Features
Calgary scientist Bonnie Kaplan publishes new book stressing the importance of nutrition on mental health
By IRENA KARSHENBAUM What people have known for centuries – that good nutrition is positively correlated to good mental health has, in the last 60 years, been largely abandoned as a precept within Western society. Instead, it’s become standard belief that mental illness can only be helped through prescription medication.
As a result, something as basic as good nutrition is not only overlooked as being key to mental health, it’s regarded as somewhat controversial.
Scientist, medical researcher, and Calgarian, Dr. Bonnie J. Kaplan has dedicated her career to researching, writing and talking about the importance of micronutrients in mental health. Now, while being semi-retired, she has written a book titled “The Better Brain”, along with her former student, Dr. Julia J. Rucklidge. The book is an achievement in itself and a sort of vindication for Kaplan, who says that her career was derailed in its early years because of her ideas, and who witnessed young scientists leaving the field because they were unable to obtain funding for their research work.
Born in Canton, Ohio, and educated at the University of Chicago and Brandeis University, with postdoctoral training and faculty research in neurophysiology at Yale University, Kaplan moved to Calgary with her husband, Richard, in 1979.
She explains that she spent most of her career in research and supervising students, and did not do a lot of regular classroom teaching. As she was going into retirement in 2016, Kaplan was considering what she would do next.
“I came up with two things,” she says. “I wanted to raise funds for my two charitable funds to help fund research by my junior colleagues on treating mental health with micronutrients in studies in Canada, US and New
Zealand.” (To date, Kaplan says, she has raised almost $900,000 for her charitable funds, one of which is held with the Calgary Foundation.)
“My second focus was knowledge translation to the public” she says. “This is why I decided to write this book.”
Written for the general reader, “The Better Brain” found a home with a major US publisher, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, in New York. Through stories and references to studies Kaplan argues that a diet of real, nutritious — not ultra-processed — food is the foundation for one’s mental health.
Mental illness has been growing exponentially. Researchers Dr. E. Fuller Torrey and Judy Miller in a book called “The Invisible Plague: The Rise of Mental Illness from 1750 to the Present” (published in 2001 by Rutgers University Press), suggested that mental disorders occurred at a rate of three in 10,000 between 1750 and 1960. The World Health Organization currently estimates the rate at over 2,000 in 10,000.
“The Better Brain” does acknowledge that the roots of mental disorders — listed as anxiety disorders, depression, mood disorders, personality disorders like narcissism, psychotic disorders like schizophrenia, neurodevelopmental disorders like autism, and medication-induced movement disorders — are varied and complex, but Kaplan and Rucklidge ask the reader to consider diet as a primary cause for mental disorders. Eating nutritious, whole foods that are rich with micronutrients – in other words, vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids, is what your brain needs to function optimally, they argue
Kaplan and Rucklidge write that the brain hungers for a variety of micronutrients; there are about 30 of them, ranging from Vitamins B and D, calcium, zinc, magnesium, iodine, and others. However, promoting the notion that mental health is linked to diet is still seen as controversial, Kaplan admits.
As well, advancing that notion had proven to be a barrier to her receiving research funding, with granting agencies telling her that if she would only confine her studies to a single micronutrient, then funding could be available.
Kaplan and Rucklidge argue, however, that when it comes to the brain there is no “magic bullet” and that the brain is not akin to, for example, a disease such as scurvy, which can be cured with a single vitamin: Vitamin C. The brain needs a broad spectrum of micronutrients – vitamins, minerals and essential fatty acids, like Omega-3. These micronutrients are found in real unprocessed foods, such as fruits and vegetables of all colours of the rainbow, plain yogurt, fish, chicken, meat, and nuts. The best source of good food can be found in a Mediterranean diet, the authors write. In contrast, a Western diet consisting of ultra-processed food is full of macronutrients like proteins, carbs, saturated fats and sodium, but lacks micronutrients, for which the brain hungers.
“The Better Brain” contains an entire chapter of helpful tips on how to shop for healthy food (which is actually cheaper than ultra-processed food, Kaplan and Rucklidge maintain) and recipes for healthy breakfasts, soups, salads, main courses and even desserts. Another chapter delves into what not to eat which, not surprisingly, includes suchg things as pop, sugar and ultra-processed food. The book says: “It’s not just the presence of healthy food but also the absence of unhealthy food that contributes to a good outcome.”
Kaplan and Rucklidge suggest that it is best to get your essential nutrients from whole foods, but if mental health issues persist, you ought to consider adding nutritional supplements. An entire chapter is dedicated to this topic.
The book says: “All the minerals and vitamins are needed for your enzymes to allow for proper brain function. Some people have inherited ‘sluggish pathways’ because their enzymes are not efficient, resulting in the need to flood their brains with even more micronutrients than usual.”
In plain English, the scientists are saying that many people with mental illnesses have brains that have been starved of essential micronutrients or their particular biochemical makeup is preventing them from absorbing the micronutrients efficiently and in such instances they need large doses of micronutrients that can only be obtained through taking supplements. These supplements are not store-bought brands that contain doses too small to make a difference, but are from supplement companies, which they list in the book. Kaplan and Rucklidge consistently state they do not have financial ties to any supplement companies.
It must be noted that the authors also make clear that they are not advising individuals to go off their meds: “It is absolutely crucial that you do not stop taking meds for your psychiatric condition. We suggest you discuss options with your prescribing physician first.”
Kaplan is seeing a complete turnaround from the opposition she experienced in her early career to the poin twhere she now receives numerous speaking invitations in Alberta and across Canada. “I am doing a webinar in Alberta that has over 1,000 registrations,” she says, “something very unusual for the organizers of the webinar. “Previously the interest for this topic was largely in Western Europe and the US.”
Co-author Julia J. Rucklidge is currently at the University of Canterbury, in Christchurch, New Zealand. Together the two women – after selling the idea to their publisher, wrote the book in just four months. Now, aided by modern technology, they are currently busy doing podcasts and interviews all over the world.
Kaplan says the book is receiving a lot of good feedback from people who have read it. “The medical system is a longer road. It would be advantageous in mental health clinics to teach a class on nutrition and Mediterranean-style cooking.”
She notes that she and her husband rarely eat out. “We cook from scratch and eat a Mediterranean-style diet. Before the pandemic, we were eating out only as a social thing to meet with friends.”
Kaplan stresses the importance of learning to cook, but also to follow the 80/20 rule. “If you’re eating a healthy diet 80 percent of the time, don’t beat yourself up if you’re eating a cookie that is not so healthy.”
“The Better Brain”
By Bonnie J. Kaplan, PhD
and Julia J. Rucklidge, PhD
Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
Released April, 2021
Irena Karshenbaum writes in Calgary.
The opinions expressed here are the author’s own.
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.