Podcasts about american scientists

Hay muchísimas formas de hacer investigación, pero la mayoría solo conocemos una: la del laboratorio académico clásico. Es el agua en la que nadamos sin darnos cuenta de que es agua.Una sola pregunta desmonta el sistema entero: ¿cuándo y cómo entran los datos en tu proyecto? Esa decisión condiciona quién manda, cuándo termina el proyecto y qué cuenta como éxito.En este episodio recorro una línea con 10 modelos ordenados por cuándo entra el dato, desde el dato congelado hasta el dato que pide un algoritmo.Laboratorio académico clásico: el dato entra una vez y se congela.Bell Labs: "correa larga, valla estrecha". Dato continuo dentro de una empresa.Institutos independientes (Arc Institute, etc.): financiación a varios años, poca presión por publicar.Ciencia ciudadana: el público recoge datos de forma distribuida y constante.Big Science (CERN, Hubble): datos en chorro permanente, papers con miles de autores.FRO: 15 a 30 personas, 5 años, dinero filantrópico, sin obligación de publicar.DARPA: un Program Manager con poder real marca hitos. Así nació Internet.DeSci: financiación y propiedad intelectual en blockchain entre holders de tokens.Self-Driving Lab: bucle DMTA. El dato entra a demanda; cada vuelta decide el siguiente experimento.Radial: rediseñar el proceso científico como ingeniería, en ciclos, a nivel de sistema.El laboratorio autónomo es el extremo más radical: no tiene final, sigue optimizando mientras lo dejes encendido. Eso es justo lo que el sistema científico actual no sabe gestionar.Lo más profundo: ¿quién decide qué dato pedir? En el modelo clásico, el investigador. En Big Science, un comité. En DARPA, el Program Manager. En DeSci, una comunidad. En el laboratorio autónomo, un algoritmo. No estamos automatizando el pipeteo: estamos delegando la autoría intelectual del siguiente paso.La razón por la que casi ninguno nace en la academia es sencilla: la academia solo sabe puntuar papers. No es un problema de calidad, es un problema de contabilidad del mérito.¿Tu problema pide un bucle? Porque si lo estás forzando dentro del molde del paper, estás remando contra tu propio problema.Comunidad de investigadores: https://horacio-ps.com/comunidadNewsletter: https://horacio-ps.com/newsletterSi el episodio te ha resultado útil, dale like, suscríbete o compártelo en Spotify, Apple Podcasts, iVoox o YouTube.Enlaces y referenciasTony Blair Institute, "A New Model for Science": https://institute.global/insights/tech-and-digitalisation/new-model-scienceFuture Blind (Max Olson), "The new wave of science and research models": https://futureblind.com/p/the-new-wave-of-science-and-research-modelsConstruction Physics (Brian Potter), "The Influence of Bell Labs": https://www.construction-physics.com/p/the-influence-of-bell-labsArc Institute, "The Arc Model": https://arcinstitute.org/modelFranzoni y Sauermann (2014), Research Policy 43(1), pp. 1-20: https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/respol/v43y2014i1p1-20.htmlBritannica, "Big Science": https://www.britannica.com/science/Big-Science-scienceFederation of American Scientists, "FROs: A New Model": https://fas.org/publication/focused-research-organizations-a-new-model-for-scientific-research/Ethereum.org, "Decentralized science (DeSci)": https://ethereum.org/desci/Tom et al. (2024), Chemical Reviews 124(16), pp. 9633-9732: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.chemrev.4c00055Autonomous Chemical Experiments, Acc. Chem. Res. (2022): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9454899/Astera, "Announcing Radial": https://astera.org/announcing-radial/Seemay Chou, "Scientific Publishing: Enough is Enough": https://astera.org/scientific-publishing-enough-is-enough/STAT News sobre Radial: https://www.statnews.com/2026/03/11/radial-ai-science-astera-nonprofit/Nature, "Inside the self-driving lab revolution": https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00974-2Nature, "Will self-driving robot labs replace biologists?": https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-00453-8

A joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran, followed by Iranian retaliation against U.S. military assets, Israel and other U.S. allies, has engulfed much of the Middle East in a conflict with global repercussions. Israel and the United States campaign's immediate aim was to decapitate the Islamic Republic's leadership, and it quickly achieved this goal. But the broader objectives of the operation are still clouded in uncertainty. What might be enough for them to declare victory is still unclear. Two months in, a weak ceasefire is in place, but outbursts of hostilities remain as the U.S. seeks to break the chokehold Iran has placed in the Hormuz Strait disrupting the global economy. Evidence points at Iran, the U.S. and Israel fighting different wars in the same territory making a lasting ceasefire very difficult. This session draws on Crisis Group's latest analysis to assess the trajectory of the conflict, examine the strategic calculations of the main stakeholders, and explore whether pathways to de-escalation remain viable—or whether the region is heading toward a more protracted and expansive war. Ali Vaez is International Crisis Group's Iran Project Director and Senior Adviser to the Group's President. He led Crisis Group's efforts in helping to bridge the gaps between Iran and the P5+1 that led to the landmark 2015 nuclear deal. Previously, he served as a Senior Political Affairs Officer at the United Nations Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and was the Iran Project Director at the Federation of American Scientists. He is an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service and a Fellow at the Foreign Policy Institute of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. He is a co-author of How Sanctions Work: Iran and the Impact of Economic Warfare.

To date, ten- possibly eleven scientists have either disappeared or died mysteriously in the United States.In this episode we look at five of these cases- the first of which occurred in 2022. As we investigated their backgrounds, we found very disturbing connection that they all shared- and significant events that occurred in the past four years around each one of their deaths and disappearances.Is it all a coincidence? Or is there something much more disturbing to this story? And who decides when knowledge becomes dangerous?

Fifty-six years ago, the first Earth Day helped spark a generation of landmark environmental legislation — and the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) was born from that same moment. On this Earth Day 2026, host Sebastian Duque Rios sits down with ELI President Jordan Diamond and Senior Attorney Jay Austin to trace the arc of environmental law from that founding era to the compounding crises of today.Together, they reflect on how statutes like NEPA and the Clean Air Act were designed with more foresight than we often credit them for, why adaptive management is baked into the DNA of environmental law, and how ELI is responding to an era of rapid institutional change — from regulatory rollbacks and executive action to the governance challenges posed by emerging industries like deep sea mining, geothermal energy, and data centers. They also dig into ELI's new collaboration with the Federation of American Scientists' (FAS) Center for Regulatory Ingenuity and their joint white paper laying out a framework for rebuilding and reimagining environmental governance fit for the 21st century.This episode is a candid, long-view conversation about what it takes to protect people, places, and the planet. For more information on other emerging topics in environmental law, see our recent episode, "What's Next for Environmental Law in 2026." ★ Support this podcast ★

Nancy Loo, National Correspondent for NewsNation, joins Lisa Dent to discuss the House Oversight Committee launching an investigation into the 11 missing or dead American Scientists since 2022.

Musical Season rolls along, as this week the Sibling watch Chitty Chotty Bang Bang for the first time. Is it a classic film, or was it a “We have Marry Poppins at home” situation?Discussed:Roald Dahl is James Bond!Van Dyke/Andrews reunion-Oops, never mind!An American Scientist in Rural England!They forgot the magical car!Sally Ann Howes' Lament!Serious Thespian, Benny Hill!Proto-Doc Brown?Contact us at adultsiblingsversus@gmail.comTikTok: @adultsiblingsversusInstagram: @adultsiblingsversusThreads: @adultsiblingsversusBluesky: @adultsiblingsvs.bsky.socialTheme Song: “Sellout” by Zombie Apocalypse NOW!https://antizombierock.bandcamp.com/

On this episode, we break down the White House response to reports that 10 American scientists tied to nuclear, aerospace, and defense work are dead or missing, the wild Allbirds stock explosion after the sneaker brand sold its footwear business and pivoted to AI as NewBird AI, and whether LIV Golf is actually shutting down or just swatting away funding rumors. We also get into the Dianna Russini and Mike Vrabel fallout, a Carnival cruise lawsuit after a passenger was allegedly served 14 tequila shots before a devastating fall, the deeply weird new RFK Jr. raccoon story from his diaries, and why lawyers are warning that your AI chatbot conversations could end up in court.#Allbirds #LIVGolf #LosAlamosGet more AoA and become a member to get exclusive access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOfx0OFE-uMTmJXGPpP7elQ/joinGet Erin C's book here: https://amzn.to/3ITDoO7Get Merch here - https://bit.ly/AnthonyMerchSubscribe to the Anthony On Air Podcast here:Facebook - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirFBYouTube - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirYTApple Podcast - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirAppleSpotify - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirSpotTwitter - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirTwitterInstagram - https://bit.ly/AntOnAirInstaTikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@anthonyonairpodDiscord - https://discord.gg/78V469aV22Get more at https://www.AnthonyOnAir.com

It can be stomach-turning, watching the Trump administration torch federal climate policy. But what if some of what's burning wasn't working particularly well to begin with? Hannah Safford and Loren Schulman of the Federation of American Scientists' Center for Regulatory Ingenuity make the case, not for defending or trying to rebuild the status quo regulatory regime, but for imagining something better. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.volts.wtf/subscribe

Since Democrats swept to statewide victories in Georgia and New Jersey last year by campaigning against high power prices, “electricity affordability” has been the watchword for climate-concerned politicians everywhere. But what can states and cities actually do to bring down power prices?The Federation of American Scientists, through its new Center for Regulatory Ingenuity, has a new report out on Tuesday about how to make it happen — and speed up clean energy deployment at the same time. On this episode of Shift Key, Rob is joined by Arjun Krishnaswami, a senior advisor at FAS and the new report's lead author. He was previously a senior policy advisor for clean energy infrastructure in the Biden White House; before that, he was a special advisor to the chief of staff at the U.S. Department of Energy.Shift Key is hosted by Robinson Meyer, the founding executive editor of Heatmap News.You can find a full transcript of the episode here.Mentioned:CELS Playbook: Clean Electricity for Local and State GovernmentsPreviously in Heatmap: How Electricity Got So ExpensivePreviously on Shift Key: A New Theory About Why Biden's Big Climate Law Failed--This episode of Shift Key is sponsored by …Accelerate your clean energy career with Yale's online certificate programs. Explore the 10-month Financing and Deploying Clean Energy program or the 5-month Clean and Equitable Energy Development program. Use referral code HeatMap26 and get your application in by the priority deadline for $500 off tuition to one of Yale's online certificate programs in clean energy. Learn more at cbey.yale.edu/online-learning-opportunities.Music for Shift Key is by Adam Kromelow. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The regulatory landscape around climate policy is shifting, and many agencies are left with outdated tools to manage modern risks. The Federation of American Scientists' Center for Regulatory Ingenuity hopes to give them a clearer path, offering practical guidance, partnerships and support for innovative approaches. We'll talk through that mission with Dr. Hannah Safford, Associate Director of Climate and Environment at FAS.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

IUDs are under the umbrella of long-acting, reversible contraceptives, and they’re the oldest one of these in use today. Research: Baldauf, P et al. “A Report on the Hysteroscopic Removal of a Gräfenberg Ring After Almost Fifty Years in Utero.” Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde vol. 74,11 (2014): 1023-1025. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1383130. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4245252/ Case Western Reserve University. “Intrauterine device (IUD).” https://artsci.case.edu/dittrick/online-exhibits/history-of-birth-control/contraception-in-america-1950-present-day/intrauterine-device-iud/ Cooper, James Fryer. “Technique of contraception: the principles and practice of anti-conceptional methods.” Day-Nichols Inc., Publishers. 1928, 1930. https://archive.org/details/techniqueofcontr0000jame/ Corbett, Megan and Brandy Bautista. “A History: The IUD.” Reproductive Health Access Project. 3/20/2024. https://www.reproductiveaccess.org/2024/03/a-history-the-iud/ Curtis, Kathryn M. et al. “U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024.” Centers for Disease Control. 8/8/2024. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/rr/rr7303a1.htm Dickinson, Robert L. et al. “Contraception: A Medical Review of the Situation.” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1924-11: Vol 8 Iss 5. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.50850/page/n585/ Edwards, Baylee A., "Ernst Gräfenberg (1881–1957)". Embryo Project Encyclopedia ( 2022-11-17 ). ISSN: 1940-5030 https://hdl.handle.net/10776/13358 Fallas, Rebecca and Helen King. “IUD or not IUD? Did the Hippocratics invent the first intrauterine device?. Mistaking Histories. 7/18/2017. https://mistakinghistories.uk/2017/07/18/iud-or-not-iud-did-the-hippocratics-invent-the-first-intrauterine-device/ Fotinos, Diane J. “Gold Stemmed Pessaries: A Shadow of the Past.” UT Health. 9/11/2019. https://library.uthscsa.edu/2017/09/gold-stemmed-pessaries-a-shadow-of-the-past/ Goldstuck, Norman D. “Reducing Barriers to the use of the Intrauterine Contraceptive Device as a Long Acting Reversible Contraceptive.” African Journal of Reproductive Health / La Revue Africaine de la Santé Reproductive, December 2014, Vol. 18, No. 4 (December 2014). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24362040 Goodhue PA. The Dalkon Shield debate. Conn Med. 1983 Mar;47(3):138-41. PMID: 6851548. Haubacher, David. “The Checkered Past and Bright Future of Intrauterine Contraception in the United States.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health , Mar. - Apr., 2002. Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3030213 Homei, Aya. “Why did the Japanese Government take so long to approve the intrauterine contraceptive device?.” Reproductive biomedicine & society online vol. 6 45-54. 16 Oct. 2018, doi:10.1016/j.rbms.2018.09.002 Hubacher, David. “The Checkered History and Bright Future of Intrauterine Contraception In the United States.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. Vol. 34, Issue 2. https://www.guttmacher.org/journals/psrh/2002/03/checkered-history-and-bright-future-intrauterine-contraception-united-states Hutchings, Jane E. et al. “The IUD After 20 Years: A Review of Worldwide Experience.” International Family Planning Perspectives, Vol. 11, No. 3 (Sep., 1985). https://www.jstor.org/stable/2947998 Jones, R. W., et al. “Clinical Experience With The Dalkon Shield Intrauterine Device.” The British Medical Journal, vol. 3, no. 5872, 1973, pp. 143–45. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25420726. Accessed 5 Mar. 2026. Klapperich, Catherine M. “From the Dalkon Shield to Britney Spears’ IUD: Why Diverse Teams Need to Be Involved in Contraceptive Design.” The Brink. Boston University. 7/1/2021. https://www.bu.edu/articles/2021/from-the-dalkon-shield-to-britney-spears-iud-why-diverse-teams-need-to-be-involved-in-contraceptive-design/ Lopes-Garcia, E. A., Carmona, E. V., Monteiro, I., & Bahamondes, L. (2023). Assessment of pain and ease of intrauterine device placement according to type of device, parity, and mode of delivery. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 28(3), 163–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2023.2189500 Margulies, Lazar. “History of Intrauterine Devices.” Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. Vol. 51, No. 5, May 1975. Museum of Contraception and Abortion. “Tenrei Ota (1900-1985).” https://muvs.org/en/topics/pioneers/tenrei-ota-1900-1985-en/ Oppenheimer, W.. “Prevention of pregnancy by the graefenberg ring method.” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Volume 78, Issue 2, 446 – 454. https://www.ajog.org/article/0002-9378(59)90203-0/abstract Peipert, Jeffrey F. “Lippes loop and the first IUDs: lessons from a bygone era.” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Volume 219, Issue 2, 127 – 128. https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(18)30488-5/fulltext Peipert, Jeffrey F. “Lippes loop and the first IUDs: lessons from a bygone era.” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Volume 219, Issue 2, 127 – 128 . https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(18)30488-5/fulltext Thiery, M. “Pioneers of the intrauterine device.” The European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care. Volume 2, Number 1, March 1997. The Parthenon Publishing Group International Publishers. Thomsen, Russel J. “An Atlas of Intrauterine Contraception.” Hemisphere Publishing Company. 1982. Tietze, Christopher and Sarah Lewit. “Intra-Uterine Contraceptive Devices: Proceedings of the Conference, April 30-May 1, 1962, New York City.” Exerpta Medica Foundation. Willingham, Emily. “A ‘Simple’ Piece of Plastic.” American Scientist. May-June 2012. https://www.americanscientist.org/article/a-simple-piece-of-plastic World Health Organization. “Selected practice recommendations for contraceptive use.” Fourth Edition. https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/582c8182-f4b1-406b-b5e7-d81c1870df93/content See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

OPM says the creation of Schedule Policy/Career aims to increase accountability, but it may instead introduce new vulnerabilities for federal researchers. Critics warn that the change could affect not only scientific judgment today but the long‑term pipeline of expertise inside government. Peter Bonner from the Federation of American Scientists joins me now.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Events are moving rapidly in the Middle East, so we wanted to provide our loyal podcast listeners with some context to help digest everything that's happened so far. We hope to provide a longer view of the what, where, who, how and why and offer some perspective on this military action's broader historical, political, and legal implications.Ted Postol is Professor of Science, Technology and National Security Policy Emeritus in the Program in Science, Technology, and Society at MIT. His expertise is in nuclear weapon systems, including submarine warfare, applications of nuclear weapons, ballistic missile defense, and ballistic missiles more generally. He previously worked as an analyst at the Office of Technology Assessment and as a science and policy adviser to the chief of naval operations. In 2016, he received the Garwin Prize from the Federation of American Scientists for his work in assessing and critiquing the government's claims about missile defenses.Ambassador Chas Freeman is a retired career diplomat who has negotiated on behalf of the United States with over 100 foreign governments in East and South Asia, Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and both Western and Eastern Europe. Ambassador Freeman was previously a Senior Fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, and served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, acting Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, and Deputy Chief of Mission and Chargé d'Affaires in the American embassies at both Bangkok and Beijing. He was Director for Chinese Affairs at the U.S. Department of State from 1979-1981. He was the principal American interpreter during the late President Nixon's historic visit to China in 1972. In addition to Chinese, Ambassador Freeman speaks French and Spanish at the professional level and can converse in Arabic and several other languages.Bruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.Ralph Nader Radio Hour is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Thanks for reading Ralph Nader Radio Hour! This post is public so feel free to share it. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Neuroscientific evidence increasingly shows that consciousness is a remarkable but explainable function of a machinelike brain. Alan J. McComas' discusses his article for the American Scientist. Alan J. McComas is an emeritus professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Greg is the Executive Director and Founder of the World War II Discussion Forum (wwiidf.org). He also has a strong interest in literature, culture, religion, science and philosophy (translation: he's an eclectic reader who is constantly missing deadlines for book reviews). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Neuroscientific evidence increasingly shows that consciousness is a remarkable but explainable function of a machinelike brain. Alan J. McComas' discusses his article for the American Scientist. Alan J. McComas is an emeritus professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Greg is the Executive Director and Founder of the World War II Discussion Forum (wwiidf.org). He also has a strong interest in literature, culture, religion, science and philosophy (translation: he's an eclectic reader who is constantly missing deadlines for book reviews). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine

Neuroscientific evidence increasingly shows that consciousness is a remarkable but explainable function of a machinelike brain. Alan J. McComas' discusses his article for the American Scientist. Alan J. McComas is an emeritus professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Greg is the Executive Director and Founder of the World War II Discussion Forum (wwiidf.org). He also has a strong interest in literature, culture, religion, science and philosophy (translation: he's an eclectic reader who is constantly missing deadlines for book reviews). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Neuroscientific evidence increasingly shows that consciousness is a remarkable but explainable function of a machinelike brain. Alan J. McComas' discusses his article for the American Scientist. Alan J. McComas is an emeritus professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Greg is the Executive Director and Founder of the World War II Discussion Forum (wwiidf.org). He also has a strong interest in literature, culture, religion, science and philosophy (translation: he's an eclectic reader who is constantly missing deadlines for book reviews). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/neuroscience

Neuroscientific evidence increasingly shows that consciousness is a remarkable but explainable function of a machinelike brain. Alan J. McComas' discusses his article for the American Scientist. Alan J. McComas is an emeritus professor of medicine at McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada. Greg is the Executive Director and Founder of the World War II Discussion Forum (wwiidf.org). He also has a strong interest in literature, culture, religion, science and philosophy (translation: he's an eclectic reader who is constantly missing deadlines for book reviews). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/technology

The Epstein files are naming names — CEOs, politicians, a current and former president. This is the stratum of people making decisions about nuclear weapons in an uncontrolled arms race with no arms limitation treaties, no diplomatic channels, and AI now integrated into nuclear command systems.Paul Jay talks with Matt Korda of the Federation of American Scientists about where the U.S. nuclear modernization program actually stands — the Sentinel ICBM, hundreds of billions in cost overruns, the Golden Dome fantasy, and a launch-on-warning doctrine that even its defenders can't rationally explain.The logic behind ICBMs collapses under scrutiny. The Golden Dome can't work. The real objective, as with every arms race boondoggle from SAGE to SDI, is the money. As Paul puts it, “It's not about the dome, it's about the gold.”Meanwhile, Russia and China aren't talking to Washington. The arms control architecture is gone. And the media is barely covering any of it.We need an anti-nuclear movement like the one that existed in the early 1980s. Midterms and a presidential election are coming. Make this an issue.Matt Korda is a senior researcher at the Federation of American Scientists.

By removing guardrails around nuclear weapons, the Trump administration is making the world a far more dangerous place. On this episode of After America, Jon B Wolfsthal, former Special Assistant to President Obama for National Security Affairs, joins Dr Emma Shortis to discuss the expiry of the New START nuclear weapons treaty between the United States and Russia, AUKUS and Australia’s nuclear capabilities, and why “nuclear weapons are back with avengeance”. This discussion was recorded on Thursday 12 February 2026 Australian time. The latest Vantage Point essay, What we owe the water: It's time for a fossil fuel treaty by Kumi Naidoo, is available now for $19.95. Use the code 'PODVP' at checkout to get free shipping. Guest: Jon B Wolfsthal, former Director of Global Risk, Federation of American Scientists // @jonatomic Host: Emma Shortis, Director, International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @emmashortis Show notes: Trump has scrapped the long-standing legal basis for tackling climate emissions by Robyn Eckersley, The Conversation (February 2026) It is now 85 seconds to midnight, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (February 2026) The nuclear option, After America, the Australia Institute (December 2025) Theme music: Blue Dot Sessions We’d love to hear your feedback on this series, so send in your questions, comments or suggestions for future episodes to podcasts@australiainstitute.org.au.Support After America: https://nb.australiainstitute.org.au/donateSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

JP hosts a roundtable with four early-career scientists launching the Atlas of Inspiring Latin American Scientists, a new project amplifying representation, mentorship, and global collaboration. A powerful conversation about imposter syndrome, visibility, returning home, and why becoming what you don't see can change an entire generation.

The last remaining US-Russia nuclear treaty that put limits on nuclear arsenals, the New START, expires today. Experts warn that without a new treaty, it raises the risk of a nuclear arms race in an increasingly volatile world, We speak with Thomas Countryman, Board Chair of the Arms Control Association, and a former U.S. diplomat who served as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, and Matt Korda, the Associate Director for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, who's tracking nuclear arsenals and trends.

In this special episode recorded at Fathom's 2026 Ashby Workshops, Greg sits down with Jennifer Pahlka, founder of Code for America and author of Recoding America: Why Government Is Failing in the Digital Age and How We Can Do Better. Jennifer walks us through her career journey, from filing paperwork at a child welfare agency to helping pioneer the U.S. Digital Services in the Obama administration (3:45). She describes the need for upstream policy reform (11:29), and discusses AI's potential to both empower public servants to challenge antiquated practices and help policymakers simplify complex regulations (28:03). Finally, Jennifer shares some AI use cases she's particularly excited about in government (59:34).   Jennifer Pahlka is a senior fellow at the Niskanen Center and the Federation of American Scientists and a senior advisor at the Abundance Network. She previously served as U.S. Deputy Chief Technology Officer, helping start the U.S. Digital Services under the second Obama administration, and as a member of the Defense Innovation Network.   Read Jennifer's book Recoding America and check out her Substack Eating Policy.   Jennifer's recommended reading: Hack Your Bureaucracy by Marina Nitze & Nick Sinai Crisis Engineering by Marina Nitze, Matthew Weaver, & Mikey Dickerson The Procedure Fetish by Nicholas Bagley Why Nothing Works by Marc J. Dunkelman Kill It with Fire by Marianne Bellotti

Join Lisa Foster and Dr. Yi “Sherry” Zhang, a fellow mom, genomic scientist, and author, as they kick off the year with a lively conversation about the future of human longevity and how science might extend healthy lifespans. They explore how genomics, epigenomics, and cutting-edge aging research intersect with everyday life, and what practical steps families can take today to support healthier aging. This episode seamlessly blends inspiration with science, offering valuable insights, hope, and practical takeaways for navigating aging in the modern world.About Dr. Yi “Sherry” Zhang:Website: https://yisherryzhang.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/yisherryzhang/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drsherrye/Book: The Founder Effect: My Journey to Becoming an American Scientist and Entrepreneur by Dr. Yi Zhang, ⁠⁠⁠(As an Amazon affiliate, at no extra cost to you, we will earn a small commission from qualifying purchases.)About the Host:Real Life Momz on Instagram:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/reallifemomz⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Real Life Momz on Facebook:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.facebook.com/reallifemomzpodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow on Youtube: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://youtube.com/@reallifemomzpodcast4048?si=jj5bQ_Afhyl0ZNi7⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

Past human space missions were protected by Earth's magnetic field and a measure of luck, but future missions beyond the Earth–Moon system will face far greater and longer-lasting radiation risks that cannot be managed by route planning alone. The authors argue that safe deep-space exploration will require major advances in understanding radiation, developing effective shielding, and mitigating both acute and long-term health effects, rather than relying on chance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Past human space missions were protected by Earth's magnetic field and a measure of luck, but future missions beyond the Earth–Moon system will face far greater and longer-lasting radiation risks that cannot be managed by route planning alone. The authors argue that safe deep-space exploration will require major advances in understanding radiation, developing effective shielding, and mitigating both acute and long-term health effects, rather than relying on chance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Past human space missions were protected by Earth's magnetic field and a measure of luck, but future missions beyond the Earth–Moon system will face far greater and longer-lasting radiation risks that cannot be managed by route planning alone. The authors argue that safe deep-space exploration will require major advances in understanding radiation, developing effective shielding, and mitigating both acute and long-term health effects, rather than relying on chance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

In this in-depth panel discussion from the 2025 National Conference, moderator Norm Ornstein of American Enterprise Institute talks to an all-star panel including Loren DeJonge Schulman of the Federation of American Scientists, Mindy Romero from the Center for Inclusive Democracy at USC's Price School, Soren Dayton of Foundation for American Innovation, and Cecili Wake of Democracy 2076. The conversation took on a wide range of topics about how American governance could and should develop over the next half-century. Management Matters is a presentation of the National Academy of Public Administration produced by Lizzie Alwan and Matt Hampton and edited by Matt Hampton. Support the Podcast Today at: donate@napawash.org or 202-347-3190Episode music: Hope by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.comMusic promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comFollow us on YouTube for clips and more: @NAPAWASH_YT

On March 20th, 1995, the Tokyo subway system was flooded with sarin nerve gas in a coordinated terrorist attack by the religious cult Aum Shinrikyō. Led by the charismatic new-age guru, Shoko Asahara, the well-funded and technologically ambitious Aum organization manufactured and deployed chemical weapons in an attempt to bring about the end of the world. In the chaos that followed, 13 people were killed, thousands were injured, and the international community shuddered at the possibility of future attacks by fringe political groups.    SOURCES: Amarasingam, A. (2017, April 5). A history of sarin as a weapon. The Atlantic.  Cotton, Simon. “Nerve Agents: What Are They and How Do They Work?” American Scientist, vol. 106, no. 3, 2018, pp. 138–40.  Danzig, Richard; Sageman, Marc; Leighton, Terrance; Hough, Lloyd; Yuki, Hidemi; Kotani, Rui; Hosford, Zachary M.. Aum Shinrikyo: Insights Into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons . Center for a New American Security. 2011. Gunaratna, Rohan. “Aum Shinrikyo's Rise, Fall and Revival.” Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses, vol. 10, no. 8, 2018, pp. 1–6.  Harmon, Christopher C. “How Terrorist Groups End: Studies of the Twentieth Century.” Strategic Studies Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 3, 2010, pp. 43–84. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/26269787.  “IHT: A Safe and Sure System — Until Now.” The New York Times, 21 Mar. 1995. Jones, Seth G., and Martin C. Libicki. “Policing and Japan's Aum Shinrikyo.” How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al Qa'ida, RAND Corporation, 2008, pp. 45–62.  Kaplan, David E. (1996) “Aum's Shoko Asahara and the Cult at the End of the World”. WIRED.  Lifton, Robert Jay. Destroying the World to Save It: Aum Shinrikyo, Apocalyptic Violence, and the New Global Terrorism. 1999. Murakami, Haruki. Underground: The Tokyo Gas Attack and the Japanese Psyche. Translated by Alfred Birnbaum and Philip Gabriel. 2001. Murphy, P. (2014, June 21). Matsumoto: Aum's sarin guinea pig. The Japan Times.  Reader, Ian. Religious Violence in Contemporary Japan: The Case of Aum Shinrikyo.  2000. Tucker, Jonathan B. “Chemical/Biological Terrorism: Coping with a New Threat.” Politics and the Life Sciences, vol. 15, no. 2, 1996, pp. 167–83.  Ushiyama, Rin. “Shock and Anger: Societal Responses to the Tokyo Subway Attack.” Aum Shinrikyō and Religious Terrorism in Japanese Collective Memory., The British Academy, 2023, pp. 52–80.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How likely is it that the US will restart nuclear testing? How much time would it take? You might be surprised by the answers. Join Shelly as she discusses this and other topics with Hans Kristensen, Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. And we find out - things can get much worse.

In the Trump administration's efforts to shrink and realign the federal government, datasets on climate, health and demographics have disappeared. Some have been scrubbed from public view, others may not be collected anymore. This data supported apps and interactive tools many researchers relied upon.Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Denice Ross, senior advisor with the Federation of American Scientists and former chief data scientist for the U.S., who recently wrote a tribute to the data that's been lost.

In the Trump administration's efforts to shrink and realign the federal government, datasets on climate, health and demographics have disappeared. Some have been scrubbed from public view, others may not be collected anymore. This data supported apps and interactive tools many researchers relied upon.Marketplace's Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Denice Ross, senior advisor with the Federation of American Scientists and former chief data scientist for the U.S., who recently wrote a tribute to the data that's been lost.

Imagine entering the Carousel of Progress at Disney World, but instead of showing you the possibilities of life in the future, it showed you what a government of the future may look like. That's the aim of The Future State Initiative. In collaboration with the Federation of American Scientists, it conducted an exercise imagining what the U.S. government should look like in 2050. Federal News Network's Eric White spoke with Loren DeJonge Schulman, Senior Advisor for Government Capacity at the Federation of American Scientists.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Of all the patterns that could possibly be preserved in the post–Big Bang radiation, the one we see is surprisingly smooth on large angular scales. Sitting by a campfire on a dark night, looking up at the Milky Way, a curious child asks, “What does the sky tell us? Where does it all come from? Does space go on forever?” A caring adult might share a little awe and humility about humanity's place in the grand scheme or perhaps relate a traditional creation story. A scientist like me, who came of age soon after the discovery that the sky is not actually dark but awash in primeval radiation, might instead relate the still-unfinished scientific story of the boundaries and origins of time and space. That tale is displayed in nature's own record of the structure of the early universe, a mosaic of temperature and density fluctuations preserved in the primordial light that astronomers call the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Of all the patterns that could possibly be preserved in the post–Big Bang radiation, the one we see is surprisingly smooth on large angular scales. Sitting by a campfire on a dark night, looking up at the Milky Way, a curious child asks, “What does the sky tell us? Where does it all come from? Does space go on forever?” A caring adult might share a little awe and humility about humanity's place in the grand scheme or perhaps relate a traditional creation story. A scientist like me, who came of age soon after the discovery that the sky is not actually dark but awash in primeval radiation, might instead relate the still-unfinished scientific story of the boundaries and origins of time and space. That tale is displayed in nature's own record of the structure of the early universe, a mosaic of temperature and density fluctuations preserved in the primordial light that astronomers call the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Of all the patterns that could possibly be preserved in the post–Big Bang radiation, the one we see is surprisingly smooth on large angular scales. Sitting by a campfire on a dark night, looking up at the Milky Way, a curious child asks, “What does the sky tell us? Where does it all come from? Does space go on forever?” A caring adult might share a little awe and humility about humanity's place in the grand scheme or perhaps relate a traditional creation story. A scientist like me, who came of age soon after the discovery that the sky is not actually dark but awash in primeval radiation, might instead relate the still-unfinished scientific story of the boundaries and origins of time and space. That tale is displayed in nature's own record of the structure of the early universe, a mosaic of temperature and density fluctuations preserved in the primordial light that astronomers call the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A veteran of the National Security Council shares what the 2025 movie got right and wrong when it comes to U.S. missile defense and nuclear command and control.  Guest: Jon Wolfsthal, Director of Global Risk at the Federation of American Scientists.

Because of the government shutdown, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will not release its monthly unemployment and jobs survey today. But that's probably not a big deal to President Donald Trump, who has apparently decided that the best statistics are the ones that either say what he wants to hear, or are simply never heard at all.  The most expensive extreme weather events, which facilities are creating the most pollution, quarterly reports, incidents of domestic terrorism, the number of people who need food assistance…these are all statistics Americans need to know. And these are all forms of data under attack by the Trump administration. And this started long before the shutdown. America has been a world leader at collecting data on everything from the number of bison living in Plains states to the divorce rate – but our data supremacy might be coming to an end. And that's really, really bad, for reasons we might not even know yet. So to find out more about the stats we're losing, and what else we're losing in the process, we spoke to Denice Ross. She's a senior fellow at the Federation of American Scientists and former U.S. Chief Data Scientist for the Biden administration.And in headlines, President Donald Trump determines the US is in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels, the Trump administration punishes a slew of blue states by cancelling nearly $8-billion in grants for their clean energy projects, and the lastest update in the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case.Show Notes:Call Congress – 202-224-3121Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Ten Across Resilience Network convened in Jacksonville, Florida, in April to share strategies from their communities—the hottest in the nation—for mitigating the mortality and economic loss caused by extreme heat, and to identify common obstacles to both long-term planning and immediate response. Representatives from the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) joined the exercise to discuss and document the findings.  With co-author Dr. Melissa Guardaro, Senior Global Futures Scientist for ASU's Global Futures Lab, FAS's Grace Wickerson has drafted a set of policy recommendations for all levels of government and non-governmental actors, “Framework for a Heat-Ready Nation.” This document draws heavily upon the recommendations, challenges and successes raised by Ten Across participants and outlines a series of steps that can be taken to protect people and their livelihoods from rising temperatures nationwide.  In this episode, Grace walks us through the five high-priority measures defined in the report;  how these points were determined and what it will take to see them carried out. A scientist recognized for their policy advocacy work by last month's 2025 Grist 50 list, Grace discusses the importance of decisions based on sound science, and how to move forward even as most federal climate policy is rolled back.   Relevant Articles and Resources  Framework for a Heat-Ready Nation (Ten Across/Federation of American Scientists, July 2025)  2025 Heat Policy Agenda (Federation of American Scientists, January 2025)  “As summer ends, Maricopa County is on track to see fewer heat-related deaths than last year” (KJZZ, September 2025)  “Ten Across Joins 60+ Organizations in Supporting Federal Policy Agenda for Tackling Extreme Heat” (Ten Across blog, January 2025)  “Here's why an Arizona medical examiner is working to track heat-related deaths” (NPR, June 2024)  Relevant Ten Across Conversations Podcasts  ASU Researchers Tackle Extreme Heat Relief as Phoenix Temps Soar  Urban Planners: The Unexpected Champions of the U.S. Heat Resilience Effort  What Some of the Hottest Cities on The 10 Are Doing to Address Deadly Heat  CreditsHost: Duke ReiterProducer and editor: Taylor GriffithMusic by: Dew of Light and Lennon HuttonResearch and support provided by: Kate Carefoot, Rae Ulrich, and Sabine Butler  About our guest  Grace Wickerson is senior manager of Climate and Health on the Climate and Environment team at the Federation of American Scientists. Grace leads programmatic work to showcase how a changing climate impacts health outcomes and public health and healthcare systems through emerging threats like extreme heat and wildfire smoke. Grace holds a master's of science in Materials Science and Engineering from Northwestern University and was named to this year's Grist 50 list of climate and justice advocates to watch.

In the wake of federal funding cuts that threaten scientists' jobs in the US, programs have emerged across Europe to attract those worried American scientists. The World's Gerry Hadden reports from a university in southern France where incoming Americans are referred to as “scientific refugees.” The post Europe wants to attract American scientists appeared first on The World from PRX.

Hassan El-Tayyeb of the Friends Committee on National Legislation returns with an update on the worsening humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the growing movement to end U.S. support for the assault. Then, Mackenzie Knight Boyle from the Federation of American Scientists walks us through the scale and secrecy of the U.S. nuclear weapons program — and the risks it poses to the world. Finally, constitutional scholar Bruce Fein joins us to call out the unchecked power and ethical failures of the Supreme Court.Hassan El-Tayyab is the lead lobbyist on Middle East policy for the Friends Committee on National Legislation. Mr. El-Tayyab co-chairs the U.S. Ceasefire Coalition and leads the Friends Committee's work to end the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, advocate for Palestinian human rights, and advance diplomacy with Iran.(The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation) militarizes aid and is run by private armed contractors. It violates all these principles of neutrality, independence, impartiality. And we even saw the GHF's own executive director, Jake Wood, resign in protest in May, saying that he couldn't work in a way that didn't adhere to these humanitarian principles.Hassan El-TayyabMackenzie Knight-Boyle is a Senior Research Associate for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, where she co-authors the Nuclear Notebook––an authoritative open-source estimate of global nuclear forces and trends.Probably the scariest false alarm was in 1979, A training cassette that was simulating a massive attack with nuclear missiles from the Soviet Union on the United States was mistakenly entered into the primary computer system of North American Aerospace Defense Command, NORAD. And it was then broadcast to other command centers as if it was going out in the National Command Authority alert system. And because of that, the proper procedures were followed for a situation like this, where the fighter jets took off. The nuclear bombers, carrying nuclear weapons, were put into the sky, missile crews were put on high alert, which means the missiles are ready to launch within seconds. And the president's doomsday plane, which is essentially the war room in the sky for the president in emergency situations, was also put into the air. And it took six minutes for them to realize that this was a training cassette that had been mistakenly put into the system.Mackenzie Knight-BoyleBruce Fein is a Constitutional scholar and an expert on international law. Mr. Fein was Associate Deputy Attorney General under Ronald Reagan and he is the author of Constitutional Peril: The Life and Death Struggle for Our Constitution and Democracy, and American Empire: Before the Fall.There can be good faith disagreements over the interpretation of the Constitution. But when you have a course of action which so systematically shows a favoritism towards limitless executive power towards corporations as well with regard to money and politics, no longer does it seem to be a matter of good faith, a disagreement, but it's a matter of advancing the partisan political interests of the president, the presidency, and that is, I think, an impeachable offense.Bruce Fein (on impeaching Supreme Court justices)News 7/4/251. The New York City Board of Elections has released the final results in the Democratic Mayoral primary – after accounting for reallocation of votes via ranked-choice tabulations. The final results are stunning. Zohran Mamdani, up by approximately seven points on election night, has emerged with a whopping 12-point victory over disgraced former Governor Andrew Cuomo. Perhaps even more impressive, Mamdani completely reshaped the electorate. According to the New York Times, he turned out young people in record numbers to the point that the largest voter bloc in this election was 18–29-year-olds, a complete reversal of usual trends.2. Speaking of reversing trends, it is worth reviewing Zohran's victory in light of the groups he won by large margins. Namely men, including young men of all backgrounds, as well as Latino and Asian voters, per Jacobin. These are groups that Democrats have notably lost ground with, including in New York City, and have devoted considerable resources to winning back to their coalition. Zohran's win therefore should give Democrats a new sense of optimism and they should seek to embrace the winning course that he has charted.3. Of course, being the Democratic Party, they are instead doing the opposite. Despite his earthquake victory, few high-profile New York Democrats have endorsed Zohran. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has not, nor has Governor Kathy Hochul, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, or other powerful New York House Democrats like Gregory Meeks. The other U.S. Senator from New York, Kirsten Gillibrand, has been openly hostile, calling Zohran “permissive [of] violence against Jews,” in an interview with Brian Lehrer on WNYC. This is of course racist, inflammatory and flatly untrue. Under pressure from other Democrats, Gillibrand retracted her statement, and “apologized for mischaracterizing Mamdani's record and for her tone on the call,” according to POLITICO. This however gives us a taste of the kind of dirty tricks and defamatory rhetoric the party could deploy against Mamdani between now and November.4. That said, Zohran is picking up significant backing locally – an indication that those actually on the ground know which way the wind is blowing. On Monday, Mamdani was endorsed by the NYC Central Labor Council-AFL-CIO. The NYCCLC is “the nation's largest regional labor federation…[bringing] together 300 unions… [and representing] more than 1 million workers.” On Tuesday, he won the endorsement of New York Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, who represents Westchester, according to reporter Vaughn Golden. Zohran has already earned the endorsement of New York Attorney General Tish James. Expect this divergence between national and local Democratic figures to continue.5. In stark contrast to Zohran, whose political brand is defined by seemingly endless energy, Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman shocked observers this week when he complained about having to do the bare minimum as a U.S. Senator. According to Rolling Stone, during Senate deliberations on the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill,” Fetterman was quoted saying “I just want to go home. I've missed our entire trip to the beach.” Fetterman's comments are particularly galling seeing as he has been chronically absent from Senate hearings, committee meetings and even votes. In other words, Fetterman is complaining about doing the bare minimum for the people of Pennsylvania, but is failing to do even that.6. The bill did of course pass, with Vice-President JD Vance voting to break a 50-50 tie vote in the Senate. On Twitter, Vance justified his vote from criticism regarding its massive cuts to Medicaid by saying “The thing that will bankrupt this country more than any other policy is flooding the country with illegal immigration and then giving those migrants generous benefits. The OBBB fixes this problem. And therefore it must pass.” AOC called his vote, “An absolute and utter betrayal of working families.”7. In more news related to the bill, Trump and Elon Musk have been trading threats regarding its passage. On Monday, TIME reported Elon Musk tweeted, “If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day. Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uni-party, so that the people actually have a voice.” Musk added, “Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame…they will lose their primary next year, if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.” Musk has also reportedly thrown his financial weight behind Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, perhaps the most vocal critic of Trump in the House Republican caucus. Trump is already backing a primary challenge against Massie; Musk intervening on the other side has turned this race into a climactic proxy battle between the two figures once called “co-presidents.”8. Trump, for his part, threatened to deport Elon Musk. Asked about this directly, Trump told reporters, “We'll have to take a look. We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is? The monster that might have to go back and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies,” per USA Today. This is of course true. Musk's companies have received billions in corporate welfare from the federal government over the years. It is unclear how much the stock value of, for instance Tesla, would suffer from the money faucet being turned off.9. Entertaining as Trump's threats to deport Musk are however, we should not lose sight of the ever-darker reality of deportation setting in nationwide. NOLA.com reports “An Iranian woman who has lived in the United States for 47 years, has no criminal record, and is married to a US citizen was detained by ICE as she gardened outside her New Orleans home.” Expect to hear more stories of secret police rounding up law abiding Americans in the days to come.10. Finally, in more positive news, Reuters reports China is quietly moving to rebuild Cuba's energy grid. This report notes that “Officials…announced China was participating in a project to modernize Cuba's entire electrical grid, with 55 solar parks to be built in 2025, and another 37 by 2028, for a total of 2,000 MW - a massive undertaking that, when complete, would represent nearly two-thirds of present-day demand.” Cuba joined China's international infrastructure development program Belt and Road in 2018. This report notes that China is taking on the development role that Russia formerly played in Havana, but has been unable to deliver on since it embarked on its special military operation-turned-quagmire in Ukraine. Cuba's energy grid has experienced continue failures for the past several years for myriad reasons, exacerbated by Trump's increasingly draconian sanctions regime. This is just another example of a reality becoming increasingly clear to much of the world: the U.S. tears down developing countries' infrastructure, China helps build it up.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

Recently I was asked to review a forthcoming book for American Scientist magazine. The book was entitled, Sweet and Deadly: How Coca-Cola Spreads Disinformation and Makes us Sick. I did the review, and now that the book has been published, I'm delighted that its author, Murray Carpenter, has agreed to join us. Mr. Carpenter is a journalist and author whose work has appeared in publications such as the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and has been featured in places like NPR's All Things Considered and Morning Edition. Interview Summary So, let's start with your career overall. Your journalism has covered a wide range of topics. But a major focus has been on what people consume. First, with your book Caffeinated and now with Sweet and Deadly. What brought you to this interest? My interest in caffeine is longstanding. Like many of us, I consume caffeine daily in the form of coffee. And I just felt like with caffeine, many of us don't really discuss the fact that it is a drug, and it is at least a mildly addictive drug. And so, I became fascinated with that enough to write a book. And that really led me directly in an organic fashion to this project. Because when I would discuss caffeine with people, mostly they just kind of wanted the cliff notes. Is my habit healthy? You know, how much caffeine should I take? And, and in short, I would tell them, you know, if you don't suffer from anxiety or insomnia and you're consuming your caffeine in a healthy beverage, well, that's fine. But, what I realized, of course, is that by volume, the caffeinated beverage people consume most of is sodas. And so that led me to thinking more about sodas because I got a lot of questions about the caffeine in sodas. And that led me to realize just the degree to which they are unhealthful. We've all known sodas not to be a health food, but I think that the degree to which they are not healthy surprised me. And that's what led me to this book. Yes, there's some very interesting themes aren't there with addiction and manipulation of ingredients in order to get people hooked on things. So let's talk about Coca-Cola a bit. Your book focuses on Coca-Cola. It's right there in the title. And certainly, they're giants in the beverage field. But are there other reasons that led you to focus on them? Other than that, the fact that they're the biggest? They're the biggest and really almost synonymous with sodas worldwide. I mean, many people don't say ‘I want a pop, I want a soda.' They say, ‘I want a Coke.' I quote a source as saying that. You know, what that means is you want a sugar sweetened beverage. And it's not just that they're the most successful at this game, and the biggest. But as I started doing this research, I realized that they have also been the most aggressive and the most successful at this sort of disinformation that's the focus of the book. At generating these health campaigns, these science disinformation campaigns, we should say. This is not to say Pepsi and Dr. Pepper have not been at this game as well, and often through the American Beverage Association. But it is to say that I think Coca-Cola has been the most sophisticated. The most invested in these campaigns. And I would argue the most successful. And so, I really think it's a league apart and that's why I wanted to focus on Coca-Cola. That makes good sense. So, in reading your book, I was struck by the sheer number of ways Coca-Cola protected their business interest at the expense of public health and also the degree to which it was coordinated and calculated. Let's take several examples of such activities and discuss exactly what the company has done. And I'd love your opinion on this. One thing you noted that Coke acted partly through other organizations, one of which you just mentioned, the American Beverage Association. There were others where there was sort of a false sense of scientific credibility. Can you explain more about what Coke did in this area? Yes, and one of the organizations that I think is perhaps the exemplar of this behavior is the International Life Sciences Institute. It's a very successful, very well-funded group that purports to you know, improve the health of people, worldwide. It was founded by a Coca-Cola staffer and has, you know, essentially carried water for Coke for years through a variety of direct and indirect ways. But so front groups, the successful use of front groups: and this is to say groups that don't immediately appear to be associated, say with Coca-Cola. If you hear the International Life Sciences Institute, no one immediately thinks Coca-Cola, except for people who study this a lot. The International Food Information Council, another very closely related front group. This is one of the ways that Coke has done its work is through the use of front groups. And some of them are sort of these more temporary front groups that they'll establish for specific campaigns. For example, to fight soda taxes in specific areas. And they often have very anodyne names, and names again that don't directly link them to Coca-Cola or a beverage, the beverage industry. And the reason that this is so important and the reason this is so effective is journalists know if they were saying, Coca-Cola says soda isn't bad for you, of course that raises red flags. If they say, the International Life Sciences Institute says it's not bad for you, if they say the International Food Information Council says it's not bad for you. The use of front groups has been one of the very effective and persistent, strategies. It almost sounds like the word deception could be written the charter of these organizations, couldn't it? Because it was really meant to disguise Coca-Cola's role in these things from the very get go. That's right. Yes. And the deception runs very deep. One of the things that I happened onto in the course of reporting this book, Sweet and Deadly, is Coca-Cola two different times, organized three-day seminars on obesity in Colorado. These two attendees appeared to be sponsored by a press organization and the University of Colorado. They were funded and structured entirely at the behest of Coca-Cola. And it wasn't until after people had attended these seminars and reported stories based on the findings that they'd learned there. Much, much later did people find out that yes, actually these were Coca-Cola initiatives. So yes, deception, runs deep and it's a huge part of their public relations strategy. It's like reputation laundering, almost. Well, it is, and, you know, I make frequent analogies to the tobacco industry in the book. And I think one of the things that's important to remember when we're looking at tobacco and when we're looking at Coca-Cola, at the soda industry writ large, is that these are industries that are producing products that science now shows unequivocally are unhelpful. Even at moderate levels of consumption. So, in order for the industry to continue selling this product, to continue leading, they really have to fight back. It's imperative. It's a risk to their business model if they don't do something to fight the emerging health science. And so, yes, it's very important to them. You know, it's easy, I guess, to ascribe this kind of behavior to ill meaning people within these organizations. But it's almost written into the DNA of these organizations. I mean, you said they have to do this. So, it's pretty much be expected, isn't. It is. I think young people when they hear something like this, they often shrug and say capitalism. And, yes, there's something to that. But capitalism thrives also in a regulated environment. I think that's maybe a little bit too simplistic. But the aspect of it that does apply here is that Coca-Cola is in the business of selling sugar water. That's what they're there to do. Granted, they've diversified into other products, but they are in the business of selling sugar water. Anything that threatens that business model is a threat to their bottom line. And so, they are going to fight it tooth and nail. So how did Coca-Cola influence big health organizations like the World Health Organization and any equivalent bodies in the US? Well, so a few different ways. One of the ways that Coca-Cola has really extended its influence is again, through the use of the front groups to carry messages such as, you know, a calorie is a calorie. Calories and calories out. That's, that's one of the strategies. Another is by having allies in high places politically. And sometimes these are political appointees that happen to be associated with Coca-Cola. Other times these are politicians who are getting funding from Coca-Cola. But, yes, they have worked hard. I mean, the WHO is an interesting one because the WHO really has been out a little bit ahead of the more national bodies in terms of wanting soda taxes, et cetera. But there's a subtler way too, I think, that it influences any of these political entities and these science groups, is that Coca-Cola it's such an all-American beverage. I don't think we can overstate this. It's almost more American than apple pie. And I think we still have not sort of made that shift to then seeing it as something that's unhealthful. And I do think that that has, sort of, put the brakes slightly on regulatory actions here in the US. Let's talk about the Global Energy Balance Network, because this was an especially pernicious part of the overall Coca-Cola strategy. Would you tell us about that and how particular scientists, people of note in our field, by the way, were being paid large sums of money and then delivering things that supported industries positions. Yes. This was a Coca-Cola initiative. And we have to be clear on this. This was designed and created at the behest of Coca-Cola staffers. This was an initiative that was really an effort to shift the balance to the calories outside of the equation. So energy balance is one of these, sort of, themes that Coca-Cola and other people have, sort of, made great hay with. And this idea would be just calories and calories out. That's all that matters. If you're just balanced there, everything else is to be okay. We can talk about that later. I think most of your listeners probably understand that, you know, a calorie of Coca-Cola is not nutritionally equivalent to a calorie of kale. But that's what the Global Energy Balance Network was really trying to focus on. And yes, luminaries in the field of obesity science, you know, Stephen Blair at the University of South Carolina, Jim Hill, then at the University of Colorado's Anschutz Center, the Global Energy Balance Network funded their labs with more than a million dollars to specifically focus on this issue of energy balance. Now, what was deceptive here, and I think it's really worth noting, is that Coca-Cola developed this project. But once it developed the project and gave the funding, it did not want to be associated with it. It wasn't the Global Energy Balance Network 'brought to you by Coca-Cola.' It appeared to be a freestanding nonprofit. And it looked like it was going to be a very effective strategy for Coca-Cola, but it didn't turn out that way. So, we'll talk about that in a minute. How much impact did this have? Did it matter that Coke gave money to these several scientists you mentioned? Well, I think yes. I think in the broader scheme of things that every increment of scientific funding towards this side matters. You know, people talk about the science of industrial distraction or industrial selection. And, you know, partly this is this idea that even if you're funding legitimate science, right, but it's focused on this ‘calories outside of the equation,' it's sucking up some of the oxygen in the room. Some of the public conversation is going to be shifted from the harmful effects of a product, say Coca-Cola, to the benefits of exercise. And so, yes, I think all of this kind of funding can make a difference. And it influences public opinion. So how close were the relationships between the Coca-Cola executives and the scientist? I mean, did they just write them a check and say, go do your science and we will let you come up with whatever you will, or were they colluding more than that? And they were colluding much more than that. And I've got a shout out here to the Industry Documents Library at the University of California at San Francisco, which is meticulously archived. A lot of the emails that show all of the interrelationships here. Yes, they were not just chatting cordially - scientists to Coca-Cola Corporation. They were mutually developing strategies. They were often ready at a moment's notice to appear at a press conference on Coca-Cola's behalf. So, yes, it was a very direct, very close relationship that certainly now that we see the conversations, it's unseemly at best. How did this all come to light? Because you said these documents are in this archive at UCSF. How did they come to light in the first place and how did shining light on this, you know, sort of pseudo-organization take place? Well, here we have to credit, New York Times reporter, now at the Washington Post, Anahad O'Connor, who did yeoman's work to investigate the Global Energy Balance Network. And it was his original FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests that got a lot of these emails that are now in the industry document library. He requested these documents and then he built his story in large part off of these documents. And it was a front-page New York Times expose and, Coke had a lot of egg on its face. It's then CEO, even apologized, you know, in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. And you know, the sort of a secondary aspect of this is after this funding was exposed, Coca-Cola was pressured to reveal other health funding that it had been spending money on. And that was, I think over a few years like $133 million. They spread their money around to a lot of different organizations and in some cases the organizations, it was just good will. In other cases, you had organizations that changed their position on key policy initiatives after receiving the funding. But it was a lot of money. So, the Global Energy Balance Network, it is sort of opened a chink in their armor and gave people a view inside the machine. And there's something else that I'd love to mention that I think is really important about the Global Energy Balance Network and about that initiative. As Coca-Cola seems, and this became clear in the reporting of the book over and over again, they seem always to be three moves ahead on the chess board. They're not just putting out a brush fires. They're looking way down the road. How do we head off the challenge that we're facing in public opinion? How do we head off the challenge we're facing in terms of soda science? And in many cases, they've been very, very effective at this. Were Coca-Cola's efforts mainly to influence policies and things in the US or did they have their eyes outside the US as well? I focused the book, the reporting of the book, really on Coca-Cola in the US. And also, and I just want to mention this tangentially, it's also focused not on non-nutritive sweetened beverages, but the sugary beverages. It's pretty tightly focused. But yes, Coca-Cola, through other organizations, particularly the International Life Sciences Institute, has very much tried to influence policy say in China, for example, which is a huge market. So yes, they've exported this very successful PR strategy globally. So, the corporate activities, like the ones you describe in your book, can be pretty clearly damaging to the public's health. What in the heck can be done? I mean, who will the change agents be? And do you think there's any hope of curtailing this kind of dreadful activity? Well, this is something I thought about a lot. One of the themes of the book is that the balance of public opinion has never tipped against Coca-Cola. And we talked about this earlier, that it's still seen as this all American product. And we see with other industries and other products. So, you know, Philip Morris, smoking, Marlboro. Eventually the balance of public opinion tips against them and people accept that they're unhealthful and that they've been misleading the public. The same thing happened for Exxon and climate change, Purdue pharma and Oxycontin. It's a pattern we see over and over again. With Coca-Cola, it hasn't tipped yet. And I think once it does, it will be easier for public health advocates to make their case. In terms of who the change agents might be, here we have a really interesting conversation, right? Because the foremost change agent right now looks like it's RFK Jr. (Robert F. Kennedy), which is pretty remarkable and generates an awful lot of shall we say, cognitive dissonance, right? Because both the spending of SNAP Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds for sodas, he's opposed to that. He has just as recently as the week before last called sugar poison. He said sugar is poison. These are the kinds of very direct, very forceful, high level, initiatives that we really haven't seen at a federal level yet. So, it's possible that he will be nudging the balance. And it puts, of course, everybody who's involved, every public health advocate, I think, who is involved with this issue in a slightly uncomfortable or very uncomfortable position. Yes. You know, as I think about the kind of settings where I've worked and this conflict-of-interest problem with scientists taking money and doing things in favor of industry. And I wonder who the change agents are going to be. It's a pretty interesting picture comes with that. Because if you ask scientists whether money taints research, they'll say yes. But if you ask, would it taint your research, they'll say no. Because of course I am so unbiased and I'm so pure that it really wouldn't affect what I do. So, that's how scientists justify it. Some scientists don't take money from industry and there are no problems with conflicts of interest. But the ones who do can pretty easily justify it along with saying things like, well, I can help change the industry from within if I'm in the door, and things like that. The universities can't really police it because universities are getting corporate funding. Maybe not from that particular company, but overall. Their solution to this is the same as the scientific journals, that you just have to disclose. The kind of problem with disclosure as I see it, is that it - sort of editorializing here and you're the guest, so I apologize for intruding on that - but the problem with disclosure is that why do you need to disclose something in the first place because there's something potentially wrong? Well, the solution then isn't disclose it, it's not to do it. And disclosing is like if I come up and kick you in the leg, it's okay if I disclose it? I mean, it's just, there's something sort of perverse about that whole system. Journals there, you know, they want disclosure. The big scientific association, many of them are getting money from industry as well. So, industry has so permeated the system that it's hard to think about who can have any impact. And I think the press, I think it's journalists like you who can make a difference. You know, it wasn't the scientific organizations or anything else that got in the way of the Global Energy Balance Network. It was Anahad O'Connor writing in the New York Times, and all the people who were involved in exposing that. And you with your book. So that's sort of long-winded way of saying thank you. What you've done is really important and there are precious few change agents out there. And so, we have to rely on talented and passionate people like you to get that work done. So, thank you so much for sharing it with us. Let me just end with one final question. Do you see any reason to be optimistic about where this is all going? I do. And I've got to say maybe you're giving scientists a little bit of short shrift here. Because, as the science develops, as it becomes more compelling and a theme of the book is that soda science really, over the past 15, 20 years has become more compelling. More unequivocal. We know the harms and, you know, you can quantify them and identify them more specifically than say, 15 years ago. So, I think that's one thing that can change. And I think slowly you're seeing, greater public awareness. I think the real challenge, in terms of getting the message out about the health risks, is that you really see like a bifurcated consumption of Coca-Cola. There are many people who are not consuming any Coca-Cola. And then you have a lot of people who are consuming, you know, say 20 ounces regularly. So, there is a big question of how you reach this other group of people who are still high consumers of Coca-Cola. And we know and you know this well from your work, that soda labeling is one thing that works and that soda taxes are another. I think those are things to look out for coming down the pike. I mean, obviously other countries are ahead of us in terms of both of these initiatives. One of the things occurred to me as you were speaking earlier, you mentioned that your book was focused on the sugared beverages. Do you think there's a similar story to be told about deception and deceit with respect to the artificial sweeteners? I suspect so, you know. I haven't done the work, but I don't know why there wouldn't be. And I think artificial sweeteners are in the position that sugary beverages were 10 to 15 years ago. There's a lag time in terms of the research. There is increasing research showing the health risks of these beverages. I think people who are public health advocates have been loath to highlight these because they're also a very effective bridge from sugar sweetened beverages to no sugar sweetened beverages. And I think, a lot of people see them as a good strategy. I do think there probably is a story to tell about the risks of non-nutritive sweeteners. So, yes. I can remind our listeners that we've done a series of podcasts, a cluster of them really, on the impact of the artificial sweeteners. And it's pretty scary when you talk to people who really understand how they're metabolized and what effects they have on the brain, the microbiome, and the rest of the body. Bio Murray Carpenter is a journalist and author whose stories have appeared in the New York Times, Wired, National Geographic, NPR, and PRI's The World. He has also written for the Boston Globe, the Christian Science Monitor, and other media outlets. He holds a degree in psychology from the University of Colorado and a Master of Science in environmental studies from the University of Montana, and has worked as a medical lab assistant in Ohio, a cowboy in Colombia, a farmhand in Virginia, and an oil-exploring “juggie” in Wyoming. He lives in Belfast, Maine. He is the author of Caffeinated: How Our Daily Habit Helps, Hurts, and Hooks Us and Sweet and Deadly: How Coca-Cola Spread

Müssen wir unsere Gefühle immer alle verarbeiten? Oder reicht es, wenn wir sie einfach nur verändern? Leon und Atze sitzen heute an den Reglern unserer Gefühle und zeigen, wie wir Musik, Raum, Zeit, soziale Beziehungen oder Kultur zur Emotionsregulation nutzen können. Immer mit dem Ziel, sich nicht von unseren Gefühlen steuern zu lassen, sondern selbst Einfluss auf deren Verlauf zu nehmen. Fühlt euch gut betreut Leon & Atze Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/leonwindscheid/ https://www.instagram.com/atzeschroeder_offiziell/ Mehr zu unseren Werbepartnern findet ihr hier: https://linktr.ee/betreutesfuehlen Tickets: Atze: https://www.atzeschroeder.de/#termine Leon: https://leonwindscheid.de/tour/ Start ins heutige Thema: 09:00 min. Podcastempfehlung: Carl Jakob Haupt im Hotel Matze Wichtige Links: Artikel in der New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/06/well/how-to-change-your-mood.html Der Autor Ethan Kross: https://lsa.umich.edu/psych/people/faculty/ekross.html Dunedin-Studie: https://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/files/1571970023782.pdf Die Studie zur Selbstkontrolle: Moffitt, T. E., Poulton, R., & Caspi, A. (2013). Lifelong impact of early self-control: Childhood self-discipline predicts adult quality of life. American Scientist, 101(5), 352-360. https://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/files/1571970023782.pdf Veränderbarkeit der Emotionen: Tamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Implicit theories of emotion: affective and social outcomes across a major life transition. Journal of personality and social psychology, 92(4), 731.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6360018_Implicit_Theories_of_Emotion_Affective_and_Social_Outcomes_Across_a_Major_Life_Transition Warum wir Musik hören: Lonsdale, A. J., & North, A. C. (2011). Why do we listen to music? A uses and gratifications analysis. British journal of psychology, 102(1), 108-134. Resilienz durch Flexibilität: Bonanno, G. A., Chen, S., & Galatzer-Levy, I. R. (2023). Resilience to potential trauma and adversity through regulatory flexibility. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(11), 663-675. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/faculty/gab38/faculty-profile/files/2023_Bonanno-et-al._NATURE-REVIEWS-PSYCHOLOGY.pdf Studie zum Selbstgespräch: Moser, J. S., Dougherty, A., Mattson, W. I., Katz, B., Moran, T. P., Guevarra, D., ... & Kross, E. (2017). Third-person self-talk facilitates emotion regulation without engaging cognitive control: Converging evidence from ERP and fMRI. Scientific reports, 7(1), 4519. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-04047-3 Temporal Distancing: Bruehlman-Senecal, E., Ayduk, Ö., & John, O. P. (2016). Taking the long view: Implications of individual differences in temporal distancing for affect, stress reactivity, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 610. Die WOOP Website: https://woopmylife.org/ Redaktion: Andy Hartard Produktion: Murmel Productions

Tuesday, May 20th, 2025Today, the Supreme Court allows DHS to reinstate secretary Kristi Noem's order ending temporary status for Venezuelans resulting in the single largest mass illegalization event in US history; Judge Beryl Howell stops Trump from dismantling the US Institute of Peace; a top CBS executive has resigned amid Trump's political pressure; House Republicans manage to get the Billionaire Bailout Bill out of committee; the far right Romanian candidate for president has LOST his election; and Allison delivers your Good News.Thank You, Fay NutritionYou can qualify to see a registered dietitian for as little as $0 by visiting FayNutrition.com/dailybeansMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueGuest: Merici Vinton - Senior Fellow at the Federation of American Scientists, former DOGE USDS employee.Merici Vinton - Federation of American Scientists@merici.bsky.social - BlueSkyStories:CBS News chief steps down amid tensions over Trump lawsuit | NBC NewsSupreme Court allows Trump to revoke protected status for thousands of Venezuelans | NBC NewsHouse Republicans Advance Trump's ‘Big, Beautiful Bill' | The New York TimesJudge bars Trump administration from shutting peace institute that sought to end violent conflicts | AP NewsRomania's pro-EU candidate beats hard-right rival to win presidential election | CNN Good Trouble: Members of the general public have been engaged and supportive as attorneys and law students work to resist the Trump Administration's attack on the legal profession. Though the Administration's attacks are multi-faceted, a key area of focus has been intimidating corporate firms through unconstitutional Executive Orders designed to block them representing clients the Administration fears. When firms have fought these orders, they've won. Let them know how you feel.Use and Share the toolkit: Bit.ly/baddecisionmakers - Google DriveShare the video - How to make lawyers who collaborate with Tr*mp face backlashFind Upcoming Demonstrations And Actions:50501 MovementJune 14th Nationwide Demonstrations - NoKings.orgIndivisible.orgFrom The Good NewsOur Patriotism Versus Their Betrayal - My Latest Video On Our Perilous Political MomentHow to Fight Fascism in America — with Timothy Snyder | Prof G ConversationsTHE MOLOSSUS DOG OF WAR | YouTubeClaudia Schmidt sings "Enough Already" Mega Happy Hour Zoom Call - you can interact with not just me and Harry Dunn, Andy McCabe, and Dana Goldberg. They'll all be there this Friday 5/23/2025 at 7 PM ET 4 PM PT. Plus, you'll get these episodes ad free and early, and get pre-sale tickets and VIP access to our live events. You can join at patreon.com/muellershewrote for as little as $3 a month. Federal workers - feel free to email me at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen.Share your Good News or Good Trouble:https://www.dailybeanspod.com/good/ Check out other MSW Media podcastshttps://mswmedia.com/shows/Subscribe for free to MuellerSheWrote on Substackhttps://muellershewrote.substack.comFollow AG and Dana on Social MediaDr. Allison Gill Substack|Muellershewrote, BlueSky|@muellershewrote , Threads|@muellershewrote, TikTok|@muellershewrote, IG|muellershewrote, Twitter|@MuellerSheWrote,Dana GoldbergTwitter|@DGComedy, IG|dgcomedy, facebook|dgcomedy, IG|dgcomedy, danagoldberg.com, BlueSky|@dgcomedyHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?Supercasthttps://dailybeans.supercast.com/Patreon https://patreon.com/thedailybeansOr subscribe on Apple Podcasts with our affiliate linkThe Daily Beans on Apple Podcasts

Eliana Johns hunts for nuclear weapons. She's a senior research associate at the Federation of American Scientists, where her team uses open-source intelligence — or OSINT — to uncover secrets about countries' nuclear capabilities and intentions. In fact, much of what we know today about China's nuclear arsenal comes from her colleagues' work, which used commercial satellite imagery to reveal that China is undertaking a massive nuclear buildup — at a pace far exceeding publicly available estimates from U.S. intelligence agencies. In our conversation, Johns explains where OSINT has worked best and why greater transparency around nuclear weapons is essential for a more stable and peaceful world. We recorded this live at the Carnegie International Nuclear Policy Conference. 

As Donald Trump guts the programs and agencies behind some of America's greatest scientific achievements and fires the people responsible for those achievements and working on new ones, scientists across the country from every discipline took to the streets in protest to "stand up for science."