Over 1.5 million mobile apps are currently available for Android and iOs users to download. With an estimated 55 per cent of the Canadian population owning a smart phone, apps have seamlessly integrated themselves into our daily routines. From getting the latest news, to crushing candy, to swiping for affection, these days there is an app for almost everything. While gaming-, business-, and entertainment-focused apps seem to dominate the app market, one area that has remained largely untapped is accessibility apps.

Jooay: access for children with disabilities and their families

For a child, there aren’t many priorities greater than being able to play and have fun. In fact, the United Nations and the World Health Organization have recognized playing and recreation as a crucial right for children, given their role in healthy childhood development.

Jooay (a play on the word “jouer,” French for “to play”) is a mobile app that helps children with disabilities and their families find leisure opportunities that are accessible and suited to their needs. This easy-to-use app allows parents to browse nearby activities through a variety of categories – such as arts, camps, and sports – by entering certain keywords. The GPS component gives anyone in Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan information on activity locations close to them.

“Families consistently expressed [that] one of the main barriers to accessing leisure activity for their child with a disability was not knowing what activities were available,”

However, according to co-creator Keiko Shikako-Thomas, an assistant professor at McGill’s School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, “the idea isn’t only to list the resources available, but to create a community around participation and leisure.” Hence, other components of Jooay include user comments, reviews, and suggestions, all of which foster a community dialogue and keep activity providers accountable for the quality of their services.

The app also links users to CHILD LesisureNet, which provides parents with additional resources on finding accessible recreation, and community members with advice on how to make leisure activities adaptable for children with disabilities.

Jooay was developed based on research by Shikako-Thomas and Annette Majnemer, director and associate dean of McGill’s School of Physical and Occupational Therapy. They found leisure participation was significantly lower in children with disabilities, even though most children expressed a desire to partake in physical and skill-based activity. Lacking the physical and social support, these children tended to defer to more passive activities, like watching television.

“Families consistently expressed [that] one of the main barriers to accessing leisure activity for their child with a disability was not knowing what activities were available,” explains Shikako-Thomas.

“As we have a good mapping now, we can see which regions are deprived in terms of activities [offered] and work with policymakers to fix that.”

In order to address this problem, Shikako-Thomas and Majnemer partnered with the Montreal Children’s Hospital and spoke to numerous parents across three provinces. They received overwhelming interest in an app that would give information on how to find accessible spaces for their children, which prompted them to begin development of Jooay.

“So how do you make an app?” Shikako-Thomas remembers asking many of her “tech friends,” having no experience herself. Not knowing much about app development, Shinkako-Thomas and Majnemer teamed up with Montreal organization Hacking Health, which “brings together healthcare professionals, developers, designers […] and anyone who is interested in revolutionizing healthcare,” according to Julia Delrieu, the organization’s director of operations. With a team of volunteers, they were able to create a prototype of Jooay.

The app received funding from NeuroDevNet, the Rick Hansen Foundation, and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Through partnerships with the Montreal Children’s Hospital Foundation and the Trevor Williams Foundation, both an English and French version of Jooay were eventually made available as a free iOS app, and soon an Android app will be released as well.

Looking to the future, Shikako-Thomas believes the next step is “to work with policymakers. […] As we have a good mapping now, we can see which regions are deprived in terms of activities [offered] and work with policymakers to fix that.”

Stay in Touch: designed for the elderly

Another app developed with the help of Hacking Health is Stay In Touch. This app has an accessible no-touch, user-friendly interface that helps people look after and communicate with their elderly loved ones.

“A big problem with apps for seniors is that they press the wrong button sometimes and end up on unpredictable places in their computers. We are building an app that runs on a tablet in grandmaís house which helps her stay in the family,” says creator John Brohan, who works on tech projects for the elderly. Brohan has been working on this app with registered nurse Donna Byrne, founder of Beaconsfield, Quebec nursing care company Health Access Sante, and tech expert Robert Crecco.

“Many places will say they’re accessible, but maybe their washroom isn’t, or the restaurant requires a large step to get in.”

This app allows family members to make Skype calls and send family photos without older relatives ever having to push a button. For convenience, the tablet is always on and starts automatically. Its latest addition is the inclusion of subtitles to Skype conversations; if the user is hard of hearing, family members can speak into the app and subtitles pop up.

Brohan’s inspiration for the app was his own mother, who lives with his brother in England. “It was a way I could turn a life spent developing computer programs to something useful to her,” he said.

According to Brohan, the next step for Stay in Touch is “likely to be collection of blood, glucose data by having [grandma] speak the reading, and maybe a video of anyone ringing her doorbell showing on the tablet.”

​Stay In Touch is now available as a free Android app.

Radical Accessibility Audit Project (RAAP): an app in-progress

Although still in its planning stages, RAAP Montreal is a collaboration between the advocacy group Accessibilize Montreal and the Community-University Research Exchange (CURE) that aims to initiate a project mapping accessible venues, restaurants, studios, and performance spaces in Montreal for individuals with limited mobility.

Accessibility is currently a major issue in Montreal, as in most metropolitan cities, with many older buildings, bars, and restaurants remaining completely inaccessible. In fact, the Société de transport de Montréal (STM) says that only 9 out of its 68 metro stations are wheelchair accessible, a number Accessibilize Montreal believes to be actually lower, due to unnoted barriers such as construction.

“We don’t have enough resources to involve app developers at this stage. What we require is the very basic data that can eventually be turned into something more presentable and usable. ”

The idea of a mapping project came to Madde Halupka, a former Concordia student, as she “was taking a GIS [Geographic Information Systems] course at Concordia and hoped to collaborate with Accessibilize Montreal.”

Halupka explains, “We don’t have enough resources to involve app developers at this stage. What we require is the very basic data that can eventually be turned into something more presentable and usable. ”

The required information Halupka points to are accessibility audits, which are done on a volunteer basis and can be found on the RAAP website. These audits can take hours to complete in order to be meticulous, which Halupka explains is necessary as “many places will say they’re accessible, but maybe their washroom isn’t, or the restaurant requires a large step to get in.”

Halupka hopes that, once the team can gather more audits, they will then be able to work with interested app developers to create a prototype.

An intersection of technology and healthcare

All in all, it seems that many are starting to realize that mobile platforms can be used to assist those who experience physical or social barriers that make daily life hard to navigate or simply unsafe. However, given how readily available and simple to use apps are, the complexity of their development is easy to overlook. Healthcare providers don’t always have the resources or the physical capacity to compile information necessary for an accessibility app, which must take into account a plethora of elements to evaluate the accessibility of a space. In addition, accessibility apps are often conceived by people who have a particular knowledge of inaccessibility, but know little about app development.

Organizations such as Hacking Health have grown exponentially in recent years, in an effort to revolutionize healthcare accessibility through technology. The success of these organizations stems from the fact that there is a clear need to build a bridge between expertise in healthcare and technology in order to realize the full potential of apps in helping to navigate inaccessible spaces.

The post Using apps to combat inaccessibility appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, there continues to be a prevalent and dangerous public distrust in them. A recent poll found that 20 per cent of Ontarians believe certain immunizations, such the shot to prevent Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR), causes autism. While this belief is shared by more people in the U.S., it is contributing to the reappearance of preventable diseases, as many parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children.

Much of this anti-vaccination movement can be traced back to a 1998 study published by disgraced researcher Andrew Wakefield, who falsely pointed to MMR vaccines as a cause of autism. His unethical study, in which he fabricated evidence for financial reasons, has since been discredited by the scientific community. Since then, several studies have established that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism, a finding which the scientific community fully endorses. Though discredited, the residual effects of Wakefield’s paper are still felt today, adding to the public’s confusion when it comes to vaccinations.

So why does this disconnect between scientific knowledge and public knowledge still exist?

According to Brian Ward, a professor in McGill’s Department of Microbiology and Immunology, “Many [parents] are not so much anti-vaccine as pro-their-own-children, and they are very concerned to not take risks.” He continued, “The principal problem is that parents with kids who have autism are desperate [to find] some reason, and MMR in particular is delivered at a time when the first diagnosis of autism is made. So in lots and lots of peoples’ minds, if something is linked temporarily they believe it is a causal relationship rather than a coincidence.”

When it comes to the debate about vaccine safety, Ward was quick to emphasize that the fact that the risks of not getting vaccinated far outweigh the safety risks of vaccines. “There are risks to anything! But you can’t compare the risks of vaccination to the risks of nothing […] If it’s compared to nothing then anti-vaccine people are always correct […] You have to compare the risk of vaccinations to the risks of the natural disease and how likely you are to get it, in which case anti-vaccine people are always wrong.”

Ward notes that a major problem is the readily available information on the internet to which well-intentioned parents have access. “The anti-vaccine websites are extraordinarily frightening. They appear to be very reasoned, very carefully thought out arguments against vaccines. The trouble is they interpret information in ways that are really not evidence-based or true at all.” Marianna Newkirk, also a professor in McGill’s Department of Microbiology and Immunology and in the faculty of Medicine, similarly points to the “media stirring up” the general public’s belief in a conspiracy theory.

Despite overwhelming scientific evidence that vaccines are safe and effective, there continues to be a prevalent and dangerous public distrust in them.

But terrible science translation just doesn’t seem to be going away, especially when it comes to vaccinations. For example, take the latest controversy surrounding the Toronto Star, where the publisher had to make a public apology for an article that presented a series of anecdotes painting the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, Gardasil, as dangerous to women. The Star’s article embodies everything that is wrong with science journalism: not only does it disregard the scientific evidence that HPV vaccines are safe and effective, but it comes at a time when HPV inoculations are very low in Canada, increasing the potential to turn more people away.

However, this is not just a media problem. The ivory tower of the academic world has also been implicated, most recently with the uproar over a professor at Queen’s University, Melody Torcolacci, who came under fire for presenting anti-vaccination material in her lectures. “If it’s something being taught to teach a lesson that’s one thing, but if it’s being taught as the truth it’s so scary,” said Newkirk in response to the anti-vaccination slides. The accusations of anti-vaccination lectures in an academic setting are scary; not only does it validate the continuation of the anti-vaccination discourse, it also questions how academic institutions educate and train future scientists, physicians, and public health workers.

Currently, communication is undervalued and neglected as an essential skill for science students, who need to be able to communicate their research and address issues effectively. Recently, one of the only science communication courses at McGill (REDM 399 Science Writing) was discontinued. Furthermore, there are no courses focused on improving communication between scientists and the public, who fund the majority of science research.

“There just isn’t enough of it,” said Newkirk regarding incorporating science communication education, specifically with medical students. She would like to see more courses where students are forced to think about these controversial issues in a more critical way, but also understands the barriers that come with large and demanding class schedules, something third year McGill medical student Steve Roy is familiar with. “I feel we do receive an appropriate level of training about vaccines, their utility, and educating parents about them. I think we can always have more training on how to educate patients and trainees, but I recognize the time limit [of] an already dense curriculum” he said. Roy added that he would love to see more workshops geared towards science communication.

So how can we bridge this science communication gap? According to Newkirk, it will take a collaborative effort that involves scientists “[reasoning] and presenting data in an appropriate and honest way,” and “educating journalists” on how to understand and present research. Newkirk also believes it’s important for students to engage in outreach efforts, such as facilitating discussions within the community to address issues like the importance of vaccines. For those students thinking “I’m not a parent or science student, and this doesn’t apply to me,” Ward has a strong message: “Get that damn vaccine booklet before your parents throw it out. [Students] have no idea what their vaccination history is. They have no idea if they’re vaccinated! Every young adult has to take responsibility.” By not knowing your vaccination history, you are putting yourself and others at risk, so check out the McGill website to see what vaccines are recommended for students, or better yet, go see your doctor, because we can all use a dose of reality.

The post A dose of reality appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Researchers at McGill’s department of Mechanical Engineering, led by Francois Barthelat, have developed a new technique that increases the toughness of glass by a factor of 200.

The research was inspired by, of all things, seashells. Barthelat explains that they are the “perfect models of nature to mimic, because of their very complex architecture.” Seashells (for example mollusk shells) are composed of mainly brittle ingredients, like chalk, but their inner layer contains mother of pearl (or nacre), a natural material composed of microscopic patterns known to be extremely strong and tough. Barthelat and his team focused their work on how seashells behave and deform, and specifically studied the internal weak boundaries of materials like nacre. Using their understanding of these boundaries, the research team used lasers to engrave jigsaw-like networks of 3D micro-cracks into glass slides, mimicking these weak boundaries.

Their technique amplified the toughness of the glass, overcoming its main downfall of being brittle. The micro-cracks served as a control mechanism for stopping other cracks from branching and becoming larger, absorbing energy from the impact in the process. By segmenting the glass material and creating weak interfaces, they were able to guide and localize the damage.

Using nature as a muse for innovative and sustainable solutions, such as synthesizing new material, is referred to as biomimicry, which translates to “imitation of nature,” from the Greek words bios and mimesis. Barthelat emphasizes the importance of drawing inspiration from nature, calling the process as common sense, as it draws upon natural materials that have withstood the test of time.

Mohammad Mirkhalaf, a former PhD student in Barthelat’s Biomimetic Materials Lab, and current postdoctoral researcher, expanded upon this. “Natural materials have evolved for millions of years, they are optimized materials. For instance, seashells are 3,000 times tougher than the materials they are made of… you can learn a lot from how they deform and behave and decide how these mechanisms translate into synthetic materials for your work.” Mirkhalaf went on to highlight the importance of this research, explaining that “synthetic materials are really reaching their limits and engineers can’t do much more, there are ways of improving these materials… our inspiration is optimization of these materials and providing new and better materials to work with.”

So what would happen if you were to drop this new, tougher glass? Well, according to Barthelat, nothing really. “It would deform a little and absorb the energy from the impact.” Rather than shattering into little pieces, which you somehow manage to find weeks later (even after a thorough clean), the glass just bends or dents upon impact. Although Barthelat does mention there are current height limitations, as the glass would shatter if dropped from great heights, they are trying to improve this through more research, by using “an impact tower, where you drop stuff and see if it breaks.”

There has been some concern expressed over how this glass is produced and if it would cause recycling problems, but Barthelat was quick to dismiss these worries stating that the “glass has the same properties, we don’t change the chemistry, we are just putting in defects, micro-cracks, it’s very environmentally friendly.” He also added that the glass “is actually cheaper to produce” compared to current manufacturing processes.

Though tight-lipped, Barthelat said they “are currently working with companies for specific applications,” giving no specific timelines. He mentions that the applications are endless, impacting industries that produce “windows, drinking glasses, electronics, and anywhere you see glass.”

The team is now looking to expand their research to other materials like ceramics. Barthelat is very excited to “explore the realm of applications,” referring to this research as a “breakthrough,” sentiments Mirkhalaf shares. “The question is, can we do what nature does?” he says. “I’m excited because I think it’s the next generation of materials,” Mirkhalaf adds.

Mirkhalaf described his PhD research as an “amazing experience.” His advice to future students wanting to get into academic research is to “think hard about what you’re doing and don’t get upset too easily.” Research can be a lengthy and difficult process, which is why it is important to remain determined and continue. Who knows what other breakthroughs will occur when your determination is as tough as glass.

The post How seashells inspired ‘unbreakable’ glass appeared first on The McGill Daily.

This will be the first major change to the MCAT approved by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) in more than twenty years. But why now?

The AAMC believes that aspiring doctors not only need a solid understanding of the natural sciences, but also a social understanding of medicine, in order to keep up with the rapidly changing healthcare system.

The new MCAT is a test of endurance, lasting seven and a half hours (with optional ten minute breaks between sections and a possible lunch break), and requiring students to extend their knowledge of core courses. The great unknowns that come with such major restructuring have many potential applicants feeling nervous. This has some students rushing to take the current MCAT (available until January 2015), which is a transitional exam and does not have a writing section, making it shorter and more familiar.

A student’s perspective
Heather Nichol is a second-year Masters student at McGill. Nichol recently wrote the current transition test; she believes the topics on the new MCAT are “relevant to the study and practice of medicine, but I also feel that a six-hour test is too long. […] Probably not something that I could have handled while also working towards a Masters full time. So I’m definitely glad I wrote the transition test.”

Owen Farcy, Kaplan Test Prep’s director of pre-health programs and the MCAT 2015, told The Daily that “students have the option to take the current version of the exam but the window is closing quickly. […] Most of the dates in January have already been sold out.” Understanding that many students, with an already busy course load, are worried about the new concepts and the daunting length, Farcy suggests that “if [students] can, the current version is a simpler test, [and it’s] in their best interest to take [it].”

However, “many people agree that these changes are in a positive direction and will better prepare students for medical school,” Farcy says optimistically. Farcy points out that instead of just regurgitating information, the 2015 MCAT will force students to rely on their ability to connect concepts by emphasizing that medicine is as much about knowing your patients as it is about knowing the human body. Additionally, Farcy adds that the length of the test, although not ideal, will allow the AAMC to collect more data, allowing the test to carry more validity.

“[The MCAT] is a very expensive endeavour and I worry that it deters or prevents some very good MD candidates from pursuing medical school.”  — Heather Nichol, Masters student

What universities think
Kaplan recently surveyed 78 medical schools – it found that 44 per cent of schools had no preference for which MCAT version students take, while 28 per cent recommended the current exam and 27 per cent of medical schools advised participants to hold out for the new version. So at this moment, there really is no consensus.

Another unknown is how medical schools will actually use the new data to interpret and compare applicants, or if certain elements will be assigned more value than others.
Although McGill accepts MCAT scores, it does not require the test for admission into their medical program, a decision that was made to eliminate the barrier for francophone candidates in 2010, as the MCAT is not offered in French.

“We want anyone who is able to, to feel free and apply to the program and show us their stuff,” says Saleem Razack, Assistant Dean of Admissions, Equity and Diversity at McGill’s Faculty of Medicine.

Razack believes eliminating the MCAT hasn’t hindered admission but has positively contributed to finding strong students for the program from a wider pool of applicants – “the proof is in the pudding,” he says confidently. Razack explained that the department has worked internally to design a process that looks at a candidate as a whole person, as part of a holistic assessment. They are not only looking for candidates with good academic performance (which they have seen increase since 2010), but also “looking at how someone negotiates the social world.”

Even after MCAT prep courses, which range from $1,899 to $11,999 at Kaplan, students still have to pay for the MCAT itself, which costs $275, in addition to program application fees.

Razack emphasizes the changes to the MCAT are “very much in line with where medical education is going in Canada and what we have done internally at McGill,” especially emphasizing the need for applicants’ knowledge about the socio-cultural determinants of health.

Ultimately, Razack says cautiously, “I can only speak on behalf of my own context, it definitely is possible to select excellent doctors in other ways […] not everybody needs to have the MCAT.”

The socioeconomic barriers
It has been argued for years that the MCAT contributes to a flawed system that mainly benefits the privileged, and does not necessarily act as an accurate indicator of who is a ‘good doctor.’ Many have called for the removal of the MCAT, so admissions can put less of an emphasis on academics, and take a more holistic look at their candidates, which would even the playing field — an approach the McGill Faculty of Medicine has already taken.

Nichol, commenting on her experience with the MCAT, adds, “I feel the biggest flaw is the expense associated with writing the MCAT. The test alone is $275 [USD] and then you add prep books, practice tests, maybe a course, and likely also travel or hotel costs to get to a testing centre. It is a very expensive endeavour and I worry that it deters or prevents some very good MD candidates from pursuing medical school.”

The socioeconomic barriers of getting into medical school are a harsh reality for many applicants. Even after MCAT prep courses, which range from $1,899 to $11,999 at Kaplan, students still have to pay for the MCAT itself, which costs $275, in addition to program application fees. It’s a continuous uphill battle that doesn’t stop, even after getting into medical school. Even though the new MCAT aims to be more holistic, it still excludes candidates who cannot afford the costs of preparing for and taking the exam.

A little incentive
With these new changes to the exam, the debate between whether or not we need the MCAT, especially here in Canada, will still continue and so will the barriers that come with the exam. Alas, future med students have little choice: the MCAT isn’t going anywhere, and so the rush for hundreds of eager applicants to get ahead of these new changes are in full swing.

Although many believe that the changes to the 2015 MCAT are positive, we won’t know anything for certain before the first round of students take the test this spring. As an incentive to take the new MCAT the first batch of students are being offered a $150 Amazon gift card. After all, they will be the guinea pigs, a frightening prospect for many.

The post The new seven hour long MCAT appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The constant negative portrayal of drones in the media has shaped the public’s misconception of this fascinating and intricate technology. Due to their military application, a lack of good science communication, and tight regulations surrounding their commercialization in North America, drones are facing a huge public image problem.

The U.S. Congress has given the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) a 2015 deadline to loosen its regulations and integrate drones into civilian airspace, which will allow for more commercial and domestic use of drones. The Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) has projected that by 2025, integrating the commercial use of drones in the U.S. will have a large economic impact, reaching $82.1 billion dollars and creating 100,000 jobs.

Although there are problems that need to be faced with integrating drones into our society, it is hopefully a step in the right direction to eliminating skewed public perceptions. From the good to the bad to the downright silly, the possible applications of drones seem endless. Whether you believe in the use of drones in the military or not, it is crucial to understand the full extent of what they can do for society, starting with the research here at McGill, and the many different applications around the world.

Drones at McGill

It’s a bird, it’s plane… it’s a drone! The aptly-named David Bird, a professor of Wildlife Biology at McGill, has been studying birds of prey for the past 45 years. Bird is regarded as a leader in his field, being among the first biologists in North America to integrate UAVs into wildlife research and management.

He realized the possibility about eight years ago with a former ornithology student, while working on a project that investigated the possibility of a drone designed to look like a hawk to scare away falcons from a vineyard. Since then, and with the help of the Kenneth M Molson foundation, he has been able to successfully use drones in his other projects, such as understanding how birds respond to drones and wildlife population tracking.

Bird is currently looking at the potential use of drones equipped with noisemakers to scare away nuisance birds, like Canadian geese that attack crops and starling flocks that damage vineyards.

He is fast to point out that drones, in comparison to helicopters, improve data accuracy, are more cost-effective and time-efficient, and are less stressful to the wildlife they track. He specifically emphasizes the element of safety. “The number one source of mortality for bird wildlife experts is dying in a plane crash. UAVs eliminate this threat.”

His enthusiasm for the possibilities of drones has led him to create the Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems, which publishes four times per year online. Bird is a huge advocate for the potential application of drones in general, saying, “For the first time in my life as a scientist, I feel like I’m on the cusp of something great.”

Permits from Transport Canada are hard to come by, and have forced Bird to conduct some of his research outside the country. In fact, Bird proudly mentions that he is the first Canadian researcher to be granted permission to use a large fixed-winged UAV over a forest in Labrador, within a military-controlled area, to detect the signals of woodland caribou and their movement patterns. This is a huge feat, considering the strict drone regulations in Canada.

Although he is a firm believer in using drones, Bird approaches their use with caution and agrees with the strict regulations enforced by the FAA and Transport Canada. “At times you can have no control over [drones]. You can have flyaways where the computer goes haywire.”

The possibility of providing aid to millions of people around the world, with no access to healthcare, clean water, or even road infrastructure is a powerfully exciting future to think of.

He stresses that there is still a long way to go before the risks are eliminated, which is why he’s concerned about how readily available they are to amateurs. “Anyone can go into a hobby store and buy a helicopter with a camera on it.” The problem with accessibility, Bird points out, is if you’re not responsible when flying around an urban area, like downtown Montreal, it can lead to horrible crashes involving innocent civilians or interfering with private property.

In June, a drone being used to film a commercial in downtown Vancouver crashed into a building. Luckily, no one was injured and an investigation by Transport Canada resulted in no charges against the operator of the drone. However, the City of Vancouver did issue a temporary ban, which has since been lifted. There have also been several incidents of small drones being used to airdrop drugs into prisons in Quebec.

It’s “stupid actions” such as the aforementioned that Bird worries might make Transport Canada further tighten its regulations, as the FAA did in the U.S..
Another area Bird feels very strongly about is the misconception behind drones. “Public perception bothers me. […] Conjure up the word drones and people think of the U.S. killing people,” he says irritably.

Like many, Bird agrees that there is a severe lack of scientific communication when it comes to drones and believes that “it is the responsibility of scientists working with [drones] today that need to show they can be used for good and not evil.”

Advancing the science

Meyer Nahon, a professor of Mechanical Engineering, focuses his research on the underlying science of UAVs rather than the application. The goal of his group is to further develop technology so drones can become fully autonomous. This means a drone wouldn’t require direct control from one person, but rather a specific command (such as flying from Montreal to Toronto), which it can route themselves. Another project his lab is currently working on is landing a UAV on a moving platform.

Most of Nahon’s work with drones takes place indoors, where they are easily controlled and safe away from the public. With the spike of interest in civil drones, he sympathizes with regulatory bodies like Transport Canada who are under a great deal of pressure. He stresses that there is a high risk associated with flying drones over a populated area, as there is very little experience compared to other aerial vehicles.

Even with a large commercial push, Nahon is “personally skeptical we will see billions of little drones flying around our heads anytime soon.”

No stranger to protests, Nahon has had to face backlash for his own work on drone technology. Last year, Demilitarize McGill blockaded the Aerospace Mechatronics Lab, where Nahon is a researcher.

In response to whether he believes it’s the responsibility of scientists to communicate the misconceptions of drone technology, he states, “It’s not that we hide our heads in the sand; but rather because we are confident there are many positive (and non-military) reasons to want to do that.”

He adds, “This is what we are interested in, this is why we are in university. The application or the use of this technology is determined by the people that make use of it […] It would be like saying, well there shouldn’t be any research done on the internet because it’s being used by the military, but look where we are now, it’s analogous […] it’s a mistake to focus on the negative when there are so many benefits.”

Like Nahon, Professor Inna Sharf in Mechanical Engineering also focuses her research on autonomous UAV technology, so they can be applied successfully. Her interests lie with smaller rotary vehicles, including how to make them last longer and withstand elements, like the wind. Sharf is also currently looking at algorithms to allow UAVs to recover from collisions.

Sharf has come under scrutiny from campus activists, especially Demilitarize McGill, for the funding of her research. While Sharf has denied the military applications of her work, in the past, documents obtained by access to information (ATI) requests revealed that she received several contracts from Defence Research and Development Canada in Suffield, totalling more than $500,000.

Sharf encourages other researchers in her position to speak up when they get a chance, but at the end of the day she believes, “It is we as society, it is all of our responsibility to make sure how particular technology is used.”

Drones around the world

There are many applications of drones that have the ability to impact society in a positive way. However, many are put on hold until drone technology can develop, or until regulating bodies (such as the FAA or Transport Canada) loosen their restrictions on commercial drones. Here are a few.

Musical drones?

The Montreal-produced classical music video channel, noncerto, is currently enlisting the aid of a drone to capture its original footage. Wael Chanab, noncerto’s drone videographer, first proposed the idea while overhearing the director, Alexandra Oakley, discuss a particular shot she wanted for a classical music video. “I suggested that a drone could probably achieve it, and researched a few possibilities. noncerto decided to purchase a drone for classical music videos and offered me an internship for the summer with their non-profit organization operating the drone.”

Chanab says that noncerto’s drone has allowed for “interesting and unique perspectives of artists playing concerts in unusual and unique locations in Montreal” in addition to capturing “stunning angles and movement.”

One great reason for the use of drones, according to Chanab, is that it allows for an efficient, easy-to-use tool at the disposal of the video directors, and it’s also much more cost-friendly compared to other aerial vehicles.

Being one of the first organizations to shoot classical music videos with a drone, noncerto is definitely adding to the versatility and list of possibilities of this technology.

The age of farm drones

According to the AUVSI, agricultural applications of drones will account for $75.6 billion by 2025 in the U.S., making it by far the most dominant market. There is a huge demand from farmers with large acres of land, as drones are being created to assess the health of crops and livestock, increase yields, save money, and quickly detect infestation or drainage issues. One potential impact is the reduction of pesticides (and other chemicals). Since drones are able to quickly find infested areas, they can spot-spray a precise area rather than mass spraying unnecessary acres as they currently do, which would have great environmental benefits. Agricultural drones have been used in Japan for years, allowing farmers to tend to their land more quickly, effectively, and efficiently. Many now believe this is the time for agriculture in North America to adopt this technology.

Disaster relief and humanitarian aid

More and more non-profits and start-up companies have aimed to use drones for social good during times of disaster for communities who are in need of aid.
One start up company, Matternet, aims to accelerate the process of humanitarian responses with the use of drones to deliver medicines and other crucial supplies to remote areas. In 2012, Matternet conducted its first field trials in Haiti and the Dominican Republic. They were able to successfully distribute medication to camps set up after the devastating 2010 earthquake in Haiti and deliver supplies and diagnostic kits from big healthcare centres to smaller, remote ones in the Dominican.

Even though the company has developed safety precautions for its drones, including shutting them down if hijacked, Matternet is still working on making them safer before considering humanitarian deployment.

More and more non-profits and start-up companies have aimed to use drones for social good during times of disaster for communities who are in need of aid.

Additionally, this year, Google also announced its plans to use autonomous drones to help deliver relief to disaster-stricken areas. Its program entitled “Project Wing” has been running test flights in Queensland, Australia, since the regulations on drones there are more laid back compared to North America.
The possibility of providing aid to millions of people around the world, with no access to healthcare, clean water, or even road infrastructure is a powerfully exciting future to think of.

Lights, camera, drones!

New and shiny technology: of course Hollywood wanted a bit of drone-loving. Although the film industry has been using drones in other countries where regulations are less stringent, the FAA has now given the green light for six television and movie production companies to film using drones on U.S. soil.

Knock knock… drone delivery!

Whether you find it cool or downright silly, millions of dollars are being invested to have drones deliver to your doorstep. Domino’s Pizza (yeah, you read that right), has tested the ‘DomiCopter,’ a pizza delivery drone that delivers to your home in ten minutes. Alas, it was just a clever marketing ad by the company, but who knows: maybe it will become a reality! It would give a whole new meaning to the term fast food.

What is real, however, are the millions Amazon is spending to develop drone technology so that its products can be delivered in thirty minutes after they are purchased.

Search and rescue

One of the first successful documented cases using a search and rescue drone occurred in Saskatchewan in May 2013. The RCMP were unable to find an injured victim of a car crash whose vehicle had rolled over in the middle of the night in a remote area. A ground search and an air ambulance were unable to find the victim. The RCMP launched a drone after receiving a call from the victim’s cellphone; equipped with heat-sensing technology, the drone was able to locate the victim. What could have potentially resulted in a fatality during the freezing night was mitigated by the use of a drone. The use of drones for search and rescue is becoming an increasingly popular tool.

Protecting wildlife

Drones are currently being used to monitor and protect wildlife by the U.S. government and other organizations around the world. One non-profit is using drones for orangutan conservation in Indonesia and Malaysia. These ‘conservation drones’ are able to track the distribution and resting spots of orangutans. The hope is that the information collected will be used to petition the government to protect national parks from developers interested in the palm trees for palm oil production.

While the drone industry continues to be mostly represented by the military complex, it is becoming clear that drones can offer significant non-lethal applications. Scientists need to strongly advocate for and shift to developing civilian applications. But ultimately, it is up to us as privileged students and citizens to ensure the proper use of this technology by holding our leaders accountable and voicing our dissent.

The post Pacifist drones appeared first on The McGill Daily.