Podcasts about american society

The Boys are Back - together they catch listeners up on David's recovery journey and the lessons he's learned during the last 100 days of sobriety, Breht's writers block and new job, and a wide ranging, multi-dimensional conversation on the horrendous state of American society in 2025. Finally, they wrap up with a conversation on history and where our godforsaken civilization is headed in the coming years... also David fixates on that one time McDonalds sold Salad Shakers. outro music: 'Plantain Char' by Spinitch find and support more of their work here: https://spinitch.bandcamp.com/album/com-postables-jungle-scraps  

Dhruv Agrawal is CEO and president of Aether Biomedical. Discover Dhruv's unique journey from studying medicine in New Delhi to creating life-changing bionic limbs. Under his leadership, Aether Biomedical has achieved significant milestones, including CE certification and FDA registration for its Zeus V1 bionic limb. Dhruv shares his personal story of transitioning from medical school to MedTech innovation, the obstacles faced and lessons learned as a young entrepreneur, and the hope and inspiration of seeing Aether's prosthetics transform lives, especially in war-torn regions.   Guest links: https://www.aetherbiomedical.com | https://www.linkedin.com/company/aether-biomedical | https://www.instagram.com/aether_biomedical/  Charity supported: ASPCA Interested in being a guest on the show or have feedback to share? Email us at theleadingdifference@velentium.com.  PRODUCTION CREDITS Host & Editor: Lindsey Dinneen Producer: Velentium Medical   EPISODE TRANSCRIPT Episode 061 - Dhruv Agrawal Dhruv Agrawal [00:00:00] Lindsey Dinneen: Hi, I'm Lindsey and I'm talking with MedTech industry leaders on how they change lives for a better world. [00:00:09] Diane Bouis: The inventions and technologies are fascinating and so are the people who work with them. [00:00:15] Frank Jaskulke: There was a period of time where I realized, fundamentally, my job was to go hang out with really smart people that are saving lives and then do work that would help them save more lives. [00:00:28] Diane Bouis: I got into the business to save lives and it is incredibly motivating to work with people who are in that same business, saving or improving lives. [00:00:38] Duane Mancini: What better industry than where I get to wake up every day and just save people's lives. [00:00:42] Lindsey Dinneen: These are extraordinary people doing extraordinary work, and this is The Leading Difference. Hello, and welcome back to another episode of The Leading Difference podcast. I'm your host, Lindsey, and today I'm excited to introduce you to my guest, Dhruv Agrawal. Dhruv is the CEO and president of the management board of Aither Biomedical. He studied medicine in New Delhi before dropping out to pursue a bachelor's in business management. He also has a postgraduate diploma in Medical Device Development Regulatory Affairs from University of California Irvine, and a Master's in Data Science from the University of London. Under his leadership, Aither Biomedical has achieved CE certification and FDA registration for the Zeus V1 bionic limb, and established distribution across nine European countries, the US, and India. Additionally, Aither has raised over 12.5 million US dollars in private capital from leading VCs and has been a part of multiple European grants and research programs for an additional 6.5 million US dollars in non-dilutive capital. All right. Well, thank you so much for being here. Welcome to the show. I'm so excited to speak with you today. [00:01:49] Dhruv Agrawal: it's a pleasure to be here, Lindsey. Thank you so much for inviting me. [00:01:52] Lindsey Dinneen: Of course, of course. Well, I would love, if you wouldn't mind just starting by sharing a little bit about yourself and your background and what led you to Med Tech. [00:02:02] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, absolutely. So I'm Dhruv Agrawal. I'm the CEO of Aither Biomedical. We are a company based out of Poznan in Poland, so on the western part of Poland. It's a little bit chilly here. As a company, we are a team of about 55 people right now, currently present in the US, Europe, Middle East, as well as India. And we focus on making bionic hands for upper limb amputees. [00:02:25] Lindsey Dinneen: Amazing. Yes. So I wanna get into everything amazing that your company does, but going back for just a little bit, in your own personal history, can you share a little bit about maybe growing up and what experiences led you to think, "Hey, in the future, maybe I wanna do X, Y, and Z." [00:02:43] Dhruv Agrawal: Mm-hmm. So first of all, entrepreneurship was never a plan for me. I didn't even knew that there was a thing called an entrepreneur until I was easily into high school. Both my parents are doctors. My dad's a pediatrician, mom's a gynecologist, and as it happens in India, if your parents are doctors, you kind of know that you have to become a doctor as well. So I went to the coaching classes to pre, to prepare for medical entrance examinations. I actually met my co-founder there about 10 years ago. We both got into medical school. I was generally comfortable with medicine, you know, growing up in a hospital with doctor parents around. So I was generally comfortable in a clinical setting, but I realized that I was much more interested in the technological aspect of medicine rather than the clinical aspect of it. And that was when I was getting into the second year of my university. And luckily my dad, for my 18th birthday, bought me a 3D printer, like a very simple 3D printer from China as my 18th birthday gift. 'cause I was really wanting to get into that world. And that's where the story begins. So even till today, my dad jokingly says that that's the worst gift he has ever bought for me, because that made me drop out of medical school. [00:03:57] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh no. Okay, so you were given this gift and you started, I imagine, tinkering with it, learning how to use it. So tell me about that. [00:04:06] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, the thing with my co-founder as well, even though we went to the same medical university, we were not really friends in the first year. We were just colleagues. But when I got this 3D printer, it was like one of those things that you assemble, you get a kit and you assemble. And I was asking around people in my university and they were like, "Come on, what are you doing? Like, I don't wanna come to your apartment to assemble a 3D printer." And my co-founder was the first one who said yes to coming down and assembling that printer with me. So that's how our friendship essentially started in the university, even though we had known each other for three years by that point. And then we started, of course, by very basic things like printing mobile phone covers and key chains and we were just in awe with the fact that I have something in my room, in a studio apartment, where I can just build physical things, right? And this was back in 2018, so 3D printer was not such a consumer product where, you know, if it was of course used in industry, but it was not something that you would imagine having at your home, at least not in India. And then we actually found out that there's a society called Enable, which is an NGO that makes very simple basic prosthetic designs for kids. So we started by printing those and started going to some amputee clinics around and trialing that out with patients, just purely out of technical curiosity. We didn't really had a draw towards amputation, so to speak. We were more driven by the technical curiosity of, you know, it sounds interesting to make a prostatic hand. So that was the beginning. And then slowly, slowly things happened very organically that we went from wanting to 3D print basic things to starting a biomedical innovation club in our university, to incorporating a company in India, then to coming all the way over to Poland and now having 55 people. [00:05:49] Lindsey Dinneen: Holy cow. That's an amazing story. Thank you for sharing about that. So, okay, so, so you started off with this curiosity, like, "Hey, let's see what we could do with this printer and, and how we can make it work for people." And I love that your initial pull with it was to actually provide something that does help people. So that's obviously a core value, something that you hold very dear. So can you speak a little bit more, did you have sort of any personal experience or within your family or what led you to say, "You know what, hey, I've got this really cool tool at my disposal. Let me start using it by actually doing something that helps others." [00:06:27] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, the honest answer, I would love to say I had some personal experience, but the honest answer is no, not, not really. I don't have one of those stories where I can tell you that, like I met an amputee 15 years ago, 20 years ago, and have had that motivation for that time. It was just pure technical curiosity to begin with. But of course, as we started building basic devices and giving it out to people and seeing the response of what a very simple, you know, $50 thing can do for a person who's missing a limb in an impoverished family in a village in India, that's a very powerful thing. So at that point, we realized that we started getting more and more close to upper limb amputation as a field, as a clinical specialty within itself. Of course, both me and my co-founder coming from medical school growing up in family of medicals, we've always had it in our heart to work in the clinical side of things. We've always liked working around, helping people get healthier and better. But amputation specifically was an area that we were very lucky that we found as an area of interest that developed within the both of us. [00:07:31] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, of course. Okay, so, so you started printing these limbs, and then you realized, "Oh my goodness, there's such a need for this. There's so much opportunity here to really help people." So, so tell me a little bit about the evolution over time of how you have made it better and better, more technologically advanced, more ergonomic, all the things that go into that. Can you speak a little bit to that learning curve and process? [00:07:56] Dhruv Agrawal: Mm-hmm. Yeah, it was a very long learning curve because not only did, me and my co-founder had zero background in business. We were 18-year-old, 19-year-old kids, right? We were just teenagers and we really had no idea what we wanted to do. And not only that, we also were not engineers, so we didn't have any engineering experience or expertise either. So everything that we did in the very beginning, at least, was self-taught. I just knew I had an inclination towards electronics and programming. My co-founder was much more towards mechanical CAD design and things like that. So we started learning these courses for free on edX and Coursera and all these, you know, MOOC platforms. And that's how we built up the very first prototype of the product by getting some small grants here and there in India. Of course, the situation is very different right now. We have R&D team of 30 people, very experienced, a few PhDs here and there. So I don't really design anymore in my day-to-day life, but that's how we started. And same was the side of the journey of coming from India to Poland. Again, that was not something that was planned at all. We had no experience in business. We had no experience in raising funding or raising money and things like that. We just learned on the go, applied to over a hundred different programs 'cause most of the investors said no to us back then in 2018 to funding 'cause why would they say yes? And we looked at like, "Okay, can we get some grants and things like that?" Applied to over a hundred programs. Luckily got selected in this program in Poland, which was like a $50,000 program back in 2018 and decided, "Yeah, let's try that place out." And came to Poland. I literally came with a backpack with stuff for two months 'cause there was a plan, come for the grant, stay for two months, go back to my family in India, and it's been seven years since then. [00:09:44] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh, there you go. Oh my goodness. That's great. So Poland, and you get along it sounds like just fine. Excellent. Excellent. Okay, so, I really appreciate you sharing about, especially, you were both so young and but so eager. It sounds like just, "Yes, let's learn, let's develop the skills that we need to along the way." I would imagine though, coming into it, perhaps that young and not having as much business experience, or, or any really in, in the past, I-- something that I really admired when I was kind of looking through your LinkedIn profile was when you post, a lot of times you share stories about areas that, that may be considered I, I guess mistakes or stumbling blocks or things that, that you've overcome on your path. And I would love if you would share maybe just a couple of things that come to mind, as an early founder, because your story is amazing and unique, but there are lots of other founders too who find themselves in similar situations where they're like, "Whoof, I've got this great idea. I know what I want, but here's maybe what I should look out for to avoid." could you share a little bit about that? [00:10:49] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, the first thing is mistakes are unavoidable, right? it doesn't matter whether you're coming from a background of a medical school dropout, or if you have 10, 15, 20 years of corporate experience and things like that. 'Cause I do find myself thinking a lot about, you know, wouldn't it have been better if I would've graduated and then did a MBA and then started a company? Yes, it might have been better, but the things that I deal with in my day-to-day life in the startup, I don't think this is taught anywhere. So the first and foremost thing, which is of importance, is that mistakes are unavoidable. It's okay to make mistakes. The biggest learning that I have is mistakes are unavoidable, but it's up to you to be decisive enough to pivot as quickly as possible. So don't look back at the mistakes that we have made, because one of the worst things that we have done in this company, or where we have failed the most, or where we have seen that like, "Ah, this is where we could have done things better," are not about making a wrong decision. They were just about being indecisive and being in a dilemma for a long, long time. It would've been far better if we would've made certain decisions quickly, gotten feedback and quickly pivoted, instead of just being in a dilemma and trying to balance two sides for a long time period. An example of that would be when we launched the first version of our product into the market, we realized that we had made some errors from the point of view of what should be the feature set in this product. And so, for example, the product was available only in a medium size hand in terms of the dimensions, but majority of the market is for a small size hand. So at that point we couldn't really just miniaturize things because there's a physical limitation. So at that point we had to make a decision of do we scrap this thing completely and build a new hand from scratch that starts with a small hand and then has a medium sized option as a grow up? Or do we continue to work on the medium sized hand, and then launch a small sized hand separately? Finally, we decided to do the second option. But looking back again, I, I don't think it would've been better or worse either way. I think both of these options are fair. It's just the fact that we spent over nine months going back and forth between, "Okay, let's continue putting our efforts in energy into the medium sized that we have right now" versus, "Okay, this month we are now suddenly feeling, ah, that's not gonna work out. Let's start building the second version." So that dilemma of indecision is probably the worst thing that you can do. Just make a decision, own up to it, move on. If it works out, great, if it not, if it doesn't work out, you're gonna have learnings and you'll be stronger at the end of the day. So that's, I would be an I would say would be an example of one of the key errors that we made. [00:13:23] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Well, thank you for being willing to share that, and that's such valuable advice and feedback. And so, as you recognize this and go, "Okay, so that didn't work as planned, or in the way that I would prefer," what did you end up deciding? How do you go now, moving forward, when you are in a position of "I have a major decision to make. I feel like both options have value and merit." How do you end up deciding, "Okay, I I'm not gonna leave this just in this hazy middle ground, I'm gonna make a decision." How do you go about that now differently? [00:13:54] Dhruv Agrawal: I think the first and foremost thing that entrepreneurs, or anybody who wants to build a new product, or anybody who just wants to build something new, is be very, very, very honest with yourself about, "Am I solving a real problem?" As founders, as creators, as developers, it is so easy to go into that mindset of you find a problem that you can relate to or you somehow think that this is a real problem. It doesn't matter what feedback you're going to get. You're going to convert that feedback, or create a narrative or story from that feedback, that is going to align with the impression that you have built in your own head about what the real problem is. So one thing that we really do right now is just focus on problem market fit at the very early stages of launching a new software, building a new product, building the next version of the hand, or whatever else we do is really try to question, "Are we solving a real problem?" And in a completely unbiased manner, "Do people agree with me that I am solving a real problem?" So that's what I would say would be a primary thing that we do differently right now. Of course at this point, we start getting users involved much earlier into our development process. That is something that we did not do in the past, and hence the surprise that we got at that point. So we start involving users, different stakeholders, and things like that much earlier, but at the same time, I would say that it's not to say that I would penalize myself for the historical decisions that I took. We did the best that we could potentially with the resources that were available at that point. Now we have much more resources so we can do all these things. So don't feel pressured to do everything on day one. You know, start with something, move forward and build that maturity as you grow. [00:15:38] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh, I love that. That's excellent advice. Thank you for sharing. Yeah, so you know that's a great segue and I love the fact that you were talking about the end user and the importance. And it's so funny because of course, ultimately your goal is to help these end users and improve their quality of life and whatnot. But to your point, it does get easy to get so bogged down in the details of what you're creating and innovating that perhaps you forget sort of the bigger picture at times. So, speaking of these end users, can you share any stories that might stand out to you as really reinforcing to you that, "Hey, gosh, I am in the right industry, doing the right thing at the right time." [00:16:17] Dhruv Agrawal: Yeah, no, absolutely. So we have had many phenomenal end users that have reiterated our belief in the product that we are building, the problems that we are solving, the company, and the organization that we are building as a whole. I mean, generally speaking, patients change their devices every three to five years, and that's really our entry point of getting a device into the hands of the patients. But even with those, a patient is using another prosthetic device, they start using ours, they will see a step change in the functionality, and that's always empowering. But the most interesting stories are where we have really seen patients who, for example, congenital amputees tried a prosthetic device 10 years ago, 15 years ago, and then made a decision to live their life without any prosthetic device. So got used to a life for 15, 20, 25 years of living a life without a prosthetic device, just with an amputated limb or a limb difference. And then, we come in with our product, they see it, they use it, and they are ready to adopt that again. And that's a much powerful validation for us because somebody who has used a device, looked at all the advancements over the last two decades, decided actively decided to not use any of those advancements, and looks at our product and says, "Ah, this really solves the problems that I was waiting for someone to solve for the last two decades." Like we had this situation with a very famous Polish guy, Marek Kamiński, who is the youngest Polish person to go to both poles, North Pole and the South Pole, and he's a bilateral amputee on legs and he has a unilateral amputation to one arm. He has not used a prosthetic device in, I think 15 or 20 years, something like that. So for a very long timeframe. He met with an ambassador of ours and was finally convinced after 15 long years to give another try. And we fitted him over three months ago and he's been performing phenomenally with the device and he's so happy with that. So those are the moments that really give us more confidence or give us a boost of confidence in the product that we are building and the company that we are building. [00:18:19] Lindsey Dinneen: That's incredible. Wow. What a story. Yeah, and I love hearing those kinds of stories and that just to reinforce, " Hey, you really are making a difference." And I'm sure that helps on the days that are a little bit harder, a little trickier, you know, it helps to have that to hold onto, so you know your impact goes so far beyond even the places that you've mentioned before. I was reading about how you've worked with the Open Dialogue Foundation and there's been some work in Ukraine, and I'm wondering if you could share a little bit about perhaps that collaboration, and or some of the other exciting collaborations you have going on with these amazing organizations all over the world. [00:18:54] Dhruv Agrawal: Absolutely. I mean, the work that we do in Ukraine is something which is very close to our heart and what you just mentioned a moment ago, it's exactly that type of work that keeps us going on the hardest of days. I have so many amazing stories from the patients who have been fitted with our device 'cause at this point in the last year or so, we have already fitted over a hundred patients with our bionic hands in Ukraine. We primarily work with Superhumans, which is NGO based out of Kyiv, a great place, really the mecca for prosthetics at this point, I would say. They're doing a phenomenal job of getting these patients in, rehabilitating them, fitting them with our device and then training them on how to use the device. In fact, even supporting them in the post rehabilitation, acquainting them to back to the real world as well. And we send teams of doctors from the US, from Poland, to Ukraine to actually fit these devices to patients. And we have had a lot of success stories come out of it. We have people who have amputations, even at the level of shoulder who are amputated all the way up to the shoulder or four quarter amputation, and they are successfully able to live a independent life with our device. I think the best story that I've had, or the part that really made me tear up, was when one of the soldiers got fitted with our device and his really, really big wish was to be able to do the first, to dance with his wife, with both hands. And I got to see that and it was, it was the most amazing feeling ever. [00:20:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Oh my goodness. Yes. I don't know how you couldn't just have the waterfall start with that kind of story. That's incredible. Thank you for sharing about that. So, as you look toward the company's future and your own, what are you excited about moving forward? [00:20:34] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, we are currently in the process of getting a new version of our hand in the market, which has all the learnings of the last four years or so. So we are definitely really excited about that. You have to keep in mind when we launched the first product, we didn't even have enough money to-- because prosthetics are expensive-- so we didn't really have had enough money to buy our competitor devices, or the devices from the past to look around to see, touch, feel, how they are built. Everything that we built was purely out of our imagination and based on what we could find on the internet. And, you know, go visit a doctor who fits these devices, have that 10, 15 minutes to look around that device, and so on and so on. I mean, four years later, now we have the experience of fitting close to seven, 800 patients with our device. All that feedback that has gone into the next version product that we are gonna be building. So very excited about that. We continue to develop the software platform, so we are not just a company that is focused on providing a device to the patient, but we provide an entire software platform that's like a digital twin for the patient. So it supports the patients throughout their end-to-end journey. Because it's not just about giving a device to the patient, but it's all about can we improve their quality of life? Can the patient pick up a glass of water? Can he tie his shoelaces? Can he water a plant? Can he do the activities that he really wants to do? And from that perspective, the software platform that we continue to build focuses on things like adherence, occupational therapy, physical therapy, monitoring of the usage of the device. Because the thing in prosthetics industry is, the day you give the device to the patient is not the day you have won the battle. That's the day the battle actually begins, 'cause now it's all about making sure that you deliver on the promise of helping him get better quality of life. [00:22:20] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure that's an exciting challenge, but it's a continually evolving challenge too. And there's probably variations, I would imagine, on people embracing the technology a little bit differently and how you handle all that. Yeah. Excellent. Well that is a very exciting future and it's so much fun to hear about, and you know, you've had a great career so far. I'm sure it's wildly different than what you may have imagined as a kid. But what a cool gift that you're bringing to the world. You've been recognized quite a bit. You're 30 under 30 for Europe, and you've been involved in lots of different cool organizations. You've been a TEDx speaker. What are some of those moments like, have they been surreal? Is it just like, "Oh, thank you." Just confirmation that, hey, you are on the right tracker. What are those kinds of moments like for you? [00:23:08] Dhruv Agrawal: I mean, definitely the first round of funding that we raised in Poland was was a huge check mark for us, because it's that moment at which you realize, "Ah, somebody wants to give me money and somebody wants to give me a quarter of a million dollars." I've never seen that much money together on a single bank account or in any way, shape or form, right? I come from a normal middle class family. We don't have that. So, that was definitely the first micro checkpoint, let's say. I mean, both the things that you mentioned, the TEDx thing, the Forbes 30 Under 30 thing, coming from a background in India where these things are really important, although they're not so important for me as a person, but they're much more important for some reason to my parents and to society. It is a different place. We put a lot of emphasis on these types of things. So from six, seven years ago, looking at these lists coming out or looking at, "Oh, this cool guy spoke on a TEDx talk, sending him an email about, 'Do you want to be an advisor in my company? I'll give you 5% shares,'" and so on and so on, to actually doing those things by yourself, that's definitely pretty well as well. But again, at the end of the day, there is nothing better than seeing a new patient get fitted with the hand, seeing the reaction of their family members. They have a daughter, they have a son who they hold their hand for the first time. They hug their wife. I mean, just, just being around amputees and patients who use your device, something that you built and that helps them get better at their daily life, that's, I would say, the most rewarding thing ever. [00:24:39] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, of course. That's, that's wonderful. Yeah. So, oh my goodness, this is so great and very inspirational, but pivoting the conversation a little bit just for fun. Imagine that you were to be offered a million dollars-- speaking of those wonderful sums of money-- to teach a masterclass on anything you want. It can be something within your industry, but doesn't have to be, what would you choose to teach? [00:25:03] Dhruv Agrawal: I have two topics in mind. One is I would probably teach a masterclass on pitching, especially for first time founders. I think that is something which I'm good at, and we have obviously raised a pretty decent amount of capital up 'till now. So that would be the one thing that I would say. So kind of a combination of pitching and starting a startup for the first time, especially in the field of hardware, medical devices, things like that. And the second thing that I would really like to talk about is just probably trying to put my thoughts together and making a masterclass on how to never give up, because I think that that's a very underrated quality. But that's a very important quality. There have been complex times in the history of our company where we have felt that like, "Ah, this might be it." But it's all about what you do in those moments and how you go beyond those. I think it's all about that. [00:25:47] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah, absolutely. And how do you wish to be remembered after you leave this world? [00:25:53] Dhruv Agrawal: Just as a positive change maker. I really would like all these patients that we are helping and giving these devices to. I, I just want to be a small part of their lives. Just as I was part of the life of the veteran who got married, I, I just wanna ha have those small moments club together amongst these different individuals that we are privileged to work with. [00:26:13] Lindsey Dinneen: Hmm. Yes, of course. Wonderful. And then final question, what is one thing that makes you smile every time you see or think about it? [00:26:22] Dhruv Agrawal: Oh, that's very simple. Patients getting fitted with our device. Today we see a patient getting fitted with our device, and that smile on their face and things like that. And, you know, that's even much bigger, much more interesting in Ukraine because many times when you go to these hospitals, and when I go to these hospitals in Ukraine, you have to understand that these people have gone through a lot. These soldiers who are putting their body on the line for their country. There, of course, there's a certain sort of low morale that they have when they're amputated and when they're in these hospitals and things like that where they don't really think that there is ever a possibility for them to regain something back. And you go in there and you show them a bionic hand, and they're not sure if this thing works, and you put the electrodes on them and they open the hand or close it for the first time, and then you suddenly see those expressions change from like, "Ah, what has happened to me?" to, "Oh, what can I achieve?" That is also an amazing feeling. [00:27:16] Lindsey Dinneen: Yeah. Oh, I love that. What an amazing gift to be able to help somebody bridge that gap and witness it. How cool is that? Oh, well, I think this is incredible. I am so grateful for you and your co-founder for starting this company and just being able to give so many people hope and new life, really, just a new way of experiencing life. So thank you for all of the incredible work you're doing. I'm so excited to continue to follow your work, support your work, as I'm sure all of our listeners are as well. So, gosh, I just really appreciate you sharing all of your advice and stories and wisdom with us. So thanks again so much for being here. [00:27:55] Dhruv Agrawal: Of course, Lindsey, thank so much for having me. [00:27:56] Lindsey Dinneen: Of course, of course. And we are honored to be making a donation on your behalf as a thank you for your time today to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which is dedicated to preventing animal cruelty in the United States. We really appreciate you choosing that organization to support and thank you just again, so very much for your time here today. I just wish you continued success as you work to change lives for a better world. And thank you also so much to our listeners, and if you're feeling as inspired as I am right now, I'd love it if you share this episode with a colleague or two and we'll catch you next time. [00:28:43] Ben Trombold: The Leading Difference is brought to you by Velentium. Velentium is a full-service CDMO with 100% in-house capability to design, develop, and manufacture medical devices from class two wearables to class three active implantable medical devices. Velentium specializes in active implantables, leads, programmers, and accessories across a wide range of indications, such as neuromodulation, deep brain stimulation, cardiac management, and diabetes management. Velentium's core competencies include electrical, firmware, and mechanical design, mobile apps, embedded cybersecurity, human factors and usability, automated test systems, systems engineering, and contract manufacturing. Velentium works with clients worldwide, from startups seeking funding to established Fortune 100 companies. Visit velentium.com to explore your next step in medical device development.

Chad discusses the changing world of AgeTech with Leanne Clark-Shirley, President and CEO of the American Society on Aging (https://asaging.org/), as they break down how age really has just become a number. They discuss the growing irrelevancy of the “AgeTech” label and how it's use case is shifting to benefit everyone, how generational boundaries mean less when it comes to tech knowledge, and the unrealised opportunities aging can offer to us all. — You can connect with Leanne (https://www.linkedin.com/in/lclarkshirley/) to stay up to date with her work or check out the various resources (https://generations.asaging.org/) the ASA (https://asaging.org/) has to offer. Your host for this episode has been Chad Pytel. You can find Chad all over social media as @cpytel, or over on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/cpytel/). If you would like to support the show, head over to our GitHub page (https://github.com/sponsors/thoughtbot), or check out our website (https://podcast.thoughtbot.com). Got a question or comment about the show? Why not write to our hosts: hosts@giantrobots.fm This has been a thoughtbot (https://thoughtbot.com/) podcast. Stay up to date by following us on social media - LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/) - Mastodon (https://thoughtbot.social/@thoughtbot) - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/thoughtbotvideo) - Bluesky (https://bsky.app/profile/thoughtbot.com) © 2025 thoughtbot, inc.

Send us a textThe newly released 2025 Ohio Infrastructure Report Card delivers a sobering assessment of the systems we rely on daily but rarely think about. Ohio has made modest improvements since the last American Society of Civil Engineers' report in 2021, yet vulnerabilities persist.Sewer District employees (and ASCE members) Derek Vogel and Lita Laven walk us through the grades and explain how federal infrastructure funding has breathed new life into long-neglected systems, particularly benefiting water, transit, and bridge projects across the state. However, the looming expiration of this funding in 2027 threatens to erase these hard-won gains. And with Ohio's stormwater infrastructure approaching the end of its designed lifespan, we're facing a perfect storm of aging systems and increasingly intense rainfall events. Check out the complete 2025 Infrastructure Report Card to see how your state's vital systems measure up.

Lindsey M. Locks, ScD, MPH is an Assistant Professor in the Departments of Health Sciences (Sargent College) and Global Health (School of Public Health) at Boston University. She directs the Global Nutrition Lab and currently serves as Chair of the Global Nutrition Council, one of two scientific councils within the American Society for Nutrition. Dr. Locks is a nutritional epidemiologist who collaborates to co-design and evaluate high-impact interventions aimed at improving the nutrition of children and families living in high-poverty settings, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.

As a past President and 10-year Board Member of the American Society of Cost Segregation Professionals, Gian has helped shape the standards of the industry and is one of the few experts who has testified before the IRS on cost segregation matters. His work has been published over 20 times in top journals like AICPA's Tax Advisor and BNA Bloomberg, and he's been a featured speaker to thousands of CPAs and real estate investors across the country. Gian also created the first-ever online cost segregation platform, allowing real estate owners to access advanced tax strategies without needing a third-party specialist. Since 1999, his firm KBKG has helped clients save over $10 billion in taxes—unlocking capital so they can reinvest and scale.Gian also created the first-ever online cost segregation platform, allowing real estate owners to access advanced tax strategies without needing a third-party specialist. Since 1999, his firm KBKG has helped clients save over $10 billion in taxes—unlocking capital so they can reinvest and scale.CONTACT DETAILSCompany: KBKG  Website: https://www.kbkg.com/ and https://www.kbkg.com/residential-costsegregatorSocial Media Address  LinkedIN - https://www.linkedin.com/in/costsegregationservices/Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/KBKGTaxIncentives/Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/gianpazzia/ X - https://x.com/KBKG  Gift: For anyone interested in doing cost segregation, you can get a discount using this code for your listeners. - go to www.costsegregation.com and use the JUSTMINDING2025 that is in all caps. you will get a 10% discount for first time users.Remember to SUBSCRIBE so you don't miss "Information That You Can Use." Share Just Minding My Business with your family, friends, and colleagues. Engage with us by leaving a review or comment. https://g.page/r/CVKSq-IsFaY9EBM/review Your support keeps this podcast going and growing.Visit Just Minding My Business Media™ LLC at https://jmmbmediallc.com/ to learn how we can help you get more visibility on your products and services.

Send us a textDr. Reynold A. Panettieri, Jr, MD ( https://ritms.rutgers.edu/faculty/reynold-panettieri/ ) is the inaugural Director of the Institute for Translational Medicine and Science, and Vice Chancellor for Translational Medicine and Science, at Rutgers University, and previously served as the Director of the Airways Biology Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Panettieri's interests include the cellular and molecular mechanisms that regulate airway smooth muscle cell growth and the immunobiology of airway smooth muscle, which lead to the irreversible airflow obstruction and airway remodeling seen in patients with chronic severe asthma. Dr. Panettieri's lab also focuses on cytosolic signaling pathways that mediate gene expression and alter myocyte growth.Dr. Panettieri also served as the Deputy Director of the Center of Excellence in Environmental Toxicology at the University of Pennsylvania. He directed the human exposure chamber that defines the molecular mechanisms regulating ozone- and particulate matter-induced airway hyperresponsiveness.In addition to his research and clinical interests, Dr. Panettieri served as chairperson of the NIH Lung Cellular, Molecular, and Immunobiology Study Section, is a member of the NIH Distinguished Editorial Panel, and is a member of the American Society for Clinical Investigation and Association of American Physicians.Dr. Panettieri has an M.D. from University of Pennsylvania, and completed hisResidency and Fellowship at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.Important Episode Links - As-Needed Albuterol–Budesonide in Mild AsthmaPublished May 19, 2025New England Journal Of Medicine -https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2504544BATURA Study Press Release - https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2025/statistically-significant-clinically-meaningful-batura-phase-iii-trial-provide-evidence-airsupra-standard-care-as-needed-rescue-treatment-asthma.htmlAIRSUPRA (albuterol/budesonide) is a prescription medication used as a rescue inhaler for adults with asthma -https://www.airsupra.com/#ReynoldPanettieri #InstituteForTranslationalMedicineAndScience #RutgersUniversity #Asthma #COPD #ChronicObstructivePulmonaryDisease #AirwaysBiology #UniversityOfPennsylvania #Immunobiology #EnvironmentalHealth #Bronchiectasis #IdiopathicPulmonaryFibrosis #InterstitialLungDiseases #RescueInhalers #Albuterol #AIRSUPRA #Budesonide #Corticosteroid #BATURA #AstraZeneca #Exposome #RespiratoryDiseases #InflammatoryResponse   #ProgressPotentialAndPossibilities #IraPastor #Podcast #Podcaster #ViralPodcast #STEM #Innovation #Technology #Science #ResearchSupport the show

Lawfare Legal Fellow Mykhailo Soldatenko sits down with Oona Hathaway, Yale Law Professor and President-elect of the American Society of International Law, to discuss how the current world events are harming the norm prohibiting the use of force in international relations, why that's troubling, and what to do about it. They chat about the current U.S. administration's policies, recent strikes on Iran, and the implications for the norm from a potential negotiated settlement in the Russia-Ukraine war. You may want to look at the following pieces relevant to the discussion: “Might Unmakes Right: The Catastrophic Collapse of Norms Against the Use of Force,” by Oona A. Hathaway and Scott J. Shapiro“There's Still No Reason to Think the Kellogg-Briand Pact Accomplished Anything,” by Stephen M. Walt“Trump's Strikes on Iran Were Unlawful. Here's Why That Matters,” by Oona A. HathawayTo receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

@JeffreyTheGreek is joined by FotP Mark Schipper of @5thDownCFB. Mark provides both great insight into the Bruins fan base, the direction under Deshaun Foster, and also a great history lesson of the Pac10 & Big Ten! He also previews his upcoming BOOK on CFB rivalries, and how they're weaved into American Society! Take a Listen! #AskForAmador

Guest Bios:Brittanny Kreutzer started The Speaker Exchange Agency with a background in sales and a love for the speaking industry. She was given a taste of the speaking industry while interning in college for Nancy Lauterbach, a past speakers bureau owner. Upon graduation from college she began a successful career selling radio space and developing radio campaigns for CBS Radio in Kansas City; however, after a few years the excitement of the speaking industry drew her back in. After working at a speakers bureau for several years and becoming one of the top sales executives, she took a break to spend time with her newborn baby Madison. The love she has for this industry struck again and after only a short month's break, Brittanny combined forces with her past colleague and friend, Julie Homsey, to create The Speaker Exchange Agency, LLC. Jeff Bigelow  joined SpeakInc in 1995, became Partner in 1996, and with over seventeen years of experience in the industry, still loves what he does. Jeff is a graduate of California State University of Northridge with a B.A. in Radio, Television, Film. At SpeakInc he works both in the corporate market, as well as the association market and is actively involved in the American Society of Association Executives (ASAE). Outside of his time in the office, Jeff can be found relaxing at the nearest beach or swinging the clubs on one of Southern California's amazing golf courses. What brings him the most joy, of course, is spending time with his wife, Denise, and daughter, Faith.Takeaways:There are a lot more speakers now, requiring more time to review information.The buying cycle for clients has dramatically shortened.Clients are increasingly using AI tools like ChatGPT to find speakers.Understanding the psychology of the audience is crucial for speaker selection.Pre-booking calls have become more common and important.Speakers should provide valuable information, not just check-ins.Top speakers maintain strong communication and relationships with agents.Speaker fees have increased, but value should not be tied solely to fees.AI is a growing topic of interest in the speaking industry.The human element in the speaking industry remains irreplaceable.Chapters:00:00 - The Evolution of the Speaking Industry03:01 - Shifts in Client Expectations05:57 - Understanding the Buying Process09:02 - The Role of Tone and Style in Speaker Selection12:01 - The Importance of Pre-Booking Calls15:12 - Staying Top of Mind in a Crowded Market19:01 - Understanding Speaker Engagement and Connection22:19 - The Top 5% of Speakers: What Sets Them Apart25:17 - Navigating Speaker Fees in a Changing Economy30:15 - The Impact of AI on the Speaking Industry34:00 - The Future of the Speaking Industry: Human Element vs. Technology35:35 - What We Love and Hate About the Speaking IndustryResourcesLearn more about Brittanny Kreutzer:WebsiteLinkedInLearn more about Jeff Bigelow:WebsiteLinkedInLearn more about Josh Linkner:WebsiteYouTubeLinkedInInstagramXFacebookABOUT MIC DROP:Hear from the world's top thought leaders and experts, sharing tipping point moments, strategies, and approaches that led to their speaking career success. Throughout each episode, host Josh Linkner, #1 Innovation keynote speaker in the world, deconstructs guests' Mic Drop moments and provides tactical tools and takeaways that can be applied to any speaking business, no matter its starting point. You'll enjoy hearing from some of the top keynote speakers in the industry including: Ryan Estis, Alison Levine, Peter Sheahan, Seth Mattison, Cassandra Worthy, and many more. Mic Drop is powered by ImpactEleven.Learn more at: MicDropPodcast.comABOUT THE HOST:Josh Linkner — a New York Times bestselling author — is a rare blend of business, art, and science.On the business front, he's been the founder and CEO of five tech companies, which created over 10,000 jobs and sold for a combined value of over $200 million. He's the co-founder and Managing Partner of Muditā (moo-DEE-tah) Venture Partners - an early-stage venture capital firm investing in groundbreaking technologies. Over the last 30 years, he's helped over 100 startups launch and scale, creating over $1 billion in investor returns. He's twice been named the EY Entrepreneur of The Year and is the recipient of the United States Presidential Champion of Change Award.While proud of his business success, his roots are in the dangerous world of jazz music. Josh has been playing guitar in smoky jazz clubs for 40 years, studied at the prestigious Berklee College of Music, and has performed over 1000 concerts around the world. His experiences in both business and music led him to become one of the world's foremost experts on innovation. Josh is the co-founder and Chairman of Platypus Labs, a global research, training, and consulting firm. Today, he's on a mission to help leaders Find A Way™ through creative problem-solving, inventive thinking, and ingenuity.Learn more about Josh: JoshLinkner.comSPONSORED BY AMPLIFY PUBLISHING GROUP:Partnering with CXOs, keynote speakers, change makers, and other visionary leaders, Amplify Publishing Group (APG) is a leader in the hybrid publishing space with more than twenty years of experience acquiring, producing, marketing, and distributing books. Passionate about ideas and voices that need to be heard, they're known for launching books that start engaging and timely conversations. At each turn, they have been at the forefront of innovation and have spearheaded a critical disruption of the publishing industry.Learn more at: amplifypublishinggroup.comPOWERED BY IMPACTELEVEN:ImpactEleven is a speaker training, development and accelerator Community working tirelessly to develop and serve thousands of voices with infinite influence to transform lives and the world for the better.Learn more at: impacteleven.com

Was it bishops first, or priests?Who came first: the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, or Evangelicals?Where is there still unity?Support this show!! : https://www.bibspeak.com/#donateGrab your free gift: the top 10 most misunderstood Biblical verses: https://info.bibspeak.com/10-verses-clarifiedJoin the newsletter (I only send 2 emails a week): https://www.bibspeak.com/#newsletterShop Dwell L'abel 15% off using the discount code BIBSPEAK15 https://go.dwell-label.com/bibspeakDownload Logos Bible Software for your own personal study: http://logos.com/biblicallyspeakingSign up for Riverside: https://www.riverside.fm/?utm_campaig...Use Manychat to automate a quick DM! It's great for sending links fast.https://manychat.partnerlinks.io/nd14879vojabStan.Store—way better than Linktree! It lets me share links, grow my email list, and host all my podcast stuff in one place.https://join.stan.store/biblicallyspeakingSupport this show!! : https://www.bibspeak.com/#donate John D. Woodbridge, PhD (born 1941) is an American church historian, professor, editor, and composer. He is Research Professor of Church History and Christian Thought at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois.He joined the faculty of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in the department of church history in 1970 and became full professor in 1974. He was Visiting Professor of History at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois from 1989–1995. From 1997 to 1999 he served as a senior editor at Christianity Today. Among the books which he has either authored or edited, four have won a Gold Medallion Book Award.[2] He appeared on The John Ankerberg Show in the 1980s. He is a member of the American Catholic Historical Association and the American Society of Church History.[3] In 2017, he was awarded an honorary Doctor of Theology from Colorado Christian University.He has been a participant in Evangelicals and Catholics Together discussions for the last thirty years. He is presently writing a book on the history of American Evangelicalism.He did not become a believing Christian until his mid-twenties as a graduate student at the University of Toulouse in France. Recommended reading from Dr. Woodbridge:

Podcast del programa Imagen Empresarial transmitido originalmente el 04 de agosto del 2025. Conduce Rodrigo Pacheco. Los entrevistados de hoy: Brian Rodriguez Ontiveros, analista Bursátil en Monex Tema: ¿Cómo resultó la temporada de reportes corporativos al 2T25 en México? Reportes trimestrales de los “7 magníficos”. Agenda económica más relevante de la próxima semana. Larry Rubin, presidente de la American Society of México Tema: Relación México y EU

When it comes to weight loss, the scale isn't the only thing that changes—your reflection and self-image often transform too. In this episode, I talk about a topic gaining attention in the media and social circles: "Ozempic face" and the emotional and physical effects of rapid weight loss, especially for those using GLP-1 medications like Wegovy, Zepbound, or Ozempic. I share a story about a friend who hesitated to increase her dosage due to concerns about skin changes, which opened the door to a larger discussion on body image during weight loss. I explain that these facial and skin changes—such as sagging, wrinkles, or looking more tired—aren't exclusive to medication use but are common with any significant weight loss, especially as we age.  Furthermore, I walk through ways to manage these concerns, like slowing down weight loss, prioritizing resistance training and protein, staying hydrated, considering aesthetic treatments, and most importantly, shifting focus from appearance to overall health. I emphasize the importance of support, tuning out unsolicited comments, and curating a healthier social media feed.  If you're navigating weight loss and struggling with body image changes like "Ozempic face," listen to this empowering episode for real talk, expert tips, and compassionate support on your journey.   Episode Highlights: What “Ozempic face” really means and why it happens Emotional impact of rapid weight loss and changing appearance How to manage body image concerns during weight loss Practical tips: strength training, hydration, and pacing weight loss Cosmetic treatment options and when to consider them The role of social media in shaping unrealistic expectations Reframing the focus from appearance to overall health and wellness Connect with Dr. Alicia Shelly: Website | drshellymd.com Facebook | www.facebook.com/drshellymd Instagram | @drshellymd Linked In | www.linkedin.com/in/drshellymd Twitter | @drshellymd About Dr. Alicia Shelly Dr. Alicia Shelly was raised in Atlanta, GA. She received her Doctorate of Medicine from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, OH.  Dr. Shelly has been practicing Primary Care and Obesity medicine since 2014.  In 2017, she became a Diplomat of the American Board of Obesity Medicine. She is the lead physician at the Wellstar Medical Center Douglasville. She started a weekly podcast & Youtube channel entitled Back on Track: Achieving Healthy Weight loss,  where she discusses how to get on track and stay on track with your weight loss journey. She has spoken for numerous local and national organizations, including the Obesity Medicine Association, and the Georgia Chapter of the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons. She has been featured on CNN, Fox 5 News, Bruce St. James Radio show, Upscale magazine, and Shape.com. She was named an honoree of the 2021 Atlanta Business Chronicle's 40 under 40 award. She also is a collaborating author for the, “Made for More: Physician Entrepreneurs who Live Life and Practice Medicine on their own terms''.   Resources: FREE! Discover the 5 Reasons Your Weight-Loss Journey Has Gotten Derailed (And How To Get Back On Track!)

Send us a textWith an ever-growing population, the world has seen a steady rise in the demand for energy.  There is a renewed interest in nuclear power due to its lower carbon footprint when compared to other technologies.In this episode we sit down with Esam Hussein to talk about nuclear engineering.  Esam is a retired nuclear engineer and professor who spent time working in both industry and academia.  During his career, Esam published numerous scientific papers and industrial reports.  He authored three books on radiating science and applications and holds six patents.  He recently finished a monograph on advanced fission reactors, to be published by the American Society for Mechanical Engineering.  In this conversation, Esam discusses his experience as a nuclear engineer and he shares his thoughts on the future for nuclear power.  He also offers advice for young people thinking about pursuing a university education.

Hosted by IPAA National President Andrew Metcalfe, AO FIPAA, this episode of Work with Purpose explores how the public sector might manage an increasingly complex global public sector environment, while maintaining a spirit of humility and empathy in serving the community.Public administration on a global scale is facing challenges from growing hostility influenced by misinformation and political rhetoric, which is impacting public servants' morale and the perception of government institutions.In this discussion, Crawford School of Public Policy Director Janine O'Flynn reflects on her address to the 2025 American Society of Public Administration Conference which highlighted these issues alongside efforts to build a positive narrative for public service and the integration of technology like AI in governance.This podcast delves into the long-running global debate on the value of public service – a conversation that continues to evolve across different national contexts.Key tips: Lead with empathy – recognise the emotional toll of uncertainty and trauma on public sector employees. Whether you're a leader or a colleague, approach conversations and decisions with compassion and understanding.Champion positivity – actively highlight the value and impact of public sector work. Sharing success stories and meaningful contributions helps counteract public hostility and rebuild trust.Engage thoughtfully with AI – understand that trust in artificial intelligence depends on more than just technology; it requires ethical oversight, sound judgement, and high-quality data. Advocate for systems that challenge, rather than replicate, existing biases.Show notes:Utrecht University project on Successful Public Governance | Utrecht University, NetherlandsSpeech to the American Society for Public Administration | Crawford School of Public PolicyPathways to Positive Public Administration: An International Perspective | Open source book via Elgar OnlineHas the time arrived for Positive Public Administration | The MandarinAutomated Assistance in Administrative Decision Making [2004] | Administrative Review Council Reports2025 American Society of Public Administration Conference | ASPANet Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Matters Microbial #102: Teaching Through the Issues with Microbes! July 31, 2025 Today, Dr. Davida Smyth, Professor of Biology and Deputy Director of the National Center for Science and Civic Engagement at Texas A&M University-San Antonio joins the #QualityQuorum to discuss her impressive work using microbiology to engage students at the intersection of cutting edge research and current events. #MicrobialLiteracy! Host: Mark O. Martin Guest: Davida Smyth Subscribe: Apple Podcasts, Spotify Become a patron of Matters Microbial! Links for this episode The American Society for Microbiology Carski Award website. The American Society for Microbiology Distinguished Lecturer website. The concept of “classroom agreements.” The 10:1 (microbial cells to human cells) story, and a related article. The 3-2-1 approach to learning in the classroom. Dr. Smyth's “How Toilets Changed the World” class. The American Society for Microbiology Curriculum Guidelines. The National Science Foundation's “Vision and Change” website describing improvements in biology education. The American Society for Microbiology profile for Dr. Smyth. A video seminar by Dr. Smyth describing open science in undergraduate education. The website for the National Center for Science and Civic Engagement. Dr. Smyth's faculty website. Dr. Smyth's superb research website. Intro music is by Reber Clark Send your questions and comments to mattersmicrobial@gmail.com

This episode of Let's Talk Micro features Dr. Andrea Prinzi, a clinical microbiologist and frequent contributor to the American Society for Microbiology. Andrea joins the podcast to discuss a critical topic in clinical microbiology: antimicrobial susceptibility testing and breakpoints. Are labs using outdated breakpoints—and what does that mean for patient care? How are breakpoints determined and updated? Dr. Prinzi breaks it all down and shares insights from her article on the subject. Tune in to learn why staying current on breakpoints matters and what steps labs can take to improve antimicrobial stewardship. This episode was originally published on May 5th, 2022.   Check out the website: https://www.letstalkmicro.com/ Link to articles: https://asm.org/Articles/2022/February/Updating-Breakpoints-in-Antimicrobial-Susceptibili https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00106-25   Questions? Feedback? Send those to letstalkmicro@outlook.com Want to support the podcast? Here's how: Venmo: https://venmo.com/u/letstalkmicro Buy me a Ko-fi: https://ko-fi.com/letstalkmicro  

En entrevista para MVS Noticias con Manuel López San Martín, el analista Gabriel Guerra Castellanos y Larry Rubin, presidente de American Society of Mexico, participaron en una mesa de análisis para hablar de la relación México-EU ante la posible imposición de aranceles y las negociaciones del T-MEC programadas para 2026. Ambos coincidieron en que el país enfrenta un escenario complejo, en el que la seguridad, la migración y el comercio están estrechamente interrelacionados.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Cleveland is repositioning its future as a dual waterfront city. Take a deep dive (pun intended!) as we reflect on the past, present, and future visions to transform our downtown into "Coastland".rnrnFor over a year, the local chapters of the American Institute of Architects, American Planning Association, American Society of Landscape Architects, and the Urban Land Institute (AIA, APA, ASLA and ULI) have collaborated on a topic of mutual interest and significance: our waterfronts and their connections to downtown. In summer 2025, multi-disciplinary professionals from these organizations hosted "From Cleveland to Coastland" featuring a 'design your own adventure' exploration of Cleveland's downtown, lakefront, and riverfront developments.rnrnPanelists from the Urban Land Institute, Greater Cleveland Partnership, and RDL Architects will discuss the results of the adventurers' collective experiences and expertise, offer insights on placemaking, architecture, and real estate development, and share impactful ways to transform connectivity between the shores and core.rnPanelists: Melanie Kortyka, Executive Director, Urban Land Institute Cleveland; Allison Lukacsy-Love, Managing Director, Major Projects, Greater Cleveland Partnership; Gregory Soltis, AICP, Senior Designer, RDL Architects; and moderated by Zaria Johnson, Reporter/Producer, Ideastream Public Media

WIU ag student Logan Kearns discusses his experience at the American Society of Animal Science meeting in Florida earlier this summer. Mark Litteken details his six-acre research plot at his Clinton County Farm. Illinois Farm Bureau Associate Director of Food Systems Development Raghela Scavuzzo with a final push for speakers for next January's Everything Local Conference in Springfield.  

“Manager and leader”? What's the difference. During my conversation this time with Scott Hanton, our guest, we will discuss this very point along with many other fascinating and interesting subjects. As Scott tells us at the beginning of this episode he grew up asking “why” about most anything you can think of. He always was a “why” asker. As he tells it, unlike many children who grow out of the phase of asking “why” he did not. He still asks “why” to this very day.   At the age of 13 Scott decided that he wanted to be a chemist. He tells us how this decision came about and why he has always stayed with it. Scott received his bachelor's degree in Chemistry from Michigan State and his PHD from the University of Wisconsin. Again, why he changed schools for his PHD work is an interesting story. As you will see, Scott tells stories in a unique and quite articulate way.   After his university days were over Scott went to work, yes as a chemist. He tells us about this and how after 20 years with one company how and why he moved to another company and somewhat out of constant lab work into some of the management, business and leadership side of a second company. He stayed there for ten years and was laid off during the pandemic. Scott then found employment as the editorial director of Lab Management Magazine where he got to bring his love of teaching to the forefront of his work.   My hour with Scott gives us all many insights into management, leadership and how to combine the two to create a strong teaming environment. I believe you will find Scott's thoughts extremely poignant and helpful in everything that you do.     About the Guest:   Scott Hanton is the Editorial Director of Lab Manager. He spent 30 years as a research chemist, lab manager, and business leader at Air Products and Intertek. Scott thrives on the challenges of problem-solving. He enjoys research, investigation, and collaboration. Scott is a people-centric, servant leader. He is motivated by developing environments where people can grow and succeed, and crafting roles for people that take advantage of their strengths.   Scott earned a BS in chemistry from Michigan State University and a PhD in physical chemistry from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is an active member of the American Chemical Society (ACS), the American Society of Mass Spectrometry (ASMS), and the Association of Lab Managers (ALMA). As a scientist Scott values curiosity, innovation, progress, and delivery of results. Scott has always been motivated by questions beginning with why. Studying physical chemistry in graduate school offered the opportunity to hone answers to these questions. As a professional scientist, Scott worked in analytical chemistry specializing in MALDI mass spectrometry and polymer characterization.   At Scott married his high school sweetheart, and they have one son. Scott is motivated by excellence, happiness, and kindness. He most enjoys helping people and solving problems. Away from work, Scott enjoys working outside in the yard, playing strategy games, and participating in different discussion groups.   Scott values having a growth mindset and is a life-long learner. He strives to learn something new everyday and from everyone. One of the great parts of being a trained research scientist is that failure really isn't part of his vocabulary. He experiments and either experiences success or learns something new. He values both individual and organizational learning.   Scott's current role at Lab Manager encompasses three major responsibilities: ·      Writing articles and giving presentations to share his experience with lab managers. ·      Driving the creation and growth of the Lab Manager Academy (https://labmanageracademy.com/) that currently contains three certificate programs: lab management, lab safety management, and lab quality management. ·      Helping people through his knowledge of science, scientists, management, and leadership. He is very happy sharing the accumulated wisdom of his experiences as a researcher, lab supervisor, and lab manager. Each article posted on Lab Manager addresses a decision that a lab manager needs to make. Lab management is full of decision-making, so helping people make better, faster, more complete decisions is very satisfying. Ways to connect with Scott:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-hanton/   About the Host:   Michael Hingson is a New York Times best-selling author, international lecturer, and Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe. Michael, blind since birth, survived the 9/11 attacks with the help of his guide dog Roselle. This story is the subject of his best-selling book, Thunder Dog.   Michael gives over 100 presentations around the world each year speaking to influential groups such as Exxon Mobile, AT&T, Federal Express, Scripps College, Rutgers University, Children's Hospital, and the American Red Cross just to name a few. He is Ambassador for the National Braille Literacy Campaign for the National Federation of the Blind and also serves as Ambassador for the American Humane Association's 2012 Hero Dog Awards.   https://michaelhingson.com https://www.facebook.com/michael.hingson.author.speaker/ https://twitter.com/mhingson https://www.youtube.com/user/mhingson https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelhingson/   accessiBe Links https://accessibe.com/ https://www.youtube.com/c/accessiBe https://www.linkedin.com/company/accessibe/mycompany/ https://www.facebook.com/accessibe/       Thanks for listening!   Thanks so much for listening to our podcast! If you enjoyed this episode and think that others could benefit from listening, please share it using the social media buttons on this page. Do you have some feedback or questions about this episode? Leave a comment in the section below!   Subscribe to the podcast   If you would like to get automatic updates of new podcast episodes, you can subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher. You can subscribe in your favorite podcast app. You can also support our podcast through our tip jar https://tips.pinecast.com/jar/unstoppable-mindset .   Leave us an Apple Podcasts review   Ratings and reviews from our listeners are extremely valuable to us and greatly appreciated. They help our podcast rank higher on Apple Podcasts, which exposes our show to more awesome listeners like you. If you have a minute, please leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts.       Transcription Notes:   Michael Hingson ** 00:00 Access Cast and accessiBe Initiative presents Unstoppable Mindset. The podcast where inclusion, diversity and the unexpected meet. Hi, I'm Michael Hingson, Chief Vision Officer for accessiBe and the author of the number one New York Times bestselling book, Thunder dog, the story of a blind man, his guide dog and the triumph of trust. Thanks for joining me on my podcast as we explore our own blinding fears of inclusion unacceptance and our resistance to change. We will discover the idea that no matter the situation, or the people we encounter, our own fears, and prejudices often are our strongest barriers to moving forward. The unstoppable mindset podcast is sponsored by accessiBe, that's a c c e s s i capital B e. Visit www.accessibe.com to learn how you can make your website accessible for persons with disabilities. And to help make the internet fully inclusive by the year 2025. Glad you dropped by we're happy to meet you and to have you here with us.   Michael Hingson ** 01:20 Well, welcome to another episode of unstoppable mindset where inclusion diversity and the unexpected meet, and mostly we get to deal with the unexpected, as opposed to inclusion or diversity. But that's okay, because unexpected is what makes life fun, and our guest today, Scott Hanton, will definitely be able to talk about that. Scott has been a research chemist. He comes from the chemistry world, so he and I in the past have compared notes, because, of course, I come from the physics world, and I love to tell people that the most important thing I learned about physics was that, unlike Doc Brown, although I do know how to build a bomb, unlike Doc Brown from Back to the Future, I'm not dumb enough to try to go steal fissionable material from a terrorist group to build the bomb. So, you know, I suppose that's a value, value lesson somewhere. But anyway, I am really glad that you're all here with us today, and we have lots to talk about. Scott, as I said, was in chemistry and research chemist, and now is the editorial supervisor and other things for a magazine called lab manager, and we will talk about that as well. So Scott, welcome to unstoppable mindset. We're glad   Scott Hanton ** 02:38 you're here. Thank you for having me. I'm excited to have this conversation with you today.   Michael Hingson ** 02:43 Well, I think it'll be a lot of fun, and looking forward to it. Now, you're in Michigan, right?   Scott Hanton ** 02:48 That's right. I live in South Lyon, Michigan,   Michael Hingson ** 02:51 ah, what's the weather back there today?   Scott Hanton ** 02:55 It's probably about 55 degrees and cloudy   Michael Hingson ** 02:58 here today. Well, it's still fairly sunny here, and we're actually, according to my iPhone, at 71 so it was up around 80 earlier in the week, but weather changes are still going to bring some cold for a while   Scott Hanton ** 03:15 in here in Michigan, I visited a customer earlier this week, and I drove by about 1000 orange barrels on the highway, which means it's spring, because there's only two seasons in Michigan, winter and construction.   Michael Hingson ** 03:29 There you go. Yeah, I know. I went to the University of California, Irvine, UCI. And if you ask somebody who doesn't know that UCI stands for University of California at Irvine. If you ask them what UCI stands for, they'll tell you, under construction indefinitely. Sounds right? Yeah. Well, it's been doing it ever since I was there a long time ago, and they they continue to grow. Now we're up to like 32,000 fresh, or excuse me, undergraduates at the university. And when I was there, there were 2700 students. So it's grown a little. That's   Scott Hanton ** 04:05 a lot of change. I'm used to big universities. I'm a graduate of both Michigan State and the University of Wisconsin. So these are big places.   Michael Hingson ** 04:13 Wow, yeah. So you're used to it. I really enjoyed it when it was a small campus. I'm glad I went there, and that was one of the reasons that caused me to go there, was because I knew I could probably get a little bit more visibility with instructors, and that would be helpful for me to get information when they didn't describe things well in class. And it generally worked out pretty well. So I can't complain a lot. Perfect. Glad it worked well for you, it did. Well, why don't you start, if you would, by telling us kind of about the early Scott growing up and all that sort of stuff.   Scott Hanton ** 04:49 I grew up in Michigan, in a town called Saginaw. I was blessed with a family that loved me and that, you know, I was raised in a very. Supportive environment. But young Scott asked, Why about everything you know, the way kids do? Yeah, right. And my mom would tell you that when I was a kid, why was my most favorite word? And most kids outgrow that. I never did, yeah, so Me neither. I still ask why all the time. It's still my most favorite word, and it caused me to want to go explore the sciences, because what I found, as I learned about science, was that I could get answers to why questions better in science than in other places.   Michael Hingson ** 05:34 Yeah, makes sense. So what kinds of questions did you ask about why? Well, I asked   Scott Hanton ** 05:43 all kinds of questions about why, like, why are we having that for dinner? Or, why is my bedtime so early? Those questions didn't have good answers, at least from my perspective, right? But I also asked questions like, why is grass green, and why is the sky blue? And studying physical chemistry at Michigan State answered those questions. And so   Michael Hingson ** 06:03 how early did you learn about Rayleigh scattering? But that's you know?   Scott Hanton ** 06:07 Well, I learned the basic concepts from a really important teacher in my life, Mr. Leeson was my seventh grade science teacher, and what I learned from him is that I could ask questions that weren't pertinent to what he was lecturing about, and that taught me a lot about the fact that science was a lot bigger than what we got in the curriculum or in the classroom. And so Mr. Leeson was a really important person in my development, and showed me that there was that science was a lot bigger than I thought it was as a student, but I didn't really learn about rally scattering until I got to college.   Michael Hingson ** 06:43 But at the same time, it sounds like he was willing to allow you to grow and and learn, which so many people aren't willing to do. They're too impatient.   Scott Hanton ** 06:58 He was a first year teacher the year I had him so he hadn't become cynical yet. So it was great to just be able to stay after class and ask him a question, or put my hand up in class and ask him a question. He also did a whole series of demonstrations that were fabulous and made the science come to life in a way that reading about it doesn't stir the imagination. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 07:23 I had teachers that did that too. I remember very well my freshman general science teacher in high school, Mr. Dills, and one day, and he loved to do kind of unique things, just to push the boundaries of students a little bit. He came in one day and he said, I got a pop quiz for everybody, which doesn't help me, because the pop quiz was in print, but he handed it out. And then he took me to the back of the room, and he said, You're not going to really be able to do this quiz. Let me tell you why. And he said, Oh, and one thing he said is, just be sure you follow all the instructions and you'll be fine on the test to everybody. He brought me back to the back of the room. He says, Well, here's the deal. He says, if people really read the instructions, what they'll do is they'll read the instruction that says, Read all the questions before you start answering, and if you get to the last question, it says answer only the first question, which is what is your name and and sure enough, of course, people didn't read the instructions. And he said, so I wouldn't be able to really deal with you with that one, with that whole thing, just because it wouldn't work well. And I said, I understand, but he loved to make students think, and I learned so much about the whole concept of realizing the need to observe and be observant in all that you do. And it was lessons like that from him that really helped a lot with that. For me,   Scott Hanton ** 08:48 I had a high school chemistry teacher named Mrs. Schultz, and the first experiment that we did in her class, in the first week of classes, was she wanted us to document all of the observations that we could make about a burning candle. And I was a hot shot student. Thought I, you know, owned the world, and I was going to ace this test. And, you know, I had maybe a dozen observations about a burning candle, and thought I had done a great job describing it, until she started sharing her list, and she probably had 80 observations about a burning candle, and it taught me the power of observation and the need to talk about the details of those observations and to be specific about what the observations were. And that experiment seems simple, light a candle and tell me what you see. Yeah, but that lesson has carried on with me now for more than approaching 50 years.   Michael Hingson ** 09:47 Let's see, as I recall, if you light a candle, what the center of the flame is actually pretty cool compared to the outside. It's more hollow. Now I wouldn't be able to easily tell that, because. Is my my process for observing doesn't really use eyesight to do that, so I I'm sure there are other technologies today that I could use to get more of that information. But   Scott Hanton ** 10:12 I'm also sure that that experiment could be re crafted so that it wasn't so visual, yeah, right, that there could be tactile experiments to tell me about observations or or audible experiments about observation, where you would excel in ways that I would suffer because I'm so visually dominant. The   Michael Hingson ** 10:33 issue, though, is that today, there's a lot more technology to do that than there was when I was in school and you were in school, but yeah, I think there is a lot available. There's a company called Independence Science, which is actually owned and run by Dr Cary sapollo. And Carrie is blind, and he is a blind chemist, and he wanted to help develop products for blind people to be able to deal with laboratory work. So he actually worked with a company that was, well, it's now Vernier education systems. They make a product called LabQuest with something like 80 different kinds of probes that you can attach to it, and the LabQuest will will provide visual interpretations of whatever the probes are showing carry, and independent science took that product and made it talk, so that There is now a Talking LabQuest. And the reality is that all those probes became usable because the LabQuest became accessible to be able to do that, and they put a lot of other things into it too. So it's more than just as a talking device, a lab device. It's got a periodic table in it. It's got a lot of other kinds of things that they just put in it as well. But it's really pretty cool because it now makes science a whole lot more accessible. I'm going to have to think about the different kinds of probes and how one could use that to look at a candle. I think that'd be kind of fun.   Scott Hanton ** 12:15 And it's just awesome to hear that there's innovation and space to make science more available to everybody. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 12:23 the real problem that we face is the one that we mostly always have faced, which is societal attitudes, as opposed to really being or not being able to do the experiments, is people think we can't, and that's the barrier that we always, usually have to overcome.   Scott Hanton ** 12:39 What I find in my time as a coach, mentor, supervisor, is that if somebody believes they can't do it, they can't do it. Yeah. And so it's often about overcoming their own mental limitations, the limitations that they've placed on themselves,   Michael Hingson ** 12:56 and that's right, or unfortunately, the limitations that other people place on us, and we, all too often and weigh too much, buy into those limitations. So it's it is something that we, especially in the sciences, should recognize that we shouldn't be doing so much of. I know that when I was at UC Irvine as a graduate student, I learned once that there was a letter in my file that a professor wrote. Fortunately, I never had him as a professor, but it and I was in my master's program at the time in physics, and this guy put a letter in my file saying that no blind person could ever absorb the material to get an advanced degree in physics at the University. Just put that in there, which is so unfortunate, because the real thing that is demonstrated there is a prejudice that no scientist should ever have.   Scott Hanton ** 13:51 I'm hopeful that as you graduated, there was a retraction letter in your file as well,   Michael Hingson ** 13:57 not that I ever heard, but yeah. Well, I'd already gotten my bachelor's degree, but yeah. But you know, things happen, but it is a it is a societal thing, and society all too often creates limitations, and sometimes we don't find them right away, but it is one of the big issues that, in general, we have to deal with. And on all too often, society does some pretty strange things because it doesn't understand what science is all about. I know when we were dealing with covid, when it all started, leaving the conspiracy theorists out of it. One of the things that I learned was that we have all these discussions about AI, if you will. But AI was one of the primary mechanisms that helped to develop the mRNA vaccines that are now still the primary things that we use to get vaccinated against covid, because they the artificial intelligence. I'm not sure how artificial. It is, but was able to craft what became the vaccine in a few days. And scientists acknowledged, if they had to do it totally on their own, it would take years to have done what AI did in a few days.   Scott Hanton ** 15:13 The AI technology is amazing and powerful, but it's not new. No, I met a person who shared her story about AI investigations and talked about what she was doing in this field 30 years ago. Yeah, in her master's work. And you know, I knew it wasn't brand new, but I didn't really realize how deep its roots went until I talked to her.   Michael Hingson ** 15:37 I worked as my first jobs out of college with Ray Kurzweil, who, of course, nowadays, is well known for the singularity and so on. But back then, he developed the first reading machine that blind people could use to read printed material. And one of the things that he put into that machine was the ability, as it scanned more material, to learn and better recognize the material. And so he was doing machine learning back in the 1970s   Scott Hanton ** 16:07 right? And all of this is, you know, as Newton said on the shoulders of giants, right, right? He said it a bit cynically, but it's still true that we all in science, we are learning from each other. We're learning from the broader community, and we're integrating that knowledge as we tackle the challenges that we are exploring.   Michael Hingson ** 16:27 So what got you to go into chemistry when you went into college?   Scott Hanton ** 16:33 That's a good question. So when I was 13 years old, I went on a youth a church group youth trip to another city, and so they split us up, and there were three of us from our group that stayed overnight in a host family. And at dinner that night, the father worked in a pharmaceutical company, and he talked about the work he was doing, and what he was doing was really synthetic chemistry around small molecule drug discovery. And for me, it was absolutely fascinating. I was thrilled at that information. I didn't know any scientists growing up, I had no adult input other than teachers about science, and I can remember going back home and my parents asking me how the trip went. And it's like, it's fantastic. I'm going to be a chemist. And they both looked at me like, what is that? How do you make money from it? How do you get that? My dad was a banker. My mom was a school teacher. They had no scientific background, but that that one conversation, such serendipity, right? One conversation when I was 13 years old, and I came home and said, I'm going to be a chemist, and I've never really deviated from that path. Did you have other siblings? Younger brother and another younger sister?   Michael Hingson ** 17:54 Okay? Did they go into science by any remote chance?   Scott Hanton ** 17:58 Not at all. So they were both seventh grade teachers for more than 30 years. So my brother taught math and English, and my sister teaches social studies.   Michael Hingson ** 18:10 Well, there you go. But that is also important. I actually wanted to teach physics, but jobs and other things and circumstances took me in different directions, but I think the reality is that I ended up going into sales. And what I realized, and it was partly because of a Dale Carnegie sales course I took, but I realized that good sales people are really teachers, because they're really teaching people about products or about things, and they're also sharp enough to recognize what their products might or might not do to help a customer. But that, again, not everyone does that, but so I figure I still was teaching, and today, being a public speaker, traveling the world, talking, of course, about teamwork and other things, it's still all about teaching.   Scott Hanton ** 18:57 I think I've always been a teacher, and if you talk to my coworkers along the way, I enjoy helping people. I enjoy sharing my knowledge. There's always been a teacher inside but only in this job as the editorial director at lab manager have I really been able to do it directly. So we've developed what we call the lab manager Academy, and I create e learning courses to help lab managers be more successful, and it's been a passion project for me, and it's been a load of fun.   Michael Hingson ** 19:30 And it doesn't get better than that. It's always great when it's a load of fun, yes,   Scott Hanton ** 19:35 well, so you left college and you got a bachelor's and a master's degree, right? No masters for me, that step you went right to the old PhD, yeah. So I went straight. I went graduated from Michigan State. So Michigan State was on terms back in those days. So graduated in June, got married in July, moved to Wisconsin in August. To graduate school at the end of August at the University of Wisconsin. Okay? And my second year as a graduate student, my professor asked me, Do you want to stop and complete a master's? And I said, Wait, tell me about this word stop. And he said, Well, you'd have to finish the Master's requirements and write a thesis, and that's going to take some time. And I said, Do I have to and he said, No, and I don't recommend it. Just keep going forward and finish your PhD. So that's   Michael Hingson ** 20:30 and what does your wife do?   Scott Hanton ** 20:33 So my wife also is in the graduate program at the University of Wisconsin, and she decided that a master's degree was the right answer for her, because she didn't want to be a PhD scientist in XYZ narrow band of science. She wanted to be a master of chemistry. Okay, and so we took different paths through graduate school, but each of us took the path that worked best for us, and each pass has great value, so we're both happy with the choices that we made,   Michael Hingson ** 21:06 and complement each other and also give you, still lots of great things to talk about over dinner.   Scott Hanton ** 21:12 Absolutely. And she took that master's degree, went into the pharmaceutical industry and largely behaved as a librarian in her first part of her career, she wasn't called a librarian, but what she really did was a lot of information integrating, and then moved into the Library Group, and was a corporate librarian for a long time, and then a community librarian. So that path worked brilliantly for her. She also has a Masters of Library Science. So I have one PhD. She has two Master's degree. I have one bachelor's degree. She has two bachelor's degree.   Michael Hingson ** 21:50 Oh, so you can have interesting discussions about who really progressed further,   21:54 absolutely.   Michael Hingson ** 21:57 Well, that's, that's, that's cute, though. Well, I I got my bachelor's and master's. My wife, who I didn't meet until years later, wanted to be a librarian, but she ended up getting a a Master's at USC in so in sociology and and ended up getting a teaching credential and going into teaching, and taught for 10 years, and then she decided she wanted to do something different, and became a travel agent, which she had a lot of fun with. That is different, it is, but she enjoyed it, and along the way, then we got married. It was a great marriage. She was in a wheelchair her whole life. So she read, I pushed, worked out well, complimentary skills, absolutely, which is the way, way it ought to be, you know, and we had a lot of fun with it. Unfortunately, she passed now two and a half years ago, but as I tell people, we were married 40 years, and I'm sure she's monitoring me from somewhere, and if I misbehave, I'm going to hear about it, so I try to just behave. Sounds like good advice. Yeah, probably certainly the safe way to go. But we, we, we had lots of neat discussions, and our our activities and our expertise did, in a lot of ways, complement each other, so it was a lot of fun. And as I said, she went to USC. I enjoyed listening to USC football because I thought that that particular college team had the best announcers in the business, least when when I was studying in Southern California, and then when we got married, we learned the the day we got married, the wedding was supposed to start at four, and it didn't start till later because people weren't showing up for the wedding. And we learned that everybody was sitting out in their cars waiting for the end of the USC Notre Dame game. And we knew that God was on our side when we learned that SC beat the snot out of Notre Dame. So there you go. Yeah. Yeah. Oh gosh, the rivalries we face. So what did you do after college?   Scott Hanton ** 24:09 So did my PhD at the University of Wisconsin. And one of the nice things, a fringe benefit of going to a big, important program to do your PhD, is that recruiters come to you. And so I was able to do 40 different, four, zero, 40 different interviews on campus without leaving Madison. And one of those interviews was with a company called Air Products. And that worked out, and they hired me. And so we moved to Allentown, Pennsylvania to go to work. I went to work at Air Products and and Helen found a role in the pharmaceutical industry at Merck. And so we did that for a long time. I was initially a research expert, a PhD expert doing lasers and materials and analytical stuff. And over the years. I progressed up the ladder from researcher to supervisor to what did we call it, group head to Section Manager, to operations manager, and ultimately to General Manager.   Michael Hingson ** 25:13 Well, at least being in Allentown, you were close to a Cracker Barrel restaurant. Yes, that is true. That was the closest to one to where we lived in New Jersey, so we visited it several times. That's how I know   Scott Hanton ** 25:26 about it. Maybe we were there at the same time. Michael, maybe this isn't our first. It's   Michael Hingson ** 25:31 very possible. But we enjoyed Cracker Barrel and enjoyed touring around Pennsylvania. So I should have asked, What prompted you to go to the University of Wisconsin to do your your graduate work, as opposed to staying in Michigan. So   Scott Hanton ** 25:47 my advisor at Michigan State, our advisor at Michigan State, told us, here's the top five schools, graduate programs in chemistry, apply to them all. Go to the one you get into. And so I got into three. Helen got into two. The one that was the same was Wisconsin. So that's where we went, yeah?   Michael Hingson ** 26:09 Well, then no better logic and argument than that.   Scott Hanton ** 26:14 It was a great Madison. Wisconsin is a beautiful city. It one of the things I really liked about the chemistry program there then, and it's still true now, is how well the faculty get along together so many collaborative projects and just friendliness throughout the hallways. And yes, they are all competing at some level for grant support, but they get along so well, and that makes it for a very strong community,   Michael Hingson ** 26:41 and it probably also means that oftentimes someone who's applying for something can enlist support from other people who are willing to help.   Scott Hanton ** 26:50 And as a graduate student, it meant that I had more than one professor that I could go to my advisor. There was a whole group of advisors who ran joint group meetings and would give us advice about our work or our writing or our approach, or just because we needed a pep talk, because completing a PhD is hard. Yeah, right, so that community was really important to me, and it's something I took away that when I started my industrial career, I had seen the value of community, and I wanted to build stronger communities wherever I went, yeah.   Michael Hingson ** 27:26 So what does a company, does air products do   Scott Hanton ** 27:31 that's sort of in the name, right? They're an industrial gas company. Got some of their big, biggest products are taking air and separating it into its components of nitrogen, oxygen, oxygen, argon, whatever, right? But at that time, they also had a chemicals business and a semiconductor business, or electronics business. So there was a lot of chemistry going on, although a lot of my work colleagues were chemical engineers who were working on the gasses side of the business, we had significant number of chemistry, sorts material science, sorts of people who are working on the chemicals side. Now, over time, Air Products divested those businesses, and now it's much more of a true industrial gas company. But I had the opportunity to work in an integrated science company that did all sorts of things.   Michael Hingson ** 28:23 Yeah, and as as we know, certainly a little helium never hurt anyone.   Scott Hanton ** 28:30 No little helium, you know, raises people's spirits, it   Michael Hingson ** 28:34 does and their voices, it does. I I've visited helium tanks many times at UC Irvine when they had liquid helium, which was certainly a challenge because of how cold it had to be. But occasionally we would open a valve and little cold but useful helium gas would escape   Scott Hanton ** 28:56 very cold. Please be safe. Cryogens are are dangerous materials, and we gotta make sure we handle them with due respect.   Michael Hingson ** 29:05 Yeah, well, we, we all did and and didn't take too many chances. So it worked out pretty well. So you stayed in Allentown and you stayed with Air Products for how long   Scott Hanton ** 29:19 I was in Air Products for 20 years. So the analytical group that I was part of, we were about 92 or 93 people when I joined the company, when I just left after earning my PhD. After 20 years, that group was down to about 35 just progressive series of decisions that made the department smaller, and as the Department got smaller and smaller, we were worried about our abilities to sustain our work. And so a dear friend and a key colleague, Paula McDaniel, and I, worked to try to see what other kind of opportunities there were. Yeah. And so we reached out to a contract research organization called Intertech to see if they would be interested in maybe acquiring our analytical department. And when we called them, and by the way, we called them before we talked to our boss about it, she forgave us later, but when we called the guy on the end of the phone said, Wait a minute, let me get your file. And it's like, what you have a file on Air Products, analytical, really? Why? Well, it turned out that they had a file, and that they had an active Merger and Acquisition Group, and they wanted an integrated analytical department on the east coast of the US. And so we engaged in negotiation, and ultimately this analytical department was sold by Air Products to Intertech. So on Friday, we're a little cog in a giant engine of an global, international company, and our funding comes from Vice Presidents. And on Monday, we're a standalone business of 35 people, we need to write quotes in order to make money. So it was an enormous challenge to transition from a service organization to a business. But oh my goodness, did we learn a lot,   Michael Hingson ** 31:13 certainly a major paradigm shift,   Scott Hanton ** 31:18 and I was lucky that I lost the coin flip, and Paula won, and she said, I want to be business development director. And I said, thank God. So she went off to be the key salesperson, and Paula was utterly brilliant as a technical salesperson, and I became the operations manager, which allowed me to keep my hands dirty with the science and to work with the scientists and to build a system and a community that allowed us to be successful in a CRO world.   Michael Hingson ** 31:49 So at that time, when you became part, part of them, the new company, were you or the standalone business? Were you working in lab? Still yourself?   Scott Hanton ** 32:01 Yes. So I had the title Operations Manager and all of the scientific staff reported into me, but I was still the technical expert in some mass spectrometry techniques, particularly MALDI and also tough Sims, and so I still had hands on lab responsibility that I needed to deliver. And over time, I was able to train some people to take some of those responsibilities off. But when the weight of the world was particularly heavy, the place for me to go was in the lab and do some experiments.   Michael Hingson ** 32:34 Yeah, still so important to be able to keep your hand in into to know and understand. I know I had that same sort of need being the manager of an office and oftentimes working with other people who were the engineers, coming from a little bit of a technical background as well. I worked to always make sure I knew all I could about the products that I was dealing with and selling, and my sales people who worked for me constantly asked, How come, you know, all this stuff, and we don't then, my response always was, did you read the product bulletin that came out last week? Or have you kept up on the product bulletins? Because it's all right there, whether I actually physically repaired products or not, I knew how to do it. And so many times when I was involved in working with some of our engineers, I remember a few times our field support people, and we were working out of New Jersey, and then in New York at the time, in the World Trade Center, we had some customers up at Lockheed Martin, up in Syria, Rochester, I think it was. And the guys would go up, and then they'd call me on the phone, and we'd talk about it, and between us, we came up with some bright ideas. And I remember one day, all of a sudden, I get this phone call, and these guys are just bouncing off the walls, because whatever it was that was going on between them and me, we figured it out, and they put it in play and made it work, and they were all just as happy as clams at high tide, which is the way it ought to   Scott Hanton ** 34:13 be. It's great to work in a team that finds success. The longer I was in technical management, the more I enjoyed the success of the team. It didn't need to be my success anymore that helping the scientists be successful in their roles was truly satisfying,   Michael Hingson ** 34:33 and that helped you, by definition, be more successful in your role.   Scott Hanton ** 34:36 And no question, it could be seen as a selfish byproduct, but the fact is that it still felt really good.   Michael Hingson ** 34:43 Yeah, I hear you, because I know for me, I never thought about it as I've got to be successful. It's we've got problems to solve. Let's do it together. And I always told people that we're a team. And I have told every salesperson. I ever hired. I'm not here to boss you around. You've convinced me that you should be able to sell our products, and sometimes I found that they couldn't. But I said my job is to work with you to figure out how I can enhance what you do, and what skills do I bring to add value to you, because we've got to work together, and the people who understood that and who got it were always the most successful people that I ever had in my teams.   Scott Hanton ** 35:30 One of the things I strive to do as a leader of any organization is to understand the key strengths of the people on the team and to try to craft their roles in such a way that they spend the majority of their time executing their strengths. Yeah. I've also discovered that when I truly investigate poor performance, there's often a correlation between poor performance and people working in their weaknesses. Yeah, and if we can shift those jobs, change those roles, make change happen so that people can work more often in their strengths, then good things happen.   Michael Hingson ** 36:07 And if you can bring some of your skills into the mix and augment what they do, so much the better.   Scott Hanton ** 36:16 Yeah, because I'm just another member of the team, my role is different, but I need to also apply my strengths to the problems and be wary of my weaknesses, because as the leader of the organization, my words carried undue weight. Yeah, and if, if I was speaking or acting in a space where I was weak, people would still do what I said, because I had the most authority, and that was just a lose, lose proposition   Michael Hingson ** 36:43 by any standard. And and when you, when you operated to everyone's strengths, it always was a win. Yep, which is so cool. So you went to Intertech, and how long were you there?   Scott Hanton ** 36:57 I was at Intertech for 10 years, and work I can if you know, for any listeners out there who work in the CRO world, it is a tough business. It is a grind working in that business, yeah? So it was a lot of long hours and testy customers and shortages of materials and equipment that was a hard a hard a hard road to plow,   Michael Hingson ** 37:22 yeah, yeah, it gets to be frustrating. Sometimes it's what you got to do, but it still gets to be frustrating gets to be a challenge. The best part   Scott Hanton ** 37:32 for me was I had a great team. We had senior and junior scientists. They were good people. They worked hard. They fundamentally, they cared about the outcomes. And so it was a great group of people to work with. But the contract lab business is a tough business. Yeah, so when covid came, you know, the pandemic settles in, all the restrictions are coming upon us. I was tasked as the General Manager of the business with setting up all the protocols, you know, how are we going to meet the number of people this basing the masks, you know, how could we work with and we were essential as a lab, so we had to keep doing what we were doing. And it took me about a week to figure non stop work to figure out what our protocols were going to be, and the moment I turned them into my boss, then I got laid off. So what you want to do in a time of crisis is you want to let go of the the general manager, the safety manager, the quality manager and the Chief Scientist, because those are four people that you don't need during times of stress or challenge or crisis. On the plus side for me, getting laid off was a bad hour. It hurt my pride, but after an hour, I realized that all the things that I'd been stressing about for years trying to run this business were no longer my problem. Yeah, and I found that it was a tremendous weight lifted off my shoulders to not feel responsible for every problem and challenge that that business had.   Michael Hingson ** 39:14 And that's always a good blessing when you when you figure that out and don't worry about the the issues anymore. That's a good thing. It was certainly   Scott Hanton ** 39:25 good for me. Yeah, so I'm not going to recommend that people go get laid off. No world to get fired. But one problem that I had is because Paula and I worked to create that business, I sort of behaved like an owner, but was treated like an employee. And my recommendation to people is, remember, you're an employee, find some personal boundaries that protect you from the stress of the business, because you're not going to be rewarded or treated like an owner.   Michael Hingson ** 39:58 Yeah, because you're not because. Or not.   Scott Hanton ** 40:01 So I got laid off. It was in the height of the pandemic. So, you know, I'm too busy of a human being to sort of sit in a rocking chair and watch the birds fly by. That's not my style or my speed. So I started a consulting business, and that was a lot of fun. I really enjoyed doing the consulting work, but I learned something really important about myself, and that's that while I can sell and I can be an effective salesperson, I don't like selling, and as a company of one, when I didn't sell, I didn't make any money, yeah, and so I needed to figure out something else to do, because I really hated selling, and I wasn't doing it. I was procrastinating, and that made the business be unpredictable and very choppy   Michael Hingson ** 40:51 in that company of one, that guy who was working for you wasn't really doing all that you wanted.   Scott Hanton ** 40:56 Exactly the Yeah, you know me as the founder, was giving me as the salesman, a poor performance review was not meeting objectives. So I had a long time volunteer relationship with lab manager magazine. I had been writing articles for them and speaking for them in webinars and in conferences for a long time, probably more than 10 years, I would say, and they asked me as a consultant to produce a a to a proposal to create the lab manager Academy. So the the founder and owner of the the company, the lab X Media Group, you really saw the value of an academy, and they needed it done. They needed it done. They couldn't figure it out themselves. So I wrote the proposal. I had a good idea of how to do it, but I was new to consulting, and I struggled with, how do I get paid for this? And I had four ideas, but I didn't like them, so I slept on it, and in the morning I had a fifth, which said, hire me full time. I sent in the proposal. An hour later, I had a phone call. A week later, I had a job, so that worked out fantastic. And I've really enjoyed my time at lab manager magazine. Great people, fun work. It's really interesting to me to be valued for what I know rather than for what I can do. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 42:23 the two relate. But still, it does need to be more about what you know, what you really bring, as opposed to what you can do, because what you can do in general probably is an offshoot of what you know.   Scott Hanton ** 42:38 So this gives me the opportunity to help lots of people. So on the outside of the company, I'm writing articles, creating courses, giving talks to help lab managers. Because I was a lab manager for a long time, yeah, over 20 years, and I know what those challenges are. I know how hard that job is, and I know how many decisions lab managers need to make, and it's wonderful to be able to share my experience and help them, and I am motivated to help them. So was it hard? Oh, go ahead, on the inside, I'm literally an internal subject matter expert, and so I can coach and teach and help my colleagues with what's the science? What do lab managers really think? How do we pitch this so that it resonates with lab managers, and I think that helps make all of our products better and more successful.   Michael Hingson ** 43:31 So was it hard? Well, I guess best way to put it is that, was it really hard to switch from being a scientist to being a lab manager and then going into being a subject matter expert and really out of the laboratory. So   Scott Hanton ** 43:48 people ask me all the time, Scott, don't you miss being in the lab and doing experiments? And my answer is, I miss being in the lab. And I do miss being in the lab. You know, on very stressful days at Intertech, I'd go in the lab and I'd do an experiment, yeah, because it was fun, and I had more control over the how the experiment was run and what I would learn from it than I did running a business. But the flip side of that is, I do experiments all the time. What I learned as the general manager of a business was the scientific method works. Let's data hypothesis. Let's figure out how to test it. Let's gather data, and let's see if the hypothesis stands or falls. And we ran a business that way, I think, pretty successfully. And even now, in in media and publishing, we still run experiments all the time. And it's kind of funny that most of my editorial colleagues that I work with, they think my favorite word is experiment. My favorite word is still why, but we talk all the time now about doing experiments, and that was a new thing for them, but now we can do continual improvement more in a more dedicated way, and we do it a lot faster. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 45:00 yeah. So what's the hardest thing you think about being a lab manager?   Scott Hanton ** 45:06 I think the hardest thing about let me answer that with two. I'm not going to be able to narrow it down to one, so I'll give you two. The first one is you transform, maybe one day to the next, from really being in control of your science and working with whether it's animals or rocks or electrons or chemicals, whatever you're working with, having a great degree of knowledge and a lot of control, and the next day, you're hurting cats. And so it's about that transition from having control over your destiny to influencing people to get the work done, and working with people instead of working with experiments, that's really hard. The second is, as a lab manager, there's endless decisions, and so combating decision fatigue is a big deal, and everybody in the lab depends upon you for the decisions you make. And it's not that every decision has to be perfect, you know, that's just a different failure mode if you try to make perfect decisions, but every decision needs to be made promptly. And as a scientist, I could always make more data in order to make a better decision, but as a lab manager, I would often only have maybe 40 or 50% of the data I wanted, and a decision had to be made. And getting comfortable making decisions in the face of uncertainty is really hard.   Michael Hingson ** 46:29 So certainly, being a lab manager or Well, dealing with managers in the way we're talking about it here, has to be very stressful. How do you how do you cope with the stress?   Scott Hanton ** 46:42 So I think ways to cope with the stress successfully is, first of all, you've got to take care of yourself. You know, we've all flown on airplanes, and what is the safety person in the aisle or on the video? Do oxygen masks will fall from the ceiling, and what do we do with them? We put them on before we help somebody else, right? We all know that. But in the workplace, especially as a manager, it's hard to remember that as we care for our team and try and take care of our team, there might not be enough time or energy or capacity left to take care of ourselves, but if we don't fill that gas tank every day doing something, then we can't help our team. And so one way to deal with the stress is to make sure that you take care of yourself. So   Michael Hingson ** 47:28 what do you do? How do you deal with that? So   Scott Hanton ** 47:31 for me, ways that I can reinvigorate is one. I like being outside and get my hands dirty. So I'm not really a gardener, but I call myself a yard dinner. So I grow grass and I grow flowers, and I trim trees, and I want to go outside, and I want to see immediate return on my effort, and I want it to be better than when I started. And it's good if I have to clean from under my fingernails when I'm doing it. Another thing I like to do is I play all kinds of games I'm happy to play, sorry, with little kids, or I'll play complicated strategy games with people who want to sit at a table for three or four hours at a time. Yeah? And that allows my brain to spin and to work but on something completely different. Yeah. And another thing that's been important for me, especially when I was a lab manager is to be involved in youth coaching, so I coached kids soccer and basketball and baseball teams, and it's just beautiful to be out there on a field with a ball, with kids. And you know, the worries of the world just aren't there. The kids don't know anything about them. And it's fun to work with the ones who are really good, but it's equally fun to work with the ones who have never seen the ball before, and to help them do even the most basic things. And that kind of giving back and paying it forward, that sort of stuff fills my tank.   Michael Hingson ** 48:51 Yeah, I empathize a lot with with that. For me, I like to read. I've never been much of a gardener, but I also collect, as I mentioned before, old radio shows, and I do that because I'm fascinated by the history and all the things I learned from what people did in the 2030s, 40s and 50s, being on radio, much Less getting the opportunity to learn about the technical aspects of how they did it, because today it's so different in terms of how one edits, how one processes and deals with sounds and so on, but it's but it's fun to do something just totally different than way maybe what your normal Job would be, and and I do love to interact with with people. I love to play games, too. I don't get to do nearly as much of it as I'd like, but playing games is, is a lot of fun,   Scott Hanton ** 49:52 and I agree, and it it's fun, it's diverting, it's it helps me get into a flow so that I'm focused on. Me on one thing, and I have no idea how much time has gone by, and I don't really care. You know, people who play games with me might question this. I don't really care if I win or lose. Certainly I want to win, but it's more important to me that I play well, and if somebody plays better, good for   Michael Hingson ** 50:14 them, great. You'll learn from it. Exactly. Do you play   Scott Hanton ** 50:18 chess? I have played chess. I've played a lot of chess. What I've learned with chess is that I'm not an excellent I'm a good player, but not an excellent player. And when I run into excellent players, they will beat me without even breaking a sweat.   Michael Hingson ** 50:34 And again, in theory, you learn something from that.   Scott Hanton ** 50:37 What I found is that I don't really want to work that hard and yeah. And so by adding an element of chance or probability to the game, the people who focus on chess, where there are known answers and known situations, they get thrown off by the uncertainty of the of the flip the card or roll the dice. And my brain loves that uncertainty, so I tend to thrive. Maybe it's from my time in the lab with elements of uncertainty, where the chess players wilt under elements of uncertainty, and it's again, it's back to our strengths, right? That's something that I'm good at, so I'm gonna go do it. I've   Michael Hingson ** 51:20 always loved Trivial Pursuit. That's always been a fun game that I enjoy playing. I   Scott Hanton ** 51:25 do love Trivial Pursuit. I watch Jeopardy regularly. A funny story, when we moved into our new house in Pennsylvania, it was a great neighborhood. Loved the neighbors there. When we first moved in, they invited my wife and I to a game night. Excellent. We love games. We're going to play Trivial Pursuit. Awesome like Trivial Pursuit. We're going to play as couples. Bad idea, right? Let's play boys against the girls, or, let's say, random draws. No, we're playing as couples. Okay, so we played as couples. Helen and I won every game by a large margin. We were never invited back for game night. Yeah, invited back for lots of other things, but not game night.   Michael Hingson ** 52:06 One of the things that, and I've talked about it with people on this podcast before, is that all too often, when somebody reads a question from a trivial pursuit card, an answer pops in your head, then you went, Oh, that was too easy. That can't be the right answer. So you think about it, and you answer with something else, but invariably, that first answer was always the correct answer.   Scott Hanton ** 52:32 Yes, I'm I have learned to trust my intuition. Yeah. I learned, as a research scientist, that especially in talking to some of my peers, who are very dogmatic, very step by step scientists. And they lay out the 20 steps to that they felt would be successful. And they would do one at a time, one through 20. And that made them happy for me, I do one and two, and then I'd predict where that data led me, and I do experiment number seven, and if it worked, I'm off to eight. And so I they would do what, one step at a time, one to 20, and I'd sort of do 127, 1420, yeah. And that I learned that that intuition was powerful and valuable, and I've learned to trust it. And in my lab career, it served me really well. But also as a manager, it has served me well to trust my intuition, and at least to listen to it. And if I need to analyze it, I can do that, but I'm going to listen to it,   Michael Hingson ** 53:31 and that's the important thing, because invariably, it's going to give you useful information, and it may be telling you not what to do, but still trusting it and listening to it is so important, I've found that a lot over the years,   Scott Hanton ** 53:47 Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book called Blink, where he talks about the power of the subconscious, and his claim is that the subconscious is 100,000 times smarter than our conscious brain, and I think when we are trusting our intuition, we're tapping into that super computer that's in our skulls. If you want to learn more, read blank. It's a great story.   Michael Hingson ** 54:10 I hear you. I agree. How can people learn to be better leaders and managers?   Scott Hanton ** 54:18 So I think it's there's really three normal ways that people do this. One is the power of experiment, right? And I did plenty of that, and I made tons of errors. It's painful. It's irritating, trial and error, but I used to tell people at Intertech that I was the general manager because I'd made the most mistakes, which gave me the most opportunity to learn. It was also partly because a lot of my peers wanted nothing to do with the job. You know, they wanted to be scientists. Another way is we, we get coached and mentored by people around us, and that is awesome if you have good supervisors, and it's tragic if you have bad supervisors, because you don't know any better and you take for granted. That the way it's been done is the way it needs to be done, and that prevents us from being generative leaders and questioning the status quo. So there's problems there, too. And I had both good and bad supervisors during my career. I had some awful, toxic human beings who were my supervisors, who did damage to me, and then I had some brilliant, caring, empathetic people who raised me up and helped me become the leader that I am today. So it's a bit of a crap shoot. The third way is go out and learn it from somebody who's done it right, and that's why we generated the lab manager Academy to try to codify all the mistakes I made and what are the learnings from them? And when I'm talking with learners who are in the program, it's we have a huge positive result feedback on our courses. And what I talk to people about who take our courses is I'm glad you appreciate what we've put together here. That makes me feel good. I'm glad it's helping you. But when these are my mistakes and the answers to my mistakes, when you make mistakes, you need to in the future, go make some courses and teach people what the lessons were from your mistakes and pay it forward. Yeah. So I recommend getting some training.   Michael Hingson ** 56:17 What's the difference between management and leadership?   Scott Hanton ** 56:21 I particularly love a quote from Peter Drucker. So Peter Drucker was a professor in California. You may have heard of him before.   Michael Hingson ** 56:29 I have. I never had the opportunity to meet him, but I read.   Scott Hanton ** 56:34 I didn't either material. I've read his books, and I think he is an insightful human being, yes. So the quote goes like this, management is doing things right. Leadership is doing the right things. So as a technical manager, there's a bunch of things we have to get right. We have to get safety right. We have to get quality right. There's an accuracy and precision that we need to get right for our outcomes and our results. Those are management tasks, but leadership is about doing the right things. And the interesting thing about that definition is it doesn't require a title or a role or any level of authority. So anyone can be a leader if you're consistently doing the right things, you are exhibiting leadership, and that could be from the person sweeping the floors or the person approving the budget, or anyone in between.   Michael Hingson ** 57:33 Yeah, I've heard that quote from him before, and absolutely agree with it. It makes a whole lot of sense.   Scott Hanton ** 57:41 Other definitions that I've seen trying to distinguish management and leadership tend to use the words manage and lead, and I don't like definitions that include the words that they're trying to define. They become circular at some level. This one, I think, is clear about it, what its intention is, and for me, it has worked through my career, and so the separation is valuable. I have authority. I'm the manager. I have accountability to get some stuff right, but anyone can lead, and everyone can lead, and the organization works so much better when it's full of leaders   Michael Hingson ** 58:21 and leaders who are willing to recognize when they bring something to the table, or if someone else can add value in ways that they can't, to be willing to let the other individual take the leadership position for a while.   Scott Hanton ** 58:40 Absolutely, and you know that really comes down to building an environment and a culture that's supportive. And so Amy Edmondson has written extensively on the importance of psychological safety, and that psychological safety hinges on what you just said, right? If the guy who sweeps the floor has an observation about the organization. Do they feel safe to go tell the person in charge that this observation, and if they feel safe, and if that leader is sufficiently vulnerable and humble to listen with curiosity about that observation, then everybody benefits, yeah, and the more safe everyone feels. We think about emotion. Emotional safety is they anyone can bring their best self to work, and psychological safety is they can contribute their ideas and observations with no threat of retaliation, then we have an environment where we're going to get the best out of everybody, yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 59:46 which is the way it it really ought to be. And all too often we don't necessarily see it, but that is the way it ought   Scott Hanton ** 59:53 to be. Too many people are worried about credit, or, I don't know, worried about things that I don't see. Yeah, and they waste human potential, right? They they don't open their doors to hire anybody. They they judge people based on what they look like instead of who they are, or they box people in into roles, and don't let them flourish and Excel. And whenever you're doing those kinds of things, you're wasting human potential. And businesses, science and business are too hard to waste human potential. We need to take advantage of everything that people are willing to give. Yeah,   Michael Hingson ** 1:00:33 we've been doing this for quite a while already today. So I'm going to ask as a kind of a last question, what, what advice do you want to leave for people to think about going forward in their lives and in their careers?   Scott Hanton ** 1:00:48 So I was participating in a LinkedIn chat today where a professor was asking the question, what sort of advice would you wish you got when you were 21 Okay, so it was an interesting thread, and there was one contributor to the thread who said something I thought was particularly valuable. And she said, attitude matters. Attitude matters. We can't control what happens to us, but we can control how we deal with it and how we respond, right? And so I think if we can hold our attitude as our accountability, and we can direct our strengths and our talents to applying them against the challenges that the business or the science or the lab or the community faces, and we can go in with some positive attitude and positive desire for for change and improvement, and we can be vulnerable and humble enough to accept other people's ideas and to interact through discussion and healthy debate. Then everything's better. I also like Kelleher his quote he was the co founder of Southwest Airlines, and he said, when you're hiring, hire for attitude, train for skill. Attitude is so important. So I think, understand your attitude. Bring the attitude you want, the attitude you value, the attitude that's that's parallel to your core values. And then communicate to others about their attitude and how it's working or not working for them.   Michael Hingson ** 1:02:31 And hopefully, if they have a positive or good enough attitude, they will take that into consideration and grow because of it absolutely   Scott Hanton ** 1:02:41 gives everybody the chance to be the best they can be.   Michael Hingson ** 1:02:47 Well, Scott, this has been wonderful. If people want to reach out to you, how can they do that?   Scott Hanton ** 1:02:51 So LinkedIn is great. I've provided Michael my LinkedIn connection. So I would love to have people connect to me on LinkedIn or email. S Hanson at lab manager.com love to have interactions with the folks out there.   Michael Hingson ** 1:03:08 Well, I want to thank you for spending so much time. We'll have to do more of this.   Scott Hanton ** 1:03:13 Michael, I really enjoyed it. This was a fun conversation. It was stimulating. You asked good questio

Broadcasting from the Evidence-based Perioperative Medicine World Congress in London, UK, TopMedTalk takes you behind the scenes to the conference conversations that matter. This episode delves into the importance of diversity in perioperative medicine, the patient-centred approach, the challenges of integrating multidisciplinary care, and the future of healthcare across different countries. Our guests share their experiences, challenges and strategies in implementing holistic, patient-focused care and the significance of leveraging technology and communication in improving patient outcomes. Presented by Andy Cumpstey with his guests, David Selwyn, appointed as the inaugural Director of the Centre for Perioperative Care (CPOC) in May 2019 and tasked with establishing and developing CPOC as a truly cross-organisational, multidisciplinary initiative led by the Royal College of Anaesthetists (RCoA), facilitating cross-organisational working on perioperative care for patient benefit. He remains an active clinician, dealing with the competing demands of anaesthesia and adult critical care; Vanessa Beavis, Past President of ANZCA, a specialist anaesthetist at Auckland City Hospital, New Zealand and also an Honorary Senior Lecturer at the Department of Anaesthesiology at the University of Auckland; and Maxime Cannesson, Department Chair, Anesthesiology and Professor of Anesthesiology at UCLA, California, USA and the Director, Centre for Perioperative Medicine (CPMed), American Society of Anesthesiology.

More people than ever are turning to medicine for weight loss, but how do you know if it's right for you? In this episode, I dive into the hot topic of weight loss medications and tackle the myths, science, and facts behind them. As a board-certified obesity medicine specialist, I explain who qualifies for medications like Wegovy, Zepbound, and others, how they work, and why obesity is a chronic condition, not a personal failure. I will walk you through the medical, hormonal, and genetic factors that influence treatment, outline FDA guidelines, and share how I assess whether a patient is a good candidate. I also discuss common misconceptions, long-term use, and tips for having an informed conversation with your doctor. Because remember, It's not about shortcuts, it's about finding the right tools to improve your health and quality of life. Tune in to learn the truth about weight loss medications, debunk common myths, and find out if they're the right fit for your health journey.   Episode Highlights: Who qualifies for weight loss medications FDA-approved options Common myths debunked about weight loss drugs How GLP-1 medications work and their long-term role in obesity treatment Key factors doctors assess before prescribing Contraindications and who should not take these medications How to talk to your doctor about medical weight loss options Connect with Dr. Alicia Shelly: Website | drshellymd.com Facebook | www.facebook.com/drshellymd Instagram | @drshellymd Linked In | www.linkedin.com/in/drshellymd Twitter | @drshellymd About Dr. Alicia Shelly Dr. Alicia Shelly was raised in Atlanta, GA. She received her Doctorate of Medicine from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, OH.  Dr. Shelly has been practicing Primary Care and Obesity medicine since 2014.  In 2017, she became a Diplomat of the American Board of Obesity Medicine. She is the lead physician at the Wellstar Medical Center Douglasville. She started a weekly podcast & Youtube channel entitled Back on Track: Achieving Healthy Weight loss,  where she discusses how to get on track and stay on track with your weight loss journey. She has spoken for numerous local and national organizations, including the Obesity Medicine Association, and the Georgia Chapter of the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons. She has been featured on CNN, Fox 5 News, Bruce St. James Radio show, Upscale magazine, and Shape.com. She was named an honoree of the 2021 Atlanta Business Chronicle's 40 under 40 award. She also is a collaborating author for the, “Made for More: Physician Entrepreneurs who Live Life and Practice Medicine on their own terms''.   Resources: FREE! Discover the 5 Reasons Your Weight-Loss Journey Has Gotten Derailed (And How To Get Back On Track!)

Gian Pazzia is a seasoned cost segregation expert and structural engineer who has spent over 25 years helping real estate investors unlock powerful tax strategies. As a former engineer at Arthur Andersen and current leader at costsegregation.com and KBKG, Gian has worked with everyone from small landlords to major casinos and Fortune 500 companies to help them accelerate depreciation and reduce their tax burdens.    

The science behind your garden hydrangeas involves far more than just planting and watering. Dr. Lisa Alexander, a research geneticist with the USDA Agricultural Research Service, takes us on a fascinating journey from her first days pollinating chestnut trees in a 70-foot bucket truck to her current work revolutionizing hydrangea breeding at the National Arboretum.Working from the heart of Tennessee's nursery country, Dr. Alexander explains how she's mapping the genetic diversity of oakleaf hydrangea across its six-state native range. Her team has identified six distinct genetic populations, some containing rare genes that might help plants survive drought or cold temperatures. This groundbreaking research comes at a critical time – they've discovered that urbanization has already caused these beautiful native plants to disappear from many previously recorded locations.The economic stakes are significant. Hydrangeas represent a $155 million industry, ranking as the second best-selling woody shrub behind roses. By understanding the genetic blueprint controlling traits like plant size, flower structure, and environmental adaptations, breeders can develop improved varieties that combine beauty with resilience.Dr. Alexander also discusses the exciting launch of "Hort Genomes" – a new initiative creating a dedicated home for specialty crop genomic data within the Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science. This resource will accelerate research across horticultural fields by centralizing crucial genetic information previously scattered across publications or unavailable to the scientific community.Whether you're a backyard gardener admiring your hydrangeas or a scientist breeding the next generation of ornamental plants, this episode reveals the remarkable intersection of traditional horticulture with cutting-edge genomics that's shaping the future of our gardens.Read the JASHS article “Precipitation, Temperature, and Population Structure Influence Genetic Diversity of Oakleaf Hydrangea Throughout Its Native Range” at https://www.doi.org/10.21273/JASHS05255-22.Learn more about the American Society for Horticultural Science (ASHS) at https://ashs.org/.HortTechnology, HortScience and the Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science are all open-access and peer-reviewed journals, published by the American Society of Horticultural Science (ASHS). Find them at journals.ashs.org.Consider becoming an ASHS member at https://ashs.org/page/Becomeamember!You can also find the official webpage for Plants, People, Science at ashs.org/plantspeoplesciencepodcast, and we encourage you to send us feedback or suggestions at https://ashs.org/webinarpodcastsuggestion. Podcast transcripts are available at https://plantspeoplescience.buzzsprout.com.On LinkedIn find Sam Humphrey at linkedin.com/in/samson-humphrey. Curt Rom is at https://www.linkedin.com/in/curt-rom-611085134/. Lena Wilson is at https://www.linkedin.com/in/lena-wilson-2531a5141/. Thank you for listening! ...

In this episode of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) Podcast, host Marilyn N. Bulloch, PharmD, BCPS, FCCM, speaks with Christy C. Forehand, PharmD, BCCCP, FCCM, about retaining highly skilled pharmacists in the ICU setting. Dr. Forehand, a clinical pharmacy specialist and residency program director at Augusta University Medical Center and the University of Georgia College of Pharmacy, shares evidence-based insights and personal reflections on how pharmacist retention directly impacts quality and safety in patient care. The conversation highlights growing concerns around burnout and attrition among ICU pharmacists, underscoring how their involvement improves clinical and economic outcomes—ranging from medication safety and reduced ventilator days to optimized transitions of care. Drawing on American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) publications and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) guidance, Dr. Forehand outlines strategies for building retention plans that prioritize recognition, advancement opportunities, career mentorship, and structural supports such as protected administrative time. She emphasizes how institutional practices such as improved scheduling, remote work models, and role-specific stipends can prevent burnout while reinforcing team trust and efficiency. Resources referenced in this episode: SCCM's Leadership, Empowerment, and Development (LEAD) Program, which supports professional development Rewards, Recognition, and Advancement for Clinical Pharmacists (Bondi DS, et al. J Am Coll Clin Pharm. 2023;6:427-439)

PREVIEW: DRUZE OF SYRIA Emma Jarbou of the Druze American Society and the Swaida American Society reports the continued threat to her family and neighbors. [MORE] 1860 DAMASCUS

Send us a textRiley's doctor recommended bariatric surgery as the solution to their health concerns, but when Riley came to me for advice, I realized they hadn't been told about the real risks. From anastomosis leaks with 15% mortality rates to spontaneous bowel perforations years later, the complications of weight loss surgery extend far beyond what most patients are counseled about. In this episode, I walk through the evidence-based risks that every patient deserves to know before making this life-altering decision, because informed consent requires the whole truth. If you or someone you know is considering weight loss surgery, then be sure to send them a link to this episode!References:Lim, Robert et al. “Early and late complications of bariatric operation.” Trauma surgery & acute care open vol. 3,1 e000219. 9 Oct. 2018Silva, Ana Flávia da et al. “Risk factors for the development of surgical site infection in bariatric surgery: an integrative review of literature.” Revista latino-americana de enfermagem vol. 31 (2023)Complications of bariatric surgery: presentation and emergency management--a review.” Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England vol. 91,4 (2009): 280-6.Benotti, Peter et al. “Risk factors associated with mortality after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery.” Annals of surgery vol. 259,1 (2014): 123-30. Coupaye, Muriel et al. “Evaluation of incidence of cholelithiasis after bariatric surgery in subjects treated or not treated with ursodeoxycholic acid.” Surgery for obesity and related diseases : official journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery vol. 13,4 (2017): 681-685 Husain, Syed et al. “Small-bowel obstruction after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: etiology, diagnosis, and management.” Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill. : 1960) vol. 142,10 (2007): 988-93 Seeras K, Acho RJ, Lopez PP. Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Chronic Complications. [Updated 2023 Jun 5]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519489/Got a question for the next podcast? Let me know! Connect With Me FREE GUIDES: evidence-based, not diet nonsense NEWSLETTER: Life-changing insights straight to your inbox UNSHRINKABLE: Find out why your body is not designed to shrink MASTERCLASSES: All the evidence doctors should give you NO WEIGH PROGRAM: Join the revolution against weight-loss lies THE WEIGHTING ROOM: A community where authenticity thrives and every voice matters CONSULTATION: For the ultimate transformation in your healthcare journe Find me on Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn.

Host: Charles Turck, PharmD, BCPS, BCCCP Guest: Manali Kamdar, MD Although CAR T-cell therapies have transformed the treatment of B-cell malignancies, a major logistical and socioeconomic barrier remains: patients are typically required to stay near a certified treatment center for at least 4 weeks after infusion to manage potential adverse events. So to help improve patient access, a recent study explored exactly when toxicities occur and whether post-infusion monitoring could be shortened without compromising safety. And based on the findings, it's time to rethink the 4-week monitoring window. To learn more about the study's results and what they mean for patient monitoring, safety, and broader outcomes, tune in to hear Dr. Charles Turck speak with Dr. Manali Kamdar, who authored a poster on this topic that was presented at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting.

Heart disease is the leading cause of death for women—yet it's still treated like a man's disease. In this powerful conversation, Dr. Martha Gulati, a cardiologist and pioneer in women's cardiovascular health, exposes the systemic gaps that leave women underdiagnosed, undertreated, and often unheard. Together, we unpack the critical differences in how heart disease presents in women, why standard diagnostic tools fall short, and what every woman needs to know about risk factors like pregnancy complications, hormone therapy, statin use, and even environmental exposures. Dr. Gulati also reveals the truth behind hormone therapy myths, explains how soft plaque really forms, and why fitness should be considered frontline prevention.You'll learn:Why women's heart symptoms are often mistaken for anxietyWhat tests to ask for to asses your risk of heart disease How statins, hormone therapy, and fitness interact with riskWhat the new “Prevent" risk score includes—and why it mattersWhy women get more benefits from exercise than menHow pollution, stress, and pregnancy complications shape long-term riskWhether you're in your 20s or postmenopausal, this episode will empower you to take charge of your heart health, ask better questions, and get the care you deserve.Who is Dr. Martha Gulati?Dr. Martha Gulati is a professor of cardiology at the Smidt Heart Institute at Cedars-Sinai, where she serves as Director of Prevention and Associate Director of the Barbra Streisand Women's Heart Center. She is the immediate past president of the American Society for Preventive Cardiology and previously served as the inaugural Chief of Cardiology at the University of Arizona. A leading voice in women's heart health, Dr. Gulati chaired the first national chest pain guidelines and is the author of the best-selling book Saving Women's Hearts.This episode is brought to you by: Manukora - Get $25 off the starter kit – https://manukora.com/DRLYON ARMRA – Code DRLYON for 15% off your first order – https://tryarmra.com/DRLYON Masa Chips - Code LYON for 25% off your first order – https://masachips.com/LYON Our Place – Code DRLYON for 10% off sitewide – https://fromourplace.com/DRLYON Find Dr. Martha Gulati At: Website - https://drmarthagulati.com/ LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/martha-gulati-9b410496/Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/drmarthagulati/X/Twitter - https://x.com/drmarthagulatiCedars-Sinai - https://www.cedars-sinai.org/provider/martha-gulati-2036029.htmlHer book Saving Women's Hearts: https://www.amazon.ca/Saving-Womens-Hearts-Conventional-Strategies/dp/0470678453 Find Me At: Instagram:

Dr Catherine Coombs and Dr William Wierda summarize major treatment advances in chronic lymphocytic leukemia presented at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting and review ongoing clinical trials. CME information and select publications here.

This talk delivered by Professor René Provost explored important lessons on the promises and limits of non-state justice in conflict zones, specifically looking at the Kurdish-dominated Democratic Autonomous Administration of North East Syria. Zones of armed conflict are spaces of disorder, which state and non-state belligerents alike aim to curtail through law. Starting in 2014, the Kurdish-dominated Democratic Autonomous Administration of North East Syria established its own courts and enacted its own laws, in civil as well as criminal matters. For a decade, this unrecognised system of administration of justice has struggled to bring social order to this war-afflicted territory. Meet our speaker and chair René Provost Ad.E. FRSC is the James McGill Professor of Justice Beyond the State at the Faculty of Law of McGill University. He joined the Faculty of Law of McGill University in 1994, where he was Associate Dean (Academic) from 2001 to 2003 and the founding Director of the McGill Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism from 2005 to 2010. Professor Provost teaches Public International Law, International Human Rights Law, International Humanitarian Law, International Environmental Law, Legal Anthropology, and various courses in legal theory. His latest book is 'Rebel Courts – The Administration of Justice by Armed Insurgents' (Oxford University Press 2021), winner of the 2022 ICON-S Prize for Best Book in Public Law and the 2023 American Society of International Law Certificate of Merit for Creative Scholarship. Robert Lowe is Deputy Director of the LSE Middle East Centre and Co-Convenor of the Kurdish Studies Series at the LSE Middle East Centre. His main research interest is Kurdish politics, with particular focus on the Kurdish movements in Syria. He is Co-Editor of the Kurdish Studies Series, published by I.B. Tauris.

In this episode of SurgOnc Today, the SSO Colorectal Disease Site Working Group will recap content from the 2025 American Society of Colorectal Surgeons (ASCARS) and Society of Surgery of the Alimentary Tract (SSAT) programs. Broad highlights of both benign and malignant disease conditions are covered. This episode is hosted by Dr. Jennifer Miller-Ocuin, Dr. Jitesh Patel, Dr. Abhineet Uppal, and Dr. Prakash Pandalai. They cover hot topics, areas of controversy, and new research shared across various specialties including colorectal surgery, surgical oncology, gastroenterology, basic, and translational sciences. We hope you will enjoy this recap.

Cardiac arrest in the operating room presents unique challenges that standard Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) protocols simply were not designed to address. This eye-opening exploration with APSF author, Zachary Smith, reveals why traditional resuscitation guidelines fall short when emergencies strike during surgery and anesthesia care.The dynamics of cardiac arrest differ dramatically in the perioperative environment. While out-of-hospital arrests typically stem from arrhythmic events, OR emergencies often result from hemorrhage, embolism, hypoxemia, or critical drug reactions like malignant hyperthermia or local anesthetic toxicity. These scenarios demand immediate, specialized interventions beyond standard ACLS algorithms.Physical constraints further complicate matters. What happens when cardiac arrest occurs while a patient is positioned prone, lateral, or in steep Trendelenburg? Traditional compressions become impossible, and emerging research suggests prone CPR might actually be superior in some scenarios. Moreover, the advanced monitoring capabilities in the OR – arterial lines, central venous pressure readings, and echocardiography – provide critical data not incorporated into standard protocols.The American Society of Anesthesiologists has responded with their Perioperative Resuscitation and Life Support Certificate program, addressing these gaps through specialized training that combines ACLS principles with OR-specific knowledge.  Ready to enhance your skills beyond basic ACLS? Explore the ASA's certificate program to earn patient safety CME credits while gaining life-saving expertise tailored to the unique challenges of the operating room. Your specialized knowledge could make all the difference when seconds count.For show notes & transcript, visit our episode page at apsf.org: https://www.apsf.org/podcast/264-rethinking-resuscitation-in-the-operating-room-beyond-acls/© 2025, The Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation

Did you know that high fructose corn syrup, a sweetener found in everything from soda to salad dressing, has been linked to obesity, diabetes, and inflammation? In this episode, I explore a surprising claim by Donald Trump that Coca Cola may switch from high fructose corn syrup to cane sugar—and use this as a springboard to explore the health concerns around high fructose corn syrup. I break down what it is, why it's used so widely in processed foods, and the many health risks it poses, from obesity and diabetes to inflammation and high blood pressure. I even share a patient story that highlights its real-life impact. While cane sugar isn't a healthy food either, it may have fewer metabolic downsides. Regardless of whether Coca Cola makes the switch, I emphasize the power we have to read labels, reduce added sugar, choose more whole foods, and make smarter decisions for our health. Tune in to learn how cutting back on hidden sugars like high fructose corn syrup can transform your health and energy!   Episode Highlights: Trump's claim about Coca Cola switching to cane sugar What high fructose corn syrup is and why it's widely used Health risks linked to high fructose corn syrup Real-life patient story on soda and high blood pressure Differences between cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup Practical tips for reducing added sugar in your diet Connect with Dr. Alicia Shelly: Website | drshellymd.com Facebook | www.facebook.com/drshellymd Instagram | @drshellymd Linked In | www.linkedin.com/in/drshellymd Twitter | @drshellymd About Dr. Alicia Shelly Dr. Alicia Shelly was raised in Atlanta, GA. She received her Doctorate of Medicine from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, OH.  Dr. Shelly has been practicing Primary Care and Obesity medicine since 2014.  In 2017, she became a Diplomat of the American Board of Obesity Medicine. She is the lead physician at the Wellstar Medical Center Douglasville. She started a weekly podcast & Youtube channel entitled Back on Track: Achieving Healthy Weight loss,  where she discusses how to get on track and stay on track with your weight loss journey. She has spoken for numerous local and national organizations, including the Obesity Medicine Association, and the Georgia Chapter of the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons. She has been featured on CNN, Fox 5 News, Bruce St. James Radio show, Upscale magazine, and Shape.com. She was named an honoree of the 2021 Atlanta Business Chronicle's 40 under 40 award. She also is a collaborating author for the, “Made for More: Physician Entrepreneurs who Live Life and Practice Medicine on their own terms''.   Resources: FREE! Discover the 5 Reasons Your Weight-Loss Journey Has Gotten Derailed (And How To Get Back On Track!)

What was it like to learn from Dr. Deming himself -- a decade before his name became legend in U.S. business circles? In this deeply personal episode, William Scherkenbach shares with host Andrew Stotz what it was like to sit in Deming's classroom in 1972, join him for late-night chats at the Cosmos Club, and help ignite transformational change at Ford and GM. Learn how Deming's teachings shaped a lifetime of purpose, and why Scherkenbach, now in his 80th year, is stepping back into the arena with lessons still burning bright. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm here with featured guest William Scherkenbach, and he is known as one of the men who has spent a huge amount of time with Dr. Deming, as he mentioned to me previously, starting from 1972, over a thousand meetings and many other activities that he's been involved in. So, Bill, welcome to the show. Why don't you give us a little background about you?   0:00:39.5 William Scherkenbach: Oh, okay. Good to be here, Andrew. Well, I'm going to start with, since it's about Deming, in '72, I was newly married in April, but had been accepted to NYU Graduate School of Business, and I don't know, I never found out who wrote the course syllabus, but whoever did wrote something that it sounded like a darn interesting course, sampling, manufacturing. I was a protocol officer at the United Nations at the time and was going to night school at the New York University Graduate School of Business. So, I said, this sounds like a good course, interesting course. Had no idea who Dr. Deming was, and I walked into the first class, and there was an old, I'm 26, so he was 72 in 1972, and he was one of the first, one of the only old person who didn't say, I used to be, and I don't want to stereotype all of my peers now that I'm 79, but hopefully I don't fall into the, well, I used to be and what happened. But he did tell, I mean, statistics can be a very technical subject, and the way he taught it, I had courses in some theory of sampling, which was one of his books.   0:02:52.2 William Scherkenbach: He had three, I said three courses. The other course that I took was based on his lectures in Japan in 1950, and in fact, two of them. The third course was an extension of that. So, he was, he would teach the statistics, but he was able to tell the history of the people behind all of the thoughts and the formulas and approaches, and I found that extremely, extremely interesting. And he handed out tons of papers and material, and it was just a very, very good experience. I know he had, and he had, in my opinion, a great sense of humor, but then statisticians, what's our status? Yeah, we're like accountants, in any event. .   0:04:12.2 Andrew Stotz: Why was he teaching? I mean, at 72, most men, you know, maybe women also, but most of us are like, it's the twilight of our years, and we now know he had 30 more years to go, but why was he teaching? And also, what's interesting is when I think about Deming, I think about his overall system of what he's teaching, whereas it's interesting to think about how he taught one relatively narrow subject.   0:04:43.7 William Scherkenbach: I'll get to that as to why I think he was teaching. But yeah, back then there were no 14 Points, no glimmer of Profound Knowledge. It was, not theoretical statistics, but applied statistics with a theory behind it. And he still was really expanding on Shewhart 's work with the difference between enumerative and analytic. He used his own. Now, why he was teaching, years later, probably 1987, so yeah, a bunch of years later, when I was at Ford and I had attended at the time, I attended a senior executive week-long get-together in order to get constancy of purpose or more continuity in the senior executive group. One of the people we brought in was Dr. Peter Kastenbaum. And I found as I attended his lecture in that week-long meeting, he was a student of CI Lewis. And CI Lewis, Deming learned about from Walter Shewhart and his work in the epistemology theory of knowledge. And in any event, Deming, when he was asked, and at the time it was still in the '30s, I think, when he was at the School of Agriculture, or the agriculture department, and bringing in Shewhart, he had tried to get CI Lewis to come talk. And CI said, I would love to, but I have a commitment to my students. And so I can't adjust my schedule.   0:07:33.9 William Scherkenbach: And the students, the people who wanted to learn were sacred. And I think that had a huge impact on Dr. Deming. I mean, he spoke about it a lot. And the way, you know, in a lot of the videos that Clare Crawford-Mason did, lovingly called the old curmudgeon. But for students, he had the greatest empathy and charity for, he just didn't suffer fools gladly. If you showed him that you weren't willing to learn, he took great joy in letting them know where they, where they stood.   0:08:43.1 Andrew Stotz: And one of the things when I went into my first Deming seminar in 1990, so now we're fast forwarding 30 years from when you first met him. It was almost like there was a safe harbor for workers, for young people, for people with open minds. I mean, I didn't, I watched as he didn't suffer fools, but I'm just curious, when you go back to 1972 in those classes, I'm assuming that he was pretty gentle with the students, encouraging them and all that was...   0:09:19.0 William Scherkenbach: Oh, absolutely. In my experience, I mean, if you were by, you know, in a student in graduate school, even though the graduate school of business in New York, down on 90 Church Street, Wall Street area, there were very few people going directly from your bachelor's to the master's program. And so these were people that had probably 10 years experience in business doing stuff. And yet by going to the class, absolutely were willing to learn, listen to different points of view, which is absolutely crucial. As you progress with theory of knowledge to be able to get different perspectives on whatever it is you're trying to look at.   0:10:23.2 Andrew Stotz: I would like to continue on this period of time just because it's a snapshot we don't get that often or that easily. You mentioned CI Lewis, a man who lived from about 1880 to about the year I was born, around 1964-65, and he was known for his understanding and discussion about logic and things like that. But why was CI Lewis someone that was interesting to Dr. Deming? What was the connection from your perspective?   0:10:59.6 William Scherkenbach: Well, my understanding is Shewhart referred to him, and Lewis was a professor at Harvard, and he was in the Peirce, I believe it's called. It looks like Peirce, but it's Peirce School of, or Chair of Philosophy, and Charles Sanders Peirce was a huge, huge influence in epistemology. And so that whole chain of thought or train of thought interested Deming, but it really was, he was introduced to it by Walter Shewhart.    0:11:48.3 Andrew Stotz: There's a famous quote, I believe, by Deming about CI Lewis and his book Mind and the World Order.   0:11:56.0 William Scherkenbach: Mind and the World Order, yeah.   0:11:59.9 Andrew Stotz: Deming said he had to read it six times before he fully understood and could apply its insights. And sometimes I think maybe Dr. Deming was truly inspired by that because when I think about his work, I'm still reading it and rereading it. And just listening to the video that you did many years ago with Tim talking about reduced variation, reduced variation, what he was talking about. Sometimes when we see the big picture, there's many different components of Deming's teachings. But if you had to bring it down to kind of its core, you know, he mentioned on that video that I just watched this morning, he mentioned reduced variation, and that will get you lower costs, happier customers, more jobs. How would you say, after you've looked at it from so many different angles over so many different years, how would you say you would sum up Dr. Deming's message to the world?   0:13:01.5 William Scherkenbach: Well, that's a difficult thing to sum up. Back then, when we did the video, which was in the early '80s, maybe '84, again, he had his 14 Points by then, but he hadn't, it hadn't really, the Profound Knowledge part of that wasn't there. Now, he had used what Shewhart said, and he had read, tried to read CI Lewis, and when he spoke about the connection between theory and questions, that's what he got from Shewhart and, well, and from Lewis, and a bunch of other pragmatist philosophers. So, he, you know, he was influenced by it, and, well, that's all I can say.   0:14:27.5 Andrew Stotz: So, let's go back in time. So, you're sitting in this classroom, you're intrigued, inspired. How did the relationship go at, towards the end of the class, and then as you finished that class, how did you guys keep in touch, and how did the relationship develop?   0:14:51.0 William Scherkenbach: Well, that is an interesting story. I usually am, well, I am introverted. So I had, after I moved from New York, I got a job at Booz Allen and Hamilton in Washington, DC. So in '74, when I got the degree from NYU, we moved to Silver Spring. And obviously, he's lived on Butterworth Place since there was a Butterworth Place. So we were able to, one of the things, and this is, well, I will say it, one of his advice to me, although he gave everyone an A, I later kidded him, he didn't remember that he gave me a B. No, he gave me an A. In any event, but one of his piece of advice was, you really don't need to join ASQC. You know more about quality than any of those inspectors. And so he had learned from the '50s in the past 20 years from the 50s that inspection wasn't going to do it. Well, I didn't take his advice, and I joined ASQC, and I was reading...   0:16:36.1 Andrew Stotz:Which for those who don't know is the American Society for...   0:16:41.6 William Scherkenbach: Quality Control, back then, now it's just the American Society for Quality. I had recommended when we did a big recommendations and forecasts for the year 2000 that quality, it should be the Society for Quality worldwide, but it's ASQ now. Let's see.   0:17:07.7 Andrew Stotz: So he recommended you don't join and you didn't follow his recommendation.    0:17:12.1 William Scherkenbach: I don't join, and I read an article, and it was by a professor in Virginia Tech, and he was showing a c-chart and the data were in control, and his recommendations were to penalize the people that were high and reward the people that were low, which is even back then, Dr. Deming was absolutely on track with that. If your process is in control, it doesn't make any sense to rank order or think that any of them are sufficiently different to reward or penalize. And I had never done this, but it was, I wrote a letter to quality progress. I sent a copy to Dr. Deming, and he said, "By golly, you're right on, that's great." And so I think it probably was '75, yeah, 1975. So I had been a year or so out, and he started inviting me over to his place at Butterworth, and we would go to the Cosmos Club. And that was a logistical challenge because at the time he had, well, his garage was a separate, not attached, it was in the backyard and emptied onto an alley. And he had a huge Lincoln Continental, the ones with the doors that opened from the center.   0:19:29.0 William Scherkenbach: And he would get in and drive and then park it in back of the club and someone would watch over it. But those were some good memories. So that was my introduction to keep contact with him. As I said, I had never done that. I don't think I've written a letter to an editor ever again.   0:20:04.8 Andrew Stotz: And you're mentioning about Butterworth, which is in DC.   0:20:12.6 William Scherkenbach: Butterworth Place, yeah.   0:20:14.7 Andrew Stotz: And Butterworth Place where he had his consulting business, which he ran, I believe, out of his basement.   0:20:18.3 William Scherkenbach: Out of the basement, yep, yep, yep.   0:20:21.2 Andrew Stotz: And just out of curiosity, what was it like when you first went to his home? Here, you had met him as your teacher, you respected him, you'd been away for a little bit, he invited you over. What was that like on your first walk into his home?   0:20:38.5 William Scherkenbach: Well, went down the side, the entrance to the basement was on the side of the house, and Seal had her desk set up right by the door. And then, I don't know if you can see, this is neat compared to his desk. It was filled with books and papers, but he knew where everything was. But it was a very cordial atmosphere.   0:21:25.2 Andrew Stotz: So when you mentioned Cecelia Kilian, is that her name, who was his assistant at the time?   0:21:36.3 William Scherkenbach: Yes, yes.   0:21:38.0 Andrew Stotz: Okay, so you...   0:21:38.8 William Scherkenbach: Yeah. For Jeepers. I don't know how long, but it had to be 50 years or so. So I don't, I mean, back in the '70s, I don't know of any other. He might have had, well, okay. He, yeah.   0:22:01.1 Andrew Stotz: I think it's about 40 or 50 years. So that's an incredible relationship he had with her. And I believe she wrote something. I think I have one of her, a book that she wrote that described his life. I can't remember that one right now but...   0:22:14.2 William Scherkenbach: Yeah. A lot of, yeah, it contained a lot of...   0:22:16.6 Andrew Stotz: The World of Dr. W. Edwards Deming, I think was the name of it, yeah.   0:22:20.6 William Scherkenbach: Okay. It contained a lot of his diaries on a number of his visits to Japan and elsewhere.   0:22:32.1 Andrew Stotz: So for some of us, when we go into our professor's offices, we see it stacked full of papers, but they've been sitting there for years. And we know that the professor just doesn't really do much with it. It's just all sitting there. Why did he have so much stuff on it? Was it incoming stuff that was coming to him? Was it something he was writing? Something he was reading? What was it that was coming in and out of his desk?   0:22:55.7 William Scherkenbach: A combination of stuff. I don't know. I mean, he was constantly writing, dictating to seal, but writing and reading. He got a, I mean, as the decades proceeded out of into the '80s, after '82, the NBC white or the '80, the NBC white paper calls were coming in from all over, all over the world. So yeah, a lot of people sending him stuff.   0:23:35.8 Andrew Stotz: I remember seeing him pulling out little scraps of paper at the seminar where he was taking notes and things like that at '90. So I could imagine he was just prolific at jotting things down. And when you read what he wrote, he really is assembling a lot of the notes and things that he's heard from different people. You can really capture that.   0:23:59.0 William Scherkenbach: Yeah. He didn't have an identic memory, but he took notes and quite, you know, and what he would do at the end of the day before retiring, he'd review the notes and commit them to memory as best he could. So he, yeah, very definitely. I mean, we would, you know, and well, okay. We're still in the early days before Ford and GM, but.   0:24:37.6 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And I want to, if I shoot forward to '90, '92, when I studied with him, I was impressed with his energy at his age and he was just on a mission. And when I hear about your discussion about the class and at that time, it's like he was forming his, you know, System of Profound Knowledge, his 14 Points. When do you think it really became a mission for him to help, let's say American industry?   0:25:09.0 William Scherkenbach: Oh, well, I think it was a mission when Ford began its relationship with him. The ability of a large corporation, as well, and Ford at the same time Pontiac, the Pontiac division, not the whole GM, but Pontiac, was learning as well. But the attachment to Ford was that you had Don Peterson at the time was president of Ford, and he was intellectually curious, and he and Deming were on the same frequency. Now, I don't want to jump ahead, but if anyone has, well, you've read my second book there, you'll know that I have mentioned that the way to change is physical, logical, and emotional. And when you look at the gurus back then, there was Deming, who was the logical guru. You had Phil Crosby, who was the emotional guru. You go to the flag and the wine and cheese party, and Deming would say, "No," and Joe Juran, who was interested in focusing on the physical organization, you report to me kind of a thing. And so each of these behemoths were passing each other in the night with the greatest respect. But, but, and so they had their constituents. The challenge is to be able to broaden the appeal.    0:27:33.8 Andrew Stotz: So we've gone through '72, and then now '75, you've written your piece, and he's brought you into the fold. You're starting to spend some time with him. I believe it was about 1981 or so when he started working with Ford. And at that time, the quality director, I think, was Larry Moore at the time. And of course, you mentioned Donald Peterson. Maybe you can help us now understand from your own perspective of what you were doing between that time and how you saw that happening.   0:28:13.4 William Scherkenbach: Well, I had, my career was, after Booz Allen, mostly in the quality reliability area. I went from Booz Allen and Hamilton to, I moved to Columbia, Maryland, because I can fondly remember my grandfather in Ironwood, Michigan, worked at the Oliver Mine. There's a lot of iron ore mines up in the UP. ANd he would, and his work, once he got out of the mines later on, was he would cut across the backyard, and his office was right there. And so he would walk home for lunch and take a nap and walk back. And I thought that really was a good style of life. So Columbia, Maryland, was designed by Rouse to be a live-in, work-in community. And so we were gonna, we moved to Columbia, and there was a consulting firm called Hitman Associates, and their specialty was energy and environmental consulting. So did a bunch of that, worked my way up to a vice president. And so, but in '81, Deming said, you know, Ford really is interested. He was convinced, and again, it's déjà vu, he spoke about, when he spoke fondly about his lectures in Japan in 1950 and onward, that he was, he was very concerned that top management needed to be there, because he had seen all the excitement at Stanford during the war, and it died out afterwards, because management wasn't involved.   0:30:42.8 Andrew Stotz: What do you mean by that? What do you mean by the excitement at Stanford? You mean people working together for the efforts of the war, or was there a particular thing that was happening at Stanford?   0:30:51.7 William Scherkenbach: Well, they were, he attributed it to the lack of management support. I mean, they learned SPC. We were able to improve quality of war material or whatever, whoever attended the Stanford courses. But he saw the same thing in Japan and was lucky to, and I'm not sure if it was Ishikawa. I'm just not sure, but he was able to get someone to make the call after a few of the seminars for the engineers to make the call to the top management to attend the next batch. And he was able, he was able to do that. And that he thought was very helpful. I, I, gave them a leg up on whatever steps were next. I'm reminded of a quote from, I think it was Lao Tzu. And he said that someone asked him, "Well, you talk to the king, why or the emperor, why are things so screwed up?" And he said, "Well, I get to talk to him an hour a week and the rest of the time his ears are filled with a bunch of crap." Or whatever the Chinese equivalent of that is. And he said, "Of course the king isn't going to be able to act correctly." Yeah, there are a lot of things that impacted any company that he helped.   0:33:07.6 Andrew Stotz: It's interesting because I believe that, I think it was Kenichi Koyanagi.   0:33:15.8 William Scherkenbach: Koyanagi, yes, it was.   0:33:17.8 Andrew Stotz: And it was in 1950 and he had a series of lectures that he did a series of times. But it's interesting that, you know, that seemed like it should have catapulted him, but then to go to where you met him in 1972 and all that, he still hadn't really made his impact in America. And that's, to me, that's a little bit interesting.   0:33:44.4 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, and quite, my take, I mean, you could tell even in '72 and '3 in classes, he was very frustrated that he wasn't being listened to. I mean, he had, his business was expert testimony in statistical design of surveys. He did road truck, truck transport studies to be able to help the interstate commerce commission. And made periodic trips back to Japan, well known in Japan, but frustrated that no one really knew about him or wasn't listening to him in the US. And that was, I mean, for years, that was my, my aim. And that is to help him be known for turning America around, not just Japan. But it's usually difficult. I mean, we did a great job at Ford and GM and a bunch of companies, but it's all dissipated.   0:35:25.9 Andrew Stotz: It's interesting because it's not like he just went as a guest and gave a couple of guest lectures. He did about 35 lectures in 1950. About 28 or almost 30 of them were to engineers and technical staff. And then about seven of them were to top level executives. And, you know, one of the quotes he said at the time from those lectures was, "the problem is at the top, quality is made in the boardroom." So just going back, that's 1950, then you meet him in 1970, then in '72, then you start to build this relationship. You've talked about Booz Allen Hamilton. Tell us more about how it progressed into working more with him, in particular Ford and that thing that started in, let's say, 1981 with Ford.   0:36:22.0 William Scherkenbach: Well, again, he was very enthusiastic about Ford because Peterson was very receptive to this, his approach. And again, it's, I think the British philosopher Johnson said, "there's nothing like the prospect of being hung in the morning to heighten a man's senses." So he, Ford had lost a couple billion bucks. They hadn't cashed in like Chrysler. GM lost a bunch too, but that, and Japan had lost a war. So does it take a significant emotional, logical, or physical event? For some folks it does. So he was very encouraged about what he was seeing at Ford. And he had recommended that Ford hire someone to be there full time to coordinate, manage, if you will. And I was one of the people he recommended and I was the one that Ford hired. So I came in as Director of Statistical Methods and Process Improvement. And they set it up outside, as Deming said, they set it up outside the quality. Larry Moore was the Director of Quality and I was Director of Statistical Methods. And that's the way it was set up.   0:38:08.0 Andrew Stotz: Were you surprised when you received that call? How did you feel when you got that call to say, "Why don't you go over there and do this job at Ford?"   0:38:18.6 William Scherkenbach: Oh, extremely, extremely happy. Yeah. Yeah.   0:38:23.1 Andrew Stotz: And so did you, did you move to Michigan or what did you do?   0:38:27.7 Andrew Stotz: I'm sorry?   0:38:29.4 Andrew Stotz: Did you move or what happened next as you took that job?   0:38:32.0 William Scherkenbach: Oh yeah, we were living in Columbia. We moved the family to the Detroit area and ended up getting a house in Northville, which is a Northwest suburb of Detroit.   0:38:49.9 Andrew Stotz: And how long were you at Ford?   0:38:53.8 William Scherkenbach: About five and a half years. And I left Ford because Deming thought that GM needed my help. Things were going well. I mean, had a great, great bunch of associates, Pete Chessa, Ed Baker, Narendra Sheth, and a bunch of, a bunch of other folks. Ed Baker took the directorship when I left. That was my, well, I recommended a number of them, but yeah, he followed on. Deming thought that there was a good organization set up. And me being a glutton for punishment went to, well, not really. A bunch of great, great people in GM, but it's, they were, each of the general managers managed a billion dollar business and a lot of, difficult to get the silos to communicate. And it really, there was not much cooperation, a lot of backstabbing.   0:40:25.0 Andrew Stotz: And how did Dr. Deming take this project on? And what was the relationship between him and, you know, let's say Donald Peterson, who was the running the company and all the people that he had involved, like yourself, and you mentioned about Ed Baker and other people, I guess, Sandy Munro and others that were there. And just curious, and Larry Moore, how did he approach that? That's a huge organization and he's coming in right at the top. What was his approach to handling that?   0:41:02.1 S2  Well, my approach was based on his recommendation that the Director of Statistical Methods should report directly to the president or the chairman, the president typically. And so based on that, I figured that what I would, how we would organize the office, my associates would each be assigned to a key vice president to be their alter ego. So we did it in a, on a divisional level. And that worked, I think, very well. The difficulty was trying to match personalities and expertise to the particular vice president. Ed Baker had very good relations with the Latin American organization, and, and he and Harry Hannett, Harold Hannett helped a lot in developing administrative applications as well. And so we sort of came up with a matrix of organization and discipline. We needed someone for finance and engineering and manufacturing, supply chain, and was able to matrix the office associates in to be able to be on site with those people to get stuff, to get stuff done.   0:43:09.5 Andrew Stotz: And what was your message at that time, and what was Dr. Deming's message? Because as we know, his message has come together very strongly after that. But at that point, it's not like he had the 14 Points that he could give them Out of the Crisis or you could give them your books that you had done. So what was like the guiding philosophy or the main things that you guys were trying to get across?   0:43:35.9 William Scherkenbach: Well, I mean, he had given in, I think, Quality, Productivity, Competitive Position back in the late '70s, and he was doing it through George Washington University, even though Myron Tribus at MIT published it. But it was a series of lectures, and he didn't really, even in the later 70s, didn't have the, the, the 14 Points. And so those came a couple years later, his thinking through, and Profound Knowledge didn't come until much later over a number of discussions of folks. But the, I mean, the key, I mean, my opinion of why it all dropped out is we dropped the ball in not working with the board. And at Ford, we didn't, weren't able to influence the Ford family. And so Peterson retires and Red Poling, a finance guy, steps in and, and everything slowly disintegrates. At least not disintegrates, well, yes. I mean, what was important under Peterson was different. But that happens in any company. A new CEO comes on board or is elected, and they've got their priorities based, as Deming would say, on their evaluation system. What's their, how are they compensated?   0:45:46.8 William Scherkenbach: And so we just didn't spend the time there nor at GM with how do you elect or select your next CEO? And so smaller companies have a better, I would think, well, I don't know. I would imagine smaller companies have a better time of that, especially closely held and family held companies. You could, if you can reach the family, you should be able to get some continuity there.   0:46:23.5 Andrew Stotz: So Donald Peterson stepped down early 1995. And when did you guys make or when did you make your transition from Ford to GM?   0:46:38.5 William Scherkenbach: '88.   0:46:39.6 Andrew Stotz: Okay, so you continued at Ford.   0:46:42.1 William Scherkenbach: The end of '88, yeah, and I left GM in '93, the year Dr. Deming died later. But I had left in, in, well, in order to help him better.   0:47:07.8 Andrew Stotz: And let's now talk about the transition over to General Motors that you made. And where did that come from? Was it Dr. Deming that was recommending it or someone from General Motors? Or what...   0:47:21.4 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, Deming spoke with them and spoke with me. And I was a willing worker to be able to go where he thought I could be most helpful.   0:47:41.9 Andrew Stotz: And was he exasperated or frustrated that for the changes that happened in '95 when Peterson stepped down, he started to see the writing on the wall? Or was he still hopeful?   0:47:55.4 William Scherkenbach: No, Deming died in '93, so he didn't see any of that.   0:47:58.9 Andrew Stotz: No, no, what I mean is when Peterson stepped down, it was about '85. And then you remain at Ford until '88.   0:48:08.0 William Scherkenbach: No, Peterson didn't step down in '85. I mean, he was still there when I left.   0:48:14.0 Andrew Stotz: So he was still chairman at the time.   0:48:17.3 William Scherkenbach: Yeah.   0:48:17.6 Andrew Stotz: Maybe I'm meaning he stepped down from president. So my mistake on that.   0:48:20.3 William Scherkenbach: Oh, but he was there.   0:48:24.3 Andrew Stotz: So when did it start...   0:48:25.9 William Scherkenbach: True. I mean, true, he was still there when Deming had died.   0:48:31.3 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, okay. So did the whole team leave Ford and go to GM or was it just you that went?   0:48:39.1 William Scherkenbach: Oh, just me. Just me.   0:48:42.8 Andrew Stotz: Okay. And then.   0:48:44.0 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, because we had set up something that Deming was very pleased with. And so they were, everyone was working together and helping one another.   0:48:59.5 Andrew Stotz: Okay. So then you went to General Motors. What did you do different? What was different in your role? What did you learn from Ford that you now brought to GM? What went right? What went wrong? What was your experience with GM at that time?   0:49:16.5 William Scherkenbach: Well, I've got a, let's see. Remember Bill Hoagland was the person, Hoagland managed Pontiac when Deming helped Pontiac and Ron Moen was involved in the Pontiac. But Bill Hoagland was in one of the reorganizations at GM was head of, he was group, group vice president for Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac. And so I went over and directly reported to him and each of the, I mean, Wendy Coles was in, Gypsy Rainey, although Gypsy was temporary, worked for powertrain and Pontiac and still, but powertrain was where a lot of the expertise was and emphasis was, and then Buick and Cadillac and so, and Oldsmobile. So we, and in addition to that, General Motors had a corporate-wide effort in cooperation with the UAW called the Quality Network. And I was appointed a member of that, of that and, and helped them a lot and as well as the corporate quality office, but focused on Buick, Oldsmobile, Cadillac.   0:51:18.6 Andrew Stotz: And then tell us about what was your next step in your own personal journey? And then let's now get into how you got more involved with Deming and his teachings and the like.   0:51:32.8 William Scherkenbach: Well, I mean, he would be at GM two and three days a month, and then every quarter he'd be here for, just like Ford, for a four-day seminar. And while at Ford and at GM, I took uh vacation to help him as he gave seminars and met people throughout the world. Even when he was probably 84, 85, I can remember, well, one of the, he always, not always, but he would schedule seminars in England over the Fourth of July because the English don't celebrate that, although he said perhaps they should, but right after the Ascot races. And so he would do four-day seminars. And on one case, we had one series of weeks, the week before Fourth of July, we did a four-day seminar in the US and then went to London to do another four-day seminar. And he went to South Africa for the next four-day seminar with Heero Hacquebord. I didn't go, but I went down to Brazil and I was dragging with that, with that schedule. So he was able to relish and enjoy the helping others. I mean, enjoy triggers a memory. We were at helping powertrain and Gypsy was there, Dr. Gypsy Rainey.    0:53:59.2 William Scherkenbach: And she, we were talking and goofing around and he started being cross at us. And Gypsy said, "Well, aren't we supposed to be having fun?" And Deming said, "I'm having fun." "You guys straighten out." Enjoy, enjoy, enjoy, yeah.   0:54:40.6 Andrew Stotz: And for the typical person to imagine a man at the age of 80, 85, traveling around the world. And it's not like you're traveling on vacation in London, you're walking into a room full of people, your energy is up, you're going and it's not like he's giving a keynote speech for an hour, give us a picture of his energy.   0:55:09.5 William Scherkenbach: And over in London, it was brutal because the hotel, I forget what hotel we're in. When he started there, I think it was Dr. Bernard that he wanted to help. And Bernard wasn't available. So he recommended Henry Neave. And so Henry was a good student, a quick learner. So he helped on a few of them. And I can still remember, I mean, the air, it was 4th of July in London and the humidity was there. There's no air conditioning in the hotel. I could remember Henry, please forgive me, but Henry is sitting in his doorway, sitting on a trash can, doing some notes in his skivvies. And it was hot and humid and awful. But so it reminded Deming a lot of the lectures in Japan in 1950, where he was sweating by 8 AM in the morning. So, yeah.   0:56:30.6 Andrew Stotz: What was it that kept him going? Why was he doing this?   0:56:39.5 William Scherkenbach: I think he, again, I don't know. I never asked him that. He was very, to me, he was on a mission. He wanted to be able to help people live better, okay, and take joy in what they do. And so he was, and I think that was the driving thing. And as long as he had the stamina, he was, he was in, in, in heaven.   0:57:21.1 Andrew Stotz: So let's keep progressing now, and let's move forward towards the latter part of Dr. Deming's life, where we're talking about 1990, 1988, 1990, 1992. What changed in your relationship and your involvement with what he was doing, and what changes did you see in the way he was talking about? You had observed him back in 1972, so here he is in 1990, a very, very different man in some ways, but very similar. How did you observe that?   0:57:56.6 William Scherkenbach: Well, toward the end, it was, I mean, it was, it was not, not pleasant to see him up there with oxygen up his nose, and it just, there had to have been a better way. But Nancy Mann was running those seminars, and they did their best to make life comfortable, but there had to have been a better way to, but I don't know what it was. He obviously wanted to continue to do it, and he had help doing it, but I don't know how effective the last year of seminars were.   0:59:01.1 Andrew Stotz: Well, I mean, I would say in some ways they were very effective, because I attended in 1990 and 1992, and I even took a picture, and I had a picture, and in the background of the picture of him is a nurse, and for me, I just was blown away and knocked out. And I think that one of the things for the listeners and the viewers is to ask yourself, we're all busy doing our work, and we're doing a lot of activities, and we're accomplishing things, but for what purpose, for what mission? And I think that that's what I gained from him is that because he had a mission to help, as you said, make the world a better place, make people have a better life in their job, and help people wake up, that mission really drove him.   0:59:57.8 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, and it, it really did. But for me personally, it was just not pleasant to see him suffering.    1:00:09.6 Andrew Stotz: And was he in pain? Was he just exhausted? What was it like behind the scenes when he'd come off stage and take a break?   1:00:18.7 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, yeah.   1:00:20.8 Andrew Stotz: And would he take naps or?   1:00:23.2 William Scherkenbach: In the early days, we'd go to, well, at Ford and GM, we would go out to dinner just about every night and talk and enjoy the conversation. We'd, my wife Mary Ellen, went many, many times. He enjoyed Northville, some of the restaurants there, and enjoyed the Deming martinis after the meetings at the Cosmos Club. So very, very much he enjoyed that, that time off the podium. So, but he couldn't do that in the, in the later years.   1:01:28.7 Andrew Stotz: And let's now try to understand the progression as you progress away from General Motors and did other things. How did your career progress in those years until when you retired or to where you are now? Maybe give us a picture of that.   1:01:51.4 William Scherkenbach: I tried to help. I've developed my view on how to operationalize change, worked for, was vice president of a company in Taiwan, spent a couple of, and before that had helped Dell, and would spend probably ending up a couple of years in PRC and Taiwan, and growing and learning to learn, in my opinion, there's too much generalization of, well, Asians or Chinese or whatever. There are many, many subgroups, and so change has to be bespoke. What will work for one person won't work for another. For instance, trying to talk to a number of Chinese executives saying, drive out fear, and they will, oh, there's no fear here. It's respect. And so, yeah. But that was their sincere belief that what they were doing wasn't instilling fear. But it broadened my perspective on what to do. And then probably 10 years ago, my wife started to come down with Alzheimer's, and while we lived in Austin, Texas, and that I've spent, she died three years ago, but that was pretty much all-consuming. That's where I focused. And now it's been three years. I'm looking, and I'm a year younger than Deming when he started, although he was 79 when he was interviewed for the 1980 White Paper.   1:04:36.3 William Scherkenbach: So I'm in my 80th year. So, and I'm feeling good, and I also would like to help people.   1:04:46.6 Andrew Stotz: And I've noticed on your LinkedIn, you've started bringing out interesting papers and transcripts and so many different things that you've been coming out. What is your goal? What is your mission?   1:05:02.3 William Scherkenbach: Well, I also would like to take the next step and contribute to help the improvement, not just the US, but any organization that shows they're serious for wanting to, wanting to improve. On the hope, and again, it's hope, as Deming said, that to be able to light a few bonfires that would turn into prairie fires that might consume more and more companies. And so you've got to light the match somewhere. And I just don't know. Again, I've been out of it for a number of years, but I just don't know. I know there is no big company besides, well, but even Toyota. I can remember Deming and I were in California and had dinner. Toyoda-san and his wife invited Deming and me to a dinner. And just, I was blown away with what he understood responsibilities were. I don't know, although I do have a Toyota Prius plug-in, which is perfect because I'm getting 99 miles a gallon because during my, doing shopping and whatever here in Pensacola, I never use gas. It goes 50 miles without needing to plug in.   1:07:00.6 William Scherkenbach: And so I do my stuff. But when I drive to Texas or Michigan, Michigan mostly to see the family, it's there. But all over, it's a wonderful vehicle. So maybe they're the only company in the world that, but I don't know. I haven't sat down with their executive.   1:07:26.4 Andrew Stotz: And behind me, I have two of your books, and I just want to talk briefly about them and give some advice for people. The first one is The Deming Route to Quality and Productivity: Roadmaps and Roadblocks, and the second one is Deming's Road to Continual Improvement. Maybe you could just give some context of someone who's not read these books and they're new to the philosophy and all that. How do these books, how can they help them?   1:07:58.8 William Scherkenbach: Well, the first book, Deming asked me to write in, I think it was '84. And I don't remember the first edition, but it might be '85, we got it out. But he asked me to write it, and because he thought I would, I could reach a different audience, and he liked it so much, they handed it out in a number of his seminars for a number of years. So.   1:08:40.7 Andrew Stotz: And there's my original version of it. I'm holding up my...    1:08:47.0 William Scherkenbach: Yeah, that's a later version.   1:08:49.7 Andrew Stotz: And it says the first printing was '86, I think it said, and then I got a 1991 version, which maybe I got it at one of the, I'm sure I got it at one of the seminars, and I've had it, and I've got marks on it and all that. And Deming on the back of it said, "this book will supplement and enhance my own works in teaching. Mr. Scherkenbach's masterful understanding of a system, of a process, of a stable system, and of an unstable system are obvious and effective in his work as well as in his teaching." And I know that on Deming's Road to Continual Improvement, you do a good amount of discussion at the beginning about the difference between a process and a system to try to help people understand those types of things. How should a reader, where should they start?   1:09:42.8 William Scherkenbach: Well, not with chapter six, as in CI Lewis, but well, I don't know what... I don't remember what chapter six is. As I said, the first book, and a lot of people after that did it, is essentially not regurgitating, but saying in a little bit different words about Deming's 14 Points. What I did on the first book is arrange them in the order that I think, and groupings that I think the 14 Points could be understood better. The second book was, the first half was reviewing the Deming philosophy, and the second half is how you would go about and get it done. And that's where the physiological, emotional, and all of my studies on operationalizing anything.   1:10:55.4 Andrew Stotz: And in chapter three on page 98, you talk about physical barriers, and you talk about physical, logical, emotional. You mentioned a little bit of that when you talked about the different gurus out there in quality, but this was a good quote. It says, Dr. Deming writes about the golfer who cannot improve his game because he's already in the state of statistical control. He points out that you have only one chance to train a person. Someone whose skill level is in statistical control will find great difficulty improving his skills.   1:11:32.1 William Scherkenbach: Yeah. Well, yeah, I mean, well, you're old enough to know the Fosbury Flop. I mean, for all high jumpers did the straddle in jumping and made some great records, but many of them had difficulty converting their straddle to the Fosbury Flop to go over backwards head first. And that's what got you better performance. So anything, whether it's golf or any skill, if you've got to change somehow, you've got to be able to change the system, which is whether you're in production or whether it's a skill. If you're in control, that's your opportunity to impact the system to get better.   1:12:40.3 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, and this was Dick Fosbury in 1968, Mexico City Olympics, where he basically went in and blew everybody away by going in and flipping over backwards when everybody else was straddling or scissors or something like that. And this is a great story.   1:12:57.0 William Scherkenbach: You can't do that.   [laughter]   1:12:58.8 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, and it's a great story of something on the outside. An outsider came in and changed the system rather than an existing person within it. And that made me think about when you talked about Ford and having an outsider helping in the different departments. You know, what extent does that reflect the way that we learn? You know, can we learn internally, or do we need outside advice and influence to make the big changes?   1:13:29.7 William Scherkenbach: Yeah. I mean, we had a swim coach, Higgins, at the Naval Academy, and he was known for, again, following in Olympic swimming. And I'm probably going to get the strokes wrong, but there was no such thing as a butterfly stroke. And he used it in swimming the breaststroke, and supposedly the only criteria was recovery had to be underwater with two hands. But I'm screwing up the story, I'm sure, but Higgins rewrote, rewrote the book by doing something a little bit different or drastically different.   1:14:25.4 Andrew Stotz: I'd like to wrap up this fascinating discovery, or journey of discovery of you and your relationship also with Dr. Deming. Let's wrap it up by talking about kind of your final memories of the last days of Dr. Deming and how you kind of put that all in context for your own life. And having this man come in your life and bring you into your life, I'm curious, towards the end of his life, how did you process his passing as well as his contribution to your life?   1:15:08.1 William Scherkenbach: That's, that's difficult and personal. I, he was a great mentor, a great friend, a great teacher, a great person, and with, on a mission with a name and impacted me. I was very, very lucky to be able to, when I look back on it, to recognize, to sign up for his courses, and then the next thing was writing that letter to the editor and fostering that relationship. Very, very, very difficult. But, I mean, he outlived a bunch of folks that he was greatly influenced by, and the mission continues.   1:16:34.1 Andrew Stotz: And if Dr. Deming was looking down from heaven and he saw that you're kind of reentering the fray after, you know, your struggles as you've described with your wife and the loss of your wife, what would he say to you now? What would he say as your teacher over all those years?   1:16:56.3 William Scherkenbach: Do your best.   1:16:59.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, wonderful.   1:17:01.4 William Scherkenbach: He knows, but he knows I know what to do. So, you need to know what to do and then to do the best. But I was, I mean, he was very, he received, and I forget the year, but he was at Ford and he got a call from Cel that his wife was not doing well. And so we, I immediately canceled everything and got him to the airport and he got to spend that last night with his wife. And he was very, very appreciative. So I'm sure he was helping, helping me deal with my wife.   1:17:56.4 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. Well, Bill, on behalf of everyone at the Deming Institute and myself personally, I want to thank you for this discussion and opening up you know, your journey with Dr. Deming. I feel like I understand Dr. Deming more, but I also understand you more. And I really appreciate that. And for the listeners out there, remember to go to Deming.org to continue your journey. And also let me give you, the listeners and viewers, the resources. First, we have Bill's book, which you can get online, The Deming Route to Quality and Productivity. We have Deming's Road to Continual Improvement, which Bill wrote. But I think even more importantly is go to his LinkedIn. He's on LinkedIn as William Scherkenbach and his tagline is helping individuals and organizations learn, have fun, and make a difference. So if you want to learn, have fun, and make a difference, send him a message. And I think you'll find that it's incredibly engaging. Are there any final words that you want to share with the listeners and the viewers?   1:19:08.9 William Scherkenbach: I appreciate your questions. In thinking about this interview, we barely scratched the surface. There are a ton of other stories, but we can save that for another time.   1:19:26.1 Andrew Stotz: Something tells me we're going to have some fun and continue to have fun in these discussions. So I really appreciate it and it's great to get to know you. Ladies and gentlemen.   1:19:36.7 William Scherkenbach: Thank you, Andrew.   1:19:37.7 Andrew Stotz: You're welcome. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'm going to leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and that is that "people are entitled to joy in work."    

Ms. Kim Woofter and Dr. John Cox discuss the latest updates to the evidence-based standards on oncology medical homes developed by ASCO and COA. These standards serve as the basis for the ASCO Certified program. They share the new and revised standards around topics including the culture of safety and just culture in oncology practice, geriatric assessment and geriatric assessment-guided management, and multidisciplinary team management. They expand on the importance of these standards for clinicians and oncology practices to ensure every patient receives optimal care. Read the complete standards, “Oncology Medical Homes: ASCO-Community Oncology Alliance Standards Update” at www.asco.org/standards. TRANSCRIPT These standards, clinical tools, and resources are available at www.asco.org/standards. Read the full text of the guideline and review authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest in the JCO Oncology Practice, https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/OP-25-00498 Brittany Harvey: Hello and welcome to the ASCO Guidelines podcast, one of ASCO's podcasts delivering timely information to keep you up to date on the latest changes, challenges, and advances in oncology. You can find all the shows, including this one, at asco.org/podcasts. My name is Brittany Harvey, and today I'm interviewing Ms. Kim Woofter, a registered nurse in practice leadership and administration from AC3 Inc in South Bend, Indiana, and Dr. John Cox, a medical oncologist and adjunct faculty member from UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, co-chairs on "Oncology Medical Homes, American Society of Clinical Oncology – Community Oncology Alliance Standards." Thank you for being here today, Ms. Woofter and Dr. Cox. Dr. John Cox: You bet. Ms. Kim Woofter: Thank you. Brittany Harvey: And then before we discuss these standards, I'd just like to note that ASCO takes great care in the development of its standards and ensuring that the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy is followed for each guidance product. The disclosures of potential conflicts of interest for the expert panel, including Dr. Cox and Ms. Woofter, who have joined us here today, are available online with the publication of the standards in JCO Oncology Practice, which is linked in the show notes. So then, to dive into what we're here today to talk about, Dr. Cox, could you start us off by explaining what prompted an update to these ASCO-COA standards and what the scope of this update is? Dr. John Cox: Well, the ASCO-COA standards relative to defining and outlining Oncology Medical Home were initially published four or five years ago. At the time, we planned a regular update of the standards. So, in essence, this is a planned update. The whole program is built on the idea of continuous improvement. So, this update and future updates are prompted and defined by our literature, our science, the science of care delivery, and new developments and insights gained from studies and evaluations of care delivery methods, and informed by the practice. These standards are in place to underpin a program of care delivery by ASCO, the ASCO Certified, and as practices engage in this program, we are learning from them. The whole idea is to enlarge and improve how patients are cared for in practice. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's great to have this iterative process to continue to review the evidence and update these standards that form the basis for ASCO Certified. So then, following that background, Ms. Woofter, I'd like to review the key points of the revised standards for our listeners. First, how do the revised standards address the culture of safety and just culture in oncology practice? Ms. Kim Woofter: I think safety is of utmost importance to all of us. So let me say that first and foremost. And what we know in oncology is our QOPI standards already address safety in the infusion suite process. So, safe delivery of chemotherapy agents and antineoplastics. It also talked about near misses and medication errors - absolutely essential, for sure. But what we need to do is look at a more systemic approach to safety because we know is processes throughout an organization they'll often cause you trouble. To do that, we know you need what we call a just culture, which is a very common term in today's workplace. But what it really means is it's a culture of open reporting of any potential for error, any potential for malfunction, and it can be in any place in the organization. So, what we are doing in our new standard is to say, look at your entire processes throughout the organization, and approach that in an open-minded way so that people don't feel scared to report things, and it's a really positive approach to intervening early and making sure that errors don't occur anywhere in the workplace. Brittany Harvey: Taking that systemic approach to look at overarching processes seems really key to ensuring safety in oncology practices. So then, the next new section, Dr. Cox, what are the new OMH standards surrounding geriatric assessment and geriatric assessment–guided management? Dr. John Cox: This is a challenging update for our standards. As many folks in practice recognize, there is a deep literature on recognizing the geriatric population in oncology. Geriatric - those in my age group over age 60, 65 - make up the majority of cancer patients in this country. And yet, there are many aspects that should be taken into account as you address treatment decisions in this population. ASCO's recognized this. There has been a guideline previously on geriatric assessment. It's been updated, and we really felt it's time that it be incorporated in any iteration of what oncology care delivery means, so, within the oncology medical home standards. In short, what the standard outlines is that practices that are using these standards, that are using this benchmark, should have a geriatric assessment for patients within the practice care and use that information to guide management. Now, the standard allows wide exploration of how practices meet this standard, but it really puts on the table that if an oncology practice in the United States, or anywhere in the world really, is adhering to a good practice, that they're going to include and recognize these assessments in practice. Ms. Kim Woofter: I would like to add that this is a highly discussed and reviewed standard. Many of our community practices were concerned that they would have the time and manpower to perform this assessment. We all know it reduces toxicities if done appropriately at treatment planning, and so the outcomes are better. And we really left it to the practices to define how they're going to implement it, understanding that it will evolve to every single patient, but maybe day one, it was a step approach to be able to implement. So, I was really proud of the team that - the expert panel - that said, okay, let's step into this, but we do think it's essential. Brittany Harvey: Absolutely. It's important to recognize that practices may have limited resources and time, and implementing it in the way that makes sense for them allows this to be a standard that can be used in practice. And it's great to have this geriatric assessment guideline integrated into these standards to improve care delivery. And we can provide a link to that guideline in the show notes of this episode as well (Practical Assessment and Management of Vulnerabilities in Older Patients Receiving Systemic Cancer Therapy: ASCO Guideline Update). So then, following that section of the standards, Ms. Woofter, how do the updated standards now address multidisciplinary team management? Ms. Kim Woofter: Well, we address multidisciplinary team management in a more comprehensive way in the updated standard. We always thought that that was a critical piece when doing treatment planning, and we kind of highlighted it in a bigger way, understanding that not everybody has the same resources available at the time of treatment planning. And again, this was a much-discussed standard, in that that multidisciplinary team approach doesn't necessarily have to be in a tumor board or a prospective analysis of every case. It is actually a conversation between specialists, between the surgeon and pathologist and the medical oncologist. And we are saying, do what works for you, but we know that that team approach, every specialty coming to the table at time of treatment planning, truly provides better outcomes for our patients. And so we kind of reiterated that, understanding that again, it doesn't have to be a formal tumor board, but it has to be a dialogue between specialties. And we highlighted that again in the new standard. Brittany Harvey: Open communication of all team members is really critical to providing optimal care. Dr. Cox, I'd like to ask you, in your view, how will these updated standards impact both clinicians and oncology practices? Dr. John Cox: Well, our whole goal with discussing a comprehensive care model for oncology practice is to have a benchmark, to have an iteration of what good oncology care delivery looks like. So, our hope is that practices, all practices, whether you're participating formally in ASCO Certified, the marquee quality program for ASCO, or if you are simply running a practice or a team within an academic environment or institutional environment, these standards are to apply across the board wherever oncology is practiced - that you can look at these standards as a benchmark and compare what you are doing in your practice and where are the gaps. So ideally, we drive improved care across the board. You know, one thing I've learned over the last couple of years as ASCO Certified is getting spun up and using and implementing these standards, is practices are remarkably innovative. We've learned a lot by seeing how pilot practices have met the standards, and that's gone into informing how we can improve care delivery for all of our practices and, importantly, for the team members who are delivering this care. The fourth rail of burnout and the like is inefficiency that occurs in practice. And when you know you've got a good, spun-up, effective team, less burnout, less stress for practice. I hope clinicians and oncology practices will use this to help drive improvements in their care and gain insight into how they can approach practice problems in a better way. Kim, you've been leading practices. I have to ask you, your thoughts in leaning into this question. Ms. Kim Woofter: I think very well said, I will say that first. And what I love about this is for practice leaders who are new to our ecosystem, if you will, they need a playbook. It's “Where do I begin?” And Dr. Cox said it very well, no one does everything perfectly day one, but it's a step-by-step self-assessment approach to say, “How do I get to this gold standard?” I really love the standards because they are very comprehensive, everything from treatment planning to end of life. So it's the spectrum of the care we deliver in the oncology setting. So as a leader and an administrator, it is the standard I want all of my departments to understand, adhere to, and engage, and be excited about. We now have a baseline approach, and what's even more important, these standards will evolve as our intelligence evolves, as literature evolves. It's a system that will always grow and change, and that's what we love about it. It's not a one-and-done. So, I'm very proud of the fact that it gives them a road map. Brittany Harvey: Yes, these evidence-based standards provide a critical foundation for practices in ASCO Certified, for those team members you mentioned, and for quality improvement beyond just those individuals and practices as well. So then finally, to wrap us up, Ms. Woofter, what do these revised standards mean for patients receiving cancer treatment? Ms. Kim Woofter: Well, I think that's the most exciting part, is we all do this for our patients and the best outcomes for our patients and the best treatment plans for our patients and their families. And these standards, that is their core, their absolute core. So what it's going to do for a patient is they can say, “Am I at a practice that implements ASCO standards?” And if that is a ‘yes', there's a confidence that, “I am in an evidence-based medicine thinking practice, I have a team around me, they will care for me not only at time of treatment planning but at the time of end of life, they will help me be part of that decision-making, and they will give me resources available to me in my community.” So, it is a true comprehensive approach. As a patient, I have that comfort, that it is bigger than just a great doctor. It is a great team. As a patient, that would be very important to me and important to my family. That being said, Kim Woofter would love every practice to be ASCO Certified. Understanding that that isn't feasible day one, just to know that the practice is implementing and engaging the standards is the great place to start. Every patient can't go to an ASCO Certified practice day one, but our dream would be that everyone would adhere to those standards, engage those standards, believe them, educate their staff on what they mean, so that patient outcomes and satisfaction will be optimized for everyone. The other piece to this that we all know is if you give evidence-based medicine, cost-effective, efficient care, it's better for the system as a whole. And I'm not saying that insurance is our driver - certainly patient outcomes are our driver - but the whole ecosystem of oncology benefits when you do the right thing. Dr. John Cox: It's hard to add anything to Kim's good statements, but I just highlight that this whole area began with the patient-centered medical home, and every time we've met, patients and how we deliver care to patients is top of mind. I think that reflects our community. It reflects oncology as a whole. I don't know any oncologist or practice that is focused on anything else as the prime goal. Brittany Harvey: That's what I was just going to say. The ultimate goal here is to provide patient-centered care across where every single patient is receiving treatment and at every stage of that treatment. So, I want to thank you both so much for your work to update these standards, to review the evidence, and discuss with the experts on the panel to come up with the solutions that will help drive quality improvement across care delivery. So, thank you for that, and thank you for your time today, Dr. Cox and Ms. Woofter. And finally, thank you to all of our listeners for tuning in to the ASCO Guidelines podcast. To read the complete standards, go to www.asco.org/standards. You can also find many of our standards and interactive resources in the free ASCO Guidelines app, which is available on the Apple App Store or the Google Play Store. If you have enjoyed what you've heard today, please rate and review the podcast, and be sure to subscribe so you never miss an episode. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guest statements on the podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement.

In this episode, CancerNetwork® spoke with breast oncologists Heather McArthur, MD; Erika Hamilton, MD; Hope Rugo, MD; and Paolo Tarantino, MD, PhD, about advances in breast cancer. These developments included recent drug approvals and ongoing research for therapeutic approaches, particularly in the areas of antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and CDK4/6 inhibitors, based on presentations they gave at the 25th Annual International Congress on the Future of Breast Cancer (IBC) East in New York City. Initially, McArthur, Komen Distinguished Chair in Clinical Breast Cancer Research at the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, discussed immunotherapy use in high-risk triple-negative and HER2-positive disease, the evolving role of adjuvant CDK4/6 inhibition in HER2-negative breast cancer, and potentially transformative advancements in early breast cancer treatment.  She highlighted the FDA approval for pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer, promising clinical trials in estrogen receptor (ER)–positive high-risk early-stage breast cancer, and data from an investigator-initiated trial to treat HER2-positive disease. Additionally, she highlighted an 8.5% improvement in pathological complete response with pembrolizumab added to immunotherapy in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-756 trial (NCT03725059), adding that a further event-free survival benefit may complicate the landscape for CDK4/6 inhibition based on lung and liver toxicities associated with the coadministration of these inhibitors with immunotherapy.1 McArthur expressed further excitement for ADC-based combinations for triple-negative disease, as well as in the high-risk residual disease setting. In addition, she highlighted potential advancements in de-escalation strategies and further considerations for ADCs in the HER2-positive and hormone receptor (HR)–positive spaces. Then, Hamilton, director of Breast Cancer and Gynecologic Cancer Research at the Sarah Cannon Research Institute, highlighted emerging therapies for early breast cancer, as well as her use of datopotamab deruxtecan-dlnk (dato-DXd; Datroway) and fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki (T-DXd; Enhertu) given their recent approvals in various breast cancer subtypes. She also touched upon challenges with respect to the implementation of new therapies for early breast cancer into clinical practice. She initially highlighted new data from the phase 3 VERITAC-2 trial (NCT05654623) presented at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting.2 Specifically, findings showed that vepdegestrant, an oral proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC), exhibited an efficacy advantage over fulvestrant (Faslodex) in patients with ESR1-mutant ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced or metastatic disease. Moreover, she highlighted data from the phase 3 DESTINY-Breast09 (NCT04784715) of T-DXd in various combinations for patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.3 Hamilton further highlighted her implementation of T-DXd into clinical practice, citing her use of the agent in patients with metastatic disease, including those with HER2-low and HER2-ultralow breast cancer. She further differentiated dato-DXd from T-DXd, suggesting that they were different classes of drugs due to their different targets: TROP2 vs HER2. She concluded by highlighting an unmet need regarding sustained benefit from endocrine therapy in HR-positive disease, as well as for ADC sequencing and mechanisms of resistance. Afterward, Rugo, division chief of Breast Medical Oncology, Women's Cancer Program Director, and professor in the Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research at City of Hope, discussed efficacy and safety considerations for CDK4/6 inhibitors in early breast cancer treatment. Specifically, she highlighted their high tolerability despite adverse effects and costs associated with their use. Rugo further touched upon a reduction of recurrence rates associated with CDK4/6 inhibition, although longer-term follow-up data were warranted to optimize the duration of therapy and elucidate survival outcomes. Finally, Tarantino, a research fellow at the Dana-Farber Institute, concluded by discussing sequencing strategies for ADCs, as well as which breast cancer settings or patient populations will experience the greatest impact with this treatment modality. Tarantino discussed his use of the “sandwich strategy,” where he switches the mechanism of action of treatment after using a TOPO1 ADC. Furthermore, Tarantino highlighted data from the DESTINY-Breast09 and phase 3 ASCENT-04 (NCT06100874) trials, which displayed the enhanced efficacy of 2 ADC combination therapies.4 He concluded by discussing future considerations for combining multiple ADCs. References 1. Cardoso F, O'Shaughnessy J, Liu Z, et al. Pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in high-risk, early-stage, ER+/HER2- breast cancer: a randomized phase 3 trial. Nat Med. 2025;31(2):442-448. doi:10.1038/s41591-024-03415-7 2. Hamilton E, De Laurentiis M, Jhaveri K, et al. Vepdegestrant, a PROTAC estrogen receptor (ER) degrader, vs fulvestrant in ER-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative advanced breast cancer: results of the global, randomized, phase 3 VERITAC-2 study. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA1000. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA1000 3. Tolaney S, Jiang Z, Zhang Q, et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) + pertuzumab (P) vs taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab (THP) for first-line (1L) treatment of patients (pts) with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–positive (HER2+) advanced/metastatic breast cancer (a/mBC): interim results from DESTINY-Breast09. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA1008. 4. Tolaney SM, de Azambuja E, Kalinsky K, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) + pembrolizumab (pembro) vs chemotherapy (chemo) + pembro in previously untreated PD-L1–positive advanced triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC): Primary results from the randomized phase 3 ASCENT-04/KEYNOTE-D19 study. J Clin Oncol. 2025;43(suppl 17):LBA109. doi:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.17_suppl.LBA109

From the 2025 annual meeting of the American Society for Virology, Charlie Rice, 2020 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine, talks with Vincent and Kathy about his career and the scientific difficulties he and his laboratory encountered in their attempts to achieve replication of hepatitis C virus in cells in culture. Hosts: Vincent Racaniello and Kathy Spindler Guest: Charlie Rice Subscribe (free): Apple Podcasts, RSS, email Become a patron of TWiV! Links for this episode Support science education at MicrobeTV 2020 Nobel Prize (Nobel Prizes) Hepatitis C human challenge study (Lancet Gastro Hepatol) Rat hepacivirus mouse model for hepatitis C (Hepatol) Replication of hepatitis C virus in cells in culture (Science) Lessons from domestication of HCV (Curr Opin Virol) Intro music is by Ronald Jenkees Send your virology questions and comments to twiv@microbe.tv Content in this podcast should not be construed as medical advice.

“Early impacts of cover crop selection on soil biological parameters during a transition to organic agriculture” with Nick Boodages. Incorporating cover crops is an important step in the transition from conventional to organic growing practices, but in Texas, limited resources can bring complications. In this episode, Nick joins me to discuss his work researching how to help farmers make the leap. Tune in to learn: ·        What challenges Texan farmers face when hoping to transition to organic agriculture ·        Which cover crops perform best in the Texas high plains ·        Which challenges Texan farmers face when growing cover crops ·        How cover crops impact crop yields during the transition to organic If you would like more information about this topic, this episode's paper is available here: https://doi.org/10.1002/agg2.20532 This paper is always freely available. Contact us at podcast@sciencesocieties.org or on Twitter @FieldLabEarth if you have comments, questions, or suggestions for show topics, and if you want more content like this don't forget to subscribe. If you'd like to see old episodes or sign up for our newsletter, you can do so here: https://fieldlabearth.libsyn.com/. If you would like to reach out to Nick, you can find him here: nicholas.boogades@ag.tamu.edu Resources CEU Quiz: Coming soon Transcripts: https://www.rev.com/app/transcript/Njg2ZTdhM2M3MTljMjMzZjYxOWE2ODlidXpYcmF2ZDF0Z04x/o/VEMwNzYxNzAyNjY3  Texas A&M AgriLife extension: https://agrilifeextension.tamu.edu/ Lewis and Burke Labs: www.txsoillab.com Organic Transition-Cotton Peanut Rotation extension paper: https://agriliferollingplainsagronomy.org/2022/11/22/organic-transition-cotton-peanut-rotation/ Alternative Certifications for Organic Transition: Quality Assurance Initiative (QAI)-Certified Organic Transition: https://www.qai-inc.com/certification-services/transitional.php/ Non GMO project: https://www.nongmoproject.org/ Certified naturally grown: https://www.naturallygrown.org/ Grazing Cover Crops in the Great Plains with Drs. John Holman and Augustine Obour: https://fieldlabearth.libsyn.com/grazing-cover-crops-in-the-great-plains-with-drs-john-holman-and-augustine-obour Thank you to our volunteer Om Prakash Ghimire for help with the shownotes and other assets. Thank you to Cole Shalk from 12twelve Media for the Audio Processing on today's episode. Field, Lab, Earth is Copyrighted by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.

When you think about the work we do as consultants and coaches, it's easy to focus on deliverables, frameworks, and strategies. But beneath all that lies a deeper truth: What is the real power we bring—especially when we don't have formal authority? In this episode, I'm diving into some of the most meaningful questions facing our profession today: What is the true influence of consultants and coaches in today's organizational landscape? How do we stay grounded in values like dignity, respect, and people-centered leadership when external pressures, and even legislation, create real barriers? And what role should we play in advancing social impact? These are not easy questions. But they are the ones that matter. And that's exactly why I invited none other than Peter Block to join me for this conversation. Peter is the author of Flawless Consulting, the book so many of us in this field consider the Bible of our profession. I first read it when I was a brand-new OD consultant at Disney—and re-reading it during my sabbatical reminded me just how deeply Peter's thinking has shaped my own. This conversation is both personally meaningful and professionally transformative. Peter shares his insights on consulting with integrity, power without authority, and how we can help build organizations that serve the common good, even in the face of short-term thinking and rising social challenges. What You'll Learn: Why Peter Block originally resisted writing Flawless Consulting—and what changed his mind How consultants can influence without control or authority Why “how we are with each other” matters more than what we say Simple, transformational questions that deepen client conversations The deeper purpose of consulting as a force for social good Where To Dive In: (0:00:02) - The Value of Consulting in Organizations(0:12:52) - The Ethical Role of Consultants(0:19:05) - The Illusion of Control and Power(0:25:24) - Embracing Agency in Consulting Relationships(0:31:47) - Shifting Perspectives in Consulting Relationships(0:40:01) - Exploring Empowerment and Collaboration Journey(0:48:38) - Navigating Organizational Shifts and Values(0:59:59) - Embodying the Common Good Philosophy(1:13:03) - Building a Community of Purpose-Driven Consultants Exact Quotes from the Episode: “The relationship is the delivery system for my expertise.” — Peter Block [0:05:37] “How you and I are with each other will make it real or make it a speech.” — Peter Block [0:09:03] “I was very nervous that my peers in OD would say, ‘Peter, the model was a cookbook.'” — Peter Block [0:05:37] “What you know is not the same as what people act on. The relationship makes it actionable.” — Peter Block [paraphrased summary of extended quote, 0:05:37] “Every invitation matters—and yours especially so.” — Peter Block [0:04:12] Next Steps: I invite you to reflect on Peter's deep wisdom, especially around how our relationship skills really are, the delivery mechanism of our expertise, the illusion of control and how nobody, even the top executives, have control. I loved what we got into about the differences between control and power, the prevailing myths that are out there that affect our own thinking and how we show up in the world around scarcity and division, and how a Flawless Consulting approach, this relationship and collaborative approach, is what's needed in any economy. As a branding person, I'd be remiss if I did not draw out what I love what Peter said about looking for clients who are looking for us. So the question I invite you to consider is how easy or hard are you making it for the people who are looking for you to get what you do? Inspired by Peter Block's take on purpose-driven consulting? Take the next step and reclaim your own power with Betsy Jordyn's free audio training + workbook: From Playing Small to Playing TrueDiscover the proven strategies to gain the clarity and confidence you need to attract the consulting or coaching clients, impact, and income you're truly ready for—even in challenging times. Access it free here and start building a business that reflects your true value. About the guest: Peter Block is an author and citizen of Cincinnati, Ohio. He is the co-founder of Designed Learning, a training company that offers workshops designed to build the skills outlined in his books. Peter is part of the Common Good Alliance of Greater Cincinnati and was a member of his local neighborhood council. His books include Activating the Common Good, Confronting Our Freedom, Flawless Consulting, Stewardship, The Answer to How Is Yes, Community, and The Abundant Community. His work is in the restoraDon of the common good and creaDng a world that reclaims our humanity from the onslaught of modernism. Peter's honors and awards include the Organization Development Network's 2008 Lifetime Achievement Award and its 2004 first-place Members' Choice Award in recognition of his book Flawless Consulting: A Guide to Getting Your Expertise Used (1999) as the most influential book for Organizational Development practitioners over the past 40 years. He is the recipient of the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) Award for Distinguished Contributions and the Association for Quality and Participation President's Award; he has also been named to Training Magazine's HRD Hall of Fame. www.designedlearning.com www.peterblock.com About the host: Betsy Jordyn is a business mentor, brand messaging strategist, and former Disney consultant who helps purpose-driven consultants and coaches build profitable businesses rooted in their unique strengths. With over 20 years in the industry and a knack for turning big ideas into clear positioning, she's your go-to for strategy that aligns with your calling. Ready to turn your expertise into a business that makes both impact and income? Work with me: https://www.betsyjordyn.com/services

What if your skincare routine started in your gut? Danielle Duboise and Whitney Tingle are joined by integrative gastroenterologist and microbiome expert Dr. Robynne Chutkan for a deep dive into the powerful connection between the gut and the skin. Dr. Chutkan unpacks how your gut health directly impacts the appearance, texture, and vitality of your skin—especially during hormonal shifts in your 40s and 50s. Plus, Dr. Chutkan shares her science-backed, food-first protocols for creating a glowing complexion from the inside out. Check out the video version on the Sakara Life YouTube channel here: https://youtu.be/HMGRo28Z6zs Dr. Chutkan shares:  The gut-skin axis explained: how it works and why it matters What skin symptoms can tell you about your internal health How hormone changes during perimenopause impact the microbiome and the skin Dr. Chutkan's approach to healing skin through gut-supportive foods The truth about stool tests, food sensitivity panels, and skincare fads About Dr. Chutkan:  Robynne Chutkan, MD, FASGE, is a gastroenterologist, the author of the digestive health books Gutbliss, The Microbiome Solution, The Bloat Cure and The Anti-Viral Gut, and the host of The Gutbliss podcast. Dr. Chutkan received her bachelor's from Yale University and her medical degree from Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, where she also did her internship and residency and served as chief resident. She completed her fellowship in gastroenterology at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York. Dr. Chutkan has been on the faculty at Georgetown University Hospital since 1997. In 2004 she founded the Digestive Center for Wellness, an integrative gastroenterology practice dedicated to uncovering the root cause of GI disorders. Dr. Chutkan incorporates microbial optimization, nutritional therapy, mind-body techniques, and lifestyle changes into her therapeutic approach to digestive disorders. A former Board member of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), Dr. Chutkan also chaired the ASGE Training Committee and Public Relations Committee. She has authored dozens of academic journal articles and book chapters and lectures frequently on the microbiome and gut health throughout the United States and Europe. Dr. Chutkan has been the medical expert on The Today Show, CBS This Morning, The Doctors, The Dr Oz Show, The Megyn Kelly Show, and has her own PBS Special entitled “Gutbliss”. She's been interviewed by numerous publications, including the NYT, WSJ, The Atlantic, and the Washington Post, and served as on-air talent and a medical consultant for Discovery Health Channel. Resources & Links: Dr. Robynne Chutkan: gutbliss.com | @gutbliss Books by Dr. Chutkan: Gutbliss, The Microbiome Solution, The Bloat Cure, The Anti-Viral Gut The Gutbliss Podcast

Hoy en Me lo Dijo Adela hablamos del riesgo de una contrarreforma electoral, del pleito con Estados Unidos, del juicio de Ovidio Guzmán… y del estreno de una película mexicana con sabor a caos. Platicamos con Ricardo Becerra, presidente del Instituto de Estudios para la Transición Democrática, sobre la carta que le enviaron a Claudia Sheinbaum para pedirle que su Reforma Electoral no destruya la pluralidad. ¿Escuchará o se impondrá el mayoriteo? También conversamos con Larry Rubin, presidente de la American Society of México, sobre las nuevas tensiones con Estados Unidos: incumplimientos del T-MEC, amagos de aranceles y creciente desconfianza empresarial. ¿Habrá renegociación? En nuestra mesa editorial con Damián Zepeda, Arturo Ávila y Juan Zavala. Y cerramos con cine mexicano: nos visitan Manuel García Rulfo y Darío Yazbek Bernal, protagonistas de Buen Salvaje, una película que desnuda el colapso emocional de una pareja americana en un pueblo de México. Caos, culpa y redención.

In this episode of Diverse, Ana Tijerina Esquino, civil engineer at Mott MacDonald, explains why engineering is fundamentally a helping profession that aims to improve society. Ana discusses her unconventional journey into civil engineering, how infrastructure projects have historically harmed marginalized communities, and sustainable practices that are changing the industry in conversation with Laurie Shuster, editor-in-chief of SWE Magazine. Hear Ana's reflections on the funding of ports and mass transit, as well as the American Society of Civil Engineers' 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure, in the Spring 2025 issue of SWE Magazine. --- The Society of Women Engineers is a powerful, global force uniting 50,000 members of all genders spanning 85 countries. We are the world's largest advocate and catalyst for change for women in engineering and technology. To join and access all the exclusive benefits to elevate your professional journey, visit membership.swe.org

Hoy en Me lo Dijo Adela hablamos del riesgo de una contrarreforma electoral, del pleito con Estados Unidos, del juicio de Ovidio Guzmán… y del estreno de una película mexicana con sabor a caos. Platicamos con Ricardo Becerra, presidente del Instituto de Estudios para la Transición Democrática, sobre la carta que le enviaron a Claudia Sheinbaum para pedirle que su Reforma Electoral no destruya la pluralidad. ¿Escuchará o se impondrá el mayoriteo? También conversamos con Larry Rubin, presidente de la American Society of México, sobre las nuevas tensiones con Estados Unidos: incumplimientos del T-MEC, amagos de aranceles y creciente desconfianza empresarial. ¿Habrá renegociación? En nuestra mesa editorial con Damián Zepeda, Arturo Ávila y Juan Zavala. Y cerramos con cine mexicano: nos visitan Manuel García Rulfo y Darío Yazbek Bernal, protagonistas de Buen Salvaje, una película que desnuda el colapso emocional de una pareja americana en un pueblo de México. Caos, culpa y redención.

Did you know that stopping GLP-1 medications like Ozempic or Wegovy can trigger powerful biological and emotional changes that impact your weight journey? In this episode, I talk about what happens when you stop taking a GLP-1 medication, like Ozempic, Wegovy, or Zepbound. I explain how these medications work by slowing stomach emptying, reducing appetite, and helping with insulin regulation, which supports weight loss and benefits conditions like type 2 diabetes and PCOS. However, I also share that they're not magic pills, you still need healthy habits like eating well and exercising. I highlight possible side effects, such as nausea or pancreatitis risks, and emphasize that stopping these medications can lead to increased hunger, cravings, weight regain, and even emotional distress. But I also reassure you that this isn't a sign of failure. Weight regain is often biological, not personal. I offer tips for tapering off safely, reinforcing lifestyle habits, and exploring other options. Most importantly, I remind you that your journey is valid, you're not alone, and lasting success requires a plan, support, and self-compassion. Tune in to learn what really happens when you stop taking GLP-1 medications—and how to stay empowered and in control of your weight journey.   Episode Highlights: How GLP-1 medications like Ozempic and Wegovy work Common side effects and safety considerations What to expect when stopping GLP-1s, both physically and emotionally Strategies to manage weight regain and maintain healthy habits Alternative tools and support options beyond medication Connect with Dr. Alicia Shelly: Website | drshellymd.com Facebook | www.facebook.com/drshellymd Instagram | @drshellymd Linked In | www.linkedin.com/in/drshellymd Twitter | @drshellymd About Dr. Alicia Shelly Dr. Alicia Shelly was raised in Atlanta, GA. She received her Doctorate of Medicine from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, OH.  Dr. Shelly has been practicing Primary Care and Obesity medicine since 2014.  In 2017, she became a Diplomat of the American Board of Obesity Medicine. She is the lead physician at the Wellstar Medical Center Douglasville. She started a weekly podcast & Youtube channel entitled Back on Track: Achieving Healthy Weight loss,  where she discusses how to get on track and stay on track with your weight loss journey. She has spoken for numerous local and national organizations, including the Obesity Medicine Association, and the Georgia Chapter of the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons. She has been featured on CNN, Fox 5 News, Bruce St. James Radio show, Upscale magazine, and Shape.com. She was named an honoree of the 2021 Atlanta Business Chronicle's 40 under 40 award. She also is a collaborating author for the, “Made for More: Physician Entrepreneurs who Live Life and Practice Medicine on their own terms''.   Resources: FREE! Discover the 5 Reasons Your Weight-Loss Journey Has Gotten Derailed (And How To Get Back On Track!)

On this episode, we are joined by Mike Mueller, an occupational therapist, Certified Hand Therapist and exercise scientist who has taken a special interest in treating female athletes across the lifespan. We discuss unique characteristics of female athletes, common injuries we are seeing in this population and how we as upper extremity specialists can help to return these athletes to their sport. Guest Bio: Mike Mueller, OTR, CHT is a staff hand therapist at Rothman Orthopaedics in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and has over 30 years of experience in upper extremity rehabilitation in a variety of settings. He is an occupational therapist, Certified Hand Therapist and an exercise scientist with extensive experience utilizing the kinetic chain approach and its application to upper extremity rehabilitation and performance. He has a special area of interest in the management of the athlete's upper extremity injuries and has extensive experience with athletes from the youth to the professional levels. Mike has presented on multiple topics at state, national and international conferences. He is a member of The American Society of Hand Therapists, American Occupational Therapy Association, American College of Sports Medicine, National Strength and Conditioning Association, and American Baseball Biomechanics Society.The views and opinions expressed in the Hands in Motion podcast are those of the guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of ASHT. Appearance on the podcast does not imply endorsement of any products, services or viewpoints discussed"

Send us a textIn this episode, Dr. Eeks sits down with world-renowned cardiologist and nutrition dynamo Dr. Kim Williams to pull the lid off “healthy” plant-based restaurant meals, and a whole lot more.What's on the menu:First-of-its-kind restaurant study – How Dr. Williams scored plant-based dishes for heart health, what shocked him, and the sneaky “health halo” traps you'll now spot a mile away.Plant-based vs. junk-based – Could plant-based be sliding toward the same fate as the Western diet? He breaks down where things are headed and how to dodge the pitfalls.Cardio-nutrition deep dive – The eating plan Dr. Williams follows himself, plus straight talk on saturated fat, carbs, sugar, cholesterol, animal welfare, and factory farming.Big-picture fixes – Population-level policies he believes could actually move the needle on improving nutrition at the public health level.If you eat out, care about your heart, or just want the unvarnished science behind plant-powered plates, this episode is packed with gems you won't want to miss.Dr. Kim Allan Williams, MD, MACC, FAHA, MASNC, FESC is Chair of Medicine at the University of Louisville and a triple-threat in general, preventive, and cardiovascular-imaging cardiology. He's a former President of both the American College of Cardiology and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and he previously led the Association of Black Cardiologists as Board Chair. At Wayne State he launched the Urban Cardiology Initiative, and later created Rush University's H.E.A.R.T. Program (Helping Everyone Assess Risk Today)—community screenings that pair education, nutrition, and lifestyle coaching. A lifelong advocate for nutrition literacy, health-equity, and system-wide reform, Dr. Williams has advised the FDA, CMS, and served more than 25 years as an AMA delegate. Most recently, he sat on the 2022 task force that briefed the White House Conference on Nutrition, Health, and Hunger.You can contact Dr. Eeks at bloomingwellness.com.Follow Eeks on Instagram here.Or Facebook here.Or X.On Youtube.Or TikTok.SUBSCRIBE to her monthly newsletter here! (Now featuring interviews with top experts on health you care about!)Support the show

Send us a message!In this episode Dana interviews Award winning food and travel journalist, speaker, author, nutrition communications consultant, television personality and registered dietitian nutritionist, Carolyn O'Neil, MS, RDN.Carolyn shares how she found her love of nutrition (and writing) and started working in nutrition media. Carolyn's newly launched podcast is Watch What You Eat with Carolyn O'Neil. Find her on Instagram at @carolynoneil More about our guest:Carolyn writes about food, nutrition, travel and healthy lifestyles for numerous publications including VIE Magazine, OLTRE Magazine, Atlanta Homes & Lifestyles Magazine, Southern Living Magazine and Food & Wine Magazines. She is on the Nutrition Review Board for Southern Living Magazine and Forbes Health.Carolyn is a member of the invite-only Google Food Lab, an international group of thought leaders in all areas of food from farming to finance. She served on Delta Air Lines Culinary Council as a nutrition consultant to help update and guide the airline's inflight menu planning for special meals and wellness initiatives.As a media spokesperson, Carolyn has worked with multiply leading brands including Nestle, The Wonderful Company, Quaker, Sunsweet, Danone, ConAgra and many others. Carolyn has been a professor of nutrition science and nutrition communication for Florida State University's London Study Centre and professor of journalism for Emory University in Atlanta.She is a contributor to NBC Atlanta & Company and can be seen as “The Lady of the Refrigerator” on Alton Brown's Good Eats on Food Network. Carolyn is the author of Southern Living's best selling The Slim Down South Cookbook and co-author of The Dish on Eating Healthy and Being Fabulous winner at the World Food Media awards.A pioneer in food television, Carolyn launched and led CNN's coverage of food andnutrition for nearly 20 years as anchor and executive producer of CNN On The Menu and was senior correspondent and anchor for CNN's Travel Now program. She's earned two James Beard Foundation Awards for excellence in broadcast food journalism and is a member of the James Beard Foundation's Who's Who in American Food and Beverage. She has also been honored by the National Restaurant Association, the American Heart Association, the American Society for Nutrition and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics for her pioneering work in nutrition communications. Her master's degree in nutrition is from Boston University and undergraduate degree in Foods and Nutrition is from Florida State University. Carolyn lives in Atlanta.

Before the ballpoint pen, people used their hands, reeds, bamboo, brushes, quills, and eventually nibs to write or draw. But how did things evolve from there to get to things like the fountain pen, and eventually, a ballpoint? Research: "pen." Britannica Library, Encyclopædia Britannica, 26 Jul. 2021. libraries.state.ma.us/login?eburl=https%3A%2F%2Flibrary.eb.com&ebtarget=%2Flevels%2Freferencecenter%2Farticle%2Fpen%2F59036&ebboatid=9265652. Accessed 13 Jun. 2025. "Pen." UXL Science, UXL, 2008. Gale In Context: Science, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CV2646000736/GPS?u=mlin_n_melpub&sid=bookmark-GPS&xid=52ede570. Accessed 27 May 2025 “Patent of Mr. Frederick Bartholomew Folsch, of Oxford street, for improvements on instruments, and pens, to facilitate writing.” https://archive.org/details/jstor-30072521/mode/2up Bayley, Stephen. “Obituary: Baron Marcel Bich.” The Independent. 6/1/1994. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituary-baron-marcel-bich-1419867.html Bourque, Joseph. “The Waterman Pen.” American Heritage. Jul/Aug92, Vol. 43 Issue 4, p30. Brachmann, Steve. “The Evolution of Modern Ballpoint Pen: A Patent History.” IP Watchdog. 12/10/2014. https://ipwatchdog.com/2014/12/10/the-evolution-of-modern-ballpoint-pen-a-patent-history/id=52550/ Cross, Alonzo T. “Stylographic Pen.” U.S. Patent 232804. 10/5/1880. Daniels, Maygene. “The Ingenious Pen: American Writing Implements from the Eighteenth Century to the Twentieth.” The American Archivist , Summer, 1980, Vol. 43, No. 3 (Summer, 1980). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40292316 Di Nardo, Sam. “When was the Fountain Pen Invented: A Brief History.” Dayspring Pens. 1/2/2023. https://www.dayspringpens.com/blogs/the-jotted-line/when-was-the-fountain-pen-invented-a-brief-history-1 Di Nardo, Sam. “Who Invented the Ballpoint Pen?: A Brief History.” Sayspring Pens. s1/2/2023. https://www.dayspringpens.com/blogs/the-jotted-line/who-invented-the-ballpoint-pen-history?srsltid=AfmBOopQR061KHIKpgm_a0a0IHiTSiY_V-ahwIFQxU5MYzLLQ5vpHjXv Dowling, Stephen. “The cheap pen that changed writing forever.” BBC. 10/29/2020. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201028-history-of-the-ballpoint-pen German Patent and Trademark Office. “László Biró´s 125th birthday.” https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/inventionsthatmadehistory/kugelschreiber/index.html Laszlo, Josef Biro. “Writing Instrument.” U.S. patent 2390636. 12/11/1945. Loud, J.J. “Pen.” U.S. Patent 392046. 10/30/1888. National inventors Hall of Fame. “Laszlo Josef Biro.” https://www.invent.org/inductees/laszlo-josef-biro Riesberg, Van Vechton. “Fountain Pen.” U.S. Patent 1171652. 2/15/1916. Rothman, Lily. “Why the Invention of the Ballpoint Pen Was Such a Big Deal.” Time. 10/29/2015. https://time.com/4083274/ballpoint-pen/ The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. “#236 Birome Ballpoint Pen Collection.” https://www.asme.org/about-asme/engineering-history/landmarks/236-birome-ballpoint-pen-collection Waterman, L.E. “Fountain Pen.” U.S. Patent 293545. 2/12/1884. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.