Thanks for the thoughtful reply!
But in honesty I would have thought the same in the past before I did my degree/MSc. For the masters my non-RG uni was fine, but I feel it may have been better to do my masters at a RG for the research component (psychology and cognitive neuroscience respectively).
At degree level I think you are just learning the ropes, and would probably be too early entering all the extremely high level stuff of innovation at the boundaries of scientific knowledge.
It's good to have an understanding of innovation at the undergrad level, and even masters, but you can get that from watching TED videos and reading insightful books and journal publications etc., so its not like you are shut out from research findings.
Both RG and non RG probably offer the same or similar in getting you ready to conduct research. I know this was the case for psychology.
I think I still stand by my point that the research innovation only really shines at masters level, simply because most people haven't developed their knowledge enough really at the undergraduate level to contribute to this, which is really only introductory (but still a hell of a lot, of course).
In medicine this may be different, but as far as I'm aware, most medical schools offer a good research component - with all schools being part of highly esteemed research universities (thus all uni's publishing a lot of good stuff).
At masters level you are probably knowledgeable enough to design your own studies (with the introductory research from undergrad) and at the same time have the direction from a tutor who is going for innovation, and chances may be improved if you want to push for publication.
This is assuming most people at undergrad don't publish (not enough knowledge/or student and supervisor don't want to). As far as I'm aware, only very few do, regardless of university - though bit more so at RG uni's.
Bare in mind that I haven't published, but know from my undergraduate psychology and masters cognitive neuroscience at a non-RG that teaching in research is sufficient and that, in my own experience, my undergraduate studies weren't effected.
To summarise, essentially I think for most, research publication at undergrad is too precocious and so it doesn't really make any difference. I think you are ready at the masters level, when many more decide to publish, and so going to a research based (rather than 'teaching based'
institution helps.
Sorry if blabbered or recapitulated anything, still very sleepy!