Features
Helen Nadel is about to assume the presidency of an important world-wide body: The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
And while Helen Nadel has had a distinguished career in medicine as a pediatric radiologist and nuclear medicine physician – Winnipeg will always be near and dear to her
By BERNIE BELLAN Quite often this newspaper has published articles about former Winnipeggers who have gone on to great careers once they’ve left Winnipeg. If there’s one thing our Jewish community here has been especially proficient at doing, it’s been serving as a springboard for outstanding students to launch successful careers elsewhere.
In some ways, while we may lament that so many of our “best and brightest” have sought to further their careers by leaving Manitoba, almost all those expatriates have something in common, and that’s a deep affection for their hometown – also for the bonds that they formed growing up in Winnipeg.
A few months ago I happened to be in conversation with one of our out-of-town readers: Diane Unrode-Ackley. Diane mentioned that a good friend of hers, Helen Nadel, had recently been elected to serve as the upcoming president of a rarified body: The Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
Now, I should also explain that Helen has been an online subscriber to this paper for many years but, like many other online subscribers, I really didn’t have a clue where Helen lived – or what Helen’s background was.
I told Diane that I would definitely want to interview Helen to ask her about her career and what led up to her assuming the presidency of such an important body. But, as you might expect, Helen Nadel is one very busy woman. Try as we might to find a time that would work for both of us to conduct an in-depth interview, it wasn’t until earlier this past month that we were able to speak – face to face so to speak, via Zoom.
What follows are excerpts from that interview, but first here is Helen Nadel’s bio as given on the Stanford University School of Medicine website:
“Dr. Nadel is a dual board -certified Pediatric Radiologist and Nuclear Medicine Physician in both the USA and Canada. She holds certifications from the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada in Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, The American Board of Radiology (ABR) with certificate of added qualification in Pediatric Radiology and the American Board of Nuclear Medicine (ABNM). Dr. Nadel was an Associate Professor of Radiology at University of British Columbia and had been practicing as a pediatric radiologist and pediatric nuclear medicine physician at British Columbia Children’s Hospital in Vancouver, British Columbia since 1983 after medical school at University of Manitoba (1977, Winnipeg, Manitoba), internship and residency at University of Toronto (1978-1982) and Pediatric Radiology fellowship (Chief Fellow) at Hospital for Sick Children (1982-1983, Toronto, Ont.) She has been working with the entire breadth of general and hybrid nuclear medicine studies in children in a fully integrated department of Pediatric Radiology and lecturing to promote this field for her entire career. Dr. Nadel currently uses PET/MRI exclusively for PET imaging at Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford University (LPCH) and co-directs the clinical PET/MRI program at LPCH. Dr. Nadel has been inducted as a Fellow of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (FSNMMI). Dr. Nadel is the 2022-2023 President-Elect of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.”
And here is the interview:
JP&N: ¨Nice to meet you – finally.”
Nadel: “You too.
JP&N: “We actually met seven years ago at the Jewish Schools Reunion. You’ve had a very illustrious career – and worn many hats, but tell me something about your growing up in Winnipeg.”
Nadel: “I’m a north ender – an only child. My mother came to Winnipeg in 1921 – she was born near Kiev.
“My father came after the war. He had had a military career in the Polish Army. He was captured by the Russians in 1939 and sent to the Gulag. Then when he was repatriated he walked back over the Ural mountains to then fight in the free Polish division of the Russian army.”
JP&N: “Wow!” (Ed. note: That would have been over 2,000 kilometres! At this point I’m including a later part of the interview in which Helen elaborated upon what happened to her father.)
JP&N: “Did you say he had to walk from the Gulag?”
Nadel: “Yes, he walked. It took him two years. He lived in the Ural Mountains, he lived in Uzbekistan.”
JP&N: ¨I just wrote about a book by another doctor – Meyer Kreger. It was the memoir of his mother, Rose. She was also from Poland and survived the war after being sent to Siberia, then Uzbekistan, then Kazakhstan. The stories of how some people were able to survive when others couldn’t endure are endlessly fascinating.”
Nadel: “You know Francie Winograd, don’t you? My father was in the same DP camp as Francie’s mother (Gertrude) after the war. It was near Munich.
“When my father came to Winnipeg, he met the Grosh family – and they had a sister-in-law who was in her thirties and not married. She was introduced to my father and as they say, the rest is history.” (I had to tell Helen that Gerry Posner uses that line in every story he writes.)
“They were married in 1949 and I was born in ’52.”
“I went to Peretz School in Winnipeg and then to Jefferson and Garden City Collegiate. I graduated and did undergrad and med school in Winnipeg. After that‚ I went to a Toronto to do my specialty training in radiology. I’m a radiologist‚ and I have two specialties – actually. three specialties. I’m a radiologist‚ but I sub specialize in pediatric radiology, and I also have a secondary qualification in nuclear medicine, both of which are diagnostic tools.
“One uses what you would think of as conventional X rays and now, ultrasound. MRI is general radiology. Nuclear medicine uses a small amount of radioactive material to also look at how the body works, how it functions. The new thing about nuclear medicine – it’s not so new really, is we can also use it for therapy. So, if you’ve heard of people having thyroid disease, sometimes we give them radioactivity to treat thyroid cancer.
“And now, the big thing‚ of course‚ is we can treat prostate cancer in men; we can treat other cancers as well. But the new kid on the block is treating prostate cancer with radioactive material. We’ve had very good success. But I’m a pediatric person‚ so that’s not actually my purview at the moment.
“But part of the reason I think Diane wanted you to talk to me is I’m about to become the President of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.”
JP&N: ¨You haven’t assumed the throne yet, have you?”
Nadel: “My presidential year starts in June of this year. But I’ve been in the leadership (of the Society) for three years. I was elected in June 2021.”
JP&N: ¨You’re going to become head of a worldwide organization – right, or is it just American?”
Nadel: “It’s a worldwide organization, based in the US‚ but it is global. We are the largest organization (in the field of nuclear medicine). We have a membership that includes physicians‚ technologists‚ scientists and industry. And it has about 14,000 (members). There are some other organizations (in the field). There are regional – sort of country-based organizations. There are continental-based organizations – like the European Association of Nuclear Medicine – but we’re much bigger.”
JP&N: “You said your specialty is pediatric radiology. Is that right?”
Helen: “Yes‚ ¨I’m a pediatric radiologist.”
JP&N: “So, up to what age would you be treating patients?”
Nadel: Well‚ that’s a good question – usually to age 18. However‚ here at Stanford‚ we have a lot of children that have had diseases as infants‚ and we keep seeing them as they become adults. We still see them. So, it’s a movable barrier. But usually pediatrics is to 18.”
JP&N: ¨I assume you know Ted Lyons.”
Nadel: “I do. Ted was instrumental in bringing ultrasound to Winnipeg and to Canada and as such he came to teach us in our radiology training program at the University of Toronto.”
(At that moment Helen’s phone rang and she had to take a short call. When Helen resumed our Zoom call I noticed a male figure had wandered into the background.)
JP&N: “Who’s that wandering into the background now? Is that your husband?”
Nadel: “Yes, that’s my husband.”
JP&N: “What’s your husband’s name?”
Nadel: “Tevy Goodman. ‘Tevy, say hi to Bernie Bellan‚ the editor of the Jewish Post.’ ”
JP&N: “Are you in Palo Alto? Is that where I’m reaching you now?”
Nadel: “We’re in Palo Alto. We’re in the heart of Silicon Valley. I came to Stanford five years ago. I was recruited here. Actually‚ I was sort of retiring from my job. I had been 35 years at Children’s Hospital – at British Columbia Children’s Hospital in Vancouver – as a pediatric radiologist and the head of their pediatric nuclear medicine department, and I was going to sort of retire – slow down, at least.
“But there was a new hospital at Stanford – a new children’s hospital. I have a lot of friends in the community all over and one of them here convinced me that I should at least look at this job. And you know what it was? It was an opportunity that not many people would get. And, so, instead of retiring‚ I decided to come here – and I’m moving – going ‘uphill’ to go ‘downhill’.”
JP&N: Are most of your duties teaching or clinical? How does it break down?”
Nadel: “I am a clinical physician. I’m in charge of a new division – brand new at this hospital‚ which is called Pediatric Nuclear Medicine. I am also a full service pediatric radiologist. And so I have two hats – two big hats.
“We have some unique equipment here that not many places in the world have – and I’m kind of a leader. I don’t want to blow my own horn‚ but I’m a leader in a field called PET/MRI (Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging).
“Winnipeg has a PET/CT scanner. There are two in Vancouver. There are two down the street from here, where I live. So‚ you know‚ it’s just a different world, it’s a different focus‚ a different way of doing things. I’ve been very fortunate that I’ve been able to use these exceptional tools for over 20 years now in my practice, both in Canada and the US. And pediatric lags behind adults in this area – just because we’re smaller. You know, there are fewer kids, but 25% of the world population is pediatric. It will increase as the Boomers get older and die off . Some Third World countries have mostly young people, so it will take a while to build up another Boomer type age group once we’re out of the picture. And disease will get younger in the medical field.”
JP&N: ¨ There are all sorts of scary news reports about cancer, saying it’s increasing – depending on who you talk to. Yesterday‚ I think I saw in Time Magazine, that 50% of people will have cancer in their lifetimes. Someone else told me‚ 70% – but she’s really into conspiracy theories. Can you give a more specific figure or is it hard to do that?”
Nadel: “I don’t have an answer to that. But there are some reports that suggest that the ages at which some people are getting certain diseases are getting younger. There was a big report this week on colon cancer – saying people are getting it younger. It’s being picked up at younger ages. I think that’s in part due to the fact that we have better techniques to pick these diseases up. We are taking more interest in preventative health‚ and that’s okay.
“One of the things that attracted me to Stanford was the physician who recruited me. His name was Sam Gambhir. He was an absolute giant in the field. Unfortunately, he died two years ago of cancer – a very horrible story. You could look him up. He was brilliant. But he basically was on track and his lab -which is still here‚ was on track to promote precision health and preventative health. And precision medicine includes wearable technology, you know.
“One of the last things he wrote about – a great article‚ was about the ‘smart toilet’ And it exists, basically. Your toilet can determine if you have disease by your feces. But nobody knows that’s the case. There’s so much going on in the world. I mean‚ this is beyond me‚ but I’m just saying that there’s a lot of stuff going on.
“So, the statistics are enabling us to pick up more diseases‚ and we’re picking it up earlier. We’re finding ways to treat it. But, have we moved the dial? I’m not sure yet. We don’t know yet. We don’t have enough information yet to determine if we’ve moved the dial in the right direction. I think we will, but I think it’s going to take a little longer to actually prove that.
JP&N: “Okay‚ I want to talk about your new position, but I also want to put a little bit of a ‘haimish’ touch to this. You said you left Winnipeg – when?. Were you in your twenties?”
Nadel: I left Winnipeg after I graduated from med school. I was 24.”
JP&N: “And you went to Toronto for postgraduate?”
Nadel: “Basically, you have to do a year of postgraduate training to get a medical license. I actually did what was called in those days a rotating internship. So I did twelve months of a bunch of everything – all different parts of medicine. I actually thought I would become a family physician and come back to Winnipeg. Then I met my husband. We actually met in Winnipeg. He’s from Vancouver‚ but we met in Winnipeg‚ and he followed me to Toronto. He didn’t want to come back to Winnipeg – put it that way.”
JP&N: “Sounds familiar.”
Nadel: “We thought we would end up in Toronto. And, after 14 years of postgraduate education – which included all my radiology training…I also did specialty training; after a year of internship; after four years of radiology residency and a one year pediatric radiology fellowship – I didn’t have a job! I needed a job. And I got offered to do much like what I’m doing here: start up a new program at a brand new hospital in Vancouver – British Columbia Children’s Hospital. I was 30 years old.
¨And my husband being from Vancouver‚ that seemed like a reasonable thing to do for what we thought would be five years. We ended up having two daughters in those first five years – and we never left.”
JP&N: “Can I ask: What did your husband do?”
Nadel: “My husband is a retired professional engineer – a civil engineer and, in an interesting twist‚ he helped build some of the nuclear generating stations in Ontario. He worked in construction development and then in power group development. He worked for Ontario Hydro for all the years that we were in Ontario. And then he basically retired.”
“He took care of me and the kids and it just worked out that way. Coming back to Vancouver turned out to be a good thing and a bad thing when we came back. We came for my job because I did not have another job, and it looked like he would get a similar job in civil engineering, but that had dried up in the 80s (when nuclear plants stopped being built).
“And, our first child was premature But, you know what? The decision to have one parent at home was the right decision. And so it was him. I was young; he was a great father. He is a great father. So he was a forerunner then. And he was not Mr. Mom. He was everything. He is everything still. I couldn’t have done anything I did – and still do if I didn’t have that kind of support.”
JP&N: “So, as far as your Winnipeg roots go‚ I know that you’re friends with Diane Unrode-Ackley. Do you still have many friends from that time?”
Nadel: “Well Diane is like a sister me. I really had a close circle of three. Mindy (Unrode, Diane’s younger sister, who sadly died in 1986) was my best friend. We met when we were seven or eight years old. We were friends forever. She moved to Toronto as well after she got divorced.
“My second close friend was Cheryl Schwartz, who’s now (Dr.) Cheryl Minuk – also in Toronto.
JP&N: “She’s a subscriber, too. I talk to her occasionally.”
Nadel: And my other close friend was (Madame Justice) Robyn (Moglove) Diamond (who also passed away – in 2018). The four of us (Helen, Mindy, Cheryl, and Robyn) were best friends.
JP&N: “What street did you grow up on?”
Nadel: “I grew up on Scotia Street‚ between Smithfield and McAdam. My cousins are the Grosh family. I should mention that my family were also long time shul goers at Rosh Pina.”
JP&N: I just heard from Joel (Grosh). His mother (Tesse) just passed and we had her obituary in the paper. This is really a little Jewish geography we’re doing.”
Nadel: “Totally. So, Tesse’s husband, Abe, and I were first cousins. Our mothers were sisters‚ but I’m almost the same age as Joel; he’s one year older than me. So, even though I’m one generation older than him we grew up together. We grew up in a compound almost. Joel’s family lived next door to us until they built their really nice house on Smithfield. His grandparents lived next door to him – half a block away
“What happened is two brothers – named Grosh, married two sisters my aunts – whose name was Chmelnitsky – and they lived across the street from each other. In a real twist of fate, someone else you know, Osher (Archie) Kraut, is also my cousin.
“They’re cousins on my father’s side – which is how my father came to Winnipeg after the war. Archie’s parents actually brought him to Winnipeg. He was only planning to pass through Winnipeg on his way to Israel. He’d been in a DP camp for four years. He had had typhus; he wasn’t that well. And then he came to Winnipeg. He wasn’t even 40.”
JP&N: “By the way, we’re only a year apart in age. Well, let’s turn to the position you’re about to assume. What will be your actual title?”
Nadel: “I’ll be President of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. When you’re first elected‚ you are vice-president elect‚ then you become president elect‚ then you become president, and then you become past president. What happens is you’re part of the leadership, basically. So, as president elect you travel together with the president. You deal with all of the sort of day to day problems that such an organization might have. We deal with the US federal government, for the most part. We deal with international governments related to the supply of radiopharmaceuticals that we use in our medical careers. And we also have international organizations. We deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency, which I’ve been involved with for 20 years as well, on a consultancy basis.
“How did I get to where I am in this organization? Well‚ as a pediatric radiologist and nuclear medicine physician‚ I was always interested in promoting the interests of children. They’re different than adults. There’s a saying that children are not small adults, and that’s true. And so, in some things, kids do get left behind. They don’t get some of the drugs. They don’t get some of the treatments that are available, some of the diagnostic things that you could do, some things you don’t want to do, etc.
“But it’s important to promote pediatrics. I’ve been a strong proponent of educating people about my field, my particular area of interest. I met people along the way who were interested in how I do things. I was interested in the organization that I belong to. I’m promoting the fact that there are new techniques that we can utilize. I’ve just been vocal. I teach, I give a lot of lectures, I’m not shy. Well‚ I guess you could say I’m an ‘introverted extrovert.’
“I got known in my field as a speaker, somebody who was interesting. I worked as a solo practitioner in my area – in Vancouver, even here (at Stanford). It’s usually never more than one person that does pediatric nuclear medicine in any hospital department.
“I suppose the reason I got to where I got was I volunteered to get involved in different parts of the organization, but I wasn’t aspiring to do this (become president of the nuclear medicine association). But again, much like coming to Stanford, somebody asked if I would consider doing it. My reaction was, given that I was new at Stanford and that I’m trying to grow a brand new program, (the administrators at Stanford) would say, ‘Are you crazy? We’re not giving you that time.’
“But, instead, they were delighted. But when you say you’re willing to put your name forward for election, you actually have to run an election. I ran an election. I sent out 10,000 emails.”
JP&N: “Were there other candidates running?”
Nadel: “There was another candidate that ran, but I won the election in June 2021. I’m going to be the seventy-first president of this organization. I’ll also be the fifth woman, the fifth pediatric person, and the third Canadian.”
JP&N: “Are you an American citizen now, too (in addition to being a Canadian citizen?”
Nadel: “No, no, I am a Canadian citizen. I do have a green card. My husband and I both have green cards, but we’ll always be Canadian.”
JP&N: “Okay, Helen, this has been terrific. It was very nice meeting you – finally. This was a long time in coming. It was hard to pin you down, but I’m glad we did this.
Nadel: “Okay, I hate talking about myself, but thanks for this. It was great.”
Following our interview I asked Helen to provide some information about her two daughters. Here’s what she wrote:
“My husband and I have two daughters. Frani is a cantor, having graduated from the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in NYC as a cantor in the Conservative movement. She is currently completing a fellowship in Vancouver to be a chaplain. She has Master Degrees in Sacred Music and Jewish Education and also teaches in the Jewish education system in Vancouver.
“Daniella has a Masters Degree in Early Childhood Special Education from Hunter College in NYC. She is currently teaching kindergarten in a charter school in Brooklyn, also completing a second Masters degree in Speech Therapy.”
Mahler the Jew: A futuristic fantasy (Part II)
David Topper
Features
Are Niche and Unconventional Relationships Monopolizing the Dating World?
The question assumes a battle being waged and lost. It assumes that something fringe has crept into the center and pushed everything else aside. But the dating world has never operated as a single system with uniform rules. People have always sorted themselves according to preference, circumstance, and opportunity. What has changed is the visibility of that sorting and the tools available to execute it.
Online dating generated $10.28 billion globally in 2024. By 2033, projections put that figure at $19.33 billion. A market of that size does not serve one type of person or one type of relationship. It serves demand, and demand has always been fragmented. The apps and platforms we see now simply make that fragmentation visible in ways that provoke commentary.
Relationship Preferences
Niche dating platforms now account for nearly 30 percent of the online dating market, and projections suggest they could hold 42 percent of market share by 2028. This growth reflects how people are sorting themselves into categories that fit their actual lives.
Some want a sugar relationship, others seek partners within specific religious or cultural groups, and still others look for connections based on hobbies or lifestyle choices. The old model of casting a wide net has given way to something more targeted.
A YouGov poll found 55 percent of Americans prefer complete monogamy, while 34 percent describe their ideal relationship as something other than monogamous. About 21 percent of unmarried Americans have tried consensual non-monogamy at some point. These numbers do not suggest a takeover. They suggest a population with varied preferences now has platforms that accommodate those preferences openly rather than forcing everyone into the same structure.
The Numbers Tell a Different Story
Polyamory and consensual non-monogamy receive substantial attention in media coverage and on social platforms. The actual practice rate sits between 4% and 5% of the American population. That figure has remained relatively stable even as public awareness has increased. Being aware of something and participating in it are separate behaviors.
A 2020 YouGov poll reported that 43% of millennials describe their ideal relationship as non-monogamous. Ideals and actions do not always align. People answer surveys about what sounds appealing in theory. They then make decisions based on their specific circumstances, available partners, and emotional capacity. The gap between stated preference and lived reality is substantial.
Where Young People Are Looking
Gen Z accounts for more than 50% of Hinge users. According to a 2025 survey by The Knot, over 50% of engaged couples met through dating apps. These platforms have become primary infrastructure for forming relationships. They are not replacing traditional dating; they are the context in which traditional dating now occurs.
Younger users encounter more relationship styles on these platforms because the platforms allow for it. Someone seeking a conventional monogamous partnership will still find that option readily available. The presence of other options does not eliminate this possibility. It adds to the menu.
Monopoly Implies Exclusion
The framing of the original question suggests that niche relationships might be crowding out mainstream ones. Monopoly means one entity controls a market to the exclusion of competitors. Nothing in the current data supports that characterization.
Mainstream dating apps serve millions of users seeking conventional relationships. These apps have added features to accommodate other preferences, but their core user base remains people looking for monogamous partnerships. The addition of new categories does not subtract from existing ones. Someone filtering for a specific religion or hobby does not prevent another person from using the same platform without those filters.
What Actually Changed
Two things happened. First, apps built segmentation into their business models because segmentation increases user satisfaction. People find what they want faster when they can specify their preferences. Second, social acceptance expanded for certain relationship types that previously operated in private or faced stigma.
Neither of these developments amounts to a monopoly. They amount to market differentiation and cultural acknowledgment. A person seeking a sugar arrangement and a person seeking marriage can both use apps built for their respective purposes. They are not competing for the same resources.
The Perception Problem
Media coverage tends toward novelty. A story about millions of people using apps to find conventional relationships does not generate engagement. A story about unconventional relationship types generates clicks, comments, and shares. This creates a perception gap between how often something is discussed and how often it actually occurs.
The 4% to 5% practicing polyamory receive disproportionate coverage relative to the 55% who prefer complete monogamy. The coverage is not wrong, but it creates an impression of prevalence that exceeds reality.
Where This Leaves Us
Niche relationships are not monopolizing dating. They are becoming more visible and more accommodated by platforms that benefit from serving specific needs. The majority of people seeking relationships still want conventional arrangements, and they still find them through the same channels.
The dating world is larger than it was before. It contains more explicit options. It allows people to state preferences that once required inference or luck. None of this constitutes a takeover. It constitutes an expansion. The space for one type of relationship did not shrink to make room for another. The total space grew.
Features
Matthew Lazar doing his part to help keep Israelis safe in a time of war
By MYRON LOVE It is well known – or at least it should be – that while Israel puts a high value of protecting the lives of its citizens, the Jewish state’s Islamic enemies celebrate death. The single most glaring difference between the opposing sides can be seen in the differing approach to building bomb shelters to protect their populations.
Whereas Hamas and Hezbollah have invested untold billions of dollars over the past 20 years in building underground tunnels to protect their fighters while leaving their “civilian” populations exposed to Israeli bombs, not only has Israel built a highly sophisticated anti-missile system but also the leadership has invested heavily in making sure that most Israelis have access to bomb shelters – wherever they are – in war time.
While Israel’s bomb shelter program is comprehensive, there are still gaps – gaps which Dr. Matthew Lazar is doing his bit to help reduce.
The Winnipeg born-and raised pediatrician -who is most likely best known to readers as a former mohel – is the president of Project Life Initiatives – the Canadian branch of Israel-based Operation Lifeshield whose mission is to provide bomb shelters for threatened Israeli communities.
Lazar actually got in on the ground floor – so to speak. It was a cousin of his, Rabbi Shmuel Bowman, Operation Lifeshield’s executive director, who – in 2006 – founded the organization.
“Shmuel was one of a small group of American olim and Israelis who were visiting the Galilee during the second Lebanon war in 2006 and found themselves under rocket attack – along with thousands of others – with no place to go,” recounts Lazar, who has two daughters living in Israel. “They decided to take action. I was one of the people Shmuel approached to become an Operation Lifeshield volunteer.
Since the founding of Lifeshield, Lazar reports, over 1,000 shelters have been deployed in Israel. The number of new shelter orders since October 7, 2023 is 149.
He further notes that while the largest share of Operation Lifeshield’s funding comes from American donors, there has been good support for the organization across Canada as well.
One of the major donors in Winnipeg is the Christian Zionist organization, Christian Friends of Israel (FOI) Canada which, in September, as part of its second annual “Stand With Israel Support” evening – presented Lazar and Operation Lifeshield with a cheque for $30,000 toward construction of a bomb shelter for the Yasmin kindergarten in the Binyamina Regional Council in Northern Israel.
Lazar reports that to date the total number of shelters donated by Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry (globally) is over 100.
Lazar notes that the head office for Project Life Initiatives is – not surprisingly – in Toronto. “We communicate by telephone, text and Zoom,” he says.
He observes that – as he is still a full time pediatrician – he isn’t able to visit Israel nearly as often as he would like to. He manages to go every couple of years and always makes a point of visiting some of Operation Lifeshield’s projects.
(He adds that his wife, Nola, gets to Israel two or three times a year – not only to visit family, but also in her role as president of Mercaz Canada – the Canadian Conservative movement’s Zionist arm.)
“This is something I have been able to do to help safeguard Israelis,” Lazar says of his work for Operation Lifeshield. “This is a wonderful thing we are doing. I am glad to be of help. ”
Features
Patterns of Erasure: Genocide in Nazi Europe and Canada
By LIRON FYNE When we think of the word genocide, our minds often jump to the Holocaust, the mass-scale, systemic government-led murder of six million Jews by Nazi Germany during the Second World War, whose unprecedented scale and methods led to the very term ‘genocide’ being coined. On January 27th, 2026, we will bow our heads for International Holocaust Remembrance Day, the 80th year of remembrance.
Less frequently do we connect genocidal intent to the campaign against Indigenous peoples in Canada; the forced displacement, cultural destruction, and systematic killing that sought to erase Indigenous peoples. The genocide conducted by the Nazis and the genocidal intent of the Canadian government, though each unique in scale, motive, and implementation, share many conceptual similarities. Both were driven by ideologies of racial superiority, executed through governmental precision, and justified by the perpetrators as a moral mission.
At their core rests the concept of dehumanization. In Nazi Germany, Jews were viewed as subhuman, contaminated, and a threat to the ‘Aryan’ race. In Canada, Indigenous peoples were represented as obstacles to ‘progress’ and seen as hurdles to a Christian, Eurocentric nation. These ideas, this dehumanization, turned human beings into problems to be solved. Adolf Hitler called it the ‘Jewish question,’ leading to an official policy in 1942 called the ‘Final Solution to the Jewish Question,’ whereas Canadian officials called it the ‘Indian problem.’ The language is similar, a belief that one group’s existence endangers the destiny of another. The methods of extermination differed in practice and outcome, but the language of intent resembles one another.
The Holocaust’s concentration camps and carefully engineered gas chambers were designed for efficient, industrial-scale killing, resulting in mass murder. The well-organized plan of systematic degradation, deadly riots, brutal camp conditions, and designated killing centres were only a few of the ways the Nazis worked to eliminate the Jews. The Canadian government’s weapons were policy, assimilation and abandonment. Such as the Indian Act, reserves, and residential schools, which were all meant to ‘kill the Indian in the child,’ cutting generations off from their languages, families, and cultures. Thousands of Indigenous children died in residential schools, buried in unmarked graves near schools that called themselves places of learning. Both systems were backed by either religion or ideology; Nazi ideology brought together racist eugenic policies and virulent antisemitism, while Canada’s genocidal intent was supported by Christian Protestantism claiming to save Indigenous souls by erasing their heritage.
The Holocaust was a six-year campaign of complete industrialized extermination, mass murder with a mechanized intent, on a scale that remains historically unique. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission describes Canada’s indigenous genocide as a cultural one that unfolded over centuries through assimilation and the destruction of indigenous languages and identities. The Holocaust ended with the liberation of the camps and a global recognition of the atrocities committed. However, the generational trauma and dehumanization of antisemitism carry on. For Indigenous peoples in Canada, the effects of the genocidal intent continue to this day, visible in displacement, poverty, and intergenerational trauma. While these histories differ in form and timeline, both are rooted in dehumanization and the belief that some lives are worth less than others.
A disturbing similarity lies in the aftermath: silence and denial. The Holocaust forced the world to confront the atrocity with the vow of ‘Never Again,’ which has now been unearthed and reformed as ‘Never Again is Now,’ after the October 7th, 2023, massacre by Hamas. The largest massacre of Jewish people since the Holocaust, and the denial of the atrocities committed on October 7th, highlight the same Holocaust denial we see rising around the world. In Canada, for decades, the genocidal intent was hidden behind narratives of kindness and social progress. Only in recent years, through survivor testimony for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the discovery of unmarked graves, has the truth gained recognition. But acknowledgment without justice risks repeating the same patterns of erasure.
Comparing these atrocities committed is not about comparing pain or scale; it is about understanding the shared systems that enabled them. Both demonstrate how racism, superiority, and dehumanization can be used to justify the destruction of human beings. Remembering is not enough in Canada. True remembrance demands accountability, land restitution, reparations, and education that confronts Canada’s ongoing colonial legacy. When we say ‘Never Again is Now’, we hold collective action to combat antisemitism in all forms. The same applies to Truth & Reconciliation; it must be more than a slogan; we must apply action to Truth & ReconciliACTION.
Liron Fyne is a 12th-grade student at Gray Academy of Jewish Education in Winnipeg. They are currently a Kenneth Leventhal High School Intern at StandWithUs Canada, a non-profit education organization that combats antisemitism.