Evidence for Democracy

10/15/2026

More than 600 documented attacks on science have occurred in the first 18 months of the Trump administration, and Canada is feeling the impact.

Canada shares research funding, data, and infrastructure with the U.S., from weather forecasts to wildfire tracking. Science works best when evidence can challenge the politics, not when politics decides what evidence gets produced.

10/13/2026

Your weekly evidence brief from E4D is here! We’re breaking down what’s happening where science, policy, and democracy meet in Canada.

10/09/2026

Can we please stop saying “fake news”? E4D stopped using the term back in 2018, and there’s a reason.

It lumps together very different things: misleading headlines, manipulated content, and deliberate deception all need different solutions. Research also suggests that exposure to the phrase can make people doubt legitimate news, without making them better at spotting false stories.

Misinformation is false or misleading information, whether or not someone intended to deceive. Disinformation is false information deliberately spread to deceive. Words matter, and being precise helps us hold others accountable.

10/08/2026

Do you think you're good at spotting misinformation? Most of us do. But being educated, or even great with numbers, doesn't make us immune.

Research shows we're more likely to accept information that fits what we already believe, a pattern called motivated reasoning. Scientific literacy isn't about always knowing what's true. It's about stopping to ask: "Why do I believe this?"

That's a big part of what Science Literacy Week is about: asking better questions, evaluating evidence, and staying curious, even when the answer challenges what we already think. 🔬

10/05/2026

Back with our second weekly evidence brief from E4D. Covering everything happening at the intersection of science, democracy, and evidence in Canada!

10/02/2026

Bill C-31 would remove the requirement for mandatory cyclical re-evaluation of registered pesticides, the primary mechanism for catching risks that emerge after a product is approved.

E4D joined the David Suzuki Foundation and other leading health and environmental organizations today urging the Senate committee to reject these amendments, introduced through an omnibus budget bill with no dedicated public consultation.

Our Executive Director, Sarah Laframboise, is quoted in the release on why a decision this consequential deserves a transparent, evidence-informed process.

Read the full press release here: https://davidsuzuki.org/press/silent-spring-provisions-in-bill-c-31-gut-federal-pesticide-protections/

09/28/2026

The first of our weekly evidence briefs from E4D. Covering everything happening at the intersection of science, democracy, and evidence in Canada.

09/19/2026

Pesticides are used on our food, around our homes, and across the environment. When Canada decides one is safe enough to use, that decision matters to all of us.

But science changes. We learn more about long-term exposure, testing improves, and we discover impacts on people, wildlife, and ecosystems we didn't understand before. That's why Canada currently requires every registered pesticide to be re-evaluated at least once every 15 years.

Bill C-31 would change that. Instead of automatic full reviews, Health Canada would first look at existing information, and only trigger a full re-evaluation if risks appear to have "increased significantly." The government says this would help focus limited resources on the highest-risk pesticides.

But what if you don't know there's a problem until you actually look for it? Periodic reviews let us test old decisions against new science. Before removing that safeguard, Canadians deserve evidence the replacement will protect us just as well.

Bill C-31 hasn't passed yet. If you want Canada's pesticide rules to keep pace with changing science, there's a parliamentary petition you can sign now here: https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Sign/e-7742

09/18/2026

Bill C-31 hasn't passed yet. If you want Canada's pesticide rules to keep pace with changing science, there's a parliamentary petition you can sign now here:

There is no obligation on the part of the House of Commons or any Member of Parliament to authorize the publication of an e-petition or to present an e-petition or a paper petition to the House of Commons. Neither the House of Commons nor any Member of Parliament authorizing the publication of an e-...

09/17/2026

Canada just announced the first 64 recipients of a major new program to attract world-leading researchers, working on everything from wildfire resilience to AI, climate change, and Arctic research. A huge opportunity.

But what kind of research system are we bringing them into? While we're spending hundreds of millions attracting researchers to Canada, researchers already here are struggling to get funded. Grad students and postdocs fight for adequate support, early-career researchers compete for limited positions, and many strong proposals simply aren't funded. This funding is also heavily centralized, with U15 universities making up 85% of the new research chairs.

We should be attracting brilliant researchers to Canada. But we need a more robust talent strategy: attract great researchers, retain the ones already here, and develop the next generation.

Canada won't become a science powerhouse by recruiting 64 researchers. We become one by building a research system where thousands can succeed.