beginning of his time at the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control at Health Canada in 1988, Villeneuve has been involved in controversial health issues that are interwoven with political implications, such as the taxation of cigarettes. Being part of such a strong team of epidemiologists, Villeneuve recalls their high caliber research on topics including physical activity, pesticide use, exposure to radon, and cigarette smoking, including second hand exposure. “It generated a lot of attention [because] we didn’t understand the risks like we do now. These things were extremely relevant to many developing policies; it was easy to become excited about the research.”

Today, Villeneuve’s primary research interests assess the link between environmental and occupational exposures on the health of Canadians. His combined expertise in epidemiology and biostatistics have resulted in close collaborations with Health Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the OCRC, Cancer Care Ontario, and academic researchers across disciplines in both Canada and the US.

“Much of my work [focuses] on the health impacts from long-term exposure to air pollution, and the health benefits of green space in urban areas.” His expertise has been applied to several large-scale cohort studies examining the association between ambient air pollution and green space, and chronic diseases. Specifically, associations between outdoor air pollution and the risk of cardiovascular disease, hypertension and diabetes; air pollution and its role on oxidative stress mechanisms related to dementia and neurodegenerative disease; urban green space access and its association with obesity and physical activity; the built environment and development of chronic disease; wind turbines and the potential health impacts and implications; and occupational causes of cancer.

Villeneuve’s research is influenced by stakeholder concerns, and the emerging literature. His health research continues to strengthen his belief that multi-disciplinary research teams are critical in developing in-depth health research perspectives and skills. “Think of all the many projects that involve clinicians, statisticians, geographers… you always need to draw from different disciplines. The nice thing is that people bring different perspectives, and you can then adapt [your research] as you learn from others. I’ve been able to work with many different researchers over long periods of time, and feel lucky to have developed both professional and personal relationships with them”. At ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, both the Department of Health Science and The CHAIM Centre combine disciplines, providing opportunities for continuing his engagement in existing and emerging collaborations with various health researchers.

Community engagement and involvement has heavily inspired his research passions. Villeneuve recalls his twenty-year involvement in evaluating the relationship between occupational exposure to radon and lung cancer among Newfoundland fluorspar miners. “We went into communities, talked with and engaged people, including the miners, and did the analysis.” Villeneuve recalls this as one the first projects that he felt truly excited about his work, “because for the first time, it was more than just looking at data. It was [about] going out and talking to people, and hearing of their stories.” A cemetery across the street from the museum of the Newfoundland Fluorspar miners contained many of the individuals who were included in the research.  “My visit there taught me that there are important stories behind the lines of data that I typically run across in an office in Ottawa. Hearing first hand of some of these struggles, and the interest in re-opening the mine because of potential impacts of its closure provided me with a different perspective on how my research could matter at a local level.”

In fact, Villeneuve identifies this as one of the most satisfying results of his research; “interacting with communities, actual residents.” Publications as academic acknowledgement and recognition are satisfying, but “explaining the research— what it means, getting [community] feedback… that level of engagement” is more rewarding for Villeneuve. The general public “doesn’t usually read our papers, so town-hall meetings or workshops that bring together more senior community members is important”.

Villeneuve notes that online articles have become a very important and widely used method of knowledge translation “that wasn’t there 10 to 15 years ago”.  He also acknowledges the evolution of the epidemiology field, especially in air pollution research. Satellites can now estimate ground level concentrations of pollution, and GPS and other apps provide better estimated exposures at an individual-level. As “the field continues to evolve, we continue to do things better and better, and [it continues to be] something that appeals to me”; an appeal that he doesn’t see fading out anytime soon.

Here for contact information for Paul Villeneuve

By Ariel Root

In his chemistry departmental office at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, Prof. J David Miller tries to identify where it all started. Before he participated in or chaired expert panels of the WHO, the US FDA, AIHA, AAAAI, or the World Bank; before he partnered with Health Canada and Environment Canada to establish health policy; and much before he became a Professor and NSERC Research Chair at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ in 2000. Miller identifies three elements that founded his interests in fungal metabolites, starting with an early introduction to fungal metabolites in what his father’s job (chemist and brew-master at Moosehead Breweries in Saint John). Miller attributes the other two elements to exceptional organic chemistry training, and introduction to inspiring mycologist Norman Whitley while pursuing his undergraduate at the University of New Brunswick.

Miller’s interests in fungal metabolites further intensified during his graduate studies, as he examined interference competition; “why some fungi don’t get along; why some appear and some don’t, or why some result in animal morbidity.” Subsequently, while completing his postdoctoral work, Miller was offered a job at Agriculture Canada where he led the Fusarium mycotoxin program, examining toxins growing in the Canadian grain systems—“and that really matters,” Miller emphasizes. Mycotoxin contamination of crops has a very large economic consequence to the agri-food systems, and particularly in developing countries has very important public health implications.

He says, you need passion.

Miller chaired a working group of world-leading experts convened by the  who recently published on critical health complications from exposure to aflatoxins and fumonisin— both are mycotoxins produced by molds. Exposure to mycotoxins much above regulatory guidelines substantially increases mortality and morbidity, and can cause acute poisoning, cancer, and, most recently noted, is a contributor to stunted growth in children of affected populations. The working group published recommendations to reduce exposure in developing countries in the report . In an  with ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, Miller stated that, “improving mycotoxin control could have a far-reaching health benefit. It is time to put the existing knowledge and technology into action to control mycotoxin food contamination in low-income countries.”

Miller’s long-term fundamental interest in fungal metabolites applies to various ecosystems and populations, including people, animals, and insects, as related to mortality, morbidity, or increasing allergic response, “it’s all the same [question]: what are the chemicals that these fungi make, and what do they do?”

And he says, you need to be persistent.

Miller is interested in large unanswered questions that are important to public health. “They take a long time, but they’re important, and that’s the challenge that I’m interested in.” Miller recalled epidemiological data that emerged in Canada in 1989/90 that showed that children who lived in moldy houses would be more likely to develop allergies to everything; “and that made no sense, so no one believed it. And I thought, ‘that’s either completely wrong, or there’s something we don’t understand.’ The short answer is, it was true.” The mechanism took over 20 years to find, but this information has allowed the guidelines used in industrial hygiene, public health and more recently for clinicians to better advise their patients.

Miller has served on many national and international committees regarding built environment mold and dampness. He currently serves on the American Academy of Allergy Asthma & Immunology committee producing practice parameters for environmental allergens. Additionally, he is an elected member of the International Academy of Indoor Air Sciences, and a Fellow of the American Industrial Hygiene Association. His expertise in indoor air quality and mold connected him with Dr. Tom Kovesi, Research Institute Pediatric Respirologist of Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO). Together with the community members of Cape Dorset, Nunavut, Miller and Kovesi investigated the association between indoor air quality and respiratory health. Specifically, Inuit infants have extremely high rates of lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI), and examining data on the indoor air quality of their housing identified and classified risk factors for LRTI. This preliminary study enabled a much larger study of many communities as well as a ventilation intervention study. The results highlighted that low per person ventilation was a major risk factor but more importantly allowed officials to support the investment of improved ventilation systems within the homes.

In the case of Nunavut, the research team knew there was a problem, and felt that the existing common wisdom wasn’t plausible. It took a lot of time, resources, and efforts to find an answer, but “the research had to be done.”

And he says you need to be genuinely curious.

After a 20-year collaboration and partnership with J.D. Irving Ltd. (JDI), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) announced the 2015 NSERC Synergy Award for Miller following their discoveries that will reduce impacts of the eastern spruce budworm on North American forests. The eastern spruce budworm is the most damaging forest insect in the country, with a historical outbreak affecting 50 million hectares. Miller’s work with JDI led to the discovery of an insect toxic strain of endophytes, a natural fungi, in the needles of conifer seedlings in the Acadian forest. The endophytes can be transmitted to seedlings as they grow from a ground surrounded by cast needles from mature trees; these seedlings grow into trees with an increased tolerance to the spruce budworm. Foresters now have an effective and environmentally sustainable tool. In his  with ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, Miller noted, that “none of this would have been possible without lots of different kinds of expertise. This award reflects a lot of work by a lot of people over a long of time.” Further, he acknowledges that an interdisciplinary approach to research is critical to produce significant results; “Science is a team sport.”

For Miller, it’s always been about asking questions, getting resources, and finishing a commitment. He also stresses the success that will inherently follow from asking the right question. “When you have no idea why something is happening, … you have to ask the right question at the beginning, get an answer, and make a decision about what the next question will be.”

When Miller is asked which project has left a lasting impression, he shakes his head and says that there’s not simply one that stands above the others. “It still matters to me that I’m working on something that will make a difference. I do this because it matters.” His continued inspiration and motivation comes from the desire to “improve lives and impact people… I don’t know why else we would do it.”

Here for contact information for David Miller.